Confirmed, came up for me too
From South Africa #2
>>>qresearch/12297688
“Gates Foundation accused of exploiting its leverage in Africa”- https://youtu.be/XcMrHpLd9C4
“The Global Justice group says that under the pretext of financing poor farmers, they are instead becoming trapped into debt by having to use chemicals and fertilisers that are underwritten by offshoots of the Gates Foundation. Private financiers linked to the foundation have demanded repayments that caused one African country, Lesotho, more than half of its entire health budget, the group alleged. Aid experts warn that the focus on high-profile, headline-grabbing diseases undermines wider attempts by African governments to reduce the poverty that causes them. Al Jazeera's Laurence Lee reports.”
“Gated Development - is the Gates Foundation always a force for good?” at https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/resources/gated-development-gates-foundation-always-force-good states;
Every January, Bill Gates sets out his vision for a better world and the role the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation can play in achieving this in an annual letter to us all. With assets of $43.5 billion, the foundation is the largest charitable foundation in the world. It is arguably the most influential actor on issues of global health and agriculture, and distributes more aid for global health than any government.
Gated Development demonstrates that the trend to involve business in addressing poverty and inequality is central to the priorities and funding of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. We argue that this is far from a neutral charitable strategy but instead an ideological commitment to promote neoliberal economic policies and corporate globalisation. Big business is directly benefitting, in particular in the fields of agriculture and health, as a result of the foundation’s activities, despite evidence to show that business solutions are not the most effective.
Perhaps what is most striking about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is that despite its aggressive corporate strategy and extraordinary influence across governments, academics and the media, there is an absence of critical voices. Global Justice Now is concerned that the foundation’s influence is so pervasive that many actors in international development, which would otherwise critique the policy and practice of the foundation, are unable to speak out independently as a result of its funding and patronage.
Below is an excerpt from the report dated June 2016 at https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/resources/gjn_gates_report_june_2016_web_final_version_2.pdf or attached. Read it in full.
In addition, the foundation has become the world’s leading funder of research into the genetic modification (GM) of crops and is funding organisations to push GM crops across Africa and to change national legislation on this issue, in the face of often considerable opposition. It is also leading the push for massive increases in the use of chemicals by African farmers and is promoting the privatisation of seed production to benefit mainly US and European agribusiness. These priorities are a direct challenge to the increasingly popular movements in support of food sovereignty and agroecological farming in Africa. Furthermore, the foundation is also using its funds to promote the increasing privatisation of health services in developing countries.
However, these individual projects mask the broader picture. In what follows, we outline key ways in which the BMGF’s grants are increasingly problematic. We believe these issues are serious and that it is time for the BMGF to be subject to proper democratic oversight and public scrutiny, and for its influence to be challenged.
The BMGF’s influence is especially great in global agriculture and health where it is funding a raft of scientists, governments, corporations, NGOs and media, giving it considerable leverage in shaping global policy priorities.
[I]n May 2011, Bill Gates told the World Health Assembly: “As we think about how to deploy our resources most effectively, one intervention stands out: vaccines. Today, I would like to talk about how you can provide the leadership to make this the Decade of Vaccines”.
A major problem with the focus on technology is that the BMGF, along with other philanthropic foundations, is reshaping aid policy further away from prioritising rights and justice towards a technocratic ‘authoritarian development’.
The Gates Foundation works closely with many corporations whose role and policies contribute to ongoing poverty.
The Guardian study also found that the BMGF Turst had investments in 35 of the top 200 companies ranked by the carbon held in their reserves. These included coal giants Anglo American, BHP Billiton, Glencore Xstrata and Peabody Energy and the oil majors Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Total and Petrobras.
video not available in US
From South Africa #2
>>>qresearch/12297688
“Gates Foundation accused of exploiting its leverage in Africa”- https://youtu.be/XcMrHpLd9C4
“The Global Justice group says that under the pretext of financing poor farmers, they are instead becoming trapped into debt by having to use chemicals and fertilisers that are underwritten by offshoots of the Gates Foundation. Private financiers linked to the foundation have demanded repayments that caused one African country, Lesotho, more than half of its entire health budget, the group alleged. Aid experts warn that the focus on high-profile, headline-grabbing diseases undermines wider attempts by African governments to reduce the poverty that causes them. Al Jazeera's Laurence Lee reports.”
“Gated Development - is the Gates Foundation always a force for good?” at https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/resources/gated-development-gates-foundation-always-force-good states;
Every January, Bill Gates sets out his vision for a better world and the role the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation can play in achieving this in an annual letter to us all. With assets of $43.5 billion, the foundation is the largest charitable foundation in the world. It is arguably the most influential actor on issues of global health and agriculture, and distributes more aid for global health than any government.
Gated Development demonstrates that the trend to involve business in addressing poverty and inequality is central to the priorities and funding of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. We argue that this is far from a neutral charitable strategy but instead an ideological commitment to promote neoliberal economic policies and corporate globalisation. Big business is directly benefitting, in particular in the fields of agriculture and health, as a result of the foundation’s activities, despite evidence to show that business solutions are not the most effective.
Perhaps what is most striking about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is that despite its aggressive corporate strategy and extraordinary influence across governments, academics and the media, there is an absence of critical voices. Global Justice Now is concerned that the foundation’s influence is so pervasive that many actors in international development, which would otherwise critique the policy and practice of the foundation, are unable to speak out independently as a result of its funding and patronage.
Below is an excerpt from the report dated June 2016 at https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/resources/gjn_gates_report_june_2016_web_final_version_2.pdf or attached. Read it in full.
In addition, the foundation has become the world’s leading funder of research into the genetic modification (GM) of crops and is funding organisations to push GM crops across Africa and to change national legislation on this issue, in the face of often considerable opposition. It is also leading the push for massive increases in the use of chemicals by African farmers and is promoting the privatisation of seed production to benefit mainly US and European agribusiness. These priorities are a direct challenge to the increasingly popular movements in support of food sovereignty and agroecological farming in Africa. Furthermore, the foundation is also using its funds to promote the increasing privatisation of health services in developing countries.
However, these individual projects mask the broader picture. In what follows, we outline key ways in which the BMGF’s grants are increasingly problematic. We believe these issues are serious and that it is time for the BMGF to be subject to proper democratic oversight and public scrutiny, and for its influence to be challenged.
The BMGF’s influence is especially great in global agriculture and health where it is funding a raft of scientists, governments, corporations, NGOs and media, giving it considerable leverage in shaping global policy priorities.
[I]n May 2011, Bill Gates told the World Health Assembly: “As we think about how to deploy our resources most effectively, one intervention stands out: vaccines. Today, I would like to talk about how you can provide the leadership to make this the Decade of Vaccines”.
A major problem with the focus on technology is that the BMGF, along with other philanthropic foundations, is reshaping aid policy further away from prioritising rights and justice towards a technocratic ‘authoritarian development’.
The Gates Foundation works closely with many corporations whose role and policies contribute to ongoing poverty.
The Guardian study also found that the BMGF Turst had investments in 35 of the top 200 companies ranked by the carbon held in their reserves. These included coal giants Anglo American, BHP Billiton, Glencore Xstrata and Peabody Energy and the oil majors Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Total and Petrobras.
video not available in US