9/11 truth groups dissect Rumsfeld's 'another attack' quip

9/11 truth groups dissect Rumsfeld's 'another attack' quip
Muriel Kane
Raw Story
Monday, May 19, 2008

A newly-revealed speech delivered by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld before an audience of Pentagon-sponsored military analysts in December 2006 is providing ample grist for 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

An audio recording of the speech was one of a large number of items released by the Pentagon on May 8 as a result of Freedom of Information requests. The New York Times had filed the requests in the course of preparing its expose of the Pentagon's use of supposedly independent retired military officers to present its message on network news shows.

Speaking a month after the Democratic Party had recaptured majorities in both houses of Congress, and just following his own resignation as Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld suggested that a new 9/11 could be the corrective for American complacency:

"This President's pretty much a victim of success. We haven't had an attack in five years. The perception of the threat is so low in this society that it's not surprising that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing's in Europe, there's a low threat perception. The correction for that, I suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized for another [inaudible] and it's a shame we don't have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats...the lethality, the carnage, that can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that you'd think we'd be able to understand it."

The audio received no notice for several days, until blogger Jack Gillis discovered it in the course of a thread at Talking Points Memo devoted to combing through the documents. Gillis then made the full audio available at his blog, along with brief quotes from some of the more "chilling" moments. Jason Linkins at the Huffington Post carried the story along by providing a complete transcription of Rumsfeld's "extraordinary" remark.

At that point, awareness of the speech exploded. However, while moderate bloggers saw it merely as Rumsfeld "blurt[ing] out the secret wet-dream fantasy of every warmongering neocon Republican," others found it far more sinister.

Rob Kall, the executive editor of OpEd News, was one of the first to suggest the obvious conclusion. "Call me a conspiracy theorist," he wrote on May 14. "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."

A few days later, PrisonPlanet.com, a website devoted to conspiracy theories, was featuring the Rumsfeld remarks as something far more than "casually joking." Editor Paul Joseph Watson described the tape as revealing "former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld talking with top military analysts about how a flagging Neo-Con political agenda could be successfully restored with the aid of another terrorist attack on America."

"Rumsfeld's admission that the correction for dwindling support of the Neo-Con imperial crusade is another terror attack is perhaps the most startling and blatant indication that 9/11 was an inside job," Watson continued. "How much more evidence do we need to confirm that the Neo-Con hierarchy in control of the U.S. government are instigating and exploiting terror in the pursuit of their own domestic and geopolitical agenda?"

Larry Chin at GlobalResearch.ca was equally emphatic, writing, "Placing the new evidence against previously revealed 9/11-related acts on the part of Rumsfeld, his guilt is overt and obvious. Recall that it was Rumsfeld who enthusiastically penned the 'Go Massive' memo, gleefully declaring the Bush administration finally had the green light to kill: 'Not only UBL (Usama bin Laden). Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.' As the Bush administration’s war ensued in earnest, Rumsfeld gloated to the New York Times that 9/11 provided 'the kind of opportunities that World War II offered, to refashion the world.'"

In an interview with conservative commentator Rusty Humphries for a Pentagon radio talk show in September 2006, three months before his speech to the military analysts, Rumsfeld was asked about "this new wave of conspiracy theories on September 11th."

He replied, "I suppose there have always been people in the world who subscribe to conspiracy theories and are -- you just almost have to suspend the idea of disbelief. I can't imagine people saying -- writing books the way they're writing them, articles of what they're writing, believing what they believe -- people contending that the -- September 11th was not an attack by al Qaeda, even though when the al Qaeda take credit for it."

Humphries went on to say, "I talk to terrorists personally, and they tell me every single time, it was the Jews that sent the planes in to start a war between us and Islam. They also told me one time that it was the Jews that sent Monica Lewinsky in to have sex with Bill Clinton so they could run America. You like that one?"

"My goodness," Rumsfeld replied.


I am getting really tired of the term "conspiracy theorist"

It is a meaningless pejorative.

weak article

This is the irrelevant part of the article:

Humphries went on to say, "I talk to terrorists personally, and they tell me every single time, it was the Jews that sent the planes in to start a war between us and Islam. They also told me one time that it was the Jews that sent Monica Lewinsky in to have sex with Bill Clinton so they could run America. You like that one?"

