Silver Certificates and Counterfeit Mobs
This post was meant to be about Silver Certificates, and if indeed their alleged increased issuance as a result of Executive Order 11110 (or otherwise) could have raised the possibility of abandoning or at least reducing the issuance of FedResNotes in favor of debt-free, silver-backed currency. If so, how would the process have taken place, how exactly WOULD the country have functioned on any supposed pure silver standard? What, exactly, happened to the price of silver in the months preceding and following the order, through 1968 when redemption of the Certificates was finally halted?
Then I stumbled across this (forcefully written, but nevertheless compelling) ‘refutation’ by J. Bradley Jansen of the EO_11110 ‘theory’ according to which for the crime of ‘attempt to reduce the influence and circulation of fiat currency issued by the FedResBanks’, JohnF was sentenced (presumably by interests controlling the FedResSystem) to death by firing squad. Based strictly on his comments at the end of this article and his resume, J. Bradley Jansen did not strike me as a Fed supporter, though some of the materials he cites certainly could be seen as such.
That such a sentence was carried out on the (convenient for whomever) date of 11/22/63 is historical record, the question is only the offense he may have perpetrated, and the composition of the jury and executioners. More on that later. But as for silver, it would appear that demonetization of silver was already a done deal – indeed, the EO in question was just a part of the mechanism for dismantling silver as a monetary metal. It was merely an add-on to Public Law 88-36, which JohnF had signed earlier. The EO is supposedly merely an ‘orderly retreat’, by restoring (i.e. giving back previously existing) control over issuing silver certificates to the SecTreas that had been stripped due to the new law. The Act went into effect in June, 1963, and ordered the repeal of the Silver Purchase Act of 1934, among others. The law also authorized the (then-new) issuance of $1 and $2 FRNs.
“The Silver Purchase Act of 1934 (31 U.S.C. 311a, 316a, 48 Stat. 1178. 316b, 405a, 448-448e, 734a, and 734b), section 4 of the Act of July 6, 1939 (31 U.S.C. 316c), and the Act of July 31,1946 (31 U.S.C. 316d) are hereby repealed. […]
SEC. 3. The first sentence of the ninth paragraph of section 16 of 40 Stat. 970. the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 418) is amended by inserting "$1, $2," immediately after "notes of the denominations of".
TITLE II—REPEAL OF TAX ON TRANSFERS OF SILVER BULLION
SEC. 201. (a) Subchapter F of chapter 39 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1954 (relating to silver bullion) is hereby repealed.”
"Let's put this issue into perspective. The proponents of the JFK Myth assert that Kennedy was assassinated because he was about to issue Silver Certificates, thereby denying the bankers their customary interest payments on the nation's currency. However, the reality was just the opposite. Previously, the President could have issued Silver Certificates on his own authority; but, with the signing of EO 11110, he delegated that authority to the Secretary of the Treasury. At that time, the Secretary of the Treasury was Douglas Dillon from a well-known and powerful banking family. That means Kennedy surrendered the power to issue Silver Certificates and gave it to a member of the banking fraternity who could do with it as he pleased "without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President." Dillon, of course, would have strong motive to preserve the dominance of Federal Reserve Notes. The theory that Kennedy was getting ready to issue Silver Certificates is without evidence or logic. "
The only fly in the ointment is that the source of this analysis (Freedom Force International) seems the only place where this letter/article is posted, and I have no way to verify that it does, in fact come directly from Griffin.
The original book "presentation on the book is here.Video of Griffin's
In 1981, a rumor was circulated that President Kennedy had been assassinated by agents of the hidden money power because he had signed Executive Order #11110 instructing the Treasury to print more than $4 billion in United States Notes. That is precisely the kind of money we are discussing: paper bills without gold or silver backing issued by the government, not the Federal Reserve. According to the rumor, the bankers were furious because they would lose interest payments on the money supply. When the Order was tracked down, however, it involved Silver Certificates, not United States Notes. Silver Certificates are backed by silver,' which means they are real money, so the rumor was wrong on that point. But there is no interest paid on Silver Certificates either, so the rumor held up on that point. There was a third point, however, which everyone seemed to overlook. The Executive Order did not instruct the Treasury to issue Silver Certificates. It merely authorized it to do so. There is no evidence that this was ever done. If the Certificates were printed at all, they never found their way into circulation. In 1987, the order was rescinded by President Reagan."
As the official story goes, it was industrial use of silver that drove the value of the silver in coinage higher than face value of the currency. (Of course, it's difficult to explain to people nowadays that thus the 'dollar value of silver' in a dollar was denominated in an FRN unit, not the same ‘dollar’ stamped onto the coins.) Once the process was recognized by the ‘smart-money crowd’ quite possibly/likely market shenanigans also contributed, but the fact remains that the period saw silver’s purchasing power rise nearly threefold in the 18 years between 1950 and 1968.
The growth of the monetary base might have had something to do with this turn of events, too, though -- especially after 1961…
The other side of the tale is presented by the Silver Bear Café, among other places – arguing that the silver issuance authority granted was aimed at restoring silver-backed currency and doing away with Federal Reserve Notes.
All of these questions around the demonetization of silver in the 1960’s deserve further study and closer scrutiny -- regardless of ties to JFK's death. Though professional myth-busters appearing on the anniversary of an assassination are always suspicious to me, and somehow such 'myth-busters' often go out of their way to insist that there is NOTHING parasitic or crony-inducing in the mechanism of FRN issuance by the FedRes. But, I was thwarted in my though experiment of the ‘what-if’ that is so common in history. There does not seem to be a more detailed framework as to how such a currency change might have taken place, or who would have executed it to what parameters. While there may be more information forthcoming to researchers as the 50-year classification terms on some 'secret' documents from 1963 have just now expired -- but of course the big boys have ways of moving material beyond the reach of FOIA requests, physical destruction being of course just one option.
So instead, below is a speech from JohnF from 1961. There is plenty in it that is as timely now as it was then, if not more. It contains as many, if not far more, potential offenses against the then-PTB (who are very likely the same as or very similar to the current PTB). When thinking about men like JohnF, I am reminded of the need for inspiring, thoughtful and honest leadership. The ever-declining quality of the ‘facsimilies’ thereof that are served up to us (as opposed to rising up from among the people), has gotten to be alarming as the decades rolled on.
I am not sure that a single, charismatic orator upon whom all the hopes and aspirations of a nation can be projected is necessarily the best idea – there are more than a handful of very negative examples of such personality cults. Yet examples of ethics, morals, convictions, humanity and courage are needed in every society, and we can no longer look to our ‘leaders’ to display such values.
Despite not REALLY having come into the job merely of his own talents and skill, to me JohnF would be among the examples of executives who truly held the office with an attempt to represent, empower and protect the populace. Enriching himself and circle seemed less a priority. That his family continued to have a higher-than-average incidents of deaths due to causes other than ‘natural’ seems to speak for itself. It's reasonable (if perhaps sentimental) confirmation of the fact that their views and activities were ruffling the wrong sort of feathers. Lone (and lonely) deranged gunmen apparently are quite common in society, just waiting for the opportune moment to wake up one day to coincidentally change history…
While I remain hopeful that all of our societies are capable of generating such leadership – the timing of this gets more remote and less likely by the day. Societies are known for being able to sustain what ultimately prove to be unsustainable development models longer than individual humans can stay alive… Yet worthy leaders can only present themselves to a knowledgeable, active populace. Despite the (seemingly) glacial pace of this process, I would argue that he spread of knowledge in the populace is beginning to speed up. Let's hope it happens fast enough.
“We cannot, as a free nation, compete with our adversaries in tactics of terror, assassination, false promises, counterfeit mobs and crises.
We cannot, under the scrutiny of a free press and public, tell different stories to different audiences, foreign and domestic, friendly and hostile.
We cannot abandon the slow processes of consulting with our allies to match the swift expediencies of those who merely dictate to their satellites.
We can neither abandon nor control the international organization in which we now cast less than 1 percent of the vote in the General Assembly.
We possess weapons of tremendous power—but they are least effective in combating the weapons most often used by freedom's foes: subversion, infiltration, guerrilla warfare, civil disorder.
We send arms to other peoples—just as we send them the ideals of democracy in which we believe—but we cannot send them the will to use those arms or to abide by those ideals.
And while we believe not only in the force of arms but in the force of right and reason, we have learned that reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men—that it is not always true that "a soft answer turneth away wrath"—and that right does not always make might.
In short, we must face problems which do not lend themselves to easy or quick or permanent solutions. And we must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent or omniscient—that we are only 6 percent of the world's population—that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94 percent of mankind—that we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity—and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.”
The final passage from a speech the President was to have delivered in Dallas seemed especially fitting considering the sub-heading of the site. It is also, strangely (or aptly) not a rhetorical flourish, but rather an invocation, a prayer -- it is addressed not to the listeners in the audience, but above their heads:
" We in this country, in this generation, are--by destiny rather than choice--the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of "peace on earth, good will toward men." That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago: "except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain."