Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (42)	3/17/2003 2:13:41 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Today, the AP filed a story with the following headline: "Poll: Bush Has Solid Support for War." Many readers, of course, will read only that headline, taking with it the message that the U.S. public overwhelmingly supports the Bush Administration's drive to war in Iraq. However, after wading through reporter Will Lester's spin to actually read the poll results, one finds the exact opposite to be true. story.news.yahoo.com Buried in paragraph six, we find the relevant numbers: "The poll found that about half of adults, 47 percent, say they support military action to remove Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power and disarm Iraq, even without the support of the United Nations Security Council. Almost four in 10, 37 percent, said the United States should do that only with full support of the Security Council; 13 percent said the United States should not take military action even if the Security Council agrees." President Bush has resolutely stated he will prosecute a war against Iraq without the "full support of the [U.N.] Security Council" -- and appears poised to do so. This means that fully 50% (37% + 13%) of those polled OPPOSE the Bush Administration policy on Iraq, as compared to 47% in favor. Why is the Associated Press afraid to honestly report the poll's findings? What can justify such an astonishingly misleading headline, followed by reporting from Mr. Lester with a similarly suspect message -- when the actual facts presented in the article point to precisely the opposite conclusion?