INTERESTING ONLINE POLL RESULT AT NEW STATESMAN ... This is from their e-newsletter to subscribers (which includes me, at least until I get purged for deviationism):

From: NS updates
Reply-To: NS updates

New Statesman - Monday, September 22, 2003 issue
http://www.newstatesman.com

[...]

LAST WEEK'S VOTE RESULTS

Should the UN take control of Iraq?

47.6% said YES
52.3% said NO

To read your comments: http://www.newstatesman.com/nsleadercomments.htm

(The comments are at that URL, but not the vote stats, it seems.)

52.3% of NSS readers voted against UN control over Iraq? Of course, two caveats:

[1] Online polls are notoriously subject to manipulation. "Vote early, vote often" and spam the e-ballot-box. Maybe if an e-magazine were to limit its cyber-suffrage to paying subscribers only, you'd get a better sample. But then, how many pro-Palestinian people would pay Marty Peretz $25 a year for the privilege of increasing the "NO" votes in a hypothetical "Should Arafat be assassinated?" online poll run by The New Republic from 0.001% to 0.002%?

[2] Knowing the likely readership of the New Statesman, there's a good chance the bulk of that 52.3% were rejecting UN control not because they want Iraq to remain an American/ Coalition protectorate, but because they want Saddam restored to power now that the casus belli (presence of WMDs) seems to be "not proven", as the Scots (eg, George Galloway MP) would put it.