Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation" />
Taking Back Our Stolen History
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

« Back to Glossary Index

In 1999, Microsoft founder Bill Gates gave over $20M to Johns Hopkins to establish a wing of the hospital where the Foundation was born and is now the largest private foundation in the world and easily the most powerful. This foundation has always hidden behind the mantra of “Health and help” for women in third world countries thus manufacturing consent for its activities through the manipulation of public opinion. The thrust of the foundation has been working with the big Pharma companies, to create vaccines for the masses in these impoverished countries. The BMGF funds the FDA in the U.S. and the Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in the U.K.

The Gates Foundation also owns shares in Pfizer and BioNTech, raising questions about corruption in the FDA and IHMA, both of which appear to have given Pfizer’s COVID shot preferential treatment despite overwhelming safety concerns and questionable effectiveness. The Gates Foundation is also a primary funder of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, which was responsible for the grossly inaccurate modeling that led to several governors ordering COVID patients to be sent into nursing homes.

Gates Funds UK and US Public Health Organizations

If we’ve learned anything over the past year and a half, it’s that corruption is rampant throughout our public health agencies and medical organizations. As reported by Armstrong Economics, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds — and therefore has significant influence over — public health agencies in both the United States and the U.K.:4

“The [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] has given full approval to Gates’s vaccines because it has been under tremendous political pressure to do so. Even CNBC reported that ‘Federal health officials had been under mounting pressure from the scientific community and advocacy groups to fully approve Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine …’

Meanwhile, in London, an investigation has revealed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are the primary funders of the UK’s Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency just as they are [of] the FDA in the United States.

The SEC has done absolutely NOTHING about insider information since Gates is also a MAJOR shareholder in Pfizer / BioNTech mRNA. There are reliable medical organizations opposing these vaccines despite the approval by two regulatory agencies that are taking money from Gates which only introduces conflicts of interest and potential corruption …

The FDA has NEVER approved a completely new type of medicine in less than one year, which raises serious questions about corruption. The average time it takes to get approval from the FDA is 12 years!”

The London investigation they’re referring to was published in The Daily Expose August 20, 2021.5 The MHRA, the British version of the U.S. FDA, actually receives most of its funding from the Gates Foundation, the investigation found.

June 4, 2021, the MHRA extended its emergency use authorization of the Pfizer jab to children between the ages of 12 and 15, despite known risks of heart inflammation. The Daily Expose writes:6

“At the time, the Chief Executive of the MHRA, Dr. June Raine said the MHRA had ‘carefully reviewed clinical trial data in children aged 12 to 15 years and have concluded that the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits outweigh any risk.’

We are left wondering if Dr. June Raine and the MHRA have even read the results of the extremely short and small study.7 If they have then they would have seen that 86% of children in the study suffered an adverse reaction ranging from mild to extremely serious.8

Just 1,127 children took part of the trial, however only 1,097 children completed the trial, with 30 of them not participating after being given the first dose of the Pfizer jab. The results do not state why the 30 children did not go on to complete the trial … Can we really trust the MHRA to remain impartial when its primary funder is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, who also own shares in Pfizer and BioNTech? We don’t think so.”

Gates Is Heavily Invested in Drug Companies

The Gates Foundation also owns “major shares” in both Pfizer and BioNTech, which jointly developed a COVID shot that August 23, 2021, was granted full approval9 for use in people 16 years of age and older by the FDA.

The Gates Foundation started shifting its investments into pharmaceuticals in 2002. That year, Gates invested $205 million into nine large drug companies, including Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. “The decision to take stakes in individual firms appears to be a shift in strategy, and for the first time aligns the charity’s interests with those of the drugs firms,” The Guardian reported at the time.10

According to The Motley Fool,11 Gates initially invested in Pfizer “with the stated intention of ‘expand[ing] access to the pharmaceutical company’s all-in-one injectable contraceptive.” Once the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, Gates predicted early on that Pfizer would be the first to get emergency use approval.

The Gates Foundation didn’t pick up BioNTech shares until September 2019, just three months before the COVID pandemic emerged, when it bought $55 million worth of shares.

Gates-Funded Forecasting Led to Nursing Home ‘Death Warrants’

The Gates Foundation has also shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which was responsible for the ill-fatedly inaccurate modeling that led to several governors issuing “nursing home death warrants.” The Strategic Culture Foundation writes:12

“New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is finally facing the heat for his botched and criminally negligent coronavirus response policies, yet no one seems to be asking why Cuomo and select governors made the fateful decisions that led to the excess deaths …

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 one of those press conferences, Cuomo thanked the Gates Foundation “for the national service that they’ve done.” The Pennsylvania Health Department also used IHME models to navigate its response. Even federal bureaucrats like Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx, both of whom have personal ties to Gates as well, leaned on the IHME forecasts to justify lockdowns, business closures and curfews.

In the end, the IHME models didn’t pan out. They weren’t even close. “For example, IHME used a 3+% death rate when the real number ‘from’ COVID-19 is only around 0.1%,” Strategic Culture Foundation writes, adding:13

“The buck does indeed stop with the elected leaders who made the fateful decisions to send sick COVID patients into nursing homes, lock down their states, and mask up their citizens in perpetuity, but that’s only half of the story.

The bad data they used almost exclusively came from the Gates network, which has trafficked in pseudoscience and has demonstrated complete incompetence and reckless forecasting since the beginning of last year.”

Not surprisingly, Gates has stayed mum on the gross failures of the IHME. As noted by the Strategic Culture Foundation,14 he has “seamlessly washed his hands of COVID mania and has moved on to demanding that the western world sacrifice itself in the name of the latest ‘crisis’ that is climate change.”

COVID-19 — A Launch Pad for the Great Reset

Of course, Gates’ “green” plans will also grow his own wealth, just like the COVID pandemic has done. Indeed, the so-called “climate change crisis” is nothing but another tool to implement the Great Reset, which will forever alter the face of society and commerce, shifting virtually all wealth and ownership to a few technocrats at the top, leaving regular people with no wealth or freedom to speak of.

Considering Gates’ position within the technocratic elite, it’s no surprise his fingerprints can be found on all the necessary chess pieces of this global chess game. As you may recall, the Gates Foundation co-sponsored the pandemic preparedness simulation for a “novel coronavirus,” known as Event 201, in October 2019 along with the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

The event eerily predicted what would happen just 10 weeks later, when COVID-19 appeared. Both the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum are also partnered15 with the United Nations which, while keeping a relatively low profile, appears to be at the heart of the globalist takeover agenda.

The World Economic Forum, while a private organization, works as the social and economic branch of the U.N. and is a key driving force behind modern technocracy and the Great Reset agenda. Its founder and chairman, Klaus Schwab, publicly declared the need for a global “reset” to restore order in June 2020.16

Gates and Schwab co-founded the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations and funded it with US$460 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The Wellcome Trust, the NIH, FDA, BARTA, and a consortium of nations, India, Germany, Japan, Norway; to which the European Union (2019) and Britain (2020) subsequently joined. CEPI is headquartered in Oslo, Norway. Gates and Klaus Schwab conspired to divide up the spoils of the world, according to Dr. Peter Breggin (see this video and his book for proof), once they had a pandemic large enough to do it with. Well, they created their own in COVID-19. He says there was a “no-loss policy” for the pharmaceutical industries as a condition – most likely to suit the head cult families (Rothschilds, Rockefellers, etc. who own big pharma).

Technocratic rule, which is what the Great Reset will bring about, hinges on the use of technology — in particular artificial intelligence, digital surveillance and Big Data collection (which is what 5G is for) — and the digitization of industry, banking and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule (although that part is never expressly stated).

Beyond pandemic preparedness and response, the justification for the implementation of the Great Reset agenda in its totality will be climate change. The Great Reset, sometimes referred to as the “build back better” plan, specifically calls for all nations to implement “green” regulations and “sustainable development goals”17,18 as part of the post-COVID recovery effort.

But the end goal is far from what the typical person envisions when they hear these plans. The end goal is to turn us into serfs without rights to privacy, private ownership or anything else. In short, the pandemic is being used to destroy the local economies around the world, which will then allow the World Economic Forum to come in and “rescue” debt-ridden countries. The price for this salvation is your liberty.

