Category Archives: Port Arthur

Amendments to Tasmania’s gun laws go before a committee

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has written to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull asking for him to intervene before Tasmania’s re-elected Liberal Government frees up the State’s gun laws.

Two days before the Tasmania election, the Liberals dropped a grenade – that if they won government they would amend the tough and ineffective laws to allow farmers and sporting shooters access to semi-auto rifles and shotguns.

However the Liberal Government had been in secret discussions with farming groups and the shooting lobby for six weeks prior to the election.

The glaring elephant in the room, is the bona fides of the Port Arthur massacre. The people’s court after dissecting the overwhelming evidence  to the contrary has decided Martin Bryant did not shoot any person at the Broad Arrow Café – he was miles away at the time of the shooting. His mother and two other witnesses who knew Martin confirmed this fact with investigators yet none was called to give evidence to Tasmania Police.

Soon to be deposed Opposition Leader,Bill Shorten (Shortbrains) has asked PM Turnbull to intervene over sensible and much-needed changes to Tasmania’s gun laws, promised before the election on March 3.

The so-called National Firearms Agreement has no effect in law, it is only an agreement between the States because the Commonwealth cannot legislate firearms law for the States.

If any State wishes to amend their respective gun laws they can do so with impunity. When the Queensland National Party Government in 1997 said it would not enact the pre-packaged gun laws presented by the Federal Government, PM John Howard threatened to withhold Commonwealth money from the State.

The Nationals leader Rob (Bubbles) Borbidge buckled and pushed the new laws through Parliament.

Shorten, soon to be deposed by Anthony Albanese, is barking up the wrong tree, because the Tasmania Liberals can tell him to go to hell where he belongs.

Likewise Turnbull would be a fool to intervene, but in any case there is nothing he can do. Premier Will Hodgman needs all the support he can get. Cairns News urges Tasmanian readers to phone Will Hodgman and give him support over the proposed changes to the gun laws.

He should take notice because it was the gun lobby which got his government over the line.

Yesterday, after the usual pressure from the ABC, Mr Hodgman said the amendments would be put before a committee to examine the effects and if they would contravene the national agreement.

Advertisements

Gun lobby propels Tasmania Liberals back into power

The Tasmanian Liberal Party has won another four-year term, holding government after Saturday’s election.

The best news emanating post-election is the stunning loss of two Greens seats, leaving a lone member. Greens leader of herself, Cassy O’Connor is a racist zealot and after hearing her losing speech on Saturday night, one could be forgiven for thinking she is a few sheep short in the pen.

O’Connor, resplendent with arm tattoos looking like a spokesman for the local chapter of Hells Angels, moaned-on how she wanted to give all of Tasmania to the blackfellas. Poor blackfella me was the gist of her tirade, after which she attracted three clappers from the mildly attentive Greens throng assembled at the electoral commission headquarters.

Sole surviving Tasmania Greens member Cassy O’Connor wanted to give Tasmania to the blackfellas. She can’t understand why the Greens vote dropped to less than 10 per cent 

Miss O’Connor probably doesn’t know that Trugannini was the last, real indigenous woman to live in Tasmania. She died in 1876. There have been a few imposters and interlopers since but history has it; there were no Tasmanian blackfellas alive after 1876.

Like all of Miss O’Connor’s diatribe, this part remains a mystery as to which blackfellas she wanted to give Tasmania.

Predictably, after losing 28 straight opinion polls embattled Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has claimed some of the credit.

He has to gain some accolades from somewhere, self-aggrandisement or not.

Not all election analysists have lost sight of the bolstering effect of the shooter’s vote which gave the Liberals victory.

Two days before the election a smart operator dropped a grenade; the Libs would overhaul the ineffective and costly gun laws adopted by the apple isle after Martin Bryant was framed for the Port Arthur massacre in 1996.

The mainland Liberals and Labor had better take a lesson from this most astute Premier and the gun lobby. Will Hodgman is a presentable, seemingly honest and smart politician the likes of which are sadly lacking in every other state.

