• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

AE911T Taking It to SCOTUS

Mark F

Graduate Poster
Mark F
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
1,746
I happened upon this earlier today and have not had a chance or enough desire to wade through it, but it seems AE911T are intent on taking their case of the NIST is naughty (therefore 9/11 was an inside job) all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

First there's this hour long video from Nov 22, 2023:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcwQlzZKhC4&ab_channel=AE911Truth

Worth noting in the description it says:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that AE911Truth doesn't have standing in our case against NIST and has claimed that federal agency reports are not required to be accurate or scientifically sound, as long as they meet statutory requirements.

AE911Truth has now filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc seeking to have the entire set of active eligible judges who sit on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to review the three-judge appellate panel's decision in our case.

In this episode of 9/11 Free Fall, AE911Truth's attorney, Mick Harrison, joins Andy Steele to go over the details of this important case, and how AE911Truth intends to move forward and fight this breathtaking ruling, as well as the implications of this ruling if it's not reversed.
Click to expand...

Then a week ago on December 22, 2023 they posted this video;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXlqMFIhdKs&ab_channel=AE911Truth

From the description;
A federal court has ruled in our case against NIST that U.S. government agencies are allowed to issue knowingly false reports, and that their reports are NOT required to be scientifically accurate.

Now we are taking our case to the United States Supreme Court to challenge this Orwellian logic!

In this episode of 9/11 Free Fall, host Andy Steele is joined by AE911Truth Chairman, Roland Angle, and the attorneys involved in the Supreme Court filing, Mick Harrison, and John M. Clifford, to delve into the details of not only the case itself but also the process ahead. And they’ll discuss the implications of this important case for the entire country.

Our case is one that not only affects the World Trade Center issue but any issue in which science sits at the center. We are now not only fighting for 9/11 justice but for the future of the United States!

As we prepare to wage this important battle in the new year, we are holding our year-end fundraiser.

We need to raise $5,000 by December 31
Click to expand...

That last part was a real shocker. Never saw it coming :D

Not having the intestinal fortitude right now to sit through 2 hours of AE911T propaganda, has anyone else looked at this yet?

Thoughts (beyond the usual)? I suspect there is really absolutely nothing new here and this is just the latest end of year fundraising special that will go nowhere and quietly fizzle out.
 
"A federal court has ruled in our case against NIST that U.S. government agencies are allowed to issue knowingly false reports, and that their reports are NOT required to be scientifically accurate."

I think it's quite likely that AE911T have misinterpreted the ruling.
 
Orphia Nay said:
"A federal court has ruled in our case against NIST that U.S. government agencies are allowed to issue knowingly false reports, and that their reports are NOT required to be scientifically accurate."

I think it's quite likely that AE911T have misinterpreted the ruling.
Click to expand...
Indeed, it is just lawyers playing with words.
 
Orphia Nay said:
"A federal court has ruled in our case against NIST that U.S. government agencies are allowed to issue knowingly false reports, and that their reports are NOT required to be scientifically accurate."

I think it's quite likely that AE911T have misinterpreted the ruling.
Click to expand...

You know, I have not actually read the ruling, and I'm no gambler, but I would be willing to bet that isn't what the ruling says.

I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
 
The clue is in the quote included in the OP:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that AE911Truth doesn't have standing in our case against NIST and has claimed that federal agency reports are not required to be accurate or scientifically sound, as long as they meet statutory requirements.
Click to expand...
Meet statutory requirements.
They do not need to be 100% perfect either at the time or bulletproof against later improving understanding.

I'll also bet that the hyperbole "are not required to be accurate or scientifically sound," is AE911's exaggeration which is not reflected in the language of the court's finding. I expect (a) someone will find the text of the finding sooner or later and (b) gullible supporters will continue to fall for the nonsense.

The appeal will go nowhere. It will be interesting to see how the attempt to go before SCOTUS is dealt with. SCOTUS is currently a bit busy avoiding dealing with appeals resulting from several states barring Trump, D from the 2024 primary ballots.
 
