TF
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: The transfer of total capital wealth from men to women beginning in 1970 and estimating up to 2050 is the largest transfer of wealth in human history.

Fact Check: The transfer of total capital wealth from men to women beginning in 1970 and estimating up to 2050 is the largest transfer of wealth in human history.

March 14, 2025•by TruthOrFake
?
VERDICT
Unverified

# The Great Wealth Transfer: Analyzing the Claim of Historical Significance ## Introduction The claim that "the transfer of total capital wealth from...

The Great Wealth Transfer: Analyzing the Claim of Historical Significance

Introduction

The claim that "the transfer of total capital wealth from men to women beginning in 1970 and estimating up to 2050 is the largest transfer of wealth in human history" suggests a significant shift in wealth distribution between genders over an extended period. This assertion has gained traction in various discussions about economic trends, particularly in the context of generational wealth transfer and gender equity. However, the validity of this claim requires careful examination of the available evidence and the sources from which it originates.

What We Know

  1. Projected Wealth Transfer: According to a report from the Bank of America Institute, approximately $84 trillion is expected to be transferred from older generations to younger ones in the U.S. by 2045, with a significant portion of this wealth expected to go to women. Specifically, about $47 trillion is projected to be inherited by women in younger generations 27.

  2. Gender Wealth Distribution: A report by NBC News states that by 2030, women are expected to hold two-thirds of the private wealth in the U.S., marking a significant shift in wealth ownership 3. This aligns with findings from Citizens Bank, which emphasize the role of women in shaping the financial future during this wealth transfer 5.

  3. Historical Context: The concept of wealth transfer is not new; however, the scale and gender dynamics are noteworthy. The shift in wealth ownership is often linked to changing demographics, including increased life expectancy and changing societal roles 4.

  4. Economic Implications: The wealth transfer is seen as an opportunity to address the gender wealth gap, which currently shows that women own significantly less wealth compared to men 8. Reports indicate that women currently own only about 32 cents for every dollar owned by white men, highlighting the existing disparities 10.

Analysis

Source Evaluation

  • Credibility and Bias: The sources cited vary in credibility. The Bank of America Institute and NBC News provide data-driven insights based on research and surveys, which can be considered reliable. However, some sources, such as Citizens Bank and Forbes, may have inherent biases due to their commercial interests in promoting financial services to women 56.

  • Methodology Concerns: The estimates of wealth transfer are based on projections and surveys, which can be influenced by various factors, including economic conditions and societal changes. For instance, the wealth transfer estimates rely on assumptions about inheritance patterns and demographic shifts, which may not fully account for unexpected economic downturns or changes in policy 49.

  • Conflicting Perspectives: While many sources highlight the positive aspects of this wealth transfer for women, it is essential to consider the broader economic context. Critics may argue that focusing solely on gender overlooks other critical factors affecting wealth distribution, such as race and socioeconomic status 10.

Unverified Assertions

Some claims regarding the exact figures and timelines of wealth transfer are not universally accepted and may vary significantly depending on the source. For example, while some reports suggest a total of $124 trillion in wealth transfer, others cite lower figures, leading to potential confusion regarding the scale of the transfer 34.

Conclusion

Verdict: Unverified

The assertion that the wealth transfer from men to women represents the largest transfer of wealth in human history remains unverified. While projections indicate a substantial transfer of wealth—estimated at around $84 trillion to $124 trillion—these figures are based on various assumptions and methodologies that may not be universally accepted. The evidence suggests a significant shift in wealth ownership towards women, but the exact scale and implications of this transfer are still subject to debate.

It is important to recognize the limitations of the available evidence. The estimates rely heavily on projections that can be influenced by economic fluctuations, demographic changes, and societal trends. Furthermore, the focus on gender dynamics may obscure other critical factors, such as race and socioeconomic status, that also play a significant role in wealth distribution.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate the information presented and consider the complexities surrounding wealth transfer and gender equity. The nuances of this topic highlight the need for ongoing research and discussion to fully understand the implications of these trends.

Sources

  1. Atkinson, A.B., Piketty, T., & Saez, E. (2011). Top Incomes in the Long Run of History. Retrieved from https://eml.berkeley.edu/~saez/atkinson-piketty-saezJEL10.pdf
  2. The New York Times. (2023). The Greatest Wealth Transfer in History Is Here, With ... Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/14/business/economy/wealth-generations.html
  3. NBC News. (2023). Women will get most of the $124 trillion 'great wealth transfer.' Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/business/personal-finance/women-will-get-124-trillion-great-wealth-transfer-rcna196076
  4. Forbes. (2024). The Great Wealth Transfer Is Happening But Not In The Way You Think. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/josephcoughlin/2024/06/26/the-great-wealth-transfer-is-happening-but-not-in-the-way-you-think/
  5. Citizens Bank. (n.d.). Women Lead the Great Wealth Transfer. Retrieved from https://www.citizensbank.com/learning/great-wealth-transfer-women-shaping-financial-future.aspx
  6. Forbes. (2024). The Great Wealth Transfer: What It Means For Women And For The ... Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/hollycorbett/2024/02/29/the-great-wealth-transfer-what-it-means-for-women-and-for-the-world/
  7. CNBC. (2025). Most of $124 trillion 'great wealth transfer' to go to women. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/12/most-of-the-124-trillion-great-wealth-transfer-will-go-to-women.html
  8. Forbes. (2024). The Great Wealth Transfer: An Investment Opportunity For Women. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesbusinesscouncil/2024/11/18/the-great-wealth-transfer-an-84-trillion-investment-opportunity-for-women/
  9. Merrill Lynch. (n.d.). How Will the Great Wealth Transfer Impact the Markets? Retrieved from https://www.ml.com/articles/great-wealth-transfer-impact.html
  10. BNN Bloomberg. (2024). Massive wealth transfer will give women US$34 trillion by 2030. Retrieved from https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/economics/2024/12/09/massive-wealth-transfer-will-give-women-us34-trillion-by-2030.html

Got your own claim to verify? It's 100% Free!

Join thousands who trust our AI-powered fact-checking. Completely free with no registration required. Your claim could be the next important truth we uncover.

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: In absolute terms women’s wealth in 1970 was much less than that of men. By 2030 women will have as much wealth as men. The total change in women’s wealth is the largest economic change between two groups in history as a total dollar figure and share of economy.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: In absolute terms women’s wealth in 1970 was much less than that of men. By 2030 women will have as much wealth as men. The total change in women’s wealth is the largest economic change between two groups in history as a total dollar figure and share of economy.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: In absolute terms women’s wealth in 1970 was much less than that of men. By 2030 women will have as...

Mar 14, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: University of the People review and FAQ Welcome to the most famous, most detailed, most comprehensive review about the University of the People aka UoPeople. Our mission is to help you understand how UoPeople really works—in other words, one of the biggest scams in the history of online education. This informative website has been online for years and still receives hundreds of letters, complaints and reports regarding the University of the People. If you want to join the class action lawsuit against the University of the People, send an email to [email protected] Alert: the Israeli University of the People aka UoPeople is selling degrees in Gaza and Palestine without disclosing that UoPeople is based in Israel, leading the Palestinians themselves to unknowingly fund the state of Israel. Check the official map (in Hebrew). UoPeople, a cult-like for-profit organization, deliberately hides these critical details and, most importantly, refuses to tell the truth. On top of that, the Israeli University of the People has been making a fortune by selling degrees to individuals who lack the qualifications to attend a real university. These "students" simply copy-paste random content generated by the free version of ChatGPT and ultimately buy a degree. The moral of the story? Anyone, even an idiot, can buy a degree from the University of the People. Share on Facebook Share on X Share on WhatsApp Share on Telegram Share on Reddit UoPeople University of the People diploma What is the University of the People: the ultimate review and FAQ on UoPeople, i.e. the biggest diploma mill in the world This website provides a comprehensive review and FAQ list on the University of the People (www.uopeople.edu), an online for-profit Israeli diploma mill that bills itself as a non-profit American university in California. Just like any diploma mill, if you visit their alleged current address, "595 E. Colorado Boulevard, Suite 623, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA" you won't see any "university"; instead, you will find a hidden PO box (under the desk) in a shared office, which they rent from loopnet.com/Listing/595-E-Colorado-Blvd-Pasadena-CA/4109015/ and which you can rent yourself: yes, you can get UoPeople's address too. The same goes for the two different PO boxes previously used by UoPeople. In other words, you can't visit this "university" simply because it doesn't exist, unless you consider a constantly changing $80 PO box a university. And if you try to call them, things don't get any better: it is just a dummy voicemail service running on a virtual phone number, and they have no real U.S. landlines or mobile phone lines whatsoever. Curiously, UoPeople claimed for a very long time that it was a real phone number managed by real people. However, after reading this page and after six years, they finally admitted that it is a "voice message service". But why would a self-described university have a throwaway "voice message service" number instead of a real landline? Simple: because they hide their real phone number in Israel. Therefore, when you come across a self-described ambassador (who basically is a spammer) from the University of the People promoting their "tuition-free American university", and you want to have some fun and catch them off guard, just ask them: "Where is your university located?" As soon as they reply "in California", you can point out there is no university at the address they give you. However, since they are brainwashed, they will reply that you are a "hater" and will keep promoting their fake university. The University of the People claims not to be a diploma mill because "we do not give credit for relevant life experience". This explanation is trivial because more than 95% of UoPeople.edu customers are students who don't have any "relevant life experience", so there is no need to take experience into consideration. In fact, it would even be counterproductive because it would highlight their inexperience. Actually, UoPeople, which has no professors and no video classes, uses more sophisticated tricks to "recognize experiences": for example, you can buy college credits from sophia.org and then transfer them to UoPeople. Besides, "life experience" credits are optional: a diploma mill may simply sell degrees for a fee—usually a few thousand dollars—which is exactly what the University of the People does. Considering that UoPeople.edu claims to have more than 100,000 paying students, it is plausible that the University of the People is the biggest diploma mill in the world. However, UoPeople's numbers should always be taken with a grain of salt, as they cannot be verified by anyone and may well be fabricated. The reality is that the University of the People transfers credits from other similar pseudo-diploma mills. Moreover, it attributes credits to some super-easy online courses from sophia.org or coursera.org, which don't even have real exams. You can even use "promo codes" to buy credits from Sophia.org, just like at a supermarket. These promo codes are often distributed through a multi-level marketing scheme. More importantly, you can use ChatGPT or any other free AI service to write every assignment, essay, journal entry, forum post, you name it. You can simply copy and paste any response from ChatGPT, and you are done. You don't even have to delete sentences like "As an AI model, I can't answer this question, but…" because the text will still be accepted. Everyone at the University of the People, including the self-described "teachers", uses ChatGPT. Essentially, you are buying a degree by filling out forms with the help of ChatGPT. UoPeople.edu undergraduate and graduate admission requirements and acceptance rate: 100% or more Many people from Africa and Asia submit fake high school diplomas and get admitted, as long as they start paying. The first fee is $60, which is actually a significant amount in many developing countries, followed by subsequent payments of $120 each. In reality, these fees are the true admission requirements. The University of the People claims this is not tuition but rather "administrative fees"—or occasionally "assessment fees", even though there is nothing to assess. Furthermore, you don't even need to understand English, as you can simply copy and paste random content generated by ChatGPT. It goes without saying that you can submit a fake diploma from any country, as long as it has a convincing fake stamp and a forged signature. This is why the title of this section is "100% or more": not only does UoPeople accept paying students with some form of high school diploma, but it also admits students without a legitimate diploma, effectively exceeding the 100% threshold. An education revolution by eliminating professors and other useless old stuff Just like any diploma mill, University of the People has no professors, no video courses and no original study material. The most frequently recommended sources are Wikipedia pages that might contain mistakes, or PDF files downloaded from various colleges' websites without asking permission from the authors and/or the owners. Those PDF files could also have mistakes or even be technically corrupt, but UoPeople doesn't care. Fake professors The public website lists prestigious names from around the world, but none of them actually teach at the University of the People. Some are even retired. Essentially, the webmaster has been authorized to publish their résumés, which also serves as a clever way to manipulate Google and other search engines. Whenever you look up one of these professors' names, UoPeople's website often appears on the first page of search results, creating the misleading impression that these individuals are actively teaching there. Unfortunately, if you enroll at the University of the People, you won't find any of them. In fact, you won't find any professors at all. Unauthorized logos On the other hand, the webmaster has not been authorized to publish the logos of various organizations, including the United Nations, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Deloitte, IBM, you name it. In his view, these unauthorized logos make the website look "more professional" and help the organization sell more "degrees". In reality, they only make the site appear more deceptive—and, frankly, ridiculous. When UoPeople.edu was first launched, they claimed their alumni worked at Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and other major companies. However, at that time, they couldn't have had any alumni, because the website had just been created. In truth, a degree from the University of the People carries such a poor reputation that many graduates choose to omit it from their résumés. Understandably, employers often discriminate against degrees from questionable offshore diploma mills, especially when they see the name University of the People. One of UoPeople's most repeated advertising slogans is "Education revolution". In this case, we couldn't agree more: they claim to be an educational institution, yet they have no professors, no classes, no real address and no functional phone number. This certainly is a revolution! The for-profit Israeli company that doesn't pay any taxes in the US University of the People Education Ltd is the actual company that operates UoPeople.edu—not the other way around, as falsely claimed by UoPeople's owner, Shai Reshef, who runs this for-profit scam. The company is based in Tel Aviv and employs several Israeli staff members, while many other workers, misleadingly labeled as "volunteers", are underpaid and work remotely off the books from countries with cheap labor, including Nigeria, India, Kenya, Ethiopia, Cameroon, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Uganda, Ghana, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Cambodia. Lately, most of the activity seems to be concentrated in India. To further conceal its true nature, the company established a separate dummy organization in the U.S., named University of the People (without "Ltd"), which successfully obtained non-profit status. According to their claims, the Israeli company merely "offers online technical and administrative services" and is supposedly a subsidiary of the American entity. In reality, this setup allows the so-called "non-profit American university" to funnel millions of dollars in student payments every year to the for-profit Israeli company, while avoiding U.S. taxes. You don't need to be a financial expert to recognize this simple tax-evasion scheme. Just read the mandatory IRS Form 990, which UoPeople, as a registered non-profit, is required to file annually. The document is publicly available at irs.gov. However, what they don't disclose is that University of the People Education Ltd is the real puppet master, controlling the virtual University of the People through a hidden PO box in California. A Reddit user successfully traced the University of the People diploma mill back to Israel. Predictably, UoPeople and its network of Reddit spammers, who also happen to be moderators, began threatening him. The same thing happened to us. However, their so-called attorney ultimately accomplished nothing… or at least, that's what UoPeople claims he is. Nobody knows if he is truly an attorney, as he refuses to disclose or verify his alleged credentials. Currently, the University of the People is paying this same (possibly fake) attorney to sanitize Wikipedia and other online sources. His job? Deleting authoritative government sources that mention Israel and intimidating editors and webmasters into compliance. (For more details, see our Contact section, where we reveal UoPeople's real address.) Unfortunately, this Reddit user was banned by UoPeople's "moderators" simply for exposing the real address. In other words, UoPeople forces the use of its fake California address while actively silencing those who reveal the truth. History of the University of the People UoPeople claims to be tuition-free UoPeople.org started as a tuition-free website—mind you, it was just a website, not a school—that could send you a diploma for free. You didn't have to pay anything because there were no real courses or exams. Needless to say, the diploma was completely useless unless you wanted to use it as a novelty item to hang on your wall. In our opinion, it was useless even as a novelty—because, honestly, University of the People was not the most impressive name they could have chosen, but that's another story. Since this setup was free, it wasn't technically a scam yet. However, don't mistake it for a MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) website, which at least offers actual courses. UoPeople.org had nothing of the sort. In 2014, Israeli scammer Shai Reshef—former owner of a for-profit e-learning company that he sold to the education giant Kaplan after encountering legal issues with Israeli authorities—managed to get his uopeople.org website accredited by a defunct, non-regional accrediting agency called DETC (formerly DEAC). This agency had been shut down after accrediting too many diploma mills (scams), but suddenly came back to life, thanks to the money Reshef paid to get uopeople.org accredited: the same money that Reshef later paid to WASC. From that moment, Reshef claimed that his empty website was now an accredited American university and simply changed its name to uopeople.edu by purchasing a new domain. Hooray, the University of the People was born: the "university" that would supposedly help humanity, save the world, and eliminate poverty. This business strategy is particularly profitable because it allows Reshef to collect more and more money to send to Israel through a website of extremely poor technical and cultural quality, which, in fact, has negligible operating costs. At first, uopeople.edu was still free, maintaining its "non-profit" status. But that didn't last long. Soon, Reshef came up with a deliberately misleading advertising slogan: "Tuition-free university". This phrasing was deceptive: sure, there was no "tuition", but only because uopeople.edu was never an actual school in the first place. Instead, it introduced "administrative fees", which required students to pay thousands of dollars for a diploma, exactly like most international diploma mills. The difference? The original uopeople.org diploma was free, whereas the new uopeople.edu diploma came with a hefty price tag. Today, the old uopeople.org website simply redirects to uopeople.edu. But even if it's not free, UoPeople is still a bargain! No: UoPeople is still a scam As soon as you realize that UoPeople is not actually "tuition-free", as their misleading ads and articles claim, their representatives aka "ambassadors" typically respond with: "It's tuition-free, but not completely free, and it's a bargain because it's low-cost." First of all, "low-cost" and "free" are two entirely different concepts. Ironically, UoPeople claims to offer an MBA and a Bachelor/Associate of Science in Business Administration, yet they seem to misunderstand basic business terminology. If your business model is low-cost, your ads should say "low-cost tuition", not "tuition-free". That being said, this is still a scam. It is like saying: "I could steal $50,000, but I'm a nice person so I'll only steal $5,000". Either way, you are still stealing! Charging $5,000 instead of $50,000 doesn't excuse fraudulent, aggressive, and deceptive business practices, especially while pretending to be a philanthropist "helping the poor" in Africa, India, and Asia. In reality, UoPeople is a fake charitable Israeli organization and one of the biggest scams in the nonprofit sector. Adding insult to injury, because UoPeople claims that student payments are "administrative fees" rather than tuition, students do not qualify for federal grants, aid, or subsidized student loans. Testimony of a former instructor «Last year, I was hired by this online Israeli school. The salary was extremely low, and they made me sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), explicitly stating that I must not discuss the contract itself. This is highly suspicious for an organization that claims to be a nonprofit. In reality, they exploit workers by falsely labeling them as "volunteers" to avoid legal action and tax obligations. I eventually quit because I was fed up with this scam. In retaliation, they refused to pay me for my hours. They profit off poor students from underdeveloped countries while deceiving charitable organizations with false promises of fully funded Bachelor's and MBA scholarships. It's a blatant case of charity fraud. To make matters worse, they even instructed me to create fake social media profiles, including LinkedIn, to fabricate the existence of a so-called "professor". Yes, the profiles existed, but the person was completely made up.» Uncensored and unfiltered UoPeople reviews written by students Leaving UoPeople.edu: impossible, unless you pay again «I am currently in the process of transferring to another school, which requires all my transcripts whether they accept the credits or not. I submitted my request and paid the transcript fee—yet another fee!