They have been caught spiking vaccines in Africa with HCG anti-fertility antigen, sued and banned in India for spiking vaccines with sterilization chemicals, and exposed for causing polio (with the polio vaccine) to tens of thousands there as well. The Foundation has donated billions to fund technologies and causes  such as Monsanto’s GM seeds that cause sterility, abortion pushing Planned Parenthood (where Gate’s father was a former director), and the development of Gate’s own sterilization chip – all designed for mass sterilization in order to address what he refers to as the world’s population problem. In addition, it has bankrolled the likes of the common core standard of indoctrination as well as a UNESCO global version called the World Core Curriculum.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) exercises power not only via its own spending, but more broadly through an elaborate network of “partner organizations” including non-profits, government agencies, and private corporations. As the third largest donor to the UN’s World Health Organization (WHO), it is a dominant player in the formation of global health policy. It orchestrates vast elaborate public-private partnerships – charitable salmagundis that tend to blur distinctions between states, which are at least theoretically accountable to citizens, and profit-seeking businesses that are accountable only to their shareholders. For example, a 2012 initiative aimed at combating neglected tropical diseases listed among its affiliates USAID, the World Bank, the governments of Brazil, Bangladesh, UAE et al., and a consortium of 13 drug firms comprising the most notorious powers in Big Pharma, including Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer.

BMGF is the prime mover behind prominent “multi-stakeholder initiatives” such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the GAVI Alliance (a “public-private partnership” between the World Health Organization and the vaccine industry).  Such arrangements allow BMGF to leverage its stake in allied enterprises, much as private businesses enhance power and profits through strategic investment schemes. The Foundation also intervenes directly in the agendas and activities of national governments, ranging from its financing of the development of municipal infrastructure in Uganda, to its recently announced collaboration with the Indian Ministry of Science to “Reinvent the Toilet.” At the same time the Foundation supports NGOs that lobby governments to increase spending on the initiatives it sponsors.

The Gates operation resembles nothing so much as a massive, vertically integrated multinational corporation (MNC), controlling every step in a supply chain that reaches from its Seattle-based boardroom, through various stages of procurement, production, and distribution, to millions of nameless, impoverished “end-users” in the villages of Africa and South Asia. Emulating his own strategies for cornering the software market, Gates has created a virtual monopoly in the field of public health. In the words of one NGO official, “[y]ou can’t cough, scratch your head or sneeze in health without coming to the Gates Foundation.” The Foundation’s global influence is now so great that former CEO Jeff Raikes was obliged to declare: “We are not replacing the UN. But some people would say we’re a new form of multilateral organization.”

Education

Within the US, BMGF focuses primarily on “education reform,” providing support for efforts to privatize public schools and subordinate teachers’ unions. Its much larger international divisions target the developing world and are geared toward infectious diseases, agricultural policy, reproductive health, and population control. In 2009 alone, BMGF spent more than $1.8 billion on global health projects.

A large chunk of the Common Core dumb-down agenda was financed by… you guessed it, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which partnered with Common Core financier Bill Gates on education, already has a set of global standards that it calls a ‘World Core Curriculum’ just waiting to be completely foisted on humanity. According to the agency, it is all linked to UN Agenda 21. In addition to gathering up unprecedented amounts of data on everyone, the global “education reform” movement is essentially seeking to instill radical new values in children — turning them into “global citizens” with views inherently at odds with Biblical Christianity — to facilitate the total regimentation of human society. Countless programs and initiatives such as “Education for All” are working toward that goal.

Family Commitment to Eugenics

Even in a field dominated by the world’s richest, the Gates Foundation has acquired a reputation for exceptional high-handedness. It is “driven by the interests and passions of the Gates family,” evasive about its financials, and accountable to no one except its founder, who “shapes and approves foundation strategies, advocates for the foundation’s issues, and sets the organization’s overall direction.”

