March 18, 2002 - I've been completely stonewalled by the Federal Reserve. Alan Greenspan has not responded to my letters. So my questions to the Federal Reserve remain unanswered. I don't like being treated like that, particularly when my questions touch upon matters of accurately reporting facts to the American people.
Consequently, I am pursuing another course of action. I have today mailed the following letter to my Congressman, The Honorable John E. Sununu.
Dear Congressman Sununu,
This is to ask for your help on the following matter. I have written three times to Alan Greenspan, but neither the Federal Reserve Chairman nor anyone else from the Federal Reserve has answered my question.
A copy of my September 14th letter is enclosed for your reference. Also enclosed is an unsatisfactory reply that I received in mid-October, prompting me to write again on November 14th, to which I have not received any reply. As a reminder that I had not received a reply, I sent another letter to Mr. Greenspan dated December 28th, which is also enclosed. Given the apparent reluctance of Mr. Greenspan to respond to my letters, I have no alternative but to ask for your help in obtaining a reply from the Federal Reserve.
The point that I would like Mr. Greenspan to address is very simple. That he or anyone else at the Federal Reserve has failed to address this simple matter suggests that contrary to assertions by the Treasury Department, the Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) has indeed been actively intervening in the gold market. Here's the background of the matter.
In December 2000 I published in my newsletter an analysis of the US Gold Reserve. My analysis was based on two different reports of the gold stock, one of which appeared in the Federal Reserve Bulletin (FRB) and the other in the Treasury Department Bulletin (TDB). There was a discrepancy in the gold stock as reported in the FRB and the TDB.
Generally the FRB showed the US Gold Reserve to be higher than the total reported in the TDB, although occasionally, the FRB total was less than the TDB total. A footnote to the gold stock in the FRB explained the difference. It stated: "Gold stock, including the Exchange Stabilization Fund". Thus, the discrepancy between these reports was explained by the fact that the gold stock in the FRB was different from the gold stock reported in the TDB because the FRB reported the gold held by the ESF but the TDB did not. As I noted, I published my findings in December 2000. My analysis of these reports is available on my website, www.fgmr.com
Then in February 2001, the Federal Reserve changed its report, presumably in response to the publicity given to my discovery. After that date, the FRB no longer included any footnote stating the inclusion of the ESF in the gold stock reported in the FRB. This change in reporting is a major concern to me. By making this change, the American public no longer has any means by which to measure and monitor the ESF's involvement in the gold market.
Consequently, I decided to write to Alan Greenspan to enquire why this change was made, and who in the government asked that this change be made. As I noted in my September 14th letter to Mr. Greenspan, I said that there "is no reason to withhold this information from the American public. Indeed, the ESF's gold position has been reported for many years, and it is important for the purpose of full, fair and open disclosure that the American public be able to see the month-end gold position of the ESF, just as it now can see the month-end gold position of the US Treasury."
Thus, my request to you is very simple. As stated in my September 14th letter, I have asked Mr. Greenspan to "direct the members of [his] staff who made this change to again prepare these reports as they have in the past, including the gold position of the ESF." Please ask Mr. Greenspan to again report the gold activity of the ESF in the Federal Reserve Bulletin.
Do not be misled by the disingenuous response in Karen Johnson's October 11th reply. She says that the data in the FRB was changed to make "routine data revisions/corrections". I of course support providing correct data, but she fails to explain why the footnote itself was omitted from the FRB after February 2001.
In fact, the reason for this omission leads to only one possible conclusion. Those "routine data revisions/corrections" to which she refers would re-appear because they arise from ESF activity. Her statement claiming "routine data revisions/corrections" is therefore spurious.
In other words, the Federal Reserve could have made the needed revisions/corrections and left the footnote relating to ESF gold activity in their report. That they removed the footnote from the FRB is proof that those revisions/corrections result from the ESF's interventions in the gold market.
Clearly, we have here a very serious matter. I would like to think that there is nothing improper happening here. However, the disingenuous reply from Ms. Johnson, the absence of any reply from Mr. Greenspan, and the Federal Reserve's apparent unwillingness to again include the footnote relating to the ESF's gold activity ominously demonstrates bad intent at best, and deceitfulness at worst.
That deceitfulness is the Federal Reserve's aim can also be deduced from mounting evidence that the federal government is surreptitiously intervening in the gold market. The federal government's motives are uncertain, but it is worth reading a Complaint filed in United States District Court in Boston (Civil Action No. 00CV-12485-RCL), Howe vs. Bank for International Settlements et al. A copy of the Complaint can be read at www.goldensextant.com
Therefore, this is to ask for your assistance as follows. Please ask Mr. Greenspan to again include the activity of the ESF in the gold stock reported in the Federal Reserve Bulletin. Additionally, please enquire who asked the Federal Reserve to change its report in February 2001. You might also ask Mr. Greenspan why he apparently is unwilling to support open and honest disclosure to the American people about the ESF's activity in the gold market.
Lastly, this is to ask that you support the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act (HR 3732) that has been introduced by Congressman Ron Paul. This bill requires the US Treasury to advise Congress if it intends to use any of the US Gold Reserve in any of its market intervention activities. HR 3732 therefore restores balance to this important monetary process, and brings back some essential checks and balances to the control of the US Gold Reserve.
I sincerely appreciate the assistance provided by you and your staff on this matter.
Yours truly, James Turk
I have relied upon Mr. Sununu once before, and he was very helpful. He will hopefully be helpful this time as well
Many people have asked me why I continue to press so hard on this matter of truthful reporting. I think the following email will answer that question.
I wrote this email to Burt Blumert, a coin dealer in San Francisco who has been long respected in the hard money camp. My email appeared this week in www.lemetropolecafe.com, a very useful website to which I wholeheartedly recommend that everyone subscribe (please note that they accept GoldMoney in payment for subscriptions).
I think you have done GATA a terrible disservice in your article, "The King Doesn't Like Gold". (http://www.lewrockwell.com)
Your statement "The good folks at GATA continue to whine on a daily basis" is not correct. What the "good folks at GATA" actually do on a daily basis is work relentlessly at disseminating the truth. The truth includes the mounting body of evidence that the US government through the Exchange Stabilization Fund and other means is keeping a lid on the gold price. GATA is effectively educating people who otherwise would have to rely upon the American media, which so far has failed miserably by not reporting even a noticeable fraction of the evidence uncovered by GATA.
I'm surprised that you would try to belittle GATA's admirable efforts, particularly because you describe so accurately the tyranny that existed in the gold market from 1933 to 1974. Perhaps you don't understand why the 1933 law restricting the ownership of gold was lifted in 1974. It did not happen because of the goodwill of the State. It was made to happen by a small but vocal band of freedom-lovers led by the late Jim Blanchard.
Against all odds when he started his epic journey in the late-1960's, Jim Blanchard and his self-proclaimed National Committee for Monetary Reform turned upside down 40 years of bad legislation. Don't you remember the bi-plane NCMR hired to fly over President Nixon's 1972 inaugural parade proclaiming "Free Gold Now!"
NCMR accomplished its objective by educating people about the pernicious efforts of the State that were aimed at preventing people from holding gold, and even understanding gold's use as money. I remember these events as if they occurred yesterday, not because I was part of Jim Blanchard's group, but rather, that I learned so much from them.
GATA is just following in NCMR's footsteps, and there is no doubt in my mind that GATA will be just as successful. After all, the truth always does prevail.
Sincerely, James Turk
Thus, if we don't pursue the truth and open, honest disclosure by the federal government, who will?
A List of Related Articles Follow ...
“Central Bankers Are Intellectually Bankrupt”
Finally, A Reply
The Debt Bubble
We Have A Right To Know
Fort Knox - My Next Step