SCEPCOP Forum

http://www.911blogger.com/node/17001

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".

With all this, how on earth did this happen???

Associated Press
Two Northwest Airlines pilots failed to make radio contact with ground controllers for more than an hour and overflew their Minneapolis destination by 150 miles before discovering the mistake and turning around.

The plane landed safely Wednesday evening, apparently without passengers realizing that anything had been amiss. No one was hurt.

The Federal Aviation Administration said that the crew told authorities they became distracted during a heated discussion over airline policy and lost track of their location.

The National Transportation Safety Board does not yet know if the crew fell asleep, spokesman Keith Holloway said, calling that idea "speculative."

http://www.thehour.com/story/476889

What? Why is number one pointless? Your excerpts have nothing to do with those guys being promoted. Nor did they debunk that.

What are you smoking?

You didn't answer any of the questions.

What is Mark Robert's email? I will send him the list of questions.

I can no longer recall any of the exact happenings of 9/11 in any sort of a timeline. I do recall jet fighters passing over my house headed toward NYC early on in the situation. I remember physically seeing them in the sky flying over the ocean coast line. There were at least two, maybe more, flying together. I can't remember how many I actually saw. I recall thinking to myself that we were at war at this point and the feeling of panic. I can't recall if it was based on the first plane or the second but it was early on in the situation.

I don't recall any news footage or any mention of these planes at all in any of the commentary, but there were up there. From where I was, it couldn't have taken more than a few minutes if even that, before they would have reached the WTC airspace.

Good post Prof I Wag.

I should also point out that there appears to be only 1 intercept of a civilian plane over the US in recent years. I'll let our friend Scepcop see if he can figure it out.

Repeating claims without thinking about them is a sign of a pseudoskeptic. To look at a claim and try to verify its correctness is an attribute of a skeptic. You might find no information, pros, or cons, but in many cases both pros and cons where you have to weigh the evidence. Do yourself a favor and look at the links and see what ProfWag used for evidence.

Thanks for the reminder Ciscop, I think I'll bumb this up also. Those three "tough" questions weren't very "tough" in my humble opinion. It would be like me saying something like "One tough question, how do you explain the thermite at the Pentagon?" Of course, what makes that question so tough is that it is a lie and there wasn't any thermite at the Pentagon, but I see little difference between that and in them posting lies about a General's promotions and trying to pass it off as a fact.

This post is kind of funny in a way. It is an unsubstantiated claim from a form or blog made by someone using the pen name of Arabesque. Doesn't that make this one of those a friend of a friend of a friend stories?

Skepcop, in case you are only reviewing posts from the "View Your Post," link, please make sure you review my thread entitled "A Challenge for Scepcop." There's an opportunity to get rid of me for a while!
Thanks.
Wag

The Federal Aviation Administration has been running on a skeleton staff. This is since the government did not re-authorize the operating budget for the organization. The most important thing most vacationers were looking towards was a tax vacation. When the authority terminated, however, flight companies hiked their costs. This implies most air travelers will not see any price drop. Here is the proof: Airlines pocketing $25 million per day after government lockout