i got this article from the nancies.org BBS: Many mistakenly believe U.S. found WMDs in Iraq. By Frank Davies Inquirer Washington Bureau WASHINGTON - A third of the American public believes U.S. forces have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, according to a recent poll. Twenty-two percent said Iraq actually used chemical or biological weapons. But such weapons have not been found in Iraq and were not used. Before the war, half of those polled in a survey said Iraqis were among the 19 hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001. But most of the Sept. 11 terrorists were Saudis; none was an Iraqi. The results startled even the pollsters who conducted and analyzed the surveys. How could so many people be so wrong about information that has dominated news coverage for almost two years? "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 1,256 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, of having their beliefs conflict with the facts. Kull noted that the mistaken belief that weapons had been found "is substantially greater among those who favored the war." Pollsters and political analysts offer 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. During and after the war, reports of possible weapons discoveries were often trumpeted on front pages, while follow-up stories debunking the 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 say Iraq sheltered and helped al-Qaeda operatives. "The public is susceptible to manipulation, and if they hear officials saying there is a strong connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda 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. 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 allowed most people to see such news through the filter of their own political beliefs. And 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," Republican strategist Frank Luntz said. "There's an assumption these weapons will be found because this guy was doing so many bad things." Several analysts said they were 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 was Iraqi. "That really bothers me, because it shows a lack of understanding about other countries - that maybe many Americans don't know one Arab from another," said Sam Popkin, a polling expert at the University of California-San Diego who has advised Democratic candidates. "Maybe because Saudis are seen as rich and friendly, people have a hard time dealing with them as hijackers." Hugick said his analysis showed those who were misinformed were not necessarily those who had less education. "I think a lot of people are just confused about the threats out there," he said. how can some of these people be so damn stupid? it's mind-boggling, really. if Bush says Iraq has WMD, it must be true!! Bush says Saddam eats babies? better believe it!! this is ridiculous...
Never underestimate the ability of a large segment of the general public to be misinformed. And it often doesn't take saying anything specific to get someone to become misinformed. They half-hear something and make incorrect assumptions or just "figure" that's how things are or how they happened. The quote about hearing an administration official saying something is probably wishful thinking. I would suspect a large percentage of the population never heard the administration say anything. For a good many people, the news is boring. And I don't think you can necessarily ascribe this to political persuasion (i.e. people believing whatever Bush says because he's a Republican, though I'm sure there is at least some of that). We do see this on other issues, even ones that aren't at all partisan. And we see people believe things that nobody said (i.e. they half-heard something and made incorrect assumptions to fill in the blanks).
Why exactly does the nationality of the hijackers or any other terrorist matter? Isn't the important point wherefrom they are deriving support and, perhaps, sustenance? Hadn't bin Laden denounced his Saudi citizenship and been disowned by his family? So he goes out and finds other Saudis who feel the same way.... big surprise!?!
What matters about the nationality is the fact that the American public did not even know that NONE of the hijackers was Iraqui and MOST of them were Saudi. This was widely reported during the SOLID WEEK where they played nothing but 9/11 "updates." Another allegation by the administration. While I admit it is POSSIBLE that Saddam supported terrorists, he was almost certainly NOT involved in 9/11, which is what the administration wants us to relate the word "terrorism" to. Nope. Yeah, he found a bunch of them Saudis, but he didn't find any Iraquis.
bin Laden had a very specific gripe about American bases in Saudi Arabia. Other than a general anti-American sentiment, why would an Iraqui give enough of a durn about that to give over his life for a Saudi cause?
What do you bet that the average American thinks that Turkey and Iran are Arab nations? This point is not even subtle.
Why are multiple posters spelling Iraqi with a 'u'? Did CNN spell it that way once and now everyone is misinformed?
Thoreau may have been right about lives of quiet sorrow, but he should have included ignorance. The problem with systems like America isn't that their not infallible; no system is...it's that people in them begin to believe in the power of the majority so much that, despite all evidence to the contrary, they equate popular belief with fact. Many Americans have no problem with being largely alone in their support of the war, compared with global opinion, based on the fact that here at home most of us are ok with it. This despite the fact that in the past we have thought we were right and the world was wrong about the following issues: Slavery. Segragation. Native genocide. Use of Nuclear Arms. Prohibition. Military involvment in SE Asia on the grounds of the Domino Principle. etc. etc.... Add to that these interesting numbers: *A greater percentage of the population believe they have been visited by aliens than voted for our current President. * More people in America believe that the world is flat than believe that Canada is geographically larger than the US. * More Americans can identify Pauly Shore, by name of facial recognition, than can identify the leaders of either France or Germany, the two nations we seem to otherwise be so expert on as to denounce their political stances. * Despite falling behind in virtually any educational measurable; counter-measured grades, language proficiency, intellectual adaptibility to new stimuli, literacy, global issues awareness, etc., most American believe that their countrymen are somehow inately the smartest and best educated populace on the planet. But the problem isn't really about America...it's about the fact that, in general, people don't know much more than their told, and have less interest/time devoted to finding out for themselves. It's compounded in America because of two key factors: We believe we're better, therefore place even greater faith in our own collective conclusions, and we are largely self-observant; much, much more of our media, news, and others means of gathering popular opinion is devoted to ourselves, and reflective of our own perspective than other nations of comparable technological access. These two factors make us succeptible to believing that, globally speaking, our sh*t doesn't stink like everyone else's, even if we're standing in it. So that way we are also uniquely pre-disposed to react to having a self-serving view of our own actions questioned by the rest of the world by saying " You're all wrong, we're right. We know because A) We're us and you're not, and B) Most of us say so. But, more to the point about popular belief, media, and believing what you're told despite evdience to the contrary, this is why I have such a problem with people who group German people of the 1930's and 40's together, and lay the balme of the Holocaust and WWII on their collective shoulders, saying that they 'let it happen.' In a time where they had far less access to media than we do, no Internet, no cable tv, just governemnt controlled radio...and we say they should have known better, and not believed their leaders' lies just because they said so, and said it was patriotic to belive in your leaders/country. And no, I'm not saying we're Nazis...please....I'm talking about collective ignorance and culpability. We blame them for believing what they were told out of misplaced patriotism, but most of us believe that Huseein was behind 9-11, that we have found WMD's, and have no problem with being mislead to get the war going. Who are we to point fingers at anyone?
Oh, man...all over the place. I posted the sources in another thread, but that was a loooong time ago, right around 9-11. They're not from one place, but a compilation...
Wow, and through all our ignoranc and stupidity, we have somehow managed to build the US in the worlds only Super Power, economically and militarily. If were that stupid, what does that make the rest of the world (minus Japan)?
Whats funny is after rereading my post, I thought about editting, but wanted to see what punk would be first to grasp at straws and take the "grammar" way out. Congrats BBob, I knew one of you would come through to prove me right.
So you are saying that average Turks and Iranians are without misconceptions about America and Americans? And of course the entire Arab World is likewise well-informed?
