It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Famine Scam

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   
OK, what you're about to read isn't some fantastical account or speculation regarding aliens, UFOs etc. so apologies if you find this topic boring. This is one of the true conspiracies in our world and an issue that I feel needs to be highlighted. I've tried to make this post as concise and easy to read as possible so hopefully you'll bear with me.

The documentary upon which this thread was inspired is entitled 'The Famine Scam'. The BBC attempted to block the release of this documentary but you can watch part 1 of 6 of it here: www.youtube.com.... The remaining 5 parts can be simply found in the related videos section.

The documentary's tag-line is this:


"Niger is dying, and the world is merely watching" This dramatic message was heard all over the world in July 2005. News media all over the world reported the famine in the worlds poorest country. Why would anyone doubt it when the UN, the BBC and the big relief organisations reported of a famine in Niger, and that millions needed immediate relief? But what if this wasn't a famine? What if it was not free food that was the right medicine for the crisis in Niger?


In July 2005, it was reported by the international media and the United Nations that the West African country of Niger was suffering from famine, which was likely to lead to the deaths of between 2.5-3.5 million people of starvation, unless they received immediate aid.

The original thread on ATS, from 2005, discussing the "crisis" can be found here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

The conclusion the documentary points to and I myself came to, is that these reports were false. There was no famine in Niger in 2005, despite the UN, the BBC and the international media telling us otherwise.

What makes me think this?

The following information can all be found in ‘The Famine Scam’ documentary:

The documentary team interviewed ordinary Nigeriens, who lived in one of the most affected areas of the famine, according to the BBC and the UN. These local people and eye-witnesses state that there was no famine in Niger in 2005. The media stated that the famine was caused by a plague of locusts that destroyed all the crops. However, the Nigerien farmers and other eyewitnesses interviewed, state that this was not true.

According to figures quoted by the media and the UN, up to 3.5 million people in Niger were starving to death in 2005. The population of Niger is between 13-15 million people. So if the UN's figures were correct, around 25% of the population of Niger were starving to death in 2005. Yet, as shown in the documentary, the average Nigeriens interviewed state that they did not know and had not heard of anybody "starving to death" at that time.

Imagine if 1 out of every 4 people in your country was starving to death - even if you take away all forms of media - do you really think you wouldn't notice it happening? Especially if you lived in one of the so-called “hardest hit” areas? And yet all of these people – just regular, local Nigeriens - appear to be totally in the dark about the famine that was supposedly happening on their door-steps.

The following people also deny that a famine occurred:

The Prime-Minister of Niger at the time, Hama Amadou.

Former head of mission at Doctors Without Borders, Johanne Sekkenes, who worked in Niger at the time states she did not see evidence of a famine.

Gary Eilerts who works for USAID and supervised the US monitoring of food and living conditions in Niger in 2005 also states that there was enough food in the country at the time. He also states that the media misrepresented children suffering from malaria and other disease and falsely portrayed them as dying of starvation.

Data collected at the time shows that there was no evidence for famine conditions in that year. There was no significant increase in deaths recorded and rain measurements for the year were average.

Continued...




posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
...

Mis-information by the BBC:

What we were told: The BBC reported that the desperate people of Niger had resorted to eating poisonous leaves for something to eat.

The truth: The type of leaves these people were filmed eating is a local delicacy eaten by people year-round. Apparently it is quite tasty.

What we were shown: A dead cow lying in the street is reported by the BBC to have died of starvation and is used as evidence of the famine.

The truth: According to eye-witnesses, the cow was hit by a car and died.

What we were told: BBC reports stated, “nobody has even counted how many people have died” and “there are so many people dying, they don’t keep a record of names”.

The truth: According to former head of mission at Doctors Without Borders, Johanne Sekkenes, deaths are always recorded in DWB centres, just like at any hospital in the world.

Why would the UN, the BBC and aid agencies make it all up?

One can only speculate on the answer to this question, however the following seems plausible in my mind:

The easiest motive to speculate on is the aid agencies. One word: money. A famine, such as the one reported in Niger, is the perfect money-making exercise for aid agencies. They’re basically getting free advertising on the national news every night and it is in their interests to exaggerate the severity of the situation in order to prompt increased media coverage and cash donations.

The media: A major international story, such as a famine affecting millions, is the perfect opportunity for a journalist to raise his/her profile and advance his/her career. Journalists, like many of us, are ambitious in their work and are desperate to be the first to break a story. Sometimes they can be so desperate for a story that they create the story in the first place. Journalistic and media tricks (like the mis-information explained previously) are commonplace and to suggest the media would not use such “tricks” with regards to “heavier” stories, such as famine, is naïve.

The less sinister explanation could be that some Western journalists who go to Africa are so shocked by the relative poverty they see around them, they mistake every-day life in these countries for famine conditions, when in fact they are seeing nothing out of the ordinary for that particular country. But just because the native people aren’t feasting on Big Mac’s, does not mean they are suffering from famine and starvation as reported.

The UN: what better way to enhance your image than to “save” millions of lives?

Do the three factions (the UN, the media and the aid agencies) conspire together in order to manufacture situations like this for their own separate benefits? Maybe, but obviously the “smoking gun” proof of this is carefully hidden.

Continued...



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
...

Even if all this is true, what is the harm in sending them food anyway?

Food handouts may seem like a worthy cause but often can cause more problems for African populations than you may think.

Firstly, it discourages farmers from tending to their own crops. Why bother working the land when you can just wait for handouts?

Secondly, it destroys local farmers’ businesses and local food markets. If you flood an area with free excess food, this causes the price of food in the area to plummet. Why buy or barter for food when you can get it for free? The farmers in the area rely on their income to continue to produce food, which feeds the local population. The farmers will still be there long after the aid agencies have gone, therefore it makes sense to support the former rather than the latter. As the saying goes: Give a man a fish and it will feed him for one day, teach a man how to fish and he will feed himself for a lifetime.

Such “famine” stories also propagate the myth that African’s are reliant on us Westerners for food and cannot feed themselves. This is a patronising and false portrayal and it is unfair and ignorant to project our Western points of reference onto the African continent. As has been shown, native African people clearly disagree with our pampered, Western definition of a famine.

The “feed the world” issue also tends to obscure the truly most important issue in Africa today: treatment of malaria. If you want to help Africa, don’t give your money to food handout agencies, give it to organisations like Doctor’s Without Borders and other organisations that treat malaria and try to prevent the spread of it.

90% of “starving” children we see on TV are suffering and being treated for malaria, not starvation. A mosquito net will save more lives in Africa than a bag of grain.

Apologies for the length of the post, I hope it made you think anyway and if you have any comments on this I’d love to read them. Cheers.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Fantastic post, I agree that it would be impossible for 25% of a population to be in a chronic stage of starvation and still maintain the cohesion of their society.

Aside from the points you made with your post, I think the reason why the UN is giving out food handouts to a country who doesn't really need it is to make the populace more fragile in a SHTF event because, they, despite being poor, are much more likely to be able to survive on their own because they usually have to grow their own food.

The UN wants to make sure 'their subjects' have increased reliance on governments so the UN will be able to control the populace more easily.

Most of us in the wealthier worlds don't grow our own food on a significant scale. If the food suddenly stops coming for us, a lot of us will be gone.

One day, the food might suddenly stop coming for these people, and it will be too late for them... They will have abandoned their gardens a long time ago and will not be able to grow well enough again for perhaps years.

Not only is it about money, it's about control too, IMO.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:44 PM
link   
This article provides links giving further clarification of the Niger "famine" overestimate:

aidwatchers.com...



reply to post by Lurch
 



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
This article provides links giving further clarification of the Niger "famine" overestimate:

aidwatchers.com...



reply to post by Lurch
 



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Excellent post. One more reason for faking a crisis in the media is to divert attention from a genuine matter. Was there anything going on in 2005 that may have been overlooked because of this?



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   
The issue may have been tied up in the Niger "yellow cake" lie as well but here's a great article on the

real "Preventable pandemics" (from malnutrition and starvation and nutrition-based disease, etc.) which go ignored in the West:

www.prisonplanet.com...


Originally posted by LiquidLight
Excellent post. One more reason for faking a crisis in the media is to divert attention from a genuine matter. Was there anything going on in 2005 that may have been overlooked because of this?



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by star in a jar
Fantastic post, I agree that it would be impossible for 25% of a population to be in a chronic stage of starvation and still maintain the cohesion of their society.

Aside from the points you made with your post, I think the reason why the UN is giving out food handouts to a country who doesn't really need it is to make the populace more fragile in a SHTF event because, they, despite being poor, are much more likely to be able to survive on their own because they usually have to grow their own food.

The UN wants to make sure 'their subjects' have increased reliance on governments so the UN will be able to control the populace more easily.

Most of us in the wealthier worlds don't grow our own food on a significant scale. If the food suddenly stops coming for us, a lot of us will be gone.

One day, the food might suddenly stop coming for these people, and it will be too late for them... They will have abandoned their gardens a long time ago and will not be able to grow well enough again for perhaps years.

Not only is it about money, it's about control too, IMO.


Apologies for the late reply but this is a fantastic point that I had not considered.

Perhaps it benefits organisations like the UN and the Western world in general to "keep Africa down". And all the better if you can do this whilst enhancing your own image at the same time (i.e. by organising mass food handouts and "saving" millions of people in front of the TV cameras, which looks good to the ignorant people in the West but in reality does more harm than good in most cases in Africa).

I just wish more people gave a damn about real life issues like these instead of fantasising about aliens and the reptilians etc...



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join