WHAT WOULD RUMSFELD SAY ABOUT GUN BUY BACK.
MAC.

From a Press Conference at NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium, June 6, 2002 [2][3]
Now what is the message there? The message is that there are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know. So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information together, and we then say well that's basically what we see as the situation, that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns. And each year, we discover a few more of those unknown unknowns. It sounds like a riddle. It isn't a riddle. It is a very serious, important matter. There's another way to phrase that and that is that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It is basically saying the same thing in a different way. Simply because you do not have evidence that something exists does not mean that you have evidence that it doesn't exist. And yet almost always, when we make our threat assessments, when we look at the world, we end up basing it on the first two pieces of that puzzle, rather than all three. I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that. Interview with Steve Croft, Infinity CBS Radio Connect, November 14, 2002 [4]

And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months. TownHall Meeting At Aviano Air Base in Italy, February 7, 2003 [5]

Then there are three or four countries that have said they won't do anything. I believe Libya, Cuba and Germany are ones that have indicated they won't help in any respect. February 8, 2003 [6]

Now, you're thinking of Europe as Germany and France. I don't. I think that's old Europe. January, 2003 [7]

It's a difficult thing today to be informed about our government even without all the secrecy. Chicago Tribune, April 13, 1966 [8]

From the DOD News Briefing following the fall of Baghdad, April 11, 2003:
I picked up a newspaper today and I couldn't believe it. I read eight headlines that talked about chaos, violence, unrest. And it just was Henny Penny -- "The sky is falling." I've never seen anything like it! And here is a country that's being liberated, here are people who are going from being repressed and held under the thumb of a vicious dictator, and they're free. And all this newspaper could do, with eight or 10 headlines, they showed a man bleeding, a civilian, who they claimed we had shot -- one thing after another. From the very beginning, we were convinced that we would succeed, and that means that that regime would end. And we were convinced that as we went from the end of that regime to something other than that regime, there would be a period of transition. And, you cannot do everything instantaneously; it's never been done, everything instantaneously. We did, however, recognize that there was at least a chance of catastrophic success, if you will, to reverse the phrase, that you could in a given place or places have a victory that occurred well before reasonable people might have expected it, and that we needed to be ready for that; we needed to be ready with medicine, with food, with water. And, we have been. Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things. They're also free to live their lives and do wonderful things. And that's what's going to happen here. I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons. At a hearing of the Senate's appropriations subcommittee on defense, May 14, 2003

You and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase immediate threat. I didn't, the president didn't. And it's become kind of folklore that that's what's happened. CBS Face the Nation, March 14, 2004

But no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Hearing Before the House Armed Services Committee, September 10, 2002 [9]. Quoted on March 14, 2004 by Thomas Friedman in reply to the previous statement.

I'm not into this detail stuff. I'm more concepty. Interview with the Washington Post January 09, 2002 [10]

Look at me! I'm sweet and lovable! Foreign Press Center, 21 Jun 2002 [11]

…it seems to me that it's up to all of us to try to tell the truth, to say what we know, to say what we don't know, and recognize that we're dealing with people that are perfectly willing to, to lie to the world to attempt to further their case and to the extent people lie of, ultimately they are caught lying and they lose their credibility and one would think it wouldn't take very for that to happen dealing with people like this. From the 2004 documentary film Control Room

It is pretty clear that the coalition can win in Afghanistan and Iraq in one way or another, but it will be a long, hard slog. [27] referring to the ongoing War on Terrorism

Those who follow orders to commit such crimes will be found and they will be punished. War crimes will be prosecuted. And it will be no excuse to say, 'I was just following orders.' Any official involved in such crimes will forfeit hope of amnesty or leniency with respect to past action. Pentagon briefing, March 20, 2003 [28]

Congress, the press, and the bureaucracy too often focus on how much money or effort is spent, rather than whether the money or effort actually achieves the announced goal. "Rumsfeld's Rules" January 12, 1974 [31]

I don't know what the facts are but somebody's certainly going to sit down with him and find out what he knows that they may not know, and make sure he knows what they know that he may not know, and that's a good thing. Talking to reporters about whether President Bush knows about equipment inadequacies in Iraq[35]