This topic is in the General Conspiracy Discussion discussion forum. (rss)

Port Arthur Massacre Setup - False flag to ban guns in Aus

<< 1 2 3 4 >>

Topic started on 1-11-2009 @ 01:27 AM by dallas18

+5 more

Hey,

Here is some information regarding the Port Arthur massacre in Australia, and how the gunman was set up. As a result of this, the government banned guns in Australia (pretty much).

The Port Arthur massacre of 28 April 1996 was a killing spree which claimed the lives of 35 people and wounded 21 others mainly at the historic Port Arthur prison colony, a popular tourist site in south-eastern Tasmania, Australia.[1] Martin Bryant, a 28-year-old from New Town, eventually pleaded guilty to the crimes and was given 35 life sentences without possibility of parole.[2] He is now interned in the Wilfred Lopes Centre[3] near Risdon Prison. The Port Arthur massacre remains Australia's deadliest killing spree and one of the deadliest such incidents worldwide in recent times.

Picture of Martin Byrant

This wiki page (source^) provides a detailed version of how the official story goes, if you are not aware of what happened.

The following two videos are very informative. There is a summary of this conspiracy in the next post.

Wendy Scurr was the first person into the broad arrow cafe after the Port Arthur massacre, and she has a completely different story to tell from the mainstream media, the police and the federal and state governments. Find out just how much disinformation and myths have been created around the pre-planned Port Arthur massacre. The first video is the woman who worked in Port Arthur and her accounts of what really happened.

Part 1:

YouTube Link

Part Two of a lecture given at the inverell forum 2001 detailing the myths and spin around this false flag operation. There are many holes in the official version of events surrounding the Port Arthur massacre and Martin Bryant is the fall guy for an international conspiracy. The second video is a policeman who has gathered information doubting the official story.

Part 2:

YouTube Link

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

Click here for more General Conspiracy Discussion topics
Hot Topics | Top Topics | This Week | Subscribe | Home

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 01:27 AM by dallas18

Summary

1. On the Sunday morning, two hours before the murders, ten of the senior managers of Port Arthur were taken to safety many miles away up the east coast, for a two day seminar with a vague agenda and no visiting speakers.
Was the timing of this trip a mere coincidence?

2. Also just before the shootings the only two policemen in the region were called away on a wild goose chase. They were sent to the Coal Mine at Salt Water River, to investigate a heroin drug stash which turned out to be soap powder.
This was too far for them to get to the Broad Arrow Cafe in time to be of any use. Had the policeman remained at Dunalley he would have closed the swing bridge to prevent the killer(s) from escaping from the peninsula.
Did Bryant, IQ 66, organise this decoy?

3. Big Mortuary Truck. Before the massacre, a specially-built 22 person capacity mortuary truck was built. It attracted some derision at the time, but its effective use at Port Arthur was unquestioned.
After the massacre it was advertised, unsuccessfully, for sale via the internet, then converted for another purpose.
Without the foresight of Port Arthur, why build it? When it had proven its worth, why get rid of it? Another coincidence?

4. Martin Bryant has never been properly identified as the gunman.
A young woman who ate her lunch near the gunman just before 1.30 said he had a freckled face. Graham Collyer, the wounded ex-soldier, who had the best opportunity to observe the killer, said he had a pock-marked or acned face.
Neither description fits Bryant who has a beautifully smooth complexion.
Graham Collyer says that it was not Bryant who shot him in the neck.

5. Illegal Photo. On 30th April the Hobart Mercury printed an old photo of Martin Bryant on the front page. This was illegal because at that stage some of the witnesses had not yet been asked to identify the killer, and the photo would have become fixed in the minds of the witnesses.
When one witness was asked to describe the clothing worn by the gunman, she described the clothing on the old photo instead of what the gunman had worn.
The Mercury newspaper was not prosecuted for breaking the law.

6. Mrs Wendy Scurr, nurse, tour guide and Ambulance Officer, rang the police at 1.32 pm to report the shooting. She and other medics then cared for the injured and the dead without any police protection for six and a half hours.
Who ordered the armed police to stop at Tarana where they had a barbecue?
Even the police who arrived by boats and were a stone's throw away from the main crime scene in the cafe, also failed to come in to see what was going on.
Was this lack of protection meant to increase the trauma of the survivors?

