OK so like weeks later I have a bit of time to finally answer some of the things you guys have pointed out. Now, I'm just going to copy and paste
bits from your posts, quote them and write a reply under but I'm not going to bother with usernames, so if you have an issue with what I said...I
hope you can remember if it's your post or not
Caveat: Just because I might not address a point doesn't necessarily mean I'm in agreement with it, it just means I might not have a thought on the
matter. I'll also ask a few questions to clarify bits. Sometimes I'm quoting out of order so you'll have to forgive me for that.
OK and on with the show.
1. The main one was how did a 19 year old man kill so many people with shots to the head, in such a short amount of time, with so few misses? In as
little as 15 seconds, and no longer than 20 seconds, he killed 12 people, with most dying from head shots. Even military special forces, have not been
able to recreate such a scenario in a short amount of time. [/QUOTE]
Do you have a link or reference to where and when military SF have recreated this event? If even military SF can't recreate it takes away some of the
credibility of the Israeli SF theory.
2. I cant say for sure with this because Im not a complete gun nut, but with an AR-15, there would be a significant amount of recoil involved every
time the weapon is fired. Almost all the people killed were shot with one bullet to the head. How does one maintain control of an assault rifle and
kill 12 people in 15 seconds, with such a weapon?
AR15s don't have a huge amount of recoil. There is a method of firing from the hip, I understand it's called point shooting but I've not had any
formal military training on firearms nor would I consider myself an expert on shooting. However, shooting from the hip is not a military technique so
far as I know. According to the wikipedia article on it (yes yes I know, wikipedia), most of the head shots were from inches away or from around 2
metres away. You don't need to be a crack shot to do that.
5. Bryants fingerprints were not found at the cafe where he ate lunch
What did he eat? If he had just a wrapped sammie in gladwrap you won't find any prints. You won't find any prints on the furniture either, depending
on what it's made of. Also, reference please.
4. None of the witnesses, could accurately identify Martin Bryant as the shooter
6. Martin Bryants mother and sister who visited him, claim their son was forced to plead guilty, otherwise "he would be responsible for their
Families are usually the last people to believe their relatives are guilty of anything.
7. Their were two police officers within 11 kilometres of the shooting site. Both of these officers recieved an anonymous call sending them to an
abandoned coal mine, in an isolated area west of the shooting, where there was allegedly a large stash of heroin. Shortly after they discovered that
the heroin was in fact jars of soap powder, they recieved a phone call about the unfolding incident. But by this time, they were half an hour away,
and got their only to be pinned down by gunfire from Bryant holding up in the seascape guesthouse.
Probably coincidence. Joke calls happen ALL the time to Police.
8. Bryant had an IQ of 66. He actually outsmarted police by doubling back to where the rampage first strarted. How can a man with below normal
intelligence think in such a tactical manner? Firther more, all the knowledge of weaponry and tactical manouvers he knew, had come from survival
guides and military magazines
IQ isn't the same as sheer cunning. I know some dumb buggers who are thick as two planks but could out-cun (whoo, made up a word!) lots of people.
Also, he used a few clips in the cafe..
They recovered the used clips and they all had "one" round left..
Usually the sign of a well trained soldier who doen't keep firing till he's empty..
Professional soldiers don't do that, it's a waste of ammo. What they do do is leave one in the breech while they're reloading in case a threat pops
up. Hence the magazine is empty but the breech is not.
It's much harder for one person to shoot a number of people dead than these stories would have us believe. Potential victims don't stay still, they
run and hide. And shooting moving targets while you are moving means missing more often than not.
Is answered by the next post:
He was also 'smart' enough to know to stand near the door when he began his rampage so as to ensure no-one could exit the cafe.
It's a small, enclosed space. People will freeze. That's a fact.
1. In the months before the massacre, a specially built body-van was ordered and constructed which could hold 19 or more bodies. This van was used to
remove the bodies from Port Arthur. Shortly after the event, the body of the van was removed, and the vehicle was sold!
Reference needed that it was sold off.
3. One of the people in the Broad Arrow Cafe, the scene of the shooting, - Graham Collier, was shot in the neck at point blank range. He had the
presence of mind to play dead. The killer stepped over him twice, so he got a good look at him. Graham survived and emphatically stated, "It was not
Martin Bryant who shot me."
So who was it then?
5. A number of foreigners, including Americans, were amongst the victims. There was never an autopsy on any one of them.
Hardly relevant. What does the lack of autopsy indicate? It indicates nothing.
Black op by Israeli special forces
Next question is, why would the Israelis do it? They'd get no benefit out of it.
There were apparently some Israeli specop guys on holiday in Australia at the time..
The kill count in the cafe was incredible yet later, the real Martin Bryant fired 250 shots from the house without hitting anyone. I actually wonder
if he even fired a shot..But who knows?
Australia is a big place, doesn't mean they were at Port Arthur, if it's true.
Re house firing. Shooting indoors at close range is far different to shooting outdoors at long range. If it really were an SF team, from whatever
nation, way more people would be dead.
Who benefits?? How about a government that has just quelled any chance of effective resistance against it if it decides to impose much harsher
draconian/tyrannical measures against it's own people.
If you don't believe in the planned World Government control agenda and the evil measures behind it from the same folk behind the 911 psyop campaign,
then this 'theory' may sound a little 'out there'. However it should be known that Australia is a vital NWO strategic hub for now and especially
for the future. There is much vested interest in it's 'New Age' role by the international power factions that currently manipulate and 'stage
manage' world events such as 911 among many other terrorist acts.
Blah blah blah, NWO wank wank. The criminals still have the guns, it doesn't lessen any chance of "resistance" to any other such rubbish.
Lastly, I questioned the Immediate, apparently knee-jerk, Government reaction of instantly placing Bans on the weapons mentioned in the OP, AND,
placing a 40 year Moratorium Ban on the entire subject. Effectively stiffling any decent and official research into the events leading up to the day.
Governments are all about knee jerk reactions. If they weren't we'd call them sensible people and not politicos
But the fact is that it is highly unlikely that someone with the intelligence and tactical knowledge of Martin Bryant, would be able to achieve such a
feat. A few years back an Israeli solider went insane and shot up a crowded street, with an AR-15. He wounded seven and killed nobody. How can someone
who probably wouldve been involved in combat (given the state of Israel), not even accomplish anything close to what Bryant did?
A street isn't the same as a crowded cafe with tables very close together. You could take a handful of peanuts, biff them and most are going to hit
I've probably got more, just let me do a bit of research first.