This poll is almost meaningless since everyone knows that Bush received the Aug. 6 Memo: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the US." So any reasonable person would think that he "Knew or MIGHT HAVE Known". Strangely this is one of the obstacles to 9/11 Truth: The Warnings. For many people find it hard to square all the warnings with an inside job. That was the question I had back in 2006 when I first started really looking into this. Were the warnings staged? I'm still not totally clear on what to make of the domestic and foreign warnings. However I see much evidence for things that were made to happen--- and could not have been merely "allowed." This was an inside job.
The FBI was stood down in its investigations prior to that day. The alleged hijackers were living it up and drawing attention to themselves so as to be noticed. This was by design. So I suspect that much of the activity that produced warnings was deliberately stoked. A number of the hijackers apparently drank alcohol heavily in bars, slept with prostitutes, watched strip shows in the US in the months and days leading up to 9/11. Mohammed Atta gambled and ate pork. None of this squares with devout Muslims ready to die and meet Allah for the "rewards." It seems to me they were intel patsies of some kind. Here:
Martyrdom is your ticket to heaven. It doesn't matter what you do, but as soon as you shed your first drop of blood in a martyrdom operation, you are going to heaven.
All is forgiven. Remember that this "ticket to heaven" promise is the tool for recruiting martyrs.
Islamic scholars will disagree on this amongst each other. Fact is, this is what recruits for suicide attacks are unfortunately led to believe: that their operation is their ticket to paradise.
(I'll have you know that Iranians, for example, do almost everything we do, but they do it in secret. The supposed collective piety is merely a charade. The thing is to make sure you don't openly do anything that violates Islamic rules. Do you know Iran has a lot of heroin junkies? That's something particularly hard to hide..and a byproduct of the Afghan drug trade)
So long as we're dealing with true matyrs. I don't know what the 9/11 hijackers were. I don't know what they believed they were doing. I don't know if they really hijacked and flew these planes. Since I'm certain the towers were rigged for demolition, which implies a false flag operation, I seriously doubt that the perpetrators would rely upon novice pilots to successfully hit these exact targets-- when this would have been a pivotal part of the whole operation. ( Just my view.) Regardless of whether or not these guys were on the planes and in the cockpits, I doubt they were piloting.
The real martyrs who act on behalf of Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad are indeed recruited by this lure of "ticket of paradise." And they are truly fanatical to their cause and aren't flagrant hypocrites to the tenets of their own religion!
I agree with you, and I 'm not certain either. I believe in the end, the hijackers were just pawns. Their own compartmentalized cell structure may have been used against them. Who knows who they actually took orders from, and who in the chain of command was a double agent or triple agent. (Case in point: ISI influence, Ali Mohamed)
I do believe suicide bombers can be hypocrites. It's my personal theory though, I'm not sourcing anyone, but this is my explanation for Hopsicker's discoveries. You know you're going to die and go to heaven as a martyr anyway, so why not enjoy some forbidden fruits before you go.
If Atta was truly the regular drug using strip bar visiting type, I'd like to know how his behavior in Hamburg really was. If he did the same thing in Hamburg as he did in Florida, then I'll become really suspicious. Otherwise, I can picture it as the nothing-to-lose behavior of a man who knows he's going to die. This is more or less a working theory, and I can think of plenty of flaws in it. Feedback appreciated.
Someone who is prepared to commit suicide because they think it'll take them to heaven is typically quite strict in all other aspects of religion. The behaviour of the hijackers doesn't mesh with that of devout Muslims, let alone Muslims of Salafist persuasion. IMO, they were most likely double agents and/or had doubles.
Some Iranians are hyprocrites because they are forced into being so by the state. Most of the economy of Iran is public. They pretend to be Muslims since they wish to advance themselves through government institutions, and are thus 'forced' to be hypocrites. It is the same as people who belong to the communist party in China in order to advance in position. Other Iranians simply do not do things openly because there are laws against open rejection of Iran's Islamic law, such as drinking alcohol.
Someone on a suicide mission is doing so by choice. There is no need for them to be hypocritical about their beliefs.
Thanks. Yeah, I'm aware of Salafism, one of the most horrible religious ideologies out there, in my personal opinion. We should never put our head in the sand when it comes to this problem. I especially object to the treatment of women by Salafists. The killer of Theo van Gogh was a salafist, who didn't commit suicide in the end, who started out as somebody who you could call a sinner by Islamic standards, but radicalized and then supposedly lived in piety all the way up to his attack.