Last edited:
SpitfireIX said:
Here is AE911T's petition for rehearing en banc, which has the appellate opinion appended.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

So if we wade through the legalese:

Nothing has changed. AE911 once again loses in legal procedural issues and fails to gain any review of the technical merits of their claims for CD.

1) AE911 does not have standing to press their claim.
2) NIST has met its obligation to present a report identifying the probable cause of collapse.
3) NIST is under no obligation to present a report that AE911 agrees with.

And
4) Expressed in polite legalese- "Get lost AE911"!
 
The court ruled that NIST had complied with their responsibility and AE911 hadn't prove their contention and didn't like the conclusion nor how the conclusion played out. AE911 has not proved their case in any of the legal proceedings nor will they win any case even IF the SCOTUS agrees to hear the case, IMO
 
bknight said:
The court ruled that NIST had complied with their responsibility and AE911 hadn't prove their contention and didn't like the conclusion nor how the conclusion played out. AE911 has not proved their case in any of the legal proceedings nor will they win any case even IF the SCOTUS agrees to hear the case, IMO
Click to expand...
Sure but I suggest it is better to NOT conflate the procedural and technical issues of merit.
"
"AE911 hadn't prove[sic] their contention"

"AE911 has not proved their case".

The only "contention" or "case" they have been making is about their right to be heard. They have NEVER got to the stage where the technical merits of the case for CD are considered.
 
ozeco41 said:
Sure but I suggest it is better to NOT conflate the procedural and technical issues of merit.
"
"AE911 hadn't prove[sic] their contention"

"AE911 has not proved their case".

The only "contention" or "case" they have been making is about their right to be heard. They have NEVER got to the stage where the technical merits of the case for CD are considered.
Click to expand...


Au Contraire
Informative video.
ASCE worked "hand in hand" (aided and abetted) the NIST to
conceal evidence in 9-11 investigations.

https://www.ae911truth.org/news/963-how-the-asce-abetted-the-9-11-cover-up


Video link https://youtu.be/X_U6v7MqDzE
 
Last edited:
At this point it should be obvious AETruth is a scam. Yes, I know it has always been a scam, but this move underlines just how uninterested they are in getting to "the truth".

A&ETruth has raised enough money over the years to conduct multiple investigation of various avenues both historical and technical. They have to date done nothing but make wild claims, and raise money from foolish people. This court challenge is an obvious waste of time. They have no standing, as the courts have ruled. Unlike the the 9-11 victim's families lawsuit against the Saudis, where there are direct stakes by the plaintiffs, A&ETruth are nothing more than hacks putting on a circus sideshow to make their dimwitted patrons think they still have relevance.

A&ETruth has no dog in a fight with NIST. They didn't rent space at the WTC, they had no input, passive or direct, in the design and construction of the WTC complex. The are no grounds for a suit against NIST. And to date, none of the various entities that received negative profiles for their part in the structural shortcomings of the Twin Towers and #7 have felt the need to file their own lawsuit againts NIST for their findings.
 
Last edited:
AE911T is simply a way to raise money to pay the people who raise the money. They do no research and they are an embarrassment.
 
Orphia Nay said:
"A federal court has ruled in our case against NIST that U.S. government agencies are allowed to issue knowingly false reports, and that their reports are NOT required to be scientifically accurate."

I think it's quite likely that AE911T have misinterpreted the ruling.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:

From the ruling:

Plaintiffs believe the report NIST issued is scientifically inaccurate or even intentionally fraudulent. They confuse, however, NIST’s obligation to issue a report that includes an analysis of the likely technical cause or causes of the building collapse with an obligation to issue a report that adopts the particular analysis plaintiffs believe is correct.

I did like this bit:

Second, Architects asserts that NIST’s issuance of the allegedly fraudulent WTC 7 Report caused Architects to expend several hundred thousand dollars commissioning a study to rebut the report.

Did they really spend that kind of cash on the report by the Alaska professor, or is that including Gage's salary (back in the day)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom