Retired Battalion Chief Arthur Scheuerman Does HardFire With Mark Roberts

Arthur Scheuerman, retired battalion chief of the New York City Fire Department and author of Fire in the Skyscraper, was at ground zero on September 11, 2001. He is the firefighting professional, with obvious great respect for his profession and his professional colleagues, of whom he lost hundreds on 9/11. He brings a well-informed calmness and dignity to what is often a shrill discussion. Watch this program and decide for yourself whether he knows exactly what he is talking about and is 100% truthful.


This video was supposed to be a debate between Mark Roberts and leading truthers. As usual all truthers either refused or backed out at the last minute.

BBC is doing a follow up documentary to their 911 Conspiracy piece and filmed part of the interview. This would have been a great opportunity for truthers to get their "truth" out to an international audience.

Anyway...there is a great amount of information here:

video.google.com...

90% speculation, 10% ad hom. Typical.

The best part was when someone who never amounted to anything more than a Tour Guide (Mark Roberts) starts to attack a professional architect and member of The American Institute of Architects who has gathered hundreds of other Architects And Engineers.

I can see why "Mark Robets" resigned from the "Duh-bunking" business. There is an old saying, "Its better to keep your mouth shut and thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt".

And they wonder why no one else wants to use their name to help promote that show by appearing on the show.

Ask Ron and Mark why they refuse to debate in any other venue than Hardfire. Could it be because then they wont be able to sell DVD's of their show?

Thanks for posting the video.

Regards,
Rob

typo

[edit on 28-2-2008 by johndoex]


ETA: As for the BBC, why have they not contacted any other Experts?

History Channel Hit Piece Consulted "Experts"?

08/23/07 - The latest hit piece against the 9/11 Truth Movement aired on The History Channel this past Monday. The program went through various events that occurred on September 11, 2001 in a fashion of introducing a "claim" followed by "expert" response. The majority of "expert" response was supplied by Davin Coburn and James Meigs of Popular Mechanics, which is owned by Hearst Publishing (Hearst Publishing is also part owner of The History Channel), which set the standard in Yellow Journalism. Replies from such "experts" did not include any solid rebuttal. It is no surprise that the only "experts" they interviewed were titled as such when in support (read: making excuses) for the government story. The experts who question the government story were instead referred to as "Conspiracy Theorists" and were either given very little airtime to present their research and/or concerns, had details edited out, or were omitted from the program altogether. Pilots For 9/11 Truth, Veterans For 9/11 Truth and Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth, nor eyewitness experts from the Citizen Investigation Team, were never contacted to present information for this program. Was it because the producers of this hit piece were unaware such organizations filled with Experts existed? David Ray Griffin -- who was interviewed for the program -- had this to say when asked if the producers were aware of the above organizations:

Rob,

Yes, I made a big point of the fact that the main thing that had happened recently was the emergence of these professional organizations. But they of course weren't interested in that, because all the "experts" support the official theory. They didn't want people like you and Richard Gage.

David


We're not surprised David, and thank you. Popular Mechanics and The History Channel obviously do not want to challenge the real experts with solid research. When they do challenge a handful of experts such as Steven Jones and yourself, they give very little airtime to present analysis and edit content to suit their agenda. It is clear the producers of this hit piece are well aware of the above organizations and their work, they just do not want to present it to the American public. We're not surprised.

History Channel Hit Piece Consulted "Experts"? (scroll down on page)

[edit on 28-2-2008 by johndoex]

reply to post by johndoex


cheers, rob, and ook fing eh.
mark roberts seeks to pander to the owners of the world, and feels he is invincible because of his omnipresent backing(nwo/cfr/wwf/whatever).
someone should have told him "god is dead".

-captain subtle

Mark Roberts has accumulated a wealth of knowledge and provided a site with with one of the most comprehensive links to the knowledge of what happened on 9/11 and why. He can back up his claims, unlike you 9/11 Truthers.

911 Links - Links for 9/11 Research
wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

Your anger that a person who is a NYC tour guide would take it on himself to educate himself and examine the evidence and claims of your political "movement" readily shows.

So does the fact that you will belief anything your Truthie religious leaders preach to you.

Once again, Mark Roberts spanked the 9/11 Truth Movement and once again 9/11 Truthers are left in the dust.

the only thing mark roberts spanks is himself.

the mighty debunking is NEVER more than speculation and often taking 'expert' speculation as fact, and most of all, IGNORING evidence.
outright denial is popular, too.
however, when evidence that doesn't fit the official story surfaces, it is 'easily' explained away by extreme rationalisations pedaled as fact.

"there was no molten metal."

yes, there was.

"there was a blast furnace in the debris pile".

highly unlikely.

put options, illegal destruction of evidence, freudian slips from the perps, faked confessions, forced confessions, IMPOSSIBLE series of 'coincidence', lies, fear, ANTHRAX from fort derrick, Osama not linked to 911 by the FBI, illegal wars, institutionalized horror, illegal wire-tapping, unexplainable collapse of WTC7.......

in short, WHATEVER, 'mark roberts'. no amount of smoke and mirrors and "debate tactics" or "power of persuasion" techniques will change the truth.

interesting that there is a bunch of people proud to be part of the truth movement opposition. that means, they don't want the truth to come out. they are opposed to truth.

i wonder if mark thinks watergate was faked by conspiracy theorists?

[edit on 29-2-2008 by billybob]

reply to post by johndoex


Rob,

Back here and still haven't answered questions about your falsified documents that are STILL on your web page?

Rob remember you said this to Mark Roberts?:

“Mark Roberts deserves to die a traitors [sic] death for trying to suppress 9/11 families from seeking the Truth.”–"Pilots for Truth" founder, and ex-commercial pilot, Robert Balsamo

...And a few months later:


"Mark Roberts does deserve to die a traitors death....

I will not apologize for it this time. I will be there for his death should America fall into Civil War. That is not a threat. .that is a promise.
If he gets in my way of defending our Constitution.. it will be my pleasure to put a bullet in his head to defend our Constitution from enemies foreign or domestic." –

"Pilots for Truth" founder Robert Balsamo, panicking after Mark Roberts challenged him to a debate.

Rob, you are one of the truthers that refused to debate him.. am i correct?

Are these your words Rob?

Instead of bashing Mark, what don't you listen to the Chief. TEll me what is wrong with what he is saying.


[edit on 1-3-2008 by CaptainObvious]

reply to post by billybob


Billybob,

Please go through Marks site. Please point out some errors that he has made in regards to 911. It's been posted for some time now and not a single person has found anything. If you find an arror pertaining to 911... i will personally e-mail him and ask him to make the appropriate corrections.

reply to post by johndoex



Not just DVD's he also asks for donations to his website.

So, CO, how do you feel about "gravy" now that he has been shown to be a money maker just like the big bad "truthers" you so adamantly attack for making money off of 9/11?

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Originally posted by johndoex




Ask Ron and Mark why they refuse to debate in any other venue than Hardfire. Could it be because then they wont be able to sell DVD's of their show?

Come from the guy that sells 911 hats and aprons!!!! Are you serious Rob??? Please show me ANY evidence that Mark has received any financial compensation for his appearances on HArdfire.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
reply to post by billybob

 

Billybob,

Please go through Marks site. Please point out some errors that he has made in regards to 911. It's been posted for some time now and not a single person has found anything. If you find an arror pertaining to 911... i will personally e-mail him and ask him to make the appropriate corrections.

CO,

Please go through the AE911truth website and point out some errors that they have made in regards to 9/11. It has also been posted for some time now and not a single person has found anything. If you find an error pertaining to 9/11, I will personally e-mail them and ask them to make the appropriate corrections.

reply to post by Griff


Griff ~

Sorry dude, my sound is now gone on my PC....any interesting quotes you can post here for me? Do you have a website where he is seeking compensation? Phone number?

Thanks in advance,

CO

reply to post by Griff


Griff... Page ONE... there is a streaming video with a list of names of Engineers. I know for a FACT two of them are fake. They were asked to be removed on several occasion and still left there.

Cameron Porter PHD is one of them. What don't you ask Mr. Gage why he will not remove that name!

As far as the content of his work.... you cant prove ANYTHING wrong with Mr. Gage's work... because there isn't any! He uses all the recycled crap that others have already done.,I wouldn't expect much elso though from an IHOP builder.

I do beleive he works with Dr. Griffen and supports his work. Dr. Griffen's work was shown to be incorrect by Mr. Ryan Mackey some time ago.

EDIT to add. I also posted videos some time ago in here that showed that Mr. Gage REMOVED audio from a controlled demolition video. He has since removed that.

[edit on 1-3-2008 by CaptainObvious]

reply to post by CaptainObvious



I take it you didn't even check out the thread I posted? The link is in there. No need for sound. It says it all right at the end.

Mark Roberts Will Win Or Else!

Donate to the Mark Roberts "Everyone Is Wrong" Fund Today"

[edit on 3/1/2008 by Griff]

[edit on 3/1/2008 by Griff]

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
I do beleive he works with Dr. Griffen and supports his work. Dr. Griffen's work was shown to be incorrect by Mr. Ryan Mackey some time ago.

I guess you forgot that Ryan Mackey was shown to be erroneous by Valhall?

EDIT to add. I also posted videos some time ago in here that showed that Mr. Gage REMOVED audio from a controlled demolition video. He has since removed that.

And Mark has "enhanced" the sound on his. What's the difference? Other than being on opposites sides of the coin?

reply to post by Griff


Griff... here is some more about Mr. Gage.....

Vesa has been quite an ally, along with many others, keeping me straight along the way. (By the way - the debunkers have also been very helpful in this regard and we should take the opportunity to thank them for pointing out errors here and there).

We will strike the controversial WTC7 squibs (in the upper right corner) from the online PPT and upcoming DVD update. I agree with the analysis - particularly the impossible "stationary explosions". ((Damn - I thought these were the real deal!)). I think what's happening is that the windows break - and right in time with the shockwave traveling up the front face! And the smoke inside is under pressure and "poofs out" - making them appear like explosions. The 2 stationary "poofs" would be due to the already damaged windows/panels which emerged prior to the collapse - although I can't understand why the smoke wouldn't be "billowing" up and out of the damaged opening more than it is.

Thanks again Vesa for your keen mind and friendship. Sorry you took heat on this blog.

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

911blogger.com...-173535


Yet he is still promoting the theory on his website!

reply to post by CaptainObvious


he won't make corrections. you and i both know this whole issue is WAAAY past any kind of 'non-political' solution. he has chosen his side. i am on the opposite one.

i will say one thing, he will have a rationalization for it, and it WILL be JUST a rationalisation, however, it will be pedaled as 'critical thinking', and 'obvious'. i will give my interpretation of data, and i will be ridiculed as being a 'stupid truther', by both you and him.

i've been doing this since 2002. the lines are drawn. mark roberts will never admit wtc7 was a symmetrical freefall that requires all four corners of the outer wall to give out at EXACTLY the same moment. mark roberts will DENY that people were pushed around by blast waves, and burned by fireballs. mark roberts will ridicule anyone who thinks there is hi-tech weaponry that is hidden from the public. mark roberts thinks american politicians 'care' about the "american people", and are all holy protectors of all that is good. mark roberts is as thick as gravy. politicians care about two things; ego and power.

i know his, and your, game. it's doesn't look very impressive from up here in the eagle's nest.

reply to post by Griff


Valhal proved nothing of the sort... and if she did, why didn't she write to him to make corrections. Thats what a reponsible engineer would do. He did a revision in January (minor changes) You asked for mistakes from Mr. Gage... there are several so far.

Please show where Mark enhanced his videos for deceptive purposes...or for anyreason.

reply to post by billybob


I am not trying to "impress" anyone... dont back away. Read his website that JTomas posted.... please tell me in all his writings what is in error. I PROMISE you i will presonall contact him and demand it be corrected.

reply to post by CaptainObvious


All I see is a guy willing to admit when he has erred. Wouldn't that be the what seeking truth is about?

Or would you rather e ranted and raved like a debunker saying "nah, nah, nah, I can't hear you"?

BTW, care to comment on him making money from 9/11?

reply to post by Griff


he admitted to the error 40 days ago Griff..... when will it get removed? When will he remove the fake names off his website. even though he has been TOLD THEY WERE FAKE!!!