September 28, 2009
Actor and 9/11 truth activist, Daniel Sunjata, gave a rousing speech from New York's Battery Park this Sunday in support of NYC CAN's New York City ballot initiative to create a new independent commission to re-investigate 9/11.
The actor who plays Franco Rivera on the critically-aclaimed television show 'Rescue Me' demanded that the city of New York respect the wishes of over 80,000 signatories who want to see a new investigation of 9/11.
Sunjata, one of many celebrities who have come out in support of 9/11 Truth over recent years, spoke of the trampling of civil liberties and the complicity of the political system in keeping the truth about what happened on 9/11 from being known.
“While the specter of 9/11 is raised repeatedly, ghoulishly, dangled before us to justify the dismemberment of our Constitution, the trampling of our civil liberties. Questioning 9/11 itself? Oh, that is strictly prohibited. Do you hear that, New York? Do you hear that, family members? Cops? Firefighters? First responders? Your government has just told you, again, again, that you are good enough to die for them, but that asking questions about the inciting event is un-American, unpatriotic and just quite simply out of bounds,” said an impassioned Sunjata.
According to a NYC CAN's media advisory, the group believes that the 9/11 Commission Report is a "disgrace" as it failed to address most of the victims family member's questions and significant details as to what happened that day and leading up to the event, and that is the reason for the ballot initiative calling for a new investigation.
So far the city is trying to kill this initiative by claiming that it doesn't have jurisdiction to investigated the greatest crime in its history. According the City Clerk, Michael McSweeney, these reasons were given:
First, the federal government has jurisdiction over an investigation into the attacks that took place on September 11 as well as the causes of those attacks. Establishing a local commission to conduct such an investigation far exceeds the proper scope and purpose of the petition process of the MHRL. Second, the petition fails to provide an adequate financing plan for the Commission as required by section 37 of the MHRL. Third, the petition's method of designating Commissioners conflicts with state laws relating to the election or appointment of public officers and the residency of public officers. Fourth, the petition overreaches in its attempt to confer a range of law enforcement and prosecutorial powers on the Commission. Fifth, the subject of this proposed amendment to the Charter does not relate to an existing Charter provision as is required by section 37.
see, http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/cityclerk.PDF"
It seems like the City of New York will try to kill the bill through bureaucratic fiat, which is done quite regularly to ballot initiatives unpopular to the status quo. Sunjata says this about the City's obstructionism:
“We have received, for our efforts, a slap in the face and a kick in the mouth. Although 80,000 New Yorkers have voice their desire, in writing, to include on November’s mayoral ballot the referendum for a new and actual investigation into 9/11, New York City has responded by taking the position that it has no jurisdiction in that matter.”
“No jurisdiction?!” he shouted. “No jurisdiction into the murder of 3,000 of its own citizens? No jurisdiction or the intent of seeking such jurisdiction. Bloomberg.”
On September 25, the legal staff of NYCCAN filed a motion to reject referee Louis Crespo's recommendation to rule in favor of the City decisions to kill the ballot initiative, and now Supreme Court Justice Edward Lehner is considering their arguments. Though October 2 was to be the deadline as to a decision on whether the petition's legality, we are still waiting to hear from the court. An appeal is planned by the NYC CAN's if the petition is rejected.
For more information on the case and NYC CAN's petition, visit NYCCAN.org
2 comments:
It's been 60 years since the politic corruption machine allowed an initiative to be leaked on a ballot.
NYCCAN had to have known it would fail and had a contingency to move it beyond the city - to the state supreme court federal appeals court etc. That should have been the plan all along.
It's a let down to jump on a bandwagon whose only strategy is to be a bandwagon. If NYCCAN did not have a plan beyond the city bench then NYCCAN [really] had no plan.
Maybe a few of the NYCCAN managers garnered enough name recognition and face time to get elected as an alderman or something and can hopefully game their way in to the NYC political money machine. I guess that will make it all worth the effort and false hopes a lot of people trusted to NO PLAN NYCCAN.
The way I see it, a lot of time and money was wasted for little more than a hey ride and the tinsel of ticker tape fan fare. NYCCAN should have had a plan to take it to the top - why didn't they?
This article is very interesting for me, thank you so much.
Post a Comment