Guest opinion by Leo Goldstein
Like everyone here, I am outraged by the terrorist attack of Dr. John Christy’s office at the University of Alabama (UAH) that followed the so-called “March for Science” (the MfS) where third-sort actors and copywriters pretended to be scientists. I share Dr. Roy Spencer’s frustration about the unwillingness of the local police to investigate this attack and his hope that FBI would investigate. We are now in the “week of action,” declared by the same shadowy forces that organized the MfS. A larger and more disorderly “People’s Climate March” is scheduled for April 29, with riots expected on May 1. The invented “climate crisis” is just a pretext for a power grab, a pretext justifying collusion with foreign powers and political parties.
The investigation of the UAH shooting should start from the top, not from the bottom. The shooter(s) might be hard to find. They might be domestic terrorists or international terrorists. We have no idea whether they acted on behalf of a larger organization, or were just lone wolves inflamed by climate alarmist and/or anti-Trump rhetoric. In any case, a connection to the MfS is very likely. Starting from the top means starting with the MfS organizers and funders.
What do we know about the top MfS organizers? Only one thing: they do not want to be known. MfS publishes neither its physical address nor names of its directors or officers. It does not even tell whether it is incorporated. The MfS National Committee and Steering Committee consist of apparently front men and women. The MfSdonations page says:
“The March for Science applied for non profit C3 status in February but is still awaiting final approval. Until that time, we are using Science Debate as a fiscal sponsor to accept tax deductible donations.”
The top MfS organizers can be anybody, from John Podesta to Bill McKibben. I wonder whether the MfS partners and low level operatives know who they are, or even care to know. But, such subterfuge combined with the large scale of operations and potential for physical violence reveals the guilty mind (mens rea) of the top MfS organizers.
Have the top MfS organizers committed any guilty act (actus reus) beyond their suspected connection to the UAH shooting? In my opinion, the answer is yes. I think there is sufficient evidence to investigate and to indict them for obstruction of justice. The MfS website instructs immigrants participating in the march to refuse cooperation and even communication with law enforcement. It does this byincorporating Guides from the notorious National Lawyers Guild. These Guides do not differentiate between the citizens and non-citizens, or between the legal and illegal immigrants. From one of the guides, 8 WAYS TO PREPARE if Traveling to Washington, DC for Marches or Actions:
“CONSIDER WHAT ID TO BRING. Carefully consider what identity documents you bring on your trip.”
This is obviously addressing criminals with multiple IDs. Applied to the UAH shooting, that might mean to use one ID to buy FN P90 (one of the few weapons chambered for 5.7mm cartridge) and another ID when going to the march.
“CREATE A PHONE TREE Create a phone tree that you can activate in the event that your vehicle is detained. There should be a designated ‘on call’ member … This ‘on call’ member is then responsible for activating other members of the phone tree.”
This is an instruction for the participants to form cells and to act as lookouts for criminals!
“In addition to the tips on the reverse side of this page, we urge you to contact organizations who have a strong history in direct action.”
The euphemism “direct action” covers a broad range of activities from innocent trespass to terrorism.
“LET THE DRIVER INTERACT WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT Only the driver or the designated legal worker/lawyer should be speaking in any law enforcement interaction. … Passengers should be trained under a solidarity plan …”
In other words, do not to talk to the police — even if one sees a crime in progress.
These instructions should not be confused with explaining the constitutional rights. The V Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination. The VI Amendment allows suspects to be represented by an attorney. Neither of them allows a person to conceal crimes committed by others. Further, these are individual rights. If an organization instructs its members or followers to refuse cooperation with law enforcement, it is committing obstruction of justice. And this is exactly what the MfS had done prior to the UAH shooting. 18 U.S. Code § 1512(b)(3) says:
“Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”
Dr. John Christy is a prominent scientist, deserving, together with Dr. Roy Spencer, a Nobel Prize in physics. Less than a month ago, he testified before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology in the hearing Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method. The UAH shooting looks like retaliation for this testimony. But FBI might be unable or afraid to connect the dots.
I ask the readers to contact the office of the U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions (former Alabama Attorney General) and the Alabama Attorney General, to demand a top-down investigation of the organizations and circumstances that led to the UAH shooting.
Another NLG Guide Social Media, Criminalization, and Immigration, referred to by the MfS website, advises the participants to:
“Consider cleaning up or deleting your Facebook or other social media accounts. … See below for resources.”
That brings to mind the “case” of Kurt Mix. Kurt Mix was an engineer who helped stop the oil spill after the Deep Horizon disaster. Eric Holder’s DOJ prosecuted Kurt Mix for deleting a few text messages from his cell phone a year after the disaster. Kurt Mix had committed no crime. He had offered his cell phone to the DOJ data collection vendor long before deleting those messages. His text messages contained only a few hundred characters – a drop in the sea compared with petabytes of data available from the video cameras and other sensors on-site. The DOJ had all the information, contained in his text messages, from other sources. Nevertheless, Holder’s underlings charged Kurt Mix with two counts of obstruction of justice, threatening him with 40 years in prison, and rabidly prosecuted the case for four years. The “mainstream media” and self-appointed guardians of civil rights were sympathetic to the persecution. (Some examples: 1,2,3,4,5,6, 7,8,9).
Today, the law can be used against wrongdoers, rather than by wrongdoers.