I had the misfortune today of watching a video made by Mark Roberts, a man who attempts to "debunk" all the claims of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The 52 minute video is certainly not entertaining, but I thought I would watch it nevertheless and write some of my observations.
Mark Roberts is obviously not being paid by any nefarious part of the US government to promote the 9/11 lie. He is merely a useful idiot who is regurgitating government propaganda.
Mark Roberts asked Les Jamison what law was violated by the removal and recycling of large amounts of steel from the towers. Is Mark Roberts saying that it is not illegal to destroy crime scene evidence?
Bill Manning wrote in his article "$elling out the Investigation"
"Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall."
Rep. Joseph Crowley(D) called the destruction of evidence, "borderline criminal."
If an individual tampers with evidence it is usually considered to be a felony.
Regardless, of the legalities of the issue, someone who is not concerned about the destruction of evidence in a crime that killed almost 3,000 people is a contemptible human being.
Later in the show Mark Roberts asked a lady what were the reasons that NIST gives for the collapse of the towers. She stated, "they claim that the twin towers pancaked."
It is true that NIST does not specifically state that the towers pancaked. However, it is easy to see how one might have come to that conclusion. NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told Popular Mechanics,
"When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, but it is the floor PANCAKING that leads to that perception."
Mark Roberts states on his debunking page that 9/11Myths is, "The best all-around site on the internet for examination of 9/11 conspiracist claims."
Mike Williams, the author of the site, states regarding the collapse of the towers, "A PANCAKE-STYLE collapse isn’t quite as rare as some sites want to portray."
Why isn't Mark Roberts interested in correcting the Popular Mechanics piece, or 911Myths?
Because he isn't interested in the truth. He is interested in ideological conformity to the government's position. As long as someone believes the government's story, then they can believe whatever they wish about the collapse of the towers. If someone strays from this position then he is interested in attacking them. Mark Roberts is good at repeating government propaganda, "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength."
In summation, Mark Roberts is a useful idiot.