Actor <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/topic/brad-pitt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Brad Pitt</a> convinced an environmental non-profit — <a href="https://www.tmz.com/2022/08/18/brad-pitt-reacts-foundation-settlement-katrina-homes-new-orleans/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Global Green</a> — to cough up over $20 million to help settle a lawsuit that didn&#8217;t even name the organization.
The lawsuit, which was filed against Pitt and his Make it Right foundation, alleged that homes built by the foundation in post-Hurricane Katrina New Orleans had been poorly built and needed major repairs and renovations in order to be livable.
Pitt initially started Make it Right in 2007, but had not been directly involved with day-to-day operations for some time — however, when he got wind of the issues that had arisen, he went back to a more active role and promised to find a workable solution. He even <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/brad-pitt-reportedly-drops-millions-to-fix-hurricane-katrina-broken-down-homes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dropped millions</a> from his personal coffers to help invest in repairs.
The <a href="https://www.tmz.com/2018/09/07/brad-pitt-foundation-sued-new-orleans-residents-hurricane-katrina/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2018 lawsuit</a> named both Pitt and the Make it Right, and accused them of fraud, unfair trade practices, and breach of contract — alleging that there were structural problems and mold in a number of the 100 futuristic looking homes the foundation had built in New Orleans&#8217; Ninth Ward. The suit also claimed that Make it Right was aware that some repairs were necessary but failed to inform the homeowners or to take steps to make those repairs.
But that suit may be all but over now that Pitt says Global Green has agreed to pony up the cash.
&#8220;I am incredibly grateful for Global Green’s willingness to step up and provide this important support for the Lower Ninth families,&#8221; Pitt told TMZ. &#8220;We collaborated in the early days post-Katrina and we are very fortunate to have Global Green&#8217;s generous continuing commitment to help address the challenges around these homes and others in need.&#8221;
The <a href="https://pagesix.com/2022/08/18/brad-pitt-reaches-settlement-with-katrina-victims-over-faulty-homes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">settlement agreement</a> allows affected homeowners to receive up to $25,000 — but it must still be approved by a judge.
Pitt has also been in the news recently after a <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/fbi-reportedly-came-close-to-arresting-brad-pitt-and-jane-doe-sued-the-bureau-to-find-out-why-they-didnt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report revealed</a> just how close the FBI came to arresting the &#8220;Bullet Train&#8221; actor after the 2016 altercation on a private jet led to his very messy public split from ex-wife and actress Angelina Jolie.
According to the report, Family Services declared allegations of abuse to be unfounded, the FBI announced that the Bureau would not prosecute Pitt — despite the fact that the agent investigating the Sept. 2016 incident had reportedly already prepared a statement of probable cause.
A woman identified only as &#8220;Jane Doe&#8221; — but believed to be Jolie — then filed a lawsuit against the FBI, demanding information regarding why that statement had not led to an arrest.

Los Angeles Premiere Of Columbia Pictures’ “Bullet Train” – Arrivals

Brad Pitt Got Non-Profit To Cough Up $20 Million — To Settle A Lawsuit That Didn’t Even Name Them

Brad Pitt Got Non-Profit To Cough Up $20 Million — To Settle A Lawsuit That Didn't Even Name Them

Brad Pitt

Environmentalists

Lawsuit

New Orleans

Democratic Governor of California Gavin Newsom <a href="https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2022-04-29/california-promised-to-close-its-last-nuclear-plant-now-newsom-is-reconsidering">told</a> the Los Angeles Times last week that he is taking action to hold off on closing down the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, which was set to be shut down over the next few years. 
The governor told the outlet that California would be looking to try to receive federal funds directed at helping save nuclear reactors facing shutdowns; funding announced by the Biden administration in April. There is a question, however, as to whether or not Diablo would qualify for the money. 
“The requirement is by May 19 to submit an application, or you miss the opportunity to draw down any federal funds if you want to extend the life of that plant,” Newsom said. “We would be remiss not to put that on the table as an option.”
Newsom noted that state authorities could determine later on whether or not they want to go forward with that as a possibility. A spokesperson for Newsom told the Times that the governor still wants to witness the plant shut down in the long run. 
The owner of the plant is Pacific Gas &amp; Electric (PG&amp;E), which is planning to close it down by 2025. The nuclear plant reportedly created 6% of California’s power last year. In 2016, PG&amp;E reached an agreement with environment organizations and its union workers to stop its nuclear work after its licenses for nuclear reactors <a href="https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/environment/article261004182.html">end in 2024 and 2025</a>. 
Suzanne Hosn, PG&amp;E spokesperson, told The Daily Wire in an email, “PG&amp;E is committed to California’s clean energy future. The people of PG&amp;E are proud of the role that Diablo Canyon Power Plant plays in our state.”
“We are always open to considering all options to ensure continued safe, reliable, and clean energy delivery to our customers,” Hosn added.
Nuclear power is often pointed to as a climate-friendly solution to energy, although it has gotten pushback from some activists.
PG&amp;E <a href="https://www.pge.com/en_US/safety/how-the-system-works/diablo-canyon-power-plant/about-the-diablo-canyon-power-plant.page">explained</a> that the Diablo Canyon plant “has continued to safely produce clean and reliable energy without greenhouse gases,” keeping away six to seven million tons per year of greenhouse gases that would be discharged by “conventional generation resources.”
The two reactors at the plant create a total of 18,000 gigawatt-hours of electricity each year, which the group notes is an amount sufficient to accommodate almost “10% of California&#8217;s energy portfolio and 20% of the power that PG&amp;E provides throughout its service area.”
Electricity has been an issue in California for the past several years, and the decision to end the use of the nuclear power plant could make the problem worse. In August of 2020, hundreds of thousands of Californians <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/02/why-is-california-closing-diablo-canyon-nuclear-plant.html">went through rolling energy blackouts</a> as a heat wave struck at the state’s power grid. That same year, nuclear energy made up <a href="https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation">more than 9%</a> of the state’s total power mix. Newsom told the Times that he has been considering keeping the plant open for longer since the August 2020 blackouts.
Still, some groups are not happy about the possibility that the plant will stay open. 
In response to the governor’s interview with the Times last week, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace <a href="https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/environment/article261004182.html">released</a> a statement wondering “whether the governor has the power to make any decisions about how long Diablo Canyon should operate,” and pointing to multiple problems with trying to keep the plant open at this stage in the shutting-down operations. 
The group <a href="https://mothersforpeace.org/contact-us/">describes</a> itself as a non-profit “concerned with the local dangers involving the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant and with the dangers of nuclear power, weapons, and waste on national and global levels.” It also said it “concerns itself with issues of peace, social justice, and a safe environment.”
Mothers for Peace said that if PG&amp;E wants to keep going past the 2025 shutdown date, “it would have to face a variety of complicated issues.”
“Logic and the safety of our community requires Diablo Canyon to close as planned in 2024 and 2025,” the group concluded. “Millions of dollars of taxpayer and rate payer money have already been spent to support an orderly shutdown process.”
As the San Luis Obispo Tribune <a href="https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/environment/article261004182.html">reported</a>, the group also pointed out how the federal funds from the Biden administration’s Nuclear Credit Program mandates that the applicant be the nuclear plant’s owner, which would be PG&amp;E. 
Environmental groups in the past were reportedly worried about how the cooling system would impact sea life, and how close the facility was to multiple geologic faults, per <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/the-activists-who-embrace-nuclear-power">The New Yorker</a>. They took these concerns to the California State Lands Commission, which has to provide a lease to the in order for the nuclear plant to be able to function. 
Newsom, who chaired the commission at the time while he was lieutenant governor, reportedly said he would consider the problems, and at a meeting in December of 2015, he said, “I just don’t see that this plant is going to survive beyond ’24-2025.”
The unreliability of the electric grid continues to be on the mind of many Americans, all while some climate activists push for nuclear energy, noting that it is a reliable power source that is arguably better for the environment than others. The Times noted that nuclear energy accounts for almost as much as all other renewable energy sources <a href="https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&amp;t=3">combined</a>. 
As California shifts to potentially keeping the plant open, several other reactors might still be shut down, The New Yorker reported last year. The outlet pointed to a 2018 <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/nuclear-power-dilemma">report</a> from the Union of Concerned Scientists describing how expensive it would be &#8220;to bring unprofitable plants back to a breakeven point.&#8221; The group described how shutting down “unprofitable and marginal at-risk plants early could result in a 4 to 6 percent increase in US power sector emissions.” It also noted that if fresh policies aren&#8217;t formed, natural gas and coal will fill the hole created.

