Author Topic: Martin Bryant Innocent?  (Read 15731 times)


agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2014, 02:57:44 AM »



agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2014, 03:00:11 AM »






Dr Kincaid

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 867
  • Ice machine broken
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2014, 06:06:13 AM »
really sad  a gullible public could no see what a scam it was
Thanks for posting this

The Grim Lifter

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3810
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2014, 06:19:40 AM »
He supposedly has an IQ of 66 yet hit 19 of 20 shots at close range with a high powered firearm.

He pled not guilty so they delayed the trial until he pled guilty.

Australia is as corrupt as any nation, the heads of state think they are smarter than anyone. Couldn't get away with this now with video's on every phone.

The Grim Lifter

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3810
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2014, 06:21:58 AM »
Let me give you an example of the people you are trying to fool in Australia.

Vince Basile. Rest my case.

Army of One

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30388
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2014, 06:47:18 AM »
Is this Kobe's dad?

io856

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2014, 11:58:23 AM »
I wouldn't say innocent
As he admitted to that whole guy in the BMW as hostage situation
But certainly a strange turn of events prior to, during and after the massacre.

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2014, 02:07:04 AM »
I wouldn't say innocent
As he admitted to that whole guy in the BMW as hostage situation
But certainly a strange turn of events prior to, during and after the massacre.

He never admited to the hostage situation that "actually occurred" - he admitted to a hostage situation at a different location with different people, who "never existed."  Police never could work out who these mystery people were - and no one fitting their description was harmed or missing.  It is as if he was "prompted" or coerced or was "playing a role". 

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2014, 02:11:27 AM »
Brigadier Ted Serong, former head of Australian forces in Vietnam, was just as impressed. In 1999, Serong—who explained that his eyes had first been opened by the "astonishing proportion of killed to wounded"—told Melbourne newspaper the Age:

Quote
"There was an almost satanic accuracy to that shooting performance. Whoever did it is better than I am, and there are not too many people around here better than I am."


http://www.whale.to/b/wernerhoff.html

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #10 on: June 20, 2014, 02:26:26 AM »
Martin Bryant, an intellectually impaired registered invalid with no training in the use of high powered assault weapons, could not under any circumstances have achieved or maintained the incredibly high and consistent killed-to-injured ratio and kill-rate which were bench marks of the port Arthur massacre. Whoever was on the trigger that fateful day demonstrated professional skills equal to some of the best special forces shooters in the world, His critical error lay in killing too many people too quickly while injuring far too few, thereby exposing himself for what he was: a highly trained combat shooter probably ranked among the top twenty such specialists in the western world.

Over the years television viewers have been subjected to such a barrage of Rambo-style television programs that most now believe every time Sylvester Stallone points a gun and pulls the trigger, twenty bad guys immediately fall down dead from lethal shots to the head or heart. Unfortunately this Hollywood media rubbish is hopelessly misleading and in no way reflects the difficulties involved in killing large numbers of people quickly, regardless of whether those people are armed or not, and regardless of the ranges involved. For a number of reasons explained later, killing efficiently at close range in crowded and confined spaces presents the shooter with far more complex targeting problems than those associated with conventional open-air combat scenarios.

Media claims that those killed in the Broad Arrow Cafe were shot at point- blank range where 'Bryant' could not possibly have missed are complete rubbish. Point- blank range is where the muzzle of the weapon is held against the body of the target, In the Broad Arrow Cafe the shooter fired at an average range of twelve feet, where a tiny aim-off error of three degrees is enough to ensure that a bullet completely misses a target the size of a human head.

Readers are invited to prove to themselves just how small an error that is, by laying two twelve-foot long pieces of string flat on the floor alongside of each other, with the far ends four inches apart. That helps put things into perspective, doesn't it?

Scientific terms such as killed- to-injured ratio and kill-rate are enough to bore most readers to death, but in order to fully comprehend the enormity of the media lies about the massacre, and expose the planned nature of the operation it is essential information. The killed-to-injured ratio is used to calculate reliably how many injured survivors should be expected for every person killed for a given number of rounds fired. Even assault rounds as powerful as those fired by the Colt AR15 can only ensure a one-shot kill if the target is hit in the head, a six by six inch target: or in the heart, a ten by ten inch target. Together these areas form between one fifth and one seventh of the over-all body target areas, so for every person killed there will be between five and seven injured, expressed as "1 to 5" and "1 to 7".

The records show that a total of 32 people were shot in the Broad Arrow Cafe, so at best we would expect 4 dead and 28 injured, or at worst 6 dead and 26 injured. These are very reliable military figures based on hard science, but the actual figures in the Broad Arrow Cafe were 20 dead and 12 injured - an incredible inverted ratio of 1.66 to 1, or nearly two dead for every one injured.

Special forces train continuously for months on end to achieve a ratio as high as this, which lies far beyond the abilities of regular soldiers, and is an absolute scientific impossibility for an intellectually impaired registered invalid.

http://www.whale.to/b/viallspam.html#MARTIN_BRYANT_-_THE_OTHER_STORY_-_PART_TWO_

Dr Kincaid

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 867
  • Ice machine broken
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #11 on: June 20, 2014, 02:36:00 AM »
More then likely a role played scenario workshoped by his Travistock therapist in the lead up to the tragedy. ???

Martin had spent a lot of time under "treatment"
He is locked in jail never to be released all with out a trial  ???
Australia is a little play set for the shadow government to play act out little scenarios.

Without Port Arther you Americanos  would have had no Devnver Colarado and some of the more obvious staged the current your government seems so hell bent on putting on.
Does anyone actually think these events are real & random ???

In short you know how all this ends.
Say goodby to your guns America.

You will be told it is for your own good and safety.
The New price for freedom.
Obama laughs and prepares your shackles.
Whoosshhh


.
.
.

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #12 on: June 20, 2014, 02:43:47 AM »
The replacement lawyer who "got Martin to confess" was himself later imprisoned for 4 years for fraud.

Quote
Jail term for Martin Bryant lawyer

    The Australian
    September 20, 2008 12:00AM


THE Tasmanian lawyer who represented mass killer Martin Bryant has been jailed for four years for stealing more than $500,000 from his clients and law firm over a five-year period.

John William Avery, 60, who had pleaded guilty to 130 counts of stealing between December 2001 and March 2006, was sentenced to four years' jail in the Tasmanian Supreme Court yesterday. He will serve two years and three months before he is eligible for parole.

The court was told Avery stole from sick, grieving and injured clients to finance his high life.

Chief Justice Ewan Crawford said Avery had been a lawyer for more than 30 years and "was well-regarded by his clients for his caring and friendly nature".

AAP

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/news/jail-term-for-bryant-lawyer/story-e6frg6ox-1111117535694


Ropo

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2895
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #13 on: June 20, 2014, 06:48:57 AM »
Brigadier Ted Serong, former head of Australian forces in Vietnam, was just as impressed. In 1999, Serong—who explained that his eyes had first been opened by the "astonishing proportion of killed to wounded"—told Melbourne newspaper the Age:


http://www.whale.to/b/wernerhoff.html

What a fucking bullshit. Shooting unarmed people inside the hall of the restaurant doesn't require any specials skills. Why it would? People are in one room, and you have a semi automatic rifle, and lot of ammunition. Only complete idiots could use arguments like that. And why do you idiots talk about this like there isn't any evidence what so ever? Do you want me to explain why? You gather your information from the foil hat morons web sites, which never can give you the truth, because it is against their agenda. They do not handle the truth at all, they're dealing with nothing but the bullshit. That's why you clearly doesn't understand that there was people left alive in that restaurant, there were eyewitnesses, there were evidence, security cameras, etc. etc. which clearly point out who to blame. Once again, you do not have any evidence at all to prove your claims, you have only that bullshit. Those videos doesn't provide anything real, not anything which person with normal intelligence even could call as evidence. False flag my ass, you got false positive when they tested you for pre school to find out if you have a brains at all  ;D

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #14 on: June 20, 2014, 07:18:04 AM »
What a fucking bullshit. Shooting unarmed people inside the hall of the restaurant doesn't require any specials skills. Why it would? People are in one room, and you have a semi automatic rifle, and lot of ammunition. Only complete idiots could use arguments like that. And why do you idiots talk about this like there isn't any evidence what so ever? Do you want me to explain why? You gather your information from the foil hat morons web sites, which never can give you the truth, because it is against their agenda. They do not handle the truth at all, they're dealing with nothing but the bullshit. That's why you clearly doesn't understand that there was people left alive in that restaurant, there were eyewitnesses, there were evidence, security cameras, etc. etc. which clearly point out who to blame. Once again, you do not have any evidence at all to prove your claims, you have only that bullshit. Those videos doesn't provide anything real, not anything which person with normal intelligence even could call as evidence. False flag my ass, you got false positive when they tested you for pre school to find out if you have a brains at all  ;D

Yes what would the highest ranking Australian Soldier in Vietnam know?  I am sure you are much more knowledgeable than him  ::)

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #15 on: June 22, 2014, 01:30:11 AM »
This is an amazing interview/speech.

This woman was a first responder and in the thick of it from start to end.

A MUST WATCH.


Ropo

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2895
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2014, 11:59:37 PM »
Yes what would the highest ranking Australian Soldier in Vietnam know?  I am sure you are much more knowledgeable than him  ::)

What couldn't complete idiot say for the money? 1. What the fuck Australian did in Vietnam? 2. What the fuck he knows about the shooting armless people behind closed doors...or do he? Is this what they teach in Australian army? Gather opposites in one small room before you shoot them? I at least have been in the army, in fact in the same army who kick the living shit out from the the Russians at the winter war, so I know something about the matter. I got my first gun 1974 and I have been shooting ever sense, so I know something about guns also. How about you, you foil hat brat? Fighting you way trough the pre school already?

Your silly statement is pending about the fact, that every fucking interview in the shitty newspapers tells absolute truth, but in the real life what you read is opinion of the individual. Do this one fucking ex soldier some how overrule all the eyewitnesses? No way in hell. If there is dozens of living people who say, that Bryant shoot at them, you can bet your balls it is a fact. There is eyewitnesses, security tapes and tons of concrete evidence, guns, bullets, fingerprints etc., and then there is bunch of foil hat loony's, who deny all this to wind up some shitty conspiracy theory. How a human can be so fucking stupid, that he believes that kind of foil hat crap? Stupidity can't cover it, you have to be insane  ;D

Simple Simon

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2014, 12:03:41 AM »
He supposedly has an IQ of 66 yet hit 19 of 20 shots at close range with a high powered firearm.

He pled not guilty so they delayed the trial until he pled guilty.

Australia is as corrupt as any nation, the heads of state think they are smarter than anyone. Couldn't get away with this now with video's on every phone.

Are you aware IQ tests rarely involve shooting a weapon?

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2014, 01:10:19 AM »
What couldn't complete idiot say for the money? 1. What the fuck Australian did in Vietnam? 2. What the fuck he knows about the shooting armless people behind closed doors...or do he? Is this what they teach in Australian army? Gather opposites in one small room before you shoot them? I at least have been in the army, in fact in the same army who kick the living shit out from the the Russians at the winter war, so I know something about the matter. I got my first gun 1974 and I have been shooting ever sense, so I know something about guns also. How about you, you foil hat brat? Fighting you way trough the pre school already?

Your silly statement is pending about the fact, that every fucking interview in the shitty newspapers tells absolute truth, but in the real life what you read is opinion of the individual. Do this one fucking ex soldier some how overrule all the eyewitnesses? No way in hell. If there is dozens of living people who say, that Bryant shoot at them, you can bet your balls it is a fact. There is eyewitnesses, security tapes and tons of concrete evidence, guns, bullets, fingerprints etc., and then there is bunch of foil hat loony's, who deny all this to wind up some shitty conspiracy theory. How a human can be so fucking stupid, that he believes that kind of foil hat crap? Stupidity can't cover it, you have to be insane  ;D

It was an interview with the Age newspaper, no money changed hands.

You really are very stupid.

jwb

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5804
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2014, 02:36:21 AM »
The guy fired over 250 rounds that day and there were tourists who filmed him walking around shooting at people.

This is the dumbest CT ever.

ESFitness

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10175
  • i win.
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2014, 02:39:28 AM »
I saw this thread and thought "huh? what'd Monica Brant do?"

The Grim Lifter

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3810
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2014, 05:58:58 AM »
The guy fired over 250 rounds that day and there were tourists who filmed him walking around shooting at people.

This is the dumbest CT ever.

But they let him plead Not Guilty right? I mean when do the Police decide the victims families have been through enough and there shouldn't be a trial?

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2014, 09:11:09 AM »
The guy fired over 250 rounds that day and there were tourists who filmed him walking around shooting at people.

This is the dumbest CT ever.

 More lies.  Show us this video buddy?  You can't because the only video is blurry and he cannot be identified at all.  YOU ARE ONE DUMB FELLOW SPOUTING OFF CRAP YOU CAN'T EVEN BEGIN TO BACK UP.

Ropo

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2895
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #23 on: June 25, 2014, 10:28:27 AM »
It was an interview with the Age newspaper, no money changed hands.

You really are very stupid.

You believe that interview of an potential idiot proves more than eyewitnesses, evidence, security tapes etc. and I am very stupid? Maybe, but I do not believe that kind of crap, so at least I am sane, which we can't say about you  ;D

agenda21nwo

  • Guest
Re: Martin Bryant Innocent?
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2014, 10:30:22 AM »
You believe that interview of an potential idiot proves more than eyewitnesses, evidence, security tapes etc. and I am very stupid? Maybe, but I do not believe that kind of crap, so at least I am sane, which we can't say about you  ;D

You are the only "potential idiot".  Highest ranking Australian soldier in the Vietnam war.  You do know about the Vietnam war now don't you....