However, committing suicide is if I'm not mistaken already a violation of Islam, believing or being promised that you go to paradise does not automatically mean that this is a widely accepted view in Islamic culture. I don't think that is the case. So it's all very complex. I submit to you that sometimes there is a lot more going on behind the facade of piety, as we have learned from the abuses in the Catholic church.
This poll dates back to '07. I like to quote the poll where just 16% of those polled believe the entire 9/11 myth. Are there any new polls out there? I'd really love to see a poll at the end of this year after all the positive things that have happened so far. The publishing of the active thermite paper, Richard Gage's appearances and the showing of 9/11 truth documentaries on KBDI, NYC CAN's work, etc... The 16% number may not change much, but the number of people that believed the gov't is "probably lying" should be diminishing as they become convinced a cover up is at hand. A possible good indicator on the effects we are having.
peace all
dtg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, and the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense..."
In August 2004, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded "half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act."
In May 2006, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded 45% of voting Americans think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success."
In August 2006, Scripps Howard/Ohio University conducted a poll that concluded, "more than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East."
In October 2006, a poll was conducted by CBSNews/New York Times that said, "only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks."
In September 2007, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded "51% of Americans want Congress to probe Bush/Cheney regarding the 9/11 Attacks."
In November 2007, Scripps Howard/Ohio University conducted another poll that concluded, "nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings."
In December 2007, a poll was conducted in Hudson County that showed residents, "are more likely than not to believe that U.S. government officials chose to ignore warnings about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks."
In September 2008, a poll was conducted that showed, "there is no consensus outside the United States that Islamist militants from al Qaeda were responsible."
Then there's the first CNN poll, the second CNN poll, the MSNBC poll, and the Showbiz Tonight poll, all of which were very much in our favor.
The only time polls weren't in our favor is when an "anti-truther/debunker" would set them up deliberately to fail. By asking ridiculous questions... I don't have any of those collected.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Matthews is trying to frame this as party partisanship. That is his way of discounting both issues.
I don't care where Obama was born. The more important issue is that he is continuing the same fascist policies that Bush did. He is their man. I don't mean he is the Democrats man. I mean he is the power elite's man.
Chris Matthews is a propaganda mouthpiece who perpetuates the myths that the PTB tell him to.
Since he is quoting a 2006 poll so will I.
Here are the 2006 Scripps Howard poll results:
""More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.
Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."
The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be.""
36% of the American Public. That number is much larger that 61 percent of Democrats.
I think there needs to be another poll right now. I am confident that the number has grown considerably since 2006, and the anger level is probably through the roof.
We are winning the information war. Keep pushing the truth.
S.H. is the poll that really scares the wits out of these perps and had nothing to do with partisanship. It was a survey of the American public. Yes, we need another poll along these same lines now in 2009. Of ALL Americans, so propagandists like Matthews can't spin it as partisan.
Very well stated, Rob. You make the best point about this thread. I hope there is another poll soon. Since we are moving heavily into the area of meeting and lobbying Congress about forensics and other things, it always helps to be able to put a poll in front of them to get their attention.
Rob, I didn't have to watch the clip to figure out this was a partisan slam against the political opposition AND against 9/11 truth, by inferring that those Democrats who think Bush knew in advance, why they must be loonies. It was a win-win from Matthew's perspective -- he scores points from the increasingly right-wing nature of politics in Amerika, and he gets to bash 9/11 truth all in one blow. Excellent display of what's so wrong about the media and political commentary, with all its lies and obfuscations, not to mention hypnotic suggestion. Heck, the media was doing that long before Obama discovered its power. But I digress. Have I mentioned how much I hate these people?
Times are tough when you have to resort to a poll from 2007 to fill time in your show!
Given the vast amount of exposure that 9/11 Truth has gotten nationally and internationally in the recent past -- mainstream Spanish TV and radio all broadcast interviews with Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin & Niels Harrit, the number one TV station in Russia broadcast ZERO in prime time and broke all-time viewing audience records, French TV aired a piece which included excerpts of ZERO, Richard Gage was on a Fox TV morning show in California, Colorado PBS chose not only to broadcast 9/11 Truth films but to rebroadcast them due to popular demand -- I wonder if Chris Matthews would be willing to redo his bit if the poll was from last week, included all Americans and provided a shockingly high percentage.
Well, if public opinion polls kept pace with something like computer technology, this "news" item would amount to announcing "a new laptop computer with a whopping 10 Go of memory on the hard disk!!"
"I just watched Chris Matthews talk about how a majority of Republicans believe Obama wasn't born here, and how two years ago, a majority of Democrats believed Bush knew about 9/11. I think they are trying to associate the two because the birthers have nothing, whereas the truthers have something. It gives them an opportunity to say "the truthers are as crazy as the birthers."
Anyone else see the "you're crazy" smirk on Matthews as he mentioned 9/11? I think that's why there is a huge effort to tie us with the birthers. They even made sure to use a variation of our name (truthers/birthers) to describe them.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
are mentioned together in almost every mainstream report. I saw one story that even mentioned Phil Berg, because he has now worked on behalf of both causes.
Of course, this "guilt by association" tactic has been used since 9/11 against Truthers, usually citing moon landing and living Elvis theories alongside 9/11 Truth.
I'm not holding my breath on the birther issue. If the mainstream media wants to associate the two - "birther" and "truther" - then my intuition tells me to distance myself, at least until all the facts come in.
...has it's talking heads throw out little snotty jabs at the 911 Truth Movement whenever it looks like 911 Truth might break out. But they dare not venture into the scientific weeds with one of the movement's main voices. Not after such a well-done scientific forensic report as Drs. Niel Harrit and Steven Jones' "Active Thermitic Materials In The WTC Dust". They won't cover Architect Richard Gage's peripatetic presentation nor the growing numbers of Architects and Engineers who agree with him.
All the MSM ever does is claim that such-and-such has been "debunked" over and over again. But the MSM has never produced any solid debunking presentations; the BBC and Popular Mechanics produced a little propaganda that the MSM quote, but the MSM will never, ever, EVER venture into the details behind the growing awareness that the buildings in NY simply MUST have been purposely demolished. The MSM can only resort to casual smearing.
It's the same reason why the 911 Truth Movement has so much trouble trying to get a really weedy debate on with officialdom. Everyone knows what the outcome would be. The best thing that TV media can do is ignore and suppress the 911 story and just keeping pumping out little bullets of disinformation -- like what Chris Matthews just did. The talking heads seem to pump out the little disinformation bullets whenever the 911 Truth story gets too interesting or credible.
...video in internet history. The film's success could not POSSIBLY be because legitimate, unanswered questions are compelling and the implications fascinating! Right!
People are hungry for information about 911 and its many seriously suspicious anomalies, ie. thermite residue, molten metal, apparent violations of physics (conservaation of energy and momentum), etc., etc. etc..
The MSM is quick to dig down a little bit and discover the source of the recent fake Obama Kenyan birth certificate. But the MSM refuses to expend the same amount of energy in looking at 911 strangeness, suspicions, leading figures, etc. -- even though in doing so, it would be supplying the public with much-desired information while getting rich off the wave of public interest in the subject. What a fucking joke TV news is - as if turning down the opportunity to profit immensely by doing some fascinating reporting is beneath them! You kind of watch it these days just to get a clue about how disinformation is subtly used in America. It's especially evident when you watch foreign TV programs and News shows and compare the the way its treated overseas compared to here in the US.
I doubt you could even get the MSM to address why they should NOT address a subject like 911 Truth even though internet film phenomenon, Loose Change, has been seen over 100 million times all over the world. Or that foreign members of Diets and Parliaments have not been shy about speaking of 911 Truth, or that the the film, "ZERO: An Investigation Into 911" was seen by some 35 million Russians on the largest national TV broadcast!
these polls are conducted? Does every representative get a ballot of some type or a phone call? If it's just a sample of representatives how big of a sample? It seems that a statistical model could be unreliable as a result of the relatively small population which exists. ie the total number of representatives.
"This is a telephone survey of adults nationwide conducted by Zogby International from August 23 to August 27, 2007. The target sample is 1,000 interviews with approximately 71 questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd's of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges. As many as six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR's approved methodologies and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies. Weighting by region, party, age, race, religion, and gender is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 3.1 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups."
online polls are not 'scientific', but may still be accurate; sometimes they limit them to 1 vote per IP address. Polls conducted by telephone and random proportional sample have a statistical error rate, generally about 3% in either direction; when the questions are phrased well, they give a fairly accurate idea of what the public believes. Interestingly, the NYT/CBS poll done in 2004 was conducted in 3 periods over a month, and showed swings in opinion of up to 10%, but all the answers were still in the same general proportion/range: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/politics/20040429_poll/20040429_pol...
77. 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?
Telling Truth Hiding something Mostly lying DK/NA
3/30-4/1/04 CBS 24 58 14 4
4/8/04 CBS 21 66 10 4
4/23-27/04 24 56 16 4
There have been at least 8 published national polls of Americans, and they all show large percentages, even super-majorities, are skeptical of the OCT. People are much less sure about what happened; more people simply support further disclosure, full investigation, etc.
Why think that Bush knew when there is now compelling evidence that he did know.
On July 23, 2001, CIA officer and former deputy chief of the Bin Laden unit at the CIA, Tom Wilshire, the very same CIA officer that had blocked FBI Agent Doug Miller’s CIR in Mihdhar on January 5, 2001, sends email back to his CTC CIA mangers that said Mihdhar will be found at the location of the next big al Qaeda operation.
On August 22, FBI IOS agent Margaret Gillespie finds that both Mihdhar and Hazmi are inside of the US and takes this information to both Tom Wilshire and FBI Agent Dina Corsi.
While both Wilshire and Corsi know that the CIA has been hiding a photograph of Walid Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur actually planning the Cole bombing with Mihdhar and Hazmi from the FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, neither one gives this information to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt, head of the Cole bombing investigation at the New York office, to insure that he and his team do not have enough information to start a search for Mihdhar. Corsi used nefarious methods to shut down Bongardt's investigation of Mihdhar, knowing this would result in the deaths of thousands of Americans.
When Bongardt accidentally found out that both Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US and called Corsi, Corsi told Bongardt that he could not be part of any investigation and search for Mihdhar because of NSA caveats on the NSA information, in spite of the fact she had actually gotten a written release from NSA on these caveats the day before. When she was asked by Bongardt to get a legal ruling from the NSLU attorneys at the FBI, to see if he and his team could investigate and search for Mihdhar and Hazmi, Corsi fabricates the ruling from Sherry Sabol, and tells Bongardt the attorney had ruled that he could not be part of any investigation of Mihdhar when Sabol had ruled just the opposite, and had told Corsi that Bongardt and his team could be part of any investigation and search for Mihdhar.
On August 23 Margaret Gillespie issues a worldwide alert for both Mihdhar and Hazmi, an alert that goes right to Cofer Black and George Tenet. On August 23, Tenet also finds out that Moussaoui has been arrested at the request of the Minneapolis FBI. Tenet then immediately flies down to Crawford Texas to have an urgent meeting with the President on August 24, 2001, a meeting Tenet denied even taking place when asked by the 9/11 Commissioners on April 14, 2004 in the 9/11 Commission public hearings.
It is impossible to believe that Tenet did not give Bush all of this information at this meeting in Crawford on August 24, 2001, the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi were found to have entered the US and the CIA knew they were inside of the US in order to prepare for a horrific al Qaeda attacks the FBI HQ and CIA had known about since April 2001, and that the FBI had just arrested an al Qaeda terrorist trying to get flight training on a B747, with no prior flight experience.
"KNEW OR MIGHT HAVE KNOWN" - NOT JUST "KNEW"
That clip was only a minute or two long. Couldn't you have at least quoted Matthews, correctly?
http://www.DemocracyABC.org
http://www.therealnews.com
http://www.pdamerica.org
Almost Meaningless
This poll is almost meaningless since everyone knows that Bush received the Aug. 6 Memo: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the US." So any reasonable person would think that he "Knew or MIGHT HAVE Known". Strangely this is one of the obstacles to 9/11 Truth: The Warnings. For many people find it hard to square all the warnings with an inside job. That was the question I had back in 2006 when I first started really looking into this. Were the warnings staged? I'm still not totally clear on what to make of the domestic and foreign warnings. However I see much evidence for things that were made to happen--- and could not have been merely "allowed." This was an inside job.
The FBI was stood down in its investigations prior to that day. The alleged hijackers were living it up and drawing attention to themselves so as to be noticed. This was by design. So I suspect that much of the activity that produced warnings was deliberately stoked. A number of the hijackers apparently drank alcohol heavily in bars, slept with prostitutes, watched strip shows in the US in the months and days leading up to 9/11. Mohammed Atta gambled and ate pork. None of this squares with devout Muslims ready to die and meet Allah for the "rewards." It seems to me they were intel patsies of some kind. Here:
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a091101beforepinkpony#a09...
Martyrdom
Martyrdom is your ticket to heaven. It doesn't matter what you do, but as soon as you shed your first drop of blood in a martyrdom operation, you are going to heaven.
All is forgiven. Remember that this "ticket to heaven" promise is the tool for recruiting martyrs.
Islamic scholars will disagree on this amongst each other. Fact is, this is what recruits for suicide attacks are unfortunately led to believe: that their operation is their ticket to paradise.
(I'll have you know that Iranians, for example, do almost everything we do, but they do it in secret. The supposed collective piety is merely a charade. The thing is to make sure you don't openly do anything that violates Islamic rules. Do you know Iran has a lot of heroin junkies? That's something particularly hard to hide..and a byproduct of the Afghan drug trade)
True...
So long as we're dealing with true matyrs. I don't know what the 9/11 hijackers were. I don't know what they believed they were doing. I don't know if they really hijacked and flew these planes. Since I'm certain the towers were rigged for demolition, which implies a false flag operation, I seriously doubt that the perpetrators would rely upon novice pilots to successfully hit these exact targets-- when this would have been a pivotal part of the whole operation. ( Just my view.) Regardless of whether or not these guys were on the planes and in the cockpits, I doubt they were piloting.
The real martyrs who act on behalf of Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad are indeed recruited by this lure of "ticket of paradise." And they are truly fanatical to their cause and aren't flagrant hypocrites to the tenets of their own religion!
I'm uncertain too about this
I agree with you, and I 'm not certain either. I believe in the end, the hijackers were just pawns. Their own compartmentalized cell structure may have been used against them. Who knows who they actually took orders from, and who in the chain of command was a double agent or triple agent. (Case in point: ISI influence, Ali Mohamed)
I do believe suicide bombers can be hypocrites. It's my personal theory though, I'm not sourcing anyone, but this is my explanation for Hopsicker's discoveries. You know you're going to die and go to heaven as a martyr anyway, so why not enjoy some forbidden fruits before you go.
If Atta was truly the regular drug using strip bar visiting type, I'd like to know how his behavior in Hamburg really was. If he did the same thing in Hamburg as he did in Florida, then I'll become really suspicious. Otherwise, I can picture it as the nothing-to-lose behavior of a man who knows he's going to die. This is more or less a working theory, and I can think of plenty of flaws in it. Feedback appreciated.
Someone who is prepared to
Someone who is prepared to commit suicide because they think it'll take them to heaven is typically quite strict in all other aspects of religion. The behaviour of the hijackers doesn't mesh with that of devout Muslims, let alone Muslims of Salafist persuasion. IMO, they were most likely double agents and/or had doubles.
Some Iranians are hyprocrites because they are forced into being so by the state. Most of the economy of Iran is public. They pretend to be Muslims since they wish to advance themselves through government institutions, and are thus 'forced' to be hypocrites. It is the same as people who belong to the communist party in China in order to advance in position. Other Iranians simply do not do things openly because there are laws against open rejection of Iran's Islamic law, such as drinking alcohol.
Someone on a suicide mission is doing so by choice. There is no need for them to be hypocritical about their beliefs.
Good points
Thanks. Yeah, I'm aware of Salafism, one of the most horrible religious ideologies out there, in my personal opinion. We should never put our head in the sand when it comes to this problem. I especially object to the treatment of women by Salafists. The killer of Theo van Gogh was a salafist, who didn't commit suicide in the end, who started out as somebody who you could call a sinner by Islamic standards, but radicalized and then supposedly lived in piety all the way up to his attack.
However, committing suicide is if I'm not mistaken already a violation of Islam, believing or being promised that you go to paradise does not automatically mean that this is a widely accepted view in Islamic culture. I don't think that is the case. So it's all very complex. I submit to you that sometimes there is a lot more going on behind the facade of piety, as we have learned from the abuses in the Catholic church.
Poll is here
22% Believe Bush Knew About 9/11 Attacks in Advance
2007 Poll
This poll dates back to '07. I like to quote the poll where just 16% of those polled believe the entire 9/11 myth. Are there any new polls out there? I'd really love to see a poll at the end of this year after all the positive things that have happened so far. The publishing of the active thermite paper, Richard Gage's appearances and the showing of 9/11 truth documentaries on KBDI, NYC CAN's work, etc... The 16% number may not change much, but the number of people that believed the gov't is "probably lying" should be diminishing as they become convinced a cover up is at hand. A possible good indicator on the effects we are having.
peace all
dtg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, and the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense..."
- President Eisenhower; April 16, 1953
Polls
I've kinda started collecting polls, I don't have any new ones, but if you find one, well, post a blog entry about it or something =)
Anybody who has their own poll collection, please let me know. Maybe I should search Gold's forum.
Polls...
In August 2004, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded "half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act."
In May 2006, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded 45% of voting Americans think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success."
In August 2006, Scripps Howard/Ohio University conducted a poll that concluded, "more than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East."
In October 2006, a poll was conducted by CBSNews/New York Times that said, "only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks."
In September 2007, 911Truth.org commissioned Zogby International for a poll that concluded "51% of Americans want Congress to probe Bush/Cheney regarding the 9/11 Attacks."
In November 2007, Scripps Howard/Ohio University conducted another poll that concluded, "nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings."
In December 2007, a poll was conducted in Hudson County that showed residents, "are more likely than not to believe that U.S. government officials chose to ignore warnings about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks."
In September 2008, a poll was conducted that showed, "there is no consensus outside the United States that Islamist militants from al Qaeda were responsible."
Then there's the first CNN poll, the second CNN poll, the MSNBC poll, and the Showbiz Tonight poll, all of which were very much in our favor.
The only time polls weren't in our favor is when an "anti-truther/debunker" would set them up deliberately to fail. By asking ridiculous questions... I don't have any of those collected.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Damn Jon.
That is awesome!!! Nice work.
Thanks.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Wow
Thanks a million, Jon. I'm blown away.
No problem...
I didn't save this stuff to keep it to myself. :)
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Nice Propaganda Spin.
Matthews is trying to frame this as party partisanship. That is his way of discounting both issues.
I don't care where Obama was born. The more important issue is that he is continuing the same fascist policies that Bush did. He is their man. I don't mean he is the Democrats man. I mean he is the power elite's man.
Chris Matthews is a propaganda mouthpiece who perpetuates the myths that the PTB tell him to.
Since he is quoting a 2006 poll so will I.
Here are the 2006 Scripps Howard poll results:
""More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.
Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."
The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be.""
36% of the American Public. That number is much larger that 61 percent of Democrats.
I think there needs to be another poll right now. I am confident that the number has grown considerably since 2006, and the anger level is probably through the roof.
We are winning the information war. Keep pushing the truth.
Scripps Howard
S.H. is the poll that really scares the wits out of these perps and had nothing to do with partisanship. It was a survey of the American public. Yes, we need another poll along these same lines now in 2009. Of ALL Americans, so propagandists like Matthews can't spin it as partisan.
Very well stated, Rob. You make the best point about this thread. I hope there is another poll soon. Since we are moving heavily into the area of meeting and lobbying Congress about forensics and other things, it always helps to be able to put a poll in front of them to get their attention.
Agreed
Rob, I didn't have to watch the clip to figure out this was a partisan slam against the political opposition AND against 9/11 truth, by inferring that those Democrats who think Bush knew in advance, why they must be loonies. It was a win-win from Matthew's perspective -- he scores points from the increasingly right-wing nature of politics in Amerika, and he gets to bash 9/11 truth all in one blow. Excellent display of what's so wrong about the media and political commentary, with all its lies and obfuscations, not to mention hypnotic suggestion. Heck, the media was doing that long before Obama discovered its power. But I digress. Have I mentioned how much I hate these people?
Anyway, thanks Rob -- well put.
Thanks RL and CK.
I erroneously said that the survey he was quoting was from 2006 when it was actually from 2007.
The point I made is still valid.
Chris Matthews is a propagandist working for the PTB.
911 Truth is not about distrust. 911 Truth is about evidence.
Slow News Day
Times are tough when you have to resort to a poll from 2007 to fill time in your show!
Given the vast amount of exposure that 9/11 Truth has gotten nationally and internationally in the recent past -- mainstream Spanish TV and radio all broadcast interviews with Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin & Niels Harrit, the number one TV station in Russia broadcast ZERO in prime time and broke all-time viewing audience records, French TV aired a piece which included excerpts of ZERO, Richard Gage was on a Fox TV morning show in California, Colorado PBS chose not only to broadcast 9/11 Truth films but to rebroadcast them due to popular demand -- I wonder if Chris Matthews would be willing to redo his bit if the poll was from last week, included all Americans and provided a shockingly high percentage.
Well, if public opinion polls kept pace with something like computer technology, this "news" item would amount to announcing "a new laptop computer with a whopping 10 Go of memory on the hard disk!!"
Here's what I wrote on facebook...
"I just watched Chris Matthews talk about how a majority of Republicans believe Obama wasn't born here, and how two years ago, a majority of Democrats believed Bush knew about 9/11. I think they are trying to associate the two because the birthers have nothing, whereas the truthers have something. It gives them an opportunity to say "the truthers are as crazy as the birthers."
Anyone else see the "you're crazy" smirk on Matthews as he mentioned 9/11? I think that's why there is a huge effort to tie us with the birthers. They even made sure to use a variation of our name (truthers/birthers) to describe them.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
Yes, it is a way to discount 911 Truth.
This story was carefully framed to discount 911 Truth, disguised as a story discounting the birthers.
Birthers and Truthers
are mentioned together in almost every mainstream report. I saw one story that even mentioned Phil Berg, because he has now worked on behalf of both causes.
Of course, this "guilt by association" tactic has been used since 9/11 against Truthers, usually citing moon landing and living Elvis theories alongside 9/11 Truth.
Yup.
Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?
This is why
I'm not holding my breath on the birther issue. If the mainstream media wants to associate the two - "birther" and "truther" - then my intuition tells me to distance myself, at least until all the facts come in.
Well
Then it starts to become funny again. I mean: what are we?
Are we moon landing hoaxing, Holocaust denying, extreme right wing birther communist socialist terrorist Elvis fans or what? I'm confused! :-P
Here we have a situation
Here we have a situation in which the majority of Republicans BELIEVE that the current President was not born in the United States.
Or - to put it another way, the majority of Republicans believe that the President is illegitimate and therefore not legally entitled to conduct wars.
Does this even slow down the war machine?
Why not?
My point is "the government" just doesn't care what the citrizenry believes about anything - true or false.
I've noticed that the mainstream media...
...has it's talking heads throw out little snotty jabs at the 911 Truth Movement whenever it looks like 911 Truth might break out. But they dare not venture into the scientific weeds with one of the movement's main voices. Not after such a well-done scientific forensic report as Drs. Niel Harrit and Steven Jones' "Active Thermitic Materials In The WTC Dust". They won't cover Architect Richard Gage's peripatetic presentation nor the growing numbers of Architects and Engineers who agree with him.
All the MSM ever does is claim that such-and-such has been "debunked" over and over again. But the MSM has never produced any solid debunking presentations; the BBC and Popular Mechanics produced a little propaganda that the MSM quote, but the MSM will never, ever, EVER venture into the details behind the growing awareness that the buildings in NY simply MUST have been purposely demolished. The MSM can only resort to casual smearing.
It's the same reason why the 911 Truth Movement has so much trouble trying to get a really weedy debate on with officialdom. Everyone knows what the outcome would be. The best thing that TV media can do is ignore and suppress the 911 story and just keeping pumping out little bullets of disinformation -- like what Chris Matthews just did. The talking heads seem to pump out the little disinformation bullets whenever the 911 Truth story gets too interesting or credible.
So True.
Excellent point Carl. Make no mistake. They are working very hard to suppress 911 Truth. They are tasked with holding the beach ball under the water.
Meanwhile, Loose Change Has Become The Most Downloaded
...video in internet history. The film's success could not POSSIBLY be because legitimate, unanswered questions are compelling and the implications fascinating! Right!
People are hungry for information about 911 and its many seriously suspicious anomalies, ie. thermite residue, molten metal, apparent violations of physics (conservaation of energy and momentum), etc., etc. etc..
The MSM is quick to dig down a little bit and discover the source of the recent fake Obama Kenyan birth certificate. But the MSM refuses to expend the same amount of energy in looking at 911 strangeness, suspicions, leading figures, etc. -- even though in doing so, it would be supplying the public with much-desired information while getting rich off the wave of public interest in the subject. What a fucking joke TV news is - as if turning down the opportunity to profit immensely by doing some fascinating reporting is beneath them! You kind of watch it these days just to get a clue about how disinformation is subtly used in America. It's especially evident when you watch foreign TV programs and News shows and compare the the way its treated overseas compared to here in the US.
I doubt you could even get the MSM to address why they should NOT address a subject like 911 Truth even though internet film phenomenon, Loose Change, has been seen over 100 million times all over the world. Or that foreign members of Diets and Parliaments have not been shy about speaking of 911 Truth, or that the the film, "ZERO: An Investigation Into 911" was seen by some 35 million Russians on the largest national TV broadcast!
.
.
Does anyone know how
these polls are conducted? Does every representative get a ballot of some type or a phone call? If it's just a sample of representatives how big of a sample? It seems that a statistical model could be unreliable as a result of the relatively small population which exists. ie the total number of representatives.
scientific polls
generally follow procedures/rules similar to the Zogby 2007 poll:
http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=1354
Survey Methodology
"This is a telephone survey of adults nationwide conducted by Zogby International from August 23 to August 27, 2007. The target sample is 1,000 interviews with approximately 71 questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd's of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges. As many as six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR's approved methodologies and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies. Weighting by region, party, age, race, religion, and gender is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 3.1 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups."
"For the full poll and demographic breakdown of results, see: http://www.911truth.org/images/ZogbyPoll2007.pdf
online polls are not 'scientific', but may still be accurate; sometimes they limit them to 1 vote per IP address. Polls conducted by telephone and random proportional sample have a statistical error rate, generally about 3% in either direction; when the questions are phrased well, they give a fairly accurate idea of what the public believes. Interestingly, the NYT/CBS poll done in 2004 was conducted in 3 periods over a month, and showed swings in opinion of up to 10%, but all the answers were still in the same general proportion/range:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/politics/20040429_poll/20040429_pol...
77. 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?
Telling Truth Hiding something Mostly lying DK/NA
3/30-4/1/04 CBS 24 58 14 4
4/8/04 CBS 21 66 10 4
4/23-27/04 24 56 16 4
There have been at least 8 published national polls of Americans, and they all show large percentages, even super-majorities, are skeptical of the OCT. People are much less sure about what happened; more people simply support further disclosure, full investigation, etc.
http://911reports.com
http://www.historycommons.org
It seems more and more obvious...
...that they need a truly baseless "conspiracy theory" against which to juxtapose 9/11 truth and they've found it with the Obama "birthers."
Why think that Bush knew
Why think that Bush knew when there is now compelling evidence that he did know.
On July 23, 2001, CIA officer and former deputy chief of the Bin Laden unit at the CIA, Tom Wilshire, the very same CIA officer that had blocked FBI Agent Doug Miller’s CIR in Mihdhar on January 5, 2001, sends email back to his CTC CIA mangers that said Mihdhar will be found at the location of the next big al Qaeda operation.
On August 22, FBI IOS agent Margaret Gillespie finds that both Mihdhar and Hazmi are inside of the US and takes this information to both Tom Wilshire and FBI Agent Dina Corsi.
While both Wilshire and Corsi know that the CIA has been hiding a photograph of Walid Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur actually planning the Cole bombing with Mihdhar and Hazmi from the FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, neither one gives this information to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt, head of the Cole bombing investigation at the New York office, to insure that he and his team do not have enough information to start a search for Mihdhar. Corsi used nefarious methods to shut down Bongardt's investigation of Mihdhar, knowing this would result in the deaths of thousands of Americans.
When Bongardt accidentally found out that both Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US and called Corsi, Corsi told Bongardt that he could not be part of any investigation and search for Mihdhar because of NSA caveats on the NSA information, in spite of the fact she had actually gotten a written release from NSA on these caveats the day before. When she was asked by Bongardt to get a legal ruling from the NSLU attorneys at the FBI, to see if he and his team could investigate and search for Mihdhar and Hazmi, Corsi fabricates the ruling from Sherry Sabol, and tells Bongardt the attorney had ruled that he could not be part of any investigation of Mihdhar when Sabol had ruled just the opposite, and had told Corsi that Bongardt and his team could be part of any investigation and search for Mihdhar.
On August 23 Margaret Gillespie issues a worldwide alert for both Mihdhar and Hazmi, an alert that goes right to Cofer Black and George Tenet. On August 23, Tenet also finds out that Moussaoui has been arrested at the request of the Minneapolis FBI. Tenet then immediately flies down to Crawford Texas to have an urgent meeting with the President on August 24, 2001, a meeting Tenet denied even taking place when asked by the 9/11 Commissioners on April 14, 2004 in the 9/11 Commission public hearings.
It is impossible to believe that Tenet did not give Bush all of this information at this meeting in Crawford on August 24, 2001, the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi were found to have entered the US and the CIA knew they were inside of the US in order to prepare for a horrific al Qaeda attacks the FBI HQ and CIA had known about since April 2001, and that the FBI had just arrested an al Qaeda terrorist trying to get flight training on a B747, with no prior flight experience.
See www.eventson911.com for more details on this.
Matthews
Matthews is an obvious demon.