More Gold Repatriations & A Nasty Question
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
December 5, 2019

Today’s blog is about a relatively short article, which contains a relatively short statement that’s a bombshell, and as regular readers here know, when I read bombshell statements in short articles, I have to wonder just what the scenario behind it really is. The article was spotted by E.G. (to whom a big thank you), and by many others who seemed to have spotted it a couple of days later (again, a big thank you).

The article concerns that gold repatriation movement that began a few years ago when Germany announced it wanted to bring a bunch of its gold reserves being held in the London, Paris, and in the vaults of the New York Federal Reserve, home. According to most estimates, Germany holds the world’s second largest gold reserves behind the United States. What was quite odd about the German repatriation, however, was that it started as a “popular” movement (as far as I can tell), when some in Germany began to push for the repatriation and a public assay of Germany’s gold reserves.  In other words, for whatever reason, someone somewhere was concerned not just about who was holding Germany’s gold (France, Britain, and the USA), but they were concerned about its purity.  You might recall that France and Britain apparently had no problems returning the amounts of Germany’s gold that Germany requested. The slacker in the process, which wanted “more time” was the New York Fed. You’ll recall at that time that this little factoid sent my suspicion meter into the red zone, for I pointed out that in 1928, Reichsbank president Hjalmar Schacht went to visit his “good friend”, Governor Strong of the NY Fed, was taken on a tour of the bullion vaults of the bank, and asked to see Germany’s gold. As Schacht recounts the episode in his memoirs, the staff went off looking for the gold, but returned and Governor Strong had to inform Schacht that apparently the NY Fed could not find Germany’s gold. Schacht records that he simply smiled and said something to the effect of “That’s ok, I know you’re good for it.”

In any case, once Germany’s gold was “returned” questions were raised about the audit and assay, but that story slid away, as other nations soon began to demand their gold back (perhaps as a result of the somewhat less-than-clear German audit? I don’t know): Venezuela, Austria, and The Netherlands all made noises about it, but Venezuela became quite insistent, and was told that it could not have its gold back from the Bank of England’s vaults because the type of regime in Venezuela was not trustworthy, or something along those lines. Right about the same time, there was a strange little article out of the United Kingdom showing pictures of Queen Elizabeth II taking a tour of the gold vaults of the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street. And of course, Russia and China and India have been buying gold like crazy (oh, and let’s not forget those stories from both China and Canada, of tungsten bars and coins wrapped in gold, perhaps having a connection to why some in Germany wanted it’s gold reserves returned and assayed).

And finally, in recent years, we’ve heard various large prime banks, and even some central banks like the Bank of International Swampery… er… Settlements talking about crypto-currencies backed by bullion. In fact, The Bank of England started floating (no pun intended) the idea right in the middle of the German gold repatriation business, and more recently the Bank of International Swampery has been doing “studies” of the idea.

But now you can add several more countries to the list according to this article in Zero Hedge:

Serbia, Slovakia Join Sudden Eastern European Gold Repatriation Push

Now, as I mentioned, there are a couple of short statements in this article that caught my eye that I think a little bombshells, and perhaps clues to what may be going on:

Just a few short days after Poland’s government touted its economic might after completing the repatriation of 100 tons of the barbarous relic; and with Hungary‘s anti-immigrant Prime Minister Viktor Orban also ramping up holdings of the safe-haven asset to boost the security of his reserves, more Eastern European nationalist leaders are demanding their country’s gold back on home soil.

As Bloomberg reports, former Slovak Premier Robert Fico, whose odds of returning to power are rising quickly, urged parliament to compel the central bank into repatriating the nation’s gold stocks, which are currently stored in the U.K..

His reason?

Perhaps most vocally reflecting what many other nations also believe – sometimes your international partners can betray you.

Citing a 1938 pact by France, Britain, Italy and Germany allowing Adolf Hitler to annex a chunk what was then Czechoslovakia, Fico told reporters:

“You can hardly trust even the closest allies after the Munich Agreement.

I guarantee that if something happens, we won’t see a single gram of this gold. Let’s do it as quickly as possible.”

Additionally, Serbia’s strongman leader Aleksandar Vucic took note, ordering the central bank to boost reserves and prompting the purchase of nine tons in October.

Vucic said last week that more should be bought because “we see in which direction the crisis in the world is moving.” (All boldface emphasis in the original, italicized emphasis added)

Now, the Serbian leader’s comments I strongly suspect are the “standard” line; gold needs to be repatriated because the US dollar’s days as the global reserve currency are numbered, yet, there’s no other currency strong enough to take its place, and hence countries need gold to help jump started bi-lateral agreements in trade, along the lines of those agreements worked out by Russia and other countries: “We’ll trade in our own currencies, by-pass the dollar, and settle accounts in gold.”

That indeed is a plausible explanation, and it’s the one most commonly floating around right now. But I strongly suspect (and here comes the daily high octane speculation) that there are much deeper and more hidden reasons for this, that are suggested by the Slovakian premier’s remarks about the theft of Czechoslovakia’s gold after the 1938 Munich agreement, and that are also suggested by the lengthy rehearsal of the “repatriation” movements I rehearsed at the beginning of this blog. The Czechoslovak gold had been deposited in accounts in the Bank of International Swampery prior to the Munich conference, and in addition, some gold was kept by the Czechs in the Bank of England. But after Hitler’s annexation of Bohemia in 1939 in clear violation of the international treaty he had signed in 1938 in Munich, a treaty which stipulated he would not seek any further annexations of Czech territory, the Nazis demanded, and both the BIS and the Bank of England granted access to the Czech gold accounts and deposits. It was pure theft, and it is interesting that Mr. Fico, the Slovakian premier, raises the spectre in today’s context. In so many words, he is saying he does not trust the central banking system, and that no one else should either. Oh, and by the way, the head of the Reichsbank in 1938 and 1939 was – you guessed it – Hjalmar Schacht. Maybe he needed that Czech gold to replace the gold the NY Fed couldn’t find.

So what’s going on? Where’s the high octane speculation? Well, if one is going to move to any sort of bullion based currency system, it’s a good idea to have accurate knowledge of (1) how much gold there really is, and (2) how pure it is. Or to put a finer point on it: if central banks can not find a country’s reserves, and then participate in the theft of another country’s reserves, would you trust them to keep accurate books if they introduce a crypto-currency “backed” by bullion? I wouldn’t. And the only way to find out not only “how much” but “how pure” is to bring it home, assay it, and have everyone compare notes. Otherwise, any bullion-backed currency system will still be a sham, because the central banks are still the ones telling you “how much” and “how pure.” And once that gets locked into a crypto-system, then that physical bullion need no longer be a concern… unless of  course certain uppity countries start asking for the real deal. Or, if you’re like Texas rather than Slovakia or Serbia, just start your own bullion depository, and thumb the nose at the entire system. If you’re going to “reset” the entire global system (as another theory out there has it), and base it on gold, are you going to trust the central and prime banks’ figures on the amounts and purity of gold that’s out there?

There’s another hidden reason too. If you’re any of these countries, and you’ve been watching this bullion-bearer bonds- hidden system of finance story, you’re already aware that there’s fraud in and outright theft in the system on a massive scale, and again, the only way to know how much, is to bring the gold home, and start comparing notes, or in this case, ledgers.

And then you publish the results.

Of course, this is all high octane speculation, but if any part of it be true or come to pass, then my advice is, if you’re a central bankster, it might be time to learn a useful trade, like farming, book binding, side-walk sweeping (I know some cities in California that have been the beneficiaries of your policies).

Read More @


About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
December 18, 2019

E.G., K.L. and M.W. spotted this one(and a BIG thank you to them).

Before we get to it, I have to confess to a little bit of “I-told-you-so-ism” with this article,  because over the past few years and months as banks, and then central banks beginning with the Bank of England started talking about gold-backed crypto-currencies, my immediate thought was, “Oh, they’ve rehypothecated it so much, that they need a way to keep that permanently secret.” Call it collateral fraud, you know, like taking out mortgages on non-existent buildings in vacant lots, or claiming that you have someone’s gold when you do not, as in the Schacht-Strong Affair of 1928, or putting tungsten inside gold coins, as recently was discovered in Canada.

This article indicates that there could be a few teensy tiny problems with the U.S.A.’s gold reserves and their audits:

US Official Gold Reserves Auditor Caught Lying

First, let us note the author of the article’s allegedly less-than-warm reception:

My journey started in 2014, when I first discovered—in contrast to what I was accustomed to reading on blogs and in newspapers—that the US official gold reserves are audited every year. I published an article on my discoveries, titled A First Glance At US Official Gold Reserves Audits, which was basically a summary of all publicly available documents about the audits. Logically, these documents present a narrative that looks to be credible at the surface, but I found some questions left unanswered, and wrote in my article “this post will be part one of a series.” (Little did I know what I got myself into.) Given the importance of the subject, I intended to submit FOIA requests at the US government, in an open-minded attempt to have my concerns removed.

Since 2014 I have been prosecuting the US government. I have emailed staff of all related institutions—the US Treasury, The Office of Inspector General of the Treasury, the US Mint, and National Archives—that were initially replied, but as I got closer to the details, ceased altogether. I have submitted several dozen FOIA requests to all related institutions, some of which were honored, some not. In search of answers, I repeatedly called the Inspector General. In one of those calls, my contact simply hung up while I was talking. This incident is emblematic of this whole investigation.

The author continues by observing that yet another method to put him off the trail was to charge outrageous sums for his FOIA requests.

In other words, in the trust and transparency department, we’re off to a very poor start.

Then the bombshells begin. The author notes these audits were begun in 1971, with the objective of auditing all of America’s deep storage gold at West Point, the Denver Mint, Fort Knox, and the NY Federal Reserve, and that the sealing of the vaults after the audit and test assays was a crucial component:

The audit protocol follows that “these actions, having once been performed by an authorized committee, in accordance with established procedures, will not have to be repeated as long as the assets verified remain under an unimpaired joint seal.” Compartments physically verified were placed under Official Joint Seal (OJS) to “avoid the necessity of verifying all assets in each annual or special settlement (audit).” The US Treasury pledged to do a “periodic, cyclical inventory” to “ensure that about 10 percent of the gold” was physically inspected annually, eventually to have audited “all the gold for which the US government is accountable” “by 1984.” The essence of the “established procedures” was to open, audit and seal each compartment once. We will return to this fundamental topic later on.

Since the stated purpose of joint sealing was to avoid the need of “re-audits,” all the gold could (after 1984) be verified by simply checking if the seals were unimpaired. Great intentions, but this is not what happened.

He then recounts how former Congressman Ron Paul, one of the backers of the unpassed Gold Transparency Act, had spurred a congressional committee to dig into the gold matter (no pun intended). The testimony of the US Treasury’s then-inspector general is cited:

The current auditor of the US monetary gold is the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). Representing the OIG, Eric M. Thorson attended the congressional hearing for the Gold Transparency Act (not enacted) that was initiated by Ron Paul in 2011. Mr. Thorson’s testimony at the hearing serves as the official statement by the government on the audits. Having weighed his words carefully, Thorson spoke under oath:

… 100 percent of the U.S. Government’s gold reserves in the custody of the Mint has been inventoried and audited. … I can say that without any hesitation, because I have observed the gold and the security of the gold reserves myself.

… the Committee for Continuing Audit of the U.S. Government-owned Gold [The Committee that started the audits] performed annual audits of Treasury’s gold reserves from 1974[*] to 1986. … by 1986, 97 percent of the Government-owned gold held by the Mint had been audited and placed under joint seal. So once you have done that, and that seal remains unbroken, then I am not sure what other benefit there would be to going back into it at that point. …

Since 1993, when we [OIG] assumed responsibility for the audit, my office has continued to directly observe the inventory and test the gold. In fact, my auditors signed the official joint seals … placed on those compartments, inventoried and tested in their presence. At the end of Fiscal Year of 2008, all 42 compartments had been audited by … the Committee for Continuing Audit of the U.S. Government-owned Gold, or my office, and placed under official joint seals.

