You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Largest Swiss Newspaper Asks if Bush Was Behind 9/11 [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-01-08 12:27 PM
Original message
Largest Swiss Newspaper Asks if Bush Was Behind 9/11
Advertisements [?]
Edited on Sun Jun-01-08 12:43 PM by seemslikeadream
http://www.blick.ch/news/ausland/9-11/artikel45057

ZRICH 2973 Menschen starben bei den Anschlgen von 9/11. Bin Laden und Al Kaida, schrie der Bush-Clan. Die Welt glaubte ihm. Inzwischen zweifeln selbst Wissenschaftler an der Bush-Version. Auch die Schweizer Uni-Dozenten Albert A. Stahel (63) und Daniele Ganser (34) stellen jetzt heisse Fragen.

Etwas stimmt nicht, sagt Strategieexperte Stahel in der Weltwoche und verweist auf den lckenhaften offiziellen 9/11-Report der US-Regierung von 2004.

Gegenber BLICK besttigt der Uni-Professor die Kritik:

Osama Bin Laden kann nicht der grosse Pate hinter den Anschlgen sein. Er habe nicht genug Kommunikationsmittel gehabt.

Stahel bezweifelt, dass ein Passagierflugzeug ins Pentagon krachte: Fr Flug-Anfnger ist es eigentlich unmglich, das Gebude so genau zu treffen.

Sieben Stunden nach den Twin Towers strzte daneben das World Trade Center 7 ein. Die offizielle Version: Es brannte lange. Stahel: Gar nichts ist klar.

Noch weiter als Stahel geht Historiker Daniele Ganser, sein Kollege an der Uni Zrich. Auch die offizielle US-Version nennt er eine Verschwrungstheorie: Es gibt 3 Theorien, die wir gleichberechtigt behandeln sollten:




By Elie Peter - Sept 15, 2006, BLICK newspaper, Zurich, Switzerland


2,973 humans died with the attacks of 9/11. "Bin Laden" and "Al Qaeda", the Bush clan cried. The world believed them. In the meantime even scientists doubt the Bush version. Now, Swiss university professors Albert A. Stahel and Daniele Ganser raise new questions.

"Something is not correct", says strategy expert Stahel in "World Week", and here he refers to the "incomplete" official US Government 9/11 Report of 2004.

The university professor confirms his criticism in BLICK: "Osama Bin Laden cannot be 'the large godfather' behind the attacks. He did not have enough means of communication".

Dr. Stahel doubts that a passenger airliner crashed into the Pentagon: "For trainee pilots it is actually impossible to crash into the building so exactly. Seven hours after the Twin Towers collapsed, the World Trade Center Building 7 next to it also collapsed. The official version: It burned for a long time. Nothing at all is clear."

Raising questions along with Stahel is historian Dr. Daniele Ganser, his colleague at the University of Zurich. Dr. Ganser also calls the official US version "a conspiracy theory".

"There are three theories, which we should treat equally":

1. "Surprise theory" - Bin Laden and Al Qaeda implemented the attacks.

2. "Let it happen on purpose" - The US Government knew the Al Qaeda plans and did not react in order to legitimize a series of wars.

3. "Made it happen on purpose" - The attacks were actually planned and orchestrated by the Pentagon and/or US secret services.

Ganser: "3,000 humans were sacrificed for strategic interests. The more we research, the more we doubt the Bush version. It is conceivable that the Bush government was responsible. Bush has lied so much already! And we already know that the US government planned an operation in 1962 that was approved by the Pentagon that would have sacrificed innocent US citizens for the government's own interests."

As for Ganser and Stahel: "We only ask questions."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC