Conspiracy Theory Martin Bryant and Port Arthur - Conspiracy or Cheddar?

[Mofra]

So yeah, I find it pretty hard to believe that an untrained person can get such a high death to shot ratio. Anyone who has handled guns knows this.

Anyone who has handled a semi-automatic rifle would know that sitting targets at close range would be ridiculously easy.

Most recruits would be getting well under 50cm groupings at 100m on their first TOET (some half of that).

 

[Exe Gesis]

Head shots, between the eyes mostly. In a cafe setting, people running, ducking for cover under tables etc would be chaotic.

That NZ shooter hit a lot of people but they werent as clinical as Port Arthur, many missed targets, multiple shots fired at people to get a kill, body shots

 

[COxone]

Head shots, between the eyes mostly. In a cafe setting, people running, ducking for cover under tables etc would be chaotic.

That NZ shooter hit a lot of people but they werent as clinical as Port Arthur, many missed targets, multiple shots fired at people to get a kill, body shots

Killshots from the hip. 19 out of 20. I can't recall what his IQ was, it's been about a decade since I've looked into this. Is the audio of him on the phone to the police still online? The one where he's talking to them while simultaneously you can someone shooting at the police in background. At night, shooting AT the police spread, somehow, with no night goggles. Then of course because Bryant with the double digit IQ realises he needs to damage the guns so ballistic tests are useless. The guy on a disability pension.

19 out of 20 shots were killshots. Nope, I couldn't do that without hours of training. Same for everyone commenting in this thread.

 

[COxone]

Anyone who has handled a semi-automatic rifle would know that sitting targets at close range would be ridiculously easy.

Most recruits would be getting well under 50cm groupings at 100m on their first TOET (some half of that).

19 out of 20 shots killshots? Hitting a target is nit the same as headshots from the hip. Head shots from the hip is hard with any gun.

Source : me. Grew up with guns, went hunting multiple times a year, had access to automatic weapons as a youth.

There's no way dumb ass Martin Bryant who couldn't manage a chequing account was able to pull this off. It's out of his incredibly limited skill set to pull this off.

 

[Mofra]

I'm ex-ADF, but Mal had far more small-arms experience than I did and I'll definitely take his word for it (and my experience) over a CT

 

[Exe Gesis]

Yeah and there are plenty of gun experts at the time who also said it wasnt possible with his child-like level of intelligence and training, that the hip shooting and shot:kill ratio were hallmarks of elite level special forces

 

[Exe Gesis]

Lots of suspicious activity with the evidence too that is explored in that article i posted pages back.

 

[Slartibartfast]

19 out of 20 shots. Kills. You think you could do that? No chance. The dude had the mental capacity of a 10 year old. He sucked at everything else in life but getting extremely high death to shot ratios. Amazing. Sounds a bit unbelievable if you ask me. But I reckon I know your type, probably got your booster and can't wait for your 4th shot eh?

You seem to have a lack of understanding about intellectual disability .

In the case of Bryant he was still capable of doing and mastering many skills like driving a car , social skills are effected mostly. He had been shooting guns for ages. He had become well practiced in the use of them. What other skills did he not have ?? Have not heard this.

But you just keep on believing on what was not even there. Make the story up to suit your narrative.
There is no doubt Martin shot up the cafe alone , you just ignore the facts.

 

[Slartibartfast]

19 out of 20 shots killshots? Hitting a target is nit the same as headshots from the hip. Head shots from the hip is hard with any gun.

Source : me. Grew up with guns, went hunting multiple times a year, had access to automatic weapons as a youth.

There's no way dumb ass Martin Bryant who couldn't manage a chequing account was able to pull this off. It's out of his incredibly limited skill set to pull this off.

Is it the fact the a disabled guy could a shoot up a cafe with such accuracy where you struggled to hit the side of a barn is causing you angst??

 

[Exe Gesis]

Wouldn't say he mastered driving a car. He reportedly kept running off the road, unable to keep a good steer

 

[Slartibartfast]

Wouldn't say he mastered driving a car. He reportedly kept running off the road, unable to keep a good steer

No, he would deliberately do that to scare the other people in car by grabbing the wheel .

wow, you make this up as you go along.

There is not conspiracy, Bryant did the crime, ALONE!!

 

[kane249]

You seem to have a lack of understanding about intellectual disability .

In the case of Bryant he was still capable of doing and mastering many skills like driving a car , social skills are effected mostly. He had been shooting guns for ages. He had become well practiced in the use of them. What other skills did he not have ?? Have not heard this.

But you just keep on believing on what was not even there. Make the story up to suit your narrative.
There is no doubt Martin shot up the cafe alone , you just ignore the facts.

Bryant was even able to travel the world solo.

 

[Lebbo73]

He shot people from 1-2 metres away who were either seated (the cafe) or cowering in fear because they were trapped by a locked door (the gift shop)

When he moved outside he struggled to hit anyone because they were moving and further away.

Hate to break it to you, but that's not the elite marksmen conspiracy theorists think he is.

He’s a good shot from a different postcode

 

[Lebbo73]

Well if you like, here's some quotes from Malifice in this thread. He's got extensive gun knowledge having served in the Australian Army












Can you counter a former soldiers take with any of your own personal experience?

Mal is many things apparently.

 

[ParapMarkets]

I just listened to an interview with Keith Noble who wrote the book "Mass murder" about the Port Arthur massacre. Martin Bryant was a patsy, 100% no question. Some key points:

• He had an IQ of 66
• He had an alibi (was witnessed elsewhere at the time of the shooting)
• Absolutely no evidence at all that he carried out the massacre whatsoever. No fingerprint or DNA evidence at all.
• Was not positively identified as the shooter on the day of the shooting
• Manipulated photo's of him the next day in almost all Australian newspapers declaring him the shooter, despite his alibi and despite no actual evidence or admission of guilt (against the law). He was cooked at this point
• Witnesses who had not identified him earlier then identified him after the Newspapers were declaring him guilty based on manipulated photo's
• Held in solitary confinement for 6 months and denied access to anybody in that time until he pleaded guilty (against the Geneva convention). It's worth remembering his IQ of 66 on this point
• His own lawyer pressured gun shop owner Terry Hill to say he gave Bryant the guns (physical evidence of this). Terry Hill refused to say that he gave Bryant the guns because he insisted that he didn't, his licence was then removed and his business ruined
• No indication as to how he could have come into possession of the guns, nobody ever saw him with any of the alleged guns. Nothing linking him to the weapons at all
• No weapons training
• No history of violence
• No trial (only a hearing), public hearing or royal commission into the tragedy
• The judge ordered that all evidence be sealed
• Such were his lack of dexterity that he had trouble with simple things such as dealing with door hatches
• Despite the lack of motor skills and weapons training the murders were carried out with professional precision, 4 of the deaths were from shots allegedly taken by Bryant whilst driving
• The author theorizes that Bryant was supposed to die in the fire at the guesthouse. He came out babbling incoherently like someone who had been drugged, with 3rd degree burns to his back and bum, he woke up and managed to escape the fire so this created a problem and they needed to deal with him which they had not intended to have to do
• This is an actual human being who is still in prison and is still being denied any visitors

The end result of course was that they disarmed Australia. The Government had been trying for years to push through legislation but could never get it through parliament, it was noted years earlier that it would take a significant massacre to push legislation through.

 

[kane249]

I just listened to an interview with Keith Noble who wrote the book "Mass murder" about the Port Arthur massacre. Martin Bryant was a patsy, 100% no question. Some key points:

• He had an IQ of 66
• He had an alibi (was witnessed elsewhere at the time of the shooting)
• Absolutely no evidence at all that he carried out the massacre whatsoever. No fingerprint or DNA evidence at all.
• Was not positively identified as the shooter on the day of the shooting
• Manipulated photo's of him the next day in almost all Australian newspapers declaring him the shooter, despite his alibi and despite no actual evidence or admission of guilt (against the law). He was cooked at this point
• Witnesses who had not identified him earlier then identified him after the Newspapers were declaring him guilty based on manipulated photo's
• Held in solitary confinement for 6 months and denied access to anybody in that time until he pleaded guilty (against the Geneva convention). It's worth remembering his IQ of 66 on this point
• His own lawyer pressured gun shop owner Terry Hill to say he gave Bryant the guns (physical evidence of this). Terry Hill refused to say that he gave Bryant the guns because he insisted that he didn't, his licence was then removed and his business ruined
• No indication as to how he could have come into possession of the guns, nobody ever saw him with any of the alleged guns. Nothing linking him to the weapons at all
• No weapons training
• No history of violence
• No trial (only a hearing), public hearing or royal commission into the tragedy
• The judge ordered that all evidence be sealed
• Such were his lack of dexterity that he had trouble with simple things such as dealing with door hatches
• Despite the lack of motor skills and weapons training the murders were carried out with professional precision, 4 of the deaths were from shots allegedly taken by Bryant whilst driving
• The author theorizes that Bryant was supposed to die in the fire at the guesthouse. He came out babbling incoherently like someone who had been drugged, with 3rd degree burns to his back and bum, he woke up and managed to escape the fire so this created a problem and they needed to deal with him which they had not intended to have to do
• This is an actual human being who is still in prison and is still being denied any visitors

The end result of course was that they disarmed Australia. The Government had been trying for years to push through legislation but could never get it through parliament, it was noted years earlier that it would take a significant massacre to push legislation through.

You should probably try reading through the thread, the aboves been covered extensively and debunked

 

[ParapMarkets]

You should probably try reading through the thread, the aboves been covered extensively and debunked

Yes, I'm sure our Government would want to try and debunk this

 

[kane249]

Yes, I'm sure our Government would want to try and debunk this

Do a bit of proper research on Bryant and his history, Noble's points don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I just listened to an interview with Keith Noble who wrote the book "Mass murder" about the Port Arthur massacre. Martin Bryant was a patsy, 100% no question. Some key points:

• He had an IQ of 66
• He had an alibi (was witnessed elsewhere at the time of the shooting)
• Absolutely no evidence at all that he carried out the massacre whatsoever. No fingerprint or DNA evidence at all.
• Was not positively identified as the shooter on the day of the shooting
• Manipulated photo's of him the next day in almost all Australian newspapers declaring him the shooter, despite his alibi and despite no actual evidence or admission of guilt (against the law). He was cooked at this point
• Witnesses who had not identified him earlier then identified him after the Newspapers were declaring him guilty based on manipulated photo's
• Held in solitary confinement for 6 months and denied access to anybody in that time until he pleaded guilty (against the Geneva convention). It's worth remembering his IQ of 66 on this point
• His own lawyer pressured gun shop owner Terry Hill to say he gave Bryant the guns (physical evidence of this). Terry Hill refused to say that he gave Bryant the guns because he insisted that he didn't, his licence was then removed and his business ruined
• No indication as to how he could have come into possession of the guns, nobody ever saw him with any of the alleged guns. Nothing linking him to the weapons at all
• No weapons training
• No history of violence
• No trial (only a hearing), public hearing or royal commission into the tragedy
• The judge ordered that all evidence be sealed
• Such were his lack of dexterity that he had trouble with simple things such as dealing with door hatches
• Despite the lack of motor skills and weapons training the murders were carried out with professional precision, 4 of the deaths were from shots allegedly taken by Bryant whilst driving
• The author theorizes that Bryant was supposed to die in the fire at the guesthouse. He came out babbling incoherently like someone who had been drugged, with 3rd degree burns to his back and bum, he woke up and managed to escape the fire so this created a problem and they needed to deal with him which they had not intended to have to do
• This is an actual human being who is still in prison and is still being denied any visitors

The end result of course was that they disarmed Australia. The Government had been trying for years to push through legislation but could never get it through parliament, it was noted years earlier that it would take a significant massacre to push legislation through.

Wow, we have our very own Aussie Alex Jones

 

[Wild Bill]

I just listened to an interview with Keith Noble who wrote the book "Mass murder" about the Port Arthur massacre. Martin Bryant was a patsy, 100% no question. Some key points:

• He had an IQ of 66
• He had an alibi (was witnessed elsewhere at the time of the shooting)
• Absolutely no evidence at all that he carried out the massacre whatsoever. No fingerprint or DNA evidence at all.
• Was not positively identified as the shooter on the day of the shooting
• Manipulated photo's of him the next day in almost all Australian newspapers declaring him the shooter, despite his alibi and despite no actual evidence or admission of guilt (against the law). He was cooked at this point
• Witnesses who had not identified him earlier then identified him after the Newspapers were declaring him guilty based on manipulated photo's
• Held in solitary confinement for 6 months and denied access to anybody in that time until he pleaded guilty (against the Geneva convention). It's worth remembering his IQ of 66 on this point
• His own lawyer pressured gun shop owner Terry Hill to say he gave Bryant the guns (physical evidence of this). Terry Hill refused to say that he gave Bryant the guns because he insisted that he didn't, his licence was then removed and his business ruined
• No indication as to how he could have come into possession of the guns, nobody ever saw him with any of the alleged guns. Nothing linking him to the weapons at all
• No weapons training
• No history of violence
• No trial (only a hearing), public hearing or royal commission into the tragedy
• The judge ordered that all evidence be sealed
• Such were his lack of dexterity that he had trouble with simple things such as dealing with door hatches
• Despite the lack of motor skills and weapons training the murders were carried out with professional precision, 4 of the deaths were from shots allegedly taken by Bryant whilst driving
• The author theorizes that Bryant was supposed to die in the fire at the guesthouse. He came out babbling incoherently like someone who had been drugged, with 3rd degree burns to his back and bum, he woke up and managed to escape the fire so this created a problem and they needed to deal with him which they had not intended to have to do
• This is an actual human being who is still in prison and is still being denied any visitors

The end result of course was that they disarmed Australia. The Government had been trying for years to push through legislation but could never get it through parliament, it was noted years earlier that it would take a significant massacre to push legislation through.

Lol 100%

 

[ParapMarkets]

Do a bit of proper research on Bryant and his history, Noble's points don't hold up under scrutiny.

What scrutiny is that?
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not a shill. He had the mind of a 10 year old. Are your shills saying he had a guardian throughout his interrogations like he should have had? What legal rights are your shills saying he has had since?

His Mum hasn’t been able to see him all this time. Are your shills saying she has?
There were survivors that knew Bryant that were adamant he was not the shooter and that the shooter had a “pock marked face”. What are your shills saying about the survivors that knew Bryant and that were adamant it wasn’t him?

 

[ParapMarkets]

Wow, we have our very own Aussie Alex Jones

Lol, Alex Jones. It’s sad to see the dumbed down masses acting as predicted. Why don’t you give us all an update on Kim Kardashian and Ariane Grande.

 

[kane249]

What scrutiny is that?
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not a shill. He had the mind of a 10 year old. Are your shills saying he had a guardian throughout his interrogations like he should have had? What legal rights are your shills saying he has had since?

His Mum hasn’t been able to see him all this time. Are your shills saying she has?
There were survivors that knew Bryant that were adamant he was not the shooter and that the shooter had a “pock marked face”. What are your shills saying about the survivors that knew Bryant and that were adamant it wasn’t him?

Your "10 year old"
-Was able to travel the world solo with his inheritances
-Had used firearms since he was young
-Admitted on camera during his police interview he did the crime. He thought the camera was off at the time and thought he was being clever by confessing then
-Stopped at a known acquaintance on the way to Port Arthur that morning, trying to convince the female of the pair to go with him.

His mum visits him every few weeks, even she now thinks he did it fwiw

Martin Bryant's mother now believes he is guilty - 9News

Martin Bryant's mother now believes her son was responsible for the Port Arthur massacre that left 35 peopl...

www.9news.com.au

He revealed Mrs Bryant visits her son in Tasmania's Risdon Prison every few weeks, along with another unnamed family friend

 

[Slartibartfast]

Lol, Alex Jones. It’s sad to see the dumbed down masses acting as predicted. Why don’t you give us all an update on Kim Kardashian and Ariane Grande.

You live in a fantasy world.
MB was more than capable of carrying out the crime.
He confessed , his guilt is not in doubt.

Here is some info to help you understand why you think the way you do. Hey lucky there were no 5G towers down Port Arthur back then or who knows what might of happened .

In the wake of the US Capitol riot and the COVID-19 pandemic, conspiracy theories are running rampant. Whether it’s the idea that the world is being run by Satan-loving paedophiles or that coronavirus is spread by 5G technology, for those of us for whom such claims seem outlandish and ridiculous, it is extremely difficult to understand why anyone would believe them. However, psychology researchers have uncovered a range of explanatory factors, from basic perceptual processes to emotional issues.

For instance, while all of us can be prone to seeing illusory patterns (such as a face in the clouds), a study led by Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam showed that this tendency is heightened among believers in conspiracy theories. This means they are likely to see apparent connections between disparate events that the rest of us just don’t notice.

Of course, many conspiracy theories make claims that are factually incorrect or they are based on fundamentally flawed logic. Unfortunately, believers in the theories are not only more likely to see illusory connections, research shows they are also less likely to have had the kind of education or have the critical thinking skills necessary to help them see the glaring holes in their wild theories.

At the same time, believers in conspiracies often have an inflated sense of their own intellectual competence – research led by the late Scott Lilienfeld at Emory University in Atlanta showed that in personality trait terms, believers tend to be lower in ‘intellectual humility’. Ignorance combined with overconfidence creates a fertile ground for unsubstantiated beliefs to take hold.

There is also a powerful emotional component to conspiracy theory beliefs, which helps explain why they can be so difficult to challenge. Believing in a widely discredited theory – and feeling part of a community of fellow believers – can help to satisfy some people’s need to feel special, according to research.

Studies have also shown believers are also more prone to anxiety and a sense that they lack control – feelings alleviated by subscribing to a conspiracy theory being spread with such apparent conviction by others.
Dr Christian Jarrett- cognitive neuroscientist

Parapmarkets
Lebbo73
BlueE

 

[Lebbo73]

You live in a fantasy world.
MB was more than capable of carrying out the crime.
He confessed , his guilt is not in doubt.

Here is some info to help you understand why you think the way you do. Hey lucky there were no 5G towers down Port Arthur back then or who knows what might of happened .

In the wake of the US Capitol riot and the COVID-19 pandemic, conspiracy theories are running rampant. Whether it’s the idea that the world is being run by Satan-loving paedophiles or that coronavirus is spread by 5G technology, for those of us for whom such claims seem outlandish and ridiculous, it is extremely difficult to understand why anyone would believe them. However, psychology researchers have uncovered a range of explanatory factors, from basic perceptual processes to emotional issues.

For instance, while all of us can be prone to seeing illusory patterns (such as a face in the clouds), a study led by Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam showed that this tendency is heightened among believers in conspiracy theories. This means they are likely to see apparent connections between disparate events that the rest of us just don’t notice.

Of course, many conspiracy theories make claims that are factually incorrect or they are based on fundamentally flawed logic. Unfortunately, believers in the theories are not only more likely to see illusory connections, research shows they are also less likely to have had the kind of education or have the critical thinking skills necessary to help them see the glaring holes in their wild theories.

At the same time, believers in conspiracies often have an inflated sense of their own intellectual competence – research led by the late Scott Lilienfeld at Emory University in Atlanta showed that in personality trait terms, believers tend to be lower in ‘intellectual humility’. Ignorance combined with overconfidence creates a fertile ground for unsubstantiated beliefs to take hold.

There is also a powerful emotional component to conspiracy theory beliefs, which helps explain why they can be so difficult to challenge. Believing in a widely discredited theory – and feeling part of a community of fellow believers – can help to satisfy some people’s need to feel special, according to research.

Studies have also shown believers are also more prone to anxiety and a sense that they lack control – feelings alleviated by subscribing to a conspiracy theory being spread with such apparent conviction by others.
Dr Christian Jarrett- cognitive neuroscientist

Parapmarkets

Does the truth really scare you so much that you have to defend a lie?
Why anyone would quote a paid psychologist shill to help them sleep better at night is mystifying.