Debate - Survivors vs. Sembler's Scheduled

[Anonymous]

Evidence should be presented by an attorney.  A paralegal "certificate" can be obtained in less than 1 year.  How about somone one with some actual "schooling"?

[webcrawler]

This is BS!!!! How can they effectively debate about Straight if they can not share personal experiences? I do trust whoever these 2 people are have skills in being articulate. So best of luck and I hope they find a way to still bring the truth out.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-09 06:09:00, Anonymous wrote:

"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.  

"

Yeah. Uh-huh.  And I am the Queen of Sheba.

[Anonymous]

Is this debate live?  If so, they could just break the rules.  This isn't a courtroom.  If someone says "I was raped" it doesn't play well in the court of public opinion to say, "you're not allowed to talk about that let's get back to Betty's statistics".

[Dr Fucktard]

Then they would be talking out in group, and would be promptly restrained.

[thepatriot]

Sounds like somebody is trolling to me, Sembler isn't going to debate anybody, especially  a survivor come on get real.

[GregFL]

I think this whole thread is a fabricated bunch of crap.

Go entertain yourself some other way dude.

[RTP2003]

On 2005-03-09 13:36:00, GregFL wrote:

"I think this whole thread is a fabricated bunch of crap.





"

Yeah, I think you're right. It ain't gonna happen.  No way in hell would those decrepit old shits debate in a neutral, uncensored forum.  What would they have to gain?   Those conniving old scumbags may be a lot of things, but they ain't THAT stupid.

[Anonymous]

We have heard about "a paralegal" before.  Seems to me at one point, a paralegal was quoted as part of the ISAC team.  Is this the same paralegal?  Is ISAC conducting the debate?   I would like to see this darn thing live for sure.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-09 13:36:00, GregFL wrote:

"I think this whole thread is a fabricated bunch of crap.



Go entertain yourself some other way dude.



"

:nworthy:  :nworthy:

[PerfectStraightling]

On 2005-03-09 06:09:00, Anonymous wrote:

"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. "

Um, since they controlled the documentation, since we don't have any documentation other than what they decided to keep or allow us to have (which is what I'm not sure), then these rules would be completely in their favor. I hope this is a joke.   :eek:  [ This Message was edited by: JMA on 2005-03-09 14:56 ]

[Antigen]

Here's an actual debate that actually occured and actually aired on a nationally syndicated radio network:

http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... forum=32&0

It's about one of Betty and Calvina's pet subjects; medical marijuana. I don't know about you, but I find it most comforting to listen to intelligent, accomplished and well respected people saying true things that we couldn't say w/o getting our asses beat.

Everybody's lost just waiting to be found. Everyone's a thought just waiting to fade.
-- Billy Corgan of The Smashing Pumpkins

[Anonymous]

Who has taken it upon themselves to represent us the survivors? If it?s Marti then I think she will do a good job for us, however I think this should be a PUBLIC debate. If it is not then we are still playing by their rules. The all-powerful Sembler has and continues to dictate the format. We are still jumping through hoops. I for one am very skeptical about this.

[Anonymous]

If the straight debaters make fools of themselves, isn't that proof that Straight was ineffective or harmful?  It's a win-win situation!!

[Carmel]

Come on guys....no one can even get Sembler to show up for his deposition in a LEGAL PROCEEDING.  What on earth makes you think he would willingly show up to answer questions and debate on a subject more openly?

I think someone here just wants something to rant at themselves about.

As far as Sembler is concerned, Straight is a non-issue to him.  According to his stance, there is nothing to debate...abuse did not happen, and we dont exist.  He and his lawyer will barely even allow a reference to Bradbury's incarceration at Straight to be allowable in any of the proceedings of his lawsuit.  But then, he is going to show up for an open debate?

Common sense here, people. [ This Message was edited by: Carmel on 2005-03-11 07:48 ][ This Message was edited by: Carmel on 2005-03-15 05:59 ]