Tell A Friend | Add to Favourites | Print this Page
21 April, 2010
Learn to deal with reality
reality will deal with you.
URL of This Issue:
Back to General Index of all issues of Last Days
Contents of this Issue ...
Watch is Dedicated to Watching and Reporting About the Enemy Who Intends to Enslave Us
- Ex Public Servant Blows Whistle On State-Sponsored Terrorism
- Watch This and Weep!
- DIVORCE LAW: Family Law's Unending War on Fatherhood
Australian Government Seeks To Impose Chinese-Style Internet
Utah Satanic Ritual Abuse: The Glenn L Pace Memo
- Port Arthur: Murderous Frameup of Martin Bryant Disarms Australia
- The Port Arthur Massacre Revisited
- Who Ordered the Port Arthur Massacre?
- Special Forces at Port Arthur
- Bursting the Malachi Martin Bubble
- Would US Troops Fire on Americans?
- News in Brief
"Why do you think the Media is so important to us? You have (as
a society), in your hypnotized comatose state, given your Free Will consent to the state your planet is in
today. You saturate your minds with the unhealthy dishes served up for you on your televisions that you are
addicted to, violence, pornography, greed, hatred, selfishness, incessant 'bad news', fear and 'terror'. When
was the last time you stopped, to think of something beautiful and pure? The planet is the way it is, because
of your collective thoughts about it. You are complicit
in your inaction, every time you 'look the other way' when you see an injustice. Your
'thought' at the sub-conscious level of creation to the Creator, is your allowance of these things to occur.
In so doing, you are serving our purpose."
(Source: Henry Makow, Illuminati Reveal Crazy Apocalyptic Agenda )
Important Note ...
Filtering software may prevent you from receiving some important NazareneRemnant.org communications. To ensure
that you never miss an e-mail from us, please follow these tips ...
SUBSCRIBE and UNSUBSCRIBE information, and HOW YOU GOT ON THIS LIST can be found at the end of this
1. Ex Public Servant Blows Whistle On
John G. Wollaston, a Fellow of the Royal Institute of Architects and former head of the Federal
Government's International Property Directorate, has written a book suggesting major terrorist attacks including
our own Port Arthur have involved some guiding hands for the purpose of social engineering. Senior journalist with
The Age, Garry Tippet was asked about policeman Andrew McGregor's research into Port Arthur and didn't want to
discuss the matter further. Tippet is an Australian director of the Dart Centre for Trauma and Journalism, a global
outfit run by psychologists who coach journalists on how to cope with trauma. But the Dart Centre makes no mention
about journalists investigating such events, it's all about handling the trauma. But now that Port Arthur is
getting out on Facebook (it's been on YouTube for ages) and the media (Murdoch's Hobart Mercury in particular) are
in a tizz because people are questioning their "official history" and have actually produced suspects apart from
Bryant. McGregor, for instance, has discovered there were about 7 ASIO people who died at Port Arthur. Tippett
apparently doesn't want to know about this, or knows about it and is keeping it under wraps.
More Facts on Port Arthur
John G. Wollaston, born and educated in Sydney, Australia, is a Fellow of the Royal Australian
Institute of Architects. He has travelled extensively throughout the world, speaks several languages, has studied
and taught martial arts, run business corporations, and is a respected public speaker. In 1978 he was head-hunted
by the Australian Federal Government to head up its worldwide Property Directorate. Because of his involvement with
Embassies and Defence facilities, Mr. Wollaston was cleared above 'Top Secret' by the Australian security
organizations, ASIO and ASIS, and is still bound in some matters by the Official Secrets Act. During the six years
that he worked in this area he was exposed to the inner workings of the government and its agencies. It comes as no
surprise, therefore, that he would question the truth about what was happening behind the scenes in 'seemingly'
unrelated events both at home and abroad.
2. Watch This and
10 minutes 28 seconds of warning.
Health care? No, total government control that will be implemented here in Australia if we don't
3. DIVORCE LAW: Family Law's
Unending War on Fatherhood
Weekly, 20 March 2010
Australian family law, the Family Law Act and the Family Court all have a
lot to answer for. They have regularly and systematically treated fathers with contempt and derision, depriving
them of the most basic of human rights, including the right to see their own children after the breakdown of a
A devastating critique of the Family Court was penned by La Trobe University historian John Hirst in his 2005 piece
entitled 'Kangaroo Court': Family Law in Australia (Quarterly Essay no. 17). In it he highlighted the
gross injustices which men receive at the hands of the court. Said Hirst: "The Family Court condemns itself. If its
orders have been conscientiously framed to advance the best interest of children, then by its failure to enforce
its orders it has been systematically damaging the children under its
He rightly points out how fathers are especially disadvantaged and discriminated against in the Family Law process.
Many have a theoretical right to visit their children, but in reality they often have no access at all.
Mothers overwhelmingly end up with the children in custody disputes, and often the last thing considered is the actual best interests of the
child. A recent case which became headline news provides a glaring example of this. This is how
one report covered the story when it broke a few weeks ago:
"A mother found by the Family Court to be violent, untruthful, lacking moral values and responsible for the
psychological and emotional abuse of her children has been given custody of them. The father, deemed 'principled' and with 'much to offer his children', has been effectively
banned from seeing his daughters. The case will spark renewed debate about family law and the issue
of shared parenting.
"The father, who we will name 'Bill' because he cannot be identified for legal reasons, is described by a Family
Court judge as no threat to his daughters, a successful parent who is 'courteous' and intelligent. The same judge
found the mother, whom we will call 'Jasmine' and who abandoned her first daughter at two and spurned the child's
subsequent attempts at reconciliation, had displayed 'dreadful', 'cruel' and
"But the judge still ruled that because of time spent apart, the children had become estranged from their father
and it was in their interests that 'the children spend no time with the father'. This was at odds with a ruling in
February 2008 that Bill should have contact with his daughters." ("Fury at ruling in custody battle", Herald
Sun, Melbourne, January 10, 2010).
Sadly this is not an isolated incident. Many other cases of
gross miscarriage of justice have been perpetrated by a biased, anti-father Family Court. Many men have endured
misery, depression and despair over the treatment they have received from the system. And far too many men have
taken their own lives as a result.
Patrick McCauley recently wrote a strong criticism of such matters for Quadrant Online, entitled
"Killing fathers". In this article he asks the telling
question: "why do an entire generation of children lack
He says: "The statistics are in, so are the studies - children do not travel
well without their fathers, and the levels of unfathered children is at least 10 times greater than
it was at the beginning of the 1970s.
"The Family Law Act of Australia sealed the fate of millions of Australian men and their children. Fathers were
reduced to 20 per cent access or every second weekend. Many wandered off in
despair. Probably [fewer] than 10 per cent were truly irresponsible or violent, dangerous men.
The state enacted a law which effectively 'stole' children from their fathers (without any apology). For the crime
of marriage failure, most men lost their fatherhood."
He continues, "Women, freed into the massive freedoms of the sexual revolution and the feminist metanarrative,
decided to have children without fathers. Single motherhood became a status symbol, an emblem, of the truly
"Both heterosexual women and homosexual women, even sexually confused women, were given state-funded access to IVF
programs on the grounds of being 'psychologically infertile'. Fatherhood was
portrayed as undesirable, and inconvenient. The state made no requirement that these children have
"The demise of fatherhood was possibly an unintended consequence of the subtle misandry (the hatred of maleness)
which suffused society throughout the late twentieth century. Schools, universities, TAFE Colleges, the public
service, hospitals, families became Male-Unfriendly Environments (MUEs) as they were overrun and dominated by women who were both ambitious and maintained an
idealistic and fundamentalist feminist narrative. The domestic matriarchy delivered to women the quickest and most significant redistribution of wealth this country has
McCauley concludes: "Up until the enactment of the Family Law Act of Australia in 1974, Australia was a patriarchy,
as were, and are, all aboriginal societies. The Australian patriarchy demonstrated its commitment to fatherhood by
taking unfathered part-aboriginal children into the care of the state or the church.
"It is the new domestic matriarchy, which, almost by stealth, has overtaken Australian society, which has declared
this act of welfare - 'The Stolen Generations'.
"I would contend that the children stolen from their fathers since the introduction of the Family Law Act are in
fact the real stolen generations. And they have been stolen by a fear and
hatred of maleness that permeates our whole society. Thus they have banished the fathers, and now
the children (both black and white) run ragged, confused and directionless throughout the bush and suburbs of the
land." (Quadrant Online, February 17, 2010).
I certainly agree that we have here a genuine Stolen Generation. It is one thing when wives become single mothers
through no fault of their own (e.g., the death or desertion of the husband). They need a lot of support, since they
must now do twice as much work with only half the resources.
But it is another thing altogether when there is a deliberate act of bringing children into the world without a
father. Single-parenthood by choice, lesbian parenting, and a monstrously lop-sided Family Court process
are all conspiring against the rights of a child to have his or her own
father. In my book that is a type of child neglect, if not child abuse.
The divorce revolution has unleashed a trail of social destruction and
ruin. And the Family Courts have done their bit to devastate fatherhood. The Family Law Act, and all
that goes with it, has done so much damage to so many that the best thing may be to simply put it out of its
misery, and start afresh.
Bill Muehlenberg is a commentator on contemporary issues, and lectures on ethics and philosophy. His website
CultureWatch is at: www.billmuehlenberg.com
Family Court No Substitute for Marriage
No one from the state forces [a married couple] to pool their incomes, if they both work. If they have the
traditional gender-based division of household labor, no one forces the husband to hand over his paycheck to his
wife to run the household. No one makes the wife allow him to take the kids out for the afternoon. No one has to
come and supervise their negotiations over how to discipline the children. When he's too tough, she might chew him
out privately, or kick him under the table. When she lets them off the hook too easily, he might have some private
signal for her to leave so that he can do what needs to be done.
The typical married couple has regular disagreements over money, child-rearing, the allocation of household chores,
how to spend leisure time and a hundred other things. Every once in a while, even a stable married couple will have
a knock-down, drag-out, (usually) private quarrel. But they resolve their
disagreements, large and small, perhaps a dozen a day, completely on their own with neither supervision nor subsidy
from any court.
Extract from Jennifer Roback Morse's essay, "Why unilateral divorce has no place in a free society", published
in The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, and Morals, edited by Robert P. George and Jean Bethke
Elshtain (Dallas: Spence Publishing Company, 2006). Another version of this essay is at:
Jennifer Roback Morse, "Marriage and the limits of contract: a libertarian case", Policy Review (Hoover
Institution, Stanford University), No. 130, April & May 2005. URL: www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/2939396.html
Unjust Assault on Fatherhood
[Before the introduction of no-fault divorce laws], divorces required legal
cause - some ground recognised in law as constituting an adequate reason for the dissolution of a
marriage. A spouse could fight the divorce and contest the grounds offered by the spouse who sued for divorce.
Under no-fault divorce, no ground is necessary. By
definition, there is no fault ascribed to either spouse - fault is no longer considered to be of legal or societal
Demanded by those who claimed that no-fault divorce would be more humane, the laws actually allowed two very
different (but entirely foreseeable) results, and both are disastrous.
The first is the fact that no-fault divorce has allowed millions of men to
abandon their families and leave their children and former wives to poverty. The statistics are
clear enough - men who divorce their wives and no longer live with their children generally improve their standard
of living over the next few years. The family left behind generally has the opposite experience, with children and
former wives living at significantly reduced income levels.
The second result is almost the opposite of the first. No-fault divorce has
also allowed women to end the marriage unilaterally, usually retaining primary custodial authority over the
children. In such situations, men - who are not even charged with any fault by their wives - can
find themselves robbed of their own children. No state has yet remedied the unjust assault on fatherhood that
no-fault divorce set loose.
Extract from Albert Mohler, "A message from Michigan?", Albert Mohler blog, February 25, 2010.
4. Australian Government Seeks To Impose Chinese-Style
By Asher Moses
March 30, 2010
The Communications Minister,
Stephen Conroy, has launched a stinging attack on Google and its credibility in response to the search giant's
campaign against the government's internet filtering policy.
In an interview on ABC
Radio last night, Senator Conroy also said he was unaware of complaints the Obama administration
said it had raised with the government over the policy.
The government intends to
introduce legislation within weeks forcing all ISPs to block a blacklist of "refused classification" websites for
Last week, it said it had held
discussions with users and parents around Australia and "the strong view from parents was that the government's
proposal goes too far and would take away their freedom of choice around what information they and their children
Google also said implementing
mandatory filtering across Australia's millions of internet users could "negatively impact user access speeds",
while filtering material from high-volume sites such as Wikipedia, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter "appears not to be
technologically possible as it would have such a serious impact on internet access".
"We have a number of other
concerns, including that filtering may give a false sense of security to parents, it could damage Australia's
international reputation and it can be easily circumvented," Google wrote.
On ABC Radio last night, the
majority of callers were opposed to the filters and right before the end of the segment, Senator Conroy attacked
Google over its privacy credentials.
"Recently the founders of Google
have got themselves into a little bit of trouble because notwithstanding their alleged 'do no evil' policy, they
recently created something called Buzz, and there was a reaction, and people said well look aren't you publishing
private information?," Senator Conroy said.
"[Google CEO Eric] Schmidt said
the following: 'If you have something that you don't want anyone to know maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the
first place'. This is the founder of Google. He also said recently to Wall Street analysts, 'we love cash', so when
people say, shouldn't we just leave it up to the Googles of this world to determine what the filtering policy
Google said today it was
surprised to hear Senator Conroy trying to "make this an issue about Google".
"This is a debate about freedom
of access to information for all Australians, an issue of national importance. Let's focus on that," Google
Google's Buzz product added
social networking features to Gmail but it caused a privacy uproar in February, with users complaining their
contacts were being made public without their knowledge and that they had little control over who could follow
their updates. Google
quickly tweaked the service to allay these concerns.
Google said the Schmidt quote
referred to by Senator Conroy had been taken out of context. Furthermore, Senator Conroy incorrectly labeled
Schmidt one of the founders of the company, when in fact he joined the company as its CEO in 2001.
spokesman Tony Smith said it was Senator Conroy's "default position" to attack anyone that questions his
"Google should be able to
express their opinion without being attacked by the Minister and having their motives questioned," he
Senator Conroy also said he was
not aware of the US State Department contacting his office or that of the Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, over the
internet filters. This contradicts a statement made by a US State Department spokesman yesterday.
"Our main message of course is
that we remain committed to advancing the free flow of information which we view as vital to economic prosperity
and preserving open societies globally," a U.S. State Department spokesman Michael Tran told The Associated
Tran declined to say when or at
what level the U.S. State Department raised its concerns with Australia and declined to detail those
"We don't discuss the details of
specific diplomatic exchanges, but I can say that in the context of that ongoing relationship, we have raised our
concerns on this matter with Australian officials," he added.
Senator Conroy argues the he is
only attempting to apply the same restrictions placed on the distribution of books, magazines, DVDs and other
content to the internet.
But critics say this approach
fails to consider that the internet is a vastly different, dynamic medium. They say Senator Conroy's proposal is a
heavy-handed measure that is easily bypassed by criminals and could restrict access to legal
Senator Conroy has conceded that
greater transparency is needed in terms of how content ends up on the blacklist, but last night he again refused to
make the blacklist itself public, saying it would provide people instant access to the banned material.
Whether the internet filtering
policy is implemented depends largely on whether the Opposition supports or blocks the legislation. It has said it
is waiting to see the government's legislation before stating a final position on the matter.
"The Federal Coalition supports
sensible and workable measures to protect children from inappropriate online content," said Smith.
"However we are yet to be
convinced that Labor’s mandatory filtering plans will actually be effective or achieve the best
5. Utah Satanic Ritual Abuse:
The Glenn L Pace Memo
On 19 July 1990, Elder Glenn L Pace, then a counselor in the Presiding Bishopric, sent a memo to
the "Strengthening Church Members Committee" on the subject of "Ritualistic Child Abuse."
Pursuant to the Committee's request, I am writing this memorandum to pass along what I have learned
about ritualistic child abuse. Hopefully, it will be of some value to you as you continue to monitor the
You have already received the LDS Social Services report on Satanism dated May 24, 1989, a report
from Brent Ward, [Utah State Attorney General] and a memorandum from myself dated October 20,1989 in response to
Brother Ward's report.
Therefore, I will limit this writing to information not contained in those papers.
I have met with sixty victims. That number could be twice or three times as many if I did not
discipline myself to only one meeting per week. I have not wanted my involvement with this issue to become a
handicap in fulfilling my assigned responsibilities. On the other hand,I felt someone needed to pay the price to obtain an intellectual and spiritual
conviction as to the seriousness of this problem within the Church.
Of the sixty victims with whom I have met, fifty-three are female and seven are male. Eight are
children. The abuse occurred in the following places: Utah (37), Idaho (3), California (4), Mexico (2), and
other places (14). Fifty-three victims are currently living in the State of Utah. All sixty individuals are
members of the Church. Forty-five victims allege witnessing and/or participating in human sacrifice. The
majority were abused by relatives, often their parents. All have developed psychological problems and most have
been diagnosed as having multiple personality disorder or some other form of dissociative disorder.
Ritualistic child abuse is the most hideous of all child abuse. The basic objective is
premeditatedto systematically and methodically torture and terrorize
children until they are forced to dissociate. The torture is not a consequence of the loss of
temper, but the execution of well-planned, well-thought out rituals often performed by close relatives.
