On November 9, an article by Eric Rosenberg about Donald Rumsfeld was published in Hearst Newspapers around the country. Rosenberg wrote that Rumsfeld has denied making two statements. According to Rosenberg, he has denied saying that "U.S. forces would be welcomed by the Iraqi citizenry and that Saddam Hussein had large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons." Rosenberg's article gave specific examples of specific interviews for both statements and their subsequent denials.
Skeptical, I decided to see if I could find transcripts of the interviews in question. Find them I did.
There is No Question...
In a February 20, 2003 interview (PBS transcript here) on PBS's News Hour with Jim Lehrer, Lehrer asked Rumsfeld the following: "Do you expect the invasion, if it comes, to be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq?" Rumsfeld responded: "There's obviously -- the Shiite population in Iraq and the Kurdish population in Iraq have been treated very badly by Saddam Hussein's regime. They represent a large fraction of the total. There's no question but that they would be welcomed."
In a later interview on September 25, 2003 (Dept. transcript here) with Morris Jones of Sinclair Broadcasting, Jones remarked: "Before the war in Iraq, you stated the case very eloquently and you said, I remember this it was done very well, you said they would welcome us with open arms." Rumsfeld responded: "Never said that." Jones replied: "Never said that." Rumsfeld ends the discussion: "Never did. You may remember it well, but you’re thinking of somebody else. You can’t find anywhere me saying anything like either one of those two things you just said I said. I may look like somebody else."
Extensive
Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on September 18, 2002 (HASC transcript here), Rumsfeld said the following about Saddam Hussein: "His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of biological weapons—including anthrax and botulism toxin, and possibly smallpox."
While Rosenberg does not give the date of the following press conference (Dept. of Defense transcript here), Rumsfeld denies the above statement. An unnamed journalist in the audience asked: "In retrospect, were you a little too far-leaning in your statements that Iraq categorically had caches of weapons -- of chemical and biological weapons, given what's been found to date?" The following transpired:
RUMSFELD: Well, I think that's a bit of a non sequitur. You -- I said what I believed. I believed it then. I believe it now. I've not seen anything in Dr. Kay's -- first of all, his report is an interim report, and I've not seen anything in his report that disproves what I said.
Q: But it hasn't proven that -- he talked about --
RUMSFELD: That's equally true. That's why it's called an interim report.
Q: You painted a picture of extensive stocks though that even an interim report -
RUMSFELD: Wait, you go back and give me something that talks about extensive stocks. The U.N. reported extensive stocks. That is where that came from. And I said what I believed to be the case, and I don't -- I'd be surprised if you found the word extensive.
Q: You used the word massive -- massive stockpiles of clandestine biological, chemical weapons. You've said that in congressional testimony. They haven't found any of that. That's all I'm asking.
RUMSFELD: I know. I've agreed with that, that they haven't. They've issued an interim report. They've also found that it's not true. They have not found that it is untrue. They simply are in the middle of their progress.
Q: If it was so massive, why didn't they find it by now? That's kind of my point.
RUMSFELD: Well, massive. You could kill tens of thousands of people with materials in a room this size, and you're talking about a country the size of California. You know that.
As he says, Rumsfeld never did use the word "extensive" or "massive." The HASC transcript proves this. Nevertheless, Rumsfeld did use the word "large." One could argue persuasively that both "extensive" and "massive" denote and connote "large," something the Oxford English Dictionary confirms: definition 3a of "extensive" is "large in amount" and definition 1a of "massive" reads "forming or consisting of a large mass."
Where Do We Go from Here?
My first response was to think Rumsfeld's denials were weirdly reminiscent of the historical revision that takes place George Orwell's 1984. Such a comparison, I realized, does not hold. The world that Winston Smith inhabits is one entirely controlled, a world where "The past ... had not merely been altered, it had been actually destroyed." This world, as the above transcripts evince, is not our world. Nevertheless, Rumsfeld, like the Party of 1984, would like "to thrust [his] hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened." Fortunately, Rumsfeld does not have that power.
If you would like to email Donald Rumsfeld about anything I have written here, you may do so using this form via the Department of Defense's DefenseLINK web site. As that is only a general email form, you may prefer to send him a letter at the following address:
Donald H. RumsfeldThanks for taking the time to read this page. If you have any questions, comments or corrections, please do not hesitate to email <jody@josephtate.com> or use the Contact Form.
Joseph Tate
http://josephtate.com/
Correction
I originally wrote here that Rosenberg incorrectly reported that one of Rumsfeld's interviews was not with Morris Jones but with Jon Leiberman instead. Since then, I have heard from Eric Rosenberg who confirmed that the interview was indeed with Morris Jones. The DOD transcript now reflects that correction as well.