50% of Americans still believe this. Still.

What. The fuck. Is wrong. With you people?

I mean really, what? certainly you all cant be congenitally retarded. so is it just willful stupidity?

Quote :

"Half of Americans still believe Iraq had WMDs before invasion By CHARLES J. HANLEY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Do you believe in Iraqi WMD? Did Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003? Half of Americans apparently still think so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in Iraq. People tend to become "independent of reality" in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull. The reality in this case is that after a 16-month, $900 million- plus investigation, the U.S. weapons hunters known as the Iraq Survey Group declared that Iraq had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs in 1991 under U.N. oversight. That finding in 2004 reaffirmed the work of U.N. inspectors who in 2002-03 found no trace of banned arsenals in Iraq. Despite this, a Harris Poll released July 21 found that a full 50 percent of U.S. respondents -- up from 36 percent last year -- said they believe Iraq did have the forbidden arms when U.S. troops invaded in March 2003, an attack whose stated purpose was elimination of supposed WMD. Other polls also have found an enduring American faith in the WMD story. "I'm flabbergasted," said Michael Massing, a media critic whose writings dissected the largely unquestioning U.S. news reporting on the Bush administration's shaky WMD claims in 2002-03. "This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence," Massing said. Timing may explain some of the poll result. Two weeks before the survey, two Republican, Pennsylvania's Sen. Rick Santorum and Michigan's Rep. Peter Hoekstra, released an intelligence report saying 500 chemical munitions had been collected in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. advertising "I think the Harris Poll was measuring people's surprise at hearing this after being told for so long there were no WMD in the country," said Hoekstra spokesman Jamal Ware. But the Pentagon and outside experts emphasized that these abandoned shells, many found in ones and twos, were 15 years old or more, their chemical contents were degraded, and they were unusable as artillery ordnance. Since the 1990s, such "orphan" munitions, from among 160,000 made by Iraq and destroyed, have turned up on old battlefields and elsewhere in Iraq, ex-inspectors say. In other words, this was no surprise. "These are not stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction," said Scott Ritter, the ex-Marine who was a U.N. inspector in the 1990s. "They weren't deliberately withheld from inspectors by the Iraqis." Conservative commentator Deroy Murdock, who trumpeted Hoekstra's announcement in his syndicated column, complained in an interview that the media "didn't give the story the play it deserved." But in some quarters it was headlined. "Our top story tonight, the nation abuzz today ... " was how Fox News led its report on the old, stray shells. Talk-radio hosts and their callers seized on it. Feedback to blogs grew intense. "Americans are waking up from a distorted reality," read one posting. Other claims about supposed WMD had preceded this, especially speculation since 2003 that Iraq had secretly shipped WMD abroad. A former Iraqi general's book -- at best uncorroborated hearsay -- claimed "56 flights" by jetliners had borne such material to Syria. But Kull, Massing and others see an influence on opinion that's more sustained than the odd headline. "I think the Santorum-Hoekstra thing is the latest 'factoid,' but the basic dynamic is the insistent repetition by the Bush administration of the original argument," said John Prados, author of the 2004 book "Hoodwinked: The Documents That Reveal How Bush Sold Us a War." Administration statements still describe Saddam's Iraq as a threat. Despite the official findings, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has allowed only that "perhaps" WMD weren't in Iraq. And Bush, since 2003, has repeatedly insisted on one plainly false point: that Saddam rebuffed the U.N. inspectors in 2002, that "he wouldn't let them in," as he said in 2003, and "he chose to deny inspectors," as he said this March. The facts are that Iraq -- after a four-year hiatus in cooperating with inspections -- acceded to the U.N. Security Council's demand and allowed scores of experts to conduct more than 700 inspections of potential weapons sites from Nov. 27, 2002, to March 16, 2003. The inspectors said they could wrap up their work within months. Instead, the U.S. invasion aborted that work. As recently as May 27, Bush told West Point graduates, "When the United Nations Security Council gave him one final chance to disclose and disarm, or face serious consequences, he refused to take that final opportunity." "Which isn't true," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a scholar of presidential rhetoric at the University of Pennsylvania. But "it doesn't surprise me when presidents reconstruct reality to make their policies defensible." This president may even have convinced himself it's true, she said. "

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/280331_wmd07.html

8/7/2006 3:21:38 AM

half our population is dumber then bricks. republicans work very hard to insure people stay stupid.

8/7/2006 3:27:16 AM

They are counting those pre gulf war 1 chemical weapons that we gave them.

8/7/2006 3:38:46 AM

More than half of Americans believe OJ was guilty...but he was proven innocent, right?

8/7/2006 6:35:30 AM

because there's no way that comparison will break down

8/7/2006 6:40:36 AM

he was found innocent

8/7/2006 7:09:24 AM

so you're saying that Iraq never had them before the war

cause thats what it looks like you are doing

I'm sure the Kurds feel the same way

8/7/2006 8:23:59 AM

Whether he did or not is irrelavent. He had 8 years to hide it all anyway.

8/7/2006 8:37:41 AM

^^ Yeah, I'm sure the mustard gas laced bones of the kurdish people still in mass graves will differ with the 50% that sitll don't believe he had them.

8/7/2006 9:24:03 AM

Quote :

"People tend to become "independent of reality" in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull."

Reality has a well known liberal bias.

8/7/2006 9:25:32 AM

50% of Americans still believe that Iraq had WMD's? Fine. I could see that possibly there was time to hide them away and we just haven't found them yet or something. Unlikely, but possible in the way that Sarah Chalke showing up at my door begging me for sex is possible.

I'm still far more concerned with the 40%(plus or minus, it's been a while since I saw the actual number) of Americans who think that Saddam is directly responsible for 9/11. Fucktards.

8/7/2006 10:03:09 AM

i don't think anyone has EVER said that saddam was DIRECTLY responsible for 9/11 as you stated. People believe, as I do, that Iraq had al-qaeda ties. That is documented.

You are the fucktard.

8/7/2006 10:05:30 AM

if only giving people correct information had a profit motive

[Edited on August 7, 2006 at 10:06 AM. Reason : .]

8/7/2006 10:06:48 AM

^^I'm pretty sure that the only thing that's been documented is that those "ties" didn't exist. At all. As a matter of fact, the only thing those two groups could really agree on is that the US was kinda evil or something.

8/7/2006 10:09:29 AM

That is incorrect. There were training camps in Iraq if not directly supported by Saddam, then conveniently ignored by Saddam.

8/7/2006 10:30:54 AM

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=684

The question asked if Iraq had WMDs when the United States invaded

So even if you believe they transported weapons to Syria before the war, the answer to this should be no.

And the title of the thread and article should be "Half of Americans now believe Iraq had WMDs" since they didnt believe it last year.

8/7/2006 10:40:00 AM

Article is more than 2 years old, so if there's been new info I'd be happy to hear about it.

Quote :

"We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

8/7/2006 10:43:50 AM

They don't need wmd's to fly a plane into a building again. Are you all forgetting 9/11?

8/7/2006 10:44:27 AM

8/7/2006 10:58:01 AM

saddam was a peaceful ruler

8/7/2006 11:11:33 AM

I mean

Read 1/10 of the stuff Treetwistah writes, multiply that by 80million and that will pretty much give you an idea of the collective intellect of most voting americans.

8/7/2006 11:28:46 AM

majority rules

and i didnt vote

8/7/2006 11:38:17 AM

ahahahahaha

You didn't vote.

8/7/2006 11:40:25 AM

yeah i also dont bitch about my boring candidate who didnt win

8/7/2006 11:41:09 AM

Dude

You didn't vote.

All your bitching done about liberals, communists, socialists and the fact that everyone on this website thinks you're an idiot is rendered null and void.

You've become one of those people.

8/7/2006 11:44:44 AM

at least i still dont bitch about my candidate losing in 2000

the most fucked up thing is 50% of Americans still think Iraq never had WMDs

8/7/2006 11:57:32 AM

You're like one of those treehuggers now.

All this verbal diarrhea and you didn't even vote.

8/7/2006 11:59:50 AM

one of those treehuggers who isnt opposed to the iraq war

yeah, lots of those people around

seriously though...keep relabelling me...its funny

i've gone from hippie to neocon back to treehugger according to you guys

8/7/2006 12:00:39 PM

Do you ever wonder why I make fun of you so much?

Why I new - boot goof with you?

I said you were like one of those tree huggers. You know, the ones you redicule of doing nothing but whining, bitching, and being completely against freedom.

Now I would think that someone like you who so vehemently opposes anyone deemed 'unamerican' (by you) would jump at the opportunity to exercise the most American of all institutions: voting.

I would think that someone who supports the war in Iraq, someone who posted about liberation and democracy would actually take part of the democratic process.

Apparently I was wrong though, because in addition to being an idiot, you are also a hyporcite. Why defend our 'freedom' when idiots like you don't even bother to vote?

8/7/2006 12:25:12 PM

i'm just smart enough to know that bush had NC on lock in 00 and 04

your votes for Gore and Kerry didnt change anything

why should I vote when it wouldnt have changed anything

and here comes your speal about how if everybody that didnt vote because they thought their vote didnt matter then their votes would matter

and is the most American of all institutions voting? hell no

Quote :

"Apparently I was wrong though"

oh what a big surprise, you misjudged me again

but at least you admitted you were wrong unlike most liberal douchebags

8/7/2006 12:28:03 PM

Man I really don't even have to try with you.

You just bury yourself.



[Edited on August 7, 2006 at 12:32 PM. Reason : later Gator * Corrected, thank you sir.]

8/7/2006 12:31:03 PM

*gator

thats how people who were born in America spell the abbreviatoin for alligator

8/7/2006 12:31:36 PM

Actually, wait, no. I know I don't make those kinds of mistakes:

2 entries found for gater.
ga·tor or ga·ter Audio pronunciation of "gater" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gtr)
n. Informal

An alligator.

8/7/2006 12:34:12 PM

8/7/2006 12:56:02 PM

Quote :

"so you're saying that Iraq never had them before the war cause thats what it looks like you are doing I'm sure the Kurds feel the same way"

8/7/2006 3:43:58 PM

yes, they did.

we have the receipt.

8/7/2006 3:45:50 PM

Didn't Iraq have dinosaurs before the war too? Like 100 million years before?

8/7/2006 3:48:14 PM

iraq was never a threat to anyone. ask the iraqi people.

8/7/2006 3:55:34 PM

theyre doing great now

8/7/2006 4:00:10 PM

C: Iraq had WMD's
L: No they didnt
C: Yes they did...ask the Kurds
L: You're right...we gave them to Saddam
C: So they had WMDs
L: No they got rid of them
C: But they had them
L: No not during the invasion
C: But we gave them to them
L: Right
C: So they had them
L: We havent found them, they're not there

see if you can tell what the 'C' and 'L' stand for

8/7/2006 4:04:30 PM

You are an idiot.

8/7/2006 4:09:17 PM

Iraq didn't have credible WMD's when we invaded.

They had WMD's (non nuclear, and regional threat only) twenty years ago. They deployed them against Iran and the kurds.

We weren't in a rush to find those weapons in 92 under Bush Senior and Iraq sure as shit didn't develop anything more advanced between '92 and '03.

8/7/2006 4:10:06 PM

i thought liberals knew enough logic to know that just because you dont find something, that doesnt mean that something doesnt exist

8/7/2006 4:14:18 PM

WELL THAT PROVES THEY EXIST

8/7/2006 4:15:02 PM

WELL THAT PROVES THEY DONT EXIST

next

8/7/2006 4:15:14 PM

You're totally right.

We should probably go invade every country hostile country in the world because God knows we don't have definitive proof that they aren't developing WMD's.

OH WAIT, IRAN AND N. KOREA FLAT OUT TOLD US THEY'RE MAKING NUKES.

Shut the fuck up.

8/7/2006 4:16:57 PM

Because clearly despite what you may think the burden is on proving that they dont exist to not go to war, and not on the more sensible proving they exist as a justification for war

8/7/2006 4:17:27 PM

yeah you're right...we have the receipts to the WMDs that we sold iran and n korea...just as much probable cause as Iraq

OH WAIT

Shut the fuck up

Quote :

"the burden is on proving that they dont exist to not go to war, and not on the more sensible proving they exist as a justification for war"

hey pal...uh...i dont know if you knew this or not...but there were 18 other reasons congress voted on to go to war...not just WMDs...i thought we cleared that up in March 2003?

8/7/2006 4:17:43 PM

Quote :

"» Americans still believe Iraq had WMDs before war 50% of Americans still believe this."

kinda coincides with 50 percent of america voting for bush in 2004

8/7/2006 4:17:52 PM

The weapons that we gave Iraq are not the weapons anyone was talking about.

8/7/2006 4:19:29 PM