NGOs

I have a friend in Australia who more or less accepts the mainstream narrative about COVID-19 and regards the WHO as genuinely caring about the health of the world's citizens. In response to exhortations on my part to find alternative and credible sources of information, he claimed Transparency International as one of his sources of information. 

I had not heard of this particular NGO so I did a little investigation. It's motto is: 

WE HAVE ONE VISION, A WORLD FREE OF CORRUPTION

This of course is a laudable goal but typically these sorts of NGOs are set up by the puppet masters to corner the debate on certain issues, corruption in the case of Transparency International and health in the case of the WHO.  Many well-intentioned individuals will work hard for these organisations, often as volunteers, in the belief that they are doing something worthwhile. This harnessing of the energy and idealism of youth is deliberate because, if directed elsewhere, it might really expose corruption or improve world health. Arundhati Roy puts its nicely when she says: 

Armed with their billions, these NGOs have waded into the world, turning potential revolutionaries into salaried activists, funding artists, intellectuals and filmmakers, gently luring them away from radical confrontation.

Anyway, Transparency International (TI) seems to be one of the more obnoxious NGOs around. It's founder, Peter Eigen, is a former regional director for the World Bank. Say no more. It has connections with various UN bodies and is in full support of sustainable development goals. Even the Wikipedia article for TI is far from flattering, highlighting several controversies, and finishing with this telling quote:

"On 25 March 2020 Wolfgang Wodarg was dismissed from his place as a member of the board of directors of Transparency International, after he expressed the opinion that the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 was only one of many similar viruses which usually go undetected as part of an ordinary seasonal period of respiratory infections, and that the worldwide activities to stop the pandemic were "hype" caused by the selective perception of researchers."

It is remarkable how effective such organisations are in gaining credibility, thanks to the support of the MSM and the social media giants. James Corbett has produced an interesting video on US-based NGOs, focussing on their role in undermining foreign governments:

More generally however, NGOs are instruments of the Global Elite and designed to further the globalist agenda. Though some have their headquarters in a particular country, they are not closely associated with the government of that country. TI is an example of such an NGO: 

Transparency International is a German non-governmental organization founded in 1993. Based in Berlin, its nonprofit purpose is to take action to combat global corruption with civil societal anti-corruption measures and to prevent criminal activities arising from corruption.  

This article sums things up nicely:

Along with governments and corporations, the two torrents of power in the global landscape, NGOs are seen as a third force. Indeed, the big international ones – the BINGOs – with budgets of hundreds of millions of dollars are pretty powerful. But are they a countervailing force, striving tirelessly for social justice and the underdog? Poverty alleviation may be the rhetoric, critics argue, but in practice little that is lasting has been achieved on this front by NGO activism.

There is the compromising nature of their funding to consider – today contributions from governmental and intergovernmental aid agencies and from corporate donors often form the largest chunks of their income. Although some BINGOs will still deny it, this influences their outlook, making them increasingly accommodated to the wishes of their donors. Their language becomes all about forming partnerships with these interests, rather than challenging them. Work within the system, and business will transform the lives of the poor – it’s the Bono school of development, but with taxes.

In a recent article Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah, the secretary-general of Civicus, a global network of civil society organizations and activists, wrote: ‘We have become a part of the problem rather than the solution. Our corporatization has steered us towards activism-lite, a version of our work rendered palatable to big business and capitalist states. Not only does this approach threaten no-one in power, but it stifles grassroots activism with its weighty monoculturalism.’ 

My advice to my friend was to avoid NGOs as sources of information, relying instead on individuals who, as far as can be determined, did not have any links to vested interests. Of course such individuals are hard to find or, if they gain any degree of prominence, are invariably denigrated by the MSM. 

Pneumonia: More Fear Mongering

Here is the header from an article that appeared in today's Jakarta Post:

Pneumonia to kill nearly 11 million children by 2030, study warns

The article was taken from NEWS DESK, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE Paris, France on Tuesday, November 13th, 2018 at 03:04 am. The article goes on to say that:

Pneumonia will kill nearly 11 million children under five by 2030, experts warned Monday on a global day aimed at raising awareness of the biggest infectious killer of infants worldwide. 

While in the developed world the severe lung infection mainly affects the elderly, in developing nations it is children who bear the brunt, with hundreds of thousands dying each year from the easily preventable disease.

It continues:

A new analysis conducted by Johns Hopkins University and the aid group Save the Children using forecasts based on current trends showed more than 10,800,000 under-fives would succumb to the disease by the end of the next decade.  

Furthermore, a handful of countries are set to carry the highest burdens, with 1.7 million children set to die in Nigeria and India, 700,000 in Pakistan and 635,000 in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Yet there is some good news.  

The study, published on World Pneumonia Day, found that scaling up existing vaccination coverage, coupled with cheap antibiotics and ensuring good nutrition for children could save a total of 4.1 million lives. 

Of course, the article is intended to grab attention. Save the Children CEO Kevin Watkins, whose group operates health programs in some of the countries worst hit by the disease, called for prices of major existing pneumonia vaccines to be lowered "dramatically". It's unlikely that pharmaceutical companies will be lowering their prices. Instead the hope is that governments in developing countries will subsidise the cost from their health care budgets. Much needed funds are thus diverted from where they could be truly useful such as improving sanitation and nutrition.

In the nineteenth century, measles epidemics killed a great many children in England and other developed countries because families lived in vermin-infested, overcrowded and unventilated dwellings with primitive sanitation. Additionally, children ate poorly and sometimes not at all. When housing conditions and diet were improved, measles ceased to be a significant factor in childhood mortality.

It is the same of course with pneumonia which as the article admits "mainly affects the elderly in developed countries". In these countries, pneumonia does not take a significant toll of children because they are generally well-fed and adequately housed. It's a transparent ploy on the part of NGOs like Save the Children to attract funds but what organisations lie behind these NGOs. Well, the usual villains of course. One of this NGO's global partners is GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), laughingly described on the NGO's website as "a science-led global healthcare company on a mission to help people do more, feel better and live longer".

Ah no, GSK is, according to Wikipedia:

a British pharmaceutical company headquartered in Brentford, London. Established in 2000 by a merger of Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham, GSK was the world's sixth largest pharmaceutical company as of 2015, after Pfizer, Novartis, Merck, Hoffmann-La Roche and Sanofi.

Of course, nobody is going to donate money to a pharmaceutical company and so GSK and other Big Pharma companies hide behind NGOs like Save the Children and push a very straight forward agenda: marketing their products. Save the Children and its current CEO have been mired in controversy lately. In July, as reported in this article in The Guardian: "(British) MPs question Kevin Watkins on failing to investigate claims of sexual misconduct by senior charity staff". Specifically:

Pauline Latham MP questioned Watkin’s decision to use £114,000 in charity funds on lawyers “to try and stop reports [of inappropriate behaviour] coming out”, adding that such money was likely to have been taken from funds raised by volunteers in the UK. 

Clearly, when donating money to NGOs like Save the Children, one needs to seriously consider how the money is being spent. However, if one were casually reading the article under discussion in the Jakarta Post or elsewhere, the simple takeaway would be that the pneumonia vaccine can save the lives of millions of children. If only it were that simple.

Vaccines damage the immune systems of children throughout the world but in developing countries, children's immunity is further compromised by overcrowded living conditions, poor sanitation and inadequate diet. These children do not need vaccines and yet limited health care funds are being diverted to this end.