The question mark’s there because Rummy actually yes “no” and then later “yes.”
This is from the November 2, 2003 program of Meet the Press.

Complete Video and Photos

Rumsfeld: Saddam No Longer A Threat? (Small – 4 MB)
Tim Russert:
“The New York Times reports that senior administration officials say that Saddam is playing a significant role in coordinating and directing attacks, and that he is the catalyst for what is going on now.”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“I don’t know what — how to take the word “catalyst.” I don’t doubt for a minute that his being alive gives encouragement to the Baathists and the regime murderers that you see in those tapes killing people.”
Tim Russert:
“He may be directing the resistance?”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“If he’s — I think he’s alive. I think he’s probably in Iraq. He’s probably in northern Iraq, and he undoubtedly has ways to communicate, imperfect ways, but probably by couriers, with some other people. Is he masterminding some major activity? Difficult to know, but unlikely. Is he involved? Possibly.”
Tim Russert:
“He’s still a threat?”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“Personally, no. No. I mean, is it a threat to have released 100,000 criminals in a country with 23 million people? You bet. Is it a threat to have foreign terrorists coming across the borders? You bet. Is it a threat to have the leftovers of the Feyadeen Saddam and the murderers of Saddam Hussein’s regime the Baathists who benefited from his regime? Sure, it’s a threat. And there’s a lot of them, and there’s a lot of weapons in that country. There are weapons caches all over the country. So is that a danger for people in Iraq? Yes.”

This is from the November 2, 2003 program of Meet the Press.

Complete Video and Photos
Rumsfeld: What He Meant By His Memo (Small – 7 MB)




Tim Russert:
“Let me turn to your memo of October 16th, which has been leaked, and share it with our viewers and ask you to talk about it.”
(Russert reading from memo) ” ‘With respect to global terrorism, the record since September 11th seems to be: “We care having mixed results with Al Qaida…” Today we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror. Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas’ the schools ‘and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?… 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.’ ”
” ‘Don’t know if we are winning or losing’ ??”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“Let me explain that. It’s not that we don’t know if we’re winning or losing in Iraq or Afghanistan. We know what’s happening there. The point I was making is this. If there are 90 nations engaged in the global war on terrorism, and if they’re out arresting, capturing, killing terrorists. If they’re out there putting pressure on their bank accounts, making it harder for them to raise money, making it harder for them to transfer money, making it harder for terrorists to move across borders. All of which is true. Good progress is being made.
The question is, that I posed, and I don’t know the answer, is how many new terrorists are being made. How many of these schools are being led by radical clerics and are teaching people that the thing they should do with their lives is to go out and kill innocent men, women and children to stop progress, to torture people, to prevent women from being involved in their country’s activities. How many schools are doing that and how many people are being produced by that? And the question I posed was: you can’t know in this battle of ideas how it’s coming out unless you have some metric to judge that and there isn’t such a metric. It doesn’t exist. Therefore, my point was in the memo, that I think we need, the world needs, to think about other things we can do to reduce the number of schools that teach terrorism. Not just continue (stops) we certainly have to continue doing what we’re doing in going after terrorists wherever the are, and capturing them and killing them. But I think we also have to think about how we, the world, not just the United States — this is something well beyond our country or the Department of Defense — how we reduce the number of people who are becoming terrorists in the world.”
Tim Russert:
“Win the hearts and minds.”
Donald Rumsfeld: (Nods)

Tim Russert asks a great question and Rummy manages to drop in a little disinformation about the non-existent connection between Al Queda and Iraq.
This is from the November 2, 2003 program of Meet the Press.
Complete Video and Photos
Rumsfeld On Whether We’re Less Safe Since The Shrub War Started
(Small – 8 MB)
Tim Russert:
“Go back prior to the war in march, where the argument was being made that there was no need to go to war with Saddam Hussein. He’s in a box. He’s confined. We have sanctions. We have inspections. And then the Administration decided to go to war and opened up that box. And that America is now less safe — less secure, than we were prior to the invasion.”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“I think that that’s not correct. I would say America is more safe today. If you believe the intelligence, which successive administrations of both political parties did, and other governments in the world, that he was progressing with these programs and that this is a country who’s used the weapons before. That’s used them on its neighbors — used them on his own people. I don’t know if you’ve seen any of the tapes more recently of what they do to their own people. Of cutting off people’s heads and cutting off their fingers and their hands, and pulling out their tongues and cutting them off — throwing them off three story buildings. This is a particularly vicious regime, Saddam’s regime.
It is true, we have terrific young men and women being killed and wounded today, as we did yesterday, and your heart goes out to their families and to their loved ones. But what they’re doing is important. What they’re doing is taking the battle to the terrorists. There are foreign terrorists coming in to Iraq. That’s true. We know that. We’ve captured two or three hundered of them from various countries.”
Tim Russert:
“Stop there. Would that have happened — would they have gone to Iraq but for the fact that we went in there?”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“Why sure. The Ansur al islam (sp) was already in Iraq. There were Al Quaeda already in Iraq. The Iraqis were engaged in terrorism themselves. They were giving $25,000 to suicide bombers’ families who would go in and kill innocent men, women and children. They are a part of that. And certainly, the work in Iraq is difficult. It’s tough. And it is gonna to take some time, but good progress is being made in many parts of the country…”

This is from the November 2, 2003 program of Meet the Press.
Complete Video and Photos

Rumsfeld: The War On Iraq And The War On Terror Are The Same (Small – 3 MB)
Tim Russert:
“How do you respond to those who suggest that the War On Terror should have been focused on Al Queda and that the resources that are now applied to Iraq are misapplied. That Saddam was not the threat that he was presented as by the Administration, and that the war should have focused on Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda.”
Donald Rumsfeld:
“Tim, we said from the outset that there are several terrorist networks that have global reach and that there were several countries that were harboring terrorists that have global reach. We weren’t going into Iraq when we were hit on September 11th, and the question is ‘well, what do you do about that?’ If you know there are terrorists and you know there’s terrorist states. Iraq’s been a terrorist state for decades. And you know there are countries harboring terrorists. We believe, correctly I think, that the only way to deal with it is (stops) You can’t just hunker down and hope they won’t hit you again. You simply have to take the battle to them. And we have been consistently working on the Al Queda network. We’ve captured a large number of those folks. Captured or killed. Just like we’ve now captured or killed a large number of the top 55 Saddam Hussein loyalists.”