—to UoPeople nearly three months ago. A week ago, I followed up via email to check on the status of my transcript. Their response? They claimed they had never received my request form or payment. I had to dig through my records and forward them the original email, including the form and the receipt they themselves had sent me. A week later, there is still no update. It's as if they don't want me to leave because they want more money. A fellow student who tried to transfer also went through the same nightmare. Don't be fooled by fake reviews from UoPeople's sales reps and so-called "ambassadors". If you still have a chance, avoid this hassle altogether. Apply to a local community college—a real school—and seek out genuine scholarships or financial aid. University of the People is simply not worth it. No matter how much or how little you pay, it's a waste of time and money.» Complaints about extortion schemes and payments «I live in the third world. Not only did UoPeople refuse to grant me a scholarship, but when I ran out of money and couldn't afford the last fee, they completely blocked my access to the website. That's right: if you don't pay, they disable your account, and you can't log in anymore. This isn't education; this is extortion. On top of that, there's clear tax evasion going on. Now, I'm left wondering: how exactly are they laundering money overseas?» MBA «I'll go straight to the point: they sold me an MBA that is not accredited as an MBA. It's completely useless. UoPeople's MBA is not legit, period.» Comment: thank you for your email. We discussed UoPeople's unaccredited MBA in the accreditation section. Peer-assessment «UoPeople's so-called "peer assessment" is driving me crazy. I submitted my assignment and got a zero (wow…) simply because all three peers assigned to grade it forgot to do so. Or maybe they just didn't know how. I feel completely cheated. I did my part and graded others as required, but I have yet to hear anything from the "volunteer instructor" to resolve the issue. She is ignoring my emails: either she's on vacation, or she's simply abandoned the course. Honestly, I even suspect her name is completely fake. At this point, I don't want to waste any more of my time. And please, don't even suggest that I need to pay yet another fee just to leave this "school", for heaven's sake.» Comment: unfortunately, UoPeople's "peer assessment" or "peer review" is nothing but a farce, just like the laughable "student learning journal". At UoPeople, students can literally copy and paste ChatGPT-generated responses as homework, and they will be accepted. In fact, the responses can even be completely random, because nobody checks whether ChatGPT's answers are accurate or relevant. That's exactly what most "students" do, especially those who don't understand English.And here's the best part: most UoPeople "instructors" are so clueless they don't even recognize ChatGPT responses. Funnily, some instructors rely on ChatGPT themselves, especially the ones who don't understand English. Peer-assessment is just yet another marketing gimmick from UoPeople. The fake rationale they provide is "it stimulates students and offers them a powerful platform" and "it is a collaborative approach that encourages learners to reflect deeply and engage with students from diverse perspectives," but it is all false. In fact, UoPeople has no professors, and peer-assessment is simply a way to avoid hiring and paying professors. UoPeople doesn't care if the student didn't understand anything about the assignment they were supposed to grade, or even if they don't understand English at all. Our advice Be wary of any organization that asks for money yet refuses to disclose its real location. Students should thoroughly research the schools they are sending money to. University of the People is a symptom of today's "education revolution"—a landscape distorted by profit-driven motives, deceptive advertising, and a disturbing lack of skepticism. The truth is, nothing in this world is truly free (or "tuition-free"): the advertisement of a "free university" should immediately raise red flags. Last but not least, if uopeople.edu were genuinely committed to helping the poor and eliminating poverty, why does it refuse to build real schools where they are needed most? Why doesn't it support poor students in their own countries instead of charging them thousands of dollars in "non-refundable administrative fees"? Selling questionable online degrees does nothing for the world's poorest populations, many of whom lack internet access altogether. In reality, UoPeople is exploiting Africans and Asians by taking their money. For example, thousands of African children are forced to work dangerous mining jobs around the clock and have no access to education. Yet, UoPeople does nothing to help them, aside from spreading fake PR stories to maintain its image. Instead of addressing its own alarming issues, UoPeople is focused on censoring criticism. The university even paid Forbes to remove a critical article, replacing it with a redirect to forbes.com. UoPeople is not interested in transparency—only in clickbait sponsored articles that serve its marketing agenda. Fortunately, the article has been republished here: edtechchronicle.com/universityofthepeople/ Fake news from UoPeople.edu UoPeople computer centers in Haiti After the catastrophic earthquake in Haiti in 2010, University of the People claimed to have built several computer centers for the earthquake victims. However, there are no UoPeople computer centers in Haiti. University of the People should be ashamed of spreading fake news like this, because many Haitians died during that terrible earthquake, and this Israeli diploma mill has no respect for them. UoPeople's PR office in Israel even paid nytimes.com to publish a fake story, with a fake (stolen) picture, about the alleged "UoPeople computer centers" in Haiti. Not only has UoPeople never built anything, but unfortunately, some charity organizations and individual citizens generously donated money, only to be scammed. UoPeople also uploaded the same stolen pictures to Wikipedia, where they were eventually deleted. Fake news and reviews on websites, media outlets, Internet forums, YouTube etc. The Israeli UoPeople.edu PR office uses international PR services such as einpresswire.com, prnewswire.com, cision.com, prweb.com, and many more. UoPeople submits any kind of story, including fake news and clickbait articles, and these platforms distribute thousands of copies all over the web. The more you pay, the more important the target websites become, which can include cnn.com, nytimes.com, forbes.com, and so on. As a result, when uninformed users see an article about UoPeople on Forbes or The New York Times, they think "Wow, wonderful news! It must be true because it's on forbes.com!" (or nytimes.com, cnn.com, etc.). Too bad the entire story was completely invented by uopeople.edu, and the journalist whose name appears on the article often has no idea what "UoPeople" even is. This absurd situation has been going on for more than ten years. For example, the BBC once published this headline: University of the People: where students get free degrees. Fake news! Instead of being free, UoPeople's degrees cost thousands of dollars. Moreover, University of the People's sales reps or ambassadors, who often disguise themselves as students, write hundreds of fake reviews on the internet (Quora, Wikipedia, Medium, Reddit, Facebook, YouTube, TrustPilot, LinkedIn, forums of various kinds, etc.), claiming that UoPeople is "wonderful", "a dream come true", "free", "the best university in the world" and other nonsense. Some spammers even claim to have met "the best professors in the world". Too bad UoPeople.edu notoriously has no professors: it is no coincidence that all these people conveniently omit the names of their alleged professors. They will also encourage you to "contact me and ask me anything else", which is nothing more than pure spam. University of the People also forces people from Africa and Asia, who are not students and have never attended UoPeople, to write fake reviews, especially on Facebook and Trustpilot. These reviews include phrases like "thank you free university", "great free American university", "I like the scholarships", and "I'm honored to use UoPeople.edu", usually accompanied by five-star ratings or a thumbs-up. These reviewers have no idea what they are talking about: they still have to pay the admission fee and have only watched a few UoPeople.edu commercials without ever logging into the website. UoPeople primarily uses these fake reviews to artificially inflate its average rating on Facebook. Sarah Vanunu was the former PR manager of UoPeople.edu. She worked (and still works) in her hometown in Israel. Her main job was to spread fake news about UoPeople across the internet while ensuring that nobody mentioned "Israel". The reason is simple: UoPeople is based in Israel but does not want people to know, particularly its Arab customers who are unaware that they are sending money to an Israeli organization. To put it plainly, whenever someone mentioned Israel—such as pointing out that UoPeople's owner, Shai Reshef, is from Israel—Sarah Vanunu would send an email demanding that the word "Israel" be removed or censored. When we refused to comply, we received a threatening letter from a "UoPeople.edu attorney", who claimed that UoPeople would take legal action against us. If we remember correctly, his name was Asaf Wolff, although we have no idea who he really is. In any case, we ignored his threats and deleted his letters. A few years later, we discovered that Sarah Vanunu had grown tired of representing a scam. She left the University of the People and now works for a more legitimate company. At the time of writing, Lindsay Pullen from Pennsylvania and Maor Galmor from Israel have taken over as the primary PR manipulators, but it is understood that these roles can change frequently. Update (2023): as predicted, they have now abandoned the UoPeople scam. As of now, it remains unclear who the current PR spammers are. Fake apps UoPeople claims to have developed a mobile app for iOS and Android to help poor people who can only access the internet through slow connections. However, neither Google Play nor the Apple App Store has ever had this app; only a few unrelated fake apps exist instead. In reality, UoPeople's subscription-based website—which requires a non-refundable $60 entry fee just to access the actual platform (beyond the promotional content)—performs poorly on all low-end mobile devices, making navigation difficult. The reason is simple: UoPeople runs on a basic Moodle installation on shared hosting—they don't even have their own servers—meaning the site is not optimized for mobile devices and often runs slowly on desktop computers as well. Ironically, UoPeople offers degrees in computer science, but their own website is clunky, outdated, and they have failed to develop a functional mobile app. A beautiful graduation ceremony Actually, at UoPeople, there is no such thing as a real graduation ceremony. Being a diploma mill, you simply receive your piece of paper by mail after paying all the required fees. That's it. However, UoPeople uploaded an amateur video showing a very long list of names of people who received their diplomas by mail. Apparently, this is what UoPeople considers a "beautiful graduation ceremony". Wikipedia UoPeople.edu has been bombarding Wikipedia with ads, fake stories, and fake pictures for a long time. As a result, most Wikipedia editors now consider UoPeople accounts to be a real nuisance. For example, paid users like Weatherextremes and SimoneBilesStan (now banned) have used Wikipedia solely to spread fake news and sponsored articles about University of the People. The latter spammer even incorporated the names "Simone" and "Biles" into their username, without Simone Biles' permission, to falsely claim that she is a "UoPeople student and ambassador", which is completely untrue. Read our article to learn more about this scam. Reddit Besides being filled with all sorts of weirdos and idiots, UoPeople's subreddit is populated by sales reps who never disclose their identity and falsely claim to be "happy students". Since Reddit is free to use, these reps and spammers can flood the subreddit with fake reviews and fake news, essentially creating unlimited deceptive advertising. Additionally, the moderators, usually disguised as "happy students", ensure that no alternative views can be expressed. Everyone must repeat UoPeople's scripted Q&A, or else they get banned; you can't even write the address of this website, because "it's forbidden". There is no way out: you must buy a degree from the University of the People, and then you must say it is "the most beautiful university in the world". Not only does this cult-like closed-mindedness shows just how brainwashed, or brainless, these people are, but it also exposes the organization's lack of credibility. Last but not least, there is also an official bot named "UoPeople09" that seems mentally challenged and just copy-pastes the same messages over and over: typical spam from UoPeople. Fake scholarships Scholarships and grants are another long-standing part of UoPeople's aggressive and deceptive marketing campaigns. The ads claim that there are "lots of scholarships for everyone", but in reality, students must pay a $60 non-refundable fee just to inquire about these so-called scholarships. What UoPeople.edu