Excuse me, but WTF???

Canada #52 >>20272919

House Republicans Introduce Bill to Withdraw Funding from Globalist’s World Economic Forum

by Jim Hᴏft Jan. 19, 2024

A group of House Republicans has taken a firm stance against the World Economic Forum (WEF) by introducing a new piece of legislation aimed at cutting off all federal funding to the globalist organization, The Daily Caller reported.

The bill known as the Defund Davos Act was spearheaded by Representative Scott Perry (R-PA), and joined by Representatives Tom Tiffany (WI-07), Paul Gosar (AZ-09), Diana Harshbarger (TN-01), Andy Ogles (TN-05), and Matt Rosendale (MT-02)

The Defund Davos Act seeks to prevent the State Department, USAID, and other federal agencies from funneling money into the WEF.

The proposed bill states, “No funds available to the Department of State, the United States Agency for International Development, or any other department or agency may be used to provide funding for the World Economic Forum.”

According to records, the United States government has contributed millions to the WEF over the past years. This spending trend is something Perry and his fellow GOP lawmakers argue should come to an abrupt end.

“Forcing American Taxpayers to fund annual ski trips for insular, global elitists is absurd – not to mention reprehensible,” Rep. Perry said in a statement. “The World Economic Forum doesn’t deserve one cent of American funding, and it’s past time we defund Davos.”

Echoing Perry’s sentiments, Representative Tom Tiffany released a statement condemning the funding of the WEF.

“The wealthy WEF globalists should not receive Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” said Rep. Tiffany. “The Defund Davos Act would ensure that U.S. tax dollars are not funding the World Economic Forum and their reset on our way of life. I thank Congressman Perry for leading this important effort.”

The World Economic Forum (WEF), founded in 1971 by Klaus Schwab, has come under scrutiny for its influence on government policies around the world.

The phrase “You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy” is associated with the WEF and its agenda for what it calls the “Great Reset.” The “Great Reset” is a proposal by the WEF to rebuild the economy sustainably following the COVID-19 pandemic.

This phrase originates from a short video the WEF posted in 2016 on Facebook, titled “8 Predictions for the World in 2030.” One of the predictions listed in the video was that by 2030, “You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy.”

WATCH:

Meat will be a special treat. Read more: https://t.co/RiQP6tpkfp pic.twitter.com/7BcRHgnWTx

— World Economic Forum (@wef) April 9, 2018

Critics argue that the WEF is overstepping its bounds by dictating or unduly influencing government decisions. They argue that the WEF’s globalist agenda conflicts with national sovereignty and the democratic will of individual nations.

Just recently, President Javier Milei of Argentina took the World Economic Forum by storm with a provocative keynote speech.

The libertarian leader delivered a blistering critique of socialism and a fervent endorsement of capitalist principles before a crowd of the world’s most influential political and economic figures.

The 53-year-old president did not hold back in his rebuke of the West’s slide toward collectivism — a political theory associated with communism.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/house-republicans-introduce-bill-withdraw-funding-globalists-world/

/Biden Administration Faces Few Good Options Against Houthis

By Iain Marlow (Bloomberg) — January 19, 2024

US officials acknowledge that airstrikes against Houthi militants in Yemen won’t deter the group from attacks that have roiled commercial shipping in the Red Sea. Yet that doesn’t mean the military campaign will stop anytime soon.

President Joe Biden candidly described the dilemma Thursday when he was asked about the efforts to weaken Houthi capabilities after the Iran-backed group’s series of drone and missile strikes disrupted shipping in in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a vital trade waterway.

“Are they stopping the Houthis? No. Are they going to continue? Yes,” Biden told reporters in comments that fit his long habit of saying the quiet part out loud.

Analysts and outside critics — not to mention the Houthis themselves — have said the aerial military campaign won’t prevent them from firing on more ships, especially if the US refuses to target the group’s main backer, Iran. Yet in the absence of any better options for now, the Biden administration may have no choice.

“I think that they don’t have any great expectations that this is going to succeed in deterring or degrading or defeating the Houthis,” said Gerald Feierstein, a former US ambassador to Yemen, who’s now at the Middle East Institute in Washington. “Basically, they came to the conclusion that this was the least bad of the bad options that they had.”

The comments only further exposed the difficult balancing act Biden faces. He must confront the chaos in the Red Sea caused by the Houthis, who insist they’ll keep up their attacks until Israel halts its bombing campaign on Hamas in the Gaza Strip. But he doesn’t want to go to war with Iran or pull in even more participants into the conflict. And he’s rejected calls at home and abroad to press for a cease-fire in Gaza — an idea Israel won’t agree to anyway.

The urgency is only increasing. The Houthi attacks, which the group says are motivated by Israel’s war against Hamas, and the US and UK response have driven down shipments through a waterway that previously handled 12% of global seaborne trade.

Shippers are diverting everything from oil and gas to livestock to commercial goods around the southern tip of Africa. Insurance costs have also shot up and some underwriters are trying to exclude US, UK and Israeli vessels from coverage.

Biden’s remarks on Thursday prompted hasty clarification from National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, who said every strike — the US has launched five so far, starting last Thursday night — makes it harder for the Houthis to keep up their attacks.

At the same time, a tentative strategy may be emerging, with a focus on continuing the strikes against the Houthis, pressuring Iran and seeking more international support for the campaign. That’s despite the understanding that the battle-hardened militants have already endured years of airstrikes from Saudi Arabia’s military, have little infrastructure of value to target and have been able to repair or replenish their weapons, thanks to Iran.

The Biden administration doesn’t think Iran initially prompted the Houthis to start attacking commercial vessels, but now believes that Tehran is helping the militants with a mix of supplies, as well as tactical and targeting information, one US official said. With the Houthis not backing down, the US expects it will take some time to resolve the situation in the Red Sea, the person added.

The UK, which has been the only US partner actively participating in the Yemen strikes within a broader coalition, has tried to pressure Iran diplomatically but concluded that only military action against the Houthis could deter Tehran, a British official said. Still, UK is wary of an open-ended conflict and regional escalation, added the official, who was granted anonymity to speak about private deliberations.

The US is now attacking in real-time as militants in Yemen mobilize missiles for attacks on commercial vessels. So far, it seems the military response has only emboldened the Houthis. “It is an honor for our people to be in such a confrontation with these evil forces,” Abdul Malik al-Houthi, the head of the militant group, said in a speech on Thursday, citing the US, the UK and Israel.

“The Biden administration is in bind,” said Aaron David Miller, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former State Department official. “Biden’s preemptive and responsive attacks will have to do for now until the Israel-Gaza war ends and the Houthis ease up their strikes.”

More:

https://gcaptain.com/biden-administration-faces-few-good-options-against-houthis/