7. Three more shots were fired at Port Arthur at 6.30 while Bryant was at Seascape. Who fired those shots?

8. Same Question - Different Answer. At a recent Forensics Seminar in Queensland where Tasmanian Police forensic gun inspector, Gerard Dutton, gave a lecture, the first question came from Mr Ian McNiven. He asked if there was any empirical evidence to link Martin Bryant to the Broad Arrow
Cafe. Sargent Dutton immediately closed the 15 minute question time and would not reply. When McNiven managed to say "I have here Graham Collyer's police statement...", Sgt Dutton threatened him with arrest and called for security agents to escort McNiven out of the building.
When Dutton was asked the same question in America by a Doctor at a seminar, he replied truthfully - "There is no empirical evidence to link Bryant to the cafe".

9. Yet a police video tape exists which proves that the police had an excellent opportunity to get DNA samples and finger prints of the gunman.
The video briefly shows the blue sports bag on a cafe table. The gunman had carried his 3 rifles in this bag and left it right next to his drinking glass, his Solo soft drink can, knife, fork, plate, etc.
Why did the police fail to take DNA samples and finger prints?

10. According to the official story, Bryant first killed David and Sally Martin at Seascape Cottage in the morning, then went on to Port Arthur.
Yet two policemen have reported seeing a naked woman with black hair, screaming and running from one building to another at Seascape well into the afternoon.
If Sally Martin was dead, who was this woman?

11. Proof of other gunmen in Seascape Cottage. While Bryant was calmly talking to police by telephone in the cottage during the 'siege' and the conversation was recorded, someone else fired an SKK rifle 20 times.
In the transcript the gunfire is recorded as 'coughs' but an electronic analysis of one of the 'coughs' shows that it was an SKK shot.

12. Two More Very Handy Seminars. On the Sunday morning, some 25 specialist doctors (Royal Australian College of Surgeons) from all over Australia had attended a training course in Hobart, and their last lecture was on Terrorist
Attack and Gunshot Wounds. They stayed on to take care of the wounded victims.

13. Also, more than 700 reporters from 17 nations came to a seminar in Hobart.
They were asked to arrive during the week-end as the seminar was due to begin early on Monday morning.
How handy to have 700 scribblers on the spot, churning out their anti-gun and disarmament propaganda to the whole world!

14. "There will never be uniform Gun Laws in Australia until we see a massacre somewhere in Tasmania", said Barry Unsworth, NSW Premier, December, 1987 at a
conference in Hobart. Prophecy or Planning?

15. "If we don't get it right this time (gun laws) next time there is a massacre, and there will be, then they'll take all our guns off us", said the deputy prime minister, Tim Fischer in May 1996.
Who is the "THEY" who would order the removal of our guns? Did Fischer let slip that gun confiscation has been ordered by someone other than our own leaders?

16. No Respect for the Law. Our law demands that a Coronial Inquiry must take place (a) when foreign nationals are killed
(b) when anyone dies in a fire.
At Port Arthur several foreigners were killed and three people died in the fire at Seascape.

17. It is evident that the massacre was planned to happen on the ferry which sailed to the Isle of the Dead every day. The victims were to be eighty elderly American tourists who had come in two coaches. But the plan went awry because the sailing time of the ferry had changed from 1.30 to 2.00 pm.

source

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

[edit on 1/

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 01:27 AM by dallas18

On to how the massacre was used to ban guns in Australia.

Australia's reaction, wiki

Australians reacted to the event with widespread shock and horror, and the political effects were significant and long-lasting. Both federal and state governments, some of which (notably Tasmania itself and Queensland) were opposed to firearm control, quickly took action to restrict the availability of firearms. It should be noted that the Tasmanian state government initially attempted to ignore this directive, but was subsequently threatened with a number of penalties from the federal government. Though this resulted in stirring controversy, most Government opposition to the new laws was silenced by mounting public opinion in the wake of the shootings. Under federal government co-ordination all states and territories of Australia banned and heavily restricted the legal ownership and use of self-loading rifles, self-loading and pump-action shotguns, together with considerable tightening of other gun laws. Family members of victims, notably Walter Mikac (who lost his wife and two children), spoke out in favour of the changes. See gun politics in Australia for more information.

Much discussion has occurred as to the level of Bryant's mental health. It is generally accepted that he has a subnormal IQ (estimated at 66, and in the lowest 2% of his age group[10]) and at the time of the offences was in receipt of a Disability Support Pension on the basis of being mentally handicapped. Despite reports to the contrary, Bryant had never been diagnosed with schizophrenia, nor any major depressive disorder. Reports that he was schizophrenic were based on his mother's misinterpretation of psychiatric advice. Media reports also detailed his odd behaviour as a child. However, he was able to drive a car and obtain a gun, despite lacking a gun licence.[11][12] This was a matter which, in the public debate that followed, was widely regarded as a telling demonstration of the inadequacy of the nation's gun laws.

Bryant was assessed as fit to stand trial as a mentally competent adult. There were no indications that he could be regarded as criminally insane at the time of the offences; as he clearly knew what he was doing. See the M'Naghten Rules for more information.

Prime Minister at the time, John Howard, saying that the moment had to be siezed to take guns.

The 35 victims of the Port Arthur massacre had not died in vain because tough new gun laws were introduced in Australia, Prime Minister John Howard says.
Mr Howard said the massacre on this day 10 years ago gave his government the chance, with the assistance of the states, to introduce tough gun laws.
He said by introducing the new laws, the deaths of so many people had not been in vain.
"It dramatised the need and I was determined to seize the moment and we were able to persuade the states to pass very tough gun control laws because this is a state matter," he told ABC television.
"It was a question, tragic though the moment was, of seizing the moment.
"It was a tragic moment, but if those people were not to have died in vain, if I can put it that way, the moment had to be seized."
Mr Howard said there were still some changes to gun laws that could be achieved at the state level.
He said the most important element of any change was to ensure Australia did not follow the lead of the United States.

smh

So, do you think this was a false flag operation in order to bans guns nationwide? While I do think that guns are not that neccessary, in these NWO times a gun can be essential to standing up and defending your rights, and your family. I have also long thought that Australia has been a test nation for the NWO.

Cheers

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 01:41 AM by atlasastro

reply to post by dallas18

Dallas, I admire your work dude, but you need to provide links to other peoples work, I'll assume that you just forgot to post the link as I have done that too. Your entire post belongs to this site here. nickmaine.info...
You have used it word for word bro! So give 'em some credit hey!.

I have come across this work before so I recognized the material. You might be interested in a guy named Joe Vallis, who also has some excellent web material dedicated to Port Arthur.
Here is a link you should look at:www.whale.to...

AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 01:47 AM by dallas18

reply to post by atlasastro

Thanks for the heads up mate, and cheers for the link. Will give it a read now.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 02:02 AM by dallas18

Here is an interesting video, the youtube description:

What we have here is a team already onsite with a camera mounted on a tripod and pre-aimed at the Cafe. Listen also to the comments, "thats a shotgun"...hmm not # someone is shooting a gun here! They are not surprised, and why should they be, no doubt they were actaully WAITING to capture the event! And seeing as they recorded the start, one must assume that they kept the camera rolling and got the entire thing!
If so it was NEVER recorded as being available by the DPP in Court who bemoaned the lack of actual footage. One can only draw the conclusion that this footage actually existing would be very hard to explain. Incidentally, the man running from the Cafe is NOT the gunman who is still inside shooting.

YouTube Link

Another video from same people

YouTube Link

In these two videos, you can both hear 'that's a shotgun'. In the second, when the person is running away, a woman says it. And she says, 'see that person running there'.It kind of looks like the person running to the bus is carrying a shot gun?

Here is a photo of the same person (it appears), running to a police helicopter

And another image of him running away

This photo was used by the media to convince us of his guilt. It was shot at 2:45 PM an hour after the shootings.

? Is that the footage they were talking about here?

Many months after the massacre took place, but only hours before the Tasmanian judge was due to make a decision that would effect Martin Bryant for the rest of his life, an Australian TV network suddenly presented the public (and of course the judge) with dramatic amateur video footage shown "for the first time ever"

www.whale.to...

I was too young to have been aware of all this when it happened, so it would be great to hear some fellow Australians express what happened with media coverage and political debate regarding gun controls and this event around this time.

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 02:09 AM by dallas18

Another interesting 3 part video:

Australia's worst mass murder in history was the precurser to the disarmament of Australia. Now an innocent man is in jail for the murder's he didn't commit.

Must watch! Includes rare recordings like the gun shot heard whilst Martin is talking on the phone to a cop, indicating a second shooter.

YouTube Link

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 02:21 AM by ITSALLGOOD

A mate on facebook sent me something on this a while back i dont know where he got it from ill see if i still got it. It basically said the amount of shots to kill ratio would make him one of the best shots goin around almost impossible. Ill see if i can get it now.

www.biblebelievers.org.au/palies1.htm

[edit on 1-11-2009 by ITSALLGOOD]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 02:38 AM by Chadwickus

I couldn't say if the the Port Arthur massacre was set up or not, one thing I do know is that Martyn Bryant was a very disturbed individual, ever since he was a child he wasn't quite right.

