Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc.
|Collection||Supreme Court Judgments|
|Collection||Supreme Court Judgments|
The Los Angeles Times revealed back in 2007 that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made millions of dollars each year from companies blamed for many of the same social and health problems the Foundation seeks to address.
The LA Times investigation revealed the Gates Foundation’s humanitarian concerns are not reflected in how it invests its money. In the Niger Delta — where the Foundation funds programs to fight polio and measles – the Foundation has also invested more than $400 million dollars in companies including Royal Dutch Shell, Exxon Mobil Corp, and Chevron. These oil firms have been responsible for much of the pollution many blame for respiratory problems and other afflictions among the local population.
The Gates Foundation also has investments in sixty-nine of the worst polluting companies in the US and Canada, including Dow Chemical. It holds stakes in pharmaceutical companies whose drugs cost far beyond what most AIDS patients around the world can afford. Other companies in the Foundation’s portfolio have been accused of transgressions including forcing thousands of people to lose their homes; supporting child labor; and defrauding and neglecting patients in need of medical care.
With an endowment larger than all but four of the world’s largest hedge funds, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is easily one of the most powerful charities in the world. According to its website, the organization “works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives.” So how do the investments of the foundation’s $36 billion investing arm, the Gates Foundation Trust, match up to its mission? We dug into the group’s recently released 2012 tax returns to find out.
The Gates Foundation did not respond to Mother Jones’ requests for comment; however, its investment policy says the the trust’s managers “consider other issues beyond corporate profits, including the values that drive the foundation’s work.”
In its most recent annual report to investors, private prison company GEO group listed some risks to its bottom line, including “reductions in crime rates” that “could lead to reductions in arrests, convictions and sentences,” along with immigration reform and the decriminalization of drugs. One year after Mother Jones reported the foundations investment in this company, the philanthropy’s trust will not say if one of its most controversial holdings is still on its books. Military contractor DynCorp ($2.5 million donated by the foundation), meanwhile, has faced allegations of fraud, mismanagement, and even slavery from the Middle East to Eastern Europe. For Bill Gates to fund corporations such as Dyncorp, a military contractor, which financed the entire Iraq war, while 37% of his net worth could end world hunger, is not noble, and its ridiculous to consider it charity.
(SEE MORE): Gates Foundation Financials
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 political unrest are never addressed. Helping the effort against polio is a noble and inspiring thing to do. In India, Bill Gates’ funded polio vaccine is said to have wiped out the disease, which is considered to be a landmark achievement. But the country now has the world’s highest rate of non-polio AFP (acute flaccid paralysis) cases, which is linked entirely to his vaccinations. AFP is a condition in which a patient suffers from paralysis that results in floppy limbs due to reduced muscle tone. While AFP is symptomatic of polio, it can be caused by other diseases such as the Guillain Barre Syndrome and nerve lesions as well—the primary cause fuelling the argument that India is not really free of wild polio virus.
There is a dirty secret in the vaccine business that is very well documented: the live oral polio vaccine can actually spread polio and causes AFP. This is very well-known throughout the world, but in the U.S. mainstream media, this information is seldom, if ever, published. As usual, we need to research further past the mainstream media outlets to find out what is happening with vaccines around the world.
Data from India on polio control over 10 years, available from the National Polio Surveillance Project, has now been compiled and made available online for anyone to see.This shows that the non-polio AFP rate increases in proportion to the number of polio vaccine doses received in each area. Nationally, the non-polio AFP rate is now 12 times higher than expected. In the states of Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Bihar, which have pulse polio rounds nearly every month, the non-polio AFP rate is 25- and 35-fold higher than the international norms.
LiveMint in India reported on the polio-free myth in India, explaining how the live polio vaccine was responsible for increases in paralysis. LiveMint is the second largest business newspaper in India and has an exclusive relationship with the Wall Street Journal. So this report was from the “mainstream” media in India.
(Vidya Krishnan reported the story: India to get polio-free status amid rise in acute flaccid paralysis cases)
What is clear from this report, and well documented in peer-reviewed literature, is that the term “polio-free status” is completely meaningless. The designation of a country as “polio-free” is simply a triumphant marketing cry to continue promoting polio vaccines, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that oral polio vaccines do far more harm than good.
The oral polio vaccine is banned in the United States and many other countries. The truth is that the reality is not pretty as we’d like to believe. Bill Gates, and his very charitable organization, is part of the problem, while funding exactly what is wrong with the world. From dangerous vaccinations, to funding war, to Bill Gates buying 500,000 shares of geo-engineering corporation, Monsanto. Ιτ ισ τime to expose him just like everyone else perpetuating the failures of our system. Because no matter how humanitarian they can appear to be, the money always tells a different story.
RT should have mentioned that the first person Rogan called after he signed the Spotify deal was Alex Jones. Rogan told Jones that he would be the first guest on his new platform.I am thrilled that someone finally is doing something to bypass the censorship of these bloated social media corporations.Spotify must make the platform as appealing and efficient as YouTube. And hopefully, Spotify will learn from the censorship and demonetizing mistakes that YouTube did.
If you know podcasts, you know Joe Rogan. The American comedian has been producing his Joe Rogan Experience for more than a decade. He began just recording himself and his fellow comics shooting the breeze and smoking some weed before and after gigs.
Fast forward ten years and he has one of the biggest talk shows on the planet with presidential candidates, Hollywood megastars and billionaires queuing up to join him in the studio. The show has such enormous sway that it even managed to affect the price of Tesla stocks after Elon Musk took a toke on a joint during an interview.
In view of all this, it is perhaps not surprising that Spotify have just wooed the former Fear Factor presenter away from YouTube after writing him a cheque for a rumoured $100 million. That is proper, box office megabucks. To put it into context, that is more than Dr Phil, Howard Stern, Rush Limbaugh, Ellen DeGeneres and Ryan Seacrest were valued at last year by Forbes Magazine in their top five list of “World’s Highest Paid Hosts”.
This, on top of his always sold out arena tours as a comedian, his long-running deal with Netflix to screen his specials and his role as a colour commentator for the UFC have made Rogan a staggeringly wealthy man, and all from just talking.
Since its inception, the Joe Rogan Experience’s home has been YouTube. His channel, “PowerfulJRE”, has more than eight million subscribers and he pulls in around 400 million views a month. But despite these outrageous numbers and his ludicrous success on the medium, Rogan has decided to leave the platform. While he will keep updating his JRE Clips channel, which shows 5-15minute clips from his shows, his flagship multiple-hour broadcasts will be made available exclusively to Spotify.
Part of his reason for jumping ship (although I’m sure the $100 million helped) is the way YouTube has been censoring both his own and other people’s content on the platform. Rogan has often complained of his shows being “demonetised” on the streaming service.
Demonetisation is when YouTube removes adverts from a video posted by a content creator, meaning that they no longer make any money from that video being on the site. The reason Google owned YouTube normally gives for that is that advertisers would be “unhappy” seeing their products advertised on that channel as it may be “problematic”.
ALSO ON RT.COMThree more months of lockdown? Joe Rogan mulls leaving ‘restrictive’ California for TexasLast October, Rogan said: “They’re scrambling for control. They want to control the way people communicate. And they also want to make a profit. See part of this is they’re incentivizing people to do shows that they can profit off of. So if you have a show that has no bad language, if you have a show that has no controversial topics, those shows are more appealing to advertisers. So for them, as a business, they’ll look at someone like me and say, ‘Well this is a limited advertisers option’.”
As a disease, demonetisation appears much more likely to afflict “right wing” content creators. Rogan appears to have fallen into this category simply by having right of centre guests on his show, despite him interviewing and saying that he would have voted Bernie Sanders if he had won the democratic nomination, as well as being a vocal supporter of Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.
Other stars on the platform that have called out YouTube for apparently politically motivated censorship include conservative comic and talk show host Steven Crowder, British YouTuber Carl Benjamin (better known as Sargon of Akkad) and talk show host Dave Rubin, all of whom have also appeared on the Joe Rogan Experience.
Rogan leaving the platform should come as a wake-up call to YouTube. He is one of their biggest and most visible stars and his shift to Spotify is likely to be the first of many moves away from the streaming service. Of the three mentioned above, most of Crowder’s content is released on Blaze TV, Rubin has launched his own social network “Thinkspot” in partnership with best-selling author Jordan Peterson, and yesterday Benjamin announced during a livestream he intended to set up his own outlet and leave YouTube.
ALSO ON RT.COMElon Musk says human language will be OBSOLETE in 10 years, after struggling to pronounce his baby’s name on Joe RoganAlong with apparently penalising “wrong thinking” content creators, YouTube has also made the decision to prioritise what it calls “authoritative sources”. This has seen it bias its algorithms in favour of mainstream news outlets, such as CNN, the BBC and Fox News, ahead of creators who have made their name on the site itself. The move seems to be an attempt by Google to cosy up to liberal-leaning legacy media for reasons of corporate vanity. However, it has angered content creators on the platform who helped build the site’s popularity, and annoyed viewers, many of whom visit YouTube expressly to get away from the MSM.
In the years to come, Rogan’s move to Spotify will come to be seen as a landmark moment in the history of the media. Having seen earning potential, a slew of content creators are likely to begin shifting away from YouTube while it continues to pander to the old media giants. YouTube is watched by younger people in search of something fresh, whereas the average age of Fox and CNN viewers is north of 60. If YouTube wants to hang on to its stellar talent it needs to stop trying to force its California liberal West Coast values onto its viewers and stay true to its original mission, “Broadcast Yourself”.