Bill Gates’ father, William H. Gates Sr., has long been involved with the eugenics group Planned Parenthood, a rebranded organization birthed out of the American Eugenics Society. In a 2003 interview with PBS‘ Bill Moyers, Bill Gates admitted that his father used to be the head of Planned Parenthood, which was founded on the concept that most human beings are just “reckless breeders” and “human weeds” in need of culling.

Gates also admitted during the interview that his family’s involvement in reproductive issues throughout the years has been extensive, referencing his own prior adherence to the beliefs of eugenicist Thomas Robert Malthus, who believed that populations of the world need to be controlled through reproductive restrictions. Though Gates claims he now holds a different view, it appears as though his foundation’s initiatives are just a modified Malthusian approach that much more discreetly reduces populations through vaccines and GMOs.

William Gates Sr.’s association with Planned Parenthood and continued influence in the realm of “population and reproductive health” is significant because Gates Sr. is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This long-time eugenicist “guides the vision and strategic direction” of the Gates Foundation, which is currently heavily focused on forcing GMOs on Africa via its financing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).

In a 2012 Newsweek profile, Melinda Gates announced her intention to get “family planning” back on the global agenda and made the dubious claim that African women were literally clamoring for Depo-Provera as a way of hiding contraceptive use from “unsupportive husbands.” Boasting that a decision “likely to change lives all over the world” had been hers alone, she announced that the Foundation would invest $4 billion in an effort to supply injectable contraceptives to 120 million women – presumably women of color – by 2020. It was a program so ambitious that some critics warned of a return to the era of eugenics and coercive sterilization.

Bill Gates, at one time an avowed Malthusian “at least in the developing countries” is now careful to repudiate Malthus in public. Yet it is striking that Foundation publicity justifies not only contraception, but every major initiative in the language of population control, from vaccination (“When children survive in greater numbers, parents decide to have smaller families”) to primary education (“[G]irls who complete seven years of schooling will marry four years later and have 2.2 fewer children than girls who do not complete primary school.”)

In addition to their multibillion dollar contraception distribution program, BMGF provides research support for the development of new high-tech, long-lasting contraceptives (e.g., an ultrasound sterilization procedure for men as well as “non-surgical female sterilization”). Meanwhile the Foundation aggressively lobbies Third World governments to spend more on birth control and supporting infrastructure. while subsidizing steep cuts in the price of subcutaneous contraceptives.

GMO Agenda

The Gates Foundation has admittedly given at least $264.5 million in grant commitments to AGRA, and also reportedly hired Dr. Robert Horsch, a former Monsanto executive for 25 years who developed Roundup, to head up AGRA back in 2006. According to a report published in La Via Campesina back in 2010, 70 percent of AGRA’s grantees in Kenya work directly with Monsanto, and nearly 80 percent of the Gates Foundation funding is devoted to biotechnology.

The same report explains that the Gates Foundation pledged $880 million in April 2010 to create the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), which is a heavy promoter of GMOs. GAFSP, of course, was responsible for providing $35 million in “aid” to earthquake-shattered Haiti to be used for implementing GMO agricultural systems and technologies.

Back in 2003, the Gates Foundation invested $25 million in “GM (genetically modified) research to develop vitamin and protein-enriched seeds for the world’s poor,” a move that many international charities and farmers groups vehemently opposed. And in 2008, the Gates Foundation awarded $26.8 million to Cornell University to research GM wheat, which is the next major food crop in the crosshairs of Monsanto‘s GM food crop pipeline.

In order to help African farmers who couldn’t afford fertilizer, the BMGF gave $10 million dollars (as a grant) to a group of British scientists working on new genetically modified crops that required no fertilizer. This was the largest single investment in GM crops ever made in that country by a private organization. Bill Gate’s goal: to allow Africa to grow enough food for themselves. So he says, but could this be a long term plan for sterilization to supplement the vaccine sterilization agenda? An Egyptian study GMO study of rats concluded that many rats were completely sterile after only 91 days of eating GMO corn (backed by a Russian study). But genetic alterations of crops also leads to doing business with huge corporations like Monsanto, that do not allow farmers to keep their own seeds, but must rather purchase licenses every year to get more patented corporate GM seed, Monsanto’s herbicide and insecticide, and even down to costly crop system equipment rentals. Currently, GM crop systems are failing in America, being overrun by what are being termed super-bugs and super-weeds, and the quality of food has plummeted for conventional farmers who have to use up to ten times the amount of pesticide to try to keep their yields from diminishing.

The Gates Foundation‘s ties with Monsanto and corporate agriculture in general speak volumes about its real agenda, which is to create a monopolistic system of world control in every area of human life. Vaccines, pharmaceuticals, GMOs, reproductive control, weather manipulation, global warming — these and many other points of entry are the means by which the Gates Foundation is making great strides to control the world by pretending to help improve and save it.

Rather than promote real food sovereignty and address the underlying political and economic issues that breed poverty, Gates and Co. has instead embraced the promotion of corporately-owned and controlled agriculture and medicine paradigms that will only further enslave the world’s most impoverished. It is abundantly evident that GMOs have ravished already-impoverished people groups by destroying their native agricultural systems, as has been seen in India. (Source)

Some may say Gates’ endeavors are all about the money, while others may say they are about power and control. Perhaps it is a combination of both, where Gates is still in the business of promoting his own commercial investments, which includes buying shares in Monsanto while simultaneously investing in programs to promote Monsanto. Whatever the case may be, there is simply no denying that Gates now has a direct interest in seeing Monsanto succeed in spreading GMOs around the world. And since Gates is openly facilitating Monsanto‘s growth into new markets through his “humanitarian” efforts, it is clear that the Gates family is in bed with Monsanto.

“Although Bill Gates might try to say that the Foundation is not linked to his business, all it proves is the opposite: most of their donations end up favoring the commercial investments of the tycoon, not really “donating” anything, but instead of paying taxes to state coffers, he invests his profits in where it is favorable to him economically, including propaganda from their supposed good intentions,” wrote Silvia Ribeiro in the Mexican news source La Jornada back in 2010.

“On the contrary, their ‘donations’ finance projects as destructive as geoengineering or replacement of natural community medicines for high-tech patented medicines in the poorest areas of the world … Gates is also engaged in trying to destroy rural farming worldwide, mainly through the ‘Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa’ (AGRA). It works as a Trojan horse to deprive poor African farmers of their traditional seeds, replacing them with the seeds of their companies first, finally by genetically modified (GM).”

Warren Buffet gave $31 billion to Bill Gates’ Foundation in June 2006 which doubling its size due to the gift, and is five times larger than the U.S. next largest Ford Foundation. The Gates Foundation is also mentioned as a financial member of the Lucis Trust (formerly Lucifer’s subgroup, “The New Group of World Servers.” Buffett said following the donation “that he was a student of many of the same philanthropists that Gates modeled himself on – the oilman John D. Rockefeller, and the steel magnate Andrew Carnegie.”

The BMGF purchased 500,000 shares in Monsanto back in 2010 valued at more than $23 million, making it abundantly clear that this so-called benevolent charity has been up to something other than eradicating disease and feeding the world’s poor. It turns out that the Gates family legacy has long been one of trying to dominate and control the world’s systems, including in the areas of technology, medicine, and now agriculture.

Gates, Big Pharma and the Vaccination Agenda

One of these wildly acclaimed vaccination programs is called “Grand Challenges Explorations,” and is supposed to include major breakthroughs in global health, even though vaccines are now being regarded by the natural health community as unnecessarily toxic – – still often carrying mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde, as well as live, untested viruses.

In 2007, the Los Angeles Times criticized the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for being hypocritical and investing in companies that actually worsen poverty and pollute the environment with chemicals. The LA Times also criticized the Gates Foundation for investing its assets in pharmaceutical companies that don’t even sell into the developing world. Gates has gained a reputation for seeking only maximum returns on his investments, no matter what the cost. The world’s youngest self-made billionaire may not be so generous after all.

Despite annual revenues approaching $1 trillion, the global pharmaceutical industry has lately experienced a critical decline in the rate of profit, for which it lays most of the blame on regulatory requirements. A US think tank has estimated the cost of new drug development at $5.8 billion per drug, of which 90 per cent is incurred in Phase III clinical trials mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration and similar agencies in Europe. (These are tests administered to large groups of human subjects in order to confirm the effectiveness and monitor the side effects of new vaccines and other medicines.) The international business consulting firm McKinsey & Company called the situation “dramatic” and urged Big Pharma executives to “envision responses that go well beyond simply tinkering with the cost base” – primarily the relocation of clinical trials to emerging markets, where drug safety testing is seen as relatively cheap, speedy, and lax.

It is in this specific context that BMGF’s intervention in the distribution of certain vaccines and contraceptives must be seen.  Heavily invested in Big Pharma, the Foundation is well positioned to facilitate pharmaceutical R&D strategies tailored to the realities of the developing world, where “[t]o speed the translation of scientific discovery into implementable solutions, we seek better ways to evaluate and refine potential interventions—such as vaccine candidates—before they enter costly and time-consuming clinical trials.” In plain language, BMGF promises to assist Big Pharma in its efforts to circumvent Western regulatory regimes by sponsoring cut-rate drug trials in the periphery.

The instruments of this assistance are Gates-controlled institutions like the GAVI Alliance, the Global Health Innovative Technology Fund, and the Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH) – public-private partnerships purportedly devoted to saving Third World lives. Notionally independent but so heavily funded by Gates as to function as virtual arms of the Foundation, these organizations began to conduct large-scale clinical trials in Africa and South Asia in the mid-2000s.

Africa soon experienced an “unprecedented increase in health research involving humans” who were typically “poverty-stricken and poorly educated” ; the results were predictably lethal. In 2010 the Gates Foundation funded a Phase III trial of a malaria vaccine developed by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), administering the experimental treatment to thousands of infants across seven African countries. Eager to secure the WHO approval necessary to license the vaccine for global distribution, GSK and BMGF declared the trials a smashing success, and the popular press uncritically reproduced the publicity. Few bothered to look closely at the study’s fine print, which revealed that the trials resulted in 151 deaths and caused “serious adverse effects” (e.g., paralysis, seizures, febrile convulsions) in 1048 of 5949 children aged 5-17 months. Similar stories emerged in the wake of the Gates-funded MenAfriVac campaign in Chad, where unconfirmed reports alleged that 50 of 500 children forcibly vaccinated for meningitis later developed paralysis. Citing additional abuses, a South African newspaper declared: “We are guinea pigs for the drugmakers.”

It was in India, however, that the implications of BMGF’s collaboration with Big Pharma first rose to widespread public attention.  In 2010 seven adolescent tribal girls in Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh died after receiving injections of HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) vaccines as part of a large-scale “demonstrational study” funded by the Gates Foundation and administered by PATH. The vaccines, developed by GSK and Merck, were given to approximately 23,000 girls between 10 and 14 years of age, ostensibly to guard against cervical cancers they might develop in old age.

Extrapolating from trial data, Indian physicians later estimated that at least 1,200 girls experienced severe side effects or developed auto-immune disorders as a result of the injections. No follow-up examinations or medical care were offered to the victims. Further investigations revealed pervasive violations of ethical norms: vulnerable village girls were virtually press-ganged into the trials, their parents bullied into signing consent forms they could not read by PATH representatives who made false claims about the safety and efficacy of the drugs.  In many cases signatures were simply forged.

An Indian Parliamentary Committee determined that the Gates-funded vaccine campaign was in fact a large-scale clinical trial conducted on behalf of the pharmaceutical firms and disguised as an “observational study” in order to outflank statutory requirements. The Committee found that PATH had “violated all laws and regulations laid down for clinical trials by the government” in a “clear-cut violation of human rights and a case of child abuse.” The Gates Foundation did not trouble to respond to the findings but issued an annual letter calling for still more health-related R&D in poor countries and reaffirming its belief in “the value of every human life.”

By thrusting the HPV vaccine on India, The Gates Foundation was not merely facilitating low-cost clinical trials but was also assisting in the creation of new markets for a dubious and underperforming product. Merck’s version of the vaccine, called Gardasil, was introduced in 2006 in conjunction with a high-powered marketing campaign that generated $1.5 billion in annual sales; the vaccine was named “brand of the year” by Pharmaceutical Executive for “building a market out of thin air.” Aided by enthusiastic endorsements from the medical establishment, Merck at first persuaded Americans that Gardasil could protect their daughters from cervical cancer. In fact the vaccine was of questionable efficacy:

The relationship between [HPV] infection at a young age and development of cancer 20 to 40 years later is not known. … The virus does not appear to be very harmful because almost all HPV infections are cleared by the immune system. [S]ome women may develop precancerous cervical lesions and eventually cervical cancer. It is currently impossible to predict in which women this will occur and why.

The prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association in 2009 openly questioned whether the vaccine’s risks outweighed the potential benefits. As word of Gardasil’s defects emerged, American and European women began to decline the vaccine, and by 2010 Fortune Magazine declared Gardasil a “marketplace dud” as year-over-year sales fell by 18 percent. GSK’s copycat HPV vaccine, Cervarix, experienced a comparable sales trough.

Billions in profits and capitalization were at stake.  At this stage the Gates Foundation stepped in. Its principal tool was the GAVI Alliance, launched by BMGF in 2000 with the “explicit goal to shape vaccine markets.” GAVI was charged with co-financing vaccine purchases with Third World public health ministries, meanwhile “finding the type of large-scale funding needed to sustain long-term immunisation programmes” and “laying the foundations that will allow governments to continue immunisation programmes long after GAVI support ends. In essence, BMGF would buy up stockpiled drugs that had failed to create sufficient demand in the West, press them on the periphery at a discount, and lock in long-term purchase agreements with Third World governments.

Video: Why Are Bill And Melinda Gates Funding White Genocide Movement

Continued on next page…

In 2011 GAVI held a highly publicized board meeting in Dhaka where, with the enthusiastic endorsement of UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon, it announced a worldwide campaign to introduce HPV vaccines to developing countries: “If [developing] countries can demonstrate their ability to deliver the vaccines, up to two million women and girls in nine countries could be protected from cervical cancer by 2015.” GSK adopted a “Global Vaccine Availability Model” involving tiered pricing to permit “transition[ing] into poorer countries with the help of ‘partners’ such as UNICEF, the World Health Organization, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization.” Meanwhile PATH was rushing to complete a large-scale, five-year long project “to generate and disseminate evidence for informed public sector introduction of HPV vaccines” in India, Uganda, Peru and Vietnam. An Indian Parliamentary report observed: “all these countries have state-funded national vaccine immunization programs, which if expanded to include Gardasil, would mean tremendous financial benefit to the … manufacturer.”

By FYE 2012, Merck was able to report a 35 percent jump in worldwide Gardasil sales, reflecting inter alia “favorable performance in Japan and the emerging markets,” where “sales growth is being driven by vaccines.” Evidently, a drug rightly deemed suspect by Americans would be good enough for women in the developing world.

Other dangerous drugs that failed to gain a toehold in Western markets have received similar attention from the Gates Foundation. Norplant, a subcutaneous contraceptive implant that effectively sterilizes women for as long as five years, was pulled from the US market after 36,000 women filed suit over severe side effects undisclosed by the manufacturer, including excessive menstrual bleeding, headaches, nausea, dizziness and depression. Slightly modified and rebranded as Jadelle, the same drug is now being heavily promoted in Africa by USAID, the Gates Foundation, and its affiliates. A recent article on the Gates-sponsored website Impatient Optimists elides its dangers and disingenuously states that the drug “never gained traction” in the US because inserting and removing the device was “cumbersome.” With Gates Foundation support, however, Jadelle “has played a pivotal role in bringing implants to the developing world” and is soon to be complemented by a second Norplant clone, Merck’s Implanon.

An equally risky contraceptive, Pfizer’s Depo-Provera, recently received the Gates Foundation imprimatur for distribution to poor women worldwide. In the US and India feminists fought against approval of the injectable drug for decades due to its alarming list of side effects, including “infertility, irregular bleeding, decreased libido, depression, high blood pressure, excessive weight gain, breast tenderness, vaginal infections, hair loss, stomach pains, blurred vision, joint pain, growth of facial hair, acne, cramps, diarrhea, skin rash, tiredness, and swelling of limbs” as well as potentially irreversible osteoporosis.

