Port Arthur Massacre
on the Port Arthur Massacre
The "JFK and Port Arthur" article generated some interest, which prompted me to do a bit of a follow up to explain the most probable scenario (based on current information) for some of the unusual facts arising out of the PAM.
For example, why was a hot load used in Bryant's AR-15 or why was the BMW torched? I may not have it right, but I'm sure I am closer to the truth and am more informed than the people that have never looked at the evidence and are simply relying upon the Daily Telegraph to tell them what to think.
I spent two days reading the witness statements that were available, also looked at some of the forensic evidence and listening to the tapes. The photo ID board has not been made available - and it is apparent why. At least one witness identified Bryant through the jumper he was wearing in the picture. Of course, the shooter wasn't wearing a jumper - it appears that the picture was from the same lot of pictures that was seen in all the newspapers and on TV. Obviously a tainted ID, so why do it?
Well, although the shooter had eaten lunch and drank from a Solo can prior to the shooting, there were never any fingerprints or DNA links to Bryant. The information about the shooter taking his tray back into the café was taken in a statement on the day of the shooting, so it was likely that some physical evidence might have been available to link Bryant with the shooting.
After no physical evidence linked Bryant, the prosecution decided to go with the photo ID - in June! That's right, the massacre was in April, but the photo ID was done in June after Bryant's picture was plastered all over the place. However, some of the statements flatly deny that Bryant was the shooter! One fellow, a Viet Nam vet that got shot said that the person that shot him was not the same person that was in the media. And then, of course, there is Jim Laycock's statement.
The firearm evidence is very interesting. It has been thought that the firearm in the Café was actually a shortened military version called the M4. It has a shorter barrel and a telescopic stock. The Mossad, the US Special Forces and our SAS use it. It would make more sense to use such a firearm in the closed space of the café. (Bryant was left-handed, the shooter shot with his right hand). Of course, the spent brass that fell on the floor would have to match Bryant's firearm. No problem - after the shooter got back to Seascape he would swap the bolt from the M4 into Bryant's AR-15. The bolt face, firing pin mark and the extractor mark would link to the brass in the Café. However, there is the other problem of "fire-forming" the brass. Each chamber has its own dimensions and a fired brass in one rifle may not fit into another chamber - that's why the "hot load" was used - to give plausible deniability to any variation in the chamber dimensions.
Let's talk money; investigative teams were sent out all over the world to track down anyone who was present during the massacre. Allegedly it was to take statements - but it appears it was actually to find out who saw what and whether any damage control was needed. Although a huge sum of money was spent sending agents all over the world, the firearm forensic specialist stated that because of budgetary considerations there was no test of the powder residue in the AR-15. What codswallop! They couldn't find the money for the test of one of the most significant issues surrounding the firearms? That simple test could have determined if the powder was the same type from the standard ammunition. In other words, was it a made up hot load, or was it a defective round using the same components as the factory ammunition? We'll never know as the test allegedly wasn't done. Also, no projectiles were recovered from the "AR-15;" it appears that the Norinco ammunition was chosen because of its very thin walls which ensured that the projectile disintegrated upon impact.
The amount of intelligence resources that were utilized at Port Arthur was considerable. It appears they even brought in a relay station so that there would be no communication hic-ups. Also, there were extra helicopter pilots that were available that weekend.
Further, the Royal Hobart Hospital had a seminar on trauma from terrorist activities that ended on that Sunday. It appears that the doctors were brought in from around the country so the whole thing wouldn't be just a local tragedy, but would incorporate doctors from all states. The doctors actually thought that the call from Port Arthur was just another exercise from the seminar.
And then there was the provision of the largest mortuary vehicle in Australia (for little Tasmania?) which proved invaluable for carting around the bodies. Also the media gave extensive coverage of the massacre, but then that should be expected as someone had thoughtfully booked 700 journalists in Hobart for a media conference that was to start the following day. Those pre-arraigned buses sure proved their worth in transporting all the media personnel around on the media tour of the Port Arthur site.
Speaking of media, there was only one media crew that was on station that day (Sunday) it was a skeleton crew from the ABC. When they saw the Police vehicles race by they knew something was up so they hustled over to the Media Centre - they were never called, they did it on their own volition. When they arrived they were surprised to find Roland Browne from the Coalition for Gun Control already there. He remained in the Centre and pushed the gun control agenda. Of course, the Police couldn't be seen to push that agenda, after all they were handling a hostage crisis - so the Coalition for Gun Control was the "arms length" organisation to handle the gun control agenda. They stayed with the media the entire time (and long after).
Bryant was not a violent person, no history of fighting or assaults. He states in his record of interview that he only shot some targets and bottles, no experience with moving targets and he never shot animals. Take that personal history and juxtapose it against what the shooter did at PA. After the shooter planted Bryant's Volvo at the tollgate, he shot the occupants of the BMW, then did not put down the SLR, but dragged their bodies out of the car with his left hand while holding the SLR up and at the ready in his right hand. Physical acts which indicate that it was someone experienced in violence and also comfortable handling deceased persons - out of character for Bryant.
He was also very familiar with killing using a firearm; most of the kills in the Broadarrow were single head/neck shots - he was very conomical/professional in his shooting, recognizing instantly a kill-shot when it happened and then quickly shifting to a new target. The shooter also stopped at 29 rounds in the 30 round magazine to reload (probably using the military technique of the third to last round being a tracer/marker round). This allowed him to continue firing without re-chambering. What he did with Annette Mikac by demanding she get down on her knees illustrates some experience with capturing and/or assassinating people.
The handling of the "Poster boy" of Port Arthur, Walter Mikac, shows the depth of horror and manipulation that went on. The shooter specifically stopped to whack Mrs. Mikac and the little girls. He got out of the Volvo, told Mrs. Mikac 3 times to get down on her knees (she did and begged for the lives of her little girls), the shooter even followed one little girl around a tree. Now here is where it gets real ugly. The bodies are lying in situ closed off from the public with Police barrier tape. An unknown "doctor" gets permission from some official to take Walter to see his ripped up family in order to help him in the "healing process." He is permitted to spend 15 minutes at the crime scene looking at his freshly head-shot wife and two daughters (have you ever heard of such a thing?) After this "healing process" he is escorted away into the hands of the Coalition for Gun Control and spends the next year traveling around lobbying for gun control. The EMA documents call the Mikac tragedy a "win-win situation" - go ahead, look it up.
The scripting of this psy-op is evidenced in several aspects. I mentioned the 3 firearms in the "JFK" article and how those firearms corresponded to the desired banned firearms. It seems that the 3 firearms were woven into the script, and the script called for the use of the heavier .308 in the shooting of the vehicles. The .223 Norinco ammunition would have been unlikely to penetrate significantly into the vehicles, whereas the .308 with the heavier jacket was able to cut through the car bodies quite well. Once the script was written and the plans set in motion, then the fact that Bryant's .308 wasn't available had to be quickly overcome, thus the substitution of the SLR. The shotgun was left in the boot at the tollgate.
The planting of the evidence trail to Bryant/Seascape also stands out. First, the bag left in the Café' with Bryant's camera and some ammunition - and the knife with Mr. Martin's blood on it (carefully wrapped in cloth to prevent loss of evidence). Then there is the leaving of the Volvo at the Tollgate with Bryant's passport in the boot. Now come on! this car is this intellectually disabled (IQ 66) fool's pride and joy - a vehicle with a surfboard permanently attached to the roof - and he simply walks away from it?
Then after whacking the occupants of the BMW and dragging them out of the way, he heads off to Seascape. But according to the script he has to make sure that the police and everybody knows he has a hostage. So as he nears the general store he runs the BMW across the road and in front of a car about to leave. He gets out and demands the girl get in his car, she goes hysterical so the guy volunteers. He puts the hostage in the boot as the witnesses in the shop look on, then casually walks back to the hysterical woman and shoots her 3 times through the door. Another "bread-crumb" to follow to Seascape.
Now he arrives at the turn off for Seascape, and he wants to make sure everybody knows where to turn, so he drives in and parks the BMW. Then he takes a position at the entrance, standing where everybody can see him and the rifle as they approach, and proceeds to blast away. After sufficient vehicles are disabled and people are wounded that the trail can't possibly be lost, he then proceeds to Seascape, takes the hostage inside and then a bit later a nice smoky fire with the BMW. - The only thing missing was a neon sign saying: "My name is Martin Bryant, follow me."
Although a trail was laid from the Broadarrow to Seascape, it couldn't be too good. The burning of the BMW was more than just setting a signal fire. The Volvo was left at the toll gate and it would have heaps of DNA and prints from Bryant - and one would expect prints and DNA from the shooter. However, the BMW at Seascape would have NO prints or DNA of Bryant, but would have the identical unknown prints and DNA of the shooter taken from the Volvo (and possibly the Café). So it had to be torched, along with Seascape, to prevent the link of the massacre to an unknown assailant.
There is a lot, lot more to this story, but you get the picture. Just listen to the available tapes and Bryant's voice tones and his naive comments and you realize this fool is a patsy. Once an intelligent person takes the time to actually look at the facts around this massacre, the façade falls away. Heck, at some point the actual evidence and the number of unusual coincidences must reach a cognitive critical mass with even the dumbest in society.
It was the job of the media to mislead the dumbed-down masses, make sure that they never become aware of the actual evidence or all the unusual coincidences; to keep the masses hyped up with emotion so they wouldn't reason. The media have done their job well, the sheeple continue to graze. The sheeple are even dissuaded from asking questions - you wouldn't want to soil the memories of the victims would you? You don't want to get a reputation as a "conspiracy theorist" would you? It looks like the Powers That Be have gotten away with it.
After discussing this case with various persons, it is amazing how dumbed-down the population is. Denial is not some river in Egypt, it flows though Australian society. Orwell had it right when he referred to the twisting of people's minds to accept War is Peace or Slavery is Freedom - I can now confirm that Sanity is Insanity. Try discussing the facts of the Port Arthur Massacre with most Australians and they immediately look at you as if you lost your marbles. However, if being crazy is not being able to deal with reality - then who's not dealing with reality?
Back to Top of Page