We won’t go near federal parliament.

The rest is history.

Patsy Martin Bryant rots in jail while the Tasmanian Liberals promise to free-up gun laws

Author Keith Noble, of ‘Mass Murder; official killing in Tasmania’  has published the most complete record of the Port Arthur massacre scam available in the world today. Below Mr Noble gives an up-to-date analysis of the case.

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.

Austrian author Keith Noble’s acclaimed work on the Port Arthur massacre which has left patsy Martin Bryant rotting in Tasmania’s Risdon jail.

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 official 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 martinbryantisinnocent@gmail.com & bigwormbooks@gmx.net) There is no copyright on any of these documents.

Note: Now based in Austria, Mr Noble has written other books about government-sponsored murder including the disappearance of Peter Falconio near Barrow Creek in the Northern Territory in 2001. Bradley Murdoch was eventually convicted of Falconio’s murder. Keith Noble says the NT police grabbed Murdoch after a hopelessly compromised and bungled investigation including a dodgy statement from girlfriend Joanna Lees then charged him for the murder without ever finding a body.

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:

WITNESS:   CROSSWELL, Peter David

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.”

WITNESS:   CROSSWELL, Peter David

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:  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-02/port-arthur-survivor-plea-over-tasmanian-liberals-gun-laws/9503356

Howard’s gun laws created thousands of unregistered guns to control the streets

At a conference in the Whitehouse last week survivors and families of those students and teachers shot at the Parkland, Florida school were pushing Donald Trump to tighten up gun laws.

One student told the President that Australia’s gun laws were a model for the world. This poor fella had been seriously misinformed. A reader kindly prepared a timeline of gun related deaths across Australia AFTER PM Johnnie Howard and Deputy Tim Fischer’s stringent new gun laws came into effect. It speaks for itself and shows how misleading the Australian media can be.

Cairns News does not support individual gun registration because of its inaccuracy, enormous cost for little benefit and inconvenience for all gun owners.

Turnbull wisely declines to help Trump change US gun laws

Turnbull well knows Australians will not tolerate any more harsh gun laws. He is keeping out of the US situation. For once a smart move in spite of the horrible school shootings.

 by Gil Hanrahan

 Malcolm Turncoat says Australian gun laws work. He is such an idiot he has no idea armed crime escalated dramatically after we lost our guns in 1997 and began the arduous and often inaccurate task of individual gun registration. Industry estimated there were more than 1 million Chinese SKK and SKS semi auto 7.62x39mm assault rifles imported into Australia between the early 80’s and the 90’s. In 1997, although the figures were not officially released, industry was able to determine that approximately 19,000  military semi-auto rifles were handed in across the country, which includes SKK’s. There is much anecdotal evidence over the years to suggest the remainder of these firearms went underground. However a number reportedly went to Papua New Guinea in the guns for drugs trade, some went with Air America (CIA) from Australian airports to Ibero Americas as cargo with their drugs.

More than 1 million of these Chinese semi-auto SKK assault rifles allegedly were imported into Australia 25 years ago.

Many thousands have been buried or securely stashed away across Australia. Anecdotal evidence would suggest these SKK’s and any other secreted guns will re-appear when corporate government finally collapses(not far away) or should Indonesia get any ideas of territorial expansion to the south.

 Cairns News has sent Donald Trump a brief about the Port Arthur scam, which eerily, has striking, parallels to the last week’s Florida school shootings. Student eye-witnesses reported at least two shooters and one girl interviewed by local television said there were three shooters and that she walked down a corridor when evacuating the school with the alleged shooter Nicholas Cruz, who did not have any guns with him.

 Make what you like from these interviews but the student narrative  is diametrically opposed to the official version. Even Trump in his first tweet was wary of crisis actors who follow these alleged massacres from site to site.

Australians were disarmed on a terrible lie, but most Yanks and the gutsy National Rifle Association will never fall for it. What a crying shame we don’t have any shooters’ representative bodies in Australia with any guts at all! Only the Shooters and Fishermens political party comes close but has backed away on gun registration.

Katters Australian Party has not wavered over the past five years in its fight to dismantle individual firearm registration, which it says is too costly, somewhat inaccurate and ineffective and ties up too many operational police officers.

 Footnote: We apologise we used the Queensland figure of 4000 handed in instead of the 19,000 handed in nationally.

 

Too many questions over Florida shooting official narrative

By Aaron Kesel

Activist Post  

Port Arthur parallells

Anytime a shooting happens, it’s a tragic event whether it was a false flag or a legitimate mass shooting by a lunatic; but just because people died doesn’t mean we shouldn’t question the veracity of the events reported. Here are 5 reasons why you should question the recent shooting and remain vigilant.

  1. There was a drill planned the day of the shooting.

Coincidentally, earlier on the day of the shooting, teachers at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School were told there would soon be a ‘code red’ or ‘lockdown’ drill, to practice their response to an immediate threat, Miami Herald reported.

  1. The shooter claims he heard “demonic voices.”

Alleged shooter Nikolas Cruz. Three eyewitnesses claim there were three shooters. Armed policeman/security guard on grounds at the time of shooting did not see or hear shooters

The shooter Nikolas Cruz is claiming to have heard “demonic voices,” like previous mass shooting suspects – Sirhan Sirhan, Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, David Chapman,  Jared Loughner, Aaron Alexis or any of the other shooters who heard strange voices before carrying out their acts of horror, according to Daily Mail. (See this writer’s article: “I HEAR VOICES: MKUltra? A Worrying Trend Of Mass Shooting Suspects Throughout History Before Committing Horrific Murders.”)

  1. The shooter arrived in an Uber and left the scene blending into the crowd then peacefully surrendered.

Cruz, who is alleged to suffer from autism, depression and other significant psychological problems according to his legal team, arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in an Uber ride. He then opened fire at the school, shooting into rooms 1215, 1216, 1214 … he then went back into 1216, 1215 and then to 1213 according to his arrest affidavit.

“The suspect then took the west stairwell to the second floor and shot one victim in room 1234 on the second floor. The suspect then took the east stairwell to the third floor … he then dropped his rifle and backpack containing extra ammunition and ran down the stairs … exiting building 12 and ran toward the tennis courts,” the affidavit continued.

“The suspect then arrived at a Walmart store and bought a drink at the Subway and left the Walmart on foot.”

According to the police timeline, he arrived at Walmart at 2:50 p.m.

“The suspect then arrived at a McDonald’s and sat down for a short period of time around 3:01 p.m. and he left on foot.”

“At 3:41 p.m., 40 minutes after leaving McDonald’s, the suspect was detained at 4700 Wyndham Lakes Drive in Coral Springs, by an officer with the Coconut Creek Police Department,” Sheriff Israel concluded.

Cruz was expelled from the school last year after students said he got into a fight with his ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend and was caught with bullets in his backpack.

  1. Witnesses claim multiple gunmen, while the media and police report a lone wolf narrative.

Three witnesses claim that there were multiple shooters, while one account is less detailed and based on meeting the shooter in the hallway and hearing gunshots ringing out. Another account of the shooting details multiple shooters where the woman states, “there were three shooters that’s what I heard … I saw some other kid and he was wearing some type of thing.”

5. The shooting is being used to take away our freedoms.

The fifth – and possibly the most important reason – the shooter allegedly posted on some random YouTube channel that he was about to carry out the disgusting mass murder, which the YouTube channel owner Ben Bennight then reported to the FBI and YouTube.

“I’m going to be a professional school shooter,” A YouTube user named Nikolas Cruz commented on a video on Sept. 24, 2017.

As a result of this, the county sheriff Scott Israel in charge of investigating the mass school shooting in Parkland, Florida, pleaded with lawmakers on Thursday to give police and doctors more power to involuntarily hospitalize people for psychiatric evaluation over posts on social media that are deemed “violent and threatening.”

