Affidavits in Michael Mann Libel Suit Reveal Astonishing Facts About Tim Ball Associate John O'Sullivan

Thu, 2012-07-26 11:52Brendan Demelle and Richard Littlemore
Brendan Demelle and Richard Littlemore's picture

Affidavits in Michael Mann Libel Suit Reveal Astonishing Facts About Tim Ball Associate John O'Sullivan

Affidavits filed in the British Columbia Supreme Court libel litigation brought by climate scientist Michael Mann against climate science denier Timothy Ball reveal that Ball's collaborator and self-styled “legal advisor” has misrepresented his credentials and endured some significant legal embarrassments of his own. 

The affidavits also reveal that Tim Ball was “aware of the charges against John O'Sullivan almost from the start” and has tried to distance himself from his erstwhile advisor and writing partner.

The affidavits [12] come from research of science and medical writer Andrew Skolnick, who documents O'Sullivan's misrepresentations, backtracking and questionable behavior.

Tim Ball and John O'Sullivan had a close working relationship, even before Mann sued Ball for libel in March 2011. For example, they co-authored the climate science denial book Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory, which was published in 2010.

Skolnick's evidence shows that O'Sullivan made a series of false claims, including:

  • that he was an attorney with more than a decade of successful litigation in New York State and Federal courts;
  • that he was employed by a major Victoria, B.C.(Canada) law firm that is representing Ball in the libel action;
  • that he is a widely published writer, with credits in Forbes and the National Review;
  • that he had received his law degree from the University College, Cork, Ireland and/or from the University of Surrey (O'Sullivan's actual legal accreditation, apparently obtained after the Mann-Ball action commenced, comes from an online degree mill, Hill University, which promises delivery in two weeks);
  • that he is a member of the American Bar Association.

One affidavit includes an online comment in which O'Sullivan says, “For your information, I am a retired academic and I have litigated personally or assisted others in pro se litigation at every level of court there is in New York State as well as Federal level, for over a decade and never lost.” 

Although O'Sullivan admits in this particular comment that he is not, in fact, licensed to practice law, in the U.S. or the U.K., he adds, “I'm just some Brit with a brain who can go live with his American wife in her country and kick ass big time around a courtroom.”

Certainly, O'Sullivan was successful in winning an acquittal when he was personally charged in England as a high school teacher accused of sending lewd text messages and assaulting a 16-year-old female. Given the acquittal, it would not generally be appropriate to bring up this sordid and unproven bit of history, except that O'Sullivan himself went on to write an “erotic” “novel” with a startlingly similar storyline: Vanilla Girl: a Fact-Based Crime Story of a Teacher's Struggle to Control His Erotic Obsession with a Schoolgirl.

Although eager to present himself as a science researcher of accomplishment - certainly Tim Ball's equal - Skolnick's research found that O'Sullivan is highly prone to error, whether intentional or not.

For example, O'Sullivan provided bogus contact information when registering as a member* with the New York County Lawyers' Association, an organization that apparently does not vet its members' qualifications (and does not, in any case, bestow the right to practice law). While O'Sullivan claimed to be with a firm named “Principia Scientific International,” he provided the address of a construction company called Second Nature Construction; the phone number and fax number didn't belong to O'Sullivan or anyone connected to “Principia,” either.

Principia certainly exists in some form. According to its website, O'Sullivan is its CEO, and Tim Ball is Chairman. Other members include climate deniers Paul DriessenPaul Reiter and more. Principia notes that it operates as a “private association rather than a charitable foundation. This is because PSI chooses to operate with the relative freedom of any start up association that has yet to determine whether it may fulfil its long term purpose as either a business with the private profit motive or a charity.”
 

This information emerged, and became relevant to this most recent libel action against Tim Ball, in part because Ball himself, in his Response to Civil Claim, stated that his communications with O'Sullivan were subject to solicitor-client privilege.

Mann then filed a reply, pointing out the facts documented in Skolnick's affidavits. As Mann's lawsuit proceeds, the court will inevitably rule on Ball's claim for “solicitor-client” privilege.

In the meantime, Ball has not submitted any affidavit from O'Sullivan attesting to his qualifications as Ball's legal advisor. If he did, O'Sullivan would be subject to cross-examination by Michael Mann's lawyer.
  

* The original post mistakenly said O'Sullivan was registering as an 'associate' member; in fact he registered as a member and was granted membership, despite not having a valid law degree or Bar certification in New York. We regret the error.

Comments

OK Pete,

This really is too amusing for words!

You discussed with Andrew about his inference that you were an anti-Semite?

So your point is what exactly? 

He was unjustified in making those slurs against you? 

And his slurs should now be struck from the record and/or forgotten? 

His past unjustifiable slurs are now ancient history but contemporaneous slurs against others remain wholly valid?

Maybe there’s a point to your comment?  Past history suggests otherwise.



 

Mr. Ridley

RE:

Behind the times again

Pete Ridley - Mon, 2012-08-06 13:55

0 votes

+

Vote up!

-

Vote down!

Hi Mark G Thompson.
Once again you are way behind. Andrew and I discussed that matter last year.
I think that you would benefit from a bit peace and quiet in the countriside. Moreau Lake’s only a short drive away so take a break and relax.
 
Best regards, Pete Ridley

Desmogblog (http://s.tt/1j6KN)

Why didn’t you just say “I know where you live, so be careful what you say?”

It just shows the deplorable depths you will go to, in order to evade constructive debate.

But I can forgive your previous inane and pointless diatribes.  They just became more amusing as you continued to tie yourself up in knots.

However, your latest comment isn’t amusing…it’s very disturbing.

I can now see why Skolnick alleged you were a cyberstalker.  Though this current missive suggests something a lot more sinister.

This really is the end of my conversation with you.  You appear to be very unbalanced.

 

Hi Mark G Thompson,

as I recall you have suggestd on numerous occasions that ” .. This really is the end of my conversation with you .. ” but you just can’t resit coming back. You really are a strange one.

Relax, because life is too short (and please don’t deliberately misinterpret that as some kind of threat).

Best regards, Pete Ridley

You’re totally right Mr. Ridley…I couldn’t resist coming back.  Your inane, hysterical and rather disturbing comments brought me back.

Skolnick suggests that you’re an anti-semitic and a cyberstalker (but we should just dismiss this, since you’ve ‘discussed’ this with him and it was almost a year ago?). And he then goes on to state that you have been sanctioned by Professor Curry? (dismiss that as well, since you’ve presumably ‘discussed’ that with him as well?)

So, as long as you and Skolnick have ‘discussed’ his slurs made against you, I guess it’s now ancient history and should be disregarded? But all the other Skolnick slurs on your blog should still be accepted as true?   Okay to be inaccurate about slurs against yourself, but wholly unacceptable to ever question the accuracy of Skolnick slurs about others? Or his own credentials?

Professor Mann deletes your comments on his FB page with a comment that they’re ‘crass nonsense.’ But I assume, in your mind, Professor Mann is equally misguided?  As it was a week or so ago, maybe also consign this to ‘behind the times’, unworthy of comment or consideration?

It’s patently clear that you feel PSI/O’Sulllivan are misguided, despite an earlier support of them…but in the past, so best to forget, behind the times? And your past attack of this blog and the ‘crazy lefties’…more ancient history we should just forget about?

Then you chose to evade the one sole question I posed to you about Skolnick’s hasty rewrite.  So Skolnick is totally misguided when it comes to comments about you, but beyond challenge for anything else?  What little grasp of logic do you have?

You then choose to evade my question about Skolnick’s credentials, yet again, but reply with a very sinister and disturbing non-sequitar  comment indicating you know where I live.  Any relevant point to this?  Why say this?  How did it advance your argument?

For me, it just showed what deplorable depths you will go to in order to suppress and evade healthy debate..and which has also resulted in a cautionary email to UK authorities (I still hold UK citizenship, despite living in the US…one more explicit or implied threat and I’ll pursue an action, per UK harassment legislature, notwithstanding any further defamatory comments, which I preserve as a separate action..please call my bluff and defame or threaten me further).

But I’m sure your retirement fund is worth gambling against further insults and threats.

If your golden years are solely consumed with archiving old Professor Curry/PSI repetitive debates..and imploring others to read these rants…I feel really sorry for you. You clearly have a big chip on your shoulder with PSI, perhaps not unsurprising given your initial inclusion and subsequent exclusion.  I have never sought to defend PSI or John O’Sullivan…I have only ever sought to to challenge Skolnick’s dubious credentials.

