Bill Gates: Public Must Eat GM Foods to Fight ‘Climate Crisis’

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates is calling on governments to start feeding the public genetically modified foods in order to fight the so-called “climate crisis.”

Gates recently gave an address at the Africa Climate Summit where he was promoting his GM seeds and chickens.

According to Gates, GM products will benefit African people while also helping to save the planet.

Stephen Anthony McQueen reports: The inaugural Africa Climate Summit was held in Nairobi, Kenya.

The event was marketed with the slogan: “Driving Green Growth & Climate Finance Solutions for Africa and The World.”

Among the summit’s funding partners are seerval familiar globalist organizations, including:

• The Rockefeller Foundation
• The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,
• The Clinton Health Action Initiative
• The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)
• The ClimateWorks Foundation

Sir. Chris Hohn’s CIFF along with the Rockefeller Brothers Fund are part of a small group of global foundations called ClimateWorks.

Since 2018, the collective has committed to investing billions by 2025 to “tackle the climate crisis.”

Gates Ventures, the personal service company of the Microsoft co-founder, is also among ClimateWorks’s funding partners.

In an update in 2020, Hohn said the original group, ClimateWorks, was well on track to invest at least $6 billion by 2025.

The huge investment was “thanks to significant increases from several funders, as well as additional philanthropic donors committing new resources, and likely more as all philanthropists are actively invited to allocate a portion of their portfolio” to invest in “tackling” the corporate elite’s “climate crisis.”

Also listed as funding partners for the Africa Climate Summit are USAID and UKAID.

A handful of UN agencies are also included, such as the UN’s Green Climate Fund and the International Organisation for Migration.

The governments of Germany, Denmark, France, and the European Union are also funneling taxpayer money into the scheme.

There is a token of African funders such as the African Development Bank and EcoBank.

However, it can be easily construed that it was not an African Summit but rather an Anglo-American-European Summit to which some Africans were invited.

Essentially, the summit represented the West and a small group of private foundations “driving green growth and climate finance solutions” in Africa.

Also, many of the suggestions for “saving the planet” etc… often sound more like running experiments on African populations ahead of global rollouts.

As if to prove this point, The Guardian reported that at the Summit the Nairobi Declaration was adopted as a blueprint “to guide” Africa in future negotiations with the West.

The report suggested that Africa would be tested in global forums such as the G20 meeting, the UN general assembly, the annual meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund, and COP28.

Meanwhile, the UN hailed the summit as a great success.

However, the UN implied that it was African leaders who were pushing the globalist agenda.

“African leaders, calling for urgent action by developed countries to reduce carbon emissions, have proposed new financing mechanisms to restructure Africa’s crippling debt and unlock climate funding,” UNECA wrote in a press release titled, “Nairobi Declaration makes strong push for accelerated climate action and financing mechanisms.”

“In a call to action, African leaders attending the inaugural Africa Climate Summit held in Nairobi, Kenya, stressed the importance of decarbonizing the global economy for equality and shared prosperity.

“They called for investment to promote the sustainable use of Africa’s natural assets for the continent’s transition to low-carbon development and contribution to global decarbonization.”

However, in reality, the Summit did not go as smoothly as the UN portrayed.

The Guardian reported:

Five hundred African civil society groups under the umbrella of the Africa People’s Climate Assembly, organised what they called the Real Africa Climate Summit. The organisations were concerned about what they called “false solutions” that were on the summit’s agenda, such as carbon markets, carbon credits and the use of technology as a viable alternative to phasing out harmful fossil fuels. These concepts, they said, are led by global north interests “and are being marketed as African priorities when in reality they will embolden wealthy nations and large corporations to continue polluting Africa.”

Maimoni Ubrei-Joe, a climate justice and energy programme coordinator at Friends of the Earth Africa, was blunt on the extractive exploitation model used by key polluters: “What should be Africa’s focus now is to stop the contributors to climate change at source and not look for shortcuts to keep extracting using the smokescreen of the carbon market, geoengineering and other false solutions. This Nairobi Declaration is short of these ideas and it could just be another beautiful document heading for the shelves.”

A few days before the summit, these organisations had written to President Ruto asking him to take charge of the talks, which they said were at risk of being hijacked by interested parties from the West. The US-based consultancy firm McKinsey & Company was identified as having helped shape the summit’s concept note, which the organisations said did not champion Africa’s interests but those of the US and “the Western corporations they represent”. They added: “Rather than advancing Africa’s interests and position on critical climate issues, the summit has been seized by Western governments, consultancy companies and philanthropic organisations hellbent on pushing a pro-west agenda and interests at the expense of Africa.”

So how do the West and private global foundations plan to gain Africa’s cooperation?

With promises of money, according to the report:

Almost every African country present at the summit walked away with a financing deal with Western institutions.

A final communique commended the “progressive capital commitments made during the week” totalling $26bn from public, private, and multilateral development banks, philanthropic foundations and dedicated partners in the development finance community.

Among the key speakers was Democrat President Joe Biden’s “Climate Czar” John Kerry.

However, the unelected Biden official irked Uganda’s leader, Yoweri Museveni, who “could not sit and be lectured by [Kerry],” the Guardian said.

Elsewhere during the event, Bill Gates took an opportunity to promote his “climate crisis” investments.

However, rather than take one of his private jets to the third-world African nation, Gates sent what appears to be a pre-recorded video speech to be played during the summit:

“I started work on climate change over two decades ago,” Gates said.

“When I visited Africa, I saw two things.

“First was how climate is already affecting agricultural output …

“I also saw the energy shortage,” he said.

After praising the research and innovation of Africans in green energy, Gates said “Breakthrough Energy is the organization I created to help with climate mitigation.”

Breakthrough Energy’s mission is to accelerate the “unprecedented technological transformations” needed to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to “Net Zero” by 2050.

It does this by supporting research and development, investing in companies that “turn green ideas into clean products,” and advocating for policies that speed innovation from lab to market.

However, two directors from the Breakthrough Institute disagree with Gates.

Breakthrough Institute was founded in 2007 by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger.

Although it is a different organization from Breakthrough Energy, two of its funders are Breakthrough Energy and ClimateWorks Foundation.

One of which is Gates’s organization and the other is funded in part by Gates.

In a statement, the Breakthrough Institute directors said:

“No matter what advocates and policymakers say, these cheap, renewables-only scenarios remain theoretical and unproven even for wealthy countries.”

“It is even more difficult for poor countries.”

“Too often, climate advocates claim a consensus on the feasibility and affordability of 100 percent renewable power globally when such a consensus simply does not exist – certainly not among energy systems experts, when they consider real-world constraints,” the two directors said.

“Claims that it will be cheaper for African countries to use only renewable energy to grow their economies rather than a mix of fuels are unrealistic.”

Nevertheless, Gates will continue to push his green ideology.

As global management consulting firm McKinsey & Company noted, “Green energy in Africa presents significant investment opportunities.”

Gates then went on to describe to the Africa Climate Summit a conversation he claims to have had with a farmer in Kenya named “Mary.”

He talked to her about “how the new seeds and new approaches were helping her.

“She had drought-tolerant seeds that made a very big difference.

“She also had chickens that were bred so they could be more heat tolerant.”

WATCH:

“Mary” did not feature in the video footage provided by Gates, however.

Gates didn’t provide any further details about the nature of the conversation with “Mary,” nor is there any evidence that the conversation took place at all, if whether she even exists.

A 2021 article published by Scientific America describes how the mission of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) to protect agroecology in Africa is at odds with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Cornell Alliance for Science’s insistence that genetically modified seeds are healthy, productive and environmentally friendly.

The groups are also accused of attacking agroecology as economically and socially regressive.

AFSA is the largest social movement in Africa.

It represents more than 200 million farmers, fishers, pastoralists, indigenous peoples, women, consumers, and others across all but five African countries.

In 2022, AFSA published an open letter to Gates to challenge several inaccurate claims he had made in articles published by The New York Times and Associated Press.

One of Gates’s inaccuracies related to the development of climate-resilient seeds.

The seeds are already in existence, without Gates’s help, and are being developed by farmers and traded through informal seed markets.

“The [Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa] initiative, which your foundation continues to fund, has also pushed restrictive seed legislation that limits and restricts crop innovation to well-resourced labs and companies,” AFSA wrote in its letter to Gates.

“These initiatives don’t increase widespread innovation but rather contribute to the privatization and consolidation of corporate monopolies over seed development and seed markets.

“There is no shortage of practical solutions and innovations by African farmers and organizations.

“We invite you to step back and learn from those on the ground.”

Gates also claims his genetically modified chickens will “fight poverty” in Africa, as well as his more recent claim that they “fight climate change.”

However, neither claimed goals are for the benefit of Africans.

In a 2016 blog post, Gates made a case for egg production as a way to “fight poverty” and “improve nutrition” in malnourished populations.

Of course, there is a catch to Gates’s “philanthropy” because all his chickens would be “properly vaccinated.”