Australian Broadcasting Corporation perpetuates the Port Arthur massacre myth

by investigative journalist and editor-at-large Gil Hanrahan

The ABC has been caught out acting as an agent of government perpetuating the lies and terrible media misinformation that surrounds the Port Arthur massacre where 35 people allegedly were killed by a lone shooter, Martin Bryant.

For 22 years the ABC and other mainstream media have been paramount in manipulating the true story of Port Arthur, how a drill turned into a massacre which has been covered up at the highest levels of government.

ABC Hobart journalist Fiona Blackwood was either under instruction or did not bother to do any basic research when she claimed Martin Bryant shot Peter Croswell, instead perpetuating the now thoroughly discredited line that intellectually impaired Bryant was the shooter.

This week the Tasmania Liberal Party Government, in election mode, announced it will free up the stringent provisions of the state’s firearms laws enacted by all states after the Port Arthur event in 1996.

The  Liberals have proposed changes to gun laws which would give farm workers and sporting shooters greater access to category C weapons, including pump-action shotguns, self-loading rifles and silencers.

The usual cries of horror by the media and now a survivor of the shooting, are screaming foul that the laws should not be tampered with and left alone.

Port Arthur shooting survivor Peter Croswell does not want any changes made to gun laws by the Tasmania Liberals should they win today’s state election.

The excerpt below from an ABC news transcript released on March 2, 2018, clearly shows how a manipulative journalist, Fiona Blackwood, has inferred Port Arthur victim Peter Croswell was shot by Martin Bryant.

“…survivor Peter Crosswell said he would be devastated if Tasmania’s gun laws were weakened in any way.

Mr Crosswell was shot by Martin Bryant while lying on the ground trying to protect two women.

He was one of the few people to survive the shooting massacre inside the Broad Arrow Cafe at the convict-era tourism site at Port Arthur in 1996, later being awarded a bravery medal for his actions.

“After Port Arthur, there was a lot of work put in by a lot of people, a lot of people were in a great deal of pain then, to get these gun laws in place,” Mr Croswell said….”

Nowhere in the ABC article was Mr Croswell directly quoted as saying Martin Bryant shot him.

Thanks to expatriate Australian, now Austrian-based investigative journalist and author Keith Noble, his hallmark work MASS MURDER: Official Killing in Tasmania, Australia (2nd edition; 2014) reveals a great deal about the massacre the Federal Government would not like published in the news media.

Indeed on April 28,1996, the same day he was shot Mr Croswell was shown a number of photos including one of Martin Bryant and in his statement told police:


DATE:          28 April 1996 (same day as incident)

CONCERNS: “At this point a male person stood up. He yelled out something like ‘No No Not Here.’ I then saw the gun­man shoot this guy in the head.” &
“I didn’t move but I could see his sandshoes across the floor.” &“I then saw a yellow car of some description leave the car park.”


DATE:          1 July 1996 (63 days after incident)

CONCERNS: “…long shoulder length blonde hair.” &

                    “I do however remember that he was carrying a long bag when he came into the restaurant. The bag appeared to be heavy.” &

                    “I have been shown a photograph identification board by Detective GHEDINI which consisted of thirty (30) photo­ graphs of male persons. I am unable to identify any of these males as being responsible for the shootings in­ side the Broad Arrow Café.”

A footnote by author Keith Noble identifies the man who stood up in the Broad Arrow café when the shooting started:

“This witness(Peter Crosswell) was wounded inside the café. To his credit and that of witnesses Pamelia (sic) Law and Thelma Walker who were with Crosswell, none of them identified Martin Bryant as the gunman. It would have been easy for them to say it was Martin. They all saw the gunman, but they all stated the truth – they did not see Martin Bryant. Thank you. The person this witness saw get shot inside the cafe, the person who called out “No No Not Here,” is believed to be Anthony Nightingale, a suspected intelligence agent. (see INDEX)”

The news clip from ABC archives shows Mr Croswell in hospital, but his narrative does not mention Martin Bryant.

This is the depth of depravity into which our mainstream media will prostitute themselves to keep the real truth from the public.

We could make excuses for the ABC journalist as she would have been a young girl at the time of Port Arthur, however she was either under instruction or had not bothered to do any basic research about the events of that fateful day at one of Tasmania’s iconic convict outposts.

NOTE: Cairns News does not in any way suggest Peter David Croswell is involved in a cover-up of the actual events at Port Arthur, then or now. Major amendments to Australia’s costly, unworkable and ineffective gun laws are long overdue consequently the Cairns News editorial board wishes the Tasmania Liberal Party all the best for the election and sincerely hopes it can retain government. Read our archives for more in-depth investigations of this tragic event. There you will discover a photograph and the names of the real shooters, as well as the true reason why the President of the Australian senate was forced to quit Parliament last year.

This is the link to the current ABC story:


About Editor, cairnsnews

One of the few patriots left who understand the system and how it has been totally subverted under every citizen's nose. If we can help to turn it around we will otherwise our children will have nothing. Our investigations show there is no 'government' of the people for the people of Australia. The removal of the Crown from Australian Parliaments, followed by the incorporation of Parliaments aided by the Australia Act 1987 has left us with corporate government with policies not laws, that apply only to members of political parties and the public service. There is no law, other than the Common Law. This fact will be borne out in the near future as numerous legal challenges in place now, come to a head this year.

Posted on March 3, 2018, in ABC, General, gun control, Gun Control Australia, guns, Liberal Party of Australia, mythmanagement, Port Arthur, Roland Browne, SSAA, United Nations. Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. This stinks….Martin Bryant had a very LOW IQ and his MOM SWEARS THAT HE IS INNOCENT..I tend to believe this .
    At the time John Howard needed a patsy to force his GUN LAWS through parliament…
    GOD help Australia …as the circus in Canberra won’t….

  2. Irene Shankis

    It is a long time since I read such biased propaganda.

  3. I have read several reports on this case and each one tends to reinforce my view that Martin Bryant was indeed a patsy. There are so many bits of conflicting evidence and strange behaviour from the defence lawyers that I find it difficult to believe a jury would convict him.

  4. this is absolutely rubbish this whole scam about Port Arthur needs to come out and all the cockroaches needs to be prosecuted and locked up for a long time. people need to be told the truth about this whole event and they need to wake up it was a false flag from start to finish to disarm the Australian people so there was no push back again this whole NWO socialist/Communist agenda. Call your state senators your elected employee’s and hold their feet to the fire and hold them accountable.


    In his witness statement given on 28APR1996, Peter David Crosswell (spelt Croswell in other places) states this in relation to the gunman who he saw up close in the Broad Arrow Café at the Port Arthur Historic Site: “I didn’t move but I could see his sandshoes across the floor.” Mr. Crosswell who was wounded in that café has the reputation of being a decent person – a truth teller, not a liar. He was one of several eyewitnesses who saw the gunman and who stated that person was not Martin Bryant. Note that the only eyewitness (James Clement Laycock) who personally knew Martin Bryant BEFORE the incident clearly states in his witness statement (10MAY1996) that the gunman he saw was not Martin Bryant.

    The following is an extract from the book MASS MURDER: Official Killing in Tasmania, Australia (2nd edition; 2014; n.23, p.388): “At least two other witnesses have said the gunman was wearing a soft type of footwear commonly referred to as runners, trainers, or sandshoes. But it gets complicated when two facts are raised: i. The alleged gunman was said to have been wearing lace-up boots before the shooting on that Sunday (see Kessarios); and, ii. The alleged gunman was said to be wearing Blundstone-type* boots during the incident, at the tollbooth specifically. (see Rabe) So how could this be? If there was only one gunman, it means he must have put on three different types of footwear and one of those times must have been inside the yellow Volvo, between the parking lot and the tollbooth. Why? To create uncertainty perhaps. Or, were there two people the subject of these different footwear sightings? (* Quality boot made by Tasmanian company Blundstone which did not make runners/sandshoes/sneakers in and prior to 1996.)”

    It is this type of evidence, given by many witnesses in their statements (see extracts in the book MASS MURDER), which confirms again and again that there is so much REASONABLE DOUBT associated with the case, that only unthinking sheeple, corrupt officials, and the complicit barristers (all of whom are officers of the court) in Tasmania say otherwise. And because there are so many truthful facts which disprove the allegations of the State, the innocent and retarded (IQ66) Martin Bryant was coerced and mentally tortured for over six months after which he repeated what the convicted criminal lawyer John Avery pressured him to say – then he was locked away FOREVER WITH NO TRIAL – repeat, FOREVER WITH NO TRIAL. Note that a hearing in a courthouse or anywhere else is not a trial. And also note that scum Avery was supposed to defend Martin Bryant. But all Avery did was pressure him relentlessly to repeat Avery’s plea of guilty. The truth is, Martin Bryant never had any ethical legal representation at any time and he was unable to engage another lawyer because the State had confiscated all his assets – his money and his home. That is what you are to accept as justice in Australia. The State accused innocent Martin Bryant of so much – yet, it was unwilling (and unable) to prove one single thing against him in a sound trial conducted by an ethical judge. Martin was the doomed PATSY.

    There is no hard evidence proving Martin Bryant was the gunman or one of the gunmen. For example, not a single fingerprint was ever presented as proof of Martin Bryant’s involvement in the massacre. It is known with absolute certainty from the witness statements and from a police video that the gunman handled food-related things and a tray inside the café and that he left a video camera on a café table. All these things would have been covered with his fingerprints – obviously not Martin Bryant’s or we would have heard about them. The officlal narrative of the Port Arthur Massacre is grossly corrupt – in the Australian vernacular, it is complete bull! free pdf copies of the 694pp. book MASS MURDER: Official Killing in Tasmania, Australia (2nd edition 2014), of 20 YEARS CORRUPTION, DECEPTION, LIES, of CLASSIC KANGAROO COURT CASE, and of INTERNATIONAL MEDIA RELEASE (relates to that embalmer, ex-cop, and ex-senator Stephen Parry who has confirmed – in writing – prior knowledge of the massacre) are available from & There is no copyright on any of these documents.

  6. It seems that you Aussies have a similar problem as do we Yanks. Stateside, it is being called the government media complex. Much misinformation and disinformation is put out by the media, really propaganda in many instances.

    Just remember there are 3 forms of a lie: spreading falsehoods, suppressing or burying truths, and trafficking in half truths. The media does all 3 here in the US, and I bet they do the same down under.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s