Home Siege Lindt Café Inquest, Part 4 – A Plethora of Videos Calling the...

Lindt Café Inquest, Part 4 – A Plethora of Videos Calling the Siege a Hoax


Lindt cafe

by Mary W Maxwell

Gumshoe readers know that I generally resist the claim that false flag events are hoaxes (meaning the deaths did not really take place).  A main worry is that we could be invited down a path that leads to total confusion and therefore helplessness. Certainly the Youtube videos calling everything a hoax can scramble one’s brain.

Let me use myself as an example. Right now I feel I am in the driver’s seat when investigating, say, the issue of cloud-abuse (a.k.a. chemtrails) or the shootout at Port Arthur, with its subsequent cruel treatment of the patsy. I have solid reference points to use, such as science and the law (not to mention morality) when I analyze these problems.

But what if the word goes around that nothing is solid anymore? Wouldn’t one lose one’s grip if suddenly there’s no expectation that judges will be honest?  What if everybody said you mustn’t be so foolish as to trust your doctor?  It would be very weird to live like that. It’s not the human way.

Was the Sydney Siege Dinki Di?

What about the 2014 Sydney siege — is there evidence that the hostages were “crisis actors”? Were all the injuries faked? Was the SWAT team from Central Casting?

I urge the judge at the current Lindt Café Inquest– which is due to finish soon – to look into the hoax matter. Yes, His Honor should confront the question, if for no other reason than to put rumors to rest.

On December 17, 2014, two days after the siege, I made a non-hoax video to say the media were “using” the event. (Don’t bother to watch it. It only chides the PM for flower-laying not for staging the shootout.)

But most likely the government did do the whole thing. Sure, a terrorist in Australia could be working free-lance, or maybe even working for Allah — but it’s a stretch.

Everything Man Haron Monis had done up to that point was portrayed by media as self-initiated, but no way, José. He’s clearly a pathetic follower, not a leader. He didn’t even do an impressive job as hostage-taker. That much I am willing to react to, as a Doubting Thomas.

But to go the hoax route, saying the event was merely a piece of theatre, is beyond me. I think the Sydney siege was a psy-op, aimed at creating fear in Oz, and it resulted in real deaths. Of course I’m willing, in principle, to upgrade to Full Hoax if there’s good evidence – but so far I don’t buy it.

The Surprising Number of Videos Dated December 15-17

A lot of people do buy it. Believing in hoaxes is quite popular. There’s a Sandy Hook hoax video on Youtube that has had three million views.

Also, typing “Sydney siege hoax” or “Lindt Café hoax” into Youtube’s search engine brings a slew of videos. Wow, was I surprised at how many videos were published within 48 hours of the siege. Some are even dated December 15, the day of the siege. (But in America, their 15th occurred the day after, if you know what I mean.)

Let me list ten of the channels that host a Sydney hoax video. All of these are from US or Canada. All were published December, 2014 — within a week of the event.

Dec 15 — ShawnY,  12 mins, 8,010 views so far

Dec 15 — Franco3830,  8 mins, 12,676 views

Dec 15 — Killuminaion,  3 mins, 3,303 views

Dec 16 — JenOpenYourEyes,  13 mins, 6,918 views

Dec 16 — 108morris108,  8 mins, 4,732 views

Dec 17 — AllTotalCoaching,  6 mins, 1171 views

Dec 17 — TheStarspirit123,  7 mins, 1,396 views

Dec 17 — Occupymundo,  3 mins, 3,383 views

Dec 20 — ItsAboutPerception,  2 mins, 859 views

Dec 22 – TruthMediaRevolution,  12 mins, 35, 232 views (gosh, a hundred times more than the 320 views for my little offering above).

Are there any Australian-made videos that treat the siege as a hoax? Yes, several individuals have produced at least one, and “Peekay,” who lives in Melbourne, has made dozens of Sydney siege hoax videos.

I’d like to interview Peekay face-to-face, as I sense that he isn’t quite cricket.  Still, maybe he will bring me around to his view that the Lindt Café siege was theatre-only. Some people consider him the guru of the Marathon bombing narrative….

Why Be Cautious?

On November 30, 2014, I wrote an article for Gumshoe entitled “Duplex False Flags.” The Sydney episode had not yet happened; I was mainly thinking of the Marathon bombing and the Sandy Hook shootout.

My complaint was that many of these “investigatory” videos looked really high-quality — by which I meant Quantico quality. Note: the technicians at FBI labs in Quantico, Virginia can produce any fake copy of anything and look authentic, be it a birth certificate or the Dead Sea Scrolls.

I also opined that hoax-themed videos are unreliable as we cannot know if the photos they debunk were presented to anyone as genuine photos in the first place! (I mean it would take major research to find out. I don’t download the evening news, do you?)

The creators of hoax videos typically don’t furnish their name, much less their curriculum vitae. To me that raises suspicion. If they’re earnest types wouldn’t they want to get public credit for their vids? I know I do. (Gimme credit! Gimme a Walkley!)

I think most of them are “on the payroll.” My main reason for digging my heels in (i.e., not going with the hoax flow) is that it looks to me that “somebody up there” wants us to be overloaded with data. Their goal must surely be to dissuade us from dealing seriously with false flags.

Just picture what would happen if the Lindt café siege were now correctly demonstrated to have employed crisis actors. I think you would feel so uncomfortable about Australia having been hoaxed that you’d no longer work on the case. To save your dignity you would dismiss the whole matter.

I’ll bet “their” psychologists and neuroscientists have established that! Boy, do they know the inner workings of the human mind.

I’ll provide a video, in the Comments section below, which spoofs the flat-earth videos. The creator of this video really understands the issue of messing up minds simply by manner of presentation. It’s brilliant.

Censorship and Self-Censorship

Another cause for caution is that hoax research may lead to a crackdown on our publications. I’ve already nattered on about that in two Gumshoe articles. On Dec 30, 2014, I wrote “Sandy Hook Denial Will Be Criminalized Like Holocaust Denial?”  and on January 4, 2015, “The Criminal Hoaxing of Sandy Hook, and Our Future.

I asked, wouldn’t it be just like Parliament to legislate new restrictions on what we can say, based on “the outrageousness” of conspiracy theories? Recall the fellow in Northumbia UK who got chased by the police for calling a violent event in Glasgow a hoax, in a tweet.

“France Moves to Make Conspiracy Theories Illegal by Government Decree” was a headline a year ago at the website of 21stCenturyWire.  Could it happen here in Oz? Just ask Attorney General George Brandis – he’s probably got a draft of the law ready.

Or just ask Dee who grew up with censorship, and consequently with self-censorship, in South Africa. “If I’m not allowed to utter anything about the unfairness of apartheid, I may as well dismiss it from my brain.”

Gumshoe Has Got the Goods in Hand

This website has marshaled loads of evidence for the falseness of two major narratives: the Port Arthur shootout of 1996, and the Marathon bombing of 2013. It’s so easy to spot the syndrome — normal police protocol is evaded, mainstream journalists refuse to notice major holes in the story, and legal professionals trample on the law.

Our Port Arthur work has drawn on years of nitty-gritty research by Andrew MacGregor, Terry Shulze, Stewart Beattie and others. They have pretty well nailed down who cooked up the massacre and who carried it out. And it weren’t your local intellectually handicapped fellow.

As for the Marathon, about half of Gumshoe’s articles on that subject come from two court watchers in North America: Josée Lépine and Cheryl Dean. They had no trouble demolishing that story about the “tiny figures” approaching the car of MIT cop Sean Collier. They dealt with the FBI’s claims of cutting Jahar’s clothes off him twice – at the boat and at the hospital — that being a plain impossibility.

So am I claiming we don’t need to prove a hoax? No, not exactly, but I am saying that identifying perjury (re the tiny figures or the clothing) seems more helpful than identifying crisis actors.

Let’s imagine that Peekay’s videos of fake blood at the Marathon get proven (the blood does indeed look fake), and that some or all of the amputees were actors (whose amputations occurred years ago) — how would this solve our problem?

I think that if we find that Jeff Bauman is having us on, we’d still have to plow through the court system to undo Tsarnaev’s conviction.

I must ask Peekay what he himself thinks we should do if  Bauman, or his wheelchair attendant Carlos Arrendondo, “confessed.” E Howard Hunt has confessed to shooting JFK but that doesn’t seem to move anything around. Has anyone ever been arrested over the Dallas coup d’etat of 1963? Nope.

That said, I welcome Gumshoe readers to donate any good evidence they have of the Lindt Café siege affair being hoaxatious.

Why not? Heck, Yours Truly has already gone out on a limb by suggesting that there’s something kinda woo-woo about the huge — gargantuan – pile of flowers that was left at Martin Place.

So go on, make a fool of yourself. This be a holiday weekend n Australia (Queen’s birthday). Let it all hang out.

A Sample of Hoax-themed Videos

I leave you with one of the siege-hoax videos that is clearly meant to be humorous entertainment. Note: the first comment it received on Youtube was “My grandmas brothers uncles sisters babysitters father was a hostage and I don’t appreciate you saying it was a hoax.”

Gotta have a laugh.


— Mary W Maxwell is holding the fort at Gumshoe News while Dee McLachlan is away making a movie. Any catapulting will incur a fine.

Photo credit: 2bp.blogspot.com




    • When I sailed to Hawaii we used a sextant for navigation. Looks like I was doing it all wrong, apparently I never had to compensate for the curvature of the Earth with the ‘Dip’ caused from eye height. LOL

  1. When one seeks the truth it is best to use what senses they have and trust in them, rather than listen to stories told by entities that cant and never will override our common sense(s).

    Too many times we disregard our inner voice or gut feeling and rather accept the norm (or perceived) story which every time can’t fit all of the facts. A truth is something that MUST always fit all of the facts (which are truths in themselves).

    Surely other people feel that things aren’t right even without any research or thought put into many different issues of the present? It really doesn’t take much research and or effort in many news topics to prove that at very least the “official” story being told is not the truth?

  2. Definition of Ley Line: A supposed straight line connecting three or more prehistoric or ancient sites, sometimes regarded as the line of a former track and associated by some with lines of energy and other paranormal phenomena.

    The definition does not say a curved straight line…

  3. I think we’ve reached a point where psy-ops and false-flags are so ubiquitous, many people assume the word “hoax” because they aren’t as familiar with the concepts behind the psy-op and false-flag but now at least know how to smell a rat, even if they don’t get the finer points of rattery.

    The other thing is the “hoax” claim can also be a poisoning of the information well by the well-placed in order to denigrate all those who question things as Internet Conspiracy Crazies (WTC holograms anyone?)

    • Paul, re your first paragraph, I see what you mean. A friend from Poland told me that during the Commie years his neighbors treated every Soviet announcement with equal disdain.

      Re your second paragraph, that’s what I was trying to say. I like the name well-poisoners. Have a look at some of the hoax videos and see a lot of well-poisoning going on. Thanks.

  4. Incident deniers are just taking the desire to control the uncontrollable to its ultimate conclusion. The salient point to remember is that one can wind up in the same trap by putting too much import on a pertinent conspiracy lead.

    The Port Arthur massacre, the Boston bombing and the Lindt Cafe siege all present multiple instances of legal processes being obviated and no good reason being provided. All three cases exemplify the fact that political actuation of the justice system in both Countries has become epidemic.

    Everyman has a duty to hold those responsible to account. The full truth will never be known about any matter any other way.

    • Berry, you have put it all so succintly. As for the “legal processes being obviated” I see it massively in the Marathon bombing trial and the Port Arthur non-trial, but am not aware of it (so far) re the Sydney siege. Please explain.

      • My understanding is that the legal process of any criminal matter starts with the deployment of Police Services and that the Police are supposed to work with the community.

        In the case of the Lindt cafe siege every offer of help from the Islamic community was rejected. Law, by definition, is a consensus. Any State that can’t trust any of it’s citizens any of the time is intrinsically lawless.

  5. Wait till Dee hears this. (She collects tales of “I locked eyes with the terrorist.”)
    Published at telegraph.co.uk, on Dec 15, 2014 at 8.25 GMT, by Harriet Alexander:

    “Kathryn Chee, an employee of the Lindt café, was due to start her shift an hour after the siege began. “It shakes me to the bone,” she told ABC news. “That could be me standing there.” Perhaps the luckiest of all was Craig Stoker – who was walking down the street after buying a coffee in the Lindt café when he bumped into Monis.
    “He was wearing a black T-shirt with white writing on it and a headband and carrying a blue bag,” said Mr Stoker, a father-of-four. “The bag bumped into me and there was something hard in it. I said: ‘Watch where you are going’. “He turned round and said: ‘Do you want me to shoot you too?’

    ‘I looked into his eyes and they were crazy. I was pretty freaked out’.”

  6. Proof is the name of the game. Or at least that what we initially think will tip a narrative from the official to the alternate, but there is just as much chance that many of these events are hoaxes as they are false flags. And there is no such thing as proof to prove an event didn’t happen. That right there is a double negative.

    Instead, all we have to go on is the ‘evidence’ presented to all that supposedly supports an official narrative event. But that’s where the aggregated anomalies lay.

    One example which is like no other. Sandy Hook. If one collects and examines as much direct footage of even just the parents and family of the alleged murdered, the whole thing crumbles. We are taught that there is typical and atypical behaviour, and that we should allow for a good proportion of atypical behaviour in response to a traumatic event. But I challenge anyone to seriously aggregate the reactions, then and now, of Sandy Hook victims. Virtually to a person, some 50 odd people acting strange to the point is obviously tellling porkies.

    And there it is. Sandy Hook a hoax. Use that same methodology with any ‘event’ you like. Virtually every event supposedly where people died reveals a cast (I’m not a believer in crisis actors) of nearly EVERYONE involved, spinning great big webs of bullshit.

    Hoaxes there be’s and lots and lots of them

    And ther wonderful thing is that they (the conjures, the perps of what ever you want to call them) cannot hurt a hair on our bodies … it’s against their rules.

    • I think “hoax” is a dangerous word. The variations of real, part manipulated, false flags are enormous.
      It is like the “fake news” — at least that word has back-fired on the msm. They are being called the fake news.

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion