Twoofers Only: The Mark Roberts Factual Error Thread

[LashL]

ummm...no. More like I didn't feel like reformatting it for a bunch of guys who aren't going to debunk anything I wrote, but rather, just throw insults my way. Which is what you just did.

Based on the foregoing, it would appear that this particular Loose Change forumite didn't even know that he couldn't post links and instead chose to be cryptic on purpose, so never mind.

 

[JAMartell]

Well that's why I broke up the link, smarty pants!

 

[LashL]

Well that's why I broke up the link, smarty pants!

Make up your mind, little one.

And, in any event, if you have something to say, just say it.

Don't bother posting non-links. Just speak up.

"Use your words."

 

[A W Smith]

Cowardice revealed

ummm...no. More like I didn't feel like reformatting it for a bunch of guys who aren't going to debunk anything I wrote, but rather, just throw insults my way. Which is what you just did.

So why bother to link to something that you believe no one here will read? are you that lazy that you cannot copy and paste your post over here with very minor editing?

 

[Gravy]

z10.invisionfree.com / Loose_Change_Forum / index.php?showtopic=20145&st=0#entry14727877

Welcome to the forums, Justin. Why don't you introduce yourself?

I just came from the SLC post "Slam-Dunking Justin Martell," which discusses your errors of omission and commission regarding this issue: http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/12/slam-dunking-justin-martell.html

So, first you change my quote from this,

Well, it's also completely false. No one said the air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe.

to this,

Well it's also completely false. No one lied about the air quality at Ground Zero.

then you post nothing that refutes it. Is this your idea of truth?

My statement was in reply to this quote from a LCFC review:

“It was also good to see the coverage of the EPA’s lies to the rescue workers when they told them that the air was safe to breathe after the three WTC collapses. This is an issue often sidelined in other films. Loose Change Final Edition includes an interview with John Feal of the Feal Good Foundation (fealgoodfoundation.com) and many other citizens, victims of 9/11 who were betrayed by their government.”

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3125417&postcount=11

I had posted in the SLC comments,

Justin, it's interesting that you posted that at the Loose Change forum, where I am not permitted to post. I guess you're afraid to address me directly when you're uninformed. Why not register at the JREF forum, where they don't ban people for expressing dissenting views?

Justin, please show where the EPA said the air at Ground Zero was safe for rescue or recovery workers to breathe, in contradiction to OSHA's requirement that PPE be worn inside the Ground Zero green line.

I await your reply.

I'm glad you made it over here. Now produce your evidence or retract your claim. Clear enough, "scholar?"


ETA: You'll find lots of resources about Ground Zero air quality at my site, linked in my signature.

ETAA: I see that Avery piped in:

What. The. [rule 10].

You are despicable Mark.

Watch the end of the WTC chapter again. I know that it has nothing to do with controlled demolition, so you probably won't pay attention, but give it a shot.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=20145&view=findpost&p=14728547

Sorry, Avery, I haven't seen your flick, and you know I can't post on your forum. Feel free to post your evidence here: you won't be banned for disagreeing!

 

[T.A.M.]

Yes Justin, so to prove you are right in your accusation you must simply...

Provide a link to, or quote from a document produced by the EPA, that states that,

"The air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe."

No speculation, no "interpretation" of some comment they made, that you "feel" indicates the above. Please, we are all waiting.

TAM

 

[LashL]

Is "Justin" running interference for "SwingDangler" in order to deflect from SwingDangler's most recent faux pas (and, man, that was a BIG faux pas) or is it just a [insert scare quotes here] coincidence [end scare quotes] that "Justin" signed up now?

I am "just asking questions," of course.

 

[Gravy]

Is "Justin" running interference for "SwingDangler" in order to deflect from SwingDangler's most recent faux pas (and, man, that was a BIG faux pas) or is it just a [insert scare quotes here] coincidence [end scare quotes] that "Justin" signed up now?

I am "just asking questions," of course.

Oh, who knows? I've long since lost my capacity for amazement at how dishonest the "truth" movement leaders are. I mean, if you want to make a good impression here, is it a good idea to start by falsifying quotes and still not being able to back up your claim? I'm open to arguments pro and con.

 

[LashL]

Oh, who knows? I've long since lost my capacity for amazement at how dishonest the "truth" movement leaders are.

Good point about the capacity for amazement. Nothing that 9/11 loons, deniers and idiots say surprises me any more.

However, it isn't just the twoofer "leaders" who are dishonest. Many of the "rank and file" are just as dishonest as those whom they choose to blindly follow. Not all of them, of course, as many of them are just caught up in the "twoof" and easily bamboozled.


But, enough of the derail. Better that "Justin" take his current allegations (whatever they might be) to another thread if he's so inclined, rather than sidetrack this thread.

Meanwhile, back on topic...

Swing Dangler... calling Swing Dangler. Come in, Swing Dangler. You've got some 'splainin' to do.

 

[JAMartell]

From Page 305 of EPA whistle blower Cate Jenkins' response to the paper released in August of 2003 entitled, "EPA's Response to the World Trade Center Collapses: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement:"

"EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman is quoted by Newsweek saying that the smoke plume at the World Trade Center disaster site is “not a health problem.” She says: “We have found particulate matter in the air, but other than being an irritant to those people who are out there breathing it deeply that’s why people are wearing protective gear and masks it is not a problem for the general population.”

The key phrase is "the smoke plume at the WORLD TRADE CENTER DISASTER SITE is “NOT A HEALTH PROBLEM." She then makes it sound as though the only reason people were wearing protective gear was because the dust was only an "irritant." Their readings showed that the dust was much more than an "irritant."

As far as the misquote is concerned, Mark please accept my apology for that. I wrote the article in my webpage editor and had the actual screen shot of what you said. When I moved it over to the LC forum it was late and I transcribed it incorrectly. The quote is now corrected and I acknowledge the mistake. However, I stand behind what I have written. The EPA made several very blanketed statements about the air quality in New York City as a whole, which includes Ground Zero, that said the air was safe to breath.

 

[Gravy]

But, enough of the derail. Better that "Justin" take his current allegations (whatever they might be) to another thread if he's so inclined, rather than sidetrack this thread.

Well, this thread's about my factual errors, so if Justin has evidence of one, here's the place for it.

Swing Dangler... calling Swing Dangler. Come in, Swing Dangler. You've got some 'splainin' to do.

Give him a break. As someone who's obviously never practiced the art, you have no appreciation for how time-consuming getting absolutely everything wrong is. Swing has to scrupulously examine every statement of his to be sure he didn't accidentally get something right. He doesn't just fling poo like some truthers do. That's easy. Swing is a poo artist.

 

[tomwaits]

LOL. Avery bans non-truthers on his forum for "less than honest debate" and then taunts them to respond! What a brave man!

 

[Gravy]

From Page 305 of EPA whistle blower Cate Jenkins' response to the paper released in August of 2003 entitled, "EPA's Response to the World Trade Center Collapses: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement:"

"EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman is quoted by Newsweek saying that the smoke plume at the World Trade Center disaster site is “not a health problem.” She says: “We have found particulate matter in the air, but other than being an irritant to those people who are out there breathing it deeply that’s why people are wearing protective gear and masks it is not a problem for the general population.”

Bolding mine.

Office of Inspector General Evaluation Report No. 2003-P-00012

EPA’s Response to the World Trade Center Collapse: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement, pp. 100-101

EPA Actions to Encourage Respirator Use

As demonstrated by a fact sheet prepared on September 11, 2001, EPA’s emergency response officials immediately recognized the need for and recommended the use of air purifying respirators at Ground Zero (a copy of this document is available on our OIG web site). EPA officials told us this fact sheet was provided to a FEMA official, but was not issued. We contacted a FEMA representative who told us that the flyer was not issued because it was decided that New York City should handle worker protection issues.

EPA also provided respirators for workers at the site. According to a May 1, 2002, letter from EPA’s Region 2 Administrator to Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and Senator George Voinovich (R-OH), EPA had distributed 22,100 air purifying respirators and 30,500 sets of P100 particulate cartridges to New York City by September 22, 2001. Additionally, 600 respirators (MSA and 3m brand) and 2,000 cartridges (GME-P100) were provided to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the New York State Department of Health. The bulk of EPA-procured equipment was transported from EPA’s Edison facility by the New York National Guard to the New York City Office of Emergency Management for distribution to response workers.

As the rescue phase progressed, EPA emergency response officials told us they were concerned about the lack of respirator use at Ground Zero and outlined these concerns in a letter to NYCDOH dated October 5, 2001. This letter outlined the threat of potential exposure of workers to hazardous substances. The letter noted that EPA “... has recommended, and continues to recommend, that workers utilize personal protective equipment and the personal wash stations to prevent the spread of asbestos and other hazardous substances from the WTC to their homes, cars, public transportation, food service locations, etc.” The letter stated that EPA had observed very inconsistent compliance with its recommendations, but did not have the authority to enforce compliance with non-EPA/United States Coast Guard employees. The letter concluded by recommending that the Incident Commander adopt and enforce a site-wide Health and Safety Plan. A copy of the letter is in Appendix P.


Health Impacts of Lack of Respirator Use at Ground Zero
Two studies documented acute health effects suffered by emergency and construction workers at Ground Zero. A study of firefighters who responded to the collapse concluded that intense, short-term exposure to material generated during the collapse of the World Trade Center was associated with bronchial responsiveness and the development of cough. The study found that the following percentages of firefighters developed “World Trade Center cough” that was severe enough to require at least 4 weeks of medical leave:

• 8 percent of the firefighters with a high level of exposure to contaminants at the site (i.e., present at the WTC collapse).

• 3 percent of the firefighters with a moderate level of exposure to contaminants at the site (i.e., present within first 2 days after the collapse).

• 1 percent of the firefighters with a low level of exposure to contaminants at the site (i.e., present within 3-7 days of the collapse).

Initial findings of medical examinations of workers directly involved in rescue and recovery efforts also found evidence of acute health impacts. Preliminary results of these examinations released in January 2003 and reported in the Washington Post concluded that 78 percent of those sampled had suffered lung ailments and 88 percent had experienced ear, nose, and throat problems in the months immediately following the attack. Further, a September 2002 report25 by the Mount Sinai School of Medicine concluded that protection of workers at Ground Zero was “seriously inadequate.” The report noted that the response of workers in the first few hours and days after the attack without regard to their personal safety was laudable and understandable. However, according to the Mount Sinai report, a lack of enforcement of worker protection measures in the weeks and months that followed was not excusable.

Note that the EPA was not responsible for enforcement of its recommendations. For more information, see my site: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/groundzerositesafety%2Cworkerhealthissues

As far as the misquote is concerned, Mark please accept my apology for that. I wrote the article in my webpage editor and had the actual screen shot of what you said. When I moved it over to the LC forum it was late and I transcribed it incorrectly. The quote is now corrected and I acknowledge the mistake. However, I stand behind what I have written. The EPA made several very blanketed statements about the air quality in New York City as a whole, which includes Ground Zero, that said the air was safe to breath.

Apology accepted. I expect you to do my alma mater proud, Justin. I once hit a softball home run from the grafted tree at the intersection of Mountain Road and the Rindge Hall drive, over the trees, and on top of Marcucella Hall. Won a case of beer from Tom Leahy, who said it could never be done. Don't make me dust off that clue bat for you!

 

[Brainster]

From Page 305 of EPA whistle blower Cate Jenkins' response to the paper released in August of 2003 entitled, "EPA's Response to the World Trade Center Collapses: Challenges, Successes, and Areas for Improvement:"

"EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman is quoted by Newsweek saying that the smoke plume at the World Trade Center disaster site is “not a health problem.” She says: “We have found particulate matter in the air, but other than being an irritant to those people who are out there breathing it deeply that’s why people are wearing protective gear and masks it is not a problem for the general population.”

The key phrase is "the smoke plume at the WORLD TRADE CENTER DISASTER SITE is “NOT A HEALTH PROBLEM."

FOR THE GENERAL POPULATION. And as James B told you in the comments at SLC, it's not on page 305 of that report, but on page 8 (page 20 of the PDF).

 

[beachnut]

debunked

 

[JAMartell]

Yes, but the EPA made blanketed statements about the air quality in New York City, which includes Ground Zero, which were not true at all. Many of the rescue workers listened to the EPA's statements...they are now sick. Do you think that the EPA was honest about the air quality in their statements?

I once hit a softball home run from the grafted tree at the intersection of Mountain Road and the Rindge Hall drive, over the trees, and on top of Marcucella Hall. Won a case of beer from Tom Leahy, who said it could never be done.

Impossible! haha! May I ask what kind of beer it was?

 

[Arus808]

Yes, but the EPA made blanketed statements about the air quality in New York City, which includes Ground Zero, which were not true at all. Many of the rescue workers listened to the EPA's statements...they are now sick. Do you think that the EPA was honest about the air quality in their statements?



Impossible! haha! May I ask what kind of beer it was?

yes some of the rescue workers are sick, but there isn't any study that has confirmed that they became sick because of the air quality around ground zero. in fact, the EPA stated that anyone working there should take any special regards to make themselves safe while working.


Can you provide a link to a study or finding that shows that the air quality at ground zero in the days following 9/11 are responsible for at least 1 of the rescue workers illnesses?

 

[Gravy]

Yes, but the EPA made blanketed statements about the air quality in New York City, which includes Ground Zero, which were not true at all.

(bolding mine) False. Justin, even the EPA's critics – of which I am one – don't make that claim.

"White House meddled with 9-11 reports"

Early U.S. EPA statements made after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City reassuring the public that the air outside the “Ground Zero” area was “safe” to breathe were not substantiated by the data available at the time, according to a report by EPA’s Inspector General (IG), the agency’s watchdog arm. Instead, the White House Council on Environmental Quality convinced EPA “to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones” in its press releases, the report finds. In effect, EPA’s overriding message was that there was no significant threat to human health, even though the agency lacked monitoring data for several contaminants, particularly PCBs, particulate matter, dioxin, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Because of the lack of supporting data—including health-based benchmarks for short-term and acute exposures to many of the contaminants of concern, research data on synergistic effects, and reliable information on the extent of the public’s exposure to these pollutants—the IG concludes that “the answer to whether the outdoor air around the World Trade Center was safe to breathe may not be settled for years to come.”

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2003/sep/science/kc_911air.html

Many of the rescue workers listened to the EPA's statements...they are now sick. Do you think that the EPA was honest about the air quality in their statements?

Let's be sure we have this straight. My statement that you took issue with, strongly enough to start two threads about it, was, "No one said the air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe."

That was in response to a comment in a Loose Change review that the rescue workers were told the air was safe to breathe.

Are you aware of any official body stating that the air at Ground Zero was safe for the rescue workers to breathe, in contradiction to the agencies that said it wasn't? I have read a lot about this issue, and I've never seen that claim made, except by 9/11 conspiracists.

Impossible! haha!

They don't hand these out to any old chimp on a rock, you know.

(High school shirt, college photo)

May I ask what kind of beer it was?

Beck's Dark, which was considered a quality beer then, or at least the best you could get at Foggs.

 

[tomwaits]

Good point about the capacity for amazement. Nothing that 9/11 loons, deniers and idiots say surprises me any more.

I think this might have to do with the fact that normal people realized soon after they watched LC that it was a bunch of BS. After a couple of years, the only people left to believe were the true crazies who believe EVERYTHING. That's why the truthers now are just paranoid nutjobs who put their fingers in their ears and go "lalalalalala". Those people have been out there forever...now they are the only ones left.

 

[Gravy]

William Rodriguez: the descent continues

I received an email from William Rodriguez today. Reprinted here because he sent it to thousands of people.

>Samandu, please send to all the Listserves, Jewish, Moslem and Christian email groups as well. Also send a copy to Mark Roberts.
>thanks
>WR.

Dear Families and Survivors: ...snip...

On another subject, I received the info of our old disrespectful attacker at it again. As you may remember Mark Roberts is the sad man who wrote the "hit piece" against me and sent offending emails to our sick friend John Shroedder. He now hits a new low level and "implies" that I should be taken care of by people from Canarsie as seen on this thread from the James Randi Foundation website forums:
​

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3227861&postcount=217

All of you received already my comments to his previous comments and writtings. Just wanted to make you all aware of it ....snip... same instructions applies as before on dealing with this people. This is the same guy who implied that I was an anti-semite.


...snip....

I replied:

William, your problems with the truth continue. You need to retract these statements, which are lies:

1) "sent offending emails to our sick friend John Shroedder."

That is a lie. I have sent no emails to John Schroeder, and have never said an offensive word about him. Since you asked that this lie be spread to many people, it is your obligation to correct your error.

2) "implies" that I should be taken care of by people from Canarsie.

That is a lie. I implied no such thing. I was jokingly responding to a joke about RedIbis's bizarre insistence that I come up with a different source for how far you were from the north tower when it fell, when even you haven't corrected me about that. So, William, exactly where were you trapped when the north tower fell? You can't possibly accuse me of lying if you refuse to answer.

Here's the exchange:

Me: "Okay, I see that I am unable to convince people not to engage with RedIbis over this nonsense. Hyperviolet, I have stated many times – including to Rodriguez – that if William Rodriguez wants to give me any other figure than "about 100 feet," I will gladly put that in my paper.

Hyperviolet, is this satisfactory to you, or is there something else you'd like me to do about this?"

UK_Dave: "Personally, I'd like to see Rodriguez re-enact the events of that day...with a tape measure in hand. Can you arrange that?"

Me: "I know some people in Canarsie who can arrange that, but they don't come cheap."

How you get from "re-enact the events of that day...with a tape measure in hand" to "I should be taken care of," I have no idea. Correct your accusation.

3) "This is the same guy who implied that I was an anti-semite."

William, that as a lie, as I told you the last time you said this, when I reprinted EXACTLY what I wrote in my paper about you. Why do you continue making the same false claims?

I don't want to suggest that William Rodriguez is anti-Semitic or a Holocaust denier. Comments like Bollyn's above, claiming that Rodriguez has inside information about Israeli Mossad involvement in 9/11, should be taken with a whole box of salt. I do submit that Rodriguez's desire to make extreme, unsubstantiated claims about the U.S. government will continue to put him in the company of other irrational extremists. Any positive message he has to offer will be tainted if he associates with such miserable, hate-filled characters. The invitation to speak in Iran, which recently held a government-sponsored conference to question the Holocaust, featuring a "roll call of the world's most infamous Holocaust deniers," should be a harsh wakeup call for Rodriguez. Link

So that's three lies in one email, and still you haven't addressed a single point in my paper. I expect you to email "Samandu" with your retractions, and have them forwarded to anyone who received your initial email. Anything less is dishonest and dishonorable. You do care about honor, don't you, William?

I truly feel sorry for you. You seem to be sinking deeper and deeper into denial and dishonesty. You had the strength to take charge when the chips were down on 9/11. You need to get the help to gather the strength to take control of your life again, and become an honest, honorable person.

Call me an optimist, but I believe you can do it. Do you?

Sincerely,
Mark

I had a brief look at the speakers' list for the GPU conference on Sunday, November 25. Around 50 speakers and musical acts. It appears to be a broad spectrum of religious leaders, activists, entertainers, and politicians.

One name caught my eye because I had just read about him recently: the Saudi Sheikh Salman bin Fahd al-Odeh. He spoke a few minutes before Rodriguez. He was extremely controversial in 2004 and 2005 because of a fatwa he co-authored and was the first to publish, calling for jihad against the Americans in Iraq. Says the SFGate:

In November 2004, 26 Saudi clerics, 21 of whom are government officials, issued a fatwa calling on Muslims to join the jihad in Iraq. The leading figure behind the fatwa, Sheikh Salman bin Fahd Al-Odah, has heavily financed Saudi insurgents in Iraq and other locations.

It's worth reading the MEMRI Institute's account of the many negative reactions to the fatwa by Iraqi leaders and other Muslim clerics.

Edited by Darat: 

The first email is being left in place as the opening sentence indicates that permission is being given to republish it.

ETA: William Rodriguez has stated that he has not given permission for his email to be published therefore I have removed the majority of it leaving a small amount that I believe is acceptable under the idea of "fair use".