UnCivil Debate Discussing what we dont want to talk about.
Related Articles
Tonight, we bring you a story that raises troubling questions about the allocation of American taxpayer dollars and the unintended consequences of foreign aid. It is a story of money, influence, and the shadowy intersections of power—a story that demands our attention and scrutiny.
The United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, was established with a noble purpose: to extend a helping hand to those struggling under the weight of poverty, oppression, and disaster. It is an agency tasked with representing the best of American values abroad. But recent revelations suggest that some of its funds may have been diverted to causes and organizations that stand in stark contrast to those values.
— $7.9 million to teach Sri Lankan journalists how to avoid “binary-gendered language”— $20 million for a new Sesame Street show in Iraq— $4.5+ million to “combat disinformation” in Kazakhstan— $1.5 million for “art for inclusion of people with disabilities”— $2 million for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala— $6 million to “transform digital spaces to reflect feminist democratic principles”— $2.1 million to help the BBC “value the diversity of Libyan society”— $10 million worth of USAID-funded meals, which went to an al Qaeda-linked terrorgroup— $25 million for Deloitte to promote “green transportation” in the country of Georgia— $2.5 million to promote “inclusion” in Vietnam— $16.8 million for a SEPARATE “inclusion” group in Vietnam— ~$5 million to EcoHealth Alliance, one of the key NGOs funding bat virus research at the Wuhan lab— $20 million for a group related to a key player in the Russiagate impeachment hoax— $1.1 million to an Armenian “LGBT group”— $1.2 million to help the African Methodist Episcopal Church Service and Development Agency in Washington, D.C., build “a state-of-the-art 440 seat auditorium”— $1.5 million to promote “LGBT advocacy” in Jamaica— $2 million to promote “LGBT equality through entrepreneurship” in Latin America— $500K to solve sectarian violence in Israel (just ten days before the Hamas October 7 attack)— $2.3 million for “artisanal and small scale gold mining” in the Amazon— $3.9 million for “LGBT causes” in the western Balkans— $5.5 million for LGBT activism in Uganda— $6 million for advancing LGBT issues in “priority countries around the world”— $6.3 million for men who have s*x with men in South Africa— $8.3 million for “USAID Education: Equity and Inclusion”
According to investigative reports, USAID funds were funneled to organizations linked to billionaire financier George Soros, a figure whose influence in global politics has long been a subject of controversy. These funds, intended to promote democracy and development, allegedly found their way into the hands of groups accused of supporting political manipulation and, in some cases, even terrorist activities.
The details are as complex as they are concerning. In one instance, a USAID-funded project in a volatile region was abruptly shuttered after it was discovered that the money had been diverted to entities with ties to extremist elements. This is not merely a case of bureaucratic mismanagement; it is a failure of oversight that has potentially dire consequences for both the people these programs were meant to help and the reputation of the United States on the global stage.
We must ask ourselves: How did this happen? Who is accountable? And what does this mean for the future of American foreign aid?
The answers are not simple, but they are necessary. For if we are to continue to champion the cause of freedom and justice abroad, we must ensure that our resources are used wisely and transparently. The American people deserve to know that their tax dollars are not being squandered or, worse, weaponized against the very principles we seek to uphold.
This is not a call to abandon the mission of USAID or to retreat from our role as a global leader. Rather, it is a call to vigilance—to demand accountability from those entrusted with the power to shape our world.
In the words of Edward R. Murrow, “We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.” Let us not confuse criticism with condemnation. But let us also not shy away from asking the hard questions, for it is only through such inquiry that we can hope to preserve the integrity of our institutions and the ideals they represent.
