Former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has once again been confronted with her membership in the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders program. Should we trust her answers?
On April 4th, former U.S. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard spoke at the Independent National Convention in Austin, Texas. Other speakers included journalist Chris Hedges and former Cleveland Mayor and U.S. Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich. After Gabbard’s speech I had an opportunity to ask her one question while walking with her to her vehicle.
I chose to ask her about her listing as a member of the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders (YGL) program. Gabbard’s apparent affiliation with the YGL’s has become a sticking point for potential supporters as the public becomes aware of the dangerous influence groups like the WEF have over national governments. I have previously investigated the WEF’s programs for infiltrating these governments, including the YGL, Global Shapers, and New Champions.
When I asked Gabbard if she would like an opportunity to explain her connection to the WEF she stated, “I’ve talked about this in different podcasts, Dr Drew’s podcast, Cameron Haynes. There’s not much more to say other than the fact that they put me on their website”.
When pressed as to why the WEF put her on their website, Gabbard said it would be a much longer conversation and she “can guess why they probably did”.
As Gabbard noted in her answer, she did indeed address this question in interviews with Dr. Drew and podcaster Cameron Haynes. When given an opportunity to explain her relationship with the WEF, Gabbard told Dr. Drew:
“So basically what what happened was early, I don’t know maybe in the first or second year that I served in Congress, I found out that my picture and name had been placed on the WEF website under this category they have listed as young global leaders, and it I looked at it and I was like okay well they have different people of different political parties and from around the world that are on this website. I was never asked to join and I was never informed by them that they had put my my name and picture on their website and I honestly didn’t know that much about it but people have said oh well what did you learn by graduating from Klaus Schwab’s young global leaders Academy or all this stuff and it’s just it’s it’s unfortunate that there’s a lot of I don’t know false assumptions being made. I’ve never gone to any of their events, I didn’t graduate from anything, so I’ve literally not had anything to do with the WEF. I’m glad to just make clear that there is no connection between me and the world economic Forum”
Gabbard also stated that her record shows that she has “been talking about, warning against the very things that these people are pushing”.
When speaking with Cameron Haynes Gabbard provided a similar answer, stating that the excitement around her election to office led to a number of groups and organizations attempting to recruit her.
“I go back to 2012 when I was first elected to congress there was a lot of buzz around my election and none of it was created by me but I was brought in and there were headlines and news stories saying oh you know Tulsa Gabbard’s rising star in the Democratic party.”
“My name popped up on the the WEF website as someone they had designated as a YGL. I didn’t know anything about it and I thought okay well maybe this is a platform where I can go and deliver my message and bring to the table the things that that I care about right and so all these different things came my way and I took advantage of opportunities.”
Gabbard told Haynes that she has spoken out against the “kind of globalist policies that the WEF pushes”. She also stated that she was not invited to speak at any of the WEF events and didn’t attend any of their sessions. However, she believed, “It’s important for me in that position to be able to take advantage of those platforms and opportunities to be that voice in the room, maybe the only voice in the room, right saying ‘no, we the people are not here to serve your globalist corporate agenda'”.
However, neither of the interviews with Dr. Drew or Cameron Haynes — or any of the other interviews where she addressed the YGL connection — mentioned Gabbard’s March 2015 tweet thanking the YGL for including her in membership.
.@wef I’m honored to be selected as 2015 @YGLvoices – representing #Hawaii amongst leaders from around the world pic.twitter.com/7JdX4mnYk3
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) March 18, 2015
“I am honored to be selected as 2015 YGL – representing Hawaii amongst leaders in the world,” Gabbard tweeted. Gabbard was also congratulated by an Indian politician, to which she replied “Thank you!”.
@ianuragthakur @wef @YGLvoices Thank you!
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) March 18, 2015
When I pulled out a printed version of the tweet Gabbard confirmed it was her tweet. When asked if this means she was selected as a YGL she repeated the claim that they put her on the site without her knowledge.
“I put out the Tweet. I’m thinking, ‘hey here’s an opportunity for me to represent my community’. Didn’t know much about the WEF, what they were about, what they stood for,” Gabbard said in frustration. “I had never gotten a phone call from them, didn’t know anything other than seeing my name pop up on their website.”
When I asked if she had made an effort to get the WEF to take her name down she said she had been trying for a “long time”.
While Gabbard states that she did not know anything about the WEF and had no idea how she ended up on their website, her tweets indicate she was not only aware but proud to be a YGL. If Gabbard is being honest, she was nominated to the Young Global Leaders without her knowledge and still chose to tweet about it and thank them. Perhaps later, with time to research she became aware of the true nature of the WEF and distanced herself.
If this is the case, my next question is why did Gabbard only come forward with a deeper answer after I presented her tweet? Why not simply acknowledge you did get nominated, you were grateful, and later changed your mind? I hope to ask these questions in the future.
Another possibility is that Gabbard was nominated as a YGL willingly and only later — once the public began to scrutinize the WEF — did she choose to distance herself from the organization and her membership scrubbed. This could mean she is still associated with them in some capacity not known to the public. While no evidence currently exists of this possibility it is important to remain skeptical.
Unfortunately, the WEF is not the only suspicious connection Gabbard has made over the last decade.
The Council on Foreign Relations
Another curious point in Gabbard’s political history concerns her involvement with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR is a long-time player in geopolitics whose members include former U.S. Presidents and federal officials.
Researcher G. Edward Griffin has been one of the few working the last few decades to expose the influence of the CFR on U.S. foreign policy. During one of his many presentations Griffin outlines the true role of the CFR beyond the surface level explanation that they are merely a think tank.
“It was spawned by a secret society which still exists today, that it is a front for a round table group originally embodied in JP Morgan and company but now the Rockefeller consortium and that its primary goal is no longer the expansion of the British Empire but global collectivism with control in private hands administered in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world,” Griffin stated.
While this claim might have seemed fantastic only a few years ago, more people are becoming aware of the international cartel of organizations, banks, and individuals who attempt to influence our world. Griffin goes on to list dozens of Secretaries of State and other high level positions within the U.S. government who are members of the CFR.
The trend of powerful U.S. politicians cooperating with the CFR continues in our current political climate. In July 2009, former Secretary of State and Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton gave a speech at the CFR headquarters in Washington D.C. making it perfectly clear who is running the show.
“I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department,” Clinton stated to a room full of CFR members. “We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.”
Former Vice President Dick Cheney also revealed his loyalty to the CFR in a February 2002 speech, only months after the attacks of September 11, 2001.
“It’s good to be back at the Council on Foreign Relations… I’ve been a member for a long time, and was actually a director for some period of time. I never mentioned that when I was campaigning for reelection back home in Wyoming,” Cheney joked to the CFR.
While the CFR no longer lists Tulsi Gabbard as a member, an archived version of the site shows that as far back as February 12, 2019 she was still listed in the membership. She was removed from the CFR membership list sometime between June 28, 2019 and July 2, 2019. Coincidentally, between those dates the website Renegade Tribune published a blog pointing to Gabbard’s CFR membership.
Additionally, in February 2019 journalist Lucy Komisar stated on twitter that her and Gabbard were members of the CFR.
In a March 2019 interview with Niko House and The Convo Couch, Gabbard acknowledged that she was a “term member” of the CFR. Gabbard explains that her main goal as a new member of Congress in 2012 was to “influence and impact our foreign policy” in an effort to end “wasteful regime-change wars”. To this end, she claimed that she joined the CFR as part of a program for people under 40-years-old in an effort to network with influential people working on foreign policy.
“They (the CFR) host speakers and things like that, brought in some speakers to Congress… through that process heard a very diverse set of views from fellows and different people who are a part of that organization, some of whom share my worldview many others who do not,” Gabbard stated in the interview. “Like we said earlier, we can’t be afraid to have these engagements and conversations.”
U.S. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command
The final point of contention relates to her appointment in the the United States Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command. After serving as a major in the Hawaii Army National Guard, Gabbard was transferred to the 351st Civil Affairs Command, a U.S. Army Reserve unit based in Mountain View, California and assigned to the U.S. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command, in June 2020.
While her position in this unit alone does not indicate she is involved in or participating in psychological operations on the American public, it does raise more questions.
One curious fact about the 351st Civil Affairs Command relates to retired U.S. Army Major General Paul E. Vallely. According to his own website, from 1982 to 1986 Vallely commanded the 351st Civil Affairs Command, including all Special Forces, Psychological Warfare and Civil Military units in the Western United States and Hawaii.
Vallely also co-authored a 1980 paper with then PSYOP analyst Michael A. Aquino, titled From PSYOP to MindWar: The Psychology of Victory. Aquino is also infamous for his founding of the satanic Temple of Set.
The book defines MindWar as “the deliberate aggressive convincing of all participants in a war that we will win that war.” The paper contrasts a use of psychological operations such as propaganda with a new approach. The paper contains this passage:
Unlike PSYOP, MindWar has nothing to do with deception or even with “selected”—and therefore misleading—truth. Rather it states a whole truth that, if it does not now exist, will be forced into existence by the will of the United States. The examples of Kennedy’s ultimatum to Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis and Hitler’s stance at Munich might be cited.
Question Everything
Whether or not Gabbard’s answers regarding the WEF and the CFR are sufficient is up to our readers to decide. However, we do think it’s important to continue to ask these questions.
Should we trust someone who was once associated with the CFR, the WEF, and working in Psychological Operations?
Should we simply judge Gabbard based on her words and stated good intentions?
Or should the focus be on her actions? Do those actions include membership in imperialist, technocratic organizations?
Should we focus on her actions as a Congresswoman, now a public speaker?
Lost faith in her a few years back. Now I just think she is controlled op. She is one to watch!
Thanks Derek!
The answer to your question – whether we should trust Tulsi Gabbard, who was selected as a WEF Young Global Leader, and former CFR member? No, outright trust. She didn’t volunteer either membership. It was leaked, and only then did she address and dismiss the importance of her deep state ties. We should listen to her ideas with an open mind, however her claims that she’ll have the power to stand up to the deep state or change any of their policies, beyond unfulfillable promises is highly unlikely. That’s the confusion most of the public has – they don’t understand the power and influence the unelected deep state secret societies like the CFR wield over your elected government, especially her Progressive-Democrat base, who knows nothing about the deep state beyond what’s written in ‘The Guardian’, ‘Intercept’, ‘Truthdig’, etc. Tulsi Gabbard isn’t admitting it.
She certainly speaks like an actress selling her latest movie. At the very least she is a very ambitious social climber and that never bodes well for being authentic.
She is a plant in order to make the public think she is something she is not! This is the Manchurian candidate in action and as COENTELPRO was used to infiltrate antiwar groups and others, she is a product of the deep state. I have asked this question 20 times over the last year without any response from her. Anyone appearing on mainstream news is not to be trusted in the first place. Just as Tucker Carleson on Fox, his firing was just a cover for the formation of a new platform of supposed freedom news reporting that is being funded by the same oliguric behind all the rest of the propaganda news. The amazing Poly has exposed this ruse just recently. Think critically when viewing these actions. No news on corporate news is truthful, and as far as Carleson is concerned, how do you criticize your boss while working for him? Just think for a minute how ludicrous this sounds, and why they allowed him to continue to do so for so long, then stage his termination due to his truth telling. No folks he is not what he appears to be, just as Gabbard is not either.
PHOTOS: Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Hosts Council on Foreign Relations Briefing in Honolulu
https://archive.ph/Wkh6D#selection-1087.0-1087.82
Hard to believe anyone could have been listed to be affiliated with the WEF and CFR by them by accident! Plus always gets huge attention on all the mainstream platforms which we all know isn’t by mistake either. If she wasn’t an insider they wouldn’t let her on…period!! Good work Derrick!
Tulsi is a master of deception! In a recent interview with Jordan Peterson, she referred to the horrible attacks by Islamic Fundamentalist Extremists on 9/11 inspired her to join the armed services. She has woven an extremely intelligent narrative about how we shouldn’t engage in “wasteful regime-changing wars” and her handlers probably agree. But you can’t play to both sides forever and she has a crack in her armor!
She is a member of Hari Krishna, is a Modi lover, is anti-Arab and supports Hindutva fascism in India.
I was disappointed in your attitude in regards to the “no virus” movement, BUT I do like how you are asking the questions that need to be asked to the likes of Big Tree, Hedges and Tulsi and others. Keep up the great work Derrick! And Thank you!
Is there any deep relationship between CFR and WEF?
If these 2 organizations only share a superficial relationship, maybe she can claim ignorance of WEF in 2015. But if these 2 organizations have meetings or that they share many prominent members, ie. one organization is well known to the other, she cannot claim ignorance as a prominent CFR member, as in shown in the photos linked by Mark from comments above.
Billionaires Larry Fink (BlackRock), David Rubenstein (Carlyle) and Marc Benioff (Salesforce) are trustees at the Davos WEF. Fink is a CFR director, Rubenstein is the CFR chairman, and Benioff who owns Time magazine is a CFR member.
The interlocking CFR/UN/WEF network includes banks, corporations, foundations, captured govt agencies, NGOs, and the media. All are pushing the global governance / sustainable development / population control agenda. For more, see the reports by Whitney Webb, Johnny Vedmore, and James Corbett.
Tulsi Gabbard was a one-time “term member” of the CFR (2014-18). Here’s a database of all CFR members since 1921, extracted from their published membership lists. Enter any last name into the search box, and follow the links: ModernHistoryProject.org/mhp?Entity
She was willing to play the game to a certain extent, but changed her mind when she realized how dark the game was. Can she be fully trusted? Who can be? She tends to play both sides, as seen with her support for Biden in the end, when she had all but sworn to fight until the end, and her panicky reaction to the Covid plandemic. Even quite late in the game, she was still backing a Pfizer medicine, and walking the Big Pharma line when critical thinkers had long seen through the plot. She holds certain beliefs that sound true, but she always gives the same talk, so she is not really ‘there”, in the moment, but rather delivering the same message over and over. So I would not back her in the political arena, because she can blow whichever way the wind blows. That said, she is obviously infinitely better than the regular DC trash.
She is herself one big psyop
We don’t know why she “changed her mind”, or even if she has… There’s more we don’t know about these groups than we do, especially their recruiting methods and how they influence their members.
I recall something I read a while back about how the Freemasons (and likely other secret groups, as well) recruit – that people “of interest” are approached nonchalantly, like at a party, and conversed with in a non-pressure, indirect way – how they respond determines if they’re “engaged” further, to further test their character – and, depending on the responses from the potential recruit, this may happen a number of times before they’re ever approached outright to join, or abandoned.
I wouldn’t trust her as far as I could throw her, as the saying goes. She “looks” and “sounds” good, but, as you point out, her talks are all very similar, and there’s never really any action that she back them up with. Her clothing, makeup, hair, demeanor, and mode of speech are all very controlled, very deliberate – like what you’d get if a department store manikin could talk… Bland enough to be appealing to all, yet no real substance – like the eponymous Manchurian candidate.