Mark Roberts: 9/11 "Debunker" or just Dishonest?

Mark Roberts: 9/11 "Debunker" or just Dishonest?

By Arabesque

Mark Roberts is most well known as a 9/11 truth "Debunker". One of the more common statements that he repeatedly makes is:

"The 9/11 "Truth" movement has made a few hundred significant claims in the past few years, none of which have been true. Don't believe me? Then name a significant claim that you get right, and prove it."

I'd like to take up this challenge. While it is true that 9/11 activists have not always promoted credible information, it is also true that the official story is obviously problematic. I could sit here all day poking holes in the official "conspiracy theory" as many have done, but I will just ask Mr. Roberts three easy questions:

1. Name one single person fired or reprimanded within the U.S. government (FBI, CIA, NORAD, FAA, NSA, or Bush Administration) for the 9/11 attacks.

2. NORAD is responsible for air defense. Mr. Roberts, how many contradictory explanations did NORAD give for their failure to intercept any planes on 9/11?

3. It is an established fact that NORAD is responsible for air defenses and no planes on 9/11 were even intercepted despite the fact this is standard procedure.

  • Consider that an aircraft emergency exists ... when: ...There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any ...aircraft. —FAA Order 7110.65M 10-2-5 (6)
  • If ... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.” —FAA Order 7110.65M 10-1-1-c (7)

Despite this fact, how many days later was the man in charge of the Pentagon promoted?

Answers:

  1. Zero.According to testimony given to Congress: not one single individual within the CIA, FBI, and NSA has been reprimanded, punished, or fired for the events of 9/11.
  2. Three contradictory versions. Senator Mark Dayton claimed that NORAD officials “lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 commission to create a false impression of competence, communication and protection of the American people.”
  3. 3 days. Richard Myers, in charge of the Pentagon on 9/11 was promoted 3 days after the attack. Ralph Eberhart, in charge of NORAD on 9/11, was also promoted

Assuming that Mr. Roberts can answer these questions correctly, why isn't he a member of the 9/11 truth movement? I am at a loss, unless he believes that it is acceptable for NORAD to change their story three times without a criminal investigation to take place, no one to be fired or demoted, and Richard Myers, the person in charge of the Pentagon on 9/11 to get promoted 3 days later, along with the man in charge of NORAD.

As I explained,

To believe in the 9/11 “official story” is to believe in a massive, coordinated, and “coincidental” failure at many levels in which those most responsible for preventing the attacks were not fired or reprimanded and instead promoted.

Mark Roberts made the charge made that the 9/11 movement has made "a few hundred significant claims in the past few years, none of which have been true." I wonder how Mr. Roberts responds to the article entitled Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction published in The Open Civil Engineering Journal by members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. The "debunkers" haven't paid much attention to this article for good reason--they would have to debunk the 9/11 official story, since these are points of agreement!

I wonder why Mark Roberts and other apologists for the 9/11 official story never go near facts such as these? I'll have to assume it's because they can't be "debunked".

See also:

911truth.org: THE TOP 40REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY OF SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001

Monisha Bansal, 9/11 Families Want New Probe, Questions Answered, http://www.cnsnews.com/, September 12, 2006. “According to the group, 70 percent of their questions were either not adequately addressed by the commission or not addressed at all.

David Ray Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie, May 22, 2005, http://www.911truth.org/

Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley, Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction, The Open Civil Engineering Journal

correction: Richard Myers was in charge of the Pentagon on 9/11. Ralph Eberhart was in charge of NORAD on 9/11 and was also promoted.

In my opinion... DISHONEST !!!

and I would not be in the least surprised, if it was eventually revealed that he is a trained lawyer working for a P.R. Firm or someone more secretive.

Back in very early 2006, when Mark Robert's first appeared on the "scene", when he was known as Gravy, I remember how disingenuous he was on the very first Loose Change Forum. He, assisted by someone in Austrailia and another in Finland (location of original torrent seeders) unashamedly pushed his first pseudo debunking "LC Guide" using any method (deceitful or otherwise) to any new member of the LC forum, this I may add was also unsolicited.

He also used to SPAM his links at every opportunity to improve his Google ranks etc...

Apart from that, I'm sure he's a lovely fellow ;-{)

--

Best wishes

Good point.

I feel 100% that he's a paid agent. His tactics are too professional for him to be written off as a sincere but misguided activist who thinks he's doing his societal duty to correct our errors.

911veritas, you said "if it was eventually revealed that he is a trained lawyer working for a P.R. Firm or someone more secretive."

That's a good point. I had always thought a public-sector agency might be his employer, such as DHS, NSA or the like. But upon reflection he could very likely be employed by a private PR firm. Perhaps this one, maybe?

In fact, many of the hard-core (i.e. 8,000 posts per year) SLC / JREF goons might all be sitting in cubicles in the same office at one of these firms.

Lest we forget how much influence PR firms can have:

I always found this video a little suspicious...

taken at the NY premiere of United 93 on the evening of the 25th April 2006...

Mark Roberts (if that's his real name) appears to be taking directives from Mr. X (pictured below)

--


Please watch the below video, interesting sections approx 3:30 and 6:05 in...

Link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRi4GaZjh6o

--

Would be interesting to know who Mr. X actually is !!!

Best wishes

Can he be anymore obvious?

Must have smoothed his act out --he got slicker later.

"Tour guide" my arse.

______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Simple

3 buidings fell at near free fall speed. Significant (has never has happened before without explosives) and provable (video evidence).

Roberts...

Tried to befriend 9/11 First Responder John Feal so he could bad mouth the movement, and turn John off from what we do. What does that make him? "Debunkers" love to A) say everything we've ever said has been debunked "years ago." B) say we never get anything right. C) promote the fringe of this movement as the whole D) make our arguments for us so as to easily tear them down. D) ignore everything they can't "debunk", and most of their "debunkings" are pseudo debunkings. They tend to leave out critical information. E) push truthers through name calling, etc... to say something stupid so as to use it against them later.

To me, some of the more "prominent" debunkers are traitors. Literally.

By the way... one thing we got right (among countless others)...

Philip Zelikow should never have been the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

I couldn't agree more.

"To me, some of the more "prominent" debunkers are traitors. Literally."

Well said.

"Richard Myers, in charge of NORAD on 9/11...?

"Richard Myers, in charge of NORAD on 9/11 was promoted 3 days after the attack."

According to Wikipedia, Myers was succeeded in February 2000 by Gen Ralph E Eberhart who
was NORAD commander on 9/11 and until November 2004.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerospace_Defense_Command#Co...

Error correction

Thanks for pointing out this error. Having researched the topic already, I should have more carefully proofread my work.

Added to the article:

"Mark Roberts made the charge made that the 9/11 movement has made "a few hundred significant claims in the past few years, none of which have been true." I wonder how Mr. Roberts responds to the article entitled Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction published in The Open Civil Engineering Journal by members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. The "debunkers" haven't paid much attention to this article for good reason--they would have to debunk the 9/11 official story, since these are points of agreement!"
_______________
Arabesque: 911 Truth

Roberts is State Department's go-to guy

The State Department has a new conspiracy-debunking "blogger", VOA (CIA) propagandist Todd Leventhal.

And what is his "recommended site" for "9/11 research"?

http://blogs.america.gov/rumors/author/leventhalta/

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson

I will just call him......

an idiot.

Great post!

Great post!

Someone please make sure...

... Roberts and his followers read these questions.

In my experience, these are also difficult questions for debunkers:

Why wasn't the President evacuated from the school for 30 minutes after the 2nd tower was hit?

Why did Rummy continue his scheduled meeting when the Towers were burning?

Why wasn't the Pentagon and the Capitol protected from the Andrews Air Force Base, just 12 miles away?

Why was the steel debris of WTC 7 destroyed instead of determining the cause and mechanism of the destruction by carefully examining it?

Accessories BEFORE or AFTER the fact?

I just had a thought. Assuming these people are government/PR firm hacks who know 9/11 was an inside job, one question remains: Did they know about 9/11 before it happened? This means they knew before 9/11 that they were going to be part of a sophisticated disinfo project and likely already had their "debunking" arguments prepared and waiting from the get-go. If this is true, these "debunkers" are accessories BEFORE THE FACT.

Or did they find out afterwards and agree to be part of the cover-up for immense financial gain, or because of death threats, and the like?

Great post!

Always thought he was a phony wanker....

______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/