The only escape for the children is to
dissociate. They will develop a new personality to enable them to endure various forms
of abuse. When the episode is over, the core personality is again in control and the individual is not conscious
of what happened. Dissociation also serves the purposes of the occult because the children have no day-to-day
memory of the atrocities. They go through adolescence and early adulthood with no active memory of what is
taking place. Oftentimes they continue in rituals through their teens and early twenties, unaware of their
involvement. Many individuals with whom I have spoken have served missions and it has not been until later that
they begin to remember. One individual has memories of participating in rituals while serving as a full-time
The victims lead relatively normal lives, but the memories are locked up in a compartment in their minds and
surface in various ways. They don't know how to cope with the emotions because they can't find
the source. As they become adults and move into another environment, something triggers the memories and,
consequently, flashbacks and/or nightmares occur. One day they will have been living a normal life and the next
they will be in a mental hospital in a fetal position. The memories of their early childhood are recalled in so
much detail that they once again feel the
pain that caused the dissociation in the first place.
There are two reasons why adults can remember with such detail events that happened in their past:
First, the terror they experienced was so stark that it was indelibly placed in their mind. Second, the memory
was compartmentalized in a certain portion of the mind and was not subjected to the dilution of experiences of
ensuing years. When it is tapped, it is as fresh as if it happened yesterday.
The memories seem to come in layers. For example, the first memory might be of incest, then they
remember robes and candles; next they realize that their father or mother or both were present when they were
being abused. Another layer will be the memory of seeing other people hurt and even killed. Then they remember
having seen babies killed. Another layer is realizing that they participated in the sacrifices.
One of the most painful memories may be that they even
sacrificed their own baby. With each layer of memory comes another set of problems
with which they must deal.
Some have said that the witnesses to this type of treatment cannot be trusted because of the
victim's unstable condition and because practically all of them have some kind of dissociative disorder; in
fact, the stories are so bizarre as to raise serious credibility questions. The irony is that one of the
objectives of the occult is to create multiple personalities within the children in order to keep the "secrets."
They live in society without society having any idea that something is wrong since the children and teenagers
don't even realize there is another life occurring in darkness and in secret. However, when sixty witnesses
testify to the same type of torture and murder, it becomes impossible for me, personally, not to believe
I mention multiple personalities because the spiritual healing which must take place in the lives
of these victims cannot happen without their priesthood leaders understanding something about it.
The spiritual indoctrination which takes place during the physical abuse is one of the most
difficult to overcome. In addition to experiencing stark terror and pain, the children are also instructed in satanic
doctrine. Everything is completely reversed: white is black, black is white, good is
bad, bad is good, Satan is going to rule during the Millennium.
Children are put in a situation where they believe they are going to die-such as being buried alive
or being placed in a plastic bag and immersed in water. Prior to doing so, the abuser tells the child to pray to
Jesus to see if He will save her. Imagine a seven year old girl, having been told she is going to die, praying
to Jesus to save her and nothing happens, then at the last moment she is rescued, but the person saving her is a
representative of Satan. He uses this experience to convince her that the only person who really cares about her
is Satan, she is Satan's child and she might as well become loyal to him.
Just before or shortly after their baptism into the Church, children are baptized by blood into the satanic
order which is meant to cancel out their baptism into the Church. They will be asked
if they understand or have ever felt the Holy Ghost. When they reply that they have, they will be reminded of
the horrible things they have participated in and will be told that they have become a son (or daughter) of
perdition and, therefore, have no chance of being saved or loved by our Father in heaven or Jesus.
All of this indoctrination takes place with whichever personality has emerged to endure the
physical, mental, and spiritual pain. Consequently, there develops within each of these individuals
the makings of what I call a civil
war. As the memories begin to surface, there are personalities who feel they have
given themselves to Satan, and there is no hope for forgiveness. The core person is an active member of the
Church, often with a temple recommend. As integration takes place, the civil war begins. Sometimes, in an
interview, personalities of the dark side have come out. They are petrified or perhaps full of hate for me and
what I represent. Eventually those personalities need to be
dealt with spiritually and psychologically.
Most victims are
suicidal. They have been brainwashed with drugs, hypnosis, and other means to become
suicidal as soon as they start to tell the secrets. They have been threatened all of their lives that if they
don't do what they are told their brother or sister will die, their parents will die, their house will be
burned, or they themselves will be killed. They have every reason to believe it since they have seen people
killed. They believe they might as well kill themselves instead of wait for the occult to do it. Some
personalities feel it is the right thing to do.
The purpose of this detail is to stress the complexity of psychological and spiritual therapy for
these individuals. Our priesthood leaders, when faced with such cases, are understandably at a loss of how to
respond. Orthodox counsel is completely ineffective. For example, some victims have been told that this all
happened in their past and that they should put it behind them and get on with their lives. This is just not
possible. Part of the spiritual therapy necessary is for priesthood leaders to assist with the conversion
process of the personalities who have been indoctrinated into Satanism. Victims must integrate their
personalities so that they can function as whole persons and be able to deal with their problems and then get on
with their lives. Often, some of the parts will begin to act out, perhaps promiscuously, and a good intentioned
priesthood leader, following the General Handbook of Instructions, will disfellowship or excommunicate an
individual. All this does is reinforce the satanic
indoctrination of the victims that they are no good.
I'm sorry to say that many of the victims have had their first flashbacks while attending the
temple for the first time. The occult along the Wasatch Front uses the doctrine of the Church to their
advantage. For example, the verbiage and gestures are used in a ritualistic ceremony in a very debased and often
bloody manner. When the victim goes to the temple and hears the exact words, horrible memories are triggered. We
have recently been disturbed with members of the Church who have talked about the temple ceremony. Compared to
what is happening in the occult along the Wasatch Front, these are very minor infractions. The perpetrators are
also living a dual life. Many are temple recommend holders. This leads to another reason why the Church needs to
consider the seriousness of these problems. In effect, the Church is being used.
I go out of my way to not let the victims give me the names of the perpetrators. I have told them
that my responsibility is to help them with spiritual healing and that the names of perpetrators should be given
to therapists and law enforcement officers. However, they have told me the positions in the Church of members
who are perpetrators. Among others, there are Young Women leaders, Young Men leaders, bishops, a patriarch, a
stake president, temple workers, and members of the Tabernacle Choir. These accusations are not coming from
individuals who think they recognized someone, but from
those who have been abused by people they know, in many
cases their own family members.
Whatever the form of abuse our main concern is for the victims, but there are legal ramifications.
We are disturbed to receive reports that a scoutmaster has abused the boys in his troop. It is not difficult to
imagine what would happen if we learn that a bishop or stake president has participated in the abominations of
ritualistic child abuse. Not only do some of the perpetrators represent a cross section of the Mormon culture,
but sometimes the abuse has taken place in our own meetinghouses.
I don't pretend to know how prevalent the problem is. All I know is that I have met with 60
victims. Assuming each one comes from a coven of 13, we are talking about the involvement of 800 or so right
here on the Wasatch Front. Obviously, I have only seen those coming forth to get help. They are in their
twenties and thirties for the most part. I can only assume that it is expanding geometrically and am horrified
at the numbers represented by the generation who are now children and teenagers.
Another reason for concern is that there are several doctrinal issues that need to be resolved. The
Church and society in general are very skeptical as to whether the occult and its activities do exist. There is
no First Presidency statement relative to some of the doctrinal issues: What does a priesthood leader tell
individuals who come forward and say that they have participated in these rituals, which may include human
sacrifice? Should they have a temple recommend? Will they ever be forgiven? There are questions regarding free
agency and accountability. Is a person who has been raised in an occult from infancy accountable for things that
take place in a dissociated state, even though those acts were committed after the age of eight? I have formed
my own opinions to these questions and have done the best I can. However, I don't have the mantle to make these
doctrinal and policy decisions. I have relied on the mantle of a bishop regarding discernment and being a common
The few priesthood leaders who have had to face these issues are crying out for help because they
don't want to give their own opinions and yet there is no place to go for an answer. A bishop will go to his
stake president who says he doesn't believe it is happening and that the member is just crazy. The stake
president might go to an Area Presidency who will react in a similar way. Most people are afraid to surface it
to the First Presidency for fear of getting the same reaction and don't want to appear crazy themselves for
asking the question.
I hope you will excuse me if I am being presumptuous, but I am concluding this paper with
scriptures I feel support my belief that these activities are real and cannot be ignored.
The things I have been writing about go back to
Cain and Abel: (More)
6. Port Arthur: Murderous Frameup of Martin
Bryant Disarms Australia
I friend sent me the
following. I find it not surprising that such would eventuate, but am surprised that it took so long. Not that I
support such actions.
The quote below attributed to you "How could anyone
ever doubt that Martin Bryant killed those people" could only be
attributed to somebody of extreme naiveté.
As a peace officer of 23 years experience it would
seem you did not learn how to evaluate evidence in that time.
Nobody who has looked at all the evidence could
possibly come to the conclusion that a left-handed person, of low IQ (65 - he hardly has the intelligence to wipe
his own bum), without tailored hearing protection, could possibly have done the shooting in the café, without being
a highly trained, qualified, experienced anti-terrorist soldier trained in close-up suburban warfare techniques.
The two are mutually exclusive.
Neither you or any politician or other "authority"
will ever convince reasonable people that MARTIN BRYANT was or is guilty of the massacre. The evidence is overwhelming that he is innocent. This is why it
was necessary to use persuasion to compel him to plead guilty so there would not be a trial. A jury would never
have found him guilty and you know that.
As an ex-soldier who served in South East Asia on a
number of occasions, I can tell you from personal experience that firing a military assault weapon in a confined
space is hard on the hearing after just three rounds, let alone over 30. Ted Sarong knew his stuff and I would back
him against any civilian or police "expert".
As for all those involved in the set up and execution
of that government massacre, the truth will eventually come out as it always does. Nobody can stop that
Lets look at a few simple facts.
Ray Groom stood down as Premier and Minister
Responsible for Port Arthur just prior to the event. (Why a minister for a publically owned tourist attraction
Tony Rundle, an ex-journalist who could handle the
media took over Groom’s job just prior to the event.
The was an exercise planned and executed in Hobart for
that weekend involving just such a scenario with all the medical experts required as that event unfolded at Port
Arthur. All the experts needed were there on hand.
Brendon Nelson was given a smooth ride into parliament
via a blue ribbon Liberal seat in Sydney for his assistance to John Howard and the rest of the planners and
executioners of the event.
The media were totally compliant with the executors of
the event and trampled on Martin Bryant’s rights by immediately accusing him and splashing his photograph across
the country before he was even charged with a crime. It was all too smooth and that is the big mistake that all
criminals make, trying to make their claims feasible.
The young fully trained and experienced ex-soldier,
who was the "main man" in the guest house overnight, certainly was not Martin Bryant. He gave that away when he
advised the police outside that he would take out their sniper with the infrared scope if he didn’t
The 22-man capacity refrigerated morgue vehicle, the
only one of its size in Australia before and since, gave the game away to any reasonable observer. Not needed
before and sold after as it was not needed after the government run massacre. If you think those involved are safe from the truth you must be
The massacre was used as an excuse
to disarm The People of the Commonwealth of Australia.
How come the government chosen psychiatrist, Dr. Eric
Cunningham Dax, also "treated" the poor bastard involved in the Dunblane massacre in Scotland, as well as Martin
Bryant, both prior to their Alleged crimes? Cunningham Dax was a director of the Tavistock Institute in London,
England, the worlds first and foremost covert organisation, begun and run by MI6 to experiment with mind control
during the second world war.
I suspect that all those involved in the Port Arthur
massacre will eventually answer for their crimes, and there are many who know the truth of it all.
A Typical Response from the Money-Power Controlled
“Martin Bryant Facebook page smears ex-cop Michael Dyson
By Danielle McKay
From: The Mercury
March 19, 2010 11:49PM
§ Facebook page says Bryant is innocent
§ Page points finger at former policeman
§ Administrators have not removed the page
A MALICIOUS website has launched an outrageous attack
on a former Tasmania Police officer, claiming he was a gunman in the Port Arthur massacre.
The Facebook hate page claims convicted mass murderer
Martin Bryant is an innocent man and long-serving former Special Operations Group member Michael Dyson is
Mr Dyson, who assisted investigations into the 1996
massacre when 35 people were killed, has shrugged off the allegations but says the internet is out of control and
accountability is needed.
He said despite attempts to contact Facebook
administrators since finding the site this week, nothing had been done to remove the defamatory page.
Mr Dyson, 52, said he had also contacted Tasmania
Police and Australian Federal Police because the site includes his photo and contact details, but was told they
"Most people see these sites and people for the
lunatics that they are, but if I've learned anything from my time in the force it's that there are also people out
there who believe it," he said.
"They're the ones that I'm concerned about the sort
that will try and take me out to even it up for Martin Bryant." Facebook faced harsh criticism only last month,
when obscene and pornographic content was posted on tribute pages for two Australian children killed in separate
acts of violence.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd weighed in then on the
debate, backing an inquiry into creating a federal office to combat cyber crime.
The latest controversial page: Martin Bryant is
Innocent Michael Charles Dyson shooter at Seascape, not only accuses Mr Dyson of being involved in the massacre but
has several links to conspiracy theory websites alleging the massacre was a government plot to force the
introduction of gun control legislation.
It also targets former prime minster John Howard,
former Tasmanian premier Ray Groom and former Tasmanian and Commonwealth director of public prosecutions Damian
Bugg, who prosecuted Bryant.
The men feature on a poster which says: Wanted for
Mass Murder, for Port Arthur massacre plot to enforce gun control in Australia. Martin Bryant is innocent and was
set up to conceal the Liberal plot.
The creator of the page is not identified and only six
people featured as fans are members, including one who has assumed the identity of Australian Vietnam War veteran
Ted Serong, who died in 2002 and who was said to have believed Bryant was not the shooter.
Mr Dyson was one of the first investigators to search
Bryant's New Town home after the massacre on April 28, 1996.
He retired from the force the following year, after 23
years' service, and now runs a security agency in Tasmania.
He said he had no doubt Bryant was responsible for the
massacre and was in disbelief that anyone could allege he was involved.
"How could anyone ever doubt that Martin Bryant killed
those people?" he said. "What's more absurd is that people can make allegations saying I was involved and to do so
in the public eye for everyone to see.
"Meanwhile, I'm powerless to stop it. People need to
be accountable for what's on the internet, it's just getting out of control because no one is controlling
Bryant pleaded guilty and is serving 35 life sentences
without parole. He killed 20 people in the Broad Arrow Cafe, 12 on the way to the nearby Seascape guesthouse and
three inside Seascape.”
7. The Port Arthur Massacre
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, [while the 33rd
degree Freemason Prime Minister, John Winston Howard, was in office] 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
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 remove semi-automatic weapons from the
Australian population and a gun buy-back proceeded. It is now illegal to own any semi-automatic gun in
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
Prior to 1996 Australia had huge
number of sporting shooters traditionally used in time of war to both train and supplement our
miniscule armed forces.
However, since the psyop at Port
Arthur more than 400,000 reserve forearms have been pulped instead of stored by the Federal
Government. (Joe Vialls)
While gunlaws should make a
country a safer place to live, in reality they are a move against the freedom and self-defence
of the people.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to
keep and bear arms is as a last resort to
protect themselves against tyranny in government".
1-----Nazi Germany established gun
control in 1938 enabling the government to round up 13 million defenceless Jews, Gypsies,
homosexuals, mentally ill and impaired human beings, imprisoning them in concentration camps,
and by a conscious process of attrition, destroyed them.
2-----The Turkish Ottoman Empire
established gun control in 1911, proceeding then to exterminate 1.5 million Armenians from 1914
More gunlaws statistics
Martin Bryant, Killer or Patsy?
It was commented that the kill rate was too high i.e.,
proportion of wounded to killed.
see new link [current 2009] -- http://members.iinet.net.au/~nedwood/Pam06.html
Joe Vialls, an independent investigator with thirty
years direct experience of international military and oil field operations "Though Australia has tens of thousands of skilled sporting shooters it has very few combat
veterans, and even fewer special forces personnel trained to kill large numbers of people quickly in an enclosed
space like the Broad Arrow Cafe, which is roughly the same size as mock-up rooms used for practicing the rescue of
hostages being held in confined spaces by armed terrorists.
"It is hard to kill
quickly under such circumstances for a number of unpleasant reasons, including the fact that shot people
tend to fall against other people, shielding the latter from subsequent bullets.
have to be shot in a careful sequence with split-second timing to maximise kill rates.
Read the Full Story Here:
The Port Arthur Massacre Revisited
8. Who Ordered the Port Arthur
There have been various bombings and
massacres here and abroad. I have been a bit wary of them as some have been hoaxes, however I have very little
doubt about the Port Arthur massacre and the reason for it. I have spoken personally to Wendy Scurr who is
mentioned in item 6 and she is adamant that it was not Martin Bryant who did the shooting. A trained investigator
Joe Vialls also came up with the same conclusion and wrote a well researched book on the
I have received the following from a
person in Tasmania and am passing it on.
The Port Arthur
Massacre, and its connections with the London Bombings.
On Wednesday 26 September Mr Andrew
MacGregor will present a common sense view of the latest World Terrorist attacks that occurred in London and
Glasgow two days after Gordon Brown became the British Prime Minister. He will also discuss the Tasmanian
connection to these incidents. It will be alleged that several important bureaucrats some of who are still active
in public life, were involved in the planning and execution of the Port Arthur massacre.
Mr MacGregor has had 17 years experience
in the Victoria Police Force and has studied Witness Reports, Court Documents, Police Reports and Media Reports. He
will show how the Port Arthur Massacre fits into a pattern very similar to other staged terrorist events throughout
Wed. 26 September 2007 at 7.30 pm Max
Fry Hall, Trevallyn, Launceston Admission $5.00 Concessions $2.00
You probably believe that Martin Bryant,
acting alone, carried out the Port Arthur massacre on Sunday 28th April 1996. If so, can you reconcile the
following facts with the official story?
Martin Bryant was 58 kilometres away
when Mr David Martin was shot at Seascape Cottage. At 10.40 am.
1. On the Sunday morning, two
hours before the murders, ten of the senior managers of Port Arthur were taken to safety many miles away up the
east coast, for a two day seminar with a vague agenda and no visiting speakers. Was the timing of this trip a mere
2. Also just before the shootings
the only two policemen in the region were called away on a wild goose chase. They were sent to the Coal Mine at
Salt Water River, to investigate a heroin drug stash which turned out to be soap powder. This was too far
for them to get to the Broad Arrow Cafe in time to be of any use. Had a policeman remained at Dunalley he would
have closed the swing bridge to prevent the killer(s) from escaping from the peninsula. Did Bryant, IQ 66, organise
3. Big Mortuary Truck.
Before the massacre, a specially-built 22 person capacity mortuary truck was built. It attracted some derision at
the time, but its effective use at Port Arthur was unquestioned. After the massacre it was advertised,
unsuccessfully, for sale via the internet, then converted for another purpose. Without the foresight of Port Arthur, why build it? When it had proven its
worth, why get rid of it? Another coincidence?
4. Martin Bryant has never been
properly identified as the gunman. A young woman who ate her lunch near the gunman just before 1.30 said he had a
freckled face. Graham Collyer, the wounded ex-soldier, who had the best opportunity to observe the killer, said he
had a pock-marked or acned face. Neither description fits Bryant who has a beautifully smooth complexion.
Graham Collyer says that it was not Bryant who shot him in the
5. Illegal Photo. On 30th April
the Hobart Mercury printed a week old photo of Martin Bryant on the front page. This was illegal because at that
stage some of the witnesses had not yet been asked to identify the killer, and the photo would have become fixed in
the minds of the witnesses. When one witness was asked to describe the clothing worn by the gunman, she described
the clothing on the photo instead of what the gunman had worn. The Mercury
newspaper was not prosecuted for breaking the law.
6. Mrs Wendy Scurr, nurse, tour
guide and Ambulance Officer, rang the police at 1.32 pm to report the shooting. She and other medics then cared for
the injured and the dead without any police protection for six and a half hours. Who ordered the armed police to stop at
they had a barbecue?The police who arrived by
boats were a stone's throw away from the main crime scene, the cafe, and they too failed to come in to see
what was going on. Was this meant to increase the trauma of the survivors?
7. Three more shots were fired at
Port Arthur at 6.30pm while Bryant was at Seascape. Who fired those shots?
8. Same Question - Different
Answer. At a recent Forensics Seminar in Queensland where the Tasmanian Police forensic gun inspector, Gerard
Dutton, gave a lecture, the first question came from Mr Ian McNiven. He asked if there was any empirical evidence
to link Martin Bryant to the Broad Arrow Cafe. Sargent Dutton immediately
closed the 15 minute question time and would not reply.When McNiven managed to say "I have here Graham Collyer's police statement...", Sgt
Dutton threatened him with arrest and called for security agents to escort McNiven out of the building. When Dutton
was asked the same question in America by a Doctor at an American seminar, he replied truthfully
- "There is no empirical evidence
to link Bryant to the cafe".
9. Yet a police video tape exists
which proves that the police had an excellent opportunity to get DNA samples and finger prints of the gunman. The
video briefly shows the blue sports bag on a cafe table. The gunman had carried his 3 rifles in this bag and left
it right next to his drinking glass, his Solo soft drink can, knife, fork, plate, video cameras, etc.
Why did the police fail to take DNA samples and finger
10. According to the official story,
Bryant first killed David and Sally Martin at Seascape Cottage in the morning, then went on to Port Arthur. Yet two
policemen have reported seeing a naked woman with black hair, screaming and running from one building to another at
Seascape well into the afternoon. If Sally Martin was dead, who was this
11. Proof of other gunmen in Seascape
Cottage. While Bryant was calmly talking to police by telephone in the cottage during the 'siege' and the
conversation was recorded, someone else fired an SKK rifle 20 times. In the transcript the gunfire is recorded as
'coughs' but an electronic analysis of one of the 'coughs' shows that it was an SKK shot.
12. Two More Very Handy Seminars. On the
Sunday morning, some 25 specialist doctors (Royal Australian College of Surgeons) from all over Australia had
attended a training course in Hobart, and their last lecture was on Terrorist Attack and Gunshot Wounds. They
stayed on to take care of the wounded victims.
13. Also, more than 700 reporters from
17 nations came to a seminar in Hobart. They were asked to arrive during the week-end as the seminar was due to
begin early on Monday morning. How handy to
scribblerschurning out their
anti-gun and disarmament propaganda to the whole world!
14. "There will never be uniform Gun Laws in Australia until we see a massacre somewhere in
Tasmania," said Barry Unsworth, NSW Premier, December, 1987 at a conference in Hobart. Prophecy or Planning?
15. "If we don't get it right this time
(gun laws) next time there is a massacre, and there will be, then they'll take all our guns off us", said the
deputy prime minister, Tim Fischer in May 1996. Who is the "THEY" who would order the removal of our
guns? Did Fischer let slip
that gun confiscation has been orderedby someone other
than our own leaders?
16. No Respect for the Law. Our
laws demand that a Coronial Inquiry must take place (a) when foreign nationals are killed (b) when anyone
dies in a fire John
Howardacted illegally when he
ordered the Coronial Inquiry to be abandoned.
17. It is evident that the massacre was
planned to happen on the ferry which sailed to the Isle of the Dead every day. The victims were to be eighty elderly American
touristswho had come in two
coaches.But the plan went awry because the sailing time
of the ferry had changed from 1.30 to 2.00 pm.
All the preparations were made for a
1.30 massacre, so the killer began his work at the Broad Arrow Cafe at 1.30, instead of on the ferry at
Here is some evidence suggesting that
the plan was to kill the Americans at 1.30 on the way to the Isle of the Dead where tourists are shown the ancient
convict cemetery -
(a) The gunman had tried to buy a ticket
for the 1.30 sailing.
(b) When the gunman began pulling out his weapons in the Cafe, one Professional witness [Anthony Nightingale] stood
up shouting "No, no, not
here!!" If it was not meant to be "here", then it
was meant to be somewhere else. Nightingale
was shot for he had
obviously given the game away.
(c) Had the gunman waited for the 2.00
sailing, the decoyed policemen may have returned with their firearms and two-way radios and upset
(d) Also, with the later start the
trauma surgeons at the Royal Hobart Hospital may have dispersed and not been available to treat the
(e) In a video made by the Tasmania Police we are told that some policemen came by sea to Port Arthur in patrol
boats. These police did not go ashore. They did not come to the crime scenes at the Cafe or elsewhere to help the
victims or to guard the First Aid workers who needed protection. Obviously they expected a massacre at sea, when
they saw nothing they returned to Hobart.
(f) On his way to the Historic Site the gunman stopped to help some girls who had problems with their car.
He told them of his intention to kill some WASPS [Wealthy
Anglo-Saxon Protestants] the Isle of the Dead.
(g) On the very day Martin Bryant was being sentenced in Hobart, President Clinton was addressing the Australian
Parliament in Canberra. Was he there to make sure poor Martin copped the blame for the massacre and that nothing
went wrong with the gun confiscation scheme, which of course was the reason
for the Port Arthur Massacre?
"I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can
do, I should do.
9. Politicians Shirk Responsibility On The Port Arthur
Readers will remember that in the immediate aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre, politicians
developed collective verbal diarrhoea in the House of Representatives as they joined the feeding frenzy
designed to undermine Australian national security by removing defensive weapons from the hands of the
public. Nowadays all that has changed, and despite serious questions about the mass murder and the murderers
remaining unanswered, the collective verbal sphincter has locked tight, presumably
on government orders.
Recently the Federal Member of Wide Bay, Warren Truss, used
the letters column of the South Burnett Times to attack my independent
investigation into the Port Arthur massacre, which used military science to prove that Martin Bryant was incapable
of killing the victims in the Broad Arrow Cafe. In his letter, Mr Truss tried to explain his
reasons for refusing to ask questions in the House of Representatives on behalf of his
So that Truss and other Federal Members can be better
informed, and thus able to do their duty to their constituents by asking meaningful questions in the House about
the sequence of events at Port Arthur, I am providing these additional critical points:-
On the day of the massacre, the only two policemen on the
Tasman Peninsula were decoyed to a remote location at Saltwater River by an anonymous caller reporting a big stash
of heroin. There was no heroin, and four minutes after the two policemen reported their arrival at Saltwater River
by radio, the shooting started in the Broad Arrow Cafe. Alas, the drive from Saltwater River to Port Arthur is a
minimum of thirty minutes, rendering local armed police assistance impossible in a mass murder that lasted only
seventeen minutes from start to finish. Research shows this to be the only drugs decoy ever used on the Tasman
Of the twenty murdered on the Broad Arrow Cafe, nineteen died from the effects of a fatal shot to the head by the Colt
AR15, which the shooter fired from his right-hip at an average range of 12 feet without the benefit
of a laser sight. Overall, only 29 rounds were used to kill or injure a total of 32 people. Such accuracy and speed is appropriate to the top 1% of expert counter-terrorist marksmen, but is an absolute scientific impossibility for an
intellectually-impaired registered invalid. Alas, Martin Bryant always fired his Webley Osprey air
rifle from the left shoulder, because he is and has always been a left handed shooter.
Bryant was evaluated using a range of clinical psychology tests, the result of which were tendered to the
Court. Those results are enough to convince any first-year psychology student that Bryant was so intellectually and
cognitively impaired that he completely lacked the
neuro-phsysiological ability to carry out the complex high-speed Port Arthur operation. Alas, the
psychiatrists ignored their own definitive scientific test results, choosing instead to ramble off into a
misleading surrealistic twilight world of entirely unproven psychoanalytical mumbo-jumbo.
Examining whether Bryant might or might not have disliked
his class mates at school, or whether he might or might not have had a desire to shoot people during his formative
years, become red herrings when faced with the harsh reality that the definitive scientific tests prove Bryant
neuro-physiologically incapable of meaningfully participating in the massacre. The real shooter is still very much at large and must be
brought to justice as swiftly as possible. Clearly this will not happen until the public finally discard the absurd
psychiatric fairy tale that an intellectually-impaired young man with a tested IQ of 66 and severe cognitive
limitations, suddenly and entirely magically metamorphosized into the lethal equivalent of one of the world's most
highly trained counter-terrorist marksman.
In sworn statements to police, eyewitnesses Roganovic and
Horrocks confirmed that the shooter exited through the front door of the Broad Arrow Cafe carrying a weapon, while
a third witness confirmed the weapon was held in the shooter's right hand. Alas, this testimony is in direct
conflict with forged video footage obtained direct from America by the Tasmanian Police Service, who entered it as
evidence in the Supreme Court against Martin Bryant.
The American footage was clearly designed to give the false
impression that Martin Bryant was responsible for the massacre, but that footage has been proven a forgery
scientifically, using a standard TV editing suite, available to anyone in the television industry or to any
Just how much hard scientific proof is required to move a
Federal Member into asking questions in the House of Representatives on behalf of his constituents I do not know,
but Mr Truss might do well to focus on the last point which deals with tendering false evidence to
the courts for the express purpose of securing a conviction. This is an extremely grave offense which
(in Western Australia) carries the penalty of strict life imprisonment. Truss and his colleagues have it in their
power as MPs to raise the matter in the House of Representatives, and to demand that it be formally investigated by
the Australian Federal Police and ASIO. The inevitable result would be a mistrial because of the false evidence
tendered, allowing Martin Bryant to finally have his day
in court before his peers, as the law provides.
10. Special Forces at Port
By Joe Vialls
Mistaravim at work at Beslan, in Gaza and firing dummy rockets
into occupied Palestine, the fence behind the rocketeer separates Gaza from OP proper, and
there are Israeli watch towers just a few hundred meters
“Just try to
remember that the central issue is getting Martin Bryant a trial (which he has
never had), rather than allowing others to deflect attention away from this prime requirement.” (Joe
JV: Back in 1996 when I destroyed the "official" story about
policewoman Yvonne Fletcher’s murder outside the Libyan Embassy in London, a strange thing happened. After fourteen
long years of accusing the Libyans of her ruthless killing, members of the mainstream media suddenly changed their
According to unnamed “MI5 sources”, Yvonne’s murder was actually orchestrated and executed by
renegade members of MI5 and the British
SAS, based at Hereford in England. Seemingly, out of nowhere, those personnel tasked with
protecting British national security and bravely rescuing hostages from the Iranian Embassy in the face of
impossible odds, were charged with changing sides and murdering an unarmed policewoman on the streets of
The reason for this sudden media panic by the lobbies, was probably the knowledge that I had proved
a direct written connection between the CIA and 8 St James Square, the building from which the fatal shot was
fired. Worse perhaps, I had also proved a direct written connection between the same building and powerful
Israeli interests headed by one Frank Maier.
The latter was unable to clarify details about his movements the day Yvonne Fletcher was
murdered, because only a few months after I destroyed the official story in 1996, He was
unfortunately incinerated on a mountainside outside Dubrovnik, when a USAF CT43A carrying Secretary
Ron Brown and others exploded in a fireball.
Rumor has it the plane was decoyed by a false NDB beacon sited on
the mountain, then shot down by a pair of short range Russian made SAM7 heat seekers. But hey, only fools listen
to rumors …
Last month, once again seemingly out of nowhere, someone panicked in Australia and floated an
almost identical rumor about the mass murder at Port Arthur. Unnamed “ASIO sources” apparently claimed that the mass murder was orchestrated and
executed by renegade members of ASIO and the Australian SAS, based at Swanbourne in Western
Australia. What an extraordinary coincidence! The modus operandi is identical of course,
indicating a common origin for both rumors.
It is time to get this all into perspective.
Certainly the number one shooter at Port Arthur was incredibly highly qualified, and demonstrated
specialist skills seen before only in Beirut and the Palestinian Occupied Territories. Unfortunately for the
lobby dream weavers, the British and Australian SAS Regiments have never operated in Beirut or the Occupied
Territories, nor does either proud regiment have any record
of shooting unarmed women and children.
Let us be realistic and limit the candidates to those with motive, method and
opportunity, plus the skills and equipment required for the job. Killing large numbers of unarmed men,
women and children at close range requires shooters who have done this kind of work before, perhaps so many
times they have become completely desensitized to the stress that normal people would suffer in such a
Beyond this, at least one of the shooters must
be a world class marksman in counter terrorist techniques,
capable of the speed and accuracy needed in the Broad Arrow Café, where the first nineteen moving targets were
killed by single shots to the head, fired from the shooter’s right hip.
Weapon selection and familiarity is of critical importance. As any competition marksman will
confirm, the weapon must become an extension of the shooter himself, with both operating together like a single
well-oiled machine. At Port Arthur the weapon of choice was
a cut-down version of the Colt AR15, known technically as the
This is not the weapon of choice for the
British or Australian SAS, nor the weapon of choice for the American Delta Force or SEALs.
However, it is the weapon of choice for a single ruthless organization in the Middle East, well-versed in its
normal use of killing unarmed Palestinian men, women and children at close range in the Occupied
Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce you
to the “Mistaravim,” a civilian Israeli Special Forces unit
officially formed in 1987,
incorporating into its ranks some former members of the IDF who saw service in Beirut during the earlier part of
the decade. Technically, the Mistaravim is comprised of “Special Forces Counter Terrorist Undercover Units” (SF
CT/U), designed to infiltrate designated areas and eliminate the opposition quickly and efficiently.
This they can and frequently do, with at least three current members thought to possess the speed
and accuracy needed for the mass murder at Port Arthur. Unsurprisingly perhaps, some of its members took their holidays down in Australia
during 1996, guess where? Not that this provides 100% proof of guilt, you understand...
Perhaps most interesting is this organization’s complete familiarity with the exact weapon used at
Port Arthur and its proven ability and willingness to use the CAR15 against unarmed men, women and children,
literally hundreds of times in Palestine. For case-hardened members of the Mistaravim, probably the most
desensitized mass murderers on the face of the earth, killing another 35 worthless Goyim at Port Arthur would
not be at all emotional or traumatic.
The Mistaravim’s weapon of choice is enlightening,
especially as the sawn-off CAR15 is all but unknown to Australians. They needed weapons possessing an
enhanced concealment feature, indicating handguns and Sub Machine Guns (SMG). However handguns and SMG
lack the firepower and accuracy of assault rifles, especially in emergency scenarios.
So the Israeli undercover units searched for a potent firepower
assault rifle with a compact frame.
The undercover units lacked the
required financial resources to procure new weapons, so they came out with a shoe-string budget idea - to create
a "home made" Colt Commandos by chopping
down some of the CAR15 barrels in service from the original 14.5 inch length to a shorter sub 10
inch barrel length. Eventually, a new weapon emerged and entered the SF CT undercover units’ arsenal - the
extreme short barreled home made Colt sawn-off CAR15.
From the moment of its first introduction in 1987, the sawn off CAR15 was an immediate success within the SF CT
undercover community. Not so much for its inherent concealment tactical advantage, but rather because it was a huge
status symbol, especially since in 1992 the 14.5 CAR15 become the standard issue weapon in all infantry oriented
units, including both SF and regular. So carrying a sawn off CAR15
not only means you are a SF operator, but also means that you are a member of one of the more prestigious CT
The sawn off CAR15 was such a success that many high ranking IDF officers adopted it, although they didn't have any
actual need for the shorter barrel. Operationally, the sawn-off CAR15 is used in various urban CT application
scenarios, both covert and overt. In order to improve the long-range accuracy of the sawn-off CAR15, most were
equipped with a custom- made modified muzzle compensator (very similar to the one fitted one the Galil Sniper
This compensator replaced the original M16 series flash hider. The sawn-off CAR15 stock was drilled with additional
1-2 holes. The additional holes are known in Israel as Terror Stock, and allow a better firing position when
utilizing the Israeli Close Quarters Battle (CQB) entry technique, i.e. stock in center chest rather than in
The sawn-off CAR15 weights 1.85 kg, is about 64 cm in length with the stock retracted and is about 72 cm with the
stock fully extended. Note that the exact length depends on the actual length of the specific sawn off CAR15
barrel, which vary from one sample to another. The figures given are relevant for a 9 inch long barrel, which is
the average length of the sawn-off Mistaravim barrels. Although more modern weapons are available, sawn-off CAR15s
are still in active duty in several SF CT undercover units, due mainly to their high status.
End of firearm history lesson, which should be enough for even the most ardent gun nut, but in practical terms
at Port Arthur during 1996 the weapon had two other huge
advantages. First, it can be stowed in a "Prince" sports bag of the kind found in the Broad Arrow
Cafe after the murders, which is too short to hold a full-length Colt Commando CAR15. Remember here the
Mistaravim's prime requirement of "enhanced concealment" for tactical scenarios.
The container used to transport the weapon into the Broad Arrow Cafe was unquestionably the Prince sports bag,
conveniently left on a cafe table after the mass murder. At 64-65 cm overall length with its stock fully folded,
the sawn-off Mistaravim CAR15 and magazines fitted inside the 74 cm-long Prince sports bag easily, but the standard "decoy" Colt
Commando later found badly damaged at Seascape could not have fitted at all.
Like all other standard CAR15s, the weapon found at Seascape has a barrel length
of 14.5 inches, resulting in a minimum overall length of 78 centimetres with its stock fully folded -
a full four centimetres longer than the Prince sports bag itself!
This is critical forensic information, because it proves once and for all time that the damaged weapon found many
hours later in the same Seascape building as Martin Bryant, could not under any circumstances have been the
same weapon as the CAR15 used in the Broad Arrow Cafe for the mass murder.
The second huge advantage of the Mistaravim sawn-off CAR15, is that its shortened barrel generates a massive blast
from the muzzle each time it fires. Well above 160 decibels (pain threshold is only 140 decibels), the CAR15’s muzzle blast is on a par with a stun grenade, and has the
same effect in a confined space like the Broad Arrow Café. Thus for several seconds after the first
round was discharged, the spatial orientation of everyone inside the Café was destroyed, making it completely
impossible for anyone to attempt to defend themselves and their families.
No-one made the much publicized statement “No. Not
here!” because after the first three shots, when the statement was allegedly made, everyone
in the Café was stone deaf, with at least two survivors suffering burst eardrums. Apart from the shooter, who was
unquestionably wearing ear and nasal protection, the occupants of the Café were dazed and incoherent, their central
nervous systems completely stunned. It was to be at least fifteen minutes, in some cases more than a week, before
most would be able to hear properly again.
So much for the Mistaravim and Port Arthur, and back to those
willing to spread unsubstantiated rumors about the institutions tasked to protect them, viz. MI5, ASIO,
and the British and Australian Special Air Service Regiments.
Perhaps you all missed the courage of the latter-named rescuing hostages from an embassy in the face of massed
Skorpion firepower; operating alone on the East Timor border, and dying in Blackhawk crashes while merely
practicing their skills in defending your respective nations? It is true they were only doing the jobs they were
paid to do, but would you be up to it personally?
In time of war, a small core of these men will go on missions you have probably never heard of, because until
recently the information was highly classified. In the northern hemisphere at least, special forces troopers are
those responsible for placing nuclear demolition munitions behind enemy lines, destroying key installations and
stalling an invasion of your country, perhaps for years. None have illusions about the missions. If required to go,
they will do so in the certain knowledge that few if any will survive.
Do not misunderstand me here. Australia is supposedly a country of free speech, and I feel sure members of the
Australian SAS are far too highly disciplined (and far too busy) to wander around Victoria and Queensland looking
for people who have besmirched their good regimental name. This may not however be the case where certain
supporters are concerned.
As an example of this, several years ago a British media-owned publishing house printed a book called Operation
Nemesis, allegedly written by a former member of the British SAS with detailed knowledge of operations in
Northern Ireland. Blood-curdling it was too, with active members of the Special Air Service accused of shooting
dozens of innocent Irishmen through the back of the head, before burying them in a mass grave deep in the woods. It
was an absolutely riveting read, but it was all untrue.
To cut a very long story short, some months later the true identity of the writer became known, and it was no great
surprise to find he was a former Army corporal (a cook or something similar from memory), who had never been near
the SAS barracks, much less a member of the Regiment. Rumor has it that shortly after this exposure, the retired
corporal's head started bouncing off very hard solid stone walls in London. So often in fact, that he almost had a
nervous breakdown. But hey, as I wrote earlier, only fools listen to rumors...
In any event, for as long as there are fifth columnists among us willing to
recirculate unsubstantiated and blatant propaganda, it is very easy to “divide and rule” countries like Britain and
Australia. The best known method is to turn citizens against the police and military, thereby automatically
directing suspicion at any officer tasked with law and order, either here and
As a dual British/Australian citizen with a military
background, I am appalled at the number of people apparently willing to believe that their own armed forces would
be prepared to murder 35 Australian men, women and children in cold blood.
Do not be sucked in by disinformation ploys. You all
have high intelligence, and do not need to read what others or I might write for guidance. “Lateral thinking” is a
puffed up new-age expression designed to pamper pompous academics, but it has no meaning in real life. What really
matters is knowing how to
think, rather than allowing the media to decide what you should think about. We can
all do this, but it does require practice.
Interested? Try this: Record the television evening news on your VCR but do not watch it. When the program is over,
play back the tape and watch it with the volume OFF. Without watching the anchorman’s face (to avoid accidental
lip-reading), decide what you think each news item is about from the video alone, and make a few notes. Now rewind
the tape and replay it with the volume ON. You will probably be amazed at the difference between your own
interpretation of the video, and what the anchorman is trying to make you believe!
On the subject of Port Arthur and Martin Bryant there will always be massed
media deception, and lobby manipulation. Just try to remember that the central issue is getting
Martin Bryant a trial (which he has never had), rather than allowing others to deflect
attention away from this prime requirement. Be encouraged rather than discouraged by the recent attempt on ASIO and
the Australian Special Air Service, because it proves the
lobbies, and others behind the mass murder, are slowly losing their nerve. For the present, be
satisfied with that.
11. Bursting the Malachi Martin
March 17, 2010
By Henry Makow Ph.D
Malachi Brendan Martin
forces have maintained the fiction that Malachi
Martin left the Jesuit Order voluntarily or on principle. In fact, this prominent church critic was forced to leave
the priesthood because he was a scoundrel and a philanderer.
By 1962, he had alienated the affections of at least four housewives and then dropped them.
When one spurned woman asked Martin's brother in Dublin where Malachi was, she was told:
"Dear girl. I don't know. I must tell you, you are the fourth woman who has come here asking me the same
question about Malachi. All of them have essentially the same story to tell. That they were in love with Malachi
and thought Malachi was in love with them."
"Four woman?" she demanded. "The same story?"
He nodded, and said, "And one rather attractive young man."
This account can be found in Robert Kaiser's book, "Clerical Error" (2002). The woman was his wife.
Kaiser was the TIME magazine correspondent in Rome in the early 1960's.
Martin was a source who became a close family friend. Martin didn't just break up Kaiser's family. (Kaiser and his
wife Mary had two young children.) It was much darker. To allay suspicions, Martin mobilized a network of
influential contacts to smear Kaiser and have him committed as a paranoid schizophrenic.
ZIONIST AGENT AND LIAR
Martin's books exposed satanic practices in the Catholic church, and the Pope's role in the New World
Order. While pretending to be against world government and the decline of
traditional faith and practice, Martin went a long way to discrediting the church. His many books were
published by Illuminati mind controller Simon and Schuster, which was a sign that something was fishy.
Kaiser's book, on the other hand, is published by Continuum which
bills itself as "unconstrained by the interests of any global media group or academic institution, and based in
London and New York."
In it, Kaiser recalls that Martin started hanging out with two officials of the New York-based American Jewish
Committee and flashing $100 bills. The Jews were particularly concerned that the 1962 Second Vatican Council
pass "the Jewish Schema" which absolved Jews of blame for Christ's Crucifixion and by implication accept guilt
for 2000 years of anti-Semitism.
This is a typical example of how Illuminati mind controllers invert good and evil. The Crucifixion of Christ was
part of an ancient conspiracy against God and man reaching fruition with the New World Order.
"Martin was their lobbyist." Kaiser wrote. "These Jews were using him and paying him well for his help. (190)
Martin was the secretary to Cardinal Augustin Bea who spearheaded the Schema and a general liberalization of church
dogma and practice. According to an article in Wikipedia,
Martin passed confidential documents to the American Jewish Committee, which is a front for Illuminati bankers. He
also wrote under pseudonyms many inflammatory articles for Illuminati magazines like Harper's describing the
foot dragging of Vatican conservatives.
Martin had a reputation as a liar. Mark Owen cites psychiatrist M. Scott Peck's book
"Glimpses of the Devil" about possession and exorcism. According to Peck, Martin, although a
formidable scholar and polyglot (17 languages), could by turns be a "pathological liar" and a "leprechaun."
In an email, Owen told me that Peck said that in his book "Hostages to the Devil" Martin claimed he performed exorcisms that were actually performed by Peck.
Bob Kaiser's book, Clerical Error is also about attaining maturity. Kaiser spent 10 years as a Jesuit
himself. He makes the point that immaturity is really a function of having "idols
and "taking guidance from "authorities" like the Jesuits or "experts."
Kaiser was fooled by Martin's collar and couldn't see what was happening in his own home. Then instead of taking
action, he sought help from the Jesuit Order, who generally prevaricated. His so-called friends didn't alert
Kaiser learned that maturity is not so much gaining wisdom as confidence in one's
own judgment, trusting oneself no matter one's limitations.
“‘Thou shalt have no other gods before me’ is really an order from God to all of us: to take charge of
ourselves, think our own thoughts, and feel our own feelings. I other words, to grow up.” (262)
For a lot of us, maturity has been realizing that no one knows very much, and there are a lot of unscrupulous,
stupid and evil people in the world.
One of these was Malachi Martin. Just a month ago I posted an article about his claims of a "satanic
enthronement in the Vatican." I had always regarded him as a good guy although I wondered about his Jewish
Now, I would avoid his work, because I regard him as a classic example of the Illuminati phoney opposition.
Martin pretended to oppose the dismantling of the Catholic Church while secretly
advancing it. His personal behavior revealed where his true loyalties lay.
Thanks to Mark Owen for referring me to Clerical Error
Michael Hoffman on Malarchy Martin
Who is Malachi Martin?
The Jesuit Operative Malachi “Maimonides” Martin
Malachi Martin: Double-Minded Occultist
Jesuit Operative Malachi Martin
An Exchange of Correspondence Regarding Malachi
12. Would US Troops Fire on
March 15, 2010
There were more than one
hundred dead and wounded, including children and babies, in 1932 when US troops dispersed a camp of WW1 veterans
demanding only what had been promised them.
Doubt America ...
By M. Ernest
question often has been asked, especially
during these last few years, if American military troops would indeed fire upon American citizens if so ordered by
Washington. The answer? Have no doubt America, because it's
WWI was a terrible war that
introduced new weapons and tactics resulting 100,000 US deaths as well as US 200,000 wounded and gassed in the
first eighteen months alone.
The soldiers fighting that war
for America earned between $1.00 and $1.50 per day while those serving under Selective Service in factories
supporting the war earned as much as ten times that amount. After the war, the veteran soldiers demanded to be paid
what they had lost during the war years as "adjusted compensation" as promised by the United States government.
Later, their detractors would call it a "bonus".
FAST FORWARD TO
Herbert Hoover, a self-made
millionaire, said during his inaugural address that "the future of the country was bright with hope"... Seven
months later the Great Depression hit. In 1932, there was 25% unemployment and many of the unemployed were
WWI veterans and their families. It was decided that the veterans led by Walter W. Waters would march
on Washington, D.C.
By May of 1932, there were
approximately 10,000 veterans and a few families totaling 30,000, who occupied what was called the Anacostia Flats
neighborhood of Washington, D.C. where the vets slept in tents, barrels and some makeshift huts in almost a foot of
Later, the veterans and their
families proceeded to march and demonstrate to remind the Congressional representatives to keep their promise of
compensation to the WWI vet, so badly needed and necessary during this nationwide financial
At first, the Congress approved
the measure but the Senate soundly defeated it days later. It was during this time President Hoover resolved
to drive the veterans out of Washington D.C. back to their homes. However, the
larger problem was that most of the veterans didn't have any homes. Many were
squatting in abandoned buildings.
Solution? President Hoover
ordered the Washington, D.C. police to drive the vets out of the abandoned buildings. As with any forcible
action, it was met with resistance...people fought the police...bricks were thrown and the police opened fire: two
vets were killed.
that anytime there is a police action around a government capital, troops are called ... reader, take notice.
President Hoover ordered General
Douglas MacArthur who led 200 Cavalry, 400 armed troops, tanks and other armored vehicles against AMERICAN
citizens and veterans of a war the government sent them to fight and die!
General MacArthur was not the
only "Who's Who" participating in this "tyrannyfest", General MacArthur's aide, General Dwight D. Eisenhower and
then Major George Patton also had a hand in the action. It should be noted that a witness, then seven year
old Naamen Seigle, witnessed Major Patton draw his saber and lead the charge against the mass of
With Patton and the Calvary
charging, the 400 ground troops dawned their gas masks and proceeded to hurl gas grenades into the crowd of
veterans, a bitter reminder of battles such as in the Meuse-Argonne Forest in France.
No, this gassing was compliments
of their own government. As the veterans ran choking from the effects of the gas, the troops with bayonets
fixed, charged and jabbed their way into the crowd. Hundreds of veterans
were injured and several killed.
After General MacArthur gained
control of the situation, President Hoover ordered the General to proceed no further. But General MacArthur had
other ideas. General MacArthur is quoted as saying "I cannot bother with pieces of paper during a military
operation" and advanced on the Anacostia Flats encampment. It was during this unauthorized attack that
MacArthur ordered the burning of the encampment to the ground.
What justification did General
MacArthur use? He felt a Communist plot for revolution was at hand.
What do we learn from this piece
of history? The government will use our own military to suppress its citizenry if it feels threatened and
it will use any excuse to do so.
Comitatus does not apply to Washington D.C. because it is a federal district governed by the U.S. Congress (U.S.
Constitution, Article 1. Section 8. Clause 17). As usual, they have their bases covered.
Mike Smith is a 49 year old Senior at Liberty University majoring in
Psychology and preparing for his Masters work in Professional Counseling. " I find myself apolitical with only the
best interest of humanity in mind and a firm believer in God and Truth."
Additional Resources ...
The Warning of the Last
The Real Crisis Is About To
Unfold And Its Not Financial
The Usher of Desecration
The Protocols Of The Learned Elders Of
How to Download and Keep
YouTube Videos …
Go to the following link for
How to Download and Keep YouTube Videos
Ask a Question or Just Let Me Know What You Think ...
My aim is to make Last Days Watch newsletter as useful to you as possible. So
if you have any questions, suggestions, tips, or other comments, or ideas for upcoming issues, I would love to hear
Just e-mail me at the email address shown at the bottom of the page, or use the form on the Contact
Thanks for reading.
See you next issue.
John Mulligan http://www.NazareneRemnant.org
Subscriber's Notes Section ...
HOW DID YOU GET ON THIS LIST:
You or someone you know subscribed you, or you downloaded an eBook from our site, or you are a
subscriber to our "Last Days Watch" ezine, or you requested free information from us. If someone has
subscribed you against your will, please follow the UNSUBSCRIBE instructions that are found in the How to
Unsubscribe section below. Then you will no longer receive this newsletter.
PRIVACY STATEMENT: Our list of subscribers is strictly confidential. Your details have
never been and never will be passed on to any third party, whatsoever. Your privacy is paramount to us! Therefore
it gets the respect it deserves. Should you ever wish to unsubscribe, see the instructions on how to do this at the
bottom of every issue.
SPAM DISCLAIMER: Every subscriber to this newsletter has personally requested a
subscription, and have confirmed their subscription through a double-optin procedure.
To SUBSCRIBE go to this page:
How to UNSUBSCRIBE:
At the bottom of every e-Mail sent by NazareneRemnant.org you will find a special link that enables you to
UNSUBSCRIBE at any moment, or EDIT your subscription details. The link looks like the one below, and all you have
to do is click on it, or highlight the link, copy to the clipboard, and then paste into your browser, and hit
Example Link For Explanation Purposes Only ...
Click on the link below to CANCEL your subscription or EDIT your details: