<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with Rumsfeld and CIA</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/Rumsfeld+CIA</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'Rumsfeld' and 'CIA' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 07:00:08 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 07:00:08 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Gulags, American-Style</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/46335/Gulags%2DAmericanStyle</link>
		<description> The administration&apos;s latest innovation in its effort to export democracy:  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644_pf.html&quot;&gt;Soviet-style gulags&lt;/a&gt;, a network of secret C.I.A. prisons known as &quot;black sites.&quot; [From the &lt;i&gt;Washington Post&lt;/i&gt;].  Meanwhile, SecDef Rumsfeld says &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2005/tr20051101-secdef4201.html&quot;&gt;no thanks&lt;/a&gt; to the idea of U.N. inspectors talking to detainees in Guantanamo Bay.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.46335</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 07:00:08 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>Al-Qaeda</category>
		<category>Bush</category>
		<category>cabal</category>
		<category>CIA</category>
		<category>Defense</category>
		<category>Guantanamo</category>
		<category>gulag</category>
		<category>interrogation</category>
		<category>Powell</category>
		<category>prison</category>
		<category>Rumsfeld</category>
		<category>terror</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<category>Wilkerson</category>
		<dc:creator>digaman</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Iraq Lacked Atom Whack</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/29205/Iraq%2DLacked%2DAtom%2DWhack</link>
		<description> &lt;em&gt;At least four times in the fall of 2002, the president and his advisers invoked the specter of a &quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/bush.transcript/&quot; title=&quot;Bush: Don&apos;t wait for mushroom cloud&quot;&gt;mushroom cloud&lt;/a&gt;,&quot; and some of them, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, described &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17707-2003Oct25?language=printer&quot; title=&quot;According to records made available to The Washington Post and interviews with arms investigators from the United States, Britain and Australia, it did not require a comprehensive survey to find the central assertions of the Bush administration&apos;s prewar nuclear case to be insubstantial or untrue. Although Hussein did not relinquish his nuclear ambitions or technical records, investigators said, it is now clear he had no active program to build a weapon, produce its key materials or obtain the technology he needed for either.&quot;&gt;Iraq&apos;s nuclear ambitions as a threat to the American homeland&lt;/a&gt;... Among the closely held internal judgments of the Iraq Survey Group, overseen by David Kay as special representative of CIA Director George J. Tenet, are that Iraq&apos;s nuclear weapons scientists did no significant arms-related work after 1991, that facilities with suspicious new construction proved benign, and that equipment of potential use to a nuclear program remained under seal or in civilian industrial use. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/em&gt;So in regards to Iraq&apos;s possession of &lt;em&gt;the one weapon we can be certain causes mass destruction: the atomic bomb&lt;/em&gt;, as &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.why-war.com/news/2002/10/07/weaponso.html&quot; title=&quot;Aum Shinrikyo employed skilled scientists and spent freely to make&apos;&apos;high grade&apos;&apos; anthrax, which it spread around Tokyo on several occasions. The cult gave up on anthrax after it failed to infect even a single person.&quot;&gt;Gregg&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newagepointofinfinity.com/homeland_security.htm&quot; title=&quot;The British and Germans used one ton of chemical weapons per fatality caused during World War I. The 1995 release of the nerve gas sarin in the Tokyo subways by the Aum Shinrikyo sect killed 12 people, fewer than a small, standard bomb might have killed in that crowded, enclosed area. An estimated 5,000 Kurds died in Saddam Hussein&apos;s chemical attack on Halabja, Iraq, in 1988, but this involved dozens of fighter-bombers making repeated low passes over the town. It&apos;s hard to imagine that terrorists could pull off such a coordinated heavy military maneuver. The image of millions cowering behind plastic sheets as clouds of biological weapons envelop a city owes more to science fiction than reality. The Japanese use of fleas infected with bubonic plague against Chinese cities in World War II was the only successful instance of bioattacks in contemporary warfare. In 1971, &apos;&apos;weaponized&apos;&apos; smallpox was accidentally released from a Soviet plant; three people died. In 1979, an explosion at another Soviet site released a large quantity of weapons-grade anthrax; 68 people died.In 1989, workers at an American government laboratory near Washington were accidentally exposed to Ebola, and it was several days before the mistake was discovered; no one died. A coordinated anthrax attack in the fall of 2001 killed five people, a tiny fraction of the number who died of influenza during the time the nation was terrified by the anthrax letters.&quot;&gt;Easterbrook&lt;/a&gt; put it, the verdict is the unsurprising (and unsurprisingly &lt;em&gt;closely held&lt;/em&gt;) nope, not, zero, zip, nada...&lt;/a&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.29205</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:43:26 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>CIA</category>
		<category>DavidKay</category>
		<category>DonaldRumsfeld</category>
		<category>Easterbrook</category>
		<category>GeorgeTenet</category>
		<category>intelligence</category>
		<category>iraq</category>
		<category>IraqSurveyGroup</category>
		<category>iraqwar</category>
		<category>middleast</category>
		<category>mideast</category>
		<category>mushrooms</category>
		<category>nuclearweapons</category>
		<category>Rumsfeld</category>
		<category>Tenet</category>
		<category>USMilitary</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<dc:creator>y2karl</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>There&apos;s just too much here to even begin to cope with.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/21825/Theres%2Djust%2Dtoo%2Dmuch%2Dhere%2Dto%2Deven%2Dbegin%2Dto%2Dcope%2Dwith</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov2002/t11212002_t1118sd2.html"&gt;An official Q&amp;A with the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld,&lt;/a&gt; alludes to some extremely scary/interesting tidbits-- the Office of Strategic Influence is still alive, John Poindexter can do anything he pleases with DARPA, we just might renew nuclear weapons testing.

Don&apos;t worry, though. Rummy sez: &quot;Anyone who is concerned ought not be. Anyone with any concern ought to be able to sleep well tonight. Nothing terrible is going to happen.&quot;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.21825</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Nov 2002 00:11:43 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>CIA</category>
		<category>DonaldRumsfeld</category>
		<category>espionage</category>
		<category>Intelligence</category>
		<category>OfficeofStrategicInfluence</category>
		<category>OSI</category>
		<category>Pentagon</category>
		<category>Rumsfeld</category>
		<category>SecDef</category>
		<category>SecretaryofDefense</category>
		<category>spies</category>
		<category>spying</category>
		<category>USPolitics</category>
		<dc:creator>LimePi</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/20767/</link>
		<description> &#8220;President Bush&#8217;s case against Saddam Hussein ... relied on a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,807194,00.html&quot;&gt;slanted&lt;/a&gt; and sometimes entirely false reading of the available US intelligence, government officials and analysts claimed yesterday.&#8221; Another article on the same subject says, &#8220;Rumsfeld&#8217;s recent remark that the United States has &#8216;bulletproof&#8217; evidence of links between Al Qaeda and Hussein struck many in the intelligence community as an &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-cia11oct11004439,0,6180956.story&quot;&gt;exaggerated&lt;/a&gt; assessment of the available evidence.&#8221; One paper explains the differences this way, &#8220;The C.I.A. has to maintain its &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/10/politics/10INTE.html&quot;&gt;credibility&lt;/a&gt; for objective estimates. The White House is mobilizing the public and preparing foreign nations for a potential American invasion of Iraq.&#8221;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.20767</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:00:17 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>alqaeda</category>
		<category>bush</category>
		<category>cia</category>
		<category>dubya</category>
		<category>georgewbush</category>
		<category>intellignence</category>
		<category>iraq</category>
		<category>rumsfeld</category>
		<category>saddam</category>
		<category>saddamhussein</category>
		<category>terrorism</category>
		<dc:creator>raaka</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