Thus, in summary:

  • From 1974 until 1986, 97 percent of the gold at the Mint had been verified by the Committee for Continuing Audit.
  • In 1993 the OIG became responsible for the audits, and by 2008 all compartments had been verified and sealed.

The conclusions we derive from Thorson’s testimony:

  • From 1987 until 1992, there were no audits.
  • From 1993 until 2008, the remaining 3 percent of the gold was verified.

But as the article continues, the seals on several vaults were opened, when the US Mint did its own audit. This, observes the author, is more-than-fishy, since the US Mint is merely a custodian for the US Treasury. It is, he says, a little bit like a bank auditing it’s clients assets, or better, opening its safety deposit boxes and seeing what’s inside. In any case, these audit seals were never to be broken, but in fact, they were. When the Treasury Inspector General was asked about this, he offered the explanation that it is necessary to do so when gold is moved from one vault to another. We’ll get back to that one, because it’s a huge clue in my opinion as to what may be going on. But, it’s also a whopper doozie of a high octane speculation. The author handles this point in the following way:

The issue isn’t whether it’s possible to re-open a compartment. Gold inside a compartment that can never be opened again has no value. You might as well put it in a rocket a blast it into the sun. The point is that barring legitimate reasons to re-open a compartment (e.g., selling the metal inside), they should remain closed.)


Altogether, the vast majority of Deep Storage vault compartments have been re-opened for dubious reasons. (For exact data on “re-audits,” see my article “Audits Of US Monetary Gold Severely Lack Credibility.”)

After years of prosecuting, these are the facts as they lay in front of us:

  • The majority of Deep Storage vault compartments have been “re-opened” for unknown or dubious reasons. (Again, for details, see “Audits Of US Monetary Gold Severely Lack Credibility.”)
  • Under oath, the auditor, Thorson, carefully avoided the subject of “re-opening” compartments.
  • In another written statement, the same auditor lied about the subject of “re-opening” compartments.
  • When this auditor was asked for an explanation regarding the “re-opening” of compartments, it could only muster an unfitting one.

I find it astonishing that all falsehoods the auditor (OIG) has spread have in common that they hide the fact compartments have been “re-opened.”

The author is correct, of course: gold remaining under such seal, never to be used, is valueless. And that’s the key to why the vaults are being unsealed, and according to the Inspector General himself, gold is being moved from one vault to another.

And this is a hugely significant clue as to what might be happening, and it’s also perhaps huge confirmation of one of my highest of high octane speculations concerning a “hidden system of finance” that I’ve elaborated over the years in connection with black projects, secret accounts, and – yes – the bearer bonds scandals. But how did I leap to that conclusion from this one clue? It’s very simple. Let’s recall for a moment the Schacht-Strong affair of 1928, which Schacht, then the head of Germany’s Reichsbank, records in his memoirs. On a 1928 visit to his friend, Benjamin Strong Jr, then Governor of the New York Federal Reserve, Schacht was taken on a tour of the underground vaults of the bullion depository. When he asked to see Germany’s gold, Strong’s staff embarrassingly reported that they couldn’t find it. Schacht, in his memoirs, records that he simple smiled and said “That’s ok, I know you’re good for it.”

But to appreciate the full strangeness of this episode, it’s essential to understand that it would be virtually impossible to lose some country’s gold, unless it had been deliberately and covertly removed from its vault, because each country has its own individual storage vault for its gold. When accounts were settled, the gold was physically moved from one country’s vault, to another, say, from France’s vault, to Germany’s. That Schacht would ask the question means that he knew that the accounts were such that Germany’s vault should contain some gold. But apparently it didn’t, and his country’s gold was being used “elsewhere.” He had, in effect, caught the Governor of the NY Federal Reserve in a “whopper doozie”, and I have even speculated that it was this precise incident which provided Schacht with the leverage to get such a light sentence at the Nuremberg Trials after World War Two.

So with that in mind, let’s return to those broken seals, and to the Inspector General’s statement to former Congressman Ron Paul in 2011: the seals had been broken, because it was necessary to move gold from one vault to another. The movement as such is similar to the way a central bank bullion depository would move physical gold from one vault to another to reflect the clearing of accounts between countries, only in this case, these vaults do not belong to countries, they are simply numbered. They could, of course, belong to a country, but they could just as easily belong to other “clients” who need and require secrecy. Even to have access to these vaults would require “an inside job,” and that, I strongly suspect, would be by people infiltrated into the positions to be able to do so, by intelligence agencies perhaps, for let us recall President Truman’s decision to recover Japanese gold, and to keep it secret and in the hands of the National Security Council, thus effectively putting the postwar American intelligence “community” into the covert banking business. The physical movement of gold into and out of vaults when accounts were cleared could then be tied to the movements of those bearer bonds which (we’ve been assured) are completely fraudulent and unauthentic. Equally importantly, the movement of gold into and out of vaults would also be the perfect way to covertly inject any recovered Axis bullion into the stream.

In other words, I strongly suspect that we’ve just been given a clue as to one crucial aspect of what I’ve been calling the hidden system of finance. And if you’ve been following the rationale of today’s high octane speculation, there’s one final, disturbing implication of all of this, namely, that the USA’s deep storage gold isn’t deep storage at all, but has long since been collateralized.

FASAB 56 anyone?

See you on the flip side…

Read More @


About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Emotional Bank Accounts: Gold & Silver Vs. Cash | #Friendship | #Friendship #Kindness | #Love | #QualityOfConsciosuness | #PositiveVibes #Positivity
Zy Marquiez
April 11, 2019

Deposits and withdraws within emotional bank accounts have varying degrees.

Just as there’s a difference between the precious metals gold and silver when compared to cash (federal reserve notes), there’s a significant difference between normal every-day acts of kindness and more significant ones.

Gold and Silver are tangible assets.  Cash is merely federal reserve notes.  The main difference is that the former asset is tangible, while the latter is merely the facsimile of it.  In the same way that gold and silver vis a vis cash are on separate levels, some normal every-day acts individuals undertake for people juxtaposed with more significant acts are on separate tiers.

For instance, saying hello to someone, smiling, opening a door for someone, doing a small favor, are all actions that contribute positively to an individual’s emotional bank account.  However, these acts are not the same as someone changing your tire, helping you move, someone baling you out of trouble, doing a big favor, lending an ear in a time of need, etc.  It’s clear these examples rank differently across the spectrum [1].  How noteworthy an action is, along with how much a person appreciates the act dictate how significant that act is as an emotional deposit.

The point is that relationships build upon trust, actions, time, history and other factors, and those factors outline the parameters of why we hold certain friends in higher standards than others.  That’s why one could argue there’s a difference between people being friends, good friends, great friends and best friends.  Another argument could be made that, as one goes up in tiers, one ‘kind of’ expects (I say this loosely) each higher tier to do more than the lower, IF it all possible [2].

For instance, would you expect a total stranger to do you a small favor?  Maybe, maybe not.  But would you expect a friend to do so?  Probably most of the time.  Equally, would you expect a random friend or acquaintance to drop everything if something significant happened like a family member was in the hospital?  Maybe.  But would you expect one of your best friends to do so if you asked?  More than likely.

In no way am I saying that anybody needs to do anything, simply that there’s a certain expectancy in friendship based on the circumstances and issues we individuals face.  It’s simply people having your ‘back’ so to speak.

Each type of emotional deposit, each type action, builds trust and loyalty.  These factors build relationships, and further solidify what they ultimate become among the above discussed tiers of friendship.

While that might not seem like a big deal, it is incredibly paramount, for society runs on arguably trust more than anything. 

You trust your deposits to be safe in your bank, you trust your food to be safe, you trust your children to be safe in school, you trust media is telling you the truth, and so on.  Every single one of us has a level of trust that is inherent in nigh every interaction we undertake, and yet, paradoxically, trust is nigh never discussed in every day topics.  Ruminate upon that deeply for it has a bearing on how society operates.

As trust between individuals grows, a healthy relationship follows, relationships of myriad types.  And the level of trust between each of these relationships dictates what you expect and what you do not.  That said, everyone is different, and that’s one of the spices of life, variety.

No matter what type of outlook or expectancy an individual has on friendships, there is a significant difference between one act and another, whatever those acts may be.

And just like there are rocks, crystals, gems, diamonds and black pearls in nature, there are individuals that mirror each of those, and with good reason, because that difference matters.  If it didn’t, there wouldn’t be a distinction between strangers and family, between friends and best friends.

That distinction is what life is about: quality human beings [3].

For quality human beings were, are, and always will be a cut above the rest.

No amount of cash, gold, or silver in the world can top that.


[1] An individual’s spectrum under which actions ping on an emotional bank account varies, and sometimes considerably.  My hopes in the above example was simply to note that, even though each individual values different actions differently, there is a point where some actions are of smaller significance when compared to others.

[2] I say ‘kind of’ because what people expect from friendships vary given an individual’s point of view, culture, society, philosophy, spirituality, age, sex, life experience and so on.

[3] Quality human being doesn’t imply perfection of any individual, far from it.  It just means the assemblage of acts an individual undertakes over the course of a lifetime that ultimately end up echoing who you are over the long term. 

Suggested Reading:

Have You Ever Walked On The Moon?
Wings Are Made To Fly, Seeds Are Made To Grow
Consciousness – The Key To Life
Why A Sound Mindset Is Crucial: The Light Side Of Mindset Vs. The Dark Side Of Mindset
Mindset Mindset Mindset!
A Sound Mindset Amidst The Obstacles Of Life
Bruce Lee On Conformity & Open-Mindedness
Mindwaves & Mindfulness
Modern Misteps Meet Mindfulness
How You Deposit A Truckload Of Black Pearls Into An Emotional Bank Account
How Are Your (Emotional) Bank Accounts Doing?
Emotional Bank Accounts: Investing In Yourself
Emotional Bank Accounts: Withdraw Withdraw Withdraw!
Emotional Bank Accounts: Mutual Funds
Emotional Bank Accounts: Deposits & Withdraws
Emotional Bank Accounts: Gems Gems Gems, Babies Everywhere!
Emotional Bank Accounts: I Call Your 7 Cents & Raise You A Dollar
Poker & Life: Pulling The Friend’s Card
Imagination Unleashed
The Inherent Power Of Curiosity
A 7 Cent Investment Into An Emotional Bank Account To Convert A Hater?
What Do You Find Inspiring?
Poker FlashBack: Swimming With Sharks, Swimming With Whales
Imagination Rises Out Of The Jaws Of Defeat
What’s Your Story?
You The Individual Are Author Of Your Own Journey, Of Your Own Destiny
Harry Potter Fans Trash Talk?  Say WHAT?!
Consciously Creating The Road Of Change, The World Of Tomorrow
What Are Your Personal Defaults?
The Opening Salvo, The First Minute
The Seeds Of Today, The World Of Tomorrow
Assumptions Are Mother Of All F@!$ Ups
Piercing Perspectives #1: Taking Things For Granted | Health & Mindset
Piercing Perspectives #2: You The Individual Are Extraordinary
Piercing Perspectives #3: The Divide & Conquer Left Right Paradigm
Piercing Perspectives #4: Poker As A Mirror For Life
The Individual, The Foundation Of Society

If you find value in this information, feel free to share it.  This article is free and open source.  All individuals have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Zy Marquiez and

About The Author:

Zy Marquiez is an avid book reviewer, inquirer, an open-minded skeptic, yogi, and freelance writer who aims at empowering individuals while also studying and regularly mirroring subjects like Consciousness, Education, Creativity, The Individual, Ancient History & Ancient Civilizations, Forbidden Archaeology, Big Pharma, Alternative Health, Space, Geoengineering, Social Engineering, Propaganda, and much more.