(The truther movement is growing.)



A monumental new scientific opinion poll has emerged which declares that only 16% of people in America now believe the official government explanation of the September 11th 2001 terror attacks.

According to the new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks:

"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%"

The 84% figure mirrors other recent polls on the same issue. A Canadian Poll put the figure at 85%. A CNN poll had the figure at 89%. Over 80% supported the stance of Charlie Sheen when he went public with his opinions on 9/11 as an inside job.

A recent CNN poll found that the percentage of Americans who blame the Bush administration for the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington rose from almost a third to almost half over the past four years. This latest poll shows that that figure has again risen exponentially and now stands at well over three quarters of the population.

How is the poll scientific or monumental? How many people were polled? How were they chosen?
Also the truther movement would really only be classified as mostly lying. Not giving full disclosure doesn't mean they don't think it was terrorist

What demographic was used from which part of the country for the random sample? What was the margin of error? These are some things that make it a legitimate survey.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FW1HKdX3Fc4

Why don't you ask CNN and the new New York Times/CBS News poll people.

You don't know how it was conducted yet you claI'm it to be scientific and monumental?

I didn't make that claim. It was a cut and paste. But here is the place that did one of the polls.

http://www.angus-reid.com/

That video is so silly and stupid it hurt my brain to listen to the first few seconds of it.

the very end of the vid summed it all up tho...

"who was responsible for 9-11?
a bunch of pissed off muslims"

And that to you, is "evidence?"

That's hilarious.

More ridicule. Typical.

i guess you can't read to well either... did you see where i said it was "evidence"?
what is typical is you making things up, like you did with my post...
but i guess with your deductive reasoning and investigation skills, that would be about right for you...

Okay I see. You're just making jokes.
My bad.
I just don't think its funny and I don't think the attack on 9/11 is funny.

actually, it was the truth. a bunch of pissed off muslims was responsible for 9-11... 19 of them that we know of...

That is NOT the truth.

That is the cover, the lie. That is what they want you to believe.

I am not at all suprised by these figures if you engage in a discussion with your peers you will find many people do not buy into 911. I would have to say about 65 to 70% of my co workers feel 911 is a fraud. This would be the bread winning male demographic middle class(or whats left of it)

what would you call the demographic in this forum?
How many are shrills?
How many just like to argue?
How many are socialy retarded?
Childless?
never been married?
Lets face it most polls are of average adults regardless of how those who do not like the results spin it.

prove it...

I could prove it to you but you are not willing to accept the facts. The fact is that the FBI has NO EVIDENCE connecting Osama Bin Laden to 9/11.

And the so-called Muslims were not qualified to fly those planes, and they were not seen or photographed boarding those planes and they were not on the passenger lists. They were not on the planes.

thats not evidence, that is called speculation. i didn't say anything about osama anyway, even though he took credit for it 2 or 3 times... and they were all filmed boarding the planes, but you didn't see that i guess...

No, I did not ever see or hear of any of them being filmed boarding any planes. Got a link to that video?

And Osama never said that he planned or had anything to do with the 9/11 attack. (Although he might have been happy about it.)

Besides, taking credit for it (if he ever did, which I doubt) does not mean he did it.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/No_hijackers_on_the_passenger_manifests

Conclusion (from the above link)

The argument that there were no hijackers on the passenger manifests relies primarily on misrepresenting partial lists of victims as complete manifests, then, while ignoring the actual manifests that are out there (or just claiming that "they're all faked").
For example, the Boston Globe said they obtained manifests for Flight 11 and 175 within a few days of the attacks. Only one was published, but this did include the hijackers.
Subsequently passenger lists were passed to Terry McDermott. These contained some anomalies (missing passengers on the UAL flights) but the hijackers once again appeared.
The manifests were released publicly at the Moussaoui trials. These matched the previous copies, and included the hijackers.
The 2008 release of the 9/11 Commission records has produced their copies of two of the manifests, which again match previous versions, and have the hijackers present.
And we also have a record showing that "United Airlines General Manager of Customer Service Teresa A. Rizzuto" passed the Flight 93 boarding passes to the FBI. The list in the FBI report shows the hijackers present, as do copies of the passes themselves.
In reality, then, there's not a single manifest that excludes the hijackers. Not one. And we have real manifests and passenger lists from more than one source that do include the hijackers. It could be argued that the manifests were hacked, and names on a list don't really prove that those people got on the plane, but the idea that "the hijackers don't appear on the passenger manifests" simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny. They do: it's time to move on to more important arguments.