9/11 Poll Results: 2002-2006

As previously reported, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11.

We've also discussed results for the same poll as conducted in May 2002. I have also located results for the same poll from May 2004 (see page 28).

So here are the side-by-side results of the poll for 2002, 2004 and 2006 (the 2004 poll actually gives results for 3 different polling periods, in late March and early April 2004; for simplicity, I will just use the early April figures, which were taken right around the time of Richard Clarke's testimony to the 9/11 Commission):

May 2002

Telling 21%
the truth

Hiding something 65%

Mostly lying 8%

Not Sure 6%

May 2004





Oct. 2006





So what do these results tell us?

Clearly, many Americans - 65% - believed right off the bat in spring 2002 that the government was hiding something. By spring 2004, that figure was reduced almost 10 percent by the 9/11 Commission's dog-and-pony show. The Americans who were only peripherally paying attention to the Commission's work believed that all questions about the attacks were being answered, and so the percentage of Americans who believed the government was telling the truth increased slightly, from 21% to 24%.

Interestingly, however, the percentage of people thinking the government was "mostly lying" doubled during that same period. So those paying attention to the facts and the actual substance of the testimony understood that the government was lying and whitewashing the 9/11 attacks.

Then by October 2006, the number of Americans who believe the government is mainly lying almost doubled again, to 28%. This is significant for a number of reasons. First, the 9/11 Commission Report has already been out for a long time. Second, the mainstream media has been defending that fairy tell for many years, calling anyone who questioned it a conspiracy nut case and -- as evidenced by Bill O'Reilly's attack on Jim Fetzer -- attempting to intimidate and harass 9/11 truthers. And third, the boys have spent untold amounts of money on psyops operations, likely including paying a bunch of desk-jockies to troll 9/11 truth discussions (such as those held at this site).

But still, the poll results show that the truth is winning out against the propaganda. Those who realize the government is lying about 9/11 has steadily risen, despite all of the bullying, disinformation, and "questioning 9/11 is unpatriotic" b.s. that has been spewed from every Orweillian talking box in the land.

The polls show that - if we re-double our efforts - we will win.

shut off italics.

damn, that was quick, haha.

VIDEO: Bill Maher rips Charlie Sheen re 911

Bill Maher and panel

It is always curious to me why a Host and a panel of people take up a discussion on a subject they obviously know nothing about. Also there is nothing funny about the truth of this subject.

So what do these results tell us???

It tells us the Bush administration is ready for the




Is Paul Thompson on the record endorsing MIHOP, LIHOP, etc?

Thanks in advance.

Last I heard...

...Thompson is a hardcore LIHOP, possibly a closet MIHOP.


Doesn't put forward any theories, just facts. That is his mantra.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


Paul would read an excerpt from the 9/11 Report...

I'm being Paul.

"The 9/11 Report says that the Secret Service didn't think it was important to run the President out of the school...

However, as you can see by these previous news reports...

April 2000, MSNBC reported, "They would move the President out of any dangerous situation as soon as possible, regardless of whether or not it was a photo-opportunity.

And on 9/10/2001, CNN reported that "The head of the President's security detail established that the protection of the President comes first, even if he's in a room full of school children."

Both stories are false, but you get the idea.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I don't think it's necessary

I don't think it's necessary that Paul proclaim himself "LIHOP" or "MIHOP".

Simply documenting in detail the MSM's timeline is enough; it serves as an invaluable resource for all 911 researchers.

This is one of the things people have a problem with: the idea of division of labor.

There's a place for Paul, a place for Alex, a place for Tarpley, a place for Schoenman, a place for Scott, a place for Chomsky.

I included the last one just to bust your balls.

It's funny though, people give Greg Palast a pass even though he's been more hostile to 911 truth than Chomsky. Ditto all the right-libertarians at anti-war.com. Ditto all the liberals on TV, from Jon Stewart to what's his name on MSNBC.

I'm not saying Chomsky shouldn't be criticized -- I think he should -- but it's weird that people single him out while ignoring the fact that very few intellectuals have had the balls to come out in support of 91 truth.

They should ALL be criticized. At the same time, we shouldn't fall into the trap of "us vs. them".

Just my opinion.

I tell you what...

I have very little doubt that Paul Thompson has a better understanding of 9/11 than anyone. Almost to the point where he can probably tell us what happened.

However, that would be speculative, and that's what he tries to avoid.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Willard Scott?

I don't see how he helps. You don't need a weatherman...

Anyway, things become clearer as to who is for what as time goes on. It will be fun to watch some of the above try to justify their silence when the truth is more widely known. This is the kind of thing you NEVER let people forget.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force



Go scan over www.cooperativeresearch.org The Complete 911 timeline and tell me he doesn't help.


We owe a huge debt to that guy for having the informatin to back up MIHOP, whether he is on record endorsing it or not.

Who said...

Paul doesn't help?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

R.T., I don't disagree, and

R.T., I don't disagree, and that was Peter Dale, BTW.

LOL Willard Scott :)

LOL Willard Scott :)

I just had to comment on the

I just had to comment on the antiwar.com issue. I used to read them daily for about 4 years(3-6 hours a day). I literally read almost all the major headlines and issues relating to, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, South America, and the sections on the war at home. I feel that they did an excellent job of covering those issues. Any one who spent a large amount of time like I did would probably agree. In many cases there would be stories that the MSM would cover but at antiwar.com you could get more details about the story and as a result see how the MSM was spinning the story by changing the focus of the story, omitting information, or outright attacking other viewpoints. Antiwar.com has done an excellent job on those issues. Unfortunately, they bomb completely with regard to an unbiased presentation of 9/11 information. I have personally forwarded 9/11 documentation such as the very simple(high school level physics) speed of the collapses. I never recieved any response and those issues were not brought up by authors on the site.

It is unfortunate but those who decide what goes on the site are suffering cognitive dissonance on the 9/11 issue. I was astounded to find that they won't hardly touch the topic because it IS the biggest causal factor in the major US wars they are covering. Is that a sign of cognitive dissonance or what??? Needless to say I have switched to reading 9/11 related material in the manner I used to read the antiwar material. The antiwar material is great but unless the site owners are willing to take the blue pill and wake up they are wasting their time describing the post-9/11 effects. With out examining causal factors what is the point of looking at the effects? It's half of the story. The site has done a superb job documenting the actions of the PNAC crew and their motives hopefully they'll wake up and start to realize 9/11 WAS part of the PNAC agenda.

Here's to those of us willing to bite the bullet and face the harsh realities the world throws at us! Wake up Antiwar.com!

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)


I have been reading antiwar.com for years and I have always contributed to their fundraisers but I've thought about it and I will not be contributing in the future. The disrespect for those who question the official version of 9/11 undermines Justin Raimondo's intellectual credibility, sorry to say.

Show "It tells us nothing. The" by KDawg (not verified)

Sorry to be so blunt but

Sorry to be so blunt but you're completely and utterly wrong. This is a poll of opinions not effects. There is no Independent Variable being manipulated by the pollsters. Opinions constantly change based on various factors. If you can't see the trends in these polls then I would recommend checking out, http://www.notrain-nogain.org/Train/Res/Num/how.asp or google "how do polls work".

"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)


Has any MSM covered this????
The NYTimes, CBS---if it is their poll, what do they plan to do with the info if not to cover it???

MSM Missing Again

yeah, i sw that too but I still don't understand why the NYT & CBS would have a poll conducted in the first place and then not use the results. Did they think the results would be different? What is the deal? Why would they risk the data getting out if the didn't intend on breaking the poll themselves? We need MSM to cover this MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!!! There are still honest, good people that just don't even know to question 911. Damn the MSM!

I never saw the 2002 or 2004

polls covered by the MSM either. Did anyone see them discussed back in the day?



I agree and am wondering the same thing . . . still, I was excited to see it at the top of Raw's page yesterday but perhaps I am overreacting.

I'm giving it until after the elections . . .


TV !

This needs to be on TV to reach the masses, the still uninformed masses! On MSM news networks. Or in MSM print.
Damn MSM---this is BS!!!! Someone better cover this!!!!

Digg also covered it....

This is good news, but let's

This is good news, but let's remember to keep it in context (a point on which we get nailed all the time). The question was:

When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?

So, "only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/1" about what it knew before Sept. 11.

This is still huge, and is the crack that will open the flood gates. Let's just not overstate what it is not.

i know, the wording is

i know, the wording is terrible as usual. like i said, it always assumes too much and is usually pretty vague if its a major poll. still, with this poll, the recent South Park and usual Fox News 5 minutes of hate spots and the rash of hit pieces in recent months really makes me more hopeful than usual about this thing. and im probably the most cynical person on this board.

that is ok....

it shows a massive majority simply don't trust this administration when it comes to 9/11. They think they are lying and hiding info! That is good for truthers.

If everyone who reads 911Blogger

recommended this diary on Daily Kos - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/16/145520/05 - it would spread pretty fast.


yeah right

anyone who even recommends that diary will have a dozen forum nazis following them around and troll rating them. lol. I'm not kidding... that site is pathetic. They dont even realize that all they have done... all the work they do as a group means nothing compared to one random sex scandal....

Had Foley been a democrat, they would all be sucking their collective thumbs right now.

Graph showing clear trend to "mostly lying"

Here is quick chart made from survey data above (note i used the three separate April 2004 dates instead of just the one like above)

Clearly, the "hiding something": and "telling the truth" (as well as "not sure") people are becoming converted into "mostly lying" people.

Its a trend!

chart on my blog here

great write up by S.Watson.

Time For The Sleeping 9/11 Giant To Awaken
Will 84% Of Americans remain content with a lying, exploitative and criminal government?

Steve Watson / Infowars.net | October 16 2006

This past weekend saw the release of a new opinion poll revealing that 84% of Americans do not believe what the government says about the attacks on 9/11. Whilst this indicates a monumental awakening, it also means that there must now be a co-ordinated effort to secure a true independent inquiry, and the subsequent removal from office and punishment of those who have consistently lied about and exploited 9/11 - including the President.

Unless there is a great push for this and it actually happens, then we must face the possibility that the people of America are wiling to put up with a government that they know is lying to them. The poll indicates that there has been a huge growth of very healthy skepticism in the US. People are turning to alternative news sources and realizing that they are not getting the whole story on 9/11. This skepticism must now be transformed into activism.


Front page on Raw Story

Poll: Just 16% say Bush admin is telling the truth about 9/11


off topic.

quick question. i find Weldon to be disingenuous myself, but he has at least looked into Able Danger. ok,so Curt Weldon looks into Able Danger thus no doubt pissing off the powers that be. Curt Weldon gets investigated by the FBI RIGHT BEFORE the election in which he is in a VERY tight race. does anyone else smell a rat or am i taking too much of a leap on this one?

FBI carries out raids in Weldon investigation
Pa. Republican says raids politically motivated, timing suspect.

Completely agree.

I linked this somewhere in another thread here and noticed the Dem. boards are celebrating this like it's the greatest thing in the world. Don't get me wrong, Weldon is a "Moonie" and may have brought up Able Danger to pin everything on Clinton, but I felt like he did more good with that one thing than harm elsewhere. Heck, he and Lou Dobbs were in essence supporting the military guys who talked about Able Danger. I just get the vibe that the McKinneys and the Weldons have to be exposed by the powers that be to keep everyone in line. I would not be celebrating this investigation. I guarantee you that they could pick on dozens of Congressmen for the same behavior. Raiding a family member seems a little extreme to me.

Show "bs" by structural engineer (not verified)

a bowling ball and balsa

a bowling ball and balsa wood? you mean, only the most weak wood you can possibly find? try again. Jim Fetzer interviewed a structural enigineer who disagrees with you. who to believe, a guy who actually gives all of his credentials and his real name, or a guy on a website who merely claims to be a structural engineer. hmmmmmm. oh, and your "explanation" of WTC7 perfect collapse is pretty hollow. try again on that one.


You write like an idiot. I bet you even sound like an idiot. I'd prefer to receive information from real scientists, thank you. The NIST is full of quacks.


This must be the structural engineer for the Jenga Building :)

Step 1 (of 12)

Why do you think we need your opinion?

We already have several experts that say the WTC buildings were brought down in a controlled demolition Here's a structural engineer:

Here's structural experts who say Building 7 fell as a result of controlled demolition.

Here's a demolition expert who says building 7 was controlled demolition.

Here's another demolition expert who says the wtc towers were brought down via controlled demolition:

Here's a former NYC police officer who was standing next to Building 7 when it was brought down at 5:20 pm on 9/11. He says the government and NIST are lying about the damage they claim the building suffered. He also says he heard bombs going off while the building was being demolished. Many others heard these bombs going off as well. Forward to 55:00 and also to 1:03:33 of this interview with 9/11 rescue worker and former NYC police officer Craig Bartmer:


So Mr. Structural Engineer....

How did gravity throw multi-ton steel beams 400 feet horizonatally to cause "the southwest corner atained massive damage" of Building 7??

conspiracy airheads

So Mr. Structural Engineer....

