• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

A new investigation for 9/11. Why?

Lupie,

I think he would be completely smashed by the time we all got done buying him beers. He most likely would have a yeaars worth of beers waiting for him.

I might have to make some phone calls. I still have some connections in the FD, so maybe someone knows who it is.

I'll keep you posted.
 
An investigation by the New York District Attorney would be very limited in power. They probably cannot subpoena Federal officials or records..which would surely take a big bite out of the thing.

In other words? Meaningless.
 
triforcharity said:
If you can find that one, PLEASE make sure that I see it. That would be comedic gold!!!
Click to expand...

i just searched again
cant find it

i used to run into it a lot (sigh)

you guys should hear me curse someone out who cut me off lol
parky are you a native NYer?
 
I was a temporary transplant. but, I grew up with 2 older brothers who were Boson firefighters, two older brothers who were psycho (read: Marines) and two uncles who were NYC fireman.

But, I am a native Bostonian!!
 
triforcharity said:
Sorry for the derail, but here is the video. I love it!! Too bad the truthers are SO disrespectfull.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFf-...36B90CB7&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=32

The bells in the background was during the ceremony.

I counted 90 in 8:53

Sorry for the derail.
Click to expand...


Haha. Awesome.

Firefighter: "What does 'pull it' mean?"
Old man: "'Pull it' means 'pull it'!"

That guy seriously restrained himself while talking to the old man, too. The truthers can say what they will, but that's a serious sign of respect on the firefighter's part.
 
triforcharity said:
I was a temporary transplant. but, I grew up with 2 older brothers who were Boson firefighters, two older brothers who were psycho (read: Marines) and two uncles who were NYC fireman.

But, I am a native Bostonian!!
Click to expand...

i have nothing against Boston. I am a Mets fan. but I have to say, something about your avatar brings great hatred to my heart.

:D
 
LashL said:
Deep, you still haven't answered my first question, which was:


Which I asked again here:



And you still didn't answer.


Then, I asked you:


And you did answer that, superficially, by saying,


But that does not address the whole question, which necessarily includes the latter part of it, "to a group such as the commission proposed in the petition"? The italicized part is the most important part of the question.

If you've read the City Charter and "noticed that various other groups were granted subpoena power", why is it that you have not made any observations or drawn any conclusions about the limited authority that City Council has to grant subpoena powers, the nature of the entities to whom City Council can grant same, and the very limited nature of those subpoena powers once granted to such entities?

Did you not notice, while you were reading the City Charter, that the entities upon whom the City's limited authority to grant subpoena power has been exercised, are very few, and did you not notice that those entities are very specific to NYC's geographical boundaries, and do not (and can not) reach beyond same? Did you not notice that nearly all of those entities are specifically related to oversight of the workings of NYC departments and agencies? (And the couple that are not specifically related to oversight of NYC departments and agencies exclusively are closely related: i.e., an environmental control board and humans rights commission)

A City Council cannot delegate to others authority which it does not have itself. That is the jist of the jurisdictional problems with the petition, in my view. It seeks to obtain from City Council authority above and beyond that which City Council has itself. It seeks to intrude upon spheres of law and spheres of authority beyond the City, and even beyond the state, for that matter. The City does not have the right or the authority to pass a law that would ostensibly put into the hands of a few people (not even necessarily NYC residents according to the petition) powers that are vested in state and federal agencies and governed by state and federal statutes (employment, criminal, and other).

And you still haven't answered this question, either:



Do you know the answer to that question? If not, just say so, but do not just avoid the question. Better yet, if you don't know the answer, why don't you seek the answer from the drafters since you are supporting the petition?



I am not asking you legal questions. I asked you why you think X, and what reason you have to believe Y, based on your posts. Asking why you think X and what reason you have to believe Y are not legal questions. I was getting the impression that perhaps you were just parroting the truther petition site without having any genuine understanding of what you were parroting, so I asked you those two direct questions.



As always, any and all opinions that I write on the forum are personal opinions, and not legal advice, etc. etc.; insert the standard but necessary disclaimer here.

I find that it is more effective in the interests of both learning and educating, and in the interests of debate, to explore the rationale behind someone's take on a legal issue that they are promulgating, and to explore what they know or understand about the fundamental premises of law and the underpinnings of statutory interpretation, rather than just saying, "I think you're wrong and here's why." I think it is much more useful to try to understand why you think the law means what you think it means, compare it to what I think the law means, and go from there. This is a discussion forum, after all, not a lecture hall.

For instance, if you were able to point me to the specific provisions of the relevant legislation upon which the petition-drafters rely in order to bring the requested relief within the purview of City Council's authority, that would be something for me to go and look at, consider, interpret, and then we could engage in a much more specific and meaningful discussion about it. You know, an exchange of thoughts, ideas, interpretations, and conclusions backed up by cited authorities, precedents, and all that good stuff. But if you don't even know what provisions of relevant legislation the petition is relying upon, then perhaps you should reconsider putting blind faith in it and perhaps you should reconsider simply parroting what you read on the petition site.
Click to expand...


Damn, she's good.
 
Drop,

That is the dang truth too!! I still have my, even though I haven't lived there since I was like, 12 or 13. I still have it though. I think I was the ONLY guy in FDNY history to have a Bostonian accent.

Pahk da cah!!
 
Justin39640 said:
i just searched again
cant find it

i used to run into it a lot (sigh)

you guys should hear me curse someone out who cut me off lol
parky are you a native NYer?
Click to expand...


I think I know which video you are thinking of. I think he was ready to physically assault a truther but the cops at GZ warned him off.
 
A W Smith said:
I think I know which video you are thinking of. I think he was ready to physically assault a truther but the cops at GZ warned him off.
Click to expand...

yup thats the one
he was gonna tear his head off
the guy had long hair glasses and a suit (the truther)

i think he grabbed and pushed the guy before the cops stepped in
its been a while since ive seen it
but the internet is inundated with woo making searches pretty much useless
:hb:
 
triforcharity said:
Sorry for the derail, but here is the video. I love it!! Too bad the truthers are SO disrespectfull.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFf-...36B90CB7&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=32

The bells in the background was during the ceremony.

I counted 90 in 8:53

Sorry for the derail.
Click to expand...

That was great fun! And at first I was happy to se that the clip got positive rating, 4-5 stars. But when I read the comments I understood that the positive rating was not because it clearly shows how moronic the truthers are. No, this seems to be regarded as another fine victory in the name of the truth.
Isn´t it bloody obvious that he is in his rights to be mad at people who claims that, and I can only begin to imagine them, his experiences that day are not real.

(Oh, and obviously not all truthers are hiding in mums basement. Unless that old mans mum is 124 yers old. Don´t you just hate it when you must adjust your stereotypes :) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom