Wow, that's twice the support that Obama got from Germans.

Some firm anti-Bushites feel 9/11 was to George W. Bush what the Reichstag Fire was to Hitler. Considering how it helped his approval ratings and gave him the ability to go to war twice, it isn't surprising people assume Bush pulled a Hitler and flew the planes in himself.

It could be that Germans think about how their own leaders once acted, and then apply that to Bush (who is often compared lazily to Hitler).

I doubt the conspiracy theory, but it can be tempting at times, considering the evidence.

... would connect the survey choices with "or". Why would the Bushes do the dirty work themselves when their long-time Saudi allies' friends could do the job with little persuasion and just a wee bit o'help?

Depending on how exactly the question was asked, I could see Germans, Mexicans or practically anyone else answering, "the US kind of brought it on themselves by being the big kid on the block," and that being recorded as "The US did it".

I can imagine a few Germans looking at their own country's recent history and frowning on the idea of doing anything that could be construed as bullying.

So, 23% of Germans think 9/11 was an inside job?
First of all, maybe their media is more open to critically analyzing the evidence. Despite the fact that almost 500 architects and engineers (Not to mention pilots and air traffic controllers, scholars etc. http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/) question the official story of 9/11 and demand a new investigation, the American media totally ignores their existence.
And maybe the Germans have learned something since they were so wrong about Hitler. Maybe because of their past mistakes, they are better able to recognize history repeating.
What if they are right? Is it so hard to believe that it could happen in our world in our lifetime? Maybe we should look at all the evidence again because most Americans would want to learn the truth now than continue to deal with uncertainty and so called "conspiracy theories." If these theories have no basis in fact, then an open investigation will answer them and shut them up for good.
Thank you.

Not only Germans. U.S. intelligence service veterans, too.

- Raymond McGovern, PhD - Former Chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Estimates (NIE) and 27-year CIA veteran. "I think at simplest terms, there's a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke." (According to the CIA, NIE's are "the most authoritative written judgments concerning national security issues")

- William Christison - Former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis, overseeing 250 CIA analysts. 29-year CIA veteran. "I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. ... An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. ... The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them."

- Melvin Goodman, PhD - Former Division Chief of the CIA's Office of Soviet Affairs and Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup. I don't know how else to describe it."

- General Albert Stubblebine - Former commanding general of U.S. Army Intelligence. 32-year U.S. Army veteran. "I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said,'The plane does not fit in that hole.' So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?"

For decades, we relied on these individuals to collect information essential to our national security and provide critical analysis during which time the U.S. faced far more real and much more serious threats than anything today. We cannot now ignore their stunning condemnation of the official account of 9/11.

More information about these and 1,000 other credible critics of the official account of 9/11 is available at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com

I am quite confident more than a quarter of Germans believe 911 as having US Government involvement as it is really quite obvious at this point. You really have to wonder about the legitimacy of the mainstream media who shilled the 911 fantasy as fact and who now make polls that surely downplay global doubt on 911. Nearly everything we've been told about 911 is untrue and Cheney pleaded with Daschle for no inquiry on 911.

What are they hiding?

Imagine, a terrorist attack that killed 3,000 people and they didn't even want to investigate it!

But they sure were on the ball when it came to establishing Homeland Security, passing the Patriot Act and invading Iraq.

Wake up, people. We were told the terrorists hated us for our freedoms and yet the government is using 911 as a justification to take those same freedoms away. There's something out of order here.

911 is being used as a catalyst for global government. Lots of evidence is pointing to inside job, especially how 3 of the terrorists were trained in Florida and California naval bases. 911 Commission totally covered up all the US government involvement and I am mad as hell.

Look, folks -- Osama bin Laden has admitted responsibility for 9/11, the U.S. government published an exhaustive report looking into the attacks, and every credible media organization in the world has reported the same. There's simply no basis to suggest that the U.S. government had any role whatsoever in perpetrating 9/11. Period.

The choices in the poll should not be mutually exclusive.

From 89-92 it is admitted Al CIAda was receiving billions of dollars from the US. Therefore it is only a matter of opinion whetehr someone should lump US intelligence services in with Al CIAda. The US gave 41 milllion to the Taliban in 2001...so the same can be said there. Although the official story is the Bin Ladens never talked or influenced their estranged son anymore...it is a fact that the bin Laden and Bush families have been friends for generations. What a coincidence that both families fortunes have benefited so greatly and Bin Laden has been treated with kid gloves?

The Bin Laden videos are so phony an unreliable it is a joke. "Fabled Enemies" is worth watching.

The biggest joke is that it seems many of you believe that there is a big difference betweent he republicans and democrats. Kissnger, Zebrinski; we know their ideas are from the same despotic tree of empire and their life long employers are water the roots from the same hose.

CIA expert on the Mid East says it was a inside job. Yet you expect us to believe a propaganda outlet of the Carnegie and Rockefeller foundation? Your not objectively looking at the evidence. Your carrying propaganda. Your foundation money has supported outright marxist organizations and philosophy in this country the last 60 years, yet you want us to believe your in favor of "capitalism"?

You ignore Prescot, H and W Bushes connections to the Harrimans and eugenically minded nazis in 1930's Germany and Ameirca yet yo wnat us to believe Bush is "protecting our freedom?

You publish Thomas Freidman, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOF6ZeUvgXs watch this clip of him and tell me he is a moral man.

Why is it so much of the establishment(like greenspan) admits that Bush lied about the reasons for the war "WMD", "war to spread democracy" and yet nobody thinks this is a problem and folks at CFR still stick to their old lies that the war was to spread freedom...or some other nonsense?

A similar poll was recently conducted on the website of a Finnish newspaper. The results are:

44 percent: Al-Qaida
37 percent: U.S. government
5 percent: Israel
13 percent: Don't know

http://tinyurl.com/6bwonh

We Finns have our own experiences of false-flag operations: the Soviet Union attacked us in 1939 on the pretext of the shelling of the Mainila village, an attack that the Soviet Army itself carried out.

The following 12 reasons (translated into English for your convenience) to doubt the official story are from a seminar entitled "9/11: an Attack by Arab Terrorists or a False-Flag Operation Familiar from History?", presented at the Finnish Social Forum last May.

1) When everyone knew the country was under attack, President Bush was not carried into safety from his publicized location in the Sarasota school. [Of course, in a "real" attack the President would have been brought into an undisclosed safe location without delay. The White House's revisionist account was shown to be false by the footage shown in Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11", since then available on the net. After continuing to listen to the children's reading exercise for a good while, Bush continued his photo-op in the classroom, and then gave a press conference at the school.]

2) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld continued his breakfast meeting while the towers were burning and didn't do anything until the third target – the Pentagon – had been attacked. [Of course, in a "real" attack the defense secretary would have responded immediately to such a calamity.]

3) The Pentagon was struck an hour and half after the attacks had started.

4) The Andrews Air Force Base, where combat units were kept "in the highest possible state of readiness", was only 12 miles from the Pentagon.

5) Three completely different explanations for the failure to reach any of the planes have been given. No one has been charged with lying, and no one has had to resign due to negligence. But when Matias Rust flew onto the Red Square with a small plane, heads rolled in the Soviet army.

6) Even the FBI acknowledged in 2006 that it has "no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11". Yet Afghanistan was officially invaded in search of Osama, while Saddam was accused of complicity in the attacks in cooperation with Osama.

7) Many professional pilots have said they could not have performed the required maneuvers. The alleged hijackers, in turn, had only flown small planes, and many poorly at that.

8) Simultaneously with the attacks, an anti-hijacking exercise was going on.

9) The Bush administration fought against the establishment of the 9/11 Commission for over 400 days, then manned it with its "trusted persons".

10) WTC: the total destruction of three skyscrapers in seconds; the numerous (ignored) accounts of explosions; the near-total destruction of the steel debris without investigation.

11) Qui bono? Who profited? The attacks provided the desired impetus for the military-industrial complex, triggered "a war that will not end in our lifetime" wherever desired, and legitimated increasingly Orwellian laws, a "national security state", repression of citizens' rights, illegal spying, Guantanamo, and torture.

12) The anthrax letters posted soon after the 9/11 attacks. The bacteria used in the letters were traced to a U.S. military laboratory, after which the investigation came to a halt. Two Senators received a letter. They had delayed the passing of the 342-page Patriot Act legislation, written before the attacks but rushed through under the pretext of the attacks.

One reason many people still have a hard time wrapping their minds around the possibility that 9/11 was at some level an "inside job" or a false flag operation is because they are totally clueless as to the use by the US military and intelligence agencies of false flag operations as standard operating procedure.

Here are some examples of what I am referring to.

1) Operation Gladio/Strategy of Tension:
NATO, The CIA and MI6 in cooperation with various West European intelligence agencies ran undercover armies, ostensibly to stage insurgent attacks against any invading Soviet forces, but which were also, in many cases, used to stage murderous terror attacks on civilian targets in various Euopean cities. An example would be the 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station which killed some 85 people. Many of these terrorist attacks in Europe were intentionally and falsely blamed on communists and radical leftist groups by governments and the media in order to demonize leftists and communist parties and politicians.

You can read more about Operation Gladio and The Strategy of Tension here:
http://nafeez.blogspot.com/2007/05/strategy-of-tension.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8110.htm
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9556

2) Operation Northwoods. This was the name given to plans formulated and approved by the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff to stage false flag terror attacks on US civilian and military targets, both in the US and Cuba, and even suggested the possibilty of attacking Cuban refugees on the high seas in order to demonize Castro's regime and generate support for a US military intervention in Cuba. Northwoods was apparently quashed by the Kennedy White House before it was implimented, but nevertheless it had been approved by all the Joint Chiefs who were, it appears, quite prepared to go ahead with the plans.

You can read about Northwoods here:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/northwoods.html

3) Operation Ajax. This was the joint CIA-MI6 operation to overthrow the democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh after he threatened to nationalize the Iranian oil industry which was at the time controlled by a British oil company (the precursor to BP). After the overthrow the Shah was installed as a dictator and compliant puppet ruler for US/British oil interests. As part of the operation, mercenary crowds were paid by the CIA and MI6 operatives to pretend to be Mossadeg supporters in the Iranian communist party, Tudeh, and to attack Mosques and religious leaders. The aim was to scare the mostly religious Iranian population into believing that if Mossadeg were allowed to remain in power he would adopt communist policies or overtly turn Iran communist and outlaw religion.

More on Operation Ajax and the overthrow of PM Mossadegh here:
http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/articles/l30iran.htm

And of course lets not forget the bogus Gulf of Tonkin incident, used by the US military and Johnson administration to fool Congress and the people into supporting a further military buildup and involvement in the Vietnam war. This wasn't strictly a false flag operation as the US, in this case did not come under attack as it had claimed. It just manufactured a story that a US destroyer had been attacked by North Vietnamese patrol boats and the media, Congress and the people bought it.

You can read about the Gulf of Tonkin here:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261

It's seems the US has taken to heart Herman Goering advice on how to make sure their is widespread public support before embarking on war.

....voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Goering to French psychologist and intelligence agent Gustave Gilbert at the time of the Nuremberg Trials. See:
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.asp