Academics‚ woke organizations‚ and liberal publications are promoting a social engineering scheme aimed at inhibiting travel and limiting freedom in the name of fighting the specter of anthropogenic climate change. CNN was among the latest outfits to recycle the claim that so-called carbon passports have become a necessity. From COVID to climate Over the course of the pandemic‚ numerous Western nations introduced or considered introducing vaccine passports — supposedly secure digital immunity certifications required for travel and admission to various events‚ businesses‚ and facilities. Critics warned that besides invading citizens' privacy‚ trampling their mobility rights‚ and serving to maximize the number of veins opened to profitable vaccines‚ there would also be "function creep" with the medical passports. Financial Post columnist Terence Corcoran noted in September 2021‚ "Somewhere deep in the cranium of the climate intelligentsia a seed was planted to produce the florid idea that the global COVID-19 virus could serve as inspiration for humankind to once and for all tackle the looming climate crisis." Corcoran highlighted how Bloomberg chairman and former Bank of England governor Mark Carney wrote in his then-new book "Value(s): Building a Better World for All‚" that "if we come together to meet the biggest challenges in medical biology‚ so too can we come together to meet the challenges of climate physics and the forces driving inequality." Carney was evidently not alone in his thinking. 220 medical journals uniformly published the same editorial titled‚ "Call for emergency action to limit global temperature increases‚ restore biodiversity‚ and protect health." The editorial stated‚ "Many governments met the threat of the COVID-19 pandemic with unprecedented funding. The environmental crisis demands a similar emergency response." "Governments must intervene to support the redesign of transport systems‚ cities‚ production and distribution of food‚ markets for financial investments‚ health systems‚ and much more‚" continued the cabal of health professionals. "Global co-ordination is needed to ensure that the rush for cleaner technologies does not come at the cost of more environmental destruction and human exploitation." A "perspective" paper published in the journal Nature Sustainability made explicit what various climate alarmists flying back and forth from the U.N.'s yearly Climate Change Conference had in mind. "Personal carbon allowances (PCAs) could play a role in achieving ambitious climate mitigation targets‚" wrote a team comprising British‚ European and Israeli activists. "We argue that recent advances in AI for sustainable development‚ together with the need for a low-carbon recovery from the COVID-19 crisis‚ open a new window of opportunity for PCAs." The multinational team concluded‚ "PCAs could be trialed in selected climate-conscious technologically advanced countries." Carbon passports Now‚ years later‚ there appears to be a concerted effort under way with predictions and excuses to prime Westerners for carbon passports. CNN‚ for instance‚ recently recycled an article from the Conversation titled‚ "It's time to limit how often we can travel abroad — 'carbon passports' may be the answer." The article‚ penned by a pronoun-providing Ph.D .candidate at Leeds Beckett University‚ begins with criticism of the tourism industry's apparent return to normal in the wake of the pandemic‚ suggesting that "there's concern that a return to the status quo is already showing dire environmental and social consequences." Despite evidence that human error and arson are often to blame‚ the article cited recent wildfires as evidence climate change is a growing problem‚ then suggested tourism is partly to blame. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency‚ 29% of greenhouse gas emissions in 2021 came from transportation‚ including planes‚ trains‚ and automobiles. The year prior to the pandemic‚ the figure was 33%. The article highlights a possible remedy detailed in a 2023 report from Intrepid‚ a travel company that claims to be ethical. The report‚ which has been taken up by various travel zines‚ claims that a "personal carbon emissions limit will become the new normal as policy and people's values drive an era of great change." Martin Raymond‚ co-founder of the Future Laboratory‚ a consultancy outfit‚ said‚ "On our current trajectory‚ we can expect a pushback against the frequency with which individuals can travel‚ with carbon passports set to change the tourism landscape." The report claims that unnamed experts "suggest that individuals should currently limit their carbon emissions to 2.3 tonnes each year – the equivalent of taking a round-trip from Rio de Janeiro‚ Brazil‚ to Riyadh‚ Saudi Arabia. However‚ the average carbon footprint in the US is 16 tonnes per person per year." As a point of comparison‚ Biden climate czar John Kerry's flights around the world promoting a green future reportedly generated 9.54 million pounds or 4‚329 tonnes of carbon just between March 2021 and July 2022. A personal carbon emissions limit would apparently ensure that those without the blessing of the government or the ability to pay off a substantial fine would be prohibited from travel deemed excessive or unnecessary. "By 2040‚ it will be unusual to see members of Generation Alpha without a carbon-footprint tracker on their smartphones. Every Uber ride‚ plane journey‚ and trip to the supermarket will be logged in their devices‚ noting their carbon footprint in real time‚" said the report. While the Intrepid report predicted that carbon passports might be enforced by 2040‚ the Conversation article recycled by CNN appeared more hopeful‚ noting that "our travel habits may already be on the verge of change." This optimism over the imminence of vaccine passport rollouts was informed by recent European initiatives‚ such as the move to axe short-haul flights and impose taxes dissuading the working and middle classes from flying. The author of the article threatened‚ "Holidaymakers should prepare to change their travel habits now‚ before this change is forced upon them." While such threats issued by junior scholars in leftist publications may be idle‚ there has been statist interst in such schemes. For instance‚ the British government has previously considered implementing personal carbon trading and placing a "ceiling on the carbon available for consumption‚ rather than seeking to reduce demand." The Biden administration has not proposed climate passports but recently noted in an EPA report that "achieving a sustainable transportation future will require implementing bold changes and different sets of solutions to address unique challenges in different locations and across all travel modes and applications." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The government doesn’t care about the border as much as it cares about crypto. The Treasury Department has launched a new Strike Force that’s masquerading as a way to crack down on illicit funds behind fentanyl trafficking. However‚ it’s really meant to crack down on money laundering networks — especially those utilizing cryptocurrency. The Strike Force will be led by the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence and IRS Criminal Investigation. Glenn doesn’t think this story should slide under the radar as it’s an especially shady move‚ considering the flow of fentanyl could be greatly reduced if the government would simply close the open southern border. Stu Burguiere agrees‚ noting that the move “seems like a money grab by the federal government.” “You need a central bank digital currency that you can turn off for purchases of these bad things. That way you could stop people from doing all these naughty things‚” Stu mocks‚ adding that it’s like a “department of pre-crime.” Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen praised the move in a statement on Monday. She noted that the “new Strike Force will allow us to bring the Department’s unrivaled expertise in fighting financial crime” and that the “treasury will use every bit of every tool at it’s disposal to disrupt the ability of drug traffickers to pedal this poison.” Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling‚ thought-provoking analysis‚ and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

A ban on sales of handguns to 18- to 20-year-olds was denied by a federal judge‚ who deemed the ban "facially unconstitutional" and inconsistent with traditional regulations.Judge Thomas Kleeh‚ chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia‚ gave a detailed but overall simple rejection of the ban in a 40-page decision.The lawsuit was brought forth by the Second Amendment Foundation and the West Virginia Citizens Defense League. Defendants in the case were the Bureau of Alcohol‚ Tobacco‚ Firearms and Explosives‚ along with Attorney General Merrick Garland.According to SCNR‚ Judge Kleeh relied heavily on the 2022 ruling in the New York State Rifle &; Pistol Assoc.‚ Inc. v Bruen case. That case overturned a New York gun control law that required gun owners seeking a concealed carry license for handguns to demonstrate a "proper cause" to do so.Kleeh explained that the defendants did not present any historical evidence of weapons bans based on age in the country's history."Defendants generally miss the point and Plaintiffs’ injury is clear. Plaintiffs do not dispute that 18-to-20-year-olds who are law-abiding adults and not otherwise banned from firearm possession are not prohibited from possessing handguns‚" he noted. "Defendants have not presented any evidence of age-based restrictions on the purchase or sale of firearms from before or at the founding or during the early republic. Defendants have likewise failed to offer evidence of similar regulation between then and 1791 or in a relevant timeframe thereafter. For that reason alone‚ defendants have failed to meet the burden imposed by Bruen."A "means-end scrutiny" was also used to justify the gun control law‚ but Kleeh noted that the state cannot supersede an individual's constitutional right simply because it believes public safety is more important. Means-end scrutiny typically means that a federal court seeks to establish whether or not a proposed government protection justifies the methods used to implement that protection."To justify its regulation‚ the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather‚ the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation‚" the Bruen case stated.Perhaps the simplest part of the ruling was the statement that the age group in question (18- to 20-year-olds) should be afforded the same Second Amendment rights as other adults. The ruling concluded that "18-to-20-year-old law abiding citizens are part of 'the people' whom the Second Amendment protects."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Harvard president Claudine Gay is trying to save face after not saying Harvard's policies condemn students who call for a genocide of the Jewish people.Appearing before the House Education and Workforce Committee on Tuesday‚ Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) asked Gay if students who call for a genocide of Jews violates Harvard's policies. Despite the straightforward question‚ Gay would say only that such speech is "at odds with the values of Harvard‚" but she refused to condemn it outright as violating Harvard's code of conduct. — (@) The outrage against Gay was swift‚ and she attempted to quell the backlash with a clarifying statement on Wednesday."There are some who have confused a right to free expression with the idea that Harvard will condone calls for violence against Jewish students‚" Gay said. "Let me be clear: Calls for violence or genocide against the Jewish community‚ or any religious or ethnic group are vile‚ they have no place at Harvard‚ and those who threaten our Jewish students will be held to account."The statement went viral but did little to repair the damage she had caused. Not only did people demand she immediately resign‚ but they questioned the sincerity of the statement because it was made in response to backlash — not under oath before Congress. "Let me be clear. No one is confused about this desperate attempt at cleaning up your pathetic antisemitic answers yesterday. You cannot undo the moral depravity and shame. And everyone in the world knows it‚" Stefanik responded."Words not spoken YESTERDAY‚ on the record‚ on camera‚ when given ample opportunity‚" CNN anchor Bianna Golodryga noted."'Let me be clear' — really? You had a whole day yesterday before the entire nation to be 'clear.' And you failed spectacularly! You think a single tweet‚ not subject to cross-examination or other follow up inquiry‚ fixes this? You are insulting the entire country!" former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman responded."President Claudine‚ Why didn’t you say that yesterday? Or better yet on October 7th?" Israeli author Hen Mazzig asked."As a Harvard alum‚ I say this with all due respect: F*@k Harvard!" Israeli journalist and Harvard alum Caroline Glick responded."You should have said this yesterday‚ live‚ in-person and on camera. Not today‚ after your PR firm told you you needed to clean it up. It’s too late now. It’s not credible‚" former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer‚ who is Jewish‚ responded."Then why didn’t you say this during your Congressional hearing yesterday?! STEP DOWN. You are a failure‚" StopAntisemitism‚ a non-profit organization‚ asked."Why was Claudine Gay unable to say this at the hearing and it took universal outrage and condemnation for you to issue this clarification?" human rights lawyer Arsen Ostrovsky asked.Even the White House condemned Gay and the other university presidents who testified on Tuesday and waffled on lay-up questions about anti-Semitism."It's unbelievable that this needs to be said: calls for genocide are monstrous and antithetical to everything we represent as a country‚" White House spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement."Any statements that advocate for the systematic murder of Jews are dangerous and revolting — and we should all stand firmly against them‚ on the side of human dignity and the most basic values that unite us as Americans‚" he added.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Our series continues with novelty songs‚ a German driving song‚ and one from a movie that scared the daylights out of us. Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting... The post 11 Surprising 1970s Radio Hits (Part 4) appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

Created by monks in medieval Scotland‚ the exquisitely illustrated Book of Kells is widely regarded as the "chief treasure of the Western world." The post Inside The Book Of Kells‚ The Stunningly Illuminated Gospels Displayed In Dublin’s Trinity College Library appeared first on All That's Interesting.

McCarthy announced Wednesday that he will step down at the end of December.

Even Bartenders Are OFFICIALLY Embarrassed by AOC After Her Latest SNAFU Defending Bowman (Watch)

Striking WaPo 'Journo' Claiming They Need Readers to Help Them 'Hold Power to Account' Goes REALLY Wrong

So DAMN good: Wokal Distance OWNS Woke Activists in EPIC Thread About Refusing to Appease Wokeness