IN GERMAN DAILY, TAGESSPIEGEL January 13

VON BULOW INTERVIEW - A criticism of authorized King George W version of September 11 story

www2.tagesspiegel.de/archiv/2002/01/12/ak-sn-in-558560.html

Source: Tagesspiegel, Jan. 12 - PARTIAL TRANSLATION below
The following interview by Stephan Lebert / Norbert Thomma with Andreas Von Bulow appeared in the German newspaper Tagesspiegel, on Jan. 13, 2002

Certains d'entre vous ont peut-être assisté à l'interview du même Von Bülow, réalisée par Hervé Claude, et diffusée sur Arte, le mardi 28 octobre. Je n'ai malheureusement pu l'enregistrer, et j'apprends qu'elle ne sera pas rediffusée - outre qu'il n'y a pas de vidéo disponible de cette soirée thématique sur la CIA. C'est pourquoi je crois utile de mettre en ligne cette interview - plus longue que celle d'H. Claude, et qui dit l'essentiel (voire davantage) des stupidités que j'ai pu entendre. Tout ce galimatias m'a fait l'effet d'une resucée des thèmes de l'écrivain sensationniste Thierry Meysan. Une grande quantité d'invraisemblance - confinant à la fiction - mais qui a des chances de faire entrer une plus grande quantité encore de DM dans le portefeuille de cet auteur. Ce qui inquiète c'est que, lcontrairement à Meysan, qui est un amateur, avide de scandale et de sensationnalisme, Von Bülow a exercé d'importantes fonctions ministérielles dans le gouvernement allemand. Mais, il n'y a pas d'âge pour déjanter ou retomber en enfance...

Pour les germanophones, voici les coordonnées du livre, aimablement communiquées par les services de documentation de Arte, à Strasbourg: Andreas Von Bülow, Die CIA und der 11 September, 2003, éd. Piper.

Last but not least, on trouvera, à la suite de cette interview un article critique, qui m'a paru de bonne facture.

Q: You seem so angry, really upset.

Von Buelow: I can explain what's bothering me: I see that after the horrifying attacks of Sept. 11, all political public opinion is being forced into a direction that I consider wrong.

Q: What do you mean by that?

Von Buelow: I wonder why many questions are not asked. Normally, with such a terrible thing, various leads and tracks appear that are then commented on, by the investigators, the media, the government: Is there something here or not? Are the explanations plausible? This time, this is not the case at all. It already began just hours after the attacks in New York and Washington and--

Q: In those hours, there was horror, and grief.

Von Buelow: Right, but actually it was astounding: There are 26 intelligence services in the U.S.A. with a budget of $30 billion--

Q: More than the German defense budget.

Von Buelow: --which were not able to prevent the attacks. In fact, they didn't even have an inkling they would happen. For 60 decisive minutes, the military and intelligence agencies let the fighter planes stay on the ground, 48 hours later, however, the FBI presented a list of suicide attackers. Within ten days, it emerged that seven of them were still alive.

Q: What, please?

Von Buelow: Yes, yes. And why did the FBI chief take no position regarding contradictions? Where the list came from, why it was false? If I were the chief investigator (state attorney) in such a case, I would regularly go to the public, and give information on which leads are valid and which not.

Q: The U.S. government talked about an emergency situation after the attacks: They said they were in a war. Is it not understandable that one does not tell the enemy everything one knows about him? Von Buelow: Naturally. But a government which goes to war, must first establish who the attacker, the enemy, is. It has a duty to provide evidence. According to its own admission, it has not been able to present any evidence that would hold up in court.

Q: Some information on the perpetrators has been proven with documents. The suspected leader, Mohammad Atta, left Portland for Boston on the morning of Sept. 11, in order to board the plane that later hit the World Trade Center.

Von Buelow: If this Atta was the decisive man in the operation, it's really strange that he took such a risk of taking a plane that would reach Boston such a short time before the connecting flight. Had his flight been a few minutes late, he would not have been in the plane that was hijacked. Why should a sophisticated terrorist do this? One can, by the way, read on CNN (Internet) that none of these names were on the official passenger lists. None of them had gone through the check-in procedures. And why did none of the threatened pilots give the agreed-upon code 7700 over the [Steuerknueppel: STEERING NOB?] to the ground station? In addition: The black boxes which are fire and shock proof, as well as the voice
recordings, contain no valuable data--

Q: That sounds like--

Von Buelow: --like assailants who, in their preparations, leave tracks behind them like a herd of stampeding elephants? They made payments with credit cards with their own names; they reported to their flight instructors with their own names. They left behind rented cars with flight manuals in Arabic for jumbo jets. They took with them, on their suicide trip, wills and farewell letters, which fall into the hands of the FBI, because they were stored in the wrong place and wrongly addressed. Clues were left behind like in a child's game of hide-and-seek, which were to be followed! There is also the theory of one British flight engineer: According to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the pilots' hands, from outside. The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case. That's a theory....

Q: Which sounds really adventurous, and was never considered.

Von Buelow: You see! I do not accept this theory, but I find it worth considering. And what about the obscure stock transactions? In the week prior to the attacks, the amount of transactions in stocks in American Airlines, United Airlines, and insurance companies, increased 1,200%. It was for a value of $15 billion. Some people must have known something. Who?

Q: Why don't you speculate on who it might have been.

Von Buelow: With the help of the horrifying attacks, the Western mass democracies were subjected to brainwashing. The enemy image of anti-communism doesn't work any more; it is to be replaced by peoples of Islamic belief. They are accused of having given birth to suicidal terrorism.

Q: Brainwashing? That's a tough term.

Von Buelow: Yes? But the idea of the enemy image doesn't come from me. It comes from Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington, two policy-makers of American intelligence and foreign policy. Already in the middle of he 1990s, Huntingon believed, people in Europe and the U.S. needed someone they could hate--this would strengthen their identification with their own society. And Brzezinski, the mad dog, as adviser to President Jimmy Carter, campaigned for the exclusive right of the U.S. to seize all the raw materials of the world, especially oil and gas.

Q: You mean, the events of Sept. 11--

Von Buelow: --fit perfectly in the concept of the armaments industry, the intelligence agencies, the whole military-industrial-academic complex. This is in fact conspicuous. The huge raw materials reserves of the former Soviet Union are now at their disposal, also the pipeline routes and--

Q: Erich Follach described that at length in {Spiegel}: "It's a matter of military bases, drugs, oil and gas reserves.''...

Von Buelow: I can state: the planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement. To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes and within one hour, to drive them into their targets, with complicated flight maneuvers! This is unthinkable, without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry.

Q: You are a conspiracy theorist!

Von Buelow: Yeah, yeah. That's the ridicule heaped [on those raising these questions] by those who would prefer to follow the official, politically correct line. Even investigative journalists are fed propaganda and disinformation. Anyone who doubts that, doesn't have all his marbles! That is your accusation.

Q: Your career actually speaks against the idea that you are not in your right mind. You were already in the 1970s, state secretary in the Defense Ministry; in 1993 you were the SPD [Social Democratic Party] speaker in the Schalk-Golodkowski investigation committee--

Von Buelow: And it all began there! Until that time, I did not have any great knowledge of the work of intelligence agencies. And now we had to take note of a great discrepancy: We shed light on the dealings of the Stasi and other East bloc intelligence agencies in the field of economic criminality, but as soon as we wanted to know something about the activities of the BND [German intelligence] or the CIA, it was mercilessly blocked. No information, no cooperation, nothing! That's when I was first taken aback.

Q: Schalck-Golodkowski mediated, among other things, various business deals abroad. When you looked at his case more closely--

Von Buelow: We found, for example, a clue in Rostock, where Schalck organized his weapons depot. Well, then we happened upon an affiliation of Schalck in Panama, and then we happened upon Manuel Noriega, who was for many years President, drug dealer, and money launderer, all in one, right? And this Noriega was also on the payroll of the CIA, for $200,000 a year. These were things that really made me curious.

Q: You wrote a book on the dealings of the CIA and Co. In the meantime, you have become an expert regarding the strange things related to intelligence services' work.

Von Buelow: "Strange things" is the wrong term. What has gone on, and goes on, in the name of intelligence services, are true crimes.

Q: What would you say determines the work of intelligence services?

Von Buelow: So that we don't have any misunderstandings: I find that it makes sense to have intelligence services....

Q: You don't think much of the earlier proposals by the Greens, who wanted to dismantle these agencies?

Von Buelow: No. It is right to take a look behind the scenes. Getting intelligence about the intentions of an enemy, makes sense. It is important when one tries to put oneself into the mind of the enemy. Whoever wants to understand the CIA's methods, has to deal with its main tasks, (covert operations}: below the level of war, and outside international law, foreign states are to be influenced, by organizing insurrections, terrorist attacks, usually combined with drugs and weapons trade, and money laundering. This is essentially very simple: One arms violent people with weapons. Since, however, it must not under any circumstances come out, that there is an intelligence agency behind it, all traces are erased, with tremendous deployment of resources. I have the impression that this kind of intelligence agency spends 90% of its time this way: creating false leads. So that, if anyone suspects the collaboration of the agencies, he is accused of the sickness of conspiracy madness. The truth often comes out only years later. CIA chief Allen Dulles once said: In case of doubt, I would even lie to the Congress!

Q: The American journalist Seymour M. Hersh, wrote in the (New Yorker,) that even some people in the CIA and government assumed, that certain leads had been laid in order to confuse the investigators. Who, Herr Von Buelow, would have done this?

Von Buelow: I don't know that either. How should I? I simply use my common sense, and--See: The terrorists behaved in such a way to attract attention. And as practicing Muslims, they were in a strip-tease bar, and, drunken, stuck dollar bills into the panty of the dancer.

Q: Things like that also happen.

Von Buelow: It may be. As a lone fighter, I cannot prove anything, that's beyond my capabilities. I have real difficulties, however, to imagine that all this all sprung out of the mind of an evil man in his cave.

Q: Mr. Von Buelow, you yourself say that you are alone in your criticism. Formerly, you were part of the political establishment, now you are an outsider.

Von Buelow: That is a problem sometimes, but one gets used to it. By the way, I know a lot of people, including very influential ones, who agree with me, but only in whispers, never publicly.

Q: Do you still have contact with old SPD companions, such as Egon Bahr and former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt?

Von Buelow: There are no close contacts any more. I wanted to go to the last SPD party congress, but I was sick.

Q: Can it be, Mr. Von Buelow, that you are a mouthpiece for typical anti-Americanism?

Von Buelow: Nonsense, this has absolutely nothing to do with anti-Americanism. I am a great admirer of this great, open, free society, and always have been. I studied in the U.S.

Q: How did you get the idea that there could be a link between the attacks and the American intelligence agencies?

Von Buelow: Do you remember the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993?

Q: Six people were killed and over a thousand wounded, by a bomb explosion.

Von Buelow: In the middle was the bombmaker, a former Egyptian officer. He had pulled together some Muslims for the attack. They were snuck into the country by the CIA, despite a State Department ban on their entry. At the same time, the leader of the band was an FBI informant. And he made a deal with the authorities: At the last minute, the dangerous explosive material would be replaced by a harmless powder. The FBI did not stick to the deal. The bomb exploded, so to speak, with the knowledge of the FBI. The official story of the crime was quickly found: The criminals were evil Muslims.

Q: At the time Soviet soldiers marched into Afghanistan, you were in the cabinet of Helmut Schmidt. What was it like?

Von Buelow: The Americans pushed for trade sanctions, they demanded the boycott of the Olympic games in Moscow....

Q.... which the German government followed...

Von Buelow: And today we know: It was the strategy of the American security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, to destabilize the Soviet Union from neighboring Muslim countries: They lured the Russians into Afghanistan, and then prepared for them a hell on earth, their Vietnam. With decisive support of the U.S. intelligence agencies, at least 30,000 Muslim fighters were trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a bunch of good-for-nothings and fanatics who were, and still are today, ready for anything. And one of them is Osama bin Laden. I wrote years ago: "It was out of this brood, that the Taliban grew up in Afghanistan, who had been brought up in the Koran schools financed by American and Saudi funds, the Taliban who are now terrorizing the country and destroying it.

Q: Even though you say, for the U.S. it was a matter of raw materials in the region, the starting point for the U.S. aggression, was the terrorist attack which cost thousands of human lives.

Von Buelow: Completely true. One must always keep this gruesome act in mind. Nonetheless, in the analysis of political processes, I am allowed to look and see who has advantages and disadvantages, and what is coincidental. When in doubt, it is always worthwhile to take a look at a map, where are raw materials resources, and the routes to them? Then lay a map of civil wars and conflicts on top of that--they coincide. The same is the case with the third map: nodal points of the drug trade. Where this all comes together, the American intelligence services are not far away. By the way, the Bush family is linked to oil, gas, and weapons trade, through the bin Laden family.

Q: What do you think of the Bin Laden films?

Von Buelow: When one is dealing with intelligence services, one can imagine manipulations of the highest quality. Hollywood could provide these techniques. I consider the videos inappropriate as evidence.

Q: You believe the CIA is capable of anything, [wouldn't stop at anything].

Von Buelow: The CIA, in the state interests of the U.S., does not have to abide by any law in interventions abroad, is not bound by international law; only the President gives orders. And when funds are cut, peace is on the horizon, then a bomb explodes somewhere. Thus it is proven, that you can't do without the intelligence services; and that the critics are (nuts,) as Father Bush called them, Bush who was once CIA head and President. You have to see that the U.S. spends $30 billion on intelligence services, and $13 billion on anti-drug work. And what comes out of it? The chief of a special unit of the strategic anti-drug work declared, in despair, after 30 years of service, that in every big, important drug case, the CIA came in and took it out of my hands.

