Rumsfeld On Tape: Terror Attack Could Restore Neo-Con Agenda

Shocking excerpts of confidential recordings recently released under the Freedom of Information Act feature 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.

The tape also includes a conversation where Rumsfeld and the military analysts agree on the possible necessity of installing a brutal dictator in Iraq to oversee U.S. interests.

The tapes were released as part of the investigation into the Pentagon's "message force multipliers" program in which top military analysts were hired to propagandize for the Iraq war in the corporate media.

In attendance at the valedictory luncheon Rumsfeld hosted on December 12, 2006 were David L. Grange, Donald W. Sheppard, James Marks, Rick Francona, Wayne Downing, and Robert H. Scales, Jr. among others.

The most extraordinary exchange takes place when Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong bemoans shrinking political support for Neo-Con war plans on Capitol Hill and suggests that sympathy for the Bush administration's agenda will only be achieved after a new terror attack.

Rumsfeld agrees that the psychological impact of 9/11 is wearing off and the "behavior pattern" of citizens in both the U.S. and Europe suggests that they are unconcerned about the threat of terror. click here for audio tapes
jfxgillis.newsvine.com... 2008/05/12/1482373-correctly-political-liquid-lunch-with-donald-rumsfeld

Why are you suprised?

Isn't there already document proff about the PNAC meeting 1997 saying the USA needs another Pearl hrbour like event to mobilise the USA in to a war.

Even when it is black and white and with audio you will still get people on this site defending them

reply to post by jimrat201

---

You got a dead link there. I would like to hear it, but I'm not really surprised by the content. A bit more surprised that it surfaced.

www.prisonplanet.com...
Fixed it for ya

He said it, but context is everything. Read the question that he was asked:

---DELONG: Politically, what are the challenges because you're not going to have a lot of sympathetic ears up there until it [a terror attack] happens.

He was merely responding to the question in the same context that it was asked and gave his opinion that if indeed another attack occurred, it would help Bush's approval ratings.

I'm not sure that there's anything sinister here, folks. It was not something that he said out of the blue, but was pretty specifically asked about.