15% believe in controlled demolition of WTC towers; 26% believe inside job: poll


Published on Mar 17 - 2010
Two-thirds of respondents stand by the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission, which blamed al-Qaeda for the attacks.

The recent suggestion by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the 9/11 attacks were a “fabrication” is rejected by a large proportion of Americans, a new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,007 American adults, 62 per cent of respondents disagree with Ahmadinejad’s claims that the “Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.” Only 26 per cent of respondents agree with this notion, and 12 per cent are undecided.

Republicans (80%) are more likely to reject the statement than Independents (66%) or Democrats (55%).

The 9/11 Commission

In all, two-thirds of Americans (67%) agree with the commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001, which concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Only 12 per cent of respondents reject the commission’s findings, and one-in-five Americans (21%) are undecided.

Four-in-five Republicans (80%) stand by the commission’s findings, while two-thirds of Democrats (66%) and Independents (65) concur.

Conspiracy Theories

The survey asked respondents whether four things that have been said and written about the events of 9/11 are actually credible. Just 15 per cent of respondents think the collapse of the World Trade Center was the result of a controlled demolition, and the same proportion believe that United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, was shot down.

In addition, 13 per cent of respondents think no airplane actually crashed at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, and six per cent claim that no airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center at all.


A majority of Americans are on the same side when it comes to 9/11, stating that the event was not a fabrication, that the conclusions of the 9/11 commission are correct, and that the conspiracy theories are not credible.

While one-in-four Americans believe 9/11 was a fabrication designed to facilitate the campaign against terrorism, the proportion of respondents who openly reject the conclusions of the 9/11 commission—and who find the conspiracy theories as credible—is far lower.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Public Affairs
+604 647 3570

It should be noted that

the way the question is framed, people are being asked to equate 9/11 Truth with the President of Iran, a person demonized by the Western press, and then asked whether they believe in both.

Precisely. Which was the


Which was the entire purpose of running the story. The Washington Times reported the story in a respectful way, and the NYT and Washington Post immediately counter with stories (out of the blue) about the beliefs of foreign leaders - one demonized as you say - and the other written up as representing a clique of Japanese Anti-American prejudices. Of course Americans will rally to the flag when the issue is presented or the question posed in those contexts.

Now both of these people have had their beliefs for years, and yet all of a sudden the NYT and WaPost decide to make stories out of them? Seems pretty clear it was in response to the story breaking through the MSM boycott by the Washington Times.

The real question in my mind is what caused the Washington Times to run its story the in the manner it did when it did, because, once again, the story has been there for years.

Gotta love push polling!

Gee, I wonder what would happen if a poll was framed something like this:

Over two thousand professionals, including hundreds of former military and intelligence officers, have serious questions about the events of 9/11/01 and are demanding a new and truly independent investigation, do you also support a new investigation into the events of 9/11/01?

Over 1100 architects and engineers dispute the government's report regarding the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 and are demanding a new and truly independent investigation into the destruction of these three WTC buildings, do you also support a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7?

Over 50% of the 9/11 victim's family members feel that their questions about the events of 9/11/01 were not answered by the 9/11 Commission, which was run by Bush administration insider Philip Zelikow. Do you support the family members call for a new and truly independent investigation into the events of 9/11/01?

Credible polling has shown that less than 20% of Americans still buy the government lie on 9/11. Over 50% know that the government is covering something up and at least 33% know that elements within the government were complicit in some way.

That's 100 million Americans, brothers and sisters.

What we should take away from this very unscientific poll and absurd article is the knowledge that the perps and their media lackeys are getting more desperate every week and will continue to throw as much bs at 9/11 truth as they think necessary to harden the <20% of Americans who will never take an objective look at the events of 9/11/01 and make discussing the issue as odious and unpleasant as possible.

First they tried ignoring us and the 9/11 Truth movement grew.

Then they tried ridiculing us and the 9/11 Truth movement continued to grow.

Then they tried fighting us on the facts and the 9/11 Truth movement grew even more.

They have now retreated back to ridiculing and marginalizing 9/11 Truth in anyway they can, in a desperate act of denial. This "poll" is just one more clear example of that.

We ARE winning this battle for the hearts and minds of ordinary Americans, brothers and sisters, let's keep being civil and educating everyone we can about the events of 9/11/01 and we will get to the tipping point sooner than many think. That's when the fun, and our real work, begins.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

1 in 4?

One in four believe that 9/11 was a fabrication?

One in four.

Think about that.

That is an extraordinarily high number. lol

And over 10 percent...

... were undecided.

Factor in the "undecided"

and it's closer to 1 in 3.

After all, "undecided" means they aren't sure about the official story, which is supposed to be Gospel Truth in America. That's a pretty strong indictment.

Better than 1/3

26 + 12 = 38%

More like 2 out of 5!

And this

is true despite the question having been framed within the context of Ahmadinejad’s statement!


Can't credit the Presstitutes,

or our so-called elected representatives,

or the controlled alternative media,

or the "feel good" anti-war establishment.

It was and is US.

....and of course, the perpe-traitor's errors and greed.

Let's get out there!

I have 300+ DVDs to give away on Saturday in Austin:
Texas Architects & Engineers call for a Real Investigation of the Destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11

What is to be made of this?

"While one-in-four Americans believe 9/11 was a fabrication designed to facilitate the campaign against terrorism, the proportion of respondents who openly reject the conclusions of the 9/11 commission—and who find the conspiracy theories as credible—is far lower."

Sounds illogical.


Reality Control. The power to hold two completely contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accept both of them.

Newspeak Dictionary

I think it's supposed to be saying

that the percentage who agree with controlled demolition, no planes, or the shooting down of U93 (all equated under the label "conspiracy theory") is far less than the 1 in 4 who agree with the "fabrication" line.

But, no, it doesn't make sense, or at least it's terribly written.

I'm not sure

whether to be happy or angry about this.

I just got up, so I'm a little grumpy.

Damn there are a lot of brainwashed flag wavers remaining.

I would like to see the demographics

It would be interesting to see the demographics of the respondents. Are the people who believe 9/11 is a fabrication more or less educated than the general public? Remember that 50% of the population are below average.


"Remember that 50% of the population are below average."

LOL - yes - and the average american has one testicle.

Don't think it has to do with education

The resistance to 9/11 truth is emotional, not intellectual.

I know lots of "uneducated" (in terms of formal schooling) people who can see 9/11 truth, in addition to educated ones.

I know lots of "educated" people who just don't get it; my parents are in this category.

My dad is from Pakistan, and as he is someone who escaped a country where it is indeed the norm for husbands to beat their wives and get away with it because the police force is itself so sexist, my dad really felt that upon arriving in America he'd arrived at a place where the Rule of Law reigns supreme.

It's too terrifying for him to contemplate that such evil people could reside within the American government. Pakistan? Oh, yes, of course, but never America.

Ever since he became westernized (went to college in England before landing a job in the US) he also still lives within this paradigm of profound sympathy for Jewish people, wherein Israel's government could never do any wrong, because "after being persecuted the world over for 3000 years, The Jews deserve to defend themselves in their own homeland."

What a mess!

Education means influence

I agree that intelligence and intellectual honesty are not bestowed by education. On one hand, the relationship between understanding that 9/11 was an inside job and education level is purely academic and inconsequential. On the other hand, formally educated people are, on average far more influential than those without credentials.

As for resistance to rejecting the OCT due to (misplaced) faith in the essential goodness of the people controlling the US. The best I can offer is the scenario of a foreign intelligence agency clandestinely infiltrating the power structure and invisibly taking over. We do have example of Soviet agents placed in sensitive positions and operating undetected for years. Now, replace the notion of "foreign state" with crime syndicate. We have examples of cities being run by organized crime syndicates. Chicago's Mayors Daley have long held the reputation for being connected to organized crime. If a city or state can be run by the Mob, why not a country?

Of course none of this can happen without a complicit MSM.

What is needed in order to persuade people is "a story". Not a fiction, but something they can follow and identify with. Something more than lots of raw facts.

The problem of course, one of

The problem of course, one of them is... that Al Qaeda is accepted as a dangerous and capable terrorist organization. They were barely known to the American public before 9/11 but all that's changed. Americans overwhelmingly fear Al Qaeda as a dangerous and capable terrorist organization. And this means that American CAN and for the most part DO believe that AQ was involved in the 9/11 attacks as well as 7/7 in London, 3/11 in Madrid and the shoe and underwear bombers as well as probably Mumbai attacks.

To expect Americans to give up the notion that AQ attacked on 9/11 means that probably all the other attacks might not have been AQ actions. While this may or may not be true the 800 pound gorilla is that the USA and the MSM have successfully raised the profile of AQ to a real force to be reckoned with and we are announcing constantly strikes against "known AQ leaders or operatives". Whether this is a legitimate target, Moslems are being targeted and killed because they are identified with AQ.

In the mind of the "public" removing AQ as the attackers on 9/11 now makes no sense at all, since the public is convinced that AQ continues to stage terrorists actions.

The alternatives are:

AQ is a creation of CIA types (rogue or otherwise). The attacks are real, but AQ is being helped so that we have an enemy which is what the MIC wants.

AQ is a creation of CIA types (rogue or otherwise). The attacks were staged to have AQ appear as guilty - False Flag. The people identified were duped by intel to thinking they could pull off some sort of terrorism... that they had friends on the inside... and they were patsies to took the rap and AQ got blamed for being this dangerous organization to be feared. Regardless, MIC benefits.

9/11 was a total creation of CIA types (rogue or otherwise) and there were no Moslems involved. This was a complete lie (along with others). MIC and others benefited. The subsequent attacks were all False Flags staged to created the illusion of AQ as an enemy to be feared.

MSM the problem, yes

And phony alternative outlets like the Daily Kos, Huffpo, and Democracy Now.

Notice how people like Michael Shermer and other "skeptics" will cite the other acts of terrorism, like the USS Cole, as proof that AQ must have been behind 9/11 also.

When I see the 74% who still believe the official line, and I think of the policy of how "Daily Kos accepts the reality that 9/11 was perpetrated by al Qaeda," I get so angry... as much as I believe in non violence, it's times like this that I totally feel solidarity with someone like Barrett when he fantasizes about complicit MSM journalists "being marched to the scaffold" alongside the PNACers who actually pulled off the crime.

New Zogby Poll

Thankfully, there will soon be a new Zogby opinion poll of New Yorkers sponsored by NYC CAN-- with better worded questions.
As our hand is strengthened by running Ed Asner radio & TV spots, Jesse Ventura's latest hits the bookshelves, and the New York City Council is inundated about Building 7, a better polling result might well be on the way. Chin up.

If everyone in this country could simply watch 'September 11 Revisited' it would be a game-changer. I revisited this recently myself after dismissing it as 'out of date', but was pleased to see that Fetzer is gone. Bottom line is that it takes the viewer through the eyewitness and news reports of the day and really helps to 'un-brainwash' them. And then introduces the viewer to Steven Jones, DRG, Richard Gage, and a still-solid Jeff King speech. Dated by OUR standards, but excellent for first-timers. It is so engaging that if someone starts to watch, they will finish it. And be changed.


"September 11 Revisited"

The site you link to has a link for downloading the film at archive.org. But the comments (dating from 2006) there say the iso version is incomplete and asks for the uploader to fix it. Do you know if the 2.2 gb iso there is the complete and new version of the film? Or should I try to find it somewhere else?


There are 250 million adults in the U. S. 15% of 250 million is $37.5 million. If each gave a dollar, our movement would easily be able to fund its own scientific poll.

Here's my first question:

There has never been an official investigation into the possibility that explosives were involved in the destruction of the three WTC towers on 9/11. Yet many scientists, architects and engineers point to evidence which they say proves the use of explosives. Do you believe that a new independent investigation should examine such evidence?


Do you agree with Mussolini that the trains should run on time?
Do you agree with Hitler that citizens should be proud of their country?
Do you agree with Jesse Ventura that citizens should question their government?
Do you agree with the majority of 9/11 commissioners that they were set up to fail?

That should make a few Heads explode.

If we had a truly free press in this country, those numbers would easily be reversed, and Cheney would be crying in prison.
What a tragic nation we live in.


That's why this story pisses me off rather than heartens me.

I think of the tens of millions the national news anchors earn to keep us propagandized and in the dark, and my outrage knows no bounds.

Excuse me, but does the word "bogus" ring a familiar tone?

I'm sorry, but this story smells worse then the blocked sewer on Ave. B and 9th Street. Come on. There is not one shred of reliable or credible information here, or am I mistaken?

We are told in the opening paragraph, which is supposed to contain all of the critical information only that, "Two-thirds of respondents stand by the conclusions of the Warren---oops, 9/11 Commission..."

Really? What respondents? How were they selected? Who ran this poll? What were the methods? Which conclusions of the 9/11 commission? ALL OF THEM??? Wow. They found two-thirds of the American people agree with all of the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission, and two-thirds of Americans can't read past a third grade level.


If this story is legit I will eat my hat, and anyone else's who cares to give me one. And you people are sucking it up like a Hoover Deluxe. I can't believe it.

"In all, two-thirds of Americans (67%) agree with the commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001, which concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden." This hasn't been true in years!!! If it ever was.

I am disappointed in you people. This should NEVER have been published. Or it should have been published after being thoroughly investigated and then shown as misinformation, which it clearly is.

Wake me when there's a real story.

There are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics.

Surveys can be useful and samples can give indications about populations, but biases are always to be considered. Who paid for the survey? How is the questioned framed? Did the person have to give their name? Was it anonymous? How was the sample taken? Random? Weighted? From what database? Was the survey over the phone? Was it a mall intercept? Was it online? What is the sample size? What are the demographics of the sample? What is the calculated margin of error? Even the survey taker's appearance, when the survey is taken in person, can skew results.

Surveys can be used as a tool to gather information, but they are often used as a tool of promotion of a product or idea. Arbitron ratings are used as a buying tool for advertising agencies, but they are also used to promote radio and television stations who all claim that they are "number one" or that they have the audience with the "highest discretionary income" or some other attribute that they deduce from their survey.

Many times I see surveys touted on the news about how American's think we are in a recovery or a recession. This is irrelevant when the facts can be determined. What people think is trumped by what is fact.

Ha, even when they try to sque the results

in favour of the Zelikow myth, by the framing of the question - it STILL comes up at just over ONE QUARTER of the American people rejecting the 9/11 Commission's version of events. That, my friends, is very significant.

Notice also

How they attempted to conflate the no-planer bullshit with controlled demolition "conspiracy theories". Yeah those no planer "truthers" have been so helpful eh? Grrrr.

Angus Reid


About Angus Reid Global Monitor
About Us

Welcome to the Angus Reid Global Monitor, the definitive online source for examining worldwide public opinion and democratic processes. Our research is independent and non-partisan, and is guided by four principles: insight, fairness, accuracy and immediacy.

We have been quoted by the Washington Post, the Council on Foreign Relations, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), the UK Social Science Information Gateway and the Christian Science Monitor.

The Angus Reid Global Monitor is edited and maintained by Mario Canseco, Vice President Public Affairs, and Gabriela Perdomo, Research Associate. Please feel free to contact us for media commentary or research needs.

What We Do

The chief aims of the Angus Reid Global Monitor are:

* providing daily information and analysis on worldwide opinion of political, social, and economic affairs—and tracking those perceptions over time; and
* assessing democratic processes (elections, leadership races and more) around the world.

To do this, we focus on three areas every day:

* Politics In-Depth
Reviews shifts in worldwide public opinion, examines effects of policy decisions on the electorate, and analyzes the upcoming challenges for political leaders.
* Election Tracker
A unique online publication that monitors democratic conditions. It reviews background information, assesses the latest campaign news and events, describes trends in voting intention, and reports on the outcome of every national-level election around the world.
* Polls & Research Archive
The world’s largest online public opinion database includes surveys from every continent on topics that range from approval ratings for heads of government, voting intention studies, and reviews of public sentiment on a wide array of global issues. The entries go beyond simply recording the numbers and percentages. Each poll is located, translated if necessary, and annotated with a brief analytic and contextual review.

The Angus Reid Global Monitor is a vital source of timely political intelligence for journalists, students, policy makers, and citizens. By merging academic expertise with the highest journalistic standards, we seek to advance research, improve information exchange, and enhance understanding of the changing dynamic of public opinion and democracy.

History of the Global Monitor

The Angus Reid Global Monitor began at the University of British Columbia in 2003, as an ongoing academic project from Dr. Angus Reid. Dr. Reid is a Canadian sociologist with four decades of experience in the field of public opinion research.

In 2004, the project was transferred to Dr. Reid’s company Angus Reid Consultants, and is now a component of Angus Reid Public Opinion, the public affairs practice of Vision Critical. The Angus Reid Global Monitor has remained an independent, non-partisan institute providing high-quality analysis and research for public dissemination and benefit.


Mario Canseco, Vice President, Public Affairs
+604 647 3570

Angus Reid

Never read so much that said so little.

It's a Conspiracy! By Mario Canseco, 28 Dec 2007

It's a Conspiracy!

JFK, Princess Di, that radiated Russian. What do people really believe now?

By Mario Canseco, 28 Dec 2007, TheTyee.ca


Not a scientific poll when attributed to disliked foreign leader

The numbers were skewed because Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made the comment. If it has been made by Jesse Ventura or Rosie O'Donnel on THE VIEW, most of the audience would have voted Yes with their applause. It happened just that way.

Look at the scientific polls that already exist.:

And "fabricated"

what do they mean with it, that 9/11 didn't happen at all?

Wasn't there a 2006 poll that showed

16% believed controlled demolition and 30% believed inside job? If this is the case and these polls are fairly accurate, then we are holding our ground. (Or gaining with the Ahmadinejad factor)

It is better for the perpetrators (or the folks who do not want the cover-up exposed) if the topic of "questions regarding 9/11" vanishes.

If the folks who are questioning the official 9/11 story were of no threat, the MSM would ignore them.

The higher-ups in the MSM have tough decisions regarding 9/11 now, and will have tougher ones in the future. (Fight back or ignore? fight back or ignore?)

Zogby Polls are surprisingly affordible

Look into it, whoever has the means - perhaps Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth should run a poll...!

Our own polls

Do we need Zogby? Wouldn't you consider them part of the mainstream media? What does it take to do a scientific poll? My gut tells me that it's not all that challenging to organize.

We've still got A LOT of work to do...

If you can, hit up the truckers. They really get around! Use the CB radio- they come in very handy for avoiding speeding tickets and in case of roadside emergencies too! Hang out at truck stops, if you have the time. Dress like a working stiff in Carharts, etc. It's pretty easy to make conversation with how bad things are, then break the news about how bad things really are, gently.

Non Partisan huh! then how do

Non Partisan huh! then how do they explain the use of terminology in the report? a few examples.

"JUST! 15 per cent of respondents think the collapse of the World Trade Centre was the result of a controlled demolition"

So 45 million Americans believe that the collapse of the World Trade Centre was the result of a controlled demolition..That''s the figure of an entire population of a large European country like Spain.

"ONLY! 26 per cent of respondents agree with this notion, and 12 per cent are undecided."

75 million+ 36 million undecided Americans believe "Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.".So that is 111 million people more than the entire population of Russia .

"ONLY! 12 per cent of respondents reject the commission's findings with 21% undecided"

That is 36 million Americans who reject the commission findings with another 60 million who are wavering and undecided. That is more people than live in Germany.

When you use figures of people that are equivalent to the entire populations of large countries the use of the words "JUST" and "ONLY" are an attempt to discredit those figures. This survey is not non partisan at all it is distinctly partisan in the way the questions were asked and the way the results were stated. Even with this slant the results are still astonishing.