EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

08.11.10

Interesting Message Connects Bill Gates to Eugenics

Posted in Bill Gates, Patents at 3:11 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Soldiers

Summary: A connection is suggested between the artificial scarcity of patents and one’s ambition to make poor populations more scarce

WE HAVE written extensively about the Gates Foundation’s investment in patents, especially those that offer leverage over the developing nations. Keith Robertson-Turner posted a thought-provoking message some days ago and it seems reasonable to make a copy here.

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Evil Bill Gates secures billions for Monsanto’s agri-patents and eugenics
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 05:16:47 +0100

[Subject corrected]

Verily I say unto thee, that Tattoo Vampire spake thusly:
> Hadron wrote:
>
>> “Thirty-eight US billionaires have pledged at least 50% of their
>> wealth to charity through a campaign started by investor Warren
>> Buffett and Microsoft founder Bill Gates.”
>>
>> What an evil bastard.

Yes, he is.

>> I bet Gates saved, ooo, hundreds of dollars by giving these
>> billions and millions away.

[quote]
From 1994 to 2006, Bill and Melinda gave the foundation more than $26
billion. Those donations resulted in a tax savings of less than 8.3
percent of the contributions they made over that time.
[/quote]

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/Pages/frequently-asked-questions-foundation.aspx

Assuming “less than 8.3″ means 8.25xxx, I’ll be generous and round the
figure down to 8.2%.

( 8.2 / 100 ) * 26,000,000,000 = 2,132,000,000 or ~2.1 Billion USD.

That was up to 2006.

Also note the wording carefully: “Those donations resulted in a tax
savings”. IOW there’s no explicit correlation between the true source of
these “donations” and the accounts benefiting from the tax break. “We
donated” can mean anything from “our private bank accounts” to “shell
accounts” or even “money laundered though business accounts”. The Gates
Foundation is well known for it’s unethical investments.

[quote]
Just How British Is BP?
By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF

In a story in The Times on Sunday, our colleague Sheryl Gay Stolberg
wrote of growing displeasure in Britain over the use of the name
“British Petroleum†by top federal officials in the United States in
referring to the party responsible for the gulf spill. The company
officially changed its name to BP several years ago, and to some on the
other side of the pond, invoking the old name is a backhanded slap at
Britain and even a threat to the “special relationship†our two nations
share.

With tens of thousands of barrels of oil still gushing into the gulf
every day, quibbling over a name might seem petty. Nevertheless, it does
seem fair to note that BP is not exactly a foreign corporation running
roughshod over American soil. As Fraser Nelson, a columnist for The
Spectator, pointed out late last week, 39 percent of the company is
owned by American shareholders and six Americans – half the total – sit
on its board of directors.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is another a major investor, with
nearly 43 million shares.
[/quote]

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/just-how-british-is-bp/

>> It’ll be interesting to see how nutcases like Roy, Homo and their
>> shill Creepy present this to the COLA minions.

I hope you’re sufficiently “interested” now.

> Hadron, it’s possible for someone to be a humanitarian but still
> engage in questionable business practices.

Or even be a “humanitarian” *in order to* engage in questionable
business practices. Like this, for example:

[quote]
Ending Africa’s Hunger? Gates Foundation & Monsanto

These are valuable efforts, but one might pause to ask why the need for
such philanthropic intervention arose in the first place. The faltering
quality of African agricultural research institutions, and the decline
in government spending on agriculture, is a result of the budget
austerity imposed by international financial institutions, such as the
World Bank, in the 1980s and ’90s. As Filipino scholar-activist Walden
Bello has noted, Africa exported 1.3 million tons of food a year in the
1960s, but after being subject to international development loans and
free-market fundamentalism, today it imports nearly 25 percent of its
food. In a 2008 report, the Bank’s internal evaluations group lambasted
the policies that led to this situation. What the Gates Foundation is
doing is using its private money to fund activities that once were in
the public domain and were, albeit imperfectly, under democratic control.

The preference for private sector contributions to agriculture shapes
the Gates Foundation’s funding priorities. In a number of grants, for
instance, one corporation appears repeatedly–Monsanto. To some extent,
this simply reflects Monsanto’s domination of industrial agricultural
research. There are, however, notable synergies between Gates and
Monsanto: both are corporate titans that have made millions through
technology, in particular through the aggressive defense of proprietary
intellectual property. Both organizations are suffused by a culture of
expertise, and there’s some overlap between them. Robert Horsch, a
former senior vice president at Monsanto, is, for instance, now interim
director of Gates’s agricultural development program and head of the
science and technology team. Travis English and Paige Miller,
researchers with the Seattle-based Community Alliance for Global
Justice, have uncovered some striking trends in Gates Foundation
funding. By following the money, English told us that “AGRA used funds
from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to write twenty-three grants
for projects in Kenya. Twelve of those recipients are involved in
research in genetically modified agriculture, development or advocacy.
About 79 percent of funding in Kenya involves biotech in one way or
another.” And, English says, “so far, we have found over $100 million in
grants to organizations connected to Monsanto.”

