_Links below ..
	The Broadarrow Cafe attack was a False Flag Co-Govt sponsored event ****BREAKING NEWS STORY**** .

---

SPECIAL EXCLUSIVE OFFER by SouthEast AsiaNews WEBSITE

For Immediate Release:- 24th January 2009

(SEANEWS-Australian Bureau - Sydney, NSW .)

Martin Bryant - The conveniant Patsy

 

Those people who still think Martin Bryant is guilty of Port Arthur... Really havent bothered to check the published facts to come to that conclusion. They have simply been misled by a compliant media industry into forming that opinion.

Since the departure of the research juggernaut: Joe Vialls in Sept 2005 and after consulting with Joe Vialls wife as to the future of his website and his research I personally offered to host the Vialls.com website and continue Joes research work.

 

His wife did not want to sell any more books, collect anymore donations, or be involved in the research any further. She did however authorise the release of his material TO ANYONE with a GENUINE interest in Joe Vialls research and as such we are offering our readers a chance to get the book FREE OF CHARGE as an electronic download in .zip file.

 

 

ANYONE who would like a FREE copy please email us with a valid reason why you would like a copy and we will assess it and send it to your email address.

 

send to:

feedback@southeastasianews.org

And please give a brief reason why you would like to read Joe Vialls amazing research book: A deadly deception at Port Arthur

 

Those that haven't quite read up on the subject and would like to, are welcome to read more:

http://southeastasianews.org/portarthur/index.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------

NY SHOOTINGS ADD WEIGHT TO VIALLS INVESTIGATIONS

At 12.40AM on the 4th Feb 1999 in New York City, four plain clothes police officers accidently shot an unarmed black man on the stoop of his building as he reached for his wallet. The police mistook the man's action as reaching for a gun and fired 41 shots from a distance of about 12 ft (3 meters) with 9mm semiautomatic pistols each holding 16 bullets in the magazine. The man, Amadou Diallo, died from gunshot wounds after being hit only 19 times.

If the NY Police are such lousy shots perhaps they should try to find the real Port Arthur shooter to give them some lessons. Read why Martin Bryant couldn't have been the shooter at Port Arthur.

 

"Throughout history - it has been true that the lone assassin has been behind many mass killings. But in recent times he has also been not so alone.......governments and intelligence agencies have been known to prey on and use simple and sometimes ill people to massacre innocent victims in order to gain greater control of the masses. Investigative journalist Joe Vaills has painstakingly put together the evidence that the young man, Martin Bryant, did not, if at all, act alone during the murderous rampage at Tasmania's Port Arthur......in fact according to the video evidence, this was physically impossible."The Strategy

---

The following is the entire works of Joe Vialls, an independent investigator with thirty years direct experience of international military and oil field operations. I have been given written permission by Mr Vialls to publish this unedited information on this site in the interests of justice. However if you are not a fair minded person and refuse to believe anything but what you have already read in the pulp fiction tabloids then my advice is to click onto another page now because what follows is not a fiction story, these are facts based on scientific investigations from which you can draw your own conclusions, as I have. If you have any further queries on this investigation please contact the author direct -
Joe Vialls
45 Merlin Drive,
Carine,
Western Australia, 6062

---

BRYANT - PROFESSIONAL OR PATSY

In early 1984, policewoman Yvonne Fletcher was murdered while on duty outside the Libyan Embassy in London. From the moment she was shot, the media misled the British public into believing that Fletcher had been shot by the Libyans, who were subsequently expelled from the country in a fanfare of negative publicity.

It was not until 1995 that this author managed to prove by entirely scientific means that WPC Fletcher could not have been shot from the Libyan Embassy at all, but was shot from the top floor of a nearby building staffed by American multinational personnel.

Was the massacre in Port Arthur a completely spontaneous act carried out by a single nut-case with unbelievable efficiency, or was it a repeat of Yvonne Fletcher's callous murder, deliberately designed to distort public perception and direct maximum hatred against a particular group of people? All of the available hard scientific evidence suggests that it was.

When investigating cases like Yvonne Fletcher's murder or the massacre at Port Arthur it is critically important to adhere to scientific proof and avoid eyewitness accounts and media hype like the Black Plague. Eyewitnesses do not lie intentionally, but as any honest psychologist will tell you the accuracy of their testimony is limited by many factors including stress, suggestive police interrogators, and peer pressure.

The more controversial the case the higher the need for absolute scientific proof, because if the investigation reaches a conclusion which conflicts with the officially accepted story, the media will attempt to trash the credibility of the investigator himself, who in these two cases happens to be me. For four years while investigating the murder of Yvonne Fletcher I was gently harassed, visited by members of British Intelligence from London, cordially invited to sign the Official Secrets Act, then threatened when I refused to comply.

Some readers might wonder why I am including so much detail about a murder in London when this story is supposed to be about Port Arthur. Well, it is about Port Arthur, but there are a number of disturbing similarities between the two cases, especially in terms of media behavior at the time of each atrocity, and the use of faked video footage to reinforce the official story of the day. So please bear with me for a few paragraphs.

In 1992 when I first decided to investigate WPC Fletcher's murder, the most serious obstacle I encountered was the British media, who for nearly a decade had knowingly nurtured a lie so horrific that it almost defeats the imagination. Yvonne Fletcher, they claimed, was murdered by a low velocity bullet fired from the Libyan Embassy located behind her on her left-hand side, with the gunman firing downwards from a first floor window at an angle of fifteen degrees. As any amateur can confirm, that means the bullet entered the left side of WPC Fletcher's back at a shallow angle of fifteen degrees and then continued through her body tissue towards the right- hand side of her body. Right? Wrong... The bullet entered WPC Fletcher's upper right back at sixty degrees then sliced down through her rib cage, turning her vital organs into a bloody pulp before exiting her body below the left rib cage.

With Yvonne Fletcher's exact position recorded by a television camera when the shots were fired there was no room for doubt. It was an absolute scientific impossibility for that shot to have been fired from the Libyan Embassy, and the steep angle of entry of the bullet limited the firing point to one floor of only one building: the top floor of Enserch House, an American multinational building staffed by personnel with documented links to the American CIA. Without the critical video footage from the television camera I would never have been able to prove how she was killed or by who, but fortunately for me the footage still existed in 1992, and television cameras are inanimate objects incapable of lying. If proof appears to exist on video there are only two possibilities: the scientific truth, or deliberately faked video footage shown to the public for special effects or in an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

Interestingly and with profound implications for Port Arthur, fake video footage was put to air by the BBC "for the first time ever" many months after Yvonne Fletcher's murder, in what appeared to be an attempt to cement the lies and calculated deceptions about her death forever in the minds of the British public. The public failed to ask why this apparently critical footage had not been presented at the coronial inquest into Yvonne Fletcher's death: which it was not, but fell hook, line and sinker for the blurred images and sound track, which apparently recorded eleven sub-machine gun shots being fired from the Libyan Embassy. The amateur footage run by the BBC in 1985 was given to one of its reporters by a member of the Metropolitan police force.

During 1995 I used the immutable laws of astronomy and physics to prove the amateur footage a total fake. Analysis of the angle and position of the sun's shadow falling across the front of the Libyan Embassy was checked using astro-navigation techniques and direct reference to the Greenwich Observatory, Britain's foremost authority on times and dates derived from the sun- line, a technique used for centuries to tell the time with great accuracy using garden sun-dials. Unfortunately for the BBC who broadcast the amateur footage "for the first time ever", absolute science proved the sun-line on the amateur footage incorrect for 10.19 am on the 17th April 1984, the time and date on which Yvonne Fletcher was murdered. Indeed, the scientific evaluation proved the amateur footage was not even filmed on the same day Yvonne Fletcher was shot. Those who created that fake footage and then broadcast it were not engaged in a mere media re-interpretation of events, but were accessories after the fact to the murder of an unarmed English policewoman doing her duty on a London street.

After four long years of research and investigation designed to expose the real truth of what happened that day, and after as consultant to the responsible film-maker, Britain's Channel Four aired part of my scientific proof in a special edition of "Dispatches" , its flagship current affairs program, on the 10th April 1996. Unfortunately, three months earlier the film-maker became incredibly agitated about my absolute scientific proof from Greenwich that the amateur footage was faked, removed me from the production process of a film based on my own copyright story, barred me from the film credits and then incorporated the fake footage as a legitimate part of the film, minus the incriminating sun-line, which proved in absolute scientific terms that what British television was putting to air for a second time since 1985 was totally false and deliberately misleading!

It became swiftly apparent, that although the media was prepared to throw tiny scraps of truth to the public, gross deceptions, especially those generated by erstwhile colleagues in the form of fake video footage designed to manipulate public opinion, were strictly off limits. So it is on the subject of fake video footage and its potential for incredible impact on the viewing public that we finally turn to Port Arthur. Some readers may by now be shifting uneasily in their seats, racking their brains and wondering exactly when and where it was that they were also suddenly shown amateur footage "for the first time ever" on television in Australia.

It was on a Wednesday in October 1996, the night before Martin Bryant was due to be sentenced for his alleged role in the Port Arthur massacre. ....

Many months after the massacre took place, but only hours before the Tasmanian judge was due to make a decision that would effect Martin Bryant for the rest of his life, an Australian TV network suddenly presented the public (and of course the judge) with dramatic amateur video footage shown "for the first time ever".

 

The reporter told us the man on the video was Martin Bryant on the day of the massacre, going about his business of slaughtering the good people of Tasmania, caught on camera by interested amateur photographers who seemed unmoved by the dangers of high-velocity bullets. Unlike most of the other survivors, these folk did not run away, but hunkered down like battle-hardened war correspondents coverings the end of World War II from an unprotected thoroughfare in the middle of Berlin.

 

They were also very discreet the day after the massacre, when the world's tabloid media descended on Port Arthur like a pack of ravenous dogs, snapping and growling for any picture they could get hold of in order to meet their respective deadlines in London and New York.

At that point in time the "amateur footage" was worth half a million bucks no questions asked, for this was a world media event and no-one had any pictures. Perhaps the amateur photographers had no need for huge amounts of cash, or perhaps at that early stage their footage had not yet been fully prepared, which was certainly the case after Yvonne Fletcher's murder in London. The amateur footage run by the Australian network in October 1996 was given to one of its reporters by a member of the Tasmanian police force.

 

Read More....

and:

This From NED WOOD:

 

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.

 

Read More...

 

MARTIN BRYANT - A convenient patsy

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 The Broad Arrow Cafe now 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 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, 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!

 

Read More....

THE PORT ARTHUR FACTS :

A 1/2 hr. before the incident, the area's two policemen receive an anonymous call on a drug stash, and drive 25 miles to Saltwater River.

Police initially reported that there were two gunmen at Seascape.

The massacre and the shooter had a military appearance. The shooter did 20 head shots in a short time, shooting from the hip - he reloaded his second clip with one round left.

The gun was a rare Israeli commando model, CAR 15.

Witnesses couldn't identify the shooter.

Jim Laycock was co-owner of the Port Arthur Motel knew Bryant for 15 yrs, and said it wasn't him. The gun was destroyed in a Mossad technique.

Reporters Conference

There were 700 reporters at a convention in Hobart, and 80 came to Port Arthur the next day.

 

There was no motive.

People with intellectual disabilities are not known for their tactical skills. Moving from one task to the next in an unbroken sequence takes precision.

Only a professional would wait until the coast was clear before leaving the Cafe. Fired from hip -20 head shots - reloaded on 29 (keeps one in chamber ) - shoots and waits few minutes for crowd to disperse.

Where did he get the guns

One month earlier he went to Terry Smith's gun shop with a similar gun. He had a phony gun license and no knowledge of even cocking or loading a gun. Smith refused to sell to him.

The gun, tactics and precision were that of a military team.

When asked about the crime scene a Australian commando commented : .. "Only Jews kill like that"

Why abandon his Volvo and take the BMW with a hostage ?

Wendy Scurr

A nurse at Port Arthur, that called the police 3 minutes after the shooting started.

She states the police are distorting the timelines, and changing facts. Evidence was planted and questions went unanswered.

Andrew MacGregor

A retired policeman, author, and speaker, who spent years investigating the massacre, feels it was a calculated preplanned operation.

 

MacGregor's CDROM

The final shootout occurs at the Seascape cottage, and he says there were two shooters, the second possibly being a Bryant's controller.

Stewart Beattie

A retired Australian gunsmith, who is a prolific writer, and investigator, on the Port Arthur Massacre. He anonymously received the official video tape of the scene. His detailed timeline.

 

Howard and his Zionist handlers wanted gun laws

John Howard

Howard is a liberal that panders to Australia's 140,000 Jews. Rupert Murdoch, who controls the newspapers, put him in power.

Jews have always wanted an gun ban - Howard rushed the most draconian one in history through in 2 weeks.

The legislation banned 80% of all firearms, set up a national registration and confiscated present guns

The Australian Gun Lobby

Rebecca Peters, a 42 yr old lawyer heads up the 'National Coalition for Gun Control', based in Sydney. Like Joe Vialls, she is another 'Johnny on the Spot' . Bankrolled by Jewish financier George Soros, and now is in Argentina.

NCGC even has Hobart Branch

NCGC has a branch in Hobart, Tasmania, headed up there by lawyer Roland Browne. His group was meeting the afternoon of the Port Arthur massacre, and showed at the Hobart Police briefing within the hour.

Bryant's history

Bryant was a 29 yr old with an IQ of 60. At his house they found 200 teddy bears.

His father died when he was a young boy and he lived with a Helen Harvey - a rich, middle-aged eccentric heiress and when she dies he gets house and $ 500,00

 

Court Psychiatrist

Dr Mullen stated: " Bryant didn't fit the profile. He had a stable childhood. mass murderers are troubled, financially insecure, aggressive and alcohol or drug abusers.

The exception is Columbine, which involved two Jewish kids and the ADL "

 

Dr Foreman - Author

They fit in three categories - family annihilators, the paramilitary enthusiasts, and the disgruntled workers.

Most shoot themselves and no one surrendered like Bryant.

 

 

 

 

There is reason to think the Port Arthur massacre was planned as early 1987 when, after a specially called Premier's meeting in Hobart in December 1987, the New South Wales Labour Premier, Mr. Barry Unsworth stated, "there would be no effective gun control in Australia until there was a massacre in Tasmania"

On Sunday, 28 April 1996, at a sleepy little tourist location known as Port Arthur, something went down that will long live in memory of Australia's collective psyche.  An unknown professional combat shooter opened fire in the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur in Tasmania. In less than a minute 20 people lay dead, 19 of them killed with single shots to the head, fired from the right hip of the fast-moving shooter. 

The awesome display of combat marksmanship was blamed on intellectually impaired Martin Bryant, who was held in illegal strict solitary confinement for more than 120 days, until he was "ready" to plead guilty. There was no trial. Within a matter of weeks legislation was passed to removed semi-automatic weapons from the Australian population and a gun buy-back proceeded. It is now illegal to own any semi-automatic gun in Australia.

The Port Arthur Massacre has come to be known in conspiracy circles as a "psyop". The definition of a psyop is a psychological operation or an event designed to drum up public support for some piece of legislation that would be otherwise be unpopular and probably be defeated. 

It is one of the signs of a propaganda campaign when the media continuously plays up scenes that are designed to appeal to gut level instincts to soften people up for the solution to be offered.  

The media were totally oriented around sensationalising the distress and trauma, played the scenes over and over, always cutting to updates on any developments and in effect the public were bombarded continuously day in and day out for weeks over the issue. At the same time a long list of facts or discrepancies were overlooked. Any calls for a royal commission fell on deaf ears, the media were later instructed not to talk about the subject anymore and the files have been closed for 30 years.

The Port Arthur massacre occurred on 28 April there was legislation prepared by mid May with plans for a national buyback of automatic and semi-automatic rifle

 

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Download Good quality .wmv file

 

This Site and its content Copyright Unless otherwise specified.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

LAST Update: 1st September 2009

 

 

 

*(US illegal invasion based on over 900 lies by Whitehouse officials)

 

DISCLAIMER:

The content on this site is for education and information research purposes, we are not responsible for the content as we may or may not either agree nor disagree with the opinions and writings herein. The onus therefore lies upon the individual to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

webmaster@southeastasianews.org

 

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Southeast Asia News has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Southeast Asia News endorsed or sponsored by the originator.