Federal Judge in Germany: Numerous 9/11 Theories Screaming For Investigation

[[http://www.opednews.com/articles/Federal-Judge-in-Germany--by-blogger-091215-977.html|Federal Judge in Germany:
Numerous 9/11 Theories Screaming For Investigation Afghanistan War - Right to Self Defense Highly Questionable, December 15, 2009]]


Federal Judge Dieter Deiseroth: It is very unfortunate that the media is not prepared to face the issue of 9/11 and ask the unanswered questions

Question: Do you think the proposal of an independent 9/11 investigation to be realistic?

Judge Dieter Deiseroth:: I think the suggestion is reasonable and necessary. Because the official investigation is the central justification for the war ( "Operation Enduring Freedom") and for serious alterations of the U.S. legal system under the so-called homeland security legislation.

Question: This should be difficult because neither politics nor the big media, dare to question the official version of 9/11 critically.

Judge Dieter Deiseroth: If the official story of 9/11 is further effectively disseminated by all governments - then it is very costly and difficult because of the effect of solidified public opinion to question it . A major research effort is needed and extensive research, time and monetary resources must be available, which is difficult in a time when resources in the newsrooms are being cut down.

But then after all, even the construct of lies to justify the Iraq war was brought down. We now know that was the Bush administration in terms of credibility and veracity,was anything but trustworthy. It is unfortunate that many within the media, are still not sufficiently prepared to face the issue of 9/11 and the open unanswered questions . Maybe also because of the abyss that becomes clear then.

Question: Not too long ago alternative explanations of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US were discussed.

Judge Dieter Deiseroth: Indeed. Parliamentarians of the Democratic Party of Japan, which has won the last election in a landslide, for about 2 years in the Japanese parliament, have repeatedly questioned the official Bush version of 9/11 with very serious arguments and demanded explanations. Something like this did not take place in German parliament, which is rather unfortunate.

Question: But the alternative theories of 9/11 also have many shortcomings.

Judge Dieter Deiseroth: This is absolutely correct. I can warn to replace the official conspiracy theory of the Bush administration with hasty drawn alternative conspiracy theories. If the critics of the official version really want to achieve a new national or international investigation into the attacks of 9 / 11, then they must impose the highest levels of integrity, fact-orientation and openness to possible objections The only way they can avoid to discredit their own arguments, for example by Conjecture and speculation disguised as evidence. I assert: On both sides, that is, both at the official presentation of the Bush administration with the 9/11-Commission Report and on alternative side of the with its many counter-theories there is a sea of questions and also a sea of blatant untruth. This fact is almost screaming for explanations.

Question: Can the military engagement in Afghanistan be based on international law's self-defense right? Did 9/11 not give the U.S. the right to defend itself and its allies a reason for an emergency?

Judge Dieter Deiseroth: We need to realize that the (military) right to self defense, as guaranteed in Article 51 of the UN Charter, in general, may be obtained only in cases where a state is attacked militarily ("if in armed attack occurs"). It must be, therefore, a current military offensive act, which is currently carried out immediately present or imminent. This right may also self-directed only against the state, which has led the attack or at least the state needs to be accountable.

The entire interview in German:

(Read the rest of the article here.)


"If the critics of the official version really want to achieve a new national or international investigation into the attacks of 9 / 11, then they must impose the highest levels of integrity, fact-orientation and openness to possible objections"

The Facts Speak For Themselves

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

Jon...that won't be popular....you know...it's a bit boring;)

When I read that I heard wisdom speaking!

Kind regards John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Maybe I should put...

Action words in between some of the sentences... BOOM!!!, BLAM!!!, BOP!!!

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? The facts speak for themselves.

I've got a German friend checking this out!

Really promising story!

Regards John

9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!

Sorry I should of said my friend of Dutch origin from NZ...

Here's what Evelien Gilbert prominent 9/11 activist and blogger said about this article...

Reply by e-mail

Evelien Gilbert to me
show details 09:15 (1 day ago)

Hi John,

With regards to your request to check the source and content of the article you send to me the following.

The journalist, the judge and the online newspaper check out just fine.
All have corroboration and ample online presence elsewhere.
The content of the article is condensed in the translation and obviously translated by someone of German background as his English is not his primary language judging by the translation but it is basically sound (Keep in mind that Dutch and not German is my first language).

