Once Again, The Will of the Voters Is Denied

Yesterday afternoon, Justice Edward Lehner of the State Supreme Court rubberstamped Referee Louis Crespo's recommendation that the decision to establish a local commission to investigate the events of September 11th not be put before the voters on November 3rd. After showing interest in weighing both sides' arguments in the hearing, the Judge's short decision gives no indication of having considered the arguments put forth in the Petitioners' memorandum of law, nor any acknowledgment of the need for a new investigation, which the City of New York callously dismissed as "irrelevant".

so quick to dismiss it. did the judge even read it? why is he ignoring the peoples request? is he a govt shil too?

The deadline for inclusion on the ballot falls just before the election, making it possible to appeal Judge Lehner's decision. NYC CAN is weighing all options and will make an announcement early next week on this issue, as well as on how it will be moving forward on other fronts. Regardless of the outcome in court, the quest for answers continues full throttle. This fight is only the beginning. Thinkers think and talkers talk. Patriots ACT.

www.911truth.org...

really this bites, they ignored the petition, and now they denied the ballot... what are they hiding!?

Would someone like to add to why they are still trying to cover this up when the citizens REQUEST a new investigation?

the victims families keep getting stone walled. the commission report was a farce, and there was more to this story, yet its being covered up.

why are they afraid of the truth?

reply to post by ugie1028


Hello Ugie,

The following is a link to his order. I think you will find that he did read it.

resipsa2006.googlepages.com...

In part:

While petitioners’ counsel argues that the severability provision of paragraph 20 of the petition allows the court to strike any provisions thereof that are unconstitutional or invalid, the extent of the impropriety of the proposal, as correctly set forth by the Referee, would result in a substantial evisceration of the petition and, even if legally permissible, would be inappropriate as inconsistent with the law sought by the signatories to the petition.

Also, there are a few other threads discussing this. The MODS may close this one.

reply to post by ImAPepper


thanks pepper!

if the mods close it, they'll close it. i wouldn't have any beef with that.

reading the document now...

This all is already covered in the thread:

Court affirms there are NO special rights for Truthers

reply to post by jthomas


I see why YOU covered it.

each story needs two sides, i can keep mine here, and you keep yours. the way you have it setup, it looks like your trying to make NYCANN look bad.

i like what they are doing, and i am upset with the outcome.

reply to post by ugie1028


We Americans certainly need to do something about our corrupt US court system and the scads of political judges who rule as ordered.

So exactly WHOSE will is being denied?

Some nutbars that think that 9/11 was an inside jobby job?

Or the the remaining population that realize that this is a serious breach of due process?

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
So exactly WHOSE will is being denied?

Some nutbars that think that 9/11 was an inside jobby job?

Or the the remaining population that realize that this is a serious breach of due process?

Since you do not agree with them, they do not deserve a voice? Is this America, land of the free as long as they see things one particular specific way?

Originally posted by Lillydale
Since you do not agree with them, they do not deserve a voice? Is this America, land of the free as long as they see things one particular specific way?

They have a voice Lilly, and it was heard in a court of law. It got a lot further than I expected it to.

Unfortunately, NYCCAN did not get appropriate representation prior to submitting their petition to the courts. Their petition was flawed for many reasons and the courts have to abide by the same laws as everyone else.

NYCCAN has to start all over and recollect signatures for another petition.

reply to post by ImAPepper


That is not my issue. I have a problem with the fact that some Americans feel that other Americans do not even have the right to ask and that is why it is so pleasing to them for this to happen. I never once told anyone that believed the Official Story that they did not have the right to believe that and pursue that belief in whatever manner they were.

Originally posted by Lillydale

Since you do not agree with them, they do not deserve a voice? Is this America, land of the free as long as they see things one particular specific way?

Want some cheese to go along with that whine?

They used their voice quite clearly. They called for a special committee, etc.... and they were told it's not legal to do in the manner that they wish.

IOW, they know nothing about the legal system that they wanted to use to get their new investigation about some inside jobby job.

Now, if they wanted a new investigation about worker safety issues ONLY, and went through the proper legal channels, then I'd be all for it, since I believe it was a travesty the way that they were allowed to work in those kinds of conditions. Clearly NYCAN't was trying to piggyback legitimate issues to get their inside job delusions looked into. Thus the monumentally stupid proposal that ED FREAKIN' ASNER be given subpeona power.

I've supervised guys where PPG was needed. To some extent, people can be reckless with their health, and must be protected from that. Clearly, the only way to deal with this THERE would have been to pull guys off the site that refused to use it, AND be clear to them about the risks to them and just why it was gonna happen.

Personally, I've fired guys that don't use their gear, but that's in the private sector, so it's a different deal.

reply to post by Joey Canoli


If you would read what you are replying to, you will see that I am not advocating that this judge be over ruled. I am speaking specifically to the glee you express in seeing that requests for more investigation get shot down. Do not pretend you are only opposed because of how they did it or because of Ed freaking Asner.

Originally posted by Lillydale
reply to post by Joey Canoli

 

If you would read what you are replying to, you will see that I am not advocating that this judge be over ruled. I am speaking specifically to the glee you express in seeing that requests for more investigation get shot down. Do not pretend you are only opposed because of how they did it or because of Ed freaking Asner.

Lilly,

If you read the petition, you will see that it is a mockery of our judicial system. It is laden with a bunch of hog wash. Personally, I do not want one cent of my hard earned money going toward another investigation. To most of the country, we are satisfied with the facts.

The "glee" is that the judge in this case ruled appropriately.

I think the lack of jurisprudence in America as a whole sucks.
But the blatant miss-use that you describe here is abominable.

My thread on the subject
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 10-10-2009 by Donny 4 million]

Originally posted by ImAPepper
Lilly,

If you read the petition, you will see that it is a mockery of our judicial system. It is laden with a bunch of hog wash. Personally, I do not want one cent of my hard earned money going toward another investigation. To most of the country, we are satisfied with the facts.

The "glee" is that the judge in this case ruled appropriately.

What is "most of the country?" Can you cite a poll or census of some kind?

As long as you are so outraged, where is your thread about your tax dollars going to AIG? To subsidize private health insurance? To bailout BofA? To fund illegal wars and ship drugs? Personally, I am sick of my tax dollars being spent on rich people doing careless things and would welcome some of it going to something useful for a change.

Do not tell me to read the petition, read my posts. I have never once defended this particular case.

Originally posted by Lillydale
What is "most of the country?" Can you cite a poll or census of some kind?

This is from a poll in 2006; the peek of the 9/11 truth movement.

More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.

www.seattlepi.com...

There are more recent polls that are much worse for the 9/11 TM. I will look for them if you'd like.

EDIT TO ADD MORE RECENT POLL: (09/23/2009)

Q4 Do you think President Bush intentionally
allowed the 9/11 attacks to take place because
he wanted the United States to go to war in the
Middle East? If yes, press 1. If no, press 2. If
you’re not sure, press 3.
Yes .................................................. ............... 14%
No .................................................. ................. 78%
Not Sure.............................................. ............ 8%

www.publicpolicypolling.com...

Also, if you would like to take into consideration the amount of signatures from New Yorkers for this Petition. In a year, only about .375% of New Yorkers signed it.

As long as you are so outraged, where is your thread about your tax dollars going to AIG? To subsidize private health insurance? To bailout BofA? To fund illegal wars and ship drugs? Personally, I am sick of my tax dollars being spent on rich people doing careless things and would welcome some of it going to something useful for a change.

That would be in the Politics forum. I don't discuss politics on line.

Do not tell me to read the petition, read my posts. I have never once defended this particular case.

Fair enough





[edit on 10-10-2009 by ImAPepper]

Originally posted by Lillydale

I am speaking specifically to the glee you express in seeing that requests for more investigation get shot down.

Any glee that I feel is that such a shallow gambit to investigate some inside jobby job, while piggybacking it onto some legimate issues that IMHO should be looked into was shot to #e.

Do not pretend you are only opposed because of how they did it or because of Ed freaking Asner.

They did it in a way that would grant unconstitutional power to a few individuals. Are you for that?

If not, then you should be gleeful also that this didn't happen, cuz from there, it *could* be a slippery slope to convening these types of committees to investigate whether or not troofers are giving emotional aid to terrorists, etc.

Just sayin'.......

reply to post by Joey Canoli


I am not sure how many times I need to say that I am not for that but you apparently cannot read unless I start spelling things like wordy words. There is a difference between thinking that they are overstepping their bounds and getting all excited that another investigation was shot down.

Originally posted by Lillydale

I am not sure how many times I need to say that I am not for that but you apparently cannot read unless I start spelling things like wordy words. There is a difference between thinking that they are overstepping their bounds and getting all excited that another investigation was shot down.

You're the one with reading problems.

I clearly stated that I wouldn't have a problem looking into the health issues.

And again, it's a good thing that delusional, "9/11 was an inside job" troofers get shot down. Maybe it'll bring into the rational world.

I doubt it though, all that seems to be left of the ever-shriveling troof movement is the truly insane.