This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Among all the nations pushing land-based or offshore wind-energy agendas, Russia is strangely missing. And while China, the world’s largest supplier of rare earth elements needed for wind turbines, is among the countries pushing wind energy, it is also building 43 new coal-fired power plants.

Meanwhile, President Joe Biden’s Green New Deal wind turbines are killing whales, they're destroying America's fishing industry, they;re exploding bats' lungs, they are chopping up flocks of birds, they're reportedly causing a national defense issue by generating numerous false signals picked up by military radar, and also giving false signals to weather radar, causing complicated navigational challenges, and last but not least, are widely seen as an unreliable source of energy.

Yet, wind turbines are being built in the oceans to replace the reliable and cheap energy sources on which the United States has long relied. And of course, as wind farms are constructed, traditional energy power plants are being shut down.

Now comes a new and largely unspoken concern: These American wind turbines are all located outside of the U.S. Territorial Sea.

There are four official zones off the U.S. coast. From the low-water line along the coast, extending out 12 nautical miles (14 miles), there is what is called America’s "Territorial Sea": "The territorial sea is sovereign territory, although foreign ships (military and civilian) are allowed innocent passage through it, or transit passage for straits; this sovereignty also extends to the airspace over and the seabed below."

From the end of the Territorial Sea, the next 12 nautical miles (14 miles) are the "Contiguous Zone," in which the U.S. can "exercise limited control to prevent or punish 'infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea.'"

The "Exclusive Economic Zone" extends from the shoreline to 200 nautical miles (230 miles) in the ocean: "A coastal nation has control of all economic resources inside its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and pollution of those resources. However, it cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea, that complies with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal state in accordance with the provisions of the U.N. Convention, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea" (from 14 miles to 230 miles from the shoreline.)

So, the actual U.S. Territorial Sea extends only 14 miles into the ocean. According to the definition of Exclusive Economic Zone, activities that occur in the region between the Territorial Sea and the outer limits of the Exclusive Economic Zone, must be "in accordance with the provisions of the U.N. Convention."

All built 'outside' the U.S. Territorial Sea

Biden’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has approved building eight offshore wind farms, all eight of which lie outside the U.S. Territorial Sea:

The first one, Vineyard Wind, is being built about 15 miles offshore of Martha’s Vineyard by "Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners [Denmark] and Iberdrola [Spain] through a subsidiary Avangrid Renewables."

The second major offshore wind project, South Fork Wind, located 35 miles east of Montauk Point, N.Y., is being built by Orsted (Denmark).

The third, Ocean 1, located 15 miles southeast of Atlantic City, N.J., is also being built by Orsted.

While 3,400 offshore wind turbines were planned for New Jersey, Orsted canceled two projects, citing "high inflation, supply chain bottlenecks, and rising interest rates." According to Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., "Orsted’s decision was a first step in exposing the economic unsustainability and environmental dangerousness of ocean wind turbines – each the size of the Chrysler building in New York City."

The fourth major offshore wind project, Revolution Wind, located 17.3 miles southeast of Point Judith, R.I., is being built by Orsted and Eversource (U.S.) to route the power.

The fifth, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, located 27 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, is being built by Dominion Energy (U.S.), headquartered in Richmond, Va.

The sixth major offshore wind project, Empire Wind 1 and Empire Wind 2, located 15 miles south of Jones Beach, Long Island, is being built via the collaboration of three U.S. companies including Con Edison.

The seventh project, Sunrise Wind, located about 16.7 miles from Block Island, R.I., is being built by Orsted and Eversource, to route the power.

The eighth major offshore wind project, New England Wind, located about 23 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., is being built by Avangrid (U.S.) based in Orange, Conn.

One key dynamic that many consider potentially disastrous is that as the wind farms come online, traditional energy power plants are being shut down.

The Biden administration enthusiastically claims it is "“on track to complete reviews of at least 16 offshore winds project plans by 2025."

But meanwhile, all of Biden’s already approved wind farms lie outside the Territorial Sea of the United States, meaning the U.S. has "limited control" over this region. Being in the region between the Territorial Sea and the outer limit of the Exclusive Economic Zone, these wind farms fall “in accordance with the provisions of the U.N. Convention”.

The U.N. Convention, in turn, states that within this area the U.S. "cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea that complies with laws and regulations." In other words, once America puts the source of its power outside the Territorial Sea, it is "limited" to how well it can protect that power source.

