|
StrangerThan -> RE: Glen Beck mentions 1 world currency (10/11/2008 4:04:37 AM)
|
I'm making nothing up.
I watched both videos in the interest of ascertaining who was lying since you were so adamant about it. Beck said, France called for a New World Order. What anyone else said here, what any other link said here, is beside the point and goes beyond the question of his veracity. Sarkozy did in fact, call for a New World Order.
As you noted in a previous post, most of the links related to the concept of a single currency stemmed from the Reuters article and occurred prior to Beck's statement. Those people did something everyone does, including you at times and certainly something everyone in broadcast news and opinion does, which is infer from a statement what that statement actually means.
Financial double-speak is common. Anyone who ever listened to Greenspan talk also more than likely saw the dissection of those speeches by journalists. To insist someone is a liar because they infer something from words on the topic is to insist every journalist who ever sat down and puzzled over similar word mazes were liars. Greenspan was the king at walking around a bush to get to the other side in ways that left anyone following confused at how they got there. This is nothing more, and the action is nothing new. It's not about lying. It's about looking at the elements of a political statement and visualizing the outcome from it if it were enacted.
"The world urgently needs to create a diversified currency and financial system and fair and just financial order that is not dependent on the United States."
Can easily be seen as a call for one world currency as it does not say we need to use the yen, Euro, ruble, rupee, peso or any other currency already in existence. It calls for the creation of a currency. The scope of that statement is not localized to any given area of the world, but global in its intent - which makes this entire debate more about interpretation than lying. Politicians and diplomats know they have to couch intent in terms everyone will accept. They're also quite adept at pointing your attention to one aspect while doing the dirty work behind your back. It's how we end up with legislation enacted for our safety that really lets government listen to your every day conversations and how laws are created ostensibly to trap credit card abusers but in reality nail a hell of a lot more elderly people to the wall for having to charge drugs they can't afford than punish actual abusers.
|
|
|
|
