Jump to content
The Education Forum

Debunking the Debunkers


Recommended Posts

LEN TRY TO BE HONEST, TRY........IF YOU ARE SHOWN YOUR WRONG RE: 911 .....CAN YOU ADMITT IT ????

I DONT THINK SO. YOU COULD NEVER ADMITT IT. IMHO

THATS WHAT MANY OF MY FRIENDS SAY," STOP DEBATING COLBY,ITS NO USE,WASTE OF TIME " ......THEY SAY HE WILL NEVER ADMIT HE IS WRONG REGARDING 911 ....NEVER

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hilarious, my friends haven't the slightest clue that you exist. Since your friends presumably are people like Terry ('LaDouche is my guru') Mauro and yourself why should anyone else give a zit what they think?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Since your friends presumably are people like Terry ('LaDouche is my guru') Mauro and yourself why should anyone else give a zit what they think? // END COLBY

ANOTHER LOW BROW CRASS REMARK FROM COLBY

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

9/11 official story doubts becoming more mainstream

September 23, 2012

By: Gregory Patin

http://www.examiner....more-mainstream

More and more people from all walks of life and all professions seem to be questioning the “official” narrative of what happened on 9/11. Those who are questioning the events of 9/11 may be moving under the radar of the corporate media from being labeled “conspiracy theorists” to legitimate investigators with legitimate questions and concerns.

A good example is Jesse Ventura’s recent appearance on CNN’s Piers Morgan. Ventura, an ex-navy SEAL and former governor of Minnesota who hosts a program on TruTV called “Conspiracy Theory,” appeared on Morgan’s show last week. After discussing 9/11, Morgan tried to dismiss Ventura and said he has “crackpot” ideas. Ventura then asked the audience, “How many people think I make crackpot points?” Only one audience member acknowledged. He then asked, “How many people think I make sensible points?” Almost the entire audience applauded him. See video here. That segment can be found at 32:10.

.Video: 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out.Another good example is Colorado PBS’s airing of a documentary film that was created by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth. It is the first time a major news network has aired anything like it. The documentary, entitled “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out,” features dozens of architects and engineers who unequivocally state that the twin towers, and WTC 7 which was not hit by a plane, were brought down by controlled demolition. (You can watch the full-length film in the video to the left for a limited time before it is only available for purchase on DVD).

If the official story that fires brought the buildings down is to be believed, then 9/11 was an architectural and engineering disaster that should have led to an urgent and exhaustive inquiry, along with suggestions for improvements and upgrades for other buildings of the same construction.

The film has a section near the end in which psychologists explain why the media and many of the public are so reluctant to question the official story. The reasons come down to trauma, belief in authority and cognitive dissonance. People simply do not want to believe anything that contradicts their “world view” and their faith in the authorities that provide their security. Confronted with contradictory evidence, people resort to denial as a defense mechanism.

According to Victoria Alexander, writing for Digital Journal, three days before the 11th anniversary of the World Trade Center tragedy, the documentary ranked number three among "most watched" documentaries on PBS and number one among "most shared." “With the presidential election only weeks away, both the Republicans and Democrats, as equally staunch defenders of the official story, stand to be affected if the public's suspicion of government corruption grows deeper.”

Questions regarding the events of 9/11 and studies are nothing new. They have been taking place for years. For years the internet has been full of information like this, a collection of hundreds of links questioning the official story of 9/11. Several versions of a documentary entitled “Loose Change” were released between 2005 and 2009 and generated over 50 million hits on the internet.

In August of 2004, a Zogby poll revealed that half of New Yorkers believe U.S. leaders had foreknowledge of impending 9/11 attacks and “consciously failed” to act. 66 percent at the time called for a new probe of unanswered questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General. That poll was ignored by mainstream media.

In 2006 The Washington Post reported that even members of 9/11 commission suspected deception on the part of authorities. "We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Defense Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth....It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."

In 2009 a research paper was published by several scientists in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in which traces of nanothermite, a military-grade explosive used to cut steel, were found in four separate samples of dust from the World Trade Center site that were analyzed by scientists. The conclusion:

Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.

That study, however, never made it out of academic circles and into the mainstream media. In a true criminal investigation, the findings in that report could be considered real forensic evidence that more than jet fuel caused the collapse of the buildings on 9/11.

Another fact that has never been publicized in mainstream media is the amount of credible people that question the events of 9/11. The corporate media publicizes questions by people such as Rosie O’Donnell and Charlie Sheen, but ignore the people listed on Patriots Question 9/11, which include over 3000 professionals from the military, government, academia, engineering, aviation, architecture, etc., that question the official story. A quick browse of the list reveals that these are not a bunch of “crackpots,” but are professionals who have the knowledge and skills in their fields to ask legitimate questions about what really happened on 9/11.

One key distinction between the 9/11 truth movement and conspiracy theorists, however, is that the 9/11 truth movement and many of the victim’s families have simply been calling for a new investigation, not making allegations as to whom are really behind the attacks. Some, however, do go further than that.

Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. expert on Arabic and Islam cultures, is one of America's best-known critics of the war on terror. Barrett, writing for Press TV, quotes Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Strategic Studies at the U.S. Army War College:

I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Headquarters Marine Corps, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period.

Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets. He has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications. In addition to teaching at colleges and universities in San Francisco and Paris, Dr. Barrett also taught at U.W. – Madison and ran for Congress in 2008.

Yet another voice bringing the unanswered questions of 9/11 to the attention of the mainstream may turn out to come from Italy. Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, the honorary president of the Italian Supreme Court, has written to the Journal of 9/11 Studies announcing his intention to bring a case before the International Criminal Court citing key figures in the U.S. administration for involvement in the execution of the 9/11 attacks.

Imposimato writes:

The 9/11 attacks were a global state terror operation permitted by the administration of the USA, which had foreknowledge of the operation yet remained intentionally unresponsive in order to make war against Afghanistan and Iraq. To put it briefly, the 9/11 events were an instance of the strategy of tension enacted by political and economic powers in the USA to seek advantages for the oil and arms industries.

Whether or not anything comes of Imposimato’s law suit, the work of the architects and engineers, or anyone else who demands a new investigation into the horrific events of 9/11, one thing is clear. With a slow but steady drip of information coming from the many 9/11 researchers and grass roots movements, more people than ever are questioning the events of 9/11. And by implication, they are questioning the honesty of U.S. government officials who are engaging in costly wars and passing legislation that erodes the U.S. constitution in order to “protect” Americans from terrorism.

If most Americans come to believe that the terrorists responsible for the events of 9/11 are the same people that run huge corporations, banks, the U.S. government’s and Israel’s intelligence agencies, then that could change the dynamics of the political scene for years to come.

I simply encourage readers to watch the documentary that was broadcast on PBS, do their own research and draw their own conclusions.

Sources:

Jesse Ventura on CNN’s Piers Morgan Sept. 17, 2012 via YouTube

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth

PBS Colorado (CPT 12)

Digital Journal

takeourworldback.com

Loose Change – Full-length version via YouTube

9/11 Truth

The Washington Post

The Open Chemical Physics Journal

WhatReallyHappened

Press TV

Patriots Question 9/11

Journal of 9/11 Studies – Imposimato letter

Madison Independent Examiner - 14 defining characteristics of fascism: The U.S. in 2012

..

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since your friends presumably are people like Terry ('LaDouche is my guru') Mauro and yourself why should anyone else give a zit what they think? // END COLBY

ANOTHER LOW BROW CRASS REMARK FROM COLBY

Ironic considering your long string of obnoxious infantile posts filled with personal attacks that left you on the verge of being placed on moderation. Did you object to comment as it related to Terry or to LaDouche? If the former do you dispute that she unquestioningly accepts loony Lyndon's pronouncements, if the latter do you think that whack job is above criticism?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

9/11 official story doubts becoming more mainstream

LOL opinion polls, attendence at truther events and movement on their sites indicates the exact opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Controversial 9/11 film soars to #1 on PBS, breaks local records

By Elliott Freeman

Sep 22, 2012

A daring new documentary that uses scientific analysis to challenge the official 9/11 story became the most popular film on PBS during the week of the 9/11 anniversary, which followed its record-breaking broadcast on Colorado Public Television (CPT12).

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out made its broadcast TV premiere on CPT12 (formerly KBDI) last month as part of a fundraising drive, according to a recent Digital Journal report. The premiere broadcast, which is available to view for free online, became the #1 "most watched" and "most shared" video on PBS online on September 11, and held the top spot for over a week. (The documentary, produced by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, currently ranks as the #4 “most watched” video and the #1 “most shared” video.)

CPT12 has also seen an impressive response at its website, CPT12.org. "The webpage for the broadcast has received more hits than any program page in the history of CPT12.org," said Shari Bernson, Director of Development at CPT12, in an email to the Digital Journal. Web traffic statistics from Alexa.com also show CPT12.org receiving a huge boost in traffic, which began during the August 18 premiere of Experts Speak Out and ran through the 9/11 anniversary. In addition, it marked the first time that a video produced by CPT12 gained recognition as one of the most watched films on PBS nationwide.

According to Bernson, CPT12 has a tradition of delivering information to the public that other news outlets are unwilling to cover. “I’m glad that CPT12 can provide a service that encompasses airing content not addressed in mainstream media," she said. “This is the reason why I work at this station. We’re not afraid to take on issues.”

PBSNumber1image.jpg

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out climbed to #1 at PBS on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

The film's director, Richard Gage, AIA, also commented on the historic outcome. “I am delighted to see that so many people are not only watching our film but also sharing it with their friends and family,” he said in an interview with the Digital Journal.

So far, CPT12 is the only PBS affiliate that has broadcast Experts Speak Out, but other stations have inquired about airing the film as well.

Even PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler, who criticized the documentary in a recent editorial report, acknowledged that CPT12 should have the freedom to air it. "I have no problem with CPT12 or any station running controversial, against-the-grain programming," Getler wrote. "That’s okay and often a good thing."

alexacpt12.jpg

Web traffic to cpt12.org spiked during August and September after the broadcast of Experts Speak Out, according to Alexa.com.

While Getler characterized the claims made by the 40 technical professionals in Experts Speak Out as "preposterous and simply beyond belief", he also admitted that out of the 230 comments posted at CPT12.org about the film, only seven or eight were negative.

“I think it’s great that so many people have left comments in general,” Bernson said. "The fact that they are overwhelmingly positive is more of an indicator that people are still interested in the subject of 9/11.”

According to Gage, the successful broadcast of Experts Speak Out on public TV may be just the beginning for this film, which is backed by over 1700 architects and engineers who are calling for a new 9/11 investigation. “We are eager to partner with other media outlets to get this vital information out to the public,” Gage explained. “We thank CPT12 for taking the lead, and we look forward to educating more audiences around the country about the explosive 9/11 evidence.”

Read more: http://www.digitaljo...2#ixzz27S9Ma0DT

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If the former do you dispute that she unquestioningly accepts loony Lyndon's pronouncements, if the latter do you think that whack job is above criticism? // END COLBY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

They begged Terry to join but she did not. Ive never been to a LaRouche meeting or gotten the EIR magazine. I have had many arguments with LaRouche people over his ideas and DOPE INC which I feel has a number of errors. I do agree with Dope Inc in that there was a deeper story regarding Lansky and China heroin. ( See my Interview with William Weston) Where I do give credit to LaRouche is in Gladio ,

for they held the torch of truth to this bloody affair years and years before 911.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Controversial 9/11 film soars to #1 on PBS, breaks local records

By Elliott Freeman

Sep 22, 2012

A daring new documentary that uses scientific analysis to challenge the official 9/11 story became the most popular film on PBS during the week of the 9/11 anniversary, which followed its record-breaking broadcast on Colorado Public Television (CPT12).

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out made its broadcast TV premiere on CPT12 (formerly KBDI) last month as part of a fundraising drive, according to a recent Digital Journal report. The premiere broadcast, which is available to view for free online, became the #1 "most watched" and "most shared" video on PBS online on September 11, and held the top spot for over a week. (The documentary, produced by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, currently ranks as the #4 “most watched” video and the #1 “most shared” video.)

[...]

According to Gage, the successful broadcast of Experts Speak Out on public TV may be just the beginning for this film, which is backed by over 1700 architects and engineers who are calling for a new 9/11 investigation. “We are eager to partner with other media outlets to get this vital information out to the public,” Gage explained. “We thank CPT12 for taking the lead, and we look forward to educating more audiences around the country about the explosive 9/11 evidence.”

Read more: http://www.digitaljo...2#ixzz27S9Ma0DT

And????

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If the former do you dispute that she unquestioningly accepts loony Lyndon's pronouncements, if the latter do you think that whack job is above criticism? // END COLBY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

They begged Terry to join but she did not.

Whether or not she formally joined the cult, she blindly accepts LaDouches pronouncements on just about every thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

COLBY blindly accepts LaDouches MSM pronouncements on just about every thing.

9/11 official story doubts becoming more mainstream

=====================================================

NY Times lies about popularity of 9/11 Truth

Submitted by simuvac on Sat, 09/25/2010 - 9:09pm

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/911-conspiracy-theory-not-as...

I

n what must be a case of deliberate distortion, the NY Times attacked Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim that “the majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree” that “some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated” the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The Times writes,

"The most comprehensive international poll on the subject was carried out in 2008 by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a collaborative project of research centers in various countries managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which asked more residents of 17 countries the question, “Who do you think was behind the 9/11 attacks?” Their answers were grouped into four categories: Al Qaeda; the U.S. government; Israel; other.

When the poll findings were published, Reuters reported, “the survey of 16,063 people in 17 nations found majorities in only nine countries believe Al Qaeda was behind the attacks.” But there were also no countries in which a majority blamed the American government. The researchers found the most support for the idea that the U.S. government was responsible for the attacks in Turkey and Mexico — but just 36 percent of Turks and 30 percent of Mexicans endorsed the theory."

What the Times ignores is the following:

A Zogby poll in May 2006 showed 42% of Americans believe "that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks." A Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll in August 2006 showed 36% of Americans believe their government was in some manner complicit with the 9/11 attacks. A New York Times/CBS News poll from October 2006 showed only 16% of Americans believe members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth about pre-9/11 intelligence, while 81% believe the government is either "hiding something" or "mostly lying." A September 2007 Zogby poll found 51% of Americans want Congress to probe the actions of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney regarding their "actions before, during and after the 9/11 attacks."

Link to post
Share on other sites

COLBY blindly accepts LaDouches MSM pronouncements on just about every thing.

9/11 official story doubts becoming more mainstream

=====================================================

NY Times lies about popularity of 9/11 Truth

Submitted by simuvac on Sat, 09/25/2010 - 9:09pm

http://thelede.blogs...heory-not-as...

I

n what must be a case of deliberate distortion, the NY Times attacked Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim that “the majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree” that “some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated” the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The Times writes,

"The most comprehensive international poll on the subject was carried out in 2008 by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a collaborative project of research centers in various countries managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which asked more residents of 17 countries the question, “Who do you think was behind the 9/11 attacks?” Their answers were grouped into four categories: Al Qaeda; the U.S. government; Israel; other.

When the poll findings were published, Reuters reported, “the survey of 16,063 people in 17 nations found majorities in only nine countries believe Al Qaeda was behind the attacks.” But there were also no countries in which a majority blamed the American government. The researchers found the most support for the idea that the U.S. government was responsible for the attacks in Turkey and Mexico — but just 36 percent of Turks and 30 percent of Mexicans endorsed the theory."

What the Times ignores is the following:

A Zogby poll in May 2006 showed 42% of Americans believe "that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks." A Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll in August 2006 showed 36% of Americans believe their government was in some manner complicit with the 9/11 attacks. A New York Times/CBS News poll from October 2006 showed only 16% of Americans believe members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth about pre-9/11 intelligence, while 81% believe the government is either "hiding something" or "mostly lying." A September 2007 Zogby poll found 51% of Americans want Congress to probe the actions of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney regarding their "actions before, during and after the 9/11 attacks."

COLBY blindly accepts LaDouches MSM pronouncements on just about every thing.

9/11 official story doubts becoming more mainstream

=====================================================

NY Times lies about popularity of 9/11 Truth

Submitted by simuvac on Sat, 09/25/2010 - 9:09pm

http://thelede.blogs...heory-not-as...

I

n what must be a case of deliberate distortion, the NY Times attacked Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim that “the majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree” that “some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated” the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The Times writes,

"The most comprehensive international poll on the subject was carried out in 2008 by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a collaborative project of research centers in various countries managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which asked more residents of 17 countries the question, “Who do you think was behind the 9/11 attacks?” Their answers were grouped into four categories: Al Qaeda; the U.S. government; Israel; other.

When the poll findings were published, Reuters reported, “the survey of 16,063 people in 17 nations found majorities in only nine countries believe Al Qaeda was behind the attacks.” But there were also no countries in which a majority blamed the American government. The researchers found the most support for the idea that the U.S. government was responsible for the attacks in Turkey and Mexico — but just 36 percent of Turks and 30 percent of Mexicans endorsed the theory."

What the Times ignores is the following:

A Zogby poll in May 2006 showed 42% of Americans believe "that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks." A Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll in August 2006 showed 36% of Americans believe their government was in some manner complicit with the 9/11 attacks. A New York Times/CBS News poll from October 2006 showed only 16% of Americans believe members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth about pre-9/11 intelligence, while 81% believe the government is either "hiding something" or "mostly lying." A September 2007 Zogby poll found 51% of Americans want Congress to probe the actions of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney regarding their "actions before, during and after the 9/11 attacks."

Wow that was remarkably stupid even by truther standards

1) the essay was from a blog, and thus is an opinion piece which represents the views of the author not the Times

2) the hapless truther produced data which proved that the NYT bloggers was correct, i.e. that is not true that, '“the majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world agree” that “some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated” the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.' That is what every single poll taken on the subject has shown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Polls Show Widespread Doubt About Official Explanations

The results of polls on peoples’ beliefs about 9/11 around the world might surprise you:

  • In its January 2011 issue, the popular German magazine “Welt der Wunder” published the results of a poll conducted by the Emnid institute on 1005 respondents. The poll indicated that nearly 90% percent of Germans are convinced that the government of the United States is not telling the whole truth about the September 11 attacks

  • A new poll conducted in France by HEC Paris shows that 58% of French people doubt the official version of 9/11, and 49% believe the U.S. government might have intentionally allowed the attacks to happen

  • A Zogby poll conducted in August 2007 found that 51% of Americans want Congress to probe Bush/Cheney regarding the 9/11 attacks, two-thirds (67%) of Americans say the 9/11 Commission should have investigated the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7

  • A poll conducted by CNN-IBN in August 2007 found that only 2 out of 5 of those polled in India – the world’s second most populous country – believe that al-Qaeda is responsible for the 9/11 attacks

  • Indeed, a poll taken by World Public Opinion, a collaborative project of research centers in various countries managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, College Park, polled 16,063 people in 17 nations outside of the United States during the summer of 2008. They found that majorities in only 9 of the 17 countries believe Al Qaeda carried out the attacks. The poll showed that in the world’s most populous country – China – only 32% believed that Al Qaeda carried out the attacks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yawn none of these polls have shown that a majority in the US or World believe the USG was behind the attacks. Believing the gov't might be covering up some aspects of the story is not the same as believing they were responsible for the attacks. The person who wrote above spun the numbers for example only 13% of the French respondents said LIHOP was probable they also count the 31% who said it was possible, most the respondents to the Indian poll said they did not know who was behind the attacks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

COLBY blindly accepts LaDouches MSM pronouncements on just about every thing.

COLBY OUT OF TREND

U.S. Distrust in Media Hits New High

Submitted by Orangutan. on Mon, 09/24/2012 - 4:40am

by Lymari Morales - Gallup.com

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' distrust in the media hit a new high this year, with 60% saying they have little or no trust in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. Distrust is up from the past few years, when Americans were already more negative about the media than they had been in years prior to 2004.

w_k9jssqk06nulsqorzbsw.gif

The record distrust in the media, based on a survey conducted Sept. 6-9, 2012, also means that negativity toward the media is at an all-time high for a presidential election year. This reflects the continuation of a pattern in which negativity increases every election year compared with the year prior. The current gap between negative and positive views -- 20 percentage points -- is by far the highest Gallup has recorded since it began regularly asking the question in the 1990s. Trust in the media was much higher, and more positive than negative, in the years prior to 2004 -- as high as 72% when Gallup asked this question three times in the 1970s.

This year's decline in media trust is driven by independents and Republicans. The 31% and 26%, respectively, who express a great deal or fair amount of trust are record lows and are down significantly from last year. Republicans' level of trust this year is similar to what they expressed in the fall of 2008, implying that they are especially critical of election coverage.

Independents are sharply more negative compared with 2008, suggesting the group that is most closely divided between President Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney is quite dissatisfied with its ability to get fair and accurate news coverage of this election.

More broadly, Republicans continue to express the least trust in the media, while Democrats express the most. Independents' trust fell below the majority level in 2004 and has continued to steadily decline.

kltluxxzzk-t5ucgsvmmrq.gif

Attention Paid to Political News Lower Than in 2008

Americans tend to pay more attention to political news in presidential election years, and that is the case in 2012. However, Americans are less likely this year to be paying close attention to news about national politics than they were in 2008. The 39% who say they are paying close attention is up from last year -- when Americans were paying a high level of attention compared with other non-election years -- but down from 43% in September 2008.

t1d23oxeneq_4ybbh8u49g.gif

Despite their record-low trust in media, Republicans are the partisan group most likely to be paying close attention to news about national politics, with the 48% who are doing so similar to the 50% in 2008 and up significantly from 38% in 2004. Independents and Democrats are less likely than Republicans to be paying close attention, with their levels of attention similar to 2008 and 2004.

xoqewmbfbk-yd0jwytlewa.gif

Implications

Americans are clearly down on the news media this election year, with a record-high six in 10 expressing little or no trust in the mass media's ability to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. This likely reflects the continuation of the trend seen in recent years, combined with the increased negativity toward the media that election years tend to bring. This is particularly consequential at a time when Americans need to rely on the media to learn about the platforms and perspectives of the two candidates vying to lead the country for the next four years.

The lower level of interest in news about national politics during this election year may also reflect the level of interest in the presidential election specifically. This survey was conducted immediately after the conclusion of both political conventions and thus may indicate the level of attention paid to those events in particular. Since this survey was conducted, Democrats' enthusiasm about voting has swelled nationally and in swing states.

On a broad level, Americans' high level of distrust in the media poses a challenge to democracy and to creating a fully engaged citizenry. Media sources must clearly do more to earn the trust of Americans, the majority of whom see the media as biased one way or the other. At the same time, there is an opportunity for others outside the "mass media" to serve as information sources that Americans do trust.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews conducted Sept. 6-9, 2012, with a random sample of 1,017 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of error is ±4 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample includes a minimum quota of 400 cell phone respondents and 600 landline respondents per 1,000 national adults, with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents by region. Landline telephone numbers are chosen at random among listed telephone numbers. Cell phone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, adults in the household, and phone status (cell phone only/landline only/both, cell phone mostly, and having an unlisted landline number). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2011 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

View methodology, full question results, and trend data.

For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit www.gallup.com.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You see, the thing about polls is....they are most often (very high percentage) phrased specifically to get the answer that the customer commissioning said poll wants to get.

Unless the interviewee is paying serious attention (unlikely on the high street where they're busy shopping, with kids, on their way to work/meeting/home for a cuppa tea...whatever) it's likely they will answer they way they are wanted to by the questioner.

It's big money for the poll firms to do it this way. BIG money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's quite true. You'll notice that with polls which are well-designed, the same question is asked two or three times only each time worded slightly different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. NIST-Naudet-CUMULUS-Release: A forgery!
    Submitted by Sitting-Bull on Tue, 10/09/2012 - 9:21pm

German researcher HerrKoenig recently discovered a forgery within the NIST CUMULUS Data-release, in the case of the WTC 1 collapse sound.

Listen yourself: This one was taken from the Naudet documentary DVD, by extrating the sequence to WAV and converting it into MP3-Layer3, 320kbps, 48.000 Hz with AVS Audio Converter 7.1.

http://www.911-archiv.net/category/4-artikel.html?download=22

This is from the NIST-release:

http://www.911-archiv.net/category/4-artikel.html?download=24

As you can hear, both sounds are very different. What does this mean? The NIST Naudet video release was of very pool quality, and this was astonishing, because they did have an original high quality digital file (DV), converted it to VHS level, and by this way, one can forge the audio and time stamp and so on, as I was told. So this poor quality release delivers the methology to forge the audio. We can conclude that most likely there was something on the original DV-sound, both the Naudet brothers and NIST do not want us to hear.

Why should NIST have forged the Audio at all? Only because THEY KNEW the Naudet brothers edited the sound beforehand, and with releasing the original DV-sound, explosions may be heard, so the need to hide it.

The same goes for the WTC 7 collapse sound, which the Naudets edited, too.

The Naudets/James Hanlon edited the CBS-recording of the WTC7-collapse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&;v=eORGPHfBnhI

NIST-Version #1 (with Boom-Sound):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&;v=BZIgcA7I9a8

NIST-Version #2 (without Boom-Sond):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&;v=bxur-UJpDLI

achimspok found out in 2009, too, that the sound seems to be edited:

achimspok.jpg

So, we do remember, the only "evidence" why WTC 7 was not a controlled demolition, presented by NIST, was the claim no loud explosion sounds can be heard. With the possibility at hand that the audio sounds may have been edited and with so poor audio sources of the WTC 7 collapse overall, this claim seems to be quite bizarre. With this video, maybe the only one unedited at all. and the only one with the seconds before the penthouse collapse recorded, a loud Bah-Boom can be heard, NIST claims is in fact totally ridiculous. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJFpWINABzg&feature=youtu.be

As I understand, "kawika" contributed to HerrKoenigs efforts. Red Dwarf contributed to my understanding of the audio converting process. Special thanks to HerrKoenig who discovered the forgery. It's the cover-up stupid! We should immediately call out NIST to release all tapes in the highest available quality, unedited and unaltered. As I learned 85% of all the tapes did have no right audio channel. If they do not comply they have something to hide!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...