This raises obvious concerns as to just how secure it is for America’s power to come under a United Nations convention, especially if any new conflict should arise with the U.N.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A spokesman for the Denver Republican Woman organization is warning that a new plan in the Democrat-run state legislature in Colorado is dangerous to a free society.

Because it would end up in speech controls not heard of since … "1984."

That would be the novel "1984" by George Orwell, whose dystopian plot included a "Ministry of Truth," absolute speech controls, and very little truth allowed.

Republican Women Vice President Ashley Troxell, in fact, has written at Complete Colorado, "Novelist George Orwell’s vision of government-controlled thought and speech has taken a disturbing turn in Colorado with the introduction of Senate Bill 24-084. Sponsored by Senator Lisa Cutter and Representative Lorena García, both Democrats, the 'Attorney General Duties to Prevent Mis- & Dis-information' reads like a page straight from Orwell’s classic novel '1984,' and should send shudders down the spine of freedom-loving Coloradans."

She cited the Democrats' demands for a state-monitored "curriculum" that would be intended to "facilitate productive and honest conversations" on various issues.

"On the surface, this may seem like a well-intentioned effort to combat misinformation. But Orwell warns about the perils of government-controlled thought and speech. Echoing the tactics of the Thought Police in Orwell’s novel, the bill represents a troubling encroachment on the fundamental freedoms that form the bedrock of our democracy," she explained.

The plan includes a "curriculum" attempt to "dictate the terms of public discourse."

"Who gets to decide what counts as 'honest' and 'productive' dialogue? By what authority does the government anoint itself arbiter of acceptable speech?" she asked.

It gets worse, she said, because the bill orders the state AG to "coordinate with the Department of Education" to tell schools what resources to use.

"We cannot allow our lawmakers to twist rhetoric in service of an Orwellian agenda. The people of Colorado should see Senate Bill 84 for what it is: a blueprint for thought control, cloaked in the language of public safety. Orwell’s vision has become our reality, and we cannot afford to let our fundamental freedoms be gradually chipped away," she said.

The bill, in fact, proposes spending $150,000 of taxpayer dollars to, among other things, "study how the internet and other media channels, including social media platforms, are used to share and spread misinformation and disinformation."

Also, the AG must "review relevant state and federal constitutional provisions and federal laws and regulations to address preemption and the intersection of state and federal authority."

The AG's assignment, per the law, is to "prevent and combat the sharing and spreading of misinformation and disinformation."

The state-required "curriculum" would be used to push people to "find common ground" and have "honest conservations."

It also orders the AG to "examine the legal framework governing the regulation of online speech," since obviously, the First Amendment is so unclear.

And the proposal includes a threat: of "civil liability" for companies that fail to prevent "the sharing and proliferation of misinformation and disinformation," even if those words are left undefined.

Such controls, the legislation demands, must be instituted immediately, for the "preservation of the public peace, health, or safety…"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

ISRAEL – On Friday, this writer worked on – and submitted to WND – an article headlined "The Waiting Game: What Will Iran's Response be to Damascus Attack?" Within hours, we had our answer.

Here in Israel, the news that Iran's military response had begun was a somewhat surreal experience. Attacks of this nature don't have the immediacy of thousands of people storming a border, killing indiscriminately, and taking hostages. No, there was a period of waiting as the drones and missiles traversed the distance from Iran.

The atmosphere is tense here on the streets of Israel. The Home Command, which gives citizens information about how to conduct life in threatening national situations, ordered schools to close Sunday as Israel braced itself for Tehran's response to the IDF's alleged strike on April 1 against its "consulate" in Damascus – which was, in fact, a local headquarters of the Islamic Republic Guard Corps.

Large gatherings of more than 1,000 people have been banned, although there was still a considerable protest against the current government last night in Tel Aviv.

In the early hours of Sunday, more than 9 million Israelis – Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Bedouin, and others – collectively held their breath as we all wondered what collection of drones and missiles would be shot our way. Several news publications had provided timelines for these various munitions: Drones are slow-moving and would take several hours to reach Israeli airspace; cruise missiles would arrive in about two hours; and most frightening of all, a ballistic missile would take perhaps a quarter-hour. This is to say nothing of reports of Tehran's development of hyper-sonic weaponry.

I had finally gotten my three-year-old son to sleep at around 10:30. At midnight, I drove the short distance to my father-in-law's apartment and brought him back to our home. He lives in an old building, built before the time when it was regulated for apartment blocks to have secure rooms. Our home office doubles as our guest room ... and also our secure room. The walls are slightly thicker than the rest of the apartment, and there are two doors to the room – one a regular wooden one, and the outer one a heavy metal door. There is also a metal plate covering the glass window.

Most of the time it's open – the need for natural light in our ground-floor apartment makes this so. However, this plate had been stuck for months. We were in London when Oct. 7 happened, and by the time we returned, although there was rocket fire from Hamas-controlled Gaza, it was much reduced. Armed with a hammer, screwdriver, and an adjustable wrench, last night seemed like an appropriate moment to get the blast plate moving again and pull it fully across the window.

I prepared the safe room: a six-pack of bottled water, candles, matches, and a makeshift den for our two dogs – made by putting a blanket over my wife's make-up table so that they could go underneath if they needed to.

Before the early hours of April 14, regional analysts had described Israel's alleged attack as a ratcheting up of the IDF's campaign against Iran and its regional proxies – which have encircled the beleaguered Jewish state. Tehran vowed vengeance, and as a response is thought to have launched at least 300 munitions against Israel. It has been reported that around 99% were downed, either by the IDF over Israeli airspace or via its allies, including U.S. and U.K. fighter jets, as well as Jordanian and Saudi Arabian defensive missiles.

Israel's Security Cabinet is already meeting to discuss an appropriate retaliation to the mullahs' provocation.

As of Friday, before the attacks, people in Israel were still out on the streets, young children attended kindergarten and students were going to school and university, the tills at the supermarkets kept ringing – not least in anticipation of the upcoming Passover festival.

Regular citizens were eating in restaurants, hanging out in bars, relaxing on the beach, playing sports, and going to the gym. It's not braggadocious behavior; Israelis are intimately aware of the challenges of their existence in an extremely unfriendly neighborhood, yet they still want to embrace life and live it to its fullest.

Despite the tension, Israelis have developed a dark sense of humor, particularly since October 7. One well-known historian and author replied on his Facebook feed to a day-old Times of Israel headline reading "U.S. said to believe Iranian attack on Israel is imminent: Matter of when, not if," with the following droll observation: "This isn't helpful. We need more precise information. Do we cook for Shabbat or do we not cook for Shabbat?"

So, what comes next? The rhetoric is flying around from all sides. One Israeli official is claimed to have said "Now it's Iran's turn to lose sleep." U.S. President Joe Biden reportedly told Israel's beleaguered Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that his administration would not support a counterattack directly on Iran.

For all the bellicose talk, Israel needs to be careful. Reports emerged over the weekend that its intelligence services miscalculated the likely Iranian response to the killing of IRGC Brig-Gen. Mohammad Reza Zahedi.

Amid the focus on Iran, tensions in Judea and Samaria are reaching a boiling point, following the murder of a 14-year-old Jewish shepherd and the response from settlers that it provoked, including the murder of a Palestinian in reprisal.

Oh ... and Hamas rejected another ceasefire deal.

All in a day in the life of Israel.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The campaign for euthanasia has been bathed in altruistic claims for several years already.

It relieves the terminally ill of pain. It allows them to die with dignity. It gives them control over their demise, which they otherwise might not have in a hospital or hospice. It is a right they should be allowed to exercise. And more.

But a new report from European Conservative documents that the chief of a health insurance conglomerate in Belgium, Luc Van Gorp, admits it is a "money-saving solution."

He heads a group that styles itself as "Christelijke Mutualiteit," or Christian Mutual Insurance.

He is lobbying for changes in the law that would allow people to be allowed to signal that their lives "are done with" and get state help in dying.

The prerequisite right now is that there be evidence of "unbearable suffering."

The report explained the head of the "Christian-in-name-only" corporation expressed his hopes during a recent interview.

"We have to remove the stigma between life and death," he said. "I have never understood why we always debate the quantity of life. We want people to get as old as possible, we do everything to accomplish this. But we never ask the question of how quantity relates to quality of life."

He added, "This debate needs to be placed high on the political agenda. As a society we are going to have to consider how to organize that care [for the elderly] in the future, knowing that we are short on hands already today."

He said an in-house study confirmed an aging population is becoming an issue in Belgium, because by 2050, the number of people over age 80 will double to 1.2 million.

"How are we going to prepare for that?" he wondered. "Not by building mass residential care centers if they won’t contribute to quality of life. If we are not going to be able to sustain the mass of people who need care, how are we going to engage in a talk with them?"

He insists people "should have the freedom to end their lives" "even if there is no unbearable suffering…"

"What if the quality of care is perfect, but the person still does not experience quality of life? What do you do then, when there are still people who indicate that they are done with life?"

He continued, "We have to remove the stigma between life and death. Not through harsh euthanasia, because that scares people away. But by allowing people to indicate that it [their life] has been good [and that it can end now]."

The Christian Institute explained Van Gorp was bluntly pushing for people who are "tired of life" to be allowed to die to "avert a social funding crisis."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Conversations on social media often are less than significant. But on occasion, there comes a stunner that demands, and gets, attention.

Such is a reposting by activist Seth Dillon of a comment from Nathan Prindler, a self-described, "shameless anti-abortion libertarian-conservative Canadian Christian who wants to become American," who succinctly points out that, "Nearly every pro-abortion argument mirrors pro-slavery arguments from the 19th century."

Then he lists them:

"This slave/baby is my property/body. You can't tell me what to do with it."

"No one is forcing you to have slaves/abortions, mind your own business."

"My property/body rights come before the rights of a slave/fetus."

"Slavery/abortion has been around for thousands of years it's never going away. We might as well have a safe and legal system in place for it."

"Slaves/fetuses aren't people, they aren't like us, they're physically different therefore we can own/kill them."

"If slavery/abortion ends most of these slaves/babies wind up on the street without a job."

"Slavery/abortion is in the best interest of the Africans/babies. The world can be a cruel place, so they should enslave/abort them."

"Slavery/abortion was vindicated by the Supreme Court. It's already been decided. It's settled law."

A Twitchy commentary pointed out, "Seth Dillon just ended every single pro-abortion argument ever made … in 1 tweet."

It commented, "It's interesting how the same party that went to war to keep their slaves is the same party now fighting to make sure women can abort up to and including birth. It's almost as if they don't like human beings, in general, and end up on the wrong side of every issue every time."

It even pointed out the warning that those very arguments likely won't stop with abortion.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden has launched an agenda that includes electric cars – for all. He wants oil exploration and natural gas production stifled. Unstable power sources like windmills are his thing.

And while it's all politically correct, it's not realistic.

Now, there's an explanation for where Biden's ideology originates: magic.

Sean Hannity was interviewing Marc Moraco, the chief of the Climate Depot website.

Hannity asked, "Marc, you have spent the better part of your adult life debunking the climate alarmist religious cult. Now it's fully in gear and it's spending all of this money. What do people really need to know about what they are peddling and how it's based on phony science, not real science? You know, look at the study that came out a couple of weeks ago; electric cars may pollute the planet more than gas-powered cars, but all of this never gets told to the American people in the media mob."

He continued, "You would need to unleash innovation if that's what we actually faced. You'd want a wealthier country; you would want a technological explosion. You would want capitalism unleashed because the cleanest environments are the freest environments."

He said Biden's approach is the opposite.

"It's 'magical thinking' from beginning to end in terms of the green agenda. This is just going to hammer the American people. They're spending so much money that there are parts of California where they don't have enough bureaucrats to spend the climate cash flowing in from the Inflation Reduction Act and from the Biden administration. They have to hire bureaucrats even to figure out how to spend it all."

Meanwhile, the ultra-wealthy John Kerry, who served as Joe Biden's climate czar and traveled the world, often in private jets, to espouse elimination of fossil fuels, is blaming resistance across America to Biden's agenda, which includes higher prices for food, fuel, vehicles and more, on one thing.

"G-R-E-E-D."

Kerry's worth has been estimated in recent years as about $250 million. His wife, who inherited from her late husband, Sen. Henry Heinz, of the Heinz food conglomerate, is thought to be worth some $750 million.

Kerry said, "You ask, what is it that's that's in the way, the imperative of status quo, the way money works, the numbers of people who are pressured, some of the oil and gas companies because they weren't doing as well as the ones that weren't doing stuff on the climate. Look at the pressure. You know, a bunch of asset owners and managers in New York, and elsewhere in the world have been under pressure to make more money.

"So, put it down to greed, G-R-E-E-D, greed."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Comments by members of Congress, even stupid and irrational, mostly are protected by the "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution – as long as the comments are part of the legislative process.

