The Butcher of Omaha: Warren Buffett, the Gates Foundation, and Billions for Abortion (Pt. 2)

by | Aug 29, 2023 | Abortion

He’s been called the “Wizard of Omaha,” America’s most revered investor and famous penny pincher. But that conceals Warren Buffett’s dark side: Untold billions of dollars for abortion-on-demand in the U.S. and experiments on poor Africans, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In this groundbreaking report, Restoration News exposes this massive money pipeline—including its favorite outlet, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—and reveals Buffett’s global depopulation agenda.

Touching a Nerve

But Buffett’s support for political extremists hasn’t gone entirely unnoticed. One man exposing the truth is Peter Flaherty, chairman of the conservative National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), who proposed Berkshire Hathaway create an independent chair—distancing Buffett from the toxic Gates Foundation—at the company’s annual meeting in May 2023.

Shareholders such as Flaherty are usually allowed three minutes to justify their proposals and rarely interrupted. Instead, his microphone was cut and Flaherty was arrested by Omaha police for “criminal trespass”—the first time a shareholder proponent has ever been arrested at a Berkshire annual meeting. Flaherty’s full remarks, which were only partially delivered before the mic went dead, are below:

If we had an independent chair, the Company would be less identified with Mr. Buffett’s political activities. He’s donated tens of billions to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. As Bill Gates explained when the couple was still together, ‘although the foundation bears our names, basically half our resources have come from Warren Buffett.’

If ‘woke’ culture is a disease, then philanthropy is the virus.

The Gates Foundation bankrolls the teaching of Critical Race Theory around the country, including that math is inherently racist. The Gates Foundation offers a Gender Identity Toolbox which asserts that gender is the result of ‘socially and culturally constructed ideas.’

This is a lie. Gender is not a cultural construct. It is a genetic and biological fact.

We know how much Bill Gates cares about children. He met and traveled with Jeffrey Epstein many times after Epstein was convicted of sex crimes.

The Gates Foundation had a huge influence over the COVID response fiasco. Bill Gates defended China’s COVID policies and still discounts the possibility that the virus originated from a lab, even though U.S. intelligence agencies disagree.

The Gates Foundation may be the largest single donor to the “dark money” machine known as Arabella [Advisors]. It funds causes like defunding the police that are making American cities unlivable. Money goes, too, to groups conducting threatening and vulgar protests at [the] homes of Supreme Court Justices.

Mr. Buffett has quietly funneled more than $4 billion to groups supporting abortion on demand through the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation. That’s $4 billion, with a B. Advocacy disguised as philanthropy.

Bill Gates has lamented political polarization and has even worried aloud about a civil war. But it is billionaires who are funding the most shrill and extreme activists who are tearing our country apart. Ironically, Mr. Buffett has pointed out that corporate executives can make a lot of people mad when they insert themselves into controversy.

Anheuser-Busch is finding that out. It cannot renounce its Dylan Mulvaney transgender promotion because it is handcuffed by its longtime support for activists who would turn on them in a minute.

Anheuser-Busch gets a perfect grade on the Human Rights Campaign scorecard, as do Berkshire portfolio companies like Coca-Cola, Bank of America, and Apple. Bank of America and Apple help bankroll this group, which wants biological men to compete in women’s sports. Worse, it is currently pressuring state legislatures to allow sex change operations on children and to keep their parents out of the decision.

Let’s revisit Coca-Cola, which I discussed at last year’s meeting. CEO James Quincey, a British citizen, vowed to kill Georgia’s voter integrity law in 2021. That’s the law that President Biden called “Jim Crow 2.0,” and which prompted Major League Baseball to move the All-Star game out of Atlanta. Mr. Buffett jumped on the bandwagon, too, by signing a statement by corporate leaders suggesting that Republicans seek to restrict ballot access based on race.

Two years later, we can now evaluate that accusation. Last year, an election was held in Georgia. Turnout was record-breaking. According to an independent poll, 99% of voters said they had “no problem” casting ballots.

92% said the new law either had no impact on their ability to vote or made it easier. James Quincy was wrong, and Mr. Buffett, so were you.

NLPC chairman Peter Flaherty arrested at Berkshire Hathaway shareholder meeting. Credit: National Legal & Policy Center.

“Our proposal was for an independent chair so different people would be chairman and CEO, ‘Good Corporate Governance 101,’” Flaherty told Restoration News. “We sponsored the same resolution at 8 other companies in 2023, and it’s generally supported by both liberal and conservative shareholder activists.

“People say Warren Buffett is perceived to be Berkshire Hathaway, and that’s certainly true—what we’re saying is that this reality actually increases the company’s reputational risks, given the unimaginable sums Buffett has steered to controversial social and political causes. But public scrutiny, especially concerning his association with Bill Gates, is starting to catch up.”

NLPC has engaged in shareholder activism since 2004, long before it was popular with political groups. Back then “I got funny looks from other conservatives,” Flaherty said, with Newsweek reporting on an NLPC-sponsored Walmart overture like a “’man-bites-dog’ story.”

But as the trend caught on, most recently with the Right’s wildly successful boycott of Bud Lite and Target, it’s helped NLPC advise the conservative movement in defeating progressivism in the boardroom. Flaherty generally advises against divestment strategies—“if an institution has already divested from fossil fuel companies, it can be asked to divest from, say, companies that support anti-Semitism”—and counsels right-leaning shareholders to demand firms stay out of policy fights that have nothing to do with their core business.

With Buffett, he’s “skillfully crafted a public image for himself as the grandfatherly mid-westerner who is happy to dispense his wisdom so everyone can achieve the American dream by investing in stocks.” His patience and common sense resonate with conservatives and moderates. And Buffett‘s benefitted from both an “incurious media” and routing his population control funding through “foundations run by others.” 

“Then I came along and say this (sic) his philanthropy is the virus that spreads woke culture, and my mic is cut and I’m immediately arrested. Why? I was messing with his legacy,” Flaherty explained.

But that’s not the end of the story. NLPC, with Flaherty at the helm, plans to introduce a follow-up proposal at Berkshire’s 2024 meeting: “It’s important for all shareholders in public companies that I not be silenced.”

“Three Generations of Imbeciles Are Enough”

The ugly truth is that Omaha’s King of Abortion is only the latest in a long line of patricians bent on limiting the Earth’s population.

Philosophically speaking, there’s a straight line from Charles Darwin’s rejection of the Genesis creation account, to the advent of Social Darwinism, to Anglo-America’s eugenics crusade in the 1930s, through the death of Hitler’s Third Reich. That story ends in forced sterilization, mass abortion, and the 1960s Sexual Revolution, paid for by the biggest foundations in the world.

Put differently, the same assumptions fueling Hitler’s attempts to create a race of Übermenschen lie behind post-war Western elites’ efforts to stop Asians, Indians, and Africans from having too many children. It was Darwin’s cousin, the brilliant statistician Francis Galton, who coined the term “eugenics” to describe the study of weeding out the human gene pool. “Eugenics is the self-direction of human evolution,” declared the Second International Eugenics Congress a few decades later in 1921. “National Socialism is nothing but applied biology,” echoed the Nazis in the 1930s.

Eugenics has more accurately been described as “the religion of the aristocrats.” A century ago, our elites called such ideas cutting-edge “science.” Today they call it “philanthropy.”

In America, Corn Flakes inventor John Harvey Kellogg bankrolled Michigan’s Race Betterment Foundation in 1906 to ensure that only individuals with the proper racial pedigree had children. In 1917, the Rockefeller family and Carnegie Institution of Washington built the Eugenics Record Office on Long Island, New York, to support the heredity research of biologist Charles Davenport, founder of the International Federation of Eugenics Organizations.

In New York City, progressive patrician Madison Grant (a close friend of Davenport’s) used Darwin’s theory to lobby Congress to close U.S. immigration to non-“Nordics” to save the “master race” from extinction by mis-reproduction, as well as to save America’s natural resources—the birth of the National Parks system. To Grant and good friend Theodore Roosevelt, the two were mirror goals.

Grant’s opus, The Passing of the Great Race (1916), presented a novel world history so race-obsessed it might’ve been written by a modern “progressive.” Under its influence, 75 percent of American universities offered eugenics courses by the late 1920s. In Germany, the book was a smash hit among Third Reich leadership. It was even featured in some Nazis’ legal defense at the 1945 Nuremberg Trials—after all, they argued, the Germans were merely putting into practice the ideas formulated in the U.S. and Great Britain!

The book inspired another major figure of the 20th century: Margaret Sanger. At one point Sanger declared that eugenics and birth control—a term that then meant vastly more than simple contraception—“should be and are the right and left hand of one body,” since the movements were both concerned with who reproduces and how often.

In the United Kingdom, Marie Stopes—the British Margaret Sanger—shared the same convictions. In 1935, both women joined Davenport and countless elites in Berlin’s World Population Conference, where they called for government restrictions on reproduction and strict eugenics laws to safeguard the future of the “Nordic” race. Today, Marie Stopes International continues her work while pretending not to bear her legacy.

Eugenic policies hinged on sterilization—sometimes by force. One of the first laws Hitler’s regime passed in 1933 created courts with the authority to sterilize anyone—400,000 by 1945—deemed “hereditarily diseased.” Where’d they get the idea? A Planned Parenthood board member, Harry H. Laughlin, who drafted a model bill intended for the U.S. Congress. Sanger vocally praised the German law in a press release.

And in 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld forced sterilization laws in Buck v. Bell, with Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.—a progressive and secularist hero—infamously opining, “three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

Killing ‘Em with Kindness

But surely that was then. Haven’t we’ve learned our lesson? Not quite.

The Population Council—which has received $49 million from Buffett’s foundations—was created in 1952 with funding from John D. Rockefeller 3rd. Its first major target was India, where it aimed to curb overpopulation and Soviet influence in the socialist (albeit non-aligned) country. Under pressure from the United Nations, Population Council, Planned Parenthood, and Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, India began paying women to use IUDs and men to be sterilized, with a $66 million loan from the World Bank.

When bad harvests threatened mass starvation in the 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson refused to send food until it agreed to greater sterilization incentives. The Indian government instituted a two-child policy, suspended the constitution, and ordered compulsory sterilization measures in what became known as India’s “vasectomy belt.”

John D. Rockefeller 3rd meeting with President Lyndon B. Johnson, 1968. Credit: Rockefeller Archive Center.

Villages were ringed with armed police, the men trundled out at sword- and gun-point and told they would be sterilized by force. Women had IUDs forcibly inserted. Those who resisted were beaten, loaded onto buses, and brought to hospitals to be sterilized. The government rewarded teachers and public employees with bonuses for getting their neighbors and family members sterilized. In some states people with more than three children were banned from holding a government job, a major source of employment in the socialist country, until they were sterilized. Elsewhere, teachers’ salaries were withheld until they were sterilized. Some states withheld food.

It’s estimated that India sterilized tens of millions of people throughout the “emergency,” as the mid-1970s are remembered. In 1976 alone, 6.2 million men were sterilized—15 times the number sterilized by the Nazis across 12 years. Amazingly, the Population Council wanted to go even further by distributing a “fertility control agent” in urban water supplies. At the same time, biologist Paul Ehrlich bemoaned India’s teeming masses in his 1968 book The Population Bomb, which famously warned the world would succumb to overpopulation by the 1980s unless we adopted a socialist, hard-“green” one-world government.

Forced sterilization surgery at a “family planning camp,” 1975. Credit: Hindustan Times.

India remains the greatest success story in the dark history of population control, yet it’s hardly remembered in the West. And none of it would have happened without the intervention of massive U.S. funding. India’s killing spree may have been wrought by socialists, but they were socialists following the dictate of “enlightened” Washington and its legion of social engineers, ultra-wealthy foundations, and secular humanists following an amoral religion—Scientism.

This was philanthropy perverted, Christ’s commandment to love thy neighbor mutated into pure malice. And it was done with the best of intentions. Arthur Herman explains it best in his excellent book The Idea of Decline in Western History:

The chief appeal of racism in the nineteenth century was its politically progressive, even liberal message. . . . In short, the whole direction of racial thinking in Europe was one of liberal egalitarian optimism.

It may seem bizarre, but today’s “progressives”—like W.E.B. DuBois, Marcus Garvey, Herbert Marcuse, and Saul Alinsky before them—are the heirs of this rotten legacy. So are Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Charlie Munger, and all those who love death.

Carter Gaskill and Bronson Winslow contributed to this report

PDF version available here.