never discloses is that there are no scholarships for Master's or Bachelor's degrees. In fact, only about 1% of students receive any kind of discount on their total tuition—meaning, at best, they only pay for two years instead of four. In other words, this is nothing more than a discount designed to attract new customers, all of whom must pay $60 upfront—a quick and easy way to generate revenue. Additionally, the ads promoting these so-called scholarships contradict UoPeople's claim of being tuition-free. After all, if courses were actually free, there would be no need to lure students in with clickbait articles about scholarships. This is how the "scholarship" scam works, step by step: young people, especially from developing countries, search for scholarships online; they come across sponsored clickbait articles claiming that "a great tuition-free university is giving lots of scholarships"; they click the article and are tricked into paying the non-refundable $60 "administrative fee". On the whole, UoPeople's scholarships are just a marketing stunt. The actual cost of a degree issued by UoPeople is 0 dollars, because this Israeli online university doesn't have any expenses to cover. Therefore, the thousands of dollars they ask for are thousands of dollars taken unjustly, used only to fund the state of Israel. UoPeople boasts about offering scholarships, which are essentially discount vouchers awarded based on a marketing strategy, and serve to further increase revenue through a word-of-mouth mechanism inspired by multi-level marketing techniques. Fake partnerships The so-called partnerships are a ripoff: some are completely invented, while others are simply useless. We cannot comment on the invented partnerships because they do not exist. However, we can examine the oldest one—the alleged partnership with the University of Edinburgh. Here's what UoPeople.edu claims: We are honored to announce our collaboration with the University of Edinburgh, which aims to support students uprooted by war, famine, and natural disasters. Health Science graduates from UoPeople will be eligible to apply to the University of Edinburgh to complete a bachelor's degree in Health, Science, and Society. First of all, any statement that begins with "we are honored to announce" suggests it is a recent development. Too bad this exact claim dates back to 2017, but uopeople.edu continuously removes or alters the date to make it seem new. That being said, the alleged partnership allows hypothetical UoPeople graduates to apply for undergraduate studies at the University of Edinburgh. However, it should be noted that there is no guarantee that the University of Edinburgh will accept these students: they can only apply. But anyone can apply anyway! There is no requirement to be a UoPeople student in order to apply to Edinburgh. So why on earth should anyone waste thousands of dollars on a useless UoPeople diploma when they can enroll in a real university directly without paying UoPeople anything? Bottom line: This "partnership" is nothing more than a marketing trick: just another way for the University of the People to squeeze money out of students and waste their time. Have you ever wondered how many students have actually taken advantage of this so-called partnership? Ranald Leask, International PR & Media Manager at the University of Edinburgh, provided the official answer: "Although we have yet to welcome any students through our partnership, this track remains open and we look forward to collaborating with University of the People in the future." In other words, zero UoPeople students have ever been accepted at the University of Edinburgh through this partnership. Other alleged "partners" (Berkeley, NYU, etc.) seem to operate under a similar model: if admitted, a UoPeople student may have the opportunity to become an undergraduate student. However, anyone can already apply to any real university (including Berkeley and NYU) and become an undergraduate student, without ever going through uopeople.edu. So why waste time and money on a UoPeople degree when it does nothing to improve your chances of getting into a real university? You can enroll directly in a real university without going through UoPeople. Fake partnership with Harvard University The latest claim is that "UoPeople has a new partnership with Harvard University", which is another blatant attempt by uopeople.edu to mislead people by using Harvard's name and logo, even though this Israeli diploma mill has nothing to do with Harvard. To "prove" this partnership, uopeople.edu links to hbs.edu. However, nowhere on that website does it state that Harvard University has formed a partnership with the University of the People. In reality, hbs.edu simply contains a list of institutions that requested to have their logo added. Any school can be listed by simply clicking Contact us: this is not a partnership of any kind with Harvard University. Besides, people who take Harvard Business School Online courses are not considered Harvard students! UoPeople requested to have its logo added and now falsely claims to be a "partner"; actually, Harvard University likely doesn't even know what UoPeople is. And as usual, there is no need to be a UoPeople student to take Harvard Business School Online courses—which, to be clear, are not part of Harvard University. Fake partnerships with Yale, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, MIT, Columbia University, New York University, Oxford University (UK) etc. We suggest you conduct a simple experiment. Call Yale, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, MIT, Columbia University, New York University, and Oxford University—fortunately, they all have real phone numbers, unlike UoPeople.edu—and ask if they "have a partnership", if they "work with", or if they "are affiliated with" the University of the People, as UoPeople's reps and ambassadors claim. The answer will be no: these universities have nothing to do with UoPeople, and in most cases, they have never even heard of it. Despite this, UoPeople continues to flood the Internet with outdated sponsored articles and press releases falsely claiming that it "works with" Harvard, Berkeley, NYU, and others. What's even more ridiculous is that UoPeople only name-drops Ivy League institutions, MIT, or Oxford (UK), as if every other university in the world is worthless. A laughably naive PR strategy. Fake partnerships with the United Nations and its agencies This is another fake story that used to appear on UoPeople's sponsored articles, and still appears on their website. The reality is the United Nations and its agencies do not have any partnerships with University of the People, nor is University of the People affiliated with them. As the United Nations' official website states, BEWARE OF SCAMS IMPLYING ASSOCIATION WITH THE UNITED NATIONS The United Nations has been made aware of various correspondences, being circulated via e-mail, from Internet web sites, text messages and via regular mail or facsimile, falsely stating that they are issued by, or in association with the United Nations and/or its officials. These scams, which may seek to obtain money and/or in many cases personal details from the recipients of such correspondence, are fraudulent. […] [In particular:] The United Nations does not offer prizes, awards, funds, certificates, compensation, scholarships […] Nevertheless, University of the People continues to claim that it has partnerships and affiliations with the United Nations (UN) and that it offers UN scholarships. It even uses UN logos without authorization, all in an effort to mislead people. Fastest way to buy a degree from UoPeople The fastest way to buy a degree from the University of the People is by using the ridiculous website sophia.org, where you can instantly pass "exams" and then "transfer credits" to UoPeople. Some students have managed to obtain their degree in just six months using this method. How our dog graduated from the University of the people using ChatGPT Thanks to this wonderful university, our beloved puppy, a Jack Russell terrier, graduated in Business Administration. Sounds insane? Not at all: it was shockingly easy, as long as we kept paying. First, we bought a diploma from a Nigerian high school, claiming that Jack (first name) Russell (last name) had completed his studies in Africa. It's important to note that this was not a fake diploma, but a genuine document printed by a real African school for a fake student (or in this case, a real dog, depending on your point of view). We also created a fake ID for "Jack Russell", using a human photo (one of us), because UoPeople and its proctors never verify whether a document is real or forged. After all, UoPeople never checks whether the "student" is actually a person or simply an AI-generated identity or even a pet. As long as you keep paying, you can easily claim that Jack Russell is a person and not a dog. Even when they ask for webcam verification, you can simply show them the fake ID for Jack Russell, and that's it. Anyway, we paid the entry fee and carefully selected the best program for our puppy. After considering the options, we decided on Business Administration: after all, UoPeople's homepage proudly claims that all their alumni work at top companies like Apple and Google. With such promising career prospects, we were confident that our Jack Russell would land a great job immediately. As for the tests, a (human) student provided us with the answers, which have remained the same for years, while we handled essays and daily journal entries by simply using the free version of ChatGPT. The vast majority of UoPeople students, especially those who barely speak English, copy-paste their homework directly from ChatGPT. Perfect results and an exceptionally high GPA: truly an "education revolution"! After paying $4,860, we were finally able to celebrate our Jack Russell's well-earned degree! Therefore, we feel compelled to write this positive review, just as a UoPeople ambassador instructed us to do on social media. Rating: A+ ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ UoPeople is a great university to buy an online degree from an Israeli diploma mill. He is already considering further education, most likely an MBA from UoPeople. Jack Russell also received a wonderful internship offer! Before graduating, UoPeople presented him with an exciting paid internship opportunity in Nigeria and India. However, in this case, "paid" meant that the student had to pay $1,495 to accept the internship (not the other way around). That's right: a UoPeople online internship, typically located in Nigeria or India, comes with a $1,495 price tag. The internship task? Writing a simple HTML page. Finding it far too easy, Jack Russell was not interested in UoPeople’s offer and politely declined. Our Jack Russell is also eager to film a YouTube video proclaiming University of the People as the most beautiful university in the world. Given that UoPeople spends enormous amounts of money on spammy SEO instead of actually helping Africa, he is thrilled to contribute to spreading the "education revolution" message. After all, our puppy and his degree, earned with the free version of ChatGPT, represent the biggest revolution ever: "UoPeople, the first dog-friendly university." We even sent an email to UoPeople, but so far, nobody has replied; we will keep you guys posted. By the way, our Jack Russell received his degree from India. Yes, University of the People mails degrees from India, or at least this is where ours was sent from. Other people have received letters from the U.S., but not from the supposed office in California. It is all very strange and suspicious, considering that the "university" claims to be based in California. But the explanation is simple: UoPeople is using yet another PO box in India, along with a group of underpaid local workers, to obscure the true location of its for-profit operations in Israel. And when UoPeople refers to an "address", it always means a PO box or a virtual address—never a real, physical location. Update 2025: We have been informed that, a few years after this article was published, UoPeople read it and introduced some new rules to make it more difficult for dogs to earn degrees. For example, it recently introduced a proctored exam that, in theory, is supposed to exclude dogs (but there are simple tricks to bypass it). Share on Facebook Share on X Share on WhatsApp Share on Telegram Share on Reddit The University of the People, which is about to face our class action lawsuit, claims that this website was created by "disgruntled ex-employees who falsified their academic credentials and were fired." Fake news! We are former students who left the University of the People after realizing UoPeople was a for-profit scam and not a legitimate American school. By the way, we would never agree to work (for free!) for an Israeli diploma mill that operates like a cult. Despite UoPeople's false accusations, we have never been involved in any of their scams, and we want our money back! Besides, stating that "the volunteer instructors were fired because their credentials were fake" clearly proves that University of the People "hires" instructors with fraudulent credentials without conducting even the most basic background checks. On the other hand, we are certain that no UoPeople professors use fraudulent credentials, just because UoPeople has no professors at all! Everyone at UoPeople simply copy-pastes content generated by the free version of ChatGPT, so there is no need to hire real professors. Last but not least, UoPeople claims to have won a court case against this site. Despite numerous attempts to censor this site, UoPeople has never managed to achieve anything, and no judge has ever ruled in their favor. This site exercises its right to provide information, and UoPeople has never won any case for the simple reason they cannot censor the truth. Every legal attempt UoPeople has made to censor this site has miserably failed, and UoPeople has also had to pay the legal fees. Instead of solving the problems we discuss on this site, UoPeople keeps losing court cases, because no judge has ever believed its nonsense. Despite numerous legal defeats, University of the People is running out of ideas and keeps trying to slander our website. For example, we came across excuses like "you must not listen to this website because the people who wrote it are crazy". So, instead of solving its own problems, UoPeople accuses the rest of the world of being "crazy": a very childish behavior. Another excuse is "you must not listen to this website because it is antisemitic". False: this site is not antisemitic, because we are not interested in religions or ethnicities. The real issue is that UoPeople provides a fake American address to send money to Israel. Had they provided their real Israeli address, there wouldn't be any issue. Share on Facebook Share on X Share on WhatsApp Share on Telegram Share on Reddit Unlike University of the People, our International monitoring center on the legitimacy of degrees offers a free website: we are not a "tuition-free website" that asks you to pay "fees" at the end of the month.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: University of the People review and FAQ Welcome to the most famous, most detailed, most comprehen...

Apr 1, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: How nuts is Mark Carney? Perhaps nuttier than you think. Have a read of this piece in the Financial Post, by Matthew Lau. "Having left his gig as UN Special Envoy for Climate and Finance to lead the federal Liberal government, Mark Carney is now in a position to focus his and Greta Thunberg’s global climate crusade squarely on Canada. The crusade, Carney boasted back in 2021 while in his previous role, is worth many trillions of dollars. As he told CBC News at that year’s UN climate conference, “We have banks, asset managers, pension funds, insurance companies from around the world — more than 45 countries — and their total resources, totalling US$130 trillion” dedicated to transitioning the world’s economy away from fossil fuels. That dollar figure is higher than global GDP. Last month, Carney laid out Canada’s required contribution to his climate ambitions: “Canada must invest $2 trillion by 2050 — about $80 billion per year — to become carbon competitive and achieve Net Zero. However, investments in decarbonisation currently run between $10–20 billion annually.” The implication is that another $60-70 billion a year will need to be wrung out of Canadian businesses and consumers, either through direct taxation and government spending or with regulatory browbeating to push Canadians’ savings and investments into global warming initiatives. Carney has made no effort to hide his agenda to browbeat businesses into joining his and Greta Thunberg’s climate crusade. In a 2021 interview he declared, “We need a sustainable economy, and is your business aligned with that? Are your hiring practices consistent with that? Are you developing people in a way that’s consistent with that? Ultimately, what’s being asked of businesses when it comes to climate is, do you have a plan for net-zero? Canada has a legislated objective for net zero alongside another 130 countries.” “A Swedish teenager,” Carney continued, referring to Thunberg, “can figure out the carbon budget and that we have less than 10 years and you have to get to net-zero to stabilize it and if you’re a company and you have purpose, well, what’s your plan? And all these plans need to come together.” This is utter insanity: under Justin Trudeau Canada suffered rapidly declining business investment and now his successor wants the country’s business leaders to take financial planning directives from Greta Thunberg. While the federal government barrels down the road to net-zero impoverishment for Canada, everyone else is looking for the exit ramp. In January, six of the largest U.S. banks — JPMorganChase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley — quit the Carney-led net-zero banking alliance. Canada’s Big Six Banks — RBC, TD Bank, BMO, Scotiabank, CIBC and National Bank — have quit the initiative as well. Even Europe is beginning to back off on government piling climate obligations onto businesses in the name of fighting global warming. As the Wall Street Journal reports, the EU is watering down its climate accounting policies “amid pushback from member states and companies within the bloc over the new rules, which they say would have increased costs and reduced the competitiveness of their business.” Specifically, regulations previously scheduled for this year would have forced companies “to report in detail on their environmental, social and corporate-governance performance while making significant cuts to the emissions from within their supply chain.” The EU is now dropping, weakening or postponing many of these climate regulations, so that businesses will be able to better “grow, innovate, and create quality jobs.” This is effectively an admission that piling climate obligations and environmental reporting mandates onto businesses prevents them from growing, innovating and creating good jobs. Unfortunately, Mark Carney is all about climate obligations and reporting mandates. The road Canada is currently marching down for climate-related financial disclosures is based on a framework proposed by a task force Carney initiated in 2015. His aforementioned Thunberg-praising interview was not with an environmental journalist, but with Pivot Magazine, which is published by CPA Canada, the accounting industry’s national association. “We cannot get to net-zero without proper climate reporting,” he insisted, speaking of the need for “one core global standard” for climate accounting and reporting. A global climate reporting standard to help push trillions of dollars — yes, trillions with a “T” — from Canadian workers and taxpayers into Mark Carney and Greta Thunberg’s climate crusade? After a decade of Justin Trudeau’s ruinous policies weakening Canada from coast to coast, there could be little worse for the country and its economy than a Liberal government led by Mark Carney." The Financial Post

Detailed fact-check analysis of: How nuts is Mark Carney? Perhaps nuttier than you think. Have a read of this piece in the Financia...

Mar 23, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: It is all about 1948. It's not about October 7, 1956, 1967, 1982, 2008, 2014 or any other date on which Israel committed egregious atrocities in and around Palestine; it's all about 1948, and it's important to remember this date well. The war and the complete failure of all attempts to achieve a viable peace have pushed Palestine back to this date. The 76 years that have passed have been a fruitless struggle for 'peace'. All they have done is give Israel four decades to reinforce its total control over Palestine. This is all about history. Understanding the struggle for Palestine requires understanding its historical context. The modern history commences with Britain using the Zionists, while simultaneously being utilized by them, to establish an imperial foothold in the Middle East, effectively transforming Israel into the central pillar of a bridge from Egypt and the Nile to Iraq, its oil, and the Gulf. The calculations were devoid of morality, driven solely by self-interest. Britain had no right to cede a portion of the area it was occupying—Palestine—to another occupier, and the UN similarly lacked the authority to do so. The 1947 General Assembly partition resolution was essentially a US resolution anyway; the numbers were fixed by the White House once it became clear that it would fail. Chaim Weizmann, the prominent Zionist leader in London and Washington, requested Truman's intervention. “I am aware of how much abstaining delegations would be swayed by your counsel and the influence of your government,” he informed the president. “I refer to China, Honduras, Colombia, Mexico, Liberia, Ethiopia, Greece. I beg and pray for your decisive intervention at this decisive hour.” Among the countries that needed a push were the Philippines, Cuba, Haiti, and France. “We went for it," stated Clark Clifford, Truman’s special counsel, subsequently. “It was because the White House was for it that it went through. I kept the ramrod up the State Department’s butt.” Herschel Johnson, the deputy chief of the US mission at the UN, cried in frustration while speaking to Loy Henderson, a senior diplomat and head of the State Department’s Office of Near Eastern Affairs, who was a staunch adversary of the construction of a Zionist settler state in Palestine. “Loy, forgive me for breaking down like this,” Johnson stated, “but Dave Niles called us here a couple of days ago and said that the president had instructed him to tell us that, by God, he wanted us to get busy and get all the votes that we possibly could, that there would be hell if the voting went the other way.” In September, UNSCOP (the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine) convened an ad hoc committee to evaluate its proposals. The committee consisted of all members of the General Assembly, with subcommittees designated to evaluate the suggestions presented. On November 25, the General Assembly, acting as an ad hoc committee, approved partition with a vote of 25 in favor, 13 against, and 17 abstentions. A two-thirds majority was required for the partition resolution to succeed in the General Assembly plenary session four days later, indicating its impending failure. However, following the White House's endorsement, seven of the 17 abstainers from November 25 voted 'yes' on November 29, resulting in the passage of Resolution 181 (II) with 33 votes in favor, 13 against, and 10 abstentions. Niles, the Zionists' ‘point man’ at the White House, subsequently partnered with Clark Clifford to undermine the State Department's proposal to replace partition with trusteeship for the time being because of the violence threatened in Palestine. Niles was the first member of a series of Zionist lobbyists sent to monitor the presidency from within. Despite their unpopularity and potential resentment, the presidents had no choice but to tolerate their persistent pressure. During John Kennedy's administration, Mike (Myer) Feldman was permitted to oversee all State Department and White House cable concerning the Middle East. Despite internal opposition within the White House, Kennedy perceived Feldman “as a necessary evil whose highly visible White House position was a political debt that had to be paid,” as noted by Seymour Hersh in The Samson Option. Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy (p. 98). Lyndon Johnson took over Feldman after Kennedy's assassination, granting Israel all its demands without offering anything in return. The transfer of Palestine to a recent settler minority contravened fundamental UN norms, including the right to self-determination. Resistance to Zionism and the formation of a Jewish state in Palestine were significant within the US administration, but it was the man in the White House, influenced by domestic interests (money and votes), who called the shots and has been calling them ever since. Palestine went from British control to American hands, and then to the Zionists. 29 November 1947 - partition plans. 33 voted for, 13 voted against, 10 abstained The desires of the Palestinians were irrelevant to the 'return' of the Jewish people to their ''ancient homeland'', as noted by Arthur Balfour. The fact that Jews could not 'return’ to a land in which they or their ancestors had never lived was equally immaterial. What went on behind closed doors to ensure the establishment of a colonial-settler state in Palestine, contrary to the desires of its populace, represents but one episode in a protracted history of duplicity, deceit, persistent breaches of international law, and violations of fundamental UN principles. The so-called "Palestine problem" has never been a "Palestine problem," but rather a Western and Zionist problem—a volatile combination of the two that the perpetrators are still blaming on their victims. There would be no ambiguity regarding our current situation at the precipice if Western governments and the media held Israel accountable rather than shielding, endorsing, and rationalizing even the most egregious offenses under the pretext of Israel's 'right' to self-defense. It is absurd to propose that a thief has any form of 'right' to 'defend' stolen property. The right belongs to the person fighting for its return, as the Palestinians have been doing daily since 1948. Aside from the 5–6% of land acquired by Zionist purchasing agencies before 1948, Israelis are living on and in stolen property. They will defend it, but they have no 'right' to defend something that, by any legal, moral, historical, or cultural measure, belongs to someone else. This has never been a 'conflict of rights' as 'liberal' Zionists have claimed, because a right is a right and cannot conflict with another right. The real rights in this context are evident, or would be, if they were not persistently suppressed by Western governments and a media that unconditionally safeguards Israel's actions. Although the non-binding UNGA partition resolution of that year did not include a 'transfer' of the Palestinian population, the creation of a Jewish state would have been more challenging without it. Without the expulsion of indigenous Palestinians, the demographic composition of the 'Jewish state' would have included an equal number of Palestinian Muslims and Christians alongside Jews. War was the sole means of getting rid of Palestinian natives; raw force achieved what Theodor Herzl envisioned when he referred to “spiriting” the “penniless population” from their land. Upon its completion, Weizmann expressed excitement regarding this "miraculous simplification of our task." Following 1948, there were massacres in the West Bank, Gaza, and Jordan; massacres in Lebanon; and wars and assassinations throughout the region and beyond. A second wave of ethnic cleansing succeeded the 1948 one in 1967, and now a third and fourth wave is taking place in Gaza and southern Lebanon, terrorizing and slaughtering town dwellers and villagers into fleeing. https://preview.redd.it/orxl88k6mfoe1.jpg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=12103a2b560e3af2f72c656e6e39fdbea64caa11 Western governments and the media are facilitating the gradual, covert, illegal, and pseudo-legal erosion of Palestinian life and rights in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It is remarkable how the media constantly discusses October 7 but never talks about any of this critical history. Of course, as an accomplice to one of the biggest crimes of the 20th century, meticulously orchestrated and executed violently, discussing it candidly would entail self-incrimination; thus, it diverts the discourse to alternative subjects—''Hamas terrorism'', ''October 7''—anything to distract from Israel's egregious war crimes. This distortion of the narrative has persisted since the PLO and the popular fronts of the 1960s were labeled as terrorists, while Israel was portrayed as a plucky small state merely defending itself. The Poles, the French, and other Europeans opposed the Nazi occupation. The distinction is clear: resistance to occupation by Palestinians is labeled as terrorism, while state-sponsored terrorism is characterized as 'self-defense.' This distortion of truth has been outrageously amplified following the pager/walkie-talkie terrorist acts perpetrated by Israel in Lebanon. Western governments and their connected media entities have rationalized and even lauded them. The Palestinians demonstrated their readiness to transcend the events of 1948 and to make significant concessions for peace —22 percent of the land in exchange for relinquishing 78 percent—provided Israel would engage sincerely with the rights of the 1948 generation; nevertheless, Israel ignored their offers contemptuously. The Palestinians were willing to share Jerusalem, but Israel was not receptive to this proposition. It had consistently desired all of Palestine. The Netanyahu government, seeing no need for such concealment, now unveils the truth that the 1990s 'peace process' and previous proposals from various diplomatic entities obscured. It explicitly states its desires, regardless of the opinions of others, including former partners, which align with the initial aspirations of the Zionist movement: all of Palestine, ideally devoid of Palestinians. Israel's refusal to cede any portion of Palestine has blurred the distinctions between the pre- and post-1967 eras. There are no delineating green lines between occupied and unoccupied territories, only the red lines that Israel transgresses daily. Deprived of even a small portion of their homeland, Palestinians and their supporters are compelled to resort to resistance and are resolute in their pursuit of reclaiming all of 1948 Palestine, rather than merely the limited fraction they previously would have accepted. Western countries facilitate and even promote Israel's existence outside international law by providing arms and financial assistance. Israel's occupation, massacres, and assassinations occur because of Western governments' tacit approval and encouragement. If Israel commits genocide, it is due to Western nations' acquiescence and implicit endorsement. If Israel is condemning itself to endless war with those whose fundamental rights it has infringed upon for the past 76 years, it is due to Western governments' acceptance. They have allowed Israel to push the world to the brink of regional and even global conflict. Israel is chaotic, yet it has never been orderly. The West has also permitted this, and it will face consequences.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: It is all about 1948. It's not about October 7, 1956, 1967, 1982, 2008, 2014 or any other date on wh...

Mar 15, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: How nuts is Mark Carney? Perhaps nuttier than you think. Have a read of this piece in the Financial Post, by Matthew Lau. "Having left his gig as UN Special Envoy for Climate and Finance to lead the federal Liberal government, Mark Carney is now in a position to focus his and Greta Thunberg’s global climate crusade squarely on Canada. The crusade, Carney boasted back in 2021 while in his previous role, is worth many trillions of dollars. As he told CBC News at that year’s UN climate conference, “We have banks, asset managers, pension funds, insurance companies from around the world — more than 45 countries — and their total resources, totalling US$130 trillion” dedicated to transitioning the world’s economy away from fossil fuels. That dollar figure is higher than global GDP. Last month, Carney laid out Canada’s required contribution to his climate ambitions: “Canada must invest $2 trillion by 2050 — about $80 billion per year — to become carbon competitive and achieve Net Zero. However, investments in decarbonisation currently run between $10–20 billion annually.” The implication is that another $60-70 billion a year will need to be wrung out of Canadian businesses and consumers, either through direct taxation and government spending or with regulatory browbeating to push Canadians’ savings and investments into global warming initiatives. Carney has made no effort to hide his agenda to browbeat businesses into joining his and Greta Thunberg’s climate crusade. In a 2021 interview he declared, “We need a sustainable economy, and is your business aligned with that? Are your hiring practices consistent with that? Are you developing people in a way that’s consistent with that? Ultimately, what’s being asked of businesses when it comes to climate is, do you have a plan for net-zero? Canada has a legislated objective for net zero alongside another 130 countries.” “A Swedish teenager,” Carney continued, referring to Thunberg, “can figure out the carbon budget and that we have less than 10 years and you have to get to net-zero to stabilize it and if you’re a company and you have purpose, well, what’s your plan? And all these plans need to come together.” This is utter insanity: under Justin Trudeau Canada suffered rapidly declining business investment and now his successor wants the country’s business leaders to take financial planning directives from Greta Thunberg. While the federal government barrels down the road to net-zero impoverishment for Canada, everyone else is looking for the exit ramp. In January, six of the largest U.S. banks — JPMorganChase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley — quit the Carney-led net-zero banking alliance. Canada’s Big Six Banks — RBC, TD Bank, BMO, Scotiabank, CIBC and National Bank — have quit the initiative as well. Even Europe is beginning to back off on government piling climate obligations onto businesses in the name of fighting global warming. As the Wall Street Journal reports, the EU is watering down its climate accounting policies “amid pushback from member states and companies within the bloc over the new rules, which they say would have increased costs and reduced the competitiveness of their business.” Specifically, regulations previously scheduled for this year would have forced companies “to report in detail on their environmental, social and corporate-governance performance while making significant cuts to the emissions from within their supply chain.” The EU is now dropping, weakening or postponing many of these climate regulations, so that businesses will be able to better “grow, innovate, and create quality jobs.” This is effectively an admission that piling climate obligations and environmental reporting mandates onto businesses prevents them from growing, innovating and creating good jobs. Unfortunately, Mark Carney is all about climate obligations and reporting mandates. The road Canada is currently marching down for climate-related financial disclosures is based on a framework proposed by a task force Carney initiated in 2015. His aforementioned Thunberg-praising interview was not with an environmental journalist, but with Pivot Magazine, which is published by CPA Canada, the accounting industry’s national association. “We cannot get to net-zero without proper climate reporting,” he insisted, speaking of the need for “one core global standard” for climate accounting and reporting. A global climate reporting standard to help push trillions of dollars — yes, trillions with a “T” — from Canadian workers and taxpayers into Mark Carney and Greta Thunberg’s climate crusade? After a decade of Justin Trudeau’s ruinous policies weakening Canada from coast to coast, there could be little worse for the country and its economy than a Liberal government led by Mark Carney." The Financial Post Cape Breton Politics Jason Boudreau · 1h · Big numbers in unions. 😁😁

Detailed fact-check analysis of: How nuts is Mark Carney? Perhaps nuttier than you think. Have a read of this piece in the Financia...

Mar 25, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: How nuts is Mark Carney? Perhaps nuttier than you think. Have a read of this piece in the Financial Post, by Matthew Lau. "Having left his gig as UN Special Envoy for Climate and Finance to lead the federal Liberal government, Mark Carney is now in a position to focus his and Greta Thunberg’s global climate crusade squarely on Canada. The crusade, Carney boasted back in 2021 while in his previous role, is worth many trillions of dollars. As he told CBC News at that year’s UN climate conference, “We have banks, asset managers, pension funds, insurance companies from around the world — more than 45 countries — and their total resources, totalling US$130 trillion” dedicated to transitioning the world’s economy away from fossil fuels. That dollar figure is higher than global GDP. Last month, Carney laid out Canada’s required contribution to his climate ambitions: “Canada must invest $2 trillion by 2050 — about $80 billion per year — to become carbon competitive and achieve Net Zero. However, investments in decarbonisation currently run between $10–20 billion annually.” The implication is that another $60-70 billion a year will need to be wrung out of Canadian businesses and consumers, either through direct taxation and government spending or with regulatory browbeating to push Canadians’ savings and investments into global warming initiatives. Carney has made no effort to hide his agenda to browbeat businesses into joining his and Greta Thunberg’s climate crusade. In a 2021 interview he declared, “We need a sustainable economy, and is your business aligned with that? Are your hiring practices consistent with that? Are you developing people in a way that’s consistent with that? Ultimately, what’s being asked of businesses when it comes to climate is, do you have a plan for net-zero? Canada has a legislated objective for net zero alongside another 130 countries.” “A Swedish teenager,” Carney continued, referring to Thunberg, “can figure out the carbon budget and that we have less than 10 years and you have to get to net-zero to stabilize it and if you’re a company and you have purpose, well, what’s your plan? And all these plans need to come together.” This is utter insanity: under Justin Trudeau Canada suffered rapidly declining business investment and now his successor wants the country’s business leaders to take financial planning directives from Greta Thunberg. While the federal government barrels down the road to net-zero impoverishment for Canada, everyone else is looking for the exit ramp. In January, six of the largest U.S. banks — JPMorganChase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley — quit the Carney-led net-zero banking alliance. Canada’s Big Six Banks — RBC, TD Bank, BMO, Scotiabank, CIBC and National Bank — have quit the initiative as well. Even Europe is beginning to back off on government piling climate obligations onto businesses in the name of fighting global warming. As the Wall Street Journal reports, the EU is watering down its climate accounting policies “amid pushback from member states and companies within the bloc over the new rules, which they say would have increased costs and reduced the competitiveness of their business.” Specifically, regulations previously scheduled for this year would have forced companies “to report in detail on their environmental, social and corporate-governance performance while making significant cuts to the emissions from within their supply chain.” The EU is now dropping, weakening or postponing many of these climate regulations, so that businesses will be able to better “grow, innovate, and create quality jobs.” This is effectively an admission that piling climate obligations and environmental reporting mandates onto businesses prevents them from growing, innovating and creating good jobs. Unfortunately, Mark Carney is all about climate obligations and reporting mandates. The road Canada is currently marching down for climate-related financial disclosures is based on a framework proposed by a task force Carney initiated in 2015. His aforementioned Thunberg-praising interview was not with an environmental journalist, but with Pivot Magazine, which is published by CPA Canada, the accounting industry’s national association. “We cannot get to net-zero without proper climate reporting,” he insisted, speaking of the need for “one core global standard” for climate accounting and reporting. A global climate reporting standard to help push trillions of dollars — yes, trillions with a “T” — from Canadian workers and taxpayers into Mark Carney and Greta Thunberg’s climate crusade? After a decade of Justin Trudeau’s ruinous policies weakening Canada from coast to coast, there could be little worse for the country and its economy than a Liberal government led by Mark Carney." The Financial Post Cape Breton Politics Jason Boudreau · 1h · Big numbers in unions. 😁😁

Detailed fact-check analysis of: How nuts is Mark Carney? Perhaps nuttier than you think. Have a read of this piece in the Financia...

Mar 25, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks