Questions for 911files about his research

[funk de fino]

This is why I would give no personal info to any of the pft or cit clowns. Despite the best efforts of Turbofan and the like.

I would like to say to 911 files that I read some of your work and commend the time and effort you put in to your investigation and the fact that when you find something to be at odds with what you originally thought you amend your reasoning and do not fall into the MO of denialism (not that I am calling you a truther).

I tried to bring some of your work to this forum in a debate with turbofan earlier but he wanted nothing to do with it.

I hope the twats are charged and made to pay for their cowardly snideness.

 

[funk de fino]

Sorry to see that your own statements and recent published claims got you so riled up. CIT has had that recording posted with your name in the title of the thread for months. You know there is nothing "damaging" about that casual call other than it reveals your contradictory behavior.

does having it for months make it legal?

 

[jhunter1163]

911files:

Poster LashL here is an attorney, and no fan of the CIT. You may want to PM her and ask her for some advice.

 

[BCR]

See, it completely escapes these guys why someone would be pissed off about having a personal phone call recorded without permission and then posted on the internet. It is called an invasion of privacy and breach of trust you bozo's! I don't care if we were talking about the weather, it would be the same deal.

What you guys call "contradictory behavior", is called learning to most sane people. When you were a kid, you believed in Santa Claus. As you grew older, you learned that Santa Claus was not real. When I was a child, I thought the Sun rose in the east and set in the west. It did not take very much education for me to learn that it was the Earth moving, not the Sun. So, if over several years I happen to learn something, well, most folks would consider that a good thing. So there is nothing in your post that irritated me. It was not until I saw quotes from a phone call I made almost two years ago that my blood started to boil.

I hope that I continue with the "contradictory behavior".

 

[332nd]

See, it completely escapes these guys why someone would be pissed off about having a personal phone call recorded without permission and then posted on the internet. It is called an invasion of privacy and breach of trust you bozo's! I don't care if we were talking about the weather, it would be the same deal.

What you guys call "contradictory behavior", is called learning to most sane people. When you were a kid, you believed in Santa Claus. As you grew older, you learned that Santa Claus was not real. When I was a child, I thought the Sun rose in the east and set in the west. It did not take very much education for me to learn that it was the Earth moving, not the Sun. So, if over several years I happen to learn something, well, most folks would consider that a good thing. So there is nothing in your post that irritated me. It was not until I saw quotes from a phone call I made almost two years ago that my blood started to boil.

I hope that I continue with the "contradictory behavior".

What?

 

[Baylor]

Farmer's got a message for CIT:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=

 

[T.A.M.]

See, it completely escapes these guys why someone would be pissed off about having a personal phone call recorded without permission and then posted on the internet. It is called an invasion of privacy and breach of trust you bozo's! I don't care if we were talking about the weather, it would be the same deal.

What you guys call "contradictory behavior", is called learning to most sane people. When you were a kid, you believed in Santa Claus. As you grew older, you learned that Santa Claus was not real. When I was a child, I thought the Sun rose in the east and set in the west. It did not take very much education for me to learn that it was the Earth moving, not the Sun. So, if over several years I happen to learn something, well, most folks would consider that a good thing. So there is nothing in your post that irritated me. It was not until I saw quotes from a phone call I made almost two years ago that my blood started to boil.

I hope that I continue with the "contradictory behavior".

No, it does not escape them. They are simply ignorant ****ers who don't give a **** about people or their personal lives or their right to privacy, or anything at all really.

CIT and PFT are the fringe of the fringe, and the worst of the worst. They almost make people like Alex Jones seem...Tolerable.

I hope you not only bring them to court, I hope you win a large monetary settlement.

TAM

 

[Turbofan]

I went to P4T and thier "brother" organization for assistance. But I soon learned that they distorted evidence and in many cases had no clue what they were talking about.

Rob Balsamo is a fraud.

(disclaimer: Farmer has expressed to P4T that all email correspondence with him is open to the public after posting private emails to his blog, so the below is not a breach of TOS, all email addys below are in public domain and since i am a member of P4T, i have access to P4T emails)

Edited by Myriad: 

e-mail removed.

See, it completely escapes these guys why someone would be pissed off about having a personal phone call recorded without permission and then posted on the internet. It is called an invasion of privacy and breach of trust you bozo's! I don't care if we were talking about the weather, it would be the same deal.

Farmer, you post private emails on your blog almost daily. And now you're crying about a phone call which is not illegal to record with one party consent in your state? Not to mention you gave Craig permission? You're a walking contradiction.

 

[Drudgewire]

Sorry to see that your own statements and recent published claims got you so riled up. CIT has had that recording posted with your name in the title of the thread for months. You know there is nothing "damaging" about that casual call other than it reveals your contradictory behavior.

Contradictory behavior like suing 9/11 truth researchers whose work you cite in a brand new book as valid evidence of a deception on 9/11.

Why are you so mad at them?

Tell it to the Judge.

The day "shooting themselves in the foot" becomes a valid substitute for "legitimate research and evidence gathering" the truth movement will be the greatest whistleblowers in history.

 

[The Big Dog]

Farmer, you post private emails on your blog almost daily. And now you're crying about a phone call which is not illegal to record with one party consent in your state? Not to mention you gave Craig permission? You're a walking contradiction.

Uh quoting the mutts over at Pfft isn't exactly proof that Craig got permission, now is it Turbo fan?

"Coincidently, he's on JokeREF trying to stir up some drama. As a good friend of mine says, "Farmer is a walking contradiction".

I suspect he's getting heat from a certain authority figure, or soldout and is getting a nice pay cheque to spin the truth.

Why else would someone with a history of finding anomalies with government data suddenly change his mind?"

"jokeRef." Hey Turbo, how is that math coming along? You and Cap'n Bob still still counting on your fingers?

 

[GStan]

Uh quoting the mutts over at Pfft isn't exactly proof that Craig got permission, now is it Turbo fan?

"Coincidently, he's on JokeREF trying to stir up some drama. As a good friend of mine says, "Farmer is a walking contradiction".

I suspect he's getting heat from a certain authority figure, or soldout and is getting a nice pay cheque to spin the truth.

Why else would someone with a history of finding anomalies with government data suddenly change his mind?"

"jokeRef." Hey Turbo, how is that math coming along? You and Cap'n Bob still still counting on your fingers?

I could get a great laugh from that if I didn't feel so sorry for people who actually believe that to be true. Er, wait. I meant to say, I might feel sorry for people who actually believe that to be true if I weren't so busy laughing at them.

 

[BCR]

To clear up a misconception, I am not suing CIT. I might later on, who knows. I have been working the phones with various law enforcement agencies in California, including the Hi Tech Crimes Center. I don't think the boys understand that this is criminal activity.

Right now we are attempting to nail down the City Police agency who should take the lead. Ranke lives in Orange County, but it is just a question of which city has jurisdiction. This will take a few days, but fortunately there are records in the Court system which are helping.

 

[Drudgewire]

To clear up a misconception, I am not suing CIT. I might later on, who knows. I have been working the phones with various law enforcement agencies in California, including the Hi Tech Crimes Center. I don't think the boys understand that this is criminal activity.

Right now we are attempting to nail down the City Police agency who should take the lead. Ranke lives in Orange County, but it is just a question of which city has jurisdiction. This will take a few days, but fortunately there are records in the Court system which are helping.

I can't imagine those guys have anything worth the hassle of suing over. Criminal charges are probably the way to go. Hand it off to a prosecutor and watch them run with it.



Crap, I'm gonna need more popcorn.

 

[Turbofan]

Such a sore loser.

How is the lawsuit going with the NTSB for missing seconds?

 

[T.A.M.]

About time someone looked into just what those idiots can and cannot do with regards to their recordings, and witness harrassment.

TAM

 

[Turbofan]

About time someone looked into just what those idiots can and cannot do with regards to their recordings, and witness harrassment.

TAM

..when a call is across state lines it comes under Federal Statute, which only requires one party consent.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

Be civil and polite

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[BCR]

Turbo, it is going quite well thank you. The FAA settled out of court and released the requested records, and negotiations with the FBI’s attorney are indicating that the requested videos are soon to be released. Of course we are just now entering the discovery phase, so it will be interesting to see what the Vaughn indices will show. The NTSB has yet to respond, but we are moving forward slowly but surely Turbo. Thanks for asking.

So you are supportive of criminal activity Turbo? So if CIT is making illegal phone recording of witnesses who don't want to talk to them (against California law) and then posting them on the internet (against Federal Law), you see no problem with that? If they use the same illegal methods to attack and malign witnesses who's only guilt is having been a part of something so horrible that most people would rather forget, this is okay with you?

Just want you to clarify exactly what it is you are supporting.

 

[WildCat]

Farmer, stop blowing smoke...when a call is across state lines it comes under Federal Statute, which only requires one party consent.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

I see your understanding of the law is just as bad as your understanding of FDRs.

The call is covered under California law, it was illegal for Ranke to record the call.

Is there anything you guys do understand?

 

[Drudgewire]

Farmer, stop blowing smoke...when a call is across state lines it comes under Federal Statute, which only requires one party consent.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

And yet, according to the state-by-state link to the left of the info you yourself just posted (I'm assuming this is Orange County CALIFORNIA we're talking about):

California

It is a crime in California to intercept or eavesdrop upon any confidential communication, including a telephone call or wire communication, without the consent of all parties. Cal. Penal Code §§ 631, 632. It is also a crime to disclose information obtained from eavesdropping. However, an individual can still be convicted without disclosing information. Two appellate courts have held that there is no disclosure or publication requirement for violation of the Privacy Act by recording confidential communications without consent. Coulter v. Bank of America, 28 Cal. App. 4th 923 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994). Marich v. MGM/UA Telecommunications, Inc., 113 Cal. App. 4th 415 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003).

Eavesdropping upon or recording a conversation, whether by telephone or face-to-face, when a person would reasonably expect their conversation to be confined to the parties present, carries the same penalty as intercepting telephone or wire communications. A California appellate court ruled that a network’s broadcast of a news report that used excerpts from secret recordings during two patient examinations violated the privacy rights of the physician, who had a reasonable expectation that his communications with his patients would be private and not recorded. Lieberman v. KCOP Television, Inc. 110 Cal. App. 4th 156 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003).

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/california.html

If he recorded it in California, that's where the law was broken. It doesn't have to be deferred to the feds simply because that's where the other end of the conversation was coming from (of course neither of us are lawyers so acting like we're so sure of something based on an Internet link would be presumptuous to say the least).

And take note, these are for the most part laws that apply to journalists who have lost these cases despite being able to afford real legal teams financed by major newspapers and other media outlets. I'm sure the gaggle of top attorneys CIT has on retainer will be tickled pink upon learning your cheerleading has landed them in a situation where they so much as have to address any of this.

 

[WildCat]

If he recorded it in California, that's where the law was broken.

Nope. It doesn't matter where it was recorded. See here from the same link Turbofan provided but didn't bother reading (surprise surprise surprise!):

The Supreme Court of California in Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney applied California wiretap law to a company located in Georgia who routinely recorded business phone calls with its clients in California. California law requires all party consent to record any telephone calls, while Georgia law requires only one party consent. The state’s high court, applying choice of law principles, reasoned that the failure to apply California law would “impair California’s interest in protecting the degree of privacy afforded to California residents by California law more severely than the application of California law would impair any interests of the State of Georgia.”