ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 9/11 litigation , ballot initiatives , nyccan , nyccant

Reply
Old 30th July 2009, 07:47 PM   #1
BigAl
Philosopher
 
BigAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,397
NYC Response to Twoofer 911 Investigation Petition: Call out the laughing dogs

Here is the NYC response to the NYCCAN Petition drive. It's a 2-page letter that shows the petition flawed on both the signature count and the legal issues. The guy in the City Clerk's office I spoke to said that the City Clerk has been officially informed that an appeal is about to be filed. That should be good for laughs, too.

Here are the two pages. I hope people can read them, the text of the copy I was given was small and somewhat blurry type. These jpgs do blow up to be readable. In FireFox, a double-click on the image will do it.

http://911links.webs.com/NYCCAN-Fail-1.jpg
http://911links.webs.com/NYCCAN-Fail-2.jpg

I stopped in unannounced. The people were very nice but I think I was lucky to find someone available to answer my request. I think they expect people to call and set up an appointment.
__________________
------
Eric Pode of Croydon
Chief Assistant to the Assistance Chief,
Dept of Redundancy Dept.
BigAl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 07:56 PM   #2
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
Ouch!!!

that is some brutally legalistic, honest, and forthright stuff!!

petition signatures missing addresses, not registered to vote in the most recent election, no method of financing provided, greatly overstepping the bounds of the Commission and the City Council, this thing looks dead as Lincoln.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 07:56 PM   #3
Trojan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 479
As I said on another thread, there would have to be serious legal flaws for the clerks to throw this out -- and it appears it has several damning flaws,

The twoofer author is clearly very ignorant of the procedure.
Trojan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 07:59 PM   #4
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
One would have thought they'd run the basic petition by some legal professional before committing two years and $50,000 (?) to it, or at least listened to the very many critiques of its contents offered for free by "debunkers..."

... or not. Standard M.O. for the Truthers. Competence is not one of their strengths.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 07:59 PM   #5
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
The City Clerk put together a very well written and well argued defeat for this pathetic petition.

The Truther fools are welcome to challenge this..I guess. But they will suffer another embarrassing defeat if they do.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:07 PM   #6
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
We Failed! Plese send us more money so we can retain..uhh....someone

Originally Posted by R.Mackey View Post
One would have thought they'd run the basic petition by some legal professional before committing two years and $50,000 (?) to it, or at least listened to the very many critiques of its contents offered for free by "debunkers..."

... or not. Standard M.O. for the Truthers. Competence is not one of their strengths.

Maybe it's a swindle to collect 50K in the guise of a 9/11 petition? Though you will never see a full accounting of where the troofer dollars went. Looks like they retained nobody to oversee something that was crafted on a PC in one evening in some half wits basement. Perhaps their biggest expense was the web hosting of the scam.
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:07 PM   #7
Drudgewire
Critical Doofus
 
Drudgewire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9,421
So as I read it, there were 26,000 signatures total. And of those, more than 24,500 were invalid.

Craptacular effort, twoofers.
__________________
"You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc."
-lapman describing every twoofer on the internet
Drudgewire is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:08 PM   #8
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,096
Speaking as a professional bureaucrat who occassionally has to smack down members of the public with persistent delusions, I just have to say.....Epic Smack Down!


Twoofer pathetic response in three, two, one.....
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:10 PM   #9
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
Could the New York City Clerk be.....a Zionist???

ah soooo..the plot thickens!!!

No doubt the Mossad sent a direct order to Michael Zionist Bloomberg to quash this petition!!

=)
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:13 PM   #10
cyclonic
Muse
 
cyclonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 977


Go suck a lemon twoofers.
cyclonic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:20 PM   #11
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
wonder when deep44 will read this thread?

Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
I would be surprised if the older signatures were the problem, but there's certainly that possibility (see '9/11 investigation' thread for additional details).

I actually suspect they made some minor change(s) to the petition between campaigns. Either way - we'll find out soon enough.

Ohhh! we found out alright



http://911links.webs.com/NYCCAN-Fail-1.jpg
http://911links.webs.com/NYCCAN-Fail-2.jpg

__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:23 PM   #12
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by A W Smith View Post
Maybe it's a swindle to collect 50K in the guise of a 9/11 petition?
The thought had crossed my mind, but no, I don't think so. When they do that, like in the TruthBurn idiocy or Gage's shilling or Craig and Aldo's little movies, it's usually clumsy and obvious.

But then, who can say? Their minds work in mysterious ways.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:25 PM   #13
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,965
Wow, this is so epic fail, I cannot even begin to find a picture that conveys how much of an epic failure it is!!

I thought pretty much every one the reasons this was disqualified was pointed out in various threads on this forum.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:35 PM   #14
AJM8125
Potsing whiled runk
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,546
This is beyond "epic", this is failure on a galactic scale.

I'm almost at a loss for words. I think if you're trying to circumvent the law, a necessary step in that process would be actually, like, studying the law or hiring that lawyer instead of having him waiting in the wings. Am I wrong?

At least they aren't as stupid as the truthers who sent donations.

Last edited by AJM8125; 30th July 2009 at 08:37 PM.
AJM8125 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:39 PM   #15
BigAl
Philosopher
 
BigAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,397
Originally Posted by BigAl View Post
Here is the NYC response to the NYCCAN Petition drive.

http://911links.webs.com/NYCCAN-Fail-1.jpg
http://911links.webs.com/NYCCAN-Fail-2.jpg
Fee free to post these URLs to any Twoofer site you haven't been banned from. 911links isn't going anywhere.
__________________
------
Eric Pode of Croydon
Chief Assistant to the Assistance Chief,
Dept of Redundancy Dept.
BigAl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:42 PM   #16
Unsecured Coins
Hoku-maniac
 
Unsecured Coins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,903
__________________
http://kcbastards.com/
"If God wants 10% of my paycheck, he can get it himself. Or at least work for it -Kochanski
"I may not be easy, but I am fast." - Hokulele
"Oh CRAP... DQ!!" - Ol' Hokey, yet again
Unsecured Coins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 08:50 PM   #17
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 14,132
1400 signatures?

Are they kidding?

Unbelievable.

Pack it up losers.
__________________
"I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."

The Big Dog was formerly known as 16.5
The Big Dog is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 09:02 PM   #18
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,675
Originally Posted by Drudgewire View Post
So as I read it, there were 26,000 signatures total. And of those, more than 24,500 were invalid.
Craptacular effort, twoofers.
Originally Posted by 16.5 View Post
1400 signatures?

Are they kidding?

Unbelievable.

Pack it up losers.

Actually, it sounds to me like there were a total of 50,667 signatures. At least 24,664 of them were invalid, leaving at most 26,003 valid signatures.

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 30th July 2009 at 09:08 PM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 09:32 PM   #19
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,231
Originally Posted by BigAl View Post
Here is the NYC response to the NYCCAN Petition drive. It's a 2-page letter that shows the petition flawed on both the signature count and the legal issues.

That's awesome, BigAl! Thank you very much for obtaining the letter and sharing it.

To the "truth"ers, I hate to say, "I told you so," but ... well, you know.
LashL is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 09:38 PM   #20
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,011
Attention Truthers! Do you see what BigAl did here? He wanted to know about something related to NYC government, so he stopped by the city clerk's office. In the real world!
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 09:56 PM   #21
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13,537
Two thumbs up, Big Al! I have linked at SLC.

ETA: I don't know if they paid all the signature gatherers a buck a signature; I know they were paying them that rate at the end when they had some money to spend.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

Last edited by Brainster; 30th July 2009 at 09:59 PM.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 10:41 PM   #22
Hokulele
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 28,139
NYCCANned.
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 10:45 PM   #23
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
 
jhunter1163's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Connecticut, or King Arthur's Court. Hard to tell sometimes.
Posts: 24,642
Originally Posted by Hokulele View Post
NYCCANned.
Today's Golden Guffaw winnah!

Hoku, you should write headlines for the Post.
__________________
A møøse ønce bit my sister
jhunter1163 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 10:50 PM   #24
Hokulele
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 28,139
Originally Posted by jhunter1163 View Post
Today's Golden Guffaw winnah!



Quote:
Hoku, you should write headlines for the Post.

Nah, they are Yankee territory. *Shudder*
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 11:09 PM   #25
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Actually, it sounds to me like there were a total of 50,667 signatures. At least 24,664 of them were invalid, leaving at most 26,003 valid signatures.
Not too sure about that. They did collect signatures from all 5 boroughs and not just NYC so those signatures are invalid.
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 11:10 PM   #26
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
 
jhunter1163's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Connecticut, or King Arthur's Court. Hard to tell sometimes.
Posts: 24,642
Random observations regarding this epic, nay, Biblical fail:

I recall seeing somewhere (I think it was at 9/11 Blogger, not sure though; sorry) that NYCCAN'T spent $75,000 on this effort. When I think about the good they could have done for people with that money...

And is anyone else as tired as I am of the way Truthers hide behind the skirts of the families and first responders? It seems like everything they try to do is couched in "the families and first responders want..." when as far as I can tell most family members and first responders want no such thing.
__________________
A møøse ønce bit my sister
jhunter1163 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 11:38 PM   #27
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Attention Truthers! Do you see what BigAl did here? He wanted to know about something related to NYC government, so he stopped by the city clerk's office. In the real world!

Notice that BigAl didn't even know the letter was a matter of public record until someone pointed it out:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com....php?p=4945493
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 11:41 PM   #28
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Notice that BigAl didn't even know the letter was a matter of public record until someone pointed it out:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com....php?p=4945493
So? Are you hurt because NYCCAN failed for all the world to see and you now realize you are a member of a cult of liars?
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 11:53 PM   #29
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
 
jhunter1163's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Connecticut, or King Arthur's Court. Hard to tell sometimes.
Posts: 24,642
I thought they had "the best election lawyer in NYC" on the case on this. You would think that a good lawyer would have told them that their petition contained no less than five disqualifying errors.
__________________
A møøse ønce bit my sister
jhunter1163 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th July 2009, 11:56 PM   #30
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 33,318
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Notice that BigAl didn't even know the letter was a matter of public record until someone pointed it out:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com....php?p=4945493
Wow, that's some amazing Truthtm, Deep.

You're totally ignoring the dozen pages of people telling you, step by step, that these are the things that were wrong with the petition and their campaign? Do you have nothing to add other than the pathetic "gotcha" above?
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele
"Chicken **** Poster!"
Help! We're being attacked by sea lions!
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 12:23 AM   #31
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 35,855
Originally Posted by Drudgewire View Post
So as I read it, there were 26,000 signatures total. And of those, more than 24,500 were invalid.

Craptacular effort, twoofers.
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Actually, it sounds to me like there were a total of 50,667 signatures. At least 24,664 of them were invalid, leaving at most 26,003 valid signatures.


As I read it, only 26,003 of the total signatories were qualified to sign. The others weren't in the right borough, perhaps, as ~enigma~ said.

24,664 of those signatories signatures were invalid, due to failing to include the date, their address and/or get their signature witnessed (ETA: or they were not registered to vote).

Perhaps LashL or Big Al might be able to correct me if I'm wrong.
__________________
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.

Last edited by Orphia Nay; 31st July 2009 at 12:43 AM.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 12:41 AM   #32
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
 
funk de fino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,779
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Notice that BigAl didn't even know the letter was a matter of public record until someone pointed it out:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com....php?p=4945493
ha ha

__________________

Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.
funk de fino is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 12:43 AM   #33
cludgie
Critical Thinker
 
cludgie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 312
Originally Posted by jhunter1163 View Post
I thought they had "the best election lawyer in NYC" on the case on this. You would think that a good lawyer would have told them that their petition contained no less than five disqualifying errors.
It doesn't even look like they managed to afford Lionel Hutz.
cludgie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 12:46 AM   #34
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Well, the price of admission is 30,000 valid signatures - not sure what there is to "appeal", since it doesn't sound like the older signatures were rejected.

As for the additional comments, don't misinterpret them as anything other than the opinion of Corporation Counsel. Those objections could be challenged in court (had they actually factored into the rejection). The part about appointing Commissioners is clearly a problem (as LashL pointed out in another thread), but the other objections appear to be judgment calls.

Now, I'm not suggesting that a judge would necessarily feel any differently about those provisions, but at least there's room to argue.
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 12:46 AM   #35
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,231
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Notice that BigAl didn't even know the letter was a matter of public record until someone pointed it out:

And somehow you think that that is a valid criticism of an individual who, despite not knowing the specifics about whether or not he would able to obtain the document, actually took it upon himself to go to the source in the real world, make the appropriate inquiries, obtain the relevant document, and post it?

Bizarre.

I would think that you should be annoyed at the "truth"er cult leaders whose dogma you follow, as they did not share the document with you and your fellow "truth"™ movement members, and did not bother to tell you the reasons for the petition being rejected, choosing instead to simply make further appeals to "truth"ers for more money, without giving you the information that they should have shared with you. Are you getting it yet? Here you are making a left-handed (and utterly ridiculous) jab at a rationalist who took the time and trouble to ascertain the information and obtain the documentation that your "truth"er cult leaders should have given to you and should have published days ago, but didn't.

Does any of this make you realize that perhaps those whose dogma you follow are not telling you the whole, unvarnished truth™? And does that not make you rethink your willingness to follow that unsubstantiated dogma?

Last edited by LashL; 31st July 2009 at 01:03 AM.
LashL is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 01:08 AM   #36
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
You're totally ignoring the dozen pages of people telling you, step by step, that these are the things that were wrong with the petition and their campaign? Do you have nothing to add other than the pathetic "gotcha" above?

Did you notice that most of those people were wrong? There's every indication that the older signatures were accepted, and the Corporate Council certainly didn't mention anything about subpoena power in his/her list of objections - those were the two big ones.

LashL made a few good points in one of her posts, but other than that, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

I suspected that the petition changed at some point -- so I was wrong, too. It's a discussion, not a contest.
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 01:24 AM   #37
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 35,855
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Did you notice that most of those people were wrong? There's every indication that the older signatures were accepted, and the Corporate Council certainly didn't mention anything about subpoena power in his/her list of objections - those were the two big ones.

LashL made a few good points in one of her posts, but other than that, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

I suspected that the petition changed at some point -- so I was wrong, too. It's a discussion, not a contest.
The document (image 2) says "the petition overreaches in its attempt to confer a range of law enforcement and prosecutorial powers on the Commission". I think you'll find subpoena power is covered there, but I could be wrong.
__________________
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 01:28 AM   #38
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by orphia nay View Post
The document (image 2) says "the petition overreaches in its attempt to confer a range of law enforcement and prosecutorial powers on the Commission". I think you'll find subpoena power is covered there, but I could be wrong.

I believe this is what they were referring to:
10. As a law-enforcement agency, the Commission shall have the right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret or confidential nature and shall have the duty of recording the taking of testimony by film or video, and the duty of providing an opportunity for C-SPAN and other television networks, stations and programs to broadcast Commission proceedings on a live or other basis.
15. The Commission as a temporary investigative office of New York City shall during its lifetime enjoy the same immunities, privileges and prosecutorial discretion granted under law to elected prosecutors.
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 01:34 AM   #39
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
Wow. Who would have thought this effort would fail.
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2009, 01:38 AM   #40
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 35,855


Originally Posted by orphia nay View Post
The document (image 2) says "the petition overreaches in its attempt to confer a range of law enforcement and prosecutorial powers on the Commission". I think you'll find subpoena power is covered there, but I could be wrong.
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
I believe this is what they were referring to:
10. As a law-enforcement agency, the Commission shall have the right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret or confidential nature and shall have the duty of recording the taking of testimony by film or video, and the duty of providing an opportunity for C-SPAN and other television networks, stations and programs to broadcast Commission proceedings on a live or other basis.
15. The Commission as a temporary investigative office of New York City shall during its lifetime enjoy the same immunities, privileges and prosecutorial discretion granted under law to elected prosecutors.
Maybe. It could also be subpoena power too.
__________________
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:40 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.