ED Noor: Here is the full transcript as well as the four films. James Corbett has put together a masterful report. Please take the time to educate yourself. I am not even adding images or editorial comments although tempted. There is more than enough for you to digest right here.
.
.
PART ONE:
HOW
BILL GATES MONOPOLIZED GLOBAL HEALTH
BILL GATES: Hello. I’m Bill
Gates, chairman of Microsoft. In this video you’re going to see the future.
Who is Bill Gates?A software developer?A businessman?A philanthropist?A global health expert?
This question, once merely academic, is
becoming a very real question for those who are beginning to realize that
Gates’ unimaginable wealth has been used to gain control over every corner of
the fields of public health, medical research and vaccine development. And now
that we are presented with the very problem that Gates has been talking about
for years, we will soon find that this software developer with no medical
training is going to leverage that wealth into control over the fates of
billions of people.
GATES: [. . .] because until we get almost everybody vaccinated globally, we still won’t be fully back to normal.
Bill Gates is no public health expert.
He is not a doctor, an epidemiologist or an infectious disease researcher. Yet
somehow he has become a central figure in the lives of billions of people,
presuming to dictate the medical actions that will be required for the world to
go “back to normal.” The transformation of Bill Gates from computer kingpin to
global health czar is as remarkable as it is instructive, and it tells us a
great deal about where we are heading as the world plunges into a crisis the
likes of which we have not seen before.
This is the story of How Bill Gates
Monopolized Global Health.
You’re tuned in to The Corbett Report.
Until his reinvention as a
philanthropist in the past decade, this is what many people thought of
when they thought of Bill Gates:
NARRATOR: In the case of the United States vs Microsoft, the US Justice Department contended that the software giant had breached antitrust laws by competing unfairly against Netscape Communications in the internet browser market, effectively creating a monopoly. Bill’s first concern was that the prosecution could potentially block the release of his company’s latest operating system, Windows 98.
SOURCE: Bill Gates Defends Microsoft in Monopoly Lawsuit
.
GATES: Are you asking me about when I wrote this e-mail or what are you asking me about?
.
DAVID BOIES: I’m asking you about January of ’96.
.
GATES: That month?
.
BOIES: Yes, sir.
.
GATES: And what about it?
.
BOIES: What non-Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 96?
.
GATES: I don’t know what you mean: “concerned.”
.
BOIES: What is it about the word “concerned” that you don’t understand?
.
GATES: I’m not sure what you mean by it.
SOURCE: Bill Gates Deposition
STEVE JOBS: We’re going to be working together on Microsoft Office, on Internet Explorer, on Java, and I think that it’s going to lead to a very healthy relationship. So it’s a package announcement today. We’re very, very happy about it, we’re very, very excited about it. And I happen to have a special guest with me today via satellite downlink, and if we could get him up on the stage right now.
.
[BILL GATES APPEARS, CROWD BOOS]
SOURCE: Macworld Boston 1997-The Microsoft Deal
DAN RATHER: Police and security guards in Belgium were caught flat-footed today by a cowardly sneak attack on one of the world’s wealthiest men. The target was Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, arriving for a meeting with community leaders. Watch what happens when a team of hit men meet him first with a pie in the face.
[GATES HIT IN THE FACE WITH PIE]RATHER: Gates was momentarily and understandably shaken, but he was not injured. The hit squad piled on with two more pies before one of them was wrestled to the ground and arrested; the others ~ at least for the moment ~ got away. Gates went inside, wiped his face clean, and made no comment. He then went ahead with his scheduled meeting. No word on the motive for this attack.
SOURCE: Bill Gates Pie in Face
But, once reviled for the massive wealth and the monopolistic power that his virus-laden software afforded him, Gates is now hailed as a visionary who is leveraging that wealth and power for the greater good of humanity.
KLAUS SCHWAB: If in the 22nd century a book will be written about the entrepreneur of the 21st century [. . .] I’m sure that the person who will foremost come to the mind of those historians is certainly Bill Gates. [applause]
SOURCE: Davos Annual Meeting 2008 – Bill Gates
.
ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say that Bill Gates is singularly ~ I would argue ~ the most consequential individual of our generation. I mean that.
SOURCE: Bill Gates Talks Philanthropy, Microsoft, and Taxes | DealBook
.
ELLEN DEGENERES: Our next guest is one of the richest and most generous men in the world. Please welcome Bill Gates.
SOURCE: Bill Gates on Finding a Vaccine for COVID-19, the Economy, and Returning to ‘Normal Life’
.
JUDY WOODRUFF: At a time when everyone is looking to understand the scope of the pandemic and how to minimize the threat, one of the best informed voices is that of businessman and philanthropist Bill Gates.
SOURCE: Bill Gates on where the COVID-19 pandemic will hurt the most
The process by which this reinvention
of Gates’ public image took place is not mysterious. It’s the same process by
which every billionaire has revived their public image since John D.
Rockefeller hired Ivy Ledbetter Lee to transform him from the head of the Standard Oil hydra
into the kind old man handing out dimes to strangers.
MAN OFF CAMERA: Don’t you give dimes, Mr. Rockefeller? Please, go ahead.WOMAN: Thank you, sir.MAN: Thank you very much.ROCKEFELLER: Thank you for the ride!MAN: I consider myself more than amply paid.ROCKEFELLER: Bless you! Bless you! Bless you!
More to the point, John D. Rockefeller
knew that to gain the adoration of the public, he had to appear to give them
what they want: money. He devoted hundreds of millions of dollars of his vast
oil monopoly fortune to establishing institutions that, he claimed, were for
the public good. The General Education Board. The Rockefeller Institute of
Medical Research. The Rockefeller Foundation.
.
.
Similarly, Bill Gates has spent much of
the past two decades transforming himself from software magnate into a
benefactor of humanity through his own Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In
fact, Gates has surpassed Rockefeller’s legacy with the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation long having eclipsed The Rockefeller Foundation as the largest
private foundation in the world, with $46.8 billion of assets on its books that
it wields in its stated program areas of global health and development, global
growth, and global policy advocacy.
.
.
And, like Rockefeller, Gates’
transformation has been helped along by a well-funded public relations
campaign. Gone are the theatrical tricks of the PR pioneers—the ubiquitous ice cream cones
of Gates’ mentor Warren Buffett are the last remaining holdout of the old
Rockefeller-handing-out-dimes gimmick. No, Gates has guided his public image
into that of a modern-day saint through an even simpler tactic: buying good
publicity.
.
.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
spends tens of millions of dollars per year on media partnerships, sponsoring
coverage of its program areas across the board. Gates funds The Guardian‘s
Global Development website.
Gates funds NPR’s global health coverage.
Gates funds the Our World in Data website that is tracking
the latest statistics and research on the coronavirus pandemic. Gates funds BBC
coverage of global health and development issues, both through its BBC Media Action
organization and the BBC itself.
Gates funds world health coverage on ABC News.
.
.
When the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer was given a $3.5 million Gates foundation
grant to set up a special unit to report on global health
issues, NewsHour communications chief Rob Flynn was asked about the potential
conflict of interest that such a unit would have in reporting on issues that
the Gates Foundation is itself involved in. “In some regards I guess you might
say that there are not a heck of a lot of things you could touch in global
health these days that would not have some kind of Gates tentacle,” Flynn
responded.
.
.
Indeed, it would be almost impossible
to find any area of global health that has been left untouched by the tentacles
of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
.
.
It was Gates who sponsored the meeting
that led to the creation of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, a global public-private
partnership bringing together state sponsors and big pharmaceutical companies,
whose specific goals include the creation of
“healthy markets for vaccines and other immunisation products.” As a founding
partner of the alliance, the Gates Foundation provided $750 million in seed
funding and has gone on to make over $4.1 billion in
commitments to the group.
.
.
Gates provided the seed money
that created the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, a
public-private partnership that acts as a finance vehicle for governmental
AIDS, TB, and malaria programs.
.
.
When a public-private partnership of
governments, world health bodies and 13 leading pharmaceutical companies came
together in 2012 “to accelerate progress toward eliminating or controlling 10
neglected tropical diseases,” there was the Gates Foundation with $363 million of support.
.
.
When the Global Financing Facility for
Women, Children and Adolescents was launched in 2015 to leverage billions of
dollars in public and private financing for global health and development
programs, there was the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as a founding
partner with a $275 million contribution.
.
.
When the Coalition for Epidemic
Preparedness Innovations was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos in
2017 to develop vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, there was the
Gates Foundation with an initial injection of $100 million.
.
.
The examples go on and on. The Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation’s fingerprints can be seen on every major global
health initiative of the past two decades. And beyond the flashy,
billion-dollar global partnerships, the Foundation is behind hundreds of
smaller country and region-specific grants ~ $10 million to
combat a locust infestation in East Africa, or $300 million to
support agricultural research in Africa and Asia ~ that add up to billions of
dollars in commitments.
.
.
It comes as no surprise, then, that ~ far
beyond the $250 million that the Gates Foundation
has pledged to the “fight” against coronavirus ~ every aspect
of the current coronavirus pandemic involves organizations, groups and
individuals with direct ties to Gates funding.
.
.
From the start, the World Health
Organization has directed the global response to the current pandemic. From its
initial monitoring of the outbreak in Wuhan and its declaration in
January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission to its live
media briefings and its technical guidance on country-level planning and other
matters, the WHO has been the body setting the guidelines and recommendations
shaping the global response to this outbreak.
.
.
But even the World Health Organization
itself is largely reliant on funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation. The WHO’s most recent donor report
shows that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the organization’s
second-largest donor behind the United States government. The Gates Foundation
single-handedly contributes more to the world health body than Australia,
Canada, France, Germany, Russia and the UK combined.
.
.
What’s more, current World Health
Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is, in fact, like Bill
Gates himself, not a medical doctor at all, but the controversial ex-Minister
of Health of Ethiopia, who was accused
of covering up three cholera outbreaks in the country during his tenure. Before
joining the WHO, he served as chair of the Gates-founded Global Fund to Fight
AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and sat on the board of the Gates-founded Gavi,
the Vaccine Alliance, and the Gates-funded Stop TB Partnership.
.
.
The current round of lockdowns and
restrictive stay-home orders in western countries was enacted on the back of
alarming models predicting millions of deaths in the United States and hundreds
of thousands in the UK.
HAYLEY MINOGUE: Imperial College in London released a COVID-19 report and that’s where most of our US leaders are getting the information they’re basing their decision making on. That 2.2 million deaths also doesn’t account for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed.
.
The report runs us through a few different ways this could turn out depending on what our responses are. If we don’t do anything to control this virus, over 80% of people in the US would be infected over the course of the epidemic, with 2.2 million deaths from COVID-19.
SOURCE: Extreme measures based on scientific paper
.
BORIS JOHNSON: From this evening I must give the British people a very simple instruction: you must stay at home.
SOURCE: Boris Johnson announces complete UK lockdown amid coronavirus crisis
.
JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Enough is enough. Go home and stay home.
SOURCE: ‘Enough is enough’, Trudeau with a strong message to Canadians
.
GAVIN NEWSOM: . . . a statewide order for people to stay at home
SOURCE: California Gov Newsom issues statewide ‘SAFER AT HOME’ order
The work of two research groups was
crucial in shaping the decision of the UK and US governments to implement
wide-ranging lockdowns, and, in turn, governments around the world. The first
group, the Imperial College COVID-19 Research Team, issued a report on
March 16th that predicted up to 500,000 deaths in the UK and 2.2 million deaths
in the US unless strict government measures were put in place.
.
.
The second group, the Institute for
Health Metrics and Evaluation in Bill Gates’ home state of Washington, helped provide data
that corroborated the White House’s initial estimates of the virus’ effects,
estimates that have been repeatedly downgraded
as the situation has progressed.
.
.
Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation
has injected substantial sums of money into both groups. This year alone, the
Gates Foundation has already given $79 million to
Imperial College, and in 2017 the Foundation announced a $279 million investment into the IHME to
expand its work collecting health data and creating models.
.
.
Anthony Fauci, meanwhile, has become the face of
the US government’s coronavirus response, echoing Bill Gates’ assertion that
the country will not “get back to normal” until “a good vaccine” can be found
to insure the public’s safety.
ANTHONY FAUCI: If you want to get to pre-coronavirus . . . You know, that might not ever happen, in the sense of the fact that the threat is there. But I believe with the therapies that will be coming online and with the fact that I feel confident that over a period of time we will get a good vaccine, that we will never have to get back to where we are right back now.
Beyond just their frequent collaborations and cooperation in the
past, Fauci has direct ties to Gates’ projects and funding. In 2010, he was
appointed to the Leadership Council
of the Gates-founded “Decade of Vaccines”
project to implement a Global Vaccine Action Plan ~ a project to which Gates
committed $10 billion of funding. And in October of last year, just as the
current pandemic was beginning, the Gates Foundation announced a $100 million contribution to
the National Institute of Health to help, among other programs, Fauci’s
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ research into HIV.
.
.
Also in October of last year, the Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation partnered with the World Economic Forum and the
Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to stage Event 201, a tabletop exercise gauging the
economic and societal impact of a globally-spreading coronavirus pandemic.
NARRATOR: It began in healthy-looking pigs months, perhaps years, ago: a new coronavirus.
.
ANITA CICERO: The mission of the pandemic emergency board is to provide recommendations to deal with the major global challenges arising in response to an unfolding pandemic. The board is comprised of highly experienced leaders from business public health and civil society.
.
TOM INGLESBY: We’re at the start of what’s looking like it will be a severe pandemic and there are problems emerging that can only be solved by global business and governments working together.
.
STEPHEN REDD: Governments need to be willing to do things that are out of their historical perspective, or . . . for the most part. It’s really a war footing that we need to be on.
SOURCE: Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Highlights Reel
Given the incredible reach that the
tentacles of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have into every corner of
the global health markets, it should not be surprising that the foundation has
been intimately involved with every stage of the current pandemic crisis,
either. In effect, Gates has merely used the wealth from his domination of the
software market to leverage himself into a similar position in the world of
global health.
.
.
The whole process has been cloaked in
the mantle of selfless philanthropy, but the foundation is not structured as a
charitable endeavour. Instead, it maintains a dual structure: the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation distributes money to grantees, but a separate entity,
the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, manages the endowment assets.
These two entities often have overlapping interests, and, as has been noted
many times in the past, grants given by the foundation often directly benefit
the value of the trust’s assets:
MELINDA GATES: One of my favorite parts of my job at the Gates Foundation is that I get to travel to the developing world, and I do that quite regularly..My first trip in India, I was in a person’s home where they had dirt floors, no running water, no electricity, and that’s really what I see all over the world. So in short, I’m startled by all the things that they don’t have. But I am surprised by one thing that they do have: Coca-Cola. Coke is everywhere. In fact, when I travel to the developing world, Coke feels ubiquitous.
.And so when I come back from these trips, and I’m thinking about development, and I’m flying home and I’m thinking, we’re trying to deliver condoms to people, or vaccinations, you know? Coke’s success kind of stops and makes you wonder: How is it that they can get Coke to these far-flung places? If they can do that, why can’t governments and NGOs do the same thing?AMY GOODMAN: And the charity of billionaire Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda is under criticism following the disclosure it’s substantially increased its holdings in the agribusiness giant Monsanto to over $23 million. Critics say the investment in Monsanto contradicts the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s stated commitment to helping farmers and sustainable development in Africa.LAURENCE LEE: The study from the pressure group Global Justice now paints a picture of the Gates Foundation partly as an expression of corporate America’s desire to profit from Africa and partly a damning critique of its effects.
.POLLY JONES: You could have a case where the initial research is done by a Gates-funded institution. And the media reporting on how well that research is conducted is done, the media outlet is a Gates-funded outlet, or maybe a Gates-funded journalist from a media program. And then the program is implemented more widely by a Gates-funded NGO. I mean . . . There are some very insular circles here.
.LEE: Among the many criticisms: the idea that private finance can solve the problems of the developing world. Should poor farmers be trapped into debt by having to use chemicals or fertilizers underwritten by offshoot of the foundation?
This is no mere theoretical conflict of
interest. Gates is held up as a hero for donating $35.8 billion worth of his
Microsoft stock to the foundation, but during the course of his “Decade of Vaccines,”
Gates’ net worth has actually doubled, from $54 billion to $103.1 billion.
.
.
The Rockefeller story provides an
instructive template for this vision of tycoon-turned-philanthropist. When
Rockefeller faced a public backlash, he helped spearhead the creation of a
system of private foundations that connected in with his business interests.
Leveraging his unprecedented oil monopoly fortune into unprecedented control
over wide swaths of public life, Rockefeller was able to kill two birds with
one stone: molding society in his family’s own interests, even as he became a
beloved figure in the public imagination.
.
.
Similarly, Bill Gates has leveraged his
software empire into a global health, development and education empire,
steering the course of investment and research and ensuring healthy markets for
vaccines and other immunization products. And, like Rockefeller, Gates has been
transformed from the feared and reviled head of a formidable hydra into a
kindly old man generously giving his wealth back to the public.
.
.
But not everyone has been taken in by
this PR trick. Even The Lancet observed this worrying transformation
from software monopolist to health monopolist back in 2009, when the extent of
this Gates-led monopoly was becoming apparent to all:
The first guiding principle of the [Bill & Melinda Gates] Foundation is that it is “driven by the interests and passions of the Gates family.” An annual letter from Bill Gates summarizes those passions, referring to newspaper articles, books, and chance events that have shaped the Foundation’s strategy. For such a large and influential investor in global health, is such a whimsical governance principle good enough?
This brings us back to the question:
Who is Bill Gates? What are his driving interests? What motivates his
decisions?
.
.
These are not academic questions.
Gates’ decisions have controlled the flows of billions of dollars, formed
international partnerships pursuing wide-ranging agendas, ensured the creation
of “healthy markets” for Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers. And now, as we are
seeing, his decisions are shaping the entire global response to the coronavirus
pandemic.
.
.
Next week, we will further explore
Gates’ vaccination initiatives, the business interests behind them, and the
larger agenda that is beginning to take shape as we enter the “new normal” of
the COVID-19 crisis.
.
.
PART
TWO:
BILL
GATES’ PLAN TO VACCINATE THE WORLD
POPPY HARLOW: Ten billion dollars. I mean, just speak about the magnitude of that. That is by far the biggest commitment of the foundation, isn’t it, Bill? I mean, this is by far the largest.
.BILL GATES: That’s right, we’ve been spending a lot on vaccines. With this commitment, over eight million additional lives will be saved. So it’s one of the most effective ways that health in the poorest countries can be dramatically improved.
In January of 2010, Bill and Melinda
Gates used the World Economic Forum at Davos to announce a
staggering $10 billion commitment to research and develop vaccines for the
world’s poorest countries, kicking off what he called a “Decade of Vaccines.”
GATES: Today we’re announcing a commitment over this next decade, which we think of as a decade of vaccines having incredible impact. We’re announcing that we’ll spend over $10 billion on vaccines.SOURCE: PBS News Hour January 29, 2010
Hailed by the Gates-funded media . . .
HARI SREENIVASAN: For the record, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a NewsHour underwriter.SOURCE: PBS News Hour January 29, 2010
. . . and applauded by the
pharmaceutical companies who stood to reap the benefits of that largesse, the
record-setting commitment made waves in the international community, helping to
underwrite a Global Vaccine Action Plan
coordinated by the Gates-funded World
Health Organization.
.
.
But contrary to the Gates’ own PR spin
that this $10 billion pledge was an unalloyed good and would save eight million
lives, the truth is that this attempt to reorient the global health economy was
part of a much bigger agenda. An agenda that would ultimately lead to greater
profits for Big Pharma companies, greater control for the Gates Foundation over
the field of global health, and greater power for Bill Gates to shape the
course of the future for billions of people around the planet.
.
.
This is Bill Gates’ Plan to
Vaccinate the World.
.
.
Given Gates’ pledge to make this a
“Decade of Vaccines,” it should come as no surprise that, since the dawn of
this coronavirus crisis, he has been adamant that the world will not go back to
normal until a vaccine has been developed.
GATES: We’re gonna have this intermediate period of opening up, and it won’t be normal until we get an amazing vaccine to the entire world.GATES: The vaccine is critical, because, until you have that, things aren’t really going to be normal. They can open up to some degree, but the risk of a rebound will be there until we have very broad vaccination.GATES: They won’t be back to normal until we either have that phenomenal vaccine or a therapeutic that’s, like, over 95% effective. And so we have to assume that’s going to be almost 18 months from now.GATES: And then the final solution ~ which is a year or two years off ~ is the vaccine. So we’ve got to go full-speed ahead on all three fronts.
.COLBERT: Just to head off the conspiracy theorists, maybe we shouldn’t call the vaccine “the final solution.”
.GATES: Good point.
.COLBERT: Maybe just “the best solution.”[GATES LAUGHS]
More interestingly, since Gates began
delivering this same talking point in every one of his many media appearances
of late, it has been picked up and repeated by heads of state, health
officials, doctors and media talking heads, right down to the scientifically
arbitrary but very specific 18-month time frame.
ZEKE EMANUEL: Realistically, COVID-19 will be here for the next 18 months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications..
DOUG FORD: The hard fact is, until we have a vaccine, going back to normal means putting lives at risk..
JUSTIN TRUDEAU: This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed..
NORMAN SWAN: The only thing that will really allow life as we once knew it to resume is a vaccine..
DONALD TRUMP: Obviously, we continue to work on the vaccines, but the vaccines have to be down the road by probably 14, 15, 16 months. We’re doing great on the vaccines.
The fact that so many heads of state,
health ministers and media commentators are dutifully echoing Gates’
pronouncement about the need for a vaccine will not be surprising to those who
saw last week’s exploration of How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health.
As we have seen, the Gates Foundation’s tentacles have penetrated into every
corner of the field of public health. Billions of dollars in funding and entire
public policy agendas are under the control of this man, an unelected,
unaccountable software developer with no medical research experience or
training.
.
.
And nowhere is Gates’ control of public
health more apparent than in the realm of vaccines.
.
.
Gates helped develop the Global Vaccine Action Plan
administered by the Gates-funded World
Health Organization.
.
.
Gates helped found Gavi, the Vaccine
Alliance, aiming to develop “healthy markets” for
vaccine manufacturers.
.
.
Gates helped launch Gavi with a $1
billion donation in 2011, going on to contribute $4.1 billion over
the course of the “Decade of Vaccines.”
GATES: And so I’m pleased to announce to you that we’re pledging an additional billion dollars to—[APPLAUSE]GATES: Thank you.[CONTINUED APPLAUSE]GATES: Alright, thank you.[CONTINUED APPLAUSE]GATES: It’s not everyday we give away a billion dollars.[LAUGHTER]SOURCE: Gates’ mammoth vaccine pledge
One of the Gates Foundation’s core
funding areas is “vaccine development and surveillance,”
which has resulted in the channeling of billions of dollars into vaccine
development, a seat at the table to develop vaccination campaigns in countries
around the globe, and the opportunity to shape public thinking around Bill
Gates’ pet project of the past five years: preparing rapid development and
deployment of vaccines in the event of a globally spreading pandemic.
GATES: If anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it’s most likely to be a highly infectious virus..
GATES: Whether it occurs by a quirk of nature or at the hand of a terrorist, epidemiologists show through their models that a respiratory-spread pathogen would kill more than 30 million people in less than a year. And there is a reasonable probability of that taking place in the years ahead..
BABITA SHARMA: Many high-profile personalities have been gathering at this year’s World Economic Forum in Davos, which aims to discuss the globe’s most pressing issues. Amongst them is the Microsoft founder Bill Gates, whose foundation is investing millions in the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations to help combat infectious diseases. Here’s some of what he had to say about his push to develop new vaccines.SOURCE: BBC Newsday January 19, 2017.
GATES: Unfortunately, it takes many years to do a completely new vaccine. The design, the safety review, the manufacturing; all of those things mean that an epidemic can be very widespread before that tool would come along. And so after Ebola the global health community talked a lot about this, including a new type of vaccine platform called DNA/RNA that should speed things along.
.And so this Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Initiative [sic], CEPI, is three countries ~ Japan, Norway, Germany ~ and two foundations ~ Wellcome Trust, [who] we work with on a lot of things, and our foundation, the Gates Foundation ~ coming together to fund . . . actually trying to use that platform and make some vaccines. And so that would help us in the future..
NARRATORS: We know vaccines can protect us. We just need to be better prepared. So, “Let’s come together. Let’s research and invest. Let’s save lives. Let’s outsmart epidemics.”SOURCE: Let’s #OutsmartEpidemics.
Given Gates’ mammoth investment in vaccines over the past decade, his insistence that . . .GATES: Things won’t go back to truly normal until we have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out to basically the entire world.
. . . is hardly surprising.
.
.
What should be surprising is
that this strangely specific and continuously repeated message ~ that we will
not go “back to normal” until we get a vaccine in 18 months ~ has no scientific
basis whatsoever. Medical researchers have already conceded that a vaccine for
SARS-CoV-2 may not even be possible,
pointing to the inability of researchers to develop any kind of immunization
against previous coronavirus outbreaks, like SARS or MERS.
.
.
But even if such a vaccine were
possible, serious concerns remain about the safety of developing, testing and
delivering such an “amazing vaccine” to “the entire world” in this remarkably
short timeframe. Even proponents of vaccine development openly worry that
the rush to vaccinate billions of people with a largely untested, experimental
coronavirus vaccine will itself present grave risks to the public.
.
.
One of these risks involves “disease
enhancement.” It has been known for over a decade that vaccination for some
viral infections ~ including coronaviruses ~ actually enhances susceptibility to viral
infection or even causes infections in healthy vaccine
recipients.
ANTHONY FAUCI: Now, the issue of safety. Something that I want to make sure the American public understand: It’s not only safety when you inject somebody and they get maybe an idiosyncratic reaction, they get a little allergic reaction, they get pain. There’s safety associated. “Does the vaccine make you worse?” And there are diseases in which you vaccinate someone, they get infected with what you’re trying to protect them with, and you actually enhance the infection.
This is no mere theoretical risk. As
researchers who were trying to develop a vaccine for the original SARS outbreak
discovered, the vaccine actually made the lab animals subjected to it more susceptible to the disease.
PETER HOTEZ: One of the things that we are not hearing a lot about is the unique potential safety problems of coronavirus vaccines. This was first found in the 1960s with the Respiratory Syncytial Virus vaccines, and it was done in Washington with the NIH and Children’s National Medical Center. Some of those kids who got the vaccine actually did worse, and I believe there were two deaths in the consequence of that study. Because what happens with certain types of respiratory virus vaccines, you get immunized, and then when you get actually exposed to the virus, you get this kind of paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon, and what ~ and we don’t entirely understand the basis of it. But we recognize that it’s a real problem for certain respiratory virus vaccines. That killed the RSV program for decades. Now the Gates Foundation is taking it up again. But when we started developing coronavirus vaccines ~ and our colleagues ~ we noticed in laboratory animals that they started to show some of the same immune pathology that resembled what had happened 50 years earlier.
This specific issue regarding
coronavirus vaccines is exacerbated by the arbitrary and unscientific 18-month
timeframe that Gates is insisting on for the vaccine’s development. In order to
meet that deadline, vaccine developers are being urged to use new and largely
unproven methods for creating their experimental immunizations, including DNA
and mRNA vaccines.
KELLY O’DONNELL: For a self-described wartime president, victory over COVID-19 equals a vaccine.
.TRUMP: I hope we can have a vaccine, and we’re going to fast-track it like you’ve never seen before.
.O’DONNELL: Adding Trump-style branding, the administration launched “Operation Warp Speed,” a multi-billion-dollar research and manufacturing effort to shorten the typical year-plus vaccine development timeline.SOURCE: Trump Administration’s ‘Operation Warp Speed’ Aims To Fast-Track Coronavirus Vaccine | Nightly News.
ANTHONY FAUCI: We’re gonna start ramping up production with the companies involved, and you do that at risk. In other words, you don’t wait until you get an answer before you start manufacturing. You at risk proactively start making it, assuming it’s gonna work.SOURCE: Dr Fauci Discusses Operation Warp Speed’s Goal Of 100s Of Millions Of Vaccine Doses By January.
BECKY QUICK: You’re thinking 18 months even with all the work that you’ve already done to this point and the planning that you are taking with lots of different potential vaccinations and building up for that now
.GATES: Yeah, so there’s an approach called RNA vaccine that people like Moderna, CureVac and others are using that in 2015 we’d identified that as very promising for pandemics and for other applications as well. And so, if everything goes perfectly with the RNA approach, we could actually beat the 18 months. We don’t want to create unrealistic expectations..
RHIJU DAS: So the concept of an RNA vaccine is: Let’s inject the RNA molecule that encodes for the spike protein..
ANGELA RASMUSSEN: It’s making your cell do the work of creating this viral protein that is going to be recognized by your immune system and trigger the development of these antibodies..
DAS: Our bodies won’t make a full-fledged infectious virus. They’ll just make a little piece and then learn to recognize it and then get ready to destroy the virus if it then later comes and invades us.[. . .]
.DAS: It’s a relatively new, unproven technology. And there’s still no example of an RNA vaccine that’s been deployed worldwide in the way that we need for the coronavirus.
.RASMUSSEN: There is the possibility for unforeseen, adverse effects.
.AKIKO IWASAKI: So this is all new territory. Whether it would elicit protective immune response against this virus is just unknown right now.
Rushing at “Warp Speed” to develop a
new vaccine using experimental technology and then mass-producing and
delivering billions of doses to be injected into “basically the entire world”
before adequate testing is even done amounts to one of the most dangerous
experiments in the history of the world, one that could alter the lives of
untold numbers of people.
.
.
That an experimental vaccine ~ developed
in a brand new way and rushed through with a special, shortened testing regime
~ should be given to adults, children, pregnant women, newborn babies, and the
elderly alike, would be, in any other situation, unthinkable. To suggest that
such a vaccine should be given to the entire planet would have been called
lunacy mere months ago. But now the public is being asked to accept this
premise without question.
.
.
Even Gates himself acknowledges the
inherent risks of such a project. But his concern is not for the lives that
will be irrevocably altered in the event that the vaccines cause damage to the
population. Instead, he is more concerned that the pharmaceutical companies and
the researchers are given legal immunity for any such damage.
GATES: You know, if we have, you know, one in 10,000 side effects, that’s, you know, way more ~ 700,000 ~ you know, people who will suffer from that. So really understanding the safety at gigantic scale across all age ranges ~ you know, pregnant, male, female, undernourished, existing comorbidities ~ it’s very, very hard. And that actual decision of, “OK, let’s go and give this vaccine to the entire world,” ah, governments will have to be involved because there will be some risk and indemnification needed before that can be decided on.
As we have already seen, in the arena
of global health, what Bill Gates wants is what the world gets. So it should be
no surprise that immunity for the Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers and the
vaccination program planners is already being worked on.
.
.
In the US, the Department of Health and
Human Services issued a declaration that
retroactively provides “liability immunity for activities related to medical
countermeasures against COVID-19,” including manufacturers, distributors and
program planners of “any vaccine, used to treat, diagnose, cure, prevent, or
mitigate COVID-19.” The declaration was issued on March 17th but retroactively
covers any activity back to February 4th, 2020, the day before the Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation announced an
emergency $100 million to fund treatment efforts and to develop new vaccines
for COVID-19.
.
.
The plan to inject everyone on the
planet
with an experimental vaccine
is no aberration in Bill Gates’ envisioned
“Decade of Vaccines.”
It is its culmination.
.
The “Decade of Vaccines” kicked off
with a Gates-funded $3.6 million observational study of HPV vaccines in India
that, according to a government investigation,
violated the human rights of the study participants with “gross violations” of
consent and failed to properly report adverse events experienced by the vaccine
recipients. After the deaths of seven girls involved in the trial were
reported, a parliamentary investigation concluded that the
Gates-funded Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), which ran the
study, had been engaged in a scheme to help ensure “healthy markets” for
GlaxoSmithKline and Merck, the manufacturers of the Gardasil and Cervarix
vaccines that had been so generously donated for use in the trial:
“Had PATH been successful in getting the HPV vaccine included in the universal immunization program of the concerned countries, this would have generated windfall profit for the manufacturer(s) by way of automatic sale, year after year, without any promotional or marketing expenses. It is well known that once introduced into the immunization program it becomes politically impossible to stop any vaccination.”
Chandra M. Gulhati, editor of the
influential Monthly Index of Medical Specialities, remarked that “[i]t
is shocking to see how an American organization used surreptitious methods to
establish itself in India,” and Samiran Nundy, editor emeritus of the National
Medical Journal of India lamented that
“[t]his is an obvious case where Indians were being used as guinea pigs.”
.
.
Throughout the decade, India’s concerns
about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and its corporate partners’ influence
on the country’s national immunization programs grew. In 2016, the steering
group of the country’s National Health Mission blasted the government
for allowing the country’s National Technical Advisory Group on
Immunisation ~ the primary body advising the government on
all vaccination-related matters ~ to be effectively purchased by the Gates
Foundation.
.
.
As one steering group member noted:
“The NTAGI secretariat has been moved out of the [government’s health] ministry
to the office of Public Health Foundation of India and the 32 staff members in
that secretariat draw their salaries from the BMGF. There is a clear conflict
of interest ~ on one hand, the BMGF funds the secretariat that is the highest
decision making body in vaccines and, on the other, it partners the pharma
industry in GAVI. This is unacceptable.”
.
.
In 2017, the government responded by cutting all financial ties
between the advisory group and the Gates Foundation.
.
.
Similar stories play out across the
Gates Foundation’s “Decade of Vaccines.”
.
.
There’s the Gates-founded and funded
Meningitis Vaccine Project, which led to the creation and testing of
MenAfriVac, a $0.50-per-dose immunization against meningococcal meningitis. The
tests led to reports of between 40 and 500 children
suffering seizures and convulsions and eventually becoming paralyzed.
.
.
There’s the 2017 confirmation that
the Gates-supported oral
polio vaccine was actually responsible for the majority of new polio cases and
the 2018 follow up
showing that 80% of polio cases are now vaccine-derived.
.
.
There’s the 2018 paper in the International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health concluding that over 490,000 people
in India developed paralysis as a result of the oral polio vaccine between 2000
and 2017.
.
.
There’s even the WHO’s own malaria
chief, Dr. Arata Kochi, who complained in an internal
memo that Gates’ influence meant that the world’s leading
malaria scientists are now “locked up in a ‘cartel’ with their own research
funding being linked to those of others within the group” and that the foundation “was
stifling debate on the best ways to treat and combat malaria, prioritizing only
those methods that relied on new technology or developing new drugs.”
.
.
Kochi’s complaint, written in 2008,
highlights the most common criticism of the global health web that Gates has
spun in the past two decades: that the public health industry has become a
racket run by and for Big Pharma and its partners for the benefit of big
business.
.
.
At the time that Kochi was writing his
memo, the executive director of the Gates Foundation’s Global Health program
was Tachi Yamada. Yamada
left his position as Chairman of Research and Development at GlaxoSmithKline to
take up the position at the Gates Foundation in 2006 and left the foundation
five years later to become Chief
Medical and Scientific Officer at Takeda Pharmaceuticals.
Yamada’s replacement as head of Gates’ Global health program, Trevor Mundel, was
himself a clinical researcher at Pfizer and Parke-Davis and spent time as Head
of Development with Novartis before joining the foundation.
.
.
This use of foundation funds to set
public policy to drive up corporate profits is not a secret conspiracy. It is a
perfectly open one.
When the Center for Global Development
formed a working group to “develop a practical approach to the vaccine
challenge,” they concluded that the best way to incentivize pharmaceutical
companies to produce more vaccines for the third world was for governments to
promise to buy vaccines before they were even developed. They titled their
report “Making Markets for Vaccines.”
ALICE ALBRIGHT: The project “Making Markets for Vaccines” was really designed to address a problem that’s existed for a long time, which is insufficient research and development budgets as well as investment capacity in vaccine development and production for the third world. How do you create better incentives to get the pharma community ~ the vaccine community ~ to produce products that are specifically dedicated for the developing world.
.RUTH LEVINE: Michael Kramer, a professor at Harvard, had been thinking about this problem for many years.
.OWEN BARDER: He realized that if the rich countries of the world were to make a promise that they would buy a malaria vaccine if somebody produced it, that that would give an incentive to the pharmaceutical industry to go and do the research and development needed to make one. But this idea was unfamiliar. No government had made a commitment to buy a product that didn’t already exist.SOURCE: Making Markets for Vaccines
When the first such “Advanced Market
Commitment” was made in 2007 ~ a $1.5 billion promise to buy
yet-to-be-produced vaccines from Big Pharma manufacturers ~ there was the Gates Foundation as
the only non-nation sponsor.
.
.
The Gates-founded Gavi Vaccine Alliance
is an open partnership
between the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, the World Bank and
vaccine manufacturers. Their stated goal includes “introducing new vaccines into the
routine schedules of national immunization programmes” and
engaging in “market shaping efforts” to ensure “healthy
markets for vaccines and other immunization products.”
.
.
If “introducing new vaccines” and
ensuring healthy markets for them was the aim of Gates’ “Decade of Vaccines,”
there can be no doubt that COVID-19 has seen that goal realized in spectacular
fashion.
URSULA VON DER LEYEN: Let’s start the pledging.
.KATIE STEPHENS: The EU kicked off its fundraising drive with 1 billion euros. In the hours that followed, pledges were beamed in from across the globe.
.TAWFIG ALRABIAH: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has pledged 500 million dollars.
.STEPHENS: Even pop icon Madonna made a last-minute donation of a million euros..
MELINDA GATES: By combining the world’s expertise and brainpower and resources, we can attack this disease in the way it’s attacking us: globally. Our foundation is proud to partner with you and I’m pleased to announce today that we will pledge a hundred million dollars towards this effort..
KATIE STEPHENS: Germany was one of the leading donors, pledging over five hundred million euros. The money is earmarked for international health organizations and research networks in a bid to speed up the development of a vaccine.
And there, at the center of this web,
is the Gates Foundation, connected to every major organization, research
institution, international alliance and vaccine manufacturer involved in the
current crisis.
.
.
Certainly, the Gates ~ like the
Rockefellers ~ have profited from their years as “the most generous people on
the planet.” As curious as it might seem to those who don’t understand the true
nature of this monopoly cartel, despite all of these grants and pledges ~ commitments
of tens of billions of dollars ~ Bill Gates’ personal net worth has actually
doubled during this “Decade of Vaccines,” from $50 billion to over $100 billion.
.
.
But once again we come back to the
question: Who is Bill Gates? Is he motivated simply by money? Is this incessant
drive to vaccinate the entire population of the planet merely the result of
greed? Or is there something else driving this agenda?
.
.
As we shall see next time, money is not
the end goal of Gates’ “philanthropic” activities. Money is just the tool that
he is using to purchase what he really wants: control.
Controlnot just of the health industry,but control of the human population itself.
PART
THREE:
BILL
GATES AND THE POPULATION CONTROL GRID
WARREN BUFFETT: Hello, everyone.
.EVERYONE: Mr. B.!
.DAVID ALLEN JONES: What’s your secret mission about?
.BUFFETT: It’s not my mission, but an idea that came from our good friend, Mr. Bill Gates.
.BILL GATES: Hi, kids.
.RADLEY HEMMING: The real, actual, in person Bill . . . Bill . . .
.ELENA RAMIREZ: He’s trying to say that we’re big fans, Mr. Gates.
It’s a strange fact that Bill Gates’
hagiographers ~ PR hacks employed, more often than not, by large corporations
that receive funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation ~ consistently
depict this drab software developer as a cartoon superhero, using his
“superpower” of being very rich to help “save the planet.”
JOHN BERMAN: Behind closed doors on this New York campus, a secret gathering of some of the world’s most powerful people: Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Winfrey. It was like . . . well, it was like the “Super Friends.”
.[Super Friends cartoon introduction plays]
.ANNOUNCER: In the great hall of the Justice League, there are assembled the world’s four greatest heroes.SOURCE: Elite Billionaires Meet in Secret (video no longer online)
But these cartoon-fueled puff pieces
reveal more than they know about Gates and the other mega-rich philanthropists
they are attempting to idolize: they reveal that the idea of the selfless,
billionaire do-gooder is a work of fiction so unbelievable it is only fit for
Saturday morning cartoon fare.
.
.
As we have seen in our first two
explorations of Bill Gates’ role as global health kingpin, the seemingly
selfless generosity of the Gates family through their eponymous foundation has
in fact greatly increased their own wealth, with Bill Gates’ personal net worth
having doubled in the past decade alone.
.
.
But the takeover of public health that
we have documented in How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health
and the remarkably brazen push to vaccinate everyone on the planet that we have
documented in Bill Gates’ Plan to Vaccinate the World was
not, at base, about money. The unimaginable wealth that Gates has accrued is
now being used to purchase something much more useful: control. Control not
just of the global health bodies that can coordinate a worldwide vaccination
program or the governments that will mandate such an unprecedented campaign,
but control over the global population itself.
.
.
This is an exploration of Bill Gates
and the Population Control Grid.
.
.
You’re tuned in to The Corbett Report.
,
,
From a journalistic standpoint, Good
Morning America’s inane report on the secretive billionaire meeting that
took place in New York in 2009 was a failure. It listed some of the meetings’
attendees and their combined net worth:
BERMAN: Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Winfrey [. . .] Together with others in the meeting, including George Soros, Ted Turner, David Rockefeller, they’re worth more than $125 billion.
It turned to the senior editor of Forbes
for a sound bite about what it would be like to witness such an assembly of
wealth:
MATTHEW MILLER: To have been in the room and see this meeting of the minds really would have been a fascinating thing.
And it dutifully reported the participants’ own stated reason for holding the meeting. . . .BERMAN: That much money. That much power around one table. It begs the question, what were they doing? What were they scheming? Total world domination? This group, together for six hours, was talking about charity, education, emergency relief, global health.
.. . . Before wrapping up with another juvenile appeal to comic book superhero lore.[Video onscreen of various billionaires superimposed as Superheroes, such as Batman, Superman. Etc.]
.BERMAN: The new supermen and wonder woman. The superrich friends. Not fighting bad guys, but fighting for good, nonetheless. For Good Morning America, John Berman, ABC News.
Yes, from a journalistic standpoint,
Berman’s report was an utter failure. There was no attempt to question the
participants about the meeting, no space for any criticism of these
billionaires or questions about their motives, no adversarial journalism of any
kind.
.
.
But as a PR piece, it was brilliant. It
leaves the viewer with a vague sense that some kind of gathering took place
somewhere in New York in which rich people ~ who, let’s not forget, are
superheroes ~ talked about charity.
.
.
One would have to turn to print sources
to discover that the meeting was held at the personal residence of Sir Paul Nurse,
then-president of Rockefeller University; that the invitation to the gathering
was co-written by Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and David Rockefeller; or that the
aim of the meeting was “to consider how
their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population.”
.
.
Given that these extraordinarily rich
and powerful men ~ including Warren Buffett, David Rockefeller, and Ted Turner ~ have
all expressed their belief that the growing human population is the greatest
threat faced by humanity, it should not be surprising that they would convene a
conference to discuss how best to channel their vast wealth into the project of
reducing the number of people on the planet. Particularly unsurprising is that
attendees of the meeting later dubbed Bill Gates ~ a man for whom population
control is particularly close to his heart ~ as the “most impressive”
speaker at the event.
GATES: Here we can see a chart that looks at the total world population over the last several hundred years, and at first glance this is a bit scary. We go from less than a billion in 1800, and then 3, 4, 5, 6 ~ and 7.4 billion, where we are today, is happening even faster. So, Melinda and I wondered whether providing new medicines and keeping children alive, would that create more of a population problem?.
SCOTT PELLEY: . . . and what the developing world does not need is more children..
MELINDA GATES: And I think that was the biggest “ah-ha” to Bill and me when we got into this work. Because we asked ourselves, of course, the same hard-nosed question you’d ask, which is: “If you get into this work and you start to save these children, will women just keep overpopulating the world?” And thank goodness, the converse is absolutely true.SOURCE: Extra: Gates On Population Rates.
GATES: This is a very important question to get right, because it was absolutely key for me. When our foundation first started up, it was focused on reproductive health. That was the main thing we did, because I thought, you know, population growth in poor countries is the biggest problem they face. You’ve got to help mothers, who want to limit family size, have the tools and education to do that. And I thought, that’s the only thing that really counts.
In recent years, critics have pointed
to Bill Gates’ own words linking vaccination programs with his goal of reducing
population growth.
GATES: The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.SOURCE: Innovating to zero! | Bill Gates.
SANJAY GUPTA: Ten billion dollars over the next 10 years to make it the year of the vaccines. What does that mean, exactly?.
GATES: Well, over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them. We could cut the number of children who die every year from about nine million to half of that, if we have success on it. And the benefits there in terms of reducing sickness, reducing the population growth, it really allows society a chance to take care of itself once you’ve made that intervention.SOURCE: Sanjay Gupta MD February 5, 2011
But as any number of “fact-checking
websites” ~ not to mention Bill Gates himself ~ are quick to point out, this
doesn’t mean what it sounds like it means.
GATES: What we found out is that as health improves, families choose to have less children..
MELINDA GATES: The truth is that when people’s lives improve ~ when children survive, for instance, or when girls go to school ~ people start making decisions based on the expectation that their children will live and thrive. The result is smaller families and slower population growth..
GATES: I came across articles that showed that the key thing you can do to reduce population growth is actually improve health. And that sounds paradoxical. You think, “OK, better health means more kids, not less kids.” Well, in fact, what parents are doing is they’re trying to have two kids survive to adulthood to take care of them. And so the more disease burden that there is, the more kids they have to have to have that high probability. So there’s a perfect correlation that, as you improve health, within a half generation the population growth rate goes down.
Yes, the Gates’ stated plan is to
reduce population growth by improving health. But the idea of using vaccines as
sterilization agents ~ even without the public’s knowledge or consent ~ is not
conspiracy lore, but documentable fact.
.
.
It its 1968
annual report, the Rockefeller Foundation addressed the “Problems of
Population,” lamenting that “[v]ery little work is in progress on immunological
methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is
required if a solution is to be found here.” The Foundation vowed to correct
this problem by funding “established and beginning investigators to turn their
attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have implications
for human fertility and its control.”
.
.
This was no empty promise. By the time
of its 1988 Annual Report,
the Rockefeller Foundation was able to report progress on its funding into
contraceptive research, including NORPLANT, a contraceptive implanted under the
skin of a woman’s upper arm and effective for five years. In its 1988 report,
the Rockefeller Foundation was pleased to announce that NORPLANT ~ which was
developed by the Rockefeller-founded Population Council ~ was “now approved for
marketing in 12 countries.”
.
.
The Rockefellers’ Population Council
and other research organizations joined with the World Health Organization
(WHO) in 1972 to create a Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation.
By 1995, they were able to report progress in “developing a prototype
of an anti-hCG-vaccine,” which works by combining an immunogen formed from a
synthetic peptide of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) ~ a hormone secreted
by the surface of the early embryo to remain implanted in the womb ~ with a
toxoid carrier molecule. The vaccine stimulates an immune reaction, causing
women to develop antibodies against the hormone, thus preventing them from
carrying babies to term.
.
.
But beginning in the 1990s, a series of
scandals over WHO-led vaccination programs
in the third world led to allegations that tetanus vaccines in places like the Philippines and Kenya were being
laced with hCG in order to implement population control by stealth. The
controversy generated by these stories led global institutions to step back
from the campaign to champion population control by vaccine.
.
.
But, as usual, the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation was there to renew interest, working with the UK government to
host a “London Summit on Family Planning” in 2012 at which the foundation
announced their support for funding the research, development and deployment of
injectable contraceptives to the developing world.
MELINDA GATES: You heard me talk earlier about Sadi, who I met in Niger. She was traveling fifteen kilometers to get an injection. But let’s ask ourselves, what if she didn’t have to travel to that clinic? If we put it in her perspective, how can we keep her in her village to get the contraceptives she wants? Well, Pfizer is testing a new form of Depo, the injection that she gets fifteen kilometers to get. They’re now putting it in a new form, a new device that can be given ~ it’s very, very small, it’s called Uniject. I think it’s going to be pictured here.
.It’s a high-quality product. It’s effective. It’s safe. It’s tiny, as you can see. And it can be put in a healthcare worker’s kit to give to the woman at the village level. So Sadi won’t have to go fifteen kilometers any longer to get that injection.
But the Gates were not content to stop
there. In 2014 it was announced that Microchips Biotech, Inc., a company in
Lexington, Massachusetts, had developed a new form of birth control:
“a wireless implant that can be turned on and off with a remote control and
that is designed to last up to 16 years.” According to MIT Technology Review, the
idea originated when Bill Gates visited Robert Langer’s MIT lab in 2012 and
asked him if it would be possible to create an implantable birth control device
that could be turned on or off remotely. Langer referred Gates to the
controlled release microchip technology he had invented and licensed to
MicroCHIPS Biotechnology, and the Gates Foundation granted $20 million to the
firm to develop the implants.
.
.
Reducing population growth has, by
Gates’ own admission, been a core mission of the Gates Foundation since its
inception. But in order to really understand what Gates means by “population
control,” we have to look beyond the concept of controlling population size. At
its most fundamental level, the “population control” that Gates speaks of is
not birth control, but control of the population itself.
.
.
In order to understand the broader
population control agenda and how it ties in to the Gates Foundation’s plans,
we have to look at a puzzling development that took place in 2017. In that
year, Gavi ~ the Gates founded and funded
alliance that partners the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization and
the World Bank with vaccine manufacturers to help ensure “healthy markets” for
vaccines ~ took a strange pivot away from its core mission of vaccinating every child on the planet
to providing every child with a digital biometric identity.
.
.
The idea was first floated by Gavi CEO
Seth Berkley in a Nature article that year, “Immunization needs a technology boost,”
where he states that the goal of 100% immunization will not be reached without
“secure digital identification systems that can store a child’s medical
history.” He then gives a specific example:
“We are working with a company in India called Khushi Baby, which creates off-grid digital health records. A necklace worn by infants contains a unique identification number on a short-range communication chip. Community health workers can scan the chip using a mobile phone, enabling them to update a child’s digital record even in remote areas with little phone coverage.”
This sudden interest in digital
identity was no mere passing fancy for the vaccine alliance. Gavi doubled down
by becoming a founding member of the ID2020 Alliance, a public-private
partnership dedicated to
spearheading a global digital biometric identity standard. Other founding members of the alliance include
Gates’ first company, Microsoft, and The Rockefeller Foundation.
.
.
In 2018, Gavi issued a call for
innovation in digital technologies “for finding, identifying and registering
the most vulnerable children.” The call specifically requested
technologies for capturing, storing and enrolling the biometric details of
infants on “rugged biometric devices.”
.
.
Berkley continued to follow up on this
idea in public engagements as one of the new core missions of Gavi.
SETH BERKLEY: What’s interesting is that people tend to think of, you know, birth certificates as kind of a major document. But, you know, the most common ~ as I mentioned before ~ is not a birth certificate, is not a death certificate, is not a marriage certificate. The most common connection ~ vital registration for the population ~ is actually a child health card, because we reach more than 90 percent of children with at least one dose of vaccine as part of a routine, so they’re in the system. The challenge is that contact is not connected into the system. So, if you could connect it, then you have the ability to give them their basic identity papers. You have the ability, then, later on, if they want to own land or they want to have their rights, you’re able to help them with that. But, you know, we’re not currently taking advantage of that. And so the children get seen, they get enrolled in the health centers, but that information is not used for anything else.
Although vaccines and identity may seem
unrelated, Bill Gates has spent the last few years funding research that can
bring the two ideas together.
.
.
Late last year, Gates once again turned
to Robert Langer and his MIT colleagues
to investigate new ways to permanently store and record the vaccination
information of each individual. The result of their research was a new vaccine
delivery method. They found that by using “dissolvable microneedles that
deliver patterns of near-infrared light-emitting microparticles to the skin,”
they could create “particle patterns” in the skin of vaccine recipients which
are “invisible to the eye but can be imaged using modified smartphones.”
.
.
Rice University describes the quantum dot tags left behind
by the microneedles as “something like a bar-code tattoo.”
.
.
So who was behind this development? As
lead researcher Kevin McHugh explains:
“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, ‘Hey, we have a real problem ~ knowing who’s vaccinated [. . .] So our idea was to put the record on the person. This way, later on, people can scan over the area to see what vaccines have been administered and give only the ones still needed.”
The microparticles that form the
fluorescent quantum-dot tags are delivered along with the vaccine, but they
cannot be delivered by a traditional syringe. Instead, they must be delivered
by a patch of microneedles made from a mixture of dissolvable sugar and a
polymer, called PVA, as well as the quantum-dot dye and the vaccine.
.
.
It should be no surprise, then, that
Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers ~ in their scramble to produce the coronavirus
vaccine that, Gates assures us, is necessary to “go back to normal” ~ have
turned to a novel vaccine delivery method: a dissolvable microneedle array
patch.
NICK HARPER: The University of Pittsburgh is where the polio vaccine was first discovered. At the medical center, researchers are now developing a vaccine that is delivered using a dissolvable patch called a microneedle array.
.LOUIS FALO: Think about them as almost like a band-aid. And so the microneedle array is simply applied to the skin topically, pressed into place very shortly, and then taken off and thrown away and then the antigen is already delivered.
As is becoming evident, this new
vaccine-delivered bar- code-like tattoo is about much more than simply ensuring
that children get all their Gavi-recommended immunizations.
.
.
On a recent “Ask Me Anything” thread on
reddit, when asked “What changes are we going to have to make to how businesses
operate to maintain our economy while providing social distancing?” Bill Gates answered:
“Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or
been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”
.
.
In his answer, Gates fails to mention
that he has himself been instrumental in kickstarting and funding the research
into the very type of digital certificates for vaccination that he is speaking
about, or that these “digital certificates” ~ likely, at first, to be a digital
marker linked to a biometric ID ~ could very well one day take the form of
vaccine-implanted quantum-dot tattoos.
.
.
But, as in so many other aspects of the
unfolding crisis, Gates’ unscientific pronouncement that we will need digital
certificates to prove our immunity in the “new normal” of the post-coronavirus
world . . .
GATES: Eventually, what we’ll have to have is certificates of who is a recovered person, who is a vaccinated person.
. . .is now being implemented by a
number of governments. It is now being reported that
Onfido, a tech startup specializing in AI-based biometric ID verification, is
in talks with the British government to provide the type of “digital
certification” Gates mentioned, dubbed an “immunity passport.” The proposed
system would require would-be workers to use the Onfido-provided app to scan
their face or other biometric data, link that information to a SARS-CoV-2
antibody test (or, eventually proof of coronavirus vaccination), and then have
their picture taken and immunity verified every time they wish to access a
restricted space or work environment.
.
.
Last month, Onfido announced that it
had raised $50 million in a round of investments led by Bill Gates’ old
company, Microsoft.
.
.
But this is not Gates’ first experience
with the field of biometric identity.
.
.
A decade ago, the government of India
began what has been called “The Largest Social Experiment on Earth“:
enrolling over one billion people in the largest biometric identification
database ever constructed. The project ~ involving iris scanning and
fingerprinting the entirety of the Indian population, recording their biometric
details in a centralized database, and issuing them a 12-digit identity number
that could be used to prove residence and access government services, all
within the span of a few years ~ presented an incredible societal, legal and
technological challenge.
.
.
It’s no surprise, then, that the person
who was brought in as the chief architect of the Aadhaar project when it was
launched ~ Nandan Nilekani, co-founder of Indian multi-national Infosys ~ is
also a long-time friend of Bill Gates and a partner with Bill and Melinda Gates on a
“philanthropic” venture called Co-Impact, which supports “initiatives to
address major social challenges at scale.”
.
.
Nilekani’s involvement in Aadhaar has
even made him one of Gates’s “heroes,” featured in
slick video promotions produced by the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
GATES: My friend, Nandan Nilekani, is one of India’s best-known entrepreneurs. He led the creation of the world’s largest biometric ID system. Now he’s working to promote his platform to improve the lives of the world’s poorest people.
.NANDAR NILEKANI: There are more than a billion people around the world who don’t have any kind of ID. You can’t do anything in life without an ID because people are mobile, they are migrant. And wherever they go, whether they want a job, or whether they want to board a train, or whether they want to get a bank account or get a mobile connection, if the person has no way of proving who they are, then they just won’t get access to those services. So the challenge we had was, how do we give a billion people, many of whom don’t have birth certificates, how do we give them an ID?
.Aadhaar is the world’s largest digital ID system, and entirely based using biometrics to ensure uniqueness. Our enrollment was very simple: name, address, date of birth, sex, email ID and phone number if you wish, and the biometrics. The ten fingerprints of both the hands, the iris of both the eyes, and a photograph. And in a few days, he will get his Aadhaar number in the mail. And that’s how a billion people got their IDs.
And Gates has personally praised the
Aadhar scheme as “a huge asset for India.”
GATES: Well, Aadhaar is a huge asset for India. It was designed very well. The fact that you can make digital payments so easily, you can open a bank account . . . India’s a leader in that. Our Foundation, you know, worked with the Reserve Bank. You know, Nandar Nilekani and a group of people that he pulled together did a great job.
But Gates is not merely an arms-length
admirer of the Aadhaar experiment. He is not only personally connected to its
chief architect. He is also connected to one of the key companies that
spearheaded the technology that underlies the project’s biometric database.
.
.
The company that provides the iris
recognition technology at the core of the Aadhaar system, Idemia, also
provides facial recognition systems for the
Chinese government and is currently developing digital drivers licenses for use in
the United States. Idemia even created the Khushi
Baby identification necklaces with embedded microchips that Gavi CEO Seth
Berkley touted in his Nature article. Unsurprisingly, the company
receives support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation through its
involvement in the GSMA Inclusive Tech Lab.
.
.
And now, Gates is funding a scheme to
retool Aadhaar for a global rollout.
.
.
In 2014, the World Bank created a
multi-sector working group to launch the “Identification for Development
Initative,” or ID4D, which aims to
“support progress toward identification systems using 21st century solutions.”
The World Bank cites goal 16.9 of the UN Agenda 2030
Sustainable Development Goals ~ vowing to “provide legal identity for all,
including birth registration” in the next 10 years ~ as the basis for its
initiative.
.
.
But ID4D was little more than a pipe
dream until 2016, when the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provided
“catalytic contributions” to launch the ID4D Multi-Donor Trust Fund, which enticed
the UK, French and Australian governments, along with the Omidyar Network, into
a partnership aiming to “shape global approaches and a shared vision on
identification.”
Unsurprisingly, this World Bank ID4D
initiative includes Nandar Nilekani ~ Gates’ partner and the chief architect of
Aadhaar ~ on its advisory council and Gates has said that he is
funding the World Bank “to take this Aadhaar approach to other countries.”
.
This headlong rush to capture the biometric details and assign digital identification to every person on earth is sold to the public under the guise of “financial inclusion.” The poorest people on the planet have trouble accessing financial services and receiving government aid because they don’t have official government identification papers. In this formulation, being issued a government ID ~ having one’s biometric details registered, tracked and databased by the government ~ is a “human right” that must be “secured.”
.
This headlong rush to capture the biometric details and assign digital identification to every person on earth is sold to the public under the guise of “financial inclusion.” The poorest people on the planet have trouble accessing financial services and receiving government aid because they don’t have official government identification papers. In this formulation, being issued a government ID ~ having one’s biometric details registered, tracked and databased by the government ~ is a “human right” that must be “secured.”
.
It should be no surprise by this point
that this “human right” also has direct benefits for big business and for the
entities that are looking to exert greater control over the human population.
.
.
Gates provided insight into the real
purpose of this identification control grid in a speech at the Financial
Inclusion Forum hosted by the US Treasury in 2015.
GATES: Every country really needs to look through these KYC ~ know your customer ~ rules to make sure that customers are able to prove who they are. But of course in many countries you don’t have any type of ID system. And the lack of an ID system is a problem, not just for the payment system, but also for voting and health and education and taxation. And so it’s a wonderful thing to go in and create a broad identification system.
.Again, India is a very interesting example of this, where the Aadhaar system, which is a 12-digit identifier that’s correlated to biometric measures, is becoming pervasive throughout the country and will be the foundation for how we bring this low-cost switch to every mobile phone user in India. The same type of thing is happening now in Pakistan and there’s early beginnings of creating these ID programs in Africa as well.
.We expect to be able to use the IDs so that when you show up for any government service ~ say, you walk into a primary health clinic ~ we’ll be able to take that bio ID very quickly and bring up your electronic health record. Even if you’ve moved from one part of the country to the other, you will be well tracked and well served without nearly as much paperwork or waiting. And so the ID system is foundational.
The ID control grid is an essential
part of the digitization of the economy. And although this is being sold as an
opportunity for “financial inclusion” of the world’s poorest in the banking
system provided by the likes of Gates and his banking and business associates,
it is in fact a system for financial exclusion. Exclusion of any person
or transaction that does not have the approval of the government or the payment
providers.
GATES: Once financial flows go underground ~ where you have lots of legitimate transactions mixed in with the ones you want to track ~ and once they’re going over a digital system that the US has no connection to, it’s far more difficult to find the transactions that you want to be aware of or that you want to block.
And, once again, this is no mere
theoretical talk from Gates. He has been intimately involved in this process of
switching the world over to a digital payment grid tied to biometric identity.
.
.
In 2012, the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation helped found the “Better Than Cash
Alliance,” which brings together governments, international organizations and
the private sector “to accelerate the transition from cash to digital payments
globally.”
.
.
And, when the Indian government made a
bold move to demonetize large amounts of its circulating currency in order to
draw off-the-books funds back under the purview of the Indian tax office, there
was Gates to praise the move as an important step toward the creation of a
brave new digital economy, tied, of course, to the Aadhaar ID grid.
GATES: The bold move to demonetize high value denominations and replace them with new notes with higher security features is an important step to move away from a shadow economy to an even more transparent economy. And digital transactions really I think will rise dramatically here. In fact, I think in the next several years India will become the most digitized economy. Not just by size but by percentage as well. All of the pieces are now coming together.
.One piece of this that we enjoyed consulting with the government on, making sure it comes together in the right way, is the pending roll out of payment banks. This for the first time really will mean that you have full currency capability on those digital phones. Once you have that digital infrastructure, the whole way you think about government benefits can be done differently. [. . .] Over time, all of these transactions will create a footprint and so when you go in for credit the ability to access the history that you’ve paid your utility bills on time, that you’ve saved up money for your children’s education, all of those things in your digital trail, accessed in an appropriate way will allow the credit market to properly score the risk and therefore loosen up more money for investments, not only in the agricultural sector but for all the entrepreneurs in the country.
The different parts of this population
control grid fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. The vaccination drive
ties into the biometric identity drive which ties into the cashless society
drive.
.
.
In Gates’ vision, everyone will receive
the government-mandated vaccinations, and everyone will have their biometric
details recorded in nationally administered, globally integrated digital IDs.
These digital identities will be tied to all of our actions and transactions,
and, if and when they are deemed illegal, they will simply be shut off by the government—or
even the payment providers themselves.
.
.
The Indian experiment in pioneering
this biometric digital economy ~ an experiment with which Gates has been so
intimately involved ~ also provides a perfect example of just how such a system
will be abused.
.
.
In January 2018, a report in The
Tribune revealed that all of
the details, including the name, address, postal code, photo, phone number and
email, of all billion-plus Aadhaar-registered Indians, was available for
purchase on WhatsApp for 500 rupees, or about USD$7. The Unique Identification
Authority of India that administers the Aadhaar scheme was then forced to admit that
approximately 210 websites, including websites of the central government and
state government departments, were displaying the list of government
beneficiaries, along with their name, address, other details and Aadhaar
numbers.
.
.
Even more worryingly, newly obtained
documents show that the Indian government is integrating Aadhaar-collected data
to create a “360-degree database”
that will “automatically track when a citizen moves between cities, changes
jobs, or buys new property” and integrate that data into a real-time
geo-spatial database built by the country’s space agency, ISRO.
Only the most willfully obtuse could
claim to be unable to see the nightmarish implications for this type of
all-seeing, all-pervasive society, where every transaction and every
movement of every citizen is monitored, analyzed, and databased in
real-time by the government. And Bill Gates is one of those willfully obtuse
people.
SHEREEN BAHN: A current debate that’s on in India and globally as well [is] around data. Now, you’ve been an advocate of Aadhaar, you’ve supported it, you’ve defended it. And I think that the questions arise not on on whether it’s a good idea or not, but whether it should be made mandatory for every citizen for every service possible. Because it was envisaged as people accessing government subsidy, using the Aadhaar card to avoid duplication and leakages. The question, then, is that India today is still grappling with putting in place a privacy framework, a privacy regulation, a data protection regulation. In that context, then, does it make sense, even though the matter is in court today, to link Aadhaar to every possible service?
.GATES: Well, Aadhar is just something that avoids you pretending to be somebody else. That, you know, you can have, you know, fake people on the government payroll. Aadhaar, you know, prevents you being on that payroll as as a ghost worker. It prevents you from collecting things that you shouldn’t collect or accessing a health record you shouldn’t have access to.
.So the basic Aadhaar mechanism is an identity mechanism. And so it’s too bad if somebody thinks that because Aadhaar is there that in and of itself creates a privacy problem.
Gates’ response is, of course,
disingenuous. The very purpose of a globally integrated ID grid and cashless
payment architecture is to remove privacy from our lives.
.
.
It should be no surprise, then, that
this man who is not concerned about the privacy implications of a global,
real-time electronic ID and digital payments grid, is also a prime investor in
EarthNow LLC, a company promising to “deploy
a large constellation of advanced imaging satellites that will deliver
real-time, continuous video of almost anywhere on Earth.”
No, this Gates-driven agenda is not about money.It is about control.Control over every aspect of our daily lives,from where we go, to who we meet,to what we buy and what we do.
The irony is that this billionaire
“philanthropist,” so often depicted as a cartoon superhero for his dazzling
generosity, actually resembles nothing so much as a comic book supervillain,
right down to the use of his vast wealth to sponsor Harvard University research into
dimming the sun by spraying particles into the stratosphere.
.
.
But once again, we are driven back to
the question. Who is this person? What ideology is driving this quest for
control? And what is the end goal of this quest?
.
.
Who is Bill Gates?
.
.
PART
FOUR:
MEET
BILL GATES
Computer whiz kid.
Talented software developer.
Shrewd businessman.
Benevolent philanthropist.
Global health expert.
There can be no doubt that Bill Gates
has worn many hats on his remarkable journey from his early life as the
privileged son of a Seattle-area power couple to his current status as one of
the richest and most influential people on the planet. But, as we have seen in
our exploration of Gates’ rise as unelected global health czar and population
control advocate, the question of who Bill Gates really is is no mere
philosophical pursuit.
.
.
Given that we are currently living
through a crisis that has been “predicted” by Bill Gates, which is triggering a
response from the global health organizations that the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation has bankrolled, and driving us toward a vaccination and biometric ID
“solution” which Bill Gates has been working on for years, the answer to the
question “Who Is Bill Gates?” is quickly becoming one of the most important
questions of our lives. That answer will not only tell us about the world that
we are living in, but about the one that we are being thrust into . . . and how
we can avoid it.
.
.
Today we will attempt to answer that
question as we examine the motives, the ideology, and the connections of this
man who has been so instrumental in shaping the post-coronavirus world.
Meet Bill Gates.
.
.
You’re tuned into The Corbett Report.
.
.
So who is Bill Gates?
.
.
Some argue that he’s a genius who
leveraged his natural computer savvy into a billion-dollar fortune.
JANE PAULEY: You’re called a genius and I will ~ well, no, I don’t think that embarrassed you at all. They call you a genius. Part of your genius is that you are a computer whiz, and the other is that you did have the business acumen to turn it into a working company. Are you a business genius, too?
.GATES: Well, I wouldn’t say “genius.”
Others insist that he is a visionary
who changed our lives with his foresight and bold imagination.
ALAN GARBER: Bill had a vision ~ and I understand it went back even then ~ that computing would be ubiquitous. It would be part of all of our lives. And, indeed, as you all know, he executed on that vision. And the world today has changed so dramatically in large part due to the work that Bill has done throughout the years.
He has been hailed as a shrewd
executive who built the Microsoft empire with his remarkable talent for
business.
JAMES WALLACE: When the biographers and historians write the history of the 20th century, Bill Gates is going to go down as the best businessman of our century, and Microsoft as one of the greatest companies of the 20th century.SOURCE: Biography: Bill Gates
And he has been praised as a
philanthropist who is selflessly devoting his wealth to improving the lives of
people around the world.
JESSE KORNBLUTH: Bill, even your harshest critic would have to admit that your philanthropy work is, you know, planet-shaking incredible and could be, if you make it, a second act so amazing that it would dwarf what you’ve actually done at Microsoft. [APPLAUSE]
But, like anyone of his status, he has
his detractors. In the 1990s he was often portrayed as the greedy head of the
evil Microsoft monopoly.
BENJAMIN WOOLEY: Bill Gates isn’t content with his Windows system running just a few PCs. He wants it to run the world, spreading like a computer virus into our faxes, our phones, our TV sets, and, yes, even our toasters.
But in the age of the coronavirus
crisis, he is most often treated like some sort of epidemiologist or leading
health researcher.
ANDERSON COOPER: Back here with us once again to talk about this, as well as testing, treatments and more: Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill, thanks so much for being back with us. It’s been a little over a month since you were here and at that time you said the US had not hit its peak. So at this point do you think we have peaked and where do you think we are right now in kind of the arc of the pandemic?
But in truth, none of these
perspectives are accurate.
.
.
Microsoft’s big break famously came
from a deal to provide software for IBM as they moved into the personal
computer market. But the deal was not the result of Gates’ technical genius or
amazing business acumen. As has been quietly admitted by IBM executives in the
years since, Microsoft was given their shot at the chance to work with “Big
Blue” as a result of Gates’ mother’s
relationship with IBM CEO John Opel.
GORAN MILIC: You remember your partnership of IBM and Bill Gates? How did it break up?
.EDWARD ANDRUS: I do remember very well, actually. Bill Gates at the time at the beginning of our relationship with them was living on pizza and Pepsi Cola in Albuquerque, New Mexico. And his mother happened to be on the United Way board with our chairman and asked our chairman to help him. And you know, when the chairman comes in and tells you to go help this kid, nine hundred people get on the plane Monday morning and they all go down to try to help Bill Gates..So I don’t see Bill Gates as this great, creative person. I see him as an opportunist. And, in fact, in those days there was a lot of sharing of software code. People gave it away in Silicon Valley; they would share everything. He came in and he tried to control everything and put a price on it.SOURCE: Idemo u Ameriku 2
Computer historians have long known how
the basis for what became MS-DOS was not Bill Gates’ brilliant imagination, but
QDOS, a “Quick and Dirty Operating System” that had been thrown together by Tim
Patterson, a worker at Seattle Computer Products, as a placeholder until he
could sell a proper operating system to his customers. And as even Gates
himself admitted, the breakthrough Graphical User Interface that became the
basis for Windows was ripped off from the researchers at the Xerox Palo Alto
Research Center.
As Bill would say after Apple unsuccessfully sued Microsoft for copyright infringement over Windows’ GUI: “Hey, Steve, just because you broke into Xerox’s house before I did and took the TV doesn’t mean I can’t go in later and take the stereo.”
And, as Gates also admits, it is not a
spirit of selfless generosity that motivates his interest in vaccines and other
lucrative health interventions.
BECKY QUICK: I’d like to talk to you about your approach to vaccinations. You wrote something recently, and, like you always do, you kind of looked at the problem from a scientific and business perspective on things. You’ve invested 10 billion dollars in vaccinations over the last two decades, and you figured out the return on investment for that. It kind of stunned me. Can you walk us through the math?.BILL GATES: You know, we see a phenomenal track record. It’s been a hundred billion overall that the world’s put in ~ our foundation is a bit more than 10 billion ~ but we feel there’s been over a 20-to-one return. So if you just look at the economic benefits that’s a pretty strong number compared to anything else.
As we have seen, Gates’ “philanthropic”
investment scheme has paid off well, with his $50 billion net worth having
ballooned to over $100 billion after his decade of “altruism” in the vaccine
market. As critics of his foundation have repeatedly pointed out, the 9,000,000
people who die every year of hunger would be best served by securing food supplies,
running water and other basic necessities, not costly medical interventions for
rare diseases. But there is no return on investment to be made from that
kind of charity.
.
.
No, this is not about charity. It is
about control. The population control grid that Gates has been quietly funding
into existence for the past decade ~ a biometric identification system tied to
a digital payments infrastructure that will be used to track, catalogue and
control every movement, every transaction and every
interaction of every citizen ~ is just now coming into view.
.
.
But the real question is: Why is
he doing this? What drives a man like Bill Gates, a man rich beyond the wildest
dreams of avarice, to spend his time and invest his fortune in schemes to
control the population? To find the answer to that question, we have to examine
Gates’ family background.
Bill Gates, it should not be surprising
to learn, was born into money. His great-grandfather, J. W. Maxwell, was
the president of National City Bank in Seattle. His grandfather, Willard, was also a
banker, and his grandmother, Adele, a prominent Seattle civic leader.
.
.
Bill Gates’ mother, Mary Maxwell Gates,
was a scion of the Maxwell banking family and, by all accounts, as hard-driving
as her forebears. She served as a director of several companies, including
First Interstate Bancorp and KIRO-TV of Seattle. She served as a regent at the
University of Washington. And she was appointed to the board of the United Way
of America, where, as we have seen, she persuaded IBM CEO John Opel to help her
son in his fledgling software development career.
.
.
Bill’s father, William H. Gates, Sr.,
was a prominent Seattle-area lawyer. He co-founded a powerful law and lobbying
firm, helped Howard Schultz in his bid to buy
Starbucks, served on the boards of numerous companies and organizations, and,
along the way, had a profound influence on his son’s life and career.
GATES: My dad was a large presence, both physically and in terms of his wisdom. He worked very hard, so he’d leave in the mornings, often before we had breakfast, and get home in time for dinner. I always looked up to my dad in terms of how hard he worked.
.At the dinner table my dad would go through various lawsuits and expect us to follow along. He had high expectations.
The young Bill Gates ~ technically
“William H. Gates III,” although his card-playing family dubbed him “Trey” ~ learned
much from his parents. From his mother’s banking family he inherited a “nose
for the dollar,” as one childhood friend’s father called it. From his
hard-driving legal-minded father, he learned the value of legalizing business
arrangements. As a child, he even had a legal contract drawn up to grant him
the use of his older sisters’ baseball mitt.
.
.
These traits would not earn him many
friends, but they served him well as he began to bring order to the anarchic
software development community of the 1970s. At that time, software for the
brand new personal computer market was the realm of computer hobbyists ~ people
whose excitement about the microcomputer revolution and love of engineering and
problem-solving led them to develop and share code freely with each other.
.
.
But this was no good for the young Bill
Gates, who, even before Microsoft was off the ground, was already dreaming of
commoditizing this hobby and turning it into the basis of a business empire. In
1976, with the ink still wet on Microsoft’s first contract with Micro Instrumentation
and Telemetry Systems of Albuquerque, New Mexico, the then-21-year-old Gates
wrote an Open Letter to Hobbyists excoriating the
early computer enthusiasts, who represented his main market, for sharing
Microsoft’s code for Altair BASIC.
As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?
.Is this fair? [. . .] The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man [sic] years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software. We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 APL and 6800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists. Most directly, the thing you do is theft.SOURCE: Open Letter to Hobbyists
The letter was awkward and tone-deaf,
as many people have described the young Bill Gates in his social interactions.
It heaped vitriol on the very people who would be the customers of any future
business and tried to change an established culture of sharing software code merely
by decree. Even Apple Computers, which would go on to be one of the prime
purveyors of “walled garden” systems that restrict users’ ability to control
their own computers, scored an easy marketing victory by responding to Gates’
angry letter with a reminder that “Yes, Folks, Apple BASIC is Free!”
.
But the gauntlet was thrown down, and Gates would have his way. Although freeware and other forms of open source software development still exist, the establishment of software code as legally protected intellectual property has led to the rise of billionaires like Gates.
.
But the gauntlet was thrown down, and Gates would have his way. Although freeware and other forms of open source software development still exist, the establishment of software code as legally protected intellectual property has led to the rise of billionaires like Gates.
.
A “nose for the dollar” and a knowledge
of how to use the legal system to get what you want were not the only
things to emerge from Bill Gates’ childhood, however. His parents also
encouraged discussion about the family’s charity work and the causes they held
close to their heart.
.
.
As Gates revealed to Bill Moyers in 2003, those
causes included “the population issue” which sparked a lifelong interest in
“reproductive health.”
GATES: One issue that really grabbed me as urgent were issues related to population . . . reproductive health.
.MOYERS: But did you come to reproductive issues as an intellectual?
.GATES: When I was growing up, my parents were always involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of Planned Parenthood. And it was very controversial to be involved with that.
Gates tips his hand when he equates
“issues related to population” with “reproductive health.” The topic is
particularly controversial, because “population control” and “reproductive
health” have been used for half a century as a euphemism for eugenics, the
discredited pseudoscience that holds that certain families are fit to be
leaders of society by virtue of their superior genes.
.
.
As we saw in “Why Big Oil Conquered the World,” eugenics
was a field named and codified by Francis Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin.
Ostensibly concerned with heredity and what would later be known as genetics,
the eugenicists believed that the rich and powerful were rich and powerful not
because of luck or chance or happenstance, and certainly not from the
deployment of cutthroat business tactics and underhanded dealings; no, the rich
and powerful had attained their status because they came from “better stock.”
Conversely, the poor were poor because of their “defective germ plasm.”
.
.
As transparent as it seems to us today
that this ideology was a self-serving self-justification for the ruling class,
it was quickly taken up as the great social crusade of the early 20th century.
From Teddy Roosevelt to
H. G. Wells to Julian Huxley to Winston Churchill,
there was widespread support for the eugenicist notion that society must strive
to make sure that the rich and “well-born” breed as much as possible, and the
poor, infirm, and “feeble-minded” be prevented from having children.
.
.
A common eugenicist argument was that
the scarce resources of society should not be used to support the lower
classes, as that only encouraged more of their kind. Instead, life-saving
medical care and intervention should be rationed so that those resources can be
best put to use elsewhere. So-called negative eugenicists even took things
further, with some, like famed playwright George Bernard Shaw, calling for
people to be called before a state-appointed board to justify their existence
or be put to death.
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW: [. . .] But there are an extraordinary number of people whom I want to kill. Not in any unkind or personal spirit, but it must be evident to all of you ~ you must all know half a dozen people, at least ~ who are no use in this world. Who are more trouble than they are worth. And I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board, just as he might come before the income tax commissioner, and, say, every five years, or every seven years, just put him there, and say: “Sir, or madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence?”
But, in the post-WWII era, as the name
of eugenics became tarred by association with the Nazi atrocities, the talk of
death panels and other harsh eugenicist notions was dropped from public
conversation. Now, the quest to reduce the size of the poor population was
spoken of as “population control” and “reproductive health.” Still,
occasionally, these old negative eugenics ideas are revisited in moments of
candor.
GATES: You’re raising tuitions at the University of California as rapidly as they [sic] can and so the access that used to be available to the middle class or whatever is just rapidly going away. That’s a trade-off society’s making because of very, very high medical costs and a lack of willingness to say, you know, “Is spending a million dollars on that last three months of life for that patient ~ would it be better not to lay off those 10 teachers and to make that trade off in medical cost?” But that’s called the “death panel” and you’re not supposed to have that discussion.
It is worth questioning why this man,
who openly muses about death panels and the trade-offs of providing health care
to the elderly, is to be taken completely at face value in his attempts to slow
population growth in the third world or to handle a coronavirus health crisis
that primarily affects the elderly.
.
.
That the Gates agenda is being driven
by a eugenicist ideology is suggested by multiple lines of evidence, both
historical and current.
As we have also seen in “Why Big Oil Conquered the World,” the Rockefeller family was instrumental in funding and promoting eugenics, both in America and overseas.
.The Rockefellers helped fund the Eugenics Record Office.
.The founding director of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, William Welch, sat on the ERO’s board and helped direct its activities.
.The Rockefellers sponsored the studies of the eugenics researchers at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany, including Ernst Rüdin, who would go on to draft Nazi Germany’s forced sterilization law.
.And, when the American Eugenics Society became embarrassed of its own name, its long-time director, Frederick Osborne, merely took over as president of the Rockefeller-founded Population Council.
.This dedication to the cause of “public health” did not escape the approving gaze of Bill Gates, Sr. In a chapter of his 2009 book, Showing Up for Life, called “Walking With Giants,” he writes admiringly of the Rockefellers and their influence in the field:Every corner we’ve turned in the field of global health, we’ve found that the Rockefellers were already there and had been there for years.
.When we committed to childhood immunization we found ourselves building on efforts the Rockefeller Foundation had helped launch and fund in the 1980s.
.When we became interested in fighting malaria and tuberculosis, we learned that the Rockefellers had been studying the prevention and treatment of such diseases around the globe for, in some cases, as long as a hundred years.
.A similar dynamic held true in the case of HIV/AIDS.
.A lesson we learned from studying and working with the Rockefellers is that to succeed in pursuing audacious goals you need like-minded partners with whom to collaborate.
.And we learned that such goals are not prizes claimed by the short-winded. The Rockefellers stay with tough problems for generations.SOURCE: William H. Gates. Showing Up for Life (pp. 158-159)
As Gates, Sr., suggests, it is by working
with “like-minded partners” that such “great” achievements in the field of
global health can be made. For the Gates, these like-minded partners include
the Rockefellers themselves. Bill Gates, Sr., got to discuss global health,
agriculture and environment with the likes of David Rockefeller, Sr., and David
Rockefeller, Jr., at a meeting on “Philanthropy in a Global Century”
at Rockefeller University campus in 2000. And Bill Gates, as we have seen,
co-hosted a meeting on reducing the population with David Rockefeller in 2009.
.
.
But the most salacious hints of a
deeper agenda are not to be found in the Gates’ public associations, but in the
associations that they have tried to hide from the public.
STEPHANIE RUHLE: Jeffrey Epstein may be dead, but this story isn’t. A shocking new report from The New York Times sheds light on the connection between Microsoft founder Bill Gates and the late Jeffrey Epstein. After Gates’ name came up in connection with Epstein and MIT Media Lab, Gates gave a statement to The Wall Street Journal where he insisted he did not have any business relationship or friendship with Epstein. But a new report outlines conversations with Gates and Epstein and a conversation with Bill and Melinda Gates’ Foundation. A connection between their foundation and JPMorgan Chase to set up a charitable fund to benefit Epstein. You know what I want to know: Why?
Beginning in August of last year, a
string of information connecting Bill Gates to convicted sex offender Jeffrey
Epstein began to emerge.
.
.
An email surfaced showing disgraced MIT Media
Lab Director Joi Ito~ who resigned
from his position after it was discovered that he had helped
cover up Jeffrey Epstein’s identity as an “anonymous” donor to the lab ~ informing
his staff that a $2 million donation to the lab in 2014 was a “gift from Bill
Gates directed by Jeffrey Epstein.”
.
.
As the story gained momentum, Gates
tried to downplay the relationship, with a Gates spokesperson protesting that
Gates “didn’t know it was Epstein’s plane,” and Gates himself insisting that “I didn’t have any business
relationship or friendship with [Epstein].”
.
.
This was immediately contradicted by The
New York Times, who reported
in October of 2012 that Gates had in fact met with Epstein on multiple
occasions, even going so far as to discuss the creation of a multibillion
dollar charitable fund with seed money from the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation and JPMorgan Chase.
.
.
According
to the Times, Gates emailed his colleagues about Epstein in 2011: “His
lifestyle is very different and kind of intriguing although it would not work
for me.”
.
.
Epstein’s will even named Boris Nikolic ~ a Harvard-trained
immunologist who served as the chief scientific advisor to both Microsoft and
the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and who appears in the sole publicly
known photo of Epstein and Gates’ 2011 meeting at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion ~
as the backup executor of Epstein’s estate.
.
.
It is not difficult to see why Gates
would try to distance himself from his relationship with a child sex
trafficker. Epstein, after all, is suspected of ensnaring high-ranking
politicians, businessmen and even royalty in an intelligence-directed
“honeypot” operation, recording them in the act of sexually abusing underage
girls and using that evidence as blackmail.
.
.
But, as it turns out, the attempt to
suppress the Gates-Epstein story may have been an attempt to suppress the
revelation of an altogether different shared interest.
KRISTEN DAHLGREN: Sources say several accusers have come forward in New Mexico, where Epstein owns a sprawling ranch. According to a new report published in The New York Times ~ not verified by NBC News ~ Epstein wanted to use the ranch for controlled breeding, using his DNA to improve humanity. Citing two award-winning scientists and an advisor to large companies and wealthy individuals, the article reports Epstein surrounded himself with leading scientists and would tell them he wanted to have 20 women impregnated at a time on the ranch.
The already scarcely believable Jeffrey
Epstein story took another bizarre turn in August of 2019, when it was reported
that Epstein “Hoped to Seed the Human Race With His
DNA.” As The New York Times explained, Epstein’s plan
to impregnate 20 women at a time at his New Mexico ranch in order to “seed the
human race with his DNA” ~ a plan he told to a number of the “scientific
luminaries” he kept in his orbit ~ put a modern gloss on a very old idea:
Mr. Epstein’s vision reflected his longstanding fascination with what has become known as transhumanism: the science of improving the human population through technologies like genetic engineering and artificial intelligence. Critics have likened transhumanism to a modern-day version of eugenics, the discredited field of improving the human race through controlled breeding.
Epstein’s interest in genetics led him
to sponsor a number of scientists working in the field, including George
Church, a Harvard geneticist whose lab received funding from Epstein’s
foundation from 2005 to 2007 for “cutting edge science.” Church publicly apologized
for his connection to Epstein, which included several meetings a year from 2014
onward. This was neither the first nor the last time that this unassuming
Harvard biologist, whose “cutting edge science” often strays into controversial
areas, caused a public scandal. In 2019, Church proposed a “genetics dating
app” which was immediately denounced as applied eugenics.
.
.
Church also acted as scientific advisor
to Editas Medicine, a startup seeking to use the
genome-editing tool, CRISPR-Cas9, to eliminate diseases by deleting the parts
of a genetic code responsible for the illness. In 2015, the company announced it had
raised $120 million from a group led by Epstein’s
appointed backup executor, Dr. Boris Nikolic. Naturally, that group of
investors included Bill Gates.
.
.
Yes, Bill Gates is certainly following
his father’s advice to collaborate with “like-minded partners.”
.
.
So, the question remains: Is Bill Gates
motivated by eugenics? Given that eugenics went underground over half a century
ago, we are unlikely ever to unearth a frank admission along those lines from
Gates himself. After all, there are no longer any card-carrying members of the
American Eugenics Society; the society was rebranded in the 1970s when, as the
society’s founder noted, “it became
evident that changes of a eugenic nature would be made for reasons other than
eugenics, and that tying a eugenic label on them would more often hinder than
help their adoption.”
.
.
But there was an American
Eugenics Society in the 1920s, and it just so happened to boast a “William H.
Gates” on its member roster. But
perhaps that is just a coincidence.
.
.
And there was an American
Eugenics Society in the 1960s, when William H. Gates II was preceded as head of
Planned Parenthood by Alan Guttmacher, who simultaneously served as the Director of the American Eugenics
Society.
.
.
And perhaps it was coincidence that the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation organized their London Summit on Family
Planning, at which the Gates recommitted themselves to funding population
control in the third world, in July 2012, on the anniversary of the First International Eugenics Congress,
held in London exactly 100 years prior.
.
.
And perhaps it is reaching to compare
the young Bill Gates’ dating preferences to the genetic-based dating favored by
modern-day eugenicists.
JAMES WALLACE: I interviewed several women who had dated Bill just briefly and one told me the very first question Bill asked her was: “What did you score on your SAT test?” You know, this is not exactly what a young woman wants to hear. For Bill Gates, though . . . He had scored a perfect 800 on his math portion of the SAT and this was a matter of pride with him. And he wanted to make sure whoever he was dating, you know, had scored a pretty high grade.SOURCE: Biography: Bill Gates
No, we cannot expect an answer about
Bill Gates true motives to come from Gates himself. By this point the question
of Bill Gates’ intentions has been buried under the combined weight of hundreds
of millions of dollars of paid PR spin. Like the Rockefellers before them, the
Gates have long since learned the secret of enlarging their family fortune ~ not
to mention their control over the human population ~ by donning the mask of
philanthropy.
.
.
There are many perspectives on Bill
Gates; depending on who you ask, he is a computer savant, a genius businessman,
or a saintly philanthropist. But all of these perspectives have been brought to
you through PR outlets founded or funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation. Bill Gates is no longer a subject for historians but hagiographers.
.
.
Now we must confront the question of why
this man is motivated to build such a web of control ~ control over our public
health agencies ~
GATES: And for all 193 member states, you must make vaccines a high priority in your health systems, to ensure that all your children have access to existing vaccines now—and to new vaccines as they become available.
Control over our identities—
GATES: And the lack of an ID system is a problem, not just for the payment system, but also for voting and health and education and taxation. And so it’s a wonderful thing to go in and create a broad identification system
Control over our transactions—
GATES: Once financial flows go underground ~ where you have lots of legitimate transactions mixed in with the ones you want to track ~ and once they’re going over a digital system that the US has no connection to, it’s far more difficult to find the transactions that you want to be aware of or that you want to block.
And even control over our bodies—
GATES: We’re gonna have this intermediate period of opening up, and it won’t be normal until we get an amazing vaccine to the entire world.
We must confront the possibility that
this quest for control comes not from a selfless spirit of generosity that
never seemed to exist before he became a multi-billionaire, but from the same
drive for money, the same desire for domination and the same sense of
superiority that motivated him on his way up the corporate ladder.
.
.
But if the answer to the question “Who
is Bill Gates” is “Bill Gates is a eugenicist,” that tells us some important
things about the world that we are living in.
.
.
It tells us that Gates is deceiving the
public into supporting his takeover of the world with a false front of
philanthropy.
.
.
It tells us that the goal of the Gates,
like the goal of the Rockefellers before them, is not to improve the world for
humankind, but to improve the world for their kind.
.
.
And most importantly, it tells us that
Bill Gates is no comic-book supervillain, single-handedly directing all of the
chaos that is unfolding in the world or single-handedly bringing his own order
to that chaos.
.
.
No, if Bill Gates is a eugenicist,
driven by a belief in the superiority of himself and his fellow wealthy
elitists, then what we are facing is not one man, or even one family, but an
ideology.
.
.
This is not a trivial point. One man,
whatever his wealth, can be stopped easily enough.
.
But even if Bill Gates were to be thrown in jail tomorrow, the agenda that has already been set in motion would continue without missing a beat. An entire infrastructure of researchers, labs, corporations, governmental agencies and public health bodies exists, funded more often than not by Gates, but driven by the belief of all those millions of people working for these various entities that they are truly working in the best interest of the people.
.
.
But even if Bill Gates were to be thrown in jail tomorrow, the agenda that has already been set in motion would continue without missing a beat. An entire infrastructure of researchers, labs, corporations, governmental agencies and public health bodies exists, funded more often than not by Gates, but driven by the belief of all those millions of people working for these various entities that they are truly working in the best interest of the people.
.
No, an ideology cannot be stopped by
stopping one man. It can only be stopped when enough people learn the truth
about this agenda and the world of total, pervasive control that is coming into
view.
.
.
If you have watched all four parts of
this exploration on Bill Gates, then you are now one of the most informed
people on the planet about the true nature of this agenda.
.
You have seen how the takeover of public health has been used to railroad the world into a headlong rush toward mandatory vaccinations, biometric identification and digital payments. You have seen how the pieces of this puzzle fit together, and how they represent a far greater threat to the future of humanity than any virus.
.
.
You have seen how the takeover of public health has been used to railroad the world into a headlong rush toward mandatory vaccinations, biometric identification and digital payments. You have seen how the pieces of this puzzle fit together, and how they represent a far greater threat to the future of humanity than any virus.
.
Here is the good news: Armed with this
information, you have the antidote to the scourge of this eugenicist ideology.
The truth is that ideologies are viruses of the mind; they spread from person
to person, infecting them with ideas that can lead to a disease of the body
politic.
.
.
But here is the even greater truth:
Inoculations do work. Inoculations of truth against the lies of
those spreading their poisonous ideology.
.
.
If you have made it this far, it is
incumbent on you to help inoculate those around you against the corrupt
ideology of Bill Gates and all those who seek to control the population of the
world. You must help to spread this information so that others have a chance to
see the bigger picture and decide for themselves whether they are willing to
roll up their sleeves and accept what is coming, or not.
.
.
But time is not on our side.
Even as we speak, mass vaccination campaigns are being prepared:
ALLISON ARWADY: You know we are already building our plans to vaccinate the whole city of Chicago and working with others across the region on a major plan for this. We’ve bought syringes, we’ve bought cold boxes, we’ve planned out locations.SOURCE: COVID COACH
Biometric identification schemes and
“immunity passports” are already being rolled out:
CARYN SEIDMAN BECKER: And so while we started with travel, at our core we’re a biometric-secure identity platform, where it’s always been about attaching your identity to your boarding pass at the airport or your ticket to get into a sports stadium or your credit card to buy a beer. And so now with the launch of Clear Health Pass, it’s about attaching your identity to your COVID-related health insights for employers, for employees, for customers.
Programs for tracking, tracing, and
surveilling the entire population are already being beta-tested:
DEENA HINSHAW: Today we are launching another useful tool that can supplement the critical detective work we are conducting in public health. Alberta Trace Together is a voluntary, secure, mobile contact tracing application to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.
And the digital payment infrastructure,
the system of financial exclusion that will allow governments to turn off our
access to the economy at will, is being put into place:
UHURU KENYATTA: In order to avoid the risk of transmission through physical handling of money, we encourage the use of cashless transactions such as mobile money, M-Pesa and otherwise, and credit cards.SOURCE: Uhuru: Government encourages cashless transactions to reduce risk of coronavirus transmission.
NICHOLAS THOMPSON: People are using touchless payment systems much more than they’re using cash, both because we’re not interacting with people directly as much anymore and also because cash is kind of skeezy.
We must spread the word about the dark
nature of this population control agenda to as many people as we can before our
ability to speak out against this agenda is taken away for good.
.
.
Thanks to the likes of Bill Gates, the
virus of this population control agenda is already here. It is threatening to
crash the system as we’ve known it.
But if Bill Gates has taught us anything,it’s how to deal with a virus.IT’S TIME FOR A HARD RESET.
No comments:
Post a Comment
If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.