WMD poll reveals chasm between beliefs, fact

[lukpac]

So much for that liberal media, eh?

http://www.dailystar.com/star/today/306 ... ADV15.html

WMD poll reveals chasm between beliefs, fact
'The public is susceptible to manipulation'

By Frank Davies
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS

WASHINGTON - A third of the American public believes U.S. forces found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, according to a recent poll. And 22 percent said Iraq actually used chemical or biological weapons.

Before the war, half of those polled in a survey said Iraqis were among the 19 hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001.

But such weapons have not been found in Iraq, and were never used. Most of the Sept. 11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. None were Iraqis.

How could so many people be so wrong about life-and-death information that has dominated news coverage for almost two years?

These poll results startled the pollsters who conducted and analyzed the surveys.

"It's a striking finding," said Steve Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which asked the weapons questions during a May 14-18 poll of 1,265 respondents.

He added, "Given the intensive news coverage and high levels of public attention, this level of misinformation suggests some Americans may be avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance."

That is, having their beliefs conflict with the facts.

Kull added that the poll's data showed the mistaken belief that weapons of mass destruction had been found "is substantially greater among those who favored the war."

Pollsters and political analysts see several reasons for the gaps between facts and beliefs: the public's short attention span on foreign news, fragmentary or conflicting media reports that lacked depth or skepticism, and Bush administration efforts to sell a war by oversimplifying the threat.

"Most people get little whiffs and fragments of news, not in any organized way," said Thomas Mann, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, a centrist-liberal think tank. "And there have been a lot of conflicting reports on the weapons."

Before the war, the U.S. media often reported as a fact the assertions by the Bush administration that Iraq possessed large stockpiles of illegal weapons. CBS News in December reported how Bush officials were "threatening war against Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction."

During and after the war, reports of weapons discoveries often were trumpeted on front pages, while follow-up stories debunking the "smoking gun" reports received less attention.

"There were so many reports and claims before the war, it was easy to be confused," said Larry Hugick, chairman of Princeton Survey Research Associates. "But people expected the worst from Saddam Hussein and made connections based on the administration's policy."

Bush has described the preemptive attack on Iraq as "one victory in the war on terror that began Sept. 11." Bush officials also contend Iraq sheltered and helped al-Qaida operatives.

"The public is susceptible to manipulation, and if they hear officials saying there is a strong connection between Iraq and al-Qaida terrorists, then they think there must be a connection," Mann said.

"Tapping into the feelings and fears after Sept. 11 is a way to sell a policy," he added.

While Bush critics see an effort to mislead the public, some analysts say Bush has been following a long presidential history of framing a foreign crisis for maximum domestic benefit.

"I'm not going to defend the president, but a policy of preemptive attacks sure looks better after this country has been hit hard," said Sam Popkin, a polling expert at the University of California at San Diego who has advised Democratic candidates.

Polls show strong support for Bush and the war, although 40 percent in the May survey found U.S. officials were "misleading" in some of their justifications for war. A majority, 55 percent, said they were not misleading.

Several analysts said the murky claims and intelligence data about lethal weapons and terrorist ties allow most people to see such news through the filter of their own political beliefs.

GOP pollsters said any controversy over weapons won't change public attitudes because ridding Iraq of an oppressive regime was reason enough for war for many Americans.

"People supported the war for national security reasons and that shifted to humanitarian reasons when they saw evidence of Saddam's atrocities," said Republican strategist Frank Luntz. "There's an assumption these weapons will be found because this guy was doing so many bad things."

Several analysts said they are troubled by the lack of knowledge about the Sept. 11 hijackers, shown in the January survey conducted for Knight Ridder newspapers.

Only 17 percent correctly said that none of the hijackers were Iraqi.

[mikenycLI]

Frightening.


Mike

[Patrick M]

"There's an assumption these weapons will be found because this guy was doing so many bad things."

"That's specious reasoning..."

-Lisa Simpson

[Ron]

". . . this level of misinformation suggests some Americans may be avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance."

Yeah! "Avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance": that's just the phrase I've been searching for all these years to describe what I thought was an ability unique to me to always be right while the rest of the world had its collective head up its collective butt.

[Rspaight]

Our foreign policy has turned into one of those segments on Jay Leno where he goes around getting ignorant answers to easy questions.

I wish it was funny.

Ryan

[mikenycLI]

I've been looking at Kerry...at a long, sideglance...on various C-Span video thingys, and I have to admit he is growing on me, for some reason I can't really pin down yet.

I feel so alienated, and ripped-off by Bush's macho foreiegn policy and Bruce Willis Tv segments.

[Ron]

"To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose."

It's important to recall that when Richard Nixon resigned, he was about to be impeached by the House of Representatives for misusing the CIA and FBI. After Watergate, all presidents are on notice that manipulating or misusing any agency of the executive branch improperly is a serious abuse of presidential power." --John W. Dean

Here' the whole article:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html

[mikenycLI]

Ron,

That is a good article by Dean. Correct me, but for Nixon, I also believe the impeachable offenses included his undeclared war in Cambodia/Laos.

Bush won't even come close to being impeached on this. Politicians have been pummeling us with this nonsense for so long, we are anesthetized to Lies.

[Ron]

You might be right, Mike, about the Cambodia bombings as being one of the impeachable offenses.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. As seen in the article Luke posted, so far there's been no groundswell of public resentment over Bush's lies. Until that happens the Democrats, wimps that they are, will remain mum. Right now they don't want to make too much of an issue of this as they'll look foolish [and Bush will gain additional support] if WMD are eventually found.

Were I a Democratic presidential hopeful, though, I might take a chance and grab this issue by the throat and play it for all it's worth as it could take me all the way to the White House. The alternative is to bask in relative obscurity.

[mikenycLI]

Ron,

None of the Democrats don't have the guts to take Bush on, which goes to show how BAD things are, and how much of a joke our democratic process has become.

I strongly feel that, it's quite possible, the US doesn't want to find Hussein, Bin Laden, and the Weapons of Mass Destruction. It's certainly not trying too hard, is it ?

[Patrick M]

You might be right, Mike, about the Cambodia bombings as being one of the impeachable offenses.

Disparaging the boot is a bootable offense.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. As seen in the article Luke posted, so far there's been no groundswell of public resentment over Bush's lies.

Even if there were a groundswell, you wouldn't hear about it.

It's funny, but it's sort of like national politics is a sporting event right now, and everyone wants to be associated with the "winning team." To question the war, or the administration, etc essentially means you are a wimp/pinko/terra-ist.

[Patrick M]

I've been looking at Kerry...at a long, sideglance...on various C-Span video thingys, and I have to admit he is growing on me, for some reason I can't really pin down yet.

He looks French.

Personally, I'll vote for the "Breck girl."