« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled  (Read 6827 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« on: March 09, 2005, 09:09:00 AM »
A public debate between Melvin Sembler and two survivors has been scheduled for on or about May 9th, 2005.
This debate will occur in a location in St. Petersburg, Florida.
The proposed rules of the debate are as follows.
The two survivors have agreed to all the rules of the debate including no personal stories accept where details of which explain documentation. The subject of the debate will be limited too the evidence (physical evidence) such as documents against Straight Incorporated. No emotional agendas will be allowed in the debate. There will also not be an audience where the debate takes place.
Only the media will be allowed to be present in the debate room.
It was further agreed that the location of the debate will remain confidential.

 This is to be a professional debate where evidence is presented by a paralegal.
This gives Mel Sembler the opportunity to once and for all silence his detractors with evidence and statistical information on the "good" the ambassador claims was done by Straight Inc.  This is truly the opportunity for Ambassador Sembler to reveal all the good he and his wife have done. This further gives them the forum to silence detractors.

Mel and Betty Sembler will be given the chance to publicly repute all claims made by survivors in a professional debate.

The Semblers have not refused this open public debate.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2005, 09:41:00 AM »
Nice Try but I doubt they will even take this proposal seriously.   So the media can attend, but not surivors?   What media?  Who decides what group is a ok media source?  Who is not allowed access?  Sounds pretty flimsy to me.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2005, 09:49:00 AM »
Apparently, "the media" I guess meaning local media and any other media will be allowed . I suspect that the survivors had to agree to no audience so, that no protest would take place. I don't know if it's true or not but it is said that Dan Rather or someone of his stature has agreed to host the debate. I believe the debate is suppose to be on was Straight and its model successful.
The Ambassador and his wife often brag to the media about it's success. I suspect the survivors may have simply agreed to debate the issue.
I am sure the survivors had to agree to terms they may not have otherwise agreed to but I am sure they felt that if they declined the finger would be pointed at them saying they were too unsure of their position, that they knew their cause was flawed if they failed to show or agree to the terms of the debate. How would it look if the survivors did not agree or fail to show. It would put into question all the accusations they have made against the treatment model.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2005, 09:56:00 AM »
I hope those survivors know what the hell they are getting into. Semblers could bring in big guns and make them feel about three feet tall. I hope they have their ducks in a row this could ruin it for us survivors if they don't handle it right. It could make us all look like idiots. He has access to all the pro's.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2005, 10:01:00 AM »
Yeah, No shit. What if he comes in there with his big wigs and discredits the survivors on National TV then no one would listen to us. No one would believe us. Our credibility and that of WWASP survivors too would be ruined. He could wipe out this whole cause just by paying people off to say this or that. What if those survivors act like fools or something that will make us all look bad. It took twenty five years for us to get people to listen they could put us back fifty years trying to go up against him.
What fools. Why did they even agree to this?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2005, 10:10:00 AM »
Yeah , No wonder ole melsie hasnt said no. He knows the survivors will loose and then the whole cause ruined.
Two very dumb survivors. One of us needs to tell whoever these people are Don't do it. It took along time to get where we are we dont need them ruining it for us.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2005, 10:20:00 AM »
You guys get up early to talk to each other. I have noticed. I like your conversations, they are very thought provoking.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline The Sharpshooter

  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2005, 10:56:00 AM »
Has anyone seen a couple of droids?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged
aking up where the law left off

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2005, 11:02:00 AM »
From what understand it isn't Mel that will be doing the debating but Betty. I really hope those survivors back out, Betty knows all the drug crap and statistics and she is the one who is well known for all the drug prevention. If they arent careful she will make them look like low life druggies. Dont get me wrong I hate Betty but I understand she is a pistol to deal with.
I mean I am all for it, I just dont want all survivors humiliated on National TV and certainly not by Betty Sembler. Have those survivors really thought this out? I mean Betty has been in drug prevention for 25 years and could easily out do survivors on all the statistics just by calling up her buddies in the field and getting all the docs and stuff.
In my humble opinion this is not a good idea.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2005, 11:05:00 AM »
I just read this thread. OMFG are they nuts. Great thanks you stupid
survivors humiliate us all on National TV and loose all our credibility.
Good thinking. Destroy all our efforts for 25 years in one shot. Friggin Brilliant.
Leave it to a survivor to be an idiot.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Froderik

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7547
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2005, 11:18:00 AM »
A question: Would there be enough "ammo" to make it worthwhile assuming that 'we' play by their rules? (no personal stories, physical evidence only, paralegal presenting, etc)

If so, then why not do it?

If not, then reasons ought to be given for 'our' absence so as not to look like liars or cowards. Example: "How are we supposed to debate this without personal accounts? Forget it, we're not interested in paticipating in this sort of 'debate,' thanks but no thanks."
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2005, 11:28:00 AM »
If they have already agreed can they back out? I know you said they should give a reason for not showing but no matter what they say for not showing it will look bad don't you think? The not showing alone will hurt all of us and the believeability of all survivors. I think at this point no matter what they do it will look VERY bad for us.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Froderik

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7547
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2005, 11:31:00 AM »
That's a shame...well if they're gonna go thru with it they had better make it good..
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2005, 11:34:00 AM »
Does anyone know if it is true that Channel 28 in Tampa is hosting the debate?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2005, 01:19:00 PM »
Good Lord - get someone like Phil Elberg to handle the survivors side.  The truth is what matters, and it doesn't have to be delivered by a survivor.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
« previous next »