Gemmel

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/535.php ) WPO_911_Sep08_img.jpgA WorldPublicOpinion.org poll of 17 nations found that majorities in only nine of them believed that al Qaeda was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States. (Photo: Tamara Beckwith) In no country did a majority agree on another possible perpetrator, but in most countries significant minorities cited the US government itself and, in a few countries, Israel. These responses were given spontaneously to an open-ended question that did not offer response options. On average, 46 percent said that al Qaeda was behind the attacks while 15 percent say the US government, seven percent Israel, and seven percent some other perpetrator. One in four said they do not know. "Given the extraordinary impact the 9/11 attacks have had on world affairs, it is remarkable that seven years later there was no international consensus about who was behind them," comments Steven Kull, director of WorldPublicOpinion.org. Even in European countries, the majorities that said al Qaeda was behind 9/11 are not overwhelming. Fifty-seven percent of Britons, 56 percent of Italians, 63 percent of French and 64 percent of Germans cited al Qaeda." However, significant portions of Britons (26%), French (23%), and Italians (21%) said they did not know who was behind 9/11. Remarkably, 23 percent of Germans cited the US government, as did 15 percent of Italians. Publics in the Middle East were especially likely to name a perpetrator other than al Qaeda. In Egypt 43 percent said that Israel was behind the attacks, as did 31 percent in Jordan and 19 percent in the Palestinian Territories. The US government was named by 36 percent of Turks and 27 percent of Palestinians. The numbers who said al Qaeda was behind the attacks range from 11 percent in Jordan to 42 percent in the Palestinian Territories. WPO_911_Sep08_graph.jpgThe only countries with overwhelming majorities citing al Qaeda were the African countries: Kenya (77%) and Nigeria (71%). In Nigeria, a large majority of Muslims (64%) also said that al Qaeda was behind the attacks (compared to 79% of Nigerian Christians). The poll of 16,063 respondents was conducted between July 15 and August 31, 2008 by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a collaborative research project involving research centers from around the world and managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland. Margins of error range from +/-3 to 4 percent. Interviews were conducted in 17 nations, including most of the largest nations--China, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Russia--as well as Egypt, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Mexico, the Palestinian Territories, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, and the Ukraine. The nations included represent 38% of the world population. Respondents were asked "Who do you think was behind the 9/11 attacks?" and their answers were categorized into four response groups: "Al Qaeda," "the US government," Israel," or "Other." Any answers that approximated al Qaeda, such as "bin Laden" or "Islamic extremists," were categorized along with those who said al Qaeda. Those who simply characterized the perpetrators as "Arabs," "Saudis," or "Egyptians" (3% on average) were included in the "Other" category. Respondents in Asia had mixed responses. Bare majorities in Taiwan (53%) and South Korea (51%) named al Qaeda, but 17 percent of South Koreans pointed to the US government and large numbers in both countries said they do not know (Taiwan 34%, South Korea 22%). Majorities of Chinese (56%) and Indonesians (57%) said they do not know, with significant minorities citing the US government (Indonesia 14%, China 9%). A clear majority of Russians (57%) and a plurality of Ukrainians (42%) said al Qaeda was behind the attacks. But significant minorities identified the US government (15% in both cases) and large numbers did not provide an answer (Ukrainians 39%, Russians 19%). Out of all countries polled, Mexico had the second-largest number citing the US government as the perpetrator of 9/11 (30%, after Turkey at 36%). Only 33 percent named al Qaeda. Though people with greater education generally have greater exposure to news, those with greater education were only slightly more likely to attribute 9/11 to al Qaeda. Steven Kull comments, "It does not appear that these beliefs can simply be attributed to a lack of exposure to information." A stronger correlate of beliefs about 9/11 were respondents' attitudes about the United States. Those with a positive view of America's influence in the world were more likely to cite al Qaeda (on average 59%) than those with a negative view (40%). Those with a positive view of the United States were also less likely to blame the US government (7%) than those with a negative view (22%).

Ouch Pap - Buctootim has caught you flush

Well they look like ******* big lumps to me. Pap - Have you got any orange videos that could pull the scores back to one one?

I'm off to get a decent bottle of something and a bag of popcorn. This has the makings of an epic.

Please don't post credible explanations opposing one of one of paps "Theories" - Its ruins all the fun. Just leave him be until he gets into full swing and they he will PROVE to you as FACT how he is right. It's pure comedy gold

Glasgow / Barry - She has put in 55 million - what bit don't you understand. Trust fund my arse. You don't take loans against every single asset when you are drawing down from a trust fund

No but we have got a couple of these;

Don't be so naïve. when clubs turn down permission to speak to the players............ You get what we have had for the last couple of weeks. The LAST thing they ever do is keep it under wraps

Without a single player having left, our new board seem to have come in for an awful lot of stick with regard to player sales and how they are handling things. For all we know old Ralph might have bigger balls than Buster Gonad and is simply telling the players and clubs to do one. But regardless of how they are performing, what they are or aren't doing, what Club / players have ever survived an approach from one of the big four? I can only think of Leighton Baines. I'm sure I will be corrected by many other examples, but for those that are so ready to judge our lack of ambition, it might be interesting to see what the realities of the football hierarchical system actually look like.

Interesting the family have invested 55 million to date, of which 33 has been converted to equity. There is a further 63 million pounds in commitments. Massive increase in profits this year? You are obviously privy to the accounts which are not due for another 10 months, because as of this year it looks like the family might have had to put their hand in their pocket again. You might want to also look at the charge against the club (For ALL assets - That is the stadium, the land the training ground, the players - even the toilet roll) that was for a loan that was taken against future TV income and season ticket sales - Ironically one of those loans that Cortese said we would never take out. You might want to check your maths before you call people idiots.

We will always be a selling club to some degree. Nothing has changed from one regime to the next. When Cortese was in charge there were two players of significance that were wanted by other clubs; 1) Chamberlain - Guess what we sold him :scared: 2) Lambert - Cortese agreed the deal, but the new board scrapped the deal At this point in time there are 3 or four players that other clubs want and they will probably get some if not all of them. Would have been no different regardless who was running the club - In my opinion.

No, he was taken off as a Director quite some time ago

Six Hours ago Benali was tweeting from a golf day in London - With a full beard. I think this might be a case of mistaken identity

It's a standard move and if anything protects the football club. The Club will want / need to show this is not being driven by them, but instead by the player. By putting in a request he will forgo a % of the transfer fee and we will get more money. If the deal is going to happen it will happen - This is the part Lallana has to play in it. We can of course refuse the request, but it is not quite as black and white and declining the request and carrying on as if everything is normal. We love Lallana and he loves the club, but he is mixing in different circles these days and I doubt if any of us wouldn't do the same (If indeed he has).

The light suggest it might have been a few hours ago

Impossible to say - Wants his name still involved with football for possible other positions? - That's the best guess I can come up with. Probably also worth remembering, Lowe was exactly the same when he left, tit bits to his mates in the press and then interview after interview. May be football is the same drug to them in the board room as it is to us fans, but I am sure there is some self preservation in all of this (Just as there was with lowe - Not my fault gov, honest, it was everyone else.)

If we were indeed courting another manager - Guess where the last place they would have the meetings?

The season ticket sales are a red herring. In comparison to TV money etc, they have little impact and the reality is that very few people will not renew based on a manager or player leaving. I guess we are just going to have to sweat it out.

You had to change your user name because of the rubbish you posted. You then came out with Ormerod being our best ever striker or some rubbish like that (And even suggested you were right the other day!!!) He wasn't> And we wont keep the entire squad together. You have to worry about some of the people that post on here

Chill everybody :) :)

Oh dear me.... I can't take anymore. We have to go with Turkish....... This is officially a mong board

Haha Brilliant

Can you humor me and change your name to "Frank Spencer"? I only make it to the first (Sometimes second) paragraph, but I just see the poster as Frank, read a few lines and then always get this image in my head.

Oh dear oh dear. Please tell me you don't actually believe that.