Q: Do you criticize the German government for its reaction after Sept. 11?

Von Buelow: No. To assume that the government were independent in these questions, would be naive.

Q: Herr Von Buelow, what will you do now?

Von Buelow: Nothing. My task is concluded by saying, it could not have been that way [according to the official story]. Search for the truth!


© Der Tagesspiegel

Mis en ligne le 01 novembre 2003 sur le site www.upjf.org


---------------------------
Sept. 11 conspiracy claims find large readership

Book that explores theories of CIA involvement in attacks achieves bestseller status in Germany

By Michael Gavin

www.faz.com/IN/INtemplates/eFAZ/archive.asp?doc={F5FD4EA0-C11F-43BA-9A82-ADB109607908}

As the second anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks approaches, a book that claims the stunning events of that day were supported and perhaps organized by U.S. intelligence services is nearing the top of the bestseller charts in Germany.
Die CIA und der 11. September. Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste (The CIA and Sept. 11: International Terror and the Role of the Secret Services) was up two places to No. 5 in the non-fiction segment of this week's Der Spiegel list, probably the country's most authoritative ranking of book sales. It was also No. 5 on the list put out by a rival weekly newsmagazine, Focus, having risen four places.

The author, Andreas von Bülow, a former member of the German cabinet, does not directly accuse the Central Intelligence Agency or any other arm of the U.S. government of crashing two planes into the World Trade Center, aiming a third plane into the Pentagon or causing a fourth to go down in Pennsylvania. But in 270 pages “full of the subjunctive: would have, could have, may have,“ as Der Spiegel put it, von Bülow sets out to demolish what has become the conventional version of the Sept. 11 events and to strongly suggest a CIA link to the attacks.

Von Bülow, who claims that such audacious and well-organized strikes could not have occurred without the “support of the intelligence agencies,“ disputes that the 19 Arabs identified as the hijackers were really responsible, claiming that they were not Islamist extremists and that seven of them were still alive after Sept. 11. He also explores, over 20 pages, the theory that huge charges were secretly planted in the World Trade Center beforehand and then detonated when the planes struck, assuring that the explosions would be powerful enough to cause the landmark skyscrapers to collapse.

Rejecting the official claim that Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network were behind the worst terrorist attacks in American history, von Bülow suggests that the four hijacked jets had been secretly fitted with equipment that allowed unknown parties on the ground to deprive the pilots of control and then direct the aircraft, by remote control, into their targets.

When asked to identify his sources, von Bülow told Der Spiegel in an interview that “a lot came from the Internet,“ where a number of Web sites put up by private individuals argue that the attacks were arranged by U.S. intelligence officials. The rationale, according to von Bülow: To “secure American global dominance“ by mobilizing an ambivalent American public into supporting military action in the Middle East that would secure U.S. control of the region and its oil supplies.

Faced with hostile questioning by Der Spiegel, von Bülow said it was legitimate to advance conspiracy theories without proving them. His main point, he said, is that so many questions surrounding the attacks have either not been explained or sufficiently explored that people should be skeptical of the official version.

“I don't have the burden of proof,“ he added. “The burden of proof is on the American government.“

Susanne Grünbeck, a spokeswoman for the book's Munich-based publisher, Piper Verlag, said about 70,000 copies of Die CIA und der 11. September have been purchased in Germany so far. “We will do the usual and offer it on the English market,“ she said.
While many Americans may find von Bülow's theories outlandish, even offensive, there is clearly a market for them in Germany, where President George W. Bush and leading neoconservatives in his administration are widely unpopular. A Forsa opinion poll conducted in July of last year found that 19 percent of Germans considered it possible that the U.S. government, or elements within it, had organized the Sept. 11 attacks.

Von Bülow, 66, once a rising star on the German political scene, hardly fits the standard image of the paranoid conspiracy theorist: A lawyer with a doctorate degree in jurisprudence, he was Germany's federal research minister between 1980 and 1982, and for four years before that served as parliamentary secretary in the German Defense Ministry.

During much of the Social Democrat's 25-year parliamentary career, which ended in 1994, he served on parliament's intelligence committee. Information gathered there, von Bülow said, led to an earlier book, Im Namen des Staates (In the Name of the State). It alleged that German and American intelligence agents had used the protective cover of their espionage activities to carry out a broad range of criminal activities and to forge secret alliances with far-right groups.Sep. 5, 2003


© Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 2000


Mis en ligne le 01 novembre 2003 sur le site www.upjf.org