Former German Minister Confirms CIA Involvement In 911

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 12 2005 @ 12:11 PM
link   
I've read this guy before. These are transcripts of an interview he did with Alex Jones. Very interesting, considering his former positions.




Former German
Minister Confirms CIA
Involvement In 911
Alex Jones Interviews Andreas Von Buelow
5-9-5

Please understand that this is a transcript made directly from a live radio interview. It may not conform to exemplary standards of grammar. Mr. Von Buelow's first language is German.

Alex Jones: All right my friends. We are already into the third and final hour of this global transmission against tyranny. And, in the last hour we had Hutton Gibson, expert on the New World Order and of course father of Mel Gibson, on talking about the different key issues. In this hour, we are joined by Andreas von Bulow and he was the federal Minister of Defense, or the equivalent of our Secretary of Defense, been in the German government since the 70s. And up until just a few years ago he was also the Minister of Technology and he has written a book that according to Reuters is the best seller in Germany that translates into 9-11 and the CIA., And he's not the only German minister who has said we are looking at world fascism here and a powerful military industrial complex institution engineering terror attacks to scare us into submission. And, Andre von Bulow, err Andreas von Bulow, we are so honored to have a man of your stature and obvious intelligence and your courage on this show. Thank you for joining us.
www.rense.com...




posted on May, 12 2005 @ 12:21 PM
link   

So for me, since the official version- it's not credible at all, it's totally incredible. The second solution for me is a covert operation.

Thats doesn't amount to a whole lot. I skimmed thru most of that, I didn't see any evidence stating that the CIA did 911 or anything like that. What was it?



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 12:26 PM
link   
They're talking about his experience in the security establishment, what he saw surrounding 9-11, and how things didn't add up - based on his experience. His opinions are worth paying attention to. He makes good points. He is not from an enemy country. And they also discuss OPERATION NORTHWOODS. Very relevant. It's the blue print dusted off.

For those unfamiliar with the declassified US government document, here it is.





In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba [includes cover memoranda], March 13, 1962, TOP SECRET, 15 pp.
www.gwu.edu...


[edit on 19-09-2003 by EastCoastKid]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 12:39 PM
link   
As posted from the ever credible and valid Rense.com:


Andreas von Bulow and he was the federal Minister of Defense, or the equivalent of our Secretary of Defense...


Andreas von Bulow gets around don't he?
He was the Head of German Intel Agency BND...
Former Technology Minister...
Former Minister for R&D and technology...
And then of course, Rense.com....

Found this though:
Was 9/11 a U.S. Plot? No, but Such Wild Theories Gain Surprising Attention in Europe

And then this:
Ex German Parliment member speaks on 9/11

Something about the water in some areas of North Carolina, me thinks, Nygdan.






seekerof

[edit on 12-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   
This guy is a member of Germany's dying Social Democrat party.

Do you think that he has some politiacal motivation there?



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Something about the water in some areas of North Carolina, me thinks, Nygdan.

seekerof


REal info's spooky, ain't it? I can always count on Seekerof to freak out and show up.


Btw, I'm from South Carolina. I work in N. Carolina. They're right next to each other.


[edit on 19-09-2003 by EastCoastKid]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
We are all very much, skeptics here. We have to be. Otherwise we risk, in our quest for further truths about all kind of questions, responding in a kneejerk fashion, or being taken in by the spurious.
Having said that. I have however, in the years since the 9/11 incident, turned very skeptical with regards to the government's version and handling of what happened.
I think alot of us feel that way regarding this issue. I'm not comfortable feeling the way I do. I don't want to think that our government would be a party to some of the things that are implied and one has to admit, very plausible. If not in some instances, by admission of the participants, very probable. I think we all want to think this can't be so.
If this general story and version of events was a singular pronuoncement from the Rense venue, I'd have more doubts about it's veracity. But this story and version of events is coming out in mutliple venues from some very credible sources. This are the words of the former Minister of several high agencies in Germany. If this same person was given the opportunity and said this on SIXTY MINUTES or the NBC Nightly News, we wouldn't be so quick to toss it away.
This same version is coming out from other credible highly placed sources. There is certainly some evidence available and curiously unavailable to support what these sources are saying.
I don't like to sound like the typical theorist but, we did as a nation go through two world wars, two very large scale police actions, and almost forty years of cold war without passing the types of constitutional busting legislation that we have in just the last five years.
There are things going on that don't add up. We can be skeptical, but we can't truthfully deny that something seems amiss. If it is 1/2 as insidious as some of these good sources claim, we should be very concerned



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link   
All one has to do (to know the official story is pure bunk) is go back and look at how the NORAD handled the Payne Stewart case. Within minutes after his jet went off course, it was intercepted, according to SOP.

And yes, if this German official spoke on 60 minutes, everyone would believe him. They're not goin' anywhere near it, though.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 11:20 PM
link   
The Germans have wised up this past centuary, because they witnessed first hand the rise of imperialism, false-patriotism, and the False flag operation that was the Reichstag fire.

They can see the same thing happening to the US.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
His opinions are worth paying attention to. He makes good points. He is not from an enemy country.

no seriously, where did he present evidence of CIA involvement?

As far as credibility, he automatically looses it by being interviewed by Ajay.

Also, I think he said that those vids of the Palestinians dancing in the streets were fake, but that wasn't ever demonstrated at all (as far as I know anyway), so this makes me think that he doesn't have any 'insider information' and is just going on conspiracy alone.

Northwoods was a despicable idea, agreed. Good think Kennedy put the kibosh on it. I don't see why bush wouldn't do the same, especially something like 911, which was way bigger.


syrian sister
They can see the same thing happening to the US.

No they can't, they simply think they are. There's not some 'other' magic set of evidence that all germans get informed about. They don't get little dossiers with photos and supporting evidence and interviews in the german post. They're efficient, but not that efficient. They have no evidence. This guy, has no evidence. He presents none. He simply states 'i think it was a conspiracy'.
Quite probably its an extension of their societal war guilt. Actually no, that would require them to do something about dictators around the world, and they don't.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Quote: "we are looking at World Fascism here and a Powerful Military Industrial Complex Institution Engineering Terror Attacks to scare us into submission."

Yep that Sounds just about right - just add non-stop Media Brainwashing starting say in the Mid 90's right up to the Present Day!

So if the CIA is Connected to 9/11 (CIA Connected to Bin Laden) & the BUSH family is DEF connected to the CIA - then result = BUSH connected to 9/11?

Perhaps the IRAQ saga was just the "Neo-Con" Lunacy's Encore?

Yeah it now looks like (after a well done job of letting loose the "Dogs of Perpetual Chaos" in Iraq) Iran is next!



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 01:28 AM
link   

All one has to do (to know the official story is pure bunk) is go back and look at how the NORAD handled the Payne Stewart case. Within minutes after his jet went off course, it was intercepted, according to SOP.

Man you said it.

We are meant to accept that our country won a war against Germany with air power and yet on the morning of 911 we allowed four commercial planes to fly around without any top-gun interception? This jets-as-bombs plan was written out in a Tom Clancy book for god's sake. It wasn't rocket science and it was easily preventable. The people in the planes were at risk and may have died anyway, but there was no reason those planes should not have been intercepted before they were used as weapons. They should never have hit the towers. Somehow, their paths were cleared of any interception. How did this happen?

Also, why did the steel from the largest mass-murder in American history get quickly trundled off to China? If we are asked to watch nothing but crime-investigation programs on American network television, why was the crime of 911 so poorly investigated by our nation?



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 01:37 AM
link   
They had GPS locators on the trucks that were hauling the WTC debris, one driver was fired for returning from lunch late because of what was being called ultra-security. Scrap metal trucks, ultra security. Hmmmm. I bet, hauling off evidence of the greatest crime ever perpetrated agains tthe american people, I'd say that would be some good security for trash trucks.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Well, what they think has some credibility, seeing as how much they have learnt from history.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 02:34 AM
link   
It's truly remarkable how you believe that the CIA, in the most closely guarded secret black operation in world history manufactured 9/11. Yet at the same time you believe that there are a whole troupe of people who admittedly wouldn't have the clearance to use the restroom in CIA headquarters who know ALL ABOUT IT!

Amazing! I guess maybe the CIA chose to share this big super secret with a bunch of ex-politicians and Mel Gibson's dad. How do I get on the secret sharing mailing list like those awesome guys?



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 03:08 AM
link   
they don't need clearance.

They've got logical brains.

1 + 1 = 2 .



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Logical brains produce theories, which may or may not be correct.

Logical brains do not, however, produce physical evidence, which people claim to have. The thread title claims "Confirmation, which would indicate evidence aka proof.

I can't say if his theory is the truth. I'm not the President. I would appreciate though if people making these claims would either put up or shut up. There's too many theories without evidence.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 03:31 AM
link   
the way 'evidence' is defined on this site.

I wrote a thread which i stated a theory, "Al-Zarqawi does not exists".

I was asked for evidence.

I produced mounds and mounds of evidence to support my claim.

And they where still asking for evidence. I gave them evidence, wether they choose to accept my evidence or not is up to them. But they couldn't say i didn't have evidence. It may not be irrefutable evidence, but it's evidence.

In court, the person who was accused of murder, had fingerprints left behind in the murder scene. Now this may not be irrefutable evidence that he murdered the person, but it's accepted as some kind of evidence in court.

It's the same thing here. Theory: 9/11 was an inside job. EVIDENCE, a 3rd building went down for apperantly no reason.

Why is it that on this site, "evidence" only means things that the lieng US government are prepaired to say?



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Syrian Sister, there is a difference between evidence and speculation. What you gave in the other thread was purely opinion (what i read anyway) and involved no hard, tangible evidence of Al-Zarqawi's non-existence (I'm not even you sure you can prove a negative proposition).

The court example is useless, yes it will be evidence in court but no one should be convicted on finger print evidence alone, there has to be motive, opportunity, etc. also you gave no hard physical evidence of Al-Zarqawi being an imaginary person.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 06:33 AM
link   
"Syrian Sister, there is a difference between evidence and speculation. What you gave in the other thread was purely opinion (what i read anyway) and involved no hard, tangible evidence of Al-Zarqawi's non-existence (I'm not even you sure you can prove a negative proposition). "

I was the one, that said "you can't prove a negative proposition"

I was the person that said that from the very begining!!! and everyone of those others kept saying where is the proof where is the proof, when i was trying to explain to them the concept of logic and the fact that you can't prove a negative.

Now YOU are saying that to ME?

The audacity!






top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join