I would love to hear AJ's thoughts on this & how he believes it went off.Unlike other false flag's there is an innocent intellectual disable man,sitting in jail rotting away,in solitary confinement with a Sith lord as his over-watcher.He is not alout to see anyone,they have told his mother that he doesn't want to see anyone,which everyone knows is untrue.The satanists within the Government thought he would be killed in the psyh op but he didn't.I am disgusted in Australians for not giving a turd about this man.Please,please AJ if you ever have the chance,look into this,there are some very credible people you could have on your show,who know alot about this false flag & witness's.
This false flag like others is surrounded in dis-info so read all information critically.
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 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.
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'?
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.
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.
Read with caution i believe there is some disinfo in it.THE PORT ARTHUR MASSACRE 10 YEARS ON THE SECRECY CONTINUES
Mon, 11/02/2009 - 21:59 — Arthur Cristian
THE PORT ARTHUR MASSACRE
10 YEARS ON
THE SECRECY CONTINUES
Note: Please use the above link to view all the photos posted with this article:
Just after the Port Arthur massacre in April of 1996 I became disturbed by the way the media was reporting the event and especially confused about the issue of Martin Bryant's photograph being printed before his trial. I always thought that no matter how guilty you thought a person was the law is supposed to presume innocence until proven guilty and I believed it illegal to print a person’s photo before he had been formally identified. The reason is to allow the police complete confidence in relying on witness identification of suspects who could otherwise be influenced by media publicity. That's exactly what happened. They printed Martin Bryant's photo Australia wide causing hatred and bias amongst the Australian public, or at least those who believed the newspaper stories who already had found him guilty.
The incessant ‘in your face’ harassment of victims and their private lives, to me, was sickening and I felt nothing but anger every time I saw another camera being shoved into the face of another distressed victim of the massacre.
It was just too obvious that people’s emotions were being exploited and sacrificed for the absence of reporting issues about what caused the incident and the killer’s motives. It was obvious that the media was not interested in why these people died, they only wanted to cash in on their grief and to sensationalise the events. When the gun laws debate fired up again it was not hard to see why everyone was being stirred up.
I was browsing in a furniture store in Moss Street Springwood, a family business where they built beautiful unique pieces of the best quality furniture. As I admired a magnificent gun cabinet on the floor I remarked to the salesman that he might have trouble selling it if John Howard got his way. We engaged in conversation and he asked me if I was on the net and when I told him I wasn’t he offered to print out some pages for me that he said I might be interested in. That’s where my journey into the mystery surrounding the Port Arthur massacre began. I was so annoyed about what I read that I wrote to Joe Vialls who gave me permission to publish his pages on the net and for almost ten years I have uncovered other investigators and like minded people who have contributed to these pages.
Early this year of 2006, almost ten years on from the Port Arthur massacre, I decided to take a little trip down to Tassy and get some idea of the present atmosphere regarding the events of that fateful day of July 28th 1996 at Port Arthur Tasmania.
For ten years hardly a word in the papers, nothing on the radio and unusual silence on television where doco hounds and current affair programs will dig up stories from just about anywhere to get ratings. For months after the massacre television presenters, like predators, descended on the grieving survivors and the victim's families like vultures with a tirade of emotional and in your face dramatic interviews to wring every last drop of sensationalism from them. Then, when finally they had milked the last "how do you feel?" out of these devastated people and shown every last tear they could squeeze into their news and current affairs programs, they curiously went quiet on the subject for almost ten years.
Most of the public were respectful of the victims privacy and it was many months before people began to ask questions only to be shunned and ridiculed as being insensitive. If you dared STRIPPED OF ALL EVIDENCE to mention anything on the radio talk-back programs you were ridiculed or cut off, implying that you were being inconsiderate and thoughtless. Suggest anything but the official line about the murders and you were dubbed with the badge of crackpot or conspiracy theorist. Usually nothing is sacred on TV current affair programs. They love to dramatise with their often graphic and over-acted portrayals in detail of horrible events, but nothing about the after-effects of the Port Arthur massacre.
Many investigators and people, who have trouble believing the official report on the killings, have aired their concerns on the internet because they just can't get a fair hearing in the usual channels. While ever our media is monopolized by so few owners we are limited to the news that they want us to see read and hear. There is no such thing as free speech in the media. They decide what they will print and air. Even if they ask you a question your answer can be edited in so many different ways that they can make you look like a saint or a fool. They can interview you and concoct any slant on the story they like, editing your responses to make black white and white black. With hardly any opposition they can ignore anything they want and create sensation out of the most mundane events to hide the important issues. Go to my Gun Laws in Australia page:
http://iinet/guns.html to see heaps of evidence of this. If it does not suit the few owners of these monopolies to report a story including these investigations, which have uncovered some very serious anomalies in the official Port Arthur story, then it just doesn't get reported or the coverage given does not reflect the importance of the event.
Of course there are supposed to be safeguards in place to ensure our freedom of speech is protected but if they can get away with attempting to pervert the course of justice by identifying Bryant and corrupting any police identification process, such as a line-up, then they can get away with a lot more. Were it not for our underground investigators, writers, editors and, so far, free medium the internet, few people would be aware of the deceit and blatant untruths told by the media and the government to avoid a Coronial Inquiry into these murders.
Roland Browne.jpg - 34620 Bytes
Roland Browne, then co-chair of the National Coalition for Gun Control (NCGC), who, with astonishing accuracy, predicted the Port Arthur Massacre when he stated, "We are going to see a mass shooting in Tasmania...unless we get national gun control laws." - (ACA ,with Ray Martin, March 1996)
The Sun Herald reported May 5 1996 that ex-Premier of NSW, Barry Unsworth made this prediction in 1987 - Before Uniform Gun Laws become possible in all States there will have to be a massacre in Tasmania.