266E4389-16BC-4619-8411-59919364DACE_1_201_a

Newsom Open To Keeping Major Nuclear Plant Operating In California

Newsom Might Support Keeping Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant Open

California

Gavin Newsom

Nuclear Power

An environmental extremist pleaded guilty in federal court on Thursday for his role in two arson conspiracies targeting animal processing facilities in the Pacific Northwest and California. 
According to a <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/pacific-northwest-environmental-extremist-and-arsonist-pleads-guilty">press release</a> from the Department of Justice, 53-year-old Joseph Mahmoud Dibee “pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit arson and arson in the District of Oregon,” as well as “conspiracy to commit arson in the Eastern District of California.”
Dibee and at least 15 other affiliates of the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front “knowingly conspired with one another to damage or destroy various commercial and government-owned properties” between October 1996 and December 2005, the Justice Department said. The conspirators held meetings to plan attacks, conducted research and surveillance, discussed their plans via code words and code names, and built incendiary bombs to destroy the sites.
“During their self-described ‘direct actions,’ the conspirators dressed in dark clothing and wore masks and gloves to disguise their appearances. Some conspirators acted as lookouts while others were responsible for placing, igniting or attempting to ignite the improvised incendiary devices,” the Justice Department described.
In July 1997, Dibee and his partners used the devices to destroy the Cavel West Meat Packing Plant in Redmond, Oregon. In October 2001, Dibee and others tried to destroy Wild Horse Corrals — a Bureau of Land Management facility near Litchfield, California, that is used to remove wild horses from public lands.
Following a domestic terrorism investigation from the FBI, Dibee and 11 co-conspirators were indicted in the Eastern District of California and Western District of Washington. They were linked to over 40 criminal acts that amounted to $45 million in damages.
Dibee, however, had fled the United States in December 2005. Cuban authorities arrested him in 2018, and the U.S. Embassy in Havana returned him to the United States.
Dibee “has agreed to pay restitution to his victims as determined by the government and ordered by the court.” The government recommends a sentence of 87 months in federal prison.
“One of Dibee’s co-conspirators remains at large,” the Justice Department added. “Josephine Sunshine Overaker, an American citizen who is either 47 or 50 years old, is believed to have fled to Europe in late 2001. Overaker faces 19 felony charges including conspiracy to commit arson and destruction of an energy facility, attempted arson, and arson.”
“No matter the agenda, using violence to advance a social or political cause is a serious crime. Over a series of years, Mr. Dibee and his co-conspirators caused millions of dollars in damage to commercial and government-owned properties,” Scott Erik Asphaug, U.S. Attorney for the District of Oregon, said in a separate <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/pacific-northwest-environmental-extremist-and-arsonist-pleads-guilty">statement</a>. “Today, after many years on the run, Mr. Dibee admitted to his role in these schemes and will finally face justice.”
“It has taken more than 20 years for Joseph Dibee to face justice. The FBI and our law enforcement partners never gave up,” Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Oregon Kieran Ramsey added. “From destroying evidence to fleeing the country, none of Mr. Dibee’s tactics stopped us from making sure he was held accountable for his malicious and destructive actions.”

Beef

Arsonist Affiliated With ‘Animal Liberation Front’ Pleads Guilty To Bombing Meat Packing Plant

Department of Justice

National Security

In addition to open combatants, every wartime power seeks to cultivate “soft power” behind enemy lines by establishing front groups. This fifth column is composed of often well-meaning citizens unwittingly manipulated into spreading foreign propaganda and lobbying their government for another country’s benefit. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union directed “peace” activists to demand the West’s unilateral disarmament … which would have established the USSR as the world’s greatest military power. Former KGB agent Vladimir Putin has employed the same tactics for decades to weaken the U.S. and the EU from within before launching his invasion of Ukraine — and one of his chosen vessels has been the environmentalist movement. According to a mounting collection of evidence, the Russian government funded global environmentalist activism in order to undermine U.S. energy independence, reap vast profits from the global fossil fuel market, and have the option of using energy as a weapon against U.S. allies.
The investigation into this funding, which remains pending, already has the contours of a great spy novel — or if the legacy media did not reflexively cover for the Left, a series of documentaries. Investigators say the money flows from the Kremlin, through a secretive office in Bermuda, to a U.S.-based nonprofit. From there, the funds go to an array of American environmentalist organizations that oppose U.S. energy independence. In other words, Green activists have advocated the very policies that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/running-on-empty-how-bidens-anti-energy-policies-helped-build-putins-war-machine">fuel Vladimir Putin’s war machine</a> and, in a fit of poetic justice, left-wingers who spent five years accusing conservatives of being Russian stooges find themselves exposed as Moscow’s mouthpieces.
The Left’s heroes warn of Russian environmentalist propaganda
For at least half of his time as Russia’s leader, Putin has been concerned about losing oil revenues, which account for <a href="https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/russias-oil-gas-revenue-windfall-2022-01-21/">36%</a> of Russia’s budget. The source of this statement is one not friendly to MAGA forces: Fiona Hill, the Russian affairs expert <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-extraordinary-impeachment-testimony-of-fiona-hill">lauded</a> by the legacy media for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/prager-fiona-hill-should-be-condemned-by-jewish-groups-she-wont-be">her role</a> in the first Trump impeachment. She remembered Putin strenuously objecting to U.S. companies that practice hydraulic fracturing (or “fracking”) during a November 2011 meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club. “He started in 2011 making it very clear that he saw American fracking as a great threat to Russian interests,” Hill <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/fiona-hill-says-that-she-heard-putin-describe-american-fracking-as-a-great-threat-to-russia">testified</a> before Congress in 2019. “We were all struck by how much he stressed this issue. And since 2011, and since that particular juncture, Putin has made a big deal of this.”
Putin has personally denounced fracking, saying it “poses a huge environmental problem.” Regions where fracking occurs “no longer have water coming out of their taps but a blackish slime,” he alleged. But generally, Putin is content to direct the grand chess game from above, while others do the wet work. For instance, the Director of National Intelligence <a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf">noted</a> that in 2012 the Russian TV network RT ran “anti-fracking programming, highlighting environmental issues and the impacts on public health. This is likely reflective of the Russian Government&#8217;s concern about the impact of fracking and US natural gas production on the global energy market and the potential challenges to Gazprom&#8217;s profitability.”
Like everything else, Putin tested his strategy in other countries first, with dramatic success. One of his targets, then and now, was Ukraine (“which is thought to have large shale gas reserves, particularly in its war-ravaged east,” <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/01/world/russian-money-suspected-behind-fracking-protests.html">reported</a> The New York Times in 2014). When Ukraine considered tapping those resources, Putin’s partisans sprang into action. “Pro-Russian separatists in the east, who have otherwise shown no interest in green issues, have denounced fracking as a mortal danger,” The Times said.
The cycle had already taken place in Bulgaria, which signed a shale gas contract with Chevron in 2012. Romania followed suit a year later, threatening Russia’s economic and geostrategic interests: In addition to the revenue, Russia can (and has) leveraged foreign nations by cutting off their energy deliveries. “Energy is the most effective weapon today of the Russian Federation — much more effective than aircraft and tanks,” then-Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta told The New York Times in 2014. “It is crucial for Russia to keep this energy dependence. It is playing a dirty game,” said Iulian Iancu, then a member of the Romanian Parliament.
Soon, both nations were <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/anti-fracking-groups-russia-secret-funding-protects-kremlin-interests/">overrun</a> by well-organized, well-financed environmentalist activists, whose often-violent demonstrations scuttled both deals. Although the targeted nations could not prove it, they held Russia responsible. So did NATO.
“We don&#8217;t go into the details of discussions among allied leaders, but Russia has been using a mix of hard and soft power in its attempt to recreate a sphere of influence, including through a campaign of disinformation on many issues, including energy,” <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking">said</a> one NATO official in 2014. “In general, the potential for Russia using energy supplies as a means of putting pressure on European nations is a matter of concern. No country should use supply and pricing terms as tools of coercion.”
Although the official said that conclusion was their own “interpretation,” NATO issued an official statement essentially confirming the broad strokes of that statement. “Clearly, it is in the interest of all NATO allies to be able to have adequate energy supplies,” NATO said. “We share a concern by some allies that Russia could try to obstruct possible projects on shale gas exploration in Europe in order to maintain Europe’s reliance on Russian gas.”
That assessment was amplified by another foe of fossil fuels: Hillary Rodham Clinton. In 2014, Clinton delivered a “<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/10/clinton-blames-russians-anti-fracking-groups/">private speech</a>” in which she discussed Russia’s financial support for Western environmentalists. “We [the State Department and the U.S. government] were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand up against any effort, ‘Oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you,’ and a lot of that money supporting that effort was coming from Russia,” Clinton reportedly said.
A team of conservative investigators have since begun documenting the money trail.
Funneling dark money to the Green movement
Suspected foreign funding of U.S. environmentalist groups came under congressional scrutiny nearly a decade ago. A 2014 Senate committee <a href="https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/publications/finalreport_73014_2.pdf">report</a> drew attention to a little-known San Francisco-based nonprofit called the Sea Change Foundation, which was at the time “the sixth largest donor to environmental causes, giving $43,149,911 in grants to environmental and far-left environmental activists.” Its own source of revenue proved more controversial: It relied on donations from the family of founder Nat Simons — and tens of millions of dollars from Klein Ltd., an opaque, Bermuda-based company with deep ties to Russia. “It appears that Klein exists on paper only … and was set up for the sole purpose of funneling anonymous donations to Sea Change,” the 2014 Senate report stated.
Klein gave Sea Change <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/204/204952986/204952986_201107_990PF.pdf?_ga=1.16971577.1015383331.1422285311">$13 million</a> in 2010 and <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990pf_pdf_archive/204/204952986/204952986_201207_990PF.pdf?_ga=1.16971577.1015383331.1422285311">$10 million</a> in 2011. The Sea Change Foundation’s <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/204952986">990 forms</a> do not appear to show donations from Klein Ltd. since that time, but the foundation’s assets more than doubled between 2011 and 2018, from $124 million to $293 million.
Little action took place, but investigators began tracing the arc of the Green movement’s “dark money” rainbow. <a href="https://www.bermanco.com/">Richard Berman</a>’s <a href="https://environmentalpolicyalliance.org/">Environmental Policy Alliance</a> <a href="https://www.biggreenradicals.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Klein_Report.pdf">found</a> that Klein Ltd. had been “formed by two employees of Wakefield Quin (WQ), a Bermuda law firm. … Both held directorship positions in a group, owned by Russian minister of telecommunications and longtime Putin friend Leonid Reiman, which was the subject of a 2008 money laundering case.” Furthermore, “Marcuard Spectrum, a Moscow-based investment firm, operates a hedge fund in Bermuda based out of WQ’s office.” Drawing on this new research, Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX) and his then-colleague Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) reiterated these concerns in a <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/353439133/Smith-Weber-Letter-to-Mnuchin-re-Russia-and-Green-Groups">letter</a> to then-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin in 2017. Klein’s attorney <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/12/klein-ltd-denies-funneling-russian-cash-to-us-envi/">denied</a> any links to Russia, and the story again died.
Now that war rages between Russia and Ukraine, Americans have awakened to Russia’s propaganda game. On March 11 three Republican congressmen — Reps. Jim Banks (R-IN), Bill Johnson (R-OH), and Ted Budd (R-NC) — found <a href="https://budd.house.gov/uploadedfiles/3.11.22_letter_to_treasury_on_putin_ngos.pdf">another piece</a> of the puzzle, writing to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen:
<blockquote>Sea Change then<a href="https://freebeacon.com/issues/foreign-firm-funding-u-s-green-groups-tied-to-state-owned-russian-oil-company/"> passed that money</a> to groups like the Sierra Club and the Center for American Progress who lobbied strongly against fracking and pro-energy policies, to reduce competition with Russian oil and gas. In 2020, the Center for American Progress<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/center-for-american-progress/summary?id=D000032441"> donated</a> over $800,000 exclusively to Democrat politicians and groups and Sierra Club Independent Action<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=C00483693&amp;cycle=2020"> spent</a> $3.7 million supporting Democrat candidates.  </blockquote>
“It is imperative that the Treasury Department investigate the claims of Russian interference in American domestic politics,” they wrote. “If Russian manipulation is confirmed in domestic anti-energy funding, we call on the Department of the Treasury to immediately partner with the Department of Justice in establishing a select committee to investigate illicit Russian influence operations.”
The charges demand a full investigation. But there’s no question that Russia (and China) would like nothing more than for the United States to stymie itself while the newly reunited Asian axis corners the surging global market.
At this point, a “ban on fracking could be viewed as an example of successful Russian espionage,” Ken Stiles, a 29-year CIA veteran, <a href="https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/04/22/the-connection-between-russia-and-2-green-groups-fighting-fracking-in-us/">told</a> The Daily Signal. “Whether these environmental groups realize it or not, they could be operating as what we [in the CIA] call ‘agents of influence.’ By working to block natural gas production, environmental activists are advancing policies that work to the advantage of Russia and to the disadvantage of America and America’s allies.”
The same could be said of Left-wing policies in virtually every realm. The intelligence community agrees that a major focus of Russian propaganda for nearly 100 years has been to divide Americans by race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, class, and viewpoint. They also seek to delegitimize U.S. institutions and ultimately cause civil strife that results in violence.
On nearly every front — from promoting the divisive and Marxist-based <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/what-is-critical-race-theory-breaking-down-the-ideology-thats-hitting-schools-across-the-country">Critical Race Theory</a>, to supporting <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/msnbc-people-only-think-blm-riots-were-violent-because-of-fox-news-newsmax-oan-bubble">violent protesters</a>, to questioning <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/if-the-supreme-court-is-illegitimate-so-is-abortion-gay-marriage-and-taking-prayer-out-of-schools">the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court</a>, to demanding U.S. nuclear disarmament and abandoning its own fossil fuel energy resources — the legacy media and the Democratic Party’s base largely have done and are <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/opinion-the-american-media-has-spread-russian-propaganda-more-effectively-than-russia-itself">doing the bidding of Russian propagandists.</a> Congress must now determine if they are getting paid for it, as well.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Green or red

Green Or Red? How Russia Funds The West’s Environmentalist Movement For Its Own Gain

Energy

Environmentalism

Propaganda

Readers Pass

Russia

Ukraine

During a congressional hearing, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) attempted to tie “fossil fuel extraction” to the kidnapping, rape, and murder of American Indian women. She intimated that local police officers helped facilitate this violence by protecting the safety of pipeline workers from violent environmentalist activists. And she seemed to blame the Keystone XL pipeline for crimes that took place in areas where it had not been built.
AOC, who blames fossil fuels for climate change and has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-ocasio-cortez-tries-grill-wells-fargos-ceo-ryan-saavedra">asked</a> bank executives if they should be held responsible for climate change because of their services to the energy industry, said she found a “very meaningful connection” between “fossil fuel extraction sites and abductions and murders of indigenous women.”
Ocasio-Cortez said “ruthless” oil companies encourage violence, and she accused unnamed state legislatures of “authorizing and almost legalizing the use of violence against fossil fuel protesters.” In fact, environmentalist protesters have frequently threatened — or perpetrated —  violence against oil and gas industry workers, especially at pipeline worksites. For instance:
<ul>
<li>A team of 20 environmentalist extremists attacked a pipeline worksite with <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10528525/Trudeau-ignores-violent-terrorism-20-eco-terrorists-axes-surround-Gaslink-pipeline-workers.html">axes and shot flare guns</a> at workers in British Columbia. They felled trees across roadways and threw torches at the Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers who responded. A policeman called the February 17 assault on the Coastal Gaslink pipeline “a calculated and organized violent attack that left its victims shaken and a multimillion dollar path of destruction.” No arrests were made;</li>
<li>In September 2016, a group of protesters <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/border/2016/09/05/militant-native-american-protesters-attack-pipeline-crew/">attacked</a> pipeline workers near the Standing Rock reservation, injuring four security officers and <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/oil-pipeline-protest-turns-violent-after-american-indian-burial-sites-destroyed">two dogs</a>; and</li>
<li>One protester against the Dakota Access Pipeline <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/12/dakota-access-pipeline-violence-rules/">shot at police three times</a> with a .38 caliber pistol. Other demonstrators threatened cops with Molotov cocktails and hurled feces at them. Security guards also say the Green activists attacked them, flashing a handgun and a knife.</li>
</ul>
Ocasio-Cortez seemed outraged that local police officers would “protect their extraction sites” from such protests, “even when workers are raping and killing indigenous women.”
AOC seemed to say that proposing a pipeline caused murders to increase. The congresswoman reported that 10% of indigenous murders or kidnappings that took place in “states affiliated with pipeline projects” had “occurred in counties where the Keystone Pipeline alone is proposed to be built.” Ocasio-Cortez did not explain how the future construction of the pipeline retroactively caused deaths and kidnappings to occur in the past.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AOC</a>: &quot;Fossil Fuel extraction&quot; is correlated with &quot;abduction and murders of indigenous women across the United States&quot; <a href="https://t.co/eUXYcNaJmQ">pic.twitter.com/eUXYcNaJmQ</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1504566064084094986?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 17, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The hearing drew attention to the tangled, overlapping web of police jurisdictions that come into play at a reservation; unfortunately, not all of its conclusions were accurate.
AOC’s witness — Angel Charley, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Violence Against Native Women — testified that oil and natural gas companies set up “man camps” for pipeline workers, who abuse American Indians with impunity, because “many tribes do not have tribal jurisdiction over non-Native workers.”
Ocasio-Cortez asked whether this means criminals “essentially escape jurisdiction from having a clear path to accountability because of where these sites are happening.” Charley agreed.
In fact, all crimes that take place on reservations are punishable — and some law enforcement officers say giving reservations more jurisdiction may reduce the number of prosecutions. “The FBI has exclusive jurisdiction for about 20 serious crimes on Indian land such as murder, rape, robbery, etc., and will come in and take over any investigation when and if those crimes occur,” Tim Dees, a former tribal law officer, <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/if-you-commit-a-crime-can_b_1507190">explained</a>. Some tribes allow local police departments to make arrests and bring charges on their land, while others entrust this exclusively to tribal law enforcement officers.
Reservations are a frequent haven for American Indian fugitives. “Tribal governments are notoriously political, and taking enforcement action against a favored person, such as the tribal chairman&#8217;s nephew, could be fatal to one&#8217;s career,” Dees wrote. South Dakota reservations sheltered <a href="https://www.indianz.com/News/2018/07/17/native-sun-news-today-county-looks-at-fu.asp">22%</a> of all active felony warrants issued by the Pennington County Sheriff’s Office in 2018.
For her final question, Ocasio-Cortez asked Charley to explain “how this collaboration between law enforcement and fossil fuel companies puts indigenous women, in particular, at heightened risk of abduction and murder.”
Charley cited no facts and replied with only one sentence: “This is a continuation of state violence against indigenous women.”
“I think what we see here is that the data speaks [sic] for itself,” Ocasio-Cortez replied.
The Bronx socialist’s comments came during a March 3 congressional hearing on “The Neglected Epidemic of Missing BIPOC Women and Girls.” The Democrat-controlled House Oversight and Reform Committee echoed MSNBC’s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/joy-reid-goes-off-on-missing-white-woman-syndrome-candace-owens-has-a-question">Joy Reid</a> in <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/legislation/hearings/the-neglected-epidemic-of-missing-bipoc-women-and-girls">bemoaning</a> “missing white woman syndrome.” While the committee asserted without proof that “white women are given vastly higher levels of media attention than women of color,” it admitted “the problem is impossible to measure” due to a lack of data.
In <a href="https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO02/20220303/114460/HHRG-117-GO02-Wstate-CharleyA-20220303.pdf">written testimony</a>, Charley blamed the murder rate on “systemic racism” that is “rooted in the devaluation of [i]ndigenous lives since the onset of colonization.” But the committee said, “The disproportionate rate of missing Black and Indigenous women and girls can be attributed to … higher rates of intimate partner violence against BIPOC women than white women.” In 2016, the National Institute of Justice, a U.S. government institution, found American Indian and Alaska Native women were <a href="https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/violence-against-american-indian-and-alaska-native-women-and-men">1.6 times</a> as likely as non-Hispanic white women to suffer domestic violence. The difference in the rate of sexual assaults was not statistically significant.
Critics of the hearing suggested that AOC should spend more time focusing on her own district’s surging crime rate. “Are they drilling in NYC?” <a href="https://twitter.com/paul02663276/status/1504648185712500739">asked</a> one Twitter user. New York City experienced <a href="https://abc7ny.com/nyc-crime-causes-shootings-murders/11505549/">485 murders</a> in 2021, and the number of major crimes committed in the Big Apple — such as homicide, rape, robbery, felonious assault, and burglary/grand theft — reached its <a href="https://nypost.com/2022/01/03/nyc-wiped-out-five-years-of-policing-progress-in-2021/">highest level in five years</a>.

Boston Mayor, Activists Rally To Ask Jeff Flake To Reject Kavanaugh Nomination

AOC Links ‘Fossil Fuel Extraction’ To The Murder Of Indigenous Women. Here’s Why It Doesn’t Work.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Dakota Access Pipeline

Keystone XL

As the price of gasoline and oil push toward record-breaking highs, President Joe Biden and his spokespeople insist that drilling for domestic oil cannot solve the problem. Exploring our own abundant energy resources to relieve U.S. dependence on foreign oil would “take years” to make any difference, they emphasize. Instead, they propose a full transformation of the economy to run on “clean energy.” But the Keystone XL Pipeline could be completed by early next year, while the most optimistic analysts say America cannot transition to renewable energy until 2050 — when President Biden will be a spry <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Joe-Biden">108 years old</a>. Critics call his renewable energy plan impossible and say efforts to implement it would cost trillions of dollars and more than 1 million jobs.
How long would it actually take to transition the U.S. economy to “clean energy” technologies, like renewable energy? How much would it cost? Is it even possible? Here are the facts you need to know.
The Biden administration says drilling takes too long; transform the economy, instead
When Biden came into office, America had just achieved energy independence. Between 2017 and 2020, U.S. production of petroleum <a href="https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/imports-and-exports.php">increased</a> by three million barrels a day, and the U.S. became a net exporter of oil products. Gasoline never reached $3 a gallon under President Donald Trump and, by election day 2020, averaged <a href="https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&amp;s=EMM_EPMR_PTE_NUS_DPG&amp;f=W">$2.11 a gallon</a>. Yet gas prices have not fallen below $3 a gallon since last May and currently average $4.10 a gallon — and rising.
As this unfolded, Biden focused on undermining the fossil fuel sector. Last December, he <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/12/08/fact-sheet-president-biden-signs-executive-order-catalyzing-americas-clean-energy-economy-through-federal-sustainability/">committed</a> the federal government to &#8220;lead by example,&#8221; transitioning to 100% “clean energy” electricity by 2030 and “net-zero [carbon] emissions by 2050.” Since then, the Biden administration has deflected the blame for rising prices and claimed exploring U.S. oil would take too long to yield results.
In March, Canadians attempted to come to Biden’s rescue. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said the Keystone XL Pipeline, which could carry <a href="https://www.alberta.ca/keystone-xl-pipeline-project.aspx">830,000 barrels a day</a> of crude oil (<a href="https://www.fox43.com/article/news/verify/keystone-pipeline-russian-oil-ban-verify-offset-fuel/521-e3a32728-2b3f-49cc-bfb3-5dac10aad18c">twice as much</a> as the U.S. imports from Russia) to Nebraska, could be completed by the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/keystone-oil-pipeline-alberta-premier-urges-revival-russia-ukraine-energy-2022-3">first quarter of 2023</a>. Yet when asked about the project, Jen Psaki <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2022/03/03/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-jen-psaki-march-3rd-2022/">said</a>, “The Keystone Pipeline has never been operational” and “would take years for that to have any impact.” This argument should sound familiar. During his vice presidential debate against Sarah Palin, then-Vice President Biden <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/">answered</a> proponents of U.S. drilling by claiming, “It will take 10 years for one drop of oil to come out of any of the wells that are going to begun to be drilled.” He said that almost 14 years ago.
On Thursday, the administration appeared to relent. “To achieve energy security and avoid volatile fossil fuel prices in the longer term, we must become energy independent,” the White House <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1501947066624319496">tweeted</a>. Unfortunately, Biden’s definition of energy independence means abandoning oil and gasoline in favor of “clean energy technologies that don’t require fossil fuels bought and sold on the global market.”
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm reaffirmed last year that the Biden administration is “all-in” on its 2050 plan. Besides, “If you drive an electric car, this would not be affecting you,” Granholm (who is <a href="https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1501301123239526404">known</a> to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/5-times-the-biden-administration-laughed-at-your-pain">laugh inappropriately at Americans’ pain</a>) said with a chuckle. Today, in light of rising gas prices due to American dependence on Russian imports, Granholm&#8217;s proposals are no laughing matter.
How long would it take to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy? 
A <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/6/9/8748081/us-100-percent-renewable-energy">much-celebrated</a> paper written by Stanford researcher Mark Jacobson in 2015 claimed that 100% of the U.S. economy could transition to renewable energy (<a href="https://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2015/EE/C5EE01283J#!divAbstract">wind, solar, and hydropower</a>) sources by 2050 — considerably later than the Keystone XL Pipeline could begin making deliveries. But even that may be too optimistic an outlook. A team of scholars published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences which <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1610381114">concluded</a> Jacobson’s “work used invalid modeling tools, contained modeling errors, and made implausible and inadequately supported assumptions.”
Due to numerous problems with green energy, it is not clear a full transition is even possible. The Institute for Energy Research <a href="https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/the-100-percent-renewable-energy-myth/">pronounced</a> the prospects of 100% renewable energy “nothing more than a myth” that “would lead to catastrophe.” They appeared to get a boost from none other than Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who <a href="https://www.wnyc.org/story/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-big-plan-tackle-climate-change/">admitted</a> that if America were ever to reach the goals of her Green New Deal, “We need to invent technology that&#8217;s never even been invented yet.”
How expensive would it be to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy?
When the Biden administration talks about green energy, the emphasis should be on the <a href="https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/263943/meaning-of-green-and-greenback-in-american-english">green</a>. The American Action Forum estimated that for the U.S. to generate its present 1,085 gigawatts on 100% renewable energy sources would cost <a href="https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/what-it-costs-go-100-percent-renewable/">$5.7 trillion</a>. AAF said this figure is “likely to be a significant underestimation, as it reflects the lowest imaginable cost” of a Green New Deal. The cost would be ongoing, and electricity costs would have to rise. This change would require “an average annual expenditure of about $423.9 billion each year. For perspective, total revenue raised in the United States from electricity sales in 2017 <a href="https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/pdf/epa.pdf">was $390 billion</a>.”
While AAF is right-of-center, the left-of-center Brookings Institution <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2014/05/20/why-the-best-path-to-a-low-carbon-future-is-not-wind-or-solar-power/">stated</a> that “a new wind plant could at least cost 50 percent more per [kilowatt hour] to produce electricity, and a new solar plant at least 200 percent more per KWH, than using coal and gas technologies.”
Of course, that estimate covers only the United States. “[G]lobal spending on physical assets in the transition would amount to about $275 trillion between 2021 and 2050, or about 7.5 percent of GDP annually on average,” <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability/our-insights/the-net-zero-transition-what-it-would-cost-what-it-could-bring">according</a> to a report issued by McKinsey &amp; Company, an influential consulting firm that <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/09/fda-rems-buttigieg-abortion-drug/">once employed</a> Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.
“Achieving net zero would mean a fundamental transformation of the world economy,” McKinsey <a href="https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/biden-climate-energy-policies-costs-high-and-rising">stated</a>, “as it would require significant changes to the seven energy and land-use systems that produce the world’s emissions: power, industry, mobility, buildings, agriculture, forestry and other land use, and waste.”
The world will use more fossil fuels no matter what the U.S. does
The Biden administration is right about one thing: Energy is a global market — and the rest of the world demands fossil fuels. MIT’s “<a href="https://globalchange.mit.edu/sites/default/files/newsletters/files/2021-JP-Outlook.pdf">2021 Global Change Outlook</a>” predicted fossil fuels will make up the vast majority of the global energy market even in 2050. “The share of fossil fuels [coal, oil, gas] drops from the current 80% to 70% in 2050,” it said. The report says that electricity from “renewable sources becomes a dominant source of power by 2050 in all scenarios” — but 28 years from now, renewable energy has yet to become stable, requiring greater reserves of fossil fuels to fill the gaps when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing. Since “intermittency issues are not fully resolved in any region within that time frame,” natural gas consumption will increase by 50% by 2050. In fact, “all energy types except coal grow from 2020 to 2050,” the report notes.
In other words, if the U.S. transitions to 100% renewable energy sources, it would adopt an unreliable source of energy, spend trillions of dollars, and watch as global fossil fuel use rises, anyway. All of this assumes that such a transition is possible.
All global leaders do well to look for less costly, more abundant, fully reliable energy sources to power their economies, transport their products, and warm their citizens. Successful leaders don’t wager their economy and their national security on unproven technologies wrapped up in political double-talk.

Gasoline

How Long Would It Actually Take For America To Shift To Renewable Energy? How Much Would It Cost?

Fossil Fuels

On Monday, an English woman trying to transport her ailing 81-year-old mother to a hospital tearfully cried at a group of eco-activists that blocked streets in London for over four hours, “How can you be so selfish?”
The as-yet unidentified woman was videotaped lashing out at members of the XR splinter group Insulate Britain as she was blocked at Blackwall Tunnel from getting her mother to a Canterbury hospital, the <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10056407/Now-eco-mob-block-Blackwall-Tunnel-Insulate-Britain-launch-ELEVENTH-day-protests.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline">Daily Mail</a> reported.
“Insulate Britain — which is demanding the Government pay for all homes in the country to be insulated by 2030 — has brought major roads to a standstill with eleven protests in less than three weeks,&#8221; the outlet reports. &#8220;Around 450 arrests have been made so far.&#8221;
The woman cried, “She&#8217;s in there. She&#8217;s going to a hospital in Canterbury. Do you think I&#8217;m stupid? &#8230; Please move your cars. Please. &#8230; This isn&#8217;t okay. This isn&#8217;t okay. &#8230; How can you be so selfish? How can you be so selfish? My mum is 81 and she&#8217;s going to the hospital.&#8221;
<iframe loading="lazy" id="molvideoplayer" title="MailOnline Embed Player" src="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/2516475.html" width="698" height="573" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
The Metropolitan Police tweeted:
<blockquote>Officers are dealing with protestors who have blocked parts of the A2, A3, A12 and A40. While the roads remain open, there is heavy disruption at all four locations with slow moving traffic while work is underway to remove those who have glued themselves onto the road. So far, 38 arrests have been made for disruption of the highway and conspiracy to cause public nuisance.
At approximately 0800hrs, protestors blocked the southern approach of Blackwall Tunnel. By 0809hrs police were on scene. At 0820hrs, protestors moved onto the North Circular Road near Hanger Lane and blocked the road. Officers were on scene by 0828hrs.
At 0845hrs, protestors obstructed the road at the junction at Lochnagar Street at northern approach of the Blackwall tunnel. Officers were on scene within minutes. At 0846hrs, a number of protestors moved onto Wandsworth Bridge. Officers are on scene by 0900hrs. We consider protests of this nature unreasonable and are acting as quickly as possible to minimise disruption caused to members of the public using the roads.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Officers are dealing with protestors who have blocked parts of the A2, A3, A12 and A40. 
While the roads remain open, there is heavy disruption at all four locations with slow moving traffic while work is underway to remove those who have glued themselves onto the road. 
1/7
&mdash; Metropolitan Police Events (@MetPoliceEvents) <a href="https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1444954966096031744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 4, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
At approximately 0800hrs, protestors blocked the southern approach of Blackwall Tunnel. By 0809hrs police were on scene.
3/7
&mdash; Metropolitan Police Events (@MetPoliceEvents) <a href="https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1444956379110952963?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 4, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
At 0845hrs, protestors obstructed the road at the junction at Lochnagar Street at northern approach of the Blackwall tunnel. Officers were on scene within minutes. 
5/7
&mdash; Metropolitan Police Events (@MetPoliceEvents) <a href="https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1444956895970738176?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 4, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
We consider protests of this nature unreasonable and are acting as quickly as possible to minimise disruption caused to members of the public using the roads. 
7/7
&mdash; Metropolitan Police Events (@MetPoliceEvents) <a href="https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1444957601612148741?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 4, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
A spokesman for Insulate Britain defended their actions, asserting, “We&#8217;re more scared of what will happen when the climate crisis causes the breakdown of law and order, than we are of injunctions and prison. The Government is focussing on us rather than what&#8217;s coming down the road. They need to face up to reality.&#8221;
<iframe loading="lazy" id="molvideoplayer" title="MailOnline Embed Player" src="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/2516501.html" width="698" height="573" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
<iframe loading="lazy" id="molvideoplayer" title="MailOnline Embed Player" src="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/2516531.html" width="698" height="573" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson stated, “This Government will always stand on the side of the law-abiding majority and ensure the toughest penalties possible for criminals who deliberately bring major roads to a standstill. We will give the police the powers they need to stop their reckless and selfish behaviour. The right to protest is sacrosanct, but there is no right to inflict chaos and misery on people trying to go about their lives.”
The maximum penalty for “obstructing a highway” amounts to roughly $1,300.

Insulate Britain Block M25 For 6th Time Colnbrook

WATCH: Tearful Woman Transporting Mom To Hospital Weeps At Eco-Mob Blocking Roads: ‘How Can You Be So Selfish’

London

There’s been a shift in mainstream Leftist acceptance of and even advocacy for environmental terrorism in recent months.
It started in mid-July when it was revealed that President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Bureau of Land Management had been indirectly involved with a “tree-spiking” incident in the late 1980s. A retired federal investigator who worked on the case said that the nominee, Tracy Stone-Manning, engaged in “vulgar, antagonistic, and extremely anti-government&#8221; behavior in the investigation of the incident. As the Daily Caller <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2021/06/14/joe-biden-land-management-nominee-connected-tree-spiking-tracy-stone-manning/">explained</a>: “Tree spiking involves inserting metal or ceramic rods into tree trunks to prevent them from being cut down. The impact from a saw can make the saw explode, sending sharp metal flying. The practice can be deadly and lead to severe injuries.”
While responding to written questions from Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), Stone-Manning said “I do not condone tree spiking or terrorism of any kind” and “I had no involvement in the spiking of trees,” <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/15/biden-blm-pick-allegations-499739">according to Politico</a>.
Stone-Manning had ties to the group Earth First and sent a letter to federal officials in 1989 that warned “a lot of people could get hurt” if loggers continued to work in Idaho’s Clearwater National Forest. She also warned that trees had been spiked.
When Stone-Manning was asked if she had ever been the target of an investigation, arrested, or charged with a crime in her official Senate committee questionnaire, she answered “no.” But the federal investigator contradicted her claim, providing a written statement from the investigation in 1989 that said:  &#8220;Ms. Stone-Manning was extremely difficult to work with; in fact, she was the nastiest of the suspects. She was vulgar, antagonistic, and extremely anti-government.&#8221;
Just days after Stone-Manning’s testimony, New York Times columnist Ezra Klein published <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/15/opinion/climate-change-energy-infrastructure.html">a dissection</a> of Andreas Malm’s book, “How to Blow Up a Pipeline,” which featured Klein seemingly condoning environmental terrorism.
&#8220;Andreas Malm’s ‘How to Blow Up a Pipeline’ is only slightly inaptly named. You won’t find, anywhere inside, instructions on sabotaging energy infrastructure. A truer title would be ‘Why to Blow Up a Pipeline.’ On this, Malm’s case is straightforward: Because nothing else has worked,&#8221; Klein wrote.
As Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/ny-times-columnist-excuses-eco-terrorism-oil-companies">pointed out</a>, Malm’s book suggested people “Damage and destroy new CO2-emitting devices. Put them out of commission, pick them apart, demolish them, burn them, blow them up. Let the capitalists who keep on investing in the fire know that their properties will be trashed.&#8221;
Klein didn’t exactly condemn these passages.
&#8220;Still, violence is often deployed, even if counterproductively, on behalf of causes far less consequential than the climate crisis. So skepticism of the practical benefits of violence does not fully explain its absence in a movement this vast and with consequences this grave,&#8221; he wrote.
The most recent defense of eco-terrorism came from The New Yorker Radio Hour, in which Malm himself defends the practice. “Should the Climate Movement Embrace Sabotage?” asked <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/podcast/the-new-yorker-radio-hour/should-the-climate-movement-embrace-sabotage">the headline</a> for the podcast. “Andreas Malm insists that the environmental movement rethink its roots in nonviolence and instead embrace “intelligent sabotage,” read the blurb for Malm’s section of the podcast.

Burning Pipe Flange 2

Leftists Increasingly Accepting Of Environmental Terrorism

Terrorism

After learning that President Biden’s choice to lead the Bureau of Land Management, Tracy Stone-Manning, not only has been linked to a 1989 eco-terrorist plot, but also described children as “an environmental hazard” in her master’s thesis, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) slammed her, writing, “Biden&#8217;s BLM nominee thinks a ‘cute baby’ is actually an ‘environmental hazard.’ What is wrong with these people? Every baby is a precious gift from God.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Biden&#39;s BLM nominee thinks a &quot;cute baby&quot; is actually an &quot;environmental hazard.&quot;
What is wrong with these people?
Every baby is a precious gift from God. <a href="https://t.co/IfwtcmdbOp">pic.twitter.com/IfwtcmdbOp</a>
&mdash; Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1419788276349739018?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 26, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As the <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2021/06/23/joe-biden-bureau-of-land-management-forest-service/">Daily Caller</a> reported, in her <a href="https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/2734/">thesis</a> titled &#8220;Into the heart of the beast/A case for environmental advertising,” Stone-Manning advocated for population control, writing, “The origin of our abuses is us. If there were fewer of us, we would have less impact. We must consume less, and more importantly, we must breed fewer consuming humans.”
“Stone-Manning also argued in her thesis that livestock grazing on public land is &#8216;destroying the West.&#8217; If confirmed by the Senate to lead the BLM, Stone-Manning would control an agency that manages livestock grazing on <a href="https://www.blm.gov/programs/natural-resources/rangelands-and-grazing/livestock-grazing">155 million acres</a> of public lands,” the Daily Caller noted.
The thesis included eight advertisements Stone-Manning created; one featured a shirtless American baby with the headline: “Can you find the environmental hazard in this photo?”
The caption read, “That’s right, it’s the cute baby.”
Stone-Manning added, “The earth is only so big, and we can tap into it only so often. In America, we tap in often and hard. When we overpopulate, the earth notices it more. Stop at two. It could be the best thing you do for the planet.”
In a script she created for a 30-second television ad, there was this statement: “When we have children, the planet feels it more. Do the truly smart thing. Stop at one or two kids.”
She also wrote,  “The point is a simple one. Harshly, the ads say that the earth can’t afford Americans. More softly, they ask people to think about how their family planning choices affect the planet.”
The Daily Wire <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/biden-nominee-with-ties-to-environmental-terrorists-violated-ethics-rules-by-concealing-finances-watchdog-group-says/">reported</a>:
<blockquote>According to a watchdog group citing a disclosure to Congress, President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) admitted to breaking ethics laws and likely committed mortgage fraud. The American Accountability Foundation (AAF) says it <a href="https://www.bidennoms.com/news/706/tracy-stone-manning-biden-nominee-for-bureau-of-land-management-takes-large-loan-and-likely-impermissible-gift-from-donor-developer">found</a> that as a congressional aide, Tracy Stone-Manning “took a possibly unethical loan from a Montana developer and political donor” named Stuart Goldberg. The group alleged her testimony at a recent hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and Resources revealed “problematic” financial dealings.</blockquote>
In May, Stone-Manning claimed to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that no federal criminal investigation had ever targeted her. However, there is evidence that her claim does not fit the facts. The Committee’s <a href="https://www.energy.senate.gov/2021/6/barrasso-tracy-stone-manning-lied-to-the-senate">website</a> states:
<blockquote>On her committee questionnaire, Stone-Manning said she was never the subject of a criminal investigation and that the case was an “alleged” tree spiking. In court testimony obtained by the committee, Stone-Manning admitted she edited, retyped, and sent a threatening letter to the US Forest Service on behalf of the eco-terrorists. Years later, she received immunity in order to testify against the individuals who had spiked the trees. The court documents also confirm that hundreds of trees were spiked. Some of these trees remain a danger to loggers, Forest Service employees, and fire fighters.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Both President Obama’s director and deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management have serious concerns about Tracy Stone-Manning leading the agency. Senate Democrats should listen to them <a href="https://t.co/245aRUHqWM">https://t.co/245aRUHqWM</a>
&mdash; Sen. John Barrasso (@SenJohnBarrasso) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenJohnBarrasso/status/1419804787726487560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 26, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Senate Judiciary Committee Considers Nominations For Judges

