Trump’s Withdrawal from 66 Organizations

By Roger Bate


nginx

ALERT: ‘A day of liberation!’ Trump Tears Up 1992 UN Rio Climate Treaty that started the whole UN Climate Scam!

By Marc Morano from Climate Depot

Watch: Morano on Fox & Friends on Trump pulling out of 1992 UN climate treaty: ‘This is a day of liberation. This is true America First, one of the most significant things he’s done in his presidency’

Watch: Morano enjoys celebratory cigar on OAN TV as Trump Withdraws USA From UN Slush Fund Orgs – A Great Win for America!

Watch: Morano on Real America’s Voice TV on Trump’s ‘historic tearing up’ the 1992 UN climate treaty, which is ‘the entire basis for the entire international global climate scam’ –‘This is a monumental day!’

BREAKING: POLITICAL CLIMATE EARTHQUAKE! Trump GUTS UN climate agenda!

Withdraws USA from 1992 UN climate treaty that started the whole UN climate scam!

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano comments:

“Thank you, Mr. President, for tearing up this UN treaty! On January 7, 2026, you have unleashed a long overdue POLITICAL CLIMATE EARTHQUAKE, by formally withdrawing the USA from the UN climate scam!  Our long national nightmare began 36 years ago when then-GOP President George H.W. Bush got the USA into this whole UN climate mess by signing the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, aka, the Rio Earth summit treaty. This treaty has served as the underlying basis for all of the climate nonsense foisted on the U.S. lo these many years.

President Trump has finally freed America from this 34-year-old UN climate terror campaign.

President Trump may have finished off the UN climate agenda with this bold action. POLITICO reported on May 14, 2025: “During his first term, Trump declined to exit the UNFCCC, which the Democratic-led Senate had ratified during George H.W. Bush’s presidency following the ‘Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro.”

“If Trump does pull the country out of the framework, it could be difficult for a new president to undo. Joining a treaty requires a two-thirds Senate vote — a high hurdle even in less polarized times,” Politico reported.

By his action today, President Trump has now injected permanence into keeping the failing UN climate agenda from rising from the ashes again. America is now a significant step closer to avoiding wild climate ying-yang policy swings, ie, Obama to Trump to Biden & back to Trump.

Trump 2.0’s climate legacy could now become permanent, making it very difficult for a future President, AOC, or Gavin Newsom to get the U.S. back into the UN climate fiasco.”

Trump listened! 

Flashback Nov. 9, 2025:  Morano on Fox & Friends live from Brazil at COP30 urges Trump: ‘Mr. President, TEAR UP THIS 1992 UN RIO TREATY’

Morano to Trump: “Our message here in Brazil to the Trump administration is simple: Get us out of this 1992 UN treaty, which was ratified by the Senate. If we can get the USA out of that, it makes it harder for a future President AOC or Gavin Newsom to get us back into this UN climate mess.”

Trump then immediately posted Morano’s entire Fox & Friends segment on Truth Social with an embedded video of calling for the vacating of the 1992 UN RIO Climate Treaty!

Morano on Fox & Friends January 10, 2026: 

Morano excerpt: We’ve been going through the yin-yang of this climate policy for over a decade, Obama, Trump, Biden, Trump. The problem is if a future AOC or President Newsom comes in, they put us back in. What Donald Trump’s done this time is different than just withdrawing from the 2015 U.N. Paris climate pact. He has now pulled out of the basis for all of the UN climate agenda.

Think of it like Jenga blocks. Trump has pulled out the base of the blocks, and it’s collapsing. This is the 1992 UN Rio Earth Summit, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change treaty that is the foundation for all of the madness, I was going to say mandates, but mandates, madness — same thing.

This goes back to 1992, this is net zero, this is the U.N. climate treaties, this is the entire United Nations climate agenda, the grandfather of them all. by withdrawing from this, legal analysts say, and, according to Politico and other publications, you’re going to need the next president to resubmit the ratification to the Senate to get us back into this.

So Trump 2.0 has gone and exceeded everything beyond what Trump 1.0 did on climate in his first term.

And we’re also out of the U.N. population fund, which is a great thing, and the U.N. climate panel, the IPCC, which was merely a political body masquerading as a science panel that had to take its orders line by line from politicians when they do their climate reports. This is a day of liberation. This is true America First, one of the most significant things he’s done in his presidency when it comes to international regulatory policy.
Trump withdraws US from key climate treaty citing UN’s ‘hostile agendas’ to USA – BBC claims Trump’s move ‘could significantly delay’ next IPCC report which ‘guides governments on how to tackle climate change’

Trump Dumps IPCC and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change – ‘A strike at the heart of the international climate apparatus’

USA pulling out of the UN climate ‘science’ panel: UN scientist laments: ‘I am unsure how the IPCC can continue without the US’

UN climate chief warns Americans: Trump’s withdrawal from UN Climate Treaties ‘will leave the US less secure & less prosperous’

‘Our nation will no longer fund radical organizations’ – Trump admin declares immediate withdrawal from the UN Green Climate Fund

UN Climate Bureaucrats Reeling After Trump Pulls Foundational Treaty

Victory as Trump withdraws America from UN climate framework & UN IPCC!

Morano Op-Ed: Urges Trump to vacate 1992 Rio Earth Summit Treaty: ‘Mr. President, tear up this treaty!’

Morano Excerpt: But, as we celebrate a failing UN climate process, we must also recognize that it may come back, just like Jason in any Friday the 13th film. President Trump needs to finish off the UN climate agenda with one more bold action: Withdraw from the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or the Rio Earth Summit Treaty signed by then-GOP President George H.W. Bush in 1992 and ratified by the U.S. Senate.

Vacating this treaty would give permanence to Trump’s agenda and free America from this 33-year-old UN climate terror campaign.

As POLITICO reported on May 14, 2025: “During his first term, Trump declined to exit the UNFCCC, which the Democratic-led Senate had ratified during George H.W. Bush’s presidency following the ‘Earth Summit’ in Rio de Janeiro.”

“If Trump does pull the country out of the framework, it could be difficult for a new president to undo. Joining a treaty requires a two-thirds Senate vote — a high hurdle even in less polarized times,” Politico reported.

Trump 2.0’s climate legacy could become permanent, making it very difficult for a future President, AOC, or Gavin Newsom to get the U.S. back into the UN climate fiasco.

Mr. President, tear up this treaty!”

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Presidential order: Withdrawing U.S. from international organizations and treaties contrary to the interests of the U.S.

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct:

Section 1.  Purpose.  (a)  On February 4, 2025, I issued Executive Order 14199 (Withdrawing the United States from and Ending Funding to Certain United Nations Organizations and Reviewing United States Support to All International Organizations).  That Executive Order directed the Secretary of State, in consultation with the United States Representative to the United Nations, to conduct a review of all international intergovernmental organizations of which the United States is a member and provides any type of funding or other support, and all conventions and treaties to which the United States is a party, to determine which organizations, conventions, and treaties are contrary to the interests of the United States.  The Secretary of State has reported his findings as required by Executive Order 14199.

(b)  I have considered the Secretary of State’s report and, after deliberating with my Cabinet, have determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support to the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum.

(c)  Consistent with Executive Order 14199 and pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to take immediate steps to effectuate the withdrawal of the United States from the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum as soon as possible.  For United Nations entities, withdrawal means ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law.

(d)  My review of further findings of the Secretary of State remains ongoing.

Sec. 2.  Organizations from Which the United States Shall Withdraw.  (a)  Non-United Nations Organizations:

(i)       24/7 Carbon-Free Energy Compact;

(ii)      Colombo Plan Council;

(iii)     Commission for Environmental Cooperation;

(iv)      Education Cannot Wait;

(v)       European Centre of Excellence for Countering

Hybrid Threats;

(vi)      Forum of European National Highway Research Laboratories;

(vii)     Freedom Online Coalition;

(viii)    Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund;

(ix)      Global Counterterrorism Forum;

(x)       Global Forum on Cyber Expertise;

(xi)      Global Forum on Migration and Development;

(xii)     Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research;

(xiii)    Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals, and Sustainable Development;

(xiv)     Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change;

(xv)      Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services;

(xvi)     International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property;

(xvii)    International Cotton Advisory Committee;

(xviii)   International Development Law Organization;

(xix)     International Energy Forum;

(xx)      International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies;

(xxi)     International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance;

(xxii)    International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law;

(xxiii)   International Lead and Zinc Study Group;

(xxiv)    International Renewable Energy Agency;

(xxv)     International Solar Alliance;

(xxvi)    International Tropical Timber Organization;

(xxvii)   International Union for Conservation of Nature;

(xxviii)  Pan American Institute of Geography and History;

(xxix)    Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation;

(xxx)     Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combatting Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia;

(xxxi)    Regional Cooperation Council;

(xxxii)   Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century;

(xxxiii)  Science and Technology Center in Ukraine;

(xxxiv)   Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme; and

(xxxv)    Venice Commission of the Council of Europe.

(b)  United Nations (UN) Organizations:

(i)       Department of Economic and Social Affairs;

(ii)      UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) — Economic Commission for Africa;

(iii)     ECOSOC — Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean;

(iv)      ECOSOC — Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific;

(v)       ECOSOC — Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia;

(vi)      International Law Commission;

(vii)     International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals;

(viii)    International Trade Centre;

(ix)      Office of the Special Adviser on Africa;

(x)       Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary General for Children in Armed Conflict;

(xi)      Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict;

(xii)     Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children;

(xiii)    Peacebuilding Commission;

(xiv)     Peacebuilding Fund;

(xv)      Permanent Forum on People of African Descent;

(xvi)     UN Alliance of Civilizations;

(xvii)    UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries;

(xviii)   UN Conference on Trade and Development;

(xix)     UN Democracy Fund;

(xx)      UN Energy;

(xxi)     UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women;

(xxii)    UN Framework Convention on Climate Change;

(xxiii)   UN Human Settlements Programme;

(xxiv)    UN Institute for Training and Research;

(xxv)     UN Oceans;

(xxvi)    UN Population Fund;

(xxvii)   UN Register of Conventional Arms;

(xxviii)  UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination;

(xxix)    UN System Staff College;

(xxx)     UN Water; and

(xxxi)    UN University.

Sec. 3.  Implementation Guidance.  The Secretary of State shall provide additional guidance as needed to agencies when implementing this memorandum.

Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

DONALD J. TRUMP

From Whitehouse.gov

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Anti-nuclear Advocates Raking In $9.3 Million Per Day

By Ken Braun


nginx

Why The Boulder Climate Case Is So Dangerous And SCOTUS Must Step In

By Editors of CFACT


nginx

Trump Admin Withdrawing From ‘Anti-American’ Global Climate Change Regimes

By The Daily Caller

The White House announced Wednesday that the U.S. is exiting 66 international organizations and treaties, including a landmark climate change entity joined in 1992.

The Trump administration found that the listed international organizations, conventions and treaties did not serve America’s interests. Notable exits pertaining to global efforts to combat climate change include two United Nations entities: the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the last of which the U.S. joined in 1992 under President George H.W. Bush.

“Today, President Trump announced the U.S. is leaving 66 anti-American, useless, or wasteful international organizations. Review of additional international organizations remains ongoing,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote on X Wednesday. “These withdrawals keep a key promise President Trump made to Americans — we will stop subsidizing globalist bureaucrats who act against our interests. The Trump Administration will always put America and Americans first.”

Today, President Trump announced the U.S. is leaving 66 anti-American, useless, or wasteful international organizations. Review of additional international organizations remains ongoing.

These withdrawals keep a key promise President Trump made to Americans – we will stop…

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) January 8, 2026

The presidential memorandum notes that the exits follow a February 2025 executive order and subsequent recommendations from the Secretary of State.

“I have considered the Secretary of State’s report and, after deliberating with my Cabinet, have determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support to the organizations listed,” the presidential memorandum reads.

Notably, Trump signed an executive order to exit the Paris Agreement under the UNFCCC on his first day back in the Oval Office, The Paris Agreement is a global climate change compact marked by a pledge to lower emissions.

The Wednesday announcement also said the U.S. will leave the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals, and Sustainable Development, the International Energy Forum, U.N. Energy and the U.N. Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women.

“For United Nations entities, withdrawal means ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law,” the announcement said.

AUTHOR

Audrey Streb

DCNF Energy Reporter

RELATED ARTICLE: Paris Agreement Ten Years Later: ‘Failed’

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Venezuela fire: Thousands of voting machines burned and more…

By Vlad Tepes Blog

A few examples of the rolling narrative attacks against the population and reframing to stay ahead of the narratives by media: Links 1 for January 5th, 2026.

1. One of the persistent examples of Canada memory holing facts and narratives this site refers to, is how the CBC and other broadcast media used Japanese-Canadian fruit fly scientist, David Suzuki to promote the idea that Western industry was producing so much pollution that it would block out the sun, mimicking the results of a major nuclear war and causing a serious ice age. This theory was called, “Nuclear Winter.

Many efforts and forms of effort have been used to find any of the dozens to hundreds of hours of Suzuki warning us all about how this would come about if the West didn’t get its industry under control.

This was a partial truth. Pollution really is a problem. And in fact, the West by and large did actually learn to manage it, and this was a great thing. But that wasn’t the real intention most likely. Suzuki then pivoted to Global Warming from the same causes and somehow, every mention of Nuclear Winter was, as 1984 named it, Memory holed.

So it is with some amusement that Suzuki is the locus of the newest state memory holing. When the state declared war on incandescent bulbs, they demanded that everyone change to something called Compact Fluorescent Bulbs. These gave off a pale blue flickering light that looked exactly like the glow that came out of Venezuelan prisons when one drove by. They were horrible, and filled with Mercury vapour and when they exploded, and they did indeed explode, it cost a home owner $2000.00 to get an environment Canada team in hazmats over to remove them. So most of us just breathed through our noses and removed them ourselves.

LED Bulbs came out roughly around the same time, but there was no push to switch to these, even though they were a nicer light, MUCH cheaper to power in terms of amount of light per Watt, and they don’t explode but they do have one huge problem. They last a really long time. So sales would slow down fast. When people moved, they could take the bulbs with them. They would likely last longer than your stay at your current residence.

Eventually Canada caught up to it and banned Compact fluorescent bulbs as well. But they also appear to have made it very hard to find any images of the billboards or other promo material of Suzuki pushing the CFBs.

Headline from January 2, 2026 Western Standard:

Ottawa begins enforcing national ban on fluorescent light bulbs

The ban, drafted in 2024 by then–environment minister Steven Guilbeault, targets bulbs once marketed as climate?friendly alternatives to incandescent lighting.

The federal environment department has begun enforcing a nationwide ban on making and importing compact fluorescent light bulbs, ending years of government promotion of products now restricted due to mercury contamination concerns.

The ban, drafted in 2024 by then–environment minister Steven Guilbeault, targets bulbs once marketed as climate?friendly alternatives to incandescent lighting. The department said the prohibition will roll out gradually.

“Between 2026 and 2030 the import, manufacture and sale of the most common types of lamps containing mercury will be progressively prohibited in Canada,” spokesperson France Gionet said, adding the phase?out reflects advances in lighting technology.

Officials said the three?year transition period was designed to give retailers time to clear remaining inventory. Homeowners are being urged to bring used compact fluorescent bulbs to municipal toxic?waste depots rather than throw them in household garbage.

I had to learn about Google Dorks to find anything about Suzuki and CFBs. A regular search told me that any mention of his promotion of them was dangerous disinformation.

From The Province.com citing The Suzuki Foundation:

When shopping for a new appliance, look for the Energy Star logo, says Randi Kruse of the David Suzuki Foundation. It can cut 30-40 per cent of household energy use.

The fridge is the best appliance to replace, because it’s running all the time. Says Kruse: “That will make the biggest difference in energy savings. In the long run, you’ll save money as well as energy.”

The additional cost is recouped usually within a couple of years through energy savings.

“When you’re buying an appliance, the cost of the energy used to run it must be factored in,” says Kruse.

7. Use compact fluorescent lights. CFLs last about eight times as long as incandescent bulbs, use 66 per cent less electricity, and only need to be replaced every five or six years.

According to B.C. Hydro’s Elisha Moreno, they should be placed in spots where the bulb is used a lot, such as a hallway, outdoor light or family room.

Replacing a 100-watt incandescent bulb with a 25-watt CFL saves $30 in electricity over the life of each bulb.

That’s pretty clear. And so is this:

It was in fact known, not hidden, and not obscured that these bulbs contained mercury at the time they were launched at the public. Which may make one ask the question, Did Suzuki just not bother to look, or did he know and took the money and ran with it?
And did he do that with Nuclear Winter as well?

2. Here is a curious event. Mind you it’s the odious BBC so temper anything it says through that lens.

Venezuela fire: Thousands of voting machines burned

The electoral council in Venezuela says a fire in its main warehouse near the capital, Caracas, has destroyed most of the voting machines held there.

Almost 50,000 voting machines and 582 computers used in the country’s elections went up in flames, electoral council chief Tibisay Lucena said.

She did not say if parliamentary elections due later this year could be affected by the loss of the machines.

She also asked prosecutors to investigate the cause of the fire.

What happened?

The fire broke out in the 6,000 sq m (65,000 sq ft) warehouse in Mariche, east of Caracas, on Saturday.

“Burnt in this fire were 582 computers belonging to the civil registry, 49,408 voting machines, 400 electronic ballots,” Ms Lucena said in a news conference on Sunday.

The article doesn’t say what KIND of machines they were, but the linked article references Smartmatic as the type of machines used in previous elections.

We should be clear here, that we are opposed to voting machines. They are in fact black boxes which have closed source code. There is no way to know what happens inside these machines. And even if they are 100% accurate, the fact that only a very tiny technically elite fraction of the population understand them undermines the results of any election. An election not only must be fair and accurate, it must be seen to be fair and accurate. Having the one without the other is undermining the process.

Having human scrutineers to watch the process, and a process of picking them that allows any of us to volunteer, or even be paid for that function is the only way to get a sense that maybe this thing went as sold. The BBC is selling the burning of these machines as anti-democratic forces trying to make sure an election can’t happen. Which seems kinda nuts since elections have happened for thousands of years prior to any kind of machine at all. But skeptics and many others will at least internally be wondering if these machines were burned by the vestigial components of the Chavez-Maduro tyranny to hide evidence of machine tampering to rig the vote for themselves.

3. Speaking of Venezuela, there were large protests against the arrest of Maduro. I would bet by many of the same people that did the “No Kings” protest against Donald Trump.

One guest was “A researcher for the Sri-continental organization for Social Research.”

The Frankfurt School, communist think tank was originally called The Institute for Social Research before it left Germany for New York.

As usual, a Quick Look reveals the true agenda.

4. ANTIFA, an organization funded in whole or in part by the German government itself, carried out a major terrorist attack against German infrastructure.

Full text:

?? German Antifa carry out a terrorist attack in Berlin

On Saturday morning, a terrorist attack targeted a power transmission line in the German capital, leaving tens of thousands of residents without electricity, and in some areas without heating, during a severe cold spell, Tagesspiegel reports.

Responsibility for the attack was claimed by a German radical Antifa group calling itself “Vulkan.”

In a manifesto published by the group, the radicals described the arson as an “act of self-defense” and a protest against fossil fuels and the expansion of artificial intelligence.

The extremists set fire to a cable bridge crossing the Teltow Canal from the Lichterfelde power plant. Incendiary devices were placed beneath the cables, creating a prolonged, high-temperature blaze. The burned wires were then deliberately short-circuited using metal rods to intensify the damage.

As a result of the attack, five high-voltage and ten medium-voltage cables were damaged. Initially, around 45,000 households in southwestern districts of Berlin were left without power.

The timing made the impact especially severe: during freezing temperatures, residents were left not only without electricity but also without heating. Mobile communications and emergency services were also disrupted in the affected areas.

Restoration efforts are being delayed due to technical challenges. The damaged infrastructure involves different types of cables that must be reconnected under specialized conditions by highly qualified technicians.

Such repairs normally take up to five weeks, but emergency crews are now working around the clock in an effort to restore power within five days.

The following needs to be understood for perspective on this event:

5. So it turns out that the British police invented evidence to justify banning Israeli soccer fans from a soccer match in the UK. 

The Times also has this story but it’s behind a paywall. The Times explains that Leaked files show West Midlands officers found retrospective ‘intelligence’ to justify barring football supporters.

UK police used false claims about Israeli fans to justify soccer game ban – report

Dutch law enforcement denies Maccabi Tel Aviv fans threw ‘innocent members of the public into the river’ in Amsterdam last year, or that 500-600 ‘intentionally targeted Muslim communities’

British police used false information to justify a ban on Israeli fans attending a game in Birmingham earlier this month, Dutch law enforcement told London’s Sunday Times newspaper.

The Aston Villa soccer club announced last month that no Maccabi fans would be allowed at the game following a police assessment that classified the fixture as “high risk,” citing “violent clashes and hate crime offenses” during a Europa League match in Amsterdam between Maccabi and local team Ajax last November.

According to the Sunday Times, the decision over the Birmingham game was made as a result of a confidential report in which British police claimed that Israeli fans threw “innocent members of the public into the river,” that 500-600 “intentionally targeted Muslim communities” and that the violence forced the deployment of 5,000 police officers.

Thank you all for checking out this site and its perspectives.

Here is an interesting juxtaposition. The new Mayor of NYC, who has lit up the buildings in Green to celebrate some Islamic thing or other, and has allowed mosques to caterwaul the call tp prayer across NYC, has vociferously claimed it was illegal for Trump to arrest Maduro as a violation of International law, or something.

But then you have this:

6. Zohran Mamdani says as mayor he would arrest Benjamin Netanyahu if he traveled to New York

If he wins his fall election, Zohran Mamdani would order New York’s police department to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu in the event that the Israeli prime minister ever traveled there, the city’s leading mayoral candidate said in a recent interview.

No surprise to anyone really. Its just nicely consistent with his Communist-Islamic intentions to reshape the West into something more like Venezuela was till a few days ago, or North Korea, or some Islamic Sh**hole.

The Atlantic has struck us as a kind of massaging propaganda rag for people who think they are smart. It is easy to get sucked in to their style. But they were heavily used during the Obama regime to soft sell even the most outrageous ideas. Like for instance that Al Qaeda were America’s allies against the Islamic State. Really.

So this should come as gentle confirmation.

Chat GPT analyzes this The Atlantic image thusly:

What the juxtaposition actually shows (and why it lands)

June 2022 frame (left):

Imperative language: “Don’t wait”

Moral urgency

Risk amplification for children

Dismissal of alternatives (“immunity from infection isn’t enough”)

The implied claim: benefit is clear, risk is negligible

December 2025 frame (right):

Concession language: “Yes, some children may have died”

Moral reframing: acknowledgment is allowed, but only to pre-empt critics

The implied claim: harm exists, but discussion must be controlled

The emphasis is no longer on risk assessment, but on narrative management (“denial serves anti-vaxxers”)

Thank you all again for your kind attention. 

RELATED VIDEO: The Fall of Maduro + The End of Tim Walz

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

DAVID BLACKMON: What 2026 Will Deliver On Energy Policy

By David Blackmon


nginx

STEVE MILLOY: Trump Dismantles Climate-Industrial Complex

By Steve Milloy


nginx

China Bans Silver Exports, and Price Skyrockets

By Joanne Nova


nginx

$5.6 Billion Dollar Texas To Arizona Pipeline Gets Upsized To Meet Demand

By Alton Wallace


nginx

Was this MIT Scientist Assassinated for Pioneering Nuclear Fusion?

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

An MIT scientist was murdered in the entryway to his home in Brookline, Massachusetts.

With the terrible attacks on Jews celebrating Hannukah in Australia, students studying at Brown, Rob and Michelle Reiner by their son, and American servicemen in Syria, it is easy to overlook the murder of MIT professor Nuno Loureiro, which remains a mystery.

No motive for the attack is known.  The murderer remains at large.

Nuno Loureiro was director of MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center.  MIT conducts some of the world’s most cutting-edge fusion energy research and development.

Was it merely coincidence that the man who was murdered was pioneering nuclear technologies that, if successful, would usher in an age of endless energy abundance for all mankind?

Coincidences happen.

Yet when facts coincide, questions are raised.

Investigators must ask: Was this an attack against our energy future?

For nature and people too.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

The End of the Beginning

By Ilya Shapiro


nginx

Critically Thinking About Industrial Wind Energy

By John Droz, Jr.

One of my faithful readers (W. van Snyder) recently wrote an important book: Where Will We Get Our Energy: A Comprehensive System Examination. As it turned out, another reader here (Dr. Jon Boone) emailed him an insightful and entertaining commentary. I’m reposting this below…


Van: Thanks for recommending your book.

Over the last month, I’ve read portions of it as I found time, assessing your content in terms of what I have learned over the last two decades. Bottom line: You produced a well documented, comprehensive, take down of the renewables ballyhoo (something I did nearly 20 years ago in my MDPSC wind testimony), eviscerating particularly the wind energy baby—along with its bathwater.

Your prose style is both pithy and entertaining; your rhetoric, compelling; and your blend of rather abstruse mathematics with down home explanation is deftly informative. For example, I loved the way you described the development of the formula for converting wind energy into electricity, quickly getting to the fly in wind’s soup: V3!

In short, you showed that the renewables du jour are a dysfunctional, very costly, solution to a non-existent problem. At grid scale, wind can neither be a functional additive nor an alternative energy source. Rather, it’s a supplement that requires a great deal of supplementation for grid integration, in the process continually subverting its reason for being.

The climate change farrago is a super-charged proposition that mocks the scientific method, as you so correctly demonstrate. It’s full of definitional slips and slides and, as currently formulated, can never genuinely be falsified, even though it is false. Your narrative excursion about nuclear is up to date and informative.

I’ve recommended your book widely.

Although I agree with all your conclusions, I nonetheless want to provide some food for your thought on the wind menu, addressing:

  1. what I think of using the term, backup, for wind output; questioning
  2. the rather blasé claim that wind provides a certain percentage of the overall delivery of electricity generation to any grid (as you have done); and, imploring you, because it’s clear you have the knowledge and skill to do so with authority, to investigate
  3. the battery charge/discharge efficiency impact in service to balancing wind’s quotidian flux over, say, the course of a year, assuming a grid in which only wind, solar, and batteries supply demand. Given that wind generation changes its output hundreds of times daily and that the grid must match demand closely at all times, I would be thunderstruck if any present-day battery system would be able to survive the onslaught for any meaningful amount of time, no matter how high the cost.

On the backup issue, the notion that wind volatility is something in need of “backup” seems to be a minor wind howler. Yes, grid reliability and security demand that all generating plants have redundancy built in, hence the idea of backup as a conventional industry term of use. However, backup overwhelmingly means a reserve or substitute for the real thing, often in the form of an understudy or a computer file. Or it can mean support for a much larger object or activity. (Let’s avoid here the notion of backup as a clogged drain.)

In the first case, the backup is sufficiently like the original (what is backed up) that performance should not be markedly corrupted. A second-string quarterback should in virtually all-important respects be able to do what the first-string quarterback does. Ditto for an understudy forced into mainline service because of illness to the diva.

In the second case, a backup buttress to an architectural feature plays a small role in the scheme of things, nice for security to be sure, but nonetheless, it is a minor part of the whole. Although it is a proactive measure in terms of ultimate security, it is mainly reactive in function.

The nature of wind variability, which routinely changes its output 5% or more at every five-minute interval and occasionally widely alters what it delivers in a very short time, means that wind is a wayward fish to conventional generation’s bicycle; it is a completely different creature both in degree and kind.

Given that wind generates an average of only a fourth of its full capacity annually, nearly 75% of that capacity must therefore consist of conventional generation—in order to keep supply matched to demand. Given that 10-15% of the time it produces nothing, then 100% of its full capacity must be taken over by conventional machines. The truth is that wind can only be a minor ingredient in a much larger fuel mix—but much like a fly in soup, which provides, like wind, problematic nutritional value. You could eat it. But why would you want to?

Given the erratic, skittering nature of its delivery, wind cannot merely be “backed up” by a slightly corrupted version of itself. Quite the contrary. It is as if wind is the whacky substitute requiring the first team, the diva, to make it functional. In the best Orwellian newspeak fashion, it is the backup that does virtually all the important work—but in a much more inefficient fashion. How would the world’s best actor squelch, live onstage, a drunken understudy who continually spoke lines from another play?

Words are important if they are to impart accurate meaning. To say that wind requires backup is to pervert both language and meaning, despite its bellyfeel quality. Although language is slippery, it should not be that quicksilver. Wind machines must always be ENTANGLED with proactive but inefficiently operating conventional machines through the entire extent of any wind machine’s full capacity.

On the issue of wind providing a certain percentage of electricity to a grid system, there is implied in this idea that the grid is therefore using less conventional power plants, particularly fossil fired, because wind is displacing them. This is of course a reasonable conclusion.

However, this is yet another of those situations where face value accurate facts don’t tell the larger context truth of things. As you surely know, there is a front and back end to wind generation. At the front end, wind energy must displace existing generation to keep the grid balanced. However, at the back end, wind’s continuous variability must be followed and balanced by conventional generation, typically fossil-fired. Thermal plants deployed as wind balancers are operating much more inefficiently in this role, consuming more fuel in the process than they otherwise would.

Here’s where the situation gets more than weird in terms of truth telling and it involves the use of imports (thanks for discussing them in your text). Let me urge you to read pages 6-13 of my paper, Overblown, where I discuss my findings about this regarding the grids in Texas and Colorado, examining claims by the wind industry that wind output had caused a reduction in overall conventional generation.

Turns out that the amount of imported generation, which was not mentioned as being part of the total generation mix, more than compensated for the reductions in the grids’ conventional generation use. In the cases of both grids, there was actually a slight increase in the use of conventional generation overall, despite a lot of wind on the system.

In all my years of looking, I have not found—anywhere—that wind generation has caused any reductions in the use of conventional power plants and their fuels. In truth, the more wind, the greater demand for fossil fuels, all things considered.

No need to respond. I haven’t done much energy related work for some while. So good to see you doing such excellent work. Trust you’ll continue in the wake of Trump’s energy agenda, providing intellectual ballast in support until the wind mess withers away from its well-deserved fate: unbelief.

Many cheers! Jon Boone

©2025 All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I offer incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking about my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

Hydro Produces Clean Snake River Energy — The Left Wants to Wreck It

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

the Trump administration affirmed its support for the four Lower Snake River hydroelectric dams in the Pacific Northwest.

CFACT’s Conservation Country series, particularly our investigative report from September 2024, highlighted the benefits of this energy source, going directly to Ice Harbor Dam in eastern Washington.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright said of his visit to Ice Harbor: “Hydroelectric dams have provided affordable and reliable electricity to millions of American families and businesses for decades. Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, they will continue to do so!”

WATCH: The Dam Truth: Hydroelectric Powers the Pacific Northwest

Our Lower Snake River Dam investigation uncovered some inconvenient “dam” truths. Dam breaching would lead to phasing out reliable hydroelectric power for electricity produced by intermittent solar and wind. Transportation of goods by barge would stop. And most “daming” of all, migratory salmon — an anti-hydro scapegoat — aren’t threatened by these power plants. Our report revealed marine mammals like voracious killer whales and sea lions pose a far greater threat.

In sum, the environmental trade-offs far outweigh the promised “benefits” of dam replacements.

CFACT is proud to have played a small but pivotal role in promoting hydroelectric power in the Northwest. However, there are numerous stories across America that also require attention. That’s where CFACT’s Conservation Country series comes into play.

Conservation Country specializes in shining a light on property rights, wildlife, and government abuses, as well as showcasing examples where things are done right — in other words, true conservation success stories.

Through this project, the CFACT team is fighting to change the narrative on terms like “environmental protection” by infusing it with sound science and free-market principles. With Team Trump in office, now is an especially good time to press the advance!

For nature and people too.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Give Thanks for the Fossil Fuel Industry

By The Daily Signal

Just by living in 21st-century America, you have a lot to be thankful for.

You live in the richest country in the history of the world—and one of the freest. Despite what the left claims, the benefits of wealth aren’t limited to the 1%. The amenities most people take for granted—a vehicle, washing machine, hot water on demand—would have been unimaginable luxuries for most of human history. Among poor families in America, significant majorities have air conditioning systems, televisions, microwaves and smartphones.

We’ve come a long way from what the Pilgrims had to celebrate at the first Thanksgiving. Over half of the settlers had died during the previous winter. The remaining settlers were grateful for a harvest that would help them survive the upcoming winter.

Today, most people are concerned with how many servings of turkey they can eat while still having enough room for pumpkin pie.

It’d be impossible to list all the changes over the last four centuries that have turned scarcity into opulence. The bravery and sacrifice of members of the military are near the top of the list.

So is the fossil fuel industry.

You didn’t have to hunt your turkey, kill it and clean it. A farmer did that on a farm powered primarily by fossil fuels. A truck powered by fossil fuels drove it to your supermarket. Your supermarket used fossil fuels to keep its lights on, its freezer cold and its credit card readers humming. You used fossil fuels to drive there and buy it. That’s true even if you have an electric car, because electric cars plug into an electric grid mostly powered by coal and natural gas. Fossil fuels will also heat the oven used to cook your turkey. The lights you turn on during Thanksgiving dinner, the TV you use to watch football and the dishwasher you use to clean up all run primarily on fossil fuels.

Renewable energy gets all the publicity, but wind and solar power generated only about 14% of the nation’s electricity in 2023. Fossil fuels generated 60%, with nuclear and hydropower generating over 24%.

When the Pilgrims got cold, they had to chop wood and burn it. Today, you push a button on your thermostat. Going to see family? Airplanes use fossil fuels. The iPhone you use to FaceTime Grandma wouldn’t exist without the power provided by fossil fuels.

This doesn’t mean fossil fuel companies are perfect. It doesn’t mean that there aren’t externalities to fossil fuel production, although it’s hard to take environmental alarmists seriously after decades of failed predictions. It doesn’t mean that someday a different fuel source, like nuclear power, won’t replace fossil fuels.

But without fossil fuels, Thanksgiving dinner and everything else in American life would look entirely different—and not in a good way.

Happy Thanksgiving.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM 

AUTHOR

Victor Joecks

Victor Joecks is a columnist for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Victor on X: @VictorJoecks.

Interview with Climate Scientist Tom Harris: What was COP30 in Brazil and what will it mean to citizens of Western nations

By Vlad Tepes Blog

With the left, the point is never the point, the revolution is always the point.

So when politicians have an international conference on an issue which is scientific (or medical) in nature, and what readers of this site know is in fact, a Line of Operation supported not by science, but by media driven mass line narrative attacks against the public, then it is good to sit down with a scientist and set the record straight.

Determining that the science does not support the policies is important to do, to negate the propaganda in the minds of the target audience. Which is all of us of course.

But what ultimately will be more important as the state launches more and more attacks on reality, is to be able to identify them as they happen, and know their true purpose. Like the Mass Graves at Residential schools. Which is another mass line, (this time intended to negate the right to own property or set rational limits to immigration)  and one that may not be questioned for fear of cancellation, and soon, actual criminal charges. Ministry of Truth stuff. Maybe even Ministry of Love.

As with Covid, the real issue should have been, and remains, ‘The state does NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to implement ANY of the measures it did against the public.’

In other words, the state made up a pseudo-crisis, partly real or totally imagined, which they then claimed justified exceeding state powers by orders of magnitude to mitigate. The point was obviously the power grab, as it had nothing to do with the claimed issue.

To call the new powers Ultra Vires would be an understatement.

To call them the first major wave of a communist revolution would be exactly to the point.

Canada at one point even implemented the ultimate negation of basic rights of a free people. The destruction of the right of exit. You could not leave the country without submitting to experimental mRNA injections and you had to have proof that you did, just to leave. This is not the stuff of a republic. This is the ultimate test of a communist polity. As the old saying goes, free nations have walls to keep people out. Communist nations have walls to keep people in.

So it was refreshing to sit down with Tom Harris and go over both the facts of the claims made by those who use climate as a way of destroying Western industry and liberties, as well as the consequences of agreements signed by nations that flew their private jets into the Brazilian jungle to force there rest of its to give up our cars.

Tom Harris on Brazil COP 30 climate conference Nov 28 2025

A previous talk by Tom Harris on climate facts. Tom mentioned the co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore.

Tom Harris: All The Facts You Need To Debunk ‘Climate Change’ Scammers

We interviewed him on this topic in November of 2021:

RAIR Exclusive Interview with Greenpeace Founder Patrick Moore

RAIR Foundation has this article pertaining to this interview with Tom Harris as well.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

A Key Energy Perspective: Energy is the Lifeblood of our Society

By John Droz, Jr.

What this chart shows are two important things:

  1. China is rapidly modernizing their country, as they are very serious about being THE global power.
  2. The US is stagnating, as annual electricity generation is a good indicator of industrialization.

What this graph does NOT reveal are some additional important matters:

  1. Almost all of China’s increase is due to their aggressive expansion of Coal generation facilities — over 100 a year, for many years! (See here.)
  2. The US is actually going downhill. Why is that? Because an increasing percentage of its electrical energy sources are now unreliable and expensive.
  3. The US is losing ground despite spending a Trillion dollars on energy facilities over this period! How can that be? Because a large part of the US expenditure is on faux energy like wind and solar.

So the bad news is that our energy policies have been heavily influenced by political agendas and outright ignorance (e.g., a lack of critical thinking).

The good news is that the current Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary, Chris Wright, is a very technically competent person who will be leading the U.S. in much more sensible directions.

©2025  All rights reserved.


Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I offer incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking about my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?