I know that the United States of America is full of loving, giving, compassionate people. Throughout our history there has never been a nation that has poured itself out for others like the USA! I am not talking about the billions of dollars the US Government has spent on foreign aid. I am talking about the American people. Who, from their own purse, no matter how meager their means, have contributed more money than anyone can count or measure. But, not just time, Americans have given of their time, energy, effort, knowledge and love. They have poured themselves out, bringing medical care, building homes, digging wells, rescuing the injured and lost, and sharing the love of GOD bringing hope to the world. Face to face, or long distance, Americans GIVE!
The problem is that there are evil people here, too. Evil, greedy, selfish people who create all kinds of ways to steal the donations and contributions and thwart the aims and purposes for which they were given.
In these very hard times, when people are hurting the most, these entities have been pushing harder and harder for you to give. GIVE to their corrupt organizations, corporations, foundations, research centers and research hospitals and all other manner of so called “Charities”. They are shameless, monsters and thieves.
I have been crying out about this truth for many years. I guess people think that I was just a “Crazy Conspiracy Theorist” or gruntled x-employee, rabble rouser or “FEAR MONGER”. All the things they like to call TRUTHERS to divert your eyes from the TRUTH.
Well, since they are crying louder and louder for your funds. I guess we have to CRY EVEN LOUDER! So that you can hear the truth above their propaganda.
Today, I hope that you will take some time to peruse all that is posted here. Really think about what is going on and where you should place your hard earned money in order to accomplish the most good.
All I ask is that you view the whole post with an open mind and heart. Listen for GOD to stir you spirit. Drown out the devil and his lying minions.
“No one has ever become poor by giving.” Anne Frank – BECAUSE YOU CAN’T OUTGIVE GOD!
If you are not a Believer… and many are not, then you will still benefit from all the information exposed in this post. Use your critical thinking and see if the so called “CHARITIES and Philanthropic Organizations have really been earning your trust when you place your gifts for the poor and needy in their hands.
The VERY WELL KNOWN LOVE Scripture. The word Charity is used, Charity is LOVE. God’s agape, unconditional love. You can see from the first line that giving to the poor is not charity. Love is Charity. Giving to the poor is an outward sign of the inward love for our fellow humans. The scripture here makes it clear you can be giving to the poor without being Charitable or loving.
1 Corinthians 13
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
agape | Etymology, origin and meaning of agape by etymonline
Strongs’s #26: agape – Greek/Hebrew Definitions – Bible Tools
Love-Agape (Greek Word Study) | Precept Austin
There are many Scriptures that address the God’s heart for and perspective of the poor but I have selected just a few to help us draw a conclusion to the subject question:
- Giving and helping the poor is core to God’s character: As it is written: “They have freely scattered their gifts to the poor; their righteousness endures forever.” (2 Corinthians 9:9 NIV) Also, 1 Samuel 2:8 NIV shares, “He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap; he seats them with princes and has them inherit a throne of honor. “For the foundations of the earth are the Lord’s; on them he has set the world.”
- Jesus assumes we will be giving to the poor (notice not “if” but “when”): “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.” (Matthew 6:2 NIV)
- True followers of Christ gave to the poor: “But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.” (Luke 19:8 NIV) Paul was eager to give as well: “All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along.” (Galatians 2:10 NIV)
- When we give to the poor, we are giving to God: “Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will reward them for what they have done.” (Proverbs 19:17 NIV)
- When we give to the poor, it honors God: ”Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker,
but whoever is kind to the needy honors God.” (Proverbs 14:31 NIV)
- The Israelites were commanded to provide for the poor and were blessed for their generosity: “At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year’s produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the foreigners, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied, and so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.” (Deuteronomy 14:28-29 NIV)
- Not helping the poor was reason for judgment in the past: “ ‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” (Ezekiel 16:49 NIV)
- It will be a topic at the future judgment: “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (Matthew 25:34-46 NIV)
So, now we see that it is IMPERATIVE for any believer, any follower of Christ/Messiah to give to the poor. Not only to give to the poor, but to do all we can to help them. To speak up on their behalf.
Now, there are those who do not have the spirit of God living in them. They see the poor and homeless as nothing more than a nuisance. They care more about the expense of cleaning up after them, paying for them when they are sick or injured, burying them when they die. For a city that is looking to attract new business and investors they present a bad image. This presents a loss of future revenue. MONEY is their god. They serve Mammon. Money is the root of all evil.
|1 Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.
He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves wealth with his income; this also is vanity. When goods increase, they increase who eat them, and what advantage has their owner but to see them with his eyes? Sweet is the sleep of a laborer, whether he eats little or much, but the full stomach of the rich will not let him sleep.
“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money. (Don’t you find it interesting that God NEVER said that about anything or any other false god or spirit. ONLY MONEY/Mammon)
The following article comes out of Colorado Springs, but there are many Cities across the country that are having similar meetings to strategize how to clean the homeless out of their cities.
The signs were created by the Colorado Springs Police Department, with input from the Avenue Task Force (ATF). An ad hoc group formed two years ago, the ATF includes Westside residents who work with law enforcement
| Police Lt. Jeff Jensen (standing) and El Paso County Sheriff’s Lt. J.D. Ross display signs intended to discourage people from giving money to panhandlers. The unveiling took place during a March 19 meeting of the Avenue Task Force in the Gold Hill Police Station community room. Seated to Jensen’s right is Gold Hill Commander Rafael Cintron.
Westside Pioneer photo
and elected officials to reduce crime along the West Colorado Avenue corridor.
Unveiled at the March 19 ATF meeting, the signs come in two rectangular sizes – one 18 inches high, the other one 12 inches. Both bear the messages “It’s OK to say no” and “Aggressive solicitation prohibited.”
A graphic on the larger version shows someone in a car reaching through a car window to give a person cash. But a red circle encompasses the graphic, with a diagonal red line across it in the universal negation symbol.
On the smaller sign, a similar red line runs across a different graphic – one that displays a piece of paper money next to a hand clutching what could be an alcoholic drink.
The term, “aggressive solicitation,” refers to people using physical or verbal intimidation when they seek a handout. Even asking a second time after being turned down is a violation of city codes.
The sign plan was motivated by city findings about an all-too-frequent unintended outcome when well-meaning people give beggars money: They use it to buy liquor or drugs. This in turn can lead to their becoming incapacitated and requiring emergency treatment at taxpayer expense. “We have spent as much as $57,000 on a single hospital visit,” comments Police Sergeant Michael Spitzmiller in a 12-minute panhandling video produced by the El Paso County Public Information Office.
At the same time, Gold Hill Police Commander Rafael Cintron explained that for legal reasons the signs cannot leave the impression that panhandling is against the law. The practice is allowed in most public places – such as the sidewalks at shopping center accesses – and even on private property, unless the land owner seeks trespassing charges, he pointed out.
Police also emphasize the efforts they take to assist people who are genuinely down and out, using a special unit called the Homeless Outreach (“HOT”) team.
At the ATF meeting, Gold Hill Police Lieutenant Jeff Jensen said final
| Several members of the Avenue Task Force March 19 watch a screening of a new video explaining the downside of giving money to panhandlers.
Westside Pioneer photo
locations for the 11 downtown signs are being determined.
Downtown merchants have frequently complained that vagrancy hurts business, and two years ago they won City Council approval for a law (later deemed unconstitutional) to curb panhandling in a defined downtown area.
On the Westside, Jensen said that “most problem areas are on private property.” Because of that, the plan is for citizen members of the ATF to seek permission from private property owners to put up the signs at strategic Westside locations.
Among those in attendance at the ATF meeting was Dave Van Ness, executive director of the Old Colorado City Associates (OCCA) business group, who expressed interest in installing one or more of the signs in Bancroft Park.
The sign costs are $35 for the larger size and $15 for the smaller, said Mary Gallivan, a citizen volunteer on the ATF.
Like the signs, the panhandling video was also unveiled at the March 19 ATF meeting. ATF members hope to have a finalized version that will eventually run on local public TV channels, such as those for the city, library and school district. For now, it can be viewed at this online link.
The video includes testimony about aggressive panhandling experiences from two members of the ATF – Gallivan and Bonnie Lapora. “It’s sometimes very frightening,” Gallivan said. “Some of these people are intoxicated or on drugs.”
Lapora recalled a time in a shopping center when “three men came at me from different directions. It absolutely freaked me out.”
Also on the video, City Councilmember Merv Bennett advises citizens that the “the best way to stop panhandling is to quit giving money to them. This is a community that’s very giving and philanthropic, but those gifts are better used for those organizations in town that can provide strategic and helpful care.”
At the end of the video, viewers are referred to the Panhandling page on the Organization of Westside Neighbors website for a list of local agencies that give needy people a “hand up, not a handout.” The page can be accessed by clicking the Panhandling link on the left side of the page at westsideneighbors.org .
Westside Pioneer article
(Posted 3/23/15; Community: Public Safety)
The biggest tool these folks have to get you to choose their way over God’s way is FEAR. They want you to focus on the addiction issues among the homeless. They want you to be AFRAID of the homeless. BUT FEAR is not of GOD. If you are walking with the Lord, HE will protect you and keep you.
They also want you to believe that you are throwing away your hard earned money by giving it to the homeless. They want you to believe they will just spend the money on drugs or booze. Believe it or not many of the homeless share what they receive with others in their situation. They help each other. They even build their own little communities with their own laws and commitments.
Even if the person you give money to spends that money on booze or drugs. That is between them and GOD. God is their judge not you. A gift is just that… a GIFT freely given, out of LOVE, not expecting anything in return. You have not control over what they do with it. If they do buy a bottle of wine or whiskey or whatever drug they choose, and that gives them a little comfort in their dyer and hopeless circumstances, so what? Even GOD’s word says strong drink is for those with a heavy heart.
3Give not thy strength unto women, nor thy ways to that which destroyeth kings. 4It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink: 5Lest they drink, and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted. 6Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts. 7Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more. 8Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction. 9Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.
They are those who will not give to the needy, poor and homeless because they see them as conning them out of their money. They have heard stories of some who make a really good living by begging and build up large bank accounts. These people may be out there, but they do not represent the majority of the homeless. Look around for heaven’s sake. Would these people be out freezing to death or living in squalor if they had big banks accounts stashed away?
Realize that the reason they have to live in squalor is because they are shout out and/or cut off from any means to clean themselves up. There is no trash pick up where they sleep. There are no bathrooms open to them to releave themselves or wash up, shower. They have no where to wash their clothes.
You should know that there are a lot of things that Cities could do to make life better for the homeless and the poor. They just don’t want to make it easier because they don’t want them in their Cities.
Man has made giving to the poor a financial business.
The world likes to call us the Richest Nation in the world and most Americans are made to feel responsible for the whole world. The truth is that most Americans have far less than people do in many other countries. It is only the few elite, who are connected to and sponsored by the UN who have all the wealth in the USA.
Our world’s deepest pockets — “ultra high net worth individuals” — hold an astoundingly disproportionate share of global wealth. Inequality Across Gender Diversity Restoring Power to the Global 99%
OECD statistics show that the top 1 percent in the United States holds 40.5 percent of national wealth, a far greater share than in other OECD countries. In no other industrial nation does the richest 1 percent own more than 27.1 percent of their country’s wealth.
The United States has more wealth than any other nation. But America’s top-heavy distribution of wealth leaves typical American adults with far less wealth than their counterparts in other industrial nations, according to the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report.
China has had the most rapid growth in the share of world millionaires, nearly doubling from 5 percent of the global total in 2017 to 9 percent in 2020. But 65 percent of the world’s millionaires continue to reside in Europe or North America, with almost 40 percent of these millionaires calling the United States home, according to the Global Wealth Report.
The United States is home to more than twice as many adults with at least $50 million in assets as the next five nations with the most super rich combined. China is rising rapidly up the ranks, with the number of individuals in the $50 million club rising from 9,555 to 28,129 between 2017 and 2020, according to the Global Wealth Report.
Michael Sanders and Francesca Tamma
Mon 23 Mar 2015 07.05 EDT
Experts from the nudge unit explain how fundraisers can make their messaging more effective
Researchers have looked into why people donate, why they don’t do it as much as they would hope and how to bridge this gap. The explanations for charitable giving fall into three broad categories, from the purely altruistic – I donate because I value the social good done by the charity. The “impurely” altruistic – I donate because I extract value from knowing I contribute to the social good for the charity. And the not-at-all altruistic – I donate because I want to show off to potential mates how rich I am.
The good news is that charitable giving is contagious
But are these motives strong enough to enable people to donate as much as they would want to? Most people support charities in one way or another, but often we struggle to make donations as often as we think we should. Although many people would like to leave a gift to charity in their will, they forget about it when the time comes. Our research shows (pdf) that if the will-writer just asks someone if they would like to donate, they are more likely to consider it and the rate of donation roughly doubles.
Hearts over heads
Many people are also aware that they should donate to the causes that have the highest impact, but facts and figures are less attractive than narratives. In a series of experiments, it was found that people are much more responsive to charitable pleas that feature a single, identifiable beneficiary, than they are to statistical information about the scale of the problem being faced. Further work also discovered that advertising which emphasises the proven effectiveness of the charity does not increase giving. Other evidence suggests that the effect of this information can actually be the opposite. In short, when it comes to charitable giving, we are often ruled by our hearts and not our heads.
Influenced by others
Another of the major takeaways from the research in this area is that giving is fundamentally a social act. One study shows that people give significantly more to their university if the person calling and asking for their donation is their former roommate. Researchers found that when JustGiving donors see that the donor before them has made a large donation, they make a larger donation themselves.
It’s not just our friends and families who can influence us. Donors to an international development charity were more likely to respond to a match–funding campaign if they knew that that the match came from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation than if it came from an anonymous source. In our own research working with a large employer and Marie Curie, we have found that celebrity supporters increase donations to charity, and fast – but that this only appears to work for people who have donated to the charity before.
Giving is contagious
The good news is that charitable giving is contagious – seeing others give makes an individual more likely to give and gentle encouragement from a prominent person in your life can make also make a big difference to your donation decisions – more than quadrupling them in our recent study. Habit also plays a part – in three recent experiments those who volunteered before were more likely to donate their time than those who had not volunteered before.
In summary, behavioural science identifies a range of factors that influence our donations, and can help us to keep giving in the longer term. This is great news not just for charities, but also for donors. Research has revealed that spending money on others actually makes us happier than spending it on ourselves, and giving to others can actually make us healthier. So what are we waiting for?
The United Way was set up as a control agent, they decided to centralize all giving. All tax-exempt charities (which is all organized charities) must REGISTER with the Government. Just like the Churches, once the Charities are registered they come under the GOVERNMENT’s jurisdiction and must follow the rules laid out for them. The United Way was given the power to decide where the money goes (which is most often to selected agencies that have nothing to do with helping the poor directly) and who does or does not receive assistance.
I was an abused wife and mother. I raised my kids on my own, no one was there to help me. If it had not been for local charities and individuals, I never would have survived. I most certainly would have lost my children. The early part of my struggle was before the United Way, THANK GOD! Once United Way was established all you could do was call 211. Everything had to go through that line. All you will hear from them is that they can’t do anything to help you. I know… I have tried it many times over the years. Thankfully once my children were older, I was able to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table by the POWER OF GOD!
Centralized control of ANYTHING is not good. You would think they could do more good because they have so much money in one place…but that is a lie. A lie they tell you to keep the money coming in for their agendas. MONEY is POWER and POWER CORRUPTS! Greed is a very strong force. If you look into it, you will find that most of the so called “CHARITIES” are laden with crooks and thieves.
The bigger any organization gets the more corruption is present. That is because it is impossible to oversea so many people.
I met a man whose job it was to teach people how to get rich by opening a “Charity”. Organized charities and s Philanthropies, are businesses! Their main purpose is to collect funds, it is not to help people.
I know, it is so much easier to write a check than to go out into the world and deal face to face with the poor and homeless, or the sick and dying. or the incarcerated. But, that is what GOD wants you to do. Why? Because it blessed both the giver and the receiver. You cannot imagine how your spirit is lifted when you take the effort. God sees what you are doing. He writes you in the book to receive blessings. The receiver, sees what you are doing and is moved. That a stranger cared.
When someone is able to receive something from an organization… there is not the same experience. Many times organizations make people feel small and unworthy. The people receiving the funds don’t have the warm experience of seeing the face of the giver. To them it is just and organization, giving out of obligation not our of LOVE.
In 2021, United Way Worldwide helped launch a 211 public service advertising campaign, aiming to connect more people in need to local available resources through 211. It’s helping people find resources they didn’t know were there. The PSA campaign was made possible because of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ad Council and Walton Isaacson. We should all know about Rockefeller. If you investigate Walton Isaacson I am sure you will find they are no better. Just a cursory look brought me to the following information.
Catching Up With Aaron Walton of the Walton Isaacson Agency
|My idea was to have the covenant signed by all the Lexus associates, dealers, and all their associates. The Lexus Covenant was to be written in stone on a large block of black granite that would be placed in the Lexus Headquarters atrium. It was to be a simple mantra meant to enact a philosophy of treating people with respect, drawing on Carl Sewell’s wisdom of exceeding customer expectations and instilling a lasting vision for the people of Lexus to achieve.|
Through research (see methodologies below) we learned that well-off Millennials have little desire to visit a car dealership. Thus Lexus’ positioning around customer service was simply not very relevant. For them luxury has evolved: from being about expensive “things” (1990s) to being about meaningful experieces (2000s) to being about “peak experiences” that let them express & share their individuality. These are experiences that have ‘bragging rights,” especially on social media. Our imperative became clear: Associate Lexus with this new definition of luxury. SOURCE
Ad Council – Wikipedia
What is the Ad Council and How is it Funded? – Doctor Schierling
Advertising in English and Spanish is running on digital and social channels (banners, mobile & social graphics), radio, video (broadcast, streaming & online) as well as print & out-of-home (billboards, bus stops, metro stations).
