Fake Meat — Fake Hype

Posted on August 12, 2023 by marcia

Fake meat sales plummet amid falling demand

‘It’s less digestible than real meat, and certainly less nutritious’

Posted by Yudi Sherman

August 10, 2023

Fake meat giant Beyond Meat’s revenue plunged over 30% for the second quarter compared to last year as consumers turn to real meat.

The California-based company also slashed its annual sales forecast from $375m–$415m to $360m–$380m “in light of greater than expected consumer and category headwinds and their anticipated impact on net revenues,” according to The Telegraph. Last year, the company was forced to cut a fifth of its workforce as its stock dropped nearly 80%.

Beyond Meat, founded in 2009 to “fight climate change,” counts globalist billionaire Bill Gates as one of its investors. It has since supplied its plant-based fake meat to McDonalds, Dunkin’ Donuts, Taco Bell, Walmart and PepsiCo. In 2013, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) named Beyond Meat “Company of the Year” and the company has been endorsed by several Hollywood celebrities.

Frontline News reported last year that Beyond Meat was distributing its fake Beyond Burger to 1,600 supermarkets throughout Germany as the country moves to reduce livestock to “fight climate change.”

Beyond Meat is not the only player in the fake meat industry. It primarily competes with Impossible Foods, which also provides plant-based meat, and Upside Foods, which provides lab-grown meat. All three companies are backed by Gates, who has clarified that government regulation may be needed to force people to transition to fake meat.

“I don’t think the poorest 80 countries will be eating synthetic meat,” Gates told the MIT Technology Review. “I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”

But nutrition experts have been warning against fake meat. Nutritionist and Sacred Cow: The Case for (Better Meat) author Diana Rodgers says lab-grown meat, such as that sold by Upside Foods, is still not as healthy as McDonalds.

“I’d rather eat my shoe than lab-grown meat,” Rodgers stated.

British investigative food journalist Joanna Blythman warns against even plant-based meat, which she says sometimes contain up to 30 artificial ingredients.

“Artificial plant-based proteins tend to be loaded with ‘anti-nutrients’ – compounds that make it harder for our guts to absorb beneficial macro and micronutrients,” Blythman wrote in an article for the Daily Mail. “Essentially, it’s less digestible than real meat, and certainly less nutritious.”

While Gates and his World Economic Forum (WEF) colleagues hope to significantly reduce meat consumption by 2030 and, ideally, phase it out completely by 2050, Blythman says the global real meat industry is forecasted to rise up to 7% annually.

There are also significant concerns about fake meat’s purported contribution to the climate. Plants require fertilizer, processing and shipping, too, and lab-grown meat is also expected to be environmentally taxing.

A preprint study published in April by University of California, Davis researchers found that if fake meat becomes as widely accepted as globalists would like, it could be extremely harmful to the climate.

The researchers found that the production process for fake meat emits 246 to 1,508 kg of carbon dioxide per kilogram of fake meat, while retail meat production produces only about 60 kg of CO2 per kilogram. According to the scientists’ estimates, producing fake meat is 4 to 25 times worse for the climate than real beef.

“Currently, animal cell-based meat products are being produced at a small scale and at an economic loss, however companies are intending to industrialize and scale-up production,” the scientists opine in the study.

“Results indicate that the environmental impact of near-term animal cell-based meat production is likely to be orders of magnitude higher than median beef production if a highly refined growth medium is utilised,” they concluded.

from: https://frontline.news/post/fake-meat-sales-plummet-amid-falling-demand

We’re Saving You A Trip!!!

Posted on July 14, 2023 by marcia

Gates, WHO Envision Future Where ‘Vaccine Patches Could Be Mailed Directly to Peoples’ Homes’

July 14, 2023 Michael Nevradkis, PHD, The Defender at Children’s Health Defense 0

A new vaccine technology that delivers vaccines through microneedles on patches is known as vaccine microarray patches (VMAP). It is backed by global players including the World Health Organization (WHO) Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The patches have yet to be approved by regulators, but are still being promoted. VMAPs are easier to deliver, especially to children, than traditional needle jabs. The head of the National Vaccine Information Center said that vaccine ‘hesitancy’ “has never been about how the product is delivered.” Instead, “it has always been about the lack of evidence demonstrating safety.”

.A new vaccine technology using patches instead of needles is being described as “groundbreaking,” a “game changer” and having the potential to “transform immunisation coverage in lower-income countries.”

Backed by global players including the World Health Organization (WHO) Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, among others, vaccine-containing microarray patches (VMAP) — also known as “micro-array patches” or “microneedle patches,” have been the subject of dozens of scientific papers in recent years.

The claimed benefits of such “vaccine patches” — for everything from measles and rubella (MR) vaccines to various mRNA vaccines — are being widely promoted even though few clinical trials have been completed and no such vaccine has yet been approved by regulators.

Scientific and medical experts who spoke with The Defender raised questions about the technology and warned of potential dangers.

Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center and co-author of the 1985 book “DPT: A Shot in the Dark,” told The Defender:

“Whether it is delivered by a needle or a patch, a VMAP is a biological product that atypically manipulates the immune system to provoke strong inflammatory responses that can lead to injury or death for some who receive it.

“If you look at the medical literature describing microneedle vaccine patches, what you see is a lot of hype about how much easier it will be for the vaccinators to slap a patch on a child’s skin instead of using a needle, and how the ‘painless’ patch can reduce vaccine hesitancy.”

Fisher said vaccine hesitancy “has never been about how the product is delivered.” Instead, “it has always been about the lack of evidence demonstrating safety.”

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., senior director of science and research for Children’s Health Defense, said that the term “vaccine patch” may also be misleading, as it might be confused with nicotine patches for smokers.

Hooker told The Defender:

“The term ‘vaccine patch’ is misleading in that this microarray technology is nothing like other patch-based delivery systems for nicotine or hormones. This ‘patch’ still breaks the skin in order to deliver the liquid vaccine that is contained in the microarray’s matrix.

“As such, I don’t quite understand how this injection system will be delivered to patients and parents to administer the vaccine directly. That seems quite risky.

“Unfortunately, repackaging the same vaccines in this different platform does nothing to improve their safety — as this seems more a ploy to convince consumers otherwise.”

VMAP backers seek to ‘turn vaccines into vaccinations’

VMAPs can “overcome many obstacles and bottlenecks faced by intradermal vaccine delivery, thus maximising the reach of vaccines to the most remote locations to turn vaccines into vaccination,” according to an article published last week by Gavi.

According to UNICEF, “VMAPs can increase vaccine coverage by increasing acceptability by caregivers and recipients, and administering vaccines more rapidly and easily with minimally trained health care workers” and can “substantially improve the productivity and resilience of governments to expand immunization coverage.”

UNICEF’s position mirrors that of the WHO, the Gates Foundation and the Clinton Health Access Initiative — “The Big Catch-up” — described as “the largest childhood immunization effort ever,” intent on reversing “declines in childhood vaccination recorded in over 100 countries since the pandemic.”

UNICEF said it is “focusing on driving the research, development and scale of VMAPs,” including “identifying barriers for scaling and investigating the need for market pull incentives to spark interest and endorsement by vaccine manufacturers.”

Nevertheless, no VMAPs have yet been approved by regulators, according to Gavi, which states that, at present, “one measles and rubella vaccine patch has completed Phase 1/2 clinical trials. Two additional phase 1/2 clinical trials are planned.”

“Some COVID-19 and flu vaccines are also entering Phase 1/2 trials, and other vaccines such as HPV are undergoing preclinical assessment,” Gavi added.

According to Gavi, data from Phases 1 and 2 of the first-ever clinical trial of VMAPs in children was shared in May during the Microneedles 2023 conference in Seattle and delivered “promising results.”