But now a letter from a legal team representing congressional witness Tony Bobulinski is charging that U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, the Democrat from Maryland most famous for leading the impeachment case against former President Trump, stepped outside of that authority when he publicly slammed the witness, who has provided key evidence to Congress in its investigation into the evidence for impeaching Joe Biden.

In fact, according to the letter from lawyers Jesse Binnall and John C. Sullivan, representing Bobulinski, Raskin "mocked" various witnesses to Congress and posted a "freeze frame" that shows Bobulinski, with the chyron, "A disgruntled Wannabe Business Partner Turned Trump World Hype man."

Raskin further publicly described Bobulinski as "a bitterly frustrated would-be business partner who collaborated with the Trump campaign" and a "dubious" witness. And he called Bobulinski a "political pawn" and accused him of lying.

The letter warns Raskin, "You are not entitled to any immunity for your defamatory statements. The Speech and Debate Clause comes from Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, and it includes, in relevant part: 'for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.'"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that a state right to abortion is invalid because it was based on the federal rights claimed by the now-defunct Roe v. Wade abortion ruling, which has since been tossed out by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The effect is that a Civil War-era abortion ban in the state can be enforced, after a district court takes further action in the dispute.

"We celebrate this enormous victory for unborn children and their mothers. Reinstating Arizona’s pro-life law will protect more than 11,000 babies annually at all stages of pregnancy while providing an exception for the life of the mother. This includes babies who have heartbeats, babies who can feel pain, and babies who can smile and suck their thumbs. Today’s state Supreme Court decision is a major advancement in the fight for life in Arizona," she explained.

"The compassion of the pro-life movement won in court today, but we must continue to fight. While Republicans have passed bills to ensure that babies born alive after failed abortions receive medical care and stepped up their support for programs that provide life-affirming help for pregnant moms facing homelessness, pro-abortion Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed born-alive protections and her administration has attacked and defunded pro-life safety net providers."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden initially announced a few years back he was going to "forgive" $400 billion in student loans, in a move that largely was seen as an attempt to buy votes from younger Americans.

The Supreme Court said he couldn't. So he reached into his bag of tools and pulled out a different law that might allow that to happen, although there is a court challenge.

Since then, he's shifted some $144 billion of student loan debt from the backs of borrowers to the backs of taxpayers, many of whom did not enjoy their younger years at an Ivy League school.

What he's shifted now amounts to between $400 and $500 per man, woman, and child in America.

On Monday, he announced he's going to go further with his defiance of the Supreme Court, with plans to "cancel" student loans for millions of people more.

And that prompted one commenter on social media to ridicule Christians who don’t support the transfer of debt from borrowers to taxpayers.

Being J. Wood said, "Why is every Christian I talk to vehemently against loan forgiveness? I mean, isn't forgiveness supposed to be what Christianity is all about?

And that presumptive declaration hit a gusher of response, none of it endorsing that concept.

A commentary from Twitchy compiled the responses, including, "It is not 'forgiveness' when you are forcing someone to pay for debt incurred by someone else," and "I've seen some real winners in the non-Christians lecturing Christians on what their religion tells them about what their political position should be on an issue department, but this one is a real doozy."

Further, if individuals are to be "equal under the law," what about those who have already paid their loans? Should they be reimbursed?

It could provide some level of discomfort for those advocating for loan transference, as a person approaching retirement now who paid off a relatively modest $20,000 in loans in his or her day could be owned in the range of $150,000 now, based on the original payments and compound interest.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

An unwritten rule adopted by the Mississippi Real Estate Commission requires real estate salespeople to live within an hour of their supervising broker, or roughly 50 miles, just so the broker can keep tabs on them.

But the Institute for Justice has written a letter challenging that standard, which essentially is a staff interpretation of a rule concerning those supervisory responsibilities and is not written down.

The issue is that with modern technology, brokers have options with a long list of ways of keeping tabs on sales representatives without having them in the same room.

A letter from the IJ to real estate commissioners Vicki Blackwell, Brian Gomillion, Anthony Jones, Joe Stedman, and James Stroo explains, "Conditioning approval of licenses on the applicant’s proximity to their designated broker is unfair, irrational in the Zoom era, and unconstitutional."

The legal team explained, "The 50-Mile Requirement Burdens the Right to Pursue an Occupation. For over a century, the Mississippi Supreme Court has held that '[t]he right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right.' Since then, the Mississippi Supreme Court has guarded that right zealously. For instance, it recently struck down irrational licensing restrictions that prevented anyone ever convicted of a felony from becoming a bail agent."