WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines Bush Supporters Still Believe Iraq Had WMD or Major Program, Supported al Qaeda

Jung

???
Premium
13,993
1,401
487
#1
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html#1

Bush Supporters Still Believe Iraq Had WMD or Major Program,
Supported al Qaeda

Agree with Kerry Supporters Bush Administration Still Saying This is the Case

Agree US Should Not Have Gone to War if No WMD or Support for al Qaeda

Bush Supporters Misperceive World Public as Not Opposed to Iraq War,
Favoring Bush Reelection

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October.

Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda.

Steven Kull adds, "Another reason that Bush supporters may hold to these beliefs is that they have not accepted the idea that it does not matter whether Iraq had WMD or supported al Qaeda. Here too they are in agreement with Kerry supporters." Asked whether the US should have gone to war with Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD or providing support to al Qaeda, 58% of Bush supporters said the US should not have, and 61% assume that in this case the President would not have. Kull continues, "To support the president and to accept that he took the US to war based on mistaken assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and leads Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information about prewar Iraq."

This tendency of Bush supporters to ignore dissonant information extends to other realms as well. Despite an abundance of evidence--including polls conducted by Gallup International in 38 countries, and more recently by a consortium of leading newspapers in 10 major countries--only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq. Forty-two percent assume that views are evenly divided, and 26% assume that the majority approves. Among Kerry supporters, 74% assume that the majority of the world is opposed.

Similarly, 57% of Bush supporters assume that the majority of people in the world would favor Bush's reelection; 33% assumed that views are evenly divided and only 9% assumed that Kerry would be preferred. A recent poll by GlobeScan and PIPA of 35 of the major countries around the world found that in 30, a majority or plurality favored Kerry, while in just 3 Bush was favored. On average, Kerry was preferred more than two to one.

Bush supporters also have numerous misperceptions about Bush's international policy positions. Majorities incorrectly assume that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues--the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%)--and for addressing the problem of global warming: 51% incorrectly assume he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty. After he denounced the International Criminal Court in the debates, the perception that he favored it dropped from 66%, but still 53% continue to believe that he favors it. An overwhelming 74% incorrectly assumes that he favors including labor and environmental standards in trade agreements. In all these cases, majorities of Bush supporters favor the positions they impute to Bush. Kerry supporters are much more accurate in their perceptions of his positions on these issues.

"The roots of the Bush supporters' resistance to information," according to Steven Kull, "very likely lie in the traumatic experience of 9/11 and equally in the near pitch-perfect leadership that President Bush showed in its immediate wake. This appears to have created a powerful bond between Bush and his supporters--and an idealized image of the President that makes it difficult for his supporters to imagine that he could have made incorrect judgments before the war, that world public opinion could be critical of his policies or that the President could hold foreign policy positions that are at odds with his supporters."

The polls were conducted October 12-18 and September 3-7 and 8-12 with samples of 968, 798 and 959 respondents, respectively. Margins of error were 3.2 to 4% in the first and third surveys and 3.5% on September 3-7. The poll was fielded by Knowledge Networks using its nationwide panel, which is randomly selected from the entire adult population and subsequently provided internet access. For more information about this methodology, go to www.knowledgenetworks.com/ganp.
 

msalyss85

Banned - What an Asshat!
277
0
0
#2
GET A GRIP PEOPLE!
The evidence has come out and many people are still ignorant...it's a shame.
 

chucktheskiffie

Way too hyper...
682
0
0
#4
msalyss85 said:
GET A GRIP PEOPLE!
The evidence has come out and many people are still ignorant...it's a shame.
There is a possibility that there are weapons there. We all know about the Iraqi MiG's found buried in the desert. Why is it that they couldn't have built some sort of hidaway in the miles of sand that Iraq contains.

Of course, being an australian, it is easy for me to remain objective as we have not lost a soldier in the iraqi conflict.

We just had an election here in Australia for our Prime Minister, and one of the things that buried the loser was that his stance on the Iraqi war was not clear. The same could be said for Both Candidates for the White house. Neither of them seem to be able to come up with definaite answers, and even if they could, they don't seem to have a clear gameplan.

Just some thoughts from the bottom of the world.
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#5
there is no chance that there are stock piles of wmds there like we were told in the first place.
 

chucktheskiffie

Way too hyper...
682
0
0
#6
tzedek said:
there is no chance that there are stock piles of wmds there like we were told in the first place.
To be honest with you, i think you are right.

And i justify this by saying:

What would iraq need WMD for anyway. Whilst the Iraqi hawks talked tough, the only reason they would need them in that part of the world would be to either attack or protect themselves from the israeli's. Whilst Hussien talked a little about Israel, Iraq largely stayed out of that conflict.

the only other reason i can think of for Iraq having WMD is to protect their wealth (oil) from intruders. However the only country that ever posed a significant threat to that was the USSR, which, as we all know, is now defunct and Russia is in a shambles.

However, Iraq certainly had both the money, the resources and the talent to be able to produce the weapons.... what if???
 
11
0
0
#9
Wonder where those mass graves came from in iraq....

Saddam used wmd's on his own f'n people, Just ask the kurds who lost loved ones to this asshole
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,906
3,366
487
#10
Right, and they're gone.
Ah nothing says marrying yer sister like a vote for bush. Yeee hawww!
 
11
0
0
#11
So i guess Iraq did have wmd's and then got rid of em and Bush should have known that without having proof.
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#12
Nezlam said:
Wonder where those mass graves came from in iraq....

Saddam used wmd's on his own f'n people, Just ask the kurds who lost loved ones to this asshole

thats not a reason to invade and oust him from power... oh, and what "wmd's" are you referring to that he used on his own people?
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,993
1,401
487
#13
tzedek said:
what "wmd's" are you referring to that he used on his own people?
Not to defend this guy, but he is right in that statement.
Chemical and biological weapons are classified as WMDs, although their classification as such is often questioned. Saddam used chemical weapons against the kurds and his own people.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2070188/
The trouble with this distinction is that it rests on the long-standing dubious convention of classifying chemical and biological weapons as "weapons of mass destruction." Saddam has indeed used mustard gas and chemical agents to commit genocide "against his own people," and that is indeed a horror. (For details, see Chatterbox's earlier item, "Jude Wanniski's Genocide Denial.")
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,906
3,366
487
#14
Nezlam said:
So i guess Iraq did have wmd's and then got rid of em and Bush should have known that without having proof.
The redneck retard seems to know everything else. He was wrong. Face it. It's that simple. There's no argument. But still he can't admit it. That just says to me "Pig headed arrogant bastard".
We need to dismiss him. He had his chance, and failed us as a nation.
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,906
3,366
487
#15
tzedek said:
thats not a reason to invade and oust him from power... oh, and what "wmd's" are you referring to that he used on his own people?
You have to remember these Bush supporters use the same tactics Bush uses.
When someone says "there are no WMD's" they change the subject and say "Well he's a violent dictator and was killing his own people. He had to be removed". They're all Brainwashed sheep, following the shepard off a cliff.

They play the "shell game" with their excuses for going into Iraq.

I have a question for all of them. What if they never said that Iraq had WMD's? They just told us "Sadam is oppressing his own people. We need to go free them".
Would any of these Bush supporters be behind this action? I would think Very few.

The whole WMD thing was just to get the people behind Bush. The "Human Rights" issue is an excuse to stay.
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#16
junglizm said:
Not to defend this guy, but he is right in that statement.
Chemical and biological weapons are classified as WMDs, although their classification as such is often questioned. Saddam used chemical weapons against the kurds and his own people.

that was my point. Exactly how does a chemical weapon do "massive destruction". Its more like a "WMM" aka weapon of mass murder.
 

ChilianFuckFace

Banned - What an Asshat!
2,186
0
0
#17
They just told us "Sadam is oppressing his own people. We need to go free them".
I totally fucking agree... Why aren't we then in Cuba? China? Korea? Venezuela? Saudi Arabia? and all of the other countries which have some type of dictator who is oppressing thier people!

Actually Venezuela might be next, they also got OIL down there!!
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,993
1,401
487
#18
tzedek said:
that was my point. Exactly how does a chemical weapon do "massive destruction". Its more like a "WMM" aka weapon of mass murder.
That point is irrelevant, bio and chem weapons are classified as WMDs. I agree that the classification is misleading, but that doesn't change the fact of the matter.
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,906
3,366
487
#19
ChilianFuckFace said:
I totally fucking agree... Why aren't we then in Cuba? China? Korea? Venezuela? Saudi Arabia? and all of the other countries which have some type of dictator who is oppressing thier people!

Actually Venezuela might be next, they also got OIL down there!!
They'll just change the subject and mutter some incoherent shit about our national security.
Too bad they aren't doing shit about our remarkably sloppy security here.

I was in France fairly recently. They have Soldiers and Mobile SAM’s parked outside this Nuclear Power plant down near Marseille. All over Europe there are fully armed soldiers in airports. The security in airports is much higher there than here currently and for the past 20-30 years.

I do a lot of traveling for my job. I can tell you first hand, that security in other countries is much tighter than here.

So, I don’t want to hear anyone spouting off about “National Security” because they have no fucking clue.
 

bigck3000

The Iron Lung
1,684
1
0
#20
DanGeo better get in here quick and defend Nezlam or he'll be the only one left (no pun intended) for another couple of months. so they had WMD's and killed their own people with them... and thats different from some, 20 other countries, how? and we had better hope that its not about oil because that would mean there is a shit load of money going toward "something" or "someone" and we will be non the wiser. they wouldnt try to fuck with S. americans...they know we're fucking wild, and the would have an incredibly pissed off latino public here to deal with. my prediction, (if bush makes a mockery out of our election process again), is that Syria gets it....they already tried earlier, but they were quick to get on our balls so they werent next. fantastic...thats exactly what i want...the big retarded playground bully as the leader of the "free world"