This isn’t surprising in light of the fact that Monsanto and Gates both
embrace a model of agriculture that sees farmers suffering a deficit of
knowledge–in which seeds, like little tiny beads of software, can be
programmed to transmit that knowledge for commercial purposes. This
assumes that Green Revolution technologies–including those that
substitute for farmers’ knowledge–are not only desirable but neutral.
Knowledge is never neutral, however: it inevitably carries and
influences relations of power.
[/quote]

http://current.com/news/91070994_ending-africas-hunger-gates-foundation-monsanto.htm

Here’s a more detailed analysis:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7529

Bill Gates advocating eugenics (elitism through genocide):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WQtRI7A064

AFAICT the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is nothing but a corporatist
front for Big Pharma, agri-patents, eugenics, and unethical businesses’
tax breaks and money laundering.


K.
http://slated.org

.—-
| When all else fails, MOVE.L 4.W,A6 and JSR -726(A6)
`—-

Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.31.5
05:16:13 up 6:26, 1 user, load average: 0.04, 0.22, 0.15

If anyone is familiar with this subject, please consider weighing in.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Koch Brothers and Big Oil Could Not Buy the Decisions in Oil States, SAS

    In Oil States Energy Services v Greene’s Energy Group, a case which Koch-funded think tanks meddled in (including those whose panel guests send me threatening legal letters), ends up with dissent from a Koch-connected Justice citing or quoting those very same Koch-funded think tanks



  2. The European Patent Office (EPO) Wastes a Lot of Money on External PR Agencies for Battistelli's 'Heist'

    The EPO's management is once again scattering/throwing EPO budget at PR agencies and media companies (publishers/broadcasters) to disseminate a bunch of puff pieces and virtually ignore the very obvious conflict of interest, which should be a scandal on par with that of FIFA (resulting in the arrest of its boss, Mr. Blatter)



  3. Today's EPO is Not Compatible With the Law and It's Grossly Incompatible With Truth and Justice

    Today, once again, the EPO openly advocates software patents while media promotes loopholes (notably hype waves)



  4. Quick Mention: As Expected, the US Supreme Court Cements PTAB's Role With Trump-Appointed Gorsuch Dissenting

    Oil States has been decided and it's very good news for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB); even Conservatives-leaning Justices support PTAB



  5. Links 24/4/2018: Preview of Crostini, Introducing Heptio Gimbal, OPNsense 18.1.6

    Links for the day



  6. Patent Maximalists Step Things Up With Director Andrei Iancu and It's Time for Scientists to Fight Back

    Science and technology don't seem to matter as much as the whims of the patent (litigation) 'industry', at least judging by recent actions taken by Andrei Iancu (following a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee)



  7. Mythology About Patents in the East

    Misconceptions (or deliberate propaganda) about patent policy in the east poison the debate and derail a serious, facts-based discussion about it



  8. Patent Trolls Watch: Red River Innovations, Bradium Technologies/General Patent, and Wordlogic

    A quick look at some patent trolls that made the news this Monday; we are still seeing a powerful response to such trolls, whose momentum is slipping owing to the good work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)



  9. Holding Benoît Battistelli Accountable After the EPO

    The many abuses and offenses committed by Mr. Battistelli whilst he enjoyed diplomatic immunity can and should be brought up as that immunity expires in two months; a good start would be contacting his colleagues, who might not be aware of the full spectrum of his abuses



  10. Links 23/4/2018: Second RC of Linux 4.17 and First RC of Mesa 18.1

    Links for the day



  11. The Good Work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the Latest Attempts to Undermine It

    A week's roundup of news about PTAB, which is eliminating many bad (wrongly-granted) patents and is therefore becoming "enemy number one" to those who got accustomed to blackmailing real (productive) firms with their questionable patents



  12. District Courts' Patent Cases, Including the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX/TXED), in a Nutshell

    A roundup of patent cases in 'low courts' of the United States, where patents are being reasoned about or objected to while patent law firms make a lot of money



  13. The Federal Circuit's (CAFC) Decisions Are Being Twisted by Patent Propaganda Sites Which Merely Cherry-Pick Cases With Outcomes That Suit Them

    The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues to reject the vast majority of software patents, citing Section 101 in many such cases, but the likes of Managing IP, Patently-O, IAM and Watchtroll only selectively cover such cases (instead they’re ‘pulling a Berkheimer’ or some similar name-dropping)



