Bill Gates at 60: The Retrospective You Won’t See in the Mainstream Media
Bill Gates at 60: An Alternative Retrospective
On October 28th, 2015 Bill Gates turned 60 years old. As one might suspect, the mainstream media has been filled with tributes and retrospectives of his life and career. These tributes of course center around Gates’ alleged revolutionary developments in technology and his “philanthropic efforts” across the globe.
Articles such as “Bill Gates at 60: His ten defining moments” and “As Bill Gates Turns 60: A Look at 10 Key Years,” such tributes are boiled down to what amounts to Bill’s 10 greatest hits. These milestones mentioned by the two articles above and the slew of other articles in the same vein focus on the creation of Microsoft, his infamous “mugshot” moment and a number of opportunistic deals clinched by Gates over the years.
However, in honor of Mr. Gates, it is important to also provide a list of his “deep tracks” that were not so heavily covered in the mainstream media. Below are just a few.
Widget not in any sidebars
1.) Bill Gates Backs and Promotes Temporary Sterilization Microchip In Women
Living up to the family tradition of promoting sterilization and the legacy of Planned Parenthood, Gates launched an ambitious plan to push the development of microchips which would “temporarily” sterilize women.
The same developers who are bringing wireless remote-controlled microchip implants are actually focusing on their first flagship product: Gates Foundation-funded birth-control microchip implants. Wireless technology allows the remote-controlled chip to turn a woman’s ability to conceive off or on at will – temporary sterilization. Of course with remote technology funded by eugenics depopulation fanatics, the first questions should always be, “the ability to conceive by whose will?” This would be the complete antithesis of female empowerment or a “woman’s right to choose” – would it not?
The encryption is alleged to be so safe, that cyberhackers cannot break entry – that means you too.
The chip can be implanted into the hip, arms or beneath the back. Mum was the word during the last few years of development until it was finally publicly confirmed that the beta testing for the birth control chip would be starting towards the end of this year.
Indeed, keeping in line with the eugenics fanaticism, Gates will be targeting women in third world countries like India and Africa to test the chip on them before introducing it to the greater commercial market.
When it comes to forceful health initiatives, especially those sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – India is the new Africa. Yet another Gates-funded initiative seeks to use influence, ferret out true believer health officials, leverage their influence for social manipulation, paint the culture as uneducated and convince them to “get with the Western health program.”
An ongoing study of cultural behavior is described in the paper “Integrating social networks and human social motives to achieve social influence at scale” in the September 15, 2014 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The idea is to pair social networks with social motives to “close the science gap.” In other words, to put authoritative findings into direct action and overcome cultural caution. It is essentially a wide-reaching and deep-acting propaganda system to heavily influence neonatal care in India.
The example used in the study focuses on convincing Indian mothers that applying a topical solution of chlorhexidine to cleanse a newborn’s umbilical cord reduced the neonatal mortality rate by 24 percent, but to the chagrin of Gates-backed researchers, many Indian parents did not receive or follow this information. They stuck to their method of mustard oil – a powerful Ayurveda solution that is becoming more popular in the U.S. for its stimulation of the circulation system.
This observation of human beings as though they are lab rats, and the effort of trying to break them of their culture, talks about using tactics of “knowledge management” and using “influencers” to get people to change. Such tactics border on brainwashing techniques used by Chinese captors on American soldiers. See for yourself the kind of degrading language the researchers use toward the “superstitious” Indians.
Gates clearly thinks highly of his work, particular in the global vaccination push department. Brandon Turbeville writes,
In a recent interview with the London Telegraph, Bill Gates has now claimed that his Foundation’s massive push for vaccination is not just an exercise in philanthropy but that it is, in fact, “God’s work.”
Gates, who, according to the Telegraph, is worth an estimated $65 billion, is now dedicating his life to the “eradication of poliomyelitis,” or, at least he is dedicating himself to the vaccination program allegedly aimed at achieving these ends.
“My wife and I had a long dialogue about how we were going to take the wealth that we’re lucky enough to have and give it back in a way that’s most impactful to the world,” he says. “Both of us worked at Microsoft and saw that if you take innovation and smart people, the ability to measure what’s working, that you can pull together some pretty dramatic things.
“We’re focused on the help of the poorest in the world, which really drives you into vaccination. You can actually take a disease and get rid of it altogether, like we are doing with polio.”
Not all of Bill Gates’ vaccine campaigns have been public relations successes, however. For instance, as Turbeville writes,
In what may prove to be a minor public relations setback for vaccine pushers like Bill Gates and GlaxoSmithKline, the much touted Mosquirix malaria vaccine recently rolled out in Africa has been officially demonstrated to be only 30% effective in babies.Results from the final-stage trial administered by GSK appeared to demonstrate that the vaccine only provided “modest protection” for babies aged six to 12 weeks, with a reduction in the contraction of the disease by only 30%, a much lower number than what had been touted by those promoting the jab in the industry and the corporate media.
Reuters also reports that for children after the age of six months, a 65% rate was established. For children of five to 17 months old, the researchers claim a protection of around 50%.
In response to what Reuters has dubbed a “surprisingly poor result” for the vaccine, Bill Gates stated, “The efficacy came back lower than we had hoped, but developing a vaccine against a parasite is a very hard thing to do.”Indeed, Gates is correct in suggesting the difficulty for creating a vaccine for a Protozoan, the type of parasite which causes malaria, This is because vaccines are supposedly designed to protect against viruses. Thus, the Mosquirix vaccine enters into the growing science of DNA vaccines – a research field which is expanding but also one in which the science is still very much out in regards to effectiveness, safety, and even possibility.
Nevertheless, GSK has announced that it will not be giving up in the attempt to develop Mosquirix into a more “effective” vaccine, and will be working with governments and international groups in order to fund the operation. GSK claims it does not plan to make a profit from Mosquirix, although it admits that it will be charging a 5% profit margin on the product. The funding for the development and rollout, of course, will be coming from the governments and international groups mentioned above, meaning it is the cash-strapped taxpayer who must shovel out the cash for yet another eugenics program aimed at poor Africans.
Turbeville has documented Bill Gates’ vaccine exploits on a number of different occasions. Yet he has also brought to light a number of questionable campaigns promoted by Gates that are not related to vaccines at all. Such as Gates’ connection to The Better Than Cash Alliance and the push for a cashless society.
Turbeville writes in his article “Better Than Cash Alliance Backed by Bill Gates to Usher in Cashless Society“:
It appears that while Bill Gates was content to play the role of Microsoft innovator and billionaire philanthropist early on, he has decided that the second half of his life deserves a more open and slightly more honest twist.
Indeed, in recent years Bill Gates and his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have funded a variety of initiatives aimed at reducing population, promoting toxic vaccinations, and now hyping and funding the development of the cashless society.
In a recent article by Peter McCoy published in Bloomberg Businessweek, McCoy reveals that Bill Gates is opposed to physical cash currency because, like vaccine-free populations who are able to determine their own reproduction rates, it hurts poor people (according to Gates).
Indeed, McCoy writes that Gates “hates cash” “because of its effect on people at the opposite end of the wealth spectrum—the world’s poor and unbanked.” Of course, in third world countries that are suffering from starvation, civil war, and abysmal living standards, the answer is clearly “banking.”
If only these nations had more banks and greater access to banks – the private banks of course – then we would finally see the living standards of these nations raised to truly acceptable levels. If only more people had access to digital transactions, then empty bellies would soon be filled.
Sarcasm aside, the push toward a cashless society under the guise of benefiting the poor and underserved is a very real movement. As McCoy points out in his article, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been instrumental in this regard as major backers of the Better Than Cash Alliance – an organization that was established last September whose stated objectives are to reach the following goals by 2017:
- Significant commitments by governments, the development community, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector to implement electronic payment solutions instead of cash.
- Delivery of demand-driven technical assistance to governments, non-governmental organizations, the development community, or members of the private sector that will dramatically increase the capacity of these stakeholders to deliver end-user-focused payment technologies.
- Improved economic security for millions of low-income and poor people, many of whom were previously unbanked, enabling them to use bank or electronic accounts to build savings and assets via innovative payment technologies.
The Better Than Cash Alliance founding members and financiers boasts of a list of organizations that have their own sordid histories from the distant past all the way back to present times. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is instrumental in population reduction initiatives via vaccination programs, abortion and sterilization, and other programs; Citi, the major international bank who was intricately involved in the 2008 derivatives crisis; the Ford Foundation, representatives of which actually stated to Reece Commission Chief Investigator Norman Dodd that the goal of the foundation was to comfortably merge the United States with the Soviet Union; Omidyar Network; and VISA Inc. which has long been interested in creating a cashless society.
Yet the Better Than Cash Alliance has more than just corporate and private sector sponsors as one of the key founding members and financiers is, in fact, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a “government” agency that answers directly to the U.S. Secretary of State. It has been understood for some time that USAID is nothing more than CIA front operation for intelligence gathering and as a facilitation mechanism for the CIA funding of foreign governments and organizations.
In addition, the Better Than Cash Alliance founder and financier roster contains the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF), the UN’s “capital investment agency” reserved for use with the “least developed” nations.
The Better Than Cash Alliance also boasts of participation by the World Food Programme, Mercy Corps, Concern Worldwide, and CARE. The governments listed as taking part in the alliance are the governments of Afghanistan, Department of Social Prosperity of the Government of Colombia,Republic of Kenya, Republic of Peru, and Republic of the Philippines.
Yet, even without the establishment of the Better Than Cash Alliance or the recent comments by Bill Gates, it is very clear that the world is moving in the direction of an entirely cashless society.
6.) Bill Gates Accidentally Blows the Lid on Vaccine Scam
Two sentences which Bill Gates will eternally regret uttering in a TED Talk are “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.”
As Turbeville writes in his article, “Bill Gates Says Global Vaccination Program is God’s Work,”
Even more concerning is the fact that paralysis rates have flourished in countries where Gates’ polio vaccine, the one he is dedicating his life to, have been administered the most. Indeed, nowhere is this any more apparent than in India. As Aaron Dykes writes,
But the real story is that while polio has statistically disappeared from India, there has been a huge spike in cases of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP)– the very types of crippling problems it was hoped would disappear with polio but which have instead flourished from a new cause.
There were 47,500 cases of non-polio paralysis reported in 2011, the same year India was declared “polio-free,” according to Dr. Vashisht and Dr. Puliyel. Further, the available data shows that the incidents tracked back to areas were doses of the polio vaccine were frequently administered. The national rate of NPAFP in India is 25-35 times the international average.
In addition to this data, it appears that the polio vaccines are themselves the leading cause of polio paralysis in India. In relation to the flawed data reported by the Polio Global Eradication Initiative which attempts to minimize the numbers of both vaccine-induced cases of polio paralysis and polio in general, Sayer Ji remarks,
According to the Polio Global Eradication Initiative’s own statistics there were 42 cases of wild-type polio (WPV) reported in India in 2010, indicating that vaccine-induced cases of polio paralysis (100-180 annually) outnumber wild-type cases by a factor of 3-4. Even if we put aside the important question of whether or not the PGEI is accurately differentiating between wild and vaccine-associated polio cases in their statistics, we still must ask ourselves: should not the real-world effects of immunization, both good and bad, be included in PGEI’s measurement of success? For the dozens of Indian children who develop vaccine-induced paralysis every year, the PGEI’s recent declaration of India as nearing “polio free” status, is not only disingenuous, but could be considered an attempt to minimize their obvious liability in having transformed polio from a natural disease vector into a man-made (iatrogenic) one.
Gates’ polio vaccines have likewise been blamed for deaths and disabilities in neighboring Pakistan, with offices of the government in that country even recommending that the vaccines be suspended.
In India, doctors heavily criticized the program not only for the heavy cost to human health and quality of life but also the massive financial burden hoisted upon the state. This is because the program was only partially funded by the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, which is itself partnered with the World Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, World Bank, and United Nations.
The doctors criticized the GAVI-alliance by stating,
The Indian government finally had to fund this hugely expensive programme, which cost the country 100 times more than the value of the initial grant,” their report stated.
From India’s perspective the exercise has been an extremely costly both in terms of human suffering and in monetary terms. It is tempting to speculate what could have been achieved if the $2.5 billion spent on attempting to eradicate polio, were spent on water and sanitation and routine immunization.
. . . . . the polio eradication programme epitomizes nearly everything that is wrong with donor funded ‘disease specific’ vertical projects at the cost of investments in community-oriented primary health care (horizontal programmes) . . . . .
. . . . .This is a startling reminder of how initial funding and grants from abroad distort local priorities.
Indeed, as the doctors assert, one cannot vaccinate away disease like polio. Apart from the fact that there has never been a study conducted which proves a vaccine either safe or effective that was not connected to a drug company or a vaccine maker, the so-called cure, if it comes under the guise of a vaccine, may well be as bad if not worse than the disease itself.
Again, Sayer Ji writes,
Polio underscores the need for a change in the way we look at so-called “vaccine preventable” diseases as a whole. In most people with a healthy immune system, a poliovirus infection does not even generate symptoms. Only rarely does the infection produce minor symptoms, e.g. sore throat, fever, gastrointestinal disturbances, and influenza-like illness. In only 3% of infections does virus gain entry to the central nervous system, and then, in only 1-5 in 1000 cases does the infection progress to paralytic disease.
Due to the fact that polio spreads through the fecal-oral route (i.e. the virus is transmitted from the stool of an infected person to the mouth of another person through a contaminated object, e.g. utensil) focusing on hygiene, sanitation and proper nutrition (to support innate immunity) is a logical way to prevent transmission in the first place, as well as reducing morbidity associated with an infection when it does occur.
Instead, a large portion of the world’s vaccines are given to the Third World as “charity,” when the underlying conditions of economic impoverishment, poor nutrition, chemical exposures, and socio-political unrest are never addressed.
The fact is that the root cause of diseases like polio are not a lack of vaccination but poor sanitation standards, poverty, lower living standards, chemical pollution, and lack of proper nutrition. If money were spent correcting these ills, as opposed to providing ineffective (in their stated purposes) and dangerous vaccinations, then polio and many other such diseases could indeed be eradicated.
In the end, the answer is about raising living standards, reducing pollution, increasing knowledge and access to proper nutrition and clean drinking water – not chemical and virus-laden needles. Perhaps this method could be more accurately described as “God’s work.”
Okay, so this one is just more funny than anything else. In 2013, Bill Gates announced a $100,000 reward offered by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation via The Grand Challenges and Global Health program to anyone who would be able to create a condom that would be easier to wear, more cleverly packaged or one that would be able to overcome “cultural differences.” It’s hard to argue against the creation of a better prophylactic, but considering Gates’ history we know that he is focused on more than preventing births than protecting sexually active adults from diseases.
In 2010, it was revealed that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was joining with notorious big agri companies Monsanto and Cargill for the purposes of promoting genetically modified foods in Africa. Gates has long supported GMOs across the world but in 2010, his direct connection to their production and promotion with the Foundation’s purchase of 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock. With Cargill, the foundation teamed up for a $10 million dollar project to quote “develop the soya value chain” in Mozambique and in other countries.
For this one, the title is certainly funny, but the goal is not. Earlier this year, Bill Gates via the Gates Foundation launched yet another “philanthropic” program to bring clean water to the hundreds of millions of people who live without it. His idea was the Omniprocessor – a giant machine that can turn human waste into clean drinking water in minutes. Of course, many might wonder why Gates did not promote a giant machine that simply treated the water that was there or developed a relatively simple concept into a technology that removed salt from water in the coastal areas. After all, sea levels are rising, right? Instead, Gates’ development focuses on producing clean drinking water through feces and urine. Is it impressive science? Sure. But it’s also a colossal waste of time and money considering the large number of other simpler and more affordable options available.
This writer sincerely wishes that people would see beyond the science-gleam and discern what this action means symbolically toward you, the reader. This writer holds the readers in the highest esteem and wants them to do so as well. The world deserves much better than the twisted, mad depopulation actions of Bill Gates et al.
Readers – would you like to share some defining moments of Gates? Share this article and share in the comments below!
Image by Heather Callaghan. The author wishes to thank Brandon Turbeville.
This article (Bill Gates at 60: Ten Defining Failures) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Heather Callaghan and Natural Blaze.com.