"My goodness," Rumsfeld replied.

To me, this is superfluous text which totally distorts the attitude of the article. You are printing the uttering of an unknown radio host who is clearly biased.

Next time, leave this type of bullshit out.

I like RAWSTORY. I have been a regular reader and participant for years. Overall, it is a great resource. I think this is an isolated instance of poor editing. I will give Muriel the benefit of the doubt. I was disappointed with the article, but I still think the site is a good resource.

Face up to it, people in the ME don't like what is going on

No bullshit here. Most people know that PNAC is pro Zionist and is the road-map for US militaristic, faschist foriegn policy and written by Israelis, and Israelis had something to do with 911. Nobody likes the 911 wars. One million Iraqi's killed and counting, several hundreds of thousands in Afghanistan. The US and Israel have polluted the ME with depleted uranium, white phosphorus, and cluster bombs.

Now the US and Israel are sounding the drums of war again for an attack on Iran making an issue of their nuclear program which IAEA says is a non-issue (ElBaradei: Iran not after bomb)

I grant you that it is not elegant to talk about Jews, while Rumsfeld talks about Moslem demographics in Europe as an impediment to European militarism to support US plans (see my comment below). But I remind you that in the Middle East everyone knows that Israel is an Apartheid Jews-only Militaristic State, militarily occupyng Arab lands in Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and it is an open secret that Israelis soldiers and the Mossad is in Iraq too. Like it or not, in the Middle East Israelis are refered to as Jews and Zionists and according to veteren US diplomats, the Whitehouse is totally dominated by Israeli (jews).

I now refer you to the following:

Egypt: US, Israel fueling ME turmoil

"The existence of American and Israeli tanks on Arab soil is leading to more instability in the region," Aboul Gheit(Egypt's foriegn ministrer) said at the World Economic Forum on Monday.

"The anger leads to lots of turmoil. Turmoil leads to instability," he added.

The minister also pointed out that the instability in the region also came from a lack of political determination to solve the region's problems, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"Would you please tell me did anyone raise the issue of the Israeli capability?" said Aboul Gheit. "Why are you hiding the Israeli nuclear capability?"

On Monday, Palestinian Authority Chief Abbas accused US of bias towards Zionists following a speech by Bush at the Israeli parliament last week.

Bush, who has a mediator role in Israeli-Palestinian peace process, lavished praise on Israel and barely mentioned the Palestinians in his speech, which marked the Zionist regime's 60th anniversary of occupation.

This is also often cited:

"believing what they believe -- people contending that the -- September 11th was not an attack by al Qaeda, even though when the al Qaeda take credit for it."

Even if we believe AQ exists and it's spokesman took credit this is no proof at all!
Especially in the face of all indications, forensics and testimony to the contrary!
(micro spheres by Al Quaeda?)

War mongering Rumsfeld: We are not sufficiently on a war footing

The hour long audio of the Rumsfeld lunch can be listened to here (please hear this pure war propaganda to get the government on a war footing (right out of PNAC) - save target as, to zap through):


At Around 38 minutes into the audio, Rumsfeld talks about military expenditures:

"I look at Europe, our allies, there is only 4 of them above 2%, and they have a growing Moslem population, who will begin to affect their voting, their demographics; aging demographics, increasing Moslem population, inevitably affect the body politic, so the likelness of getting it up from 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, to 3.8% is very low. So we are going to end up with, in 5, 10, 15 years, with a capability amongst our allies that is relatively modest."

So Moslem demographics are a problem for Rumsfeld?

Audio exerpts are here

See last clip on exerpt page for: "perception of the threat level is so low... and the same thing in Europe... the correction is an attack...the longer you get away from 911"

What is this guy Muriel

What is this guy Muriel Kane's problem? Is this how Rawstory "sneaks truth out" by imitating corporate mainstream hacks who like to associate 9/11 Truth with "the Jews" and term it all "Conspiracy Theory"? Frankly I'm sickened by this because I like Rawstory and thought they were better than that.