Just after noon on 28th April 1996, an unknown marksman opened fire on diners in the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur in Australia. In less than 20 minutes at this and five other crime scenes, the marksman killed 35, injured 22, and crippled two cars with only 64 shots. Nineteen of the first twenty dead in the Broad Arrow Cafe died from single shots to the head, all fired by the unknown marksman from his right hip. This staggering display of marksman- ship was blamed on left-handed and intellectually impaired Martin Bryant, whose shooting experience extended to popping off cans in the bush, and had no military training of any kind. From the time of his arrest, remand prisoner Martin Bryant was illegally held in strict solitary confinement and denied access to media of any kind until his police interrogation on 4th July 1996. When he refused to admit to the Port Arthur Massacre at interrogation, he was once more placed back in illegal solitary confinement. Eventually in desperation during November 1996, Martin Bryant pleaded "guilty" 72 times, thereby allowing the authorities to avoid a humiliating trial at which they could present no hard evidence of guilt. Intellectually impaired Martin Bryant was convicted by a hysterical media pack, then forced to plead guilty by prison officials illegally enforcing solitary confinement.

http://home.overflow.net.au/~nedwood/portarthur.html

wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2008 at 8:57pm:

Just after noon on 28th April 1996, an unknown marksman opened fire on diners in the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur in Australia. In less than 20 minutes at this and five other crime scenes, the marksman killed 35, injured 22, and crippled two cars with only 64 shots. Nineteen of the first twenty dead in the Broad Arrow Cafe died from single shots to the head, all fired by the unknown marksman from his right hip. This staggering display of marksman- ship was blamed on left-handed and intellectually impaired Martin Bryant, whose shooting experience extended to popping off cans in the bush, and had no military training of any kind. From the time of his arrest, remand prisoner Martin Bryant was illegally held in strict solitary confinement and denied access to media of any kind until his police interrogation on 4th July 1996. When he refused to admit to the Port Arthur Massacre at interrogation, he was once more placed back in illegal solitary confinement. Eventually in desperation during November 1996, Martin Bryant pleaded "guilty" 72 times, thereby allowing the authorities to avoid a humiliating trial at which they could present no hard evidence of guilt. Intellectually impaired Martin Bryant was convicted by a hysterical media pack, then forced to plead guilty by prison officials illegally enforcing solitary confinement. http://home.overflow.net.au/~nedwood/portarthur.html

hmmmmm someone refute this please it has a credible point or two

Don't believe everything you read.

Classic Liberal wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2008 at 9:33pm:

wrote on Mar 23rd, 2008 at 8:57pm: Just after noon on 28th April 1996, an unknown marksman opened fire on diners in the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur in Australia. In less than 20 minutes at this and five other crime scenes, the marksman killed 35, injured 22, and crippled two cars with only 64 shots. Nineteen of the first twenty dead in the Broad Arrow Cafe died from single shots to the head, all fired by the unknown marksman from his right hip. This staggering display of marksman- ship was blamed on left-handed and intellectually impaired Martin Bryant, whose shooting experience extended to popping off cans in the bush, and had no military training of any kind. From the time of his arrest, remand prisoner Martin Bryant was illegally held in strict solitary confinement and denied access to media of any kind until his police interrogation on 4th July 1996. When he refused to admit to the Port Arthur Massacre at interrogation, he was once more placed back in illegal solitary confinement. Eventually in desperation during November 1996, Martin Bryant pleaded "guilty" 72 times, thereby allowing the authorities to avoid a humiliating trial at which they could present no hard evidence of guilt. Intellectually impaired Martin Bryant was convicted by a hysterical media pack, then forced to plead guilty by prison officials illegally enforcing solitary confinement. http://home.overflow.net.au/~nedwood/portarthur.html hmmmmm someone refute this please it has a credible point or two

It does have a credible point or two.

This has been widely argued on the net.

The fact that Bryant was intellectually impaired does raise some question marks in relation to any 'confession' he offered ,thats just for a start.

Originally he pled not guilty which was refused.

He was able to be an extremely good shot in the cafe and other places yet when he was holed up in a building for the final siege he fired off dozens of shots without a single hit. When police snipers were moving in to the building he told them to back off as they were going to 'hit your (their) main man' and the building was destroyed shortly after without there being an investigation in to it. Why was the building destroyed to start with? Destroying evidence isn't usually how things are done.

Read the investigation it raises a lot of questions.

im a pretty fair shot with a firearm. passably intelligent...

with lots of practice of shooting from the hip, its doubtful i could have scored half the headshots bryant made in that cafe......

the chinese murdered 3000 of its citizens in tianamen square.
the us murdred 3000 on 911.
stalin murdered 30 million in russia.

governments will murder its citizens to achieve their agenda. do you really believe our government wouldnt? our government is part of the murder of 650,000 iraqis, started with decieteful intel......

So what are we all implying now? That JWH, the Liberal govt and the AFP or SAS killed some innocent people, set up a patsy so that they can enact the gun buyback scheme and implement new gun laws?

: :-?

very good. i dont know. but im open minded enough to consider it.

i just spent an hour re reading some of the inconsistancies in the official story of port arthur...and there are MANY glaring mistakes and inconsistancies....

my question is; how can all these facts be available that would form a case for an inquirey, yet there is none?

as a side note. joe vialls was a dis information stooge. so dont go with his side of events. he sets up the 'alternate' view of things to fail....

things like saying the gunman only took 90 seconds in the cafe to murder those people, (which is the official line) but witnesses say the shooting happened over 5 minutes.....also, vialls contends it was israeli gunmen....so as to turn the conspiracy into anti-semitism, and deflect the blame away from our intelligence/military, who would most likely be the ones to have to carry out such horror..

my question is; how can all these facts be available that would form a case for an inquirey, yet there is none

Perhaps they aren't facts at all.

as a side note. joe vialls was a dis information stooge. so dont go with his side of events. he sets up the 'alternate' view of things to fail...

LOL. It sucks when all the other conspiracy theorists won't tow the line and blame it on the people you want to blame, hey?

all i can do is enlighten you. for you to see, you must first open your eyes..

imperial wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2008 at 6:43am:

things like saying the gunman only took 90 seconds in the cafe to murder those people, (which is the official line) but witnesses say the shooting happened over 5 minutes....

It's also worth considering that time is in the eye of the beholder. When you are in the thick of it and adreneline is feeding your fear, time will appear to slow down. What may in fact be 90 seconds can feel like 5 minutes when the world is exploding around you.

Just putting it out there.....

where were the witnesses situated during this event acid...????

I don't know Imp, you're the one telling the story. You tell me.

If they were right at the heart of the action I'm sure that you'll agree that time would slow for them. Even if they were outside the cafe and/or a little further away from the action the effects would be the same with varying degrees.

I'll recount a very personal experience - I was actually one block away and around the corner when the Russel St bombing happened. I can tell you that, and having never face a situation like it before (and hopefully never will again); and as a witness and spectator it felt like a VERY long time (hours) when in fact it was only a few minutes.  :-/

One of my favourite things was this.....

Often a witness would say that something happened in just five minutes.

My next question was silence.....

(While I counted, to my self, hoping to reach 60 seconds.)

Invariably, the Judge would intervene out of impatience, and thus help me out, because they always jumped in well before I got even close to 60 seconds.

I'd then ask the witness, 'Was it as long as that."

"No," just as invariably.

Test it yourself.

We always exaggerate time lapse.

Eyewitnesses will often add in things like grenades going off, helicopters, bombs, extra gunshots etc. Especially if they talk to each other and share their stories - people will often incorporate suggestions from other people of what happened even if they didn't actually witness it. There have been some interesting experiments done on this. It's great fodder for conspiracy theorists as you can always get some odd eyewitness accounts of major events. Even minor events can be difficult for the police to sort out from witnesses. Not to mention all the people who just make stuff up to get attention, and the people who swallow it unqestioningly to be part of the drama.