I abhore hypocrisy and that’s why I continue to post in such ‘lion’s dens’ such as this…Skolnicks credentials are far from squeaky clean, which is presumably why he chose to rewrite his bio.  Though I remain convinced that neiter you, Skolnick or anyone else will ever ‘fess-up’ to such puffery.

But since Skolnick has suggested that you’re an anti-Semite (and who’s to argue with Skolnick), my sympathy and sorrow is slim-to-none.

Please get a life.

 

It seems my concerns over the ‘Moreau Lake’ comment were wholly warranted.  I’ve been told you do this kind of cyberstalking all the time.

For example:

http://www.desmogblog.com/coming-classroom-climate-conflict

Ian Forrester - Thu, 2011-02-24 18:28

“He is a cyber stalker. There is no knowing what he will do with the information that he collects from the internet. He and his buddy poptart aka poptech put all my personal information including employer, work phone number, personal phone number, personal address, a map of where my house was located and a picture of it on the internet.”

But to pre-empt the inevitable response of ‘don’t believe everything you read’, there’s a self-acknowledgement of your very creepy and disturbing behavior:

http://www.joabbess.com/2010/10/18/pete-ridley-three-strikes/

from Peter Ridley
to Jo Abbess
date Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:38 PM

“Towards the end of our public exchanges Phil persistently called me a con man, which I did not appreciate, coming as it did from someone who I considered was cowering behind a false name, so I decided to try to track him down. I was astounded that I was able to find out, in only four hours on the Internet using Google, who he was, where he worked, his E-Mil address and details of family and friends.”

This is very, very disturbing.  Is this how you suppress debate?  Not only very disturbing but very sad.  Have you got nothing better to do in your retirement?

So it appears Skolnick was accurate to call you a cyberstalker.  On that basis, I also must give credence to his allegation that you’ve made anti-Semitic slurs and support Neo-Nazi’s.

Mark G Thompson, (ref. your comment 2012-08-07 02:36)

 

That’s the best rant I’ve heard for a long time. I have a recommendation for you - become a member of PSI. You’ll fit in perfectly there.

 

It appears from your rant that once again your strings are being pulled by your puppeteer. John O’Sullivan also has a history of rants, rages and talk of legal action against those who disagree with him, e.g: 

- his 2012-04-28 rant against Professor Curry, Andrew Skolnick, me ( “Professor Judith Curry threatened with blog closure attempt” (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/professor-judith-curry-threatened-with.html),

- his 2005-11-25 rant against one-time New York State Attorney Attorney Eliot Spitzer concerning “ .. The shocking truth about Eliot Spitzer’s unlawful methods in handling the case of Bracci v NYSDOCS .. ” http://exposingspitzer.blogspot.co.uk/2005_11_01_archive.html).

 

As for powers of logic deduction, yours does not seem up to scratch. You say of me “what deplorable depths you will go to in order to suppress and evade healthy debate but how on earth did you dream that one up from? Professor Curry’s thread “Letter to the dragon slayers” had over 1400 comments posted. I suspect that with your apparent dearth of deductive powers you’ll take a while to figure out the origins of that long debate, despite the fact that I’ve pointed you to it time and time again on this thread.

 

If you can’t work it out for yourself then please get back to me and I’ll provide another link.

 

As for your “Please get a life” – thanks for the concern but I’m enjoying it very much as is. On the other hand, perhaps you’d be happier cutting the strings and doing your own thing- just a thought.

 

Best regards, Pete Ridley   

Yep,

I hate to admit it, but I suspect Skolnick may actually be right, for once.

He alleged that Ridley is a cyber-stalker and anti-Semite.

And, per the eminent Professor Mann’s comment, he’s guilty of ‘crass nonsense.’

What Professor Curry has said about Ridley is just icing on the cake (e.g.  “after the moderator of Dr. Judith Curry’s web site repeatedly snipped and warned him to stop posting malevolent personal and intimidating attacks”, source: Skolnick).

Enjoy your ‘golden years’ Pete. 

It may be more fulfilling for you if you can move beyond your current obsession.  I think you’ve made your point…everyone who wants to read your archive has now read it, me thinks. 

All salient points have been incorporated into Skolnick’s affidavit…so I’m not sure what you feel continued bragging about your archiving will achieve…everything is now in the hands of the court…but good on you for helping out.

Kind regards, Mark

P.S. Seriously, if you make any more defamatory or harassing comments I’ll nail you…I promise…call my bluff if you like.  I’m still a UK citizen so a civil suit would be a walk in the park. But your call.

 

Hi Mark G Thompson,

I’m sure that you’ll have a rant about me posting this comment from Andrew Skolnick which he posted only 8 hours ago on John O’Sullivan’s Facebook page where there are some interesting exchanges taking place.

” .. Pete Ridley is no con artist. He and I have had heated and sometimes nasty exchanges in the past. And we still do not see eye to eye about global warming. But we agree without a doubt about the charlatan John O’Sullivan and his group of “scientific luminaries.” (http://www.facebook.com/john0sullivan).

Anyone interested in seeing those exchanges better hurry before John takes them down.

Best regards, Pete Ridley

Yep Pete,

I think you should marry each other…previous anti-semitic and cyber-stalking allegations  about you by Skolnick should clearly be forgotten, given that they occurred almost 12 months ago.

I’m glad you’ve made up.

All my love

Mark

 

Hi Mark G Thompson,

Don’t you think that you should show a little respect for the owners of this thread and stick to the subject matter?

Best regards, Pete Ridley

I always have…and I have no intention of having any further conversation with you, based upon the below.  Not from some unreliable troll in the blogosphere, but a Pulitzer Prize-nominated journalist, Andrew Skolnick:  http://www.joabbess.com/2010/10/18/pete-ridley-three-strikes/

askolnick August 3rd, 2011 at 17:20

And while we’re on the subject of Pete Ridley, the reason for his jihad against global warming scientists is that he believes they are part of the worldwide conspiracy of Jewish bankers led by the Rothschilds, who began the global warming “hoax” in a plot to rule the world.

Here’s one of his posts pushing this crackpot theory of the British National Party and other Neo-Nazi groups:

http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.com/2010/03/much-more-scary-than-human-made-global.html

This is the Neo-Nazi rant that he’s pushing: http://euro-med.dk/?p=13656

Anti-Semite?  Supporter of Neo-Nazi’s?  Either you’re a very unpleasant anti-Semitic or Andrew Skolnick is publishing malicious and unfounded slurs.  Which one is it Pete? 

And saying “I discussed it with Andrew”  is called non-responsive (but predictable).

And just to clarify,  my comment about “Pulitzer Prize-nominated journalist, Andrew Skolnick” is called ‘irony’.

His claim to have been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize is as disingenuous and misleading as your claim not to be a cyberstalker and anti-Semite. 

You really need to get married to Skolnick…your willingness to indulge in defamatory, vitreolic, Ad Hominem attacks and rambling rants clearly demonstrates  strong shared values.

But no doubt this latest criticism will get me a posting of my personal details on the internet, per Ian Forrester’s complaint and your ‘investigation’ of ‘Phil’, per Jo Abbess blog? (previously supplied on this thread).  And given Skolnicks allegation of cyberstalking by you? 

Doing it for (alleged) reasons of exposing the real person behind anonymous monikers or seeking to show how easy it is to expose the real person is the weakest excuse I’ve ever heard for your creepy behavior…do you wonder why people choose to maintain anonymity, when folks such as you choose to expose such details as personal addresses of those that choose to disagree with you?  Good grief man, you show the maturity of a six year-old.

If this is how you operate, you really need to look in the mirror. 

Different perspectives, ideologies and constructive debate are wholly legitimate.  But cyberstalking and malicious, personal and defamatory insults are a totally different matter…like Skolnick, I doubt you will ever subscribe to the ‘strong minds attack ideas, weak minds people’ mantra.  You appear totally incapable of making a logical counter-argument…your mo appears to just indulge in juvenile ‘slime-ball’ comments.  Do you really think that helps advance your cause?…or just further highlights your intellectual limitations?

But as you’re both retired, I doubt professional reputation or career advancement means much to either of you.  But it’s a rather sad waste of your retirement and his, in my opinion.

 

Last night I obtained additional newspaper accounts that describe how John O’Sullivan was acquitted of assaulting, sending dozens of obscene text messages and offering money for sex to a 16-year-old-school girl.

http://www.aaskolnick.com/global_deniers/Daily%20Express%20Sat%2028%20Feb%202004%20Page%2019.pdf

http://www.aaskolnick.com/global_deniers/Daily%20Star,%20Sat%2028%20Feb%202004%20Page%2029.pdf

http://www.aaskolnick.com/global_deniers/Cleared%20over%20lewd%20material%20-%20TheJournal%202004_03_05.jpg

http://www.aaskolnick.com/global_deniers/Cleared%20of%20sending%20lewd%20texts%20-
%20BandB2004_03_05.jpg
  

After O’Sullivan’s acquittal in 2004, unable to teach, he tried to launch a literary career by writing Vanilla Girl, an autobiographical novel he described as a “fact-based crime story of a teacher’s struggle to control his erotic obsession with a schoolgirl.” In it, he defends what he called “kiddie fiddling” and argues against age of consent laws that bar adults from having sex with underage girls.  Unable to find a publisher or agent, Mr. O’Sullivan self-published the book on his own blog:

http://cupboard55vanillagirl.blogspot.com/


 

Hey Pete Ridley and Andrew Skolnick

Pete, you’ve been quiet for a while…something to hide or evade answering? Are you a cyberstalker, anti-Semite and neo-Nazi, denier as Andrew Skolnick has alleged? (see above thread).

Or was he making malicious and unfounded slurs?

Again, any chance of answering without evading the question and resorting to rambling Norfolk Broads stories, posts to your blog or personal slurs?

Same for Mr. Skolnick..care to maintain these allegations or retract?

You did state, Mr. Ridley, that Skolnick was tough and fair.

So should we assume by your silence that it’s a fair and accurate statement about you by Skolnick?  And not a malicious, unfounded slur?

How amusing!

The odd couple are still as obsessive and as illogical as ever. Obviously not the sharpest tools in the tool-box.

Based upon his latest tirade on his blog against me (and subsequent deletion of my reply…so much for free speech!):

Skolnick throws irrelevant dirt and demonstrates his typical cyberstalking (disclosing my home location as Gansevoort, etc) when he can’t respond to legitimate questions as to his own questionable and egocentric claims (e.g. “I earned a Pulitzer prize nomination” or ‘veni vidi vici’ CMS nonsense).

What don’t you understand about the PPC rules, Mr. Skolnick? You seem very happy to question the credentials of others, but seem so unwilling to engage in in a discussion about your own, resorting instead to mud-slinging (why?…insecure? inflated ego? bitter and twisted about your firing from JAMA? unhappy that your expose of O’Sullivan hasn’t got more exposure?). Here’s an excerpt from Mr. Dedman’s piece, once again (and he’s a real Pulitzer Prize nominee…and winner!…unlike you):

It’s not uncommon for Pulitzer entrants to claim to be nominees. Here’s how it works: Though there are only three nominees, known as nominated finalists, in each Pulitzer category each year, there are more than 2,000 entrants. One could say that all of them were “nominated” by someone. If all Pulitzer entrants could be called nominees, any publisher could give all its authors that honorific by submitting an entry form and a check for $50.”

Source: http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11608553-conservative-author-jonah-goldberg-drops-claim-of-two-pulitzer-nominations?lite

The Pulitzer rules make clear that the only people to be known as nominees are those finalists chosen by the Pulitzer juries.” (source as above).

And then the guy who Skolnick claims is a cyberstalker, anti-semite and neo-Nazi supporter, weighs in with some ironical comment about rambling tirades (remember your own ramblings about the Norfolk Broads, Pete?). Yup, the evidence suggests you are a cyberstalker, Mr. Ridley (Ian Forrester, Jo Abbess et al)…in addition to Skolnicks claims…you really are a creep, in my opinion.

If Skolnick is accurate in his allegations that you’re an anti-semite, I’m really surprised you’re happily married to a Jewish gal…or maybe Skolnick has made an unfounded slur, as usual? Which one is it, given that you’re so sure of your convictions? Or maybe evade as normal and refuse to answer? Pray tell, if you have the courage of your convictions….or some balls, to put it more directly.

Let’s hope these two retirees can find something else to do with their ample spare time. And, no Skolnick, I doubt your “investigative reporting” about Mr. O’Sullivan will ever get reported in the mainstream press, despite your continual efforts and protestations on FB et al…it’s merely illustrative of a disgraced journalists efforts to resurrect a long-gone career…as well as an over-inflated ego.

Stick to pet photography Skolnick…or dog training if PetsMart haven’t fired you. And no doubt Pete will stick to his life goal of promoting his blog of an archaic and defamatory Judith Curry blog.

It’s easy to blame censorship of free speech when you two old fools get banned from an ever-increasing number of blogs and LinkedIn forums. At some point, though, you both need to realize your own puerile, immature and ad hominem comments are behind the bans.

Please either grow up, get married to each other or stick to flying RC airplanes, etc.”

How really, really sad! If these guys had half a brain, they’d realize that the best way to respond to criticism was with a coherent, non-personal, well-considered counter-argument. Their puerile behavior amuses me, but I’m more fulfilled by the fact that their desperate mud-slinging can only dilute Mann’s lawsuit claim.

Btw, did Mann also go to great lengths to promote being a Nobel Prize winner…among the other 2000+ winners of that prize that year?…me thinks Mann and Skolnick are related? (c.f. Pulitzer Prize)…I’m tempted to suggest egocentricity is at play here…though I won’t as Mann seems to want to sue anyone who has the audacity to disagree with him.

 

Ridley is a cyberstalker and anti-semite…I rest my case: (source: http://www.joabbess.com/2010/10/18/pete-ridley-three-strikes/)

from Peter Ridley
to Jo Abbess
date Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Towards the end of our public exchanges Phil persistently called me a con man, which I did not appreciate, coming as it did from someone who I considered was cowering behind a false name, so I decided to try to track him down. I was astounded that I was able to find out, in only four hours on the Internet using Google, who he was, where he worked, his E-Mil address and details of family and friends.”

askolnick August 3rd, 2011 at 17:20

And while we’re on the subject of Pete Ridley, the reason for his jihad against global warming scientists is that he believes they are part of the worldwide conspiracy of Jewish bankers led by the Rothschilds, who began the global warming “hoax” in a plot to rule the world.

Here’s one of his posts pushing this crackpot theory of the British National Party and other Neo-Nazi groups:

http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.com/2010/03/much-more-scary-than-human-made-global.html

This is the Neo-Nazi rant that he’s pushing: http://euro-med.dk/?p=13656

askolnick August 3rd, 2011 at 17:20

And while we’re on the subject of Pete Ridley, the reason for his jihad against global warming scientists is that he believes they are part of the worldwide conspiracy of Jewish bankers led by the Rothschilds, who began the global warming “hoax” in a plot to rule the world.

Here’s one of his posts pushing this crackpot theory of the British National Party and other Neo-Nazi groups:

http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.com/2010/03/much-more-scary-than-human-made-global.html

This is the Neo-Nazi rant that he’s pushing: http://euro-med.dk/?p=13656

What a creep.

 

Ridley is a cyberstalker and anti-semite…I rest my case: (source: http://www.joabbess.com/2010/10/18/pete-ridley-three-strikes/)

from Peter Ridley
to Jo Abbess
date Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Towards the end of our public exchanges Phil persistently called me a con man, which I did not appreciate, coming as it did from someone who I considered was cowering behind a false name, so I decided to try to track him down. I was astounded that I was able to find out, in only four hours on the Internet using Google, who he was, where he worked, his E-Mil address and details of family and friends.”

askolnick August 3rd, 2011 at 17:20

And while we’re on the subject of Pete Ridley, the reason for his jihad against global warming scientists is that he believes they are part of the worldwide conspiracy of Jewish bankers led by the Rothschilds, who began the global warming “hoax” in a plot to rule the world.

Here’s one of his posts pushing this crackpot theory of the British National Party and other Neo-Nazi groups:

http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.com/2010/03/much-more-scary-than-human-made-global.html

This is the Neo-Nazi rant that he’s pushing: http://euro-med.dk/?p=13656

askolnick August 3rd, 2011 at 17:20

And while we’re on the subject of Pete Ridley, the reason for his jihad against global warming scientists is that he believes they are part of the worldwide conspiracy of Jewish bankers led by the Rothschilds, who began the global warming “hoax” in a plot to rule the world.

Here’s one of his posts pushing this crackpot theory of the British National Party and other Neo-Nazi groups:

http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.com/2010/03/much-more-scary-than-human-made-global.html

This is the Neo-Nazi rant that he’s pushing: http://euro-med.dk/?p=13656

What a creep.

 

Pages