Rumsfeld's Mind: If 9/11 Worked, Why Not Try it Again
by Rob Kall - May 14, 2008
Call me a conspiracy theorist. But when Donald Rumsfeld spoke, in late 2006, to the pentagon propagandists the NY Times recently exposed, he, in opining the loss of both houses of congress to the Democrats, suggested that “the US could benefit from another terrorist attack,” Jason Linkin of the Huffington post reports:
“As documented by Newsvine, it all went down at a valedictory luncheon Rumsfeld hosted for those analysts on December 12, 2006. Many of the "message force multipliers" named in the original New York Times piece were in attendance, including David L. Grange, Donald W. Sheppard, James Marks, Rick Francona, Wayne Downing, and Robert H. Scales, Jr. They were treated to an extraordinary conversation (Newsvine has highlights, the hour-long clip of which can be found here) with Rumsfeld, that included many jaw-dropping moments, such as Rumsfeld admitting that in Iraq, the U.S. "can't lose militarily, but...can't win by military means alone," an agreement that Iraq could use a Syngman Rhee-type dictator (because that's what democracy smells like!), and a lengthy passage where Rumsfeld jokingly offers a bottle of champagne to anyone who could kill Moqtada al Sadr. You sure don't see too many people joking on al Sadr these days!
“But by far the most extraordinary part of this luncheon is the antipathy the gathered members exhibit toward the American people for having the temerity to vote the Democrats back into power. When Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong bemoans the lack of "sympathetic ears" on Capitol Hill, Rumsfeld offers that the American people lack "the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats." What's to be done? According to Rumsfeld, "The correction for that, I suppose, is [another] attack."
Now this is just factual information. Why do I start this article by saying, “call me a conspiracy theorist?” Because this slips too easily off Rumsfeld’s reptilian tongue. Too easily because perhaps it’s not at all a new idea. Perhaps it is an idea that, for him, for all the propagandist sell-out generals, this is not new, that is actually, already tried and true.
One of the oft cited premises of the 9/11 Truth movement is that the attack on the towers was the pearl harbor-like event that the neocons anticipated would be necessary to move the US to embrace the aggressive militaristic tactics manifested in Iraq. Here, we have Rumsfeld casually joking about it—not a smoking gun, but, perhaps, a clear “tell” in poker parlance, indicating ready ability to think in these terms.