(L) Justice William Cox of Tasmania. (Center) Justice George O’Toole of Boston. (R) Magistrate Michael Barnes of New South Wales
by Mary Maxwell, currently a candidate for US Senate, in Alabama
At GumshoeNews.com we often deal with conspiracy theory. I write “investigative” articles – mainly investigating court documents and government behaviour. This has resulted in books entitled Marathon Bombing: Indicting the Players, and Inquest: Siege in Sydney, as well as a book co-authored by Dee McLachlan — Port Arthur: Enough Is Enough.
Information from one case often enlightens another case. I believe the main gunman in each of those three books was a patsy. Jahar (Dzhokhar) Tsarnaev, age 19, did not do the 2013 Boston bombing; Martin Bryant, age 28, did not do the 1996 Port Arthur massacre; the hostage-taker Man Haron Monis, in the 2014 Sydney siege, was indeed the gunman but his actions were arranged by someone else.
I personally believe the authorities did all three events. The FBI or Boston’s Emergency Management did the Marathon “bombing.” A Special Operations Group ran the killings at Port Arthur and burned the Seascape Cottage. I say the Sydney siege was controlled by police while constables were “stood down.”
Some members of the public still have not heard of “false flags,” but these are well documented in history. The best device a government can use to control people is to tell them an enemy is lurking or is about to strike. Create a false-flag atrocity and nearly everyone will fall in with the official story. (Monis literally used a false “flag.” He placed an irrelevant Islamic banner in the window of the Lindt Café.)
On hearing conspiracy theories talked about, many people use two logical statements to resist acceptance. They say: 1. It’s not possible that so many people would participate in wrong-doing; some would be conscience-pricked. And 2. If the atrocities had a perpetrator other than the nominated one (such as Jahar at the Boston Marathon) that perpetrator would surely have been exposed – you can’t keep things hushed up for too long.
Nice logic, but there’s a competing logic. For #2, it doesn’t matter how many exposés a journalist may accomplish, the public mind WANTS TO BELIEVE THE FALSE-FLAG STORY. Our tricksters know this, they are experts at psychology. Our book Port Arthur: Enough Is Enough is full of wonderful exposés, but people turn their face away. Indeed many get angry at the authors.
As for #1 (wrongdoers would get a prick of conscience), it’s a fact of life that a few individuals do start to feel guilty — but they may then get “taken out.” If you “know too much” you are considered a risk. Dozens of people who knew the real score about the assassination of JFK met an untimely death, for example, George Mohrenschildt and David Ferrie. Mohrenschildt was told that the House Select Committee on Assassinations wanted to see him as a crucial witness. That afternoon, he was found dead. When it was reported that District Attorney Jim Garrison would call David Ferrie for questioning, Ferrie was soon found dead.
In sum, the two logical reasons to reject conspiracy theory are sensible, but they are bested by other factors.
You Can Argue the Case on the Basis of 4 “Diagnostic” Tip-offs
I have been asked to explain why I sound confident when talking conspiracy theory, especially in the face of ridicule. It is because I use certain criteria when looking at a case. Or, should I say, certain criteria jump out at me. The first time this happened when I was a law student in 2005. I happened to read in a law blog that Lord Hutton, who was conducting an inquiry into the death of a bioweapons expert, called the witnesses in the wrong order.
Judges don’t do that. They don’t break rules unless they are getting up to no good. I followed the links in that article and, before you know it, ended up reading a conspiracy website for the first time in my life. Was I ever scared to find out about 9-11, and other things!
So if you want to know how to feel confident about a conspiracy theory, look for a judge’s odd behaviour – that is the best tip-off. Here is another example of it. Australian citizen Mal Hughes wrote to the coroner in the Sydney siege case with a very interesting insight about the guns used. He has waited 9 months, so far, for a response.
And the same coroner, Magistrate Michael Barnes, ignored a letter I sent with “99 things about the siege that don’t add up.” Did any other person send in even five such items? I think my collection of 99 ought to merit coronial attention. But if the case is a false flag, if the gunman is a patsy, silence is bound to reign.
In Boston, Justice O’Toole went way over the limits of protocol. He shook hands with each juror before the Tsarnaev trial began and said “We are a team.” I am claiming that when we see a deviation like that, we are well on the way to knowing that the official case is a lie. Moreover, Judge O’Toole allowed Jahar’s “Defense” Attorney to get away with saying “It was him” even though Jahar was pleading Not Guilty!
See what I mean? If the case was kosher, such a thing would never happen.
In the Port Arthur case, Justice Cox did not bother to ask if the accused, Martin Bryant, had taken advice from his guardian. Just fathom that. An adult receiving a disability check for mental illness is on trial and the judge does not say “Hey, wait a minute!”
