If Belief in 9/11 Conspiracy were a US political party, it would rank #1

Recently we've heard it stated quite vocally on this board and in the media that "9/11 truth" is just some fringe losers; the most extreme version of this attitude is that they should be thrown in gov't-run gulags. Charming.

Well, let's look at the numbers, shall we?

Here is a Scripps Howard/Univ. of Ohio poll from August 2006 entitled "Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy."

(Edit: link is acting up; here is the url to paste directly into your browser window: www.scrippsnews.com... www.scrippsnews.com/911 poll )

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.

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.

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."

To gain some perspective on that 36% figure, here are the percentages of party affiliation in the US, from Harris polls. 34% are registered Democrats and 31% GOP.

So, if belief in 9/11 conspiracy were a US political party, it would rank first.

Also, 16% think the gov't had an active hand in the events. That's enough for a very active 3rd party that Ross Perot, Ron Paul or Ralph Nader would envy.

Fringe groups? Loner nut-cases? Here's your reality check. Let's put this groundless nonsense to rest once and for all.

[Edits to fix links]


[edit on 6-3-2008 by gottago]

Ron Paul has his momentum, but he lose it.

And he was on the close edge with openly start cooperating with Truth Movement. But he give up to MSM.

He lose his momentum, but maybe his family, and his live was threatened in the time of NH Primaries. Or then he jump to other side... In there, where the first vote rigging was obvious, he should turn his way towards Truth Movement.

And there was a place called Sutton, witch was a place to start the real revolution, but it didnt never happen. And USA lose its last hope.

Ron Paul lose his momentum because he denied the Truth, because whole revolution was fueled by people from 9/11 Truth Movement.

Your link to the poll is not working for me, please try to fix it. Can comment till I see the actual poll.

reply to post by pavil


Thanks, I've added a hotlink as well. the poll url is:

www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

Thanks for the link, still doesn't give the raw data and the wording of all the questions, but it will do. I wish all the polls would publish a link of the actual results and questions asked. Wording can make all the difference in a poll.

Not much really except the explosives did in the WTC crowd is higher than I would have thought.

The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed........

Twelve percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a military cruise missile in 2001 rather than by an airliner captured by terrorists.

I would have thought those numbers to be in the single digits.

The 36% number would be combining the Govt. did it and the Govt. did nothing to stop it groups. They don't break it down making it seem larger than it is IMO. Again, those numbers would depend on the phrasing of the questions.

Originally posted by pavil
Thanks for the link, still doesn't give the raw data and the wording of all the questions, but it will do. I wish all the polls would publish a link of the actual results and questions asked. Wording can make all the difference in a poll.

You can probably infer from the article that the question included the reason for allowing the attacks to happen (i.e., Afghanistan and Iraq), as the lead sentence is:

"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..."

I doubt though this had much influence on the results as it's what happened in any event, whether you believe the Hegelian dialect was in action for 9/11 or not.

well thank someone that they are not a political party.
those 36% are a disgrace to this nation,

reply to post by logictruth


Actually you're wrong, those that close their eyes and cover their ears and refuse to listen to anything that puts their illusion of 'freedom and democracy' in question are a disgrace to this nation and YOUR constitution backs me up. Unless of course it's just a piece of paper to you?

Blindly excepting what your government tells you is NOT being patriotic, it's being blindly nationalistic. Remember Nazi Germany? You would do good to understand your history...

Ask yourself this question...How did the three buildings fall with no resistance?
Can you honestly, keeping in mind the laws of physics, understand why that is a problem and come to an educated conclusion that satisfies you? If you can please explain it to me, as I'm a little confused how that could happen and until that question is answered then it puts the whole 'official story' in question. And according to your constitution you are SUPPOSED to question your government. So who is really a disgrace to the country? I bet Madison would have a different answer than Bush, and you...

Who's side you on? 36% awake and growing...Take your country back.

reply to post by ANOK

wow. to question a war, policy, law, justice, thats understandable. but when you question the 9/11 events and truely believe it was an inside job, with out any evidence, thats disgraceful.

and what so unbelievable about the towers falling because of the impact. you have jet fuel burning a really bad impact and alot of weight on top of that. why wouldnt the towers fall? think man.

Originally posted by logictruth
think man.

I don't want to turn this thread into a 9-11 debate but before you try to tell me how a building falls please try to answer the question I asked. When you can answer it, and understand it, you will realise the question pertains well to your analogy and misunderstanding of physics. Yes man think!...

reply to post by logictruth


[Mod Edit - Please Review Courtesy Is Mandatory]

Seriously, you should read Thomas Paine writings and learn about Operation Northwoods, the Reichtag Fire, the USS Liberty and the Bush Jr's grandfather attempt to overthrow the US government to make a Nazi America in the 40s.

[edit on 8/3/2008 by Sauron]

Originally posted by logictruth
wow. to question a war, policy, law, justice, thats understandable. but when you question the 9/11 events and truely believe it was an inside job, with out any evidence, thats disgraceful.

Translation: Questioning all the elements of US society that are being trashed because of 9/11 is okay, just don't question why they are now happening.

and what so unbelievable about the towers falling because of the impact. you have jet fuel burning a really bad impact and alot of weight on top of that. why wouldnt the towers fall? think man.

The gov't set NIST to answer that question, and they couldn't answer it. In fact, they just ignored trying to figure out how they actually fell. And of course we're still waiting for the NIST report on WTC7. Good question!

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by logictruth

 

Blindly excepting what your government tells you is NOT being patriotic, it's being blindly nationalistic. Remember Nazi Germany? You would do good to understand your history...

You continue to have to use that strawman since you know that the evidence of what happened on 9/11 does not come from the government. Why you still think people will believe your strawman is quite remarkable

Ask yourself this question...How did the three buildings fall with no resistance?

Your False Claim # 1. They didn't fall without resistance. If there were no resistance, the first two towers would have fallen in 9.6 seconds.

Can you honestly, keeping in mind the laws of physics, understand why that is a problem and come to an educated conclusion that satisfies you?

That's easy. You are wrong and the Laws of Physics still are true.

Tear down your wall, ANOK.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by logictruth

 

Hey troll, get back to your cave.

Seriously, you should read Thomas Paine writings and learn about Operation Northwoods, the Reichtag Fire, the USS Liberty and the Bush Jr's grandfather attempt to overthrow the US government to make a Nazi America in the 40s.

What you need to learn is that the burden of proof falls on you to support your claims and assertions.

Originally posted by gottago

The gov't set NIST to answer that question, and they couldn't answer it. In fact, they just ignored trying to figure out how they actually fell. And of course we're still waiting for the NIST report on WTC7. Good question!

FALSE. NIST demonstrated conclusively that WTC 1 and WTC 2 fell as a result of a combination of the impact damage and unfought fires.

Repeating such falsehoods only further damages your movement.

If you want to refute NIST, you are welcome to but that burden of prove falls on you. And that you and your political truth movement have never been able to come close to refuting NIST nor bring any evidence of your own to back up your claims.

Tear down your wall, gottago.

reply to post by jthomas


...by tricking the data and using the most extreme variables, because it wouldn't collapse any other way. The families of 9/11 victims have a lawsuit about exactly this, IIRC? Don't they?

And it is definitely not false my statement, jthomas. You know as well as I do that NIST did not attempt an aalysis of the actual collapses--only the onset.

Post proof otherwise here if I'm wrong, and stop pushing outrageous falsehoods.

Get out of your bunker, jthomas

reply to post by gottago

This is great news. Thank goodness! The American people are not the knuckleheads that people around the world were beginning to think they were. Go America! Throw those Bushwackers in jail and get back to the road that made you great and good.

Originally posted by logictruth
and what so unbelievable about the towers falling because of the impact. you have jet fuel burning a really bad impact and alot of weight on top of that. why wouldnt the towers fall? think man.

You've already been schooled in countless threads on ATS with your aimless pro-military pro-government postings.

I'm not going to bother.

But yeah, ... burning jet fuel and massive steel beams. Yeah... that's why the tower collapsed.

Frickin batty Denial will cause people to accept anything. Either that or you're just another government agent.

Originally posted by gottago
reply to post by jthomas

 

...by tricking the data and using the most extreme variables, because it wouldn't collapse any other way. The families of 9/11 victims have a lawsuit about exactly this, IIRC? Don't they?

You just demonstrated you didn't actually READ the NIST report.

And it is definitely not false my statement, jthomas. You know as well as I do that NIST did not attempt an aalysis of the actual collapses--only the onset.

Post proof otherwise here if I'm wrong, and stop pushing outrageous falsehoods.

Get out of your bunker, jthomas

The laughs on you. Why do you continue to post debunked myths, gottago? There's no existing computer capability in the world that actually has the power to model the collapse once it started.

Neither is it necessary to model the collapse once the causes are understood and found to be sufficient to initiate global collapse.

Thank God we rely don't rely on 9/11 Truthers whose only capability on Earth is to believe debunked myths. No go and actually read the NIST report.

Amazing.

Originally posted by jthomas
You continue to have to use that strawman since you know that the evidence of what happened on 9/11 does not come from the government.

This is rubbish and you know it. And you keep waving this about as though you've made a point.

For most of us, the overwhelming majority of the disputed evidence does come from the government, whether, for example, in the form of the lies and misleading statements given to the 9/11 Commission by the administration and the Pentagon, or else in the form of the NIST report.


[edit on 10-3-2008 by coughymachine]