new poll out about 9/11

POSTED BY: antimason
UPDATED: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 17:03
VIEWED: 3383
PAGE 2 of 3

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:30 AM

It's sad that so many are relying on fairy tales and intentional distortions about what really happened, instead of dealing w/ the hard , cold facts.

But folks prefer religious fairy tales to reality too, so it's not all that surprising. I just thought that in the 21st century, and w/ all the evidencde clearly seen as it was on t.v. , folks would be more logical in such matters.

Not that I believe the poll #'s are by any means accurate as they're being reported, but still. Opinions don't chancge facts. But if more than 20% of the people believe 9/11 wasn't what it really was, an attack by Islamic Jihadist, then we all might as well believe in YoungEarth Creationism, BigFoot, the Lochness Monster and Alien flying saucers.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

SIMONWHO

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:40 AM

The architect who built the twin towers has said he knew they were going to come down the moment the planes hit them. I think he knows more about the physics of buildings than anyone here.

ANTIMASON

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:59 PM

AURAPTER-i think you are letting your emotion get the better of you. why would any muslim hate you, what did you personally ever do to them? you, me, we did nothing, we've never even been to the middle east. what is the motivation to murder someone that youve never met? the average American is no more a threat to the avg Muslim than vice versa; but it is our POLITICAL and ECONOMIC influence in that region that has tainted their perspective of us, and rightly so, not just because we feel relentlessly entitled to protect our self-interests, but also for enforcing the wall street status quo, and the continuation of the global monetary fraud perpetuated by the central banks. its time you realise that the establishment, ie the elite players in politics and finance literally want the world divided into bio-regions, under the dominion of a type of global UN government, and a single universal currency. they know they can control the western nations through debt and consolidate wealth, theyve enslaved much of the developing world through IMF and world bank loans, and now the objective is to bring the M.E. under their direct influence.

SimonWho- actually i had heard the opposite, that it was designed to withstand the impact of two commerical 737(the largest at the time), or to have as many as 20 center collumns removed before structural integrity was compromised. to my understanding, the pancake theory falls on its face when its asked to explain how jet fuel(less than a full tank) burned at several times its capacity, precisely and uniformely to not only directly melt steel(as seen falling off buliding in some videos), but to weaken ALL the structural welds and supports, and then subsequently pulvarise all 80 plus fully intact floors below; meanwhile collapsing at near free fall speeds, into an explosion of vaporised dust. and then building 7! which wasnt even hit by a plane..i mean.. its just rediculous that not one, not two, but three buildings fell in such a way; mathematically the odds are impossible.

ANTIMASON

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:19 PM

here is an interview with senatorial candidate Stan Jones who knows the agenda is a pan American union, and also knows the government was envolved in 9/11. he actually outlines his case pretty thorougly
http://prisonplanet.tv/audio/121006jones.mp3

its guys like him, who know both parties are controlled, that we can trust to be objective on the issues

RIGHTEOUS9

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:26 PM

And how is believing the story that was sold to you, BELIEVING IT as you do, any different than believing in the lochness monster, Auraptor? You have certainly had to ignore certain facts in order to be so positive of your reality. Isn't that exactly the kind of lunacy your post is meant to shame?

The poll numbers are this. something like 84 percent of americans reject the official story about 9/11. That is hardly the same thing as saying 84 percent believe that this administration put explosives in the buildings.

Lets look at the official story for a minute shall we? "nobody could have anticipated 9/11." Well sir, the facts don't mete that out.

Are you still in the camp of 16 percent...because that's pretty loony.

FELLOWTRAVELER

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:29 PM

You know, "people can come up with statistics to prove anything, 14% of the people know that."

This is an interesting exercise in skewing polling data. 84% of respondents may not believe the official story, but that in no way indicates that 84% believe there was some kind of conspiracy or government involvement. It means, simply, they don't buy the story. To suggest that this data denotes anything other than that is either dishonest or wishful thinking on the part of conspiracists.

And in response to this question posed by Antimason:

Quote:
why would any muslim hate you, what did you personally ever do to them?

Brother, they have their reasons. First, if you're a taxpayer, you support your government. Now, consider the US government's unwavering support of Israel no matter the circumstances or US support for various totalitarian Middle Eastern regimes that oppress their citizens. These are just two of the many reasons these people have to dislike America and there are dozens more. The first step in making peace with the Muslim world is to acknowledge that they do have some legitimate grievances.

EDIT- Oops, I think I just repeated the above post. Sorry.

SOUPCATCHER

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
The poll numbers are this. something like 84 percent of americans reject the official story about 9/11. That is hardly the same thing as saying 84 percent believe that this administration put explosives in the buildings.

Absolutely. And yet that is precisely the conclusion that prisonplanet tried to get their readers to draw based on that article. And they even went so far as to leave out a key phrase from the original poll question to further support their thesis. In going to the original polling question, my selection would've been one of the three that was added together to get 84%. And yet I don't think there is compelling evidence that the US government planted explosives in the twin towers.

{Side note: this is why it's nice to always include a linky. When I don't see a link, I start wondering.} Here's the prisonplanet link: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/October2006/141006poll.htm

The title of the article is, "Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story". Here's how they report the poll question:

Quote:
excerpted from prisonplanet article
"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 the truth 16%

Hiding something 53%

Mostly lying 28%

Not sure 3%"

In fairness to prisonplanet, they did include a link to the original polling ( http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/1
3469 ). Here's how the original poll posted the question:

Quote:
excerpted from angus-reid article
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?

See any differences? And if you actually go to the pdf that has all the polling details you see that there are three additional questions that make things even more clear:

Quote:
excerpted from http://www.angus-reid.com/admin/collateral/pdfs/polls/NYT_October2k6.p
df
78. Do you think that George W. Bush personally knew before September 11th, 2001 about intelligence reports that warned of possible terrorist attacks against the United States using airplanes, or not?

79. Was the Bush Administration paying enough or not enough attention to terrorism prior to September 11, 2001?

80. Was the Clinton Administration paying enough or not enough attention to terrorism prior to September 11, 2001?

81. 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?

It's just a tiny little detail, the leaving out of the opening part of the question from what they quoted, but it says something about whoever wrote the article.

Edited to add: Oh well, looks like I posted basically the same point as the preceding post. Now we're going to all be accused of conspiring to silence those who believe in conspiracy theories. Why do we insist on persecuting them?

FELLOWTRAVELER

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Oh well, looks like I posted basically the same point as the preceding post. Now we're going to all be accused of conspiring to silence those who believe in conspiracy theories. Why do we insist on persecuting them?

Well, the good news is at least three of us are capable of spotting BS when we see it...

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, October 18, 2006 1:45 AM

Auraptor,

Quote:
It's sad that so many are relying on fairy tales and intentional distortions about what really happened, instead of dealing w/ the hard , cold facts.

Funny, I would characterize your position in the identical manner.

I think you should take this fairly seriously. I'm not a moron, and I did really look into this.

I am about as certain as I can be of the following facts:

1. This required at least one high level inside man
2. The planes alone could never have levelled those buildings, not in the same universe that has evolution in it. Maybe in creation fantasy world that could happen, but it defies physics, and a decent portion of chemistry.
3. There is no concrete evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to the 9-11 attacks, or identifying conclusively any of the 9-11 hijackers.

Given that, and the huge pile of evidence favoring some sort of inside involvement, I think this is a wide open case.

That wide open case can still lead to islamic extremists. I'd give that about 50/50. But I'd give you odds of about 90/10 that members of PNAC were some how involved. And I'm talking in serious terms, not wild accusation and speculation. I think an objective criminal trial with no outside interference would convict the Bush administration of at least gross negligence, and I'd wager good money that this could be proven as a deliberate attempt by at least one deputy secretary of defense or higher to - at the very least - intentionally allow a terrorist attack (possibly planned and executed by islamic radicals) to happen on US soil to forward their own radical political agenda.

And, that, in a word, is treason.

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, October 18, 2006 1:47 AM

Quote:
Simon who:

The architect who built the twin towers has said he knew they were going to come down the moment the planes hit them. I think he knows more about the physics of buildings than anyone here.

This must have been after he said the thing about never in a million years would that happen. Perhaps after someone many many times more rich powerful and scary talked to him.

Building 7, look into it.

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE