The most insidious "fact" is the website's description of United Nations Resolution 1441: "In November 2002, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a new resolution demanding that Iraq allow weapons inspectors into the country. Iraq denies having any weapons of mass destruction, but the United States and Britain are demanding that Iraq disarm completely, or else face military action." Wrong. U.N. Resolution 1441 calls for Saddam's immediate voluntary disarmament, not only the return of weapons inspectors. If Saddam refused to disarm, the United Nations authorized "serious consequences." Oprah's website makes it sound as though the United States and Britain are holding Iraq to a higher standard than that put in place by the United Nations. It's an obvious attempt to paint the "coalition of the willing" as aggressors in violation of international law.
This is 180 degrees from October 2002, when Oprah appeared to push regime change in Iraq. On Oct. 9, 2002, she hosted Kenneth Pollack, the author of "The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq," as well as Entifadh Qanbarid, the president of the Iraqi National Congress. Both of them made extremely compelling cases for invasion, Pollack from a national security angle and Qanbarid from a human rights angle. Oprah also spoke to Elie Wiesel, Holocaust survivor and 1986 Nobel Peace Prize winner; Wiesel made an emotional plea for American intervention. After the show, AlterNet, a left-wing publication, ran an article asking if Oprah was a "warmonger."
Oprah's audience is composed mainly of busy soccer moms who simply don't have the time to research political issues. They take Oprah's word as gospel. She portrays herself as all-knowing, all-caring, all-wise -- after all, she's qualified to teach "Iraq 101." Oprah's opinions vacillate as quickly as her weight, and she plays fast and loose with the facts. When she waxes political, her audience should change the channel.