How did gravity throw multi-ton steel beams 400 feet horizonatally to cause "the southwest corner atained massive damage" of Building 7??

Not only does everyone at NIST agree with me , but so do 99% of the engineers in the world. As far horizontal ejections, gravity can easily cause this. When something is crushed it ejects things horizontally, try jumping down on a toothpaste tube or dropping a gallon of milk of your roof, the contents will flow horizontally. It feels so good clowning you tin fhat wearing fools, i have 20 yrs of engineering experience, you guys are being laughed at by professionals like us.

Hey Poser, why do you lie?

99% of engineers don't agree with you. If you think they do try to prove it.

Certainly, you're no engineer

the examples you provided alone show that. But here's your chance to prove me wrong: Debunk THIS!

Or, alternatively, just get lost.

Dust Study

I have been studying the dust.

Bottomline, there is not enough energy in a gravitational collapse to create the dust we saw that day, 911.

The dust study is a powerful proof that explosives were used, no ifs, no maybes, no buts.

The dust study is the Achilles heel to the "official" apologies.

"The columns bowed inwards

"The columns bowed inwards after massive damage from the impacts and fires, then the part of the building crushed everything below in freefall speed because of its tremendous crushing force...."

[first I start snickering, working up to a hysterical laugh]

Hem. This just gives me the giggles.

That's it. I've got nothing clever to say to this bollocks.

You're no structural enginner...

Or any kind of engineer for that matter.

Surely you would realize that each piece of balsa wood would, in fact, slow the bowling ball down slightly, and the result would be that the bowling ball would NOT be falling at free fall speed.

Regardless of this fact (which should be obvious to anyone with an engineering degree, of course), were the lower levels of the twin towers made out of balsa wood? I think a more instructive example would be a bowling ball falling through a series of bowling balls. Even more instructive, an 8 pound bowling ball falling through a series of bowling balls, each subsequent bowling ball having an increased weight relative to the previous one (after all, the lower structure of the twin towers would have to be thicker and stronger to support more of the building than the upper floors.

Tell us, oh all-knowing structural engineer, do you think the bowling ball in the more instructive examples would be falling at free fall speed? Or do you think perhaps the bowling ball would take the path of least resistance and bounce off to the side?

The old get old And the

The old get old
And the young get stronger
May take a week
And it may take longer
They got the guns
But we got the numbers
Gonna win, yeah
Were takin over
Come on!

October surprise....

it is strange that neo cons are not petrified
of the coming election results...something is in the air....
Bush has not signed Hr6166 yet(even though he signed a whole bunch of mean nothing documents lately)....what is he waiting for?...something
to add once the October surprise blows in our faces?


lets pay attention folks


The election will be rigged. They are confident because they already know the results.

bowling balls

your insistence on the lower portion being consisted of bowling balls is stupid. The top above the impact zone acted like a pile driver or trash compacter. Nist and several of the worlds prominent enginners now take this position. Think of a fat man sitting on a flimsy bench. Add to the fact that he sits on the bench in a wily and uncontrollable matter. BAM there goes the bench, a la their goes the structure. The fact that you guys only have about 5-10 enginners and we have hundreds says a lot , and all of the enginners beleive in the flimsy bench theory NUFF SAID!


I love it! I used to be "you don't even have one single engineer that agrees with you". Now it's "you guys only have about 5-10 engineers". Soon it will be "you may have hundreds of engineers, but ours are better".

Your flimsy bench theory is stupid. The flimsy bench you refer to stood perfectly intact for about 30+years. Yeah... really flimsy.

And smart guy, how exactly is the bowling ball example stupid? The upper portion of the building was made of the same materials and construction as the lower portion of the building. Seems to me any example would have to involve an object falling on top of a very similar object to bear any relevance to the real world.

Not that any of this matters because you are either a complete idiot or a shill


hello there seve. If that analogy is too hard for you to understand imagine this. Think of an elephant doing the moonwalk and then balancing on one foot on a flimsy kitchen table, there is nowhere to go besides than straight down symetrically. Oh yes you guys have less than 5 enginners to support you publicly, we have hunderds that support the elephant on table standing on one foot/doing the moonwalk theory. SO GET EDUCATED

Where was the May 2002 poll published?

Can anyone find it published/ever published? There was a FreeBS/New York Crimes poll March/April 04 that got published: