Think Progress and Powerline fact off!
Think Progress challenges Powerline to a fact off.
Far be it from me to pile on, but I can’t let this one go.
Thinkprogress.org found a significant portion of their information from a report by the Brookings Institute. I have never had a reason to bash Brookings, but now I do. The report uses excerpts from a table of “data” that looked really familiar to me. I looked at the reference and sure enough it is a table listed as:
British Ministry of Defense Poll
This survey is bogus, and I don’t go around claiming that about many polls, but this one is BAD.
http://telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml
The Source
An Iraq University Research Team
Why is that a problem? Who do you think was running and teaching at the university under Saddam? Saddam supporters vetted by the Bath’ists. Do you think we went in and replaced them all? Of course not. This university was built to be a bastion of Saddam propaganda and will employ the same people for many years to come.
Think I am wrong and still like the poll? Check out what Factcheck.org has to say: http://www.factcheck.org/article366.html
The 'Secret' British Poll
MoveOn also cites another "poll" in support of its ad. According to the press release the ads are based on a report by the
London
Sunday Telegraph on Oct. 23. The Telegraph reported a "secret" poll commissioned by the British Ministry of Defense and conducted by an Iraqi university research team. The Telegraph said that they had "seen" it – but full results were not published.
The Telegraph said the poll showed 82 per cent of Iraqis "strongly" oppose the presence of coalition forces – a much higher figure than any of the other Iraqi polls published to date. The 82 per cent figure has been cited uncritically by Democrats including Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania and party chairman Howard Dean.
But that "poll" is dubious at best. The British government won't confirm or deny whether such a poll actually exists, or comment on the accuracy of the figures the newspaper reported. The Telegraph gave no information on how large the sample was, or what the statistical margin of error might be, or even exactly what questions were asked. Without such information there's no basis on which to judge how reliable such a poll might be. The margin of error in the ABC/BBC poll, for example, is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, and the sample size was 1,711. The exact wording of each question is reported.
So, sorry Think Progress, there goes points 3 and 4.
Then Think Progress goes on to lay down the same tired line that the 9/11 commission said there was no connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda.
A few points.
The 9/11 commission did not say there was never any support to al-Qaeda by Saddam.
They specifically said there is no evidence of a link to the 9/11 attacks.
The 9/11 commission made this finding before this information was know.
More evidence of Saddam's links to al-Qaeda
Not to mention the fact the State Department and CIA reports all during the Clinton
Administration listed Saddam as a state supporter of terror, including the Egyptian Islamic Jihad which is lead by Ayman al-Zawahri and makes up a significant portion of al-Qaeda.
Don’t believe that al-Qaeda is as much about the EIJ as it is Osama Bin Ladin? Check out this article from the Council on Foreign Relations.
http://cfrterrorism.org/groups/jamaat.html
There goes point 5.
I’ll give ThinkProgress.org point 1 until I have time to check out the video myself. And point 2 is not unreasonable. Unemployment is high in Iraq.
But 3, 4 and especially point 5 are busted.
www.qando.net has it as well
Comments