If there is one unchanging aspect of America, it arguably would be that its elite leaders loot its treasury for personal, group and international aggrandizement and power. Indeed, crime pays! Naturally, national power has been exercised in ways meant to conceal these massive crimes from prying eyes or to have to justify their overall expenditures, while "pooh-poohing" the loss of a billion dollars here, or there, as "paying the price for democracy." Often, the losses are explained by corrupt foreigners defrauding well-meaning Uncle Sam.
Consider: "A relatively obscure audit report [ed.- hidden] from the Office of Inspector General of the United States Department of Defense suddenly is getting a lot of attention for what it apparently reveals: The Pentagon can't account for $6.5 trillion.
"The day before 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted $2.3 trillion was missing from the Defense Department budget..." [ArmstrongEconomics blog]
Additionally, consider: "Over a mere two decades, the Pentagon lost track of a mind-numbing $10 trillion...and no one, not even the Department of Defense, knows where it went or on what [ed. - if anything] it was spent...
"Even though audits of all federal agencies became mandatory in 1996, the Pentagon has apparently made itself an exception, and - fully 20 years later - stands obstinately orotund in never having complied...
"'Over the last 20 years, the Pentagon has broken every promise to congress about when an audit would be completed,' Rafael DeGennaro, director of Audit the Pentagon told The Guardian recently. "Meanwhile, congress has more than than doubled the Pentagon's budget." [Activist Post, Marcfh 27, 2017 by Claire Bernish]
The tail has wagged the dog here. The threat by congress to "trim the tail" apparently is recognized by all concerned as "idle." Yet, while America's infrastructure crumbles for lack of funds to reconstruct, modernize and maintain - a threat to economic progress, congress seeks to increase Department of Defense funding to patch up the crumbling military war machinery and supportive equipment. What parent or teacher rewards a badly-acting child?
This huge loss cannot be incidental "bleeding" of an overworked military struggling with daunting global problems. "Human cupidity" would be the rational conclusion. It would be naïve to believe that select contractors, global and local banks (capable of handling large sums) and cooperating foreign leaders did not feast on such largess. Each covered its trail in various ways, which would complicate any investigation of these massive DoD losses. It is reasonable to believe that the "big money" ended in the hands of the West's Big Boys. It is also reasonable to believe that many generals and admirals did not get to their lofty positions due to acumen in military strategy. Men and women may be promoted because they were, and are, owned by non-military interests. Big money theft required big money planning. Some generals and admirals may be essentially "goodfellas" employed by international criminal syndicates which evolved from banking and trade.
The craft of theft of national treasure has a long history. Hereafter, I am going to consider only a couple of 20th Century examples. I believe a hefty tome could be written on this subject.
Most Americans don't have too much awareness that gold was once a central part of the lawful money of the United States. It's spelled out in the U.S. Constitution. Because of gold's relative scarcity as a commodity, in the United States silver was also anointed by the U.S. Constitution as lawful money. A proportional relationship was devised therein. Naturally, being commodities, gold and silver were implicitly subject to relational changes as new discoveries of deposits occurred. This would be the task of congress.
However, banks, whether central, state or local, preferred paper allegedly backed by gold or silver. The backing was typically fractional - and the fraction might be 1/10th or less. Banks could lawfully loan money in the form of dollar certificates of which the gold or silver promised on demand they didn't actually have. They gambled against a "run" on their dollar certificates.
As possession of an ounce of gold provided the holder with an asset which has historically globally been accepted as money and as a store of monetary value, and as this asset can also be multiplied in purchasing power by means of fractional loans, its possession spurred covetousness, cupidity and crimes against property. On a grand scale it shook the world like a series of earthquakes. War was typically its "blind."
The gold bullion assets of the citizens of the United States of America appeared to be an instance of high criminal theft by its elites and their Western partners - especially Great Britain.
The United States Bullion Depository at Ft. Knox, Kentucky - one of six such facilities - was built during 1935 and completed in 1936. Gold was initially housed there in 1937. By 1944 the U.S. Gold Stock amounted to 589.5 millions of fine troy ounces. Not all of these were deposited at Ft. Knox. By 1949 the U.S. deposit had risen to 701.8 millions of fine troy ounces. [Source: Federal Reserve Bulletins, Annual Reports of the Director of the Mint]
The United States possessed more gold bullion than all other countries combined. What happened? Things got, and get, very murky indeed. Just as the DoD doesn't seem able to audit itself according to sound accounting principles, the U.S. Treasury doesn't seem to be too forthcoming about the missing Ft. Knox gold. Consider:
"Why, in October 1961, when the U.S. had more gold [ed. - 484.2 millions of fine troy ounces] than all the western world combined, did the U.S. find it advisable to establish the so-called London Gold Pool?
"Was the 'broad purpose,' as stated, really to stabilize the gold at $35.00 per ounce or was it a device to make it possible, under the cloak of authority, to physically remove the huge weight of gold from the underground, maximum security vault at the U.S. Bullion Depository at Ft. Knox, where it was originally stored?
"Why did this 'informal and flexible arrangement' between the United States, all free European nations and Great Britain, state that the U.S. '...share in Gold Pool purchases and sales was 50 per cent?'
"Why was the London Gold Pool operation abandoned March 17, 1968, and the so-called 2-tier system established?
"Was it because the U.S. had run out of good delivery (.995 fine) gold? Was it because those who had acquired over 7.5 billion dollars worth of U.S. gold at $35.00 wanted to manipulate the price to around $90 an ounce?
"What was the emergency when, on January 17, 1968, House Bill No. 14743 was introduced at the urging of President Johnson to remove the 25% gold cover of the U.S. dollar?
"Why was the 2-tier gold arrangement established on March 17, 1968, the day before H.R. 14743 was signed into law by President Johnson?" ["52 Unanswered Questions Regarding Alleged Gold Reserves of The United States" (updated January 1986)]
In the '50s and '60s in the United States there were far more meaningfully patriotic American citizens than presently exist. Education was more rigorous and diverse. Pedagogic propagandizing was only beginning to explore its range of possibilities to "shape" America's collective mind in ways intended to advance the agenda of the elitists.
I cannot help wondering if the anti-war movement and the black civil rights movement had not been seized upon and funded by sources which wanted to distract Americans at the very time that the final massive theft of United States gold was being planned and executed.
Because the last official audit of U.S. gold bullion deposits occurred in the Eisenhower Administration, many curious citizens, such as Edward Durell, asked, "Mr. President, Where Is Our Gold?" In reply to persistent inquiries the Treasury Department responded 1) It's not necessary because everyone knows that it resides in Ft. Knox [ed.- "Begging the question" fallacy] and 2) it would cost too much money [ed.- a few million dollars]. Does this sound like a responsible public servant department? Or does it sound like "stone-walling?"
Thanks to the patriotic Virginian, Mr. Durell, and his welling comrades across America, a faux audit of Ft. Knox occurred in 1974. It involved Mrs. Mary Brooks, Director of the Bureau of the Mint, one senator, six congressmen and about 100 journalists. The underground central vault was not visited during the faux audit and William Simon denied its existence. The thirteen cell-like vaults above it were targeted. Only three were opened. No core samplings occurred. Some chips were examined. Although pure gold is bright yellow, some observers noted that the color was orangish in color. Over the 30-day audit about twenty inappropriately-skilled Treasury Department officials worked on the project.
According to Treasury and Bureau statistics released in bulletins et al, the U.S. Gold Stock in 1974 was 276.0 millions of fine troy ounces. The journalists in 1974 overwhelmingly assured the American public that all the gold was there in the Ft. Knox Depository although they only peeped at three cell-like vaults. No one viewed the great central vault which held the great bulk of U.S. gold. This central vault was attested to by General Ryan, who was the first commanding officer at the Ft. Knox Depository, but its existence was denied by Secretary of the Treasury William Simon.
Who would you trust? Indeed, has there been any Treasury Secretary worthy of trust?
Other points relative to this issue but not all of them:
1.) "When Mrs. Brooks was showing the gold of the one compartment opened to the newsmen September 23, 1974, she was asked, 'Has any of the gold ever been removed from Ft. Knox for any reason?', she replied, 'Oh, certainly. When we had the run on the pound and the French franc and we were shipping gold overseas to help our friends and I guess it was pretty wild. They flew it across the ocean...'" [52 Unanswered Questions..., p.5]
2.) "Why did Simon testify on December 3, 1974, before a House sub-committee, when discussing the forthcoming General Services Administration auction of gold to be held on January 6, 1975, that 'No gold will be dispensed from Ft. Knox?'
"Treasury's own statement of August 31, 1974, shows 24 million ounces of 'good delivery form' (.995) gold at Ft. Knox. According to The Washington Post, December 4, 1974, he also said that the gold stored in Ft. Knox was inferior to other U.S. gold." [supra, p.6]
3.) "Why, on December 12, 1974, did the General Services Administration offer to sell just 2 million ounces of gold? In round figures, this was the same number of ounces 'purchased' from the Exchange Stabilization Fund on December 9, 1974." [supra]
4.) "Why was the gold offered on an 'as is, no inspection' basis? And why was the auction of the so-called 'Dutch' type? (That is an auction where all bidders buy at the lowest price accepted by the seller from any bidder). [supra, p.6]
5.) "Why did the Treasury omit from its official list of shipments from Ft. Knox from May, 1961 through June 9, 1971, a shipment of 1,762,381 fine ounces which left Ft. Knox secretly in four tractor-trailer loads on January 20, 1965?" [supra, p.8]
6.) There is logic to believing that "whatever gold is found to exist in the U.S. and stored by the Treasury, does not belong to the Treasury, but to the Federal Reserve System." "We first secured the balance sheets of the regional Federal Reserve Banks...We find that the amounts of the 12 regional banks under this heading [ed.-Gold certificate account] varies from time to time, but the total of the 12 is always carried on the statement of the Federal Reserve System as an asset under the heading 'Gold Stock.' At that time it was $11.2 billion (figured at the official gold price of $42.22 per Troy ounce)." "At the same time, the Treasury carries on its balance sheet as a liability under the heading 'Gold certificates, and credits payable therein' an equal amount of $11.2 billion (again figured at the official gold price of $42.22 per Troy ounce)." "The last sentence reads 'These obligations are fully secured by gold in the Treasury." "Would you not think that this footnote clearly meant that the $11.2 billion shown by the Federal Reserve System as an asset was collateralized by 264.3 million ounces of gold held by the Treasury?" [Mr. President, Where Is Our Gold?, p.7]
7.) "...if you subtract that last shipment of 14 million troy ounces from the total 233 million troy ounces, you come up with 219 million troy ounces that left Fort Knox during the London Gold Pool period of operation." " Note that more than 9 million ounces was said to be sent to the New York regional Federal Reserve Bank. I will accept that as probably reaching its destination." "Secretary Simon wrote Congressman John Conlan on May 4, 1976, that during the operation of the London Gold Pool 45.2 million ounces constituted the net sales by the U.S. for the benefit of the Pool." "When you deduct these figures you get over 165 million ounces of gold where no satisfactory destination has been given. Where did it go?" [Mr. President...,supra, p.6]
This rather extensive defining of the primary issues from articles and pamphlets generally cited from studies by Edward Durell and Dr. Beter seem to me to overwhelmingly suggest criminal misappropriation of U.S. gold bullion into unknown private hands, whether personal or corporate. Characteristically, representatives of elitists in high official positions deflect, deny and ignore queries. A monumental theft of national assets appeared to have occurred, and no officials, elected or appointed, make any effort to unveil the mystery. The adage, "Old people die; the young forget," seems to apply. In short it all blows over. Once again, public officials fail in their duties. Mandated audits rarely, if ever, occur. Life goes on.
In my final consideration of this topic, I want to touch on a high crime that appeared to occur during the close of WWI. It involved Eugene Meyer, whose name is better known for his purchase of The Washington Post during the 1930s.
Bernard Baruch and Eugene Meyer headed two of the most powerful organizations during the Woodrow Wilson Administration. "Eugene Meyer's stewardship of the War Finance Corporation comprises one of the most amazing financial operations ever partially recorded in this country."
"Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, figured in two investigations of Meyer, in 1925, and again in 1930, when Meyer was proposed as Governor of the Federal Reserve Board. The Select Committee to Investigate the Destruction of Government Bonds, submitted, on March 2, 1925, 'Preparation and Destruction of Government Bonds - 68th Congress, 2nd Session, Report No. 1635':
"P.2. 'Duplicate bonds amounting to 2314 pairs and duplicate coupons amounting to 4698 pairs ranging in denominations from $50 to $10,000 have been redeemed to July 1, 1924. Some of these duplications have resulted from error and some from fraud.' [Eustace Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, p.95]
In essence a defrauder in high position was causing to be issued two identical sets of bonds & coupons and dishing them out on the basis of "one for me, one for Uncle Sam; one for me, one for Uncle Sam," etc. If a man has control of the essential levers, he can enrich himself. Eugene Meyer had such control. However, Rep. McFadden could not conclusively prove that Meyer defrauded the government. It was determined under the McFadden investigation that the orders and details of the bond & coupon sums was determined between Meyer, or trusted aid, and the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Jerome J. Hanauer. The approach was very casual and no records seem to exist regarding their conversations on the issuance of debt securities of the U.S. If there was collusion, then it probably involved benefits for both - however unequal. Both would need to "tidy things" so evidence would reveal the crime but not the criminals.
Whether Eugene Meyer, descended from a partner in the French merchant bank, Lazard Freres & Cos., had the ability and daring to rob Uncle Sam under his very nose can only be guessed. It has been claimed that Bernard Baruch entered service under the Wilson Administration as a millionaire and left as a centimillionaire. Eugene Meyer has been estimated, if guilty of bond fraud, to have left with nearly 100 million dollars of additional wealth. He did manage to buy Allied Chemical Company shortly after leaving government service. Later, he gathered in the Depression-era sale of The Washington Post at a good price.
The conclusions reached by the McFadden-chaired committee included the term "from error." I am guessing this was a way of saying that since fraud was not conclusive, they would create the generous category of "error."
This concludes my look at the benefits of public service for elite Americans and their vassals. It is noteworthy how often war acts as a blind for theft on a massive scale from the national treasury. Without suitable laws, people cannot be restrained. When suitable laws are ignored by those entrusted to enforce them, opportunistic criminals will take advantage of the chance to materially advance themselves.
