Armstrong: Of Covert Ops, Fake Marines, of Classifieds, of Cabbages and Kings

[Tom Scully]

Is the creation of a second thread on this same topic, with a title calling out someone who is not a member here and who has quoted much of the research I came up with and presented in my last post on this thread, really necessary?

A theory is being defended, and we will see more of this defense in the coming days, as Jim DiEugenio is announcing the coming of, at least twice in the past two days. Why the eagerness? We were told that the money order diplayed in the image below was located by the government, in the wrong place....that Washington, DC was the wrong place....

When you have elected to apply the most sinister explanation for the research details you deem applicable, what happens when some of your claims just do not stand up; considering your methodology was originally prejudiced?

https://books.google.com/books?id=z2...lic%2C+and*%22
page 144 ( "banks, federal reserve, the public, and*" )
Closeout of Kansas City Money Order Center

Coincident with the installation of the print punch machines, the audit of the
money orders was transferred to a computer technique and consolidated with the audit
of Treasury checks at Washington, D.C., and the closeout of the Money Order Center at
Kansas City moved into its final phase. The Money Order Center was discontinued on December 1, 1963, except for three caretakers for the files, and all reports of money order issues now go to Money Order Audit Division in Washington, D.C. The last group of files at the Kansas City Center will be destroyed by March 31, 1965 (destruction age) and the caretakers will then be separated and the space leased to the GSA.

Money Order Audit Division, Washington, D.C.
In fiscal year 1965, 65 employees will handle payment, inquiry servicinng, and audit of the approximately 250 million money orders issued annually. The machine work will be performed by Treasury on a reim- bursment basis; but all contacts with banks, Federal Reserve, the public, and....

http://www.uspostalbulletins.com/PDF/Vol83_Issue20342_19621227.pdf#searc... Page 2:

We were told that all postal money orders must display a Federal Reserve Bank endorsement stamp. We were told that the $21.45 postal money order issued in Dallas and date March 12, displayed a grossly out of sequence serial number, a "future" number indicating that the money order was only created after the JFK Assassination, that it was "faked" and "found" in the wrong place, i.e., not at the Postal Money Order Center in Kansas City, MO. I did my own research, just this past week, and now things have changed, and exciting "new" research details will be revealed by the same source that told us the "things" I described above..... I hope readers are wondering just what is fake, and what is not actually supported.

https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceeding...680479.pdf
(Lance Payette brought this to my attention, today.)

https://casetext.com/case/stewart-v-us-69
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.·300 F. Supp. 1047
(E.D. Mich. 1969)

"STEWART V. U.S., (E.D.MICH. 1969)
James A. STEWART, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.

Civ. No. 30490.

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D. June 16, 1969. *1048
.......... Postal money orders are not negotiable instruments and hence
are not governed by laws applicable to commercial paper, but are governed
by postal laws. Levin v. United States (U.S. Court of Claims, 1959), 170
F.Supp. 646. This court is aware of the fact that postal money orders have
limited characteristics which make them like negotiable instruments, but
these characteristics are minimal and deprive them of being classified or
considered as ordinary negotiable instruments. United States v. First
National Bank of Boston (D.C.Mass., 1967), 263 F.Supp. 298.

The operation of the postal money order system is a "sovereign function"
and not a "commercial operation", notwithstanding it may have some aspects
of commercial banking. United States v. Northwestern Nat'l Bank Trust
Co. (D.C.Minn., 1940), 35 F. Supp. 484, at

486. *1050 ....."

https://books.google.com/books?id=yccPAA...ume&q=lack

A check, unlike a postal money order is a negotiable instrument of
multiple endorsements, but....even a check, it turns out, is not required
to receive an FRB processing endorsement.:


Page 118 - 119 : (if the page does not display using the link above, click
on the following link and you'll see a "look inside this book" search box
and just type in the word, "lack" w/out quotes......

Federal Reserve Pricing Policy on Check Clearing Services: ...
https://books.google.com/books?id=yccPAAAAIAAJ
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs - 1984 - Snippet view -

"Although the lack of the Federal Reserve endorsement on checks collected
through the fine sort program may be a source of inconvenience for some
depository institutions, primarily the larger institutions that may
receive checks from several several sources other than the Federal
Reserve, the fine sort program does not result in significant problems in
the return item process. We believe the fine sort program results in
improve- ments in the speed and efficiency of the nation's check
collection system"

[PDF]The Role of the Federal Reserve in the Payments System
https://www.bostonfed.org/economic/c...45/conf45f.pdf
by PM Connolly - pg. 147 "....The Federal Reserve's Role in Developing High-Speed Check Sorting Equipment
"..By the time the EFA became effective in
September 1988, the Federal Reserve Board had proposed for public
comment, and subsequently adopted, regulations to accelerate the return
process. A working group of banking industry and Federal Reserve
officials contributed operational expertise that supported the develop-
ment of practical and effective regulatory change.
The Board also used its new regulatory authority to propose and
adopt an essential new standard that previously had eluded the banking
industry. To accelerate the check return process, all participants in the
check system needed a ready means to identify the bank of first deposit....

....The endorsement standard in place prior to the enactment of the
Expedited Funds Availability Act had proved inadequate to support
the clear identification of each bank involved in the collection of a check.
The banking industry, through the American National Standards Insti-
tute, or ANSI, had made substantial progress during the 1980s on a more
comprehensive standard. However, the banks, equipment manufactur-
ers, and check printers had not reached closure on an adequate new
standard, in part because of the competitive concerns of particular firms.
To support the EFA, the Federal Reserve officials who had participated in
the ANSI process took all that had been accomplished with ANSI and,
with Board of Governors staff, added the new features needed for an
effective standard...."

https://www.chicagofed.org/utilities/abo...-1940-1964
Chicago Fed History: 1940-1964

.....In 1961, the Chicago Fed and four other Reserve Banks began to test
automated check-sorting equipment from different manufacturers. Heading
the project at the Chicago Fed were Vice President Harry Schultz and
Assistant Vice President Carl Bierbauer. The goal was to automatically
process 1,500 checks a minute on each machine, but there were a variety of
initial problems. Bierbauer, who went on to become a senior vice president
at the Bank, recalls, "There were days and weeks when things didn't go
right. It wasn't a case where we just brought in a machine and it
worked.".."

The Role of the Federal Reserve in the Payments System
https://www.bostonfed.org/economic/conf/...onf45f.pdf by PM Connolly
- pg. 136 "....The Federal Reserve's Role in Developing High-Speed Check
Sorting Equipment When the ABA Technical Subcommittee talked to possible
manufac- turers of check automation equipment in 1955.....

.....To provide operational and financial
support for this key initiative, the Federal Reserve worked with and
partially subsidized five firms that submitted acceptable proposals: the
Burroughs Corpora- tion, IBM, National Data Processing Corporation, the
National Cash Register Company, and Ferranti-Packard. The latter two firms
assembled systems using their own computers and check sorters made by
Pitney Bowes. Five Reserve Banks--New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston,
and San Francisco--participated. Each experimented with the equipment from
one of these companies. In each case the Reserve Banks paid the full lease
cost, even though the equipment was constantly being adjusted and
modified. Thus, the Federal Reserve provided a financial incentive for
five different manufacturers to participate. In addition, the Reserve
Banks devoted staff time and used portions of their daily incoming check
volumes to help the manufacturers test their new equipment. The System
hoped that, in the long run, multiple firms would succeed. This would
encourage compe- tition among manufacturers and help create a network with
common standards, benefiting all banks.

The Federal Reserve started this pilot project in 1960. By 1965, most
of its offices and branches were running high-speed check-sorting equip-
ment supplied by Burroughs and IBM. Other manufacturers that partic-
ipated in the Reserve Bank tests developed lower-speed equipment that
many smaller commercial banks adopted.

During the entire experimental period, the accumulated knowledge
of the System was made available to the banking industry. ..."

If the challenge is not searching for and identifying the most reliable information to piece together the most reliable
explanation, then what is going on? "Face" should not be on the top of the list of things needing saving. What is it that is most important to be made reliable, if we are not to be doomed to repeat it?