The trial, conducted in Gambia with 45 adults, 120 toddlers 15-18 months of age, and 120 infants 9-10 months of age, “evaluated the safety, immunogenicity, and acceptability” of an MR vaccine delivered by micro-array technology developed by Atlanta-based Micron Biomedical.

The vaccine itself was developed by the Serum Institute of India, the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer by number of doses produced and sold. The Serum Institute produces the COVISHIELD COVID-19 vaccine, as well as over half of the world’s vaccines administered to babies.

The Serum Institute, along with Bill Gates, are named as defendants in a pair of lawsuits filed by family members of deceased vaccine injury victims in India.

Envisioning a future where ‘vaccine patches could be mailed directly to peoples’ homes’

The lack of any successfully completed clinical trials has not stopped the proponents of VMAPs from claiming this technology will deliver a broad range of benefits.

According to Gavi, VMAPs are “needle-free and pre-dosed,” simplifying the administration of vaccines, which can then “be carried out by minimally trained volunteers.”

Gavi also claims VMAPs “are safer as they overcome the risks related to operational errors” during administration, such as dosage errors and needle-stick injuries.

VMAPs are “easier to distribute,” according to Gavi, due to their light weight and “enhanced thermostability” which addresses “the problem of vaccine storage requirements” and removes “the need for cold-chains.”

Moreover, Gavi claims “The lower level of pain experienced during administration with MAPs would help reduce vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccine acceptability.”

“There are difficulties in reaching the last mile with the current injectable vaccines since they depend on a functional cold-chain and administration by well-trained staff … Furthermore, most vaccines are administered via injection that may cause pain, and discomfort that leads to hesitancy,” UNICEF states.

Healthcare consulting firm Avalere said VMAPs provide “the potential for lower healthcare costs,” “increased compliance due to convenient and pain free application,” are “ideal for patients with needlestick phobias or difficulty swallowing,” and are “easier for children, older people and patients requiring complex care.”

According to CEPI, VMAPs “could enable a future in which vaccine patches could be mailed directly to peoples’ homes, workplaces and schools, avoiding the delay and inconvenience of traditional needle-and-syringe vaccine scheduling and administration.”

CEPI describes itself as “an innovative global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations launched in Davos in 2017 to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics.”

VMAPs proposed for wide range of vaccines, including mRNA injections

Proponents of VMAP say the purported benefits of this technology can ultimately translate to acting as an “advantageous delivery route for existing vaccines,” including influenza, tetanus toxoid, MR, hepatitis B and “biologics and small molecules.”

According to the WHO, a VMAP for the MR vaccine may be “potentially favourable,” with “perceived operational advantages that could ultimately increase equitable coverage and facilitate vaccine administration in inaccessible areas.”

For the same vaccine, a Jan. 16 article in the Frontiers in Public Health journal states that as vaccination coverage for measles and rubella “has stagnated,” VMAPs “are anticipated to offer significant programmatic advantages to needle and syringe” options and lead to increased vaccination coverage, with “significant demand expected for MR-MAPs between 2030 and 2040.”

And on Jan. 17, CEPI launched preclinical testing for a “high-density microarray patch … to assess its stability, safety and immunogenicity and to evaluate its potential as a rapid-response technology for heat-stable, dried-formulation mRNA vaccines.”

According to CEPI, this initiative was borne out of its January 2022 call for proposals, as part of its “wider strategic goal of harnessing innovative technologies to improve the speed, scale and access of vaccine development and manufacturing in response to epidemic and pandemic threats.”

Gates, World Bank, World Economic Forum connected to VMAP proponents

While Gavi states that “There is a need for investments to fund pilot-scale manufacturing facilities” for VMAPs, Gavi and other entities that are actively promoting this technology are themselves backed by or connected to some of the world’s most prominent investors, as well as major global organizations.

Gavi says it “helps vaccinate almost half the world’s children against deadly and debilitating infectious diseases.” It was established in 1999, with the Gates Foundation as one of its co-founders and one of its four permanent board members.

Gavi maintains a core partnership with UNICEF, the World Bank and the WHO, which includes Gavi in its list of “relevant stakeholders,” while the Rockefeller Foundation also is a partner and board member — and donor — to Gavi.

Gates-related connections extend to PATH president and CEO Nikolaj Gilbert, who is a member of Challenge Seattle, described as “an alliance of CEOs from Seattle area’s largest employers including Microsoft, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Starbucks, and Boeing.” He previously served as director for Big Pharma firm Novo Nordisk.

According to PATH’s 2021 annual report, the organization is funded by organizations including the Gates Foundation, the Schwab Charitable Fund and the Vanguard Charitable Endowment, in addition to the United Nations, Gavi, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Bank and the WHO.

PATH has also received funding from the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, Google and the World Bank for vaccine projects in countries such as India.

The Gates Foundation is also a co-founder of CEPI, along with the Wellcome Trust and the World Economic Forum (WEF). Indeed, CEPI was founded in Davos, Switzerland — home of the WEF’s annual meeting. Its CEO, Dr. Richard J. Hatchett, was previously acting director of the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority.

Several CEPI board members are also connected to entities like the Gates Foundation.

For instance, Dr. Anita Zaidi is the president of gender equality, director of vaccine development and surveillance, and director of enteric and diarrheal diseases programs at the Gates Foundation, while non-voting member Gagandeep “Cherry” Kang, M.D., Ph.D., is chair of the foundation’s Joint Working Group.

Νon-voting member Dr. Juan Pablo Uribe is the global director for Health, Nutrition and Population and director of the Global Financing Facility for Women, Children and Adolescents at the World Bank.

Dr. Mike Ryan, also a non-voting member, is the executive director of the WHO’s Health Emergencies Programme who gained global prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic through his participation in WHO briefings.

And non-voting member Dr. L. Rizka Andalucia is the director-general for Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices at Indonesia’s Ministry of Health. In November 2022, Indonesian Minister of Health Budi Gunadi Sadikin, at the G20 meeting in Bali, called for a “digital health certificate acknowledged by the WHO” that would allow the public to “move around.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/bill-gates-who-vaccine-patch-vmap/

from: https://needtoknow.news/2023/07/gates-who-envision-future-where-vaccine-patches-could-be-mailed-directly-to-peoples-homes/

“Doctor”(?) Chelsea Clinton Wants Your Kids

Posted on May 29, 2023 by marcia

‘The Big Catch-Up’: Chelsea Clinton Pushes ‘Largest Childhood Immunization Effort Ever’

May 10, 2023 NewsWars 7

Chelsea Clinton aims to provide childhood immunizations to as many children as possible with a new initiative called “The Big Catch-Up” that she touted as “the largest childhood immunization effort ever.” The WHO, UNICEF, GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, along with Immunization Agenda 2030, announced “The Big Catch-Up” last month, which WHO characterized as a “targeted global effort to boost vaccination among children following declines driven by the COVID-19 pandemic.” Clinton complained about the lack of trust in science and public health officials and said that she thinks we need the public sector to stop stripping away public health emergency powers from state public health agencies.

Chelsea Clinton aims to provide childhood immunizations to as many children as possible with a new initiative called “The Big Catch-Up.”

Speaking at the Brainstorm Health conference hosted by Fortune Magazine last month in Marina del Rey, Calif., the daughter of Bill and Hillary Clinton called the initiative “the largest childhood immunization effort ever.”

“A new effort that we’re a part of is the new initiative launched by the WHO last week to try to catch kids up on their routine immunizations. In 2021 alone more than 25 million kids under the age of 1 missed at least 1 routine immunization and so we’re working with WHO and the Gates Foundation and others to kind of hopefully have the largest childhood immunization effort ever over the next 18 months to catch as many kids up as possible, because no one should die of polio, measles, or pneumonia—including in this country, where we also need people to vaccinate their kids,” she said.

The WHO, UNICEF, GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, along with Immunization Agenda 2030 announced “The Big Catch-Up” last month, which WHO characterized as a “targeted global effort to boost vaccination among children following declines driven by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

“This effort aims to reverse the declines in childhood vaccination recorded in over 100 countries since the pandemic, due to overburdened health services, closed clinics, and disrupted imports and exports of vials, syringes and other medical supplies,” WHO described in a press release.

Read full article here…

from: https://needtoknow.news/2023/05/the-big-catch-up-chelsea-clinton-pushes-largest-childhood-immunization-effort-ever/

Vaccines in Your Veggies – Oh, No!!!

Posted on April 5, 2023 by marcia

Eat Your Vaccines: mRNA Gene Therapy Is Coming to the Food Supply THIS MONTH

April 3, 2023 • by The Vigilant Fox

They’ve given up on a needle in every arm. Now they’re coming for what you eat.

“I’ve got documents from the NIH – from 2002 – talking about integrating vaccines into foods,” announced attorney Tom Renz in an eye-opening interview with Dr. Naomi Wolf. “They’ve been working on integrating these [vaccines] into our food supply. They’ve been working on it for at least two decades.”

Mr. Renz brought the receipts in his latest Substack piece:

“Here is an article published in the NIH (you know – by our government) talking about foods ‘under application’ to be genetically modified to become edible vaccines – FROM 2013,” he wrote. “The fact that food can be altered to act as a vaccine is not disputable.”

And according to attorney Renz’s recent tweet, “lobbyists for the cattleman and pork associations in several states have CONFIRMED they WILL be using mRNA vaccines in pigs and cows THIS MONTH.”

“Gates, the WHO, a ton of these universities: they’re all talking about including mRNA vaccinations as part of the food. They’re going to modify the genes of these foods to make them mRNA vaccines,” he warned in this video.

But Missouri HB 1169 seeks to counter such an effort. It’s been described as “one of the most controversial bills in history,” but all it is – is a labeling bill. It doesn’t ban anything. You have every right to know if a food product is a gene therapy product. So, if this bill gets passed, it’s a major victory for informed consent and, in all likelihood, our well-being. The entire two-page bill is available to read on DailyClout. Here’s an excerpt:

Looks Like ‘Immortalized Cells’ Can Kill You

Posted on March 16, 2023 by marcia

Are They Trying To Kill Us? Lab Grown Meat Backed By Bill Gates Has CANCER CELLS And Could Cause Other Scary Health Issues

By Cullen Linebarger Feb. 24, 2023 11:00 am762 Comments

Sometimes you have to wonder what the globalists are up to. A bombshell report from Bloomberg earlier this month revealed the lab-grown meat strongly supported by Bill Gates has cancer cells.

You are reading this correctly. You are devouring glorified cancer tumors when consuming fake meat.

Joe Fassler, the author of the piece, revealed that in order for lab-grown meat companies to produce what they “cultured meat,” they utilize what are called “immortalized cells.” These cells, in some cases ,are fully cancerous.

The big honking asterisk is that normal meat cells don’t just keep dividing forever. To get the cell cultures to grow at rates big enough to power a business, several companies, including the Big Three, are quietly using what are called immortalized cells, something most people have never eaten intentionally. Immortalized cells are a staple of medical research, but they are, technically speaking, precancerous and can be, in some cases, fully cancerous.

Despite this, leading scientists claim you cannot get cancer when you eat fake meat.

Read: One Way To Keep Your Family Fed In A Crisis

If we wanted to, we could eat malignant chicken tumors by the bucketload. “It’s essentially impossible for a cell from one species to gain a foothold in the tissues of another species,” says Dr. Robert Weinberg. “So even if one were to take highly malignant cells from a cow and drink them, I don’t see what the problem would be.”

The FDA, as previously reported by the Gateway Pundit, also asserted lab meat was safe to eat back in November.

The problem with this assumption according to National Pulse, is that these “immortalized cell lines” reproduce forever, just like cancer. This means they are effectively cancer.

These cell lines have been used in scientific research but never to produce food before. So the assertions by scientists that cancer cells in lab grown meat cannot cause cancer are not exactly based on factual information.

We also cannot forget what happened during the COVID-19 pandemic when the experts lied at multiple turns and cost millions of workers their jobs and even their lives. Trusting them on health matters can be questionable.

Cancer is not the only potential danger from eating fake meat. The Children’s Health Defense Fund reported on a study by Impossible Foods in September which demonstrated that rats had serious complications such as unexplained weight gain and anemia.

In 2019 the manufacturing company, Impossible Foods, applied for permission to market the burger in the EU and the U.K.

However, the results of a rat feeding study commissioned by Impossible Foods and carried out with SLH suggest that the burger may not be safe to eat.

SLH is the substance that gives the burger its meaty taste and makes it appear to bleed like meat when cut. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initially refused to sign off on the safety of SLH when first approached by the company.

The rat-feeding study results suggest that the agency’s concerns were justified. Rats fed the GM yeast-derived SLH developed unexplained changes in weight gain, changes in the blood that can indicate the onset of inflammation or kidney disease, and possible signs of anemia.

From: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/02/are-they-trying-to-kill-us-lab-grown-meat-backed-by-bill-gates-has-cancer-cells-and-could-cause-other-scary-health-issues/

What Did Fauci Do?

Posted on October 23, 2022 by marcia

Fauci’s Calendar: What Was He Doing in the Months Before the Pandemic?

After filing an expensive lawsuit, OpenTheBooks.com finally got the National Institutes of Health to release Dr. Anthony Fauci’s work calendar — here’s what it shows.

On Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2020, at 9 a.m., Dr. Anthony Fauci joined staff at the National Security Council (NSC) — the President’s national security and foreign policy advisory shop — for a meeting in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building about the novel coronavirus.

Fauci would continue to have meetings in classified settings throughout the month.

Fauci’s calendar entries included NSC meetings, White House Situation Room meetings and meetings in other classified settings, as COVID-19 was breaking in China. (To our knowledge, the existence of these meetings before Jan. 28, 2020, was not previously disclosed.)

On Friday, Jan. 24, four days after China admitted human-to-human transmission of the virus, Fauci started attending a small group COVID-19 discussion that first took place in “Anthony’s Office” in a building next to the White House. Anthony, in this case, appears to be an NSC employee and an expert in biodefense and China.

Flashing back to December 2019, when patients in Wuhan were showing up at hospitals with unidentified pneumonia cases, Fauci attended the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation — National Institutes of Health (NIH) dinner and workshops on Dec. 19 and 20 — the sixth annual event for NIH staff and Gates Foundation executives.

On the morning of Dec. 19, billionaire Bill Gates tweeted out his own hopes for the coming year and his now prescient prediction: “one of the best buys in global health: vaccines.”

Today, we only know about these meetings, because our organization at OpenTheBooks.com, in partnership with the public-interest law firm Judicial Watch, sued the NIH in federal court. NIH had refused to even acknowledge our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

So, for the first time, here is our exclusive release of Fauci’s official calendar.

For a government bureaucrat, this sure was one tightly held calendar.

The refusal by NIH to follow open records law was a strategy to delay transparency: NIH forced us into expensive taxpayer-paid litigation to slow-walk 156 pages of semi-redacted calendar production.

Fauci’s calendar has 933 events during this five-month period — including 224 media interviews and 84 redacted events (only significant redactions that prevented analysis and understanding were counted, for example, phone number redactions were not included).

It’s a document that NIH and Fauci didn’t want you to see …

Why? What did Fauci know? And when did he know it?

Following Fauci’s timeline — highlights

Nov. 6, 2019: Fauci’s calendar lists “GPMB Discussion Note.” This likely deals with the World Health Organization (WHO) and World Bank’s Global Preparedness Monitoring Board. Fauci is a past member of the GPMB board which was formed to “ensure[s] preparedness for global health crises.”

On Jan. 27, 2020, the GPMB convened regarding the COVID-19 outbreak and Fauci signed off on the group’s Jan. 30, 2020, statement commending the WHO and the “transparency of China.”

Judicial Watch’s FOIAs uncovered that this statement was organized and circulated by Wellcome Trust scientist and GPMB member Jeremy Farrar (who also organized a secret conference call with Fauci and others on Feb. 1, 2020).

Nov. 12, 2019: Fauci flies to the Netherlands. His multi-day itinerary is not listed. The Netherlands is home to the father of “gain-of-function,” high-risk researcher Dr. Ron Fouchier.

Fauci’s NIH institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), paused (2014) then restarted (Jan. 2019) funding to the controversial researcher who (using NIH funds) created an H5N1 bird flu in his lab with pandemic potential. He did so by passaging the virus through ferrets multiple times, until it gained a new function by going airborne and infecting a ferret in a different cage.

Nov. 25, 2019: Fauci joins Ambassador Deborah Birx, the Global AIDS Coordinator at a World AIDS Day evening event hosted by the Business Council for International Understanding. On Feb. 27, 2020, Birx is appointed to join Fauci on Trump’s COVID-19 Task Force.

Earlier that day, Fauci has a “Pre-Brief for US Japan Biodefense Meeting.” In 2004, as I previously reported at Forbes, Fauci received a permanent pay adjustment for his “biodefense” work. Fauci is the top-paid federal employee, specifically because he was paid to prevent the next pandemic.

Nov. 25, 2019: Fauci has a call with his future biographer, Janet Tobias, who later produces the “FAUCI” documentary.

Dec. 3, 2019: Fauci has a call with Victor Dzau, who is the president of the National Academy of Medicine, a Duke University professor and a man whose Chinese family fled to Hong Kong to escape China’s civil war.

Dec. 19, 2019: Fauci attends an “NIH Gates Fdn dinner” at “The Cloisters,” likely the one in Lutherville, Maryland, an hour from NIH.

Earlier that morning, Bill Gates tweeted out what has become a much-discussed prediction, “What’s next for our foundation? I’m particularly excited about what the next year could mean for one of the best buys in global health: vaccines.”

Fauci and top officials, such as NIH director Francis Collins and Health and Human Services (HHS) assistant secretary for health Brett Giroir, joined Gates Foundation executives during the dinner and on panels the next day, according to a press report from the time.

Jan. 17, 2020: Fauci has a call to discuss “CDC Gao Writing Request.” This is presumably related to George Gao, Director-General of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Jan. 23, 2020: Fauci had an 8 a.m., in-person meeting with Dr. James LeDuc. LeDuc ran one of the few BSL-4 (biosafety level-4) biocontainment labs in the country (think: moon-suit stuff), at the University of Texas Medical Branch, where he has long-trained Chinese scientists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) lab in BSL-4 biosafety procedures.

Emails acquired by FOIA from the U.S. Right To Know (USRTK) organization revealed that LeDuc was sending backchannel emails with his Wuhan colleagues to get information on the novel coronavirus outbreak, and even soliciting edits and corrections from Wuhan’s so-called “bat lady” Shi Zhengli for his April 2020 Congressional testimony.

LeDuc’s emails show he was communicating with his virologist colleague Yuan Zhiming, who was in charge of the WIV BSL-4 lab. LeDuc wrote an op-ed published on January 24 about his U.S.-China working relationship.

It’s possible this drop-by visit by LeDuc was to let Fauci know what he was hearing from Wuhan, and perhaps, not put that news in email.

By 4:30 that afternoon, LeDuc and former Ft. Detrick BSL-4 biolab director Dave Franz joined HHS Robert Kadlec for a conference call, a call revealed in USRTK’s document production from the University of Texas (page 3,409).

Franz emailed a brief note that same day “to facilitate [the] call.” The email described his and LeDuc’s work since 2007 as establishing a relationship with Chinese scientists (pg 115).

In other words, LeDuc was in town to talk about China and the Wuhan lab with top HHS and former military biolab officials.

Thus, while the public discussion was and would remain that the virus had a natural origin, behind the scenes, people were being briefed on the U.S.-Chinese scientists’ interactions and the Wuhan lab itself.

Top-secret meetings

Unreported until now, throughout late January and February 2020, Fauci was in meetings with the NSC and in top-secret settings — including in the White House Situation Room. Fauci was also in small, “restricted” meetings with the NSC.

Were all these top-secret meetings known to the president, and do they give the impression people-in-the-know thought the virus had a natural origin?

Jan. 14 and 16, 2020: Fauci has a 9 a.m. “Novel Corona Virus PCC/Synch Meeting” with Phil Ferro, NSC and Executive Office of the President, on the 14th and a “Novel Corona Virus Touch Base” with Ferro on the 16th.

Jan. 20: China announced to the world that the virus has human-to-human transmission, an admission that they had a possible pandemic virus on their hands.

Jan. 21: Fauci’s NSC meeting gets a new name (“nCoV-PCC”) and the meeting now includes secure video teleconference.

Jan. 21: Fauci is interviewed by The Wall Street Journal reporter Betsy McKay on the listed topic “Coronavirus & HIV Papers.”

Is she asking Fauci about an upcoming scientific paper (published Jan. 31 by Indian scientists, but quickly withdrawn by the authors, amid intense criticism) that noted an “uncanny similarity” between the HIV virus and the spike protein in the COVID-19 virus?

Because bats don’t contract HIV, such a similarity would point to a lab creation for the novel virus.

An hour earlier, Fauci had a call with Peter Hotez about an “Anti-SARS vaccine candidate.” Hotez is an NIH-funded, Texas-based scientist and vaccine researcher, who had a $6 million NIH grant since 2012 studying a “SARS vaccine for biodefense.”

Hotez developed a non-mRNA vaccine model, that won recent approval for distribution in some foreign countries, such as India.

Jan. 22: The COVID-19 meetings with Fauci rise to a new level as Fauci’s calendar shows him in the White House Situation Room (“WHSR”), from ~1:30-3 this day for “nCoV PCC.”

Jan. 24: From ~1:30-2:30 p.m. Fauci has a “nCoV Small Group Discussion” at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB), next to the White House, in “Anthony’s Office” Room 381. (nCoV stands for novel coronavirus and was the reference given to COVID-19 before it was officially named SARS-CoV-2.)

This is one of the few times no last name is listed on Fauci’s calendar. The meeting entry in our FOIA production is cut off but includes “***Please”; the entry also includes an attachment, which NIH currently has not released to OpenTheBooks.com.

“Anthony’s Office” Clue from Feb. 5: From 2:30-3:30 p.m. on Feb. 5, Fauci’s calendar shows an EEOB “Restricted Small Group” meeting with Anthony Ruggiero, who is listed as with the Executive Office of the President/NSC.

Anthony Ruggiero, according to his public LinkedIn page, was NSC “Special Assistant to the President, Senior Director for Counterproliferation and Biodefense” at the time of the meeting. Thus, it’s likely the Jan. 24 EEOB meeting in “Anthony’s Office” was with the same man as the Feb. 5 meeting: Anthony Ruggiero.

Jan. 27: From 2:30-3:30 p.m., Fauci has an “NSC Deputy Call” in the NIH SCIF. (SCIF stands for “Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility” and is usually a room reserved for sensitive or classified briefings.) Trump’s NSC deputy at the time was Matthew Pottinger. The subject of the call is not noted on the calendar.

(Also on Jan. 27, Fauci met with the CEO of Moderna, Stephane Bancel.)

Jan. 28: A Fauci/NSC COVID-19 meeting was previously disclosed Sharri Markson, who reported in her book “What Really Happened in Wuhan” that Pottinger called the Jan. 28 meeting with Fauci, HHS Secretary Azar and CDC Director Redfield just after Pottinger heard from Chinese dissident and human rights activist Wei Jingsheng about the virus breaking in China.

From Jan. 16 through Jan. 29, with few exceptions, Fauci’s weekday calendar shows a COVID-19 meeting, either in person or by phone via secure video teleconference with Phil Farro, who is with the Office of the President and the NSC.

Jan. 22: Fauci has an hour and a half blocked off for the COVID-19 meeting in the White House Situation Room.

Jan. 27: If he didn’t know before, emails released to the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Committee reveal that on this date, Fauci got definitive word from his staff that NIAID, his institute, funded a bat coronavirus grant to EcoHealth Alliance who collaborated with the WIV and Ralph Baric. If the virus was from the WIV, Fauci now knew he had funded the Chinese lab.

Jan. 31: Fauci is in the Oval Office, meeting, presumably, with the president.

Feb. 4: By this date, according to released emails, Fauci and the federally funded scientists he consults with, have decided that COVID-19 came from nature via a bat, through some intermediate species. Behind the scenes, they are drafting papers arguing that any position besides a natural origin is a conspiracy theory.

Yet, Fauci keeps meeting with Anthony Ruggiero, NSC’s biodefense and China expert (1/25 and 2/5). Are they thinking COVID-19 may have come from a lab leak?

Feb. 11: Fauci has a meeting with Ralph Baric, the University of North Carolina coronavirus scientist, arguably the nation’s foremost expert on bat coronaviruses. The meeting includes Emily Erbelding, the director of the NIAID Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

Baric had a long working relationship with the Wuhan lab, and, it would later be revealed, applied (unsuccessfully) for a $14 million DARPA grant with the WIV and EcoHealth Alliance to insert a furin cleavage site into a chimeric bat virus and passage it through “humanized” mice to see if it had pandemic potential.

Some virologists have called that leaked document a recipe for the COVID-19 virus.

The Fauci/Baric meeting backs up against the NSC meeting with Phil Ferro. It’s not clear where Baric is during the meeting, if in-person or by phone. Was Baric on the NSC call or listening in?

(Previously at Forbes, I wrote about how Fauci continued to fund scientists like Baric and Fouchier by giving exemptions and narrowly defining scrutinized research — circumventing funding bans by Presidents Obama and Trump.)

Feb. 17: “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” a paper that Fauci apparently helped edit and was organized by NIH-funded Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, stated that the COVID-19 virus was from nature and called any suggestion otherwise a conspiracy.

Largely based on this paper, scientific discussion and social media posts suggesting a lab leak were censored as misinformation.

Other items of interest

Between Nov. 25, 2019, and Feb. 26, 2020, Fauci does three events with the American Society of Microbiology (ASM): a “Biothreats” discussion (11/25/2019); the ASM biothreats conference (1/29/2020); and meets with the ASM board (2/26/2020).

Jan. 7 and 9, 2020: Fauci did his first interviews on corona: 1. With CTV (Canadian TV) on the “pneumonia outbreak in China”; and 2. With Voice of America (VOA) on the “Wuhan pneumonia.” We couldn’t find the interviews published anywhere on the internet.

While the NIH keeps a public record of interviews Fauci conducted since Jan. 27, 2020, we identified 34 other interviews with him discussing the coronavirus from Jan. 7 to Jan. 26.

Between Jan. 27 and Feb. 24, Fauci meets or has calls with Stephane Bancel, the CEO of Moderna (1/27); Jeremy Farrar of Wellcome Trust (British health non-profit focused on vaccines) (2/1); BioNTech executive and former NIH staffer Gary Nabel (2/6) and Johnson & Johnson chief scientist Paul Stoffels (2/24).

Feb. 7: Fauci receives training on personal protective equipment (PPE). Given his varying recommendations on PPE early in the pandemic, it would be interesting to know what training he received.

March 18: Fauci logged a meeting entitled “code red” with a follow-up meeting on March 20. No further details were listed.

March 26: Fauci did four YouTube hits of 15 minutes each. Fauci’s calendar titled these events: “FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] Califf Request” — likely referencing Robert Califf. At the time, Califf was leading healthcare strategy at Alphabet (Google and YouTube parent company).

Robert Califf is the current Commissioner of Food and Drugs of the FDA and the former commissioner under Obama.

Summary

The official work calendar is an historic hour-by-hour documentation of Fauci in the months leading up to and during the publicly announced COVID-19 pandemic.

Even with this topline calendar transparency, NIH admits to holding an additional 60,000 pages of backup documentation. The federal court is allowing us to ask for specific items.

Therefore, if there is a specific document of oversight interest, please send our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com a message via the “Contact Us” portion of our website.

The historic release of Fauci’s work calendar leaves all of us with more questions than answers.

It’s incumbent upon Congress to exert its right to oversight.

Note: We reached out for comment to Fauci, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other top scientists mentioned on Fauci’s calendar. None gave us comments by our deadline.

Originally published on Adam Andrzejewski’s OpenTheBooks Substack page.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

from: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/anthony-fauci-calendar-before-pandemic/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=84cfc378-168f-4950-b1ba-671f4546a6b0

Bill Gates & The Seeds of Doom

Posted on September 24, 2022 by marcia

Bill Gates’ ‘Magic Seeds’ Won’t Solve World Hunger But Will ‘Create Ecological Disaster’

Bill Gates is rebranding genetically engineered seeds as “magic seeds” and says they’re the answer to world hunger, but according to Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., a “failed, clumsy crude manipulation of living systems does not create ‘magical seeds.’ It creates an ecological disaster.”

bill gates magical gmo seed world hunger feature

Bill Gates said he believes the global community must invest in engineered crops using what he calls his “magic seeds” to solve world hunger.

Food aid alone cannot address the problem, Gates said in an essay accompanying the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s (BMGF) Goalkeepers 2022 Report, released earlier this month.

What is needed, he said, are “magic” seeds that have been genetically engineered to be resistant to hot and dry climates or to grow three weeks faster than natural seeds.

“Temperature keeps going up,” Gates said. “There is no way, without innovation, to come even close to feeding Africa. I mean, it just doesn’t work.”

However, André Leu, organic farming expert, former president of IFOAM Organics International and author of “Growing Life: Regenerating Farming and Ranching,” criticized Gates for calling his genetically modified seeds “magical.”

“This is patently false and an example of spin doctoring by public relations companies to rebrand products that are widely regarded as Frankenfoods,” Leu told The Defender.

According to Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., environmental activist, author and founder of Navdanya International, “[Natural] seeds as the source of life are magical. They hold their implicate order within them, and unfold to relocate the unique patterns and structures of life in its diversity.”

In contrast, Shiva said, “Genetically engineered seeds have been made to own life through patents.”

Shiva told The Defender:

“[Genetically engineered seeds] are a failed technology.

“Herbicide-resistant crops were supposed to control weeds. They have created superweeds. Bt toxin crops were supposed to control pests. They have created super pests, increased the need for pesticides, increased farmers’ debt and driven farmers to suicide in India.

“A failed, clumsy, crude manipulation of living systems does not create ‘magical seeds.’

“It creates an ecological disaster of monocultures of GMOs [genetically modified organisms] displacing the rich diversity of crops that we need for the health of people and the health of the planet.”

According to Gates, he’s concerned about the planet — at least how it may be impacted by climate change.

The BMGF on Sept. 6 released an “Agriculture Adaptation Atlas” that uses predictive modeling to estimate how climate change may affect growing conditions for crops in African countries.

The BMGF is also promoting the use of artificial intelligence (AI) that processes the genome sequences of crops along with this environmental data to conjure up a data-based vision of what farms should look like in the future.

“From this computer model, researchers can identify the optimal plant variety for a particular place,” Cambria Finegold, director of digital development for CABI, an intergovernmental organization that is developing models for the BMGF, earlier this month told The Associated Press (AP). “Or they can do the reverse: pinpoint the optimal place to grow a specific crop.”

Finegold added:

“It’s not just, ‘how do we get through this crisis and get back to normal?’ It’s, ‘what does the future normal look like?’”

But critics pointed out this reliance on AI and genetically modified seeds would exacerbate environmental issues because the modified seeds require heavy use of fossil-fuel fertilizers, which must be transported across great distances, and pesticides that threaten biodiversity.

According to Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa and AGRA Watch, a group that “works with partner organizations in Africa and the US to support sustainable, agroecological, socially responsible, and indigenous alternatives,” the BMGF’s industrial agricultural programs in Africa, including its Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), cause biodiversity loss, hurt small-scale farmers and cause environmental harm — all while failing to solve hunger.

Rachel Bezner Kerr, a professor of global development at Cornell University, told the AP there are existing alternatives — such as locally managed seed banks, composting systems that promote healthy soil and non-chemical pesticide interventions — that can build more resilient farming systems and reduce the need for food aid.

Kerr, a lead author of the food chapter of the latest report from the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said that although the panel doesn’t make recommendations, “overall, the kind of focus on a few technologies and reliance on fossil fuel-based inputs isn’t in line with ecosystem-based adaptation” or a biodiverse future.

However, BMGF CEO Mark Suzman contended fertilizer is necessary. “You simply cannot meet overall productivity gains without it,” he said on a call with reporters, according to the AP.

Gates also dismissed alternative ideas.

“If there’s some non-innovation solution, you know, like singing ‘Kumbaya,’ I’ll put money behind it,” Gates told the AP in an interview. “But if you don’t have those seeds, the numbers just don’t work.”

Gates said, “When researchers in Kenya compared plots of this new [genetically modified] maize, which they called ‘DroughtTEGO®,’ with the old one, they saw the DroughtTEGO farms were producing an average of 66% more grain per acre.”

Shiva said genetically engineered crops and seeds aren’t the answer.

“To end world hunger we must stop treating food as a commodity and seeds as corporate ‘intellectual property,’” she told The Defender.

“To solve world hunger every farm must become biodiverse and ecological. Biodiversity intensification produces more nutrition per acre, with no dependence on external inputs of seeds and toxic agrochemicals as our report ‘Health Per Acre’ shows.”

“We can feed the people while regenerating the biodiversity of the planet,” Shiva said.

Leu agreed. “The scaling up of regenerative organic agriculture based on the science of agroecology would easily solve the global food insecurity crisis. It is low-cost, proven, and effective, and scaling it up globally would be less than the cost of developing one GMO crop.”

Claiming GMOs have no place in solving world hunger, Leu said:

“Despite more than 40 years of hype that GMO seeds were going to dramatically increase yields, solve pest and disease problems, reduce pesticide use, drought-proof crops, allow them to be grown in saline soils, and numerous other extravagant claims, this has not been achieved.

“The research by independent scientists — not by the scientists employed by the biotech companies who have an obvious conflict of interest — clearly shows that there have been no yield increases over conventional breeding.

“The only two things GMO crops have succeeded in doing are dramatically increasing the use of toxic pesticides such as glyphosate (Roundup) in our food, bodies, and environment and the profits of the large agribusiness pesticide companies.”

Leu emphasized the effectiveness of teaching organic farming methods to small-scale farmers to address hunger.

“The majority of food-insecure people are smallholder family farmers and others who depend on them in rural communities,” he said.

“We have proven many times that teaching good organic farming practices can increase their yields by over 100% so they can feed their families and local communities. They also get an income to pay for healthcare, education and many other things that are important for a good quality of life.”

Who really suffers and who profits from ‘philanthrocapitalism based on biopiracy’?

The BMGF and the Gates-led AGRA say they aim to transform agriculture in Africa by increasing incomes and food security for millions of smallholder farmers.

On July 13, Gates pledged to donate $20 billion to the BMGF so it can increase its annual spending to “mitigate some of the suffering people are facing right now.” The donation brought the foundation’s endowment up to $70 billion, CNBC reported in July.

The BMGF has spent $1.5 billion on grants focused on agriculture in Africa, according to Candid, a nonprofit that researches philanthropic giving.

But an independent evaluation of AGRA’s efforts, released in late February by the consulting firm Mathematica, found “mixed” outcomes on inclusive financial, output markets and farmer outcomes, The Defender reported.

According to Joeva Rock, Ph.D., assistant professor of development studies at the University of Cambridge who wrote a not-yet-released book about food sovereignty in Ghana, activists in Africa questioned whether the funds could have been better spent elsewhere.

In Ghana, field trials for four varieties of genetically modified seeds began in 2013, Rock told the AP.

“What would happen if those went into increasing funds to the national research centers in Ghana, to building roads, to building storage, to building silos or helping to build markets?” Rock said.

Food insecurity is not caused by low yields, Leu told The Defender. “It is caused by unfair and inefficient food distribution systems.”

Leu said:

“Industrial farming systems are not designed to feed the poor. The COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns and war in Ukraine are examples of why it is the wrong model.

“Growing food thousands of miles away from where it is needed instead of growing it locally is the problem. People are dependent on supply chains that can easily be disrupted.

“Also, food-insecure people are the poorest on the planet. Even if the food gets to their country, they can’t afford to buy it.

“On the other hand, we now have an obesity epidemic in the more affluent countries and regions due to an oversupply of calories empty of nutrition from industrial agriculture.”

In 2006, the BMGF joined with the Rockefeller Foundation to spur a “green revolution” in Africa by creating AGRA.

“Over the long term, the partnership, called Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), intends to improve agricultural development in Africa by addressing both farming and relevant economic issues, including soil fertility and irrigation, farmer management practices, and farmer access to markets and financing,” the groups said.

At its inception, AGRA declared Africa deficient in what it referred to as “improved inputs,” such as fertilizer and “advanced” seeds, and has worked to implement policies that would make African farmers use manufactured fertilizers, pesticides and engineered seeds — which are all patented products that generate profits for their owners.

AGRA Watch — founded to respond to and challenge AGRA’s policies — calls BMGF’s efforts “philanthrocapitalism based on biopiracy.”

Although the BMGF and AGRA claim to be “pro-poor” and “pro-environment,” their alignment with transnational corporations such as Monsanto, and foreign policy groups such as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), makes their motives suspect, according to AGRA Watch:

“[BMGF] takes advantage of food and global climate crises to promote high-tech, market-based, industrial agriculture and generate profits for corporations even while degrading the environment and disempowering farmers.”

A three-part video series “Rich Appetites: How Big Philanthropy Is Shaping the Future of Food in Africa” explains why exporting the U.S. agribusiness model to Africa is a “grave mistake” and exposes how “Big Philanthropy” — namely the BMGF — is destroying farming and food in Africa by seizing control from local interests.

As of Sept. 20, Forbes estimated Gates’ net worth to be around $104.4 billion.

from: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/bill-gates-genetically-engineered-seeds-world-hunger-ecological-disaster/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=8ad4e1dd-353b-431d-9c30-7212afb73ef1

Bill’s Ills

Posted on October 5, 2021 by marcia

Bill Gates: The Figurehead of Modern Technocracy

Image courtesy of Wikipedia

Posted By: Dr. Joseph Mercola September 29, 2021

Bill Gates is a ruthless monopolist with visions of global dominance. His tentacles manipulate education, geo-engineering, climate, agriculture, population surveillance, genetics, medicine and governments. He is singularly the most important driver of the pandemic and mandated vaccine policies. ⁃ TN Editor

(NOTE: This is relatively long, but you can get a sense of the article by checking out the summary below. The video is quite informative.)

STORY AT-A-GLANCE–

> After years of building a reputation as a “ruthless tech monopolizer,” Bill Gates 2.0 was launched with the creation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. With this foundation, he reinvented and rebranded himself as one of the world’s most generous philanthropists

> However, Gates’ brand of philanthropy creates several new problems for each one it solves and can best be described as “philanthrocapitalism”

> Today, Gates monopolizes or wields disproportional influence over the tech industry, global health and vaccines, agriculture and food policy (including biopiracy and fake food), weather modification and other climate technologies, surveillance, education and media

> According to Gates, vaccines are phenomenal profit makers, with more than a 20-to-1 return

> Gates is now promoting the technocratic “reset” plan, which includes an aggressive climate change agenda, yet Gates’ extensive travel by private jet makes him a top polluter

“Bill Gates — What You Were Not Told,” a segment of the Plandemic documentary,¹ reviews the personal and professional background of the Microsoft mogul, Bill Gates. Contrary to popular myth, many see Gates as more of an opportunist than a genius inventor, and the video touches on several of the less honorable moments of his career.

After years of building a reputation as a “ruthless tech monopolizer,” Bill Gates 2.0 was launched with the creation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. With this foundation, he reinvented and rebranded himself as one of the world’s most generous philanthropists.

Gates’ Charity Is Not What It Seems

Alas, as noted by AGRA Watch,² Shiva Vandana, Ph.D., and others, Gates’ brand of philanthropy creates several new problems for each one it solves and can best be described as “philanthrocapitalism.” As noted in the AGRA Watch article, “Philanthrocapitalism: The Gates Foundation’s African Programs Are Not Charity,” published in December 2017, advocates of philanthrocapitalism:³

“… often expect financial returns or secondary benefits over the long term from their investments in social programs. Philanthropy becomes another part of the engine of profit and corporate control. The Gates Foundation’s strategy for ‘development’ actually promotes neoliberal economic policies and corporate globalization.”

Indeed, over the years, Gates has ended up in a position where he monopolizes or wields disproportional influence over not only the tech industry, but also global health and vaccines, agriculture and food policy (including biopiracy and fake food), weather modification and other climate technologies,⁴ surveillance, education and media.

Not surprisingly, he’s tied to online fact checker organizations that strangle free speech, and recently told “60 Minutes” that to combat mistrust in science, we need to find ways to “slow down the crazy stuff.”⁵ What’s “crazy” and what’s not, however, is rarely as clear-cut as the mainstream media would like you to believe.

And, like a true philanthrocapitalist, Gates’ generosity ends up benefiting himself most of all. In reality, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donates billions to the very same companies and industries that the foundation owns stocks and bonds in. As Gates himself reveals in the featured video, he figured out that vaccines are phenomenal profit makers, saying they’re the best investment he’s ever made, with more than a 20-to-1 return.

The one thing that allows for this is the liability shield vaccine makers have been given by the U.S. government through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).^6,7 Under this law no vaccine maker can be sued directly by a consumer; if vaccine injury is suspected, the victim(s) must sue under the NVICP, which is run by special “masters” who determine the cases.

Gates, Global Climate Czar

As mentioned in the featured video, Gates is financing an effort to divert solar rays from the Earth’s surface in an attempt to combat global warming — an irrational approach at best, considering the potential this has to devastate global agriculture.

His latest book also details his climate change recommendations, which just so happen to include urging governments to support the very companies he’s invested in and similar sleight-of-hand gestures.

Meanwhile, as noted by The Nation, Gates himself is a serious polluter, with a 66,000 square-foot mansion, a private jet, 242,000 acres of farmland (which makes him the largest farmland owner in the U.S.) and investments in fossil fuel-dependent industries such as airlines, heavy machinery and cars.

“According to a 2019 academic study⁸ looking at extreme carbon emissions from the jet-setting elite, Bill Gates’s extensive travel by private jet likely makes him one of the world’s top carbon contributors — a veritable super emitter,” The Nation writes.⁹

“In the list of 10 celebrities investigated — including Jennifer Lopez, Paris Hilton, and Oprah Winfrey — Gates was the source of the most emissions. ‘Affluent individuals can emit several ten thousand times the amount of greenhouse gases attributed to the global poor,’ the paper noted. ‘This raises the question as to whether celebrity climate advocacy is even desirable …’”

Gates Leads the Technocratic Takeover

Gates’ focus on climate change makes perfect sense once you realize that he’s part of the technocratic elite that, for decades, have been working to gobble up the world’s resources in anticipation for the Great Reset,¹⁰ previously known as the One World Order.

Over the past year, the need for the Great Reset has been announced by government leaders around the world, the clarion call being that we need to “reset” the global economy and the way we live, work, travel and socialize in order to make the world more fair and sustainable. Addressing climate change under the banner of a global emergency is part and parcel of that PR campaign.

If you’ve paid attention, you’ve probably seen the hints. During the initial lockdowns in the early part of 2020, there were a slew of articles talking about how nature and wildlife were thriving in the absence of human socialization and travel. At other times, the COVID-19 pandemic has been presented as a warning to us all as to what happens when you get out of sync with nature.

No Real Food for You

Gates clearly feels pressure to do his part to realize the technocratic dream. He told “60 Minutes”¹¹ he is eager to see his various visions come to fruition within his lifetime, and he guesses he might have 20 or 30 years left. As reported by ZeroHedge:¹²

“Gates is pushing drastic and ‘fundamental’ changes to the economy in order to immediately halt the release of greenhouse gasses — primarily carbon dioxide— and ‘go to zero’ in order to save the planet from long-prognosticated (and consistently wrong) environmental disaster. Changes we’ll need to make in order to realize Gates’ vision include:

Allocating $35 billion per year on climate and clean energy research.
Electric everything.
Widespread consumption of fake meat, since cows account for ‘4% of all greenhouse gases.’
Retooling the steel and cement industries, which Gates says account for 16% of all carbon dioxide emissions, to inject up to 30% of captured C02 into concrete, and create a different type of steel.
Widespread adoption of next generation nuclear energy to supplement wind and solar.

And since producing plants to make fake meat emits gases as well, Gates has backed a company which uses fungus to make sausage and yogurt, which the billionaire calls ‘pretty amazing’ … ‘The microbe was discovered in the ground in a geyser in Yellowstone National Park. Without soil or fertilizer it can be grown to produce this nutritional protein — that can then be turned into a variety of foods with a small carbon footprint.’”

Indeed, Gates would like wealthy Western nations to switch entirely to synthetic lab-grown beef, and he rails against legislative attempts to make sure fake meats are properly labeled as such, since that slows down public acceptance.¹³

Gates Again Proves Feudalism Is a Failed System

With his land ownership, Gates clearly is in a monopoly position (yet again!) to drive agriculture and food production in whatever direction he desires, and he wants us all to eat as much fake food as possible. As noted in a long and detailed article on Gates’ philanthrocapitalist endeavors by The Defender:¹⁴

“Thomas Jefferson believed that the success of America’s exemplary struggle to supplant the yoke of European feudalism with a noble experiment in self-governance depended on the perpetual control of the nation’s land base by tens of thousands of independent farmers, each with a stake in our democracy.

So at best, Gates’ campaign to scarf up America’s agricultural real estate is a signal that feudalism may again be in vogue. At worst, his buying spree is a harbinger of something far more alarming — the control of global food supplies by a power-hungry megalomaniac with a Napoleon complex.”

The article goes on to detail Gates’ “long-term strategy of mastery over agriculture and food production globally,” starting with his support of GMOs in 1994. Ever since then, Gates’ “philanthropic” approaches to hunger and food production have been built around his technology, chemical, pharmaceutical and oil industry partners, thereby ensuring that for every failed rescue venture, he gets richer nonetheless.

“As with Gates’ African vaccine enterprise, there was neither internal evaluation nor public accountability,” The Defender writes.¹⁵ “The 2020 study ‘False Promises: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)’ is the report card on the Gates’ cartel’s 14-year effort.