The Deep State has taken down the eyewitness reports of students claiming there were 3 shooters. We will attempt to recover it.

“If they see something on social media, if they see graphic pictures of rifles and blood and gore and guns and bombs, if they see something, horrific language, if they see a person talking about ‘I want to grow up to be a serial killer,” Israel said.

Then there are the consistent calls to ban guns and dismantle the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms … like banning firearms, a tool used to aggress or defend is going to do anything. One could argue that if someone in that school had a firearm the damage done could have been minimized.

In some US states selected teachers at various schools are armed and there is a permanent armed security guard presence.

 

 

Australian Government Port Arthur cover-up evidence expanding

“Justice” In The Lucky Country – The Port Arthur Massacre

By Dee McLachlan – gumshoenews.com

The 10 minute video above is the start of a series from Gumshoe News on false flags and other crimes. This one is on Port Arthur. [Much of the video is sourced from Channel 7’s Mike Willesee series that damned Bryant]

When I immigrated to Australia in the late 1990s I made the assumption, as had most Australians, that Martin Bryant was the shooter in Tasmania. But as soon as I looked beyond the official narrative, I realized that something was terribly wrong. The entire case is a diabolic miscarriage of justice. For starters, it seems the defence, John Avery, was working for the prosecution.

In the video, I only concentrate on the case — and not on the actual perpetrators. There are many articles on Port Arthur on Gumshoe, and in Mary Maxwell’s recent article, she outlines the players (also here and here). I decided to produce a 10 minute video after asking retired barrister Terry Shulze what he might say to a jury in a hypothetical summation of the case.

What is shocking, is that in the recent Channel 7 (Mike Willisee) program, John Avery (Bryant’s defence lawyer), admits that he did not provide, or want to provide, Martin Bryant a defence. And the way Willisee and co. twisted and manipulated the footage is monstrous.

In the Exposé video, episode one, I outline these few simply points:

  • Martin Bryant said he was innocent of the killings for months.
  • He stated that he had not visited the historic site for 6 years.
  • The police interviews demonstrate the State’s attempt to manipulate and coerce a vulnerable and mentally challenged young man into a guilty plea.
  • The media portrayed a revengeful and crazed gunman. The transcripts of the negotiation and interrogation conflict with this view.
  • The defence failed their legal duty. Avery may have acted criminally in doing so.
  • The skill required to shoot 12 people and injure 10 in 15 seconds is equal to the most proficient marksman. The shooter was right-handed and also shot from the hip. Bryant was a left-handed shooter, and had never practiced shooting from the hip.
  • The AR 15, and the very rare SLR .308 were not owned or used by Bryant. His AR-10 (.308) had been taken away from a month earlier by Terry Hill — when he went into Hill’s Gun shop with it loaded and in poor condition.
  • There was another shooter in cottage. These are heard whilst Bryant is talking to negotiator Terry.
  • It is also ludicrous to believe that Bryant was managing a siege whilst making sandwiches and tea for the ‘hostages’, and talking to the negotiator.
  • Some witnesses describe the shooter as 18 – 20 years old.
  • Another witness, Jim Laycock, who saw the shooter near the General Store, had known Martin as a child, and said it was not him.
  • The shooter handled a tray and soda drink in the cafe. This tray was identified. No DNA evidence, or fingerprints from Bryant was found.
  • The DNA and fingerprint evidence would have, or rather, will exonerate Bryant, and identify the real shooter.

Why did they need to get a guilty confession out of Bryant — when they could have closed the case on him in a week or two in May 1996, with a single fingerprint on that Solo can? The answer is simple. Bryant was NOT the shooter.

What is presented here is only the tip of the iceberg. One can easily get bogged down with the detail, as there is so much evidence that destroys the official narrative. And there are enough coincidences to raise the Titanic from the depths — like the 500 plus journalists, from about 17 nations, that attended a seminar in Hobart. Coincidence? Please!

