‘Wanted’ campaign targets Climate Criminals at Paris summit
Avaaz publishes dossier on dirty energy lobbyists at Paris talks, calls for ministers to boycott lobbyists
The seven most insidious fossil fuel lobbyists in Paris to weaken attempts to agree a global climate deal have been named and shamed as ‘climate criminals’ in a dossier published by the global citizens movement Avaaz.
The group, which spearheaded last weekend’s climate marches which saw 785,000 people take to the streets globally, posted over a thousand ‘Wanted’ posters outside 5-star hotels in the French capital on Monday morning. The poster highlighting the seven most notorious dirty energy lobbyists unearthed from the list of more than 50,000 delegates at summit.
On Monday morning, Avaaz ‘Climate Cops’ will hand out flyers outside key Metro stations leading to the Le Bourget with photos of the lobbyists, who are expected to ramp up their efforts to derail a deal when ministers arrive this week to negotiate the deal.
Emma Ruby-Sachs, Acting Executive-Director of Avaaz says: “These lobbyists have come to Paris to sabotage a global deal for ambitious climate action, despite over 3.6 million citizens around the world calling for 100% clean energy. Ministers must listen to their people, not polluters, and refuse meetings with climate criminals who want to derail a deal the whole world wants.”
Each of the seven named lobbyists is renowned for their backroom dealings to to stop the transition to clean energy and push the interests of dirty fossil fuels. Some have resorted to harassing climate scientists and even calling for them to be ‘publicly flogged’.
The lobbyists include:
- Benjamin Sporton, head of the World Coal Association
- Fiona Wild, representative of mining-giant BHP Billiton
- Marc Morano, whose trademark activity is to publish the email addresses of climate scientists to expose them to hate mail.
- Myron Ebell, director of US think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute known for receiving money from ExxonMobil
- Chris Horner, funded by the coal industry and known for “harassing” climate scientists in order to access to their email
- Bjorn Lomborg, previously backed by funders with links to the Koch brothers, he’s most known as the ‘delayer in chief’ when it comes to climate
- James Taylor, senior fellow at climate denial lobby group Heartland Institute
Examples of lobbyists’ far-reaching influence within climate meetings include The World Coal Association setting up shop next to the COP19 summit in Warsaw in 2013 to convince negotiators to embrace coal as a solution to climate change.
This resulted in the Warsaw Communiqué promoting clean coal, which has been deemed as “a myth” by National Geographic. At the COP17 in Durban in 2011, the Carbon Capture and Storage Association (comprised of major fossil fuel and power companies) successfully lobbied for carbon credits for new coal plants.
With global warming a clear scientific reality, the world has become increasingly intolerant of the fossil fuel industry’s attempts to undermine climate science and climate legislation. The campaign comes off the back of recent cases cracking down on “climate criminals,” including the investigation into Exxon for allegedly lying to the public about the risk of climate change.
The dossier is published as part of Avaaz’s 100% Clean campaign, which has been backed by more than 3.6 million people.
Source: https://secure.avaaz.org/act/media.php?press_id=684
Posters: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/climate_criminals/
Marc Morano made a statement by email:
Marc Morano, publisher of Climate Depot and producer of new ‘Climate Hustle’ film having its red carpet debut tonight in Paris: Climate Hustle tonight at the Cinéma du Panthéon at 7:30 PM.Morano statement: “Since the ‘wanted’ posters for me are all over Paris, I have relocated to a secure undisclosed location. I hope my trip to Paris for ‘Climate Hustle’ red carpet premiere will go better than JFKs trip to Dallas.”
UPDATE: Another photo showing the wanted posters:
From the New York Times:
Environmental activists pasted more than 1,000 “Wanted” posters outside luxury hotels here overnight, calling seven people who have ties to the fossil fuel industry or are skeptics of climate change “criminals.” The activists also distributed flyers with photographs of the seven.
“These lobbyists have come to Paris to sabotage a global deal for ambitious climate action,” said Emma Ruby-Sachs, acting executive director of Avaaz, the activist group that organized the stunt. “Ministers must listen to their people, not polluters, and refuse meetings with climate criminals who want to derail a deal the whole world wants,” she added.