‘What Is Wrong With These People’: Cotton Rips Biden BLM Choice Who Called Children An ‘Environmental Hazard’

Joe Biden

Tom Cotton

According to a watchdog group citing a disclosure to Congress, President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) admitted to breaking ethics laws and likely committed mortgage fraud.
The American Accountability Foundation (AAF) says it <a href="https://www.bidennoms.com/news/706/tracy-stone-manning-biden-nominee-for-bureau-of-land-management-takes-large-loan-and-likely-impermissible-gift-from-donor-developer">found</a> that as a congressional aide, Tracy Stone-Manning “took a possibly unethical loan from a Montana developer and political donor” named Stuart Goldberg. The group alleged her testimony at a recent hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and Resources revealed “problematic” financial dealings.
<a href="https://mailchi.mp/americanaccountabilityfoundation/personnel-is-policy-senate-republicans-advance-bidens-nominees-4948862?e=ea6536841c">More details</a> from the AAF:
<blockquote>In her <a href="http://wordpress.bidennoms.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Stone-Manning-Responses-to-QFRs-6-8-21-SENR-Cmte-Nominations-Hrg.pdf">questions for the record </a>to the U.S. Senate, Stone-Manning describes that in 2008, Mr. Goldberg, who was a close friend of many years, lent her and her husband’s company $100,000 because of financial troubles. As the economy worsened and crashed, Stone-Manning’s business ultimately failed, leaving the outstanding loan from Goldberg unpaid. Rather than pay back in full, Stone-Manning and her husband paid Goldberg $40,000 from the sale of their home and came to a verbal agreement that the remaining $60,000 would be converted to a personal loan, where Stone-Manning would pay Goldberg annual interest until she was able to pay off the principle of the loan.</blockquote>
The AAF <a href="https://www.americanaccountabilityfoundation.com/">describes</a> itself as “a charitable and educational organization that conducts non-partisan governmental oversight research and fact-checking so Americans can hold their elected leaders accountable.” It claims Stone-Manning’s “incriminating statement” proves she “deliberately violated” policies about accepting gifts when she worked for Democratic Senator Jon Tester (MT) from 2007-2012.
“The Senate Gift Rule states that no member of the Senate shall knowingly accept a gift, meaning any gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality. loan, forbearance, or other item having monetary value,” an AAF statement said.
Stone-Manning took out three different mortgages since Goldberg provided her with a personal loan, according to the group.
AAF determined Stone-Manning “also likely committed mortgage fraud by failing to provide banks with all of the required information,” pointing out that federal loan applications require disclosure of personal loans.
Stone-Manning testified that she did not recall the specifics on those loan applications.
AAF called on the Federal Bureau of Investigation “to reopen Stone-Manning’s background investigation and subpoena each of her mortgage applications to ensure that a senior federal official has not violated federal law.”
On Wednesday, a retired federal investigator claimed Stone-Manning had exhibited “extremely anti-government” behavior during a 1989 probe involving allegations of an eco-terrorism sabotage tactic known as “tree-spiking.”
<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/15/biden-blm-pick-allegations-499739">According</a> to Politico, tree-spiking has been “advocated by some fringe environmental groups in which metal or other material is inserted into trees set for logging.” The foreign objects can endanger lumber mill workers by jamming high-speed saws.
Politico reported:
<blockquote>Stone-Manning has repeatedly distanced herself from the tree-spiking, which she was connected to indirectly when she was a graduate student involved with the environmental group Earth First. But the political heat surrounding her nomination is likely to grow following a letter sent to the Senate Energy Committee by retired U.S. Forest Service criminal investigator Michael Merkley, who said Stone-Manning knew she was under criminal investigation at the time.
“She was aware that she was being investigated in 1989 and again in 1993 when she agreed to the immunity deal with the government to avoid criminal felony prosecution,” Merkley wrote in a letter obtained by the committee and shared with POLITICO.
When asked if she had ever been the target of an investigation, arrested or charged with a crime in her official Senate committee questionnaire from earlier this year, Stone-Manning had answered “no.” The designation of target is generally reserved for individuals for whom an investigation finds substantive evidence of their committing a crime.</blockquote>

TRACY STONE-MANNING

Biden Nominee With Ties To Environmental Terrorists Violated Ethics Rules By Concealing Finances, Watchdog Group Says

Biden Administration

&#8220;Reliable Sources,&#8221; the CNN show dedicated to critiquing media misinformation, falsely claimed that the death toll from burning fossil fuels kills 10 million people a year, “larger than the Holocaust.” To help combat this alleged epidemic, a fellow guest added, reporters should not bypass scientists and simply report that the world’s extreme heat is an “injustice” caused by a 40-year conspiracy of the oil companies.
Brian Stelter, who once <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-asks-jen-psaki-how-it-can-help-push-joe-bidens-agenda">asked</a> White House spokesperson Jen Psaki how to best cover the White House, asked two climate alarmists to tell him how to cover environmental issues on Sunday’s “Reliable Sources.”
After another guest said that “everyone should be a climate reporter,” Stelter asked New York Magazine editor-at-large David Wallace-Wells, “What does it mean, David, to be a climate reporter?”
Wallace-Wells replied that it means seeing “that climate is threaded through every aspect of our lives, at the very highest level through the geopolitics and competition of nations … not to mention their physical health.”
“Today, best estimates suggest that air pollution from the burning of fossil fuels kills about 10 million people every year, which is dying at the scale of the Holocaust — in fact, larger than the Holocaust, every single year,” Wallace-Wells, the author of The Uninhabitable Earth, added. “And yet, we don&#8217;t see many public health stories, we don&#8217;t see many moral crises stories addressed to that issue.”
While there is no moral equivalence between releasing fine particulate matter through the generation of energy and the deliberate gassing of 6 million Jews by the Nazi regime, unfortunately for Wallace-Wells, the estimate of 10 million climate-related deaths a year is fallacious, according to the study’s authors.
The World Health Organization previously estimated that <a href="https://www.who.int/news/item/25-03-2014-7-million-premature-deaths-annually-linked-to-air-pollution">7 million</a> people died from all forms of air pollution, not merely fossil fuels. But in April, Harvard researchers using a <a href="http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/geos/">computer model</a> known as GEOS-Chem published a <a href="http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/publications/2021/vohra_2021_ff_mortality.pdf">study</a> in the journal <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935121000487#!">Environmental Research</a> which more than doubled that number. But the authors noted that, while the model’s original estimate of fossil fuel deaths came in at 10.2 million, that figure “predates substantial decline in fossil fuel emissions” from China, “bringing the global total to 8.7 million.”
Even though they used a radically different threshold to link fossil fuels to deaths, the study found 5.4 million of those deaths took place in China and India. Wallace-Wells simply stuck to the highest possible estimate.
He also ignored how <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2021/02/01/how-fossil-fuels-are-saving-lives-in-developing-countries/?sh=7cb7c7af763f">fossil fuels save millions of lives a year</a> by giving people access to clean cooking, which reduces air pollution from charcoal and wood emissions. “Every year, almost four million people die from household air pollution, which is mostly coming from cooking,” according to Forbes. That does not take into account fossil fuels’ <a href="https://www.moralcaseforfossilfuels.com/data/">other lifesaving applications</a>.
Stelter should have been on guard; climate scientists have criticized Wallace-Wells’ history of making “erroneous statements” and relying on inaccurate data. His best-known work on the subject, The Uninhabitable Earth, <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html">claims</a> that climate change will destroy human life on the planet by the end of the century. “It is, I promise, worse than you think. If your anxiety about global warming is dominated by fears of sea-level rise, you are barely scratching the surface of what terrors are possible, even within the lifetime of a teenager today,” he wrote.
His “doomist framing” cannot be supported by the science, <a href="https://www.inquirer.com/philly/health/environment/climate-change-doomsday-ny-mag-michael-mann-20170710.html">according</a> to Michael Mann, a professor of atmospheric science at Pennsylvania State University. After noting numerous factual errors with the original article that formed the basis of the book, Mann said Wallace-Wells had done nothing but “overstate the evidence, particularly when it feeds a paralyzing narrative of doom and hopelessness.” Bjorn Lomborg <a href="https://www.hoover.org/research/bjorn-lomborg-declares-false-alarm-climate-hysteria-1">wrote</a> a book-length refutation, noting how human beings could avoid most of the catastrophes Wallace-Wells predicts with existing technology.
Stelter, who prides himself on sticking with facts over narrative, then turned to Emily Atkin, the founder of HEATED, which <a href="https://heated.world/">bills</a> itself as “a newsletter for people who are pissed off about the climate crisis.”
Atkin said that journalists who are reporting on extreme weather, like the heat in the Pacific Northwest last week, do not need to establish whether climate change played a role. They can simply assure their readers that it did — and blame it on greedy oil executives.
“It&#8217;s not an excuse that you need to talk to a climate scientist anymore to include something in your story that says, ‘This extreme heat event was made more likely by climate change,’” Atkin said. “And what I would also argue is that you should probably have a sentence in there saying, ‘Climate change is caused by fossil fuels,’ because climate change is not something that&#8217;s happening to us; it&#8217;s something that&#8217;s being done to us.”
“It is injustice due to a 40-year campaign to lie and prioritize short-term profit over the health of vulnerable people. So, those are just basic facts.”
Stelter labeled the story of climate change “a corruption story.”
“That makes it sexy, to be honest,” said Atkin. “It makes it a good story to tell.”
But that does not necessarily transform the narrative into an accurate story that serves its readers, rather than political ideologues pushing an extreme Green agenda.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

