Did Bank of America "misplace' $1.4 billion in Taxpayer Money in the 1990's?

In the early 1990's, $700 million were allotted by the U.S. Government for "humanitarian purposes'. The Security Pacific National Bank (SPNB) of Brea, California, was contracted to transform the money into prepaid banking instruments (International Money Orders/IMO's) in denominations of $2,000 to then be distributed to victims of the war in Bosnia. However, in 1992, SPNB suffered a "security breach' and the IMO's were ordered destroyed. Whatever became of the $700 million? In 1996, the same Bank (SPNB) which was responsible for the "security breach' in 1992, entered into another contract to transform $700 million into prepaid banking instruments (IMO's) for a company called International Trading Holding of New York. The guarantor was to be The National Bank of America. According to the contract, this money was also destined to be used for "humanitarian Purposes'. Was this the same money allotted in 1990? If so, did it reach its destination this time? If not, who can tell us what happened to both allotments which total $1.4 billion ? These contracts remained shrouded in secrecy till, in 2001, a Rome businessman began investigating, and in 2003, California officials and the FBI, decided to leak selected information regarding the IMO's to the public. While the information leaked by the authorities revealed little about the whereabouts of the money, it managed to label the IMO's "counterfeit' (without listing proof). The Chief Investigator at the California Controller's Office, Dale Lee, released this statement to the press in 2003, regarding the arrest of two men in November of 2002, who were attempting to cash IMO's at the offices of the Controller: "The roots of the case go back to the early 1990's when Security Pacific National Bank suffered a security breach. Before it was bought by Bank of America (BofA), SPNB contracted out for the destruction of the money orders. The destruction was to be done in the Philippines. But some money orders became templates for counterfeiters. Counterfeit money began circulating in Eastern Europe in 1992, about the time the bank merged with Bank of America (BofA).' Lee's statement is misleading as it precludes any opposition to the arrests or disagreement that the IMO's are counterfeit. Another feature of this affair is the behaviour of officials of Bank of America (BofA), throughout the businessman's investigations. When pressed for information regarding the IMO's, BofA officials responded in a variety of ways: IMO's were "legit'; IMO's were "real' but were "not a valid account'; then honoured one (1) IMO at a Texas bank; then honoured two (2) IMO's with the Internal Revenue Service; then refused to honour them. Considering the gravity of these facts, every U.S. citizen has the right to demand clear and precise answers to a lot of questions concerning the $1.4 Billion dollars in question. Documentation is available!