Mr. Morano sent back a photograph of himself, looking mock-terrified, crouching next to one of the “Wanted” posters that had been posted in the Eighth Arrondissement.
“The posters are an exercise in silliness,” Mr. Morano said. “Climate skeptics are here promoting open debate and arguing to allow dissent. The idea that any alternative views amount to a ‘criminal’ perspective is obscene.”
…
Mr. Taylor, of the Heartland Institute, said in an email: “It is a shame that people must experience such vitriol and harassment when they make scientific arguments supported by scientific data. If such attacks must be made, however, I am glad it was my face that appeared on their posters. I will always be proud to stand up for free and open discourse and ultimate truth.”
The Heartland Institute is hosting a climate change conference of its own on Monday, at the Hotel California here. It posted on Twitter: “Eco-left activists put ‘Wanted’ posters outside our event space last night. We are not intimidated.”
Eliminating opponents is a standard tactic of revolutionary communism.
Somewhat ironically the “useful idiots” are guided to support the “purging” of individuals who wish to save the “useful idiots” themselves from the ruin that is to come.
Where were the military tacticians when the Soviets were repelled by tiny Norway?
“The Soviets possessed more than three times as many soldiers as the Finns, thirty times as many aircraft, and a hundred times as many tanks. The Red Army, however, had been crippled by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin’s Great Purge of 1937.”
Where were the agricultural specialists when Lysenkoism lead to the starvation of millions?
And again in Maoist China:
“Some activists went against the Great Leap Forward movement, but they were seen as the opponents of Mao and were silenced in the purges of the following Anti-Rightist Movement”.
In the end the results are always the same:
“Yu Dehong, the secretary of a party official in Xinyang in 1959 and 1960, stated,
I went to one village and saw 100 corpses, then another village and another 100 corpses. No one paid attention to them. People said that dogs were eating the bodies. Not true, I said. The dogs had long ago been eaten by the people”
Above quotes collected in about 2 minutes from wikipedia. Even a “useful idiot” can do that!!!
Apologies – above should read tiny Finland, not Norway. (the winter war).
Can’t help thinking that someone should organise a book signing or something. Avaaz have done all the legwork, seems to me that Morano et al should take advantage of the free publicity
I do not recall ever hearing from or about those two individuals or their associated organizations on the major critical (aka skeptical) climate focused blogs over the past 8 years.
John
Global warming climate change is a Marxist leftist scam. From day one in the 60’s/70’s, the leftist climate scammers claimed (in their usual sky is falling down/end of the world tactics) that we were entering a new Ice Age. This turned out to be a transparent lie. Now transition to the 90’s and 00’s when Al Gore the failed politician somehow became a climate scientist (after claiming to have invented the internet); and now his claims of global warming have turned out to be a lie (A Convenient Lie) as there has been proven to be no warming since the late 90s. This is why the alarmists have stopped saying Global Warming and instead are now claiming Climate Change (their first scam was proven to be false so they just changed the name to a new scam: Climate Change).
Peter I know you will think this is off topic ! But its not, Albert Gore Sr. and George McGovern big D senators in the late 60,s with the help of the US FDA and UN World Health Org. changed first the US and then the world diet to a high Carbohydrate low Fat Diet. The result; Diabetes Epidemic, Major Obesity, High Blood, Arthritis I can go on and on. This is BIG Business think Obama Health Care; Health Insurance; Pharmaceutical Industry; if the truth ever came out the US economy would collapse : even Judith Curry mentioned the lie on Cholesterol this in her testimony to congress on climate. Please watch:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvKdYUCUca8
In addition to the Climategate scandals of cooked and manipulated data from the University of East Anglia which the UN’s IPCC depends on for its data; their is also the government funded agencies like NOAA and the EPA that, at the direction of the politically motivated Obama admin., are producing corrupt and manipulated data to advance the Climate Change Scam and therefore justify further centralized government regulations and controls and increased taxes.
Do not omit the greatest active offender of manipulated data NASA, rewriting historical data to manufacture a false narrative for Obama to take to Paris.
Climate change (real “climate change”) is simply Earth’s normal and natural climate variability (primarily affected by the Sun’s natural cycles), & has nothing to do with and is not influenced by human activity. This is why Canada and Australia have repealed their Climate Change policies & other nations are starting to realize this is all a Marxist Leftist scam. Czech President Vaclav Klaus has warned that environmental extremism is the New Communism. He said, “As someone who lived under communism…the biggest threat to freedom, democracy,….is not communism…” “Communism was replaced by the threat of ambitious environmentalism [Climate Change].” He added, “The so-called climate change and especially man-made climate change has become one of the most dangerous arguments….” In other words, this is all a Marxist leftist scam. The same old thing you always get from the corrupt lying Marxist Left; scams and lies to take money out of your wallet and put it into the government’s pocket.
Isn’t Paris in a state of emergency ? So who allows this to happen?
Eco-left climate jihadis. It is all about believe not facts. They become fundamentalist.
It’s not “a scientific reality” you moron.
Here is a web site which makes it easy to recognize the arguments used by Avaaz: Logical Fallacies
Many of their arguments seems to fall in under the category: Emotional logical fallacies
Appeal to emotion:
When a position is promoted through the manipulation of emotions, rather than through the presentation of an actual argument.
—
Confidence as a validator:
When the certainty one feels in respect to a claim is submitted as evidence for the truth of that claim.
Judgmental language:
insulting or pejorative language to influence the recipient’s judgment.
Argumentum ad baculum:
When a position is promoted through coercion or threats of force.
Ad hominem:
When the person is attacked instead of the argument.
Appeal to spite:
When an appeal to bitterness or spite towards the proponents of an opposing position is used in an attempt to make or bolster an argument.
Appeal to ridicule:
When ridicule or shame is introduced in an attempt to invalidate the opposing position.
Appeal to motive:
When a claim is dismissed, by calling into question the motives of its sponsor.
Appeal to fear:
When fear is employed as a reason to hold to a particular conclusion.
Appeal to authority:
When a claim is deemed true because of the position, authority or esteem of the person asserting it.
—
The response by Mr. Taylor, of the Heartland Institute, seems very mature on the other hand:
“It is a shame that people must experience such vitriol and harassment when they make scientific arguments supported by scientific data. If such attacks must be made, however, I am glad it was my face that appeared on their posters. I will always be proud to stand up for free and open discourse and ultimate truth.”
Reblogged this on A Time For Choosing and commented:
The Neo-Nazi “global warming” scammers are getting desperate!
Damn, I didn’t get my own poster.
You can still go to office depot and have some made with your picture and captioned:
Wanted: Climate Skeptics
See Wattsupwiththat.com for details
Brings more folks here to find out the truth.
The French parliament has extended the state of emergency.
http://www.english.rfi.fr/france/20151119-french-parliament-extends-state-emergency-after-paris-attacks
How could the justice system start sorting out the hate-crimes according to their motivations? After all, even the suicide bombers tend to claim they are saving the future.
Is this the sort of thing Nazis do?
Yes.
http://www.famouspictures.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ChurchillMurder-207×300.jpg
WANTED — for incitement to murder
(Winston Churchill)
(Source: http://www.famouspictures.org/churchill-and-the-tommy-gun/ )
Don’t forget the 3 Stooges also being on the ‘death list’
http://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/three-stooges/
These climate bigots are the same people who claim to value diversity, tolerance, and multiculturalism. But they have absolutely no tolerance for any diversity of opinion or freedom of expression when it comes to the climate. If you’re not part of their echo chamber, you’re not welcome. If you have different ideas, you’re not welcome. Everyone must be assimilated into a monolithic culture that shares the same goals and strives to achieve the same plan of action. Dissension will not be tolerated. Resistance is futile. At least, that’s their hope.
One of the most intolerant people I’ve ever met had a “Coexist” bumper sticker on her car.
She meant that everyone else should coexist with her on her terms.
Yes, indeed, lol, I always pass / greatly increase my following distance whenever I see that one.
“COEXIST” — That’s an order!
Some people love Humanity. It’s humans they don’t like.
So, about 0.5% of the world population. Anyone want to take a stab at how many millions around the word are calling for ANY energy?
I’d say the rest prefer CHEAP energy.
Marc Morano looks great….I think the publicity is fabulous. And just imagine that 3.6 million people want totally clean energy….that’s like 50% of the world’s population. No wait, maybe 5%. No, hang on…0.5%. Bugger…it’s only 0.05% Well, it’s something
It’s …… HILARIOUS. lololol
Avaaz worldwide demonstrations? Are they talking about the reports of eighty people in downtown Portland, sixty in Chicago, 100 in New York City….yeah real robust international movement that one!
Americans and Europeans use the words “left” and “right”, politically speaking, to mean different things. Unfortunately, no matter how many times you point this out, people insist on pretending it isn’t so.
The International Communists duked it out with the National Socialists. Because Europe uses “right” to mean “nationalist,” roughly, then they claim the Nazis were right wing.
In the US, “right wing” is a conservative political philosophy centered around individual rights (which both factions claim as their mantle) and minimalist government (at least nominally). *Both* major divisions in the US are nationalist, but not in the narrow fashion that European nationalists are seen as holding to. Also, there are more internationalists on the left, but it’s not exclusive to them.
Traditionally socialists and communists are both on the American “left,” so, to Americans, Nazis are properly left wing.
Europeans use the same word for something completely different, so to them the Nazis were right wing.
Unfortunately, while at least some Americans understand this, as far as I’ve been able to tell no Europeans are capable of understanding that a word can have more than one meaning, so this dumb argument will still be going on when the sun burns out (slight hyperbole).
The “American right” essentially does not exist in Europe, the vast majority of the “left and right” in Europe would be on the left in the U.S.
I have explained this about a thousand times.
Most people use the words “left wing” and “right wing” incorrectly. Left wing has nothing to do with big government.
“Left-wing politics are political positions or activities that accept or support social equality, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality. They typically involve concern for those in society who are perceived as disadvantaged relative to others and a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished.”
“According to author Barry Clark, “Leftists […] claim that human development flourishes when individuals engage in cooperative, mutually respectful relations that can thrive only when excessive differences in status, power, and wealth are eliminated.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
Right-wing politics are political positions or activities that view some forms of social stratification or social inequality as either inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable, typically defending this position on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition. Hierarchy and inequality may be viewed as natural results of traditional social differences and/or from competition in market economies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics
The wikipedia political bias comes through strong. This is the same reason why you can’t trust anything they say about climate science.
In the US, the left is the ‘big government knows best’ party, while the right is more about ‘small government, personal responsibility and free markets’.
Interesting. As I spoke in a message that’s a few hundred feet up in the queue here, Wikipedia has a decent article about the history of the Left vs. Right Wing in politics, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_politics which ends with this wise conculsion:
“the way the words should be used often displaces arguments about policy by raising emotional prejudice against a preconceived notion of what the terms mean”
Maybe the Left vs. Right article was written by someone else!
“Leftists […] claim that human development flourishes when individuals engage in cooperative, mutually respectful relations that can thrive only when excessive differences in status, power, and wealth are eliminated {by — the — state — ultimately — out — of — the — barrel — of — a — gun}.”
“Socialists” of Europe try to hide behind the above double-speak, but, the bottom line is, coerced charity is NOT what the Bible teaches (many of them call themselves “Christian socialists” and invoke Scripture to justify confiscating the wealth of others to create their utopia) and “socialism” (like fascism) is statism no matter which side of the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation you live on.
Typical political science definition:
“Far right” = “radical” ==> go “back” to X way of living
(and control the society).
“Far left” = “socialist” ==> go “forward” to Y way of living
(and control the society).
Both = control society by confiscation of private wealth via confiscatory taxing and/or “nationalizing” industry and severely restricting by regulation personal liberty (and all in the name of “the people”).
They are simply two sides of the same counterfeit coin.
“go “forward” to Y way of living (and control the society).”
= progressists
“go “back” to X way of living (and control the society).”
= regressists or co-progressists (dual of progressists)
That is *such* a tendentious set of definitions it isn’t even laughable. It’s basically a lefty saying that leftism is good and rightism is bad. While the right say the left is bad and the right is good, and could write an equally tendentious set of definitions.
It would be an act of grotesque ignorance to accept one of those definitions.
“tendentious”
sometimes this site is way better than jeopardy
🙂 You can tell the Scrabble players as well.
French politics is “50 shades of socialism, collectivism, nationalism, imperialism, centralism”.
There is no Republican Party in France.
Hate to break this to you but there are at least 5 shades if not 50 shades of ism in the Republican Party. Depends on how you break it down. The ones I refer to are: Libertarianism, Conservatism, Centrism (moderates), Liberalism (undercover), and the most insidious of all ism’s – Progressivism
Progressivsim was born out of Mussolini’s fascist Italy. It is the father of New Age University Liberalism aka Petulant Brat-ism.and the home of Environmentalism. The reason for the Paris Summit. Progressivism is, at it’s core the supremely (obscenely) wealthy, buying up the political system through crony capitalism, eliminating free market competition through regulation and then using the political system to enslave the masses and control the population, resources and the distribution of energy to third world industrialization until they can control ownership
Progressives are both “Republicrats” and “Demoplicans” The two party system in American has become opposite sides of the same coin and it is possessed by the Progressives..
And a left shift of the shades of the ‘right’ describes the shades of the ‘left’ which are:
Conservatism (undercover), Centrism (moderates), Liberalism, Progressivism and Socialism
The fact that there’s so much overlap is why many can get confused.
Thanks for your thoughtful post. I’ve tried to clarify this point several times to no avail. I believe the problem is that when a European Socialist opposes the climate scam, they feel persecuted by those that blame all lefties, and then seek to defend themselves.
Right wing in the US is different than right wing in the Eurozone.
Simply look at the policies put forward by “conservatives” in the US, and you will see they don’t look anything like Nazism or Fascism.
Isn’t it about time the FBI had a list of ‘climate terrorists’ who represent a clear and present danger to national economic security?
Those in Paris would be very high up on the list……
Where are the previous poster on WUWT “Leo” and “jeyon”?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/05/al-gore-practices-stagecraft-at-paris-cop21-climate-meeting-with-fainting-woman/
Those two clowns are active if not the same one.
{Draft Message}
To: Emma Ruby-Sachs, Acting Executive-Director of Avaaz
Subject: CAGW Parousia Canceled
Well, the bad news for you is that the CAGW Parousia** is being canceled by reality. But the good news is that you can relax now, because resistance to independent critical CAGW hypothesis analysis (aka skepticism) is futile. Reality will de-assimulate you from alarmism.
Note: Apologies to Star Trek for my climate focused adaptation of the well known lines in the ‘Borg’ episodes.
** ‘Parousia’ is an ancient Greek word meaning presence, arrival, or official visit.
John
{Draft Message}
(whips out calculator) Hmmmm…. Lemme see here….. 3.6 million extremist warmistas… 7 billion people on the planet, most of whom have benefited from an energy-intensive technological civilization, even if they aren’t part of it yet (cf. Norman Borlaug, disaster relief, cheap cell phones everywhere, etc. etc. etc.).
I make that 2000 to 1 against.
“With global warming a clear scientific reality” That’s the real lie. All warming predictions have been wrong. The polar ice caps are growing. Were humans to blame for the warming after the ice age too? This whole thing is absurd. A con to control us and make us pay $$ for the lie.
I have been for some years on a mail list of AVAAZ. They had several voting actions for good purposes like helping a refugee, preventing a capital punishment, etc. After some time I noticed that they also wanted support for climate actions. These texts differed from the others as they were totally bizarre and paranoid. Their editor was always Emma Ruby-Sachs. More sensible texts were usually written by other team members. With this Paris event, I’m afraid that their psychiatric component has gone wild. Two years ago I made an end to their emails as these became more and more about mad climate issues. So I missed a bit of their latest developments.
3.6 Million of the worlds 7.3 BILLION is hardly a representative sample size. Less than 0.05 percent.
The warmists are like kids on a schoolyard calling names. They certainly don’t act like scientists. Is it any wonder they lose more credibility everyday.