Elonka wrote:

] If I were going to dig deeper, I'd keep looking until I found
] information from a source that I trusted. And then I'd keep
] looking until I found information from *other* sources I
] trusted, and then I'd cross-reference them all to try and
] filter out the truth. Which is usually going to be somewhere
] in the middle anyway. ;)

The first thing I Googled were things like "zogby debunked" "zogby unreliable" etc. Strangely enough, the first hit I found was the one you memed to me. I think we have a similar mindset when it comes to verification of sources.

The big push of this debunking seems to be that Zogby is slanted to the right. If that is so, I would not see that there is an ulterior motive to the 9/11 poll. Results that show people believe the current administration was complicit with 9/11 would be the exact opposite of what I would want to project if I wanted Bush to be re-elected.

What are some specific reasons you do not like Zogby? The sample size seemed somewhat small to me. It had a good cross section, but it was still relatively small. I don't know much about polling and what is to be expected. But still, the fact that out of almost 1000 random people picked to be a cross section of race and political alignment, the fact that more than half of them think the government was complicit, that is an amazing fact.

RE: Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act