And the way this case continues to be covered up, is an indication that the politicians in Canberra do not represent the people of Australia. Our leaders are clearly being “managed.”

We look forward to some action being taken. Below is an email list of a few of the prominent Australian politicians, so you can urge them to take 10 minutes out of their day, to update their perspective of Port Arthur.

Read more at sosnewsPort Arthur Coverup page.

 

Contact emails of a few prominent Australian politicians:

Government

Eric Abetz (TAS) senator.abetz@aph.gov.au  Cory Bernardi https://www.corybernardi.com/contact/ (SA)  Simon Birmingham (SA) senator.birmingham@aph.gov.au  George Brandis (QLD) senator.brandis@aph.gov.au David Bushby (TAS) Senator.Bushby@aph.gov.au Michaelia Cash (WA) Senator.Cash@aph.gov.au Richard Colbeck (TAS) senator.colbeck@aph.gov.au Mathias Cormann (WA) financeminister@finance.gov.au Sean Edwards (SA) senator.edwards@aph.gov.au David Fawcett (SA) senator.fawcett@aph.gov.au Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW) senator.fierravanti-wells@aph.gov.au Mitch Fifield (VIC) http://www.mitchfifield.com/Contact.aspx Ian MacDonald (QLD) senator.ian.macdonald@aph.gov.au Brett Mason (QLD) senator.mason@aph.gov.au Stephen Parry (TAS) senator.parry@aph.gov.au Marise Payne (NSW) minister@humanservices.gov.au Linda Reynolds (WA) senator.reynolds@aph.gov.au Scott Ryan (VIC) http://scottryan.com.au/email Nigel Scullion (NT) senator.scullion@aph.gov.au Arthur Sinodinis (NSW) senator.sinodinos@aph.gov.au Dean Smith (WA) senator.smith@aph.gov.au Josh Freydenberg ministerfrydenberg.invitations@environment.gov.au

Labor Party

A.Albanese.MP@aph.gov.au,  Sharon.Bird.MP@aph.gov.au,  Chris.Bowen.MP@aph.gov.au, gai.brodtmann.mp@aph.gov.au, Anna.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au, Tony.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au, Mark.Butler.MP@aph.gov.au, Anthony.Byrne.MP@aph.gov.au, Jim.Chalmers.MP@aph.gov.au, Nick.Champion.MP@aph.gov.au, Lisa.Chesters.MP@aph.gov.au, Jason.Clare.MP@aph.gov.au, Sharon.Claydon.MP@aph.gov.au, Julie.Collins.MP@aph.gov.au, Pat.Conroy.MP@aph.gov.au, Michael.Danby.MP@aph.gov.au, Mark.Dreyfus.MP@aph.gov.au, Justine.Elliot.MP@aph.gov.au, Kate.Ellis.MP@aph.gov.au, David.Feeney.MP@aph.gov.au, Laurie.Ferguson.MP@aph.gov.au, J.Fitzgibbon.MP@aph.gov.au, Andrew.Giles.MP@aph.gov.au, Gary.Gray.MP@aph.gov.au, Alan.Griffin.MP@aph.gov.au, Jill.Hall.MP@aph.gov.au, Chris.Hayes.MP@aph.gov.au, ed.husic.mp@aph.gov.au, stephen.jones.mp@aph.gov.au, Catherine.King.MP@aph.gov.au, andrew.leigh.mp@aph.gov.au,JMacklin.MP@aph.gov.au, Alannah.MacTiernan.MP@aph.gov.au, Richard.Marles.MP@aph.gov.au, rob.mitchell.mp@aph.gov.au, Shayne.Neumann.MP@aph.gov.au, Brendan.O’Connor.MP@aph.gov.au, Lucy.Wicks.MP@aph.gov.au, Julie.Owens.MP@aph.gov.au, melissa.parke.mp@aph.gov.au, Graham.Perrett.MP@aph.gov.au, Tanya.Plibersek.MP@aph.gov.au, Bernie.Ripoll.MP@aph.gov.au, Amanda.Rishworth.MP@aph.gov.au,michelle.rowland.mp@aph.gov.au, Joanne.Ryan.MP@aph.gov.au, Bill.Shorten.MP@aph.gov.au, Warren.Snowdon.MP@aph.gov.au, Wayne.Swan.MP@aph.gov.au, Matt.Thistlethwaite.MP@aph.gov.au, Kelvin.Thomson.MP@aph.gov.au,  Maria.Vamvakinou.MP@aph.gov.au, Tim.Watts.MP@aph.gov.au, Tony.Zappia.MP@aph.gov.au,

Senator Parry refuses to explain his incriminating words about Port Arthur

Letter to the editor

If you would like the details (includes references) of Stephen Parry’s inside knowledge of the official massacre at Port Arthur in April 1996, please email me for the 50-page summary document: “20 YEARS, CORRUPTION, DECEPTION, LIES” (no copyright, distribute freely) – martinbryantisinnocent@gmail.com

This evasive embalmer from Tasmania has refused to explain his incriminating words which he presented at a government seminar in 1997. (see details in above-mentioned summary)

What does it say about the affairs of State in Australia when Stephen Parry – a person who knew preparations for the massacre (allegedly 35 killed; 23 wounded) were made in Victoria “ready for the incident” – becomes President of the Senate? But don’t just condemn the Liberal Party. A copy of the Show Cause Notice which was directed to Parry was also sent to every senator at the time. None have replied or reacted.

It seems every senator in Australia is quite content to see the torture of the poor patsy Martin Bryant continue. He has been wrongly condemned and imprisoned since 1996. Over 20 YEARS!!!!!!!!!

There was NO hard evidence proving guilt, NO motive, NO fingerprints, NO credible identification, NO public inquiry, NO legal integrity, NO proper firearm ownership, NO DNA evidence, NO coronial inquest (with 35 killed!), NO free admission of guilt , NO witness ever testified in a court, NO forensic results, NO crime re-enactment, NO jury, NO complete list of evidence, NO explanation for the naked black-haired woman police wrote they saw at Seascape (it was not the owner who officials said was already dead), NO proper legal representation, and Martin had NO trial (hearings in courtrooms are NOT trials).

All there was were official allegations all unproved and blown up to psycho-shock and unsettle the very gullible public. Just right as a prelude to the gun-control legislation which quickly followed.

Of course officials could not have had a trial. The only witness who knew Martin Bryant and who was at Port Arthur said the gunman was not Martin Bryant. Terry Hill a gunsmith was pressured to say he sold a weapon to Martin, but Mr. Hill refused to lie. (All documented in the book MASS MURDER.) And the marksmanship and coolness of the gunman was way beyond mentally handicapped Martin. (And did you know two people – ASIO or MOSSAD? – voluntarily went and sat inside the vehicle WITH the gunman at the PAHS toll booth, and there had a discussion with him. It seems those two people knew the gunman and/or why he was there. They knew the gunman had already killed people, but they just went and had a chat with him. This is documented in the statements of witnesses who were at that tollbooth. You’re not supposed to know this. It’s all in the book MASS MURDER.)

Do not believe for one minute the bullshit about him making a confession. For six months Martin Bryant clearly stated he was innocent. But to circumvent proper legal and trial procedures, that criminal lawyer Johne Avery worked Martin over and got him to accept Avery’s plea. (Even Martin’s bewildered mother was herself pressured to put pressure on Martin to get him to say he did it. And she did.) Given his mental handicap (IQ of 66; retarded), Martin should have had a protecting guardian with him at all times. But that did not happen. Three official mongrels John Avery (corrupt lawyer), Damian Bugg (corrupt prosecutor), and William Cox (corrupt judge) worked on poor Martin then locked him away forever.

Martin Bryant is INNOCENT! It is Stephen Parry who is GUILTY!

Sincerely,

Dr. Keith Allan Noble; author
Vienna, Austria
t. 43-1-9712401
murder.research@gmail.com

free pdf of the book:
MASS MURDER: Official Kiling in Tasmania, Australia
(2nd edition; 2014)
BIGWORMBOOKS@gmx.net

Draining the Australian swamp continues with Liberal Senator Parry gone and more to come

from New Daily and Cairns News
Parry was last year accused by Austrian author Keith Noble of being involved in the Port Arthur training massacre. In a speech to the Undertakers and Embalmers Association several years after the alleged shooting of 30 people, Parry admitted he knew the operation was going to take place.

Tasmania Senator Stephen Parry resigns from the senate. He is, a former police officer and undertaker and has been accused of prior knowledge of the alleged Port Arthur massacre in 1997

Only days after the High Court disqualified five parliamentarians, the Tasmanian Liberal senator on Tuesday said he believed he may hold UK citizenship. If this is confirmed by UK authorities, he will immediately resign from Parliament.

Senator Parry’s revelation comes after the High Court thrust a by-election on former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce, disqualifying him and four senators from Parliament under Section 44 (i) of the constitution.

 As Senate President, Senator Parry, who earns $348,320 a year, oversaw the referrals of six senators to the High Court over dual citizenship.

He has contacted the British Home Office seeking confirmation of his citizenship status, he said in a statement to the Senate on Tuesday afternoon.

joyce
Barnaby Joyce is fighting a byelection in his seat of New England. Photo: AAP

Senator Parry said he did so after the High Court’s unanimous decision on Friday provided “absolute clarity” over Australian’s citizenship law.

“In the event that I am found to hold British citizenship by virtue of my father’s status, then I will clearly be in breach of Section 44 (i) of the Constitution and would therefore resign as President of the Senate,” he said.

“I would further resign as Senator for the State of Tasmania and not await the outcome of any referral to the High Court, as I believe the High Court has made it abundantly clear what action is required.”

Senator Parry’s father moved from the UK to Australia in the 1950s, leaving him vulnerable to holding citizenship by descent in a similar situation to former Nationals deputy leader Fiona Nash.

The development has already reignited calls for an audit of the eligibility of all parliamentarians, as advocated by the crossbench but rejected by the major parties, and may also bolster Mr Joyce’s proposal for a omnibus referendum that would consider a change to Section 44 of the Constitution.

On Sunday, Attorney-General George Brandis said he had “no reason … to believe that there is any other Coalition member” who held dual citizenship.

“Surely the time has come for the Libs and ALP to back the Greens’ call for an audit of all MPs and end this crisis,” Greens leader Richard Di Natale tweeted on Tuesday afternoon.

Senator Parry, who turned 57 on Tuesday, would be the first Liberal parliamentarian hit by the citizenship crisis that claimed Mr Joyce and his former Nationals deputy Fiona Nash.

Constitutional cloud looms

The news of Senator Parry’s potential disqualification comes as the Liberal politician in line to replace Ms Nash is placed under a possible constitutional cloud.

Hollie Hughes, the NSW Liberal candidate who is tipped to win the recount ordered after the High Court disqualified Ms Nash over dual citizenship, could be vulnerable to a challenge under section 44 of the constitution, experts have said.

That is because Ms Hughes, a one-time aide to the former Liberal senator Bill Heffernan, was recently appointed by Attorney-General George Brandis to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Under section 44(iv) of the Constitution, members of Parliament must not hold an office of profit under the crown when they nominate for election. The law saw independent MP and former school teacher Phil Cleary booted from Parliament in the early 90s.

Constitutional law experts Anne Twomey, of the University of Sydney, and the University of New South Wales’ George Williams, have both argued Ms Hughes could face difficulties because of the precedent set by the 1992 Sykes v Cleary case.

The Greens have also found themselves facing another possible constitutional headache, with Queensland candidate Andrew Bartlett, who is in line to replace Larissa Waters, also facing questions under s44 (iv).

Mr Bartlett, a former leader of the Democrats, worked at a university while he nominated for the Senate.