I have changed one or two things to more proper use of English but feel free to go with the original.

It is a very interesting article and the judge is a prominent and acknowledged specialist in international military law and well aware of false flag attacks . In fact he published a series of articles on the Reichstag fire (False flag to start the second world war).

I say go with it.

Here are some of the many links I found links to support the origine and veracity of the article.

Another article written on the illegality of the war in Afghanistan by the judge: http://www.fr-online.de/in_und_ausland/politik/doku_und_debatte/2105270_...

More confirmation of the judges credentials:





Credentials for Telepolis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepolis (And no they are not in any way aligned with the "Alien" nuts. I checked the rest of the news paper articles in this edition and they are all sensible "normal" subjects. No wild eyed craziness.)
It received the European prize for online journalism and is distributed by a reputable publishing house.


Marcus Klöckner (the interviewer) is quoted multiple times in other online publications as a reliable resource.


Hope this helps.




9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!


Would be good to see a subtitled video of this.

Was the interview videoed, I wonder?

war crimes

Im confused a bit here The judge said " We need to realize that the (military) right to self defense, as guaranteed in Article 51 of the UN Charter, in general, may be obtained only in cases where a state is attacked militarily" But we are trying them in a civilian court.
Does this not show that the afgan was is illegal as well. It wasnt a state attacking our state, but rather a world wide group."according to the bush regime"

"It wasnt a state attacking our state"

"It wasnt a state attacking our state"

I could be wrong, but isn't that what the judge was inferring?

With you in the struggle,
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
I work for the 9-11 First Responders, the 9-11 victims, and all those who are being slaughtered and tortured because of 9-11.

Al Qaeda is not a state...

Right, the US was not attacked by either Afghanistan or Iraq. It was ALLEGED that we were attacked by a group which resides in many different countries-- but it was never proven. Our military invasions of sovereign nations was by international standards, illegal.

Of course the bigger scam is that we don't even know if the alleged group was involved. And the even bigger scam is that we do know that it was an inside job. (WTC 7 + Free-fall = Controlled Demolition)

And we know that the 9/11 Commission was lied to and deliberately lied. They were obstructed by the White House, CIA and Pentagon. Plus they lied about many other things: They said that none of the black boxes were recovered from the WTC. They said that Dick Cheney did not arrive at the PEOC until "10:00 a.m., maybe 9:58." And they said "the interior core of the Twin Towers was a hollow shaft, in which the elevators were grouped."

Afghanistan was based on

Afghanistan was based on three UN resolutions,UN 1386,UN 1373 and UN 1378.None of these resolutions justified a war of aggression,neither does Article 51 of the UN Charter.Therefore what has happened is not a war of self defence but a war of aggression.It was not a war on terror it was a war of terror.It is more than a war crime it is the SUPREME war crime.

Yes I suppose it is possible for some smart lawmakers to wriggle around these fact,s because article 51 is particularly vague.This is impossible in the case of Iraq and I will let Colin Powell explain why.

Colin Powell ,CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer Feb 2001

"And we have to make sure that we keep the pressure on Saddam to meet that commitment. Because those weapons are not threatening American youngsters. They're not threatening the American people.His neighbors are the ones who are being threatened, not the United States."

This is Powell admitting that Iraq were no threat to America.The allegation of waging a war of aggression is thus proven as is the charge of waging what amounts to be the supreme war crime.


Here's a summary from a German perspective

The subject of the article is Afghanistan, more precisely: the legitimaticy for the German involvement in the war. The air strike from September 4, when a German officer ordered US fighters to attack people believed to be Taliban (and not, as the government always said, to destroy two scary tank lorries) is top news here right now, and the big majority of the Germans want the troops out anyway.

Deiseroth questions the legitimacy of the German participation in the war, and on this course he touches 9/11. Afghanistan was attacked becaused it harbored the alleged masters of the 9/11 attacks. Deiseroth asks for proof that it was really bin Laden, arguing strongly juristical.

The legitimacy of the German war participation has often been questioned, but this is the first time someone links it directly to the problem 9/11.