Saturday, 19 January 2013

Best wishes & thanks to all who visit blog!

Best wishes!

:)


And

Remember Port Arthur, Australia:


http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/port_arthur.htm


Part of the page is as follows:


..................................

Wendy Scurr  [affirming the following post wrote on the site Public Debate, at]http://www.publicdebate.com.au/php/forums/getpost.php?post_nb=12660&page=2

"I have read Joe Vialls['] book, I was heavily involved in the Massacre itself, I was working at Port Arthur. I know that what Mr Vialls is stating is true and that the official version is one hell of a cover up. The video footage is one issue, the time factor is another, why did it take police 6 hrs to arrive except for one policeman at 4.30pm and two female officers at 5.30pm to control over 500 people and 5 major crime scenes. 
"There many other issues to be considered. But it is one huge coverup."


Unexplained discrepancies


1 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.


2 There was lack of forensic evidence at Port Arthur. There were no tests to matched [sic] Martin Bryant's guns and no fingerprint comparisons from the Broad Arrow Cafe. 


3 Both the guns Martin Bryant supposedly used were damaged to the point where forensic tests to match cartridges to guns weren't possible. The damage to the guns could have occurred in either of two ways.
 (1) A cartridge blowing up in the breach which would mean the user would have a damaged hand which Martin Bryant didn't have. 
(2) Deliberate use of explosives remotely detonated, which is a trick learned by special forces to avoid make positive identification impossible. This must have been done somewhere other than where the guns were found at Seascape because, despite a thorough search of the area, some gun parts were never found. The guns shown to media were a reconstructed version with missing pieces supplied from police weapons archives, a fact which was never mentioned in the mass media.


4 No legally valid eye witnesses to the massacre. Out of the few survivors of the massacre who were able to identify the shooter, non were called on to identify Martin Bryant as the shooter. It was explained that these people had been put through enough trauma and their evidence would not be required.


5 Martin Bryant was left handed, the shooter was right handed.


6 Police decoyed away from scene just before shooting began on a "first time in history since records began" hoaxed call to pick up some heroin which turned out to be soap power.


7 Descriptions of the shooter didn't match. Eye witnesses to the shooting describe the shooter as being around 20 with golden blonde hair a few inches below his shoulders which was straight, with rat tails and a heavily pock-marked face.


Martin Bryant was 29, had whitish blonde, slightly curly hair which was just above shoulder length and a clear complexion.


8 Martin Bryant had an IQ of 66 (average IQ 90-110), making it hard to believe that he could have planned and executed the massacre with any degree of efficiency [especially the excellent kill shot quota]. 


9 A refrigerated hearse large enough to hold 22 people was bought before the operation[,] which was considered strange. After the massacre it was disposed of.


10 Martin Bryant underwent trial by media, assumed guilty, human rights abused.


11 Is it significant that no Jews nor Freemacs nor Politicians and their relatives 'were amongst the deads' [sic]? 


12 Faked "first time ever" video showed overcast sky when the actual massacre happened when the sky was clear.

To this day efforts are still being made to prevent anybody getting a photo of Martin Bryant to compare with the video.


13 The very fact that his back was on fire when he exited Seascape Cottage, and the fact that he came out unarmed, and that he said "Don't shoot, I am the hostage", should have received immense scrutiny. [Claimed he was a hostage?! Low IQ probably meant he was telling the straight truth from what he'd been told, for a drill or something.]


14 ASIO were on the scene too quickly making it look like they had fore knowledge. How soon was ASIO on the scene after the incident? What is meant by 'ASIO screened out some people'?


15 What Hobart logs of departure were falsified? enroute Melbourne CTR logs, Bankstown secondary arrival log falsified?


Various airport departure and arrival logs were falsified which points to a well co-ordinated escape strategy for the actual shooter and his accomplice.


16 30 year embargo on evidence


Anyone wishing to pursue the matter beyond this point should read the item "Port Arthur - What Next?" printed alongside Joe Vialls' report. [And go to the site these points are listed at, which is given at the top of my post]

"We now know the weapons used were not the crippled AR-15 and FN-FAL found at Seascape, and we also know the shooter was not Martin Bryant, because he was completely contained by SOG personnel throughout the entire period in the same Seascape compound as both crippled weapons. " -- Joe Vialls

1. Both Martin Bryant's weapons were found CRIPPLED after the Seascape siege.

2. Somebody was firing back at police DURING the seige. What weapons were they using?


No comments: