It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Port Arthur massacre conspiracy

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Proof Bryant is innocent:

home.overflow.net.au...




posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by CinLung
It means, people of Australia or Aussie are soooooooooo weak hopelessly can do nothing at all, and so do the government after over 10 years the incident happened.

Yeah you speak the truth my friend. Except that doesn't just apply to Aussies. Just look how many people think that Bush/US Gov was somehow involved in 9/11. Thousands of US citizens dead..


Originally posted by CinLung
Shame to Aussie, and more shame to Aussie who keep on bringing this issue to public and internet but do nothing to their own people.

Yeah but...

Originally posted by Flighty
the majority of Australians think Bryant is guilty as hell



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by styxxz
........
Yeah you speak the truth my friend. Except that doesn't just apply to Aussies. Just look how many people think that Bush/US Gov was somehow involved in 9/11. Thousands of US citizens dead..
........
Yeah but...
........
the majority of Australians think Bryant is guilty as hell


It seems everything is consipracy
, or is it a work of jobless who has nothing better to do instead of guessing this and that?

And, why the majority of Australian think Bryant was guilty? Oh ok, because the majority was misinformed. Majority win, right? That's the week point of democracy when public opinion can be easily distorted by public media and conspirators.
Then what should Aussie do? Stop electing Howard, and don't even think of that racial Lady prime minister wanna be.


Well, I guess Aussie in this forum are right, the only way is to keep on putting this message on public especially internet and hope one day it will open up public eyes.
But that's not enough, Aussie must do it physically on the ground as well. Gathering those who have same thoughts and march to their government!








BTW, what is this? Three lost in ghost ship.

www.news.com.au...

What made the police go and check the ship? Who reported?
I mean, no one really a care a yacht has been floating for days. But why the police checked this boat when everything was still warm, computer GPS and food were still warm.

Another conspiracy?





[edit on 20-4-2007 by CinLung]



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by CinLung
It seems everything is consipracy
, or is it a work of jobless who has nothing better to do instead of guessing this and that?


i think you'll find, if you actually LOOK, that most conspiracy detectors are well educated and have jobs. however, you're take on the matter seems rather like typical 'tinhat' ad hominem tactics, whether it is or not.


Originally posted by CinLungAnd, why the majority of Australian think Bryant was guilty?


can you prove the majority believe this? because i know the majority of americans think the government is lying about 911, and that JFK was not killed by oswald alone. americans have more firepower per capita than australians by a ridiculous ratio.
you're not thinking hard enough.


Originally posted by CinLungThat's the week point of democracy when public opinion can be easily distorted by public media and conspirators


from the old palmolive dish-soap commercials.."you're soaking in it".


Originally posted by CinLungBut that's not enough, Aussie must do it physically on the ground as well. Gathering those who have same thoughts and march to their government!


yeah. that always works. get a posse, and give 'them' an excuse.
no, my naive little buddy, things are not a cowboy movie. from sun tzu, or some guy on the subway i talked to once...

"it is impossible to defeat an enemy that does not want to be defeated"

in other words, the only REAL war is in the collective mind. 'they' must decide it is in their best interest to give up. right now, that ain't gonna happen.
blogging and youtube "VOLUNTARY ESP" is the first foray in the conscious revolution.



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob.........
can you prove the majority believe this? because i know the majority of americans think the government is lying about 911, and that JFK was not killed by oswald alone. americans have more firepower per capita than australians by a ridiculous ratio.
you're not thinking hard enough.


I don't know, that was someone's statement. At least 2 Australians in this forum said that, I think.


Originally posted by billybob "it is impossible to defeat an enemy that does not want to be defeated"

in other words, the only REAL war is in the collective mind. 'they' must decide it is in their best interest to give up. right now, that ain't gonna happen.
blogging and youtube "VOLUNTARY ESP" is the first foray in the conscious revolution.


So there is no point of talking conspiracy while you know you can't beat them? Right? So we are just wasting time here, jobless nothing better to do and try to war against someone we can't win.



Just who can't be defeated? I am not saying I can defeat anyone, but who can't be defeated? The American Jews conspirators?



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by CinLung
I don't know, that was someone's statement. At least 2 Australians in this forum said that, I think.


well, i don't want you to feel inadequate, but that's a pretty SMALL POLL.



Originally posted by CinLung
So there is no point of talking conspiracy while you know you can't beat them? Right? So we are just wasting time here, jobless nothing better to do and try to war against someone we can't win.



Just who can't be defeated? I am not saying I can defeat anyone, but who can't be defeated? The American Jews conspirators?



you can defeat anyone?

WOW!

keep saying "jewish conspirators" over and over, and see how long you're not in jail for.




did i say 'american jew'? i don't think so. the real conspiracy is global, and all races and religions are represented.

keep laughing, though.



laughter is good for the soul.

[edit on 20-4-2007 by billybob]



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob


you can defeat anyone?

WOW!

keep saying "jewish conspirators" over and over, and see how long you're not in jail for.

.....

[edit on 20-4-2007 by billybob]


Did I say I can defeat anyone? Wrong typing of mine or wrong reading of yours?

So this Jewish Conspirators job is to put people in jail? They are bad huh?

Is that a warning or simply an information? Or you put me in jail?

Argh, another bad buy on bad internet.



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by CinLung

Originally posted by billybob


you can defeat anyone?

WOW!


Did I say I can defeat anyone? Wrong typing of mine or wrong reading of yours?

So this Jewish Conspirators job is to put people in jail? They are bad huh?

Is that a warning or simply an information? Or you put me in jail?

Argh, another bad buy on bad internet.


it was selective quoting actually. an object lesson in propaganda. you DID say "i can defeat anyone". of course, you ALSO said, 'i'm not saying' before that, but when we cut out the CONTEXT of the VERBATIM QUOTE, it completely reverses the meaning.

i'm not a bad guy. i AM pointing out that the whole 'anti-semitism' monster is rearing it's politically ugly head again. did you read the thread about holocaust denial being considered as a CRIME which you can go to JAIL for in the european 'union'?



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 06:08 AM
link   
G'day all,

I have just come across this thread and feel VERY strongly about this conspiracy, I have posted a few times about this incident both in the thread titled "Ozzie Guns" found halfway down the first page here -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

aswell as the thread titled "Federal Officials: At Least 32 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting" found on page 25 here -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But non the less because of my interest in this case, I shall also post here what I have previously to promote further discussion about the inconsistencies with the case, and the Australian Governments and police compacency with the investigation, such as not wanting to take the witness statements of people who saw a totaly different person as the killer than Martyn Bryant for it would not go along with the "official" story.

Here is my write-up, I hope you enjoy it and find it imformative........

In regards to the Port Arthur Massacre, let me forward you to the following link which proves that this was planned upto 10years before it happened -
members.iimetro.com.au...

Quote - "There is reason to think the Port Arthur massacre was planned as early 1987 when, after a specially called Premier's meeting in Hobart in December 1987, the New South Wales Labour Premier, Mr. Barry Unsworth stated, "there would be no effective gun control in Australia until there was a massacre in Tasmania""

Quote - " At the same time a long list of facts or discrepancies were overlooked. Any calls for a royal commission fell on deaf ears, the media were later instructed not to talk about the subject anymore and the files have been closed for 30 years.

The Port Arthur massacre occurred on 28 April there was legislation prepared by mid May with plans for a national buyback of automatic and semi-automatic rifles."

Quote - Prior to 1996 Australia had huge number of sporting shooters traditionally used in time of war to both train and supplement our miniscule armed forces.

However, since the psyop at Port Arthur more than 400,000 reserve forearms have been pulped instead of stored by the Federal Government. - Joe Vialls"

Quote - "

THOMAS JEFFERSON
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government".

1-----Nazi Germany established gun control in 1938 enabling the government to round up 13 million defenceless Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill and impaired human beings, imprisoning them in concentration camps, and by a conscious process of attrition, destroyed them.

2-----The Turkish Ottoman Empire established gun control in 1911, proceeding then to exterminate 1.5 million Armenians from 1914 - 1917."

This will happen in the states but going by your history, it'd have to be one hell of a massacre to drum up the public support necessary to force this legislation through your congress.

Just a little bit more in regards to the Poret Arthur Massacre and discrepencies -

The following quote from the link attached details the extent of lies and fabrication aswell as the sort of operation the government undertook in an effort to make this happen so they may force through their "anti-gun" legislation.

home.overflow.net.au...

Quote - "Just after noon on 28th April 1996, an unknown marksman opened fire on diners in the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur in Australia. In less than 20 minutes at this and five other crime scenes, the marksman killed 35, injured 22, and crippled two cars with only 64 shots. Nineteen of the first twenty dead in the Broad Arrow Cafe died from single shots to the head, all fired by the unknown marksman from his right hip. This staggering display of marksman- ship was blamed on left-handed and intellectually impaired Martin Bryant, whose shooting experience extended to popping off cans in the bush, and had no military training of any kind. From the time of his arrest, remand prisoner Martin Bryant was illegally held in strict solitary confinement and denied access to media of any kind until his police interrogation on 4th July 1996. When he refused to admit to the Port Arthur Massacre at interrogation, he was once more placed back in illegal solitary confinement. Eventually in desperation during November 1996, Martin Bryant pleaded "guilty" 72 times, thereby allowing the authorities to avoid a humiliating trial at which they could present no hard evidence of guilt. Intellectually impaired Martin Bryant was convicted by a hysterical media pack, then forced to plead guilty by prison officials illegally enforcing solitary confinement."

Explain to me how anyone, even a sniper in Iraq with years of experience could have shot 19 people in the head whilst shooting from his hip amongst the panic and noise of the scene? Let alone a intellectually disabled individual?

Quote - "On the 23rd of June 1996 the Sunday Telegraph published a story about a gun collector in Victoria who identified the AR15 rifle used for the Port Arthur killings as one that he had handed in to police during an amnesty in February 1993. Strange that the weapon used in the killings just happened to fall off a conveyor belt on the way to the smelters."

The following quote is VERY IMPORTANT
Quote - "I have had these pages up and running since 1997 and have never had anyone tell me that they saw the Port Arthur shooter and it was Martin Bryant. Yet I have seen several sworn statements from eyewitnesses who could identify the shooter and give descriptions of a man other than Martin Bryant where the killings took place. While there were witnesses who said that they saw Martin Bryant at the Port Arthur area not one could identify him as being anywhere near the Broad Arrow Café, where most of the murders took place, or any other crime scene on the way to the Seascape Inn. Those who eyeballed him said that he had a pocked ugly face and long hair. Martin Bryant has clear skin and on that occasion his hair was less than shoulder length. Photographic evidence shows a man wearing what looks like a woman's wig. Witnesses said the shooter shot from the right hip, yet Martin was left handed and the list goes on and on. All of which will be revealed in these pages."

continued in next post --->



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 06:08 AM
link   
The following link has very in depth analytical report on how the Port Arthur Massacr was staged government operation which IO highly recommend all you Yanks have a read so you may know what to expect when a similar event occurs in the States - home.overflow.net.au...

And to conclude, I saw a documentary pice about a year or so ago on "the Sunday Show" here in Australia that mentioned when Martyn Bryant was at the house still, before he went to the cafe, police marksmen had on several occassions had him in their sights for a kill shot and everytime they were refused permission to shoot.

CONSPIRACY, CONSPIRACY, CONSPIRACY. Our governments have become dictatorships under the cloak of democracy!

I'll try my best mate and state some facts that "helped" the governments case against us - (the information gathered here and quotes included is from home.overflow.net.au...
authored and investigated by the ltae Joe Vialls who dediacted alot of his time and effort for free into informing the public of the wrond doings of the government)

1. "To this very day there has not been a Coronial Inquiry, an inquest that is by law, essentially held for all suspicious deaths including suicide and some accidental deaths."

2. "American video evidence submitted to the Supreme Court has already been scientifically proven a forgery; deliberately submitted to the court in order to secure the conviction of Martin Bryant on all counts, in the event that he continued to plead "Not Guilty". Due to the seriousness of this offence, copies of the scientific proof have been sent by registered mail to departments which should take active steps to have the material reviewed and struck out of evidence, and then urgently implement strategies to ensure the future integrity of Australian national security."

3. All the eyewitness at the scene failed to identify Martyn Bryant as the killer. The description of the killer was different to that of the accused.

4. "There is now also convincing hard evidence that the gun control proposals accepted by Police Ministers in May 1996 were prepared before the massacre, by an ideological senior bureaucrat with United Nations connections."

5. Quote from home.overflow.net.au...
" in the immediate aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre, politicians developed collective verbal diarrhoea in the House of Representatives as they joined the feeding frenzy designed to undermine Australian national security by removing defensive weapons from the hands of the public."

6. The media jumped on the bandwagon and tried to force through to the public via television and newspapers the notion that anyone with a legalaly aquired firearm is crackpot criminal mass murderer just waiting to go off. They tried to make it socially unacceptible to own a firearm.

7. Both sides of politics stood together to publibly support gun control measures and our current prime-minister has said on a few occasions that he would like to make our current gun-laws alot tougher - making me think that there could be another massacre on the way.

8. on talkback radio the media and government had fake listeners call up tp put the governments comments and ideas forward to the public to sway opinions. Heres a few of them from home.overflow.net.au...

" Gun nuts, rednecks and lunatics. That's all they are. What would ever possess anyone to want to own a thing that kills people is beyond me"

"Yeah, I heard them say that they use their shotguns for sport. What kind of sport do you need a shotgun for? That's what I'd like to know? It's ludicrous."

"That's right, it just goes to show how stupid they are."

Two weeks later our shooters were the first to bring gold home from the Atlanta Olympics and that ignorant talk-back host and his equally ignorant supporter must have felt very foolish to find out that one of Australia's safest sports is clay shooting and we are among the world's best. "

There was also an incident at Monash University here a few years later 21st October 2002, when a student open fire with a handgun in a classroom and almost immediately there was a review on for handguns.

www.abc.net.au...

Quote - "GEMMA PINNELL: We are calling for the complete ban of semi-automatic hand guns and we think that, as an urgent step, the State Government should seek to see that occur in Victoria.

Two semi-automatic hand guns were used in the tragedy and we think there is a range of reasons why these should be banned immediately because of, essentially, what happened today.

But semi-automatic hand guns are easy to access, they are the most concealable, the most dangerous types of guns and they can shoot several rounds per second and they are as powerful as a rifle."

Quote - "KIM WELLS: Now we don't know whether the guns were licensed, whether the shooter was registered."

The following is the actual bill put forward by the Federal Government for the Handgun Buyback Scheme -

www.aph.gov.au...

Quote - "It was subsequently reported that the alleged gunman was a licensed pistol owner with access to several handguns, including semi-automatic pistols and a .357 magnum revolver."

Even thou the guns were registered and he was a registered owner, how can this be viewed as categorizing the rest of the legitimate firearms community as criminals and subject to a buyback?

Criminals dont participate in buybacks and the fact that they are registered will almost allways result in a conviction.

They will do anything to disarm the public and this is part of the UN sponsored NWO agenda to disarm the public before serious totalitarian laws get passed by the Governments.

Governments should not have anything to fear of the public if their intentions are honest!

There you have it, that above was my writeup in regard to the Port Arthur incident as written up on other threads.

I still beleive that it was a Government orchestrated incident and I did quote in January of this year that there will be soon a Port Arthur incident in the US that the Congress will use to justify their anti-gun policies, to be implemented to enable their future martial law plans/scenario's to be enacted much more efficiently and with minimal resistance.
Americans, pay attention to what is happening around you, for when the 2nd Ammendment is gone, so are you.......



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I suppose the 600 eye witness accounts mean nothing?

Those people who were there on the day and gave statements are part of some Govt OP hey?

600 people? All liars are they?



These are just three eyewitness accounts...

Mr Grenfell ...

Mr Grenfell then identified Bryant, realised who it was and called out, ‘It’s him.’


Mr Buckley ...

...Mr Buckley looked down the road Page 154 And observed Bryant standing beside the open driver’s door of his yellow Volvo, raise a rifle to his shoulder and shoot Mrs Mikac and immediately thereafter her youngest daughter.


Mrs Frida & Nicholas Cheok ...

Mrs Frida Cheok and son, Nicholas, observed a woman in the front passenger seat of the BMW we believe to have been Mrs Nixon, motioning to them with her hands as if to say, ‘go back’. At the same time they observed two men, Bryant and Mr Salzmann apparently arguing at the driver’s side door of the Volvo. It is the Crown case that Bryant then quickly moved a step or two to the rear of the Volvo and removed the .308 calibre SLR rifle. A few more words were exchanged and Bryant raised the rifle and shot Mr Salzmann at point blank range through the neck, a lethal injury, causing Mr Salzmann to fall straight backwards to the roadway.


transcript



[edit on 20-4-2007 by NJE777]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by NJE777]



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Bryant's former girlfriend:

Jeanette Hoani


Jenetta Hoani, the gunman's former girlfriend, claimed that Bryant was obsessed with bestiality, violent videos and teddy bears, of which he had 200 in his bedroom. His best friend was a pet pig with whom he sometimes shared his bed. Jenetta said Martin's favorite video was "Child's Play 2", which features a doll named Chucky that is possessed by a serial killer and comes to life after killing a boy and taking over his body. She also said that he would undergo frightening personality changes and appeared to delight in death and danger.Ref



During the 12-hour siege an Australian journalist managed to reach Bryant by phone. He told her, "I can't talk now, I'm having too much fun. I want to have a shower and if you ring me back again I will shoot the hostage."Ref


What do we make of the recorded audio evidence?


In his childhood Mr Bryant was assessed on a number of occasions by psychologists and psychiatrists. He was noted soon after starting school to have both behavioral problems and learning difficulties. He was referred from the Friends School in September 1973 for assessment. He was noted to be aggressive, destructive and very difficult with other children. He was transferred to the New Town Primary School where again his behavior led to referral to a child guidance clinic. At this time he was thought to be hyperactive and placed both on medication and subsequently on a special diet which was then fashionable for the treatment of this condition. Mr Bryant's behavior at school and at home remained troublesome. He is noted in the records from New Town Primary School to lack friends, to be struggling scholastically and to be persistently disruptive in class. There are references to him stealing, to him having violent outbursts and to tormenting vulnerable children. There are also descriptions in this material of him taking delight in the discomfort and failure of other children in the class situation. In August 1977 he was suspended from the New Town Primary School and soon after was assessed at the Hobart Diagnostic Centre. In this assessment there are records of Mr Bryant torturing and harassing animals and tormenting his sister. He was still apparently having speech problems at this time. Considerable work was attempted to remedy Mr Bryant's problems and when in 1978 he returned to school there was noted to be a decrease in his aggressive and distruptive behavior, though he was apparently still teasing younger children. In 1980 on transfer to the New Town High school he was placed in the special education unit where at least initially he coped better both academically and behaviorally. There is however clear indications of deterioration in all aspects of his performance toowards the end of his school career. Again in the material from this period are references to tormenting animals. Ref



Mr Bryant spoke of this longstanding resentment against Mr and Mrs Martin. He described them as "very mean people" and as " the worse people in my life". The basis for this antipathy appears to be Mr Bryant's belief that Mr Martin bought the property which they occupied at their death with the expressed intention of preventing his father from buying the same property. Mr Bryant appears to believe that this event broke his father's heart and led to the downfall of this family. It appears that this was indeed a family myth about their misfortunes and according to Mrs Bryant her late husband would often complain to Martin Bryant of the damage to the family inflicted by what was viewed as the double dealing of the Martin familyRef


The EMA Conference Procedings in a must read:


...Lets start out by examining first, the claim that Bryant was "phenomenally accurate" in his shooting. That it was impossible for such a person as Bryant who was intellectually handicapped. Indeed, Vialls makes the point, continually that, Where method is concerned any expert combat shooter could have killed 20 unarmed civilians in less than thirty seconds, and wrought havoc in the general area, although the words "expert combat shooter" should be noted with care.



...Now, lets examine what the EMA conference proceedings had to report on the number of people killed in the Broadarrow Cafe, where most of the deaths occurred. Bryant is claimed to have shot, "people with 29 shots being fired, the first 18 in about 15 seconds. From these 20 people were killed and a further 12 wounded."(p.5, EMA, Port Arthur Papers)

Furthermore, it had this to add about the nature of the wounds suffered by the victims at Port Arthur:

The fatal injuries were predominantly high calibre gunshot wounds to the head, chest, or both, mostly at very short range. The critical injuries were all high calibre gunshot wounds to the upper body (chest, neck, jaw, head and shoulder) and other injuries included gunshot wounds to peripheries limbs and legs) and penetrating fragment injuries. (p.34, EMA, Port Arthur Seminar Papers)

To this can be added, according to the "Forensic Overview" of the Conference Papers that, "the pattern of injuries was variable, some being of single shot through and through type, others being complex with several injuries being complicated intermediate targets and primary and secondary woundings." (p.99, Ibid)

From my past military and technical training this indicates to me not a case of considerable marksmanship but rather one of incredibly low accuracy on the part of Martin Bryant. We have more people hit than the number of shots which were actually fired in the Broadarrow Cafe. This would tend to indicate that bullets actually penetrated and struck other victims on their exit from the original victim's body. This is further supported by this comment about the power of the rounds used by Bryant:

The power of the weapons was such that one bullet fired at a car pierced the metal pillar between the driver and passenger's windows killed the woman and exited through the other side of the vehicle. (ibid)

Furthermore, because of the nature and position of most of the injuries, as described above, it becomes evident that either Bryant was either firing, not from the hip but the shoulder or the victims were in fact seated. Considering the other evidence available that most of the victims were in fact eating in and around the Cafe, we can I think almost completely discard the former of the two hypotheses and safely assume that the majority of his victims were actually seated at the time they were shot.



The result is that instead, as Vialls and Noel claim, Bryant was carefully aiming each round, resulting in phenomenal accuracy, he more than likely was doing what we used to refer to in the Army as "spray and pray" - pulling the trigger as fast as he could (remember this is only a semi-automatic weapon) and simply pointing it in the general direction of his target.Because that target was a densely packed throng of people in a small confined space he managed to hit far more than he actually aimed for (if he aimed at all) and in the process achieved a higher "kill ratio" than he would normally have been expected to. It can be fairly safely assumed that most in the target area were also seated (at least initially) and that Bryant standing and firing from the hip, produced a disproportionate number of head wounds, all of which resulted in death, whilst the peripheral wounds necessarily did not.
Ref






[edit on 23-4-2007 by NJE777]



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 11:48 PM
link   
The above relies upon this -> Emergency Management Australia, Port Arthur Seminar Papers, Hobart, 1997. Fackler, M.L., "Wounding Patterns of Military Rifle Bullets, International Defence Review, 1/1989, Vol.22

Perhaps those offering up a conspiracy would benefit from getting a job at Risdon and have the opportunity to interact with Bryant on a daily basis?


Dr Wilf Lopez is the Head of Psychiatry at Risdon. He says Bryant isn't easy to deal with. Every day Bryant reminds his jailers of who he is and what he's done.

