US formally ditches World Health Organization



President Donald Trump announced America's withdrawal from the scandal-plagued World Health Organization late in his first term, citing the organization's abysmal response to COVID-19, its willingness to help the communist Chinese regime cover up the spread of the virus, and its refusal to adopt urgently needed reforms.

Former President Joe Biden swooped in, however, to prevent the withdrawal, which was scheduled for July 6, 2021.

'The United States will not be making any payments to the WHO before our withdrawal.'

On his first day back in office, Trump put the country back on track for withdrawal, giving the WHO a one-year notice period as required by U.S. law. In the months since, the Trump administration has cut off funding, withdrawn all personnel from the organization, and pivoted initiatives previously executed with the WHO to bilateral engagements with other countries and outfits.

Pursuant to the president's order, the United States has — as of Thursday — officially finished its exit from the WHO.

In a joint release confirming the completion of the withdrawal, the U.S. State Department and the Department of Health and Human Services stated, "Going forward, the U.S. government will continue its global health leadership through existing and new engagements directly with other countries, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and faith-based entities."

"U.S.-led efforts will prioritize emergency response, biosecurity coordination, and health innovation, including for noncommunicable diseases, to protect America first while delivering benefits to partners around the world," added the departments.

RELATED: 'We are not doing this any more': Rubio to strip billions in foreign aid from 'NGO industrial complex'

Photo by Robert Hradil/Getty Images

In a corresponding fact sheet, the departments indicated that in addition to terminating all funding to the WHO and recalling all U.S. personnel and contractors previously assigned to or embedded with the agency, the U.S. has "ceased official participation in WHO-sponsored committees, leadership, bodies, governance structures, and technical working groups."

"Withdrawing from WHO restores long-overdue accountability and transparency for U.S. taxpayers," says the fact sheet.

The WHO, a specialized agency of the United Nations that was founded in 1948, has long depended on the U.S. for financial and technical support. The U.S., a founding member, has historically been the organization's single largest contributor, pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the WHO yearly and regularly accounting for over 20% of all member-state assessed contributions.

While the Trump administration satisfied its statutory obligation to give a one-year notice, critics of the withdrawal and officials at the globalist organization claim the U.S. has not met its financial obligations under the provisions of the congressional resolution that first enabled the country to join the WHO.

The amount supposedly owing for the 2024-2025 period is reportedly $278 million.

"The United States will not be making any payments to the WHO before our withdrawal," a State Department official told NPR earlier this week. "The cost borne by the U.S. taxpayer and U.S. economy after the WHO's failure during the COVID pandemic — and since — has been too high as it is."

Lawrence Gostin, director of the WHO's Center of National and Global Health Law, told NPR, "This is a very, very public and messy divorce."

"The man says, 'No, I'm not going to pay you any money, and we're no longer married.' And the woman says, 'No, you can't not be married unless you pay me,'" said Gostin.

Unlike in Gostin's analogy, the man in this scenario is the world's pre-eminent nuclear superpower.

Despite the apparent futility of the effort, the WHO's principal legal officer, Steven Solomon, indicated earlier this month that the organization's member states will discuss whether the U.S. has met the requirements for leaving, reported Stat News.

"It’s a lose for the U.S., and it’s also a lose for the rest of the world," Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said last week of America's imminent departure. "I hope they will reconsider."

Bill Gates, a funder of some of the WHO's work, told Reuters, "I don’t think the U.S. will be coming back to WHO in the near future."

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

The fastest way to stop Iran’s killers ... without firing a single shot



The mullahs of Iran have resumed the familiar work of slaughtering their own people. (Again!) The United States can respond without firing a shot — and without waiting months for a traditional embargo to bite.

It can impose an electronic embargo.

An electro-embargo could do something sanctions often cannot: break the regime’s control quickly enough to matter while the killing is still underway.

Washington could pursue this approach unilaterally, or it could press the United Nations to authorize it under Article 41 of the U.N. Charter, which empowers the Security Council to order measures “not involving the use of armed force,” including the partial or complete interruption of “postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication.” The text already exists.

The question is whether anyone has the imagination — and the nerve — to use it.

The electronic advantage

In the context of Iran’s continuing humanitarian emergency, the United States, with a bit of diplomatic legerdemain from Ambassador to the U.N. Michael Waltz, could challenge the Security Council to act. China and Russia sit on the council. They will posture. They will threaten vetoes. But even a public debate would force them to explain why the world should tolerate a regime that murders civilian protesters in the streets.

If the Security Council approves an Article 41 action, the United States could then present its combatant commanders with something Iran has never faced at scale: an embargo not on goods but on electrons.

Physical embargoes remain a standard tool of statecraft. They also take time. Iran can evade, reroute, smuggle, barter, and stall. An electronic embargo moves at the speed of light.

Target Iran’s hardline regime — not the Iranian people — by degrading the communications infrastructure that allows the government to command and control its security forces and manage the extraction and export of oil, its primary source of hard currency.

Strike the regime’s hardened telephone and cellular systems, satellite communications, and broadcast television.

Cripple the internal nervous system that keeps the state coordinated, disciplined, and armed.

The effect would be immediate. A regime that cannot communicate cannot coordinate raids, deploy forces efficiently, jam dissident signals, or maintain operational tempo. It cannot manage a modern oil export apparatus without functioning networks. It cannot run a crackdown in real time if it loses the ability to issue orders and track compliance.

The ‘Venezuelan formula’

Just as important, an electronic embargo could reverse the regime’s favorite trick: cutting the Iranian people off from each other and from the outside world. Tehran has already tried to block the internet and throttle social media. A targeted electronic campaign could negate that control and unleash an information tsunami — one the mullahs cannot shape, censor, or contain.

That shift matters. When citizens can communicate, organize, document, and broadcast, repression becomes harder and riskier. The regime loses its monopoly on narrative. Fear starts to spread in the other direction.

RELATED: Memo to Hegseth: Our military’s problem isn’t only fitness. It’s bad education.

erhui1979 via iStock/Getty Images

One can imagine a greatly expanded “Venezuelan formula”: degrade internal communications, then use broadcast means to confuse and complicate the regime’s grip on what is happening — while simultaneously encouraging the population to resist theocratic authority. The goal would not be spectacle. The goal would be collapse: the steady unraveling of the regime’s confidence, coherence, and control.

In this mode, a combatant commander could employ SOFTWAR principles to engage and degrade the mullahs through coordinated, non-kinetic lines of operation. Properly executed, such a campaign would affect nearly every aspect of Iranian society — and it would do so without turning Iranian cities into ruins.

A greater strategic payoff: China

The strategic payoff for the United States extends beyond moral clarity. It comes down to oil — and to China.

The recent decapitation of the Maduro junta in Venezuela proved a point many analysts ignore. The key factor is not the quantity of oil in a given country. It is control of the flow of oil. Energy states matter because they can fuel, fund, and sustain adversaries.

If the mullahs fall, China loses a major energy supplier at a moment when it can least afford disruption. Beijing’s ambitions depend on stable inputs. Xi Jinping’s dream of Chinese communist hegemony runs on energy. Remove an important provider, and you squeeze China’s strategic bandwidth — again.

That result alone justifies exploring an electronic embargo.

This is not a call for war. It is a call to use power creatively, within the bounds of international law when possible, and in defense of a population being beaten, shot, and silenced by its rulers.

The mullahs survive by controlling the physical streets and the electronic space above them. Take away the second, and the first becomes harder to hold.

An electro-embargo would not solve every problem. But it could do something sanctions often cannot: break the regime’s control quickly enough to matter while the killing is still underway.

Trump pulls US out of 'racist' UN forum pushing 'global reparations agendas'



President Trump has made several moves this week that will have globalists, climate activists, and other international grifters up in arms.

On Wednesday, President Trump signed a presidential memorandum removing the United States from over 60 international organizations as part of a longer-term plan to put American interests first.

'America will no longer lend its credibility to racist organizations.'

In an executive order signed in February 2025, President Trump ordered the secretary of state to review the United States' membership in many international groups to determine whether cooperation with those groups is in American interests.

The memorandum said that the president had since reviewed the secretary's report and "determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support" for 66 organizations and has officially withdrawn the U.S. from them.

These organizations include 35 "non-United Nations Organizations" and 31 United Nations organizations.

RELATED: Trump administration saves billions in simple move globalists and climate activists alike will hate

Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

Some of the U.N. organizations that the United States removed itself from are the U.N. Economic and Social Council, the International Law Commission, the U.N. Alliance of Civilizations, the U.N. Democracy Fund, the U.N. Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, and the U.N. University.

Also included in that list is the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, an organization that United States officials have called "racist."

“America will no longer lend its credibility to racist organizations,” State Department principal spokesman Tommy Pigott told the New York Post.

“Radical activists who embrace DEI ideology and seek to compel the United States to adopt policies mandating race-based wealth redistribution, in organizations such as the U.N. Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, will no longer be entertained,” he added.

According to an article on the United Nations' website, the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent seeks "slavery reparations" and fashions itself as a forum to "shape ... global reparations agendas."

According to the Post, Trump administration officials have alleged that the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, a subsidiary of the United Nations Human Rights Office, runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment and Equal Protection clause with its focus on "victim-based social policies."

Notably missing from the list is the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, even though Trump's February executive order called for an investigation into it. Specifically, the executive order said, "The review will include an evaluation of how and if UNESCO supports United States interests. In particular, the review will include an analysis of any anti-Semitism or anti-Israel sentiment within the organization."

Trump and the Treasury Department also ordered the United States' "immediate" withdrawal from the Green Climate Fund on Thursday.

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

Trump administration saves billions in simple move globalists and climate activists alike will hate



The Trump administration is uprooting the United States from another large money-sink as it continues to try to put America first.

On Thursday, Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent announced that the U.S. is "immediately" withdrawing from the Green Climate Fund, a United Nations-aligned organization that has cost the U.S. billions in the last decade.

'Continued participation in the GCF has been determined to no longer be consistent with the Trump administration's priorities and goals.

"Our nation will no longer fund radical organizations like the GCF whose goals run contrary to the fact that affordable, reliable energy is fundamental to economic growth and poverty reduction," Bessent said in a statement on social media.

The Green Climate Fund is an affiliate of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The GCF was established in 2010, according to a timeline on its website.

In a press release, the Treasury Department said that while the administration "is committed to advancing all affordable and reliable sources of energy, ... the GCF was established to supplement the objectives of the UNFCCC, and continued participation in the GCF has been determined to no longer be consistent with the Trump administration's priorities and goals."

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

Photographer: Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The GCF Board — directed by James Catto, an American, until Thursday's announcement — is "charged with the governance and oversight of the Fund's management." The GCF, according to its website, "embodies a new and equitable form of global governance to respond to the global challenge of climate change."

Under the Biden-Harris administration, the United States pledged $3 billion in a multi-year "replenishment" of the fund spanning from 2024 to 2027. The United States also seeded the fund at its inception, providing $2 billion, according to the same 2023 press release.

The Green Climate Fund did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment.

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

Will Trump’s unconventional plan to stop the UN climate elites work?



When President Trump boycotted the U.N. climate summit, many Americans who aren’t buying the elites' climate fearmongering were pleased, hopeful that Trump’s move might weaken the globalist plans.

But after the global elites appeared to use the president’s absence to push extreme climate policies, some are wondering if the president could have made a mistake.

“We’ve got Trump in the White House, and of course he actually boycotted the summit. We reached out to the State Department. They told us they deliberately chose not to send anybody. So there was no U.S. delegation for the first time in 30 years of these, and that made for a very interesting situation,” journalist Alex Newman tells Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck.


“And you know, a lot of Americans thought that was great. Hooray. And a lot of the climate skeptics also thought so. But some of the globalists at the U.N. conference also said, ‘Hey, this is a great opportunity, because the United States is still involved in the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, but they’re not here to obstruct passage of an ambitious deal,’” Newman explains.

“‘So let’s do some great stuff, and then when Trump is gone in three and a half years, we’ll impose that on Americans,’” he adds.

And the agreement they passed without Trump’s presence included “mention of a carbon budget.”

“They claim that four-fifths of the CO2 that humans can be allowed to emit has already been emitted,” Newman tells Glenn.

“I think the strategy for these people, Glenn, is ‘Hey, we’ve got Trump for three and a half more years. Let’s just keep our heads down. We know that he doesn’t believe us. We know that the American people don’t believe us. So let’s just not talk about it too loudly,’” he adds.

“So was this a mistake by not showing up?” Glenn asks.

“I don’t know,” Newman answers. “I know some of the people down at the U.N. summit thought this was a good opportunity for them, but you know, Trump’s not done.”

“I’ve spoken with people at EPA; I’ve spoke with people at the State Department, who have said that they are seriously considering the possibility of withdrawing from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change,” he continues.

“We have to,” Glenn interjects.

“Yeah, that seems like a no-brainer. … In fact, before he went into the White House, he said one of the top priorities for the MAGA movement and the United States needs to be to decisively crush this climate hysteria hoax,” Newman says, adding, “So he’s really serious about it.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

‘Everything Is On the Table’: Trump Admin Weighs Terror Sanctions for UNRWA

The Trump administration says that "everything is on the table"—including terrorism-related sanctions—as it moves closer to taking fresh punitive measures against the Hamas-linked United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), according to three senior officials, who told the Washington Free Beacon that the aid group’s "time playing a role in Gaza is over."

The post ‘Everything Is On the Table’: Trump Admin Weighs Terror Sanctions for UNRWA appeared first on .

Federal Investigators Work To Blacklist Hamas-Tied UNRWA Staffers

The chief oversight body responsible for monitoring American foreign assistance has launched an independent investigation into United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) staffers’ ties to Hamas, building a blacklist that will prevent them from migrating to other U.N. agencies that may be involved in the Gaza reconstruction project, nonpublic briefing materials reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon show.

The post Federal Investigators Work To Blacklist Hamas-Tied UNRWA Staffers appeared first on .

Hamas floods the feeds to sway clueless Westerners



As President Donald Trump toured Israel and the region celebrating his newly brokered Gaza ceasefire agreement last month, several Israeli families received unexpected video calls from their loved ones still held captive in Gaza.

After more than two years without information, many suddenly found themselves staring at the faces they feared they might never see again. “I love you! I can’t wait to see you already!” cried one shocked mother.

In a post-truth environment, Hamas has learned how to set the terms of debate, frame Israeli actions, and pressure global institutions.

Behind each hostage stood a Hamas militant in a green headband and full face covering. Before release, the militant gave a command in broken Hebrew: “Post this on social media. Put this in the news.”

It was a scene both surreal and deliberate. For Hamas, the call was not simply a gesture ahead of a ceasefire. It was the final stroke in a propaganda campaign the group has refined into a core battlefield strategy.

Across the war, Hamas moved far beyond the low-tech, grainy videos of earlier terror groups, like al-Qaeda 25 years ago. Borrowing lessons from Russia, China, Iran, and ISIS, it adopted a multi-platform media operation built on drone footage, high-definition body cameras, Telegram networks, curated databases, and a constellation of Instagram influencers.

The goal was simple: Demoralize Israelis, energize supporters, and sway public opinion abroad — especially in the United States and Europe, where diplomatic pressure could yield concessions no battlefield victory could deliver.

Instagram combatants

Influencers became frontline assets. Saleh Aljafarawi, a 27-year-old Instagram personality, chronicled rubble tours and took selfie videos with children and activists, overlaying them with music to evoke sympathy. His content racked up millions of views.

Motaz Azaiza, another influencer, surged to more than 16 million Instagram followers while documenting scenes on the ground and conducting street interviews. A graphic video credited to him — viewed more than 100 million times and widely disputed — showed what appeared to be bleeding toddlers pulled from wreckage.

Hamas-aligned Telegram channels such as Gaza Now and Al Aqsa TV amplified their posts around the clock. Western media outlets often ran these images uncritically, including allegedly starving children later shown to have congenital conditions unrelated to the conflict.

But the visual blitz was only one part of the strategy. Hamas understood that controlling the premises of the debate mattered as much as controlling the images. That is why organizations such as the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs relied heavily on casualty numbers supplied by the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health. Those tallies — widely framed as disproportionately civilian — drove international diplomatic pressure on Israel and fueled student protests across American campuses.

‘Broadcast the images’

A recently declassified memo from Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar revealed the strategic logic behind the group’s media doctrine. Mixed among military instructions were orders to create “heart-breaking scenes of shocking devastation,” including directives for “stepping on soldiers’ heads” and “slaughtering people by knife.” Body-camera footage from the Oct. 7 massacre reflected that intent.

To execute the strategy, Sinwar empowered a spokesman known as Abu Obaidah, who was killed in an Israel Defense Forces strike last year. Under his direction, Hamas expanded its propaganda arm from roughly 400 operatives during the 2014 conflict to more than 1,500. Every battalion and brigade gained its own deputy commander for propaganda, each trained in field filming, livestreaming, and rapid editing inside decentralized “war rooms.”

One category of production featured Israeli hostages forced to deliver scripted messages from tunnel captivity, urging Israelis to protest their government. These videos were released with trilingual subtitles and high-end visual effects. They accelerated domestic pressure inside Israel to accept a deal on terms favorable to Hamas.

During the January 2025 exchange, Hamas choreographed the release events with precision. Operatives filmed every moment with high-definition lenses as hostages were paraded before Red Cross representatives and instructed to wave to crowds. Slogans appeared in Arabic, Hebrew, and English — some tailored to Israeli politics (“we are the day after”), others crafted for Western activists (“Palestine — the victory of the oppressed”).

Iran funds roughly $480 million annually in state propaganda efforts through its IRIB broadcaster. It is reasonable to assume Hamas directs a significant share of its estimated $2 billion budget into communications.

RELATED: The genocide that isn’t: How Hamas turned lies into global outrage

Photo by ZAIN JAAFAR/AFP via Getty Images

Perception shapes policy

The investment has paid off. A Quinnipiac poll found that half of Americans — and 77% of Democratic voters — believe Israel committed a “genocide” in Gaza. A Cygnal survey shows Israel at -21 net favorability among voters younger than 55. Younger Americans, who consume more social media, are almost three times more likely than older voters to view Hamas favorably.

Substance remains another story. A majority of Americans — 56% — oppose or remain ambivalent toward the two-state plan frequently cited by foreign governments and activist groups.

But perception is shaping policy. Hamas has become a dominant force in the narrative battle, feeding imagery, statistics, and talking points directly into Western media ecosystems. In a post-truth environment, the group has learned how to set the terms of debate, frame Israeli actions, and pressure global institutions.

Israel and its allies cannot afford to treat communications as an afterthought. Effective messaging is a force multiplier — not a cosmetic accessory. It frames the battlefield, shapes public opinion, and constrains diplomatic options.

The war showed that Hamas understands this. It is time its opponents understood it too.

Fire breaks out at UN climate alarmist conference reportedly plagued by flood, toilet, 'inadequate air-conditioning' problems



Over 50,000 climate alarmists from across the globe climbed aboard fuel-guzzling planes, boats, and automobiles and traveled to Belém, Brazil, this month to attend the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference.

On the second-last day of anti-American diatribes and globalist pearl-clutching over the supposed crisis that Bill Gates recently admitted "will not lead to humanity's demise," the conference went up in smoke, at least partly.

'The world is watching Belem.'

Footage circulating online shows a hectic scene: of flames erupting in the pavilion area of the Hangar Convention and Fair Center of the Amazon, where nations and various NGOs had set up their public-facing stands; of security guards blowing whistles and shooing panicked delegates and observers away; and of some individuals attempting to extinguish the growing inferno as it ate a hole in the roof.

One person in the office of the summit presidency confirmed that the blaze had been contained within about 30 minutes, the New York Times noted.

"Firefighters and security teams responded promptly and continue to monitor the site," Cop30 organizers said in a statement obtained by Le Monde.

It's presently unclear what started the fire. No injuries have been reported.

RELATED: Bill Gates does stunning about-face on climate 'doomsday' claims: 'This view is wrong'

Photo by PABLO PORCIUNCULA/AFP via Getty Images

The fire proved to be the latest of several issues affecting the conference.

For instance, torrential rainfall at the outset of the conference flooded the entrances to the venue and left certain meeting areas soaked. There were reportedly also complaints of non-functional restrooms and oppressive heat.

In addition to complaining about "inadequate air-conditioning in venue areas" and the "poor condition of the delegation offices provided," Simon Stiell, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, whined in a Nov. 12 letter to Andre Correa do Lago, the president of COP30, that the conference's security was substandard. According to Stiell, hundreds of protesters had damaged property and injured staffers.

COP30 was embroiled in scandal even before it began as the result of the local government's decision to cut a four-lane highway through tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest to ensure that COP30's participants would enjoy easy motorized transit in and out of the hosting city.

Hours before the fire began, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres urged negotiators to reach an "ambitious compromise" on an anti-fossil-fuel agenda, stating, "The world is watching Belem."

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

New U.N. Treaty Decriminalizes AI Child Sexual Abuse Images

Children should not have to bear the burden of protecting themselves from exploitation on online technology platforms.