I certainly wouldn't call it Rathergate II because I don't think this is at all in the same ballpark as that fiasco.

Consider something he said to Zahn from the article Dan posted:

CHURCHILL: Actually, I think you're wrong in some part on both counts. But, yes, in general, I can understand the sense of outrage and that's what I was attempting to engender. I wanted to engender a response comparable by that experienced and manifested by peoples elsewhere when they are treated in a similar fashion as a matter of course in the U.S.

Remember that time you gave me the big "Fuck you!" to sort of get a reaction outta me? With the idea that perhaps it would stimulate a certain discussion or thought process to occur. I think that's more the idea of his essay and he wanted it to be inflammatory and stimulate thought and discussion. I don't think it's harmful or hate speech in any way and I also don't think it's meant to be some sort of activist propaganda. He's trying to get people to discuss and understand the events that have transpired. To look at, think about, and maybe understand why these things happened.

It is a bit of a stunt but not one I think that's meant to draw more attention to him or an activist cause. Just to get you to pause and ponder...but let's face it, anything that tries to get you to understand the thought process or reasons why a terrorist may have attacked us is not going to be a popular topic with the majority of this country.