Well, what Rumsfeld said makes perfect sense on the surface of it...but it does not provide any justification for attacking Iraq, that's the problem with Rumsfeld saying it in the context I would assume he's saying it in.

It's true that a lack of evidence for something's existence doesn't necessarily prove it doesn't exist....but neither does it provide any legitimate excuse for behaving as if it did exist.

Now, supposing that ghosts existed (as a phenomenon). It would be hard to provide any evidence for that, other than people's experiential evidence, given that ghosts are presumed not to be a physical phenomenon....meaning they are presumed not to be a liquid, a solid, or a gaseous substance or a biological lifeform...nor are they presumed to be a known form of energy. So how could you prove that they exist, even if you and hundreds of other people personally witnessed them on numerous occasions?

But the lack of physical evidence wouldn'd prove they don't exist either. You can't prove that something doesn't exist. You can only prove that it doesn't exist in a specific identifiable form or a specific time or place, that's all...by demonstrating that it doesn't, strictly under those conditions.

But you can't prove that it doesn't exist in other times or places. You can only make an assumption about it.

The Bush administration allegedly made an assumption that Iraq had WMDs. I say "allegedly", because they may just have been lying about it, and known perfectly well that they were lying...in order to get the public to support their war of choice.

You can't prove that ghosts, the soul or God do not exist. You can only assume so, based on your general attitude toward such things. And that's what people do...while other people assume that ghosts, the soul or God do exist...depending on their attitude toward such things.

Everyone basically believes what they feel like believing. ;-) If they can find some facts to bolster their belief, all the better, but if they can't, they will simply assert their belief regardless...and interpret the available facts as best they can to support it.

And this thread has now been well and truly derailed by morphing into serious discussion. ;-)