  14. Patents Roundup: Metaswitch, GENBAND, Susman, Cisco, Konami, High 5 Games, HTC, and Nintendo

    A look at existing legal actions, the application of 35 U.S.C. § 101, and questionable patents that are being pursued on software (algorithms or "software infrastructure")



  15. In Maxon v Funai the High 'Patent Court' (CAFC) Reaffirms Disdain for Software Patents, Which Are Nowadays Harder to Get and Then Defend

    With the wealth of decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) wherein software patents get discarded (Funai being the latest example), the public needs to ask itself whether patent law firms are honest when they make claims about resurgence of software patents by 'pulling a Berkheimer' or coming up with terms like “Berkheimer Effect”



  16. Today's European Patent Office Works for Patent Extremists and for Team UPC Rather Than for Europe or for Innovation

    The International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) and other patent maximalists who have nothing to do with Europe, helped by a malicious and rather clueless politician called Benoît Battistelli, are turning the EPO into a patent-printing machine rather than an examination office as envisioned by the EPC (founders) and member states



  17. The EPO is Dying and Those Who Have Killed It Are Becoming Very Rich in the Process

    Following the footsteps of Ron Hovsepian at Novell, Battistelli at the EPO (along with Team Battistelli) may mean the end of the EPO as we know it (or the end altogether); one manager and a cabal of confidants make themselves obscenely rich by basically sacrificing the very organisation they were entrusted to serve



  18. Short: Just Keep Repeating the Lie (“Quality”) Until People Might Believe It

    Battistelli’s patent-printing bureau (EPO without quality control) keeps lying about the quality of patents by repeating the word “quality” a lot of times, including no less than twice in the summary alone



  19. Shelston IP Keeps Pressuring IP Australia to Allow Software Patents and Harm Software Development

    Shelston IP wants exactly the opposite of what's good for Australia; it just wants what's good for itself, yet it habitually pretends to speak for a productive industry (nothing could be further from the truth)



  20. Is Andy Ramer's Departure the End of Cantor Fitzgerald's Patent Trolls-Feeding Operations and Ambitions?

    The managing director of the 'IP' group at Cantor Fitzgerald is leaving, but it does not yet mean that patent trolls will be starved/deprived access to patents



  21. EPO Hoards Billions of Euros (Taken From the Public), Decreases Quality to Get More Money, Reduces Payments to Staff

    The EPO continues to collect money from everyone, distributes bogus/dubious patents that usher patent trolls into Europe (to cost European businesses billions in the long run), and staff of the EPO faces more cuts while EPO management swims in cash and perks



  22. Short: Calling Battistelli's Town (Where He Works) “Force for Innovation” to Justify the Funneling of EPO Funds to It

    How the EPO‘s management ‘explained’ (or sought to rationalise) to staff its opaque decision to send a multi-million, one-day ceremony to Battistelli’s own theatre only weeks before he leaves



  23. Short: EPO Bribes the Media and Then Brags About the Paid-for Outcome to Staff

    The EPO‘s systematic corruption of the media at the expense of EPO stakeholders — not to mention hiring of lawyers to bully media which exposes EPO corruption — in the EPO’s own words (amended by us)



  24. Short: EPO's “Working Party for Quality” is to Quality What the “Democratic People's Republic of Korea” is to Democracy

    To maintain the perception (illusion) that the EPO still cares about patent quality — and in order to disseminate this lie to EPO staff — a puff piece with the above heading/photograph was distributed to thousands of examiners in glossy paper form



  25. Short: This Spring's Message From the EPO's President (Corrected)

    A corrected preface from the Liar in Chief, the EPO's notoriously crooked and dishonest President



  26. Short: Highly Misleading and Unscientific Graphics From the EPO for an Illusion of Growth

    A look at the brainwash that EPO management is distributing to staff and what's wrong with it



  27. Short: EPO Explains to Examiners Why They Should and Apparently Can Grant Software Patents (in Spite of EPC)

    Whether it calls it "CII" or "ICT" or "Industry 4.0" or "4IR", the EPO's management continues to grant software patents and attempts to justify this to itself (and to staff)



  28. Links 21/4/2018: Linux 4.9.95, FFmpeg 4.0, OpenBSD Foundation 2018 Fundraising Campaign

    Links for the day



  29. As USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu Gives Three Months for Public Comments on 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Software Patenting Impacted)

    Weeks after starting his job as head of the US patent office, to our regret but not to our surprise, Iancu asks whether to limit examiners' ability to reject abstract patent applications citing 35 U.S.C. § 101 (relates to Alice and Mayo)



  30. In Keith Raniere v Microsoft Both Sides Are Evil But for Different Reasons

    Billing for patent lawyers reveals an abusive strategy from Microsoft, which responded to abusive patent litigation (something which Microsoft too has done for well over a decade)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts