Connect with us

International

The Fall Of The Mainstream Media And The Biggest Lies They Told In 2021

The Fall Of The Mainstream Media And The Biggest Lies They Told In 2021

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

If the past year has confirmed anything it is that the mainstream media is thoroughly dishonest. Yes, most people already…

Published

on

The Fall Of The Mainstream Media And The Biggest Lies They Told In 2021

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

If the past year has confirmed anything it is that the mainstream media is thoroughly dishonest. Yes, most people already suspected this, but the last 12 months have provided more confirmation than the past several years combined. 2021 has made is clear that the mainstream media is a propaganda arm of political and corporate elitists, from big government to big pharma.

While there have been a few shining examples of independent and mostly unbiased journalism in the MSM, these moments are as rare as Loch Ness Monster sightings and almost as unbelievable. The public has been lied to so consistently that sometimes we ignore legitimate journalism when it pops up because it’s safer to assume the media is disingenuous at all times.

I’ve personally noticed a wash of commercials lately paid for by major legacy media platforms like the New York Times desperately trying to convince the public that they are still relevant. The message is that they are the only “true source” of news information while they beg people to start subscribing and reading their hot garbage once again. Leftist media is crumbling, with online propaganda peddlers and click-bait prostitutes like Buzzfeed and Vox imploding. The lack of profits is obvious and the layoffs have been aggressive.

These platforms survived for the past few years on tech media hype and venture startup capital, but the free money has run out and now they don’t know what to do. Buzzfeed’s scheme was to go public and sell shares, but this plan failed so completely and the company’s stock plunged so hard that the event has exposed all other fledgling tech media to wider scrutiny. In other words no one has faith in these outlets, at least not enough to invest in them, and now the veil of their supposed “success” has been lifted. Buzzfeed used to claim they were worth $1.5 billion; reality revealed they are worth almost nothing.

Legacy media has also seen its audience numbers plummet over the past ten years, but the the last year in particular has been especially unkind to them. ALL of the major corporate news channels saw their audience ratings decline, with CNN seeing the largest drop overall. CNN is facing an epic decline of 68% in it’s prime time numbers in 2021, while MSNBC now has the smallest prime time audience it has witnessed since 2016. Fox also dealt with audience declines but continues to remain the most watched cable news outlet so far, probably because of the continued popularity of commenters like Tucker Carlson .

Some might blame the loss of election coverage, but it’s not as if there hasn’t been enough news to hype in 2021. With millions of people still working from home and facing intermittent covid restrictions this year (in blue states), you would think that this would represent a captive audience for the fear machine. Hell, even YouTube and other social media platforms are forcing MSM content into our faces daily while burying any alternatives. Yet, their numbers are still plunging and audiences are laughing.

YouTube has even removed the “Dislike” button just to protect the corporate media and the White House from the hilarious bombardment of thumbs down they receive on every video. It’s unacceptable for us peasants to have the ability to voice our discontent.

So, where are people turning for their news if not the mainstream? While stats are not as well tracked for independent sources, it is obvious from viewership and subscription numbers that the alternative media is quickly becoming the dominant force in information. My own audience numbers have jumped at least 30% in the past two years alone and this seems to be the trend across the board for conservative and libertarian media. Websites like Social Blade, which tracks YouTube channel stats, support the conclusion that the alternative media is becoming the go-to media.

Why is this happening? It’s actually been a long time coming. Mainstream media numbers have been in decline for many years and their audience age brackets have been increasing dramatically. This accelerated after 2016 when the mainstream media mask came off completely and what we now know as the “Culture War” revealed itself.

The migration of audiences is undeniable in entertainment and pop culture media. Mainstream platforms funded by a steady cash flow from the corporate coffers of Disney, Time Warner, Comcast, Viacom, etc, used to reign supreme in entertainment publications. Moderately sized tech media operations clamored to remain in the good graces of these corporations in exchange for favors and special access. Now, operations with billions of dollars behind them are being thwarted by low cost do-it-yourself YouTube channels like Geeks And Gamers, The Quartering, Nerdrotic, Clownfish TV, etc.

The bloodletting has been so horrific that social media companies (with a shared agenda) have partnered with the majors to suppress these types of channels, demonetizing them or erasing them from public view with their algorithms. Alternative channels get so much attention because they offer something people want – An honest opinion and analysis instead of an opinion bought and paid for with corporate dollars.

In the political and social sphere there have been numerous success stories, including Joe Rogan’s podcast, Steven Crowder, Ben Shapiro, Blaze TV’s ‘You Are Here’, Tim Pool the list goes on and on. In economic media, outlets like Zero Hedge continue to bring in millions of readers that most other mainstream institutions WISH they had.

To be sure, some of these information sources are still playing catch-up to those of us once considered “conspiracy theorists” a few years ago. That’s okay. I’m not saying that there isn’t more that could be done. What I’m saying is that there is a revolution happening in how people consume media and at least some truths are getting out there to the normies.

I have been working and publishing within the alternative media for 16 years and I don’t think many who are new to the field realize how much Americans have broken free from the mainstream narrative in that time. When I got started, to even dream of the audience numbers we now have was considered naive fantasy. Today I continue to find great hope in the growth of independent journalism.

The fact of the matter is, for decades corporate institutions conned the masses into believing only THEY were qualified to act as gatekeepers and guardians of the information bottleneck. Only they were the true “journalists.” They have now lost the respect of the public and their gatekeeping is over.

On that note, lets examine just a few of the reasons why trust in the mainstream has imploded. Lets look at some of the biggest lies perpetuated by the MSM in 2021…

The Jan 6th “Insurrection”

Probably one of the most fake news stories of the decade. The mainstream media has relentlessly parroted the propaganda that the conservative protest at the Capitol Building on Jan 6th was some kind of planned attempt at a national takeover and violent coup resulting in multiple deaths. The reality was much less sexy.

First, the FBI has been forced to admit there is no evidence supporting the claim that the protest was an organized coup. And when an institution that is extremely hostile to patriots admits this, you know the government has NOTHING.

Not a single death originally attributed to the Jan 6 protesters was actually caused by them, so that tall tale has been tossed down the memory hole. While there was violence and an unarmed protester was shot and killed by police (Ashli Babbitt), the result of the event was nothing close to an insurrection. Protesters walked in, milled around for a little while, some people stole some souvenirs, and then everyone left. It can barely be considered a “riot.” Compare this to the BLM riots across the country which resulted in multiple actual killings by people directly participating, not to mention billions of dollars in property damage. The media called these riots “peaceful protests” while condemning the Jan 6 participants as monsters.

When conservatives protest something at least we go to the source instead of burning down the homes and businesses of innocent people. And I want to explain something else to leftists because I don’t think they get it – When you do see a conservative “insurrection” (rebellion against centralized tyranny), they will not be unarmed like they were on Jan 6 and they will not stop until all corrupt elements of the establishment are removed from power. If you were hiding under your beds over the events of Jan 6th, you really have no clue.

The Texas Power Grid Failure

Wow, what a politically charged mess the coverage of this event was. Multiple people die from a freak winter storm hitting Texas and taking down parts of their independent power grid and the first thing the mainstream media does is write hatchet stories about how this “proves they could never secede from the union.” These people are obsessed with centralization to the point that they lose their minds if you generate your own electricity.

Paul Krugman, a notorious spin doctor for the establishment, went on a tirade in the New York Times dismissing any and all evidence that federally funded Wind Turbine failures led to the Texas power grid crisis. The facts on this are buried to this day.

The numbers prove Paul Krugman and the MSM utterly wrong. The Mises Institute published a comprehensive article on this based on analysis from the Institute For Energy Research, but I’ll summarize:

The MSM and Paul Krugman argued that the entire incident was caused by Texas’ ill prepared natural gas powered grid and that Wind Turbines had nothing to do with it. By extension, the MSM asserted that this makes any notion of a state like Texas becoming independent from centralized governance and a centralized grid “laughable.” It’s important to note that Krugman offers no real stats to support his arguments. An “economist” should know better.

The truth is that failing wind turbines were indeed the primary source of the power grid decline. Leading up to the winter storm in February, wind turbines were generating around 28% (nearly one third) of Texas power while natural gas was providing 43%. By the end of the freeze wind power had dropped to 6% while natural gas took up the slack and increased to 65% of the grid. In other words, Krugman either lied, or he was oblivious to the actual stats. While there were failures in some natural gas plants, the majority of the fault was in federally funded wind power. During the grid down crisis, natural gas lost 7% of its overall output while the federally funded wind turbines lost 47% output. THIS IS A FACT.

Also keep in mind that power demand in the state skyrocketed at this time breaking all previous records, perhaps because the state population jumped from 29 million to 30 million from the end of 2019 to the beginning of 2021. Millions of people had just transplanted to Texas in a matter of months to escape blue state policies such as high taxes and oppressive covid mandates. And here is where we find what is likely the core motive behind the media’s lies about Texas – The establishment does not want Americans to migrate and congregate to fight against the mandates. Lying about Texas at any opportunity, even during tragedy, reveals their underlying fears.

Fauci’s Gain Of Function Research

Anthony Fauci is perhaps the highest paid liar in recent history, but his lies go beyond simply acting as a propagandist for the government. The covid pandemic has luckily resulted in a very low average Infection Fatality Rate (only 0.27% officially), meaning, over 99.7% of the population at any given time has very little to worry about from the virus. With the mild Omicron variant now in circulation the death numbers are falling even further. However, there have been fatalities that did not need to happen and Fauci is partly to blame.

Despite the fact that the largest Level 4 virology lab in Asia is in Wuhan, China right down the street from the epicenter of the Covid-19 outbreak, the mainstream media at the behest of the government and the medical establishment has fought tooth and nail to deny any connection. If this was a murder investigation it would be like a detective walking in a room to find a dead body and a neighbor standing over it with a bloody knife, and then buying the suspect ice cream and sending him on his merry way. If you didn’t witness the actual stabbing, why investigate further?

Why was the media so adamant about ignoring the obvious? Maybe because government agencies like the NIAD and NIH under the direction of Anthony Fauci were involved in funding clandestine “Gain of Function” research of corona viruses at that very lab in Wuhan. This would explain why the initial strain of Covid that spread around the world in early 2020 was a 96% match to samples held at the lab since 2013. The other 4% could be attributed to genetic manipulation through gain of function.

Fauci denied any involvement in gain of function research, which is predominantly used for the weaponization of a virus or other microorganisms. The media violently defended him and accused anyone critical of Fauci of being crackpot conspiracy theorists. Well, it turns out he was lying again. The release of over 900 documents related to coronavirus research funded by Fauci and the US government in Wuhan proves the media either blindly defended Fauci without looking at the evidence, or that they share the same agenda.

The Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated

“Breakout case” is now a common term used in the media to describe fully vaccinated people who still get sick from and die from covid infection. But not long ago the narrative was that anyone and everyone falling ill from the virus was unvaccinated. The media and the government still push the notion that unvaccinated people are filling up hospitals and ICU beds, but there is ZERO evidence to support these claims. Meanwhile, the most vaccinated countries on the planet are also dealing with some of the highest infection rates on the planet and continuing deaths.

In Ireland, for example, over 63% of recent covid deaths were fully vaccinated individuals. In Israel, nearly 60% of covid hospitalizations are fully vaccinated. Uruguay, Bahrain, Maldives and Chile all have overwhelming majority vaccinations and all of them have seen spikes in covid deaths and infections.

If the vaccines actually work, then how is this possible? Conclusion: The vaccines don’t work, at least not in the way that pharmaceutical companies initially claimed. Add to this the fact that people with natural immunity are 13 to 27 times more protected from covid than people who submit to the jab. On has to ask – What is the point of these experimental mRNA vaccines with no long term data to prove their safety?

Transitory” Stagflation

Mainstream media denial of US inflation has been commonplace for some time. Now, they can’t hide it anymore. With price inflation hitting 40 year highs (according to official numbers), the pocketbook of the average American is taking a massive hit, and its only going to get worse from here on.

The media appears to be specifically invested in hiding real economic data from the public and protecting the Federal Reserve and central banking practices in general. I won’t get into my theories on why this is the case (I already wrote extensively on this issue in my last article), I’ll only say that an unprepared populace is an easy to control populace when an economic crash occurs.

Covid Keeping Audiences From The Movie Theaters?

The movie industry was on the decline well before the covid pandemic happened, and it is undeniable that this was largely due to the extreme leftist propaganda implanted into Hollywood films since 2016. Yes, Hollywood was woke before then, but nowhere near as bad as the industry has become in the past five years. Hollywood calls this politicization of films “inclusivity,” but having more black and brown people in films is not the issue. Rather, it is the injection of leftist woke ideology and cultism into everything from films to TV series to commercials.

The culture war is VERY real, and sadly, the biggest mistake of conservatives was to mostly ignore the fight in popular entertainment until recently. There is hope, however, and it is found in the mantra of “Get Woke Go Broke!” Audiences are voting with their wallets and the consensus is that they do not want woke politics poisoning their entertainment. For the past couple years leftists in the media have said that the crash in theater profits has been caused by public fear over covid. This excuse was recently destroyed by the latest Spiderman film, which has no woke politics and had audiences coming to theaters by the millions. The film made over $1 billion in 5 days breaking previous records.

Clearly, covid is not a factor at all, but if you look at almost every failed movie this past year there is a thread that connects them – Woke propaganda. No one wants it, no one likes it. The media has no other means of denying it any longer.

There are many other lies I did not get a chance to cover here, but I think you get the picture. Who knows what the next year will bring in terms of spin from our corporate gatekeepers? At least, for now, the alternative media has stepped up to fill the void and bring facts where there was once only deception. In order to get rid of the truth, they will have to get rid of us. Otherwise, the free market has spoken.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

Tyler Durden Fri, 12/31/2021 - 16:25

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Delivering aid during war is tricky − here’s what to know about what Gaza relief operations may face

The politics of delivering aid in war zones are messy, the ethics fraught and the logistics daunting. But getting everything right is essential − and…

Published

on

By

Palestinians on the outskirts of Gaza City walk by buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment on Oct. 20, 2023. AP Photo/Ali Mahmoud

The 2.2 million people who live in Gaza are facing economic isolation and experiencing incessant bombardment. Their supplies of essential resources, including food and water, are quickly dwindling.

In response, U.S. President Joe Biden has pledged US$100 million in humanitarian assistance for the citizens of Gaza.

As a scholar of peace and conflict economics who served as a World Bank consultant during the 2014 war between Hamas and Israel, I believe that Biden’s promise raises fundamental questions regarding the delivery of humanitarian aid in a war zone. Political constraints, ethical quandaries and the need to protect the security of aid workers and local communities always make it a logistical nightmare.

In this specific predicament, U.S. officials have to choose a strategy to deliver the aid without the perception of benefiting Hamas, a group the U.S. and Israel both classify as a terrorist organization.

Logistics

When aiding people in war zones, you can’t just send money, a development strategy called “cash transfers” that has become increasingly popular due to its efficiency. Sending money can boost the supply of locally produced goods and services and help people on the ground pay for what they need most. But injecting cash into an economy so completely cut off from the world would only stoke inflation.

So the aid must consist of goods that have to be brought into Gaza, and services provided by people working as part of an aid mission. Humanitarian aid can include food and water; health, sanitation and hygiene supplies and services; and tents and other materials for shelter and settlement.

Due to the closure of the border with Israel, aid can arrive in Gaza only via the Rafah crossing on the Egyptian border.

The U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, will likely turn to its longtime partner on the ground, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, to serve as supply depots and distribute goods. That agency, originally founded in 1949 as a temporary measure until a two-state solution could be found, serves in effect as a parallel yet unelected government for Palestinian refugees.

USAID will likely want to tap into UNRWA’s network of 284 schools – many of which are now transformed into humanitarian shelters housing two-thirds of the estimated 1 million people displaced by Israeli airstrikes – and 22 hospitals to expedite distribution.

Map of Gaza and its neighbors
Gaza is a self-governing Palestinian territory. The narrow piece of land is located on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, bordered by Israel and Egypt. PeterHermesFurian/iStock via Getty Images Plus

Politics

Prior to the Trump administration, the U.S. was typically the largest single provider of aid to the West Bank and Gaza. USAID administers the lion’s share of it.

Since Biden took office, total yearly U.S. assistance for the Palestinian territories has totaled around $150 million, restored from just $8 million in 2020 under the Trump administration. During the Obama administration, however, the U.S. was providing more aid to the territories than it is now, with $1 billion disbursed in the 2013 fiscal year.

But the White House needs Congress to approve this assistance – a process that requires the House of Representatives to elect a new speaker and then for lawmakers to approve aid to Gaza once that happens.

Ethics

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency is a U.N. organization. It’s not run by Hamas, unlike, for instance, the Gaza Ministry of Health. However, Hamas has frequently undermined UNRWA’s efforts and diverted international aid for military purposes.

Hamas has repeatedly used UNRWA schools as rocket depots. They have repeatedly tunneled beneath UNRWA schools. They have dismantled European Union-funded water pipes to use as rocket fuselages. And even since the most recent violence broke out, the UNRWA has accused Hamas of stealing fuel and food from its Gaza premises.

Humanitarian aid professionals regularly have to contend with these trade-offs when deciding to what extent they can work with governments and local authorities that commit violent acts. They need to do so in exchange for the access required to help civilians under their control.

Similarly, Biden has had to make concessions to Israel while brokering for the freedom to send humanitarian aid to Gaza. For example, he has assured Israel that if any of the aid is diverted by Hamas, the operation will cease.

This promise may have been politically necessary. But if Biden already believes Hamas to be uncaring about civilian welfare, he may not expect the group to refrain from taking what they can.

Security best practices

What can be done to protect the security of humanitarian aid operations that take place in the midst of dangerous conflicts?

Under International Humanitarian Law, local authorities have the primary responsibility for ensuring the delivery of aid – even when they aren’t carrying out that task. To increase the chances that the local authorities will not attack them, aid groups can give “humanitarian notification” and voluntarily alert the local government as to where they will be operating.

Hamas has repeatedly flouted international norms and laws. So the question of if and how the aid convoy will be protected looms large.

Under the current agreement between the U.S., Israel and Egypt, the convoy will raise the U.N. flag. International inspectors will make sure no weapons are on board the vehicles before crossing over from Arish, Egypt, to Rafah, a city located on the Gaza Strip’s border with Egypt.

The aid convoy will likely cross without militarized security. This puts it at some danger of diversion once inside Gaza. But whether the aid convoy is attacked, seized or left alone, the Biden administration will have demonstrated its willingness to attempt a humanitarian relief operation. In this sense, a relatively small first convoy bearing water, medical supplies and food, among other items, serves as a test balloon for a sustained operation to follow soon after.

If the U.S. were to provide the humanitarian convoy a military escort, by contrast, Hamas could see its presence as a provocation. Washington’s support for Israel is so strong that the U.S. could potentially be judged as a party in the conflict between Israel and Hamas.

In that case, the presence of U.S. armed forces might provoke attacks on Gaza-bound aid convoys by Hamas and Islamic jihad fighters that otherwise would not have occurred. Combined with the mobilization of two U.S. Navy carrier groups in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, I’d be concerned that such a move might also stoke regional anger. It would undermine the Biden administration’s attempts to cool the situation.

On U.N.-approved missions, aid delivery may be secured by third-party peacekeepers – meaning, in this case, personnel who are neither Israeli nor Palestinian – with the U.N. Security Council’s blessing. In this case, tragically, it’s unlikely that such a resolution could conceivably pass such a vote, much less quickly enough to make a difference.

Topher L. McDougal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Diagnosis and management of postoperative wound infections in the head and neck region

“The majority of wound infections often manifest themselves immediately postoperatively, so close followup should take place […]” Credit: 2023 Barbarewicz…

Published

on

“The majority of wound infections often manifest themselves immediately postoperatively, so close followup should take place […]”

Credit: 2023 Barbarewicz et al.

“The majority of wound infections often manifest themselves immediately postoperatively, so close followup should take place […]”

BUFFALO, NY- October 20, 2023 – A new research perspective was published in Oncoscience (Volume 10) on October 4, 2023, entitled, “Diagnosis and management of postoperative wound infections in the head and neck region.”

In everyday clinical practice at a department for oral and maxillofacial surgery, a large number of surgical procedures in the head and neck region take place under both outpatient and inpatient conditions. The basis of every surgical intervention is the patient’s consent to the respective procedure. Particular attention is drawn to the general and operation-specific risks. 

Particularly in the case of soft tissue procedures in the facial region, bleeding, secondary bleeding, scarring and infection of the surgical area are among the most common complications/risks, depending on the respective procedure. In their new perspective, researchers Filip Barbarewicz, Kai-Olaf Henkel and Florian Dudde from Army Hospital Hamburg in Germany discuss the diagnosis and management of postoperative infections in the head and neck region.

“In order to minimize the wound infections/surgical site infections, aseptic operating conditions with maximum sterility are required.”

Furthermore, depending on the extent of the surgical procedure and the patient‘s previous illnesses, peri- and/or postoperative antibiotics should be considered in order to avoid postoperative surgical site infection. Abscesses, cellulitis, phlegmone and (depending on the location of the procedure) empyema are among the most common postoperative infections in the respective surgical area. The main pathogens of these infections are staphylococci, although mixed (germ) patterns are also possible. 

“Risk factors for the development of a postoperative surgical site infection include, in particular, increased age, smoking, multiple comorbidities and/or systemic diseases (e.g., diabetes mellitus type II) as well as congenital and/ or acquired immune deficiency [10, 11].”

 

Continue reading the paper: DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncoscience.589 

Correspondence to: Florian Dudde

Email: floriandudde@gmx.de 

Keywords: surgical site infection, head and neck surgery

 

About Oncoscience

Oncoscience is a peer-reviewed, open-access, traditional journal covering the rapidly growing field of cancer research, especially emergent topics not currently covered by other journals. This journal has a special mission: Freeing oncology from publication cost. It is free for the readers and the authors.

To learn more about Oncoscience, visit Oncoscience.us and connect with us on social media:

For media inquiries, please contact media@impactjournals.com.

Oncoscience Journal Office

6666 East Quaker Str., Suite 1D

Orchard Park, NY 14127

Phone: 1-800-922-0957, option 4

###


Read More

Continue Reading

International

G77 Nations, China, Push Back On U.S. “Loss And Damage” Climate Fund In Days Leading Up To UN Summit

G77 Nations, China, Push Back On U.S. "Loss And Damage" Climate Fund In Days Leading Up To UN Summit

As was the case in primary school with…

Published

on

G77 Nations, China, Push Back On U.S. "Loss And Damage" Climate Fund In Days Leading Up To UN Summit

As was the case in primary school with bringing in presents, make sure you bring enough for the rest of the class, otherwise people get ornery...

This age old rule looks like it could be rearing its head in the days leading up to the UN COP 28 climate summit, set to take place in the United Arab Emirates in about six weeks. 

At the prior UN COP 27, which took place in Egypt last year, the U.S. pushed an idea for a new World Bank "loss and damage" climate slush fund to help poor countries with climate change. But the G77 nations plus China, including many developing countries, are pushing back on the idea, according to a new report from the Financial Times

The goal was to arrange how the fund would operate and where the money would come from for the "particularly vulnerable" nations who would have access to it prior to the upcoming summit in UAE.

But as FT notes, Pedro Luis Pedroso Cuesta, the Cuban chair of the G77 plus China group, has said that talks about these details were instead "deadlocked" over issues of - you guessed it - where the money is going and the governance of the fund.

The U.S.'s proposal for the fund to be governed by the World Bank has been rejected by the G77 after "extensive" discussions, the report says. Cuesta has said that the nations seek to have the fund managed elsewhere, but that the U.S. wasn't open to such arrangements. 

Cuesta said: “We have been confronted with an elephant in the room, and that elephant is the US. We have been faced with a very closed position that it is [the World Bank] or nothing.”

Christina Chan, a senior adviser to US climate envoy John Kerry, responded: “We have been working diligently at every turn to address concerns, problem-solve, and find landing zones.” She said the U.S. has been "clear and consistent" in their messaging on the need for the fund. 

Cuesta contends that the World Bank, known for lending to less affluent nations, lacks a "climate culture" and often delays decision-making, hindering quick responses to climate emergencies like Pakistan's recent severe flooding.

The G77 coalition voiced concerns about the World Bank's legal framework potentially limiting the fund's ability to accept diverse funding sources like philanthropic donations or to access capital markets.

With just days left before the UN COP 28 summit, the World Bank insists that combating climate change is integral to its mission and vows to collaborate on structuring the fund.

Tyler Durden Fri, 10/20/2023 - 15:45

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending