The WHO didn't get its pandemic treaty through. Critics say it still managed to consolidate 'unchecked authority.'



WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and other globalists have campaigned feverishly in recent months to promote an international pandemic agreement, lashing out at those who dared to suggest the legally binding pact would undermine American sovereignty and burden U.S. taxpayers with yet more financial obligations, as well as at those who noted that the WHO is an untrustworthy, corruption-prone, and Chinese communist-compromised organization.

Ghebreyesus, who leaned on concern-mongering about "Disease X" to move the needle, sought a successful vote on the globalist pact at the 77th meeting of World Health Assembly from May 27 to June 1 in Geneva, Switzerland. His hopes were dashed as the Assembly couldn't agree on the wording or passage of the pact.

Blaze News previously reported that the WHA did, however, manage to adopt a package of amendments to the International Health Regulations allegedly aimed at strengthening "global preparedness, surveillance and responses to public health emergencies, including pandemics."

Critics have expressed concern that the amendments, adopted by "consensus" contra an actual vote, might not be as advertised or even be legal under the WHO's own rules.

American biochemist Dr. Robert Malone claimed Monday that the "hastily approved IHR [amendments] consolidate virtually unchecked authority and power of the Director-General to declare public health emergencies and pandemics as he/she may choose to define them, and thereby to trigger and guide allocation of global resources as well as a wide range of public health actions and guidances."

'The WHO's failure during the COVID-19 pandemic was as total as it was predictable and did lasting harm to our country.'

The IHR make up a legally binding international instrument authorized under Article 21 of the WHO Constitution to which all 194 member states of the WHO, including the U.S., are parties. While amendments submitted to the WHA can be advanced by consensus, decision-making by vote "is a legally available option."

WHO member states agreed in January 2022 to consider potential amendments to the IHR. This decision was prompted, in part, by concerns over "the negative effects of discrimination, misinformation and stigmatization on public health emergency prevention, preparedness and response as well as unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade, and recognizing the need for strengthened coordination."

The amendments were negotiated parallel to the so-far unsuccessful pandemic pact but crafted in the same spirit.

According to Liberty Council, the proposed amendments took "major steps in the wake of COVID-19 to conform and integrate each nation's pandemic responses by directing them to develop 'core' capabilities in areas of Surveillance (vaccine passports/digital health certificates), Risk Communication (censoring misinformation and disinformation), Implementation of Control Measures (social distancing/lockdowns), Access to Health Services and Products (greater sharing of resources and technologies between countries), and more."

The Kaiser Family Foundation reported that the Biden administration was actively engaged in the negotiations despite the urging of Republican lawmakers, such as Sens. Dr. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), to spike the amendments, noting they would "substantially increase the WHO's health emergency powers and constitute intolerable infringements upon U.S. sovereignty."

Cassidy, Johnson, and the entire Senate Republican Conference told President Joe Biden in a May 1 letter, "The WHO's failure during the COVID-19 pandemic was as total as it was predictable and did lasting harm to our country. The United States cannot afford to ignore this latest WHO inability to perform its most basic function and must insist on comprehensive WHO reforms before even considering amendments to the International Health Regulations."

'We consider any such agreement to be a treaty requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution.'

Like Dr. Malone and the Heritage Foundation, the Republicans indicated that the adoption of new IHR amendments at the 77th WHA would be in violation of the WHO International Health Regulations, specifically Article 55, which states, "The text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration."

"As the WHO has still not provided final amendment text to member states, we submit that IHR amendments may not be considered at next month's WHA," wrote the Republican lawmakers. "Should you ignore this advice, we state in the strongest possible terms that we consider any such agreement to be a treaty requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution."

Extra to facing potential congressional pushback, the Biden administration negotiated the amendments with the foreknowledge that the U.S. might not be bound by them depending on the results of the 2024 election. After all, President Donald Trump is expected to once again move to withdraw America from the WHO.

'The final version of the IHRs significantly enhances the WHO’s authority.'

The WHO said in a statement Saturday that the WHA and its 194 member countries "agreed [on] a package of critical amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR), and made concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year, at the latest."

"The amendments to the International Health Regulations will bolster countries' ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities, and coordination between fellow States, on disease surveillance, information sharing and response," said Ghebreyesus. "This is built on commitment to equity, an understanding that health threats do not recognize national borders, and that preparedness is a collective endeavor."

Despite the insinuation of consent among member nations, the Sovereignty Coalition suggested that roughly 30% of member states were present and Ghebreyesus declined to conduct a roll-call vote.

The amendments ultimately adopted by 77th WHA include a new definition for "pandemic emergency"; another "equity"-driven international wealth redistribution mechanism; the creation of a new bureaucracy to oversee the implementation of the other half-measures; and the creation of IHR authorities for member countries to "improve coordination of implementation of the Regulations within and among countries."

While acknowledging that the language of the amendments was weakened during the negotiations, Liberty Counsel indicated that "the final version of the IHRs significantly enhances the WHO's authority."

The U.S. State Department claimed the amendments will "make the global health security architecture stronger overall while maintaining full respect for sovereignty of individual states."

The Kaiser Family Foundation indicated that if "approved at the WHA, the [IHR] revision does not require further Congressional approval or ratification in the U.S."

The British government indicated that each member state has the right to evaluate "each and every amendment before making a sovereign choice of whether to accept or opt out of each — or all of — the amendments."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Globalists suffer big upset in Geneva; WHO chief urges aggressive crackdown on 'global pandemic agreement' skeptics



WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and other globalists were met with failure at the May 27-June 1 World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. Rather than win over critics with reassurances ahead of the next stage of his campaign to promote the failed scheme, Ghebreyesus instead doubled down, urging a crackdown on skeptics.

Road to failure

Ghebreyesus has spent several months promoting his "global pandemic agreement."

In his Feb. 12 Dubai address, entitled, "A Pact with the Future: Why the Pandemic Agreement Is Mission-Critical for Humanity," Ghebreyesus said, "We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged by those who spread lies, either deliberately or unknowingly."

The critics whom Ghebreyesus branded liars and conspiracy theorists include those who reckon the pact would undermine national sovereignty as well as those skeptical of the WHO's competence. In the latter case, the WHO did itself no favors in recent years, particularly during the pandemic.

After all, the organization reportedly aided the Chinese communist regime in its cover up of COVID-19's origins; told the nations of the world not to restrict travelers from China or close their borders even though China had domestically; granted Beijing a veto over the WHO's COVID-19 origins report; and it endorsed vaccines that were not nearly as safe or as effective as advertised, including the blood clot-inducing Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine whose developer now faces a class-action lawsuit over injuries in the United Kingdom as well as a recent lawsuit in Utah. Prior to the pandemic, it also courted controversy with its sexual abuse scandal, wasteful spending, and corruption.

Evidently, it was not enough for the WHO director to demean opponents of his grand scheme to see it through.

'I know that there remains among you a common will to get this done.'

"Of course, we all wish that we had been able to reach a consensus on the agreement in time for this health assembly, and cross the finish line," Ghebreyesus said in his opening remarks at the 77th World Health Assembly. "I remain confident that you still will, because where there is a will, there is a way. I know that there remains among you a common will to get this done."

In the days that followed, the assembly failed to cross the finish line or even come close. As the result, Ghebreyesus has sought to transform the race into a marathon.

New deadline for a desired result

Desperate to keep the dream alive after two years of futile negotiations, the WHO had countries agree to continue negotiating the proposed globalist pact. A package of half-measures have apparently been accepted to tide over pandemic treaty supporters in the meantime.

The WHOsaid in a statement Saturday that the World Health Assembly and its 194 member countries "agreed [on] a package of critical amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR), and made concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year, at the latest."

The half-measures compromise amendments to the IHR that will supposedly "strengthen global preparedness, surveillance and responses to public health emergencies, including pandemics."

These include a new definition for "pandemic emergency"; another "equity"-driven international wealth re-distribution mechanism; the creation of a new bureaucracy to oversee the implementation of the other half-measures; and the creation of IHR authorities for member countries to "improve coordination of implementation of the Regulations within and among countries."

"The amendments to the International Health Regulations will bolster countries' ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities, and coordination between fellow States, on disease surveillance, information sharing and response," said Ghebreyesus. "This is built on commitment to equity, an understanding that health threats do not recognize national borders, and that preparedness is a collective endeavor."

Clampdown on vaccine critics

After negotiators failed to produce a draft deal for approval by the WHO annual assembly, Ghebreyesus gave a speech promoting health initiatives and vaccines.

'I think they use COVID as an opportunity and, you know, all the havoc they're creating.'

Toward the end of his remarks, he noted, "You know, the serious challenge that's posed by anti-vaxxers and I think we need to strategize to really push back because vaccines work, vaccines affect adults, and we have science, evidence on our side."

"I think it's time to be more aggressive in pushing back on anti-vaxxers," continued the WHO director. "I think they use COVID as an opportunity and, you know, all the havoc they're creating. Maybe that's one of the messages I'd also like to include to whatever I have [to] say."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

WHO director is upset 'conspiracy theories' may derail his global pandemic treaty



WHO director general Tedros Ghebreyesus traveled to Dubai last week to hype "Disease X," the yet-to-be-released sequel to COVID-19 that is supposed to scare nations around the world into embracing an internationally binding pandemic treaty.

Although Ghebreyesus has fear-mongered about the hypothetical pestilence for several weeks, it appears he has finally let questions and concerns over his proposed remedies get under his skin.

In his Feb. 12 address, entitled, "A Pact with the Future: Why the Pandemic Agreement Is Mission-Critical for Humanity," Ghebreyesus lashed out at critics who have suggested his proposed "collective action" amounts to an affront to national sovereignty, suggesting that "conspiracy theories" put "the health of the world's people at risk."

Ghebreyesus painted himself as a prophet in the speech, noting that years ahead of the pandemic, he warned that the world would be ill prepared should a virus sweep the land.

"Six years ago, I stood on this stage and said the world was not prepared for a pandemic and expressed my concern at the time that a pandemic can happen any time," said Ghebreyesus. "Less than two years later, in December 2019, COVID-19 pandemic struck. And indeed the world was not prepared."

The WHO general director glossed over how the world was unprepared and in the dark largely on account of his organization and China. While Beijing covered up the spread of the virus, putting the world behind in taking action, Ghebreyesus reportedly provided smoke cover for Beijing's deceit at the outset; told the nations of the world not to restrict travelers from China or close their borders even though China had domestically; and then later granted Beijing a veto over the WHO's COVID-19 origins report.

In his address, Ghebreyesus noted that some "progress" has been made since the pandemic in the way of internationalist schemes and collective action, such as "improvements in surveillance, pandemic fund, and also the establishment of the pathogen sharing app and building capacities in vaccine production. ... Still the world is not prepared for a pandemic."

"History teaches us that the next pandemic is a matter of when, not if. It may be caused by an influenza virus or a new coronavirus," continued the bureaucrat.

Blaze News reported last month that amidst elites' talk of "Disease X," Chinese scientists crafted a coronavirus variant called GX_P@V that kills humanized mice 100% of the time, usually with late-stage brain infections. The scientists from the country on which Ghebreyesus has lavished much praise and little criticism said their mutant virus "underscores a spillover risk of FX_P2V into humans."

"Or it may be caused by a new pathogen we don't even know about yet or what we call 'Disease X,'" said Ghebreyesus, whose largely American-funded organization warned of an "infodemic" or a "an overabundance of information" in 2020.

The WHO leader suggested "Disease X" is not a novel term but indicated it has instead been used as a placeholder term since 2018 to describe pathogens that have yet to be discovered.

"COVID-19 was a Disease X," said Ghebreyesus. "There will be another Disease X or a Disease Y or a Disease Z. And as things stands, the world remains unprepared for the next Disease X."

The bureaucrat's preferred solution to this viral alphabet is the WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty: a legally binding pact "under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response."

Ghebreyesus is scrambling to get the treaty finalized ahead of a May 27 vote by the World Health Assembly. In the meantime, critics are pointing out the treaty's apparent flaws.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) noted at a press conference earlier this month that the so-called pandemic treaty suffers from "a slew of significant issues surrounding the proposed treaty — including lack of transparency, the back-room negotiations, WHO overreach and infringement on U.S. sovereignty, unknown financial obligations for U.S. taxpayers, threats to intellectual property rights and free speech, funding for abortion, and how the treaty will benefit China at the expense of the United States."

"Throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic, the WHO caved to the Chinese Communist Party rather than following the science," said Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus. "Now, the WHO wants to infringe upon our national sovereignty with their proposed 'pandemic treaty.'"

At the same press conference, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, suggested, "This is a global power grab using any future emergency as a justification to use that power."

Ghebreyesus claimed in Dubai that a "major barrier" to the successful implementation of his pandemic treaty is "the litany of lies and conspiracy theories about the agreement — that it's a power grab by the World Health Organization; that it will cede sovereignty to WHO; that it will give WHO power to impose lockdowns or vaccine mandates on countries; that it's an attack on freedom; that WHO will not allow people to travel; and that WHO wants to control people's lives."

"If these lies weren't so dangerous, these lies would be funny," said Ghebreyesus. "But they put the health of the world's people at risk, and that is no laughing matter."

"These claims are utterly, completely, categorically false," added the WHO head.

After suggesting that the internationalist scheme bolstered individual nations' sovereignty and would not empower the WHO to intervene in the domestic choices of various countries, Ghebreyesus underscored, "We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged by those who spread lies, either deliberately or unknowingly."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Vance, Rep. Hern Introduce Bill To Tax Cartels’ International Money Transfers

'reduce the cartels' financial power'

White House Announces Date Ending COVID-19 Vaccination Requirement For International Travelers

Requirements for federal employees and contractors are also set to end

Biden seeks to blow $1 billion on a UN climate fund that has already diverted $100 million to America's top adversary



President Joe Biden has pledged to blow $1 billion on a foreign eco-socialist fund that redistributes Western wealth to so-called vulnerable countries such as China, an adversarial superpower with a GDP pushing $18 trillion.

In his speech Thursday at the 2023 Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, Biden warned of the impact of bad weather on faraway nations, suggesting that "as large economies and large emitters, we must step up and support these economies."

Despite economic troubles at home, Biden stressed that he was "pleased" to announce that his administration "is going to provide $1 billion to the Green Climate Fund, a fund that is ... critical in ways to help developing nations that they can’t do now."

The White House confirmed that $1 billion of Americans' money would be sent to a United Nations Green Climate Fund, thereby bringing total U.S. contributions to the GCF to $2 billion. Biden indicated in 2021 he'd like to boost that number to $11 billion a year by 2024.

According to the GCF, this latest American contribution represents 1/12th of its current portfolio, which redistributes Western wealth, "delivering transformative climate action in 140 countries."

Henry Gonzalez, executive director of the UN's Green Climate Fund, responded to Biden's pledge, saying, "This money will provide urgently needed climate finance for the most vulnerable countries in the world. The USD 1 billion will increase the resilience of populations in Least Developed Countries, protect Small Island Developing States threatened by climate change, and support the transition to low-emission, climate-resilient development around the world."

The Washington Free Beacon noted that China — the genocidal nuclear superpower that ostensibly seeks to edge out the United States in partnership with Russia — has been a big-time beneficiary of the fund.

For instance, the GCF pledged $100 million to help "green" the economy of Shandong, a polluted province in China, itself the world's top carbon emitter.

The Institute for Energy Research reported that China's carbon dioxide emissions in 2020 — to say nothing of its plastic or heavy chemicals pollution — exceeded that of the U.S., the European Union, and India combined, totaling 10.7 billion metric tons.