As United Way Global tells the story, in 1887, a Denver woman, a priest, two ministers, and a rabbi got together… It sounds like the beginning of a bad joke, but they didn’t walk into a bar; what they did do was recognize the need to work together in new ways to make Denver a better place.
Frances Wisebart Jacobs, the Rev. Myron W. Reed, Msgr. William J.O’Ryan, Dean H. Martyn Hart and Rabbi William S. Friedman put together an idea that became the nation’s first united campaign, benefitting 10 area health and welfare agencies. They created an organization to collect funds for local charities, coordinate relief services, counsel and refer clients to cooperating agencies, and make emergency assistance grants for cases that could not be referred. That year, Denver raised $21,700 for this greater good and created a movement that would become United Way.
Our roots are in collective impact organizing, meaning we work collectively to maximize our local impact. Essentially, we gather funding from various sources and seek to match that funding with other sources, then work with our partners to direct resources to address systemic social issues. So, instead of donating $1.00 to one organization, you can donate $1.00 that’s matched and added to a lot of other dollars and then given to the local organizations that are committed to making the biggest impact.
There have actually been multiple cases of fraud and embezzlement in various United Way Offices, the biggest one is the following:
United Ways raise funds primarily via company-sanctioned workplace campaigns, where the employer solicits contributions from their employees that can be paid through automatic payroll deductions (in the same way tax withholdings and insurance premiums are deducted from an employee’s net pay ).
No, United Way is a scam.The organization is so greedy it limits when a partner agency can schedule fundraisers all the while decreasing funding? If the United Way is about helping people who need help; why limit when other agencies partnered with them can schedule fundraisers? Could it be the United Way cares more about the money being funded through them than the money getting to the people in need via any charity? Why does the United Way see other charitable agencies as competition and not partners? Why is the UW afraid of other charities fundraising during certain times?
The answer is due to them wanting to take their 15-20% administration fee right off the top. If the other charities get direct donations the UW does not get a piece of the pie. UW is a bully agency. They lure in smaller agencies with promises of donations, limit the smaller charities fundraising days (thus making them more dependent on the UW), and then decrease funding on a whim. The UW is not a charity it is a business and should lose their non-profit status.
Yes, my friends, I am calling out United Way, 211 AND the Salvation Army for the scammers that they truly are and hope that my voice gets heard. I want this to go as viral as possible because it needs to stop! People need to stop donating and start asking questions as to where the money is actually going. I’m sure that in some cities, these scam artists are better than others, however; in a place such as West Palm Beach Florida, with 1.4 million people, well, they are worthless to say the least. I will be happy to explain. Here is just one instance as to how deep the scam can go.
William Aramony served for 22 years as president and CEO of United Way of America (UWA), the umbrella group for thousands of local United Way organizations that fund social and human service projects nationwide. In 1992, Aramony resigned amidst allegations that he siphoned money from UWA through spin-off companies he helped to create. Before the scandal broke, Aramony was widely respected as one of the most influential nonprofit leaders of his time. He even had a hand in creating many of the rules under which charities operate today. In 1995, Aramony and two conspirators, Thomas Merlo and Stephen Paulachak, were convicted of defrauding UWA. Aramony was convicted on 25 felony counts and sentenced to seven years in prison for fraudulently diverting $1.2 million of the charity’s money to benefit himself and his friends.
That is just one person, however; for me, this has become personal. For years at AT&T I was asked to give money to the United Way. They had reps come in and talk about how great they are and how wonderful they are and how they helped the communities and children graduate high school, etc (which I never really understood because school is free) They would come in with all of their stories about how we can help them. They were some of the best salesman dressed in wolves clothing that I have ever seen. I cannot say that AT&T forced us to give donations because they didn’t. They just implied that we should. Personally, I felt AT&T makes more than enough money to donate without asking us to do it, but it really wasnt a shock. It is not a secret as to how cheap big corporations can be.
As a business owner you will have good times, and bad times. Slow times and busy times. It may differ month to month, year to year, or sometimes it may be week to week. As a new business owner, most of us have made the mistake of spending too much money when we made it, or making common mistakes that we pay for, learn from and move on. Sometimes, we put ourselves in such a hole that we just cannot get out of. Then when you finally do get out of it, something major happens and your 3 steps forward, just went 5 steps back. For example, you have a $20,000 month and spend it all, thinking every month after that will be just as good. Next month drops to $10,000.. Next 3 months you are at $3,000. The further back you keep going, the more you sink. Then a catastrophe happens and you cannot work for months. Bills pile up and you are overwhelmed. There is money outstanding, people aren’t paying you, therefore; you cant pay others. Car breaks down, kids need stuff, yada yada. Life happens!
Before you know it, you are in a hole with maxed out credit cards and not knowing what to do, you panic. So you do some research online an remember that United Way and/Salvation Army are here to help people like you. They will help you get thorough this month and you will get back on your feet. Right? That’s what they are here for. Right? They just gloated as to how many millions of dollars they bring in each year, thanks to all of your corporate sponsors and wonderful donations. So you call up with a positive attitude and tell them your situation and they tell you, “sorry, we have no funding“. “Sorry, we cant help you””.”Sorry, we cant help you because we have a waiting list of 6 weeks and only give minimal funds.”.
WHAT? How can you not help me? Isn’t a situation like mine the very reason you were designed? So what happens if I am thrown out on the street with 3 kids in 2 days? A child that is disabled?
I’m truly sorry, because even the shelters in your area are all full”.
WOW!.I hung up the phone and thought, wow. Next time I see someone standing on the street corner begging for money, I will no longer roll up my window. I am going to give him $5.00.
Are you glad you have given so much to these “charities to help people?”
I have my own personal theory on where the multi-millions of dollars are going..They help out the “underprivileged” “minorities” from the ghetto because that is how they can put on the smoking mirrors to the working class in order to make it “appear” as if they are just so wonderful. If I am wrong, then PLEASE show me where I am wrong. I would LOVE to be wrong.
So as Part I ends, I would like all the CEO’s, C-Level Executives, Attorney;s and any other high level executive to think twice next time you bring United Way into your office, or write them a check. I can promise you that if something went very wrong in your life, or even a family member, and you needed emergency help, the very places that you have always donated to, would tell you they cant help you. Especially if you are a middle class white person who lives in an affluent neighborhood. (Yes, they ask you what color your skin is BEFORE they advise if they can help you or not)
All shares, comments and thoughts are appreciated. Agreed or debate.
A UNICEF program in West Africa that spent $27 million US to decrease child deaths from disease has failed, according to a study that found a higher survival rate in some regions that weren’t included in the program.
The United Nations children’s agency pursued strategies like vaccinating children, giving them vitamin A pills and distributing bed nets to protect against malaria from 2001 to 2005 in parts of 11 countries.
The aim was to reduce the death rate by at least 25 per cent by the end of 2006.
An analysis of the program in Benin, Ghana and Mali found children in areas where it wasn’t in effect had a better chance of surviving past age five than children who were covered by it. The study was published online Tuesday in the British medical journal Lancet.
It is one of the few studies to evaluate whether UN health programs really save lives. Related work published last year found that it wasn’t clear what the world had gotten from UN initiatives that cost nearly $200 billion US over the past two decades, and that some programs may have been counterproductive.
The UN’s children’s agency has admitted shortcomings in its humanitarian support to children who allege that they were raped and sexually abused by French peacekeepers in Central African Republic.
A statement by Unicef Netherlands is the first public acknowledgement of the agency’s recent failure to provide support to some of the victims of alleged abuse by peacekeepers in the African nation. It comes as the aid sector and the UN face increasing scrutiny for their failings in managing internal sexual misconduct by their own staff.
Unicef was given the task of overseeing the support for children who said they had been abused by peacekeepers.
But in March last year, an award-winning investigation by Swedish Television’s Uppdrag Granskning (Mission Investigate) revealed that some of the children supposedly in the UN’s care were homeless, out of school and forced to make a living on the streets, despite UN assurances that they would be protected. Unicef’s representative in CAR told the programme that the children were in the agency’s assistance programme for minors and were being supported. He said he was not aware that some were on the streets.
In a tumultuous world riven by wars, revolutions, famine, pestilence, and natural disasters, millions of people take comfort and hope in the knowledge that UNICEF, the United Nations Children’s Fund, is on the scene, rendering assistance to the planet’s unfortunates. When the television news cameras bring horrendous scenes of multitudes of starving waifs in Ethiopia and Somalia, and images of hordes of pathetic refugee children suffering from disease and exposure, the heart is overwhelmed. For decades, Americans have opened wide their wallets to help UNICEF provide medicines and immunizations, food, shelter, and development assistance to les miserables of the earth. Every year, the UN’s premiere charitable organization can count on compassionate Americans to cough up millions of dollars for UNICEF’s Halloween trick-or-treaters and UNICEF Christmas cards.
The American Red Cross is an institution. It’s one of the biggest charities in the country, raking in billions every year. After any disaster you see people sharing links all over social media, begging others to donate to the Red Cross so they can get out there and help those affected.
But the organization has a dark underbelly. Its history is full of scandal and bigotry. It flat-out refused to help during one of the biggest disasters America ever faced. In the modern era, Red Cross assistance during emergencies has been called into question time and again, by everyone from watchdog groups, to politicians, to the people they were supposed to help, to their own volunteers. There are also serious questions about what exactly they do with donations, and why their employees steal them all the damn time.
This list just might convince you that after the next disaster, your precious dollars would be better off with a different charity.
The Red Cross took emergency vehicles away from aid work and used them as props at press events…Meanwhile, storm victims were going hungry…and disabled victims were stuck sleeping in wheelchairs for days… The Red Cross didn’t have batteries to give out with flashlights… Battery by Luboš Volkov from The Noun Project … Read the story for more details on the Red spacer
Recently, long-simmering concerns about the Red Cross’ disaster relief operations were expressed by Richard Walden, of the humanitarian group Operation USA, in the Los Angeles…In fact, the whole history of the organization is one gigantic scandal–stretching from its racist policies toward African Americans to its corporate mentality toward human beings.
It is a tribute to the feebleness of the U.S. media–and the Red Cross’ powerful Republican allies–that an institution with such a dubious history continues as the symbol of “humanitarian leadership,” when it should have been replaced by a far more effective agency decades ago.
The Red Cross is a corrupt child trafficking, organ harvesting cabal entity that hides its evil behind so called good deeds. Documents found in the liberated city of Mariupol Indicate the Red Cross was participating in war crimes in partnership with the Azoz fighters in Ukraine. More than 1000 medical records of children that were marked with the notation of “healthy organs” were found. Many of those children are missing or unaccounted for.
6 months, 2 weeks ago
If you want to help the tens of thousands of victims of hurricanes Harvey and Irma, then “AVOID the American Red Cross”, so says fraud investigator Charles Ortel. Although Hollywood celebrities are working hard to channel MILLIONS to the Red Cross, the charity’s track record for getting funds to the people who need them is abysmal. Look no further than Haiti, where just like with the Clinton Foundation, many tens of MILLIONS in donations are completely unaccounted for. Thanks for tuning in.
PLEASE support our sponsor! Buy PHYSICAL silver (and gold) from SD Bullion:
Thanks for tuning in.
MUSIC CREDITS: Epidemic Sound: “Who’s There 1” paid license for You Tube use
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
5 years, 3 months ago
LINK TO Q MEGA-MEMES…
I noticed that the people who donate submit wonderful comments and questions and have decided that a good way to answer questions would be through their PayPal email…
you can keep your eyes out for me if you’ve asked me a question…
This channel is not monetized…because YouTube has made it impossible to monetize AND retain my Freedom of Speech.
Thanks to all of you who support this channel!
To all of you who have donated…It’s because of you, that I can go where the research leads me…and continue to do this full time. Many Thanks to each and every one of you.
VISIT MY DAILY BLOG…
NOTE: In case anything were to happen to this channel…
I will continue to produce videos…NON-STOP… and you can see them on Bitchute and on my BLOG.
4 years, 8 months ago
The true purpose of the Red Cross: Vampires, young blood transfusions…
3 years, 10 months ago
- The lawsuit said that from 2008 to 2012 the charities, through aggressive fundraising, raised $187 million in cash and spent less than 3% of that on true charity related to cancer.
According to the lawsuit, these included “vehicles, personal consumer goods, college tuition, gym memberships, Jet Ski outings, dating website subscriptions, luxury cruises, and tickets to concerts and professional sporting events.”
Years after the news media started detailing problems in charitable fundraising, federal and state regulators today finally announced strong legal action against four cancer nonprofits.
The “Race for the Cure” scam exposed: The cancer industry’s guilt-powered shakedown of a gullible public
You’ve probably seen billboards that proclaim “Race for the Cure.” There are a multitude of false presuppositions in this statement, but let’s start with the obvious — the myth that there is a “cure” to the disease being fought by the race. Let’s take breast cancer as the disease of choice, for example. The slogan on these billboards presupposes that there is a chemical cure for breast cancer just waiting to be discovered, and if we could just turn over enough rocks, we could find this magical cure and all live happily ever after without breast cancer.This presupposition is just plain wrong. There is no chemical cure for breast cancer because breast cancer is not a germ-based infectious disease in the first place; it’s just a name given to an observable pattern of symptoms that are indicative of cellular malfunction and a systemic failure of the immune system in a human being. There is no breast cancer disease in the same sense that there is malaria, AIDS or cholera. Breast cancer is a name given to the side effects of poor health that just happen to emerge first in the breast tissues.
It is also ridiculous to imply that if we all race enough, run enough miles or walk enough steps, then somehow a chemical cure will magically be found. (Click here to see the ‘Race for the Cure’ cartoon.) Of course, we have to raise money while we’re running around in circles in order to find this elusive cure, but that’s the whole point, isn’t it? To raise money and donate that money to various nonprofit groups that actually function as front groups for the cancer industry, which is all about Big Business and big profits. If money actually solved cancer, the disease would have been solved long ago, because billions of dollars have already been poured into research for this fictitious disease, and still, there are no solutions.
Everybody hurry, hurry to raise more money for the cancer barons
Another odd presupposition in the “Race for the Cure” is that there is a limited-time race underway, and we all have to hurry up and participate to find a cure before the deadline expires. It creates a sense of urgency, as if we have to urgently participate by running in circles or donating money to this race.The real urgency, however, should be in prevention, because if we could prevent breast cancer now — which we can do very easily through herbs, nutrition and natural therapies like sunlight — then we could eliminate the billions of dollars spent on breast cancer treatments, research and chemotherapy and prevent virtually all of the deaths associated with breast cancer in future years.
Naturally, the nonprofit breast cancer front groups never promote urgency in prevention. They just want to raise more money to study the disease without actually preventing it, because preventing the disease — and wiping it out through prevention — would make all the people involved in these “Race for the Cure” events seem irrelevant. Just as military leaders desire to have a war because it makes them important, the people involved in disease-mongering desire to see those diseases because it keeps them relevant and allows them to go on television and make urgent appeals for participation in these “Race for the Cure” shams.
The last presupposition, which is more present in the advertising and the overall philosophy of these money-raising efforts, is that we should all be involved out of the goodness of our hearts. If we are good people, the message seems to imply, we will also race for the cure, and if we fail to participate, we must feel really guilty about it, because we are not part of the solution to breast cancer.
This hidden presupposition is, like the other three, blatantly false. Again, there is no genuine disease as they define it, there is no cure and no urgency to raise money for finding more ways to treat the symptoms of breast cancer with patented chemicals.
If there’s any kind of urgency, it should be the urgency to educate people about ways to prevent breast cancer. Prevention is remarkably inexpensive, and it can be put into practice right away. The preventions for this disease are already well-known and well-documented, so there’s really nothing to run around in circles for — unless you want to get some exercise and sunshine, which are probably the best cures for breast cancer in the first place. The healing power of sunlight and its ability to promote vitamin D in the body — which halts the growth of breast cancer tumors — is far more powerful than any pharmaceutical human beings can create. Add in the power of green tea, chlorella, Una de Gato (Cat’s Claw), selenium, zinc and other nutrients from foods and herbs and you already have the tools to help prevent more than ninety percent of all cancers.
If you want your “Race for the Cure,” go ahead and race, but race for your own sunshine, your own exercise and your own cure. And don’t be suckered in by a corporate-sponsored guilt trip that only functions as a financial shakedown of a gullible public. Mark my words: Breast cancer will never be cured by patented chemicals. The “race for the cure” is a massive deception that distracts us from what we all need to be focusing on in regards to this condition, which is prevention through nutrition, detoxification, avoidance of cancer-causing chemicals, stress reduction and physical exercise.
Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.
More news on cancer
About the author:Mike Adams (aka the “Health Ranger“) is a best selling author (#1 best selling science book on Amazon.com) and a globally recognized scientific researcher in clean foods. He serves as the founding editor of NaturalNews.com and the lab science director of an internationally accredited (ISO 17025) analytical laboratory known as CWC Labs. There, he was awarded a Certificate of Excellence for achieving extremely high accuracy in the analysis of toxic elements in unknown water samples using ICP-MS instrumentation. Adams is also highly proficient in running liquid chromatography, ion chromatography and mass spectrometry time-of-flight analytical instrumentation.
Adams is a person of color whose ancestors include Africans and Native American Indians. He’s also of Native American heritage, which he credits as inspiring his “Health Ranger” passion for protecting life and nature against the destruction caused by chemicals, heavy metals and other forms of pollution.
Adams is the founder and publisher of the open source science journal Natural Science Journal, the author of numerous peer-reviewed science papers published by the journal, and the author of the world’s first book that published ICP-MS heavy metals analysis results for foods, dietary supplements, pet food, spices and fast food. The book is entitled Food Forensics and is published by BenBella Books.
In his laboratory research, Adams has made numerous food safety breakthroughs such as revealing rice protein products imported from Asia to be contaminated with toxic heavy metals like lead, cadmium and tungsten. Adams was the first food science researcher to document high levels of tungsten in superfoods. He also discovered over 11 ppm lead in imported mangosteen powder, and led an industry-wide voluntary agreement to limit heavy metals in rice protein products.
In addition to his lab work, Adams is also the (non-paid) executive director of the non-profit Consumer Wellness Center (CWC), an organization that redirects 100% of its donations receipts to grant programs that teach children and women how to grow their own food or vastly improve their nutrition. Through the non-profit CWC, Adams also launched Nutrition Rescue, a program that donates essential vitamins to people in need. Click here to see some of the CWC success stories.
With a background in science and software technology, Adams is the original founder of the email newsletter technology company known as Arial Software. Using his technical experience combined with his love for natural health, Adams developed and deployed the content management system currently driving NaturalNews.com. He also engineered the high-level statistical algorithms that power SCIENCE.naturalnews.com, a massive research resource featuring over 10 million scientific studies.
Adams is well known for his incredibly popular consumer activism video blowing the lid on fake blueberries used throughout the food supply. He has also exposed “strange fibers” found in Chicken McNuggets, fake academic credentials of so-called health “gurus,” dangerous “detox” products imported as battery acid and sold for oral consumption, fake acai berry scams, the California raw milk raids, the vaccine research fraud revealed by industry whistleblowers and many other topics.
Adams has also helped defend the rights of home gardeners and protect the medical freedom rights of parents. Adams is widely recognized to have made a remarkable global impact on issues like GMOs, vaccines, nutrition therapies, human consciousness.
In addition to his activism, Adams is an accomplished musician who has released over a dozen popular songs covering a variety of activism topics.
Click here to read a more detailed bio on Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, at HealthRanger.com.
Science News & Studies
Medicine News and Information
Food News & Studies
Health News & Studies
Herbs News & Information
Pollution News & Studies
Cancer News & Studies
Climate News & Studies
Survival News & Information
Gear News & Information
News covering technology, stocks, hackers, and more
Learn the truth about Breast Implants and why they’re so toxic There are massive lawsuits happening in the breast implant industry right now…Risks women DESERVE to know about breast implants post mastectomy (and other non toxic alternatives)Nightmare horror stories about women getting implants after breast cancer treatment that have been covered upMammogram LIES for diagnostics and what to do instead for breast scans.Who’s to blame here? Surgeons, implant manufacturers, the FDA? Us?The corruption in the medical device industry and how to avoid the most dangerous ones…The Angelina Effect” – how
We recorded this in October, which is Breast Cancer Awareness month, and on this show, we’re doing things a LOT different from the Susan B Komen organization.
No high sugar, GMO rich, endocrine disrupting, sponsor foods that CAUSE cancer.No money being raised, less than 10% of which goes to actual breast cancer research (which to this day has yielded NO cure)NO lies about where breast cancer REALLY comes from…
We’re going straight to the heart of the matter, to help women learn the TRUTH about breast health, breast implants, cancer prevention and options to rebuild her breasts post cancer treatment.
In 2013 Angelina Jolie had a bilateral mastectomy after testing positive for the BRCA gene. She lost her mother to ovarian and breast cancer and grandmother and aunt to breast cancer. The awareness of the BRCA gene has prompted many women to get tested, and many patients make the choice to have a preventative mastectomy to decrease their chances of getting cancer. THIS IS INSANITY!
Recently in 2020 the FDA issued a Black Box Warning label on all breast implants due to the adverse events that women have been experiencing for decades. None of which Anglina talks about in any of her public talks.
So today…we are here on the Cleanse, Heal, Ignite podcast.
ROBYN’S MISSIONGPAC – Global Patient Advocacy Coalition works collaboratively with the FDA, federal and state legislators, patient advocacy groups, plastic surgery societies, and other medical associations to implement policy changes and legislation to protect and inform patients about the safety of medical devices.
ROBYN’S BIOI am a former teacher and three-time cancer survivor who was harmed by a medical device. This led to a passion for advocacy medical device safety. I am a co-founder of GPAC Global Patient Advocacy Coalition, as well as co-founder of BISA, Breast Implant Safety Alliance. I am also an administrator of multiple patient advocacy groups. I have testified twice at the FDA in support of patient safety and proper informed consent. Collaborative efforts with industry and medical societies h
1 year, 1 month ago
mirrored from youtubeiHealthtube channel
2 years, 7 months ago
Here’s a quick video I shot to explain why I don’t Race for the Cure, buy pink products, wear a Livestrong bracelet, grow a moustache for Movember, Stand up to Cancer, and generally oppose most cancer charities.
When this was first posted on YouTube, a few people were bothered by the fact that this was shot “while I was driving.”
If you pay close attention, you will see that for the first 45 seconds I am stopped at a red light. And yes, for the next 45 seconds I am driving and talking with my eyes on the road – something that every person who drives a car does, and is also a much safer situation than texting or fiddling with the radio. Then for the remaining 4 minutes, I am parked in a parking lot.
Just to be clear, I am not demonizing all cancer charities. So, before you get all huffy and puffy defending your favorite charity, please take some time to thoroughly investigate what they actually do with the money you give them. Don’t be influenced by their slick marketing and fundraising propaganda. Cue the earnest celebrity actors, dramatic music, and pictures of bald sickly children poisoned by chemotherapy.
If money raised is going to pharmaceutical drug research, it’s more than likely wasted.
Why do I say that?
Because the overall cancer death rate has only improved about 5% since 1950.
That’s a whopping 0.083% improvement per year, on average.
If you want to really help cancer patients, put some cash money directly in their hands that they can use to pay for treatments, put food on the table, or put gas in the car. It will not be wasted.
I’ve interviewed over 60 people who’ve healed all types and stages of cancer. Check them out here. Or use the search bar to find survivors of specific cancer types.
I also created a coaching program for cancer patients, caregivers and anyone who is serious about prevention called SQUARE ONE. It contains the step-by-step strategies used by myself and everyone I know who has healed cancer with nutrition and natural, non-toxic therapies.
Nov 15, 2021U.S. News & World Report ranked it the country’s 10th-best children’s cancer hospital, and St. Jude raised roughly as much as the nine hospitals ahead of it put together.Last year, St. Jude raised a record $2 billion. U.S. News & World Report ranked it the country’s 10th-best children’s cancer hospital, and St. Jude raised roughly as much as the nine hospitals ahead of it put together. It currently has $5.2 billion in reserves, a sum large enough to run the institution at current levels for the next four and a half years without a single additional donation.
St. Jude makes a unique promise as part of its fundraising: “Families never receive a bill from St. Jude for treatment, travel, housing or food — because all a family should worry about is helping their child live.” the hospital covers the travel and housing costs of only one caregiver and one patient. For many families, the daily food budget is capped at $50. In some cases, hotel stays en route are provided only if families travel more than 500 miles to get to St. Jude.
Only about half of the $7.3 billion St. Jude has received in contributions in the past five fiscal years went to the hospital’s research and caring for patients, according to its financial filings with the Internal Revenue Service. About 30% covered the cost of its fundraising operations, and the remaining 20%, or $1 of every $5 donated, increased its reserve fund.
Further, ProPublica found, a substantial portion of the cost for treatment is paid not by St. Jude but by families’ private insurance or by Medicaid, the government insurance program for low-income families. About 90% of patients are insured, bringing in more than $100 million in reimbursements for treatment a year. If a family shows up at St. Jude without insurance, a company hired by the charity helps them find it. St. Jude does cover copays and deductibles, an unusual benefit.
St. Jude spends about $500 million a year on patient services — a figure that includes all medical care and other assistance. Very little of what St. Jude raises from the public goes to pay for food, travel and housing for families, the investigation found. Last year, it was 2% of the money raised, or nearly $40 million.
Mar 19, 2021 The Forest Park prosecution is one of the first cases in the nation to use the federal Travel Act to prosecute healthcare fraud. In addition to the $82.9 million restitution, the government plans to collect more than $25.5 million in money judgments against those convicted in the Forest Park scheme.The $200 million scheme was designed to induce doctors to steer lucrative patients – particularly those with high-reimbursing, out-of-network private insurance – to the now defunct hospital.
Most of the kickbacks, which totaled more than $40 million, were disguised as consulting fees or “marketing money” doled as a percentage of surgeries each doctor referred to Forest Park. spacer
Koehler’s case for corporate fraud breaks into six parts:
- First, SCH, through its decades-long conduct, mismanaged its air handling systems resulting in Aspergillus contamination.
- Second, the hospital used an operating room even though it knew there was an ongoing Aspergillus problem which it had not disclosed.
- Third, the hospital contaminated one-third of the toddler’s skull in the operating room with the mold.
- Fourth, the hospital hid the positive findings of Aspergillus contamination from the parents for one month.
- Fifth, the hospital did not use its infectious disease program to begin care of the child to make sure he was not contaminated during that one-month delay period.
- Sixth, the hospital destroyed the skull piece without telling the parents.
“This is not what we’re suing for,” Koehler continued. “We’re suing because what happened was, for almost 30 full days, almost a full month, the hospital appeared to have been doing PR work. They did not tell the parents. They deprived the parents of knowledge of their children, they deprived the parents of access to the chart, they deprived the parents of a property right.”
Koehler went as far to say SCH only told the family of the mold contamination because the media was about to break the story.
These nonprofits adopt popular causes or mimic well-known charity names that fool donors. Then they rake in cash, year after year.
Among the findings:
– The 50 worst charities in America devote less than 4% of donations raised to direct cash aid. Some charities gave even less. Over a decade, one diabetes charity raised nearly $14 million and gave about $10,000 to patients. Six spent no cash at all on their cause.
– Even as they plead for financial support, operators at many of the 50 worst charities have lied to donors about where their money goes, taken multiple salaries, secretly paid themselves consulting fees or arranged fund-raising contracts with friends. One cancer charity paid a company owned by the president’s son nearly $18 million over eight years to solicit funds. A medical charity paid its biggest research grant to its president’s own for-profit company.
– Some nonprofits are little more than fronts for fund-raising companies, which bankroll their startup costs, lock them into exclusive contracts at exorbitant rates and even drive the charities into debt. Florida-based Project Cure has raised more than $65 million since 1998, but every year has wound up owing its fundraiser more than what was raised. According to its latest financial filing, the nonprofit is $3 million in debt.
– To disguise the meager amount of money that reaches those in need, charities use accounting tricks and inflate the value of donated dollar-store cast-offs – snack cakes and air fresheners – that they give to dying cancer patients and homeless veterans.
Over the past six months, the Times and CIR called or mailed certified letters to the leaders of Kids Wish Network and the 49 other charities that have paid the most to solicitors.
Most declined to answer questions about their programs or would speak only through an attorney.
Approached in person, one charity manager threatened to call the police; another refused to open the door. A third charity’s president took off in his truck at the sight of a reporter with a camera.
While philanthropy is considered noble, some philanthropists appear to be doing far more harm than good with their donated millions. Bill Gates, who cofounded Microsoft in 1975, is perhaps one of the most dangerous philanthropists in modern history, having poured billions of dollars into global health initiatives that stand on shaky scientific and moral ground.
Gates’ answers to the problems of the world are consistently focused on building corporate profits through highly toxic methods, be it chemical agriculture and GMOs, or pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.1 Rarely, if ever, do we find Gates promoting clean living or inexpensive holistic health strategies.
Gates Donates Billions to Private Companies
A March 17, 2020, article2 in The Nation titled, “Bill Gates’ Charity Paradox,” details “the moral hazards surrounding the Gates Foundation’s $50 billion charitable enterprise, whose sprawling activities over the last two decades have been subject to remarkably little government oversight or public scrutiny.”)
As noted in this article, Gates discovered an easy way to gain political power — “one that allows unelected billionaires to shape public policy” — namely charity. Gates has described his charity strategy as “catalytic philanthropy,” one in which the “tools of capitalism” are leveraged to benefit the poor.
The only problem is that the true beneficiaries of Gates’ philanthropic endeavors tend to be those who are already rich beyond comprehension, including Gates’ own charitable foundation. The poor, on the other hand, end up with costly solutions like patented GMO seeds and vaccines that in some instances have done far more harm than good. (For a few examples, see the following references.3,4,5) The Nation reports:6
“Through an investigation of more than 19,000 charitable grants the Gates Foundation has made over the last two decades, The Nation has uncovered close to $2 billion in tax-deductible charitable donations to private companies … which are tasked with developing new drugs, improving sanitation in the developing world, developing financial products for Muslim consumers, and spreading the good news about this work.
The Gates Foundation even gave $2 million to Participant Media to promote Davis Guggenheim’s previous documentary film ‘Waiting for Superman,‘ which pushes one of the foundation’s signature charity efforts, charter schools — privately managed public schools. This charitable donation is a small part of the $250 million the foundation has given to media companies and other groups to influence the news.
‘It’s been a quite unprecedented development, the amount that the Gates Foundation is gifting to corporations … I find that flabbergasting, frankly,’ says Linsey McGoey, a professor of sociology at the University of Essex and author of the book ‘No Such Thing as a Free Gift.’
‘They’ve created one of the most problematic precedents in the history of foundation giving by essentially opening the door for corporations to see themselves as deserving charity claimants at a time when corporate profits are at an all-time high.’”
Companies that have received large donations from the Gates Foundation include GlaxoSmithKline, Unilever, IBM, Vodafone, Scholastic Inc. and NBC Universal Media.7,8
Those Calling the Shots Stand to Gain the Most
In the video above, Spiro Skouras reviews how the global COVID-19 pandemic is being used to snatch freedom and liberty away from us, and the role Gates is playing in the process.
“We have been encouraged to sacrifice our liberty for a false sense of security, being conditioned more and more each day to rely on the state for protection and now many of us find ourselves relying on the state to pay our bills,” Skouras says.9
“Some are beginning to see that there may be more to the official story than what we are led to believe. The very few may have seen this coming and are waiting for the next phase of what very well could be another step closer to global governance.
The exact same individuals and government agencies, in addition to global institutions who stand to benefit the most, are the ones calling the shots.”
Gates, surely, fits the description of someone who is both calling the shots and stands to gain handsomely from the COVID-19 pandemic. How? First, by investing in the same industries he’s giving charitable donations to and, second, by promoting a global public health agenda that benefits the companies he’s invested in and supports.
How Gates’ Foundation Benefits From Its Own Donations
For example, in 2014, a Mastercard affiliate, MasterCard Labs for Financial Inclusion, received a $19 million donation10,11 “to ‘increase usage of digital financial products by poor adults’ in Kenya,” The Nation reports, adding:12
“The credit card giant had already articulated its keen business interest in cultivating new clients from the developing world’s 2.5 billion unbanked people, McGoey says, so why did it need a wealthy philanthropist to subsidize its work? And why are Bill and Melinda Gates getting a tax break for this donation?”
Indeed, those are sensible questions that need serious review. The Mastercard donation also appears to have benefited the Gates Foundation, making an investigation into Gates’ “philanthropy” all the more necessary.
As explained by The Nation, at the time of that donation, the Gates Foundation had “substantial financial investments in Mastercard through its holdings in Warren Buffett’s investment company, Berkshire Hathaway.”
That’s not the only questionable donation on record. The Nation found “close to $250 million in charitable grants from the Gates Foundation to companies in which the foundation holds corporate stocks and bonds.” In other words, the Gates Foundation is giving money to companies that it owns stocks in and will benefit financially from.
As a result, the Foundation and Gates himself continue to increase their wealth. Part of this growth in wealth also appears to be due to the tax breaks given for charitable donations. In short, it’s a perfect money-shuffling scheme that limits taxes while maximizing income generation.
Companies that have received donations that in turn made money for the Gates Foundation include Merck, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Vodafone, Sanofi, Ericsson, LG, Medtronic, Teva and “numerous startups,” The Nation writes, adding:
“A foundation giving a charitable grant to a company that it partly owns — and stands to benefit from financially — would seem like an obvious conflict of interest …
Tax scholars like Ray Madoff, a law professor at Boston College, indicate that multibillionaires see tax savings of at least 40 percent — which, for Bill Gates, would amount to $14 billion …
Madoff, like many tax experts, stresses that these billions of dollars in tax savings have to be seen as a public subsidy — money that otherwise would have gone to the U.S. Treasury to help build bridges, do medical research, or close the funding gap at the IRS …
If Bill and Melinda Gates don’t pay their full freight in taxes, the public has to make up the difference or simply live in a world where governments do less and less (educating, vaccinating, and researching) and superrich philanthropists do more and more.
‘I think people often confuse what wealthy people are doing on their own dime and what [they’re] doing on our dime, and that’s one of the big problems about this debate,’ Madoff notes.
‘People say, ‘It’s the rich person’s money [to spend as they wish].’ But when they get significant tax benefits, it’s also our money. And so that’s why we need to have rules about how they spend our money.’”
Take Action — Demand an Investigation
If donating to for-profit companies sounds oddly illegal to you, you’d be right. Gates is a tax evader for doing so — he’s simply getting away with it. The nonprofit foundation is a disguise to avoid taxes while funding the research arms of for-profit organizations that his foundation is invested in.
