Monday, December 22, 2025
Home Blog Page 55

Linda Boyle: WHO Without America, and America without globalist health orders

By LINDA BOYLE

Within hours of being sworn in, President Trump issued an executive order directing the United States to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO).  

In that executive order, Trump cites the WHO’s “mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that originated from Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states.” Trump faulted WHO for not holding China accountable for its slow response to WHO’s investigation of Covid-19 origins.

This withdrawal will undoubtably have an effect on the WHO’s finances. The US provides more money to the organization than any other member state. The US also provides funding above the assessed dues which is designated to be spent on specific issues.

At this time, about 70% of WHO’s budget is from voluntary contributions, making it difficult for the WHO to set its own public health priorities. In 2022, WHO member countries agreed to reform its financing model, aiming to make countries’ membership fees about half of its budget by 2030, AP reported.

Of the 2024-25 budget for WHO, “US funding comprises 22% of its assessed contributions ($261 million) and more than 14% of its voluntary contributions (nearly $728 million). That  funds 20% of WHO’s emergency response work, and 25% of its core program.”  Privately, WHO doesn’t know how to would make up the loss of US funding and would be faced with a “hand-to-mouth type situation” in early 2026. 

The graph below highlights the disparity in funding.  

https://www.statista.com/chart/33800/top-contributors-to-the-world-health-organization

The world order is concerned by our withdrawal as our absence (and money) would likely exacerbate global health inequities. And therefore hinder “progress” towards global health equity. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of WHO, regrets America’s decision. His concern is equity and seeing health as a basic human right. 

As pointed out in an MRAK article entitled, “Trump Administration rejects WHO pandemic rules, citing sovereignty concerns,” such thought process “would ultimately lead to the United States and wealthier nations being responsible for the health of 8.2 billion people, regardless of their location, lifestyle choices, or medical history.” 

As part of the IHR recommendations, on May 20, the 78th World Health Assembly (decision making body of WHO)  agreed to a Pandemic Agreement. The adoption occurred with a vote of 124 in favor, 0 objections, and 11 abstentions. 

The amended IHR would give the WHO the ability to evaluate and do risk assessments of future possible public health emergencies and order global lockdowns, travel restrictions, or any other measures it sees fit to respond to that emergency.  While the WHO specifically states it cannot interfere with the sovereignty of a nation, that would seem to contradict the IHR Pandemic Agreement wording.  The WHO would become the “central coordinating authority”. 

Prior to the passage of the 2024 International Health Recommendations amendments by WHO, US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Secretary of State Marco Rubio provided a joint statement stating that the US rejects those amendments. 

In discussing why the IHR amendments were rejected, Secretary Kennedy said he was concerned about provisions for a global health ID system and vaccine passports.  Kennedy stated this would lay the groundwork for “surveillance of every person on the planet”.  

Secretary Kennedy also said, “the agreement is an official treaty that bypasses the US Senate” and the senate “plays a key role in assuring international commitments receive democratic oversight.”

The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations open the door to the kind of narrative management, propaganda, and censorship that we saw during the COVID pandemic, Kennedy said. 

Secretary Kennedy also released a video explaining the action to the American people. He went on to state, “The United States can cooperate with other nations without jeopardizing our civil liberties, without undermining our Constitution, and without ceding away America’s treasured sovereignty.” 

In the joint statement with Kennedy, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said “this administration will never cede control over American public health decisions to unelected international bureaucrats. We will always defend the rights of the American people to self-determination.”

Shortly after the EO was announced, a group of Democrat Congressmen and women asked President Trump to reconsider pulling out of the WHO. Shortly after that, Trump stated he was possibly open to negotiating with the WHO if they would clean up their act. 

Lawrence Gostin, professor and chair of global health law at Georgetown University and director of the O’Neill Institute, stated Trump’s decision to withdraw from the WHO may leave him open to legal actions. Goslin wrote on X that because it was an act of Congress that we joined WHO in 1948, Trump would need congressional approval to withdraw.  Goslin is contemplating a lawsuit against this action. 

If you read the specifics of the resolution, you will note it states “In adopting this joint resolution, the Congress does so with the understanding that, in the absence of any provision in the World Health Organization Constitution for withdrawal from the Organization, the United States reserves its right to withdraw from the Organization on a one-year notice: Provided, however, That the financial obligations of the United States to the Organization shall be met in full for the Organization’s current fiscal year. (62 Stat. 441, 442 (1948).)”

It doesn’t state that withdrawal notice has to be by Congress. President Ronald Reagan withdrew from UNESCO without Congressional approval and then President George W. Bush rejoined.  

I am sure there will be more to follow. 

There is always more to the story when money and power are involved.    

Get your popcorn and stay tune for episode two.

Linda Boyle, RN, MSN, DM, was formerly the chief nurse for the 3rd Medical Group, JBER, and was the interim director of the Alaska VA. Most recently, she served as Director for Central Alabama VA Healthcare System. She is the director of the Alaska Covid Alliance/Alaskans 4 Personal Freedom.

Breaking: Trump Administration rescinds NPR-A restrictions, citing push for energy independence

The Department of the Interior announced Monday that it has rescinded three policy documents that placed new restrictions on development within the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.

The decision, issued by the Bureau of Land Management, reverses guidance from the Biden administration that sought to expand protections for “special areas” of the NPR-A. The Trump administration characterized those previous efforts as overly restrictive and inconsistent with the intent of Congress.

The rescinded documents include:

  • A 2024 Request for Information titled Special Areas within the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska,
  • A January 2025 report titled Maximizing Protection in the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska, and
  • A BLM memorandum issued the same month titled Interim Management of Special Areas within the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska.

According to the Interior Department, those documents were developed without proper consideration for statutory mandates, economic conditions, or the concerns of Alaskans. The administration said the previous approach risked undermining the core purpose of the NPR-A, which Congress designated as a strategic energy reserve.

“Alaska’s resource potential has been held hostage for years by anti-development ideologues,” said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. “The Trump administration is delivering certainty for industry, opportunity for Alaskans, and real energy security for the American people.”

The decision follows directives outlined in Executive Order 14153 and Secretary’s Order 3422, both titled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential.” The administration said the move is consistent with broader energy policies that seek to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil and prioritize the responsible use of domestic resources.

Alaska’s North Slope communities, where the NPR-A is located, have been vocal in their opposition to expanding special management areas that limit oil and gas development. According to the BLM, the public comments received in response to the 2024 request for information reflected a strong desire to maintain access to economic opportunities tied to resource development.

The Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 directs the Interior Secretary to implement an “expeditious program” of leasing in the reserve, while balancing surface protections. Interior officials argued that the previous administration’s approach undermined that statutory purpose by elevating preservation goals over development.

The policy change is also tied to the Interior Department’s broader push to modernize land management practices in Alaska. In addition to the rescinded documents, the administration is rolling back a 2024 rule that had curtailed leasing in the NPR-A. Officials also pointed to progress on a new Integrated Activity Plan, which they say better reflects the needs of Alaska and the nation’s energy goals.

The NPR-A, spanning 23 million acres on Alaska’s North Slope, is believed to contain significant untapped oil and gas reserves. While some areas have long been designated for conservation, others have been open to leasing, subject to environmental safeguards.

Alaska Supreme Court: Even prisoners can make the ballot

The Alaska Supreme Court has upheld the inclusion of federal prisoner Eric Hafner on the 2024 general election ballot for US House of Representatives, affirming a lower court ruling that the state Division of Elections acted lawfully in placing him as a replacement candidate under Alaska’s bizarre ranked-choice voting system.

In a 4-1 decision issued Friday, the court ruled that state law permits the Division to replace multiple candidates who withdraw from the general election ballot, provided the replacements come from the next-highest vote-getters in the primary. The decision clarifies the interpretation of Alaska Statute 15.25.100(c), which was amended as part of Ballot Measure 2 in 2020; that ballot measure creased the ranked-choice voting for general elections and jungle (no-party) primaries.

The Democrats were livid when two of the top four candidates in the August 2024 open primary — Republicans Nancy Dahlstrom and Matthew Salisbury — withdrew their candidacies. That moved AIP candidate John Wayne Howe, who finished fifth, and Eric Hafner, who finished sixth, to the general election ballot alongside then-incumbent Rep. Mary Peltola and Republican Nick Begich.

The Alaska Democratic Party and Democrat Anita Thorne sued to block Hafner’s inclusion, arguing that the law only allows one replacement — the fifth-place finisher. The party also objected to Hafner’s presence on the ballot because he is serving a federal prison sentence out of state and may not be released until 2036.

The Alaska Republican Party intervened in the case in support of the Division’s decision.

The Supreme Court, echoing the findings of Anchorage Superior Court Judge Ian Wheeles, ruled that the statute is ambiguous but must be interpreted in a way that fulfills the intent of Ballot Measure 2, namely, to ensure voters have four choices on the general election ballot whenever possible.

“Both interpretations of the statute are reasonable,” the majority opinion stated, “but the purpose and structure of Ballot Measure 2 favor an interpretation that ensures four candidates appear on the general election ballot.” The court also noted that Alaska precedent leans toward resolving ambiguities in favor of broader ballot access for voters.

Justice Susan Carney dissented, writing that the law’s plain language refers only to the fifth-place finisher as a permissible replacement and does not authorize a sixth-place candidate to be elevated. She criticized the majority for reading additional meaning into what she saw as unambiguous statutory text.

Democrats had also argued that Hafner’s incarceration made him ineligible for office, but the court noted that constitutional requirements regarding inhabitancy apply only upon election and not at the time of candidacy.

Here’s the entire decision and dissent:

Listicle: Trump promised, and delivered on ending sexual mutilation of children

Dozens of major hospitals and health systems have halted the provision of gender-related medical interventions for minors, actions that are likely a result of President Donald Trump’s executive order banning the chemical and surgical mutilation of children.

During his campaign and throughout the first months of his second term, Trump has made stopping so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors a cornerstone issue, repeatedly stating, “We are not going to allow child sexual mutilation.” While politicians have discussed the issue over the years, Trump is now being credited by supporters with delivering concrete results.

This week, Yale New Haven Health and Connecticut Children’s Medical Center joined the growing list of institutions that have ended such services. Though their official statements have not explicitly cited the president’s order, their actions come amid a wave of compliance following the federal directive.

The following health systems have either paused or permanently ended gender-related medical interventions for patients under 18 or 19:

  • Phoenix Children’s Hospital: Stopped prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy to minors.
  • Stanford Medicine: Ended sex-change surgeries for minors.
  • Children’s Hospital Los Angeles: Closed its Center for Transyouth Health and Development.
  • Denver Health: Suspended sex-change surgeries for patients under 19.
  • UCHealth (Colorado): Ceased gender-related services for minors.
  • Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago: Ended sex-change surgeries for patients under 19.
  • University of Chicago Medicine: Suspended gender-related care for minors.
  • Northwestern Memorial Hospital: Halted gender surgeries for minors.
  • Rush Medical Center (Chicago): Stopped offering new gender-related services to patients under 18.
  • Mount Sinai Health System (New York) and New York-Presbyterian: Curbed gender-related services for minors.
  • Penn State HealthUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center, and University of Pennsylvania Health System: Ended services for patients under 19.
  • Children’s Hospital of The King’s Daughters (Virginia): Suspended hormone therapy and puberty blockers for minors.
  • Seattle Children’s Hospital: Discontinued gender-related surgeries for patients under 19.
  • Children’s National Hospital (Washington, D.C.): “Paused” puberty blockers and hormone therapies.
  • Kaiser Permanente: Paused surgeries for patients under 19 at all affiliated hospitals and surgical centers.

The executive action, signed earlier this year, threatens the withdrawal of federal funding from medical centers that provide puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or surgical procedures to minors for the purposes of gender transition. The White House says the policy is a necessary step to “protect children from irreversible harm,” citing growing political, ethical, and medical scrutiny.

Trump’s action comes at a time when the debate over transgender issues has turned the corner in schools, sports, and medicine. His administration is expected to pursue further restrictions, including bans on federal funding for research related to pediatric gender transition and tighter oversight of professional licensing boards.

More restrictions than Iran: Nick Begich slams Biden-era assault on Alaska, says it’s time to unlock energy

By AUDREY STREB | DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION

Republican Alaskan Congressman Nick Begich said his state is a resource giant that can help unlock America’s energy potential in a sit-down interview with the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The former Biden administration imposed a multitude of harshrestrictions on the energy industry in Alaska and chained the state’s oil and gas leasing across almost half of the massive National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A), which President Donald Trump has been working to reverse. Now is the time to shield Alaska from future assaults on its energy industry and unlock its resource potential for the whole country given that the US has a president advocating for energy dominance, as well as a Republican-controlled House and Senate, Begich said.

“Alaska had about 70 executive orders and actions that specifically targeted our ability to develop mineral resources and energy resources in our state [under former President Joe Biden.] These are orders and actions that did not apply to other states. And others have said this — that’s more executive actions against the state of Alaska than sanctions against the nation of Iran,” Begich told the DCNF. “Alaska has a bigger role to play in our nation going forward. I believe we’re going to play that role. We’re going to play it an outsized way relative to the past, and we’ve got the perfect opportunity right now with a Republican House, Republican Senate, and a president that wants to make America great again to get those things done for our state, for our nation.”

After years of staying static, American energy demand is on the rise, and the US is not projected to meet its impending electricity needs, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). The anticipation of more domestic manufacturing, closures of aging power plants, as well as the proliferation of new data centers that burn through large amounts of energy have driven up projections, experts explained to the DCNF previously.

Alaska’s vast energy resources, including oil and natural gas, can help supply America’s growing energy needs, Begich said. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act included major benefits for Alaskan energy, as it mandates leases that could open up about 30 million acres in Alaska on public lands over a decade.

“That’s almost the size of the state of Florida,” Begich said. “That’s how much land and opportunity is being unlocked for Alaska … [and] the rest of the United States for oil and gas exploration and development.”

There are vast amounts of natural gas that remain untapped on the North Slope, and developing the state’s resources could provide power America for decades “or even potentially hundreds of years,” Begich said.

Begich acknowledged that more congressional action is needed to protect Alaska’s natural resource development, which is why he is working on Congressional Review Act legislation to block future administrations from locking up Alaska again, as Biden did.

“When Congress successfully completes a CRA, it prevents any future administration from taking a similar set of actions without explicit congressional approval. So, we’re looking at those opportunities right now in Alaska to unwind what Biden did. And then to make sure that creates a firewall for a future administration,” Begich said. “They would need the full support of the House, the Senate and the presidency in order to do the sort of things that Biden was doing to Alaska.”

The Biden Administration cracked down on Alaskan energy through effectively rejecting necessary components for mining projects, shutting down oil and gas leasing across 13 million acres in the NPR-A, cancelled drilling leases, among other initiatives.

Alaska’s natural resources extend beyond the oil and gas industry, as it has vast opportunities for mining critical minerals, as the state holds 49 out of 50 on the critical minerals listaccording to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

China has a chokehold on critical minerals vital for the economy and national security, though Alaska could help provide the much needed resources if mining is expanded in the state, Begich said.

Alaska can not only help supply America’s growing energy needs, but also contribute to the AI race, crypto mining and space technology innovation, Begich said.

“Energy consumption is now the primary driver of where crypto mining activity occurs. The same thing is true and increasingly true for AI,” Begich said, noting that data center and crypto mining developers are “going to go where the power is reliable, where it’s abundant and where it’s inexpensive. Alaska answers every single one of those [needs] very well. … Alaska is a natural place for AI data centers, for cryptocurrency mining, for traditional data centers… We’re cold, we’re abundant, and we’re reliable.”

Trump trade agreement with Europe: ‘We’ve had decades of bad deals — those days are over’

President Donald Trump on Sunday unveiled a trade agreement with the European Union that will impose a 15% tariff on all imports from the 27-country bloc, a move he hailed as a win for American workers and the US economy.

Trump announced the deal following a meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland. The agreement comes after weeks of tough talk, with Trump threatening to set tariffs as high as 30% on European goods.

“It’s a good deal for everybody,” Trump said after the meeting.

As part of the agreement, the EU will also purchase $750 billion worth of American energy and invest $600 billion into the US economy, Trump said. Specifics of the investment plan were not yet available, but this could bode well for Alaska.

The North Slope holds an estimated 35 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, positioning the state as a key player in America’s energy future. The $44 billion Alaska LNG project aims to tap that potential by constructing an 800-mile pipeline from the North Slope to a proposed export terminal near Anchorage, with operations projected to begin around 2030 or 2031. The project aligns with the European Union’s $750 billion commitment to purchase US energy, particularly liquefied natural gas, as Europe continues to shift away from dependence on Russian gas supplies.

According to the Office of the US Trade Representative, total goods trade between the United States and the European Union was an estimated $975.9 billion in 2024. US goods exports to the EU totaled $370.2 billion, while imports reached $605.8 billion — resulting in a $235.6 billion trade deficit.

By comparison, total U.S. goods trade with Japan amounted to $227.9 billion in 2024.

The tariff deal is the largest trade achievement of Trump’s first year back in office. Last week, the president announced similar agreements with Indonesia and the Philippines, each involving a 19% tariff on imports. His deal with Japan has a 15% import tariff.

Since before he was elected, Trump has made tariffs a central feature of his economic platform, to help restore lost manufacturing jobs, shift the tax burden off of American families, and generate revenue to reduce the national debt. He has frequently criticized previous administrations for “one-sided” trade deals.

“We’ve had decades of bad deals — those days are over,” Trump said. “We’re rebuilding American industry, one negotiation at a time.”

Court reloads Second Amendment, shoots down California’s ammo background requirement

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled that California’s background check law for ammunition purchases violates the Second Amendment.

The decision in Rhode v. Bonta, leaned on a legal framework established by the US Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires courts to evaluate gun laws through a “text and history” test. Under this standard, modern firearms regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of gun control as understood at the time of the Constitution’s ratification.

The Ninth Circuit determined California’s law burdens conduct protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment because it restricts access to ammunition, a necessary component for keeping firearms operable. The court wrote that the law “meaningfully constrains the right to keep and bear arms.”

The panel researched whether the state’s background check requirement for ammunition had any historical analogues, and found no evidence of any similar regulation in the 18th or 19th centuries. Judges concluded that the law lacked historical precedent.

The court also addressed a specific footnote in Bruen in which the Supreme Court noted that certain “shall-issue” licensing schemes may be constitutional. However, the Ninth Circuit found this footnote irrelevant to California’s law, which applies not to concealed carry permits but to the purchase of ammunition. The court emphasized that the California regime imposes a more severe burden by requiring a background check before each and every ammunition purchase, regardless of previous checks.

In affirming the lower court’s permanent injunction, the Ninth Circuit said California’s law is incompatible with the Constitution’s protection of the right to bear arms. Unless the decision is stayed or overturned by the Supreme Court, which appears unlikely, California can no longer enforce its background check requirement for ammunition sales.

Video: Drone footage reveals sprawling vagrant occupation expanding in S. Anchorage greenbelt

Must Read Alaska revisited a wooded area in South Anchorage this month, where we first reported in April on sprawling, often multi-level vagrant encampments hidden within a greenbelt near Northwood/Strawberry/Raspberry Road residential neighborhoods.

New drone footage taken by a concerned neighbor in late July shows not only that the camps remain, but that they’ve grown:

The footage, shot over the wooded area reveals an alarming accumulation of trash, debris, and makeshift structures — all on public land and all still untouched by municipal intervention.

Must Read Alaska brought this issue to public attention with drone images capturing the magnitude of the problem: multiple large encampments only somewhat concealed beneath the forest canopy. In April the camps already showed signs of long-term settlement, with some featuring stacked structures, extensive tarps, and large amounts of household items and waste. Neighbors are now calling it an occupation.

“Nothing has changed,” said a source who lives nearby. “If anything, there are more structures, more trash, and more activity. It’s a permanent occupation now.”

Despite repeated complaints from nearby homeowners and calls for action to the Anchorage Police Department and city officials, no visible cleanup or abatement has occurred. It’s SLAZ South — the Mayor Suzanne LaFrance Autonomous Zone.

The Campbell Creek Trail, once a beloved path for runners, cyclists, and dog walkers, has become a “no-go zone.” Reports of open drug use, theft, and vandalism have steadily increased on social media, even as city officials speak of compassion and transitional housing strategies. The new law that passed this month prohibiting occupation of public land has not touched this encampment.

The latest drone footage shows dozens of tarps, makeshift shelters, shopping carts, discarded electronics, and household waste scattered across the forest floor. Some structures are clearly long-established and reinforced, indicating the occupants have little fear of being removed.

A work session of the Anchorage Assembly is set for Monday to discuss another $18 million in grant awards for congregate shelter services in Anchorage.

Meanwhile, Mayor Suzanne LaFrance announced last week a “Beyond the Beige” program to award $100,000 in public money to muralists to paint images on buildings around the downtown area.

Must Read Alaska will continue to monitor the occupation and provide updates as the summer progresses.

Assembly to award multi-millions in grants for congregate shelter services

The Anchorage Assembly is holding a work session Monday, July 28, to deliberate two major contract awards totaling over $18 million for congregate shelter services aimed at chronically homeless individuals who are not adaptable to other forms of shelter because they generally cannot follow rules of more structured shelters.

The proposed awards come as part of Request for Proposal 2025P012:

  • Assembly Memorandum AM 562-2025 recommends awarding up to $11,115,360 to MASH Property Management, LLC.
  • Assembly Memorandum AM 567-2025 recommends awarding up to $7,147,126 to Henning, Inc.

Both contracts would be administered through the Anchorage Health Department, with the total not-to-exceed amounts contingent on all renewal options being exercised.

The stated goal of the funding is to provide safe, supervised, and appropriate congregate shelter environments for individuals who have not successfully transitioned to other housing models such as low-barrier shelters, hotel conversions, or permanent supportive housing.

The contracts add to a growing list of public expenditures aimed at managing Anchorage’s homeless crisis. In 2024:

  • The Assembly approved $4 million in emergency funds in September to secure 450 winter shelter beds.
  • The state budget drafted in April included another $4 million for a year-round, 200-bed low-barrier shelter in Midtown.
  • The municipality spent $1.5 million to move 150 clients into permanent housing with supportive services.

These figures represent only a portion of the city’s annual spending on homelessness, and does not include all the overhead of running programs, or the public safety responses, including incidents such as the vagrants who set fire to a park in protest of the city’s abatement of the encampment.

A 2023 report noted that Anchorage had spent $161 million on the crisis since 2020, an average of roughly $40 million per year. That figure is likely only a portion of the real costs.

Despite the enormous outlay, residents of Anchorage continue to grapple with escalating problems associated with chronic hobo lifestyles, including shoplifting and camp violence fueled by alcohol and drug transactions and addiction.