Posted on 04/23/2011 4:58:07 PM PDT by neverdem
I've been looking for a good analogue to the willingness of Republicans to believe, or say they believe, that Obama was born abroad, and one relevant number is the share of Democrats willing to believe, as they say, that "Bush knew."
There aren't a lot of great public numbers on the partisan breakdown of adherents to that conspiracy theory, but the University of Ohio yesterday shared with us the crosstabs of a 2006 poll they did with Scripps Howard that's useful in that regard.
"How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?" the poll asked.
A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was "very likely." Another 28.2% called it "somewhat likely."
That is: More than half of Democrats, according to a neutral survey, said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks.
I'm still not sure this represents actual belief, as opposed to a kind of trash talk about a president you hate. (Bush wasn't mentioned in that survey question, but had been earlier in the poll.)
It does, though, offer a bit of context to the suggestions on the left that mass insanity has beset the GOP.
Bush did know. But it was Hitlary who had the balls to ask him “What did he know and when did he know it?”
Meanwhile her scum of a husband knew in 1996.(Dereliction of Duty) Didn’t he? Release “Path to 911” with the uncut version on dvd. You shut that down and Sandy Burger shoved the files that tie into the events that shows your husband was to blame for 911.
That’s why he walked down the streets in NY saying “I told them to watch out for Bin Laden.” How did he know?
The Clinton's have a habit of projecting, accusing others of doing what you are guilty of.
The Clinton's projected racial profiling on Bush when it was bill Clinton that got sued for racial profiling.
The Clinton's projected voter disenfranchisement on bush, when it was Bill Blinton that got sued for voter disenfranchisement.
It was Hillary that started the Truthers when she held up the paper proclaiming BUSH KNEW.
The Clinton's had what they called a 20 year plan. Bill would be president for 8 years, there would be 4 years for another president, then Hillary would be president for 8 years.
Not only did the Clinton's have to make sure Gore didn't get elected, they also had to come up with a plan to bring down a sitting president.
One of the tapes UBL released, he made it clear the objective of the 9/11 attack was to bring down the president.
I find it impossible to believe the Clinton's and UBL would both be making plans to bring down the next president at the same time and there is no connection.
When it comes to the Clinton's, “JUST COINCEDENCE” doesn't exist.
One had unending investigations by congress and the media and the other has the word of a Hawaii Demohack.
Pray for America
There is NO “University of Ohio.”
There is “Ohio University” and there is “Ohio State University.”
{Pray for America}
We better pray for lost souls, because it looks like the party us over for this Great Republic.
House of Lords looking to seat Imams. England has lost their collective minds, and we seem to be in a great hurry to emulate them.
So are you claiming that Bush knew in advance about 9/11?
Exactly. The Constitution itself deals with eligibility, so it must not be too far out as an issue. 911 Trutherism is a whole ‘nother level of crazy.
At the end of the day, Why do we care what the fn democrats think?
This is losing focus on the big picture.
Defeating them! Our Goal
We can’t be like them, get along with them, or understand them.
Bush did not know, and you know that
Yup.
I believe that the traitor administration briefed the Bush administration.
The Bush administration did take terrorism seriously. I don’t think they knew which planes were going to be hijacked but they knew of a plan to fly planes into buildings.
read Dereliction of duty
watch youtube- the path to 911
http://captainamericagroundzero.blogspot.com/
The administration knew of A plan to fly planes into buildings, however since the klinton/gorelick administration would not let the CIA talk to the FBI the whole plan was not put together.
I am not a truther. I don’t believe that Bush brought down the towers.
That’s like saying Klinton and gore drove the truck into the towers the first time. You remember....klinton didn’t even go to the Towers. He told people in NJ not to worry about it, that it was nothing.
I did a lot of research for my book (http://captainamericagroundzero.blogspot.com/)
read Dereliction of Duty. Klinton knew of this plan in 1996.
Yet he did nothing. Nothing to protect the American people. That was too big of a job. He let us get hit 12 times.
There are two basic schools of Truther - MIHOP (made it happen on purpose) and LIHOP (let it happen on purpose).
So you don't have to believe Bush brought down the towers to be a truther.
Thanks for clearing that up. i thought the people who bought that loose change bull crap were truthers.
Whether he let it happen, that’s the Pearl Harbor Theory.
I am saying they knew of a hijacking plan that had terrorists flying planes into buildings.
That aint opinion, that’s fact.
Read”Dereliction of Duty”, klinton knew in 96.
Read Dereliction of Duty.
they knew of “something “ coming.
Bingo.
Radical islamists killed 3000 Americans on the morning of 9/11. Within weeks of the attack, the dimrat party and their media turned on GW Bush and took the side of the muzzies. They never let up. If there had been any involvement of Bush/Cheney, the dimrat media would have uncovered and quickly.
Hussein comes on the stage and the dimrat media goes into promote and protect mode for the guy. The same investigative media who would go to the lengths to manufacture a story about Bush, have circled the wagons around barak.
If there is any commonality it would be their dogged defense of islam and their same zeal to protect barak.
In the doc UBL makes a passing statement to the effect “the news is 905 of the preparation for the battle”.
If you have a small scale attack where a lot of planning isn't involved, you can carry out the attack based on what is in the news.
For a large scale attack where a lot of planning is involved, in order for the attack to achieve its objective you simply can't wait for the appropriate news to pop up, you have to orchestrate the news for the attack, then you have to be able to spin the news after the attack.
UBL doesn't have the ability to orchestrate the news before the attack much less control the spin after the attack.
The only people in this country that can control the news is the left.
You can take that info and work out a clear pattern to the terrorist attacks going back to the 1st WTC attack in 1993.
In each and every case, it's been the Clinton's orchestrating the news.
I think Ted Kennedy was complicit in the 9-11 attacks and that’s why the Bin Laden gang were able to roam freely around Boston.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.