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.
I would be interested to know if the shell casings were dusted for prints. The 5.7 has a long case, and loading the FN five-seven pistol manually can leave some thumb partials.
Spent cartridge cases usually lack fingerprints. The heat of firing evaporates the oils needed to form them. With such an unusually energetic round (for a pistol), the heat would be higher than normal. But it’s worth a try.
More likely if a weapon is ever recovered to test fire and compare to the spent shell casings, the identification will be made from the breach markings left on the cases. Good job UAH Police for working this crime. Those who think the Feds or even State Investigations would do a better job need to think about the work load the FBI or ABI has. Do you really think this case would be a very high priority for them? The UAH Police have a vested interest in finding whoever did this. It’s their building (Cramer Hall is a University facility) and the need to bring those responsible to justice would benefit the university and no one else. Having a campus where people feel safe is incredibly more important to the university PD than to the FBI.
Pressure should definitely be put on law enforcement officials to do their job and try to get to the bottom of this shooting.
There were probably some video cameras in the area.
“sooner or later”?
Only if the firearm is used in other crimes,
• and the perpetrators are caught,
• and there is reason for the police to run a check on the firearm’s rifling,
• and there is reason to search FBI files for a 5.7 rifling match,
• and someone bothers to have the existing expended rounds analyzed at a serious ballistics laboratory,
• and the rifling on the bullets is photographed and filed in the FBI databases.
Forget the criminal shows, especially many of the dramas where someone is killed in the evening and investigatory officers have a full ballistic report, qualitative and quantitative chemistry reports and coroner’s analysis in the morning. It does not happen.
A) The UAH (University of Alabama) Police officers are apparently in charge of this investigation.
Gun “registration” schemes are just another scam used to harass law abiding citizens, not prevent crime.
• Firearms’ are registered to buyers at point of sale.
• This is strictly, by law, a paper trail; not a database.
• Gun gets stolen – end of registration trail.
• Many years pass, end of registration trail
The problem, is that criminals just plain refuse to register their weapons.
Registering ammunition serves less purpose.
But there is a small, very small chance. Certain kinds of five-seven ammunition were only supplied to Law Enforcement and Military units; that is, a body armor penetration five-seven ammo unique to LEO (Law Enforcement Officers).
It is extremely unlikely that LEO officers fired at John Christy’s office. Especially using a fully automatic five-seven P90 rifle with thirty round clips.
Other than that, five-seven ammunition is quite standard. Not only is the ammunition still available, it has been freely available for over a decade. There are dealers who have had the same five-seven ammunition on display since it became available.
As manufacturers are wont to do, they will use the same equipment with the same ingredients unless they run into a need to change.
Multiple manufacturers may/likely are using the same equipment and the same supplies.
Mass markets, mass merchandizing, mass advertising all depend on factory manufacturing and widespread distribution. “Small custom lots only sold in a three block radius” (heard on a British crime drama) borders upon insane.
hahaha – if they didn’t live stream it on facebook, the cops will never find out who
You left quite a litter of mis-information assumptions, Forrest.
Typical of WUWT.
Breitbart report it as “reported” and WUWT adopt fake news as reason to get the pithforks out. In a years time when its been long shown to be unrelated to Christy its become another zombie myth. Quite clever actually.
The real story is that the US has a million Joe Bobs, a bottle of ‘Comfort’ away from hanging their guns out the pick up window late at night and popping off a clip at random, with no idea of what they’re aiming at.
http://www.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/movieposters/3201/p3201_p_v8_aa.jpg
You really are an a whole, aren’t you?
Now just being pithy
Here is a news report showing a grouping of shots 4 of the 7. 3 shown in the building and the 4th is half way up the glass above the three. The grouping appears to be in an area of about 4ft.
http://whnt.com/2017/04/24/multiple-shots-fired-into-uah-building-over-the-weekend/
He’s a liberal, but that’s pretty much the same thing.
He actually thinks Hollywood is an accurate reflection of reality.
Then again, liberals have no knowledge of reality in the first place.
He does have his Pithfork out though
Tony, where I live, your comment above would prove sufficient, by default, for you to be called a ‘dick head’ (sorry to be crude – but sheez)
You, like many have closed the door on the possibility of one motivation….that this WAS motivated by a zealot taking a pot-shot at their ‘opposition’.
Was this the case?
We’d never know, if it where left up to your sort of closed mind thinking.
BUT, I respect you for at least being engaged in the discussion.
D B H
Where he lives that term is equally valid.
Richard Cranium
Why, pray tell, do you have the desire to dismiss terrorism? Because you agree with the yahoos who did this?
Because liberals are allowed to do whatever they want, so long as it advances the parties agenda.
Thanks for providing us your bigoted stereotypes. It tells a lot about you and your state of mind.
How many “Joe Bobs” have got caught shooting at a science building at a public university?
The idea, like you, makes no sense, Sad that you try to apologize for such a dangerous criminal act.
talk about stereotypes…
how many trigglypuffs have you seen with firearms?
your logic is simply peccable. beware of the other chickens.
did you, perhaps, google the satellite view of the campus and locate the street where the shell casings were found?
oh, no? so you really don’t give one bit of a fox for facts and prefer all the ‘alternative facts’?
what effort did you make to determine anything at all about this?
oh, none?
did you find out the rate of fire of a p90? (hint: 900 rounds per minute, or 7 shots in less than half a second)
did you find out what they sound like? (hint- a motorcycle, to the unfamiliar)
did you find out how little recoil? (you can shoot one handed easily)
so wtf do you know about it, really?
and why does that not stop you from talking about it and criticizing people who are not fixated on YOUR stereotypes?
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 4:41 pm
talk about stereotypes…
What stereotypes? What evidence of “Job Bobs” and Southern Comfort fueled shooting rampages, on College Campuses?
Especially against Science Buildings?
“What evidence of “Job Bobs” and Southern Comfort fueled shooting rampages, on College Campuses?”
exactly as much evidence as there is for your conjecture that attributes means and motive to trigglypuff, right?
you had a computer model to prove this, right? no, it’s unreason.
but you’re just hot to lynch trigglypuff (can’t say i blame you- but i will wait for evidence, thanks. scientific method and all, you see)
gnomish’s specialty is impressing himself with vaguely worded verbal salads.
Huh? WUWT quoted from Spencer’s blog in its first thread on this, and Spencer said in it that he’d seen the holes in the wall on the 4th floor. Later a photo of Christie looking through the bullet-holed window of the office next to his was printed. So WUWT wasn’t relying on a rumor from Breitbart. Didn’t you read the first thread at all?
Oops: for “THEM” read “TM” (Tony McLeod). My abbreviation-expander expanded it.
i read on wuwt that it was a tight cluster achievable only by someone with expert self defense training.
where does all this fake news come from?
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 4:43 pm
i read on wuwt that it was a tight cluster achievable only by someone with expert self defense training.
where does all this fake news come from?
———–
Where exactly did Anthony, Dr. Spencer, or Dr. Christy ever suggest that?
Please provide links, can you?
oh hell yeah i can
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/24/on-earth-day-shots-fired-at-building-housing-leading-climate-skeptic-scientists/
“(Despite my personal defense training, I probably would have struggled to get that tight a “random” cluster with a semi-automatic pistol.)”
see update 2
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 4:41 pm
“did you find out the rate of fire of a p90? (hint: 900 rounds per minute, or 7 shots in less than half a second)
did you find out what they sound like? (hint- a motorcycle, to the unfamiliar)
did you find out how little recoil? (you can shoot one handed easily)
so wtf do you know about it, really?”
To own a full “auto” requires a federal licence. And paying a tax.
the pistol is 7 rounds
possible it was a p90 but if full auto not likely just 7 rounds.
oh and I watched a video of one at full auto did not sound like a motorcycle, thought perhaps that is what your motorcycle sounds like. Instead of bad mouthing people here you should find a good mechanic to tune your bike.
And yes I have been around live firing of full auto weapons with similar cycle rates.
Oh one more thing the shooting was premeditated. Your really not very bright are you. No common sense.
michael
“To own a full “auto” requires a federal licence. And paying a tax.
the pistol is 7 rounds
possible it was a p90 but if full auto not likely just 7 rounds.”
for sure- and nobody has established what kind of gun it was – or much else for that matter.
but the fact that it requires a license and the 200$ fee is a formality only the law abiding comply with.
after all, you know it’s illegal to shoot at other people’s buildings, too – and yet here we are.
every weekend i hear people at the sand pit with automatic weapons. they blow half the week’s wages on ammo and beer for noisy fun. i wouldn’t even ask if they care about a federal permit for them. nor would i discourage them. it sounds like freedom to me.
meanwhile, there can be no attribution of means or motive either – yet here we frikn are, skeptic shmeptic, assuming all manner of ‘alternative facts’ not in evidence. this is what i protest – cuz it’a toxic BS.
Tony Mcleod,
Not sure where where to start …
We have Billy Bob and Billy Joe.
Never met a “Joe Bob’ where I come from.
Pretty sure there’s a lot more than a million of us,
They wouldn’t bother to produce Colts and Comfort for a market that small.
Numbers may not be your thing.
Billy Bob and Billy Joe would know that, after a “bottle of Comfort”, a shotgun is better choice, not something that would have a ‘clip’.
‘Clips’ are for after a few beers.
One ‘aims’ at road signs out the pick up window.
What’s “North to Alaska”?.
We would watch the “The Green Berets” or “True Grit”.
I am offended by the term ‘Joe Bobs’.
I suggest in the future you refer to us as ‘Appalachian Americans’.
Remember, if you hear banjos, hop in your electric car and drive fast until the batteries die.
Tony, we even have hillbilly sports like cowboy mounted shooting (.45 colt revolvers), very loud so we practice in earshot of the dry lots so the horses get accustomed to hearing gunshots. You folks gave up your rights to carry anything but single-shot bolt action rifles IIRC, not so fun on horseback.
Would you come out with the same nonsense had the offices of Michael Mann or Gavin Schmidt been attacked?
What’s a pithfork?
One thing I’ve learned about liberals, is that they are all convinced that everyone who disagrees with them is a low grade moron one insult away from going postal.
Which is also why the liberals are convinced that the only way to save the world is to put them in charge of everything.
And you Mark… I have formed an impression your opinion of people who disagree with your viewpoint on climate science is not high and you have frequently expressed that in colourful language…
I love the way Griffy tries to disprove a general point by bringing up a specific point.
In this case, climate science.
If you could make an intelligent case to support the claim that CO2 is the major driver of the climate, you would do so.
You can’t. Heck, you don’t even try to anymore.
Yea, that worked out so very well in Venezuela.
UAH was where I began my college career while in the Army at Redstone Aresenal in the 50’s. A chill went through me when I read the account of the shooting. UAH back then was a small extension center and I understand tht now it is a major institution even to graduate degrees. As such, I have followed both Drs Christy and Spencer’s work with much interest. I surely hope the perpertrators will be found.
Charlie in Pa.
How about we wait for some evidence. Until then its speculation parading as fake news.
LOL!
And I’m sure you said the same about the Climategate hacker theory, which was entirely disproved when the original whistle blower disclosed how he had access to the data, and why he felt compelled to expose the corruption and the danger it represented.
Pathetic.
Reg,
I must have missed that admission by “the original whistleblower”. Can you provide a reference to that?
b b but – weaponized unicorns!
clicks and eyeballs and drama, oh my!
We already have hard, verifiable evidence. Seven bullets fired into the offices of 2 climate experts, that recently provided testimony before a Congressional Hearing on the false claims of Anthropogenic Climate Change, is unequivocal evidence.
It isn’t speculation.
It isn’t fake news.
Attempting to d’nye this is despicable.
please do give link to substantiate that claim – what offices were hit.
it would be despicable to make false claims about this, don’t you agree?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/25/shots-fired-over-earth-day-weekend-campus-building/
It’s not proof, but that’s what an investigation is for which is all that’s being asked. Seems warranted in my view.
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 5:45 pm
please do give link to substantiate that claim – what offices were hit.
it would be despicable to make false claims about this, don’t you agree?
—–
Read the article. There are pictures of the bullet holes in the forth floor building.
Are your really that massively thick?
where did it say whose office was hit?
that’s a real simple question so it will be flaming obvious if you try to dance around and blow smoke.
@ur momisugly gnomish April 26, 2017 at 6:05 pm
where did it say whose office was hit?
—
Here:
Dr. John Christy, Alabama state climatologist and atmospheric science professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, points to bullet holes in the side of the building containing his office,
Did you not see the picture? How incredibly misinformed and ignorant are you?
so, NOT his office, then, right?
and spencer’s office is on the other end of the building, right? so not his office either.
so you are making stuff up, right?
and you will do anything to avoid facing that, right?
and that makes you what, then?
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 6:28 pm
“so, NOT his office, then, right?”
Now tell us way your statement is wrong. You will of course have to re-read everything. And no I am not going to lead you to it, it is your responsibility to know the facts before bad mouthing people here. Learn them or we will all just laugh at you.
michael
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 6:28 pm
so, NOT his office, then, right?
and spencer’s office is on the other end of the building, right? so not his office either.
so you are making stuff up, right?
and you will do anything to avoid facing that, right?
and that makes you what, then?
—-
No, not making anything up.
The shots were clearly aimed at the UAH science building, and more specifically at the floor containing the offices of Dr. Christy and Dr. Spencer. That is not in dispute.
The shots were clearly directed at Dr. Christy’s office.
Sad that you would dismiss these acts of horrendous terrorizism as nothing than they really are.
heh- so your computer models have shown the anthropogenic cagw fingerprint on this crime.
you’re doubling down on your lies, eh…
that fact is very clear.
you lose.
mikethemorlock
is that your case? dismissed for lack of evidence.
why i’m laughing at you is cuz you think your disapproval matters to anybody.
shall i swoon? schwa…
Here’s the caption on the photo in the prior thread on this topic:
gnomish April 26, 2017 at 6:59 pm
you did not re read everything, you responded to quickly it shows though that you care more about my views then making sure you have all the facts.
have a good evening
michael
i know, roger. i read that when it was posted.
can you compare and contrast with the statement i was questioning?
let’s do this together, ok? i’ll help you focus:
“a bullet hole in the window of the office next to his at the university. Seven shots were fired at the building”
vs.
“Seven bullets fired into the offices of 2 climate experts, that recently provided testimony before a Congressional Hearing on the false claims of Anthropogenic Climate Change, is unequivocal evidence.”
can you see the distinct difference between these 2 statements? can you do a bit of critical thinking or not?
which one is objective reporting and which one is spun into propaganda?
let me know how you fare cuz you’re obviously concerned with my acceptance of an alternative narrative and that dream will be shattered. i don’t care who gets triggered.
but wow- did you see this one: ” acts of horrendous terrorizism” ?
probably takes a better linguisticist than i to conceive its etymology… most amusing…
mikethemorlock
i didn’t need to re-read.
you assume that i didn’t because you operate on a faulty premise which was that i asked a question to which i did not already know the answer.
probably way too sophisticated for you to imagine that, but it is actually part of the socratic method.
don’t mean to bore you to death but you started it.
Sorry Gnomish
But since the shots missed the target area by a slight margin, and the perp (you for all anyone knows) is still at large, It is best not to publish the building floorplan noting the exact location of the offices and the relative location of the shots thereby giving the perp (possibly you for all anyone knows) better information as to the location of their target.
As Maxwell Smart would say, “Missed it by that much”
You’re right up to a point. It’s speculative because it’s unusual: there hasn’t been a pattern of physical intimidation attempts on climate dissenters yet (although eco-terrorism has occurred in other areas related to ecology). And it would be self-defeating for warmists to get violent, as is surely obvious to nearly all of them: It would be bad PR. It’s even remotely possible that this was a false flag or “crying wolf” event, like some made-up outrages on campus in recent years.
OTOH, speculation on a warmist being the likeliest suspect is reasonable. Presuming that conclusion is unwarranted as yet, but all-too-human; it isn’t “fake news.” Anyway, what’s being called for here by the head post is an investigation, not a finding of guilt.
What kind of message does it send to the fanatical global warming believers if it is not investigated thoroughly? A recent Congressional Committee witness no less. What message does it send?
You guessed it.
I worked in the ‘south’ (Virginia, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana) for universities from the late 50s–90s. If this had been at a black college or something equivalent in the 60s there would be reasonable suspicion. It was still not a good time for them, but what is occurring now seems similar. Innocent until proven guilty is slipping away not unlike it was for blacks back then. This time it seems to be coming from those that call themselves educated. I also remember WWII vividly as a child. Read “Mein Kampf” and “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” Bigotry/Racism, etc. is independent of skin color at both ends.
During last year’s election campaign, Bill Clinton said at one venue, “In this post-truth era, facts no longer matter.”
People should study this mantra of the left that Bill Clinton repeated. It explains everything about “new age” thinking by pseudo-scientists engaged in consensus science such as in relation to the “catastrophic man-made global warming” supposition of the IPCC.
It then explains why genuine scientists must be demonised, intimidated, threatened and shut down.
Related….
I find it quite discomforting that some here treat this incident as no big deal and dismiss any possibility of intimidation against “lukewarmer” scientists.
Even if it were a random shooting, it is still a big deal. Shooting like that endangers the life of others for no justifiable reason.
The Five-Seven (just another Europellet, for those in the know) is definitely not a favorite caliber of the trigger happy redneck crowd. Neither of the urban gangsta demographic.
Apparently the 5.7×28 is more popular among the videogame generation. Which makes the perpetrators more likely to be (relatively) young, urban and well-off.
This supposing that it was not a stolen weapon (it’d be worth checking if there are reports of stolen weapons of that caliber).
Whatever the case, the incident should be investigated.
The last rifle I shot was 7.62 with school CCF so nearly 50 years ago but a quick read shows the 5.7 is capable of penetrating Kevlar body armo(u)r so quite serious. It certainly looks like a serious incident from over here.
“I find it quite discomforting that some here treat this incident as no big deal and dismiss any possibility of intimidation against “lukewarmer” scientists.
Even if it were a random shooting, it is still a big deal. Shooting like that endangers the life of others for no justifiable reason.”
Yes, I bet it would be a big deal if someone put seven bullets in the local police station’s outside wall and one through the window. I’ll bet the police wouldn’t dismiss it as a “random shooting”. I bet the police would investigate that kind of shooting.
I don’t know, it is possible that the local police has good reasons to believe it was just a random shooting, that’s why I am not jumping to conclusions.
On the other hand, seeing all the acrimony if not worse aimed at anyone not orthodox enough on climate change, the idea of a deliberate attack isn’t exactly unlikely.
In other news Ann Coulter is prevented from giving a talk at Berkeley by the University’s political enforcers.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39727531
So it’s OK for a left-of-centre person to take pot shots with live rounds at the office of a scientist with views dissenting from one’s own.
But it’s not OK for a right-of-center speaker to exercise free speech by giving a talk on campus.
In Na3i Germany the authorities did not in fact order Jews to leave or deny any of their rights at all, according to sympathetic leftist revisionist historians. They just informed them in a polite and friendly way that it wasn’t safe for them to hang around.
According to leftists, the first amendment doesn’t cover hate speech. And of course leftists define hate speech as anything they disagree with.
We have no idea who shot at this.
blaming leftists without evidence is a bit like blaming someone for setting fire to your parliament building
I think we have plenty of evidence to suggest it was NOT a random shooting, and no evidence it was.
That you want evidence that the person was left-wing is ridiculous. If the shooting was random, which is too much a coincidence after the testimony, Earth Day march, its end point and the imprecise yet general direction at the interesting office.
But what is interesting is not what happened, but what reasons people tell to play down this event. I’m pretty sure you’re being very selective and trying to discredit people even though you technically understand this is far-fetched for a random event.
In my parts of world, people don’t shoot at buildings. I suspect it is not common at UAH either.
Hence the “DEMAND” for an investigation!
It is more telling about the left that they do not WANT an investigation and refuse to CONDEMN the shooting, regardless of who did it, for the simple reason of WHOM was fired at.
By their silence, they signal assent.
“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.”
There is another option. They could be uninformed climate skeptics (yes they are on both sides) who think the UAH building is only inhabited by those evil scientists who are responsible for all this climate scam. If it is… does that make them terrorists or heroes here?
Just idiots much like yourself.
Haha that’s very good …. except I don’t go around shooting bullets into empty buildings for fun.
Nobody here does anything worse than gently mock Michael Mann et. al.. On the other hand denying cheap reliable energy to poor people will almost certainly lead to many premature deaths.
The building wasn’t empty either …
I see Simon actually believes that skeptics are as ill-informed as he is.
Tis very Simple Simon,
It isn’t the Modis of Skeptics to take up arms against their opposition. Skeptics aren’t the ones rioting in the streets in Berkeley when Skeptics want to give a speech on campus. Skeptics aren’t the ones blocking freeways chanting (Insert Ething Group) lives matter. Skeptics arent the ones in a RAGE because President Trump is now in office. AND skeptice aren’t the ones shooting into buildings of people they oppose.
So, not too bright Brian (seems name calling is mandatory here), when was the last confirmed time a mainstream climate scientist or one of their supporters, used a firearm on a skeptic?
And rather than divert, answer my question. If it turns out they were actually ignorant skeptics… as in they got it wrong and thought they were targeting mainstream scientists, would they still be regarded as terrorists?
A skillful retort Simon, Simply skillful. I can list 2 current episodes where conservatives were attempting to give a speech at a school that believes in and preaches “FREE SPEECH” and the indiginous liberals threw a riot at one so both speeches wound up being cancelled due to the School Securities inability or unwillingness to offer protective services to ensure that civil liberties weren’t trod upon. Instead the Liberals insisted thet the “Free Speech” that was intended was actualy stopped under the guise of being “Hate Speech”
How many times have you seen conservatives rioting? (0)
How many times have you seen skeptics marching for a cause? (0)
How many skeptic marches have you seen people wearing all black with masks to hide their identity? (0)
How many social cause marches this century have you seen end in violence? (how many marches have there been)
How many of those that ended in violence were for liberal causes? (all)
As far as your question goes, all you need to do is pick up the paper and see where AGW (CAGW) climate science supporters are calling for jailings “Or Worse” of any and all climatre
d’nyersskepticsor call for government overthrow, again, not a climate skeptic/conservative tactic.
Same question to you but reversed
When was the last time a Skeptical Climate Scientist or one of their supporters used a firearm on an AGW proponent? (0)
Same question to you but reversed
“When was the last time a Skeptical Climate Scientist or one of their supporters used a firearm on an AGW proponent? (0)”
That is true, but it is also true for mainstream scientists and their supporters. Both sides have received numerous threats of violence and even death. My point is it is totally unacceptable for either side to do it.
On that we agree. Totally unacceptable!
And because it is unacceptable and frankly reprehensible, wouldn’t you agree that this case, and all like it should be thoroughly investigated by disinterested third parties?
Since it happened in a building housing federal employees, shouldn’t the FBI be involved in or spearhead the investigations?
I think they were uniformed climate alarmists who had checked the place during the march and heard about where the offices are.
So I googled ‘shots fired Alabama’ in the news section and got multiple hits just for April…
It hardly seems an uncommon occurrence in Alabama
Also, I remember a certain ice scientist jokingly claim his fellows had been rubbed out and the scorn poured on his misrepresented remarks in these parts…
Get a grip, all.
This isn’t what terrorism looks like (I say, as my office has twice been damaged by terrorist bombs)
Stars fell on Alabama too but that still isn’t an excuse.
Believing that your friend that died in a traffic accident was rubbed out by the CIA is one thing.
Pointing out that your office has been shot at is another.
Of course Griff is quick to pick up on the line du-jour.
Its my own line and my own experience.
You had much experience of terrorist attack Mark? (I hope not though)
Of course it’s your own line Griff. I’m sure that’s what you were taught to say.
Why should it matter if I have experienced terrorism first hand? I’ve been stalked by someone who got upset over things I’ve said on the internet though.
I googled idiot in UK, and got a lot of hits, does that mean the people at Oxford are lunatics?
Look, without a real investigation it is difficult to say how probable a random shooting is as an explanation. We have lots of reasons to believe this was related to the Earth Day, not limited to the facts that many marchers had a reason to hate a particular person and the march was destined where it was.
You’d be funny if you weren’t actively trying to save a probable left-wing shooter.
The question to ask is … if this shooting had been at Michael Mann’s office what would the media have said and how would law enforcement have reacted?
And how would people here react? Would they still call it terrorism?
I’m sure Anthony would not want to cheer on that. Mann being a target is not far from somebody else, skeptic, being shot. To call it terrorism is an assumption about a motive. Now you can suggest who would have a motive to kill our favourite Congress charlatan? The best motive I can come up with, is a false flag to cause a movement, but even that is far fetched as terrorism.
So Mann is safe. But if you wanted to say you like it that way, you should take this event seriously as well.
Simon
But we’re not talking hypothetical here.
John Cristy’s office WAS fired on.
The MSM HAVE chosen to remain silent on the attack.
This silence speaks volumes of the murderous predjudice of the media-academic-political establishment against climate skeptics.
IF the office of Michael Mann had been fired on in the same way, CNN would in their typical way be talking 24-7 about nothing else for days on end.
This whole event has simply illuminated the reality of massive media-political bias against climate skeptics which extends as far as giving an unmistakable green light to assassination of individuals with climate skeptical views. That is not a trivial matter.
ptolemy2 April 27, 2017 at 3:14 am
Simon
But we’re not talking hypothetical here.
John Cristy’s office WAS fired on.
Yes the building containing his office was fired on, whether his office was the target is a conjecture.
A similar drive-by attack on a NASA building occurred a few years ago, I don’t remember much on the news about it.
http://www.space.com/15547-saturn-5-rocket-gunshots-damage.html
But when an IRS building was “fired upon” we immediately heard weeks of accusations about “right-wing” zionists and zealots, right-wing extremists, and demands for yet more gun control!
Phil,
The shots appeared to target his office on the fourth floor.
RACookPE1978 April 27, 2017 at 11:19 am
But when an IRS building was “fired upon” we immediately heard weeks of accusations about “right-wing” zionists and zealots, right-wing extremists, and demands for yet more gun control!
We did, when was that?
Chimp April 27, 2017 at 11:21 am
Phil,
The shots appeared to target his office on the fourth floor.
‘Appeared’ being the operative word, someone doing a drive-by shooting would appear to target whoever’s office they struck near too. As I said it’s a conjecture
Phil
Here in Europe we’re not used to billets flying round with such frequency. Shootings tend to be more noteworthy events. I guess there’s a chance it was at least not premeditated.
bullets
Dang, I was getting quite a kick out of trying visualize flying billets.
Well what would commenters here have said if he’d claimed that? Yes. Now turn that round the other way (and remember outside the skeptic blog community even green activists have no idea who this scientist guy is)
Aside from the fact that it only takes one deranged semi-informed individual, I agree with the above statement. The green activists I know are an ignorant herd.
The problem is not so much their ignorance, but the things they know for sure that are wrong. Pardon, but Reagan really nailed this.
I contacted the Justice Dept and requested the FBI investigate. I hope others did the same.
+1
Watermelon response:
1) it wasn’t us
2) you can’t prove it was us
3) it was an individual
4) they deserved it
Every. Time.
You forgot 1a) It didn’t happen or you did it to yourself
True. The, um, intersectionality between 9/11 Troofers and watermelons is large.
Yes, it is very interesting to see who are the people coming up with these. And how they move the goalpost if new information arrives.
Currently we don’t know who the shooter or shooters were. But should there have been multiple marchers coming back and shooting, the answer would be ‘they deserved it’ at the mental level. The headlines would be small, the wickedness of sceptical thinking would be brought up, and opinion boards would be let filled with comments about evil de-nie-rs.
There is no excuse for them not investigating this. Those aren’t “random” shots; there may as well have been a target painted on the building. Are they going to wait til someone is killed?
No, I think murder of JFK is already a tragic joke. Like yeah, who would not like to make business with conspiracy theories as they sell so well. How could I see through all the fabricated rubbish?