CNN Heroes – Red Carpet

CNN Says Fossil Fuels Kill More People Each Year Than The Holocaust. Here’s The Truth

Climate Change

Fact Check

Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg has reemerged into the public view with a series of new, viral videos chiding Americans that they must profoundly alter virtually every aspect of their lives, or the world will run out of resources before turning into a scorched wasteland. They must also change the food they eat because, after all, it has feelings, too.
Thunberg made global headlines when she delivered a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/greta-snaps-we-are-beginning-mass-extinction-how-ryan-saavedra">bitter indictment</a> of global leaders at the United Nations in September 2019. “All you can talk about is money and fairytales of eternal economic growth,” she said. “How dare you!”
The Swedish climate change activist has brought her pessimistic message back to the internet for NowThis News.
“Let’s face it, if we don’t change, we’re f***ed,” she says in a <a href="https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1396561068541976576">new video</a>, which has garnered more than 117,000 views as of this writing.
We can’t fact-check her sense of existential doom, but we can examine a few of her statements.
Thunberg&#8217;s Claim
Thunberg tied several contemporary social crises into her apocalyptic view of climate change, including the spread of disease, the possible starvation of the human race, and the mass slaughter of what she apparently views as thoughtful and emotional fish. “What they all come down to is the way we treat nature,” she said, because we ignore the fact that “we are part of nature.”
Thunberg said that deforestation speeds the spread of diseases from animals to humans. “Millions have died from COVID-19, Zika, Ebola, Swine Flu, Mad Cow Disease, West Nile Fever, COVID-19, SARS, MERS, [and] HIV-AIDS. Up to 75% of all new diseases come from other animals,” she said.
She also virtually equated the death of lower lifeforms with that of humans. “Every year we kill more than 60 billion animals, excluding fish, whose numbers are so great that we only measure their lives by weight. What about their thoughts and feelings?” she asked.
Thunberg sounded a more familiar argument when she argued that the prosperous lifestyle of the West will soon cause the entire world to run out of resources. She pinpointed the consumption of meat as a source of carbon dioxide emissions, as well as a huge use of land.
“If we continue, we will run out of land and food,” she said. “If we change toward a plant-based diet, we could save up to 8 billion tons of CO2 every single year. We could feed ourselves on much less land, and nature could recover.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
‘If we don’t change, we are f*cked’ — In her new video, <a href="https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GretaThunberg</a> lays out how we can connect the dots between the climate, ecological, and health crises <a href="https://t.co/2GJHsB45Aq">pic.twitter.com/2GJHsB45Aq</a>
&mdash; NowThis (@nowthisnews) <a href="https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1396561068541976576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 23, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Facts
The most easily verifiable claim we can check is a common one: that higher levels of prosperity mean the world will run out of resources, in this case, food and farmland. The extreme environmentalist movement, especially its population control wing, has made the same, baseless argument for decades. Population control guru Paul Ehrlich wrote in 1970 that overpopulation will “completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make” — which would trigger a “great die-off,” where <a href="https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/18-spectacularly-wrong-apocalyptic-predictions-made-around-the-time-of-the-first-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year-3/">65 million Americans</a> will starve to death in the 1980s together with 4 billion people around the world.
Obviously, that didn’t happen. Ehrlich made a common mistake: He ignored the fact that technological progress lets the world sustain life more effectively with fewer resources.
The world is not running out of farmland, because advances in productivity have made it possible to grow more food on less land. People globally consume <a href="https://www.humanprogress.org/dataset/food-supply-per-person-per-day/">more calories</a>, pay less for food, and <a href="https://reason.com/2016/09/06/advances-in-agriculture-in-the-us-and-ar/">use less land</a> for cultivating food than in decades past. “Between 1961 and 2014, global cereal yields per unit of land increased by 154%,” <a href="https://www.humanprogress.org/seven-ways-in-which-human-ingenuity-helps-the-planet/">according</a> to the invaluable website HumanProgress.org. Erosion <a href="https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/technical/nra/nri/?cid=stelprdb1041887">fell by 43%</a> between 1982 and 2007.
But what about meat? The same process is at work for every kind of livestock, which have gotten larger over the decades without taking up more space. Cows, chickens, and pigs produced <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production#cattle-yields-per-animal">150-169% more meat</a> per carcass in 2018 than in 1961. And this trend will continue.
We’re in no danger of running out of meat. Over the next 10 years, the global supply of meat will outpace global demand by <a href="https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/29248f46-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/29248f46-en">15 million tons</a> (megatons, or “Mt” for short), driving down real prices. Demand for meat will increase to 350 million tons (or megatons, “Mt”), while the supply will increase to 365 Mt, according to an estimate from the OECD.
It’s true that, if we made no technological progress, the world could not live on the <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production#cattle-yields-per-animal">same kind of diet</a> as the average American does today. Greta’s beef with beef is a red herring, because most global demand is for chicken and pork, which takes less land. And it’s not clear that the current American diet is <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html">healthy</a> for Americans, either.
Her claim of animal-to-human disease transfer rests on better ground. “At least 61% of all human pathogens are zoonotic, and have represented 75% of all emerging pathogens during the past decade,” <a href="https://www.who.int/neglected_diseases/diseases/zoonoses/en/">according</a> to the World Health Organization. But it doesn’t help Thunberg’s case to raise this just as public authorities are <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/10-times-the-media-slammed-the-wuhan-lab-origin-theory-as-a-conspiracy">finally beginning</a> to investigate the possibility that COVID-19 originated inside a lab like the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/from-impossible-to-credible-how-the-legacy-media-is-desperately-spinning-their-wuhan-lab-flip-flop">Wuhan Institute of Virology</a>.
The weak link is the idea that human beings are simply another part of nature, so the “thoughts and feelings” of fish are equal to those of your relatives. Scientists have not established definitively that fish possess intelligence or emotions comparable to humans. Some researchers like biologist Victoria Braithwaite of Penn State University have <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/fish-feel-pain-180967764/">claimed</a> to find <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/do-fish-suffer/">evidence</a> that fish <a href="http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160220-do-fish-have-feelings">feel pain</a>, have thoughts, or have some form of rudimentary emotions. Others, like Brian Key of Australia’s University of Queensland, have <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4356734/">concluded</a>, “While mammals and birds possess the prerequisite neural architecture for phenomenal consciousness, it is concluded that fish lack these essential characteristics and hence do not feel pain,” much less do they experience higher emotions.
Most importantly, Western civilization built itself upon the notion that human beings possess special, innate human dignity that sets us apart from the rest of creation. The Judeo-Christian tradition, harkening back to the Bible, finds this in the creation of all humanity in the image of God (imago Dei) and the commandment to “replenish the earth and subdue it” (<a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201%3A28&amp;version=KJV">Genesis 1:28</a>).
The Bottom Line
Greta Thunberg stretches the truth at times, bends or breaks it at others, and downgrades the unique place of human beings in creation. Her overblown claims might provoke greater cases of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/eco-anxiety-is-the-medias-coverage-of-climate-change-giving-viewers-psychological-issues">eco-anxiety</a>,” but they don’t point the way to a brighter or more sustainable future.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

World Leaders Gather For United Nations Climate Summit

Greta Thunberg: You Kill Fish! ‘What About Their Thoughts and Feelings?’

Greta Thunberg

Menu