DANIEL S. writes:

From Russia Today:

Tens of millions of pounds of UK aid money has been spent forcibly sterilising Indian women. Many have died being mistreated, causing outrage from those who suspect Britain simply wants to curb the country’s population for ulterior motives. RT’s Priya Sridhar has the details of this controversial program.

Video here.

[NOTE: A reader below raises serious questions about the accuracy of this report.]

—- Comments —-

Buck writes:

Women being mutilated is an evil horror that should be stopped and punished, but by whom? Who is responsible? As dead as Britain is, there seems to be a pretty thin case that it is UK money causing these atrocities. Where is the claim that The Guardian has honestly followed the money? I doubt that UK money is put into the hands of honest Indian brokers who make certain that it gets where intended. The U.S. can’t assure that food stamp money is used for food. I’d like to see some facts from The Guardian; name the NGOs and do some real investigative reporting.

I don’t mean to alter the focus of this entry, but the more I read, the less focused it gets. If the Russia Times report is true, I can only wonder how they know this.

 The Wikipedia entry “Compulsory sterilization” posts this about India:

 India’s state of emergency

[B]etween 1975 and 1977 included a family planning initiative that began in April 1976 through which the government hoped to lower India’s ever increasing population. This program used propaganda and monetary incentives to convince citizens to get sterilized. People who agreed to get sterilized would receive land, housing, and money or loans.[16] Because of this program, thousands of men received vasectomies and even more women received tubal ligations. However, the program focused more on sterilizing women than men. An article in The New York Times entitled “For Sterilization, Target Is Women” states, “There were 114,426 vasectomies in India in 2002-03, and 4.6 million tubal ligations, the analogous operation on women, though ligation is a more complicated operation.” [17] Despite the fact that sterilizing men is a more simple procedure, the government still chose to focus on sterilizing women instead. [16][17] Son of the Prime Minister at the time Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi was largely blamed for what turned out to be a failed program.[18] A strong backlash against any initiative associated with family planning followed the highly controversial program, which continues into the 21st century.[19]

Also at Wikipedia in the “Family planning in India” entry:

Family planning in India is based on efforts largely sponsored by the Indian government. In the 1965-2009 period, contraceptive usage has more than tripled (from 13% of married women in 1970 to 48% in 2009) and the fertility rate has more than halved (from 5.7 in 1966 to 2.6 in 2009), but the national fertility rate is still high enough to cause long-term population growth. India adds up to 10 lakh (100,000) people to its population every 15 days.

This links to the “Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (India)” entry.

There’s an awful lot written about India’s history on “family planning” and  lots of sources and references in these entries, but I don’t see anything referring to the U.K. or to money coming from the U.K., or exclusively from the U.K. to pay for this, or that the U.K. is the inspiration for this, except from the The Guardian, which is where it all seems to be coming from. All of my search results from “UK aid funds forced sterilization of India’s poor” source the identical “information” from The Gaurdian, as does the linked video from RT.

All refer to nameless “NGO”s.

 I don’t pretend to know much about NGOs, but I do know that they function just like for profit companies. They bid on work and sign huge multi-million dollar contracts just like civil engineering firms. They have a structure not unlike corporations; management and pay. They thrive off tax dollars for which they lobby hard and full time. This is one list of India’s NGOs. Are they not owned and operated by Indians?

 There’s a “debate” as to whether India will continue to accept aid money. How can they refuse it? “A third of the world’s poor live in India – more than all those designated as poor living in sub-Saharan Africa.”

 UK page on Aid.

 British MPs back aid to India

 Is India ready to refuse UK aid?

Daniel S. writes:

I suspect all of this is a product of a collaboration between Western elites and globalist elites in India. Western elites, both in America and Europe, have made quite clear their efforts for global eugenics and population control, and I see no reason why elites in India wouldn’t hold similar positions and work toward that end.

Please follow and like us: