• 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?

This guy says he was on Veasy street when it cace down. The guy is lucky to even be alive. Holy crap.


Oh, and the bosons thing, I googled it, and I understood precisely 5 words on the page I visited. HOLY CRAP!! I know NOTHING about that stuff!! I feel dumb!!
 
Hey hey hey now, Enigma, that wasn't nice. Its because I am a fireman that I am dumb. I mean, really, who runs INTO a burning building as everyone ELSE is running out. Seems pretty dumb IMHO.

But, I do it anyway.
 
There is the one guy in Abby Scott's 9/11 Conspiracy Wars:



He comes in around 4:12. Not happy with the troofers.
 
I have heard of Abbey Scott, she sounds hot!! And looks it too!! Too bad I am very happily married!! She's ALMOST as good as Mark Roberts, and most likely looks better in a dress!!
 
LashL said:
Pro-tip: You would have better served yourself by acknowledging and responding to my post #177 rather than engaging in this little bit of self-serving whining.
Click to expand...


I'm anxious to hear your thoughts on #191 - the first section (before the second quote block) more than anything else.

I'll keep checking back in case you've been busy.
 
kookbreaker said:
There is the one guy in Abby Scott's 9/11 Conspiracy Wars:



He comes in around 4:12. Not happy with the troofers.
Click to expand...


The planes were, were, were guided in on remote control by INFRA-RAYS! Yeah, that's the ticket!
 
Last edited:
deep44 said:
I'm anxious to hear your thoughts on #191 - the first section (before the second quote block) more than anything else.

I'll keep checking back in case you've been busy.
Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding of the Goddess's answer is that the subpoena power that NYCCAN is requesting is not the City Council's to grant.

I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong... *looks expectantly towards Toronto*
 
deep44 said:
I'm anxious to hear your thoughts on #191 - the first section (before the second quote block) more than anything else.

I'll keep checking back in case you've been busy.
Click to expand...

There is nothing in your post #191 that leads me to believe that you have any understanding whatsoever of the legal issues at play. Is there something specific in that post that you want me to address? And are you ever going to address the issues that I have raised, or are you just here to carry water for other "truth"ers? Full disclosure: I am not predisposed to assist "truth"ers in their misguided quest, after all, so don't expect me to volunteer to help you/them with legal opinions about the things that they seem to wholly misinterpret, misconstrue and miscomprehend.
 
Last edited:
LashL said:
Is there something specific in that post that you want me to address?
Click to expand...


Yes, you've mentioned City Council's willingness to "grant" certain powers, or "delegate" authority. When would City Council evaluate the petition and make that decision? Are you suggesting that their decision to reject the petition cannot be overridden with additional signatures?

Like I said, I've researched this and cannot find anything to suggest that City Council has the absolute authority to reject a petition, since their decision can be overridden. If they are overridden, and the referendum passes, the underlined text in the petition is added to the City Charter.
 
From the NYCCAN FAQs:

Q: If I signed the petition in 2008, is my signature still valid in 2009?

Yes. Each of the 30,000+ signatures collected in 2008 remain valid until the signer is no longer a registered voter in New York City.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmmm. Does this mean that they're counting the 30,000 or so they got last year as part of the 52,000 they now have? Seems to me that would be a verification nightmare, people moving, people leaving town...

It also means they only got 22,000 more in their current drive. Rather less impressive.
 
triforcharity said:
Hey hey hey now, Enigma, that wasn't nice. Its because I am a fireman that I am dumb. I mean, really, who runs INTO a burning building as everyone ELSE is running out. Seems pretty dumb IMHO.

But, I do it anyway.
Click to expand...

hehe maybe its your choice of team? lol (i can talk crap now that we're 1.5 ahead lol)
just feel bad for mets fans though
theyre ready to jump outta window lol
 
deep44 said:
They have just over 70,000 signatures now - so they've collected 40,000 in the current drive.
Click to expand...

Last year's signatures will have to be reverified and if the signer moves within NYC, the verification will fail this time. I'd expect 25% drop-off each year for death, moves, dups, etc.

I'd like to see the election law that allows lists to be accumulated from year to year. I don't believe it.
 
jhunter1163 said:
Hmmmmmm. Does this mean that they're counting the 30,000 or so they got last year as part of the 52,000 they now have? Seems to me that would be a verification nightmare, people moving, people leaving town...
Click to expand...


I hope for the organizers' sakes that this year's petition is exactly the same as last year's petition. Otherwise, I believe, those signatures from last year would be invalid.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
I hope for the organizers' sakes that this year's petition is exactly the same as last year's petition. Otherwise, I believe, those signatures from last year would be invalid.
Click to expand...


This is an excellent point. From what I understand, there are minor differences between the current petition and the one circulated last year.

The organizers claim they have checked into it and confirmed that the older signatures are still valid, but they don't really offer any specifics.
 
deep44 said:
This is an excellent point. From what I understand, there are minor differences between the current petition and the one circulated last year.

The organizers claim they have checked into it and confirmed that the older signatures are still valid, but they don't really offer any specifics.
Click to expand...

I'm skeptical. NYC petition laws are notoriously picky. One of the candidates for a NYC race got more than enough signatures (150,000) and submitted them but had a truly trivial typo on the cover sheet which as of this moment has him off the ballot for the Sept 15 primary. Lots of election law lawyers will make nice fees on this no matter which way the decision goes.
I want to see the law that says that petition signatures can be accumulated over more than one election cycle.
 
BigAl said:
I want to see the law that says that petition signatures can be accumulated over more than one election cycle.
Click to expand...


NYCCAN received verbal confirmation from the city clerk that the old signatures could be used. They also consulted an election lawyer, who agreed.

Unfortunately, I can't find a copy of the original petition to confirm what, if anything, has been changed. Either way - doesn't sound like it's a problem.
 
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