digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

Pentagon Missing 2.3 TRILLION Dollars!

cbsnews.com — Rumsfeld promised change but the next day – Sept. 11-- the world changed and in the rush to fund the war on terrorism, the war on waste seems to have been forgotten...

show profanity settings
expand all
  • quakerorts, on 10/12/2007, -10/+127This is the military-industrial-congressional complex, that Ike warned us about, in action. War pigs at the trough.
    • chopenik, on 10/12/2007, -6/+107That was a great farewell address he (Eisenhower) gave.

      On the side note pertaining to the news article. This is one of the saddest chapter in this country's history. Please take note that this hasn't been talked about on any of the major corporate media outlets even though this would seem like the story of the centruy! What is up with that. Let's face it. The American society as we know it is rotting away from the inside much like the Roman Empire once did.
    • weirdness, on 10/12/2007, -4/+50"The American society as we know it is rotting away from the inside much like the Roman Empire once did."

      Historians may say that it was inevitable. Fortunately, there will be a helluva a lot of evidence as to what what went wrong. Thank technology, if that's the case. Or possibly, smart people will figure it all out much sooner and the "empire" is just experiencing a little turbulence.
    • MarkCiccone, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33I remember seeing this in a video, I was so pissed off, what a day to announce this, no one would obviously remember this the next day... how eerily convenient!
    • VhaidraU, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25A democratic republic has never laster more than 250 years. The people keep accepting more government "protestion" and control until it is a dictatorship and then eventually the people revolt again. Sadly no political system is free from the grasps of corruption, but a republic tends to last longer that communism or socialism.
    • TheAstronomer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+84Did anyone check the date on this?

      The War On Waste
      LOS ANGELES, Jan. 29, 2002

      Probably more like 5 trillion now
    • littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42Two words: Black Operations
    • 0o0Moylan0o0, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13A tip for the Pentagon: Look inside your asses
    • superal1394, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@littlebylittle: And some of the money into pockets that are never to be found
    • aerogant, on 10/12/2007, -10/+72Hey blowing up two towers isn't cheap.
    • aerogant, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23oops I meant responding to the blowing up of two towers isn't cheap :)
    • mrpacco, on 10/12/2007, -23/+6Um, I hate to break it to you all, but THIS IS NOT NEWS. If you've been staying up-to-date with this stuff you should have already known this years ago. If you need more convincing, just look at the date on the news article: Jan 29 2002.

      I mean, Back to the Future was a good trilogy and all... but for crying out loud, diggers... /sigh
    • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -24/+4> "I remember seeing this in a video, I was so pissed off, what a day to announce this, no one would obviously remember this the next day... how eerily convenient!"

      Oh, cut the conspiracy *****. Why say *anything* if They™ didn't want anyone to know/remember? And, really... "forget"? Is that why this is still on CBS' website (not to mention the myriad of other national and international news sites)?

      Don't just think; think logically.
    • CornStarch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Sam Fisher needs his gear and those sticky shockers ain't cheap.
    • littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26"oops I meant responding to the blowing up of two towers isn't cheap :)"

      Neither is worldwide distribution, I mean eradication, of all the pesky Opium crops in Afghanistan.
    • raindogmx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13And Lou Dobbs was worried last night because americans spend 61 billion in drugs each year. He said something about how many kids could be educated with that money.
    • Spiritcatcher, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Three words: Donald ***** Rumsfeld
    • Toast1185, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"Is that necessarily a bad thing? Perhaps something better will grow out of the fertile ruins. Death and rebirth, my friends."
      It is for me since I will probably be part of the death generation in this country. Bloated government budgets and the like... If you are so excited about it, you enjoy all of the demise of America, call me when it rises from the ashes.
    • DAGONthehauge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8And let me make you a prediction - This problem wont go away ever as long as americans can only vote "same old" democrats or republicans.
    • mdhauke, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2the article was in 2002. Buried for recycling the same articles
    • Sil369, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1@0o0moylan0o0,
      "A tip for the Pentagon: Look inside your asses"

      Yes, thank you moylan for that goatsec visual. Excuse me while I go vomit.
    • MrEguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11@mdhauke

      Uh, there was no digg.com in 2002 -- so how could the contributor be "recycling the same articles"??
      Its subject is relevant to today's events, and it needs to be read whether it was written in 2002 or yesterday.
    • doctorfungi, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6http://www.911myths.com/html/rumsfeld__9_11_and__2_3_trilli.html
      http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-69818.html

      A lot of people have a lot of reading to do.
    • maxpain, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Ike? David Icke? You think he was the first person to warn us about the MIC ?
    • mdhauke, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@mreguy

      If the subject was "relevant to today's events" then I'm sure you would have no problem finding a more updated article then early 2002. lol

      Now you'll have to excuse me while I dig up every pre-Digg article out there and post it on this site. I'm sure I can find some dandies on William Taft.
    • mdhauke, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1@mreguy

      If t
  • Disastermaster1, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27Now,now,gentleman- don't you know that our leaders know better than we do what is good for us. You see, the reason this story has not been reported in the mainstream media is because it is SPAM. That's right,SPAM, the word used on DIGG.com to refer to a story such as this. I think I am beginning to understand the meaning of SPAM. I think it is a synonym for TRUTH.
    • Aeaus, on 10/12/2007, -6/+33Don't be so simple, it's all really terrorist propaganda, anything against the war is blatently anti-american and supportive of the terrorists. Everybody get writing checks to Halliburton.
    • AngryBacon, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13Huh. I smell 1984.

      Doublespeak?
      Newspeak?
      Blackwhite?

      Bush doubleplusgood duckspeak.
  • SnowflakePillow, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2I don't want to know where that money's going. But I do. It's the dinosaurs in the core of the earth that hold us hostage. Don't criticize the government for this - they just want to keep us alive.
  • dtd00d, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Area 51.
  • Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32Where are you fiscal conservatives? Sold all your principles but don't care because you're too spineless to say something?
    • mike17032, on 10/12/2007, -36/+3Look at the date *****, this is from 2002. Clinton would have been in charge when most of this money went missing.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Don't ever call anyone a ***** again.
    • geoboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Pay no attention to mike. He is a freeper. Know how you can tell? Look at all those numbers in his name.
  • l337fanboy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I have a feeling this will come up in the discussion on [Government] Wasted Wednesday.
  • SLuM, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9WE NEED SUPREME COMMANDER WESLY CLARK FOR THIS *****.. NOW!!!!
  • mag72, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Well, considering that this was published in 2002, the total is probabaly about twice that much now...
    • bookwurm322, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"LOS ANGELES, Jan. 29, 2002"

      Yea i'd like to see a more recent article on this. Not saying one way or another what happened since then.
    • mike17032, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Or that they figured out where it went.
  • wassim2k, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7They're also missing 2.3 trillion bytes of personnel data.
  • datalife, on 10/12/2007, -16/+2But will it blend?
  • TomPizzle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4That sucks.
  • DeFray, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4Anyone else bothered that it's the number 23?
  • kavery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Did they check under the couch?
  • SLuM, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3lol, and? The US borrows tons of money from other countries even though we don't need it. No one's gonna call us on our ***** for a while. Maybe in the year 2050 they might start paying attention to all the ***** we do but for now everyone's our bitch.
  • MackPrime, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Austin Powers jokes aren't funny.

    Start backspacing now.
  • joltjake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29hmm, that's weird, because I found 2.289 trillion dollars.
    • skyfire1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Would your name happen to be Dick Cheney?
  • ZakColeman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+41How can you lose 2.3 trillion, I mean if I do something wrong on taxes the gov. is right on my ass grabing the extra pennys' - WTF
  • sergeantmudd, on 10/12/2007, -7/+20Look, I'm sure the Pentagon loses billions of dollars. But this 2.3 trillion figure comes from Donald Rumsfeld. And Rumsfeld had an agenda from day one and a predilection towards hyperbole. He wanted to paint the Pentagon as inefficient, money wasting, bureaucratic, and in desperate need of the reforms he proposed.

    I don't doubt the Pentagon is all those things but not to the tune of 2.3 trillion dollars. Rumsfeld was trying to make a case for his deep and drastic reforms.

    Also, he never gave that figure a time frame. 2.3 trillion dollars over how many years? Only past years, or does this include future predictions? And he said "we cannot track." That doesn't mean the money is missing. It means accounting practices to follow that much money are not adequate.
  • geneikillua, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4The article, published in 2002, said not that they had lost 2.3 trillion dollars, but that they couldn't account for it. These are very different things.

    Furthermore, it's kind of stupid to attribute this to Bush, as it seems like, in 2002, most of that money would have come from the Clinton administration. Blame the war-industrial complex instead.
    • gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3> These are very different things.
      Not really, in this case. Whether they spent it or not, they lost it - as in they don't know where it is currently, it's missing. Sure you "lose" money in a bet with your neighbor, but you can also "lose" money just like you lose your keys. Can you think of a decent sized company that allows itself to run with a variance of -25%? I mean, a many-billion dollar corporation like Sun or Microsoft? That's why they call it a "profit and loss" statement.

      And really, could the Pentagon not figure it out "if they wanted to"? Is extra money for everyone in the country and the economy in general not a good enough reason? Why aren't people being yelled at and fired for not sticking to their budget and reconciling their balances? These departments can have their budgets reduced as leverage to do so.

      And that's why Bush is as responsible as Clinton. Neither of them spent the money first-hand... but why aren't they monitoring simple balance and variance statements from the major government facilities?
    • sergeantmudd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2It's the submitter's headline that said the money was missing, not the article. The article says Rumsfeld said "we cannot track the money." They are very different things. I worked in a real estate division once. Our records were *****. We couldn't tell you forward commitments, and couldn't tell you how much was coming in and out. At the end of the day, we paid most leases correctly but only because we pulled leases and calculated everything by hand. Money wasn't missing and wasn't stolen, we just could not track the money. The tracking system was just not good enough. I think that is what Rumsfeld was saying.
    • gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Real estate division of what? A government organization? They know what's going in - you're telling me they don't know what's going out? From the article: "...Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared war. Not on foreign terrorists, 'the adversary's closer to home. It's the Pentagon bureaucracy,' he said. He said money wasted by the military poses a serious threat. 'In fact, it could be said it's a matter of life and death,' he said."

      It doesn't sound to me like he's just having some problems getting his pie charts together.
    • sergeantmudd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2It's clearly impossible for 2.3 trillion dollars to be missing from the Pentaon's budget. That would represent the entire budget for five years. And yes, it is perfectly plausible that they really do not know what is coming and going out. The Pentagon is a massive institution with millions of employees. It is funded by dozens of appropiations and contaings dozens of agencies.

      My point about the real estate story is that record keeping is hard even for small organizations. For a gigantic one where programs can be constantly added and cut from an outside entity (Congress), the challenge seems almost impossible.

      That doesn't mean 2.3 trillion dollars are missing, but if you can't track 2.3 trillion dollar, that means billions and billions of dollars can be lost.
    • gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1In case you hadn't noticed, I never mentioned the number 2.3 trillion. Someone in the article mentioned not being able to account for up to 25% of the money, and it wasn't Donald Rumsfeld - that's what scares me. If there is really so much money being wasted, it's quite likely that most American taxpayers have paid some in vein.

      Finance management can be hard even for one person. But sometimes, you gotta do the hard *****! The Pentagon's money isn't the Pentagon's money, it's the money of American taxpayers. There is no fathomable excuse for not being able to account for a large sum of money. You can *buy* a system to manage that much money because you *have* that much money. Any frugal person would agree that with so much money being unaccounted for, investing in a system that can successfully manage it would be a smart decision.

      It's all BS anyway. They have the ability to track the money. As soon as people start getting held accountable with tangible consequences, the "variance" will decrease, by a lot.
    • opiniastrous, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm going to have to agree with geneikillua on this one.

      Sure, it's bad that they don't know where those assets are, but the fact of the matter is that they are all probably in use within the DoD right now (or were until they came to the end of their effective lives). When the US military goes on ops, it effectively writes off most of the goods that it supplies to its troops (e.g. uniforms, boots, webbing, hats, ammunition). In doing so, it no longer account for the items, but the boots are still on the soldiers' feet, and the rounds are still in their magazines. In other instances, soldiers might have taken a few more things than they were technically entitled to (making them disappear on paper), but they're still being used for productive purposes, so it doesn't really matter to the DoD; just the accountants.
  • Malarie, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9@slum
    And you are your government's bitch
    Listening to B. Spears and watching the latest Bruckheimer "action" hit while your government is raping the third world and killing thousands of innocents in a war against "terror".

    You fail.

    -French Canadian.
    • mcway32, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5And you are your country's pimp?

      You win dude.

      - American mutt.
  • mike17032, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5I love 5 ***** year old stories that make the home page.

    Did anyone else hear that the USSR broke up? Crazy!
    • popltree2, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3I heard we landed on the moon too!
    • jboeke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Well... Digg wasn't born yet back then.

      I just wanted to give everyone another chance to get pissed that we have to pay taxes and THIS is how our government handles our money.
    • xister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Ummm, where was it before it went to computers? o_O
  • SLuM, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3@ malarie
    Who do you think gives billions upon billions to those third world countries so they may develop? THE USA not you french canadian. If you for one second think I approve the deaths, misery or suffering of ANYONE in the world for my or my governments benefit you can go get molested by bubba in the state prison. But what can I do as one man against the tyrannical governments of the world? *****..
  • knodi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7If they are going to just lose it like they, why do they get mad when I lose the tax return form that I filled and then lost.
  • foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Its being funneled into the Stargate Program.
    Dont worry, the money is going towards defending the Earth...
    • TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well thanks to SciFi we'll be saving trillions a year :
  • mikev, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13In Soviet Russia, 2.3 trillion dollars loses you!
  • Klowner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I used it to buy cupcakes for everyone, I eated them
  • skyfire1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Billions, trillions, shmillions. What difference does it make? It's not like we can just give the government a big spanking for screwing everyone out of their tax dollars.
  • bluechips23, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Osama ran away with them. Now he is living in a large palace with lots of nude babes!
  • artificial001, on 10/12/2007, -2/+92.3 trillion = $7666.66 per person.

    talk about a *****
    • starguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1buys a lot of toilet seats... even at that price
  • goink, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Has Digg degraded to such a low level that people are no longer content with just links to stupid photos/stories about how the Wii is better than PS3/Apple is god/evil republicans/meaningless top 10 lists/and news links with inaccurate titles? Now we also need to read news articles that are 5 years old?

    Have the people who post on digg have lost any sense of what is a good news article?
    • jboeke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Sorry. I have lost have good sense of news have article.
    • goink, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6oh Wow, you caught my typo. That totally negates what I said.
    • jboeke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah. That was a dick move. I was feeling saucy.

      For serious: Has anyone heard about this since? I'd really, truly, honestly like to know if anybody has looked into this or if it was just forgotten.
    • jboeke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Apparently it was just forgotten!
  • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Funny I mentioned this to some family members during a heated discussion about the course our nation has been taking and the direction it appears we're headed... and not a single one of them had ever heard about this. People who only go by the mainstream media are missing so much information it makes it nearly impossible to discuss certain matters without the conversation devolving into a character bashing party.

    Yeah I must be a complete conspiracy nut because you've never heard about the missing pentagon money. This doesn't even mention the fact that a very large amount of gold worth millions of dollars that was held below building 7 also went 'missing' on the same exact day.
  • Salgat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I could use that money for college.
  • thekarmastrike, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8This should be the scandal of the decade. 2.3tril? Thats two Iraq wars - GONE.

    I'm so sick of these scum who run our country.
    • geneikillua, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Hey moron. Read the damn article. It's not "gone." It's not directly accountable for. Trust me, somebody didn't just go ahead and steal $2.3 trillion.

      Besides, this story is from Jan. 2002. That means most of that money was from under Clinton. We have no idea if Bush has been better or worse at making the Pentagon more accountable.
    • xister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Oh don't turn it into a left/right thing. Dem? Republican? Both sides are full of dirty bastards. But you're right, the money just can't be accounted for. It's still in our economy, or more to the point in some rich bastard's pocket and that $$$ estimate is probably over a long period of time.
    • MrEguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@geneikillua

      I'm getting sick of the fcuking name calling here. You could have easily made your point without calling thekarmastrike a moron. Nobody wins that game, it's just degrading.
  • crazyman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I was wondering what that giant bag of money was doing outside my house.
  • TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Read the damn article people.

    They said the money couldn't be properly tracked, not that it was lost. Plus, this all went down a few years ago and without any new and relavent information, its useless and FUD. Digg me down if you like, but the level-headed people understand what I'm talking about...

    Maybe each Digg membership should come with Hook'd on Phonics so people will actually read the articles.
    • jboeke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yeah, I couldn't properly track my sunglasses earlier today. That's why I always buy cheap ones. I keep improperly tracking those things all the time.
  • beijingdave, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Isn't it obvious? It's been skimmed off to fund those newfangled gravity-drive flying machines that were built from UFO technology. Duh. ;-)
  • cp101, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Old.
  • TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@jboeke

    Next time, when you submit something, try letting the article speak for itself and not twist its meaning and constantly defend it in the comments. Otherwise, you might as well join the rest of the blog spam.
  • jboeke, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Is this a better headline?

    "The books are cooked routinely year after year."
  • ahuxley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Iraq's Missing Billions has some of the projects that your cash went towards.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzWk4G9NwVQ
  • jeanette3654, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Why the f%#& is this story out now like it's new?! Rummy uncorked this minor little detail on Sept.10 2001(what a coincidence) as if he knew everyone would be focused on something else the very next day, and nothing would ever be done about it! I remember when he did it! Whoever re-released this story probably thinks we're all moronic infants with the attention span of your average video gamer.
    • faskippy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3And that makes it not worth addressing, HOW??? Perhaps we shouldn't discuss it at all, eh?
  • skulljar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I worked in the Comptroller aboard a large military installation. I balanced the books. I kept track of all incoming dollars. They ran into the hundreds of millions and even the billions- and came from multiple sources. I tracked what it was supposed to be used for, what it WAS used for, and every single movement in around and between with intricate detail. There was no "losing track of money." That was not an option nor a possibility with the layers and layers of accountability in place. Money like that does not get "lost," it gets laundered.
  • stotch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0what would brian boitano do?
  • Tours732, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Big news...the Federal government wastes, steals, loses money. The Pentagon isn't even the biggest spender anymore. Isn't that the whole point of insisting on "limited" government? Once the operatiks get our cash it's in the wind. Like Sen. William Proxmire used to say when awarding his "Golden Fleece" prize for blatant waste, "...A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're into real money."
  • ugene, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4only a matter of time before there is an uprising
    • CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There are two very large hurdles to an uprising in the US:

      1: Ideology. When there was a "king", it was easy to say "him vs. us". But unfortunately, "democracy" has been drilled into people as meaning that the government _is_ "us". That somehow the government is not run by a cadre of corrupt multi-millionare oligarchs, just because they let us vote for them every few years.

      2: The Federal Reserve. Even if a general uprising were to occur, the central government has complete control of the economy. One twitch and every bank, every bank account, every means of buying and selling except barter is gone. How much actual cash do you have on hand, really?

      Don't get me wrong, I still think the US has the best opportunity to roll back Leviathan. But indeed the future does seem to be getting darker even as we watch.

  • integerx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is somewhat related I think:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911+Mysteries&hl=en
    It's the most chilling thing I've seen for a long time.
  • faskippy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"I don't doubt the Pentagon is all those things but not to the tune of 2.3 trillion dollars. Rumsfeld was trying to make a case for his deep and drastic reforms."

    Can I please ask what you base your apparant knowledge of the accountings on? Is this an educated statement or just a guess? How far back should we go? Although we are talking Rummy here, who you could trust about as far as you can throw him, if someone, ANYONE is saying we're wasting taxpayer dollars, then maybe we are. And by "we", I mean the PENTAGON! Let it come to light! We have everything to gain by uncovering the whereabouts of the money, the path it took, and those responsible for not accounting for it in the first place. Oops, I left out the thieves who stole it from the taxpayers.
  • metall1c1ne, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3No taxation without competence!

    ...morons.
  • wantanswers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So, what should Congress do about it? If public accountability is truly lost and gone forever, then they should literally just hand the Pentagon a blank check, and that'll end the debate, and lay the blame for being fiscally responsible squarely at their feet, and absolve Congress of the blame. If they don't have control of the budget anymore, if it's gone 'runaway', then that needs to be said publicly, so that voters know what's Really Going On, Here.

    Or, if Congress DOES have control of the budget, then they need to wrench back on all spending until the budget is again balanced. Whichever, whatever...
  • bubba1971, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why do we as Americans have such a high tolerance for mediocrity amongst our "leaders"? What will it take to hold these people accountable? This isn't simply "bureaucracy", "black ops" or just the natural order of things, THIS IS A CRIME against AMERICANS! These "leaders" need to be arrested for treason, straight and simple, even after they leave office. They know they've committed crimes, they willfully ignore the views of the majority of Americans, they know we all hate their guts, and yet they're laughing all the way to the bank. Wake up Americans!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.