Alex. Please expose The Port Arthur False Flag Massacre & war on guns Down Under

Author Topic: Alex. Please expose The Port Arthur False Flag Massacre & war on guns Down Under  (Read 5403 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline liko

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,031
  • Freedom or Nothing!
Hi Alex if you ever read this ,can you very breifly ever expose The Port Arthur Massacre in Australia 1996 in you ever get the chance.I know you have sooo much on your plate,but i'll give you reasons why....in relation to the US.

The Port Arthur Massacre was a false flag in Australia 1996 for the sole reason of disarming the country & it worked.

The women who headed that directorate was a Rebecca Peters,now Dr Rebecca Peters (now in the USA)was running the The National Coalition for Gun Control.She has a very dubious past but she was Born in 1962, Peters grew up as a teenager in Costa Rica, the second of six children in an American family. As her father worked for the American Government there, 'half jokingly,' she suggested in an interview in Australia he "probably worked for the CIA." At age 15 years while attending an "alternative school" in Costa Rica, Peters was educated by itinerant "young hippies". It was during this new-age education she became "obsessed with changing the world."

In 1991 with a not-so-subtle agenda, Peters returned to university, enrolled as a law student gaining her law degree, at the end of which, she produced a thesis on 'tighter gun control'. This was the "centrepiece" of an enormous folio of material she collected and wrote for her campaign to remove loop-holes in existing gun laws in Australia. She promoted herself as a 'multilingual middle-class lawyer' who was fanatical about "gun control".

In a remarkably short time she quite brilliantly bull-dozed aside the entire weak, (some treacherous), and fragmented firearm owner, sporting shooters' groups, and almost surely was surprised by her success with the shooting massacres producing a 'win-win sound-bite' for the minds and meek support of the gullible Mums and Dads of Australia. Dunblane massacre occurred on 13 March `96 and Port Arthur followed 46 days later. Then all the pieces fell into place for Federal Attorney General, Daryl Williams, to implement the gun-ban laws prepared and ready in November of 1995 by Daryl Smeaton. Job done, it was off to the "Big Apple" for Peters.

But a point to remember, while Rebecca Peters was "down-under", 6 shooting massacres occurred in Australia and New Zealand resulting in 76 deaths and 53 wounded people. In "gun control" here, Peters was no doubt - numero uno. Curiously though since Peters left, the shooting massacres have ceased! None in the last six years. And private firearms still abound.

In New York, Rebecca Peters hit the pavement 'running' and is immediately associated with Desmond Riley of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence - part of the NAACP crowd involved in 'crafting a gun control strategy' for "curing gun ownership" - their words.

Shortly it was announced that Peters was awarded (if you believe their own news releases, or if logic is your guide, rewarded may be the more appropriate word), with a Senior Fellowship in March 1997 by the Soros Foundation's Open Institute funded Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Merryland. So the good citizens there should perhaps keep her Australasian achievements in mind. In making application for her fellowship, Rebecca had to 'submit a budget' for her envisioned work - forgive me from chuckling. Can you imagine her difficult task here? Think of a big digit add lots of zeros and voila - a budget!

Her citizenry disarmament program is far flung, and includes Australia, New Zealand, the sub-continent, South America, Great Britain and Europe: she's a true-blue "globalist". First on the list after jetting out of Australia though, was her close involvement in organisation of the 'Million Mom March' and in reports of this event, her trademark outlandish unsubstantiated claims regarding crimes, firearms and related deaths appeared on cue. Easily destroyed later by reputable writers, but once the lie is said, truth inevitably is the casualty. Before leaving Australia though, her name was noted alongside that of her NCGC Hobart colleague (now chair of NCGC), Roland Browne on a University Paper entitled, Australia's New Gun Control Philosophy: Public Health is Paramount. 3 But I find it remarkable, that even although in Australia she'd been granted citizenship, Peters' American roots were emphasised. Now in America, Dr Peters is always reported as being 'an Australian gun control expert' - a weird twist don't you think.

In America, the Million Mom March staged on Monday 15 May 1996, on the Mall in Washington, was in Australia lauded 'a raging success'. But even with wall-to-wall major media publicity, numbers were in fact a long way short of the hoped-for million. Hillary and Bill Clinton were of course on tap for the regulation photo-shoot, not surprising really. As it was reported that the rally was 'conceived by Donna Dees-Thomases', supposedly just a concerned 'New Jersey housewife'. However it was reported that in fact Dees-Thomases was a 'high-powered CBS publicist who at one point worked for CBS anchor Dan Rather'. Even of more interest in this same report was the claim that the lady 'is the sister-in-law of Susan Thomases', who was lawyer, political advisor and confidant of Hillary Clinton, the then First Lady. 4

For Rebecca Peters, her 1996 schedule was quite hectic. It was crunch year and on 13 March at Dunblane primary school in Scotland,

43-year-old Thomas Hamilton, shot dead 16, wounded 13 and then shot himself. Fifteen of the sixteen dead, and ten of the thirteen wounded were all children. Energetically publicised by their chums in the Media, Dunblane was in the scheme of disarmament, the precursor to Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, Australia. At Port Arthur on 28 April 1996, 35 people died and 20 were wounded in the first convoluted terrorist shooting massacre in this nation. In the massacre, the murder of Nanette Mikac and her two daughters was said by the CNN's John Raedler in the EMA papers to be the classic win-win, sound bite. Raedler scurried down to Tasmania from Sydney to capture that win-win, sound bite. I'm caused then to wonder how would uncivilized people evaluate Dunblane?

However, in relation to both massacres it should be remembered it was Rebecca Peters' colleague, Roland Browne, now chair of NCGC, who predicted a shooting massacre in Tasmania in November of 1995, and quite remarkably again made a repeated prediction on the "A Current Affair" TV show, straight after Scotland's Dunblane Massacre. But then anti-gun proponents in Australia seem to have this remarkable psychic skill. For in Tasmania's capitol city Hobart after a Special Premier, s Conference in relation to Gun Control held in December of 1987, NSW's then Premier, Barry

"No-gunsworth" Unsworth stated bluntly:

"There will never be uniform gun laws in Australia until we see a massacre in Tasmania." Port Arthur massacre was the catalyst for subsequent reciprocal visits across the globe by some of those closely involved with victims of both shooting murders. But with Peters in America, in the, Washington Mall, just 9 weeks after Dunblane massacre, three mothers; Kareen Turner, Alison Crozier and Karen Scott, who each lost a daughter in the Dunblane murders, featured in the Million Mom March. Now while we all probably sympathise with their personal loss of young innocent children, in Washington they marched along smiling and waving. I wonder who paid for their return flight to America and similarly other flights to Australia, and conversely the Port Arthur survivors to Dunblane? Dr Peters also flew to Dunblane in August of 1996 'to deliver messages from Port Arthur survivors' it was reported at the time.

The network of Peters' and her NGO's the global Gun Control Network, are well funded and conveniently placed, as the synonym suggest - outside of governmental restraints. I would be astonished if it was proven her Australian network had not received a generous helping of Institute hand-outs to disarm our good people in 1991- 1996. To example the extent of these amassed fortunes, one such "funder", the Joyce Foundation, was reported as granting between 1993 and 1997, some $13.2 m, for distribution among 55 'gun control' organisations. John Hopkins is bank-rolled to sustain disarmament battle by such "funders" as the California Wellness Foundation (CWF), Gerorge Soros' Open Society Institute and the Public Welfare Foundation, just three of the well-endowed tax-exempt funders supporting the global gun-grabbers. George Soros, Open Society Institute funds gun control networks on a national scale across America, but indeed globally, in 33 countries. One should be surprised if Australia didn't figure high on this list. Open Society also gave the Violence Policy Center $1.2 million in 1997 to expand its anti-gun efforts.

Like Joyce, CWF treats gun violence as a public health problem that requires government regulation just as Peters did in Australia. Sadly every good citizen Peters disarms effectively produces one more potential victim of criminal misdeeds, a point obviously not overlooked by her. As it was observed by the then leader of the Australian Democrats, Cheryl Kernot, that Peters always went out of her way to keep a discreet distance from victims of gun crime, as she was 'sensitive to the emotional implication.'
6 I wonder if disarmed potential victims ever crossed her mind while accepting her Human Rights award from Dame Roma Mitchell? As I mentioned Peters went to John Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, and first to their Violence Policy Center. Interestingly, my investigations show Rebecca's doctorate is somewhat tainted, as if such principals would matter to Dr Rebecca.

Back in August of 1987, John Hopkins University was heavily involved in promoting food irradiation, even although the process was banned by the West German Government in 1958, and the American FDA in 1968. But not to be deterred John Hopkins organised a forum to promote publicly a 'balanced view' with 20 guest speakers. However the seminar had to be abandoned, when speaker number 20 exposed the other 19 speakers not only heavily biased to promote this disposal system for nuclear waste as "safe" with all of them involved heavily in the nuclear industry.

It should come as no surprise to learn that John Hopkins in 1986, received funding of a reported $317m American "defence dollars"! What level of "Arms and Military" funding does John Hopkins receive today that in any way assists the works of Dr Peters and her 'arms-grabbing' cadre? 7

Now returning to the scene in New South Wales for a moment. Before Rebecca Peters flew out to her allotted 'battle ground' in America, she had one important task to complete here. The Parliaments of Australia are legislatures with limited powers. They are not supreme. The right to keep and bear arms and use them is a right beyond the powers of Parliament. Six hundred years ago people didn't trust government, and it would appear nothing has changed. So armed Government willing to use force - legitimised by Doctor Peters and her network - are in truth, hell-bent on closing that "loop-hole" in gun laws which are basic individual freedoms that with "clubs" they are intent on closing! This single fact assured that there would inevitably be a legal challenge mounted by some section of our citizenry that would surely win in the courts.

So in New South Wales, as the Government proclaimed "gun buy-back," began to effect the citizens a previously formed Concerned Citizens Association in the Hunter Valley, sought legal opinion as to how best to mount a case against government to have this iniquitous "law" quashed.

The global "gun control" network had no intention of suffering such a set back. Its network tentacles obviously penetrated the very fabric of society at many different levels. Peters and company certainly had a very effective "grape vine" network.

The legal advice was no sooner prepared and delivered to the client Association, than word was received by the Association's executive that Peters - remember in her own estimation a "middle class" lawyer, a very junior solicitor - had already been given an audience before the autocratic NSW Bar Association, a quite extraordinary accomplishment in itself.

I have learned that it was directly as a result of Rebecca Peters addressing that eminent group of staid gentlemen which caused them to immediately pass a motion which effectively bound them, that should a legal challenge be launched against the 1996 gun law changes in Australia, the Bar Association would mount a strong campaign to defeat such a legal challenge and apparently "free legal services" were promised to aid in defeating any such challenge, which is perhaps why in the courts of Australia, survivors of the Port Arthur massacre seeking redress have a devil's own job in getting their case to Court.

When Port Arthur and its "fruit" are considered alongside what has occurred especially in Canada what is building - fast - just south of the border should cause all Americans a deal of concern. In Canada a not-so-discreet Canadian Liberal Party Senator, Sharon Carstairs let the cat out of the bag some time back with her witnessed as pointing out before the Community Legal Education Association, that the new gun law is the lynchpin in her party's plan to "socially re-engineer Canada". 8

Her revelation prompted journalist Lorne Gunter of the Edmonton Journal, to write, "The Liberals believe [the draconian gun law] would re-engineer Canada, and especially male gun owners, making its citizens more docile." Continuing he wrote, "When lawmakers trample centuries-old liberties without an overwhelming social good, in return then respect for the law dies and the rule of law along with it." 9

Summary:

As I edited this article, news came to hand that a tenth victim had been shot and killed in Washington. On the same television news I saw were
10 people were killed and 34 injured in a 24-plus vehicle pile-up on Interstate 13, near Milwaukee: they died a grizzly, fiery death - but to a wider public such incidents are fill-in news items. They cause no widespread trauma, certainly nothing equivalent in any way to a win-win sound bite such as results from the gross uncertainty of the Washington sniper. Just the same as the Port Arthur massacre. Those who employ Hegelian dialectics against their fellow man for political gain play trauma as a finely tuned tool, to control a nation, just as 9/11 did to many nations. Trauma is an extraordinarily efficient agent, deployed to deliver control to the State through voluntary surrender by the people of their inalienable rights and freedoms.

Is it too hard to look at history? Not so long ago the Tavistock guru's Aldous Huxley and Timothy Leary under the wing of Capitol International Airways (CIA), created the first "somatotomic serial killer" Charles Manson. Hence the spate of earlier school yard shootings in America, and this latest sniper program prompts me to quote the following for your consideration: http://jahtruth.net//node/view/255

"In a quite almost invisible way, OSS-CIA assessment methods transformed our basic notions about human nature. Thirteen million youths were screened, selected, trained in complex skills, behaviour-modified by means of psychological techniques. In the future, both war and peace were to be based on our knowledge of the brain. Intelligence became the key to survival in the future. Psychology became the new science of human engineering." end quote. 10

This morning's latest "breaking news" of the huge bomb detonated in the Bali township of Kuta resulting in upwards of 184 killed and 'hundreds' more wounded reminds me of the above article. Official reports here are suspect to say the least. After the Port Arthur Massacre, how can any Australian trust our present crop of politicians. For in the scheme of gun control delivered by politicians, I must remind you: there is no trigger guard or safety-catch on politicians.

But of one point I can be certain; Dr Peters has not deserted her latest field of operations, Baltimore and the District of Columbia, and the gun control network is not going away either. So, in these uncertain times it is Okay to be unarmed, but if you love freedom with a passion - should you be so reckless as to allow yourself to be disarmed?

By Stewart Beattie

JTCoyoté

  • Guest
Thanks Liko...

Folks need to see how it is done and who the real murderers are!

I'm Very Familiar with this case... It was the government false flag that began the confiscation of the guns in OZ, got a bunch of friends businesses raided and closed... and got Rodney William Ansell, the REAL Crocodile Dundee, among others murdered at the hands of the Australian government because he refused to give up his guns...

Here is a link to a thread on "Politics & Old Guns" from about 6 years ago tying it in with other false flags... This forum was one I started when my radio show went belly up in late 2002, for the guys that used to listen to the show giving us all a place to chat ... Mommote is my wife, BTW.

http://p102.ezboard.com/fpoliticsandoldgunsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=17.topic

JTCoyoté

"Such is the irresistible nature of truth
that all it asks, and all it wants, is the
liberty of appearing."

~Thomas Paine

Offline Hayley

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
Liko,
I gather that since you are so familiar with Rodney Ansell 's situation, you will realize that the cops were not there to take his guns away from him. They were not there to disarm him in any way! They were there to confiscate his UNREGISTERED rifles. There is a huge difference between taking his guns because he was a danger to others and confiscating the rifles because they were not legal!

All he had to do was give them to the cops, then get them registered, then he would have got them back!!

I love my country, and I love the people here in Australia, but Rodney Ansell was a freaking danger to himself! He got himself lost in the bush for two months, and because of that, they made a movie out of him!! I feel bad that he died, but why make it out to be something that its not?
I've said this before and I'll say it again, I have guns, my family have guns, my friends have guns. NONE of our guns have ever ever ever been taken! They are all registered!! I handed in 3 rifles because they were unregistered, then I got them back!!
I dont mean to be rude here, but sometimes this forum lacks serious common sense!


As for the Port Arthur Massacre being a Govt. False flag... OMG.
Everything here is something!

Marge Simpson

Offline Brocke

  • Eleutherophiliac & Drapetomaniac
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,790
  • I am not a number, I am a free man!
    • Vimeo page

As for the Port Arthur Massacre being a Govt. False flag... OMG.


Hayley, If you are unfamiliar with the idea that Port Arthur was deliberately staged to tighten gun control in Aus/NZ then you need to do some research.



In December 1988 New South Wales Premier, Barry Unsworth stated the following at a Special Premier's meeting called in Hobart, where National Firearms Laws were the agenda.

"there will never be uniform gun laws in Australia until we see a massacre in Tasmania."

This was in 1988!

The incedent that sparked the Special Premier's meeting was the

Australia Post building in Queen Street on the 8th December 1987

The shooter was Frank Vitkovic

...In the report on Frank Vitkovic, it states that this person, who supposedly had a long-standing fascination with firearms, obtained a M1 carbine .30 calibre semi-automatic military styled firearm with a sawn off barrel and shortened stock. Mind you these alterations were made so that the weapon could fit into the bag which was used to carry the weapon to the scene of the massacre, and completely destroys the statement that Vitkovic had a fascination with firearms, as any student of weaponry would know that by cutting off the end of the barrel removed the gas pressure that caused the weapon to automatically reload. This meant that to create the massacre, Vitkovic had to manually reload the rifle after each shot. Moreover this created the possibility for the weapon to jam, should the reloading action become jerky, which is exactly what happened with this particular incident, and enabled two men to actually take hold of Vitkovic before he apparently broke loose and jumped through a plate glass window and fell to his death eleven floors below.

But what is extremely interesting is that two persons who, by sheer coincidence happened to view the massacre from the building directly opposite. The then State Attorney General, Jim Kennan and the Police Minister Race Matthews. These two Labour Party Politicians were part of the push in Victoria to introduce their tough new firearm laws, and it is by sheer coincidence that they just happened to be in the building where Jim Kennan's extremely secure offices were located on the 20/23rd floors. However at the time of viewing this incident, I am reliably informed that they were at a typing pool located on the 12th floor, with the massacre taking place in the building directly opposite on the eleventh floor.

Another interesting bit of trivia given to us by this report is that during his killing spree, Frank Vitkovic was heard making some rather startling comments including, "How do they expect me to kill people with this gun?" Just exactly what did Vitkovic mean by that statement and who are 'they'?...

...It was very shortly after this massacre that a Special Premier's meeting was called in Hobart, where National Firearms Laws were the agenda, but the plan was defeated due to Tasmania and South Australia not accepting the federal incursion into the States constitutional powers. This was when Premier Barry Unsworth made his now famous quote of "there will never be uniform gun laws in Australia until we see a massacre in Tasmania."

Please remember that in cases where the Constitutions are involved each and every State must accept the amendments. If any State declines, then the Federal Constitutional amendment cannot continue...

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/conspiracy/conspiracy/parthur2.html

...However as Australia was a ‘Commonwealth’ of States, the Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke didn’t have the power to bring in the required legislation, and a special meeting of the various State premiers failed to adopt Bob Hawke’s proposal for the State premiers to cede their power in regard to firearm laws to the Federal government. That was when the New South Wales Premier, Barry Unsworth spat the dummy and stated, “There will never be uniform gun laws in Australia until we see a massacre in Tasmania.”...
http://vyzygoth.com/Chicken%20Little.pdf


Dr. Behind Port Arthur (Aust.) Gun Control Now In Maryland
...But a point to remember, while Rebecca Peters was "down-under", 6 shooting massacres occurred in Australia and New Zealand resulting in 76 deaths and 53 wounded people. In "gun control" here, Peters was no doubt - numero uno. Curiously though since Peters left, the shooting massacres have ceased! None in the last six years. And private firearms still abound...
http://100777.com/node/185




That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history.
~Aldous Huxley

He who has a why to live can bear almost any how. - ~Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline zharklm

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
seconded, a show on this issue would be awesome to get the locals to listen or watch rather than read, as we know people have issues with that.

Offline liko

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,031
  • Freedom or Nothing!
Thanks JT,Brocke & others for comments.

@hayley

Because you are a "newb" i will give you a break & won't tear holes in you.If you cannot see the inconsistence in this case "The Port Arthur Massacre" & the minor (if any)real participation by Martin Bryant,how can see any in other false flags  inconsistencies as these are SO big i could drive an 18 wheeler through.All i ask for as in all "false flags" is an "Real" independant inquiry & for the government agencies to release all known/relevent information/ material so a fellow Australian can have his day in court (defended by a real  lawyer not a criminal)to be judged by his peers on the REAL evidence,remember your children,brother ,sister,niece,newphew could be in this position one day.Australia is one of the MOST heavily indoctrinated countries in the world,you again have just proved that fact.Australian has be used for tavistock social experiments for almost a hundred years,because of its remoteness, & data collection via Gov ment agencies & NGO's is a cinch.Then they are thrown out onto the world once assessed.I know this is not the only "fishbowl" in the world nor will it be the last.

The Port Arthur Massacre was about alot of things on different levels.

My belife is only slaves are not aloud to own guns.A FREE man,should be able as an defend his family,hunt when he needs to,for survival ,and protect his countrymen from enemies foreign and domestic.Australians could learn alot from the REAL Americans,but they are to busy & stupid not to be able tell the difference between "the people" and the crimes of their globalsit administration(ask any Australian & they will tell you).This was one of the reasons (other than shock doctrin) for The Port Arthur Massacre,because the people do not know,that they don't have the rights to own them because they(Australians) are slaves.

I would stand next to any "real" American man defending his nation because he understands the concept of freedom,and realises he's being made a slave.That already put's him on the  path to freedom,unlike Australians who do not realise yet,that they are/being made into slaves.

To first want to fight for your freedom,you have to first realise you are a slave-or you can just go to the footy,get my drift.

While Martyn Bryant is in gaol(jail) there can be no "real" freedom in Australia.Until 9/11 is exposed there can be no freedom in America.

False flag terrorism to me is the synthesis of slavery,and until its exposed there can be know freedom.


PS. Hayley if you are an enviromentalist in Australia or apart of an Enviromentalist NGO club (greenpeace,WWF etc,please research how Enviromentist's  are used by the Globalists to aid in slavery & theft.

Offline Hayley

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
Thanks JT,Brocke & others for comments.

@hayley

Because you are a "newb" i will give you a break & won't tear holes in you.

Well thank you so much for your compassion and mercy as I am such a 'newb'... lol.
I am new to posting yes, but not new to this forum. I find it such a concern that everyone is so happy and willing to 'tear holes' in each other just because they don't agree...
I don't believe the first thing that I hear about anything these days, in fact I find myself a skeptic when listening to any side of the story, since so much crap is mixed in with a pinch of truth. I see it everywhere, even here.
You easily made judgment when you asked 'how can see any in other false flags inconsistencies as these are SO big i could drive an 18 wheeler through'....  all I can say to that is, I am part of this forum for a reason. I am not walking around blind to what is going on in our country, and I don't easily fall for any story someone sells me.
You also say 'Australia is one of the MOST heavily indoctrinated countries in the world,you again have just proved that fact' Yes is is one of the most indoctrinated countries. I did not just prove that, and your statement is demeaning, pointless and non-constructive.

Someone else said this to me, 'Hayley, If you are unfamiliar with the idea that Port Arthur was deliberately staged to tighten gun control in Aus/NZ then you need to do some research.'
Yes you are right, I may need to do some research, but I have based my thoughts on the P.A massacre on my own experience.
The P.A massacre did nothing that impacted my rights to own a gun! Its as simple as that.
Deliberately staged? I don't know. Did they take advantage of the situation to tighten gun laws? Probably, but it didn't effect me as a gun owner so I wonder what they got out of it if it was all deliberate, do you get my drift?

What I am more upset about is the way that Martyn Bryant has been treated since and continues to be treated.
I am not here for an argument. I am here to learn from others like yourself, whether I agree with you or not. Please try not to be defensive, instead of making judgment, point me to a site or a link that might 'open my eyes' to your view. I am open to that.



Everything here is something!

Marge Simpson

JTCoyoté

  • Guest
I was hoping one of you guys down under would bring this subject up... it was the pivot point in the final subjugation of OZ... Gun registration laws had been on the books for a long time, and were trotted out in a big way after Port Arthur, against the general population in a draconian way. A friend who dealt in antique British and Australian militaria and collectible firearms was raided under the new stiffer laws and he lost everything... what was finally returned were the least valuable of his inventory... and very few of them, his parts inventory and the highly valued pieces, were never returned... I Hate Gun Grabbers they are thieves working under color of law and should be hunted, tried, convicted, and hung, because they infringe upon one of the most basic of human rights...

Here is a link to another forum we started in early 2002 to support my radio show, this search is to the events concerning our friend who was swat team raided and put out of business about 7 years ago. The second link is more on Port Arthur

http://britishmilitariaforums.yuku.com/search/text/forum/25?q=Ken+Chaffer&submit=Search+Forum

http://britishmilitariaforums.yuku.com/search/text/?q=Port+Arthur&submit=Search+All

Coyoté

"To argue with a person who has renounced
the use of reason is like administering
medicine to the dead."

~Thomas Paine

Offline Brocke

  • Eleutherophiliac & Drapetomaniac
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,790
  • I am not a number, I am a free man!
    • Vimeo page
...
The P.A massacre did nothing that impacted my rights to own a gun! Its as simple as that.
Deliberately staged? I don't know. Did they take advantage of the situation to tighten gun laws? Probably, but it didn't effect me as a gun owner so I wonder what they got out of it if it was all deliberate, do you get my drift?...


Hi Hayley, I'm going to assume from your statement that you do not live in VIC,NSW or SA. Because there is no question that OUR rights, when is comes to gun ownership, have definitely been effected. It turned the relatively easy process into a lengthy intricate and expensive procedure. It can take up to four months to purchase a gun what with licenses, permits, safety courses and the availability thereof.

Imagine, if you will, that owning a car was as complex and tightly controlled:

1. You would need to wait 3 months for your drivers license.
2. Cars would be rare and expensive in Australia compared to other countries.
3. You would only be allowed to purchase a manual transmission car unless you has a disability and could prove you needed automatic.
4. You had to invest in a special government approved locked storage area for the car.
5. You had to remove the petrol and store it in a separate government approved locked storage area whenever it was not in use.
6. You are forbidden by law to use your car to protect yourself in any way. I.e. no airbags, ABS or defensive driving.
7. You are required to show your license and proof of auto ownership when ever you purchase petrol. And you are not allowed to purchase petrol other than the type for your car.
8. You are forbidden by law from borrowing anyone's car.
9. If you break any of the above laws you loose your license permanently and can never drive again.


These laws would turn you RIGHT to own a car into a PRIVILEGE.

To say that "it didn't effect me as a gun owner" shows your lack of understanding when it comes to the difference between rights and privileges. The right to own and bare arms is not about how it effects you. It is about how it effects EVERYONE.

Understanding the difference between rights and privileges is fundimental to believing in truth and freedom. The best reason to own a firearm is to excersize you right to do so. One day soon thoses rights will be gone forever.

If you only care about how the New World Order effects you then why are you here at Prison Planet Forum?

P.S.

I used the example of a car because:

1. cars are MORE deadly then a firearm even in the hands of an amature.
2. more people die every year from auto accidents than from firearms accidents.
3. children borrow (steal) their parents cars all the time and risk not only their own lives but other as well.



That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history.
~Aldous Huxley

He who has a why to live can bear almost any how. - ~Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline Hayley

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69

Hi Hayley, I'm going to assume from your statement that you do not live in VIC,NSW or SA.

To say that "it didn't effect me as a gun owner" shows your lack of understanding when it comes to the difference between rights and privileges. The right to own and bare arms is not about how it effects you. It is about how it effects EVERYONE.

Understanding the difference between rights and privileges is fundimental to believing in truth and freedom. The best reason to own a firearm is to excersize you right to do so. One day soon thoses rights will be gone forever.

If you only care about how the New World Order effects you then why are you here at Prison Planet Forum?
(steal) their parents cars all the time and risk not only their own lives but other as well.



Thanks for replying Brocke.  I understand what you are saying, and totally agree.
I live in Western Australia, so gun laws may have changed/tightened for you but not me. However, I know gun owners from all over Australia, and they say the same thing as I have, that nothing has changed. How has it affected you as a gun owner? I feel like I have missed something here....

To your comment implying that I do not understand the difference between rights and privileges is completely wrong. What is it with people here making things so personal? Trying to point out flaws in ones character?
I have the right to own a gun, and do so. But I understand that owning an unregistered gun is different. There are rules that are in place to protect us, not always simply to control us. And before you make a judgment on that statement, I know the difference there too.

You ask why am I here if I only care about myself? Another judgment on your behalf that you DO NOT have right to.
I was simply sharing a bit about how the P.A Massacre did NOT effect my rights to own a gun, I don't see that as ignorant at all and I also do not see any issue with discussing it.
I don't have blinders on to the rest of the world like you seem to be pointing out. If you are a gun owner in SA, VIC or NSW, and your rights to own a gun have been taken away, please tell me. Seriously, I would like to know. Because like I said before, nothing has changed for me, my friends or family. I am not disputing that it hasn't changed for some, but it hasn't changed a thing for the people I know.
So, a few questions for you if you don't mind.
Are you a gun owner?
What state are you in?
Has your right to own a gun changed since the P.A massacre?
How has it changed?
Did anyone demand that you hand over your registered guns?
Also, just another question,
Do you have an issue with having to have your guns registered?

Hayley


Everything here is something!

Marge Simpson

Offline Brocke

  • Eleutherophiliac & Drapetomaniac
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,790
  • I am not a number, I am a free man!
    • Vimeo page
Thanks for replying Brocke.  I understand what you are saying, and totally agree.
I live in Western Australia, so gun laws may have changed/tightened for you but not me. However, I know gun owners from all over Australia, and they say the same thing as I have, that nothing has changed. How has it affected you as a gun owner? I feel like I have missed something here....

To your comment implying that I do not understand the difference between rights and privileges is completely wrong. What is it with people here making things so personal? Trying to point out flaws in ones character?
I have the right to own a gun, and do so. But I understand that owning an unregistered gun is different. There are rules that are in place to protect us, not always simply to control us. And before you make a judgment on that statement, I know the difference there too.

You ask why am I here if I only care about myself? Another judgment on your behalf that you DO NOT have right to.
I was simply sharing a bit about how the P.A Massacre did NOT effect my rights to own a gun, I don't see that as ignorant at all and I also do not see any issue with discussing it.
I don't have blinders on to the rest of the world like you seem to be pointing out. If you are a gun owner in SA, VIC or NSW, and your rights to own a gun have been taken away, please tell me. Seriously, I would like to know. Because like I said before, nothing has changed for me, my friends or family. I am not disputing that it hasn't changed for some, but it hasn't changed a thing for the people I know.
So, a few questions for you if you don't mind.
Are you a gun owner?
What state are you in?
Has your right to own a gun changed since the P.A massacre?
How has it changed?
Did anyone demand that you hand over your registered guns?
Also, just another question,
Do you have an issue with having to have your guns registered?

Hayley





Hi Hayley,

It's not personal so please don't take it that way.  :)

If you wanted to go to a gun shop and buy your 12 year old son or daughter a Ruger 10/22 .22 semi-automatic rifle to learn to shoot and handle a firearm with you would not be able to here in Australia.

Semi-automatic rifles are prohibited as are firearms for anyone under 18.

As for me, I am an American living in Victoria so I have the benefit of knowing the freedom to purchase a firearm in my country and I also know how convoluted and expensive it is to get a firearm here in Australia.

In a country where the citizenry are forbidden to own firearms only the government and criminals have guns. Within ten years this is how I think it will be in Australia, a totally disarmed populous.

Anyway, I don't want to distract from Liko's excellent post about Port Arthur anymore. If you are not familiar with the Port Arthur Massacre false flag I would really suggest you look it up! It is a very important event in Australia's history and for more reasons than the obvious.


That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history.
~Aldous Huxley

He who has a why to live can bear almost any how. - ~Friedrich Nietzsche