View Full Version: Who Is Mark Roberts?

Loose Change Forum > Research > Who Is Mark Roberts?


Title: Who Is Mark Roberts?
Description: And why is he so out to get Dylan Avery?


grandtheftcountry - May 8, 2006 12:32 AM (GMT)
There's this guy who calls himself "Conspiracysmasher" that is going around doing damage control for the fed story on several websites that host forums for 9/11-related issues. I first encountered him on the RottenTomatoes.com website and clicked his link for his blogspot page. I checked out the
CODE
http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/2006/05/loose-change-gets-spanked.html
link and there's a downloadable PDF that tries to take an ax to the film in a big way. He does raise a few good points, but most of his arguments are weak as hell, and the entire work is riddled with ridicule and name-calling tactics. The only good thing about this piece is that it puts the facts in check, and actually lends some more information and investigation to the story.

So what does this have to do with Mark Roberts?

Well, this "anonymously" authored hit-piece contains the username the person uses to login to his computer everyday and even displays the location of the file on his computer [desktop/911 activism]. The name is Mark Roberts. He anonymously wrote this piece "to avoid being harrassed by CTists." [Just so you know, "CT", according to Roberts, is short for "Conspiracy Theorists", which means that "CTists" actually translates to "Conspiracy Theoristsists."]

He thought he could blow up Loose Change's spot, but it looks like he blew his own in the process. He says that he spent 6 days working on it so that he could get it to Dylan before the United 93 demonstration. Wow! What conviction! He actually transcribed the movie word-for-word [and poorly, I might add], included screenshots, and even did a lot of his own research. But the piece comes off as if it was written by a professional 9/11 debunker, who resorts to adolescent criticisms that don't hold up.

Has anyone else seen this
CODE
http://media2.uploadjar.com/uploads/911_loose_change_vie15a3eb.pdf
?

chucksheen - May 8, 2006 12:35 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (grandtheftcountry @ May 7 2006, 05:32 PM)
There's this guy who calls himself "Conspiracysmasher" that is going around doing damage control for the fed story on several websites that host forums for 9/11-related issues. I first encountered him on the RottenTomatoes.com website and clicked his link for his blogspot page. I checked out the Loose Change Gets Spanked link and there's a downloadable PDF that tries to take an ax to the film in a big way. He does raise a few good points, but most of his arguments are weak as hell, and the entire work is riddled with ridicule and name-calling tactics.  The only good thing about this piece is that it puts the facts in check, and actually lends some more information and investigation to the story. 

So what does this have to do with Mark Roberts?

Well, this "anonymously" authored hit-piece contains the username the person uses to login to his computer everyday and even displays the location of the file on his computer [desktop/911 activism]. The name is Mark Roberts. He anonymously wrote this piece "to avoid being harrassed by CTists."  [Just so you know, "CT", according to Roberts, is short for "Conspiracy Theorists", which means that "CTists" actually translates to "Conspiracy Theoristsists."]

He thought he could blow up Loose Change's spot, but it looks like he blew his own in the process.  He says that he spent 6 days working on it so that he could get it to Dylan before the United 93 demonstration. Wow! What conviction!  He actually transcribed the movie word-for-word [and poorly, I might add], included screenshots, and even did a lot of his own research. But the piece comes off as if it was written by a professional 9/11 debunker, who resorts to adolescent criticisms that don't hold up.

Has anyone else seen this garbage critique?

Thanks friend and fellow truthseeker. There are a couple weak attacks on the credibility of Loose Change but they are ALL feeble attempts. Even 911myths.com fails miserably. There are even experts and threads that debunk the CT debunkers. Just keep raising hell and spreading the word. People will see all the holes for themselves and realize.

Use this great tool:

UniversalSeed.org

Welcome to the forums.

popol vuh - May 8, 2006 06:04 PM (GMT)
One more time, for the learning impaired.

LC2E doesn't owe anyone any explanations as they-

1) Didn't plan and pull off 911.

2) Didn't aid and abet the coverup/investigation.

3) Don't have a budget of billions of dollars and a staff of thousands to make this film.

If Mark Roberts is so concerned about finding flaws in a storyline, I have one he should dig into.

Tell him to drop me a line and I'll point him in the right direction.



OCMARK - May 8, 2006 06:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (popol vuh @ May 8 2006, 10:04 AM)
One more time, for the learning impaired.

LC2E doesn't owe anyone any explanations as they-

1) Didn't plan and pull off 911.

2) Didn't aid and abet the coverup/investigation.

3) Don't have a budget of billions of dollars and a staff of thousands to make this film.

If Mark Roberts is so concerned about finding flaws in a storyline, I have one he should dig into.

Tell him to drop me a line and I'll point him in the right direction.

Good Vuh!!

grandtheftcountry - May 8, 2006 08:14 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (popol vuh @ May 8 2006, 06:04 PM)
One more time, for the learning impaired.

LC2E doesn't owe anyone any explanations as they-

1) Didn't plan and pull off 911.

2) Didn't aid and abet the coverup/investigation.

3) Don't have a budget of billions of dollars and a staff of thousands to make this film.

If Mark Roberts is so concerned about finding flaws in a storyline, I have one he should dig into.

Tell him to drop me a line and I'll point him in the right direction.

I'm not learning impaired. I found this critique and thought it was ridiculous. I discovered his real name, and since the author claimed to be doing it "anonymously" I thought I'd bring this person to your attention, being that he's determined to discredit Loose Change.

I thought you folks might appreciate the info, but I guess I was wrong.

Here's the "anonymous" author's email if YOU want to contact him:
itmatters@mail.com

[it was listed on the blogspot]

Thanks for the welcome.


xiando - May 11, 2006 02:01 AM (GMT)
QUOTE
He thought he could blow up Loose Change's spot, but it looks like he blew his own in the process.  He says that he spent 6 days working on it so that he could get it to Dylan before the United 93 demonstration. Wow! What conviction!  He actually transcribed the movie word-for-word [and poorly, I might add], included screenshots, and even did a lot of his own research. But the piece comes off as if it was written by a professional 9/11 debunker, who resorts to adolescent criticisms that don't hold up.

Has anyone else seen this garbage critique?


YOU STUPID BASTARD!!!!

You made me spend 5 minutes OF MY TIME on this ridiculously stupid DISINFORMATION document which is clearly written by a DISINFORMATION TERRORIST (Or, as you put it, "professional 9/11 debunker")

1. On page 6 of this expert critique, you find the transcript from the movie:

00:03:07,100 --> 00:03:12,300
At an altitude of 32000 feet, cruising altitude for a commercial jetliner.

And the very important comment which clearly shows the whole Loose Change movie is just "conspiracy theory":

"Three minutes and twelve seconds and nothing you’ve said has had a connection to 9/11."

The comment is probably appropriate because everything said until then has a connection to 9/11, but only if you have a functioning brain and therefore are able to connect the dots. If I hit you in the head with a hammer then most people would probably find it relevant that I had a hammer in my hand before hitting you, however, it may be less relevant if I choose to deny hitting you in the head even though it's got a big hole.

2. On page 7 of this EXPERT review, I find the quote from the movie "The Department of Justice releases a terrorism manual, with the World Trade Center in crosshairs."

and the comment..:

"That’s the north tower, WTC 1, in the crosshairs. It was bombed iby Islamic terrorists in 1993.
The terrorists were trying to knock the north tower into the south, killing tens of thousands of
people. They did a lot of damage, but “only” six people died, and the cyanide gas that had been packed with the bomb was incinerated by the explosion."

While I think DoD planning 9/11, not the 1993 bombing, where the reason for the crosshairs, it must be pointed out that the 1993 WTC bomber was a 43 year old Egyptian, Emad Salem. According to stories from the New York Times, Salem was paid $1,000,000 and was trained by the FBI to perform this reprehensible act. Salem figured out that he was being set‑up to be the patsy and taped John Anticev. Anticev, a top American FBI agent, told Salem to proceed with the bombing!

This act of treason is quite interesting, isn't it? It is also of interest that someone who apparently wrote a 285-page long viewer's guide did not take the time to research such basic facts..

3. On page 8 of this EXPERT review, I find

"Are you going to keep reciting facts unrelated to 9/11? We don’t have all day here."

WOW. THE AUTHOR WROTE THIS 285-PAGE "REVIEW" AND DON'T HAVE ALL DAY HERE!?

Clearly, someone was payd to write this pile-o-dung and did a poor job of it.

I totally agree: The document was clearly written by a DISINFORMATION TERRORIST. It was not written by someone even remotely interested in the truth; it was, in my opinion, clearly written by someone who's goal is to cover-up the truth.

I understand that you feel like being kind and call it a "professional 9/11 debunker". Some call such people "a liar". Steven E. Jones always use the term "data falsification" when the government presents disinformation. But I personally think the term DISINFORMATION TERRORIST fits because 9/11 was an act of terrorism and those who try to cover-up the truth are complicit; thus terrorist.

WARNING: Don't bother to read this document unless you are researching disinformation terrorist and Psychological Operations. No new information about 9/11 can be found in this document. However, if you want to learn a thing or two about professional 9/11 debulkers and disinformation terrorist, then you may want to look briefly at it.

grover79 - May 14, 2006 08:00 PM (GMT)
[QUOTE=xiando,May 11 2006, 02:01 AM] [QUOTE]
While I think DoD planning 9/11, not the 1993 bombing, where the reason for the crosshairs, it must be pointed out that the 1993 WTC bomber was a 43 year old Egyptian, Emad Salem. According to stories from the New York Times, Salem was paid $1,000,000 and was trained by the FBI to perform this reprehensible act. Salem figured out that he was being set‑up to be the patsy and taped John Anticev. Anticev, a top American FBI agent, told Salem to proceed with the bombing!
[/QUOTE]
Where are you pulling this from? From what I've read, Salem was a FBI informant working with the bomb crew. He never actually took part in the bombing though, and was actually pulled out of the operation and warned the feds that they were making a huge mistake - saying "don't call me when the bombs go off". After the 93 WTC incident, Salem was payed roughly 1.5 million in a package deal for infiltrating and gathering intel on the blind sheikh's cell. He was instrumental in foiling the day of terror plot.

rennie - May 15, 2006 05:40 PM (GMT)
There is a "new & improved" version of that slam piece out. We were talking about the other day here. Supposedly that pdf was just a draft. Apparently he's not annymous anymore, because here he is on the 9/11myths site:
CODE
http://911myths.com/html/mark_roberts.html
. By the way, you can download the whole script for Loose Change on their website. I'm deaf, so that's what I did because there isn't a subtitled version out.

Jezz - May 15, 2006 07:10 PM (GMT)
God that is some awful evidence, your right I did just waste at least 20 minutes reading that garbage.

rennie - May 15, 2006 07:56 PM (GMT)
Ok, found the links to the new version

Download my "Loose Change" guide (.doc file)
CODE
http://tinyurl.com/epp82

View my "Loose Change" guide (HTML)
CODE
http://tinyurl.com/jnfp8


Got these from the Randi forum. "Mark Roberts" goes by the name "Gravy" on there. Jesus, they are busy talking about Loose Change. I wonder what original work they have come up with????
No, people, mu name is not "Geggy."

summerisle - May 15, 2006 08:05 PM (GMT)
A message from Mark Roberts a.k.a. Gravy:

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=163...&postcount=3889

QUOTE
I love the fact that one of them said how poor my transcription was, when in fact it was cut and pasted directly from the Loose Change site. I just didn't correct their typos and other errors.

Somebody please tell them that I'd be glad to defend my work, but I'm banned from their site, so they'll need to come over here for discussion or email me.




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree