Back to Home Page  

 New World Order and conspiracies

Martin Bryant and Port Arthur

Port Arthur Killer cartoon

Port Arthur Update

Port Arthur: the BIG picture

Electromagnetic Weapons

Secret Underground Bases


and Port Arthur

The Not So Lone Assassin?

By Joe Vialls

Author Joe Vialls is an independent investigator with thirty years direct experience of international military and oilfield operations.

(as published in Exposure Magazine)


After a political attack on Joe Vaills' independent investigation of the Port Arthur massacre, Joe has submitted some "never before released" details to further substantiate his research.

* One hour before the massacre commenced, the only two policemen on the Tasmanian Peninsula were decoyed to a remote location at Saltwater River by anonymous caller reporting a big stash of heroin. There was no heroin, and four minutes after the two policemen reported their arrival at Saltwater by radio, the shooting started in the Broad Arrow Cafe. The drive from Saltwater to Port Arthur is a minimum of 30 mins. The mass murder lasted only 17 minutes from start to finish.

* The shooter in the Broad Arrow cafe fired from his right hip at an average range of 12 feet without the benefit of a laser sight. Only 29 rounds were used to kill or injure a total of 32 people, accuracy and speed equivalent to the top 1% of counter-terrorist marksmen. Martin Bryant always fired his Webley Osprey air rifle from the left shoulder, because he is and always has been a left handed shooter.

* In sworn statements to the police, eyewitness 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 that the weapon was held in the shooter's right hand. This testimony is in direct conflict with the fake video footage obtained direct from America by the Tasmanian Police Service, who entered it as evidence in the Supreme Court against Matrin Bryant.

 In 1988 Australian newspapers reported New South Wales politician Barry Unsworth's claim that, "there would be no effective gun control in Australia until there was a massacre in Tasmania"

Throughout history - it has been true that the lone assassin has been behind many mass killings. But in recent times he has also been not so alone...governments and intelligence agencies have been known to prey on and use simple and sometimes ill people to massacre innocent victims in order to gain greater control of the masses.

Part 1

In early 1984, policewoman Yvonne Fletcher was murdered while on duty outside the Libyan Embassy in London. From the moment she was shot, the media misled the British public into believing that Pletcher had been shot by the Libyans, who were subsequently expelled from {he country in a fanfare of negative publicity. It was not until 1995 that this author managed to prove by entirely scientific means that WPC Fletcher could not have been shot from the Libyan Embassy at all, but was shot from the top floor of a nearby building staffed by American multinational personnel.

Was the massacre in Port Arthur a completely spontaneous act carried out by a single nut-case with unbelievable efficiency, or was it a repeat of Yvonne Fletcher's callous murder, deliberately designed to distort public perception and direct maximum hatred against a particular group of people? All of I the available hard scientific evidence Isuggests that it was.

When investigating cases like Yvonne Fletcher's murder or the massacre at Port Arthur, it is critically important to adhere to scientific proof and to avoid eyewitness accounts and media hype as if it were the Black Plague. Eyewitnesses do not lie intentionally, but as any honest psychologist, will tell you the accuracy of their testimony is limited by many factors including stress, suggestive police interrogators, and peer pressure. The more controversial the case, the higher the need for absolute scientific proof; because if the investigation reaches a conclusion which conflicts with the officially accepted story, the media will attempt to trash the credibility of the investigator himself, who in these two cases happens to be me. For four years while investigating the murder of Yvonne Fletcher, I was gently harassed, visited by members of British Intelligence from London, cordially invited to sign the Offlcial Secrets Act, then subtly threatened when I refused to comply.

Some readers might wonder why I am including so much detail about a murder in London when this story is supposed to be about Port Arthur. Well it is about Port Arthur, but there are a number of disturbing similarities between the two cases, especially in terms of media behaviour at the time of each atrocity, and the use of faked video footage to reinforce the official story of the day. So please bear with me for a few paragraphs.


In 1992 when I first decided to investigate WPC Fletcher's murder, the most serious obstacle I encountered was the British media, who for nearly a decade had knowingly nurtured a lie so horrific that it almost defeats the imagination. Yvonne Fletcher, they claimed was murdered by a low velocity bullet fired from the Libya Embassy located behind her on her left-hand side, with the gunman firing downwards from a first floor window at an angle of fifteen degrees. As any amateur can confirm, that means the bullet entered the left side of WPC Fletcher's back at a shallow angle of fifteen degrees and then continued through her body tissue towards the right-hand side of her body. Right? Wrong...the bullet entered WPC Fletcher's upper right back at sixty degrees then sliced down through her rib cage, turning her vital organs into a bloody pulp before exiting her body below the left rib cage.

With Evonne Fletcher's exact position recorded by a television camera when the shots were fired, there was no room for doubt. It was an absolute scientific impossibility for that shot to have been fired from the Libyan Embassy. The steep angle of entry of the bullet limited the firing point to one floor of only one building; the top floor of Enserch House, an American multinational building staffed by personnel with documented links to the American CIA. Without the critical video footage from the television camera I would never have been able to prove how she was killed or by who, but fortunately for me the footage still existed in 1992, and television cameras are inanimate objects incapable of lying.

If proof appears to exist on video there are only two possibilities: the scientific truth, or deliberately faked video footage shown for the public for specia1 effects or in an attempt to pervert the course of justice. Interestingly and with profound implications for Port Arthur, fake video footage was put to air by the BBC "for the first iime ever" many months after Yvonne Fletcher's murder, in what appeared to be an attempt to cement the lies and calculated deceptions about her death forever in the minds of the British public. The public failed to ask why this apparently critical footage had not been presented at the coronial inquest into Yvonne Fletcher's death, but fell hook, line and sinker for the blurred images and sound track, which apparently recorded eleven sub-machine gun shots being fired from the Libyan Embassy.

The amateur footage run by the BBC ln 1985 was given to one of its reporters by a member of the Metropolitan Police Force. During 1995 I used the immutable laws of astronomy and physics to prove the amateur footage a total fake. Analysis of the angle and position of the sun's shadow falling across the front of the Libyan Embassy was checked using astro-navlgation techniques and direct reference to the Greenwich Observatory (Britain's foremost authority on times and 'dates derived from the sun-line). Unfortunately for the BBC who broadcast the amateur footage "for the first time ever", absolute science proved the sunline on the amateur footage totally incorrect for 10.19 am on the 17th April 1984, the time and date on which Yvonne Fletcher was murdered. Indeed, the scientific evaluation proved the amateur footage was not even filmed on the same day Yvonne Fletcher was shot. Those who created that fake footage and then broadcast it were not engaged in a mere media reinterpretation of events, but were accessories after the fact to the murder of an unarmed English policewoman doing her duty on a London street.

After four long years of research and investigation designed to expose the real truth of what happened that day, and after one year as consultant to the responsible film-maker, Britain's Channel Four aired part of my scientific proof in a special edition of "Dispatches", its flagship current affairs programme, on the 10th April 1996. Unfortunately, three months earlier the film-maker became incredibly agitated about my absolute scientific proof from Greenwich that the amateur footage was faked, removed me from the production process of a film based on my own conyright story, barred me from the film credits and then incorporated the fake footage as a legitimate part of the film, minus the incriminating sun-line, which proved in absolute scientific terms that what British television was putting to air for a second time since 1985 was totally false and deliberately misleading!

It became swiftly apparent, that although the media was prepared to throw tiny scraps of truth to the public, gross deceptions, especially those generated by erstwhile colleagues in the form of fake video footage designed to manipulate public opimon, were strictIy off limits. So it is on the subject of fake video footage and its potential for incredible impact on the viewing public, thaf we finally turn to Port Arthur. Some readers may by now be shifting uneasily in their seats, rackin their brains and wonderin exactly when and where it was that they were also suddenly shown amateur footage "for th first time ever" on television in Australia. It was on Wednesday in October 1996, th night before Martin Bryant was due to be sentenced for his alleged role in the Port Arthur massacre.


Many months after th massacre took place, but only hours before fhe Tasmanian judge was due to make a decision that would effect Martin Bryant for the rest of his life, an Australian TV network suddenly presented the public (and of course the judge) with dramatic amateur video footage shown "for the first time ever". The reporter -told us the man on the video was Martin Bryant on the day of the massacre, going about his business of slaugtering the good people of Tasmania, caugh on camera by interested amateur photographers who seemed unmoved bv the dangers of high velocity bullets. Unlike most of the other survivors these folk did not run away but hunkered down like battie-hardened war correspondents covering the end of World War II from an unprotected thoroughfare in the middle of Berlin.

They were also very discree the day after the massacre, when the world's tabloid media descended on Port Arthur like a pack of ravenous dogs, snapping and growling for any picture they could get hold of in order to meet their respective deadlines in London and New York. At that point in time the "amateur footage" was worth half a million bucks no questions asked, for this was a world media event and no-one had any pictures. Perhaps the amateur photographers had no need for huge amounts of cash, or perhaps at that early stage their 'footage had not yet been fully prepared, which was certainly the case after Yvonne Fletcher's murder in London. The amateur footage run by the Australian network in October 1996 was given to one of its reporters by a member of the Tasmanian Police Force.

There are so many irregularities on this supposedly genuine video footage, which was accepted as evidence against Martin Bryant in the Tasmanian court, that only a few of the more obvious will be included in this story to help drive the message home. The rest have been carefully collated, and it will give me considerable pleasure to detail each and every one of them personally before a properly convened Royal Commission. If a Royal Commission is not called to fully investigate the methodology used in the massacre, and if Martin Bryant is not called to give evidence, then the People of Australia had best get used to the fact that what little remains of our representative democracy died with the thirty five innocent civilians who were ruthlessly and needlessly murdered at Port Arthur on 28 April 1996.

Most readers will remember that at the time of the massacre there were a few clouds in the sky but the sun was shining and casting shadows on the buildings, as shown by footage from some of the genuine video cameras recording at the correct time, indicated by timing clocks displayed in the corner of the video footage itself. One or two of these genuine amateur video cameras recorded the sounds of several shots, complete with multiple echoes, proving that the shots in question were being fired outside rather than in an enclosed space such as the Broad Arrow Cafe. But the video footage allegedly showing Martin Bryant running down the road was filmed under an overcast sky, which was the first indicator that something was terribly wrong with this so-called evidence. Who the hell changed the weather at point-blank notice?

One of the most damning sequences shows what appears to be Martin Bryant (well, a tall man with long blonde hair anyway) running down the road away from the Broad Arrow Cafe towards a coach park by the waterside. Because he is running directly away from the Broad Arrow Cafe with a bulky package under his arm, the assumption is that the package contains a Colt AR15, the weapon known to have killed 20 vichms in the cafe at a rate of one every five seconds. Problem! Scaled against the man's height and surrounding objects fhe package he is carrying is a maximum of 22 inches long, a full ten inches too short for the Colt AR15 which measures 32 inches with its butt fully retracted, and more than ten inches too short for either of the other two weapons claimed to have been found in his car: a Belgian FN 7.62-mm Paratrooper and a combat shotgun. So who is this man running down the road, and why is he not carrying any of the weapons allegedly used in the massacre?

At this stage it would be nice to be able to determine whether or not the man really is Bryant, by comparing an accurate right-hand profile of I Bryant with the video itself. Unfortunately Bryant is the least photographed man in the world to today and all attempts to get hold of a photograph of him have failed. For a while toyed with the idea of asking Martin Bryant's lawyer to get one for me, but then he too had his camera and film confiscated by prison officials. One wonders why the Australian authorities are so anxious that no pictures of Bryant be allowed outside (or I even in) the Prison. They would do no obvious harm.

Whether the man is Bryant ur not, a few frames in this sequence make a mockery of any suggestion the prized footage presented to the Tasmanian court was meaningful evidence asgainst Martin Bryant. What they show is a blonde man still running down the road towards the coach park clutching his package, while in the upper left corner of the same frames three men can be clearly seen standing directly outside the entrance of the Broad Arrow Cafe, out of which the blonde man has just run after murdering 20 citizens. One man is standing to the left of the entrance casually leaning on the balustrade with one hand; the second is standing casually on the right smoking a cigarette, and the third is standing directly in front of the door filming the running blonde man with a video camera. To suggest this in any way incrimates Bryant is not only ridiculous, but also quite impossible with the blonde man allegedly in the middle of a massive killing spree.


Just these points alone prove in scientific terms one of two entirely critical scenarios:

(1.) If the blonde, man is Martin Bryan but unarmed, what is he doing role-playing with three men directly in front of the Broad Arrow Cafe? It is scientifically impossible for the three men not to be involved so this option proves beyond doubt that Martin Bryant did not act alone, but was manipulated or directed at the crime scene by others whose identities are not yet known.

(2.) If the blonde man is not Martin Bryant then the only alternative is that a team of unknown men carried out the massacre and then set up a reconstruction on film using a blonde look-alike, to ensure that Martin Bryant would later be convicted. In absolute scientific terms there are no other explanations at all, no matter how much the media might wriggle and squirm in its attempts to ensure the pathetic "Lone Nut" legend remains intact.

If sufficiently panicked, the police might claim that Martin Bryant was merely helping them with a reconstruction to assist with their future inquiries, which was filmed and then accidentally released to the Australian television network. But he couldn't have, could he? Martin Bryant was badly burned at Seascape and spent weeks afterwards heavily sedated in Hobart Hospital under armed guard. Of course he may have been induced to help with a reconstruction before the massacre started, but it seems unlikely the police would be prepared to discuss such a blood curdling possibility.

Sclence can be frighteningly efficient at times because, believe it or believe it not, science has just proved in absolute terms, using court evidence, that Martln Bryant could not under any circumstances have acted alone, and may possibly not have acted at all other than in an orchestrated 'Patsy' role. Which one is true depends on which of the two alfernative scenarios detailed above are correct, but there are absolutely no other scientific life-rafts for the sinking media to grab hold of.

Remember, this is not unsubstantiated hearsay evidence from frightened eyewitnesses used by the media to hype up its mythical version of events. It is absolute scientific proof which cannot be questioned or refuted. Most readers like a story to have a beginning, a middle, and a coherent end. Science can and has provided an accurate outline of the first two but it cannot provide the third. As an nvestigator I insist on dealing only with hard facts because it is the only way to avoid being swept afong by the avalanche of misinformation put out by the media on a daily basis, and there are no hard facts available to answer the question "For God's sake why?"

In any criminal investigation it is acknowledged that three main criteria have to be satisfied i.e. opportunity, motive and method. Just about anyone had the opportunity to attack those civilians in a remote spot like Port Arthur, on a Sunday, without fear of being caught or punished in any way. Where method is concerned, any expert combat shooter could have killed 20 unarmed civilians at five second spacings and wrought havoc in the general area athough the words "expert comat shooter" should be noted with care. 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 peopIe quickly in an enclosed space llke 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 practical reasons, including the fact that shot people tend to fall against other people, shielding the latter from subsequent bullets. Targets therefore have to be shot in a careful sequence with split second timing to maximise kill rates. Whoever was on the trigger in Tasmania managed a kill rate well above that required of a fully trained soldier. This was an impossible task for a man with Martin Bryant's midsixties IQ and his total lack of military training, which is an interesting but largely unimportant observation because we have already proved in absolute scientific terms that Bryant could not have acted alone.


That leaves us looking for the motive, which is impossible to determine with any certainty, thouch it is reasonable to cross link his to Yvonne Fletcher's pre-meditated murder in London purely in terms of cause and effect. The effect of Yvonne Fletcher's savage and very public murder caused public hatred to be directed against the Libyans, who were subsequently deported en-masse from Britain despite the fact they were in no way responsible for her death.

The only visible cause and effect that can be laid at the door of the Port Arthur massacre is that the effect of the obscene action caused public hatred to be directed against Australian sporting shooters, who like the Llbyans were innocent of any crime at all. Directly linked to this was a massive funded campaign to disarm the Australlan people in spite of significant external threats to our national security. If this was indeed the motive, Australia and its people have been violated in the worst possible way by sworn enemies of our great nation, with likely long term consequences too awesome to contemplate.

It is just not right to simply accept the status quo as it exists today in Port Arthur, because to do so implies that Australians have thrown in the towel and admitted defeat on the strength of a single savage action in our smallest State. The only way to avenge our dead in Port Arthur, is to force a Royal Commission on the matter and drag witnesses kicking and screaming into the dock, including certain members of the Tasmanian Police Service. Failing that, funding should be sought for an indedendent investigation, which would provide the real facts about the chain of events at Port Arthur.

Realistically, it would probably take years to find the massive sum needed for such a wide-ranging initiative but there is a positive need for action now, if only to put the Prime Minister on the back foot and convince him there is no longer any need to wear 'boron carbide body armour' when attending public meetings.

All Australians must be made aware of the real and shocking circumstances in which their fellow citizens died, because knowledge is the only weapon we can use to guard against future lethal charades on Australian territory.

Part 2

Part two uses military science to prove that Martin Bryant could not have been responsible for the murders at Port Arthur or on the Arthur Highway, though he may have fired 250 wild shots from Seascape during the siege (every one of which failed to hit a target).

The initial reaction of most readers to the idea that Martin Bryant killed no-one at Port Arthur but was deliberately set up, is a combination of horror and complete disbelief. Yet all of the hard evidence at Port Arthur bears the distinctive trademark of a planned "psyop" (an operation designed to psychologically manipulate the belief mechanisms of a group of people or a nation for geopolitical or military reasons). Because of their illegal nature psyops are never formally ordered by governments, but are discreetly arranged through multinational corporations and others.

Patsies are normally used as decoys to deflect attention away from the specialist group, allowing the latter time to extract safely from the operational area while the patsy takes the blame.

As an example, police woman Yvonne Fletcher's murder in London during 1984 was a psyop where the intended patsie were four million Libyans. The next blatant psyop was Lockerbie when on 21 December 1988 Pan American flight 103 exploded in mid-air killing all 259 passenger and crew. AIthough very recent scientific evidence not yet in the public domain proves conclusively that the Libyans could not have been responsible, they were nonetheless blamed for the atrocity. The principal affect of these two psyops on the Libyans, were sanctions designed to prevent them updating defensive weapon systems capable of protecting their resource-rich nation.

By a strange coincidence Australia is also a resource-rich nation, with overall reserves more than twenty times as valuable as those in Libya, but with only half the defence capability. In some ways this was not an insurmountable problem until 1996 because our nation has always had huge numbers of sporting shooters traditionally, used in time of war to supplement our minuscule forces. Not any more. Since the psyop at Port Arthur more than 400,000 reserve firearms have been pulped instead of stored by the Federal Government, leaving our nation and people terribly exposed to just about anyone interested in taking over the natural resources "jewel" of the Southern Hemisphere.


Martin Bryant, an intellectually impaired 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 in injuring far too few, thereby exposing himself as a highly trained combat shooter probably ranked among the top twenty of 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 that every time someone 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. For a number of reasons, killing efficiently at close range in crowded and confined spaces presents far more complex targeting problems than those associated with conventional open-air combat scenarios. 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.

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 massacre, it is essential information. The killed-to-injured ratio is used to calculate 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 Coll 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 overall body target area, 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. 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.

Those desperately trying to protect the "lone nut" Iegend will scream foul at this point and claim that flukes happen. No they do not. About seven months ago trained Israeli soldier went berserk in Hebron and fired a complete thirty-shot magazine of ammunition from an identical Col AR15 into a crowd of Palestinians at the same range His thirty high velocity bullet injured nine and killed no-one at all This Israeli example helps to drive home the absolute lunacy of insinuations that Bryant, registered invalid, suddenly metamorphasized into the lethal equivalent of a fully trained an highly disciplined US Navy SEAL.

Next we come to the kill-rate which refers to the speed at which people are killed, thereby reflecting the skill, co-ordination, and accuracy of the shooter. It is accepted by all the authorities in Tasmania that immediately after the shooter entered the Broad Arrow Cafe he killed his first 12 victims in 15 seconds.

The first thing special forces do when entering an enclosed area containing superior numbers is lay down very fast accurate fire designed to kill as many hostiles l as possible, thus gaining absolute control of the area in record time and minimising the risk of injury to themselves. Because hostiles frequently wear body armour protecting the heart area, special forces are trained to aim instinctively for the smaller heart target. Following these unpublished protocols precisely, the shooter at Port Arthur gained absolute control of the Broad Arrow Cafe in fifteen seconds flat killing most of his victims with single a shot to the head. To even suggest that Martin Bryant (whose proven weapons handling experience was limited to a single shot Webley Osprey air rifle) could have caused this carnage is absurd.


When the shooter entered the Broad Arrow Cafe and fired the first shot, everyone inside reacted instinctively to the huge muzzle blast, but each reacted in a different way. Some just turned their heads while others moved physically, temporarily obscuring yet more diners and shielding them from the line of fire. In a millisecond the cafe was full of targets moving in at least ten different directions while the muzzle of the AR15 was still recoiling upwards from the first shot.

Despite the enormous difficulties and the complex target trigonometry involved, the shooter controlled the recoil, shooting 12 moving and partially obscured targets at the rate of one every 1.25 seconds. He did not trip over any obstructions, indicating that he must have been in the cafe some time earlier, during his final reconnaissance when he studied the layout to ensure no hiccups occurred during the operation. Ninety seconds after entering the Broad Arrow Cafe the shooter departed, leaving thirty two people lying on the floor, twenty of them dead.

All of these hard scientific facts were deliberately excluded by the frenzied media pack. Long blonde hair did not prove that the shooter was Martin Bryant, and the media somehow forgot to remind the Australian pubic that long wigs are the most common form of basic disguise ever used. In the Broad Arrow a long wig would also have been necessary to conceal the ear protection worn by the shooter. Firing more than thirty high velocity AR15 rounds in that hollow confined space produced as much concussive blast as a pair of stun grenades; sufficient concussion to severely impair the shooter's spatial orientation (and thus aim) unless wearing ear protectors or combat communications headphones.

Official accounts are hazy about what happened next, but it is confirmed that most of those killed thereafter were shot with the Belgian FN, a heavier assault weapon which has a completely different weight and balance from the Colt ARI5 and fires a round producing more than twice the recoil. But despite switching between weapons with very different handling characteristics, and shifting from close to intermediate range, the shooter constantly maintained an awesome inverted killed-to-injured ratio.

Overall the massacre produced 35 dead and 22 injured for a final killed-to-injured ratio of 1.60 to 1, almost identical to the 1.66 to 1 ratio in the Broad Arrow Cafe. To say the shooter was consistent would be the understatement of the year. In layman terms, the shooting of 35 people who were killed at Port Arthur should have been accompanied by between 175 and 245 injured survivors; very similar ratios to the American McDonalds and other random massacres. Instead there were only 22, the trademark of a highly trained combat shooter.

The professional shooter in Tasmania presented us with a final display of his unquestioned prowess when tourist Linda White and her boyfriend Mick approached Seascape Cottage on the Port Arthur road (in a small four-wheel drive vehicle) shortly after the massacre in the Broad Arrow Cafe. Both saw the shooter aim and Linda White felt the wind of the first round as it passed her cheek and shattered the driver's window next to her head. The shooter corrected his aim and the second round hit Linda White in the arm, just to the right of the heart target area. The third round killed the engine and stopped the vehicle.

In this, his ultimate demonstration of combat skill, the shooter fired one sighting shot at a fast-moving target of unknown speed from an unsupported freestanding firing positron (the most difficult posltlon of all). He instantly and accurately compensated for vehicle speed and weapon recoil with the same blinding speed as the computer gunsight on an F14 Tomcat, then disabled both driver and vehicle with shots two and three. This man might have been an indispensable asset stopping speeding car-bombers in Beirut, but his professional skills were far too conspicuous for Port Arthur.


In the view of this author, these were the last shots fired by the professional before he (or they) smoothly exited, leaving patsy Martin Bryant down the track at Seascape holding the baby.

The trail to Seascape Cottage had been meticulously laid. In Martin Bryant's car was a combat shotgun, a bag of ammo for the Belgian FN and, very conveniently, Martin Bryant's passport. Then there was Linda White's disabled four wheel drive on the Arthur Highway, a stolen BMW burning in the grounds of Seascape to mark the way, and just in case all these clues were not enough for the Tasmanian Police, an anonymous caller to police headquarters in Hobart advised the authorities that the man holed up in Seascape was probably Martin Bryant.

Short of erecting a pink neon sign reading "this way to the patsy", the professional or professionals seem to have thought of everything. There were no eyewitnesses who could positively identify Martin Bryant at Port Arthur because an Australian newspaper circulated his photograph nationwide, thereby totally corrupting any and aIl police lineups, photo boards, or controlled shopping mall parades. All the eyewitnesses could legally claim was a "tall man with long blonde hair".

So Bryant the patsy, was firmly in place and Seascape was swiftly surrounded by armed police from Tasmania and Victoria, most of whom must have been very puzzled as the siege continued through the night. If we are to believe media reports, Martin Bryant fired 250 rounds during the siege period but hit nothing at all, which is exactly what one would expect of someone whose prior experience was limited to a Webley Osprey air rifle. If the professional shooter had fired 250 rounds from Seascape Cottage during the siege, his awesome killed-to-injured ratio would have resulted in a police funeral cortege stretching from the Tasman Peninsula to Hobart.


It is beyond doubt that many of the armed police at Seascape noticed Bryant's wild undisciplined performance bore I absolutely no resemblance at all to that of the deadly shooter at Port Arthur, and some must have told their senior officers about it. But the media had its man, the feeding frenzy was in full swing and the police were not going to be allowed to spoil a lucrative politically-correct story.

Unfortunately media versions of events had some flaws so basic, that to mention them on national television was an insult to the intelligence. We were told in most reports that Bryant had three weapons, one of which (the Daewoo combat shotgun) was left in the boot of his Volvo near the tollbooth, and that he then took the Colt AR15 and Belgian FN assault rifles down to Seascape with him, using them along with other weapons found in the house to fire the 250 shots at police during the siege.

Bryant's last telephone conversation with the police was around 9 pm on 28 April and his next contact was when he stumbled out of a fiercely burning Seascape Cottage unarmed and with his back on fire at 8.37 am the following morning. Police confirmed that Bryant came out unarmed, and also confirmed that by then the fire was burning so fiercely that they were completely incapable of approaching the building to see if anyone else was still alive.

Seascape rapidly became an inferno as the entire structure collapsed on the ground in a pile of white-hot debris, which of course included the charred and twisted remains of the Colt AR15 and Belgian FN assault rifles allegedly fired from inside the building by Martin Bryant.

So how can it be that on a Channel 9 program shown in November 1996 a Tasmanian police officer was able to show all Australians two immaculate assault weapons allegedly used by Bryant at Port Arthur. Where did the police obtain those pristine weapons we were shown on national television?


In order to present even a shell of a case against Martin Bryant the prosecution needed valid identification by witnesses, but all eyewitness statements were corrupt. In addition they needed the weapons used in the massacre either in Martin Bryant's possession or bearing his fingerprints, so that they could be ballistically cross-matched to bullets found in the victims at Port Arthur. They had neither. Nor were Bryant's fingerprints found at the Broad Arrow Cafe where he is alleged to have eaten lunch immediately before the massacre and in an unprecedented move, fully-edited fake video footage obtained directly from America was entered as evidence in court.

In short there is no case for Bryant to answer with regard to Port Arthur, though he must still explain why he was at Seascape or, more to the point perhaps, tell us who talked him into going there when he did. Bryant did admit to taking the BMW (but from a different location) and without knowing why, setting fire to it later at Seascape, but vehemently denied any involvement at Port Arthur.

His limited confession fits the known hard scientific facts exactly and for many months after his arrest, despite the severe disadvantage of his intellectual impairment, Bryant kept to history in the face of tremendous pressure from police interrogators and psychiatrists to admit the enormity of his alleged crimes. He continued to refuse to do so and at the formal hearing on 3 September 1996 pleaded not guilt, to all seventy two charges. At that precise point in time the prosecution knew it had a very serious problem. Martin Bryan was refusing to roll over and there was absolutely no hard evidence at all linking him to the murders at Port Arthur, a fact that would very quickly become obvious if the case was allowed to proceed to trial in front of twelve alert Tasmania jurors. About the only thing the might save the day was a false confession. With the media pack outside its doors baying for blood government had to do something but had few options

Shortly afterwards, according to Tasmanian reporter Mike Bingham, Martin Bryant's mother Carleen, unable to face the stress of a public trial, paid a visit to Bryan at Risdon Prison and told him that if he did not plead guilty, she and his younger sister Lindy would commit suicide and he would never see them again. Bryant's mother and sister were probably the only people in the world that would still talk to him, and as a result Carleen Bryant's threat achieved in days what the police interrogators and psychiatrists had l failed to achieve in months. Martin Bryant loved his mum and sister and wanted to see both of them again, something that would only happen if he could stop them committing suicide.


If Seascape had been located in California or Texas, Martin Bryant would unquestionably have been shot dead the split second he left the building. It was only the iron discipline exercised by the Tasmanian and Victorian police special operations groups at the scene, which allowed Martin Bryant to be taken into custody alive. All of those armed officers deserve the highest praise for their restraint in what must have been perceived as an extremely dangerous situation.

It is beyond doubt that those who planned the psyop are uneasy about Martin Bryant's continued existence and would sleep better at night if he should suddenly drop down dead. With this in mind, any good-natured crims enjoying an extended sabbatical in Risdon prison who read this report, are asked to keep an eye on Martin Bryant and do what they can to ensure that he doesn't accidentally commit 'suicide' or slip on a bar of soap and break his neck.

This is far from the end of the story but it is all that I will be publishing until an intensive independent investigation into the massacre is carried out in Tasmania. There are at least eight other gross errors surrounding the mass murder, any one of which has the potential to savagely damage government, and another thirty lesser points, but each and every one must be verified in absolute privacy. If my investigation into Yvonne Fletcher's murder in London taught me anything at all, it I was simply that the premature release of critical information serves only to allow time for media apologists to think up highly creative ways of minimising its impact on the public.

If the Federal Government is to be forced into action, it must be presented with a case so complete and so utterly damning that immediate action will be its only recourse short of being thrown out of office by a large bunch of very angry Australians.

Many years ago Oscar Wilde l said "Literature always anticipates life. It does not copy it, but moulds it to its purpose" In 1988 Australian newspapers reported New South Wales politician Barry Unsworth's claim that, "there would be no effective gun control in Australia until there was a massacre in Tasmania"

Part 3
Tasmania's second patsy: Terry Hill

Official documents supporting this report in full are held by the author, but certain names have been suppressed on legal advice!

 Two days afler the massacre at Port Arthur in April 1996, gun dealer Terry Hill of New Town, Tasmania, saw a photo of a men on the front page of his local newspaper, reportedly connected with the mass murder.

Hill recognized the man as "Martin RYAN" who had earlier visited his dealership. Hills wifliy contacted police. Unfortunately for him, he was unaware that the Tasmanian Government had thirty five corpses, one possible suspect, but no supplier of the weapons allegedly used in the massacre.

It was one of the biggest holes in the Government's impossible case against Martin Bryant, but a hole that could be filled in very neatly by sacrificing Terry Hill on the alter of political expediency.

On 27 March 1996 Terry Hill and assistant Greg Peck were working at "Guns and Ammo" in New Town, Tasmania, when the door opened and a tall man with long blonde hair walked in carrying a package wrapped in a towel. Known to Terry Hill only as Martin, the man muttered that "something was wrong with it" and promptly handed the package muzzle first across the counter. When Terry Hill unwrapped the towel he found that "it" was an AR10 assault rifle fitted with a clip containing 15 live rounds of high velocity .308 (7.62-mm NATO) ammunition.

Horrified, Hill removed the clip and worked the action, at which point another live round ejected from the breech. "Martin" had calmly walked into the store with a fully-loaded and unsafe assault weapon, blissfully unaware he had done anything wrong. His actions that morning demonstrated with chilling clarity that "Martin" had absolutely no idea how to load, cock, aim, fire, or unload, assault weapons of any kind.

Despite this staggering lack of knowledge, thirty two days later the Tasmanian Government tried to convince the world that "Martin" had entered the Broad Arrow cafe at Port Arthur, and with the panache usually reserved for top special forces combat shooters, shot 32 victims (20 of them dead), in less than 90 seconds with a Colt AR15 Commando. After that, the clumsy inept Martin is alleged to have left the cafe, deftly changed weapons to a heavier Belgian FN FAL with completely different loading and cocking mechanisms, and used it to kill or wound another 25 people. Both weapons were so well maintalined and tuned that neither one faltered or jamed during the entire 14.5 minute operation at Port Arthur.

As proved scientifically in parts one and two, written by this author, whoever prepared and fired those weapons was no Martin Bryant at all, but an expert combat shooter with special forces counter-terrorist experience.

Back at "Guns and Ammo" in New Town during late March this was still in the future, as a shaken Terry Hill stared aghast at the neat pile of high velocity rounds on his counter. Did Martin have a license? Yes he did, one of the newer photographic licenses, endorsed for prohibited and automatic firearms.

In a statement to police Hill confirmed the first name was Martin, and so far as he could remember, the surname was RYAN. Under the gun laws existing before the massacre Hill was not required to write down license details unless selling a weapon, and thus did not do so, but he has sworn statements from other witnesses that Martin produced this license in their presence. The Dutch AR10, serial number 001590, was in very poor condition and Hill wanted to retain it at the shop for safety. Receiving no instructions for repairs, Terry Hill asked Martin to return after Easter.

Over the next month Martin made several visits to 'Guns and Ammo', purchasing items that did not require details of his license to be recorded. These purchases included several gun cases and finally, on 24 April 1996, four days before the massacre, three boxes of Winchester XX 1 1/2 oz shotgun shells, code number X12XC. But at no time before or since did Terry Hill sell Martin any weapons, or ammunition of .223 Remington or .308 Winchester calibres, as use in the mass murder on 28 April 1996.


Martin had lived in the New Town area for many years but was not a regular customer at 'Guns and Ammo', so why did he suddenly start purchasing multiple innocuous goods from Terry Hill in the month immediately preceding the massacre at Port Arthur?

The most likely answer in intelligence parlance, is that someone asked Martin to go and buy the various items mentioned in order to build a "legend", designed to ensure that after the massacre a direct association would be made between Martin Bryant and a recognized gun dealer as the "supplier" of the weapons used at Port Arthur.

There is other evidence indicating this was the case. Long before the massacre took place, Martin Bryant's unaccompanied baggage was searched on entry to Australia and two pornographic videos seized. As the baggage was literally unaccompanied, anyone could have placed the pornographic tapes in the suitcase and then tipped-off Customs about its "obscene" contents.

On another occasion Bryant was arrested on entry to Australia on "information received", and taken to a Melbourne Hospital for an internal examination on the suspicion of drug trafficking. He was found innocent of any offense and released. On a third occasion there was an alleged "incident" in Hereford, England, which was reported to the police because Hereford is the home of British Special Air Service (SAS). Once again Bryant was completely innocent of any wrong doing, but by then the international computers were building a very convincing legend indeed.

By the date of the massacre at Port Arthur through no fault of his own, a computer search would have shown a string of warning flags indicating that Martin Bryant was a possible drug trafficker and purveyor of pornographic materials, and perhaps someone who had shown an unhealthy interest in the activities of Britain's premier counter-terrorist unit. Add all of that to his frequent visits to 'Guns and Ammo' during March and April 1996, and the Tasmanian Police Service would have needed to be superhuman to resist the implied legendary "proof" that Martin Bryant was its man.


Unfortunately Terry Hill was completely unaware of these computer manipulations when he did his duty as a responsible citizen on 30 April 1996, and reported his knowledge of Martin to police. It was at that point that his life and the lives of his family started to slowly come apart at the seams. Members of the police insisted that he must have sold the weapons and ammunition to Bryant, and made similar "off the record" accusations to the Tasmanian media, but Hill refused to budge. Why on earth admit selling weapons and ammunition to Bryant when he had not done so?

That later sordid attacks on Hill were political initiatives is beyond question. Terry Hill had a valid gun dealer's license, and there were witnesses to the fact that Martin had shown a valid dealer's license to him. He was thus fully entitled to sell any weapon to Martin without committing any offense at all under Tasmanian law, and would have admitted doing so in his statement if it were true. But it was not true, and Terry Hill was not prepared to "help the police" by signing a statement that amounted to an outright lie.

Things went quiet for a while and then Hill was interviewed by police in the presence of a lawyer on 6 June 1996. As he had always done, Hill maintained that he had not at any time sold weapons or rifle ammunition to Martin Bryant (or Ryan) and would not be changing his truthful stand. Unfortunately pressure seemed to be mounting, perhaps at senior Tasmanian Government levels, to incriminate Hill at any cost, and he immediately received a letter from the attending lawyer, containing the following comments:

"... In a private conversation that was had between the writer and Inspector xxxxx, Inspector xxxxx made it abundantly clear that police have very strong evidence to suggest that you did in fact sell guns to Bryant and unless you are prepared to in effect to change your story, they will press on and try and find sufflcient evidence to charge you with some offenses.

However, it is also abundantly clear that the Director of Public Prosecutions is prepared to offer you an indemnity against prosecution if you are prepared to accept that you did sell guns to Bryant .."

The letter was crude and revealing. By saying the police would "press on and try to find sufflcient evidence to charge you with some offences", the writer admitted that police had no evidence whatsoever against Terry Hill. If they had, in a matter of such seriousness as the Port Arthur massacre, he would have already been charged with criminal offences. But Terry Hill was never charged at all, making a mockery of the police threats. That the offer of an indemnity was guaranteed by the DPP is especially telling in terms of who was applying the blowtorch to police in an attempt to coerce a false confession out of Hill. The office of DPP is a political appointment, and agreement for indemnity against prosecution was thus a political decision made by government.

The legal letter delivered to Terry Hill on Friday 7 June, advised that the Tasmanian Police would be expecting an answer no later than the following Wednesday, 12 June. There seemed no point in delaying the matter, so Hill called his lawyer on Monday 10 June and said there would be no statement of the sort requested by the police. Terry Hill also had other things to worry about. His mother, Alma, was terminally ill and not expected to live for many more days.

On Thursday 13 June, Hill received a call from the hospital requesting his immediate attendance at her bedside, and was forced to depart 'Guns and Ammo' immediately, leaving his wife Dorothy alone to cope with police who simultaneously arrived at the store to carry out a "snap inspection". And so it was that the police found a number of technical reasons to revoke Terry Hill's gun dealer's license, while he sat powerless beside his dying mother's bedside at the local hospital. Alma finally passed away at 6.03 am the following morning.


It is of course possible for any government regulatory body to find sufficient technical reasons to close down any business at any time, provided there is sufficient political will to do so. There is a copy of the "Notice of Cancellation of Gun Dealer's License No. 54546" on the desk beside me as I write this report, and it must be said it records some items which under normal circumstances might have attracted an infringement notice calling for action within a specified time period. But not for Hill. Instead, his license was revoked and his livelihood destroyed.

Terry Hill would have been less than human if he had not glanced again at the legal letter sent to him just one week earlier, which warned quite coldly that if he did not admit to selling weapons to Martin Bryant, the police would "press on an try to find sufficient evidence to charge you with some offenses."

More than a year later in July 1997 the situation was to worsen. Why all the fuss, and why the continual persecution of Terry Hill, a man who had every reason to tell the truth and none at all to lie? The answer lies in the critical importance of proving that Martin Bryant had access to, and used, two high velocity assault rifles which could not be backtracked to anyone on the island of Tasmania or on the Australian mainland.

The police had no credible proof at all that Bryant fired either weapon at Port Arthur; they had no ballistic cross-matches between the weapons in question and the bullets found in the victims; they had no fingerprints proving an association between Martin Bryant and the weapons, or between Martin Bryant and the Broad Arrow Cafe where the massacre was initiated. By any standard then, the government should have long ago announced these harsh but accurate facts, and further announced its intention to hunt down those who did have access to (and ownership of the weapons most likely to have been used in the mass murder.

At the political level however, such an honest move would be seen as quite unacceptable, leaving as it would several politicians with egg all over their faces. Admitting that you had locked up the wrong man while the guilty parties were probably sunning themselves in the Bahamas was simply too hard and, anyway, who gave a damn about Martin Bryant?



But no matter the blast of continuous media myth assuring us of his guilt, there was still the impossible matter of proving once and for all that the two known assault weapons were Martin Bryant's as provided by "somebody".

Which somebody? Terry Hill of course, as Tasmanian Legal Aid finally decided to try and prove in an unprecedented "back door" civil legal action launched on 31 July 1997. Taxpayer funds were suddenly allocated to a plaintiff to take action against Terry Hill, a man who has never been charged with any criminal offence. Cracks were appearing in the official government version of events, and someone somewhere was determined to paper them over with taxpayer funds.

For any government to allow such a desperate and absurd case to proceed, is a deliberate misuse of public funds, and has the potential to create an incredibly dangerous legal precedent. The rationale for the civil suit is that the plaintiff was injured by a bullet fired at Port Arthur, and is suing Terry Hill for damages for negligence and breach of statutory duty; for allegedly selling Martin Bryant an AR15 military-style rifle, a scope, and around 250 round of ammunition.

For doing WHAT? The Tasmanian police have already proved via the legal letter to Terry Hill that there is absolutely no evidence to support such a claim for this. If there was, they would unquestionably have pressed criminal charges.

Even if Terry Hill had sold Martin Bryant the weapons, which he did not, it would have been an entirely legal transaction on the valid license that Bryant produced, where it is the duty of the licensing authority to judge the suitability of the applicant for the license, and thus the right to use those weapons.

Under such circumstances, allowing this case to proceed would be exactly the same as allowing a case to be brought against a licensed car dealer, for selling a car to a licensed driver, who then drove off and killed somebody in the street. Once the transaction was complete the licensed car dealer would no longer be involved. And what about the farmer who sells wheat to a cereal manufacturer, who makes a mistake with his production process and kills someone with a bowl of Wheat Bran? Do we sue the farmer for damages and statutory negligence? Of course not, because we are clearly not as unhinged as some members of the Tasmanian bureaucracy.

That legal aid should even be considered in this matter is beyond the pale because Terry Hill never sold Martin Bryant any weapons, and probably lost his livelihood because of his determination to maintain the truth and not provide the DPP with that vital missing link in the trail of evidence.

So are all of you out there going to sit back and let this happen, funded by hard-earned dollars screwed out of you by the government elected by the people for the people? The Port Arthur cover-up has gone too far already and it is time for every responsible Australian to call for the dismissal of the official in The Legal Aid Commission of Tasmania responsible for authorizing this Orwellian outrage.

By Joe Vialls
45 Merlin Drive, Carine, West Aust. 6020

Electromagnetic Weapons

Top-Secret Weapons Testing?


By Harry Mason, B.Sc., M.Sc. (c)1997 All Rights Reserved

(As published in Nexus magazine)


Were Tesla-style EM weapons used in the Kobe earthquake, the Oklahoma City bombing and the downing of TWA Flight 800, in a secret war between unidentified factions?


On 17 January 1995, the Japanese city of Kobe was struck by a massive earthquake that devastated much of the city, killing over 5,500 people and injuring many thousands more. Shoko Asahara, the leader of the Japanese Aum Supreme Truth (Aum Shinrikyo) sect, had surprisingly predicted, in a Tokyo radio broadcast on 8 January 1995, that a major quake would soon occur at Kobe. Asahara went even further and stated that this quake would be initiated by a "a foreign power" utilising an electromagnetic (EM) weapons system.

Aum's Science Minister Hideo Murai later stated at the Foreign Press Correspondents' Club in Tokyo on 7 April 1995 that, "There is a possibility that the great Hanshin [Kobe] earthquake was activated by electromagnetic power or some device that exerts energy into the ground."

Although Asahara would undoubtedly have preferred his great predictive powers to be thought of as due to a highly developed and superior spiritual ability to examine the future time-track (thus attracting more gullible followers after this quake event), it is far more likely that he was fed warning intelligence re Kobe by Aum's Science Minister Murai, and/or Japanese Intelligence operatives who themselves were forewarned by Russian KGB officials.

In his pre-Aum days, Hideo Murai had worked on highly advanced microwave and gamma/cosmic-ray physics applications for cold molding of steel at the Kobe Steel laboratories. This laboratory complex was located at the near-exact epicentre of the great Kobe earthquake. Japanese investigative journalists believe that this Kobe laboratory was one of several research facilities (located at Osaka, Tsukuba and Tokyo universities) engaged in top-secret research and development of EM weapons technologyãunder the cover of Kobe Steel industrial research and/or environmental "desert-greening" studies.

The Aum's deputy leader, Kiyohide Hayakawa, in his pre-Aum days studied at Osaka University in the Landscape Engineering section of the Environmental Engineering department. His thesis is highly confidential and not available to the public, but allegedly contains only landscape engineering studies.

For several days prior to the great Kobe earthquake there were reports of glowing orange-red and pink lights and spherical forms hovering over and along the Kobe fault line. Such Earth stress lights have been observed over major quakes in many parts of the globe since the 19th century, but the number and intensity of those that developed in the January 1995 pre-Kobe quake days appear to be highly anomalous.

The existence of geophysical weapons capable of creating or triggering earthquakes in highly stressed crustal regions has been discussed privately by geophysicists for a decade or more. Rumours have abounded over certain huge earthquakes of the 1970s and 1980s in the Central Asian republics of the former USSR. Some writers have suggested that these were caused by Israeli, French or American EM weapons systems used in retaliation for Soviet EM weapon strikes on the West. US scientist Tom Bearden contends that the Soviets brought into service an intercontinental-range Tesla EM weapon in 1963 during the Khrushchev era.

The evidence that Kobe was not a natural earthquake is slender and is based primarily upon Asahara's prediction that was later proved so horrifyingly correct. However, one cannot be certain about actual cause, and quite possibly I am totally incorrect in suggesting this event could have been caused by a sentiently controlled and directed EM energy weapon. There would appear to be some supporting evidence of an indirect nature involving political considerations and other more recent events. Taking into consideration the entire Kobe and Aum Tokyo scenarios together with the earlier, possibly Aum-related, fireball-explosion-earthquake events of 28 May 1993 at Banjawarn, Western Australia, one is left with a very strong impression of a serious fire underlying the visible "dark plume of smoke" that rose over Kobe.

But what motive could there possibly be for such a major city- busting weapon strike? Why choose an exotic EM weapon system?

It is quite possible that the EM strike was directed at the secret Kobe Steel EM weapons research laboratory and that the motive was in part to destroy this facility and cause such a resounding blow to the civilian population, similar in scale to the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that the Japanese oligarchic powers behind the scenes would think long and hard before attempting to continue their EM weapons project.

If the USA (or a covert international power group based therein) were the belligerent party that struck down Kobe, then the motive would most likely have included a 'big stick' warning to the Japanese powers to do what they were told with regard to the New World (economic) Order, or face the consequences.

It would appear from subsequent events that the Japanese oligarchy did not grovel under this attack but in fact, after some further provocation, went on the offensive with its own (or a friend's) EM weapon system.


During 1995 and 1996 the following major events were literally blasted onto the world stage:

1) 17 January 1995: The great Kobe "earthquake";

2) 20 March 1995: Tokyo subway gas attack;

3) 19 April 1995: Oklahoma City "terrorist bombing";

4) 1 May 1995: Perth "fireball-explosion";

5) 17 July 1996: Destruction of TWA Flight 800 off New York City and Long Island.

With the exception of the Tokyo subway gas attack, each of the above cret power groups who are willing to use them without mercy against the innocent citizens of planet Earth, represents a horrifying future prospect in the power struggles of this planet. Defence against such weapons and the curs who control them must now be our primary objective. The nuclear terror has been replaced by something far worse: a usable, high-energy weapon.


The Tokyo subway gas attack on 20 March 1995 killed 11 people and injured thousands.

The Aum Supreme Truth sect was soon implicated by the Tokyo Police and the world Press.

The Aum was reported as initiating the gas attack as a prelude to a revolutionary "right-wing" takeover of Japan. Aum members were shown on film by the BBC being trained and armed by the Russians. Allegedly the Aum smuggled thousands of automatic rifles and other weapons into Japan from Russia. Apparently the Aum intended to use Russian helicopters and Spetsnaz troops landed on the coast as aids to allow Aum forces to take control of Japanese Government ministries during a series of major diversionary terrorist nerve-gas attacks on key population and government centers across Japan. The Tokyo subway attack was allegedly a preliminary operational test prior to the full-scale AUM action.

In Australia, ABC TV soon ran a prime-time news story with video showing a shed full of large chemical drums (allegedly found at Banjawarn by the new post-Aum owners) and trenches full of hundreds of dead sheep. The report also discussed Federal Police reports concerning sarin-gas-derivative chemicals found in the dead sheep, and interviews with the Aum's Australian sheep station manager. All of this was supposed to demonstrate that the Aum purchased Banjawarn station to carry out tests with home-made sarin nerve gas on sheep, as a precursor field trial to the Tokyo subway gas attack.

Problems soon surfaced with regard to this official Australian press scenario. The present owners of Banjawarn reported to this author that the ABC TV story was "a pack of lies", for the shed of chemicals shown on the 7.00 pm news was not on Banjawarn station; in fact, they had never seen it, and did not know where this video film had come from. They insisted that they had only reported finding two relatively small bottles marked "HCl" (hydrochloric acid) in the old station building, which was previously used by the Aum sect in September 1993 as a mining field-laboratory.

The ABC news footage showing hundreds of dead sheep was actually stock video recorded the previous year when sheep were being shot on farms near Esperance, WA, due to extremely low market prices. Only a few tens of dead sheep were found by police on Banjawarn, and these had been put down by hammer-blows to the head by the Aum's real manager, appointed by the WA Pastoral Board, because the Aum had failed to tend the station's windmills, thus causing a shortage of water for the flocks, which resulted in many severely dehydrated sheep having to be put down.

In Japan, European chemical and nerve-gas experts who examined the Aum's chemical complex laughed at the notion that sarin or any other nerve gas had been made there, pointing out that the equipment and facilities would have leaked like a sieve, killing the operators and local villagers. They did find plenty of residual evidence in the plant that demonstrated that large quantities of designer drugs such as ecstasy had been manufactured there, right up to the time of the Tokyo subway gas attack.

Small samples of sarin and other nerve gases as well as other lethal gas and chemical types were found in the Aum complex, along with a few automatic rifle kits of Russian origin and equipment for duplicating further arms. However, Aum members were apparently deliberately warned about a week in advance that a police raid was coming - thus allowing them to remove any other stocks of arms, gases and drugs in advance.

It appears that deputy leader Hayakawa used the sect as cover for a range of foreign weapons purchases and weapons-related researchãapparently for the "right-wing" oligarchic power behind the Japanese Government. It is quite obvious that at least parts of the Aum organisation were not staffed with 'good guys' and that they were involved with some quite crazy and antisocial activities such as the manufacture of massive quantities of drugs.

Japanese investigative journalists believe that the drugs were being distributed worldwide by the Yakuza, possibly through a rogue CIA operation. Thus, in time-honoured planetary secret-service fashion, a "right-wing" Japanese oligarchic intelligence operation was being funded by illicit drugs.

These same Japanese journalists (see their web site, have suggested that the Aum sect was a cover for Japanese Intelligence operations involving covert re-arming of the Japan Self-Defense Forces with new Russian weapons systems. Recent Japanese Defense Agency press releases tend to support this view by revealing large, new purchases by Japan of modern frontline Russian jet fighters and bombers, as well as joint communications exercises between the two countries' defence forces. There is plenty of evidence concerning the Aum's activities in Russia, such as training with Russian troops and managing the joint Japan-Russia University in Moscow - a cover for a Russian-Japanese redevelopment of the first-generation Russian EM weapons systems mated to Japanese computer power.

As early as mid-1993, in his visa applications to enter Australia, Asahara complained of gas and laser attacks on his person and against Aum facilities. He continued to complain of such attacks in further correspondence with Australian Immigration in mid-1994.

If taken at face value, this data and much else of the press web re the Aum suggest that the Aum (and hence their backers?) have been the victim of a knockout blow delivered by a very influential foreign secret service. The Aum was set up as the perpetrator of the Tokyo subway gas attack - the patsy, if you like.

It may be highly significant that over 50 per cent of the Japanese LDP Cabinet allegedly flew covertly to North Korea for one week's negotiations, the day after the gas attack. The Aum Science Minister Hideo Murai was murdered by a North Korean hitman's knife soon after the Tokyo subway gas attack. Someone was very afraid that he was going to talk. Apparently Murai's last words in the ambulance were the equivalent of "The Jews got me!", although other interpretations of his final mumblings have also been advanced.

Hayakawa left his early "landscape engineering" studies and joined the Moonies, whereupon he was equipped with the deeds of several Tokyo buildings and vast sums of cash so as to buy his way to the top of the Aum sect. The Reverend Moon was a close friend of the North Korean "Great Leader". Reportedly the Moonies still have exceptional ties to North Korea and, more recently, to ex-US President George Bush, involving business ventures in South America.

Several previously reliable Japanese sources believe that the CIA planned and executed the Tokyo subway gas attack to destabilise the LDP government and/or force it to co-operate with US policy requirements. The exact nature of their evidence is unknown to me, but similar claims have been made by Debra von Trapp, an ex-CIA agent involved with bugging the Clinton White House for a George Bush-controlled faction of the CIA on behalf of certain Japanese industrial companies during key USA -Japan trade talks.

The strange ABC TV deception of its viewers, by implanting - the Aum = Sarin nerve gas = Banjawarn station testing = Tokyo subway gas attack - imagery across Australia, suggests an intelligence action - possibly in support of United States interests.


On 19th. April 1995, at a few minutes after 9.00 am, Oklahoma City was blasted by the "terrorist bombing" of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. One hundred and sixty eight men, women and children were killed, and hundreds more were maimed or injured in this callous attack. The building was nearly totally destroyed by the explosion, whilst severe damage was inflicted on adjacent buildings, petering out at about a one-mile radius from ground zero.

This event was soon blamed upon a "right-wing militia group" composed of ex-Gulf War veterans utilising an ANFO bomb composed of from two to five tonnes of ammonium nitrate and Diesel fuel-oil set up in a hire truck parked in front of the target building. A robotic Timothy McVeigh was recently convicted of the OKC "bombing", and his alleged accomplice Terry Nichols awaits his trial (which is about to commence as this article goes to press).

On the day of the event, I, like many others, watched the CNN TV feed of the Oklahoma scene. Intriguingly, there were early reports of missiles being seen coming down vertically into the building, but these reports never resurfaced. A survivor with blood over his face was interviewed about one hour into the rescue effort. He described how his life had been saved by his previous domicile in California. When the Murrah Building began to shake violently he recognised an earthquake, just like those he had experienced in California, so he dived under his fifth-floor desk. Some five-to-ten seconds later, a huge explosion demolished the building around him, but the desk saved his life.

Then came reports that more bombs had been found, and a utility truck with a small armoured bomb box in its tray was shown, whilst the FBI's radio delivered a conversation alleging large drums of mercury fulminate explosive had been found attached to building support pillars next to the lift shaft.

I became agitated, since I had never heard of earthquake-type effects hitting a building before a bomb went off, and I knew mercury fulminate to be an extremely unstable explosive and very unlikely to have survived a major explosion. Also, the size of explosive drum reported then and later photographed would have been far too large to fit in the armoured bomb box that reportedly drove away with these dangerous prizes.

Explosives experts in Australia, the UK and USA (e.g., the General Partin report) began to question the nature of the damage at OKC. The gist of their theses is that low-velocity explosives like ANFO cannot have demolished so many support pillars in the strange pattern seen at OKC, since the blast pressure falls off according to the inverse cube distance lawãyet some near-bomb pillars were still standing, whilst some further away from the bomb were demolished by the blast. Their reports generally invoke a need for very-high-velocity explosives and individual charges attached to certain pillars inside the building - requiring hours of work to fit out.

Personal friends with experience in mining explosives and Belfast IRA ANFO terrorist-bomb damage have confirmed these points to me and have noted that the crater that allegedly developed at OKC does not fit with the truck bomb explanation or the truck's alleged parking lot position.

Another possible weapon candidate soon surfaced: the "A-Neutronic" bomb. In this scenario, a mad criminal scientist (the infamous Michael Riconosciuto, currently serving time in a US prison), developed for the US Government a new super-weapon that involved blowing a cloud of chemicals into the air, charging the cloud with a large excess of electrostatic energy by means of a small rocket-carried "wire", and then detonating the resultant "fuel-air" mix to create a small nuclear-type explosion.

I began to collect eyewitness reports and evidence from official source publications and Internet sites relating to the OKC event. Then, in late 1996, I visited Oklahoma City and with the help of local author David Hoffman examined the "bombing" site and interviewed local witnesses. The outpourings of grief and anguish, with messages and wreaths of the victims' relatives and friends, on the targeted building site's protective fences, made me resolve to give this event my very best analysis - to try to deduce the true nature of this explosive event and thereby help indicate the real culprits.

Seismic evidence recorded by local seismometers demonstrated a double-pronged explosive energy event with two nearly identical three-to-five-second, low-amplitude, multiple wave trains separated by a null field, occurring over a nine-second interval. USGS geophysicists argued that these two wave-packets were due to an initial ground "surface" wave arriving before a secondary wave that had traveled via deeper reflecting Earth layers, i.e., via the local basement. Other geophysicists argued that there were two wave-packets, representing the "bomb's" explosion followed by the building debris impacting with the ground.

These hypotheses were blown apart by the US Government's explosive demolition action on the Alfred P. Murrah Building remains, which failed completely to demonstrate a two-pronged seismic response that was in any way similar to the original event recordings. The original and best seismic recordings have been confiscated by the FBI, along with many other items of evidence such as the City video-surveillance tapes. Hardly surprisingly, none of this evidence surfaced in the McVeigh trial.

Along with the evidence of seismic action shaking the building some five-to-ten seconds prior to any explosion or blast wave hitting the building, there were several other mysterious pre-explosion events.

A policeman working at his computer noticed electrical sparks and streamers in the wiring under the table several seconds before the explosion brought the building down around him. A woman on an upper floor noted a strong ionising electrical sensation and hot air-flow entering the windows several seconds prior to the explosion which blew the same windows in on her. The lights in the building went out some five seconds before the explosion. A dictation tape recording made across the street from the "bombed" building recorded a loud "click" a few seconds before it recorded the sound of a huge explosion. This "click" was probably a local electromagnetic wave spike of considerable intensity picked up by the recorder circuitry.

An eyewitness located in a car a couple of hundred metres from ground zero observed a silver-white light flash or beam coming out of the top of the building, followed by a large blue-white electrical arcing flash or beam, followed by an orange-red light flash or beam that shot out from the top of the building. These electrical and light effects took some five seconds and were immediately followed by a "loud swarm of bees type vibrational noise" which preceded the actual explosion. (Reports of missiles may have been mistaken identification of these pre-explosion energy beams.)

The light flashes/beams and the "swarm of bees noise" were followed immediately by two explosive shock waves, one trailing on the other, that propagated out and away from the base of the building. These waves lifted the ground and buildings violently upwards. The witness called this the "lid effect". The outgoing expansion waves were immediately followed by return implosion shock waves.

Several cars located on the above-ground carpark had electronic ignition computers completely burnt out by the event. Two cars had factory-fitted digital magnetic compasses that were later found to have been thrown out by 180 and 45 respectively. Many nearby office computers went down with burnt-out circuit- boards. These facts point strongly to a major EM pulse having struck the area associated with the explosion.

The local area damage from the OKC event was huge. I cannot emphasise enough how devastated this area was. I was quite amazed when I visited the site. Entire blocks of damaged office buildings had been knocked down due to their shattered state, some nearly a mile away from ground zero. Large open spaces were surrounded by boarded-up buildings with no windows, no roofs, and intensely shattered internal concrete beams and supporting pillars. I saw the intense damage inside the nearby newspaper building where internal dividing walls had been smashed asunder and horizontal three-foot-square reinforced concrete beams sagged down everywhere. This building had been built to very high 1930s standards to withstand tornadoes, yet it was wrecked. Many buildings had entire windowsills forced back in with their front brick walls sagging inwards. Nearer to ground zero, large, one-foot-wide, floor-and-wall reinforcing steel H-girders were twisted like spaghetti into grotesque shapes amidst the ruins of entire floors blown away to dust and rubble.

I showed a suite of local damage photos to retired SAS trooper friends, with experience in IRA ANFO bomb damage. They were as amazed as I was, and stated categorically that this was no ANFO damage. They said it would not have mattered how large an ANFO bomb had been detonated, it could not have caused the damage seen in the photos and/or described in the US literature.

Funnily, the FBI released film of ANFO car-bomb test explosions that show significant fireball or fiery effects from such explosives. Yet no witnesses have described any fiery explosion or flamesãjust strange, pre-explosion light flashes or beams followed by pure energy waves, with very high plasma-type heat effects noted on nearby car paint.

It is my contention that the OKC event was the result of a double-pronged EM weapon strike that caused the Earth's dielectric field to erupt up through the building - the light flashes. The building shook first because of harmonic reaction to the first EM wave packet which also blew the building's electrical supply and created the various computer, digital compass and ionising hot-air effects. Having rocked the building sufficiently, the EM weapon mode was advanced in a second strike to initiate explosive atomic-bond rupture and literally blow the building material apart.

No conventional or nuclear explosive, including a so-called "A-Neutronic" bomb, can cause seismic shaking and electrical light-energy effects in a structure, several seconds before the explosion blast-wave hits.

Oblique aerial photos of the Murrah Building show two nearly vertical, tubelike damage forms running through the building. These represent slightly displaced near-vertical but divergent beam-pulse orientations, suggesting an orbital platform was involved in the action.

Any bomb or militia-terrorist character to this event was set in train by those who hit the building, to ensure that the true nature of the weapon system and its technology was hidden from public and possibly other US Government personnel.

This implies that a faction from within the US Government was responsible. Either that, or the US Government was warned well in advance that this particular building would be hit that day by an advanced weapon over which there was no defence - so it quickly found a patsy and built up a cover story.

"Need-to-know" secrecy policy suggests that there then entered a cock-up of horrific dimensions. Lower-level personnel had been searching for a bomb earlier that morning, having been told that the building was targeted for bombing by terrorists, but, in failing to find it, they then did not proceed to evacuate the building. Higher government levels, having decided to hide the horrible truth from even their own operatives, had to have a plausible McVeigh militia-type event. The Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms personnel were better served, as were the Judges in the adjacent court house: they were all warned to stay away that day.

Secret Service personnel engaged in anti-drug operations were in their offices which lay in the center of the damage and were wiped out by this OKC event. Interestingly, similar terrorist- bombing events in the past were apparently aimed at the same anti-drug Secret Service in both the downing of the Lockerbie Pan Am jumbo and the "bombing" of the New York World Trade Center. Indeed, it is possible that this entire series of events is being fought over a drugs empire.


In the early hours of 1 May 1995, a major fireball flew in a north-northeasterly direction towards Perth, WA, and detonated above the eastern side of the city at approximately 2.00 am in a huge explosion. Limited Australian press coverage of this event defined it as a meteor fireball. Unfortunately, too many such fireballs fly around our night skies, exhibiting exotic flight behavior and a preference for the first of May each year.

This Perth event has been described in more detail in Part 1 of this "Bright Skies" series (see NEXUS 4/03, April-May 1997), where I present evidence for the non-natural origin of this event and suggest that it represents an EM weapons incident of probably Russian origin, or possibly off-planet alien origin.

The megatonne-force level of this explosion woke up over half a million people and demonstrated that Perth could have been obliterated at the flick of a switch. This was the message in the wake-up call made that early morning to the people of Perth.

I strongly suspect it was pointing out that WA hosts a huge US-controlled EM weapons system at Exmouth in the northwestern part of WA, and that we should wake up and bring order to our own house - or face the consequences.

The trajectory of this fireball suggests an origin in Enderby Land, Antarctica, where a number of Japanese and Russian bases are located. The fireball flew on towards the Kamchatka Peninsula where a huge Russian (former Soviet Union) EM weapons complex/transmitter (Tx) site lies.

The seismograph record of this Perth "meteor" airburst explosive event is surprisingly similar to one of the two low-order wave-packet arrivals seen on the record of the OKC "bomb" events.

On the premise that such a fireball represents no mass object but is purely a concentrated slug of 'infolded' EM energy created by a Russian-type Tesla weapon system, I contend that this incident fits well with the other exotic events of 1995 and represents yet another stage in an escalating EM weapons exchange as part of an oligarchic war for control of our planet.

Some evidence in this study points strongly at a mainly Earth-based series of actions involving those who live by the profits of drugs, fighting against other oligarchic power-mad men - with both sides utilising very technologically advanced EM weapons systems. However, some evidence points to a battle between secret Earth-based power groups and off-planet aliens - possibly the little Greys or the greenish Reptilians (see Part 4, NEXUS 4/06). Perhaps we are involved in both scenarios, with two Earth-based oligarchic factions with separate off-planet allies fighting with horrific new weapons for control of planet Earth.

Rumours abound about all of these scenarios but then again, it is quite possible that none is correct and we are just dealing with strange, exotic, natural events that have been mistakenly identified.

Even so, these events have been, and continue to be, extremely dangerous to human life; thus, whatever is going on requires immediate attention by the people of this planet - as the next incident involving the fateful TWA Flight 800 amply demonstrates.


TWA Flight 800 was destroyed on the evening of 17 July 1996, and, with her, some 230 men, women and children perished.

I had been researching strange orange-red fireballs and other exotic light-energy beams observed around Australia when I was surprised by reports coming out of the USA about events surrounding the downing of TWA 800. I fly quite a lot on jumbo jets, and the thought of a bunch of nutters killing off hundreds of ordinary, innocent people made (and makes) my blood boil.

Reports soon started coming in, one from a New York Air National Guard helicopter pilot who, on patrol that Wednesday night, was an eyewitness to the explosion of TWA Flight 800.

"I know the strike of a missile. What I saw didn't look at all like a missile," said Commander Fritz Meyer of the 106th Rescue Wing of the New York Air National Guard. "Our three-man crew saw the same thing: a flash of red-orange light, characteristic of a shooting star," he said. "Then we saw a small explosion followed by a large explosion, and a ball of fire fell into the sea."

I telephoned the Pentagon in Washington and was put through to the pilot's air base, but after leaving messages I got no reply - until about a week later when I reached the base control-tower. By accident, this man was in the tower, having been grounded due to the very same news item and a very upset FBI and New York Mayor who had ordered him gagged. I spoke with him for a few minutes and felt that he was an honest man and, like all military pilots, a damn good observer who was very perplexed at what he had seen that night. He reiterated that he knew missiles from his Vietnam tours and it definitely wasn't one of those. He said he really would like to know what it was and would love to chat with me further, but I had better get the okay for us to talk from the public relations officer at his base.

A fax exchange later, I was reading that FBI investigators wanted no one to talk to this man until they had determined the cause of the "crash". He and I are still waiting for that chat.

Over the next few months, several airline pilots saw apparently similar orange-red and green-blue mini-fireballs with tails flying at jumbo-jet height through this area. A TWA pilot returned to Kennedy Airport rather than proceed, after seeing one such meteor-like object fly past his wingtip. In all, about 10 separate reports came in concerning strange sentient fireballs or meteors flying in the air corridors of the New York and Long Island or near vicinity.

Meanwhile, allegedly after demands from the French Government (which lost several Secret Service men on TWA Flight 800), the US authorities assembled a team of divers who recovered the wreckage from the sea for a crash investigation. The flight recorder was recovered but it was electrically dead due to burnt-out circuits and gave no clues to the events of that night. I had earlier predicted in e-mails to the FBI the likelihood of just such a fact by analogy with evidence from Australia that our orange-red lights and fireballs were EM field effects, possibly due to the testing of scalar EM weapon systems. The FBI did not reply.

Theories began to execute a "do-loop" in the world's press. These revolved around a meteorite impact, a terrorist bomb, a terrorist missile, and, later, a US Navy missile or drone impact, a bird impact, a mechanical failure of some kind, and an explosion in the near-empty central fuel tank. Recently the crash investigation team has come out with evidence for an electrical overvoltage spark in a valve located within the nearly empty central fuel tank, and has suggested that this was the cause of the explosion and that Boeing should redesign this part.

Obviously their findings should also include considerations on what caused the overvoltage jump; for instance, was it an EM weapon pulse or an electrostatically charged meteor? Trouble is, meteors do not keep returning to the same piece of the Earth every few days for several months - as has been recent experience around New York and Long Island.

Interestingly, there were many UFO reports from Long Island over the preceding two months, and a local UFO researcher was arrested under cloudy circumstances just five weeks before the TWA 800 event.

In late 1996 a leading British psychic, who often works with Scotland Yard and MI5, was approached by the CIA and asked to remote-view the TWA 800 incident. She reported seeing two beams flash down from high altitude; where they intersected they created a third orange-red beam which shot out, hitting the jumbo jet and causing the secondary major explosion.

This was fascinating stuff, since her description was almost the verbatim equivalent of the actual eyewitness evidence from the 1987 DC-8 crash near Gander in Newfoundland, northeast Canada, that killed hundreds of US Army personnel. She did not know of this event, and had seen only British news about the TWA 800 explosion - and nothing about beams.The overall evidence pattern here links the destruction of TWA 800 to an EM-type event that strongly resembles certain of the Australian fireball-event types.

We are left with yet another strong impression that this event - on the 17th day of the month, again - involves Secret Service agents (French ones this time), and advanced EM weaponry that has been responsible for the death of hundreds of innocent people.

Then again - as in many other recent incidents, during October 1997, in Texas, New Mexico, Queensland, and New South Wales, where orbital UFO's were apparently bought down on two opposing continents, within two days of each other, after falling from orbit they were finally destroyed as huge airburst explosions, that littered the ground in aluminum shards and plasma energy balls, part of a series of October 97 UFO incidents that lasted for several days - there are elements of the picture that suggest an ongoing war with alien, off-planet UFO's.

Perhaps a UFO really did knock down TWA Flight 800, and Triffid meteor showers or some modern derivatives have made us all blind to the new reality on our patch. Or maybe some strange, EM-style natural event, such as an electrostatically charged bolide, caused the demise of this plane and its passengers.

I, for one, think it's high time we found out the truth. Our lives, those of our children, and quite possibly the future of the human race, could depend upon it.

Note: Anyone wishing to report exotic fireballs/light-emission events, or knowing about EM weapons systems technology/testing in Australia or elsewhere, may phone the author on +61 (0)8 9525 5999 (after 10.00 am WA time = GMT + 8 hours), fax on +61 (0)8 9525 5944, or e-mail

About the Author:

Harry Mason, BSc, MSc, is a UK-born geologist/geophysicist, resident in Perth, Western Australia. His 30-year international career has given him extensive field experience in mineral resource exploration, including seismic and EM studies. He (usually) specialises in the geology and resource exploration of Western Australia's eastern Goldfields.

1313 Armstrong Road
Jarrahdale WA 6203, Australia
Phone: +61 (0)8 9525 5999
Fax: +61 (0)8 9525 5944

Back to top