Gates from Hell ~ Like you Never Knew Him Before ~ Corbett Report

Video Transcript:

This world is not what you think it is. This world is not what you think it is. Oh, God! Hello. I'm Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft. In this video, you're going to see the future. Who is Bill Gates? A software developer, a businessman, a philanthropist, a global health expert? This question, once merely academic, is becoming a very real question for those who are beginning to realize that Gates' unimaginable wealth has been used to gain control over every corner of the fields of public health, medical research, and vaccine development. And now that we are presented with the very problem that Gates has been talking about for years, we will soon find that this software developer with no medical training is going to leverage that wealth into control over the fates of billions of people. Because until we get almost everybody vaccinated globally, we still won't be fully back to normal. Bill Gates is no public health expert. He is not a doctor, an epidemiologist, or an infectious disease researcher. Yet somehow, he has become a central figure in the lives of billions of people, presuming to dictate the medical actions that will be required for the world to go back to normal. The transformation of Bill Gates from computer-kingpin to global health czar is as remarkable as it is instructive, and it tells us a great deal about where we are heading as the world plunges into a crisis, the likes of which we have not seen before. This is the story of how Bill Gates monopolized global health. You are tuned into the Corbett Report. Until his reinvention is a philanthropist in the past decade, this is what many people thought of when they thought of Bill Gates. In the case of the United States versus Microsoft, the US Justice Department contended that the software giant had breached anti-trust laws by competing unfairly against net-skid communications in the internet browser market, effectively creating a monopoly. Bill's first concern was that the prosecution could potentially block the release of his company's latest operating system, Windows 98. You asked me about what I wrote to the email or what you asked me about? I'm asking you about January of 1996. That month? Yes, sir. And what about it? What non-Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 1996? I don't know, you mean concerned? What is it about the word concerned that you don't understand? I'm not sure what you mean by it. We're going to be working together on Microsoft Office, on Internet Explorer, on Java, and I think that it's going to lead to a very healthy relationship. So it's a package announcement today. We're very, very happy about it. We're very, very excited about it. And I haven't had a special guest with me today via satellite download. And if we could get him up on the stage right now. The police and security guards in Belgium were caught flat-footed today by cowardly sneak attack on one of the world's wealthiest men. The target was Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates arriving for a meeting with community leaders. What would happen when a team of kitmen meet him first with a pie in the face? You can't just get in there. Gates was momentarily an understandably shaken, but he was not injured. The hit squad piled on with two more pies before one of them was wrestled to the ground and arrested the others for at least the moment. He got away. Gates went inside, wiped his face clean, and made no commenty then went ahead with his scheduled meeting. No word on the motive for this attack. But once reviled for the massive wealth in the monopolistic power that his virus latent software afforded him, Gates is now hailed as a visionary, who is leveraging that wealth and power for the greater good of humanity. In the 20th century, a book will be written about the entrepreneur of the 21st century. I'm sure that a person who will foremost come to the mind of those historians is certainly Bill Gates. I don't think it's hyperbole to say that Bill Gates is singularly, I would argue the most consequential individual of our generation. I mean that. Our next guest is one of the richest and most generous men in the world. Please welcome Bill Gates. At a time when everyone is looking to understand the scope of the pandemic and how to minimize the threat, one of the best informed voices is that a businessman and philanthropist Bill Gates. The process by which this reinvention of Gates' public image took place is not mysterious. It's the same process by which every billionaire has revived their public image since John D. Rockefeller hired Ivy Ledbetter Lee to transform him from the head of the standard oil hydra into the kind old man handing out dimes to strangers. You had a dime? Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. I can send him myself. Thank you for the ride. I can send him myself more than happily paid. Bless you. Bless you. Yeah, bless you. More to the point, John D. Rockefeller knew that to gain the adoration of the public, he had to appear to give them what they want. Money. He devoted hundreds of millions of dollars of his vast oil monopoly fortune to establishing institutions that, he claimed, were for the public good. The General Education Board. The Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research. The Rockefeller Foundation. Similarly, Bill Gates has spent much of the past two decades transforming himself from software magnate into a benefactor of humanity through his own Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In fact, Gates has surpassed Rockefeller's legacy with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation long having eclipsed the Rockefeller Foundation as the largest private foundation in the world, with $46.8 billion of assets on its books that it wields in its stated program areas of global health and development, global growth, and global policy advocacy. And, like Rockefeller, Gates' transformation has been helped along by a well-funded public relations campaign. Gone are the theatrical tricks of the PR pioneers. The ubiquitous ice cream cones of Gates' mentor Warren Buffett are the last remaining holdout of the old Rockefeller handing out Dimes gimmick. No, Gates has guided his public image into that of a modern-day saint through an even simpler tactic, buying good publicity. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation spends tens of millions of dollars per year on media partnerships, sponsoring coverage of its program areas across the board. Gates funds the Guardian's Global Development website. Gates funds NPR's Global Health coverage. Gates funds the Our World and Data website that is tracking the latest statistics and research on the coronavirus pandemic. Gates funds BBC coverage of global health and development issues, both through its BBC Media Action Organization and the BBC itself. Gates funds World Health coverage on ABC News. When the News Hour with Jim Lehrer was given a $3.5 million Gates Foundation grant to set up a special unit to report on global health issues, News Hour Communications chief Rob Flynn was asked about the potential conflict of interest that such a unit would have in reporting on issues that the Gates Foundation is itself involved in. In some regards, I guess you might say that there are not a heck of a lot of things you could touch in global health these days that would not have some kind of Gates tentacle, Flynn responded. Indeed, it would be almost impossible to find any area of global health that has been left untouched by the tentacles of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It was Gates who sponsored the meeting that led to the creation of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, a global public-private partnership bringing together state sponsors and big pharmaceutical companies whose specific goals include the creation of healthy markets for vaccines and other immunization products. As a founding partner of the Alliance, the Gates Foundation provided $750 million in seed funding and has gone on to make over $4.1 billion in commitments to the group. Gates provided the seed money that created the global fund to fight AIDS tuberculosis in malaria, a public-private partnership that acts as a finance vehicle for governmental AIDS, TB and malaria programs. When a public-private partnership of governments, World Health Bodies and 13 leading pharmaceutical companies came together in 2012 to accelerate progress toward eliminating or controlling 10 neglected tropical diseases, there was the Gates Foundation with $363 million of support. When the global financing facility for women, children and adolescents was launched in 2015 to leverage billions of dollars in public and private financing for global health and development programs, there was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as a founding partner with a $275 million contribution. When the coalition for epidemic preparedness innovations was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2017 to develop vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, there was the Gates Foundation with an initial injection of $100 million. The examples go on and on. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's fingerprints can be seen on every major global health initiative of the past two decades. And beyond the flashy multi-billion dollar global partnerships, the Foundation is behind hundreds of smaller country and region-specific grants, $10 million to combat a locust infestation in East Africa, or $300 million to support agricultural research in Africa and Asia, that add up to billions of dollars in commitments. It comes as no surprise then that far beyond the $250 million that the Gates Foundation has pledged to the fight against coronavirus, every aspect of the current coronavirus pandemic involves organizations, groups, and individuals with direct ties to Gates funding. From the start, the World Health Organization has directed the global response to the current pandemic. From its initial monitoring of the outbreak in Wuhan and its declaration in January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission, to its live media briefings and its technical guidance on country level planning and other matters, the WHO has been the body setting the guidelines and recommendations shaping the global response to this outbreak. But even the World Health Organization itself is largely reliant on funds from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The WHO's most recent donor report shows that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the organization's second-largest donor behind the United States government. The Gates Foundation single-handedly contributes more to the World Health body than Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Russia, and the UK combined. What's more, current World Health Organization Director General Tedros Adonom Gebraasis is in fact, like Bill Gates himself, not a medical doctor at all, but the controversial ex-minister of health of Ethiopia, who was accused of covering up three cholera outbreaks in the country during his tenure. Before joining the WHO, he served as chair of the Gates-founded Global Fund to fight AIDS tuberculosis in malaria, and sat on the board of the Gates-founded Gavi the Vaccine Alliance, and the Gates-funded Stop TB Partnership. The current round of lockdowns and restrictive stay-home orders in Western countries were enacted on the back of alarming models predicting millions of deaths in the United States and hundreds of thousands in the UK. Imperial College in London released a COVID-19 report, and that's where most of our US leaders are getting the information they're basing their decision-making on. The report runs us through a few different ways this could turn out, depending on what our responses are. If we don't do anything to control this virus, over 80% of people in the US would be infected over the course of the epidemic, with 2.2 million deaths from COVID-19. That 2.2 million deaths also doesn't account for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed. From this evening, I must give the British people a very simple instruction. You must stay at home. Enough is enough. Go home and stay home. To a statewide order for people to stay at home. The work of two research groups was crucial in shaping the decisions of the UK and US governments to implement wide-ranging lockdowns and, in turn, governments around the world. The first group, the Imperial College COVID-19 research team, issued a report on March 16 that predicted up to 500,000 deaths in the UK and 2.2 million deaths in the US, unless strict government measures were put in place. The second group, the Institute for Health, Metrics, and Evaluation in Bill Gates' home state of Washington, helped provide data that corroborated the White House's initial estimates of the virus effects, estimates that have been repeatedly downgraded as the situation has progressed. Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation has injected substantial sums of money into both groups. This year alone, the Gates Foundation has already given $79 million to Imperial College. And in 2017, the Foundation announced a $279 million investment into the IHME to expand its work collecting health data and creating models. Anthony Fauci, meanwhile, has become the face of the US government's coronavirus response, echoing Bill Gates' assertion that the country will not get back to normal until a good vaccine can be found to ensure the public safety. If you want to get to pre-coronavirus, that might not ever happen in the sense of the fact that the threat is there, but I believe with the therapies that will be coming online and with the fact that I feel confident that over a period of time we will get a good vaccine, that we will never have to get back to where we are right now. Beyond just their frequent collaborations and cooperation in the past, Fauci has direct ties to Gates' projects and funding. In 2010, he was appointed to the Leadership Council of the Gates Founded Decade of Vaccines Project to implement a Global Vaccine Action Plan, a project to which Gates committed $10 billion of funding. And in October of last year, just as the current pandemic was beginning, the Gates Foundation announced a $100 million contribution to the National Institute of Health to help, among other programs, Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Research into HIV. Also in October of last year, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation partnered with the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to stage event 201, a tabletop exercise gauging the economic and societal impact of a globally spreading coronavirus pandemic. It began in healthy-looking pigs, months perhaps years ago, a new coronavirus. The mission of the pandemic emergency board is to provide recommendations to deal with a major global challenges arising in response to an unfolding pandemic. The board is comprised of highly experienced leaders from business, public health, and civil society. We're at the start of what's looking like it will be a severe pandemic. And there are problems emerging that can only be solved by global business and governments working together. Governments need to be willing to do things that are out of their historical perspective for the most part. It's really a war footing that we need to be on. Given the incredible reach that the tentacles of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have into every corner of the global health markets, it should not be surprising that the foundation has been intimately involved with every stage of the current pandemic crisis either. In effect, Gates has merely used the wealth from his domination of the software market to leverage himself into a similar position in the world of global health. The whole process has been cloaked in the mantle of selfless philanthropy, but the foundation is not structured as a charitable endeavor. Instead, it maintains a dual structure. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation distributes money to grantees. But as separate entity, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation trust. It manages the endowment assets. These two entities often have overlapping interests. And, as has been noted many times in the past, grants given by the foundation often directly benefit the value of the trust assets. One of my favorite parts about my job at the Gates Foundation is that I get to travel to the developing world. And I do that quite regularly. My first trip in India, I was in a person's home where they had dirt floors, no running water, no electricity, and that's really what I see all over the world. So in short, I'm startled by all the things that they don't have. But I am surprised by one thing that they do have. Coco Cola. Coco is everywhere. In fact, when I travel in the developing world, Coke feels ubiquitous. And so when I come back from these trips and I'm thinking about development and I'm flying home, I'm thinking, well, we're trying to deliver condoms to people or vaccinations. You know, Coke's success kind of stops and makes you wonder, how is it that they can get Coke to these far-flung places? And if they can do that, why can't governments and NGOs do the same thing? And the charity of Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda is under criticism following the disclosure, it substantially increased its holdings in the Agribusiness giant Monsanto to over $23 million. Critics say the investment in Monsanto contradicts the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's stated commitment to helping farmers and sustainable development in Africa. The study from the pressure group Global Justice now paints a picture of the Gates Foundation partly as an expression of corporate America's desire to profit from Africa and partly a damning critique of its effects. You could have a case where the initial research is done by a Gates-funded institution. The media reporting on how well that research is conducted is done. The media outlet is a Gates-funded outlet. And maybe a Gates-funded journalist from a media program. And then the program is implemented more widely by a Gates-funded NGO. I mean, there are some very insular circles here. Among the many criticisms, the idea that private finance can solve the problems of the developing world should poor farmers be trapped into debt by having to use chemicals or fertilizers underwritten by offshoots of the foundation. This is no mere theoretical conflict of interest. Gates is held up as a hero for donating $35.8 billion worth of his Microsoft stock to the foundation. But during the course of his decade of vaccines, Gates' net worth has actually doubled from $54 billion to $103.1 billion. The Rockefeller story provides an instructive template for this vision of Tycoon-turned philanthropist. When Rockefeller faced a public backlash, he helped spearhead the creation of a system of private foundations that connected in with his business interests. Leavaging his unprecedented oil monopoly fortune into unprecedented control over wide swaths of public life, Rockefeller was able to kill two birds with one stone. Molding society in his family's own interests, even as he became a beloved figure in the public imagination. Similarly, Bill Gates has leveraged his software empire into a global health development and education empire, steering the course of investment and research and ensuring healthy markets for vaccines and other immunization products. And, like Rockefeller, Gates has been transformed from the feared and reviled head of a formidable hydra into a kindly old man, generously giving his wealth back to the public. But not everyone has been taken in by this PR trick. Even the Lancet observed this worrying transformation from software monopolist to health monopolist back in 2009, when the extent of this Gates led monopoly was becoming apparent to all. The first guiding principle of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is that it is driven by the interests and passions of the Gates family. An annual letter from Bill Gates summarizes those passions, referring to newspaper articles, books, and chance events that have shaped the foundation's strategy. For such a large and influential investor in global health, is such a whimsical governance principle good enough? This brings us back to the question, who is Bill Gates? What are his driving interests? What motivates his decisions? These are not academic questions. Gates' decisions have controlled the flows of billions of dollars, formed international partnerships pursuing wide-ranging agendas, ensured the creation of healthy markets for big-farm of vaccine manufacturers. And now, as we are seeing, his decisions are shaping the entire global response to the coronavirus pandemic. Next week, we will further explore Gates' vaccination initiatives, the business interests behind them, and the larger agenda that is beginning to take shape as we enter the new normal of the COVID-19 crisis. Next week, on the Corbett Report. And then the final solution, which is a year to two years off, is the vaccine. The only thing that will really allow life as we want to do it to resume, is a vaccine. This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed. The truth is that this attempt to reorient the global health economy was part of a much bigger agenda. But when we started developing coronavirus vaccines, we noticed the laboratory animals that they started to show us some of the same immunopathology. Just to head off the conspiracy theorist, maybe we shouldn't call the vaccine the final solution. Maybe just the best solution. Bill Gates planned to vaccinate the world. 10 billion dollars. I mean, just speak about the magnitude of that. That is by far the biggest commitment of the foundation, isn't it Bill? I mean, this is by far the largest. That's right. We've been spending a lot on vaccines. With this commitment, over 8 million additional lives will be saved. So it's one of the most effective ways that health in the poorest countries can be dramatically improved. In January of 2010, Bill and Melinda Gates used the World Economic Forum at Davos to announce the staggering 10 billion dollar commitment to research and develop vaccines for the world's poorest countries, kicking off what he called a decade of vaccines. Today we're announcing a commitment over this next decade, which we think of as a decade of vaccines having incredible impact. We're announcing that we'll spend over 10 billion dollars on vaccines. Hailed by the Gates Funded Media. For the record, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a news hour underwriter. And applauded by the pharmaceutical companies who stood to reap the benefits of that large S. The record-setting commitment made waves in the international community, helping to underwrite a global vaccine action plan coordinated by the Gates Funded World Health Organization. But contrary to the Gates' own PR spin that this 10 billion dollar pledge was an unalloyed good and would save 8 million lives, the truth is that this attempt to reorient the global health economy was part of a much bigger agenda. An agenda that would ultimately lead to greater profits for big pharma companies, greater control for the Gates Foundation over the field of global health, and greater power for Bill Gates to shape the course of the future for billions of people around the planet. This is Bill Gates' plan to vaccinate the world. You're tuned into the Corbett Report. Fraktion Other virtualiederstations Given Gates' pledge to make this a decade of vaccines, it should come as no surprise that, since the dawn of this coronavirus crisis, he has been adamant that the world will not go back to normal until a vaccine has been developed. But we're going to have this intermediate period of opening up, and it won't be normal until we get an amazing vaccine to the entire world. The vaccine is critical because until you have that, things aren't really going to be normal. They can open up to some degree, but the risk of a rebound will be there until we have very broad vaccination. They won't be back to normal until we either have that phenomenal vaccine or therapeutic that's like over 95% effective. And so we have to assume that's going to be almost 18 months from now. And then the final solution, which is a year to two years off, is the vaccine. So we've got to go full speed ahead on all three fronts. Just to head off the conspiracy theorist, maybe we shouldn't call the vaccine the final solution. Maybe just the best solution. More interestingly, since Gates began delivering this same talking point in every one of his many media appearances of late, it has been picked up and repeated by heads of state, health officials, doctors, and media talking heads right down to the scientifically arbitrary, but very specific 18 month time frame. Realistically, COVID-19 will be here for the next 18 months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications. The hard fact is, until we find a vaccine going back to normal means putting lives at risk. This will be the new normal until a vaccine is developed. The only thing that will really allow life as we want to do it to resume is a vaccine. Obviously, we continue to work on the vaccines, but the vaccines have to be down the road by probably 14, 15, 16 months, doing great on the vaccines. The fact that so many heads of state, health ministers, and media commentators are dutifully echoing Gates' pronouncements about the need for a vaccine will not be surprising to those who saw last week's exploration of how Bill Gates monopolized global health. As we have seen, the Gates Foundation's tentacles have penetrated into every corner of the field of public health. Billions of dollars in funding and entire public policy agendas are under the control of this man, an unelected, unaccountable software developer with no medical research experience or training. And nowhere is Gates' control of public health more apparent than in the realm of vaccines. Gates launched the decade of vaccines with a $10 billion pledge. Gates helped develop the global vaccine action plan administered by the Gates Funded World Health Organization. Gates helped found Gavi, the vaccine alliance, aiming to develop healthy markets for vaccine manufacturers. Gates helped launch Gavi with a $1 billion donation in 2011 going on to contribute $4.1 billion over the course of the decade of vaccines. And so I'm pleased to announce to you that we're pledging an additional billion dollars to... All right, thank you. It's not every day we give away billions dollars. One of the Gates Foundation's core funding areas is vaccine development and surveillance, which has resulted in the channeling of billions of dollars into vaccine development, a seat at the table to develop vaccination campaigns in countries around the globe, and the opportunity to shape public thinking about Bill Gates' pet project of the past five years, preparing rapid development and deployment of vaccines in the event of a globally spreading pandemic. If anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it's most likely to be a highly infectious virus. Whether it occurs by the quirk of nature at the hand of a terrorist, epidemiologists show through their models that a respiratory spread pathogen would kill more than 30 million people in less than a year. And there is a reasonable probability of that taking place in the years ahead. Many high-profile personalities have been gathering at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, which aims to discuss and deal with the globe's most pressing issues. Amongst them is the Microsoft founder Bill Gates. His foundation is investing millions in the coalition for epidemic preparedness and innovations to help combat infectious diseases. His son of what he had to say about his push to develop new vaccines. Unfortunately, it takes many years to do a completely new vaccine. The design, the safety reviews, the manufacturing, all those things mean that an epidemic can be very widespread before that tool would come along. And so after Ebola, the Global Health Committee talked a lot about this, including a new type of vaccine platform called DNA RNA, that should speed things along. And so this coalition for epidemic preparedness initiative, CEPI, CEPI, is three countries, which pan norway Germany and two foundations. Welcome trust. We work with a lot of things and our foundation gets foundation. Coming together to fund, actually trying to use that platform and make some vaccines. And so that would help us in the future. We know vaccines can protect us. We just need to be better prepared. So let's come together, let's research and invest, let's save lives. Let's pass on our epidemics. Given Gates' mammoth investment in vaccines over the past decade, his insistence that things won't go back to truly normal until we have a vaccine that we've gotten out to basically the entire world. Is hardly surprising. What should be surprising is that this strangely specific and continuously repeated message, that we will not go back to normal until we get a vaccine in 18 months, has no scientific basis whatsoever. Medical researchers have already conceded that a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 may not even be possible, pointing to the inability of researchers to develop any kind of immunization against previous coronavirus outbreaks like SARS or MERS. But even if such a vaccine were possible, serious concerns remain about the safety of developing, testing and delivering such an amazing vaccine to the entire world in this remarkably short time frame. Even proponents of vaccine development openly worry that the rush to vaccinate billions of people with a largely untested, experimental coronavirus vaccine will itself present grave risks to the public. One of these risks involves disease enhancement. It has been known for over a decade that vaccination for some viral infections, including coronaviruses, actually enhances susceptibility to viral infection, or even causes infections in healthy vaccine recipients. Now, the issue of safety is something that I want to make sure the American public understand. It's not only safety when you inject somebody and they get maybe an idiosyncratic reaction, they get a little allergic reaction, they get pain. Their safety associated does the vaccine make you worse, and there are all diseases in which you vaccinate someone. They get infected with what you're trying to protect them with, and you actually enhance the infection. This is no mere theoretical risk. As researchers who were trying to develop a vaccine for the original SARS outbreak discovered, the vaccine actually made the lab animal subjected to it more susceptible to the disease. One of the things that we're not hearing a lot about is the unique potential safety problem of coronavirus vaccines. This was first found in the early 1960s with respiratory sensational virus vaccines. It was done here in Washington with the NIH and children's National Medical Center. That's some of those kids who got the vaccine actually did worse, and I believe there were two deaths in the consequence of that study. Because what happens with certain types of respiratory virus vaccines, you get immunized, and then when you get actually exposed to the virus, you get this kind of paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon. We don't entirely understand the basis of it, but we recognize that it's a real problem for certain respiratory virus vaccines. That killed the RSV program for decades. Now the Gates Foundation is taking it up again. But when we started developing coronavirus vaccines and our colleagues, we noticed in laboratory animals that they started to show some of the same immune pathology that resembled what had happened 50 years earlier. This specific issue regarding coronavirus vaccines is exacerbated by the arbitrary and unscientific 18-month time frame that Gates is insisting on for the vaccine's development. In order to meet that deadline, vaccine developers are being urged to use new and largely unproven methods for creating their experimental immunizations, including DNA and mRNA vaccines. For a self-described wartime president, victory over COVID-19 equals a vaccine. Adding Trump-style branding, the administration launched Operation Warp Speed, a multi-billion dollar research and manufacturing effort to shorten the typical year-plus vaccine development timeline. We're going to start ramping up production with the companies involved, and you do that at risk. In other words, you don't wait until you get an answer before you start manufacturing. You at risk proactively start making it assuming it's going to work. You're thinking 18 months even with all the work that you've already done to this point and the planning that you are taking with lots of different potential vaccinations and building up for that now. There's an approach called the RNA vaccine that people like Moderna, Kureback, and others are using that in 2015 we'd identified that as very promising for pandemics and for other applications as well. If everything goes perfectly with the RNA approach, we could actually beat the 18 months. We don't want to create unrealistic expectations. So the concept of an RNA vaccine is let's inject the RNA molecule that encodes for the spike protein. It's making yourself do the work of creating this viral protein that is going to be recognized by your immune system and trigger the development of these antibodies. Our bodies won't make a full-fledged infectious virus, so just make a little piece and then learn to recognize it and then get ready to destroy the virus if it then later comes it invades us. It's a relatively new, uncruven technology and there's still no example of an RNA vaccine that's been deployed worldwide in the way that we need for the coronavirus. There's the possibility for unforeseen adverse effects. So this is all new territory whether it would elicit protective immune response against this virus is just unknown right now. Rushing at warp speed to develop a new vaccine using experimental technology and then mass producing and delivering billions of doses to be injected into basically the entire world before adequate testing is even done amounts to one of the most dangerous experiments in the history of the world one that could alter the lives of untold numbers of people. That an experimental vaccine developed in a brand new way and rushed through with a special shortened testing regime should be given to adults, children, pregnant women, newborn babies, and the elderly alike would be in any other situation unthinkable. To suggest that such a vaccine should be given to the entire planet would have been called lunacy mere months ago. But now the public is being asked to accept this premise without question. Even Gates himself acknowledges the inherent risks of such a project. But his concern is not for the lives that will be irrevocably altered in the event that the vaccines cause damage to the population. Instead, he is more concerned that the pharmaceutical companies and the researchers are given legal immunity for any such damage. You know if we have you know one in 10,000 side effects, that's you know way more 700,000 people who will suffer from that. So really understanding the safety at gigantic scale across all age ranges, you know pregnant male, female, undernourished existing comorbidities, it's very very hard. And that actual decision of okay let's go and give this vaccine to the entire world, governments will have to be involved because there will be some risk and indemnification needed before that can be decided on. As we have already seen, in the arena of global health, what Bill Gates wants is what the world gets. So it should be no surprise that immunity for the big farm of vaccine manufacturers and the vaccination program planners is already being worked on. In the US, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a declaration that retroactively provides liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID-19, including manufacturers, distributors and program planners of any vaccine used to treat, diagnose, cure, prevent or mitigate COVID-19. The declaration was issued on March 17th, but retroactively covers any activity back to February 4th, 2020. The day before the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced an emergency $100 million to fund treatment efforts and to develop new vaccines for COVID-19. The plan to inject everyone on the planet with an experimental vaccine is no aberration in Bill Gates's envisioned decade of vaccines. It is its culmination. The decade of vaccines kicked off with a Gates-funded $3.6 million observational study of HPV vaccines in India that, according to a government investigation, violated the human rights of the study participants with gross violations of consent and failed to properly report adverse events experienced by the vaccine recipients. After the deaths of seven girls involved in the trial were reported, a parliamentary investigation concluded that the Gates-funded program for appropriate technology and health, or PATH, which ran the study, had been engaged in a scheme to help ensure healthy markets for glaxo-smith-cline and mark, the manufacturers of the Gardasil and Cerverix vaccines that had been so generously donated for use in the trial. Had PATH been successful in getting the HPV vaccine included in the Universal Immunization Program of the Concerned Countries, this would have generated windfall profit for the manufacturers by way of automatic sale year after year without any promotional or marketing expenses. It is well known that once introduced into the immunization program, it becomes politically impossible to stop any vaccination. Chandra M. Gholhadi, editor of the influential Monthly Index of Medical Specialties, remarked that it is shocking to see how an American organization used surrepetitious methods to establish itself in India. And Samarin Nundi, editor emeritus of the National Medical Journal of India, lamented that this is an obvious case where Indians were being used as guinea pigs. Throughout the decade, India's concerns about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and its corporate partners influence on the country's national immunization programs grew. In 2016, the steering group of the country's national health mission blasted the government for allowing the country's national technical advisory group on immunization, the primary body advising the government on all vaccination-related matters, to be effectively purchased by the Gates Foundation. As one steering group member noted, the NTAGI Secretariat has been moved out of the government's health ministry to the Office of Public Health Foundation of India, and the 32 staff members in that secretariat draw their salaries from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. There is a clear conflict of interest. On one hand, the BMGF funds the secretariat that is the highest decision-making body in vaccines, and on the other, it partners with the pharma industry in Gavi. This is unacceptable. In 2017, the government responded by cutting all financial ties between the advisory group and the Gates Foundation. Similar stories play out across the Gates Foundation's Decade of Vaccines. There's the Gates founded and funded Menenditis Vaccine Project, which led to the creation and testing of Men Afravac, a 50-cent per-dose immunization against Menendococcal Menenditis. The tests led to reports of between 40 and 500 children suffering seizures and convulsions, and eventually becoming paralyzed. There's the 2017 confirmation that the Gates supported oral polio vaccine was actually responsible for the majority of new polio cases, and the 2018 follow-up showing that 80% of polio cases are now vaccine-derived. There's the 2018 paper in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, concluding that over 490,000 people in India developed paralysis as a result of the oral polio vaccine between 2000 and 2017. There's even the WHO's own malaria chief, Dr. Arata Kochi, who complained in an internal memo that Gates' influence meant that the world's leading malaria scientists are now locked up in a cartel with their own research funding being linked to those of others within the group, and that the foundation was stifling debate on the best ways to treat and combat malaria, prioritizing only those methods that relied on new technology or developing new drugs. Kochi's complaint, written in 2008, highlights the most common criticism of the global health web that Gates has spun in the past two decades. That the public health industry has become a racket run by and for big pharma and its partners for the benefit of big business. At the time that Kochi was writing his memo, the executive director of the Gates Foundation's global health program was Tachi Yamada. Yamada left his position as chairman of research and development at Glaxo Smith client to take up the position at the Gates Foundation in 2006 and left the foundation five years later to become chief medical and scientific officer at Takeda Pharmaceuticals. Yamada's replacement as head of Gates' global health program Trevor Mundell was himself a clinical researcher at Pfizer and Park Davis and spent time as head of development with Novartis before joining the foundation. This use of foundation funds to set public policy to drive up corporate profits is not a secret conspiracy. It is a perfectly open one. When the Center for Global Development formed a working group to develop a practical approach to the vaccine challenge, they concluded that the best way to incentivize pharmaceutical companies to produce more vaccines for the third world was for governments to promise to buy vaccines before they were even developed. They titled their report Making Markets for Vaccines. The project making markets for vaccines was really designed to address a problem that existed for a long time which is insufficient research and development budgets as well as investment capacity in vaccine development and production for the third world. How do you create better incentives to get the pharma community, the vaccine community, to produce products that are specifically dedicated for the developing world? Michael Kremmer, professor at Harvard, had been thinking about this problem for many years. He realized that if the rich countries of the world were to make a promise that they would buy a malaria vaccine if somebody produced it, that would give an incentive to the pharmaceutical industry to go and do the research and development needed to make one. But this idea was unfamiliar. No government had made a commitment to buy a product that didn't already exist. When the first such advanced market commitment was made in 2007, a $1.5 billion promise to buy yet to be produced vaccines from big pharma manufacturers. There was the Gates Foundation as the only non-nation sponsor. The Gates Founded Gavi Vaccine Alliance is an open partnership between the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, the World Bank, and Vaccine Manufacturers. Their stated goal includes introducing new vaccines into the routine schedules of national immunization programs, and to engage in market-shaping efforts to ensure healthy markets for vaccines and other immunization products. If introducing new vaccines and ensuring healthy markets for them was the aim of Gates' decade of vaccines, there can be no doubt that COVID-19 has seen that goal realized in spectacular fashion. Let's start the pledging. The EU kicked off its fundraising drive with 1 billion euros. In the hours that followed, pledges were beamed in from across the globe. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has pledged $500 million. Even Pop icon Madonna made a last-minute donation of a million euros. By combining the world's expertise and brain power and resources, we can attack this disease in the way it's attacking us globally. Our Foundation is proud to partner with you, and I'm pleased to announce today that we will pledge $100 million towards this effort. Germany was one of the leading donors pledging over 500 million euros. The money is earmarked for international health organizations and research networks, in a bid to speed up the development of a vaccine. And there, at the center of this web, is the Gates Foundation, connected to every major organization, research institution, international alliance, and vaccine manufacturer involved in the current crisis. Certainly, the Gates, like the Rockefellers, have profited from their years as the most generous people on the planet. As curious as it might seem to those who don't understand the true nature of this monopoly cartel, despite all of these grants and pledges, commitments of tens of billions of dollars, Bill Gates' personal net worth has actually doubled during this decade of vaccines, from $50 billion to over $100 billion. But once again, we come back to the question, who is Bill Gates? Is he motivated simply by money? Is this incescent drive to vaccinate the entire population of the planet merely the result of greed? Or is there something else driving this agenda? As we shall see next time, money is not the end goal of Gates' philanthropic activities. Money is just the tool that he is using to purchase what he really wants. Control. Control not just of the health industry, but control of the human population itself. Next week on the Corbett Report. Some women I wondered whether providing new medicines and keeping children alive would that create more of a population problem? Research is now developing a vaccine that is delivered using a dissolvable patch called a micro needle array. In Gates' vision, these digital identities will be tied to all of our actions and transactions. Once you have that gentile infrastructure, the whole way you think about government benefits can be done differently. And so it's too bad if somebody thinks that creates a privacy problem. Bill Gates and the population control grid. Hello everyone. Mr. Pete! What's your secret mission about? It's not my mission, but an idea that came from my good friend Mr. Bill Gates. Hi kids. The real actual in-person Bill Bill? He's trying to say that we're big fans Mr. Gates. It's a strange fact that Bill Gates' hagiographers, PR hacks employed more often than not by large corporations that receive funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Consistently to pick this drab software developer as a cartoon superhero using his superpower of being very rich to help save the planet. Behind closed doors on this New York campus, a secret gathering of some of the world's most powerful people, Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Winfrey. It was like, well, it was like a super friend. In the great hall of the Justice League, there are assembled the world's more greatest heroes. But these cartoon-fueled puff pieces reveal more than they know about Gates and the other mega-rich philanthropists they are attempting to idolize. They reveal that the idea of the selfless billionaire do-gooder is a work of fiction so unbelievable. It is only fit for Saturday morning cartoon fare. As we have seen in our first two explorations of Bill Gates's role as global health kingpin, the seemingly selfless generosity of the Gates family through their eponymous foundation has in fact greatly increased their own wealth, with Bill Gates' personal net worth having doubled in the past decade alone. But the takeover of public health that we have documented in how Bill Gates monopolized global health, and the remarkably brazen push to vaccinate everyone on the planet that we have documented in Bill Gates' plan to vaccinate the world, was not at base about money. The unimaginable wealth that Gates has accrued is now being used to purchase something much more useful. Control. Control not just of the global health bodies that concordinate a worldwide vaccination program, or the governments that will mandate such an unprecedented campaign, but control over the global population itself. This is an exploration of Bill Gates and the population control grid. You're tuned into the Corbett report. From a journalistic standpoint, Good Morning America's enane report on the secret of billionaire meeting that took place in New York in 2009 was a failure. It listed some of the meetings attendees and their combined net worth. Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Winfrey, together with others at the meeting, including George Soros, Ted Turner, David Rockefeller, they're worth more than $125 billion. It turned to the senior editor of Forbes for a sound bite about what it would be like to witness such an assembly of wealth. To spin in the room and see this meeting of the mines really would have been a fascinating thing. And it doodifully reported the participant's own stated reason for holding the meeting. That much money, that much power around one table, it begs the question, what were they doing? What were they scheming? Total world domination? This group, together for six hours, was talking about charity. Education, emergency relief, global health. Before wrapping up with another juvenile appeal to comic book superhero lore. The New Superman and Wonder Woman, the super rich friends, not fighting bad guys, but fighting for good, nonetheless. For Good Morning, America, John Berman, ABC News. Yes, from a journalistic standpoint, Berman's report was an utter failure. There was no attempt to question the participants about the meeting. No space for any criticism of these billionaires or questions about their motives. No adversarial journalism of any kind. But as a PR piece, it was brilliant. It leaves the viewer with a vague sense that some kind of gathering took place somewhere in New York in which rich people, who, let's not forget, are superheroes, talked about charity. One would have to turn to print sources to discover that the meeting was held at the personal residents of Sur Paul Nurse, then President of Rockefeller University. That the invitation to the gathering was co-written by Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and David Rockefeller. Or that the aim of the meeting was to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world's population. Given that these extraordinarily rich and powerful men, including Warren Buffett, David Rockefeller and Ted Turner, have all expressed their belief that the growing human population is the greatest threat faced by humanity. It should not be surprising that they would convene a conference to discuss how best to channel their vast wealth into the project of reducing the number of people on the planet. Particularly unsurprising is that attendees of the meeting later dubbed Bill Gates, a man for whom population control is particularly close to his heart, as the most impressive speaker at the event. Here we can see a chart that looks at the total world population over the last several hundred years. And at first glance, this is a bit scary. We go from less than 1,800 and then three, four, five, six, and seven point four billion where we are today is happening even faster. So Melinda and I wondered whether providing new medicines and keeping children alive would that create more of a population problem. And what the developing world does not need is more children. And I think that was the biggest aha to build on me when we got into this work, because we asked ourselves, of course, the same hard-nosed question you'd ask, which is if you get into this work and you start to save these children, will women just keep overpopulating the world and thank goodness the converse is absolutely true. This is a very important question to get right, because it was absolutely key for me. When our foundation first started up, it was focused on reproductive health. That was the main thing we did because I thought, you know, population growth in poor countries is the biggest problem they face. You've got to help mothers who want to limit family size, have the tools and education to do that. And I thought that's the only thing that really counts. In recent years, critics have pointed to Bill Gates own words linking vaccination programs with his goal of reducing population growth. 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, healthcare, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent. $10 billion over the next 10 years to make it the year of the vaccines. What does that mean exactly? Well, over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made, both in venting new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them. We could cut the number of children who die of a year from about 9 million to half of that if we have success on it. The benefit serum terms are reducing sickness, reducing the population growth. It really allows the society a chance to take care of itself once you've made that intervention. But as any number of fact-checking websites, not to mention Bill Gates himself, are quick to point out, this doesn't mean what it sounds like it means. What we found out is that as health improves, families choose to have less children. The truth is that when people's lives improve, when children survive, for instance, or when the girls go to school, people start making decisions based on the expectation that their children will live and thrive. The result is smaller families and slower population growth. I came across articles that showed that the key thing you can do to reduce population growth is actually improve health. And that sounds paradoxically, you think, okay, better health means more kids, not less kids. Well, in fact, what parents are doing is they're trying to have two kids survive to adulthood to take care of them. And so the more disease burden it there is, the more kids they have to have, they have that high probability. So there's a perfect correlation that as you improve health within a half-generation, the population growth rate goes down. Yes, the gate's stated plan is to reduce population growth by improving health. But the idea of using vaccines as sterilization agents, even without the public's knowledge or consent, is not conspiracy law, but documentable fact. In its 1968 annual report, the Rockefeller Foundation addressed the problems of population, lamenting that very little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is to be found here. The Foundation vowed to correct this problem by funding established and beginning investigators to turn their attention to aspects of research and reproductive biology that have implications for human fertility and its control. This was no empty promise. By the time of its 1988 annual report, the Rockefeller Foundation was able to report progress on its funding into contraceptive research, including Norplant, a contraceptive implanted under the skin of a woman's upper arm and effective for five years. In its 1988 report, the Rockefeller Foundation was pleased to announce that Norplant, which was developed by the Rockefeller Founded Population Council, was now approved for marketing in 12 countries. The Rockefeller's Population Council and other research organizations joined with the World Health Organization in 1972 to create a task force on vaccines for fertility regulation. By 1995, they were able to report progress in developing a prototype of an anti-HCG vaccine, which works by combining an immunogen formed from a synthetic peptide of human Chorionic Gnatotrophin, HCG, a hormone secreted by the surface of the early embryo to remain implanted in the womb, with a toxoid carrier molecule. The vaccine stimulates an immune reaction, causing women to develop antibodies against the hormone, thus preventing them from carrying babies to term. But beginning in the 1990s, a series of scandals over WHO-led vaccination programs in the Third World led to allegations that tetanus vaccines in places like the Philippines and Kenya were being laced with HCG in order to implement population control by stealth. The controversy generated by these stories led global institutions to step back from the campaign to champion population control by vaccine. But as usual, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was there to renew interest, working with the UK government to host a London summit on family planning in 2012, at which the Foundation announced their support for funding the research, development, and deployment of injectable contraceptives to the developing world. You heard me talk earlier about Sadie, who I met in New Year. She was traveling 15 kilometers to get an injection. But let's ask ourselves, what if she didn't have to travel to that clinic? If we put it in her perspective, how can we keep her in her village to get the contraceptive she wants? Well, Pfizer is testing a new form of depot. The injection that she goes 15 kilometers to get, they're now putting it in a new form, a new device that can be given, it's very, very small, it's called un eject, I think it's going to be pictured here. It's a high quality product, it's effective, it's safe, it's tiny, as you can see, and it can be put in a healthcare workers kit to give to the woman at the village level. So Sadie won't have to go 15 kilometers any longer to get that injection. But the Gates were not content to stop there. In 2014, it was announced that microchips biotech ink, a company in Lexington, Massachusetts, had developed a new form of birth control, a wireless implant that can be turned on and off with remote control, and that is designed to last up to 16 years. According to MIT Technology Review, the idea originated when Bill Gates visited Robert Langer's MIT Lab in 2012 and asked him if it would be possible to create an implantable birth control device that could be turned on or off remotely. Langer referred gates to the controlled release microchip technology he had invented in license to microchips biotechnology, and the Gates Foundation granted $20 million to the firm to develop the implants. Reducing population growth has, by Gates' own admission, been a core mission of the Gates Foundation since its inception. But in order to really understand what gates means by population control, we have to look beyond the concept of controlling population size. At its most fundamental level, the population control the Gates speaks of is not birth control, but control of the population itself. In order to understand the broader population control agenda and how it ties into the Gates Foundation's plans, we have to look at a puzzling development that took place in 2017. In that year, Gavi, the Gates founded and funded Alliance that partners the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, and the World Bank, with vaccine manufacturers to help ensure healthy markets for vaccines, took a strange pivot away from its core mission of vaccinating every child on the planet, to providing every child with a digital biometric identity. The idea was first floated by Gavi CEO Seth Berkley in a Nature article that year, immunization needs a technology boost, where he states that the goal of 100% immunization will not be reached without secure digital identification systems that can store a child's medical history. He then gives a specific example. We are working with a company in India called Kushi Baby, which creates off-grid digital health records. A necklace worn by infants contains a unique identification number on a short-range communication chip. Community health workers can scan the chip using a mobile phone, enabling them to update a child's digital record even in remote areas with little phone coverage. This sudden interest in digital identity was no mere passing fancy for the vaccine alliance. Gavi doubled down by becoming a founding member of the ID 2020 Alliance, a public-private partnership dedicated to spearheading a global digital biometric identity standard. Other founding members of the alliance include Gates' first company, Microsoft, and the Rockefeller Foundation. In 2018, Gavi issued a call for innovation in digital technologies for finding, identifying, and registering the most vulnerable children. The call specifically requested technologies for capturing, storing, and enrolling the biometric details of infants on rugged biometric devices. Berkeley continued to follow up on this idea in public engagements as one of the new core missions of Gavi. What's interesting is that people tend to think of birth certificates as kind of a major document. But the most common, as I mentioned before, is not a birth certificate, is not a death certificate, is not a marriage certificate. The most common connection vital registration for the population is actually a child health card because we reach more than 90% of children with at least one dose of vaccine as part of routine. So they're in the system. The challenge is that contact is not connected into the system. So if you could connect it, then you have the ability to give them their basic identity papers. You have ability then later on if they want to own land or they want to have their rights, you're able to help them with that. But you know, we're not currently taking advantage of that. And so the children get seen, they get enrolled in the health centers, but that information is not used for anything else. Although vaccines and identity may seem unrelated, Bill Gates has spent the last few years funding research that can bring the two ideas together. Late last year, Gates once again turned to Robert Langer and his MIT colleagues to investigate new ways to permanently store and record the vaccination information of each individual. The result of their research was a new vaccine delivery method. They found that by using dissolvable microneedals that deliver patterns of near infrared light emitting micro particles to the skin, they could create particle patterns in the skin of vaccine recipients, which are invisible to the eye, but can be imaged using modified smartphones. Rice University describes the quantum dot tags left behind by the microneedals as something like a barcode tattoo. So who was behind this development? As lead researcher Kevin McEw explains, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, hey, we have a real problem, knowing who's vaccinated. So our idea was to put the record on the person. This way, later on, people can scan over the area to see what vaccines have been administered and give only the ones still needed. The micro particles that form the fluorescent quantum dot tags are delivered along with the vaccine, but they cannot be delivered by a traditional syringe. Instead, they must be delivered by a patch of microneedals made from a mixture of dissolvable sugar and a polymer called PVA, as well as the quantum dot die in the vaccine. It should be no surprise, then, that big form of vaccine manufacturers in their scramble to produce the coronavirus vaccine that Gates assures us is necessary to go back to normal, have turned to a novel vaccine delivery method, a dissolvable microneedal array patch. The University of Pittsburgh is where the polio vaccine was first discovered at the medical center, researchers are now developing a vaccine that is delivered using a dissolvable patch called a microneedal array. Think about them as almost like a bandaid, and so the microneedal array is simply applied to the skin, typically pressed into place very shortly, and then taken off and thrown away. And then the antigen is already delivered. As is becoming evident, this new vaccine delivered barcode-like tattoo is about much more than simply ensuring that children get all their govy recommended immunizations. On a recent ask me anything thread on Reddit, when asked, what changes are we going to have to make to how businesses operate to maintain our economy while providing social distancing? Bill Gates answered, eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently, or when we have a vaccine who has received it. In his answer, Gates fails to mention that he has himself been instrumental in kickstarting and funding the research into the very type of digital certificates for vaccination that he is speaking about, or that these digital certificates, likely at first to be a digital marker linked to a biometric ID, could very well one day take the form of vaccine implanted quantum.tattos. But as in so many other aspects of the unfolding crisis, Gates' unscientific pronouncement that we will need digital certificates to prove our immunity in the new normal of the post-coronavirus world. Eventually, what we'll have to have is certificates of who's a recovered person, who's a vaccinated person. Is now being implemented by a number of governments. It is now being reported that on FIDO, a tech startup specializing in AI-based biometric ID verification is in talks with the British government to provide the type of digital certification Gates mentioned, dubbed an immunity passport. The proposed system would require would-be workers to use the on-fiddle provided app to scan their face or other biometric data, link that information t