I recommend reading his biography.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:04 AM by dallas18

reply to post by ITSALLGOOD

"On 28 April 1996 at Port Arthur in Australia, some of the best combat shooters in the world used a total of only 64 bullets to kill 35 people, wound 22 more, and cripple two cars. The first 19 victims in the Broad Arrow Cafe each died from a single 5.56-mm bullet to the head, all fired in less than 20 seconds from the right hip of a fast-moving combat shooter. This awesome display of marksmanship was blamed on an intellectually impaired young man called Martin Bryant, who had no shooting or military experience at all. In the months and years following Martin’s arrest, much of the public and private strain fell on his widowed mother Carleen. This is a very small part of Carleen Bryant’s profoundly disturbing story." --Joe Vialls

source

The third major investigation was into the Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, Australia. Vialls claimed that an intellectually-impaired man, Martin Bryant, was wrongly convicted for this crime and did not receive a fair trial. Vialls claimed that this case, also, was an Israeli operation carried out by Mistaravim. [9]

source

Indeed the bullet to hit ratio was very impressive! The video recently posted above also goes into this.

AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:19 AM by Pilgrum

I live close enough to go there for a picnic lunch and I would actually have been there with my wife and 3 kids except for a problem with the car. I heard the story as it developed on the radio in my shed - well as much as radio reporters had to say about it at least.

Prior to '93 here in Tas you could purchase virtually any weapon you liked and as much ammo as you could afford without any problems whatsoever and no licenses were required. I used to get ammo for my rifles over the counter at K-Mart and the nearby marine shop had the best deals on cartons of shotgun shells for skeet & trap shooting as an example. I was an active sporting shooter and a member of the Field & Game Association in those days.

There was a similar incident in Melbourne (the 'Hoddle St Massacre') involving a semi-auto military style weapon that brought the subject of tighter firearm control to the forefront of govt discussion and here in Tas a 'shooters license' was introduced which amounted to getting police approval (involving character assessment plus a background check of records) and being issued a license for $25/yr but still no details of actual weapons owned needed to be supplied (no weapons inspections either).

The actual number of rapid-fire weapons in the community is anyone's guess but they were coming into this state by the container load in those days and the population here is under 500 000. For less than $300 you could pick up a used SKS and a 1200 round crate of 7.62x39 military ammo and take the lot home the same day. A 30 round magazine was an optional extra.

You see, the gun culture here in the early 90s made it quite easy for someone like Martin Bryant to get whatever weapons he liked and the only limit was how much cash you had on hand - he had plenty of that.

Yes he could have done it and I still think he actually did it. It was not the action of a mentally stable person.

The government action in the wake of the incident did not disarm the population as many think. Severe restrictions were placed on all types of rapid-fire weapons including pump-action shotguns but single shot (eg bolt action) rifles and shotguns were spared with special conditons placed on how and where they and ammo are stored. 'Home Defense' is not a valid reason for possessing a firearm but there are many other legitimate reasons like being a member of a registered rifle club or being a farmer as examples. Firearms may still be purchased here and the nearest gun dealer is only a few minutes away from me - you need only comply with the more stringent legal requirements these days.

As for me, I elected to get rid of all my weapons but it was voluntary, not enforced and I could have legally kept about half of them if I wished.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:19 AM by BlackViolet

Hello Dallas,

All this doesn't suprise me in the least,

To add a bit to your thread I used to work with a man that spent some time
in the slam with Bryant,In workmates words"He was not capable of pulling that off",Told me that Bryant was very shy,never said much and seemed to stare off in to space a lot,He also told me that when he first went in that Bryant was in Solitary with two "Men in black suits and sunglasses posted outside his door".
Make what you will of that one...

Regards

BV.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:24 AM by Pilgrum

reply to post by ITSALLGOOD

I'd been in that cafe before the day of the incident and it wasn't all that large. He could hardly have missed in that smallish space and it was reasonably full on the day.

[edit on 1/11/2009 by Pilgrum]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:26 AM by Kryties

I met Martin Bryant about 6 months before the massacre on a cruise in the Whitsundays. He and I talked and shared a few drinks for about 4 hours one night and chatted up the female cruise waitresses (or whatever you call them hehe) - NEVER at any point in time did he give me the impression of being unstable, warped or capable of committing such an atrocity.

All I know is this: When the massacre occurred I was unable to go hunting with my grandfather anymore because he was forced to hand in his guns. I am not allowed to get a license to continue hunting now without having to go through years of red tape and most likely denial at the end as my "need" does not satisfy their requirements.

What has the gun ban here achieved? Last time I checked, the murderers are still murdering - just with knives and their hands instead of guns. Does anyone else here agree with me when I say if I was going to be murdered I would much prefer a bullet to the head than a slit throat or being choked?!?!

