Archive for Bill and Melinda Gates

Taxpayers send millions to abortion training program at UCSF

Posted in Abortion Pill Connections, Abortion Pill Study, Abortionist, Abortionist Training, Bill Gates, Fellowship in Family Planning (FFP), Hewlett Foundation, Innovating Education in Reproductive Health, National Abortion Federation, Packard Foundation, Philip Darney, Ryan Residency, Uta Landy with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 23, 2019 by saynsumthn

Who’s paying millions for this abortion training program? Taxpayers.

third trimester abortion, abortion training

Abortion training is being orchestrated out of a University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) program which receives millions in government dollars. UCSF trains abortion providers through their Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health , which claims to be “one of the few research institutions to unflinchingly address abortion, investigating multidimensional aspects of abortion care in the United States and globally.” Bixby claims their work has:

According to Bixby’s annual reports, in 2014, nearly $22 million dollars (52 percent) of Bixby’s revenue came from the taxpayer, although the report does not specify whether the funds were state or federal. By 2015, although Government dollars made up only 18 percent of Bixby’s revenue, it totaled over $18 million in taxpayer dollars. Bixby is conveniently located in California, which permits millions in taxpayer dollars to fund abortions and has no requirement that abortion numbers be reported to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for data analysis.

UCSF Bixby Gov Funding 18 million in 2015 to 2016 AR

Taxpayer dollars sent to UCSF for fetal research include millions from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). A recent report published by CNS News breaks down the dollars of the multi-year contract:

[T]he Department of Health and Human Services has granted contracts to UCSF to make “humanized mice.”… According to contract information published on the Federal Procurement Data System, the new three-month extension will pay UCSF $521,082—bringing the total payments the federal government has made to UCSF for this contract to $10,596,960. If the government continues renewing the contract through Dec. 5, 2020, HHS would end up paying UCSF a total of $13,799,501.

In addition to government (taxpayer) dollars, Bixby receives funding from a number of organizations collaborating to expand abortion, such as:

UCSG Bixby trains abortion to increase access (Image: Twitter)

According to Bixby, which was created to address a shortage of abortionists dating back to the mid 1980’s, the number of US abortion providers decreased by 38% between 1982 and 2005, and some 87% of US counties do not have an abortion provider.

Bixby runs two flagship programs, which “provide the opportunity to develop high-level research and clinical skills in abortion and contraception:”

FFP was established by Dr. Philip Darney, and as previously reported, FFP’s website makes it clear that abortion is their mission, stating that the family planning fellowship is a “two-year fellowship focused on subspecialist training in research, teaching and clinical practice in abortion and contraception… and they play an active role in discussions in the media related to family planning access and advocate for their patients in popular media outlets.”

Fellowship in Family Planning FFP FB Page (Image credit: Facebook)

Live Action News also previously reported how the Kenneth J. Ryan Residency Training Program in Abortion and Family Planning was founded in 1999 by Dr. Uta Landy, a former director of the National Abortion Federation and a recipient of Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s infamous Margaret Sanger Award. According to the Bixby Center, Landy established “one of the first abortion clinics in New York after legalization in 1970, and became the first executive director of the National Abortion Federation in 1979.” Landy was recently caught in undercover footage from the Center for Medical Progress talking about late-term abortions.

Philip Darney and Uta Landy at UCSF abortion training

The Ryan program is now at 70 major medical schools in the US and Canada, according to their website.

The Bixby Center was originally founded as the Center for Reproductive Health Research & Policy in 1999 by Philip Darney, MD and Nancy Padian, who were shortly thereafter joined by Claire Brindis, DrPH, MPH, and Felicia Stewart, MD, according to their report. The Center offers online abortion training courses and lectures through its Innovating Education in Reproductive Health which is described as “a digital hub that highlights innovative family planning and abortion curricula, tools, teaching techniques and research from educational leaders around the world.”

Innovating Education at UCSF abortion training

The group’s week by week abortion course, “Abortion Quality Care and Public Health Implications,” has a stated goal to destigmitize abortion, among other things. The “career planning brochure” instructs graduates to “moonlight” at abortion facilities and to “highlight [their] abortion training as a special skill set” when they apply to a practice.

Innovating Education Abortion Career Planning Brochure

The abortion training course is introduced by Jody Steinauer, Associate Professor at UCSF. The course is “directed at health care students and professionals.”

The video lectures lead up to the topic of  “abortion after the first trimester,” in week four, where Steinauer admits that later abortions “can be a difficult topic to discuss for many due to feelings about a more developed fetus.”

Jody Steinauer at UCSF abortion training

Despite the abortion industry’s frequent denial of facts about fetal development, Bixby’s TEACH Program (Training Early Abortion for Comprehensive Healthcare) workbook acknowledges that the fetal heartbeat can be detected very early, around six weeks gestation (dates used are gestational, which is measured at two weeks more than the date of fertilization):

The embryo follows a predictable path of development and therefore can be used to date a pregnancy based on its size. The embryo appears at approximately 6 weeks and grows 1 mm per day thereafter until 12-14 weeks. After 12 weeks, fetal flexion and extension make measuring length more challenging and using the fetal biparietal diameter (BPD) is preferred. Cardiac activity appears around 6 ½ weeks.

Bixby abortion training workbook TEACH

The workbook then gives suggestions on how to speak to an abortion patient about the baby. But because this is about ending the life of a developing human person in the womb, the workbook suggests abortion providers use euphemisms like “pregnancy” instead of scientifically correct terminology such as fetus or baby.

“Your pregnancy is 8 weeks along,” instead of  “Your baby is 8 weeks old.”

Bixby abortion training workbook TEACH communication

In upcoming Live Action News articles, we will highlight various teaching lectures published by the UCSF abortion training program.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Bill and Melinda Gates give $500 grand to homosexual marriage efforts

Posted in Bill Gates with tags , , , on October 25, 2012 by saynsumthn

According to the Seattle PI

Bill and Melinda Gates are giving $500,000 to the Referendum 74 campaign, boosting a war chest that totaled more than $10.8 million, according to reports filed with Washington United for Marriage as of Tuesday morning.

The Gates household had already donated $100,000 to the same-sex marriage cause, and Bill Gates recently put $2 million into the campaign for Initiative 1240, which would allow establishment of charter schools in Washington.

Referendum 74 asks voters to either approve or reject the state’s gay marriage law.

Tell Congress to stop Genetically Modified Foods- Stop the Monsanto Rider !

Posted in Bill Gates, Genetically Modified Food with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on July 19, 2012 by saynsumthn

From Think Progress—A progressive Liberal Blog:

Buried in the House Farm Bill, approved by the House Agriculture Committee , is the agribusiness industry’s latest attempt to shed regulations restricting new genetically engineered (GE) crops. While the bill’s massive food stamps cuts elicited widespread outcry, the industry quietly inserted provisions to rush new crops onto the market after only a cursory review of their safety.

Three sections (10011, 10013, and 10014) tucked into the middle of the bulky bill work together to eliminate any real review of GE crops. This “Monsanto Rider” got its name from the corporation with a choke-hold on most of the country’s staple crops; Monsanto owns the patents to genetically engineered strains of soybean, corn, sugar beet and cotton, to name a few, as well as many controversial chemical herbicides. Here are some of the rider’s most egregious game-changers:

* Environmental law does not apply. Review of GE crop impacts under the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, or any other environmental law is outlawed. Monsanto has particular beef with NEPA; in 2010 a federal court forced the USDA to conduct a study of Monsanto’s “Round-up Ready” alfalfa, which banned farmers from planting or selling the crop for four years. The USDA eventually approved the crop, even after finding that “gene flow” between GM and non-GM alfalfa is “probable,” threatening organic dairy producers and other users of non-GMO alfalfa, and that there is strong potential for the creation of Roundup-resistant “superweeds” that require ever-higher doses of toxic herbicides.
* No outside scrutiny allowed. The bill makes the USDA the sole authority on GE crops, immunizing applications from review by other federal agencies or outside groups. Furthermore, the USDA is not allowed to accept money to fund a study from anyone who petitions for additional analysis — even if a judge orders one.
* Impossible deadlines. While the USDA has never denied a single application for GE crop approval, the industry is making sure that they never will. Currently, new crops can at least be slowed down by lengthy environmental studies and expert review. But the House Farm Bill forces the USDA to approve or deny any application within one year (with an optional extension of 180 days).
* Approval time bombs. If the USDA fails to meet the deadline, the crop gets automatically approved for commercialization, entirely skipping the review process.

Monsanto paid well for these radical additions. OpenSecrets.org reported that in the first three months of this year, the corporation spent $1.4 million lobbying Washington. Last year, Monsanto spent about $6.3 million total, more than any other agribusiness firm except the tobacco company Altria. Even if the Farm Bill provisions are killed in the Senate, another “Monsanto Rider” was already inserted into the FY 2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill. The company also recently took its aspirations across borders to Mexico, where political pressure has pushed the government to give Monsanto’s genetically modified corn a planting permit.

According to NaturalNews, a more Conservative Blog:
While millions of Americans were busy celebrating freedom from tyranny during the recent Independence Day festivities, Monsanto was actively trying to thwart that freedom with new attacks on health freedom. It turns out that the most evil corporation in the world has quietly attached riders to both the 2012 Farm Bill and the 2013 Agriculture Appropriations Bill that would essentially force the federal government to approve GMOs at the request of biotechnology companies, and prohibit all safety reviews of GMOs from having any real impact on the GMO approval process.

The Alliance for Natural Health – USA (ANH-USA), the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), and several other health freedom advocacy groups have been actively drawing attention to these stealth attacks in recent days, and urging Americans to rise up and oppose them now before it is too late. If we fail to act now as a single, unified community devoted to health freedom, in other words, America’s agricultural future could literally end up being controlled entirely by the biotech industry, which will have full immunity from the law.

You can fight back now against these threats to food freedom by visiting:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_25711.cfm

Who Loves Monsanto- their Funder: Bill Gates:

Bill Gates loves GM Foods, you know the Eugenics pro-abortion-population control billionaire- that Gates ! The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s investments in Monsanto and Cargill. A US financial website published the foundation’s annual investment portfolio, which showed it had bought 500,000 Monsanto shares worth around $23m. This was a substantial increase in the last six months and while it is just small change for Bill and Melinda, it has been enough to let loose their fiercest critics.

Read more on Bill Gates and Monsanto – Here and see how Melinda Gates is pushing Population Control here

This one will scare you- CONTRACEPTION CORN:

Occupy targets Bill Gates on Education #OWS

Posted in Bill Gates, Occupy Wall Street with tags , , , , on March 15, 2012 by saynsumthn

Counterpunch MARCH 14, 2012

A Policy Throwdown
Occupy Education v. the Gates Foundation

by JESSE HAGOPIAN
“Gates Foundation, you will fail! Education is not for sale!”

The chants of about 150 teachers, students, parents and Occupy Seattle activists reverberated off the windows of the global headquarters of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, announcing that we were ready for our scheduled debate as part of a national call to “Occupy Education” on March 1.

From Oscar Grant Plaza in Oakland to the Department of Education in Washington, D.C., Occupy activists schooled the nation with “experiential learning” demonstrations that had the instructional objective of making education a right for the 99 percent, not a privilege for the 1 percent.

In Seattle, when our spirited march for education arrived at the Gates Foundation, a leading promoter of corporate education reform, many of the organizers were as nervous as kids before a high-stakes test–not because they doubted the validity of challenging one of the biggest backers of charter schools and standardized testing, but because many expected a no show from the foundation that they would have to chalk up as an unexcused absence.

As it turned out, the wealthy foundation sent three poor souls to debate the Occupy movement.

I should admit from the start that it wasn’t a fair competition–something akin to the varsity team taking on the JV squad’s second-stringers. In our corner, we had people who have attended public schools, taught in public schools and are parents of kids in public schools. All they had were policy analysts and public relations specialists.

The “throwdown” began with the p.r. spokesperson declaring his dedication to the right of every student to receive a quality education, but that he disagreed with our rally’s characterization of the Gates Foundation. He never offered any vision of what it would take to get a quality education for all students, nor did he specify what Occupy got wrong.
Former high school teacher Wayne Au, an editor of Rethinking Schoolsmagazine and education professor at University of Washington, spoke next on behalf of the Occupy education delegation. Au challenged the foundation for its record of supporting charter schools even after a Stanford University study showed they underperformed public schools.

Au then took on the foundation’s support for standardized testing, which helped pressure the Washington legislature to pass a law mandating the use of test scores in teacher evaluations. Au went on to explain that such tests force teachers to narrow the curriculum to tested items.

Then he set the hook: “If all the students passed the tests you advocate, that test would immediately be judged an invalid metric, and any measure of students that mandates the failure of students is an invalid measure.”

The reply from the Gates foundation spokesperson was crippled by a mistake worthy of a rookie on the high school debate team: He failed to address any of the points the opposition raised. The spokesman retorted, “We think that testing should be part of multiple measures, and not the only judge of student performance.”

At this point, I couldn’t help but enter the debate. I grabbed the bullhorn and, deploying a tactic a certain smart-aleck in my fifth period once used against me, asked a question that I knew he wouldn’t be able to answer, just to tarnish his image in front of the crowd: “How did standardized testing enter the public schools originally?”
“I’m not the person to answer that question,” he replied.

It worked. So I moved on to phase two of the classroom know-it-all’s strategy: declare victory against authority. I offered:

I consider this debate a victory for our side, if they do not know how and why standardized testing entered the public schools in the first place. As a history teacher, I find it insulting to come to a debate about education and not know the history of how testing entered the public schools. I can break it down about it being part of the eugenics movement.
As Wayne Au explains in his book Unequal By Design, standardized testing entered the public schools in the early 1900s as a way to bring scientific-management models used in assembly-line production into the classroom. The “scientists” in charge of marrying Taylor’s strategies for industrial regimentation to the education of children were adherents of the early 20th century school of eugenics, which is the view that intelligence is genetic, and that whites are biologically more intelligent than other racial and ethnic groups.

Au writes:
Looking back to its origins in the eugenics movement, standardized testing provided the technological apparatus for the functioning of the production model of education…It is no coincidence that I.Q. testing, eugenics and standardized testing all become prominent during the same period.
The point I made to the Gates Foundation policy wonks was this: While they claim to be part of a 21st century civil rights movement for education, advocating policies they insist are specifically designed to close the achievement gap, the standardized tests they insist are central to their project are designed by racist pseudoscientists of the early 20th century.

As NAACP founder W.E.B. DuBois wrote:

It was not until I was long out of school and indeed after the [First] World War that there came the hurried use of the new technique of psychological tests, which were quickly adjusted so as to put Black folk absolutely beyond the possibility of civilization.

For example, the SAT test was developed by Carl Brigham, an Army psychologist and a figure in the eugenics movement. Brigham used data collected during the First World War to “prove” that whites born in the U.S. were the most intelligent of all peoples. He also found the “evidence” showing that immigrants were genetically inferior.
Contrary to the assertions of corporate education reformers who claim to be crusaders against the status quo in education, there is nothing innovative about advocacy for standardized testing. It is merely the repackaging of eugenics for a “post-racial” era in which it is “passé” to espouse racist ideas, and yet American society–from the prisons to the schools–is dominated by institutional racism.

The purpose of standardized tests today is the same as it was then–to provide a way to categorize, sort and rank students. These tests “prove” that some students–Black students, students of color generally and working-class kids–belong at the bottom, while simultaneously demonstrating the intellectual “superiority” of the wealthy and white students who score better on the tests.
But while white students may score better on such tests, such scores don’t actually measure what standardized testing boosters say they do. These tests don’t prove that white and wealthy students actually have superior aptitude compared to students of color and low-income students. They measure social advantages–private tutoring, books in the home, parents with more time to read to their kids, children who come to school healthy and more focused. The tests are created to reflect the values and norms of an affluent and white society.

Today, the Gates Foundation advocates for so-called value-added tests to pinpoint a teacher’s contribution in a given year, by comparing current school-year test scores of their students to the scores of those same students in the previous school year, or to the scores of other students in the same grade. But as Professor Au explained by bullhorn to the

Gates policy analysts:

One thing about value-added is that there is plenty of evidence to show that it is absolutely unstable as a measurement. If you use one year of test scores to evaluate a teacher, you have a 35 percent error rate. That’s error rate–not even taking into account the validly of measurement. If you use three years of test scores, there is a 25 percent error rate to measure teacher effectiveness. That’s a one in four chance that you could be rated as poor instead of effective…
High-stakes testing is so volatile from year to year, teacher to teacher. As we see with the New York City case, you have many teachers rated good, and then, in the same year, rated terribly using a different metric. You can look at Bruce Baker’s study. This shows that when we use tests–even if it’s only part of the evaluation–it’s a real, real problem.
The foundation that represents one of the richest men on earth had no response. Professor Au’s schooling had left them speechless, and you can be sure it wasn’t because they were the shy kids in back–they clearly just hadn’t done their statistics homework on value-added testing.

Occupy Education made it clear that day that we will not allow billionaire flunkies to remake our schools in the image of a production line, where stopwatches are used to measure the workers’ (teachers) efficiency at producing commodities (students).

Our vision for education reform advocates a holistic approach to education, including the teaching of leadership skills and social responsibility. We need to assess students based on their ability to collaborate with peers, to reevaluate assumptions based on new evidence, and to defend well-reasoned positions on current events. None of these things can be neatly quantified by standardized tests.

We believe that real education reform would equalize the resources of our schools, demand culturally relevant pedagogy and assessment, lower class size to provide the individualized attention that students deserve, and support the most effective form of assessment that has yet to be devised, one that can adjust to every child, evaluate results quickly and make appropriate changes in instruction–the human educator.

The most important point of the debate was made by a parent who locked eyes with the Gates Foundation representatives and demanded to know, “Why should Bill Gates’ views matter to me as a public-school parent? I actually have a B.S. degree in education. Does he have the qualifications to speak for me? I say no.”
When it comes to education, the popular Occupy chant got the math problem right: “99 to one–they don’t stand a chance!”

Jesse Hagopian is a public high school teacher in Seattle and a founding member Social Equality Educators (SEE). He serves on the Board of Directors of Maha-Lilo—“Many Hands, Light Load”—a Haiti solidarity organization. Hagopian is a contributing author to the forthcoming book, Education and Capitalism: Struggles for Learning and Liberation (Haymarket Books). He can be reached at: hagopian.jesse@gmail.com

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Bill Gates and Planned Parenthood:

GATES: When I was growing up, my parents were almost involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of Planned Parenthood. And it was very controversial to be involved with that. And so it’s fascinating. At the dinner table my parents are very good at sharing the things that they were doing. And almost treating us like adults, talking about that.
My mom was on the United Way group that decides how to allocate the money and looks at all the different charities and makes the very hard decisions about where that pool of funds is going to go. So I always knew there was something about really educating people and giving them choices in terms of family size.

Read the Transcript: Bill Moyers Interviews Bill Gates / Admits dad worked for Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood was founded on racist eugenics according to the documentary: Maafa21 (Clip below)

The Bill and Melinds Gates Foundation is known for financing the nation’s largest abortion clinic Planned Parenthood ( See here)

LARGE CORPORATIONS FUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD_ MAAFA21 Begin 6:23 minutes:

FYI:
In a conversation with Charlie Rose, Melinda Gates said that foundations must act as catalysts to spurn governments into action to create “vaccines” in Africa.

Melinda French Gates: Family Planning in Kenya

This is masking the Eugenic NASSM200 plan:

Listen to what our own president, Lyndon B. Johnson had to say< LBJ Faces up a Crisis: Johnson also stated, “Nations with food deficits must put more of their resources into voluntary family planning programs.” ( SOURCE: Lewiston Evening Journal – Feb 2, 1967 , from Johnson’s 1967 State of the Union Address )

On December 10, 1974, the United States National Security Council promulgated National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), also called The Kissinger Report. This document explicitly laid out a detailed strategy by which the United States would aggressively promote population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.

In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from lesser-developed countries, LDCs as it called them, to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, who must, according to NSSM-200, be limited by population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts.

According to NSSM-200, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include: a) the legalization of abortion; b) financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates; c) indoctrination of children; and d) mandatory population control, and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.

The New Eugenicists

Posted in Bill Gates, Eugenics, forced abortion, Life Dynamics, Maafa21, Ted Turner, Warren Buffet with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 5, 2011 by saynsumthn

Vodpod videos no longer available.

The New Eugenecists, posted with vodpod

More on Eugenics in Maafa21

Melinda Gates wife of Bill Gates pushes “Eugenics” at CARE conference

Posted in Abortion, Bill Gates, Eugenics, Margaret Sanger, NSSM200, Planned Parenthood with tags , , , , , , , , , on March 11, 2011 by saynsumthn

Melinda Gates, Co-Founder and Co-Chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation addressed the 2011 CARE Conference and International Women’s Day Celebration in Washington DC. on Wednesday and urged US lawmakers not to cut funding for family planning programs in developing countries ( code word for eugenics, abortion , and minorities) , saying access to contraception can “save a huge number of lives.”

“There is a lot of controversy in this country about reproductive health because of the issue of abortion, and it’s appropriate to continue that dialogue because there are strong feelings on both sides,” Gates said in a speech at the annual conference of CARE, a global anti-poverty group.

“But we must remember that there has long been a broad, bipartisan consensus on the need to give all women access to the contraceptives that women in rich countries use every day. It is vital to maintain that consensus,” she added.

ALL WOMEN????? Who is she referring to on that one ????

Gates and her husband Bill, co-founder of Microsoft, chair a global philanthropy group that bears their name.

“Right now, more than 200 million women in the world… are not using contraceptives,” Melinda Gates said.

Melinda is the wife of Bill Gates and he is the son of a former Planned Parenthood Head…Planned Parenthood was seeped in eugenics :


Bill Gates and Planned Parenthood:

GATES: When I was growing up, my parents were almost involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of Planned Parenthood. And it was very controversial to be involved with that. And so it’s fascinating. At the dinner table my parents are very good at sharing the things that they were doing. And almost treating us like adults, talking about that.
My mom was on the United Way group that decides how to allocate the money and looks at all the different charities and makes the very hard decisions about where that pool of funds is going to go. So I always knew there was something about really educating people and giving them choices in terms of family size.

Read the Transcript: Bill Moyers Interviews Bill Gates / Admits dad worked for Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood was founded on racist eugenics according to the documentary: Maafa21 (Clip below)

The Bill and Melinds Gates Foundation is known for financing the nation’s largest abortion clinic Planned Parenthood ( See here)

LARGE CORPORATIONS FUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD_ MAAFA21 Begin 6:23 minutes:

FYI:
In a conversation with Charlie Rose, Melinda Gates said that foundations must act as catalysts to spurn governments into action to create “vaccines” in Africa.

Melinda French Gates: Family Planning in Kenya

This is masking the Eugenic NASSM200 plan:

Listen to what our own president, Lyndon B. Johnson had to say< LBJ Faces up a Crisis: Johnson also stated, “Nations with food deficits must put more of their resources into voluntary family planning programs.” ( SOURCE: Lewiston Evening Journal – Feb 2, 1967 , from Johnson’s 1967 State of the Union Address )

On December 10, 1974, the United States National Security Council promulgated National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), also called The Kissinger Report. This document explicitly laid out a detailed strategy by which the United States would aggressively promote population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.

In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from lesser-developed countries, LDCs as it called them, to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, who must, according to NSSM-200, be limited by population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts.

According to NSSM-200, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include: a) the legalization of abortion; b) financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates; c) indoctrination of children; and d) mandatory population control, and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.

While the CIA and Departments of State and Defense have issued hundreds of papers on population control and national security, the U.S. government has never renounced NSSM-200, but has only amended certain portions of its policy. NSSM-200, therefore, remains the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government.

In 1969, Guttmacher as then President of Planned Parenthood-World Population, said this: “ I would like to give our voluntary means of population control full opportunity in the next 10 to 12 years. Then , if these don’t succeed, we may have to go into some kind of coercion, not worldwide, but possibly in such places as India, Pakistan, and Indonesia, where pressures are the greatest…There is no question that birth rates can be reduced all over the world if legal abortion is introduced…” ( SOURCE: Family Planning: The needa and the Methods, by: Alan F. Guttmacher; The American Journal of Nursing, Vol. 69, No. 6. (June, 1969) PP. 1229-1234)

And in February of 1970 Alan Guttmacher was interviewed by the Baltimore Magazine and said this
Our birth rate has come down since we last talked.. I think we’ve hit a plateau- the figure’s not likely to drop much more unless there is more legal abortion. , or abortion on request as we call it…My own feeling is that we’ve got to pull out all the stops and involve the United Nations…If you’re going to curb population, it’s extremely important not to have it done by the dammed Yankees, but by the UN. Because the thing is, then it’s not considered genocide. If the United States goes to the Black man or the yellow man and says slow down your reproduction rate, we’re immediately suspected of having ulterior motives to keep the white man dominant in the world. If you can send in a colorful UN force, you’ve got much better leverage.”

Kenyans did NOT Want abortion legalized. The United States forced it on them under NSSM reasons – In fact, when they stood against the legalization, they were bombed: A peaceful anti-constitution protest and prayer service on June 13, 2010 turned violent when two bombs exploded, killing six people and injuring over 100 more, according to Kenyan newspaper The Standard.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about "Kenya churches blame government for g…", posted with vodpod

Not only were opponents being bombed, their leaders were being arrested. Three members of the Kenyan parliament were taken into custody on June 16 on charges of alleged hate speech relating to their prominent leadership in opposing the new constitution.

Three other members of parliament were also accused of hate speech, including Higher Education Minister William Ruto, widely seen as a leader in the campaign against the new pro-abortion constitution. The Obama administration offered “incentives” to Kenya to approve the pro-abortion constitution legalizing abortion for the first time, promising that passage will “allow money to flow” into the nation’s coffers, including U.S. aid. The pressure worked and Kenya passed it.

This is about POPULATION CONTROL – Increasing abortions in African nations is part of the NSSM200 plan.

Simply listen to the words ex Planned Parenthood President, Alan Guttmacher told a symposium at the University of California Medical Center in 1966 he stated that, “the belief that the white middle class was coercing their own poor and people with black and yellow skins to reduce family size because the middle-class whites are frightened of being outnumbered.”

The only way the mounting feeling that birth control is a tool of racism can be handled, is to involve knowledgeable leaders from the minority groups who understand and are favorable to the philosophy of birth control. They, in turn, must translate their appreciation of the contribution which birth control can make toward family stability to their own people.” (SOURCE: New York Times: Doctor blames his profession for delays on Family Planning: 1/16/1966)

Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, was a member in good standing with the racist American Eugenics Society. Sanger had boards members who were known for their racist writing and Sanger published many of those in her publications. Sanger called for parents to have a QUOTE: LICENSE TO BREED controlled by people who believed in her eugenic philosophy. She wanted all would be parents to go before her eugenic boards to request a “PERMIT TO BREED“.

Margaret Sanger once said, “More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

In Margaret Sanger’s, “Birth Control and Racial Betterment,” Feb 1919. Birth Control Review , Library of Congress Microfilm 131:0099B .
Sanger states, “Before eugenists and others who are laboring for racial betterment can succeed, they must first clear the way for Birth Control. Like the advocates of Birth Control, the eugenists, for instance, are seeking to assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit. Both are seeking a single end but they lay emphasis upon different methods.

Eugenists emphasize the mating of healthy couples for the conscious purpose of producing healthy children, the sterilization of the unfit to prevent their populating the world with their kind and they may, perhaps, agree with us that contraception is a necessary measure among the masses of the workers, where wages do not keep pace with the growth of the family and its necessities in the way of food, clothing, housing, medical attention, education and the like.

We who advocate Birth Control, on the other hand, lay all our emphasis upon stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction when there is not economic means of providing proper care for those who are born in health.While I personally believe in the sterilization of the feeble-minded, the insane and syphilitic, I have not been able to discover that these measures are more than superficial deterrents when applied to the constantly growing stream of the unfitEugenics without Birth Control seems to us a house builded upon the sands. It is at the mercy of the rising stream of the unfit…

Sanger also called for those who were poor and what she considered to be “morons and immoral‘ , to be shipped to colonies where they would live in “Farms and Open Spaces” dedicated to brainwashing these so-called “inferior types” into having what Sanger called, “Better moral conduct”.

I consider that the world and almost our civilization for the next twenty-five years, is going to depend upon a simple, cheap, safe contraceptive to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles, and among the most ignorant people. Even this will not be sufficient, because I believe that now, immediately, there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.
Planned Parenthood Founder, Margaret Sanger, 1950

In addition, Planned Parenthood’s top award is called the Margaret Sanger Award, despite the fact that Sanger was an admitted Klan speaker. This is what Sanger wrote in her autobiography, “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

Africans suspicious of Bill Gates investment

Posted in Bill Gates, Eugenics, Genetically Modified Food with tags , , , , , , , on August 27, 2010 by saynsumthn

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invests in Monsanto
Thursday, August 26, 2010

Farmers and civil society organizations around the world are outraged by the recent discovery of further connections between the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and agribusiness titan Monsanto. Last week, a financial website published the Gates Foundation’s investment portfolio, including 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock with an estimated worth of $23.1 million purchased in the second quarter of 2010. This marks a substantial increase from its previous holdings, valued at just over $360,000.

“The Foundation’s direct investment in Monsanto is problematic on two primary levels,” said Dr. Phil Bereano, University of Washington Professor Emeritus and recognized expert on genetic engineering, in the press release. “First, Monsanto has a history of blatant disregard for the interests and well-being of small farmers around the world, as well as an appalling environmental track record. The strong connections to Monsanto cast serious doubt on the Foundation’s heavy funding of agricultural development in Africa and purported goal of alleviating poverty and hunger among small-scale farmers. Second, this investment represents an enormous conflict of interests.”

Monsanto has already negatively impacted agriculture in African countries. For example, in South Africa in 2009, Monsanto’s genetically modified maize failed to produce kernels and hundreds of farmers were devastated. According to Mariam Mayet, environmental attorney and director of the Africa Centre for Biosafety in Johannesburg, some farmers suffered up to an 80% crop failure. While Monsanto compensated the large-scale farmers to whom it directly sold the faulty product, it gave nothing to the small-scale farmers to whom it had handed out free sachets of seeds. “When the economic power of Gates is coupled with the irresponsibility of Monsanto, the outlook for African smallholders is not very promising,” said Mayet. Monsanto’s aggressive patenting practices have also monopolized control over seed in ways that deny farmers control over their own harvest, going so far as to sue—and bankrupt—farmers for “patent infringement.”

News of the Foundation’s recent Monsanto investment has confirmed the misgivings of many farmers and sustainable agriculture advocates in Africa, among them the Kenya Biodiversity Coalition, who commented, “We have long suspected that the founders of AGRA—the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—had a long and more intimate affair with Monsanto.” Indeed, according to Travis English, researcher with AGRA Watch, “The Foundation’s ownership of Monsanto stock is emblematic of a deeper, more long-standing involvement with the corporation, particularly in Africa.”

Rest of Story Here

Learn more about Bill Gate’s investments in eugenics and Black Genocide in the film- Maafa21