In reality, Bill and Melinda Gates should be given federal prison sentences, and while not directly spelled out, I believe that’s really the point of The Nation’s article. Using nonprofit money to advance research for companies you’re invested in is illegal.
If you are as repulsed by the fact that Gates is getting away with this illegal behavior as much as I am, then I encourage you to contact the IRS Whistleblower Office and ask them to investigate Gates’ tax evasion. You can also file a consumer complaint with the Washington State Attorney General’s office.
Gates’ Pro-Patent Agenda Limits Reforms
That Gates philanthropic endeavors protect his own investments can also be seen in his pro-patent stance. James Love, director of the nonprofit Knowledge Ecology International pointed out to The Nation that Gates:13
“… uses his philanthropy to advance a pro-patent agenda on pharmaceutical drugs, even in countries that are really poor … He’s undermining a lot of things that are really necessary to make drugs affordable … He gives so much money to [fight] poverty, and yet he’s the biggest obstacle on a lot of reforms.”
Gates is a staunch and longtime defender of the drug industry, and his intent to further the pharmaceutical agenda can clearly be seen in the current COVID-19 pandemic.
Gates’ COVID-19 Plan — Vaccinate Global Population
As reported by Forbes,14 The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has committed $100 million to fight the global COVID-19 outbreak. As much as $20 million will reportedly go to agencies such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization to be used for front-line detection, containment and treatment efforts.
Another $20 million is earmarked for at-risk populations in Africa and South Asia while the remaining $60 million is to be used for vaccine development, diagnostics and other treatments.
Vaccines are clearly one of Gates’ mainstay “solutions” to most diseases. Gates has gone on record saying the U.S. needs disease surveillance and a national tracking system15 that could involve vaccine records embedded on our bodies (such as invisible ink quantum dot tattoos described in a Science Translational Medicine paper.16,17
In fact, he’s stated that life will not go back to normal until we have the ability to vaccinate the entire global population against COVID-19. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has echoed this exact sentiment as well, as if they’re reading the same cue card.
It would not surprise me if they were, seeing how the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation collaborates with both the NIAID and WHO “to increase coordination across the international vaccine community and create a Global Vaccine Action Plan.”18
Fauci is on Gate’s Leadership Council board charged with developing this vaccine action plan, as is WHO’s former director general Dr. Margaret Chan. As explained in a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation press release:
“The Global Vaccine Action Plan will enable greater coordination across all stakeholder groups — national governments, multilateral organizations, civil society, the private sector and philanthropic organizations — and will identify critical policy, resource, and other gaps that must be addressed to realize the life-saving potential of vaccines.”
Gates influence over global health policies has been criticized for years, yet nothing has been done to limit it. If anything, his power has only grown, and warnings that his corporate interests may undermine public health policy now appears to have come true. As reported by Politico in 2017:19
“Some billionaires are satisfied with buying themselves an island. Bill Gates got a United Nations health agency in Geneva. Over the past decade, the world’s richest man has become the World Health Organization’s second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom …
The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $2.4 billion into the WHO since 2000 … This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda … The result, say his critics, is that Gates’ priorities have become the WHO’s …
Some health advocates fear that because the Gates Foundation’s money comes from investments in big business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO’s role in setting standards and shaping health policies.”
Vaccinate or Become a Social Outcast?
According to statements made by Gates, societal and financial normalcy may never return to those who refuse vaccination, as the digital vaccination certificate Gates is pushing for might ultimately be required to go about your day-to-day life and business.
An April 4, 2020, article by OffGuardian comments on Gates’ March 24, 2020, interview with Chris Anderson, the curator of TED (which runs TED Talks) above:20
“Shockingly, Gates … suggests people be made to have a digital ID showing their vaccination status, and that people without this ‘digital immunity proof’ would not be allowed to travel. Such an approach would mean very big money for vaccine producers.”
.Again, vaccine producers stand to make enormous amounts of money from any given pandemic, and the Gates Foundation is both funding and making investment profits from vaccine makers. Is it any wonder then that Gates is trying to indoctrinate people into thinking there are no other answers? When asked by Anderson about the economic ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic, Gates says:
“It is really tragic that the economic effects of this are very dramatic … But … bringing the economy back … that’s more of a reversible thing than bringing people back to life. So, we’re going to take the pain in the economic dimension, huge pain, in order to minimize the pain in disease and death dimension.”
As noted by OffGuardian, Gates’ statement:21
“… goes directly against the imperative to balance the benefits and costs of the screening, testing and treatment measures for each ailment — as successfully promulgated for years by, for example, the Choosing Wisely campaign — to provide the maximum benefit to individual patients and society as a whole. Even more importantly … there may be dramatically more deaths from the economic breakdown than from COVID-19 itself …
Millions could potentially die from suicide, drug abuse, lack of medical coverage or treatment, poverty and lack of food access, on top of other predictable social, medical and public-health problems stemming from the response to COVID-19.”
Gates Explains Economic Shutdown
At 33:45 in the interview, Gates goes on to reveal what appears to be a stunning insider’s insight into the current economic shutdown:
“We don’t want to have a lot of recovered people … To be clear, we’re trying — through the shut-down in the United States — to not get to 1% of the population infected … I believe we will be able to avoid that with having this economic pain.”
In other words, if we are to believe Gates, we’re sacrificing the financial stability and sanity of hundreds of millions of Americans in order to prevent the infection rate from hitting 1% of the population.
Keep in mind, the death rate for COVID-19 now appears to be on par with seasonal influenza, according to Fauci,22 so the vast majority of those infected end up recovering after mild illness, and have antibodies that should provide them with long-lasting immunity. Clearly, if you want to make money from a vaccine, you don’t want people to develop immunity naturally, and this is precisely what Gates is admitting to. As noted by OffGuardian:23
“Gates and his colleagues far prefer to create a vast, hugely expensive, new system of manufacturing and selling billions of test kits, and in parallel very quickly developing and selling billions of antivirals and vaccines.
And then, when the virus comes back again a few months later and most of the population is unexposed and therefore vulnerable, selling billions more test kits and medical interventions.”
Gates Leads Medical Tyranny Agenda
The short video above summarizes some of the points I’ve touched on in this article so far and reviews how the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation influences public health policy at the very highest levels through a vast web of personal and organizational interconnections.
Gates has a history of “predicting” global pandemics with vast numbers of deaths,24 and with his call for a tracking system to keep tabs on infected/noninfected and vaccinated/unvaccinated individuals, he’s ensuring an unimaginably profitable future for the vaccine makers he supports and makes money from via his Foundation investments.
In an April 9, 2020, Children’s Health Defense article,25 Robert F. Kennedy Jr. further details Gates’ vaccine agenda. As noted by Kennedy:
“Vaccines, for Bill Gates, are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft’s ambition to control a global vaccination ID enterprise26) and give him dictatorial control of global health policy.”
The vaccination ID enterprise Kennedy mentions refers to a program called ID2020, launched in 2019, which is designed to “leverage immunization as an opportunity to establish digital identity.”27
This digital identity system is said to carry “far-reaching implications for individuals’ access to services and livelihoods,” so to think that Gates’ call for implantable COVID-19 vaccine certificates would be limited to that alone would likely be a grave mistake.
It’s not so far-fetched to imagine a future in which your vaccine certificate simply replaces personal identifications such as your driver’s license, state ID card, Social Security card and passport.
Wall Street Journal Wants Us to Pity Gates
As people are starting to see the truth, Gates’ social media accounts have been flooded with criticism, resulting in The Wall Street Journal publishing an article28 trying to raise pity for him, saying he’s being attacked by “social media mobs.” April 17, 2020, Zero Hedge commented on the PR campaign to protect Gates:29
“The Wall Street Journal’s Deepa Seetharaman wants us to know that while poor billionaire Bill Gates has ‘long been a target for online trolls’ … ‘the social-media attacks have intensified’ as the Micrrosoft co-founder and World Health Organization (WHO) benefactor has become the left’s de-facto coronavirus czar …
Perhaps the ‘conspiracy theorists’ are having a little trouble digesting the fact that Gates — whose vaccine efforts in India were blamed for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children — coincidentally hosted an October, 2019 high-level ‘pandemic simulation’ in New York called Event 201 which specifically focused on coronavirus …
Combine that with Gates’ recent comments about mass vaccination and biometric identification in order to ‘open up’ the country and allow people to attend mass gatherings — an idea which Dr. Anthony Fauci said ‘has merit,’ and so-called conspiracy theorists have plenty of dots to connect.
According to the Journal, ‘social-media platforms remain fertile ground for virus-related conspiracies and online harassment, despite repeated pledges by the companies to crack down on such activity.’
So — Gates is being harassed and nobody is stopping these thought criminals with their menacing opinions. And of course, ‘bots’ are also being blamed for amplifying ‘conspiracy claims’ — since there can’t be that many real humans with bad things to say about Mr. Gates.”
Far from being a force for good, Gates appears to have chosen to use his wealth and intellect to further a distasteful social control plan to benefit his own nefarious agendas, and people all over the world are finally starting to see his true colors.
For more information on Bill Gates and other Philanthophers, check out my earlier post:
“The concept of the church’s care of ‘the poor’ was basic to the founding of the earliest hospitals. The hospital was, in origin and conception, a distinctively Christian institution, rooted in Christian concepts of charity and philanthropy. There were no pre-Christian institutions in the ancient world that served the purpose that Christian hospitals were created to serve, that is, offering charitable aid, particularly health care, to those in need.”
So writes Gary Ferngren, Professor of History at Oregon State University , in his meticulous study Medicine and Health Care in Early Christianity . Ferngren makes the case that benevolence in the ancient world was not only lacking, but even frowned upon, and that the introduction of Christian ideas such as the value of every individual, the need to show agape (selfless, sacrificial love such as the love Jesus Christ showed for all humanity) and social responsibility beyond class commitments was the background to most of the charitable instincts and institutions that christianised nations like Australia now take for granted.
Ferngren also emphasises that as the Roman Empire under Constantine became increasingly warm towards some aspects of Christianity, the development of charities (hospitals, poor houses, specialised care centres for orphans, the aged and the diseased) became a joint church-state venture. Tax concessions for the churches enabled them to pour effort and resources into fulfilling their religious service: caring for all of God’s creatures without reference to creed, race, religion or social status.
Today, one such institution celebrates its 200th birthday – the Benevolent Society. And while it may seem a long way from the poorhouses of Constantinople to the streets of nineteenth-century Sydney, the principles that led to the founding of the Benevolent Society are themselves found back there in the early days of the social outworking of the way of Jesus Christ.
In 1813, a free settler named Edward Smith Hall began what is known today as the Benevolent Society. The Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge and Benevolence was an association of “friends of Christian benevolence” who wished to relieve the distress of many an early citizen of the colony. Governor Macquarie initially was not impressed, thinking Smith Hall was a something of a time-waster. But Macquarie subsequently changed his views and Smith Hall played an important role in the founding of the first Bank (1817, now Westpac), the first independent newspaper (The Sydney Monitor) and the nation’s oldest continuous institution (The Bible Society, founded one month before the bank). Smith Hall’s society of benevolence began on 8 May 1813 to care for the distressed as well as to promote missionary work and the “sacred duties of religion.”
This initial work was valuable, and we have the careful records of the one thousand people who were assisted in those first few years of activity. However, the founding of the Bible Society in 1817 diverted significant money from Smith Hall’s Society. It was noted by William Cowper, the Rector of St Philip’s Church Hill, that two Societies – one for promoting Christian knowledge through dissemination of the Bible, and one for acts of benevolence – would probably be a better way forward. Hence, in 1818, the Benevolent Society of New South Wales was formed by an act of the Bible Society, with the express aim of “relief of the poor, aged and infirm and for other benevolent purposes.” But this is not to say that religion was being stripped out of the society’s work – on the contrary, its benevolent aims were to include the encouragement of “industrious habits amongst the indigent poor as well as to afford them Religious instruction and Consolation in their distress.”
I find the shared history of the Bible Society and the Benevolent Society delightful, because it provides an excellent historical illustration of the manner in which Christian ideas and social benefit go hand-in-hand. Just as Christianity instigated new levels of charity in the Roman Empire, so the Christian faith drove (and still drives) many charitable endeavours in the early settlement of Australia.
Today, the Benevolent Society acknowledges its Christian origins and, gratefully and graciously, the role played by the Bible Society. But it describes itself as a “not-for-profit and non-religious organization.” It is overwhelmingly funded by government grants, and the place of the Christian church seems by and large diminished in its culture and programmes. It did and continues to do what can readily be described as work mandated by the Old and New Testaments: caring for orphans and the outcast, running hospitals (no longer called asylums) and advocating for the rights of the underprivileged (like its great work campaigning for the old-age pension). Although such activities can indeed be carried out by Christian believers and other compassionate citizens alike, it can be fairly claimed that the biblical worldview generated the atmosphere that normalised such charitable work.
As Stephen Judd and Anne Robinson, leaders in the charity sector, write in their book Driven By Purpose: Charities that make a difference , “The Christian organization exists on its religious foundations, and its activities are ‘faith in action’ … However, many organisations in attempting to fit into a particular category of tax concession charity, find their purpose and identity lost in the statement of activities.” This is an increasingly difficult issue in our political and social climate. How can an organisation be shaped by its specific religious values, but also receive the support of the State? And will the State be willing to acknowledge that without being “driven by purpose,” it is hard to sustain such charitable efforts?
The marketing department would request me to make such statements in a much more positive way: how much more good could be done if the charity sector, spurred on by beliefs and ethics such as those found in the Christian religion, was incentivised and supported even further? History has shown it to be true that a motivated Christian community can change the world for good – indeed, how I long for a time when this is once again seen as a great asset to civil society, rather than a cause for concern and regulatory intervention.
It is an uncomfortable truth that many charitable endeavours simply wouldn’t have started without the Christian faith to drive them. This is by no means to suggest that non-Christian people or societies are lacking in benevolence and charity; rather, it is an acknowledgement of the peculiar power of the Christian worldview to establish and sustain the kind of philanthropy that has become popular in the Western world. The former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams summarised this idea in a lecture on civil and religious law in 2008:
“It never does any harm to be reminded that without certain themes consistently and strongly emphasised by the ‘Abrahamic’ faiths, themes to do with the unconditional possibility for every human subject to live in conscious relation with God and in free and constructive collaboration with others, there is no guarantee that a ‘universalist’ account of human dignity would ever have seemed plausible or even emerged with clarity.”
In other words, can we assume that Australian society would have its wonderful charitable institutions without the influence of Christian teaching? Graeco-Roman paganism had little to no philosophical basis for charity, and it wasn’t until Christian concepts such as “the equality of God’s image-bearers” arrived that anything changed.
But the next question is even harder: can we assume that such institutions can be severed by the State from their theological and ethical roots without losing the heart of the endeavour? I sincerely hope that, in this case, time will not tell.
Greg Clarke is Chief Executive Officer of The Bible Society Australia.
The Roman Catholic Church hijack the Christian Movement very early on. The ROMAN Catholic Church is the spiritual arm of the Roman World Empire. If you want to know more about this truth, see the following series:
Hospitals were the creation of the KNIGHTS TEMPLARS who were the original ILLUMINATI. If you want to know more about that, check out my series on the Knight Templars:
Scripture tells us that it’s always more blessed to give than receive. Christians should always give to the homeless and needy. God loves a cheerful giver. Christians are to be kindhearted and loving with everyone even with our enemies. If we have it and a poor man asks for something and we don’t help, how is God’s love in us?
Think about it. We have money to buy our favorite sweets, to rent a DVD, to splurge on things, but when it comes to someone other than ourselves it becomes a problem.
When it comes to others selfishness starts to kick in. We are told to be imitators of Christ. Was Christ thinking only about Himself when He died on the cross? No!
God has given you the opportunity to be a blessing to someone. Scripture makes it clear that when your heart is set on blessing others, God will bless you in the process.
If you were in need wouldn’t you want someone to help you? Instead of judging, ask yourself that question whenever you see the needy. Always remember that those in need are Jesus in disguise.
- “The more you give, the more comes back to you, because God is the greatest giver in the universe, and He won’t let you outgive Him. Go ahead and try. See what happens.” Randy Alcorn
- “A lack of generosity refuses to acknowledge that your assets are not really yours, but God’s.” Tim Keller
- “Be someone’s sunshine when their skies are grey.”
- “When you open your heart to giving, angels fly to your door.”
- “We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give.”
- “We can’t help everyone, but everyone can help someone.” – Ronald Reagan
Deuteronomy 15:7-8 If there should be a poor man among your relatives in one of the cities of the land that the Lord your God is about to give you, don’t be hard-hearted or tight-fisted toward your poor relative. Instead, be sure to open your hand to him and lend him enough to lessen his need.
28. Matthew 19:21 Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
29. Acts 2:44-26 And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need. They worshiped together at the Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord’s Supper, and shared their meals with great joy and generosity.
30. Galatians 2:10 All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along.
PLEASE SHARE THIS POST WITH EVERYONE. EVERYONE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THESE TRUTHS!
I STRONGLY URGE EVERYONE TO STOP GIVING TO ORGANIZED “CHARITIES” and START GIVING FACE TO FACE wherever you find people in need. They are out there. Doesn’t take any effort to find them.
If you are not able to get up and get out and around. Give your gifts to people you know who can and do. Or give to a LOCAL church, soup kitchen or Food Bank. Just be sure you check them out first. Be sure you designate where and how your want your money to be applied.