Thursday, June 26, 2014

Historical US Gold Reserves simply can't be consistent with the actual history of the closing the the London gold Pool in 1968 ( due to London and the US having a few months of gold left to meet French demands for gold ) and the closing of the US gold window in 1971 by President Nixon..... And as the historical data for US Gold Reserves do not indicate any measurable change in gold reserves since the early 1970's ( such as gold purchases to offset those massive deliveries of gold in the late 1960's ) , there simply cannot be physical gold in the US ( US Treasury or Federal Reserve ) that matches up with the so called official data..... Which explains why Germany's Government has given up on bring their gold home from the New York Federal Bank ! Austria will bay at the moon but back off as well..... what's gone is gone and it's not coming back !

How can the US Government  ( US Treasury ) or the Federal Reserve have any sizable physical gold left ?  First the official malarkey .... Focus on years starting 1968 - 1971.....


Historical U.S. Gold Reserves
Published : February 19th, 2013


Keywords :   Bretton Woods | Gold | Gold Reserves | Gold Standard | Us Gold |

From the historical data in the World Gold Council’s archives comes the chart below depicting the dramatic rise and fall of U.S. gold reserves before and after World War II (note that the stair-step pattern prior to 1950 was the result of data being available only in five-year increments).
All sorts of helpful annotations could be made here such as the surge in early 20th century U.S. exports leading to a great accumulation of gold reserves under various forms of the gold standard and then 1960′s “Guns and Butter” U.S. policies leading to a great loss of gold reserves under the Bretton Woods system.


Now consider this .....




http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2014/6/26_Missing_China_Gold_Warns_Of_Catastrophic_Bullion_Bank_Default.html



****


“People forget that investors around the world realized the dollar was being devalued and gold was worth more than $35 an ounce.  France then decided it didn’t want to hold dollars any more -- it wanted to redeem dollars for gold.  So the massive offtake of gold in late 1967 and early 1968 led to emergency meetings in Washington and London.

At that point those in charge of the pool realized they only had a few months of gold reserves left at the massive rate of offtake.  Well, in 1968 the situation became really desperate.  The minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee record that the United States was sending emergency Air Force transport shipments of gold over to London in order to reimburse the Bank of England for British gold that was being advanced into the market on behalf of the United States’ contribution to the gold pool.

Finally, in 1968 when the U.S. government and Bank of England realized that they had only a few weeks of gold reserves left, the United States contacted the British government and asked them to close the London Gold Pool.  The gold price then rose substantially.  Then, in 1971 Nixon closed the gold window.  So Sprott is right, this is how it ended in 1968 and 1971.  A certain amount of metal was always required to suppress the gold price, and after a while it was clear that metal would no longer be available.



****




And this ....


http://www.theinternationalforecaster.com/International_Forecaster_Weekly/Looking_in_Fort_Knox_for_its_Gold


Looking in Fort Knox for its Gold

Only a fraction of gold in Fort Knox was ever allowed to be seen, No audit of Fort Knox in over 60 years,   If you believe government routinely lies, why would you believe government's claim to have retained 8,200 tons of gold for the past 30 years—especially when government refuses to provide or even allow any independent verification of its claim?   The only reason to currently believe that government has retained 8,200 tons of gold is that a contrary belief is too fantastic to accept.  

January 12 2013, By Alfred Adask


    Ft. Knox Gold Gone? On Thursday’s radio show (Financial Survival, 4PM to 5PM East Coast time (dgscoins.com), I was reading from an article by Mr. Przemyslaw Radomski that explored the possibility that there's no longer any gold in the U.S. depository at Ft. Knox:
•  "An audit of the US gold holdings has  been demanded by some for years, but the government will not allow it.   The gold belongs to the American people, so why won't they let us see  it?  Many think it is because it is no longer there.  If that is indeed  the case, do we not face a 'financial Armageddon'?
"At first it may sound shocking, but the last audit of gold stored in Fort Knox took place in 1953. No typo here, 1953, just after U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower took office. [However,] No outside experts were allowed [during that audit] and the audit team tested only about 5% of gold hoarded in the fort. So, there hasn’t been a comprehensive audit of Fort Knox in over 60 (!!!) years."
 •  "Congressman John R. Rarick demanded a Congressional investigation and, on September 23, 1974 six Congressmen, one Senator and the press were allowed to enter Fort Knox to see for themselves if the gold was there or not.  The tour showed that there was gold in Fort Knox but, all the same, it sparked even more controversies.
"Only a fraction of the gold reserves were available to see. A photo of one Congressman published by Associated Press suggested that gold bars held in the fort may have been less heavy than would be usually expected.  This resulted in even more doubt about the fineness of gold in Fort Knox. . . . [This is]  important if you consider that counterfeit 'gold bars' have been showing up in New York recently and that fake gold bars turned up in LBMA Approved Vaults in Hong Kong."
•  "In 2012, the German federal court ordered that the German central bank, Bundesbank, conduct an audit of German gold reserves stored abroad, particularly in the U.S., U.K. and in France. The German authorities have never before conducted a comprehensive audit of their foreign gold reserves and the last time they were [even] able to see their gold stored in the New York Federal Reserve vaults was supposedly in 1979/80. Because of that, 150 tons of gold will be shipped from the U.S. to Germany to assess the fineness of the bars."
     All of this—no comprehensive audit in over 60 years, Congressional doubt as far back as A.D. 1974, German doubt in A.D. 2012, and counterfeit "gold bars"—illustrates that there are legitimate reasons to doubt the gov-co's claim to currently store about 8,200 metric tons of gold at Fort Knox and/or the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
     Mr. Radomski provided an interesting chart to illustrate the relationship between U.S. National Debt and the currently claimed U.S. treasury of gold (8,200 metric tons):
     The red line shows changes in the number of metric tons of gold held by the U.S. Treasury over time.  The yellow line signifies the National Debt as measured in dollars of debt per ounce of gold.  
     Mr. Radomski used this graph to illustrate that back in the 1920s, the government had virtually no National Debt and therefore the ratio of debt to an ounce of gold was 0 to 1.  However, over time the National Debt (yellow line) increased until today there are $60,000 in National Debt for each ounce of gold allegedly held in the U.S. Treasury.
     Mr. Radomski doesn't argue that the price of gold should therefore be $60,000/ounce.  But he does believe that, much like fractional reserve banking, at least 10% of the National Debt should be backed by gold and therefore the current price of gold might reasonably be about $6,000/ounce.  He adds that if it turns out that there is little or no gold in Ft. Knox, the price of gold should skyrocket.
     •  I look at the graph and a couple of points jump out at me:
     •  First, from A.D. 1917 to 1939, the U.S. treasury of gold grew in a fairly orderly, "stair-step" manner from 2,500 tons to about 8,500 tons.
     •  Second, in A.D. 1939-1940, the U.S. treasury of gold suddenly jumped from 8,500 tons to about 19,500 tons.  That's a 130% increase in about one year.  That's fantastic.
     I don't know why our holdings in gold increased so dramatically.  I presume that with the onset of WWII, foreign nations in the European or Asian theaters of war decided to store some of their gold in the comparatively safe USA.  But, if so, I don't understand how an influx of foreign gold intended to be merely stored in the USA could be counted as an addition to the U.S. Treasury.  I therefore presume that when WWII started, America's first response was to sell food, and/or military equipment and supplies nations at war—and sell it for gold.
     Whatever the reason, the onset of WWII was extremely profitable for the U.S. Treasury.
(In fact, WWII was so initially profitable that I'm left to wonder if the onset of a WWIII could be similarly profitable.  If so, could a WWIII be started for the purpose of increasing our Treasury's supply of gold?)
     •  Third, our gold supply grew more or less slowly from A.D. 1939 (19,500 tons) through A.D. 1957 to about 20,500 tons.
     •  Fourth, starting about A.D. 1957, the U.S. Treasury's holding of gold began to fall precipitously from 20,500 tons to a reported 8,500 tons in about A.D. 1972.  I don't know what caused that steep decline, but I suspect that the cause may have been some sort of policy change or treaty under the Eisenhower-Nixon administration.
There was severe unemployment in A.D. 1958.  It's remotely possible that the government began to sell off its gold as a means to "stimulate" the economy.  (If so, I can also imagine how government would eventually realize that they couldn't use up all of their gold and therefore opted to create of a pure fiat that could be used to "stimulate" the economy without actually spending any gold.  I wouldn't bet that hypothesis is true, but it's an interesting possibility.)
Whatever the reason, the U.S. government admits to having reduced its gold holding from 20,500 tons to 8,500—almost 60%—in the 15 years from A.D. 1957 to 1972.  That's a huge reduction, and I wonder what the rationale may have been.  (How th'  Hell was that allowed to happen?)
     •  Fifth, the U.S. disposed of another 200 to 300 tons of gold between A.D. 1972 and A.D. 1980.  Since then, our reported gold supply has remained at a constant 8,200 tons.  The U.S. Treasury has reportedly not bought or sold another ounce of gold of the past 32 years.
I wonder why?  Is 8,200 the "magic number" that represents exactly how many tons of gold we should have?  Not too much.  Not too little.  But juuuust right! . . .  Right?
     Actually, it strikes me as extremely odd that our Treasury hasn't reported buying or selling one more ounce of gold—nor have they allowed us to inventory the national treasury of gold—for over 30 years.  Very, very odd.
     As illustrated by the green dotted line on the graph above, by about A.D. 1972, our reported hoard of gold was almost exactly the same (8,500 tons) as it had been prior to the onset of WWII.  Another oddity.  To this day, our reported national gold holdings are almost identical to those of A.D. 1935.  I wonder why.
    Here's another variation on the previous graph that focuses on the loss of American gold from A.D. 1957 through A.D. 1972.  I added a blue dotted line to hypothetically extend that rate of loss (from '57 to '72) on through A.D.1978—about when our Treasury's gold holdings would've been completely depleted.
Link to Image:

     The reasons for this extension (dotted blue line) are an interesting story reported by Mr. Radomski and an insight provided by one of today's radio show listeners that struck me as profound.
First, Mr. Radomski's story.  Speaking about claims that the Ft Knox holds no gold, Mr. Radomski wrote,
"This is no new topic. One of the first written accounts questioning the amount of gold really stored in Fort Knox appeared in 1974 in a tabloid, the National Tattler. An unnamed informant claimed that there was no gold left in Fort Knox. The sensational nature of the story, and of the newspaper, didn't contribute to the credibility of the account but it was later revealed that the informant, Louise Auchincloss Boyer, secretary to Nelson Rockefeller, had fallen out of the window of her New York apartment and died three days after the publication in the Tattler. The tragic incident resulted in controversies over the possibility that the U.S. Bullion Depository may have misstated the actual amount of gold held in Fort Knox."
     You don't need a tin-foil hat to see the conspiracy theory in that story.  A secretary to Nelson Rockefeller reports that there's no gold in Ft. Knox, and three days later she dies under violent and mysterious circumstances.  Assuming these two events (the report and the death) are linked rather than coincidental, they imply that the secretary was murdered for telling the truth—the gold was already gone from in Ft. Knox all the way back in the early 1970s.
(Incidentally, if the gold was removed from Ft. Knox, where did it go?  Who got it?  Insofar as Nelson Rockefeller's secretary died, it might follow that Rockefeller ordered her death.  How much more of a leap would be required to presume that Rockefeller also received at least some of the theoretically missing gold?)

     Now, here's the insight provided by one of my radio show listeners that struck me as profound:      Did President Nixon close the "gold window" (redemption of foreign-held paper dollars with U.S. gold at the rate of $35/ounce) in A.D. 1971 because he didn't want to bleed any more gold out of the U.S. Treasury?  Or did Nixon close the "gold window" because the gold was already all gone?
     Closing the "gold window" and thereby reducing the paper dollar to a pure fiat currency wasn't Nixon's only option.  He could more easily have simply devalued the dollar from $35/ounce to $100/ounce—or even $200 per ounce.  Sure, such devaluation would cause an uproar in global trade, but declaring dollars to be worth only 1/100th of an ounce of gold could not be as bad as declaring dollars were worth no gold whatsoever.  If Nixon had devalued the dollar from roughly 3% ($35) of an ounce of gold to 1% ($100) or 0.5% ($200) of an ounce of gold, the dollar would at least have still been "as good as gold"—not as much gold as formerly, mind you, but still, some gold.
     Why did Nixon choose to "close the gold window" and turn the dollar into a pure fiat currency rather than simply devalue the dollar to $50, $100 or $200 per ounce of gold?  Was it because Nixon was a hard-nosed S.O.B?  Or was it because the Treasury could no longer redeem paper dollars for gold at any price for gold (not even $1,000/ounce) because the gold was already all gone?  Was the government's primary objective in "closing the gold window" to prevent the American people and the world from "looking in" and learning that the U.S. was out of gold and therefore bankrupt?

     Look back at the previous graph.
     The government admits to losing 60% of our gold from A.D. 1957 through A.D. 1972.  But, according to Mr. Radomski, we haven't had a comprehensive audit of Ft. Knox since A.D. 1953.
     Thus, we don't actually know how much gold is gone.  Ohh, you can bet that at least 60% of the former gold is gone.  Government has admitted that much gold is gone.  But, it's entirely possible that government didn't merely dispose of 60% of our gold during those 15 years.  Maybe they disposed of 70%.  Or, even 80%.  Or, even 99.9% of our national treasury of gold.  We have nothing to prove government's claim that it's kept 8,200 tons of gold since A.D.1973--except the government's word of honor.
     We do see proof every day that government has no "honor" and will, instead, lie any time it suits the government's interests.  What is the true inflation rate?  What's the true unemployment rate?  What's the true size of the National Debt?  How many of you believe government tells the truth about any of those numbers?  How many of you believe the government routinely lies?
     If you believe government routinely lies, why would you believe government's claim to have retained 8,200 tons of gold for the past 30 years—especially when government refuses to provide or even allow any independent verification of its claim?   The only reason to currently believe that government has retained 8,200 tons of gold is that a contrary belief is too fantastic to accept.     Surely, our beloved gov-co would never lie about such an important issue, right?  This parallels the "big lie" strategy first advanced by Adolph Hitler's minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels.  In essence, the people may not believe government's little lies, but they'll never doubt gov-co's big ones.
     Could it be that our gov-co's claim to hold 8,200 tons of gold is one of the world's biggest--and therefore most believable—lies, ever?

     If we extend the blue dotted arrow on the previous graph, we can see that at the rate gold was admittedly being lost between A.D. 1957 and 1972, all of the gold would've been gone by about A.D. 1978.
     We're told that Nelson Rockefeller's secretary revealed that all of the gold was gone in A.D. 1974.
     We know that President Nixon closed the "gold window" in A.D. 1971.
The graph, the secretary's claim and closing the gold window all reflect events in the 1970s. That's not proof, but it is a bit of coincidence.  Those three bits of "evidence" are all consistent with the possibility that all of the U.S. gold was gone sometime around A.D. 1970 (which, coincidentally, was in the midst of the Viet Nam War).
     Is it possible that the gold reportedly stored at Ft. Knox hasn't disappeared recently (as some suspect), but has been gone for over 40 years?
     Inquiring minds wanna know.
     (Finally, those of you who have tin-foil hats may want to don them while you relish yet another conspiracy theory:  Could it be that a primary purpose for the Viet Nam War was less to prevent the spread of communism, but more to conceal the theft of gold from Ft. Knox?).







Head Of German Gold Repatriation Initiative Responds To Bloomberg Story About Repatriation Halt

Tyler Durden's picture





Just hours after we noted Bloomberg's story of Germany's decision to halt its repatriation of gold from the NY Fed, the gentleman at the center of the story, who Bloomberg quoted as saying his 'Repatriate Our Gold' campaign was "on hold" - Peter Boehringer - has come out swinging... The Bloomberg story is "a 'non-news' article with a wrong headline, strange interviewees, old news, and with a clearly apologetic ideological approach." and that's just the start...