Tip-off 2, in my list of four tip-offs, is that key people are not called as witnesses. In the Port Arthur case it is shocking that Wendy Scurr’s testimony was deemed unworthy to be heard. She was the main helper of the wounded at the site. Wendy was dying to tell what she saw — but the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) fobbed her off. Can you imagine.
In the Sydney siege case, the widow of the gunman, Amirah Droudis, could have been summoned to give important information. Or the coroner could have visited her in jail to take a deposition (since she was allegedly “taught how to murder” by siege-man Monis). Nope, too much trouble, can’t afford the train fare, or whatever.
Then there is the matter of the “terrorist’s” aunt, Maret Tsarnaeva, sending Judge O’Toole an affidavit, pleading that the Defense team had gone to Russia 14 times to pressure Jahar’s family “to not resist conviction.” Did such a thing really happen? Unless Maret has a fertile imagination, it did happen and is a huge scandal. For the judge to do nothing in reaction is about as telling a tip-off as you can get.
For Tip-off 3, I propose we look at “failure to clarify who was in charge.” Even though I’ve read several of the European reports of shootouts by Muslim terrorists, it’s never clear where the cops came from onto the scene, or which part of the law enforcement profession was technically in charge. In the recent Melbourne “Bourke Street rampage,” we plainly see undercover police cars participating, but just try to get the police media liaison to explain that!
Regarding the Marathon, it’s still not clear to citizens who have watched many videos of the event, whether the law enforcement personnel in the vans were FBI or Private Security or what. Since real cops would want to take credit for their brilliant work, it is a tip-off (Tip-off 3) that the Boston Mayor doesn’t explain who’s who. Heck, we weren’t even told which ambulances were onsite, even though marathon races standardly have ambulances.
As for Port Arthur in which 35 people were killed, there was never an explanation for the local police’s failure to appear for the first five hours when hundreds of tourists were traumatized with fear. Nor does Parliament answer questions as to why the fire brigade was waiting for Seascape cottage to go ablaze. Did a tarot card reading tell them that Martin Bryant would commit arson? See? You’re just not entitled to know.
The most amazing thing to me in 2016, when I sat through the police testimony at the Lindt Café Inquest, was to hear top officials of the NSW Police (Chief Andrew Scipione and Deputy Chief Cath Burn) say that they had no part to play in deciding when the café would be stormed by police to rescue the hostages. The phrase that came to my mind was “I’m like Huh?”
Nor were we ever informed who did have that responsibility
The point of this article is to present tip-offs to see if a conspiracy theory satisfactorily explains an event. When a case is genuine, authorities rush to collect any evidence available, right? But when it’s a false-flag, evidence needs to be suppressed. Famously, on September 11, 2001, the debris of the fallen towers was carted off — in absolute breach of the rules of evidence.
Tip-off 4, therefore, is a tip-off to look at what’s going on with physical evidence. In the Marathon trial, there was clear evidence that the offending backpack was a black one. We could all see that Jahar’s backpack was grey-ish white, not black, but this major problem was completely ignored. In the Port Arthur case, exculpatory evidence was not handed over by the prosecution, as is required by law.
As I said above, Mal Hughes sent to the Sydney coroner some interesting points about the guns used in the siege. Do you think he will ever get a reply? Don’t bet your house on it.
A Word from the Editor
Dee McLachlan, editor and founder of GumshoeNews, wants me to correct my use of the word “government” in this article. Her comment on my saying that the Sydney siege was arranged by police is as follows:
Authorities? These could be shadow controllers, foreign authorities or specialized entities. I think part of our problem is that we are thinking the government is responsible.
I think the “government” knows very little – due largely to compartmentalisation. For those orchestrating and controlling a false flag, the less government and police know the better. You just need people in authority in a state of doublethink. Look at how the media behave, to understand how easy it is to control tens of thousands of journalists. They are not in on the game — they are just issued blinkers.
Please await an article by Dee, soon, addressing that important point.
Recap of the Tip-offs
To recap, four tip-offs that help to check on the validity of a conspiracy theory are:
- A judge deviates from proper procedure. (Ask why.)
- Key witnesses are not called. (Ask why.)
- Government won’t tell us who was in charge at the scene. (Ask why.)
- Telltale evidence is hidden from view or, if it is blatant, it’s not talked about. (Ask why.)
Please sift through some terrorist events of recent years. See if you locate the relevant tip-offs. I say they are diagnostic of conspiracy by government.
A combination of all four should lead to arrests before the day is out.
–Mary Maxwell, PhD, LLB, is the author of 12 books. Her Prosecution for Treason is a free download at the campaign website www.maxwellforsenate.com
Photo credits: Justice Cox – Bethlehem House Justice O’Toole – Cool Justice - blogger Magistrate Barnes – Daily Telegraph Boston Strong tee-shirt -- USA TODAY College