Commentary
"Painwashing" the Moussaoui jury and us
By Jerry Mazza
Online Journal Contributing Writer


Apr 14, 2006, 01:06

Painwashing is brainwashing: repeating the same painful stories over and over again to individuals (in this case a jury) till their resistance to questioning gives in. The hurtful repetition induces a kind of trance. And in the flood of emotionally-charged 9/11 recollections, rational logical questioning of who was responsible for what is disappeared. Repeating the effects of the tragedy becomes a false proof of guilt for the patsy Zacarias Moussaoui. It also attempts to hypnotize the country into the 9/11 trance once again.

It’s not unlike stunning the defendant himself with a painful jolt of electric via the alleged stun belt under his clothing, till he does and says what is expected of him, reported in my Online Journal article, Was Moussaoui outfitted with a hidden ‘stun belt’ at trial?

Actually, the jury “painwashing” was duly noted by U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema, after complaints from defense lawyers “that a stream of victim-impact testimony last week would be overly prejudicial to the jury that must decide if Moussaoui is to be executed,” as reported in an MSNBC.com article, Moussaoui jury to hear painful testimony – Judge warns against using emotion Sept. 11 accounts to influence jury.

The article reports, “The wrenching first-person account of the day’s horrors came on the same day that the judge in the death-penalty trial warned prosecutors against relying too heavily on such emotional testimony to influence Moussaoui’s jury. . . . Brinkema acknowledged that there is no way to avoid emotional testimony in this case, but reminded prosecutors that overly prejudicial testimony can be grounds for overturning a death sentence on appeal.

“You may pay a price for that down the road,” the Judge told prosecutors.”

The price would be condemning the wrong person to death and letting the real culprits go free.

Another challenge to the prosecution’s tactics came from Kristen Breitweiser, who lost her husband, a financial executive, on 9/11. She said, “I certainly wasn’t invited to give a witness impact statement. I certainly don’t know anyone who was invited. When it comes to 9/11 and the government, everything is nontransparent.” I quoted Mrs. Breitweiser in an earlier Online Journal article on the over-zealous testimony of New York’s former mayor, Rudy Giuliani slavering witness for Moussaoui prosecution.

Again she had a very different notion of events and said, “Can someone please explain to me why Rudy Giuliani gets to give a victim's impact statement at the Moussaoui penalty phase hearing? Which family member did Guiliani lose in the attacks?

“Forgive me, but Giuliani is the person responsible for deciding to locate NYC's emergency command center in the World Trade Center along with a diesel fuel tank (against the advice of certain FDNY officials) before 9/11.” For the full thrust of her reasoning, check the article.

It also Interesting that in a New York Daily News article, Snubbed kin air outrage at 9/11 trial, “Wayne Myers, a Manhattan psychiatrist, said he can understand why relatives would want to directly help convince the jury to condemn Moussaoui to death. ‘You have the ability to exact some revenge. It gives a belated chance to master some control over the situation.’"

That is psychologically true. Obviously it’s not a reliable path to legal truth. It offers an opportunity for victims’ families, as tragic as they are, to go for the only so called “perpetrator' offered to them.” Better him than no one," must go through their minds. Yet, keep a bit of the past in your mind about Moussaoui. It’s major. And it hasn’t been brought to the jury’s attention.

U.S. Gave Top Secrets to Moussaoui in 2002

As of September 27, 2002, in an explosive New York Times article, U.S. Gave Secrets to Terror Suspect by Philip Shenon, the reporter tells us, “Although Mr. Moussaoui, 34, a French national, has admitted that he is a member of Al Qaeda and is loyal to Osama bin Laden, he has insisted that he had nothing to do with the Sept. 11 attacks.” Remember that: insistence he had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Then ask, what occurred in the interim to turn his testimony totally around? Could it possibly be brainwashing, painwashing?

Also, the occasion for Shenon’s article is that “Federal prosecutors mistakenly turned over 48 classified F.B. I. reports to Zacharias Moussaoui in what a federal judge described as a grave security breach, the government acknowledged in court documents released today.

“The reports, which were summaries of interviews related to Mr. Moussaoui’s case and the bureau’s larger investigation of the terror network of Al Qaeda, were retrieved in search of his jail cell this summer on the order of the judge, Leonie M. Brinkema.” Once more, Judge Brinkema to the rescue, this time to save the FBI’s strange gaff.

“Judge Brinkema ordered the searches, which took place over several days, after determining that ‘significant national security interests of the United States could be compromised if the defendant were to retain copies of this classified information.’” Could it be the FBI wanted Moussaoui to see these papers, to further incriminate him with possessing information he originally did not have?

In fact, the FBI acknowledged that it was “dangerous” for this material to be in Moussaoui’s possession, especially since he was the only person charged in an American court in the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Could the FBI be that dumb? Or was their plan, as I said, to bury Moussaoui deeper in that misplaced information?

Judge Brinkema revealed the story at the request of Moussaoui’s court appointed lawyers, “Over the protests of the prosecutors, who have not revealed how the mistakes were made.” What’s more, “Justice Department officials said . . . that the errors involving the documents were now the subject of an internal investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” Well good luck with that one. Any results yet, several years later?

Moussaoui obviously had no clearance to see the highly classified materials. The documents were given to him “in the pretrial discovery process, in which prosecutors are required to provide defendants with evidence that they may use against them at trial.” Didn’t anybody look at what was in the boxes? This was Mr. 9/11 about to go on trial.

Yet the Justice Department said that the prosecutors in Alexandria “were convinced that Mr. Moussaoui had not read the documents at issue, since they were among huge stacks of paper and computer disks that had been provided to him after he announced in April that he wanted to act as his own lawyer and fire his court-appointed defense team.” Not to worry, I guess. He’s a slow reader.

But, in fact, he’d been given millions of documents and pieces of evidence, some which could have been passed on some way if that were his purpose. Yet a department official said, “But that doesn’t mean we’re trying to excuse this. It’s a grand mess-up.” Yet the government didn’t want to release this embarrassing information, even though that could have compromised national security.

Originally, it was only two documents in question. A week later it was another five. Several days later, it was five to seven documents. But one of the pair of missing documents “is the most critical (for reasons I [US Attorney Paul J. McNulty] can explain in a more secure form).” Ah, the old more secure form.

Yet on Sept. 5, McNulty wrote to the Judge again, asking for 43 classified documents to be gotten back from Moussaoui. Probably totally fed up with the feds’ bungling, Brinkema ordered “that United States Marshals Service seize any box of evidence that contained F.B.I. interview summaries.” Sure, take the guy’s mattress. How about his shorts?

Nevertheless the judge commented that “Mr. Moussaoui had been ‘cooperative’ [imagine] during the early searches ‘and the deputies were able to cover all of the CD ROM’s’ on which some of the documents were stored.” And this is the guy to whom we want to give a fatal hot shot. A person we have been—what should I call it— brain/painwashing (?) into redacting his original plea of non-involvement with 9/11 for almost three years.

Judge Brinkema May Call Richard Reid as Witness

A very reliable source, in fact the person that suggested my article headline, The Moussaouian Candidate, wrote to me that, “Defense lawyers have already said they think the jury should spare Moussaoui's life because of his limited role in the attacks, evidence that he is mentally ill and because his execution would only play into his dream of martyrdom.”

And guess what? “On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued an order requiring an unidentified individual to be produced for testimony. The order apparently applied to would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid. Defense lawyers issued a subpoena last week seeking his testimony. Prosecutors had opposed the subpoena.

”Moussaoui testified previously that he and Reid were going to hijack a fifth plane on Sept. 11 and fly it into the White House. The defense lawyers, who have tried to discredit their client's credibility, have said Moussaoui is exaggerating his role in Sept. 11 to inflate his role in history.

”Alas, I think Madame Leonie is on to something . . . Richard Reid's ‘antics’ not only parallel those of Mr. Moussaoui, but tend to support another gem: that Reid, too, was hypno-programmed to advance the trumped-up Osamadunnit myth, which in turn matches up with the fact that most of those beneath Mohammed Atta were actually ‘hypno-robots,’ programmed to perform sans conscious knowledge of same.”

Back at the Courthouse Came More Pain

In a full court emotional press, children testified, grandfathers, mothers, wives, voices from the Towers crying for help. And, for the first time ever, the battered black box from Flight 93 appeared like the Holy Grail for the jury to hear. Neil A. Lewis wrote about it in the yesterday's New York Times, in his article Final Struggles on 9/11 Plane Fill Courtroom.

This would be the first and last time the purported black box tape would be heard in public said Judge Brinkema, though a nine-page transcript would be released. Remember that voice-cloning technology that the folks from Los Alamos designed? A sampling of any voice can be used to clone that voice, with which any person can then speak any words desired.

That aside Neil Lewis reports, “The release of the transcript comes as Universal Studios is about to release a film about the event called ‘United 93,’ the trailer of which some moviegoers found too disturbing. The transcript may provide another template against which to measure the film’s accuracy.” What an incredible coincidence, a multi-media campaign to brain/pain/wash the public concerning the events of Flight 93. Another template to generate emotional response.

But what about subjecting the black box itself to an independent investigation, conducted by critics as well as bobbing heads, given the fact that the original Zapruder film of the Kennedy Assassination was totally manipulated by the CIA by the day after the murder. See Professor James Fetzer’s amazing book The Great Zapruder Film Hoax from Cat Feet Press.

How About Some Alternative Information?

In fact, speaking of media materials, I wonder why they don’t show the jury the DVD of “Loose Change’s Part 2,” and look at some alternative evidence and thinking. LC’s clear, logical and concise 90 minutes proves to even the nearly deaf, numbed and almost blind, that Towers 1 and 2 fell because of a series of heavy internal detonations. Fire alone, especially not a half to an hour and a half’s worth, has never in history taken down steel-framed buildings, in this case redundant steel buildings.

The 9/11 liners, most likely remote controlled A-3 Sky Warriors, 60 percent the size of 757s, weren’t carrying passengers or terrorists. They acted as a dramatic, shock and awe-inspiring diversion from the internal explosions and planned demolition, including Silverstein’s Tower 7, which wasn’t even hit, but “pulled.” The names and pictures of terrorists, pulled out of a hat, had, according to FBI Chief Robert Mueller, no real basis in fact.

And don’t forget old Marvin Bush, the president’s brother, who was on the board of Securacom, the company that did security for the WTC from the early 1990s through 9/11, and for the armed forces as well and Dulles Airport. After 9/11, Securacom was let go. They served their purpose. And they changed their name to Stratesec. Catchy isn’t it. And they were delisted from the stock exchange in 2002.

What’s more, it was an A3 that hit the Pentagon as well, flown by remote control, and firing a bunker-buster into the West Wing wall before the craft hit and collapsed into three rings and through some 12 feet of solid concrete and steel. The debris of the A3, including its two JT8D engines, was removed by 500 FBI men within 15 minutes and transported to the North parking lot and removed to an undisclosed location. Part of a JT8D engine was also found in a wire garbage holder on Murray Street near the Twin Towers conflagration. See them side by side in the link.

Flight 93 was en route to San Francisco and diverted to Cleveland where it landed at Hopkins Airport at 10:45 AM, evacuated by 11:15 AM. I believe the voice tape is a sham, a CIA audio fiction, not unlike the Hollywood analog to come. F93’s 200 passengers were unloaded within a half hour, and brought to an old NASA facility nearby. Where those people and Flight 77s passengers were really taken has yet to be revealed. All that was found in Pennsylvania, where 93 supposedly went down, was a smoking hole in the ground filled with scrap metal.

More Food for Thought

And then there were those millions and million of dollars made on the Stock Exchange in puts days before 9/11. Puts are bets and the betting was that prices would go down on the stock of American Airlines, United Airlines, even Morgan Stanley, one of the investment companies located in the Towers. To this day, $2.5 million dollars in put’ profits remain unclaimed. Was that suspicious foreknowledge of events for private profit mentioned at the trial?

And then there was the gold, baby, the gold. Follow the shiny stuff. Was this mentioned?

Rudy Giuliani claimed they reclaimed some $230 million in gold from the rubble of the Towers. Later, an abandoned 10-wheel delivery truck and a fleet of cars were discovered in a tunnel between Buildings 4 and 5, running it seemed from the soon to tumble South Tower, the second hit. Bottom line, it was really more like $160 billion in gold that had been stored under the Towers by various banks and corporations. So, where did the gold go after it left the 10-wheel truck? Perhaps it was the ultimate pay-off for the high-level government participants and patsies?

This is evidence the jury should be looking at and evaluating as well, not just the beleaguered Moussaoui, the guy that gave the FBI back more than a million pieces of 9/11 terror evidence, the same they “mistakenly sent him,” the guy who has redacted his statement of having nothing to do with 9/11 as of Sept 2002. Brain/pain/washing anybody?

So shower the lies off your brains, members of the jury, people of America. Remember the five fake terror hijacking drills that drained all the fighter planes from the Northeast seaboard, including New York City. The few planes left arrived too late there to shoot the liners down. Wash off that pain which ignorance perpetuates, jurors and fellow citizens. Deprogram your brains one and all from the 9/11 myth. You can do it. I believe in you, god knows. You can save yourself and send Bush, Cheney and their vicious Company to the rock pile or lethal needle once and for all.

In short, don’t let the wrong man die. If you do, as Judge Brinkema would say, “You may pay a price for that down the road.” A very big price -- I might add: your country.

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer residing in New York. Reach him at gvmaz@verizon.net.