Scholars Call Moussaoui Trial a "Charade;" [ Post
294584916 ]
Category: News & Opinion (General) Topic: Crime &
Corruption
Synopsis:
Source: Yahoo News
For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial
Use.
Washington, DC (PRWEB) April 22, 2006 -- The trial
holding Zacarias Moussaoui responsible for the horrors
of 9/11 has all the marks of a political charade,
according to Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a society of
experts devoted to exposing falsehoods and establishing
truths about the events of that day. "Even the most
basic elements of due process have been violated,"
according to James H. Fetzer, its founder and co-chair,
"by failing to prove that the accused had anything to do
with 9/11. What we are seeing here tends to substantiate
Charlie Sheen's allegations."
Fetzer insists there has been a clever ruse to confuse
the jury by using a confession to one plot as though it
were evidence of complicity in another. As The New York
Times (April 27, 2005) reported, Moussaoui "confessed"
to having been involved in a plot to fly a plane into
the White House to free Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who is
serving a life sentence for terrorist acts. He denied
that he was part of the 9/11 attacks in New York City
and Washington, D.C.
A Judicial "Shell Game"
The mentally instable Moussaoui has now "confessed" that
he and shoe-bomber Richard Reid were going to hijack a
fifth aircraft and fly it into the White House, which
was not the plot of which he was convicted. The Scholars
believe government prosecutors have been playing a
deceptive "shell game" by tying him to 9/11. Even the
FBI has expressed doubts about Moussaoui's new version
of events, since Reid left a will naming Moussaoui as
his beneficiary, which was very odd if they were going
to participate in a suicide mission together.
The government claims Moussaoui should be put to death
for failing to report everything he knew about 9/11,
which it claims would have saved lives. "This is
blatantly unconstitutional," says 9/11 Truth Scholar
Webster Tarpley. "Under the Fifth Amendment to the US
Constitution, nobody can be prosecuted for a failure to
incriminate themselves.'"
"This entire trial has been a farce," says Fetzer, a
professor of philosophy at the University of Minnesota.
"Government prosecutors have contaminated witnesses,
elicited testimony they cannot corroborate, and --
according to multiple reports -- even forced Moussaoui
to wear a 'stun belt'. 50,000 volts should be enough to
keep anyone from straying from the script," he said. "It
is very difficult to imagine how testimony taken under
duress is admissible."
The 9/11 Truth Movement
The fast-growing, over 200-member strong society is only
the tip of an iceberg of a "9/11 Truth" movement which
has produced dozens of books and scores of websites
assailing the official version of 9/11. According to
those involved, it's an uphill battle. John Leonard, a
member of S9/11T and the publisher of several books on
9/11, including one by Webster Tarpley, insists that at
least one basic element of the "9/11 Truth" idea can be
conveyed in less than a minute, but he finds most
Americans have psychological barriers to it.
"When we hit a fact that contradicts our world view, we
usually pause, rationalize it and keep going. But
sometimes we stumble onto something and want to dig
deeper. That's where 9/11 researchers get started."
Psychologists describe the resistance to ideas that
threaten our sense of security as "cognitive
dissonance", which can occur when, for example, a mother
discovers evidence her husband has been molesting their
daughter.
To demonstrate his position, Leonard asks people to
consider three points:
First, as the video-clip on this page (wtc7.gif)
reveals, when WTC-7, a 47-story building that was not
hit by any airplane, collapsed at 5:20 PM on 9/11, it
displayed all of the signs of a controlled demolition,
including sudden and complete collapse at virtually the
rate of free fall into its own footprint, precisely as
old casinos and hotels are brought down in Las Vegas.
Second, the collapse of WTC-7 is not even mentioned in
The 9/11 Commission Report and has yet to be explained
by the government. When Steven Jones, professor of
physics at BYU, wanted the video of the collapse played
on Tucker Carson's MSNBC program, only a single frame
was shown, which is typical of the attention it has
drawn from the national media.
Third, for WTC-7 to be brought down by controlled
demolition implies the existence of previously
positioned explosives. That raises the possibility there
were previously positioned explosives in WTC-1 and WTC-2
as well. Jones' own physics research, archived on the
Scholar's web site at st911.org, suggests that all three
must have been brought down by controlled demolition.
Appeals to Fabricated Evidence
The most stunning example of government mendacity in the
Moussaoui trial, Fetzer explains, came with the
inflammatory recordings, allegedly the last moments of
Flight 93, which went down in Pennsylvania. "Not only
should they not have been admitted into evidence," he
said, "but Allen Green has noted that much of the
conversation is from the passenger cabin -- which would
not have been picked up in by the cockpit voice
recorder, even through an open door. Yet the cockpit
door was supposed to be closed before it was finally
broken open using a drink cart."
Another blunder was noted by a Muslim member of S9/11T.
The last words of the "hijackers" on the tape are "Allah
is great! (Allahu akbar!"). Muhammad Columbo says, "The
last words of a Muslim cannot be these! They are used in
the call to prayer, or in an attack at war. On the
moment of death, a Muslim must confirm that "There is
but one God, Allah, and that Mohammed is his prophet!"
The government's own evidence proves either the tapes or
the Muslims are fake.
Fetzer has also been struck by the use of phrases that
appear to come from Hollywood scripts. "It's not enough
that he talks about "making his day" as though he were a
fan of Dirty Harry, but he also parodies "Born in the
USA" with his rendition of "Burn in the USA" and has
described his trial as a 'cyberlynching'. We are so used
to movies that we may not notice this is supposed to be
real life, where this trial appears to be following a
script.
Patsies and Moles
Another perception of the events taking place in
Alexandria, VA, comes from Webster Tarpley. "Moussaoui
represents the classic case of the patsy - part double
agent consciously working for the government, part
psychotic, part fanatic, part dupe," Tarpley observes.
"His lawyers tried to save him by suggesting he is a
delusional paranoid schizophrenic, and this may be
accurate." (See
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/04/17/AR2006041700637.html.)
"Like shoe bomber Richard Reid, Moussaoui is a product
of Finsbury mosque in London, long notorious as a
British intelligence recruiting center for expendable
patsies...." In his book, "9/11: Synthetic Terror,"
Tarpley explains that, "Again and again, terrorist
groups with US-UK backing have intervened against
progressive nationalists in the Arab world, in favor of
fundamentalists."
Of "false-flag" operations (a term from sailing ship
days, when a war could be begun by raising an enemy flag
and attacking one's own side), Tarpley observes, "The
patsies ultimately have three vital functions. The first
is that they have to be noticed. They must attract lots
and lots of attention. They may issue raving
statements." That description does seem to fit Moussaoui.
Secondly, they must stay out of jail, not to carry out
the terrorist attack -- that is a job for the
professionals -- but only to be blamed for it. Keeping
them out of jail is a job for "the moles."
After the terror act is complete, the moles turn on the
patsies and destroy them. In this case, the situation
may be more complex, since Moussaoui has expressed the
belief that he is going to be pardoned by
President Bush, possibly in exchange for Americans
captured in the war in
Iraq.
Painwashing and Propaganda
On March 21, 2006, CBS reported the prosecutors'
allegation that Moussaoui's lies to FBI agent Harry
Samit had prevented the FBI from thwarting or at least
minimizing the 9/11 attacks. Samit himself, however, in
one of the most embarrassing twists of the trial with
regard to the government's case, testified that he had
already "warned higher-ups and others in the government
at least 70 times that Moussaoui was a terrorist."
This nullifies the entire prosecution, Fetzer observes.
"Ignoring five or six reports of this kind might reflect
incompetence. Twenty or thirty, criminal neglect. But
ignoring 70 reports has to be a matter of deliberate
policy." Samit's testimony proves that, even if
Moussaoui had come forward to incriminate himself in a
plot in which he was not involved, it would not have
helped. "Which means," Fetzer adds, "that this trial is
simply an exercise in propaganda."
Jerry Mazza, Online Journal (April 14, 2006), has
described the trial as a "painwashing," which he defines
as repeating the same painful stories over and over
again until the audience's resistance to questioning
their authenticity is overcome. Leonard adds, "9/11 was
what Pavlov called 'traumatic conditioning,' a way of
reversing your normal characteristics by deep shock."
"If our findings are correct," Fetzer observed, "then
the American government has been using acts of violence
to instill fear into the American people in order to
manipulate us for political purposes. That, however, is
the definition of 'terrorism'; which means that the
American government has been practicing terrorism on the
American people. That may be difficult for many
Americans to accept, but the evidence is clear and
compelling. Charlie Sheen was right!"
***
Related Events
- Thierry Meyssan, pioneering 9/11 author and President
of Reseau Voltaire, will be on 9/11 Scholar Webster
Tarpley's World Crisis Radio show on RBNLive, Saturday,
3 to 5 pm CDT.
- Tarpley speaking in Washington DC, at Busboys & Poets,
Mon. Apr. 24th, 8-10 pm, and in Burlington Vermont, Wed.
Apr. 26 and Thurs. Apr. 27. See announcement online at
http://www.waronfreedom.org/press/vermont-washdc-events.html
###
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Prof. James Fetzer
218-726-7269
REPLY / REMARKS:
---------------------------------------
LISTEN:
AL FRANKLAN W/GUEST HELEN THOMAS,
MR. PRESIDENT, WHY DID WE INVADE IRAQ?