Wilf Lopez: I'll give you one example. One of the nurses happened to be talking to him, and Martin as usual in a very childish way said, 'Have you got any children? How old are they? Will you bring them to come and see me?' And when this particular member of the staff - I'm not saying nurse or officer - said, 'Oh, I'm not going to bring them', he just put his hand out and said 'Click! Click!' - you know, making the suggestion of a gun.

Ginny Stein: That was not an isolated incident. Bryant has said many terrible things to staff. He's even offered to be a sperm donor. But the incident where he asked a staff member to bring children to visit, and then acted out shooting them, remains solid in the memories of hospital staff.



Forensic psychiatrist Dr Rod Milton later explained Bryant's actions to me.

Rod Milton: I suspect that his staring was quite deliberate, in order to discomfort you.

Ginny Stein: He would be aware of that?

Rod Milton: Well of course, he spends most of his time thinking about how he has an effect on other people, and that was the reason for the killing.



Wilf Lopez: I think gradually the gravity of what he has done seems to be sinking in, and it is quite obvious now when he talks, he does express words that convey the feeling that he probably regrets what he has done. Not because he's jailed, but in general. For instance he starts talking about 'Should I write to those people and say how sorry I am?' And I've been trying to document this sort of statement that he makes, so that I can put it back to him and see how sincere he is about this.

Ginny Stein: Have you tried to put it back to him as yet?

Wilf Lopez: No, not yet. At this stage, I'm trying to collect as much information as possible, document it, and then put it back to him. What I'm worried about is that if I do this prematurely, he's going to say and do things to please me, rather than express his real feeling.


Ref






[edit on 22-4-2007 by NJE777]

[edit on 22-4-2007 by NJE777]



posted on Apr, 23 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I'll address the following just to show how ludicrous your claims are (and btw, I cant help but notice this is off an Australian government website):


The result is that instead, as Vialls and Noel claim, Bryant was carefully aiming each round, resulting in phenomenal accuracy, he more than likely was doing what we used to refer to in the Army as "spray and pray" - pulling the trigger as fast as he could (remember this is only a semi-automatic weapon) and simply pointing it in the general direction of his target.Because that target was a densely packed throng of people in a small confined space he managed to hit far more than he actually aimed for (if he aimed at all) and in the process achieved a higher "kill ratio" than he would normally have been expected to. It can be fairly safely assumed that most in the target area were also seated (at least initially) and that Bryant standing and firing from the hip, produced a disproportionate number of head wounds, all of which resulted in death, whilst the peripheral wounds necessarily did not.


Firstly, you fail to mention the number of bullets fired with not only the number of kills but ALSO the number of shots to the head ie 1 shot kills. To suggest this was just a result of 'spray & pray' is idiocy at best.

'the gunman had killed twelve victims and wounded a further ten in 15 seconds flat, using only 17 rounds fired from the right hip' judicial-inc.biz...

Further - 'At this stage the gunman had killed twenty and wounded another twelve with a total of 29 rounds. He then stopped firing and changed magazines in a most professional way. The magazine fitted to the AR15 held 30 rounds total, so by changing magazines after firing only 29 shots the gunman ensured that he still had a live round in the breech in case anyone moved, enabling him to kill that person instantly if caught unawares. Such professionalism is well known to counter-terrorist personnel'.

And all this by a guy with an IQ of a 12 yr old?? I think not.

Secondly, you 'claim' Bryant has confessed to the killings & boasts about it yet you choose to ignore all the eye-witness accounts that claim it WASNT him. And many of these witness actually knew him.

I'll address your other claims later, when time allows, but these 2 claims for starters are indisputable, no matter how much 'spin' you put on them.

And the fact PM Howard over-ruled the high court by failing to give Bryant the right to 'due process' is not only illegal but unconstitutional. The arguement they wanted to 'spare the families the 'emotional distress' of a trial is a furfy. These were murders no different to any other mass killing. The families didnt need to be present, but Bryant has the right to a trial.

As I said before, the incarceration of Bryant is a national disgrace.




[edit on 23-4-2007 by Nonchalant]



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 06:44 AM
link   
Here is a brief yet very important summary c/o Vialls in regards to the Port Arthur massacre. It does make you think who the hell is running the country when they allow atrocities like this to occur just to push their ideologies forward.

100777.com...



Was Port Arthur Designed to Undermine our National Security?
December 22, 2003 - 02:46
Disarmament of the people
Filed under: Disarmament of the people
More on the Port Arthur Massacre and their patsy.

Forwarded is one of the most bizarre events of the recent past. Its facts were so muted and disguised as to make the entire issue, hardly plausible. Yet, the event happened, and the Gun issue in Australia emerged.... The similar event in Scotland can easily fit into the same category ..as unsolved, or at least why these people did what they did...JRN


Was Port Arthur Designed to Undermine our National Security ?

It is an accepted media "fact" that Martin Bryant, an intellectually- impaired young man with a dramatically low IQ of 66, shot dead 35 people at Port Arthur and wounded 22 others.

Not just that, but this awesome shooter managed to kill the first 19 out of 20 dead in the Broad Arrow Cafe with single accurate shots to the head fired from his right hip.

Not bad for a man with no firearm experience other than using a Webley Osprey air rifle when he was a boy, and by the way, Bryant used to fire the Webley from his left shoulder because he is and has always been left- handed.

Perhaps the media should have questioned this startling inconsistency but failed to do so. After all, the suspect was in custody, international media outlets were screaming for the "dramatic" story, and somehow Martin Bryant's increasingly desperate pleas of "Not Guilty" were ignored by all and sundry.

Why? Perhaps because the Tasmanian Government was already aware that there was absolutely no evidence of any kind linking Bryant to Port Arthur, and needed a media "conviction" to protect their exposed political hides. And so it was that Martin Bryant became the most vilified and hated man in Australia, with thousands calling for his immediate execution.

BEFORE YOU RUSH TO JUDGEMENT ON PORT ARTHUR, TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THE QUEEN v. MARTIN BRYANT, AND TRY TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS TO YOUR SATISFACTION. IT IS UNLIKELY YOU WILL BE ABLE TO DO SO.

--- 1 Two hours before the mass murder commenced at Port Arthur, all senior site personnel were collected and driven north to a management seminar more than two hours from the Historic Site. In practice, this meant that at the time of the mass murder, no experienced managers were available at the Port Arthur Site. A residential weekend management seminar had never happened before in the entire history of Port Arthur.

WHO ISSUED THIS EXTRAORDINARY ORDER ?

--- 2 One hour before the massacre commenced at Port Arthur, the only two armed policemen on the Tasman Peninsula were decoyed on an imaginary drugs bust, to a coal mine location 30 minutes drive away from Port Arthur. Within minutes of these officers reporting themselves on location at the coal mine by radio, the shooter opened fire in the Broad Arrow Cafe. Timed from the point at which shot number one was fired, the entire massacre was completed in 17 minutes elapsed tim, meaning armed police could not intervene.

WHO DECOYED THE ARMED POLICE OFFICERS ?

--- 3 The shooter entered the Broad Arrow Cafe carrying his weapons in a Prince sports bag, then left the empty sports bag in a prominent position to later "link" the murders to Martin Bryant. Problem! The Colt Commando AR15 later found by police at Seascape Cottage and claimed to be "Bryant's Murder Weapon", has a standard 14.5" barrel, making it far too long to fit into the Prince sports bag. The weapon removed from the sports bag in the Broad Arrow Cafe by the real shooter had a barrel no longer than ten inches. Where is the shortened AR15 actually used in the mass murder?

--- 4 After the mass murder, police were attracted to Seascape Cottage by a tall plume of smoke from a burning BMW in the yard. Martin Bryant remembers a BMW car but is adamant he does not remember setting fire to it, because a man was secured in the boot, or so he believed. Bryant was [Glenn Pears] was removed before the car was set on fire, and later shot dead inside Seascape Cottage. Was the car set on fire merely to destroy forensic evidence, or was it [like the Prince sports bag in the Broad Arrow Cafe], used as another 'link' to incriminate Martin Bryant ?

--- 5 Immediately after being taken into custody and while being treated at the Royal Hobart Hospital, Martin Bryant was able to easily converse with his captors, confirm he understood their questions, and plead "not guilty". How was this possible? If Bryant had been inside the Broad Arrow Cafe during the mass murder, the concussive blast of 20x.223 Remington rounds fired by an AR15 with a shortened barrel, would have severely damaged his hearing. Most survivors in the cafe were hearing impaired for weeks, and some had burst eardrums. Even the, only the shooter him self was subject to the full reflected concussive blast of all 29 rounds. This medical fact alone excludes Martin Bryant from the Broad Arrow Cafe, so who really did the shooting?

J.Vials


The Howard has blood on its hands. It was a direct attack against the Australian people to further the New World Order agenda of disarming the public, for a disarmed flock of sheep is far easier to slaughter in the future than an armd flock.

As mentioned previosuly.....a bloody disgrace this government!





posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 03:59 AM
link   
What can i say but NEW WORD ORDER. please goto INFOWARS.COM
COS THERE IS A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND!

TIMMYDEAN MACKA



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Martin Bryant's guilt: the problem of lack of evidence

Strikingly absent from the recent media coverage of the 10th anniversary of the most traumatic event in modern Australian history was evidence to support the official claim that Martin Bryant had been responsible for the massacre.

The matter of whether Bryant had really been the perpetrator was only touched upon in an interview with Bryant's mother, Carleen Bryant, that was published in the Bulletin of 4 April 2006:
"She likes to talk about her boy's hair. It's another reason she thinks he has been framed. 'He had beautiful, shampooed soft hair.' Carleen wants to set the record straight. 'The guy who did it had dark, greasy hair and pocked skin. My Martin has lovely soft baby skin.'"

The writer of the report, Julie-Anne Davies, of course does not raise the subject of whether Carleen Bryant has any evidence to support her claims, simply observing patronisingly that Mrs Bryant "lives in a state of denial". As I will show in this report, however, it is Julie-Anne Davies who is living in a state of denial—as are all Australians who think that Martin Bryant was responsible for the tragedy. There is simply no hard evidence to support this belief.

Most Australians, when confronted by the heretical idea that Bryant might not have been the gunman, respond in knee-jerk fashion: "Of course he was! People saw him do it!" In fact, it has never been proven that Bryant was the man "people" saw do it. It was the police and the media, not the eyewitnesses, who identified Bryant as the gunman.

As we shall see, only two eyewitnesses have ever specifically identified Bryant as the perpetrator, and both of them gave their statements a month later—after they had been influenced by the publicity given to Bryant in the media.

If you ignore the media propaganda and study the details of the case, what becomes readily apparent is that there is no evidence that Martin Bryant—alone and to the exclusion of all other young men with long blond hair—executed the massacre. What's more, there are compelling reasons to believe that Bryant could not have done it. As Carleen Bryant told the Bulletin, "He didn't have the brains". Above all, he didn't possess the shooting ability.

(more) www.loveforlife.com.au...



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Maybe we're reviving an old thread here but I often see the term WASP which seems to be, from the context it's been used in, some acronym (possibly military related) I'm not aware of.
Can anyone enlighten me as to what it stands for?

As to MB's quoted statement from the day, I believe he was referring to insects - the large aggressive type with black and yellow chevron stripes that breed into a plague here by late summer/early autumn. They make eating outdoors on a warm April day quite a battle of nerves (Yes I live in Tas). He mentioned Japanese tourists as well and we tended to get a lot of those in the mid 90s when the exchange rate made Oz an attractively cheap holiday for them. That particular day was quite warm & sunny (I remember it clearly) and the European wasps were out in force.

For the record, I still can't fit a conspiracy to the event as I remember the gun culture we had here prior to 1996 where anyone could buy virtually any weapon they could carry and a case of 1200 rounds of miltary jacketed rounds with no questions asked and no details recorded. In 93 a 'Shooters License' was introduced but that had no affect on sales/ownership of weapons at all. I purchased firearms myself from the same dealer MB did (he lived just across the road from there). I used to buy ammo from K-Mart and for my 12 guage (for skeet and trap shooting) I visited the local marine shop for the best deal on genuine Winchester cartridges. In those days there were gun-happy loons running all over this otherwise quiet island we have and there probably still are - they're just a bit more secretive about it now is all that's changed.

All my weapons were happily handed in after the Port Arthur incident BTW but the public has not been disarmed. I could have kept all but one of my weapons if I could show a need for them, say by joining a rifle club or equivalent like the field & game association of which I was already a member. I would also have needed to get approved storage lockers to keep them at home with weapons and ammo in separate safes which would require annual inspection.

For those who still believe he was set up I'd just ask why was he allowed to be captured alive & capable of being questioned?



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 07:14 AM
link   
Found this excellent video on youtube.

Im of the opinion Bryant may have been used in some way by the people carrying out the psyop, not realising he was also going to be also used as the patsy. Indeed its reported no less than 7 Intelligence Operatives, possibly involved in the psyop, were also murdered in the cafe due to a mix-up over the ferry timetable.

This video includes a couple of short recordings between himself & a police negotiator.



[edit on 14-7-2008 by Nonchalant]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Its also worth noting, the main weapon used by the shooter was a 'sawn-off' Colt AR-15. A favourite weapon of choice 'designed' & used by the Israeli Special Forces Counter Terrorist Undercover Units (Mistaravim).

An AR-15 was found later outside the Seascape Cottage with its breach destroyed. The way this is done is you stick a 'hot load' into an AR-15, which blows up the barrel, bolt, firing pin, extractor, riflings, etc.

(Definition of 'Hot Load') - Basically you take an empty cartridge, take a hotter powder, and fill it to the brim. The cartridge is too much for the gun, it explodes, and wrecks the mechanisms.

This is often used when professionals want to destroy ballistic evidence.

judicial-inc.biz...

But this weapon was a decoy. A full version AR-15 (78cms in length), wouldnt have fitted into a Prinz sports bag as carried by the shooter...

www.vialls.com...

Why would Bryant, who had an IQ of 66, destroy the evidence? And for that matter, would he know how? And this by someone in his own admission was 'afraid of guns'?

Connect the dots. What it draws is your answer.




[edit on 14-7-2008 by Nonchalant]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join