New information on Dr Mullens page [23 Apr 2012]
Port Arthur Massacre
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"
On Sunday, 28 April 1996, at a sleepy little tourist location known as Port Arthur, something went down that will long live in memory of Australia's collective psyche. An unknown professional combat shooter opened fire in the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur in Tasmania. In less than a minute 20 people lay dead, 19 of them killed with single shots to the head, fired from the right hip of the fast-moving shooter.
The awesome display of combat marksmanship was blamed on intellectually impaired Martin Bryant, who was held in illegal strict solitary confinement for more than 120 days, until he was "ready" to plead guilty. There was no trial. Within a matter of weeks legislation was passed to removed semi-automatic weapons from the Australian population and a gun buy-back proceeded. It is now illegal to own any semi-automatic gun in Australia.
The Port Arthur Massacre has come to be known in conspiracy circles as a "psyop". The definition of a psyop is a psychological operation or an event designed to drum up public support for some piece of legislation that would be otherwise be unpopular and probably be defeated.
It is one of the signs of a propaganda campaign when the media continuously plays up scenes that are designed to appeal to gut level instincts to soften people up for the solution to be offered.
The media were totally oriented around sensationalising the distress and trauma, played the scenes over and over, always cutting to updates on any developments and in effect the public were bombarded continuously day in and day out for weeks over the issue. 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.
Martin Bryant, killer or patsy?
It was commented that
the kill rate was too high i.e., proportion of wounded to killed.
Joe Vialls, an independent investigator with thirty years direct experience of international military and oil field operations
"In this his ultimate demonstration of combat shooting skill the shooter fired one sighting shot at a fast-moving target of unknown speed from an unsupported free-standing firing position, the most difficult of all; instantly and accurately compensated for vehicle speed and weapon recoil with the same blinding speed as the computer gunsight of an F14 Tomcat, then disabled both driver and vehicle with shots two and three.
"This man might have been an indispensable asset stopping speeding car-bombers in Beirut, but his professional skills were far too conspicuous for Port Arthur."
Problems with the guns used
Lack of forensic evidence
Martin Bryant had two guns - a Colt AR-15 and a Belgian FN-FAL.
There was an overnight siege at Seascape cottage where two gunmen kept police under fire. The next morning the building came alight and Martin Bryant came out of the building saying not to shoot that he was the hostage.
When Both Martin Bryant's weapons were recovered after the Seascape fire, it was discovered that both had damage to barrels, breech, and receiver, making "individual characteristic" matches with bullets and cartridge cases from the various crime scenes impossible to match.
The AR-15 was found in the house after the fire and the FN-FAL was was recovered from the roof of an outhouse some distance from the main building.
Both guns damaged
Both the guns were damaged, one with a bent barrel and the other with the type of damage that either comes from an exploded cartridge in the breech, or being deliberately blown out.
In cases where a faulty cartridge causes a gun to explode it does serious damage to the hand of the person using the weapon. Yet Martin Bryant had no damage to his hands.
Pieces of both guns had missing pieces
Both guns reconstructed from police spare parts
Both the two guns Martin owned were damaged at Seascape, yet turned up later in police evidence complete and undamaged. The weapons on display were in near new condition because the Tasmanian Police reconstructed them with spare parts from the NSW Police firearms library - a fact which didn't receive media coverage.
Guns weren't damaged at Seascape
There were pieces missing from both guns which weren't found at Seascape. Therefore they must have been damaged at another location and the pieces planted at Seascape.
Seascape Seige lasted throughout the night
Martin Bryant said he was the hostage, yet there were two people firing from Seascape. How did these two other people escape from Seascape?
What was Bryant shooting with?
What was Bryant firing at the police with if both guns were destroyed?
Why would somebody damage the guns to make positive identification impossible? Obviously to cover the fact they weren't the same.
Therefore the conclusion must be that it was a setup and Martin Bryant was the patsy.
The initial reaction of most readers to the reality that Martin Bryant killed no-one at Port Arthur but was deliberately set up as a patsy is a combination of horror and complete disbelief.
All of the hard evidence at Port Arthur bears the distinctive trademark of a planned "psyop", meaning an operation designed to psychologically manipulate the belief mechanisms of a group of people or a nation for geopolitical or military reasons.
Because of their illegal nature, psyops are never formally ordered by governments, but are discreetly arranged through multinational corporations and others. Some psyops ordered during the last forty years are known to have been carried out by independent contractors hired from a small specialist group, staffed mostly by retired members of American and Israeli special forces.
Patsies are normally used as decoys, deliberately inserted into the psyop to deflect attention away from the specialist group, allowing the latter time to extract safely from the operational area while the patsy takes the blame, But the planners leave tell-tale signs and occasionally make critical mistakes.
It is a little-known fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was proved a patsy when a New Zealand newspaper printed a story about his guilt several hours before he was accused of the crime in Dallas. The planners put the decoy story on the news wires too early, forgetting the crucial time difference would allow the New Zealand paper to print the story long before Oswald was even accused. It was a single planning error, but one that proved in absolute scientific terms that Lee Harvey Oswald was deliberately set up as a patsy.
As part one of this report proved, policewoman Yvonne Fletcher's murder in London during 1984 was a psyop where the intended patsies were four million Libyans. The operation was successful and resulted in Tripoli being bombed by an 'outraged' President Reagan in 1986.
The next blatant psyop was Lockerbie, when on 21 December 1988 Pan American flight 103 exploded in mid-air killing all 259 passengers and crew. Although very recent scientific evidence not yet in the public domain proves conclusively that the Libyans could not have been responsible, they were nonetheless blamed for the atrocity. The principal affect of those two psyops on the Libyans were sanctions designed to prevent them updating defensive weapon systems capable of protecting their resource-rich nation.
Since 1984 Libyan defence capabilities have steadily declined, leaving its people and resources increasingly vulnerable to external attack and thus possible conquest. By a strange coincidence Australia is also a resource-rich nation, with overall reserves more than twenty times as valuable as those in Libya, but with only half the defence capability. In some ways this was not an insurmountable problem until 1996 because unlike Libya this nation has always had huge numbers of sporting shooters traditionally used in time of war to both train and supplement our miniscule armed forces. Not any more.
Since the psyop at Port Arthur more than 400,000 reserve forearms have been pulped instead of stored by the Federal Government, leaving our nation and people terribly exposed to just about anyone interested in taking over the natural resources jewel in the southern hemisphere crown. To hell with multinational global ambitions. This is Australia and we need to restore our reserve capability in order to keep this country the way it is. The first thing we have to do is prove once and for all time that Martin Bryant was used as a patsy to cover the objective of the Port Arthur psyop, which effectively undermined our national security.
In fact I am going to prove that now but doubt the Federal Government will be interested in the hard scientific facts, or in correcting the multiple gross errors made immediately after the massacre tool place. The harsh and unpalatable truth about Port Arthur will have to be forced on the Australian Government by the Australian People.
Martin Bryant, an intellectually impaired registered invalid with no training in the use of high powered assault weapons, could not under any circumstances have achieved or maintained the incredibly high and consistent killed-to-injured ratio and kill-rate which were bench marks of the port Arthur massacre.
Whoever was on the trigger that fateful day demonstrated professional skills equal to some of the BEST SPECIAL FORCES SHOOTERS IN THE WORLD.
HIS CRITICAL ERROR LAY IN KILLING TOO MANY PEOPLE TOO QUICKLY WHILE INJURING FAR TOO FEW, THEREBY EXPOSING HIMSELF FOR WHAT HE WAS: A HIGHLY TRAINED COMBAT SHOOTER PROBABLY RANKED AMONG THE TOP 20 SUCH SPECIALISTS IN THE WESTERN WORLD.
This inquiry will also look into:
I have 2 more to add to it now...
(11) Why has the
court accepted conflicting evidence that contradicts the DPPs own case, namely
the Balasko Video of the gunman leaving the cafe, which is completely in error
to the Transcripted version of events when the gunman left the cafe?
(12) And why has
the McLeod Video which was also evidenced, tampered with before showing on
Only drug decoy in history
The only personnel available to stop or interrupt the slaughter were two policemen, one stationed in Nubeena 11 kilometres from the Port Arthur site, (map) and the other at Dunalley, a small town to the north with a swing bridge capable of isolating the Tasman Peninsula from the rest of Tasmania.
Shortly before the massacre both policemen were sent to the coal mines near Saltwater River, an isolated location on the extreme western side of the Tasman Peninsula, in response to an anonymous caller reporting a large stash of heroin. On arrival they found only glass jars full of soap powder, and reported this via the police radio net.
A harmless time consuming prank perhaps?
No. Reliable sources in Hobart state that this was the only drugs decoy ever attempted on the Tasman Peninsula since police records began, and meaningfully point out that leaving glass jars of fresh soap powder was a very professional touch that backfired.
Why would anyone assume the soap powder was heroin and place an emergency call to the police without checking the contents first?
And why did the caller insist on anonymity?
Graeme Scurr makes the valid point that it would be hard to select a more suitable remote location if specifically decoying the two policemen away from the Port Arthur historic site and Dunalley.
A single glance at a map of the Tasman Peninsula proves his observation to be absolutely correct.
50 Unanswered Questions About Port Arthur
Details That Point to a Coverup At Port Arthur
This information is from The Shooters Party web site, USA.
Before looking at the unanswered questions one needs to be aware of what it is alleged Bryant did that day.
Below is a summary
The case against Martin Bryant alleged he killed Mr. & Mrs. Martin at Seascape Cottage Guesthouse sometime before 12.40pm then travelled south 6km to see a Mr. Larner then proceeded into the Port Arthur Historic Site and after an argument with the parking attendant went to the Broad Arrow Cafe and bought lunch.
He sat having lunch inside then went outside to finish it. At 1.30pm he then went back inside the Cafe and opened fire with a COLT M16 CAR .223 Cal. Rifle killing 20 and wounding another 12 people in 90 seconds then left the Cafe shooting at people in and around the bus park killing and wounding more - during that time he switched guns to an FN SLR .308 Rifle .
He then is alleged to have driven his yellow Volvo out of the site shooting people along the way and at the tollbooth. He then abandons his car and transfers some of his implements to a BMW which belonged to his victims at the tollgate (he leaves behind the keys to Seascape, cans of petrol and a Daewoo Shotgun and ammo) .
He then stops at the service station up the road shooting more people and takes a hostage who is forced into the boot of the BMW. The BMW then proceeds at high speed 6 km north to Seascape where he stops and shoots at cars on the highway injuring more people. He then takes his hostage inside Seascape and sets fire to the BMW.
The time is now around 2pm. Two police officers are confined in a ditch for several hours while shots are fired from Seascape. After dark Special Operations Group Police (SOG) arrive at Seascape. During the night police talk on the phone to someone identified as "Jamie" at Seascape. Many shots are fired from Seascape during the night but nobody outside is hit.. At 7.45am the following morning Seascape erupts in smoke on fire.
At 8.40am Martin Bryant - clothes on fire emerges from the rear of Seascape staggering and unarmed and is apprehended by police with TV News cameras rolling. Bryant remains in hospital isolated for several days. He is then moved to Risdon prison hospital. He denies committing the shootings to police when interviewed.
He pleads not guilty for months. His first lawyer is removed in unclear circumstances and his second lawyer gets him (reportedly under pressure) to later plead guilty (thereby avoiding the requirement for a proper jury trial and scrutiny of evidence). Bryant's isolation continues to this day with little or no contact with his mother or relatives.
Who ordered the Port Arthur Massacre
There have been various bombings and massacres here and abroad. I have been a bit wary of them as some have been hoaxes, however I have very little doubt about the Port Arthur massacre and the reason for it. I have spoken personally to Wendy Scurr who is mentioned in item 6 and she is adamant that it was not Martin Bryant who did the shooting. A trained investigator Joe Vialls also came up with the same conclusion and wrote a well researched book on the subject.
I have received the following from a person in Tasmania and am passing it on.
The Port Arthur Massacre, and its connections with the London Bombings.
On Wednesday 26 September Mr Andrew MacGregor will present a common sense view of the latest World Terrorist attacks that occurred in London and Glasgow two days after Gordon Brown became the British Prime Minister. He will also discuss the Tasmanian connection to these incidents. It will be alleged that several important bureaucrats some of who are still active in public life, were involved in the planning and execution of the Port Arthur massacre.
Mr MacGregor has had 17 years experience in the Victoria Police Force and has studied Witness Reports, Court Documents,Police Reports and Media Reports. He will show how the Port Arthur Massacre fits into a pattern very similar to other staged terrorist events throughout the world.
Wed. 26 Semptember 2007 at 7.30 pm Max Fry Hall, Trevallyn, Launceston Admission $5.00 Concessions $2.00
You probably believe that Martin Bryant, acting alone, carried out the Port Arthur massacre on Sunday 28th April 1996. If so, can you reconcile the following facts with the official story?
Martin Bryant was 58 kilometres away when Mr David Martin was shot at Seascape Cottage. At 10.40 am.
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 a 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 a week 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 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? The police who arrived by boats were a stone's throw away from the main crime scene, the cafe, and they too failed to come in to see what was going on. Was this meant to increase the trauma of the survivors?
7. Three more shots were fired at Port Arthur at 6.30pm while Bryant was at Seascape. Who fired those shots?
8. Same Question - Different Answer. At a recent Forensics Seminar in Queensland where the 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 an American 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, video cameras, 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 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 laws demand that a Coronial Inquiry must take place (a) when foreign nationals are killed (b) when anyone dies in a fire John Howard acted illegally when he ordered the Coronial Inquiry to be abandoned.
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
All the preparations were made for a 1.30 massacre, so the killer began his work at the Broad Arrow Cafe at 1.30, instead of on the ferry at 2.00.
Here is some evidence suggesting that the plan was to kill the Americans at 1.30 on the way to the Isle of the Dead where tourists are shown the ancient convict cemetery -
(a) The gunman had tried to buy a ticket for the 1.30 sailing.
(b) When the gunman began pulling out his weapons in the Cafe, one Professional witness [Anthony Nightingale] stood up shouting "No, no, not here!!" If it was not meant to be "here", then it was meant to be somewhere else. Nightingale was shot for he had obviously given the game away.
(c) Had the gunman waited for the 2.00 sailing, the decoyed policemen may have returned with their firearms and two-way radios and upset things.
(d) Also, with the later start the trauma surgeons at the Royal Hobart Hospital may have dispersed and not been available to treated the wounded victims.
(e) In a video made by the Tasmania Police we are told that some policemen came by sea to Port Arthur in patrol boats. These police did not go ashore. They did not come to the crime scenes at the Cafe or elsewhere to help the victims or to guard the First Aid workers who needed protection. Obviously they expected a massacre at sea, when they saw nothing they returned to Hobart.
(f) On his way to the Historic Site the gunman stopped to help some girls who had problems with their car. He told them of his intention to kill some WASPS [Wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestants] the Isle of the Dead.
(g) On the very day Martin Bryant was being sentenced in Hobart, President Clinton was addressing the Australian Parliament in Canberra. Was he there to make sure poor Martin copped the blame for the massacre and that nothing went wrong with the gun confiscation scheme, which of course was the reason for the Port Arthur Massacre?
Great coverage of the Port Arthur massacre [new
The Port Arthur Massacre
Port Arthur Massacre - 10 years on
http://members.iinet.net.au/~nedwood/Pam06.html [current 2011]
Government cover up at Port Arthur
Port Arthur Massacre
The Port Arthur Massacre
Just Facts - Gun Control
Australia Moves Toward A Fascist Police State
* * *
Other - may contain deadlinks
John Howard had the NEW gun laws prepared in 2 weeks: That would be clearly impossible without months of preparation.
UN gun control, Agenda-5 (7277 is NOW)
Information About The Deception & Coverup At Port Arthur
Documents on this website have in the main come from work done by Andrew MacGregor and his associates.
Those wanting more details are asked
to buy the CD-ROM Andrew has done on the incident at the address below. It
contains a vast amount of other material and analysis of it - 300 megabytes
worth ( too much to put on any website ) including numerous videos taken by
witnesses there on the day. ( Note : The operator of this website does not
receive any commissions etc... in relation to this CD-ROM).
Books available on Port Arthur massacre
A Presentation on the Port Arthur Incident. by Noel Mc Donald
Deceit & Terrorism [CD] by Andrew MacGregor
Deadly Deception At Port Arthur by Joe Vialls
Australian Police Journal: September 1998, Sergeant Gerard Dutton
Port Arthur Seminar Papers, Emergency Management Australia
Port Arthur: A Story of Strength and Courage by Margaret Scott
To Have and to Hold by Walter Mikac
Stewart Beattie - author of A
Gunsmith's Notebook on Port Arthur, 2002