March 15, 2012
During December 2011 and January 2012, I wrote two articles dealing with the announcement of two different lawsuits being filed in U.S. District Courts regarding astronomical amounts of money in the forms of U.S. Bonds, Federal Reserve Notes, foreign government-issued bonds, and other financial instruments.
The first article, entitled, “Unprecedented Lawsuit Reveals Bizarre Worldwide Banking Connections,” deals with a lawsuit filed by Neil Keenan, an acting representative of the Dragon Family of Asia, that contains a list of plaintiffs including individuals, governments, private institutions, and secret societies that spans the entire globe. Keenan is alleging that a trillion dollars worth of Federal Reserve Notes, Kennedy Bonds, and Japanese Government Bonds were stolen from himself and the Dragon Family by a worldwide cartel network.
The second article, entitled, “Massive New Lawsuit Filed Against U.S. Federal Government in Bond Theft Scheme,” deals with a similar situation. In this lawsuit, plaintiff Joseph Riad alleges that $15 billion worth of Federal Reserve bonds were stolen from him by similar criminal cartel network involving many agencies of the U.S. Federal Government such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Bureau of Public Debt.
In the latter incident, the bonds are supposedly dated back to 1934. However, the facts surrounding both of these lawsuits are quite difficult to decipher. With such an interconnected web of players including very secretive persons and institutions, as well as historical questions and connotations, it will likely be some time before the convoluted inter-workings of these incidents are unraveled -- if indeed they ever are.
$6 trillion worth of U.S. Treasury bonds by Italian prosecutors and one might begin to see a trend developing. In this instance, according to the Italian prosecutors, the bonds had been hidden in makeshift compartments in three different safety deposit boxes in Zurich. The investigation, dubbed “Operation Vulcanica,” resulted in the arrest of eight individuals who were allegedly planning to buy plutonium from Nigerian sources. Interestingly enough, the bonds were sealed in crates labeled as property of the Chicago Federal Reserve System – Treaty of Versailles Mother Boxes to be exact. In this case, as in the case of the Joseph Riad lawsuit, the bonds were dated back to 1934.
Although the bonds are alleged to have been fake, at this time we cannot confirm that this is really the case.
The claim that these bonds are fake, of course, might very well be true. However, there is also a great deal of evidence to the contrary.
As I have mentioned in a previous article, the sheer number of U.S. bonds involved is so large that it presents one argument against the theory of a rogue counterfeiter. U.S. bonds are intentionally made incredibly difficult to forge and, considering the technology required to do so, the odds of such technology residing in the possession of a rogue network of underground counterfeiters is highly unlikely. If the bonds had indeed been faked, then it would be much more reasonable to assume that the counterfeiting operation was undertaken by a State – the only type of institution that would have had the infrastructure to oversee such a massive operation.
That being the case, the question would then become “Who?” and, necessarily, “Why?”
Yet, if the bonds were indeed counterfeited, it also seems that the counterfeiters took the long way around as they were produced inside sealed boxes thus indicating that the boxes themselves had been counterfeited. As Madison Ruppert of End The Lie points out:
If these bonds were indeed forgeries, it implies that the box itself might be fake as well, which raises the question: why would counterfeiters go through the effort of not only faking $6 trillion in $1 billion bonds but also go through the effort of creating a fake Treaty of Versailles Mother Box?
When I try to imagine the mindset of a thief, I cannot bring myself to understand why I would counterfeit two things instead of just one, thus doubling my chances of forgeries being detected.
Furthermore, why hide the bonds in makeshift compartments within the Mother Box? It all just makes so little sense I’m not sure what to think at this point.
Of course, this argument is not concrete enough to prove whether or not these bonds are real. Indeed, it is important to point out that this writer is not declaring judgment one way or the other. Clearly, the situation continues to develop and more information will hopefully come to light. Whatever one may suspect regarding this issue, it would be wise not to rush to judgment until a significantly larger amount of facts emerge.
Regardless, a suggestion made by many in the “fake bond” camp is that the amount of money is too great to be real. The argument here is that this much money simply does not exist within the Federal Reserve/U.S. Treasury bond system. Furthermore, there are questions as to how so many of these bonds found their way into Asian hands, particularly those bonds dated around the 1930s.
It is true that interest has accrued on the initial value of many of these bonds and financial instruments over time, particularly those instruments which have been held for a long period of time. However, many might point that the number of bonds/instruments that would have been required to be issued in the first place would have been enormous. Not only that, but there is no popular record of such massive financial exchanges having taken place involving the issuing of such instruments as Federal Reserve/U.S. Treasury bonds. That is, at least transactions that number in the “many thousands of trillions” of dollars that the Neil Keenan lawsuit alludes to.
However, one must remember that the world of banking, particularly privately administered, international, government-based financial instruments of which the Federal Reserve specializes in, is not an industry in which transparency is the order of the day.
After all, it was only recently revealed that the Federal Reserve had loaned a whopping $16 trillion dollars to major banks as a result of the current American bailout culture. There was no public announcement of these transactions, and acknowledgement only came after a watered-down and quite narrow audit provision was passed by Congress. If massive transactions made by the Federal Reserve such as the one mentioned above have only recently been uncovered, one is clearly justified in wondering how many other enormous financial transactions have taken place in the past between similar institutions?
Indeed, such transactions cannot be considered abnormal in the upper reaches of the international banking cartel.
Nevertheless, some clues have appeared that might explain the nature of some of the bonds at issue (if they are real) as well as the reason why the 1930s keep popping up as the birth year of so many of them.
At this point, I would like to encourage the reader to take a look at David Wilcock’s series FINANCIAL TYRANNY: The Final Sections. Wilcock has been sounding the alarm on many of these banking issues such as the stolen bonds and lawsuits for some time and, should his information pan out, deserves much credit for his work on this issue. There is a great deal of information collected in Wilcock’s series so make of it what you will.
One of the questions central to this entire issue is whether or not these types of bonds have ever been issued in this first place and, if they have been issued, whether or not they have been issued in such large quantities. In searching for an answer to this question, we find ourselves as far away as China and as far back as the early 1930s.
During the 1930s Chiang Kai-Shek was facing war on two fronts – from Mao Tse-Tung’s Communist insurgency and from the Imperial Japanese. As a result, China was incredibly unstable and, likewise, Chinese gold held by Kai-Shek’s China was in danger of being seized by one or both of its enemies. In an effort to protect this gold in the event of a successful push from either of the usurpers, an arrangement was made for the gold’s safekeeping inside the United States under the care of the U.S. Federal Government in the form of the Federal Reserve as well as the BIS (Bank of International Settlements). This was a plan that was apparently deemed acceptable by both Kai-Shek and the United States government, although the public was not notified of its existence.
The CIA, around 1948, played a major role in the physical removal of much of this gold as Tse-tung marched successfully through China. As Professor Richard Aldrich of Nottingham University and co-editor of the Journal Intelligence and National Security reveals, the CIA used their cover operation known as the Civilian Air Transport (CAT) to fly large shipments of Chinese gold to the United States.
But that was in 1948. “What about the 1930s?” you might ask. “Is the 1948 shipment all of the gold brought to the U.S.?”
As David Wilcock states in his article, news reports from The New York Times give us a glimpse into the gold shipments taking place from China to the United States in the 1930s. Indeed, Wilcock includes the photo of six reports published in the newspaper from 1934 to 1938 clearly indicating the receipt of Chinese gold. Bringing all of these reports into perspective, he writes;
The last newspaper article we just read, from December 1, 1934, reveals a total excess of $222 million, 385 thousand and 270 dollars' worth of 'imported' gold to the US between 1929 -- when the BIS was officially founded -- and 1934.
At the stated 'new price' of $35 an ounce, this adds up to roughly 6,540,743.23 troy ounces, or 203.43 metric tons of gold.
As we can see, this process continued well after 1934. Our first article revealed that $6,120,500 in gold was taken in by the Federal Reserve in a single day -- on February 19, 1937.
Chiang Kai-Shek supposedly sent 125,000 metric tons of gold to the US in 1938. This is obviously much higher than the publicly-reported 203.43 metric tons that had been taken in from various countries between 1929 and 1934.
However, let's not forget that we now have documented proof that secret gold shipments were conducted from China to the US in 1938.
Japan intercepted 2.488 metric tons of gold, bound for the Federal Reserve, on October 24, 1938. It is very likely that many other shipments occurred and were not intercepted -- just as we have been told -- and Federal Reserve bonds were issued.
Special attention should be paid to the last statement because the reports that Wilcock produces are only from The New York Times and most do not mention U.S. receipt of gold as anything other than a footnote. If we were able to examine all of the leading newspapers during this time period, or even a more detailed search of The New York Times itself, there might turn up even more reports of gold shipments. Not only that, but we certainly can’t count out the fact that many of these shipments might have been kept secret from the very beginning. If this is the case, it would stand to reason that there would be no reports published about them.
Regardless, Wilcock claims that these bonds were used to create what he calls the “Occult economy,” where loans are made based on the value of the secret gold stockpiles and transactions between private individuals and central banks are made in secret.
Not only that, but because “operational loss” of bonds/notes was to be expected there would necessarily have been more of the bonds/notes created than the exact number needed by the Chinese.
Furthermore, as Professor Aldrich states, “Regional banks receiving FRNs [Federal Reserve Notes] in return for their gold were aware that the FRNs were likely to be redeemable for only a proportion of their face value. Therefore a much larger value in FRNs would have been required than the total value of the gold that the Americans and Chinese nationalists were trying to extract from China.”
Some might even argue that printing so many bonds essentially under the table would be done with very little concern since the CIA, with its high level of intelligence, would have foreseen that Kai-Shek would soon be in no position to cash the bonds in any event. In short, the money changers could have provided the Chinese with the bonds with no intention of ever honoring them. Likewise, there would be no concern of ever finding themselves in the position of having to do so.
But for all the questions surrounding the bonds, Federal Reserve Notes and other financial instruments seized or mentioned in the various lawsuits recently filed, there are documented instances of fake bonds surfacing in cases very similar to those mentioned at the start of this article.
For instance, in 2003,* two men – a Canadian and a Korean living in Japan – tried to use $25 million worth of US Treasury bonds in order to secure a line of credit from the Imperial Bank of Commerce. The bonds presented by the men were easily spotted as fake and the men, along with Graham Halksworth – a 69-year-old British man and his associate, Michael Slamaj, a former Yugoslav spy -- were arrested and charged.
The story behind the acquirement of the bonds provided by Halksworth and Slamaj directly coincided with the chronology of events as recorded in the files of the Foreign Office.
Yet, although the bonds/notes in the Halksworth case were demonstrably false, they did reveal some rather startling information – that fake bonds were often included amongst large quantities of real bonds so as to preclude the holder from ever being able to cash them.
Indeed, when questioned by the police as to his role in the fake bond scandal, Halksworth responded by telling police that “Deliberate mistakes were often made in such bonds as a security device; ask the CIA.” When the police pointed out that the mistakes were so obvious it looked like a child had made them, Halksworth responded, “Exactly.”
Halksworth might be in some position to speak on the matter considering his background. He was a forensic specialist and a member of the Forensic Science Society who helped develop a fingerprinting system for Scotland Yard in 1967. He also worked for a company that provided forensic equipment for many foreign governments as well as authenticated historical documents for the Chinese and German governments. He helped issue bonds from both commercial banks and the Bank of England. He also authenticated and approved U.S. Federal Reserve bonds for churches, Saudi princes, and Native American tribes. With a career history such as this, Halksworth is likely to know whereof he speaks.
In addition, David Wilcock claims that he has inside information that Halksworth’s assertions are indeed true. That is, at least his assertions about deliberate mistakes being added to real bonds and other financial instruments of a high value and secretive nature. Wilcock claims that his insider explained to him that for every box of real bonds created, four boxes of fake bonds are created along with it. According to Wilcock, the source also claims that even the real boxes contain up to 20 percent fake bonds.
This is designed, Wilcock suggests, in order to prevent the bonds from ever being cashed and endangering either the “Occult economy” or the real economy that is now made up of derivatives and private central banks. If anyone ever comes into possession of these bonds, they will be “caught” with the forgeries, arrested, their bonds will be seized, and the Secret Service or other relevant agency will escape with the real financial instruments.
Unfortunately, at this point, it is still impossible to make a final judgment about the Riad/Keenan lawsuits, seized bonds, or even many of the claims made by David Wilcock. However, by taking a look at each of these cases while keeping in mind the big picture, it is possible that some light may be shed on the shadowy edges of international finance and worldwide banking cartels.
Throughout this saga, if the information we have received so far can be believed, we are approaching great revelation into the tunneled spider web of the global control system that, up until this point, has remained well hidden.
*NOTE: The original article from the UK Independent has apparently been scrubbed from the Internet. It is, however, preserved in the archives on Rense.com.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.