Discussion 2

 

 

 

 

 

 


If Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates do not run the World Economic Forum, Then Who Does?

The World Economic Forum (WEF) is governed by a structured leadership framework comprising the Board of Trustees and the Managing Board. The Board of Trustees includes distinguished individuals from various sectors who oversee the organization's mission and values. The Managing Board, led by President Børge Brende, functions as the executive body responsible for the Forum's operations and strategic initiatives. Financial Times+13World Economic Forum+13World Economic Forum+13

In May 2024, Klaus Schwab, the founder of the WEF, announced his decision to step down from his executive role by January 2025, transitioning to the position of chairman of the Board of Trustees. This move was part of a broader succession plan aimed at ensuring the organization's continued leadership in global public-private cooperation. Financial Times+2Reuters+2Wikipedia+2

Bill Gates does not hold a formal leadership position within the WEF. While he has participated in WEF events and discussions, his involvement is as a participant rather than as part of the governing body.Wikipedia

Therefore, the WEF is led by its Board of Trustees and Managing Board, with Klaus Schwab serving as chairman of the Board of Trustees and Børge Brende as President, overseeing the organization's strategic direction and operations.AP News+9World Economic Forum+9World Economic Forum+9

Who is Børge Brende?

Børge Brende, born on September 25, 1965, in Odda, Norway, is a distinguished Norwegian politician and diplomat who has been serving as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the World Economic Forum (WEF) since 2017. Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre+2Wikipedia+2Wikipedia – Die freie Enzyklopädie+2

Political Career:

  • Ministerial Roles: Brende has held several key positions in the Norwegian government:LinkedIn+1World Bank Blogs+1

    • Minister of the Environment (2001–2004): During his tenure, he chaired the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development from 2003 to 2004.World Bank Blogs+2Wikipedia+2LinkedIn+2

    • Minister of Trade and Industry (2004–2005): In this role, he focused on enhancing innovation and development, leading to a 30% increase in funding for innovation by the end of his term.LinkedIn+2PMNCH+2Wikipedia+2

    • Minister of Foreign Affairs (2013–2017): As Foreign Minister, Brende played a pivotal role in normalizing Norway's relations with China and served as a guarantor in the Colombian peace process. Wikipedia

  • Parliamentary Service: He was a Member of the Norwegian Parliament (Storting) representing Sør-Trøndelag from 1997 to 2009, serving as Deputy Chairman of the Standing Committee on Energy and Environment during his last term. Wikipedia+5PMNCH+5Sustainable Development Goals+5

Other Leadership Roles:

  • Secretary-General of the Norwegian Red Cross (2009–2011): Brende led significant relief operations in Haiti and Pakistan, two of the largest in the organization's history. PMNCH+1LinkedIn+1

  • Managing Director at the World Economic Forum (2008–2009, 2011–2013): Before becoming President, he was responsible for policy initiatives and engagement with non-business constituents. Wikipedia

Education:

Brende holds a Bachelor of Arts in economics, law, and history from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim. World Bank Blogs+2Sustainable Development Goals+2World Economic Forum+2

Current Roles and Affiliations:

  • President and CEO of the World Economic Forum: Since 2017, Brende has been leading the WEF, focusing on fostering public-private cooperation to address global challenges. 

  • Board Memberships and Advisory Roles:

    • Member of the Board of Directors of P4G – Partnering for Green Growth and the Global Goals 2030.

    • Member of the Advisory Council of the Harvard International Negotiation Program.

    • Member of the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development (CCICED).

    • Member of the Strategic Committee of the Paris School of International Affairs at Sciences Po.

    • Member of the Board of the Bilderberg Meetings.

Brende's extensive experience in international diplomacy, environmental policy, and economic development has positioned him as a key figure in global discussions on sustainable development and international cooperation.

 

Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

The WEF Mission

Find more information by visiting this site Our Mission | World Economic Forum


Douglas Murray on the JFK files, where Covid came from & conspiracy culture

 

Douglas Murray on the JFK files, where Covid came from & conspiracy culture

 

The Spectator's columnist Douglas Murray joins deputy and US editor Freddy Gray to discuss his recent column on why the JFK conspiracies just won't die. They also discuss the moon landing, the emergence of American self-hatred, and the return of the post-truth era.

 

Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.


Glenn Beck & BlazeTV Hosts REACT to Trump's Address to Congress

 

Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.


Congressional Debate: Rep. Jim Jordan Challenges Rep. Ilhan Omar

 

In a recent session of the House Judiciary Committee, a notable exchange occurred between Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. Rep. Jordan delivered a speech addressing various policy positions, which led to a direct challenge to Rep. Omar's perspectives. This interaction has garnered significant attention, reflecting the ongoing debates within Congress.

 

From a conservative perspective, many viewed Jordan’s speech as a necessary pushback against policies they believe have weakened law enforcement and national security. Conservatives argue that Omar’s progressive stances, particularly her past criticisms of law enforcement and support for reducing police funding, have contributed to rising crime and instability in many cities. Jordan’s remarks were seen as a strong defense of law and order, emphasizing the need to support police officers and ensure that policies prioritize the safety of American citizens. His firm stance resonated with many on the right, who see figures like Omar as emblematic of policies they believe have negatively impacted public safety and economic stability.

 

Rep. Jordan, known for his conservative stance, has previously criticized certain policy proposals, emphasizing concerns over national security and law enforcement. In this instance, his remarks were directed at positions held by Rep. Omar, highlighting the ideological differences between the two lawmakers.

 

From a conservative viewpoint, Jordan’s criticism reflects growing frustration with what many on the right see as a progressive agenda that undermines national security and law enforcement. Conservatives argue that policies championed by lawmakers like Omar, including leniency on immigration enforcement and criminal justice reform, have contributed to rising crime rates and weakened border security. Jordan’s direct challenge was seen as a necessary stand against policies they believe prioritize ideological activism over the safety and stability of American communities. Many conservatives applauded his willingness to confront what they view as failed progressive policies, reinforcing the Republican Party’s message of law and order.

 

Rep. Omar, representing a progressive viewpoint, has been an advocate for various reforms, including changes to law enforcement practices. The exchange with Rep. Jordan underscores the broader discussions and differing perspectives within the legislative body.

From a conservative perspective, Omar’s advocacy for law enforcement reform is often seen as part of a broader progressive push that weakens police departments and emboldens criminals. Conservatives argue that her support for policies like defunding the police and reducing sentencing for certain crimes has led to increased crime in cities with similar policies. Many on the right see Jordan’s challenge as a necessary counterbalance to these initiatives, emphasizing the need for strong policing, tougher sentencing laws, and a justice system that prioritizes victims over criminals. Jordan’s remarks resonated with conservatives who believe progressive policies on law enforcement have led to dangerous consequences for law-abiding citizens.

 

This incident is part of a series of debates that illustrate the dynamic and often contentious nature of policy discussions in Congress. Such interactions are indicative of the diverse viewpoints that shape legislative processes and the importance of dialogue in addressing complex national issues.

 

From a conservative standpoint, this exchange highlights the growing divide between those advocating for traditional American values and those pushing progressive policies that many on the right view as radical. Conservatives argue that debates like this expose what they see as the dangers of leftist ideology, particularly when it comes to national security, law enforcement, and economic policy. Many on the right believe that progressive lawmakers like Omar prioritize social justice activism over practical governance, often disregarding policies that ensure law and order. Jordan’s speech, in their view, represents a much-needed defense of conservative principles in a political landscape where they feel their values are constantly under attack.

 

 

Sources:

 

 

Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.    


John Fetterman is a HERO for what he did at The View

 

During a recent appearance on "The View," Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania made headlines by suggesting that former President Donald Trump's trial in New York City over alleged hush money payments was "politically motivated." This assertion led to a notable exchange with co-host Sunny Hostin, who challenged Fetterman's perspective.

 

Fetterman emphasized the importance of an impartial judicial system and cautioned against the use of legal actions for political purposes. He argued that the charges against Trump, which were elevated from misdemeanors to felonies, might not have been pursued if another individual were involved. This viewpoint aligns with previous statements by former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who suggested that the case against Trump was unlikely to proceed if not for his identity and presidential candidacy.

 

Additionally, Fetterman shared insights from his meeting with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, describing the former president as "kind" and "cordial." He highlighted the importance of engaging with political opponents and emphasized the need for bipartisanship in governance.

Fetterman's remarks have been praised by some for their pragmatism and willingness to cross partisan lines, while others have criticized them as controversial. His approach underscores the complexities of political discourse and the challenges of navigating bipartisan relationships in contemporary politics.

 

SOURCES

John Fetterman is a HERO for what he did at The View😂😂 - YouTube

Sen. John Fetterman Discusses His Takeaways From Visit To Mar-a-Lago | The View - YouTube

 

Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. 


Try Not to CRINGE While Watching These Awkward Clips from The DNC

 

The DNC met over the weekend to elect their new leadership. It was an unintentionally hilarious circus that proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Democrats learned nothing from their embarrassing defeat.


Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.