Huffington Post and their Lies about John O’Sullivan

They say truth is stranger than fiction. And here is the proof. Let’s begin at the end, or where an “end” might be perceived today. Climatologist, Michael Mann is now exposed by the Nobel Committee perjuring himself in his botched courtroom capers hoping to silence critics of his junk climate science claims. Even the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has now thrown Mann under the bus. But what has that got to do with the Huffington Post and their lies about me? Well, it seems that HuffPo’s ploy to trash my name has backfired as badly as Mann’s phony Nobel Prize claims. In their haste HuffPo has exposed at least one of Mann’s own witnesses also committing perjury.

In this article we see there are no “white lies” told by this cheating scientist and his cronies. Lies perpetrated by Mann, and at least one other co-conspirator, are lies given under oath in a court of law with the express intention of inflicting serious financial harm on an opposing litigant. This matter refers specifically to the now crumbling Mann-v-Ball lawsuit filed last year in the British Columbia Supreme Court.

It seems in the interim Mann’s Canadian lawyer recruited a disgraced former journalist from the Journal of the American Medical Association to provide faked evidence to smear me and thus Tim Ball, by association.

Last week the Nobel Committee and the IPCC came out to trash Dr. Mann’s ludicrous Peace Prize claims inserted into his court papers with the hope of swaying jurors. The most recent bogus lawsuit from his perjuring hand was filed two weeks ago against Mark Steyn, the National Review and other defendants. This was joyous news to Dr Tim Ball who has risen to be one of Mann’s most popular critics. He is also my trusted colleague and Chair of Principia Scientific International (PSI), a free-to-join grassroots association advancing openness and the traditional scientific method. PSI, like me, gave its full support to Ball when Mann proved how thin-skinned he was in filing a libel suit against Ball for quipping that Mann belonged “in the state pen, not Penn. State.”

Unfortunately, for Mann his grand plan to make an example of us “deniers” has backfired spectacularly. Almost immediately after he filed his claim in Canada huge public interest grew about Mann’s “dirty laundry” – dirt that could expose his global warming data fraud. Skeptics have long argued that if exposed to honest scrutiny such data could discredit Mann’s “hockey stick” graph – touted since 2001 by global warming doomsayers as the smoking gun of human impact on climate. Not only that, if it’s showed Mann tortured his data as badly as some suggest, it may prove an intentional fraud was committed.

But among Mann’s greatest traits are his huge ego and bully boy manner, as exposed by those leaked Climategate emails. So Mann was quick to seize the help offered to him via the deep pockets of the David Suzuki Foundation. Nutjob Suzuki wants any politician who doesn’t agree with his fascist green agenda “thrown in prison.” In no time Mann had a hotshot Canadian libel lawyer representing him. Incredibly, it was the second time in a matter of months that Big Green backers had come out to hit Ball with a vexatious libel suit (the first was filed by IPCC climate modeler, Andrew Weaver). Again the same hot shot libel attorney, Roger McConchie was batting for Big Green.

But the move incensed public opinion as it was felt courtrooms shouldn’t be used by rich NGO’s to silence free speech in scientific debate. Mann and Suzuki soon found they’d made a monumental miscalculation in believing 72-year-old retired Ball would be a soft target. Ball was now firmly ensconced as an international icon for the skeptic cause and a grassroots campaign soon provided Ball with a very healthy legal fund to defend himself against both Mann and Weaver.

Suzuki’s money-no-object attrition tactic had failed and as time passed it became very apparent that if it came to a showdown neither Mann nor Weaver were going to allow any actual open courtroom examination of their dodgy secret science. Unable to then advance their claims according to the openness required under the rules of the British Columbia Supreme Court, both cases stalled and Ball’s legal team are left very much on top. Neither Mann or Weaver can beat Ball if they don’t come to court and demonstrate to two juries that their hidden data is robust and concurs with the UN IPCC claims that humans are dangerously warming the climate. Their obstinate secrecy is contrary to all the normal tenets of good scientific practice.

Instead, all they are left with is a hope and a prayer that the courts (and the world) will take their word for it, on their “authority” as official UN IPCC scientists, that their work is reliable. For years the UN and “leading academies” backed the pro-green media trope so surely, it must be right, yes?

Well – no. Public doubts grew in tandem with the failure of junk science prophecies about temperature and sea level rises. Indeed, official satellite data shows beyond doubt there’s been no global warming trend for 16 years. As interest in his flagging lawsuit collapsed Mann turned to his cronies at Huffington Post to rally his demoralized fellow eco-warriors.

HuffPo duly obliged by running an attack piece by Brendan DeMelle on yours truly based on “evidence” submitted in a sworn affidavit from one of Mann’s loyal supporters. I was singled out for a vicious attack after the story that I literally wagered my house on Ball beating Mann went viral. HuffPo’s “evidence” was gleaned from an affidavit submitted by Andrew Skolnick, a disgraced former editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), to the B.C. Supreme Court.

But neither DeMelle or HuffPo did any proper due diligence on Skolnick. They were so impressed by his bogus affidavit claim to be a “Pulitzer Prize nominee” they simply swallowed whole his pack of lies. And why wouldn’t they – it was all in Skolnick’s sworn Canadian court affidavit to help Mann so it must be true right? Wrong.

Skolnick is no less a perjurer than Mann. The most sickening part of HuffPo’s attack piece was the (already officially discredited) lie that I unlawfully misrepresented my legal credentials in Canada, plus the inference I was a pedophile (disproved by a full official UK Govt. investigation). But even when the New York County Lawyers Association came out to denounce HuffPo’s misrepresentations with evidence in my defense, no retractions were made. Even to anyone vaguely up on the law, it is very obvious I would face criminal prosecution if I’d falsely represented myself as a licensed attorney.

But as we have seen so often with these pro-green radicals, their mission isn’t to gauge the veracity of the evidence, it’s simply to wound their target with lots of cheap shots and innuendo. Skolnick’s “pedophile” slur relies heavily on newspaper cuttings from 2004 from a time when I was working as a schoolteacher. I had been arrested, tried and then acquitted on six criminal counts involving a teenage girl in my care. Naturally, such a salacious story had initially filled the British national press and, up till the surprise verdict, I was certainly painted as a violent pedophile.

But as we have learned from media coverage about global warming, the truth is often very different from what is portrayed in the mainstream media. Yes, I was accused of some awful crimes. Yes, even being accused is very damaging not just to me, but to my family, especially my young son and daughter. But I wasn’t a quitter. I mounted my own defense and I set out to prove that the key physical “evidence” against me, a transcript of a secretly recorded conversation between the girl and me, had been faked. In a three-day ordeal by public trial I exposed the lies of the prosecutor and his witnesses. A verdict of “not guilty” was handed down on all charges within 30 minutes. All this is on court record.

Just as with the Mann lawsuits versus Ball and others, in my story we find eerie parallels of evidence abuse and fake claims made from authority. Unbeknown to me the girl had taped the conversation I had with her at the time of the alleged “attack.” In my case the court was urged to accept on police and Crown Prosecution authority that the transcript they provided of the girl’s secret tape recording was a reliable and true record. In it’s submissions, the only evidence the prosecutor wanted the court to examine was their carefully prepared transcript, not the secret tape recording itself. However, I fought for my rights until I was granted a full courtroom examination of the tape, too.

Given access to listen to the tape, I prepared my own transcript and presented it to the court alongside the prosecutor’s version. Thereby everyone present in the court could verify for themselves the reliability of each transcript by comparison to the tape recording as it was played out repeatedly to a stunned court. Such is how the truth is uncovered. No evidence should be kept secret under lock and key and no authority can be assumed to be always faithful to the truth.

Against the odds I succeeded in forcing the Crown Prosecution Service to comply with the rules of evidence to ensure a full, fair and open examination of ALL the evidence. Widespread shock and outrage ensued when the prosecutor’s transcript was shown to be so biased and riddled with omissions and bogus added dialog (damning words not heard on the tape) that all such “errors” somehow favored only the prosecutor’s case and/or harmed my own. Angry voices at the back of the court could be heard that, in legal parlance, accused the prosecution of succumbing to noble cause corruption. In the fifteen minutes it took for the court to hear the tape recording the case against me had unraveled and the girl exposed as a liar.

Of course, the British tabloids, always keen to get their teeth into a salacious story had already done the damage to my reputation. The press has never had a good track record when it comes to putting right their goofs. It seems the same goes for the HuffPo.

Upon my full acquittal a full internal police inquiry ensued and I prepared for a long legal battle to claim damages. Soon my case was used by civil rights activists as evidence for a change in English law so that schoolteachers accused of child sex offenses should have their identities kept anonymous, unless found guilty.

Moreover, medical evidence that could have proven the girl was mentally ill was never allowed to be presented at trial. No press stories ever appeared about my complete vindication or about the exposure of the police and prosecution conspiracy. The case was virtually “sanitized” from the Internet. But a year later the matter was finally settled out of court in my favor. The Secretary of State for Education completely exonerated me and contrary to Skolnick’s lies, I could resume teaching any time I wanted. But because of my change in financial circumstances I chose not to.

It is from such personal experience that private individuals become inspired to fight government corruption. This is how I first became immersed in the Climategate scandal. I wanted to be a champion for climate truth and, as they say, eventually “the truth will out!” Now, I sense another legal victory coming. When it happens I hope to see criminal prosecutions against those climatologists that knowingly engaged in the conspiracy to falsify data to bolster a concocted narrative. Fraudsters who peddled the lie of catastrophic man-made global warming must also pay for their “noble cause corruption.”