The WorldPublicOpinion-poll did not include USA, and without the exact same questions, we can't compare difference in opinions.

From Wikipedia it seems that very few US citizens believe persons in the US government actively planned or assisted the attacks. However, quite some in the US suspect that the government are to blame for incompetence. Or had foreknowledge, but did nothing to stop the attacks, as it facilitated public opinion towards a desired hawkish foreign policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_opinion_polls

I read that this Italian produced documentary about 9/11 will not be shown on US TV-channels, guess it is regarded as "politically uncorrect". Pity, it's rather good, to the point. Such decisions by national TV-networks may explain some of the difference in national opinions.
ZERO : An Investigation Into 9/11 - PART 1 of 10

If the home office of Ann Taylor Loft isn't a military target, maybe we can bend a point and consider it one just for that day.

The Pentagon was a military target, at least.

On your other favorite issue, I thought the whole opinion poll approach was a good one, so I did some checking:

http://www.bigmantra.com/man_on_moon/public.html

The gist of it:

Mythbusters did a whole show on Moon Landing Hoax theories. You can see the first part of it on youtube, and find the remaining parts from there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

They seem to debunk all the crackpot theories we talked about here before.

Here is an excellent opinion piece by columnist Charles Krauthammer in which he describes, (in his opinion), just how that the addition of Sarah Palin to the Republican presidential ticket has changed the dynamics of this 2008 presidential race, because it highlights the weaknesses of Barack Obama as a presidentail candidate.

This opinion piece is titled, "OBAMA\'S ALTITUDE SICKNESS".


Chess Fan

With all the flaming that has been going on, you bring up the Apollo moon project Petrosianic? As a rhetoric tactic that is fine, but I think we need some low intensity contemplation in off-topic now (and perhaps I should await another flamable topic until 9/11 2009).

Mythbusters is a fine program, I often see it while training at the gym. They did a decent job with some urban legends regarding the moonlandings. Especially interesting Mythbusters Moonwalk hoax At 7.21 you can see the strings attached to the astronauts in the original film, in about 1/4 of a second.

As public opinon goes, I may reassure that the belief in Apollo is close to 100% in my country (I just stumbled over this David Percy guy, he convinced me, sorry). Armstrong himself had a visit here this year, got a heros welcome, and many payed an expensive ticket to hear him speak about possibilities.

I am one who will assert the facts in the teeth of all opposition--like Shakespeare the Spear Shaker, shaking defiance in the face of ignorance.

So to me it's rather simple: who cares what a lot of uneducated, ignorant foreigners think about 9/11? It wasn't their citizens burned alive or falling to horrible deaths on the concrete below! It wasn't their country that has had to bear the costs of warfare against medieval fanatics who spread death and terror wherever they go!

The idea that the Bush administration had anything to do with 9/11, including foreknowledge of it on which they didn't act, is ludicrous in the extreme. Bush simply hadn't been in office long enough to undo the damage inflicted by that cheating, white-trash prevaricator Bill Clinton, whose justice department under Janet Reno crippled the country's intelligence gathering capability and left us open to 9/11.

RB, I'll handle you with the one-sentence dismissal your latest idiocy deserves. The Japanese militarists would have sent most of the population against American invasion troops and far greater bloodshed would have resulted--which is why dropping the bombs did have some justification, despite there being other excellent war-ending alternatives available, such as a blockade.

Petrosianic, you and Ed have been putting out some really excellent posts lately. I can hardly believe I'm writing that, but I must give credit where credit is due. Either I've been misreading your previously fine posts or else you two have massively improved. I know, I know, the former is much more likely, but it's probably a bit of both. Anyway, Petro, your post on the other moonies was very good. All this talk about the moon landing being fake is more complete bull****. Scientific examination of soil samples taken from the moon showed this material to be way too old to have been manufactured by the U.S. government--probably the strongest evidence against a hoax.

Ken, your link to the Onion article nailed it, as always. Science has such great prestige in the world precisely because scientists don't operate like religious people. Look at these religious people pushing so-called creationism; everything is done to give it the trappings of science. If they really believed in their moth-eaten books, they'd stick to scripture and stop messing around with serious stuff that they are intellectually equipped to understand, but are emotionally unable to accept.

CF, I told you once I'd stand in front of a church with my guns strapped on to defend it from being turned into anything else, and I feel the same way about a school. The public school system has been screwed over enough by the liberals without the conservative bible-beaters trying to mess it up even more with pseudo-science twaddle. You wanna push your Bible, great, it's your right--but do it in a church! Inside that institution, preaching prehistoric Babel is protected speech; outside, it's just foolishness that lowers the dignity of clergy and believers alike.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

"...the assertion which outstrips evidence is not only a blunder but a crime."--T. H. Huxley

Akselborg
Well there are too problems to even list with the theories laid out by the various actors and playwrights in your youtube "documentary".

But I'm curious has there ever been a peer reviewed engineering paper written that shows the towers couldn't have fallen from the planes?

I mean showing a picture of some different building in Italy burning that didn't fall is really nice and all but it is a different building.

Second what is the possible motivation that President Bush would have here to put explosives in the building? I mean OK lets say we play along with your European view of Bush wherein the thing he wanted to do most in life was start a war. So ok he arranges to have these extreeeemely loyal government employees crash these planes into a building. (Yeah sure maybe someone from the Christian religious right trying to bring on the end of the world or whatever) But why would he need to make sure the 2 towers collapsed? Surely crashing the planes would be all he needed. He really didn't need to then make sure the buildings collapsed after did he? Why then would he risk raising these questions? Why if the buildings won't collapse would he make sure they do? What is the supposed thought process that conspiracy theorists are suggesting here?

Combo_Kid. Welcome back, and welcome back aboard. Thanks for your posts.

@ChessOutpost.com:

What did you think of the Charles Krauthammer piece in my quote above?


Chess Fan

CF --

It is a good article. It doesn't really say anything new, but it does summarize things very nicely. Nobama doesn't really have a platform to run on other than the "I'll do it different than Bush" platform. While that can start a vacuum and gain some intial momentum, the campaign is long and eventually he will have to put some meat behind his statements, as does McCain.

The thing that is frustrating to me now, is that both candidates are barely putting out any platform content. Their commercials are ridiculous and are just cheap shots at each other which gets sickening fast. I am talking about both candidates here. One of the candidates would see a pickup in the polls if they put their back-stabbing character assaults in the closet and talk about how they are going to make America better and why they are more qualified than the other party to lead.

If you have not already, start doing your homework on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. See who the major players were, how much money was made in bonuses, why and how they made it, who they contributed to, and ask yourself why the Lib media hasn't gone into a feeding frenzy yet. It is fascinating reading.

Also, if you don't know who Mark Levin is, you would really enjoy his radio show. Check him out at marklevinshow.com. He is starting to turn his attention to the Fannie/Freddie scandal. I started listening to Levin about 1 year ago and the man is outstanding.