CDZ clean debate on the NIST report banned

[Josf]

There is a libel (crime) at work when criminals perpetrate this crime in the form now commonly known as the name calling by someone (criminal libeler) of someone (targeted victim of the libeler) when the chosen name is "Conspiracy Theorist."

That type of criminal can get away with that type of crime upon that type of victim in a geographical area where there is no rule of law; where instead there is rule by criminals upon victims, also known as rule by man, dictatorship, tyranny, and organized crime.

If there is no trial by jury, as explained in such works as The Bill of Rights, or Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner, or any of the writings of George Mason, Patrick Henry, and other promoters of rule of law, and trial by jury, then that absence of a process by which everyone is due their remedy, their restitution, and their individual defense, affords the criminals an immunity to perpetually perpetrate crimes as insignificant as libel and as significant as mass torture and mass murder; now known as genocide and democide.

Since there has been no trial by jury (according to the common laws of American people; again referenced in the Bill of Rights) concerning accusations made by victims of criminals in the case of crimes perpetrated on September 11, 2001, there is a span of time in which the criminals are free to perpetrate more crimes, including the crimes associated with evidence tampering, jury tampering, and libeling anyone who even suggests that rule of law is set aside in this case where these people accuse people of wrongdoing.

When there is a trial by jury, where rule of law is the process by which accusers and those who are accused are afforded their means of individual defense, then the libelers who perpetrate the crime of name calling, with the term "Conspiracy Theorist," are nullified by the unanimous decision of 12 randomly selected people known as peers, whereby facts, and the law, are found during that trial, and conspiracy is proven or disproven in any case.

An example of such a case exists in at least one high profile case involving accusers who have their day in court, and a jury that finds, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspiracy that is thereby no longer an accusation, and therefore the false term "Conspiracy theorist" is no longer useful to the libeler intending to discredit those who agree with the accusers.

An example of this due process, rule of law, almost works with the Martin Luther King Jr., Conspiracy Trial. The fact that the libelers claiming "Conspiracy Theorist" are exposed as libelers in that case does work, in that case; however, the worst criminals accused of conspiring to murder Martin Luther King Jr. were defended against prosecution for their crimes by the army of libelers whose job, pro bono, or paid character assassins, is to censor the truth.

The army of sycophants are free to perpetrate libel when rule of law is too little and too late, as there is no associated cost to the libelers as they get away with libel in their work that so effectively affords the conspirators the freedom to get away with murdering thousands of people occupying buildings when the order is issued to pull them down.

 

[eots]

You continually call people debwunkers and then expect a clean debate? That is not how you start a clean debate.
Further, you are asking for facts but don’t provide any. The only thing I see so far is an appeal to authority. Bring more.

debwunkers are a type of troll who use nothing but inane strawmen

 

[eots]

There is a libel (crime) at work when criminals perpetrate this crime in the form now commonly known as the name calling by someone (criminal libeler) of someone (targeted victim of the libeler) when the chosen name is "Conspiracy Theorist."

That type of criminal can get away with that type of crime upon that type of victim in a geographical area where there is no rule of law; where instead there is rule by criminals upon victims, also known as rule by man, dictatorship, tyranny, and organized crime.

If there is no trial by jury, as explained in such works as The Bill of Rights, or Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner, or any of the writings of George Mason, Patrick Henry, and other promoters of rule of law, and trial by jury, then that absence of a process by which everyone is due their remedy, their restitution, and their individual defense, affords the criminals an immunity to perpetually perpetrate crimes as insignificant as libel and as significant as mass torture and mass murder; now known as genocide and democide.

Since there has been no trial by jury (according to the common laws of American people; again referenced in the Bill of Rights) concerning accusations made by victims of criminals in the case of crimes perpetrated on September 11, 2001, there is a span of time in which the criminals are free to perpetrate more crimes, including the crimes associated with evidence tampering, jury tampering, and libeling anyone who even suggests that rule of law is set aside in this case where these people accuse people of wrongdoing.

When there is a trial by jury, where rule of law is the process by which accusers and those who are accused are afforded their means of individual defense, then the libelers who perpetrate the crime of name calling, with the term "Conspiracy Theorist," are nullified by the unanimous decision of 12 randomly selected people known as peers, whereby facts, and the law, are found during that trial, and conspiracy is proven or disproven in any case.

An example of such a case exists in at least one high profile case involving accusers who have their day in court, and a jury that finds, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspiracy that is thereby no longer an accusation, and therefore the false term "Conspiracy theorist" is no longer useful to the libeler intending to discredit those who agree with the accusers.

An example of this due process, rule of law, almost works with the Martin Luther King Jr., Conspiracy Trial. The fact that the libelers claiming "Conspiracy Theorist" are exposed as libelers in that case does work, in that case; however, the worst criminals accused of conspiring to murder Martin Luther King Jr. were defended against prosecution for their crimes by the army of libelers whose job, pro bono, or paid character assassins, is to censor the truth.

The army of sycophants are free to perpetrate libel when rule of law is too little and too late, as there is no associated cost to the libelers as they get away with libel in their work that so effectively affords the conspirators the freedom to get away with murdering thousands of people occupying buildings when the order is issued to pull them down.

This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims
Fallacy Appeal to Authority

I have posted legitimate authorities qualified to make reliable claims..there is no appeal to authority

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[airplanemechanic]

debwunkers are a type of troll who use nothing but inane strawmen

Oh ok so you're a debwunker.

Got it.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I know for absolute fact planes hit the towers on 9/11. How? I saw them on live tv. Watch enough tv, film, and video and you can easily spot the differences. CGI looks like CGI, live tv looks a certain way, recorded tv looks another way, film looks like film, etc. People's reactions too confirm reality or fabrication. Body language, tone of voice, where the eyes are looking.

There's no way they faked 9/11 or it was anything other than planes and terrorists.

People disputing it are like religious lunatics refuting science or perpetuating young-earth hypotheses. They take some initial eye-witness account (which historically are almost always wrong) then run with it, facts be damned.

You could never keep a deliberate government-backed act to do 9/11 secret. Someone's always willing to be martyred to get the truth out and would come foward with irrefutable evidence.

The "evidence" of conspiracy types isn't any kind of evidence unless you broaded the definition to include eyetwitness testimony and hearsay.

 

[FA_Q2]

There is a libel (crime) at work when criminals perpetrate this crime in the form now commonly known as the name calling by someone (criminal libeler) of someone (targeted victim of the libeler) when the chosen name is "Conspiracy Theorist."

That type of criminal can get away with that type of crime upon that type of victim in a geographical area where there is no rule of law; where instead there is rule by criminals upon victims, also known as rule by man, dictatorship, tyranny, and organized crime.

If there is no trial by jury, as explained in such works as The Bill of Rights, or Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner, or any of the writings of George Mason, Patrick Henry, and other promoters of rule of law, and trial by jury, then that absence of a process by which everyone is due their remedy, their restitution, and their individual defense, affords the criminals an immunity to perpetually perpetrate crimes as insignificant as libel and as significant as mass torture and mass murder; now known as genocide and democide.

Since there has been no trial by jury (according to the common laws of American people; again referenced in the Bill of Rights) concerning accusations made by victims of criminals in the case of crimes perpetrated on September 11, 2001, there is a span of time in which the criminals are free to perpetrate more crimes, including the crimes associated with evidence tampering, jury tampering, and libeling anyone who even suggests that rule of law is set aside in this case where these people accuse people of wrongdoing.

When there is a trial by jury, where rule of law is the process by which accusers and those who are accused are afforded their means of individual defense, then the libelers who perpetrate the crime of name calling, with the term "Conspiracy Theorist," are nullified by the unanimous decision of 12 randomly selected people known as peers, whereby facts, and the law, are found during that trial, and conspiracy is proven or disproven in any case.

An example of such a case exists in at least one high profile case involving accusers who have their day in court, and a jury that finds, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspiracy that is thereby no longer an accusation, and therefore the false term "Conspiracy theorist" is no longer useful to the libeler intending to discredit those who agree with the accusers.

An example of this due process, rule of law, almost works with the Martin Luther King Jr., Conspiracy Trial. The fact that the libelers claiming "Conspiracy Theorist" are exposed as libelers in that case does work, in that case; however, the worst criminals accused of conspiring to murder Martin Luther King Jr. were defended against prosecution for their crimes by the army of libelers whose job, pro bono, or paid character assassins, is to censor the truth.

The army of sycophants are free to perpetrate libel when rule of law is too little and too late, as there is no associated cost to the libelers as they get away with libel in their work that so effectively affords the conspirators the freedom to get away with murdering thousands of people occupying buildings when the order is issued to pull them down.

This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims
Fallacy Appeal to Authority

I have posted legitimate authorities qualified to make reliable claims..there is no appeal to authority

Point 3 from your own reference:


"There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question.
If there is a significant amount of legitimate dispute among the experts within a subject, then it will fallacious to make an Appeal to Authority using the disputing experts. This is because for almost any claim being made and "supported" by one expert there will be a counterclaim that is made and "supported" by another expert. In such cases an Appeal to Authority would tend to be futile. In such cases, the dispute has to be settled by consideration of the actual issues under dispute. Since either side in such a dispute can invoke experts, the dispute cannot be rationally settled by Appeals to Authority.
There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question. "

There are far more "experts" that disagree with your cited expert making this appeal to authority false. You need actual points rather than someone else said.

 

[Josf]

If rule of law was afforded to accusers in America, then this case, and many other high profile or low profile cases, would be settled in a timely manner according to the common laws of Americans, which are explained briefly in The Bill of Rights.

The Martin Luther King Jr. trial by jury serves as an example to anyone caring to know how facts, and the law, are determined when rule of law partially works through due process. The reason for the Martin Luther King Jr. trial to be only partially abiding by rule of law concerns the lateness of the trial compared to the conspiracy to murder, and then the actual crime of murder, of the innocent targeted victim by the guilty conspirators. Again: too little, too late, to work as an example of true, timely, due process of law.

Those buildings in New York destroyed as they were constituted a crime scene and if due process of law was working here in America, which is demonstrably not the case, then anyone accusing someone of perpetrating those crimes would initiate the due process afforded to the accuser and the accused, again, as it was (too late) handled in the Martin Luther King Jr. case.

The accuser and the accused are afforded their remedy to settle their dispute and even when the accused confesses, as demonstrated in the transcripts of the Martin Luther King Jr. case, there is still a demand, by common laws of Americans, to insist upon a trial by jury. Confessions can also be falsified.

One of the reasons (one of many reasonable reasons) for a speedy trial is to afford those in conflict (the accuser and the accused) the opportunity to find impartial jurists before the level of deception reaches a point at which there remains very few people who have not been infected by the false accounts that inevitably spew forth from the deceivers whose job it is to deceive.

So four new ways are possible in this clean debate on this topic, as a means of making sense of the facts and the law in this case.
1. Imagine if the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy trial was processed in a timely manner, instead of the conspirators being found guilty 60 years after the fact.
2. Use number 1 above as a base by which it can be imagined if the victims of 911 could also have a timely trial as those victims accuse specific people of those specific crimes and due process was processed in a timely manner, immediately after September 11, 2001.
3. Use the actual Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy trial as a known method by which the character assassins who assassinated the characters of the people who agreed that Martin Luther King Jr. was, in fact, a victim of a conspiracy to murder Martin Luther King Jr., are guilty of libel as those character assassins assassinate the characters of people who agree that conspiracy is not a theory, conspiracy is a knowable fact, through such processes as trial by jury according to the common laws of free people as explained in such works as The Bill of Rights.
4. Use the too little, too late, Martin Luther King Jr. trial as an example of what can still happen, 60 years after the criminals perpetrated their conspiracy to mass torture, and mass murder, thousands of innocent people, in New York on September 11, 2001, as that conspiracy fact can still be processed with a trial by jury according to the common laws of free people who prefer to make the facts known in an authoritative manner; rather than allow the conspirators to continue to cover up their guilt perpetually.

From the trial transcripts where conspiracy was proven according to the common laws of free people:

Quote:__________________________________________
age 1582

William Schaap

“Because when year, after year, after year you hear that something was the case, one story -- one day saying, hey, the whole thing was a lie, and it doesn't register on their brain.”

Page 1614

“Q. (BY MR. PEPPER) Mr. Schaap, you've described an awesome power that exists in government influenced and controlled, sometimes owned, media -- print, audio, visual media entities -- and how that infrastructure gets focused on opponents of the United States such as Martin Luther King.”

[Defenders of the innocent are not opponents of the many (50 or so) Republics which are united into a voluntary federation, the Legal Fiction known as U.S. Inc., is a false front, so people who are opposed to frauds are opponents of frauds, not opponents of the false word]

Page 1632

A. Oh, but -- as we know, silence can be deafening. Disinformation is not only getting certain things to appear in print, it's also getting certain things not to appear in print. I mean, the first -- the first thing I would say as a way of explanation is the incredibly powerful effect of disinformation over a long period of time that I mentioned before. For 30 years the official line has been that James Earl Ray killed Martin Luther King and he did it all by himself. That's 30 years, not -- nothing like the short period when the line was that the Cubans raped the Angolan women. But for 30 years it's James Earl Ray killed Dr. King, did it all by himself.

And when that is imprinted in the minds of the general public for 30 years, if somebody stood up and confessed and said: I did it. Ray didn't do it, I did it. Here's a movie. Here's a video showing me do it. 99 percent of the people wouldn't believe him because it just -- it just wouldn't click in the mind. It would just go right to -- it couldn't be. It's just a powerful psychological effect over 30 years of disinformation that's been imprinted on the brains of the -- the public. Something to the country couldn't -- couldn't be.
_______________________________________________

Those who choose to assassinate the characters of concerned, free, people, who care enough to know the truth, are those who conspire to aid and abet the worst criminals ever to disgrace the human gene pool, helping those criminals cover up a most heinous conspiracy on par with that murder of that innocent preacher in Memphis.

 

[eots]

There is a libel (crime) at work when criminals perpetrate this crime in the form now commonly known as the name calling by someone (criminal libeler) of someone (targeted victim of the libeler) when the chosen name is "Conspiracy Theorist."

That type of criminal can get away with that type of crime upon that type of victim in a geographical area where there is no rule of law; where instead there is rule by criminals upon victims, also known as rule by man, dictatorship, tyranny, and organized crime.

If there is no trial by jury, as explained in such works as The Bill of Rights, or Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner, or any of the writings of George Mason, Patrick Henry, and other promoters of rule of law, and trial by jury, then that absence of a process by which everyone is due their remedy, their restitution, and their individual defense, affords the criminals an immunity to perpetually perpetrate crimes as insignificant as libel and as significant as mass torture and mass murder; now known as genocide and democide.

Since there has been no trial by jury (according to the common laws of American people; again referenced in the Bill of Rights) concerning accusations made by victims of criminals in the case of crimes perpetrated on September 11, 2001, there is a span of time in which the criminals are free to perpetrate more crimes, including the crimes associated with evidence tampering, jury tampering, and libeling anyone who even suggests that rule of law is set aside in this case where these people accuse people of wrongdoing.

When there is a trial by jury, where rule of law is the process by which accusers and those who are accused are afforded their means of individual defense, then the libelers who perpetrate the crime of name calling, with the term "Conspiracy Theorist," are nullified by the unanimous decision of 12 randomly selected people known as peers, whereby facts, and the law, are found during that trial, and conspiracy is proven or disproven in any case.

An example of such a case exists in at least one high profile case involving accusers who have their day in court, and a jury that finds, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspiracy that is thereby no longer an accusation, and therefore the false term "Conspiracy theorist" is no longer useful to the libeler intending to discredit those who agree with the accusers.

An example of this due process, rule of law, almost works with the Martin Luther King Jr., Conspiracy Trial. The fact that the libelers claiming "Conspiracy Theorist" are exposed as libelers in that case does work, in that case; however, the worst criminals accused of conspiring to murder Martin Luther King Jr. were defended against prosecution for their crimes by the army of libelers whose job, pro bono, or paid character assassins, is to censor the truth.

The army of sycophants are free to perpetrate libel when rule of law is too little and too late, as there is no associated cost to the libelers as they get away with libel in their work that so effectively affords the conspirators the freedom to get away with murdering thousands of people occupying buildings when the order is issued to pull them down.

There is a libel (crime) at work when criminals perpetrate this crime in the form now commonly known as the name calling by someone (criminal libeler) of someone (targeted victim of the libeler) when the chosen name is "Conspiracy Theorist."

That type of criminal can get away with that type of crime upon that type of victim in a geographical area where there is no rule of law; where instead there is rule by criminals upon victims, also known as rule by man, dictatorship, tyranny, and organized crime.

If there is no trial by jury, as explained in such works as The Bill of Rights, or Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner, or any of the writings of George Mason, Patrick Henry, and other promoters of rule of law, and trial by jury, then that absence of a process by which everyone is due their remedy, their restitution, and their individual defense, affords the criminals an immunity to perpetually perpetrate crimes as insignificant as libel and as significant as mass torture and mass murder; now known as genocide and democide.

Since there has been no trial by jury (according to the common laws of American people; again referenced in the Bill of Rights) concerning accusations made by victims of criminals in the case of crimes perpetrated on September 11, 2001, there is a span of time in which the criminals are free to perpetrate more crimes, including the crimes associated with evidence tampering, jury tampering, and libeling anyone who even suggests that rule of law is set aside in this case where these people accuse people of wrongdoing.

When there is a trial by jury, where rule of law is the process by which accusers and those who are accused are afforded their means of individual defense, then the libelers who perpetrate the crime of name calling, with the term "Conspiracy Theorist," are nullified by the unanimous decision of 12 randomly selected people known as peers, whereby facts, and the law, are found during that trial, and conspiracy is proven or disproven in any case.

An example of such a case exists in at least one high profile case involving accusers who have their day in court, and a jury that finds, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspiracy that is thereby no longer an accusation, and therefore the false term "Conspiracy theorist" is no longer useful to the libeler intending to discredit those who agree with the accusers.

An example of this due process, rule of law, almost works with the Martin Luther King Jr., Conspiracy Trial. The fact that the libelers claiming "Conspiracy Theorist" are exposed as libelers in that case does work, in that case; however, the worst criminals accused of conspiring to murder Martin Luther King Jr. were defended against prosecution for their crimes by the army of libelers whose job, pro bono, or paid character assassins, is to censor the truth.

The army of sycophants are free to perpetrate libel when rule of law is too little and too late, as there is no associated cost to the libelers as they get away with libel in their work that so effectively affords the conspirators the freedom to get away with murdering thousands of people occupying buildings when the order is issued to pull them down.

This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims
Fallacy Appeal to Authority

I have posted legitimate authorities qualified to make reliable claims..there is no appeal to authority

Point 3 from your own reference:


"There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question.
If there is a significant amount of legitimate dispute among the experts within a subject, then it will fallacious to make an Appeal to Authority using the disputing experts. This is because for almost any claim being made and "supported" by one expert there will be a counterclaim that is made and "supported" by another expert. In such cases an Appeal to Authority would tend to be futile. In such cases, the dispute has to be settled by consideration of the actual issues under dispute. Since either side in such a dispute can invoke experts, the dispute cannot be rationally settled by Appeals to Authority.
There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question. "

There are far more "experts" that disagree with your cited expert making this appeal to authority false. You need actual points rather than someone else said.

there are over 2000 engineers and architects willing to risk reputation going on public record
you would have a hard time finding three outside of NIST willing to sign off on the NIST Report as factual

 

[eots]

debwunkers are a type of troll who use nothing but inane strawmen

Oh ok so you're a debwunker.

Got it.

I have presented no strawman arguments

 

[PredFan]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

 

[eots]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

there is no conspiracy in debating the scientific validity of the NIST report

 

[eots]

unlike the NIST report this mans work was peer reviewed

 

[Josf]

"there are over 2000 engineers and architects willing to risk reputation going on public record
you would have a hard time finding three outside of NIST willing to sign off on the NIST Report as factual"

Thank you. Had any one of the surviving victims in the buildings, or victims whose loved ones were murdered at that crime scene, managed to gain access to the true rule of law, which is trial by jury, then the accuser would have had to prove the case, and certainly those facts would have been relevant during the trial. The fact that the inculpatory evidence is ubiquitous, and the fact that exculpatory evidence does not exist, in this case, is remarkable, almost never before exemplified. Most crimes perpetrated under the color of law afford the guilty criminals some measure of defense, some "plausible deniability," while this case exemplifies a complete lack of any defense whatsoever.

How the general public became co-conspirators in the cover up, as demonstrated in the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder case, adds to the inculpatory evidence; rather than, in any way, helping as yet named defendants avoid their eventual accurate judgment.

 

[Josf]

Note how character assassination works in this case. If the event is understood as a crime, and then victims are understood as accusers, then the process of character assassination (false labeling accusers as "conspiracy theorists") is rendered null and void, and the accusers are afforded due process as they would be in any capital crime of any magnitude let alone one of this extreme magnitude of criminal activity.

 

[PredFan]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

there is no conspiracy in debating the scientific validity of the NIST report

The conspiracy is that the NIST report is wrong on purpose. This is a conspiracy that YOU believe in. Yes debating it belongs in the CT category.

 

[eots]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

there is no conspiracy in debating the scientific validity of the NIST report

The conspiracy is that the NIST report is wrong on purpose. This is a conspiracy that YOU believe in. Yes debating it belongs in the CT category.

disagreement with the work of any paper or report released by the government is a conspiracy theory ...really is that how science works ?

 

[PredFan]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

there is no conspiracy in debating the scientific validity of the NIST report

The conspiracy is that the NIST report is wrong on purpose. This is a conspiracy that YOU believe in. Yes debating it belongs in the CT category.

disagreement with the work of any paper or report released by the government is a conspiracy theory ...really is that how science works ?

No, but you don't just disagree do you?

 

[P F Tinmore]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

there is no conspiracy in debating the scientific validity of the NIST report

The conspiracy is that the NIST report is wrong on purpose. This is a conspiracy that YOU believe in. Yes debating it belongs in the CT category.

Conspiracies are speculative in nature. What I posted is based on known evidence.

This is all peer revue material. Anyone can publish where the findings have been incorrect.

If you have some I would be interested in seeing them.

 

[PredFan]

It's a conspiracy theory, that's why it goes in the CT department.

there is no conspiracy in debating the scientific validity of the NIST report

The conspiracy is that the NIST report is wrong on purpose. This is a conspiracy that YOU believe in. Yes debating it belongs in the CT category.

Conspiracies are speculative in nature. What I posted is based on known evidence.

This is all peer revue material. Anyone can publish where the findings have been incorrect.

If you have some I would be interested in seeing them.

1. I wasn't talking to you.
2. A conspiracy can have the truth and facts supporting it and still be a conspiracy.
3. I don't think you understand the discussion.