By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent
Sun Aug 6, 7:43 PM ET


Do you believe in Iraqi "WMD"? Did        Saddam
Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction
in 2003?

Half of America apparently still thinks 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 lawmakers,
Pennsylvania's Sen. Rick Santorum (news, bio, voting
record) and Michigan's Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news, bio,
voting record), released an intelligence report in
Washington saying 500 chemical munitions had been
collected in Iraq since the 2003 invasion.

"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 stressed
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 press "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 himself, 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," observed 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.

Americans have heard it. A poll by Kull's
WorldPublicOpinion.org found that seven in 10
Americans perceive the administration as still saying
Iraq had a WMD program. Combine that rhetoric with
simplistic headlines about WMD "finds," and people
"assume the issue is still in play," Kull said.

"For some it almost becomes independent of reality and
becomes very partisan." The WMD believers are heavily
Republican, polls show.

Beyond partisanship, however, people may also feel a
need to believe in WMD, the analysts say.

"As perception grows of worsening conditions in Iraq,
it may be that Americans are just hoping for more of a
solid basis for being in Iraq to begin with," said the
Harris Poll's David Krane.

Charles Duelfer, the lead U.S. inspector who announced
the negative WMD findings two years ago, has watched
uncertainly as TV sound bites, bloggers and
politicians try to chip away at "the best factual
account," his group's densely detailed, 1,000-page
final report.

"It is easy to see what is accepted as truth rapidly
morph from one representation to another," he said in
an e-mail. "It would be a shame if one effect of the
power of the Internet was to undermine any commonly
agreed set of facts."

The creative "morphing" goes on.

As Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerrillas battled in
Lebanon on July 21, a Fox News segment suggested, with
no evidence, yet another destination for the supposed
doomsday arms.

"ARE SADDAM HUSSEIN'S WMDS NOW IN HEZBOLLAH'S HANDS?"
asked the headline, lingering for long minutes on TV
screens in a million American homes.

Reply via email to