What is Avaaz.org and why does it claim Climategate is misinformation?
By Ron Chapman
Mar 6, 2010 - 5:32:00 AM
Ron: Recently on the AH Support forum some questions were asked about the role of some high profile global social and environmental advocacy organizations. As these discussions may have wider appeal I am posting some of my responses here. Here are three about AVAAZ.
I would be interested to know your opinion of the role of avaaz who
seem to have had fingers in many pies and who now claim that the CO2
"climategate" is misinformation (see below) .... they are presently
mobilising a lot of people it seems .. and trying to mobilise a
lot of money ....
The best way to silence dissent is to lead it.
The Jewish matrix controllers have always efforted to control both
sides of any serious debate or conflict. The current Climategate
issue is no exception. In fact it is a good example of why they do
it. Given that CO2 being responsible for global warming and climate
change is a LIE orchestrated by the Jew banksters and their
corporate cohorts, there is a great need for them to be able to
marshall large scale seemingly independent opinion claiming that the
evidence coming out about scientists corruptly pushing the premise
that CO2 is responsible for global warming, is incorrect or worse.
Thus we get a lot of bullshit about how the emails from East Anglia
Uni were HACKED! HEAVEN FORBID! The emails were "HACKED" you say?
That's a terrible crime isn't it? Well "No" it isn't. First because
the emails may have been made available by a whistle blower within
the Uni or otherwise in the "know". Second, because in all the
circumstances the world has a right to know the truth about this
matter. Third, even if it is true that emails about pseudo global
warming were "hacked", that action is a trivial crime compared to
the massive crime involved in the criminal conspiracy to foist upon
our world the United Nations Climate Change Treaty which is designed
to impoverish and enslave the whole population of this planet.
Note: A typical ploy by the matrix controllers' disinformation
agents is to divert attention from core issues onto trivial side
issues in this way. Given that matrix controlled governments in the
US and around the world routinely invade the privacy of their
citizens in all sorts of electronic and other ways, WHY is it
suddenly such a heinous crime for the East Anglia Uni Climategate
emails to have been "hacked" - if indeed they were?
IMHO the purpose of "Avaaz" (and associated organisations like "Get
Up" in Australia) is to LEAD THE OPPOSITION so that the Jewish New
World Order banksters control both sides of every debate. Rather
like "Get Up" in Australia, Aveez came out of nowhere in 2007 and
garnered a huge a membership and following almost overnight. How?
Where did the money come from to organise such an instantly
successful " protest" and a mass membership, popular pressure group?
Well, I doubt very much that the money came from the meagre
contributions of the working class whose pay, conditions and
employment is rapidly disappearing up the fundamental orifice of the
declining Anglo-US and EU economies, or the pockets of the rapidly
disappearing middle classes in those countries.
Sooo, WHO has the money to organise these seemingly spontaneous
popular mass movements demanding "change"? (that you can believe
in??) Arguably the money and the "change" rhetoric and ideas comes
from the same sources that have given our world all the other
successful mass movements over the last 250 years, namely the French
Revolution; the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917; the rise of
Nazism in Germany in the early 1930s; the creation of Israel in the
1940s; the Consumer Society, Feminism and the Drugs and Rock and
Roll Generation in the 1950s-1970s; the Washington Consensus and
economic rationalism cum globalisation in the 1980s and so on. Sooo,
WHO are they? Who are the people who continue to provide the money
to give the world Hegelian dialectical "SOLUTIONS" to problems they
have created for the purpose? WHO is behind the never ending
Hegelian "Problem, Chaos, Solution" mechanism that has dominated
global political life for centuries? WHO always appears to bring
"Order out of Chaos" in our world? Let me guess. The Jewish
banksters and their willing minions, puppets and hangers-on, aka
"the matrix controllers".
Frankly I cannot be bothered researching and deconstructing the
specific origins and originators of the Avaaz phenomenon and the
mechanisms used to put it in place to sway global public opinion in
relation to the last and possibly the greatest bankster scam of all:
Global Warming, the SOLUTION to which is supposed to be the
Copenhagen Treaty which will require that most global citizens pay
vastly increased taxes and much higher prices for electricity and
power supplies generally so that our world will get cooler and the
oceans will not rise. YEAH RIGHT! You Betcha! Where do I sign up?
What amazes me is that people around the world continue to accept
that paying corporations more for power supplies and paying higher
taxes to governments will somehow control the climate and reverse
the Earth changes causing so-called global warming and climate
change. Presumably climatic and other Earth changes have always been
with us so why do people now believe that paying higher taxes and
power charges will reverse such changes?
The devil is always in the detail and almost nobody wants to examine
the detail. That's why ersatz mass popular "movements" like Avaaz
work; and why most people believe the simplistic lies pumped out by
their organisers, corrupt politicians and the MSM day and night ad
nauseam. For instance, how many "members" of Avaaz (or Get Up in
Australia) have bothered their pretty heads to actually read the
draft United Nations Climate Change Treaty (see: http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu
... OR to watch Lord Christopher Monckton's critique of that draft
treaty (see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zOXmJ... )
OR read articles like the Wall Street Journal article entitled `Has
Anyone Read the Copenhagen Agreement - U.N. plans for a new
'government' are scary.' by Janet Albrechtsen dated 28/10/09? See:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703574604574500580285679074.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#printMode
For instance Janet Albrechtsen (a columnist for "The Australian"
newspaper) says, among other things:
`The "scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the
Convention" that starts on page 18 contains the provision for a
"government." The aim is to give a new as yet unnamed U.N. body the
power to directly intervene in the financial, economic, tax and
environmental affairs of all the nations that sign the Copenhagen
The reason for the power grab is clear enough: Clause after
complicated clause of the draft treaty requires developed countries
to pay an "adaptation debt" to developing countries to supposedly
support climate change mitigation. Clause 33 on page 39 says that
"by 2020 the scale of financial flows to support adaptation in
developing countries must be [at least $67 billion] or [in the range
of $70 billion to $140 billion per year]."
And how will developed countries be slugged to provide for this
financial flow to the developing world? The draft text sets out
various alternatives, including option seven on page 135, which
provides for "a [global] levy of 2 per cent on international
financial market [monetary] transactions to Annex I Parties." Annex
1 countries are industrialized countries, which include among others
the U.S., Australia, Britain and Canada.
To be sure, countries that sign international treaties always cede
powers to a U.N. body responsible for implementing treaty
obligations. But the difference is that this treaty appears to have
been subject to unusual attempts to conceal its convoluted contents.
And apart from the difficulty of trying to decipher the U.N.
verbiage, there are plenty of draft clauses described as
"alternatives" and "options" that should raise the ire of free and
democratic countries concerned about preserving their sovereignty.
Lord Monckton himself only became aware of the extraordinary powers
to be vested in this new world government when a friend found an
obscure U.N. Web site and searched through several layers of
hyperlinks before discovering a document that isn't even called the
draft "treaty." Instead, it's labelled a "Note by the Secretariat."
Interviewed by broadcaster Alan Jones on Sydney radio Monday, Lord
Monckton said "this is the first time I've ever seen any
transnational treaty referring to a new body to be set up under that
treaty as a 'government.' But it's the powers that are going to be
given to this entirely unelected government that are so
frightening." He added: "The sheer ambition of this new world
government is enormous right from the start, that's even before it
starts accreting powers to itself in the way that these entities
inevitably always do."'
Can anyone say "New World Order"?
See also http://abundanthope.net/pages/article_4152.shtml
As Avaaz is vociferously advocating this perfidious United Nations
Climate Change Treaty it is clearly and unequivocally PART OF THE
PROBLEM, NOT THE SOLUTION. By their fruits you shall know them!
Incidentally, IF a United Nations Climate Change Treaty is signed in
Copenhagen along the lines of the current draft treaty the other
issues upon which Avaaz says it is actively campaigning like, for
instance its "Stop the Clash of Civilizations" campaign for peace in
the Middle East and its somewhat anaemic `End the war in Iraq'
campaign will become irrelevant. Why? Because once the matrix
controllers add their new "government" powers under the Copenhagen
Treaty to their EU government powers acquired on 1 December 2009
under the Lisbon Treaty and their stranglehold on US governance
through Corporate US, issues relating to Israel, Iraq and almost
anything else cease to matter. Absent Celestial intervention or
Earth Changes that collapse existing political, civil and economic
structures globally, the hidden global matrix controllers will have
in fact achieved their New World Order, however it might be described.
As they say, `don't judge a seemingly popular mass public interest
group by its "cover" but by its fruits.'
Avaaz.org is an international civic organization that promotes
activism on issues such as climate change, human rights, and
religious conflicts.[Avaaz mission statement, 17 October 2007]
Ron: Avaaz says it launched in January 2007 although it only
published a mission statement on 17 October 2007. The implication is
that it has been established to PUSH the Climate Change Treaty
agenda despite the yada, yada, yada that its `stated mission is to
"ensure that the views and values of the world's people inform
global decision-making." YEAH RIGHT. You Betcha!
And WHO actually decides WHICH of the views and values of the
world's people will be pushed forward to "inform global decision-
making"? Is that process transparent? Who controls the selection
process as regards issues on the Avaaz agenda?
IF Avaaz really aims to change our world WHY does it focus so much
on marginal issues like Burma, Tibet, China and Zimbabwe ? Surely
the TEN MILLION deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan and the proliferation of DU in that region resulting from Anglo-US invasions, bombings etc
are more relevant to global peace and security than the `Burma
Uprising', the Burma Cyclone, Tibet, `Lighting a Candle for China',
the Congo, the mythification of Canada's healthcare system and
firing Paul Wolfowitz as World Bank president for pampering his girl
friend at the bank's expense (an obvious diversion)* and so on. All
of this stuff looks like a smokescreen to hide the real agenda which
is to PUSH for a UN Climate Change Treaty. Why am I wrong?
*To get the flavour of Avaaz's diversionary tactics just look at
their self congratulatory spiel about the inconsequential removal of
Wolfowitz from the World Bank:
`Fire Paul Wolfowitz - In response to Paul Wolfowitz's policies and
conduct as World Bank President, Avaaz produces a spoof video,
petition and rolling protests that catch the imagination of the
international media. Wolfowitz resigns.
When a corruption scandal broke around Wolfowitz, Avaaz broadened
the story from an issue of propriety to show how unpopular his
leadership was. We launched a "Fire Wolfowitz" petition and created
"The Bank", a video spoof starring Wolfowitz, based on sitcom "The
The video caught the imagination of the international news media
[Ron: ie the bankster controlled mass media] including USA Today,
the Guardian and the Washington Post, and aired on national
television in France and Germany. It was also very popular among
staff at the World Bank, who sent in many messages of support. One
wrote: "The people of Avaaz have been amazing. There is no doubt you
made an enormous difference". [Ron: I rest my case!]
We teamed up with other activists to protest outside the Bank in
Washington DC, then hand-delivered our petition carrying flags of
countries around the world. A crowd of reporters turned out. [Ron: NO reporters would have 'turned out' had their Jewish owners and controllers not wanted the issue publicised.] Our petition was taken directly to the Board--the body in charge of Wolfowitz's fate. Wolfowitz stepped down within the week, and the global outcry helped make it happen.'
This stuff is standard diversionary entertainment for the masses who
feel good about making a difference when really nothing at the World
Bank or anywhere else changed. All that happened was that Wolfowitz
and his girl friend (note the sanitised references to `Wolfowitz's
policies and conduct'; `an issue of propriety;' and `a corruption
scandal broke around Wolfowitz') had to move on to other well paying jobs for the cabal.
`Avaaz launched in January of 2007--and since then, has run major
campaigns around the world.'
`The organization operates in thirteen languages, and claims more
than three million members worldwide.'
`G8 Wake Up Call - Avaaz runs a global TV ad campaign (left) and
delivers a huge petition -- the G8 planning meeting agrees to put
climate at the top of their agenda.' http://avaaz.org/en/report_back_1/
Ron: My, but hasn't Avaaz come a looong way in such a short time
since early 2007?! How dooo they do that? And how can Avaaz afford
to run global TV Climate Change advertisement campaigns and other
`major campaigns around the world.'? Just asking?
On 14/12/09 comments were sought on an AVAAZ email "Cash for Coal or climate?" It included:
'Let´s challenge Obama to be a real climate leader, end fossil fuel subsidies and use the money to lead the world to a strong treaty in Copenhagen! Take action now.
The global Avaaz community is doing amazing work to win a deal in Copenhagen. More than 3000 of us hosted vigils in 139 countries on Saturday, and helped build one of the biggest days of action on climate in history. We're running huge advertisements in the Financial Times newspaper on Monday to drive home our call for climate finance. We're swamping the conference centre in Copenhagen with creative stunts from aliens to walking trees; we're flooding key leaders with phone calls in Europe, Africa, Latin America and Asia--and as island states like Tuvalu fight for their survival, we're supporting them with flash protests in the halls.
This is a moment that calls us to do everything we can. [Ron: Why?] Let's call on Obama to join us--and lead the way to win a deal and make history.[Ron: What history? Total global slavery level taxation and prices for power supplies forever?]
With hope and determination,
Ben, Ricken, Alice, Paul, Luis, Iain, Veronique, Graziela, Pascal, Paula, Benjamin, Raj, Raluca, Taren, David, Josh and the whole Avaaz team. [Ron: Notice that although this is a multi national organisation with offices in many major cities and some three million members the people urging the masses to take action and/or donate to the cause provide ONLY a bunch of purported first names and no family names or other identifying characteristics. Why is that? Why should anyone take any notice of an email purporting to be from "Tom, Dick and Harry, Millie, Madge and Mabel? And who are "the whole AVAAZ team"? Inquiring minds want to know.]
Some further analysis of Avaaz's propaganda is in order.
Avaaz.org says it is `an independent, not-for-profit global campaigning organization that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people inform global decision-making…Avaaz receives no money from governments or corporations, and is staffed by a global team based in Ottawa, London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Buenos Aires, and Geneva.'
It is no secret that the Rockefellers and their ilk hide most of their wealth in tax free so-called charitable foundations and trusts. It is therefore quite possible that Avaaz, which says it is `entirely funded by donations' receives its main DONATIONS from such institutions which are NOT "governments or corporations" but ARE bankster organisations. Given that Avaaz boasts about operating offices in Ottawa, London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Buenos Aires, and Geneva and funding massive global campaigns, yada, yada, yada … it must get very substantial funding from SOMEWHERE.
Frankly, even if it published audited public accounts which did not reveal any covert funding from bankster sources I would not believe them. After all, the banksters' activities and fundamental aspects of US, EU (and many other) governments' activities are fraudulent and criminal, so one can hardly believe that the corporate auditors (if any) who would sign off on Avaaz' accounts, could be expected to be diligent, honest and truthful.
The main argument Avaaz presents in this email, namely that the US should spend 10 billion USD of taxpayer money on subsidising "climate finance" in order to `be the gamechanger that breaks the climate deadlock and unleashes a clean-energy future' because that's allegedly a "win-win" as it `won't add to any budget deficits' is obviously bullshit. If the US gives 10 billion USD to `help developing countries' that money WILL increase the US deficit by 10 billion USD. That may be a good thing to do BUT it WILL increase the US budget deficit and it's a lie to suggest otherwise.
The fact that Avaaz recommends that at the same time the US should NOT provide a 10 billion USD subsidy to fossil fuel corporations in order to save that amount is a separate issue. One might just as easily say that giving 10 billion USD to developing countries won't increase the deficit because, say, the US could cancel orders for 10 billion USD worth of bombs and missiles for Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The money to be actually given to developing countries IS a charge on the US budget bottom line and so Avaaz is lying when saying it isn't. THAT isn't rocket science.
The whole point of the draft Copenhagen Treaty is to get the US and other developed countries like the UK and Australia to pay large sums of money to a UN "government" which is then supposed to give it to developing countries. SOOO, arguably this Avaaz email is just part of the scam since that is what it is urging the ignorant global sheeple to clamor for. Same old, same old... Problem … turmoil … solution. The solution being what the banksters have wanted all along.
As I understand it, there is no mechanism (transparent or otherwise) specified in the "Treaty" to allow the countries of the world (be they recipients or donors of the monies allegedly earmarked for payment to developing countries) to KNOW, track and audit, what happens to the huge sums of money which Avaaz and other Copenhagen Treaty advocates say must be paid to the UN "government" by the US and other countries for the purposes alleged in the Treaty. Nor is there any mechanism whereby individual nations could enforce UN compliance with any stated funding distribution purposes in the Treaty should this "deal" be done.
Incidentally the fact that Avaaz alleges that `More than 3000 of us hosted vigils in 139 countries on Saturday, and helped build one of the biggest days of action on climate in history. We're running huge advertisements in the Financial Times newspaper on Monday to drive home our call for climate finance.' does NOT mean that the Copenhagen "deal" which Avaaz advocates, will be directed towards climate amelioration or have any, let alone any significant effect on Urantia's climate at all.
Here is AVAAZ "in action" again. What is going on in Equador? Is AVAAZ pushing the climate/CO2 button yet again? Putting blame on "the
world's polluters" instead of personal responsibility? Providing an
opportunity for USA to go in and play policeman? Trying to create fear
through the reference to Chernobyl? Just guessing? Refer: http://secure.avaaz.org/en/chevron_toxic_legacy_4/?vl
AVAAZ pretends to be greatly concerned about Earth's environment so it has to pick up some environmental causes and seem to run with them. If it didn't it would lose its mass appeal for those who want to feel they are doing something when they are not.
What are the BIG current environmental issues today? First, the US military's genocidal activities in Haiti (designed to secure free and unfettered access to OIL and minerals there) would be top of the list. Is AVAAZ interested? No. Why not? Second, the US military's increasing interference in Yemen (because of the need to exploit oil there) and its moves to turn the pristine island of Sokotra into yet another major US military base to assist that purpose, is another. Is AVAAZ interested? No. Why not? Third, the US military's constant use of DU (depleted uranium munitions all over the place is yet another). Is AVAAZ interested? No. Fancy that. Too busy in the Amazon are they? And the list goes on …
WHERE in that list is the Chevron Amazon issue? The damage was done long ago, is not still occurring and has been dealt with in court, sooo what can AVAAZ reasonably expect to achieve? Well, the main benefit will be to distract global attention away from all the other fascist activities occurring NOW, behind the (media blackout) curtain – although still in plain view in some instances. There's lots of fascist environmental harm being organised and/or done right now which a genuine public interest organisation should be trying to stop by bringing them to public attention. Sooo, what is AVAAZ doing? The primary task of those directing AVAAZ's focus is to steer global awareness and hence global consciousness, AWAY from current ratshit environmental (and other) activities by corporatists, bankers and their military henchmen. Hence this belated interest in oil spills in the Amazon that occurred years ago.
That's how its done and why its done. How the top manipulators at AVAAZ must laugh! Notice also that they are still calling for donations. That way they harvest money from the stupid slave population while seeming to be needy (and busy) themselves. And guess who audits the expenditures by the top AVAAZ organisers and managers? No one YOU know is it? Of course those associated with such a noble undertaking can be trusted to spend donations wisely can't they? You betcha! After all, all the big charities and `not for profits' ALL do it. And anyway, top management must get "adequate COMPENSATION" or they will go elsewhere. After all they have to staff and manage a global team with offices in Ottawa, London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Buenos Aires, and Geneva. Perhaps I just feel slighted because they haven't established an office in Sydney?!
The bullshit never changes though. They still say:
`ABOUT AVAAZ Avaaz.org is an independent, not-for-profit global
campaigning organization that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people inform global decision-making. [Ron: don't make me laugh! How stupid must people be to still believe that petitions and powerless flocks of people being herded by AVAAZ organisers and the like MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHAT SO EVER to the decision making processes of political puppets let alone the secret government banksters who actually make the decisions about wars and everything else. As if the @*%#* banksters and their puppet politicians don't already KNOW what is right and what ordinary people want. Continuing the same old, same old pathetic rhetoric about making representations to "POWER" is not just demeaning, its a pain in the arse.]
And: ` (Avaaz means "voice" in many languages.) [Ron: Really? How cute! Who lies awake nights thinking up this twaddle?] Avaaz receives no money from governments or corporations' [Ron: Even if that isn't a LIE and why wouldn't it be and who would know, does AVAAZ receive money from so-called charitable foundations? That's where the really rich like the Rockefellers hide their money because it doesn't get taxed there and the stupid global masses think those who put their money into charitable trusts don't own it when in effect they do. After all who manages the trust monies and spends it? Santa Claus doesn't, does he? For instance Bill and Linda Gates and Warren Buffett have a 60 billion dollar (or more) charity trust and are saying they are putting BILLIONS into vaccinating poor African children and other genocidal projects useful to the New World Order.]
Incidentally, if AVAAZ was serious about Ecuador winning this one wouldn't they focus on exposing and preventing the expected US government BULLYING OF ECUADOR into burying this court case?
And don'cha just luv the wording of the petition:
`To John Watson, the new CEO of Chevron:
We urge you to demonstrate genuine commitment to environmental accountability and respect for human rights in all Chevron's business practices. Instead of lobbying to evade your obligations, take full responsibility for what your corporation has done: clean up Chevron's toxic legacy in Ecuador, compensate affected communities for the damage you have done to their lives and environment, and adopt new policies worldwide to prevent similar tragedies in the future.'
WOW! That should really make Chevron agree to fork out 27 billion dollars don'tcha reckon?
WHY does it require a multi-national lobbying organization with offices all around the world to come up with this stuff? A high school student could do it on a home computer.
IMHO the AVAAZ management pushes ANY buttons that they think will distract attention from what is really going on in the world. That's their job. AVAAZ's function is to act as minor stress release button for middle class do gooders who lack the gumption to actually want to understand their world and start taking responsibility for their part in what goes on in it.
I think any reference to Chernobyl is meant to create fear and thereby give undue importance to an issue so that people will tend to pay less attention to other issues and especially to what is happening in Haiti. The US would luv to find a reason to send the troops into Ecuador but Chevron and the Amazon ain't it.
Also, didja notice that AVAAZ is distracting attention from what the US military is doing in Haiti by focussing on the issue of debt forgiveness for Haiti! In all the circumstances that should not be an issue – it should be automatic. Talk about making a virtue out of NOT demanding to get blood out of a stone!
Why do I get depressed as this charade goes on and on …
writings by members of AbundantHope are copyrighted by
AbundantHope - All rights reserved