Thursday, January 27, 2011

Global Health Fund Is Sick

One major western nation has decided that common sense and good fiscal policy are more important than satisfying the "don't make waves" maudlin sentimentality of bleeding hearts trying to fix all the ills of the world by throwing money at them. Which one? Hint: It isn't America.

The Global Health Fund currently has $21.7 billion in its coffers, but like so many goody-goody projects, it doesn't want to account to anyone for how it spends those funds. If you think that it's all spent on, well, health--then think again. The corruption and waste of money became so notorious that even the Associated Press could no longer ignore it. Breaking from the liberal-leftist policy of ignoring the good intentions leading to hell, Germany has become the first western nation to say "where the hell is all the money going?" And it will be contributing no more money until it gets answers.

Since the Fund is allegedly devoted entirely to healing AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in the poor parts of the world, specifically Africa, guilt-ridden limousine liberals have poured billions into the fund without actually determining if anything good was being done. As it turns out, the Fund has indeed done some good. But it could have done it a lot cheaper and more efficiently if money wasn't being siphoned off for personal gain almost as fast as it was being replaced.

Naturally, the United States is the biggest sucker, with France a far-distant second. Germany was a close third, but with the election of a more conservative government with both a heart and a head, the gravy train will not depart from Berlin for the time being. Germany's first 200 million Euro ($270 million) payment was to have taken place as part of its three year 600 million Euro commitment. That will not happen now until the chief thieves at the Fund do some 'splainin.

Germany's new Development Minister, Dirk Niebel, said that no more money would flow into the Fund from Germany until there has been a thorough investigation and possible restitution. In order for the money to be allocated, he must ask the German legislature for the money as part of the commitment, and he will not be doing so. Niebel announced: "I take the allegations of corruption and breach of trust . . . against the Fund very seriously, and I expect that the Fund will promptly clear them up. But I have halted all payments until it is fully cleared up."

One irony here is that the Fund's Inspector General hired a highly decorated ex-US federal prosecutor to investigate the early allegations of fraud, misfeasance and malfeasance. That investigator, Robert Appleton, found that there was as much fire as there was smoke and exposed millions, and perhaps billions, in improperly used funds. The information was made available to American officials at the same time it was transmitted to Germany.

Germany read the report, and acted promptly to halt payments until the money was being spent on its goal, not on crooks, liars and blood-suckers who couldn't care less about communicable diseases in Africa. Those "healers" are much more concerned with their bank accounts in Switzerland. The Obama administration, on the other hand, has taken no action whatsoever. Not only will American money not be withheld, but there is no action on the report itself, and Obama is actually asking for more money for the Fund this year.

This is another example of the Obama administration's policy of playing to the masses, covering up scandals of epic proportions, throwing money at "feel-good" projects that enhance their phony image as humanitarians, and advancing the cause of worldwide corruption. In fact, it's just like Chicago.

Next stop--Haiti.


BevfromNYC said...

This is great! It just writes itself, doesn't it, LawHawk! {I know it doesn't, but you know what I mean} And it happens every damn time - the 9/11 Compensation Fund #1, Katrina Fund, Haiti and all kinds of global relief -

I will only give to specific organizations that do direct aid - Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders. Otherwise, it's just goes completely unaccounted for.

Unknown said...

Bev: Sometimes I think they should just write it into the proposals. Actual work: 20%
Graft, corruption, waste: 80%

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I agree with Bev -- never give money to anyone you don't know how they use the money and where it goes. Too many charities are either fake or use their money to support their salaries.

darski said...

I would never give any money -knowingly- to the Red Cross.

During Katrina, they chose to let people starve rather than take food from Christian churches. it was only when they were called on it that they agreed to accept the tainted food

Unknown said...

Andrew: I still prefer to give through my church's social ministries outreach. All volunteers, and practically no administrative expenses. Costs are carefully monitored, and the vast majority of collections go directly to the services they purport to perform.

Unknown said...

Darski: Yep. Another example of willful blindness on the part of liberals.

Unknown said...

Darski: The Red Cross services have deteriorated badly over the past few decades since they became victims of political correctness.

Tennessee Jed said...

Got a chance to quickly read earlier before going out. You have a great nose for the good stories that otherwise don't get told. "Just like Chicago" says it so well. I wonder what percentage of Americans truly understand how bad this administration is on this stuff (advancing the cause of worldwide corruption.) I have a hunch the details of the personal enrichment fraud is more sickening than we realize.

Unknown said...

Tennessee: Thanks. Andrew and I both try to fill in gaps wherever we can.

As for Obama, the Chicago gang, and the foreign thieves, it's called "birds of a feather."

Joel Farnham said...

Why am I not surprised LawHawk?

If there is a way to steal our money to pay for their feel-good stupidities, the liberals will find a way to do it. All it takes is one "well-meaning" fool in authority know the rest.

Obama is never going to change. He can't even get triangulation right.

Unknown said...

Joel: That's a good summation. Liberals can always find a way to spend money, and not spend it wisely. And if it's somebody else's money, all the better.

Post a Comment