[Stoves] Subject: GACC, bullying, and Children's Rights

[Traveller]

Looks like I am a naive, innocent bumpkin from the heathen race of India.
Couldn't imagine someone "suggesting" to Tom that this list be shut down.
If anybody thinks

People involved in funding stove development projects "monitor the list"?
They should; after all, they are the stewards of taxpayers' monies. If they
are content with misinformation generated by their projects, that's their
prerogative. But if they are intent on generating misinformation - Leo
DeCaprio and the Obamas, the Clintons may have reputations to protect -
they must be challenged.

Someone called "to suggest " this List be shut down? In Washington, we know
the meaning of "suggest". Politically and psychologically.

Enough "suggestions" from peer-reviewed studies - "Our findings suggest
(subject to assumptions and qualifications)" - have been processed by
propagandists like GACC and sadly, WHO (whose funding sources are unclear),
EPA and marketed as "scientific consensus".

I hope it wasn't GACC who tried to bully Tom. I would hate to see the UN
Foundation, Inc. to be subject to regulatory scrutiny or lawsuit for
engaging in political activity. What would happen to GACC CEO's
compensation and career? (She is a valuable knowledge resource now, no
matter what she parrots for the media.)

I have known the pains home-schoolers went through in US; even now, many
are dismissed as religious extremists. (A college for home-schooled
children opened some 20 years ago near here, and before that I had
considered home schooling as an option. I think I taught everything worth
teaching while cooking. A kitchen is the best school for children. I could
even teach the infants at GACC, IHME, ISO, EPA, and WHO. Roughly $5,000 per
hour per child.)

I also happen to know about "children's rights". I was a member of one such
organization 20+ years ago (no, not like the UKCRC) and have heard or read
tragic complaints about Western bureaucracy of child protection.

There is a common connection between GACC and Children's Rights most people
may not be aware of: Hillary Clinton.

When she was a student at Yale Law School, she was a research assistant to
Anna Freud (yes, Sigmund's daughter) and Albert Solnit (a Child
Psychiatrist at Yale) and Joseph Goldstein (Yale Law professor) in a project
<http://news.yale.edu/2002/06/25/memoriam-renowned-yale-child-psychiatrist-albert-j-solnit>
"Beyond the Best Interests of the Child". The book is still available in
the US, perhaps a revision of what I read back in early 1990s. I distinctly
remember a case there of some Jewish home in New York and removing a child
from its mother. I also remember the study advocating greater state role in
regulating families, and justifying removal of children from their homes.
Many such cases are immense tragedies, as anybody in the Family Law cases
and involuntary confinement cases (mental health) will testify.

I love Hillary. I happen to think that she carried on with her 1960s
enthusiasm for children's rights and for health, environment all the way
through her years in the White House and afterwards.

But her sycophants kept supplying her with misinformation - in many areas
of her interest. (Including her campaign for the presidency, I would add).
She became a leader of many cults.

Neil says "The main agenda of any state originated so called 'alliance'
will never be the stated one."

As far as I can tell, GACC has little or no funding from the US government.
It is non-US governments who have to worry about credibility and
effectiveness of GACC, and the competence of GACC staff, transparency (no
financial statements).

And much as GACC enjoys being confused with the UN (Ted Turner was crafty,
when he established UN Foundation, Inc), it is not a part of the UN.

Nor is GACC a part of any government. It is USEPA, NIHs, CDCs, etc. who are
parts of US government and got most of the money.

In fact, GACC has no independent legal identity - the capacity to sue and
be sued.

It is an "initiative". A "project" so long as UN Foundation, Inc. chooses
to host it and contract on its behalf, collect 10% overhead, and provide
the platform for propaganda.

This is not to say that GACC has not taken an initiative to fund some
excellent research projects. I respect some of GACC's work.

Now, now. Someone will suggest that I am providing misinformation.

I do think GACC clients - after all, it provides contractual services to
non-US governments and other private sector entities - owe it to themselves
to rethink GACC. And publish GACC financial statements, conduct a
performance audit.

The time is ripe. Hillary should get serious about cooking, women, children
without NIH/WHO/IHME/EPA ideologues.

I wrote my prayer to the Clintons a month ago on this List.

Nikhil




Message: 9
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 03:04:01 -0000
From: neiltm at uwclub.net
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
        <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: [Stoves] The meaning of 'Global Alliance', was Re: report
        with dissapointing results from cleaner cookstoves (Crispin)
Message-ID: <584CC221.2581.11FC4DCD at neiltm.uwclub.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

You can call this an off topic, conspiracy theorist rant if you like, and I
have no desire to repeat or continue it, so feel free to ignore, but
my intention
is to write to share what I feel I have learned in a different sphere of
life that has a bearing on the very on topic question here of what is GACC,
and the prospects for genuinely helping the world's poorest to attain a
better quality of life and health which I have no doubt is everyone's
honest intention and endeavour here.  Here it is, then I'll shut up:

On 10 Dec 2016 at 13:32, Tom Miles wrote:

> We do have an impact. I got a call this year to suggest that this list be shut
down. Somebody didn't like the criticism and "misinformation". So I  suspect
that people involved in funding stove development projects monitor the
list.  I refused to shut the list down.

I recognise your experience.  I started the first UK based LISTSERV mailing
list in 1997 for elective home educators based in the UK (AKA 'homeschoolers'
in the US).  And the first outside the US I think.  Boy was that some
learning curve!

We learned the hard way and repeatedly that doing anything of any significance
autonomously, outside the control of the state, attracts takeover and
subversion of your purposes to theirs and which are invariably hostile.
 There is nothing like making lawful but unwanted
choices, (by power and vested interest), for making interesting discoveries
such that we never really had a 'rule of law', that government is the
principle law breaker for example.  As home educators we live battling with
that dark reality endlessly and with increasing pace and menace, and I
should probably write a book about it - it should be chronicled.

It is important to recognise that in Orwellian newspeak the word 'Alliance'
is about coralling all of any particular activity, aspiration or body of
thought or belief into a forged consensus chosen by state and or corporate
and banking interests and designed to marginalise and
suppress any expression that falls outside its plan for how whatever it is,
is to serve the ruling elite interests.  It strives towards absolutism as
any lie has to in order to reduce its exposure to truth which can expose
it.  It is otherwise literally indefensible by any rational discourse or
enuiry, and thus must resort to tyranny.

(Rest clipped)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20161213/00929a62/attachment.html>