The investigation concludes that the number of Africans suffering extreme hunger has increased by 30 percent in the 18 countries that Gates targeted. Rural poverty has metastasized dramatically …

Under Gates’ plantation system, Africa’s rural populations have become slaves on their own land to a tyrannical serfdom of high-tech inputs, mechanization, rigid schedules, burdensome conditionalities, credits and subsidies … The only entities benefiting from Gates’ program are his international corporate partners …

His investment history suggests that the climate crisis, for Gates and his cronies, is no more than an alibi for intrusive social control, ‘Great Reset’-scale surveillance, and massive science fiction geoengineering boondoggles, including his demented and terrifying vanity projects to spray the stratosphere with calcium chloride or seawater to slow warming, to deploy giant balloons to saturate our atmosphere with reflective particles to blot out the sun, or his perilous gambit of releasing millions of genetically modified mosquitoes in South Florida.

When we place these nightmare schemes in context alongside the battery of experimental vaccines he forces on 161 million African children annually, it’s pretty clear that Gates regards us all as his lab rats.”

Gates Foundation Seeded Catastrophic COVID-19 Policies

Gates, of course, has also played a leading role in the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. According to investigative journalist Jordan Schachtel, who has a channel on Substack,¹⁶ Gates had a hand in the “criminally negligent coronavirus response policies” that killed an inordinate number of senior citizens in nursing homes in New York, California, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Schachtel points out that a common thread in these instances is that they listened to the frightfully inaccurate modeling forecasts from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which is funded and controlled by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He writes:¹⁷

“In March and early April, politicians were informed by the modeling ‘experts’ at Gates-funded IHME that their hospitals were about to be completely overrun by coronavirus patients.

Modelers from IHME claimed this massive surge would cause hospitals to run out of lifesaving equipment in a matter of days, not weeks or months. Time was of the essence, and now was the time for rapid decision making, the modelers claimed.

On two separate April 1 and April 2 press conferences, Cuomo made clear that his policy decisions were based off of the IHME model … In an April 9 briefing, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer referred to the IHME model in order to project deaths and the PPE resources needed for the supposed surge. It was the same story with the government of Pennsylvania.”

White House Coronavirus Task Force members Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, both of whom have substantial ties to Gates, also relied on the IHME forecast models. As noted by Schachtel:

“These models, and the policy decisions that were made by relying on them, set off a chain of events that led to indefinite lockdowns, complete business closures, statewide curfews, and most infamously, the nursing home death warrants.”

Delete That Which No Longer Serves

The Gates Foundation also co-sponsored Event 201, a scripted tabletop exercise held mere months before the COVID-19 outbreak that ended up being remarkably prophetic.

Strangely enough, in an April 2020 BBC interview, Gates denied the simulation had occurred, saying that “We didn’t simulate this, we didn’t practice, so both the health policies and economic policies, we find ourselves in uncharted territory.”¹⁸ In an article for National Herald India, Norbert Häring highlights Gates’ apparent forgetfulness, stating:¹⁹

“It is true that if a little less emphasis had been placed on opinion manipulation, more attention could have been paid to health and economic policy. One of the four meetings was entirely devoted to this. But health and economic policies did get discussed. Gates can hardly have forgotten that.

The video on control of public opinion is the most interesting one, as it helps to put in perspective the efforts in this regard, which we are currently experiencing. One participant tells us that Bill Gates is financing work on algorithms which comb through the information on social media platforms to make sure that people can trust the information that they find there.”

Gates has also erased other evidence where the truth is coming back to haunt him. Case in point: Gates-funded fact checkers have vehemently denied claims that Gates ever said we’ll need digital vaccine passports, passing it off as yet another crazy conspiracy theory.

But Gates did say that in a June 2020 TED Talk. Someone just edited that specific statement out of his speech after the quote started making the rounds on social media. In a December 11, 2020, article, The Defender presented the proof.²⁰

Fact checkers also dismiss claims that subdermal microchips or digital tattoos will eventually be used to track and trace us, yet as noted by The Defender, Gates did commission MIT to develop an injectable quantum dot dye system to “tattoo” medical data on your body, and has patented technology that uses implanted biosensors that monitor body and brain activity and is tied to a crypto currency system.

He’s also invested tens of millions into microchip devices with remote-controlled drug-delivery systems and military contractors that track and trace pandemic infections and vaccine compliance. He also has a greater than $1 billion investment in 5G video surveillance satellites and 5G antennas. When you put all of these things together, Gates’ plans start to take on a rather ominous feel.

Gates Is the Most Visible Figurehead of Modern Technocracy

Whether preplanned or not, the COVID-19 pandemic is clearly being used to usher in highly controversial changes that are unmistakably totalitarian-building, including the private take-over of government through public-private partnerships.

Surveillance has become the biggest for-profit industry on the planet, and your entire existence is now being targeted for profit. Among those who stand to profit the most is Gates himself. Time is running out. To have any chance of stopping it, we must understand our trajectory, and unite to change the course Gates and others like him have set for us.

from: https://www.technocracy.news/bill-gates-the-figurehead-of-modern-technocracy/

“Equitable Math” Does Not Add Up

Posted on March 3, 2021 by marcia

Michael Burry Slams “Out Of Touch, Rich White Man” Bill Gates

Less than two weeks ago, we reported on the fact that The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is bankrolling an activist educational group that believes math is racist and that arriving at an objective answer is an example of “white supremacy.”

Yes, really.

Specifically, as Summit News noted at the time, a conglomerate of 25 educational organizations called A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction asserts that asking students to find the correct answer is an “inherently racist practice.”

The organization’s website lists the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as its only donor.

“In fact, over the past decade, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has awarded over of $140 million to a variety of groups associated with Pathway. Their “antiracist resources” are at the epicenter of a new training course for teachers offered by the Oregon Department of Education throughout the state,” reports National File.

“Three of the most prominent organizations receiving grant money from the Gates’ are The Education Trust, Teach Plus, and WestEd, all non-profit 501c organizations.”

A guidebook for teachers produced by Pathway called ‘Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction’ ludicrously claims that mathematics “is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views.”

Teachers are instructed to blame non-white students getting answers wrong on “white supremacist practices,” which are truly to blame for the “underachievement” of minorities.

This liberal, progressive insanity appears to have triggered Michael “Big Short” Burry who unleashed his usual acerbic, and entirely accurate, wit on Gates and the entire concept of math being racist…

“Math is a form of #whitesupremacy? Where I’m from, whites are the dummies in math. South and East Asians apparently didn’t get the message whites use math to #suppress them. Would be a #LOL moment at the local high school, at whites’ expense. “

Burry went on:

“Apparently an old rich white man is behind this. I’m really starting to think old white people are out of touch. Wait, I already knew that…”

The outspoken market savant concluded:

“I am of a generation that I know junior people who worked with Gates. Brilliant, exacting, and intimidating. Could and would pick apart and embarrass anyone in the room who was not prepared. Open conflict was his weapon. The right answer was never wrong.“

Ending with the all too telling hashtag: #formenotforthee

from: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/michael-burry-slams-out-touch-rich-white-man-bill-gates?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

REturn on Investment

Posted on January 10, 2021 by marcia

Why did Bill Gates Switch from Software to Vaccines?

2020-12-31 G. Edward Griffin 0

The answer is given in the first 60 seconds of this documentary when Gates says the investment return on vaccines is 20 to 1. But the story does not end there. Beyond incredible profits there is the lure of power over the entire human race, even to using vaccines delivered by mosquitoes to reduce population. This is the madman who is shaping the future of humanity.
2020-12 – Source: Truth Comes to Light

from: https://redpilluniversity.org/2020/12/31/why-did-bill-gates-switch-from-software-to-vaccines/

Chromographics Institute

Color + Art = Healing

Tag Archives: Bill Gates