Can politicians and people for gun control really see into the future?
Yes, it's true that this dreadful crime has not, to this day, been subjected to a Coronial Inquiry, an inquest, that is by law, essentially held for all suspicious deaths including suicide and some accidental deaths. All deaths by homicide are subjected to the highest scrutiny by a coroner for evidence at any trial. None was done for the Port Arthur victims. Certainly the crime would have warranted an investigation so why didn't these innocent people, murdered at Port Arthur, deserve an inquiry into their deaths as citizens and visitors to Australia?
The official answer was that the government had no wish to inflict further pain on the victim's friends and family by subjecting them to a trial. Furthermore, the authorities decided, before the hearing to convict the alleged killer, that they had their man, who was, supposedly, caught red handed, despite the fact that there is no forensic evidence to place Martin Bryant at the Broad Arrow crime scene. They could save the taxpayers a costly drawn-out trial by just sentencing Martin Bryant so they decided before the hearing that he was guilty on all accounts and a coronial inquiry would be withheld in this case. Never been done before! The most horrific crime in Australian history and no Coronial Inquiry!
a tiny plaque a stripped Broad Arrow.jpg - 49209 Bytes
The pity being that, regardless of the pain of having to relive the events of that day, many victims would have gladly endured a trial to get a conviction of the real killer and not some patsy used to appease the anger of the public. Furthermore a trial could have revealed reasons for the deaths of loved ones which would have given these grieving people some kind of closure. To this day the secrecy continues and no one is any the wiser.
By avoiding a trial the prosecution effectively also avoided the summoning of witnesses who might be required to give evidence and possibly identify the shooter. If a witness who happened to have talked to, been shot by or clearly saw the shooter could not identify Martin Bryant on the stand there was nowhere for the prosecution to go and all hell would break loose all over again. This was a problem since there were witnesses who were eager to testify that Bryant was not the shooter but were never put on the witness list.
The media accepted the official explanation for not having a jury trial and again got everyone feeling very emotional about the victims by poking cameras into their faces to film their private pain, anger and shattered lives - inciting hatred against a man who was not yet found guilty of anything at that time. Their vendetta was incessant to railroad the alleged killer, illegally disregarding the lawful path of justice in order to get quick results.
It is almost beyond belief that, in this day and age, a trial and sentence by media, breaking all the rules of fair play and justice, could brainwash the Australian public into blindly believing the official report and the media's propaganda but it happened.
CLICK HERE FOR MAPS AND SEQUENCE OF EVENTS IN THE BROAD ARROW CAFE:
http://http//members.iinet.net.au/~nedwood/cover-up.htmlIn the beginning it was not hard to believe that the reporting was accurate. To make sure that Martin Bryant became the most hated man in the country the newspapers went to the trouble of enhancing his photographs to make his eyes look Manson-like crazy. The same original photos show a quite, shy looking, ordinary sort of a man of insignificance.
mediapic.jpg - 31960 Bytes
When I first saw the enhanced photo of Bryant on the cover of The Australian he certainly looked like a crazy man to me. But at the time I wondered how they could be allowed to print his photo before him being formally identified. He was not at large or on the run and when I saw the original untouched photo on the net I began to feel very uncomfortable about the way the media was telling this story, especially the way they hounded the victims to add sensationalism to their sickening over dramatic stories. It was obvious that they were setting us all up for something.
GO HERE TO READ A CONDENSED VERSION OF THE OFFICIAL STORY FROM THE BOOK SUDDENLY ONE SUNDAY:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/bryant/index_1.htmlGuilty or not guilty people just wanted Martin Bryant to "rot in hell" because they read it in the paper and saw it in the news that he was the killer and that was that. I would not be surprised that, if asked, most people at that time couldn't have cared less if he had a trial or not, they just wanted him dead or behind bars for the rest of his life.
The expression "innocent until proven guilty" never applied to Martin Bryant at any time. He was never "the alleged killer" but instead, as every Murdock and Packer medium in the country described him before his hearing, "the killer", "the murderer", "the sadistic slayer of 35 people". Only one day after Bryant was
THIS IS THE MAN.jpg - 35271 Bytes
captured his face was on all the major newspaper front pages in the country in every state under the headings "FACE OF A KILLER" and "THIS IS THE MAN". These accusations were virtually defamation of his character, no matter how guilty he might be, because he was in custody at the time but not found guilty by any court of law.
The television news and current affairs programs blatantly displayed props which were supposedly at the murder scene and items carried by the killer when in actual fact the film was shot in the café either before the massacre or after everything had been cleaned up because the dining room looked as if it was open for business. The weapons they showed us on TV that were supposed to be the murder weapons were in pristine condition. Then we were told that they were destroyed in the Seascape fire but then they later turned up again deliberately damaged and with missing parts, outside the Seascape Inn. One on the roof of a nearby shed and the other in nearby bush, after the Seascape burned down. How the killer managed to dispose of these weapons while exiting the burning building unarmed and on fire himself is hard to explain and never has been. Probably because the real killer had already left the building leaving the patsy to take the rap.
A mediocre lawyer could have done an investigation and come up with a very good case for this man already condemned of perhaps the worst crime in Australian history? It was obvious that he could have afforded the best defence since he was left a small fortune by a benefactor who thought highly of him in the past. But the authorities fixed his wagon there again by another unprecedented move of taking away his earthly possessions. Reason being, to compensate his victims, even before his trial and being found guilty. To this day there is only very vague information as to what happened to the $3.5 million dollars donated by the Australian public coupled with at least another $1.5 million from Bryant's estate. Many people were compensated for the victims funerals (and rightly so), some medical expenses and grief counseling but it was argued that the bulk of the money went to business people in the area who suffered revenue loss due to the bad publicity of the massacre. Many of the families of the dead received little more than $1000.
Being rendered destitute by the authorities who confiscated everything he owned Bryant was appointed a lawyer by the court whose sole mission was to get him to plead guilty. Not an easy task since Martin was adamant that he had never been to Port Arthur on that day. Both the prosecutor and the defendant's lawyer just wanted the whole damn thing over with. There was never any question of a defence, only preparation for a guilty plea.
FAKE VIDEO.jpg - 48331 Bytes
fake video 2.jpg - 66790 Bytes
Now, as described on other pages on this site, Martin Bryant is not very bright. He has an IQ of 66 and the mind of an 11 year old. A major factor in his defence should have been that the Port Arthur shooter far surpassed any ability Martin could ever possess even if he had been trained in combat shooting, which he certainly was not. Another factor would have been the incessant defamation of his character by the media, including the malicious altering of his photographs to incite hatred of him. No DNA was taken from the Broad Arrow Cafe where the killer ate a meal and handled several items left on the table. One would think that with so many people shot he would have sustained some blood splatter on his clothing that could be matched with any one of the victims and would have proved his guilt beyond doubt.
With all of the evidence that could have been collected to incriminate Martin Bryant only this vague video emerged from America at the eleventh hour before the hearing and was claimed to be the killer running from the Broad Arrow Cafe. I don't even know what this is supposed to prove because it's impossible to identify the man anyway. The same man was filmed at the same time from another angle which showed amused onlookers in the background lounging on the veranda of the Broad Arrow where the murders happened just inside the door. It is clear that the DNA evidence would have cleared Martin. So would blood splatter tests on his clothing and not wanting to call witnesses who could not identify Bryant the DPP had to rely on this ridiculous video that proves nothing. The only thing that convicted Martin Bryant was his coerced "guilty" plea.
Bystanders on the cafe veranda watch a man running down the road. This video convicted Martin Bryant
Yet none of this was entered as evidence that Bryant was at the Broad Arrow Cafe. Instead the only evidence submitted to convict Bryant was a very grainy video film, supposedly taken on the day, of a man (impossible to identify), running down the road away from the cafe. However another video taken at the same time and from a different angle filmed the same man (also impossible to identify) running towards the camera operator and showing the Broad Arrow Cafe in the background where at least three people were standing on the veranda, looking very relaxed, leaning on the veranda posts, apparently undaunted by the gunman running down the road or the 20 bodies lying shot to death just inside the door behind them.
from the verandah.jpg - 132175 Bytes
It was from this veranda that people watched the "running man" running down this road away from the Broad Arrow Cafe. This, so called, "running man" has since been identified as one of the staff members carrying blankets for the wounded long after the shooter had left. There was no explanation or motive for the murders. Bryant had no criminal record and he didn't consort with criminals. He didn't smoke or take drugs of any kind or if he had there were no tests done while he was in hospital to prove that he had taken any drugs. He was very polite and didn't swear. He called men sir. In fact, without the media slander he could not be described as anything else but a fairly uninteresting, clean living man with a bit of a mental problem.
One reporter wrote of his cruelty to animals but others told of his love for them. During a police interrogation where detectives questioned him about his expertise with a rifle, he told of how he used home made cardboard targets and cans for practice on the few occasions that he went shooting but he never hunted animals. He wouldn't even shoot bottles for fear animals might injure themselves on the broken glass. Some of the mis-information about what he kept in his house is pure sensationalism and typical of media exaggeration to embellish a story.
Where could Bryant have gained the expertise of a talented combat shooter? The Port Arthur shooter brought attention to himself by displaying an amazing ability for handling a long rifle with incredible accuracy that far surpasses the average shooter. A performance, so far, unmatched by anyone else in the world apparently since I have had my site up for almost ten years now and no one has come forward to say that they know of anyone who can match this killer's unbelievable expertise. His performance displayed a talent that could only have been performed by someone who was top of the class in his field and obviously had more training than popping off cans in the bush on a couple of weekends.
From the book Deadly Deception at Port Arthur by the late Joe Vialls. "Brigadier Ted Sarong DSO OBE, the former head of Australian Forces in Vietnam and one of the world's leading experts on counter-terrorist techniques and their application. In an interview with Frank Robson in the Sydney Morning Herald on 10 April 1999, Brigadier Serong makes it plain that Martin Bryant could not have been responsible for the mass murder at Port Arthur. "There was an almost satanic accuracy to that shooting performance" he says. "Whoever did it is better than I am, and there are not too many people around here better than I am". He continues "Whoever did it had skills way beyond anything that could reasonably be expected of this chap Bryant ... if it was someone of only average skills, there would have been many less killed and many more wounded. It was the astonishing proportion of killed to wounded that made me open my eyes first off." Brigadier Serong believes more than one person was involved and directly infers that the mass murder at Port Arthur was a terrorist action designed to undermine Australian national security. "It was part of a deliberate attempt to disarm the population, but I don't believe John Howard or his Government were involved. Howard is being led down a track. He doesn't know where it's leading, and he doesn't much care...""
http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/11/02/port-arthur-massacre-10-years-secrecy-continuesThe Tavistock Institute's lone nuts -
As {EIR} has documented (see issue of April 4, 1997), Great Britain is the command center for world terrorism today. This article will demonstrate, through examining the case of Martin Bryant, that the dozens of mass murderers who have exploded into the world's headlines over the last decade or so, constitute a special capability within the Crown's arsenal.
Already in May 1996, after a quick investigation of the Port Arthur massacre, including discussions with Australian police and counter-terror specialists, LaRouche's Australian associates in the Citizens Electoral Council charged in their newspaper, {The New Citizen}, that the incident -
"... bore all the hallmarks of the blind terror campaigns pioneered by the Tavistock Institute in London, an arm of British intelligence which ... has conducted precisely the kind of experiments necessary to create and manipulate damaged personalities such as Martin Bryant."
The article recounted the evidence already in hand to support that conclusion; it was hysterically denounced by some of Australia's major media, and by the British Broadcasting Corporation, which broadcast the thesis all over Europe, in order to deny it.
Further investigations over the past year, supplemented by files on Tavistock which this news service has compiled since 1973, have established the following:
1. Co-ordinated by Tavistock
The Port Arthur events were indeed co-ordinated by Tavistock, the premier psychological warfare unit of the British Crown, which was founded in 1920 based upon studies of "shell shock" and related neuroses caused by the trauma of World WarII. Tavistock's strategic mission is to replace a civilization of self-ruling, industrial nation-states with a "post-industrial," globalized world ruled by a tiny oligarchy.
Toward this end, Tavistock specializes in what its own psychiatrists call "brainwashing"--the use of stress-induced fear to artificially create neurotic states of mind, which may be programmed as desired.
For instance, Tavistock offered the anxiety-ridden American youth of the 1960s--hit by the Cuban missile crisis, the assassinations of political leaders, and the TV's incessant bloody images of Vietnam--a retreat from this horrifying reality, into the consolations of rock music, drugs, and sex. Taking the bait, the future leaders of America and other nations regressed into an infantile preoccupation with self; patriotism, and an agapic concern for the "common good," were replaced by a hedonistic obsession with "my body," "my feelings"--a {counter} culture.
More generally, Tavistock's "theory of turbulence" specifies that entire populations may be driven into a similar infantile regression by repeated terrorist shocks, such as the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, the sarin gas subway bombing in Japan, or the dozens of Martin Bryant-style mass murders around the world over the past decade.
It is precisely the "blind" nature of such events that makes them psychologically so devastating, since there seems to be no answer to the question, "Why?," and therefore, apparently there is little or nothing that can be done to prevent them.
2. Established networks
British intelligence will trigger such terrorist events where it has control over the local media, and psychiatric, police, and intelligence networks.
It has this control in Scotland, where a pedophile well known to police murdered 16 five- and six-year-olds and their teacher, in the town of Dunblane on March 13, 1996;
It has this control in the Commonwealth nation of New Zealand, where five such massacres have taken place since 1990; and
It has this control in Australia, to which numerous of Tavistock's top operatives were deployed right after World War II.
Australia, which has seen a dozen mass murders since the infamous "Hoddle Street massacre" of 1987, has been subjected to particularly intense Tavistockian profiling and manipulation--in part, no doubt, because Australia broke with the British Empire in World War II, and allied with Gen. Douglas MacArthur and America, against Churchill's plans to cede Australia to the Japanese.
As an island-nation, Australia also offered a "controlled environment" for Tavistock's experiments; in turn, the most isolated part of Australia, the island-state of Tasmania, off the continent's southeastern tip, has served as the perfect Tavistock laboratory.
And, Tavistock specifies that, because of the power of the modern mass media, no matter where a terrorist attack takes place, the shock is felt worldwide--it is a "global event."
3. Programmed in Tasmania
Martin Bryant was monitored, directed, and, in all likelihood, programmed by Tavistock networks in Tasmania, from at least the time that one of Tavistock's senior representatives in Australia, the now 88-year-old Dr. Eric Cunningham Dax, first examined Bryant in 1983-84, and set the parameters for all his future "treatment."
Dax was for decades an associate of Tavistock's longtime leader and World Federation of Mental Health chairman, Dr. John Rawlings Rees. Beginning with his collaboration with Rees in the late 1930s, Dax, by his own account, had specialized in "brainwashing."
To cover its tracks, Tavistock invariably circulates what might be called the "Lee Harvey Oswald theory of mass murder"--that each such incident is the result of a "lone nut," who one day just "went crazy."
Such was the "finding" of Melbourne-based British forensic psychiatrist Dr. Paul Mullen, in his evaluation of Bryant for Bryant's defense attorney, in which Mullen concluded,
"It would be more satisfactory if one could point to some simple and direct cause of the tragedy at Port Arthur"; unfortunately, Mullen said, one could not.
But, notwithstanding that Bryant was a "lone nut," Mullen confidently predicted to the {Herald Sun} of Feb. 4, 1997, that there would be "more such massacres because of strong evidence of a copycat element," a warning echoed by other Tavistock assets in Australia and abroad.
Curiously, Mullen himself reportedly participated in the investigation of two mass slaughters in New Zealand, before coming to Australia.
The Bryant case provides some guidelines on how to rip up this Tavistock capability, before the next atrocity is unleashed. -
Shock troops of psychiatrists -
In 1944, Bank of England chief Montagu Norman suddenly quit his banking post in order to start a Tavistock spin-off called the National Association for Mental Health. Norman had been at the apex of the international financial oligarchy.
One of his proteges, longtime Australian Reserve Bank head H.C. "Nugget" Coombs, called him the "head of a secret international freemasonry of central bankers." As such, he had supervised the banking arrangements which put Adolf Hitler in power, as {EIR} History Editor Anton Chaitkin has documented.
Norman tapped his Bank of England assistant, Sir Otto Niemeyer, to be the NAMH's treasurer, and Niemeyer's niece Mary Appleby, to be general secretary of the association.
Niemeyer is well known to Australians: He headed the infamous "Niemeyer mission" to Depression-wracked Australia in 1930, to tell Australia to savagely cut its health and welfare spending, in order to pay her British creditors.
The British NAMH soon gave birth to the World Federation of Mental Health (WFMH), one of the first of the innumerable, anti-nation-state "non-governmental organizations" spawned by Tavistock. Affiliated with the United Nations, the WFMH was one-worldist from the outset.
To head up the new organization, Norman tapped Brig. Gen. John Rawlings Rees, the head of Tavistock in the 1930s, and then the chief of Britain's World War II Psychological Warfare Directorate.
Rees had commanded 300, mostly Tavistock-trained Army psychiatrists; since then, Tavistock has been almost indistinguishable from the various wings of British Military Intelligence (MI-6, MI-5, SAS, etc.)--a connection perhaps of relevance to the military precision with which Bryant planned and executed his mass slaughter.
At the war's end, in a speech to U.S. Army psychiatrists in 1945, Rees called for the creation of "psychiatric shock troops," who would move out of the military and psychiatric institutions, in order to shape society as a whole:
"If we propose to come out into the open and to attack the social and national problems of our day, then we must have shock troops and these cannot be provided by psychiatry based wholly in institutions. We must have mobile teams of psychiatrists who are free to move around and make contact with the local situation in their particular area.... In every country, groups of psychiatrists linked to each other ... [must begin] to move into the political and governmental field."
The "mission" Rees outlined, was to create a situation "where it is possible for people of every social group to have treatment when they need it, {even when they do not wish it}, without the necessity to invoke the law" (emphasis added).
Tavistock's methods were outlined by Dr. William Sargant in his 1950s book, {The Battle for the Mind: A physiology of conversion and brain-washing.}
A pioneer in the study of "shell shock," Sargant also emphasized the work of Soviet psychologist Pavlov in the 1920s and 1930s, in particular an incident in which a rising flood trapped some of Pavlov's dogs in their cages, while the water rose up to their heads, before receding. Pavlov found that the intense fear the dogs experienced "wiped clean" the tricks they had been taught, following which they could be "reprogrammed."
Further experiments by the SAS/SIS during the 1950s, including in Malaya and Kenya, showed Tavistock that such stress, with resultant "reprogramming" capabilities, could be applied to entire societies.
In a 1961 series of lectures at the University of California Medical School, one of Sargant's closest collaborators, British novelist Aldous Huxley, assessed the notorious MK-Ultra mass drugging and brainwashing experiment which had been under way since the early 1950s. Huxley was the author of the 1952 book, {The Doors of Perception,} which first popularized LSD usage; he had long before fictionalized the results of such experimentation in his novel {Brave New World}. Huxley himself played a key role in MK-Ultra.
With such methods, Huxley now said, in 1961 lectures entitled "Control of the Mind," there will be a "method of making people love their servitude and producing dictatorships without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any real desire to rebel--by propaganda, or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods.
And this seems to be the final revolution." Another pet project of Huxley's from the 1930s on, was the creation of what he called the "somatotonic personality": one who would not hesitate to murder. The Tavistockians operate with a construct of the human mind as a {tabula rasa} that can be imprinted, or a mechanical system that can be manipulated by such techniques. Since the essence of the human mind is, on the contrary, its inherent creative capability, Tavistockian brainwashing works only if the brainwashers can create a "controlled environment," in which the victim sees only the alternatives presented by his tormentors. -
Tavistock deploys to Australia
In the early 1950s, Rees sent two of his "psychiatric shock troops" to Australia, Dr. Eric Cunningham Dax and Dr. Fred E. Emery.
Dr. Eric Cunningham Dax
Dax had written a chapter for Rees's 1949 book, {Modern Practise in Psychological Medicine}, and had trained at the same hospital where Rees had practiced.
Dax was also a protege of Sargant. Sargant had initiated a brainwashing technique called "deep sleep," in which patients were given massive doses of drugs, to keep them asleep 20 hours or more a day, which increased their susceptibility to "programming."
Under Sargant's tutelage, Dax performed 1,300 experiments in deep sleep, and rapidly became one of Britain's top practitioners of so-called "physical methods" of psychiatry, which included pre-frontal lobotomies, on which Dax wrote a monograph, and electric shock, which was often administered during "deep sleep."
The acknowledged problem with "deep sleep," was that up to 2% of the patients subjected to it, died; those who lived were often psychologically destroyed.
Arriving in Australia In 1952, Dax set up the Mental Hygiene Department of Victoria, which in turn set up Australia's entire mental health care system.
As Rees said in his introduction to the book he told Dax to write, {Asylum to Community: The Development of The Mental Hygiene Service in Victoria, Australia}: "The Mental Hygiene Service of Victoria, may, indeed, have provided a major training ground in psychiatry and mental health work for all the English-speaking populations of the South-western Pacific region, and this is a matter of very great importance."
Dr. Fred Emery
The second Tavistock brainwasher whom Rees dispatched to Melbourne around the same time, and whose work would help shape Dax's own, Dr. Fred Emery, set up shop as Senior Research Officer in the Department of Audio Visual Aids at Melbourne University.
There, Emery began conducting experiments on schoolchildren, as described in his article "Psychological Effects of the Western' Film," to see how "oedipal patterns" could be induced in schoolchildren--a subject of some relevance to 28-year-old Martin Bryant, and the mysterious deaths of both his father and Martin's own elderly girl friend. By the early 1960s, Emery, together with the chairman of Tavistock's governing council, Dr. Eric Trist, was giving lectures to select audiences at Tavistock on methods to brainwash entire societies.
In this new age of mass communication, they said, a series of short, universal shocks would destabilize a targeted population, plunging it into a form of "shell shock," a mass neurosis. If the shocks were repeated over a period of years, a more and more infantile pattern of thinking would develop. Emery elaborated these concepts in his 1967 article in Tavistock's magazine {Human Relations,} entitled, "The Next Thirty Years: Concepts, Methods and Anticipations," and in his 1975 "Futures We Are In." In the latter, he outlined the three stages of this process:
1.
People would "lose their moral judgment";
2.
Next, "segmentation"--societal disintegration--would begin, in which the individual's focus moves from the nation-state to preoccupation with local community or family; and finally,
3.
"Disassociation" would set in, "a world in which fantasy and reality are indistinguishable," in which the individual becomes the societal unit.
Emery calls this final result "Clockwork Orange," after the Anthony Burgess novel, in which habitual, random violence by gangs of youth is the order of the day, while adults retreat to their television sets and other forms of "virtual reality."
In 1980, Trist looked back at the last two decades of the assassination of the Kennedys, of Martin Luther King, the Vietnam War, the oil shocks, the Iranian hostage crisis, etc., and announced that the process Tavistock had predicted, had indeed begun, and would now accelerate.
Meanwhile, in Australia, Dax brought Sargant to Melbourne on Aug. 14, 1962, to lecture on "The Mechanism of Brainwashing and Conversion."
Another of Sargant's proteges, the Sydney-based psychiatrist Dr. Harry Bailey, was a fanatical practitioner of "deep sleep," and killed a number of patients during experiments at the Chelmsford Private Hospital in the 1960s and 1970s.
The resulting scandal led to the convening of an investigatory Royal Commission into Deep Sleep, and to Bailey's own suicide in 1985. As reported in the book {Deep Sleep,} by Brian Bromberger and Janet Fyfe-Yeomans, which chronicled Bailey's experiments, Bailey and Sargant "remained in constant contact for almost 30 years, and ... Bailey often spoke of the competition between them to see who could keep their patients in the deepest coma without killing them."
Dax himself pushed ahead with research on "turbulence," "aggression," and "brainwashing"--all from the Reesian perspective of using psychiatry to shape society as a whole, as exemplified by a speech he gave at the University of Melbourne on July 20, 1964, titled "Some Observations on Psychiatric Research." "It is no more than a few years past," he said, "when psychiatry was solely represented by the mental hospitals, before the child guidance clinics were first begun or the psychiatrists started to move into the outpatient diagnostic centres.... The mental hospitals may be likened to the grandmothers of community psychiatry....
Within the span of a single generation, psychiatrists have been thrown from the protective, circumscribed and alienating walls of these hospitals into a restless, changing and aggressive community, seething with turbulence, which struggles to adjust to the gathering speed of mechanization and the disrupting forces of a disordered society.
"Most of us are more experienced in the treatment of individuals than in correcting the pathological behavior of groups, though there may be an increasing tendency to seek our advice in these and related matters. For instance, the frightening implications of forcible indoctrination of individuals on the one level and communities on the other are closely related to our specialty. Yet almost paradoxically we are driven to consider as to whether modifications of such methods of indoctrination can be used in the treatment of some of the psychoses."
Foreshadowing his work on Martin Bryant, Dax continued: "In many of these fields, the {consideration of aggression is of the greatest importance. There is no more useful subject for research studies at the present time, whether it be in the individual or the group}.
Here, from the individual, the psychiatrist has much to learn. It may be that the aggression is turned inwards, ultimately resulting in suicide, outwards in homicide, or more specifically in hostility towards the community, in causing death on the road...
"Moreover many a murderer has the inability to postpone his strong emotional reactivity to thwarting, and this often has an association with a past history of repeated frustration of a variety with which he has been unable to deal.
Or again, the person who uses a motor car as an extension of his own aggressive body image may be using it in escaping from his anxieties and supposed rejection by the community. Yet it seems that none of these aggressive manifestations would be of the same magnitude were it not for the effect of alcohol. It releases these strains by depressing the inadequate control which spreads its thin veneer over the underlying aggression" (emphasis added).
Precisely these elements were to arise in the Martin Bryant case. In 1969, Dax left his prestigious, highly influential position in Melbourne to go to the backwater state of Tasmania, an island of some 300,000 people off Australia's southeast coast.
A prominent U.S. psychiatrist who specializes in ritual abuse, and who is intimately familiar with Australian psychiatry over the past three decades, when queried by this news service as to why in the world Dax would move to Tasmania, replied:
"Tasmania is the Appalachia of Australia. There is a lot of alcoholism, a lot of incest. It is the poorest of all the states, very primitive, with a lot of descendants from very violent criminals from the British days. You will find many people there with no value system, no super-ego.
"It is the perfect place for Manchurian candidates, and for all sorts of experiments. He could do whatever he wanted there."
Something of great interest must have been taking place in Tasmania, because two of Tavistock's leading international operatives, the Melbourne-based Dr. Alan Stoller, a past president of the World Federation of Mental Health and a close associate of John Rawlings Rees and of Dax, and Dr. John Bowlby, went to Tasmania for extended visits in 1971 and 1972, respectively.
Dax and Bryant -
From early childhood, Martin Bryant was a very disturbed individual, as British psychiatrist Paul Mullen could not help but record in his evaluation for the defense:
"Mr. Bryant was assessed on a number of occasions by psychologists and psychiatrists.... He was noted to be aggressive, destructive and very difficult with other children.... There are references to him stealing, to him having violent outbursts and to tormenting vulnerable children.... There are records of Mr. Bryant torturing and harassing animals and of tormenting his sister."
Bryant was notorious among his schoolmates for carrying a green can of gasoline, which he constantly threatened to pour on things and set them alight, as he once did so on himself. His schoolmates would frequently remark, "Here comes silly Martin with his can."
Before long, this behavior brought him to the attention of Dax, as Mullen noted: "In February 1984 Mr. Bryant was assessed by a very experienced clinical psychiatrist, Dr. Cunningham-Dax," an evaluation which set the parameters for all further treatment of Bryant.
Contacted by an American academic on April 16, 1997 about his evaluation of Bryant, Dax said, "I left Tasmania in 1983, I think it was, and I had seen him a few times before that, but I had no notes on him, except that I thought that he was below normal intellectually and that his father was very permissive about him. And I wondered about the boy, whether later he might have some schizophrenic features. But that is as far as I went."
Judging by the impact Bryant made on another psychiatrist who examined Bryant soon after, Dax was singularly unobservant. Dr. Ian Sale, psychiatrist for the prosecution, recalled in a discussion on April 16: "When he was about 16 or 17, he was examined by a government doctor for the purpose of a pension assessment. It was to that doctor that he made some reference to having a wish to {shoot people}. She still remembers that to this day" (emphasis added).
Dr. Sale noted that, not only did Dax have "no recall of the assessment," but that, "unfortunately, the clinical notes that were made, were destroyed," ostensibly because Dax "was practicing in the rooms of another psychiatrist. When that psychiatrist died, it was a provision of his will, that his notes be destroyed, apparently, which is remarkable.
And not only were his notes destroyed, but also Dr. Cunningham-Dax's notes were destroyed." The psychiatrist, Dr. T.H.G. Dick, was also British, and had served as Tasmania's medical commissioner beginning in 1969, the year Dax moved to Tasmania. Shortly after, Dax joined Dick on the Medical Advisory Committee to Tasmania's Mental Health Commission. Despite Dax's fascination with aggression, suicide, and murder, Dax claimed he knew very little about Bryant. And, when asked to comment on the relevance of his associate Emery's "theory of turbulence" for the Port Arthur events, Dax replied, guardedly, "I don't think I can answer your question usefully."
Emery himself died in early April 1997, and thus could not answer the question either. But, Dax said, "The person who knows a good deal more about Bryant is in the University of Tasmania, at the hospital there, the Royal Hobart. They did a good deal of study of Bryant at the time. Professor Jones is his name, but the person who knew more about him was the research person, who was particularly interested in Bryant."
Dr. Jones, who is British, and who, until his retirement, headed the two floors of Royal Hobart Hospital which are devoted to psychiatric studies, was unavailable for comment. -
What the police knew -
As well known as Bryant was to Tasmania's Tavistock networks, he was equally well known to the police--despite post-Port Arthur protestations to the contrary--as evidenced in the following:
1. He had repeatedly threatened to kill some of his neighbors in Tasmania, several of which incidents, at least, had been reported to the police.
2. On one of his frequent international flights, he had been arrested at Melbourne Airport on suspicion of being a drug courier, in part because he travelled without luggage; he was taken to the Royal Melbourne Hospital and examined before being released. On another occasion, pornographic videos depicting bestiality were found in his luggage. According to one police source interviewed by this news service, Bryant's police records indicated a profile of a "psychotic multiple killer."
3. That profile accorded well with what his neighbors thought of him, and not merely because of his frequent threats. There was intense suspicion among them that Bryant had murdered, first, his spinster friend and protector, wealthy heiress Helen Harvey, and then, then months later, his father, Maurice Bryant.
Eyewitnesses had seen Bryant wrench the steering wheel from Harvey while the two were out driving, and Harvey had told the mayor of Tasman Council, not long before the fatal car crash that killed her and seriously wounded Bryant, "Oh, he's a worry to me sometimes. He grabbed hold of the steering wheel coming down today, and nearly pulled me off the road, going silly. What would you do with him?"
On Aug. 16, 1993, Maurice Bryant was found, wearing weight belts, dead at the bottom of a dam on the property formerly owned by Harvey, which she had willed to Martin Bryant. Bryant had had numerous arguments with his father, who moved onto the property the same night that Harvey was killed; his son was particularly bitter that his father was getting rid of the menagerie that the younger Bryant and Harvey had collected. After his father had disappeared, {but before his body had been found}, Martin ran into neighbor Marian Larner outside the local hospital.
As Larner reported to the police shortly thereafter--who never questioned her further--Bryant had accosted her excitedly, grabbing her by the shoulders: "Oh, Marian, it's so exciting. So exciting!" She asked, "What are you talking about, Martin?" "Dad's at the bottom of the dam," he replied. "You'll hear all about it soon. You'll read all about it." And, when the elder Bryant's body was soon after pulled from the dam, "The searchers were amazed to see Martin walking back from the dam, laughing," according to a book about Bryant, {Suddenly One Sunday,} by local journalist Mike Bingham.
Several days before, another neighbor, John Featherstone, had run into strangers inquiring about a boat which a man named "Martin" had advertised for sale. When asked why he was selling the boat, Martin Bryant had told them that his father had just recently passed away. After recounting the incident to his wife, Featherstone told her, incredulously, "I saw Maurice just this morning!"
4. But, it was not only local police who noticed Bryant. In early 1994, on one of his trips to the United Kingdom, he checked into a hotel in Hereford, the super-sensitive home of Britain's elite Special Air Services (SAS). Bryant started acting so strangely, that the hotel management notified the police, who notified Interpol, which in turn put in inquiries to the police in Tasmania, who replied that his slate was clean.
The guy had military training -
Beyond all these and other run-ins with the police, which curiously never resulted in anything, still another anomaly is the obvious planning and skill which went into the commission of the mass murder itself--well beyond the capabilities of someone diagnosed as "borderline intellectually disabled," in the lowest 1-2% of Australia's population, and unable to manage his own affairs.
After reading Mullen's psychiatric evaluation, one of Australia's senior counter-terror experts, who had himself investigated the case, observed to this news service on the subject of Bryant ostensibly having learned all he knew about weaponry and tactics from "survival magazines":
"If this guy had weapons and survival skills from magazines, then that conflicts with his learning difficulties--how could he understand the books in the first place? Any decent lawyer would have a field day with this report. They could pick it to pieces. For a start, Bryant worked out the military aspects of the shooting. Most soldiers couldn't do that on their own, but Bryant did. What's more, he outsmarted the police by doubling back to the Seascape--that's not a low IQ.
"Then, look at the planning of the assault, the equipment required, the weapons stash, the most effective weapons to use, how much ammunition to take with him, how to use the weaponry, planning an escape route, creating havoc in multiple areas to keep the authorities guessing, and so on. Now, how could he have learned all that from books, with such a low IQ and poor reading skills? This guy had military training."
Tasmanian Deputy Commissioner Lupo Prins, who directed the overall police operation at Port Arthur on April 28, 1996, observed drily to {The New Citizen} in mid-April 1997, that Bryant had "set up six different areas of activity--he had police running in circles. That's pretty good for a guy who's a slow learner."
Prins also told the {Courier Mail} on April 28, 1997, that he believes Bryant "was playing out some pre-arranged script. What that script was, we don't know," because even though Bryant, unlike most mass murderers, did not commit suicide and was not killed, and thus "is able to tell the story ..., he hasn't. It's really frustrating."
That Bryant's actions, and even his very words, had been choreographed, was also the assessment of the man who dealt most closely with him, Sgt. Terry McCarthy, the police negotiator during the siege at Seascape. McCarthy recalled with some amazement how very calm Bryant, who was then calling himself "Jamie," was throughout the siege.
Author Mike Bingham interviewed McCarthy and summarized his observations in his book: McCarthy had "found that parts of his [Bryant's] conversation seemed prepared in advance, and it had become clear that some of what Bryant had done was extremely well planned."
And, as Bingham further recorded, in the observations of Broad Arrow kitchen supervisor Brigid Cook about Bryant: "The care that he took of himself struck her. He appeared to be having a fine time, a very exciting time, but he made sure there was no way he could be snuck up on." And, where did the well-trained Bryant get his military-style weapons?
In an interview with the {Herald Sun} on June 23, 1996, Victorian farmer and gun collector Bill Drysdale said that he had turned his Colt AR 15 in to the Victorian police in February 1993, but he was virtually certain that the AR 15 Bryant used was his, both because of the rarity of that weapon in Australia at the time, and because of the unique mark a gunsmith had made on the barrel of his rifle, which matched that on Bryant's rifle.
The serial numbers were almost identical, and "my rifle also had a collapsible stock and a Colt sight, just as the massacre weapon has," said Drysdale.
The {Herald Sun} noted, "One of Australia's largest firearms importers told the {Sunday Herald Sun} that firearms matching the Port Arthur weapon were as scarce as hen's teeth,' and that the chances of two weapons of the same type, with almost-matching serial numbers, being imported into Australia, were next to nothing.'|"
After an interview with police, Drysdale was ordered by them not to talk to reporters any further.
Why did the Tasmanian police repeatedly overlook Bryant's activities?
The chief police official for Tasmania until his recent retirement was Commissioner of Police John Johnson, who was also the head of the Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence. Johnson commanded the police team which carried out a 15-week investigation of the Port Arthur events, and somehow managed to miss all of the anomalies recorded above.
Who is Johnson?
Among other things, he was the first prominent Australian police official to call for the legalization of drugs, which he did in 1995. As a series of articles in the {The New Citizen} in 1996 demonstrated, those pushing the decriminalization of drugs in Australia--whose major funder is George Soros--are precisely those London-linked financial circles who are already benefitting from drug-money laundering.
Right after the Port Arthur investigation, Johnson retired, and has seemingly disappeared. Said a police source to {The New Citizen}, "You can't find him, because he doesn't intend to be found."
There are still other anomalies in the case, beyond Bryant's contacts with psychiatric networks and with the police.
Despite official pledges to "get to the bottom of the case, so such a tragedy would never happen again," all evidence about the case, including the psychiatric evaluations of Bryant, was ordered sealed by the judge.
In addition, an expose which had been produced by the TV show "Four Corners," on the Tasmanian Mental Health Department--which had had extensive contact with Bryant from the time he was a child--was suddenly cancelled, just before it was to air.
Then, several weeks after the Port Arthur massacre, 23-year-old Dion Garry Yost went on a shooting rampage in the Northern Territory town of Palmerston, in which he wounded one civilian and four police officers. Yost had attended, several years after Bryant had, the same Tasmanian high school! According to psychiatrists, Bryant modeled his murders, at least in part, on that of Thomas Hamilton's March 13, 1996 slaughter in Dunblane, Scotland, an act that horrified the world. Bryant's neighbors even said that he was in the U.K., on one of his many trips there, when Dunblane took place.
There, too, the "lone nut" Hamilton, a pedophile well known to police, had nonetheless been allowed to organize "Scouting clubs" all over Scotland. -
The Monarch Project -
The Tavistock-sponsored form of "blind terror" of which Bryant is an example, has the great advantage to its authors, that its programmed zombies almost invariably kill themselves, or are killed during the course of the events, leaving little or no evidence.
"One of the essential elements ... is they are looking to kill and be killed," as Mullen put it. Bryant stated that he was sure he would be killed; though he has not yet killed himself in prison--despite two attempts--prison authorities have publicly stated that they expect a fellow inmate to kill him.
Was Bryant programmed?
Perhaps hard-core programming was not necessary; given his psychological make-up, it may have been sufficient just to "steer" him. But, he did show signs of one known form of Tavistock brainwashing in which individuals can be programmed to kill, and then to kill themselves, as a "sub-routine" of Tavistock's MK-Ultra known as the Monarch Project. The best documentation on Monarch, although still sketchy, is provided in the second edition of former Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp's book, {The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism and Murder in Nebraska}.
One of DeCamp's clients, child-abuse victim Paul Bonacci, was a Monarch trainee, and has described in detail (not all of which DeCamp records in his book) some of the processes involved. These are much more sophisticated than the average psychiatrist is equipped either to recognize, or to treat.
Monarch, or related conditioning, leaves certain tell-tale signs in its victims:
1) Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD);
2) bizarre sexual behavior; and, frequently,
3) involvement in Satanic cult activity.
<
