Unbelievable: 72% believe Iraq/al Queda connection (new poll)

"From what you've seen or heard in the news, do you believe that Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was harboring al Qaeda terrorists and helping them to develop chemical weapons, or not?"

Yes: 72%
No: 17%
Don't Know: 11%

Since I pride myself on being open-minded, let me just ask, am I sorely mistaken to be in the 17%? Is there some legitimate evidence of a link that I may have missed?

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

(on edit: added link)

I am in that minority 17% as well. Of course two can be as lonely a number as the number one. Hah!

THere are 3 of us!!! :crazy:

there are a whole lot of people in the 17%

I really doubt that poll!

There was a "qualifer" in the question "..based on what you have seen or heard in the news..."

Could that account for a skew of this proportion?

n/t

N/T

That means 200 million americans are in for a rude awakening <hen the 9/11 report becomes common knowledge.

That was my first thought; that the 9/11 report will discredit this. But the 9/11 report says there was no known link between Iraq and al Queda related to the 9/11 attacks. The poll asks a different question. Not if Iraq was behind 9/11 specifically, but if Iraq was harboring al Quead and helping them develop chemical weapons.

Who took the poll, where was it taken at, what area of the country did they poll the people in and what party affiliation are the pollsters registered with? Until I know this then they are SHIT.

said about those?

it does feel to me in my daily going about, that many Americans DO remain out of the loop on this. Most I encounter in passing have never heard of the PNAC.

And when you talk to repubs in the higher tax brackets, they denigrate EVERYTHING as a conspiracy theory. I wonder if that is because the PNAC IS a conspiracy against WE THE PEOPLE. And BTW many of the republicans I do business with who chide me for being liberal and not knowing what I am talking about never heard of the PNAC either. All just keeping IN STEP with the propaganda, many just hawks they love the dominatrix trip!

What an outrageous scam it all is this Hiding their deeds virtually in plain sight... because the devious planners know how out of the loop the american public really is, they bank on their selective amnesia.

General Maxwell Taylor did say when the Pentagon Papers hit the public eye. "The people only need to know that which enable them to do their job." And I guess that is what many working class Americans are tired out doing, whether it is one two jobs and a graveyard shift.

Look how much time it takes to keep up. People generally are to tired to even discuss it. I am told regularly that I read too much!

For whatever reason they are typically very pro-Bush in their polling. It's weird because they aren't very pro-Bush in their editorial content.

I can't believe that people are this stupid or that I have somehow missed some evidence of this link. As far as I could tell, the only evidence of a link was a meeting between an iraqi intelligence agent and an al-qaeda member in the Czech Republic, which was shown to have never happened.

Either this poll is BS, I have not been as diligent as I thought, or the American public is even dumber than I thought...

I'm hoping the answer is #1

yes, i'd like to know where this came from and when. the 9/11 report says it isn't true!!! we need to get that word out!!

...or as it's otherwise known "The Ministry of Fair and Balanced Truth" :eyes:

I'm usually one of the first to discredit info that isn't documented and therefore, I am usually very careful about providing sources. I must have been so shell-shocked that I forgot to do so in the original post.

The poll was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates for Newsweek. I found it here: http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

"Do you think Iraq actually had banned chemical or biological weapons right before the Iraq War started in March, or not?"

Yes No Don't Know
% % %
7/24-25/03 71 20 9
7/10-11/03 69 18 13
5/29-30/03 72 17 11


This says That 71% of the people (a growing number) believe(d) that Sadam had weapons before-hand.

I saw a documentary made by the New York Times and Discovery Channel, and even the NYTimes reporters were making it sound like goign to Iraq was a good idea.

scary.

:WTF:

Rush is a master at that. People believe all types of things that are not true. Like snake in the clothing from So. Am. is one of the funny ones but people believe it. Course we know where this story started. Who ever tells Bush what to saydid that.

the dem pols had damn well better get out there and talk, hell shout the 9/11 report as well as debunk all the other lies. if we shout the truth long enough maybe that will start to be believed,

Well, that shows what Bush and friends really master is the art of marketing. To sell people what they want to.
If media influences the people, and that produces the poll results, or poll results influences people, it is all the same.
Sadly, the media is not capable of propagating the right picture. Instead they support the marketing machinery.

This is why the NON-connection of Iraq-AlQaida is an even bigger story than the "african uranium."

If we can get across the fact that Bushco has been lying about this supposed connection, which so many people believe to be true, the effect will be devastating.

I will never forget the sunday morning after the news came out about the whole Iran-Contra scheme. People in the after-church crowd at my local super market were absolutely LIVID. This was a god-fearing, Reagan-loving crowd who NEVER, EVER talked politics at the grocery store.

But that day people were fuming, spitting mad, talking to complete strangers in the aisles. Why? Because they had completely swallowed the whole "we never negotiate with hostage-takers" line. They BELIEVED IT. And the Iran-Contra scheme made them realize they had been fools all along. (Somehow they forgot about it again very quickly, but that's another story.)

If we could get people to understand how they have been lied to right where it matters most -- about who and what was behind 9-11, I think we could generate some of that same fury.

that there is no evidence linking Saddam Hussein and Al Qada.

Then when the other side calls you a liar, ask them for the evidence. If they show any evidence, discredit it.

...with the fact that saudi arabia DID connect with and support al quaida and that we went after the wrong guys. this 9/11 report could be a pot of gold, the missing pages will leak out. even if they do not prove direct complicity with bush we can use his own words against him. paraphrasing: "we will go after those nations that harbor and assist terrorists!" well, the 9/11 report says he went after the wrong guys, pure and simple. once that gets out in the mainstream consciousness the next question will be why?? and we all know what will happen then.

Bush and his apparatchiks made the Saddam/Osama connection at every opportunity and the lapdog press never once contradicted him.

since the media have been so manipulative

I can't believe that many people can be duped so easily.

Was Saddam harboring Al-Qaida terrorists? Probably. But the problem arises in that there is no clear distinction between one terrorist regime to the next. They could've been Al-Qaida bred terrorists or Hiballah bred terrorists, or any of the other regimes. All of the regimes are intertwined: they share the same sponsors and support groups, and often work cooperatively. How US intelligence is able to distinguish one from the other I don't know- and I doubt they even bother.

So to answer the question, Bush had no more reason to attack Iraq than he does to attack one of the other dozen or so countries.

It's about the oil.

I started a thread on this that went nowhere. Sigh.

In light of the purposeful delay of the 911 commission report (that was ready in DECEMBER, no less) this is damning. The 911 report debunks all claims of a connection, the Atta meeting, Zarqawi (part of a rival organization), and everything else. Read this quote in light of deliberately delaying this. Isn't this, by definition, a lie? It's not inference or clever wording, it's flat-out stating of something known to not be true.

"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."

why the Iraq /Al Qaeda connection was included in the SOTU speech when the 9/11 report found no linkage between the two, president Bush replied... “The American public has said it has intelligence, which we do not have access to, that there was a connection between Al-Queda and Iraq... And they said today that they stand by that intelligence.

Parody mode = off

Jay