Just to set the record straight re this article in which my name is mentioned and in which I am quoted out of context:
a)BusinessWeek/Bloomberg uncritically cites statements of politicians and BuBa-bankers who have or give no proof whatsoever re the untouched whereabouts of the german Gold.
b) Re our campaign"Repatriate our Gold": "On hold" does of course NOT mean that we are in any way satisfied with the current status of BuBa´s ongoing repatriation (far too slow and too little - only 5 tons came from NY in 2013! Not exactly a proof for the untouched existence of 1500 tons in a NY vault unaudited since 1950...). Our public campaign will therefore have to continue.
c) Almost no info in the article can be considered in any way "news". Simply because there has not been any material news in this context since early 2013.
d) Especially the headline is plainly false, because there has not been any change in BuBa´s (too slow) repatriation plans: at least 300+ tonnes will come from NY by end 2020. It is not much - but contrary to the headline, BuBa has NOT stopped the ongoing partial repatriation - enforced solely by public pressure!
e) The political party "Alternative for Germany" has never been part of our campaign - they can therefore not have been "rebuffed" as the article suggests.
f) The political party "FDP" has (with the exception of one (1) MP ) never demanded a repatriation - yet another false info in the article.
g) Some politicians cited in the article can not in any way claim to be "in charge" of the german gold hoard(abroad or not). This holds true for both Mr Barthle and for Mr Hardt: BuBa alone is in charge - and officially, BuBa is independent from political influence...
Summary: a "non-news" article with a wrong headline, strange interviewees, old news, and with a clearly apologetic ideological approach: the main purpose seems to be NOT to give space to the myriad of unanswered and extremely relevant questions BuBa and the Fed have been refusing to answer for decades.








http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-23/germany-gives-trying-repatriate-its-gold-will-leave-it-feds-safe-hands



Germany Gives Up On Trying To Repatriate Its Gold, Will Leave It In The Fed's "Safe Hands"

Tyler Durden's picture





Several months after it was revealed that Germany was able to only recover a miserable 5 tons of its gold in all of 2013(under 10% of the 84 tons it wasscheduled to repatriate),Germany appears to have given up entirely in its attempt to recover gold which simply is not there, and as Michael Krieger reports, citing Bloomberg, has decided to keep "it" (by "it" we don't mean the gold since that clearly has not been at the Fed for decades, but merely the paper promises of ownership: for more see China's gold rehypothecation scandal and how the unwind works) at the NY Fed after all. That is to say, in the "safe hands" of former Goldmanite Bill Dudley.
Just last week, I published a post titled, Video of the Day – “End the Fed” Rallies are Exploding Throughout Germany, which subsequently went viral. Interestingly, only a few days later we find out that Germany’s very own criminal political class has decided it will continue to store the nation’s gold in New York rather than bring it back home as had been the intention. It’s quite ironic that just as protests against the fascist Federal Reserve are spreading throughout the land, the political class officially decides to keep Germany’s treasure across the Atlantic, in care of none other than The Fed itself.
To be fair, this merely seems like a way for Angela Merkel and the rest of her German cronies to save face. After all, it was very clear that the Federal Reserve had already told them “no” when they asked for the gold back in the first place. Why else would it take almost a decade to transport the gold from the U.S. to Germany, which was the latest repatriation schedule.
We learn from Bloomberg that:
Germany has decided its gold is safe in American hands.

Surging mistrust of the euro during Europe’s debt crisis fed a campaign to bring Germany’s entire $141 billion gold reserve home from New York and London. Now, after politics shifted in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition, the government has concluded that stashing half its bullion abroad is prudent after all.

The Americans are taking good care of our gold,” Norbert Barthle, the budget spokesman for Merkel’s Christian Democratic bloc in parliament, said in an interview. “Objectively, there’s absolutely no reason for mistrust.”

Ending talk of repatriating the world’s second-biggest gold reserves removes a potential irritant in U.S.-German relations. It’s also a rebuff to critics including the anti-euro Alternative for Germany party, which says all the gold should return to Frankfurt so it can’t be impounded to blackmail Germany into keeping the currency union together.

The Bundesbank, Germany’s central bank, sent a delegation to the New York Fed’s vault in 2012 for spot checks on the hoard. As the gold’s guardian, the Frankfurt-based Bundesbank is obliged to ensure its safety. It says it’s sensible to store part of the reserves outside the country so they can be swapped more easily for foreign currency in an emergency.
This last sentence is absolutely incredible in its Orwellian irrationality. Swap gold easily for foreign currency? Foreign currency can be conjured up in infinite amounts at will by crooked bankers in suits with phony smiles and calming words filled with complex economic jargon. So Germany needs to be able to swap its gold for that? Well, it seems many nations are falling for this simple, yet effective scam, as I outlined in my post: Ecuador to Transfer More Than Half its Gold Reserves to Goldman Sachs in Exchange for “Liquidity.”
German gold reserves, the second-biggest in the world after those of the U.S., totaled 3,386.4 tons on March 31, according to World Gold Council data. Due to German postwar history, the biggest part is stored at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York;the rest is in London, Paris and Frankfurt.

Right now, our campaign is on hold,” Peter Boehringer, a Munich-based euro critic who co-founded an initiative to bring home all of Germany’s gold in 2012, said in an interview.
Right now and forever. Sorry suckers. This guy promises everything is just fine:
Screen Shot 2014-06-23 at 10.44.09 AM
Full article here.

First Germany, Now Austria Demands An Audit Of Its Offshore Held Gold

Tyler Durden's picture




First it was Germany, now another AAA-rated European country is starting to get concerned about its hard assets.
Overnight Bloomberg reported that following in Bundesbank's footsteps, Austria will audit its gold reserves located in the UK, which represent 80% of its total gold holdings. This gold reserve reviews held at Bank of England in London will be first conducted by external auditors, Christian Gutleder, a spokesman for the Austrian central bank, says via telephone.
As a reminder, Austria held 80% of its roughly 280 tons of gold in U.K., according to last annual report.
Gutleder explained that the Central bank has checked its reserves regularly in the past, adding that gold reserves haven’t changed since 2007. Which begs the question: why check them now then? 
According to the official explanation that review comes after euro-skeptic Freedom Party demanded more transparency, repatriation of reserves. Perhaps it is time to rename the Euroskeptic party into the "we doubt our gold is where you say it is" skeptics. A better explanation was provided by the Austrian Trend magazine, which said that "the measure is seen as a consequence of growing public pressure. There is a rising disbelief among Austrians about the existence of the gold."
Joking aside, with Euroskeptics across Europe ascendent, we wonder which central European nation will be the first to uncover that its gold is no longer where it is supposed to be (that most certainly includes the Banque de France).
Some more color fromGoldreporter.de:
Austria is planning to send auditors to the Bank of England in order to verify the existence of Austrias gold reserves stored in british vaults.

The Austrian accountability office will sent a delegation to London in order to check on Austrias gold reserves stored in vaults at the Bank of England. This is reported by Austrian magazine Trend. The measure is seen as a consequence of growing public pressure. There is a rising disbelief among Austrians about the existence of the gold.

“I acknowledge the request. Any grocery store is obliged to do inventory once a year. It is the only way of getting rid of these unreasonable allegations”, Ewald Nowotny, Governor of the National Bank of Austria tells Trend.

Austria officially owns 280 tonnes of gold of which 17 percent are kept in vaults inside the country. Around 150 tonnes are estimated to be stored in London.

In recent years doubts about the existence and the quality of Germanys monetary gold stored at the New York Fed and the Bank of England were raised by a rising number of skeptics. In January the Bundesbank eventually announced plans to repatriate most of Gemanys gold reserves until 2020.
So first Germany (which at this rate may repatriate its gold held in New York, London and Paris some time in the year 3000, now Austria... Who's next to confirm that all those doubts about infinite rehypothecation of physical gold with countless beneficiaries of paper receivables will be the next conspiracy theory to become conspiracy fact, after last week's surprising announcement that Barclays (the first of many) had manipulated paper gold prices on at least one occasions in the past decade.