In July, we published an article about a UN report that read as if the UN is attempting to take control of the global narrative using artificial intelligence (“AI”). 

It should come as no surprise then that in an announcement yesterday,  UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres made a declaration indicating the UN is getting ready to claim central oversight, control and administration of future AI development.

Nobody Panic: UN Chief Guterres Ready to Claim Bureaucratic Primacy in Global AI Governance

By Simon Kent, as published by Breitbart

Nobody panic. The UN and its vast globalist elite bureaucracy is ready to claim central oversight, control, and administration of future artificial intelligence (“AI”) development to ease worries about the fast-developing science.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres made the declaration Wednesday, warning world leaders AI poses ‌risks – known and unknown – that cannot be ignored.

The former Portuguese Socialist Prime Minister spoke after pushback from President Donald Trump, who called threats that AI might destroy humanity “a HOAX” and claimed efforts to limit the technology are part of a “SICK conspiracy.”

He and Mark Zuckerberg both argue market pressure, not government mandates and centrally administered bureaucracy, will keep AI developers in line.

Guterres disagrees, embracing political and industry AI controls rather than trusting the marketplace.

Cautioning that “the world cannot afford a race to the bottom on AI safety,” the chief bureaucrat said concerns raised by those on the front lines of AI technology that its development “is racing ahead of our understanding of the risks” can’t be ignored, the Associated Press (“AP”) reports.

Governments must assume their first responsibility to protect civilians from AI threats, which means “national action is essential,” Guterres told UN reporters. “But global coordination is also indispensable.”

“We need guardrails to build trust – and that make AI safe, transparent, accountable, with human dignity at the centre.”

That’s where the UN and its strictures come in, Guterres outlined.

He said AI will be a major topic in his discussions with world leaders at their annual gathering next week for the high-level session of the UN General Assembly.

“The United Nations will continue to explore practical ideas and approaches in the immediate days ahead,” Guterres said, per the AP report.

“We need a shared understanding of how to advance the safe, secure and responsible development of AI – while identifying when increasingly powerful systems may require stronger safeguards, or additional measures to manage potential risks.”

Expect a global UN summit sooner rather than later on AI controls, Guterres said in response to a question asking whether next week’s meeting of top officials from the UN’s 193 member nations wouldn’t be the perfect opportunity for talks on curbing the excesses of AI.

The career bureaucrat said, “I think it makes full sense at the right moment to have a serious international summit on artificial intelligence.” And at a summit, he said, “it is absolutely essential to have everybody on board” – governments, companies, scientists and civil society – “and I hope that this will be possible.”

Source: https://expose-news.com/2026/09/17/un-moves-forward-with-plans/

Fight the Censorship Join the Hopegirl Mailing List and get my free AudioBook: The QEG Chronicles Free Energy Full Disclosure: https://bit.ly/HGQEGBook

HopeGirl Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@hopegirlblog
HopeGirl Telegram Channel Chat and Groups: https://t.me/Hopegirl587 
Get Our Free EMF Survival Guide : https://bit.ly/FTWEMF
10 Percent Off our EMF Protection Products with this Link: https://www.ftwproject.com/ref/tenoff

The post UN moves forward with plans to take control of AI globally appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

More and more people recognise that the so-called climate emergency is not about the Earth’s climate but is a vehicle for wealth redistribution, central planning and eroding national borders in favour of supranational governance.

So the UN is trying to muscle in, take control and force its climate scam on all nations.  The Globalist organisation has taken it upon itself to declare that its climate decrees are “international law” and nations must obey or face the consequences.

Irrespective of what the UN or any of its puppets say or do, we must never lose sight of the facts: CO₂, the gas of life, is not the enemy; centralised power pretending to save the planet at the expense of liberty is.

United Nations Claims All Must Fight “Climate Change”

By Alex Newman, as published by Liberty Sentinel on 22 July 2026

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Trump Opposition to the UN Climate Play
3. The World Court and Its Climate Ruling
4. Critics Ridicule It All as Narrative Implodes
5. Trump and Experts Pushing Back
6. Roots in Globalist Ideology
7. Implications for Sovereignty and Economy
8. Historical Parallels and the Path Forward
9. About the Author

Introduction

Reports about the death of climate alarmism have been greatly exaggerated. In fact, obeying United Nations climate decrees is now officially “international law.” At least that is what two key UN entities and more than 140 national governments would like humanity to believe.

In one of the most consequential developments yet for the global climate movement, the UN General Assembly voted to formally endorse and “operationalise” a 2025 ruling by the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) declaring that governments are legally obligated to combat climate change.

Supporters hailed the move as a historic victory for “climate justice.” Critics blasted it as a brazen assault on national sovereignty, self-government, affordable energy and constitutional government.

The major UN move came even as US President Donald Trump and his administration were stepping up their war on the “climate change” machine. But the US government’s vigorous opposition was not enough to stop the UN’s power grab.

In one of its most breathtaking rulings, the ICJ – also known as the “World Court” or “World Supreme Court” – ruled on 23 July 2025 that all governments have a legal duty to protect “human rights” and fight “global warming” by restricting emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂). Officially, it was “advisory.” But on 20 May this year, the governments of the world, acting through the UN, voted to give it real force.

Among other elements, the new resolution charges the UN boss with advancing “compliance” with the court’s controversial decision. It also purports to interfere with the sovereign authority of governments to set their own policies on issues such as energy, the environment and even immigration, multiple governments warned.

The UN chief was enthusiastic about it, though. “The world’s highest court has spoken,” gushed UN Secretary-General António Guterres, a longtime Socialist Party operative. “Today, the General Assembly has answered.”

In a 20 May statement welcoming the General Assembly vote, Guterres described its resolution as “a powerful affirmation of international law, climate justice, science and the responsibility of states to protect people from the escalating climate crisis.”

Critics argued that the vote, which passed with 141 governments and tyrants in favour versus eight against and 28 abstentions, represents yet another brazen power grab by globalist forces. The UN General Assembly, or UNGA, has been described by top UN officials as the “Parliament of Humanity.”

The UN resolution seeks to transform the opinion of the so-called World Supreme Court into a de facto legal weapon against national sovereignty, hydrocarbon energy, economic freedom and, ultimately, human prosperity, opponents argued.

Trump Opposition to the UN Climate Play

Multiple critics have pointed out that this goes far beyond environmental policy. Instead, it is a frontal assault on self-government dressed up in the language of international law and human rights.

The legal foundation to criminally prosecute those who refuse to play along with the climate narrative is being laid down rapidly through these measures. Indeed, the resolution treats the ICJ opinion as “irrefutably authoritative and as setting out binding obligations on States,” warned US officials.

Among those forcefully opposing the UN General Assembly measure was the Trump administration on behalf of the American people. US taxpayers are by far the largest financiers of the UN, even though the outfit consistently works against the rights and interests of Americans.

“Throughout the negotiation of this resolution, the United States has been consistent in conveying our opposition to this initiative,” argued Ambassador Tammy Bruce, deputy US representative to the UN. “The United States did not support seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on climate change and has many concerns about the Court’s opinion.”

The ICJ’s July 2025 ruling, spanning hundreds of pages, declared that governments have a “legal duty” under international law to prevent “environmental harm” by slashing CO₂ emissions. Failure to do so, the court warned, could constitute an “internationally wrongful act.”

ICJ President Yuji Iwasawa painted an apocalyptic picture: Man-made global warming is supposedly an “existential problem of planetary proportions” imperilling “all forms of life.” States must “cooperate” to meet emission targets, phase out fossil fuels and provide “climate justice” reparations to poorer nations, Iwasawa and other members of the court declared.

In comments delivered ahead of the General Assembly vote, Ambassador Bruce highlighted some of the problems the US government saw with the resolution and the World Court ruling.

“In brief, this resolution is highly problematic in calling on States to comply with so-called ‘obligations’ that are based on non-binding conclusions of the Court on which UN Member States’ views diverge,” she said. “The resolution includes inappropriate political demands relating to fossil fuels and on other climate topics, and we believe there is no basis for the resolution’s mandate to the Secretary-General to report on the complex and nuanced legal issues addressed by the Court.”

Several other governments expressed similar concerns, Bruce said.

Specifically, the UN resolution and the ICJ ruling claim that all governments have obligations that would “impermissibly interfere with each States’ [sic] sovereign rights to regulate and manage its own energy policy,” Bruce continued. The UN resolution also pretends that “peoples,” rather than individuals, have “human rights,” she noted.

The World Court and Its Climate Ruling

The ICJ climate case – pushed by Pacific Island governments such as Vanuatu with heavy UN backing – was billed as the most significant ever before the court. One analyst said it was tantamount to putting the entire industrialised world on trial.

The ruling was designed from the outset to provide legal cover for the entire UN climate regime, including the 2015 Paris Agreement, and to arm activists, non-governmental organisations and foreign governments with tools to harass energy producers and sovereign nations, analysts observed.

“Failure of a state [government] to take appropriate action to protect the climate system … may constitute an internationally wrongful act,” ICJ President Iwasawa said, making clear that the climate movement ultimately intends to use global “authorities” to impose its agenda on humanity by force.

The court echoed that view in its unanimous, 500-page opinion. “Failure of the state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from [greenhouse gas] emissions including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licenses, or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act,” the court warned, a clear threat.

The International Court of Justice, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, is considered the principal judicial body of the UN. Its 15 judges are elected by the UN General Assembly and Security Council – bodies in which tyrannical regimes often hold equal sway with free nations.

Along with the International Criminal Court, critics have long derided the ICJ as a “kangaroo” court. Among other concerns, analysts have noted its politicised rulings that advance globalist agendas over genuine justice. Key principles from the US Constitution are notably absent.

In its climate ruling, the court leaned heavily on “customary international law,” the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (“UNFCCC”), the Paris Agreement, and even nebulous “human rights” obligations. Trump has announced the US withdrawal from many of those schemes, but globalist legal experts believe the ruling still applies under human rights.

Indeed, the UN’s top court asserted that a “clean, healthy, and sustainable environment” is a human right, a view echoed in the General Assembly resolution adopted on 20 May. As such, states must curb emissions to comply with their supposed international human-rights obligations. Critics have long noted that the UN rejects the traditional US and Christian understanding of God-given rights, instead promoting a Soviet-style view of revokable “rights” to government “services.”  

The ruling has especially significant implications for Western nations. Wealthy nations, the ICJ suggested, bear heightened responsibilities for dealing with climate change. That should include taxpayer-funded financial support and potential liability for what it described as “transboundary harm.”

The opinion’s “advisory” nature is a fig leaf. While the ICJ lacks its own army, its rulings carry “moral authority” and are routinely weaponised in domestic courts, international negotiations and activist litigation, as multiple UN officials pointed out before and after it was handed down.

The UNGA resolution amplifies this by welcoming the opinion and going even further, calling on states to “take all possible steps” to avoid climate harm, and keeping it on the agenda for future action. It also reinforces purported obligations under the Paris Agreement and paves the way for lawsuits, reparations claims and pressure on holdouts such as the Trump administration.

Critics Ridicule It All as Narrative Implodes

Ironically, the General Assembly decision came amid more and more bad news for proponents of the increasingly embattled man-made global-warming hypothesis. Polling shows most Americans reject the whole narrative, and even Democrats and the establishment media admit that talking about climate is a non-starter with US voters.

A stunning new poll released just days after the UN vote showed most Americans reject the UN’s climate hypothesis altogether. According to the survey by Pew Research, only 48 per cent of Americans even believe human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing climate change. About 22 per cent believe the warming is natural, 17 per cent are not sure what is causing it and 12 per cent do not even believe the planet is warming at all.

Among Republicans, just one in five believe human activities are causing global warming, Pew revealed. Almost 40 per cent believe the warming is natural, and one in four do not even believe the globe is heating up. About three out of four Democrats, by contrast, believe human emissions of CO₂ are to blame for observed warming.

This partisan divide underscores a deeper truth, analysts said. The “climate crisis” narrative is less about science and more about ideology, power and control. Republicans and sceptics, informed by decades of failed doomsday predictions – from the 1970s global-cooling scare to Al Gore’s ice-free Arctic prophecies – recognise the narrative for what it is. Democrats and globalists cling to it as a vehicle for wealth redistribution, central planning and eroding national borders in favour of supranational governance.

But even Democrats and leftists are recognising the political danger of peddling the alarmism. Indeed, The New York Times, among the most alarmist “news” outfits in America, recently ran an op-ed headlined ‘Democrats Don’t Have to Campaign on Climate Change Anymore’.

The piece, written by Syracuse University Environment Professor Matthew Huber, urged Democrats to stop talking about climate change if they want to win elections. While he encouraged them to keep pursuing climate policies, he said they must focus on regaining credibility with the working class to win elections – and the working class is apparently not buying the UN’s climate narrative.

Just weeks before the General Assembly vote, even the hyper-alarmist UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”) was forced to concede that its most alarmist scenarios were not grounded in reality. The outfit, long criticised for politicising science, revised its modelling that had suggested temperature increases of 4 to 5 degrees Celsius by the end of the century. Those scenarios are now gone.

President Trump responded to the news on Truth Social with his characteristic style. “GOOD RIDDANCE! After 15 years of Dumocrats promising that ‘Climate Change’ is going to destroy the Planet, the United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!” he said.

Trump and Experts Pushing Back

The Trump administration has been a wrecking ball to the climate movement. Indeed, it has withdrawn from numerous UN climate agreements, including the 1992 treaty, the aforementioned UNFCCC, which underpins the whole UN climate regime. Speaking to the UN, the president himself ridiculed the climate narrative as the greatest “con job” in human history.

The administration is also ending the domestic assault on CO₂, including many of the regulations on energy production. Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency is even reversing the Obama-era “endangerment finding” claiming that CO₂ – the gas exhaled by all living creatures – is “pollution” that must be regulated.

Legal experts and sceptics immediately pushed back on the UN’s climate ruling, too. Astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon, a leading voice debunking climate alarmism, called the decision “a joke at a cosmic proportion.”

The court, he told The New American, demonstrates “zero understanding of climate science” while threatening America First policies under President Trump. “Since when has ICJ or the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change proved that rising gas of life can cause all the computer model-produced imaginary disasters?” asked Soon, who has published multiple peer-reviewed studies debunking the narrative on CO₂.

Climate Depot publisher Marc Morano, often dubbed the top enemy of “climate action,” was equally blunt. “Facing the insurmountable collapse of their global climate agenda … the UN ‘high court’ has ruled nations are compelled … to comply or pay ‘reparations’ and fund ‘climate justice’ programmes,” he told TNA. “Thank God for Donald Trump leading the global collapse of the UN climate bullcrap!”

Roots in Globalist Ideology

This push for a global “climate regime” to dictate policy to nations goes back decades. The UN’s climate apparatus – rooted in the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and subsequent frameworks – has always been about more than temperature. It is a vehicle for socialist dreams of world government, wealth transfers from developed to developing nations and control over energy, the lifeblood of modern economies.

By demonising human emissions of CO₂ as pollution, the UN and governments are able to regulate the “gas of life” (essential for plant photosynthesis) and literally all human activity. Of course, CO₂ comprises a tiny fraction of the atmosphere, with human contributions even smaller. Indeed, human emissions of CO₂ make up a fraction of one per cent of all the “greenhouse” gases in the atmosphere.

The ICJ case itself originated from a UNGA request, with broad participation from nearly 100 governments and various organisations. Joe Biden’s administration, true to form, urged a strong ruling, framing climate change as a “gravest challenge” requiring global coordination.

Now, with Trump back in office dismantling these schemes domestically and eyeing exits from international entanglements, the globalists are doubling down through global judicial and assembly manoeuvres.

Critics rightly point out the selective outrage. Communist China, the world’s top emitter by far, faces little real pressure as it continues building coal-fired power plants. Governments and tyrants ruling “developing nations” are still demanding trillions in “loss and damage” funding while building coal plants, too.

Meanwhile, Western nations are pressured to deindustrialise, accepting energy poverty in the name of climate virtue as jobs and production are shipped to China and other nations ruled by hostile tyrants. Clearly, this is not about “science,” experts say. Instead, it has all the characteristics of a scam.

Implications for Sovereignty and Economy

Despite being based on largely discredited pseudoscience and models producing endless debunked predictions, the ICJ ruling and the subsequent UNGA resolution threaten profound consequences.

Among other measures, they could justify lawsuits against US companies, increase pressure for phasing out reliable energy in the West and even justify demands for “climate reparations” from Third World dictatorships.

Self-government and individual liberty are also under threat. Without serious action from US authorities, domestic courts may cite the ruling and the UNGA resolution, eroding the US Constitution’s supremacy. The same will happen across what was once known as “Christendom” and the “Free World.”

Trump’s agenda of pursuing American energy dominance, withdrawing from UN climate schemes, and slashing regulations directly counters this – for now. But, obviously, Trump will not be in office forever. Few of his climate policies have been enshrined in law. As such, a future president can and almost certainly will embrace the UN agenda going forward, at least if Congress does not act now.

Globally, the ICJ ruling and the UNGA resolution bolster support for upcoming UN climate summits. They are also likely to fuel ever-more-draconian “Nationally Determined Contributions” under the Paris Agreement, framing them as binding obligations. Just last year, the UN climate summit adopted an agreement claiming humanity had already burned through four-fifths of its “carbon budget.”

Historical Parallels and the Path Forward

From the League of Nations to the United Nations, internationalist bodies have sought to subordinate nations and people to international law. Supposed man-made climate change serves as the perfect pretext: invisible, global, urgent, never-ending and requiring endless sacrifice from the productive West.

At least on this issue, President Trump appears to understand the stakes. What is left of the movement he built has clearly rejected the false choice between environmental stewardship and prosperity.

As even a brief overview of the evidence shows, true environmental protection flows from property rights, innovation and human ingenuity – not top-down edicts from The Hague or the UN headquarters in New York City.

Trump’s actions are not enough to stop this global agenda. Americans must demand that Congress reject any implementation of the ICJ ruling or the UNGA’s resolution. The US government should reaffirm non-recognition of ICJ jurisdiction, defund related UN programmes, expose the faulty science behind the scheme and ultimately abandon the UN entirely. States can and should lead the way by prioritising affordable energy and rejecting the abuse.