[edit on 1/11/2009 by Kryties]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:28 AM by Beyourself

Great Work Dallas, I was considering beginning a thread about this matter only less than a week ago, Kudos for beating me to it. _javascript:icon('

')

There are so many anomalies involved in this case that one can conclusively agree that this was a PYSOPS operation.
en.wikipedia.org...

Evidently undertaken by the Australian government to introduce Draconian gun laws onto the population.

This site has an invaluble amount of information which substantiates Dallas18's thread. - www.whale.to... - Highly recommended read.

Poor Martin Bryant is just another Harvey Lee Oswald

I agree 100% that Australia is the NWO's testing ground.
I can think of a lot of interested parties fiening interest in the massive untapped jewel of the southern hemisphere that is Australia.

S&F for bringing up this important case again

BY

[edit on 1-11-2009 by Beyourself]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:37 AM by Beyourself

reply to post by Pilgrum

It really wasn't the fact that the Broad Arrow cafe was so small, it was Headshot ratio that someone with an IQ of 66 achieved.
Some of the best professional shooters in the world would be hard pressed
to meet the number of headshots required in the time elapsed.
Not to mention the fact he was supposedly shooting from the hip.
The overall number of bullets fired compared with number of death's and injuries are staggeringly close.

On a different note:
The official story for this event is completely full of holes and as per usual,
the sensationalised Australian media conducted their typical trial-by-media perfectly.

[edit on 1-11-2009 by Beyourself]

AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:46 AM by dallas18

Is there an Israeli psyop connection?

taken from here

When asked about the crime scene a Australian commando commented : .. "Only Jews kill like that"

The gun was a rare Israeli commando model, CAR 15.

Howard is a liberal that panders to Australia's 140,000 Jews. Rupert Murdoch, who controls the newspapers, put him in power.

Jews have always wanted an gun ban - Howard rushed the most draconian one in history through in 2 weeks.

The legislation banned 80% of all firearms, set up a national registration and confiscated present guns.

What really happened ?

Jews want a gun law passed so they stage an horrific massacre.

Martin Bryant was befriended by two Mideast types in the month before. That day they took two cars to Port Arthur. One drives Bryant's Volvo to the cafe and slaughters the 35 moving his way back to the cottage. There they killed the elderly couple and give Bryant a drug mixture (psychotropic drug cocktails) containing amphetamines and benzodiazepine (Used by Mossad on Arab suicide bombers.)

Bryant was told to 'Stay and protect' and they left.
A pair were seen escaping over drawbridge. (video no longer available)

agree that this source isn't that great, but its somewhere to start and would be interesting how this information surfaced, if genuine

Vialls claimed that this case, also, was an Israeli operation carried out by Mistaravim.

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

[edit on 1/11/09 by dallas18]

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 03:57 AM by Tayesin

Bryant's IQ is very low. He was overseen by a psych in Sydney.. sorry no links just public information. Regularly he was evaluated by another psyche from The Tavestock Insitute in London. A little research on the place brings you to think it the home of mind control.

I read a report from Australian Military Marksmen written by the top four which says there had to have been more shooters to have the high number of head and heart shots in the relatively short timeframe. Again no links it was hardcopy and not mine.

Bryant on the other hand was a terrible shot with no training, and using rifles that had been handed in to Police in Sydney months earlier.

Lots of research shows problems with the case. Photos allegedly of Bryant in the same spot with and without a large boat in the background and claimed to be taken at the same time, according to Police.

Something is wrong with the whole thing. I remember thinking Howard's reaction was a little too knee-jerking for my liking, and that he would go down in history as insuring we could never fight against invaders ourselves... well, we do have a very small military after all.

Lastly, Howard placed a 30 year moratorium ban on the subject. Meaning there is to be no official discussion or open study conducted by the government into the event. Interesting.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 04:01 AM by Chadwickus

reply to post by dallas18

That source is super dodge mate, it's loaded with anti-semantics and inaccuracies.

Bryant had motive, at least for the B&B owners, who bought the property from under his fathers nose.

His childhood also wasn't stable, far from it.

I think you need to step back and separate the wheat from the chaff because there is a lot of chaff getting thrown about regarding the Port Arthur massacre.

reply posted on 1-11-2009 @ 04:04 AM by Pilgrum

reply to post by Beyourself

I don't think IQ is much of a factor in being able to pull a trigger and those people were mostly seated enjoying their lunch when he cut loose with no warning.

I was surprised that the police eventually took him alive at the Seascape - seems he really didn't intend to survive. For an answer as to why they didn't simply shoot him there & then you need to look into the earlier Joe Gilewicz affair where a gunman (vietnam veteran) was shot dead by a police marksman during an armed siege near Hobart. The police were still hurting from the media bashing they got over that event.