h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"Credibility Firestorm"

That's what Reuters is calling the current state of affairs in the White House with respect to the information it has released.

Funny thing is, I don't see much of an uproar from the H2G2 community who have in the past debated both sides of the motivation for war with Iraq. And this is coming on the heals of the "sexed up intelligence information" controversy from the British side.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=LN1FBDZB5OHOQCRBAEKSFFA?type=topNews&storyID=3080926

What's the present state of opinion? Have the people who supported the war been finally convinced that the US and British governments were deceiving them all along, or the opponents given up opposing?

I've noticed that most of the staunch pro war people have quietly dissapeared from Iraq threads one by one.

Blatherskite called us all the "pro sadam party" before going.

There's been quite a lot of that thing going around: viewing opposition to war as support for Saddam. Cannot imagine how anyone in their right mind could think that, but then I'm seeing the label "liberal" referring to anyone who's not nuts.

As they say: you can lead a horse to water but you cannt make it drink, likewise: you can lead a person to information, but you cannot make them think!

At great risk I'll say that it seems that conservatives perfer to be told what to think.

I had another reminder of that the other night when I was in a taxi and the driver was listening to talkback.

Not sure I entirely agree there, but I do see a lot of "faith based support". It seems the same people who are attracted to religion are attracted to conservative political positions. Countless times I've seen people saying things like: "when Bush will produce the WMD all will be resolved". That's no different from waiting for the 2nd (or 1st depending on your orientation) coming of the messiah.

There's something in people that makes them want to believe in a cause no matter how lost it may appear. I guess that why we have a whole field of medicine devoted to mental problems!?

yes I agree. Before the war it was called "faith based evidence". I had conservative leaning relatives with absolute faith in the first official Bush excuse that all the WMD was moved to Syria.

The problem ofcourse with faith based support is when the person/people you place your faith in begin to contradict themselves.

That 1st excuse Bush used of WMD being moved to Syria was accepted by a few people I know as well. It's amazing that people believe that $100's of millions of dollars *in cash* were left behind (and easily found), yet the WMD were moved and not a trace found.

When you put the two togeather it becomes increasingly difficult to belive and actually kinda silly.

There have been some very good commentaries about the differences in "rumors and rumbles" here vs the official investigation in the UK of Blair and others. The difference is striking on the surface.

you may need to elaborate a bit here abbi. i'm not quite seeing your point.

Here they still are hoping for belief and disinterest from the public. People who make noises are still considered traitors or ignorant same as before the war. People are worried about the economy and he knows it. Questions about motives and contracts in Iraq end up in the same place. "Info witheld in the interest of National Security.

The same issues are being handled differently in the US and UK. On the surface anyway,who knows behind the scenes.
Every day they show Blair under the scope of an official investigation. Bush is not.

Here they just report rumors and opinion polls, not openly pursuing investigations of the Financial Contracts and the credibility of war. There are petitions to look into the Presidents choices. I have heard Bush blame the UK for it's evaluation, and support his intelligence sources. Sources he sites are not as supportive of his use of information as he claims.

Given Bush's party has control of both congress and the senate, he would need one hell of a dissension in the ranks to affect any serious investigation. It also doesn't help that many Democrats don't want to voice their oppinions too loudly just in case they may appear "unpatriotic". In short, there's a lot of cowardice going around both Republican and Democrat camps.

I think you'll find there will be a lot more vocal opposition getting closer to election time (next year). Many things may happen between now and then and both parties are not voicing their opinions too loudly just in case something does.

When are the next elections to be held in Britain?

They are wanting Tenet the head of the CIA and Chaney to take the fall it's begining to look like. The Dems are pushing for an official investigation, they have a few Republican s behind it also. The vice-Presidents are often around for that very purpose. Like the one time blame them and throw 'em away emergency button. I always thought he would sacrifice Rice and Chaney before all is done but probably not Powell because he is well liked.

I saw Tony Blair in the local paper, saying that he *still* has faith that WMD will ally appear

wow

New deck od cards for sale!

Kathy Eder's 55 playing cards show pictures of President Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others along with quotes, mostly from journalists, questioning the rationale for the U.S.-led war. The backs feature a 1983 photograph of Rumsfeld shaking Sadaam Hussein's hand

http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR040403.htm

http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2003/07/56430.php

Steering Committee
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16398

This is what is being said summed up well in the first link

Do you have a link to a site that shows the cards?

The cards have just been put on sale and are flying off the shelves.
No link to view them yet ,only for purchasing.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0715-12.htm
Here is an article about the cards, and the teacher who did them.