The UNGA vote and ICJ opinion are symptoms of a much deeper problem: the erosion of national sovereignty in favour of unaccountable global governance. This latest salvo should serve as a powerful reminder of why vigilance against the climate-industrial complex and the forces of globalism remains essential. The gas of life is not the enemy; centralised power pretending to save the planet at the expense of liberty is.

It is true that the climate movement is under tremendous pressure. But the battle is far from over, as the ICJ and UNGA made clear with their latest moves. With public scepticism rising and a resolute president in office, the globalists’ “legal” manoeuvres may ultimately backfire, accelerating the very collapse of their narrative. But that will take work. Sovereignty, science and sanity can still prevail – if Americans insist on it and get busy.

Source: https://expose-news.com/2026/07/23/un-declares-every-nation-has-a-legal-duty/

Fight the Censorship Join the Hopegirl Mailing List and get my free AudioBook: The QEG Chronicles Free Energy Full Disclosure: https://bit.ly/HGQEGBook

HopeGirl Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@hopegirlblog
HopeGirl Telegram Channel Chat and Groups: https://t.me/Hopegirl587 
Get Our Free EMF Survival Guide : https://bit.ly/FTWEMF
10 Percent Off our EMF Protection Products with this Link: https://www.ftwproject.com/ref/tenoff

The post UN declares every nation has a legal duty to obey its climate decrees – or face the consequences appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

The UN’s latest attack on economic growth comes wrapped in moral language. Its global initiatives are marketed as justice through economic restraint, while its advocates promise less poverty, greater equality and a safer climate.

In reality, their policies would deliver less production, less investment and fewer opportunities. That is managed decline, not prosperity. It will make all societies poorer, Vance Ginn warns.

The Poverty of the UN’s Degrowth Agenda

By Vance Ginn, as published by The Daily Economy on 26 June 2026

The latest attack on economic growth comes wrapped in moral language. Its advocates promise less poverty, greater equality and a safer climate. Their policies would deliver less production, less investment and fewer opportunities. That is managed decline, not prosperity.

The UN-backed ‘Roadmap for Eradicating Poverty Beyond Growth’ proposes 80 policies meant to reduce society’s dependence on growth. A separate ‘Global Justice Report’, led by Thomas Piketty and researchers at the World Inequality Lab, puts numbers behind this vision.

The reports differ, but they share the same central mistake. They treat growth as an obstacle to justice rather than the force that has lifted billions of people.

What Degrowth Would Mean

The Piketty-led model would push rich countries toward output of roughly €60,000 per person, or about $69,000, by 2100. It would hold annual per-person growth in wealthy regions near zero. That figure requires context.

US GDP per capita was about $89,962 in 2025. The proposed level is about $21,000 lower, or roughly 23 per cent below current American output per person. GDP per capita is not the same as a worker’s salary. It measures the total value produced in the economy divided by the population. For another comparison, personal income per capita was running near $77,800 in early 2026.

Not content to slow some distant, future excess, the plan envisions an America that produces less than we do today. The model would also cut annual work hours by more than half, shifting labour away from construction and manufacturing. As Veronique de Rugy notes, “a comprehensive programme for global managed decline … making everyone poorer” isn’t just a likely forecast – it’s the plan’s whole design.

But building fewer homes will not solve a housing shortage. Making fewer goods will not make necessities more affordable. Restricting work will not help families trying to move ahead.

Growth Is Human Progress

Economic growth is not just a line on a government chart. It is the process through which people create more value from limited resources. That process gives us better medicine. It makes food easier to afford. It allows workers to earn more while spending fewer hours producing the same goods.

Productivity is the engine of rising living standards. When a worker produces more value per hour, wages and leisure can rise together. Degrowth reverses this process, reducing production and hoping people will enjoy the loss. 

Emile Phaneuf and Christopher Lingle put the stakes plainly in ‘Degrowth Kills People—Yes, Literally’. Wealthier societies are healthier, safer and better able to survive crises. Scarcity carries a human cost.

The Poverty Record Is Clear

The strongest argument against degrowth is what growth has already accomplished. Around 60 per cent of the world lived in extreme poverty in 1950. By 1990, the share was about 40 per cent. The World Bank now estimates that it fell to 10.4 per cent in 2024 and could fall to 10 per cent in 2026.

The number of people in extreme poverty also fell sharply, even as the world’s population grew. Under the World Bank’s updated $3-per-day standard, about 847 million people remained in extreme poverty in 2024. That is still far too many. But the direction matters.

Since 1990, roughly 1.5 billion people have escaped extreme poverty. Much of that progress occurred in Asia as countries expanded trade, welcomed investment and allowed more private enterprise. They did not become wealthier by closing factories.

The World Bank also finds that poverty reduction accelerated after 1990. The average decline doubled from about half a percentage point per year before 1990 to roughly one point annually afterwards. That is what economic liberalisation made possible.

Poverty Is Not Inequality

Degrowth advocates often move between poverty and inequality as though they mean the same thing. They do not.

A poor family does not gain because a wealthy family loses money. A worker is not better off because a factory closes and makes an inequality chart look more balanced. Making fewer goods will not make necessities more affordable. Equality achieved by destroying wealth is shared deprivation.

As I have argued at American Institute for Economic Research (“AIER”), the better question is why government policy blocks people from earning, investing and moving upward. The goal should be to expand opportunity, not punish success. Growth does not guarantee that every outcome is equal. It does create more room for people to improve their lives. Stagnation makes mobility harder.

The Plan Undermines Itself

The Piketty proposal depends on a global fund financed by taxes on income and wealth. Yet it would weaken the economies expected to finance that fund. It also assumes poorer countries can keep growing while rich countries consume and invest less. That does not add up.

Developing countries need capital. They also need customers. If the United States and Europe stagnate, both will become scarcer. A development plan cannot succeed by weakening the world’s largest sources of investment and demand.

Degrowth also creates a political problem. Someone must decide how much people may work. Someone must choose which industries shrink and which goods are no longer produced. Those decisions will not remain inside an academic model.

Markets coordinate millions of choices through prices and voluntary exchange. No global commission has enough knowledge to replace that process. Managed scarcity eventually requires managed lives.

Prosperity Is the Better Path

Rejecting degrowth does not mean ignoring pollution or other real harms. Property rights matter. So does accountability. Innovation can reduce environmental damage without forcing society backwards.

As Joakim Book explained in his review of ‘The Capitalist Manifesto’, prosperous societies have more resources to adapt and invest in cleaner technology. Poor societies must focus on survival. The world’s poorest people do not need comfortable academics deciding they have reached “enough.” They need the freedom to work, save, invest and build.

Degrowth is a luxury belief because its advocates already enjoy the abundance they would restrict. Poverty cannot be overcome by rationing scarcity. It is overcome by economic freedom that lets people create abundance.

Source: https://theexposenews.com/2026/07/01/the-un-wants-to-impose-degrowth/

Fight the Censorship Join the Hopegirl Mailing List and get my free AudioBook: The QEG Chronicles Free Energy Full Disclosure: https://bit.ly/HGQEGBook

HopeGirl Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@hopegirlblog
HopeGirl Telegram Channel Chat and Groups: https://t.me/Hopegirl587 
Get Our Free EMF Survival Guide : https://bit.ly/FTWEMF
10 Percent Off our EMF Protection Products with this Link: https://www.ftwproject.com/ref/tenoff

The post The UN wants to impose degrowth on the world; it will make everyone poorer by design appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

The UN’s FAO just warned of a major global food crisis triggered by the Strait of Hormuz conflict. In this video I decode their official policy recommendations and show what they actually mean for farmers and food production.

From digital registries and surveillance to debt traps and corporate control, this is the technocratic takeover of food production hidden behind “resilience” language.

The real solution lies in decentralized, self-reliant food growing … like Russia’s dacha gardens that fed a nation during collapse. Watch until the end for the better path forward.

Source: https://theexposenews.com/2026/06/01/previous-outbreaks-of-ebola-were-linked-to/

Fight the Censorship Join the Hopegirl Mailing List and get my free AudioBook: The QEG Chronicles Free Energy Full Disclosure: https://bit.ly/HGQEGBook

HopeGirl Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@hopegirlblog
HopeGirl Telegram Channel Chat and Groups: https://t.me/Hopegirl587 
Get Our Free EMF Survival Guide : https://bit.ly/FTWEMF
10 Percent Off our EMF Protection Products with this Link: https://www.ftwproject.com/ref/tenoff

The post UN FAO Warns of Food Crisis, Announces Technocratic Takeover of Food Production appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

The UN is currently finalising changes to “children’s rights” to give them access to abortions without parental consent.

This is not the first attack on children, families and all of our futures using “children’s rights” as the excuse.  In 2023, the UN issued “guidance” which explicitly links “children’s rights” to the UN’s nefarious climate change agenda.

Climate Change and Children’s Rights

In 2023, the UN issued new guidance to member states from the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. The Committee produces “General Comments” to explain the rights contained in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (“CRC”) and its Optional Protocols and provide guidance with respect to particular issues.  General Comments are key standards that help States improve both the way they write their reports and the way they implement the treaties.

General Comment No. 26 provides a comprehensive interpretation of UN member States’ obligations under the CRC and affirms for the first time that children have a fundamental right to live in a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. It explicitly links this right to the “climate crisis,” biodiversity loss and pollution, emphasising that States must not only protect children from immediate environmental harm but also prevent foreseeable future violations due to current actions or inaction.

The Committee stresses that States are accountable for environmental harm occurring both within their borders and beyond and urges urgent action, including phasing out fossil fuels, transitioning to renewable energy, improving air and water quality, and protecting biodiversity. It also mandates that children’s views be meaningfully considered in environmental decision-making and highlights the importance of environmental education.

It is claimed that the development of General Comment No. 26 involved extensive global consultation, including with children, civil society and national human rights institutions, and reflects the growing recognition that the climate crisis is a child rights crisis.

We must remember that children are being brainwashed in schools and through entertainment and other media to, among others, blindly follow the UN’s false narrative about a climate change crisis.  Children are not expressing their own minds but, rather, innocently repeating what they have been indoctrinated to say.  It is no wonder then that the UN is encouraging a small number of UN-indoctrinated children to “have their say” and to participate in decision-making that affects the world, now and in the future; the UN’s propaganda is not influencing parents so they are bypassing the adults and targeting innocent children to be their pawns.

Read more: New UN guidance affirms children’s right to a clean, healthy environment, United Nations, 28 August 2023

“Justice” and Children’s Rights

The UN has not limited its egregious “guidance” under the guise of “children’s rights” to a manufactured climate change crisis.  A second general comment, No. 27, is currently being finalised.  According to Childs Rights Connect’s estimated timeline, the guidance will be “launched” in May 2026.  This “guidance” emphasises children’s access to “justice,” including the need for access to abortion services.

Argentina has strongly criticised the draft, arguing it exceeds the Committee’s mandate, violates national sovereignty and parental rights, and confuses procedural access to justice with the broader fulfilment of rights.

The Ordo Iuris Institute raised concerns that the use of “gender” instead of “sex” could lead to irreversible medical interventions for minors without parental consent, citing cases like a Canadian father imprisoned for opposing his daughter’s gender transition.  They argued that such cases do “not provide access to the justice of the child, but rather an irreversible damage on a subject not yet mature.”

The Committee has a long-standing history of advocating for abortion access, beginning in the late 1990s, including urging decriminalisation and opposing parental notification laws.

Read more: UN Child Rights Committee Promotes Abortion, Undermines Parental Rights in New General Comment, C-Fam, 1 August 2024 (?)

Campaign group CitizenGo is bringing the UN’s nefarious changes to children’s rights in the name of “justice” to the public’s attention.  The following is the wording for their petition to UN Ambassador Martin Fraser and UN Ambassador Laurence Simms.  There is a link at the end where you can sign the petition if you choose to do so.  You can find a link to download a copy of the draft General Comment No. 27 HERE.

Don’t Let the UN Redefine Children’s Rights!

By CitizenGo, 8 January 2026

A quiet UN committee is about to change the meaning of “children’s rights.”

Right now, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is finalising a new interpretation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child – without a vote, without public debate and without asking parents.

If adopted, this text won’t stay on paper. It will become a new “global standard” and be cited in courtrooms, enforced in schools and hospitals, and used to pressure parents who refuse to comply.

And what it pushes is extreme – and dangerous.

The draft treats abortion for minors as a child’s right that must be provided quickly, and removes parents from the decision entirely.

It also pushes gender ideology, demanding that states reshape laws and institutions to affirm a child’s declared “gender identity,” sidelining parents who say no.

They call this “access” and “protection.” In reality, it means parents are pushed out of decisions that will have lifelong consequences for their children.

Once something is labelled a “child’s right” at the UN, parents are no longer decision-makers.

Institutions step in. Courts intervene. And parents are treated as obstacles to overcome rather than the primary caregivers who understand their child’s needs best.

This was never agreed: not by voters, not by parliaments and not by parents.

No country signed a treaty giving children the right to abortion. No country agreed that gender transition should override parental responsibility.

Yet if governments stay silent (as they often do), this text will be adopted quietly and then used for years to pressure families around the world.

This is how radical ideas become normal. Quietly. Technically. Permanently.

We are calling on the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and Ambassador Martin Fraser and Ambassador Laurence Simms, Ireland’s Ambassadors to the UN in New York and Geneva, to stop this rewrite before it is locked in.

Parents must not be pushed aside. Children need protection, not ideology.

Source:  https://theexposenews.com/2026/01/14/un-uses-childrens-rights-to-bypass-parents/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

The post UN uses “children’s rights” to bypass parents and target children appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

In September 2025, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (“UNESCO”) released a report titled ‘Homeschooling through a Human Rights Lens’, which sparked significant debate regarding parental rights and educational freedom.

Alex Newman joined The New American’s podcast last year to discuss this report and what it means for parental rights and educational freedom.

In December 2024, the UK’s Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, first announced in the King’s Speech during the 2023 State Opening of Parliament, was introduced into the Uk Parliament by the Department for Education. It has passed three readings in the House of Commons and two readings in the House of Lords.  It is now at the report stage before having its third and final reading in the House of Lords.

Child rights advocates have raised several key concerns about the Bill, primarily centred on human rights, privacy and the erosion of parental autonomy.  They argue the Bill is a violation of parental and family rights, and an overreach and surveillance via the Unique Identifier.

Further reading:

• Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. What it is, and its implications for parents, The Home Ed Daily, 8 January 2025
• Locking up children under the Children Act 1989 – some thoughts on Clause 10 of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, the Barrister Group, 21 January 2025
• The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill: An Attack on Home Education and Parental Rights, The People’s Republic of South Devon, 4 February 2025
• Why the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Is Unnecessary – and Dangerous for Families of SEN Children, Education Otherwise, 9 July 2025
• Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – Updates, BASW

It can’t be coincidence that the UK government, despite the consequences, is suddenly taking an interest in controlling the information children are taught or exposed to; considering UNESCO’s homeschooling report, it can only be seen as part of a global agenda being dictated by a supranational non-governmental organisation (“NGO”) which is controlled by oligarchs – the United Nations.

UNESCO’s report emphasises a rights-based approach, asserting that governments, not parents, are the primary duty-bearers in ensuring children’s access to quality education.

It advocates for curricula aligned with UN-mandated values, including global citizenship, respect for diversity and comprehensive sexuality education, while discouraging traditional gender roles and religious “dogmatic approaches” that may promote intolerance.

These UN demands represent an overreach, undermining parental autonomy and constitutional protections.

Related: Home Education: An AI-powered tool for legal advice when the local council comes knocking

UN Targets Homeschoolers Through “Human Rights” Scheme

By Liberty Sentinel, 12 November 2025

The United Nations is once again attacking homeschoolers in an attempt to control the education of youth to embrace collectivism, climate hysteria, social-emotional learning, and globalism, explains Alex Newman for The New American’s ‘Behind The Deep State’.

A new UNESCO report, prepared under the supervision of a literal North Korean totalitarian, explains that homeschooling, if not done by the UN’s standards, can violate a student’s “human rights.” Therefore, all forms of education must be viewed through a “rights-based” lens.

This invasion of parental rights and educational freedom must be taken seriously, Newman said. The UN’s efforts to control the education of our children must be resisted once and for all.

You can find a summary and the transcript for the video above HERE.

Further reading:

• UN Targets Homeschooling, Alex Newman, 7 October 2025
• UNESCO’s Homeschooling Agenda and What It Means for American Families, New American, 16 October 2025
• What UNESCO Gets Wrong About Homeschooling, HSLDA, 12 November 2025

Source: https://expose-news.com/2026/01/10/un-is-targeting-homeschooling/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

The post UN is targeting homeschooling through national governments appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

On 8 August, the United Nations announced that 60 organisations have signed up to the ‘United Nations Open Source Principles’.  The principles include supporting the development of solutions that meet the evolving needs of the UN system.

The agreement raises concerns about embedding discrimination into systems and the influence of the UN on open-source organisations, with some principles being code words for racist and discriminatory practices.

What is Open Source?

Open source refers to software whose source code is made freely available for anyone to view, use, modify, and distribute.  Although the term originated in the context of software development,  “open source” designates a broader set of values that is referred to as “the open-source way.”

Open-source intelligence (“OSINT”), for example, refers to collecting, analysing and disseminating information from publicly available sources. OSINT is used across various sectors – including national security, law enforcement, cybersecurity, business intelligence, market research, investigative journalism and academic research – to gather actionable insights for decision-making.  It essentially means that an investigative journalist, for example, shares details of sources and, where possible, hyperlinks to sources and resources.

Open Source Orgs Pledge Fealty to United Nations

By Bryan Lunduke, 6 August 2025

“Who controls Open Source?” is a fascinating topic.

Some of the largest “Open Source” foundations are primarily funded by corporations which, by most estimations, have not historically been fans of “Open Source” or “Free Software.”

Case in point, The Linux Foundation – which brings in roughly a third of a billion US dollars per year – is heavily funded by corporate sponsors such as Microsoft, Hitachi, Meta and Tencent. All of which derive most of their revenue from proprietary systems. Likewise, Mozilla (bringing in over US$600 million annually) is almost entirely funded by Google.

As the saying goes, “He who controls the purse strings, controls how the money is spent.”

And, of course, we must consider the political control (and influence) over Open Source. Many large Open Source Foundations and organisations have deep, often financial, ties to political activist organisations – both Mozilla and Wikimedia being some of the more well-known examples.

Well.  Buckle up, Buttercup. Because all of this is about to get a whole lot worse.

Enter the United Nations

Back in March, the United Nations announced that 16 organisations had signed up to the ‘United Nations Open Source Principles’, in addition to the founding signatory Open Source Initiative (“OSI”). [Note from The Exposé: On 8 August, the UN Office of Information and Communications Technology announced that a further 22 organisations had endorsed the UN Open Source Principles, bringing the total to 60.]

The UN Open Source Principles are a set of 8 core principles which Open Source organisations are vowing to adhere to. Five of those 8 principles are fairly obvious and, considering the topic, not at all surprising – expected things like “Make Open Source the standard approach” and “Encourage active participation in Open Source.” Oh, and “Make security a priority.”

Ok. Sure. Fine.  I can understand why an Open Source organisation might choose to pledge to follow such ideals. In theory, they were possibly doing those things anyway.  But three of the “UN Open Source Principles” raise significant red flags.

The Red Flag UN Open Source Principles

Let’s go over those three, red-flag-raising items. Which every signatory has agreed to.

1. “4. Foster inclusive participation and community building: Enabling and facilitating diverse and inclusive contributions.”

Inclusive. Diverse.

Over the last several years, these have become code words for “discriminate against people we don’t like.” We’ve seen this time and time again, with companies like Red Hat and IBM building entire corporate policies around what skin colour they want in their employees.  All hidden behind words like “inclusive” and “diverse.”  And the United Nations wants open-source organisations to commit to that form of systemic discrimination.  Already, this is not great. But it gets far, far worse.

2. “7. RISE (recognise, incentivise, support and empower): Empowering individuals and communities to actively participate.”

If you don’t know what RISE is, that sentence reads like a bunch of corporate buzzword mumbo jumbo. But it has a very real, very sinister meaning.

What is “RISE”, you ask? It is a codified framework for encouraging exactly the type of discrimination we just talked about – it has become an increasingly widely used tactic among DEI advocates.

RISE is an acronym for:

• Recognise the contributions of “underrepresented or marginalised” groups. Highlight the achievements of “diverse” employees over “non-diverse” employees.
• Incentivise “underrepresented” groups (with internships, promotions, scholarships, bonuses, etc.) to encourage “diversity” (read: discrimination).
• Support “underrepresented or marginalised” groups with tailored resources to ensure “equitable” outcomes (read: no meritocracy).
• Empower “diverse” individuals with leadership roles to promote DEI.

Sometimes discussion around RISE specifically includes language regarding DEI and “diversity.” Other times that exact language is left out – but the core goals and motives remain consistently DEI focused.  It is, in essence, a corporate-speak checklist for encouraging discrimination.

Which brings us to the last UN Open Source Principle. The one which, quite possibly, raises the largest red flag of all.

3. “8. Sustain and scale: Supporting the development of solutions that meet the evolving needs of the UN system and beyond.”

Did you catch that?

Open Source organisations, which sign on to this compact, are pledging to “support the development of solutions that meet the needs of the United Nations.”  Or, put another way, endorsing organisations are pledging to do the bidding of the UN. Whatever that might be.  The UN is asking these open-source organisations to pledge fealty to them.

The Open Source Organisations Pledging Fealty

Which Open Source organisations are we talking about? Quite a few of the big names – names which will be very familiar to Lunduke Journal readers – including:

• The Linux Foundation
• The GNOME Foundation
• Eclipse Foundation
• The Document Foundation (LibreOffice)

And so many others. Heck, even Nextcloud and Matrix have signed on.

[The Exposé has added the list below of the additional 22 organisations announced on 8 August.]

Many of these organisations (and others) recently met, in person, at the United Nations in New York to discuss, among other things, this formal agreement; this … compact.

The UN Global Digital Compact

In June of this year, the United Nations hosted the ‘UN Open Source Week’ and invited a who’s who of organisations which control Open Source in one form or another (along with a number of smaller organisations which are politically aligned with the UN).

This gathering was officially named ‘An Open Community for the Global Digital Compact’.

[Related: UN Pact for the Future on The Exposé and UN Pact for the Future: Who are the likely contenders to be appointed as the UN’s “special envoy for future generations”?]

Who did the United Nations make a point of inviting to speak to those in attendance?  Let’s go down the list.

The Gates Foundation and Mozilla, of course.

Amazon and, I kid you not, the World Bank.

GitLab and Wikimedia Foundation.

I found the inclusion of Mastodon a fascinating one. While Mastodon is small (in most ways, even considering the size of their social media network), they align strongly with the political goals and views of the United Nations (promote leftist extremism, censor political opponents).

And, of course, GitHub (aka Microsoft).

In addition, representatives from most of the signatories of the United Nations Open Source Principles agreement were in attendance (including the GNOME Foundation).

Some of the presentations were about things like “ethical” software, interoperability with United Nations systems, “public infrastructure,” digital “cooperation” of governments, and (of course) “inclusion.”

Many presentations, by many organisations, which already raise significant concerns.

But – and this is important – what did they talk about behind closed doors? What was discussed out of the public eye at the (many) meetings and events where attendees were wined and dined?  That remains unknown.  The Lunduke Journal has asked. The UN isn’t talking. Neither are the attendees.

The Three Masters of Open Source

But we now know, with a high level of certainty, that many of the significant Open Source organisations and foundations now serve three masters:

1. The corporations
2. The political activists
3. The United Nations

I don’t know about you, but I sure wouldn’t want to have those three masters.

As always, The Lunduke Journal encourages representatives and leadership from any organisation involved with this story to reach out – for any reason. Corrections, clarifications, or additional information. Considering the professed commitment to “openness” of every organisation mentioned in this story, there should be no reason to continue refusing to speak to journalists regarding it.

Likewise, if you would like to become a whistleblower, there are multiple ways to get hold of The Lunduke Journal.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. And this story needs a heck of a lot of sunlight.

Source:  https://expose-news.com/2025/08/19/organisations-sign-up-to-support-the-needs-of-the-un/

Bitchute: https://www.bi,tchut,e.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post 60 open source organisations sign up to support the needs of the United Nations appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Dr. Rima Laibow returns to the program to expose the shocking scale of globalist health agendas now openly unfolding. We discuss the disturbing proposal to add an outrageous 500 vaccines to the official schedule, a move that raises serious questions about informed consent, corporate influence, and medical overreach. Dr. Laibow also breaks down the case for leaving the WHO and the United Nations, highlighting the long history of deception, manipulation, and top-down control that these institutions have imposed on sovereign nations.

We go deeper into the ongoing depopulation agenda, connecting the dots between policy, propaganda, and profit. This is a powerful and eye-opening conversation that challenges the official narratives and urges people to reclaim their health freedom before it’s too late.

Source:  https://rumble.com/v6tigvj-500-vaccine-schedule-who-and-un-deception-cyborg-depopulation-agenda-w-dr.-.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp

Bitchute: https://www.bi,tchut,e.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post 500 Vaccine Schedule, WHO & UN Deception, Cyborg Depopulation Agenda w/ Dr. Rima Laibow appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Donald J. Trump just told the United Nations and the globalist pricks behind the anti-American, anti-human UN Agenda 2030 to go screw themselves. America is OUT! And NO “sustainable development goals” to make the American people serfs either! The great culling of the GLOBALIST’s agenda is on! Dr. Lee Vliet and Todd Callender are back with the week in review.

Source:  https://rumble.com/v6sxiqt-trump-gtes-us-out-of-un-agenda-2030-and-much-more-callender-vliet.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp

Bitchute: https://www.bi,tchut,e.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post TRUMP ENDS UN AGENDA 2030 & MUCH MORE! – Callender | Vliet appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

President Donald Trump has just dealt a devastating blow to the globalist agenda by signing executive orders to pull American taxpayer funding from the “climate change” and “global health” schemes led by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations (UN).

Shortly after his inauguration on Monday, Trump went straight back to work, signing a flurry of executive orders to assert his America First agenda.

At the top of his priorities was cutting ties with unelected foreign entities that seek to strip the American people of their freedoms in order to advance the globalist agenda.

Trump started by dropping the hammer on the UN, pulling the United States’ funding to the organization’s “health” agency.

The executive order officially withdraws the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO).

Trump cited the WHO’s failure to hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for the Covid pandemic, despite American taxpayers paying far more toward the agency than China.

The president also blasted the WHO over its role in pushing radical globalist health agendas that undermine American sovereignty and freedom.

Trump described the order as “a big one” before explaining why he was signing it.

WATCH:

As Slay News has reported, the WHO has been demanding that all UN member states, including the U.S., sign the organization’s “Pandemic Treaty.”

The WHO’s proposed Pandemic Treaty and the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) would give the globalist organization sweeping new powers that override the laws of sovereign nations.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration confirmed that it is committed to surrendering America’s pandemic authority to the WHO in a “legally binding” accord.

In a March 2023 press release, the Biden admin publicly affirmed the U.S. federal government’s commitment to the agreement.

The accord will give the WHO ultimate control over U.S. pandemic policies such as lockdowns, censorship, masking, vaccine mandates, and public surveillance.

Once a health emergency is declared by the World Health Organization, every signatory, including the United States, would submit to the authority of the WHO.

This includes caving to the WHO on treatments, lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and government surveillance.

Under the treaty, the WHO would have the power to lock the public in their homes or censor the American people in violation of their First Amendment rights, overriding the Constitution.

Alarmingly, the WHO has been seeking powers to declare a “climate emergency” which would also give the foreign agency powers to lock Americans in their homes.

However, now that Trump has withdrawn the U.S. from the WHO, any such policies would no longer apply to the American people.

Meanwhile, Trump’s America First executive orders didn’t stop at defending the country from the UN and the WHO.

In addition, Trump also withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord.

The Paris Climate Accord asserts that all signatory nations, including the United States, must comply with the “Net Zero” agenda as dictated by Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum (WEF).

As Trump signed the executive order, the crowd cheered loudly when it was announced.

Withdrawing America from the agreement is expected to save American taxpayers $1 trillion.

WATCH:

“The United States Ambassador to the United Nations shall immediately submit formal written notification of the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,” the executive order read.

“The notice shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Depositary of the Agreement, attached as Appendix A,” it added.

“The United States will consider its withdrawal from the Agreement and any attendant obligations to be effective immediately upon this provision of notification.”

Shortly before signing the order, Trump described the treaty as the “Paris Climate Accord rip-off” during his post-inauguration speech at the Capitol One Arena.

“I’m immediately withdrawing from the unfair one-sided Paris Climate Accord ripoff,” Trump said.

WATCH:

President Trump: “I’m immediately withdrawing from the unfair one-sided Paris Climate Accord ripoff. The United States will not sabotage our own industries while China pollutes with impunity.” pic.twitter.com/paK1DEA2ST

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 20, 2025

Trump also signed a letter to the UN indicating his intention to withdraw from the 2015 Paris agreement.

The Paris Accord orders nations to provide targets to cut their own emissions of “greenhouse gases” from the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas.

In order to comply with the “Net Zero” goals of the agreement, nations must meet certain targets to align with the WEF’s “Agenda 2030” and “Agenda 205o.”

Those targets are supposed to become more stringent over time, with the key deadlines being 2030 and 2050.

Countries are expected to meet the target of zero emissions by 2050.

Nations are currently facing a February 2025 deadline for new individual plans.

Last month, former President Joe Biden’s administration offered a plan to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by more than 60% by 2035.

Trump’s order says the Paris Accord is among several international agreements that don’t reflect U.S. values.

The president notes that the agenda of the WEF, UN, and other unelected globalists “steer American taxpayer dollars to countries that do not require, or merit, financial assistance in the interests of the American people.”

Source:  https://slaynews.com/news/globalists-doomed-trump-cuts-us-funding-wef-un-agenda/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchut,e.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Globalists Doomed as Trump Cuts U.S Funding to WEF & UN Agenda appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.