Federal Judge in Germany:
Numerous 9/11 Theories Screaming For Investigation
Afghanistan War - Right to Self Defense Highly Questionable, 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?
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.
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:
Dieter Deiseroth, born 1950, studied law, sociology and political science. From 1977 to 1983 Research Fellow at the University of Giessen and lawyer. PhD in Law. Since 1983, administrative judge in Dusseldorf, from 1989 to 1991 at the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. Then Chief Judge of the Administrative Court in Munster and Head of the Data Protection Agency of North Rhine-Westphalia. Since 2001 judge at the German Federal Administrative Court.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).