As reported here on March 24, Zhou Xiaochuan, the governor of China’s central bank, has called for scrapping the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. On March 25, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) scored Geithner for being deceptive about his true intentions concerning the China proposal. Rep. Bachmann’s office issued a release declaring:
“Yesterday, during a Financial Services Committee hearing, I asked Secretary Geithner if he would denounce efforts to move towards a global currency and he answered unequivocally that he would,” said Bachmann. “And President Obama gave the nation the same assurances. But just a day later, Secretary Geithner has left the option on the table. I want to know which it is. The American people deserve to know.”
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Asked today about a currency proposal from China at a Council on Foreign Relations event, Secretary Geithner stated he was open to supporting it. Despite attempts to clarify his remarks later in the day, the unguarded initial response calls into question his true intentions.
Here is the comment from the CFR meeting, entitled “A Conversation with Timothy F. Geithner,” to which Rep. Bachman refers:
QUESTIONER: Well, thank you. Wonder if you could comment on two related things. One, the Chinese government proposal about a global currency; and about the IMF regulations that were — the new IMF idea about, you know, very general agreements to borrow and having a faster ability to disburse to the [inaudible].
GEITHNER: On the first question, I haven’t read the governor’s proposal. He’s a remarkably — a very thoughtful, very careful, distinguished central banker. Generally find him sensible on every issue. But as I understand his proposal, it’s a proposal designed to increase the use of the IMF’s special drawing rights. And we’re actually quite open to that suggestion. But you should think of it as rather evolutionary, building on the current architectures, than — rather than — rather than moving us to global monetary union.
A transcript of the meeting is available from the CFR’s website here and a video link for the event can be viewed here. The moderator of the CFR event, investment banker Roger C. Altman (a top Treasury Department official in both the Carter and Clinton administrations), asked for clarification, which elicited from Geithner more praise for Communist China’s central banker:
ALTMAN: Let me just follow that up for one second. A number — I haven’t read the governor’s essay, either, but a slew of news reports interpreted his comments to suggest that the world needs a super reserve currency, and that the dollar, on some gradual basis, ought to be replaced in favor of that. And I wasn’t entirely clear what your response was.
GEITHNER: Well, as I said, I haven’t read his proposal, but I thought the initial reaction was sort of ahead of the details of the proposal I saw. The only thing concrete I saw was a reference to expanding the use of the SDR, but I look forward to reading his figures. As I said, I have tremendous respect for him. He’s a really thoughtful, pragmatic guy, and he has a great record of credibility in China as a whole, so anything he’s — he’s thinking about deserves some consideration.
Secretary Geithner’s denials notwithstanding, Communist China’s proposals for the new currency reserve are indeed a scheme for “moving us to global monetary union.” It is an attempt to move us closer to the original vision of Lord John Maynard Keynes, the Fabian Socialist, architect of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. Keynes had hoped to replace the dollar with a new global currency he called the bancor. That idea is being revived now in preparation for the London G20 conference next week, though most proposals call for a vast expansion of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), which is more arcane and sounds less threatening than an actual global currency like Keynes’ bancor, or the “acmetal” proposed by Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev. It is no small matter that Canadian economist Robert Mundell, who received the Nobel Prize for his key role in laying the groundwork for the euro currency, has endorsed Nazarbayev’s proposition. “It would be a very good idea if the G20 took that idea up in London,” Mundell said.
This is a very telling endorsement. Mundell and his colleagues laid most of the groundwork for the euro in secret and only succeeded in foisting the euro upon the peoples of Europe through deception. For decades, the architects of the Common Market and European Union denied that they were seeking monetary or political union, or anything that would harm national sovereignty; now it is pointless to deny that the EU central government in Brussels has usurped virtually all sovereign powers.
As we have noted in several previous reports on this subject over the past months, the globalist choir has been laboring mightily to build up a “mandate” for the London G20 confab to propose “Supersizing the IMF,” which would entail transferring vast new monetary and regulatory powers to the IMF, making it the equivalent of a global Federal Reserve System. Beyond that, the same choir has unleashed a host of proposals to exploit current economic and political crises to further empower the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and other international institutions, some even calling outright for world government. That is the real agenda for many of the world leaders and their one-world sherpas who will be attending the London summit.
Related articles from The New American:
The G20 Push to “Supersize” the IMF
Dropping All Pretenses About “Global Governance”
Photo: AP Images