After the US Food and Drug Administration succumbed to industry pressure and granted approval in 1992, studies found a marked racial disparity in Depo-Provera prescriptions between white and African American women, leading to charges that “this form of long-acting provider-controlled birth control is routinely given to women of color in order to deny them the ability to control their own reproduction.” White American and European women, by contrast, receive the drug only rarely and typically as a treatment for endometriosis, greatly limiting its commercial potential in the West.

Hence Pfizer stands to benefit enormously from a Gates-sponsored program, announced with much fanfare at the 2012 London Summit on Family Planning, to distribute the drug to millions of women in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa by 2016:

[Y]ou do the numbers: If 120 million new women users chose Depo-Provera, at an estimated average cost between $120-$300 per woman annually, that works out to $15 billion to $36 billion in new sales annually, a nice payoff from leveraging $4 billion in research money.

Foundation publicity suggests that its aggressive backing of a discredited drug is merely a response to appeals from poor women. “Many [African] women want to use injectable contraceptives but simply cannot get access to them,” claimed PATH President and CEO Steve Davis. Reproductive rights activist Kwame Fasu disagrees: “No African woman would agree to being injected if she had full knowledge of the contraceptives’ dangerous side effects.”

The campaign called “Global Polio Eradication Initiative” (GPEI) is also funded by Gate’s (Bill and Melinda) Foundation – – and to the total of $1.3 billion. It’s primary “targets” are India, Pakistan and the Philippines, but oddly enough, oral polio vaccines have been banned in most industrial nations because they actually cause polio.  As reported by the 2012 Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, more than 47,000 cases of vaccine-associated polio paralysis (VAPP) and acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) arose in the year 2011, and those cases arose regionally in proportion to oral polio vaccine doses administered to children. This comes in light of the fact that only 42 cases of wild virus polio were even reported in India in 2010 and India had already declared that polio was no longer a health priority. In fact, in 2010 there were only 42 cases of wild virus polio reported in India. Plus, statistically, children infected with the AFP polio oral virus are twice as likely to die as those who just get the wild virus. On top of it all, less than one percent of children with wild polio are likely to become paralyzed in the first place, so why all the concern and commitment by one Bill Gates? Depopulation is one hypothetical, and coincidentally worldwide cases have risen steadily of AFP, inluding Guillain-Barre syndrome, traumatic neuritis and transverse myelitis. Bill Gates is not bothering to inform his fans about mega-doses of vitamin C – proven effective for curing polio. While India celebrated the eradication of polio in early 2012, the AFP victims and those statistics are all ignored.

Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates donates hundreds of millions of dollars to new vaccine efforts and speaks on the issue of CO2 emissions effecting climate change. Gates has even invented his own formula for tracking emissions via people, services, energy per service and CO2 per energy unit. Sounds like a good way for the elite to eventually tax us poor folk for using the earth’s precious resources that only they are entitled to, huh? The world is just one large computer for Mr. Gates, and 6.8 billion people are too many people, by his math. A reduction of 10 to 15 percent is ideal for the world, Bill says, which equates to the elimination (genocide) of over one billion people. Which vaccines will work the best for that – – only Bill Gates, the CDC and vaccine manufacturers know. However, at the “TED” Convention, Bill Gates was recorded on video as professing the following:

“The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 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.” (Video)

Vaccines containing dangerous heavy metal toxins like mercury (thimerosal) and aluminum, and known carcinogens like formaldehyde that could kill people slowly in an unnoticeable way, taking a whole generation to deteriorate the individual with accelerating degenerative diseases. Vaccines could be used to reduce (or eliminate) fertility in order to lower birth rates around the world using a “soft kill” method, such as miscarriages or spontaneous abortions, and that’s more easily accepted by mainstream scientists. Lastly, a pandemic of some infectious disease could be deliberately planned or the result of carelessness, or even used as a bio-weapon, which could easily wipe out a billion to two billion people, especially those who are immune-deficient and more susceptible. This could be as simple as a virulent flu strain, such as swine, put into a “new” vaccine.

Continued on next page…