Although it has exerted its economic might the world round and is the top polluter, China remains a net taker since the U.N. continues to classify it as a "developing nation."

However, the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill last month directing the Secretary of State to strip the communist nation of its "developing country" label, reported The Hill.

According to the bill, "It should be the policy of the United States ... to oppose the labeling or treatment of the People's Republic of China as a developing country in any treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is a party; ... to oppose the labeling or treatment of the People's Republic of China as a developing country in each international organization of which the United States is a member; and ... to pursue the labeling or treatment of the People's Republic of China as an upper middle income country, high income country, or developed country in each international organization of which the United States is a member."

Despite this bipartisan consensus, Biden appears unwilling to condition support to the GCF or other foreign beneficiaries on making this concession.

Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), the lawmaker who sponsored the legislation to strip China of its developing country status, told the Free Beacon, "Handing over taxpayer dollars to subsidize the Chinese Communist Party is a bad investment and will do nothing to protect our national security or promote U.S. development globally."

"The Biden administration’s announcement of $1 billion to the Green Climate Fund, which sends millions to PRC projects, underscores the need to revoke the PRC’s developing country status and ensure the PRC plays by the rules in international agreements," added Kim.

Daniel Turner, executive director of the energy advocacy group Power the Future, has lambasted the Biden administration for "subsidizing countries like China," telling the Free Beacon, "China is building the equivalent of two new coal plants a week, and they don't deny it. Meanwhile, we're closing down our coal plants and giving China money for green products, which we'll then buy."

"So we're subsidizing them twice. And you just wonder — how much more in debt do we have to go? And how much more do we have to risk on national security?" added Turner.

In addition to indirectly funding America's top adversary, the GCF indicates on its site that Biden's investment on America's behalf is not guaranteed to accomplish much in the way of combating the specter of climate change. The GCF admits that its stated goal of limiting global warming is only "narrowly possible."

Although the ultimate aim may be futile, the GCF's website notes, "Climate change offers businesses an unprecedented chance to capitalise on new growth and investment opportunities."

Chinese state-owned businesses will be among those that can exploit these opportunities, made possible by the American taxpayer and Biden's extranational largess.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Joe Biden: International Embarrassment | 4/13/23

Joe Biden: International Embarrassment | 4/13/23

'I don’t feel comfortable racing against men': Man claiming to be female since 2017 crushes another women's track record



A 50-year-old former soccer player and triathlete began claiming to be a woman six years ago. In an apparent effort to make up for lost time, he has since been racing to break records set by female athletes at various track events.

Over the weekend, "Tiffany" Newell placed first at the 2023 Canadian Masters Indoor Championship in Toronto. Catherine Weber, his sole opponent in the 50-54 age group for the women's 1500-meter indoor race, appears to have placed first among real women in the category.

Newell managed to break another record earlier this month, which has since been ratified by Canadian Masters Athletics under the regulations of World Masters Athletics. Newell ran 18:02:30 in the 5000m, beating the real woman previously in the top spot by six seconds.

Reduxx reported that Newell also secured the top spots on Jan. 8 in the women's 3000 meters in the 45-49 age group at the Winter Mini Meet and on Feb. 5 in the 1500 meters for women ages 45-49.

Running Magazine indicated that Newell began his process of gender transmogrification in 2017, but did not begin competing against women until the transition was reportedly complete in 2020, at which time his testosterone levels satisfied the requirements set by the World Athletics transsexual athlete policies.

Accordingly, Newell would have had to "demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Expert Panel (on the balance of probabilities) that the concentration of testosterone in her serum has been less than 5 nmol/L3 continuously for a period of at least 12 months."

He would also have had to keep his "serum testosterone concentration below 5 nmol/L for so long as she wishes to maintain her eligibility to compete in the female category of competition."

To satisfy the requirements adhered to by WMA, it is not necessary that a male transsexual competing with women undergo surgical anatomical changes or provide legal recognition of his gender identity.

Since completing his so-called transition in 2020, Newell has also competed against women at the 2021 Canadian XC Championships in the masters 8k, securing a silver medal, as well as at the 2022 Hamilton Marathon.

In response to the transsexual's recognized victories, the International Consortium on Female Sport, an advocacy group that seeks to protect meaningful distinctions in sexed categories, asked World Athletics and WMA: "WHY are you not protecting the integrity of the female category? WHY do you insist on showing such blatant sex-discrimination?"

\u201cBREAKING \u26a0\ufe0f \nNew World #1 in women\u2019s 50-54 age 1500m is a male athlete.\n\nQs to @WorldAthletics & @WMA_Social :\n\ud83d\udc49\ud83c\udffcWHY are you not protecting the integrity of the female category? \n\ud83d\udc49\ud83c\udffcWHY do you insist on showing such blatant sex-discrimination?\n\n#SaveWomensSports \n#WorldAthletics\u201d
— International Consortium on Female Sport (ICFS) (@International Consortium on Female Sport (ICFS)) 1677472292

George Perry, an athlete performance coach, noted in a Twitter thread ahead of Newell's most recent victories that there are some meaningful differences between male and female track competitors, at least in the way of performance and outcomes:

\u201c25/ Take another look at some of the graphs.\n\nImagine if they showed the results for all men and women in each AG for each event. There wouldn\u2019t be empty space between the men\u2019s record holder and the women\u2019s record holder.\n\nThat space would be filled with men. Lots of men.\u201d
— George M. Perry (@George M. Perry) 1674062144

Perry underscored that between the top man and the top woman will be a lot of "un-notable men, midgrade, mediocre men," of which he reckons Newell is one.

Running Magazine noted that in response to the suggestion by some critics that transsexuals compete in an open category besides those designated for biological men and women, Newell said, "The policy makes sense for non-binary athletes, but I don’t feel comfortable racing against men."

Newell suggested that an open category would categorize him in the sex he does not identify with: "I am a woman, and I feel most comfortable racing against women or other transgender women. I believe an open category can work if athletes can continue to race against athletes of the same gender."

One Twitter user suggested that when transsexuals like Newell "steal women's accomplishments it is the worst kind of sexism."

\u201cThis is why it is so important for \n@WorldAthletics\n to FIX their policy!!\n\nThis is another shameful man stealing women's records and accomplishments. Sex stereotype nonconforming men are not women. When they steal women's accomplishments it is the worst kind of sexism.\u201d
— Amy E. Sousa, MA Depth Psychology (@Amy E. Sousa, MA Depth Psychology) 1672420406

The Guardian reported in 2020 that male transsexuals retain a 12% edge in tests two years after "transitioning." This conclusion was first reached in a paper published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine showing male transsexuals performed 31% more push-ups and 15% more sit-ups in one minute on average than real women and ran 1.5 miles 21% faster.

After taking hormones, a male transsexual was found to retain a 10% advantage in push-ups and a 6% advantage in sit-ups years later.

World Athletics president Sebastian Coe told Insider last year, "If you pushed me and said I had to choose between fairness or inclusion, I will always lean towards fairness, because that’s what sports have to be based on."

December 10, 2021 youtube.com

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

European Commission and the International Energy Agency suggest that people cut energy usage by driving slower, adjusting their thermostats, working from home



The European Commission and the International Energy Agency have suggested that Europeans cut down on energy consumption by adopting practices such as adjusting the thermostat, driving slower on highways, using public transit, working from home, and walking or biking on short trips rather than driving a vehicle.

"Using less energy is a concrete way for Europeans to reduce their bills, cut reliance on Russian fossil fuels, demonstrate solidarity with the Ukrainian people, and support climate action," the report declares. Ukraine has been striving to defend itself amid a brutal invasion as Russia has been wreaking death and destruction, killing many, including civilians.

Our new guide offering simple steps for EU citizens to reduce their energy use & save money is out now, produced with @Energy4Europe.\n\nThese actions could save enough oil to fill 120 super tankers & enough natural gas to heat 20 million homes.\n\nMore \u2192 https://iea.li/3xDpURI\u00a0pic.twitter.com/n4WvZNKpP1
— International Energy Agency (@International Energy Agency) 1650546904

The energy saving proposal suggests setting the air conditioning on a warmer temperature and lowering the temperature target when heating. It also suggests that drivers reduce their speed in order to increase fuel efficiency.

"The average heating temperature within homes across the European Union is over 22 °C, but many could comfortably accommodate 19 °C or 20 °C. Turning down the thermostat in your home by just 1 °C would save around 7% of the energy you use for heating," the report states. "Setting your air conditioner 1 °C warmer could reduce the amount of electricity used by almost 10% and save you EUR 20 a year."

"Driving too fast is inefficient for the car engine and wastes fuel. The average car in the European Union clocks up around 13 000 kilometres a year. By reducing your average cruising speed on motorways by 10 kilometres an hour, you could cut your household fuel bill by around EUR 60 a year," the proposal states.

Many figures and institutions around the globe promote climate alarmism.

"When it comes to climate change, time really is running out. Earth Day is a reminder that if we pledge to do our part and then follow through on those commitments, we can help preserve and protect our planet for future generations," former U.S. President Barack Obama tweeted on Friday.

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey of "Relatable," responded by tweeting, "If you believed this, you wouldn’t have a mansion on the beach." Obama has a mansion on Martha's Vineyard, a Massachusetts island.

"On Earth Day, let us recommit to coming together and taking on the existential threat of climate change. We must act now to save the planet," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) tweeted on Friday.

If you believed this, you wouldn\u2019t have a mansion on the beach.https://twitter.com/barackobama/status/1517569559397474304\u00a0\u2026
— Allie Beth Stuckey (@Allie Beth Stuckey) 1650661134

The Russian central bank takes steps to stabilize the ruble as it plummets in value



The Bank of Russia is proceeding with emergency measures to stabilize its economy and to prevent the Russian ruble from losing further value.

For the first time, the Russian central bank said that it will intervene in the foreign exchange market and expand its Lombard list of securities that it will accept as collateral, Bloomberg reported.

The central bank did not mention whether or not it would raise interest rates but it did proceed with agreeing to provide Russian banks with additional liquidity. It is preparing to offer banks 1 trillion rubles — roughly $11.5 billion —in an overnight repo auction.

On Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin, ordered Russian forces to launch their invasion of Ukraine and strike strategic targets to demilitarize the country. Upon doing so, the ruble fell to a record low in value.

In response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, leaders of Western nations are implementing a wide array of sanctions to weaken the Russian economy.

Less than a day after the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, President Joe Biden announced that the United States would target Russia’s largest financial institutions, Sherbank and VTB, to prevent them from using the American financial system to conduct transactions. These sanctions are fairly comprehensive and will restrict nearly 80% of Russian banking assets.

Previously, Biden stopped short of calling for Russia’s removal from the Society of Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT).

Biden said, “It is always an option, but right now it’s not the position the rest of Europe wishes to take.”

Kicking Russia out of SWIFT would greatly damage the Russian economy in the short term and make recovery incredibly difficult in the long term. It could prevent Russia from engaging in international transactions and would cripple their ability to export oil and gas.

On Saturday, the allied leaders of several Western countries — including the Untied States — expressed their support for preventing Russia from being able to access and utilize the SWIFT network.

The Western leaders agreed to target specific Russian banks for removal from the SWIFT system, to prevent the Russian central bank from manipulating its monetary policy, and to take aggressive steps to sanction and financially punish Russian individuals involved in the invasion of Ukraine.

By preventing Russia from using the SWIFT network, the West will effectively isolate them and inhibit them from conducting trade with some of its largest trade partners.

At the time of writing, a Russian ruble is worth about 0.012 U.S. dollars. The in-game currency for the popular children’s videogame “Roblox” – aptly named Robux – is worth about 0.0125 U.S. dollars per unit.