Rumsfeld 'Kept up fear of terror attacks!"

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Are there, or are there not a large amount of people that challenge the official stories of every modern terror attack? WTC '93, Oklahoma City bombing of '95, U.S.S. Cole '00, WTC '01, London '07?

Do you even read what you type ?
The above list does not consist of every terror attack that has taken place.

Okay, that's what I thought. Stop with the dramatics.

Well I am just dishing up a cold serving of reality.
As for Somalia there has seems to have been some progress made against the enemy which is good . See this thread for more on this matter.

My sources ?
I expect anyone sources to be backed up by solid and veritable(SP?) evidence. I would only be naive if I believed in assumptions that are based on three to six words out of differnt memos. Don't get wrong I was glad to see Rumsfeld go he should have been fired a lot sooner but that still doesn't change my opinion on this matter.

reply to post by xpert11


Let me reiterate that for you.. I have a very western world view of what "terror" is. Every Major attack on the "western world." I think you knew exactly where I was coming from given my examples, and decided to throw a cheap shot focusing on grammatical error, rather than content.

And I was going to bow out gracefully but your arrogance is so annoying I can't help it. I can hang out and will gladly keep running you into the dirt if you'd prefer. As far as factually, we'll have to wait and see if new information comes out concerning the articles implications.

Language is a beautiful dance and just by dancing a little myself, I have a pretty good grasp of using "affective" words.

"Keep elevating the terror threat." Let's flirt with that for a minute.

Keep; continuously, to maintain, to carry on..

Elevating; the act of increasing, progressing to a higher limit.

To continuously elevate a threat doesn't make sense because our government has a implemented a "staging" system, so your average joe can relate color, or intesity of color, with the severity of the alert. You can't really "keep elevating" the terror threat in that sense because it's limited. That wording is irrelevant to the type of staging we use. This could only mean to "increase" the terror rhetoric through other means. The Defense secretary conveniently has someone just for that very reason. What is this position called? the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Liaison. Weird to think of who wold have recieved these memos considering the DS and the SDPL go hand in hand..

I found this pretty interesting while I was looking around..

Several senior war planners complained to me in interviews that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his inner circle of civilian advisers, who had been chiefly responsible for persuading President Bush to lead the country into war

Why would one man try to "persuade" the president towards war? Ulterior motives? This is the man you're going to trust with a substantial amount of power over the governments media resources? This may not be directly relevant, but it definitely says something about his character and his intentions. And civilian advisors planning for a national war..Doesn't sound weird at all.


If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck. Chances are....

reply to post by xpert11


I want to make it apparent that I know exactly where you're coming from and I completely agree. In "context" and the grammatical aspect itself, you're very correct. Who know's to what extent he was saying or what "exactly" he was referring to, but I have a very, very good idea. We'll have to see if anything further is leaked as to the memos "context" and we can have at it again.

And save your arrogance for the minor leagues.

reply to post by xpert11

I think their is enough evidence in history about Rumsfeld's activities to provide evidence that in fact DeadFlagBlues assertions are most probably correct.

What was rummy up to near the end of the cold war? Sorry i mean what should of been the end of the cold war, but rummy got his way.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld began to make speeches arguing that the Soviets were ignoring Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s treaties and secretly building up their weapons, with the intention of attacking the United States. The CIA and other agencies who watched the Soviet Union strongly disagreed with Rumsfeld, calling Rumsfeld's position a "complete fiction" and pointing out that the Soviet Union was disintegrating from within, could barely afford to feed their own people, and would collapse within a decade or two if simply left alone. Rumsfeld used his position to persuade President Ford to set up an independent inquiry. Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz wanted to create a much more severe view of the Soviet Union, Soviet intentions, Soviet views about fighting and winning a nuclear war.

Rummy and Wolf formed an organization called the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB). In 1975 the PFIAB wanted the CIA head William Colby to approve a competitive independant analytical group to the CIA, of course Colby didn't allow it. Colby was removed from his position as a part of the 'Halloween Massacre' where President Ford had a major cabinet clean out. William Colby was replaced by none other than George H.W. Bush.

Historians allege that President Ford's decision was not one of his own design and historically two theories are postulated to support this allegation. First, Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney manipulated their appointments to advance their own agendas within the American political arena. Or, secondly, Rumsfeld and Cheney convinced Ford to make these changes in order to improve his re-election prospects against his primary Republican opponent, Ronald Reagan.[2]

Veteran political correspondents and commentators initiated newspaper and magazine articles immediately fingering Donald Rumsfeld as the manipulator of these events despite Ford's protestations that he, himself, made the decision alone.[3] The historiography of the "Halloween Massacre" appears to support these allegations.

So now with George Bush Senior in as CIA Director the PFIAB asked for approval to implement an independent completive analytical group to the CIA, which Bush Senior approved.

Team B was a competitive analysis exercise commissioned by the Central Intelligence Agency in the 1970s to analyze threats the Soviet Union posed to the security of the United States. Team B was comprised of "outside experts" who attempted to counter intelligence officials within the CIA known as Team A.[1] Team B concluded the National Intelligence Estimate on the Soviet Union, generated yearly by the CIA, underestimated Soviet military power and misinterpreted Soviet strategic intentions.

The Team B reports became the intellectual foundation for the idea of "the window of vulnerability" and of the massive arms buildup that began toward the end of the Carter administration and accelerated under President Ronald Reagan.[4] Anne Cahn of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, then-CIA director George H. W. Bush, and other critics on both ends of the political spectrum later concluded the Team B project's findings were wrong.

source : en.wikipedia.org...
source : en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by blahdiblah


Jesus, man.

I knew the guy was a crook, but I didn't give it second thought to check further into his past discretions. Both sides of the argument can now reevaluate their talking points and go at it again.

Hell of a post.

A sample of some of the stuff team B came up with:

Team B came to the conclusion in their report[27] that the Soviets had or could develop an entirely new anti-submarine detection system that used a system that did not depend on sound and was, thus, undetectable by contemporary Western technology, even though no evidence existed for it or its deployment, other than money spent on research, and when the western experts believed that such a system would be impossible. When the CIA argued that the economic chaos in the Soviet Union was hindering their ability to produce an air defense system, Team B countered by arguing that the Soviet Union was trying to deceive the American public and claimed that the Russian air defense system worked perfectly. Some members were even considering promoting a first strike policy against the U.S.S.R.

source: en.wikipedia.org...

So whats it all about. The CIA was reporting on the state of the USSR correctly pretty much summing it up as "painted rust" and not really worth worrying about. This didn't gel with Secretary of Defense Rummy's rhetoric that the ruskies were amassing more nuclear weapons and are still a threat. So to counter the CIA's claims he wanted his own 'stacked' intelligence group. He asked the Director William Colby if it he would approve this independent group, Colby said no i wont. So then Rummy used his position to influence President Ford to get rid of Colby and allocate Bush Senior as CIA director. Bush Senior approved rummy's 'stacked' intelligence group thats objective was to make the ruskies seem like a threat and reinvigorate the dieing cold war. So to do that Team B came up with classy analysis of intelligence like; intelligence said the Russians didn't have sonar therefore they must have some sort of more superior anti-submarine detection system that western science hasn't discovered yet. Then when the CIA said look they don't really have enough money to be a threat anymore Team B countered with 'they are just tricking you guys,' they really do have money. So where did all this Team B bs lead? It lead the US and the ruskies in to Cold War Version 2.0 which meant another massive nuclear arms build up between the two nations. All thanks to good old rummy.

So yeah I can come to the conclusion as should you from 6 words taken from memos sent in 2006 to the pentagon that the guy is trying to 'market fear' to the public.

[edit on 3-11-2007 by blahdiblah]

[edit on 3-11-2007 by blahdiblah]

reply to post by blahdiblah


It's obvious they have been "hyping" fear since even before 9/11. Fear is a very powerful tool in the right hands and our own government has been honing the skill of manipulation through fear for the better part of it's history. I was almost confused when people brought "context" into the equation, becaues the context is obvious. I thought maybe I was seeing something somebody else wasn't. I thought the wording, even in the short examples seemed telling as to the very intentions of Rumsefeld and you have seemed to compound my suspicions.

I'm also glad you stepped in, because it's rare than I ever overstep the bounds of giving into things like "intuition" or emotion in general when it comes to discussion. There's no progression to be made if anybody is going off those kind of instinctual urges.

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
This game reminds me of those little punching bags you have when you're a kid. You hit it and it falls down, only to spring up, only to subsequently get knocked down again. They were fun then, they're fun now.

hum dee dee dum
Weebles wabble but they don't fall down

Remember Rummy also visited Saddam during the Iraq/Iran war, he also flew to Iraq just before Saddam's hanging, I am really curious what final words he wanted to say. I think the whole Iraq war thing might have been personal to him also.

-Redge777

[edit on 5-11-2007 by Redge777]

Just a bit of vision of rumsfeld shaking saddams hand.

youtube.com...