by Dee McLachlan
This Part 3 of this “Fake Media War” series was inspired by comments from yesterday’s article, and refers back to the reporting of the Port Arthur massacre. I’ll assume that the reader has some familiarity with the case, but if not please see my short video below.
If we have “fake news” today, it must be because the media has been rehearsing for decades. Today, if journalists did what they did at Port Arthur, we would recognize it immediately as blatant fakery, but in those days – 1996 — Australians were innocent.
This article will mainly quote from sources that reflect on the reporting of the massacre, plus a personal reflection from ABC’s Judy Tierney. As I rummaged through these sources I thought “How could dozens of journalists have been herded through a tour of the crime scene (as they were) and not realize they were being herded?”
Let’s first go to a book called, “Fair Game or Fair Go? Impact of News Reporting on Victims and Survivors of Traumatic Events”, by T. McLellan:
“If one revisits media coverage of the Port Arthur massacre, sensationalism and insensitivity are readily evident. There were powerful, evocative headlines, often penned by media personnel who never left the relative comfort of their offices in Hobart, Melbourne, Sydney or elsewhere. Snappy captions accompanied graphic photographs of the dead and injured, while snazzy line drawings ‘recreated’ the scene … [Loved ones of the deceased] said what they needed from journalists was compassion, but instead they experienced callous competition as the media ‘hunted like a pack’.
“The host of one national (mainland-based) current affairs program secured an exclusive interview with the grieving Walter Mikac even before the bodies of his wife and children had been removed from the site. The high-profile journalist was rushed to the Tasman Peninsula by helicopter which attempted to land … across the road from Mikac’s pharmacy…”
McLellan also refers to a 1997 statement by author Margaret Scott, that staff members at the Port Arthur Historic Site (campus of the 19th century convict prison) complained that incoming media calls continuously jammed the limited number of telephone lines in the first hours after the shooting began. They were trying to convince authorities about what had happened and to establish the whereabouts of the gunman.
Ironically (Scott says), “a staff member from CNN’s Atlanta office managed to call the security manager at Port Arthur and told him the gunman was surrounded by police at the nearby Seascape Cottages, yet local authorities could not.”
Pretty amazing.
On 28 April, 2016, ABC’s Sonya Voumard wrote an article entitled: “Did ‘vulture’ journalists descend on Port Arthur?” She ponders whether the journalists behaved ethically, and for the article she interviewed Garry Bailey — former editor of The Hobart Mercury. To quote her:
“Bailey told me he thought the local media in Tasmania had largely behaved ethically over the Port Arthur massacre. [Judy] Tierney differed and then raised the issue of the Hobart Mercury’s use of a photograph of Martin Bryant despite ethical questions about how it had been accessed. Bailey said he could not break a confidence about how the image [Martin Bryant’s image] was accessed. He admitted there had been a huge debate about whether to use it.”
Oh, really?
Judy Tierney Was Hosting a “Girls’ Lunch”
For the 10th anniversary of the massacre, Judy Tierney, a presenter at ABC, recalled the day:
“When Hobart man Martin Bryant began indiscriminately shooting people at one of Tasmania’s iconic tourism destinations I was entertaining 35 women at home. I was hosting a “girls’ lunch” for my journalist colleagues and some friends who held responsible positions in government.”
Judy lives in Tasmania, but I wonder how many of those 35 women were mainlanders, or even foreign journos. The fact is that Hobart was the scene of a media conference set to begin the next day, April 29, 1996.
She continues:
“The phone rang and it was the Sydney executive producer of the television program I worked for, requesting I head to Port Arthur immediately. Port Arthur is about 50 minutes’ drive from Hobart and is the site of the remnants of one of Australia’s most grim colonial penal settlements. [In my] home, mobile phones were ringing furiously as just about every woman there was receiving similar instructions to get across what was happening.”
Below is much of her article. The emphasis in bold is mine, and I have added questions and notes in brackets. Knowing what we know today, it is truly a revealing report. Note that when she describes what happened at the shooting – which none of the journos observed – she is parroting the official narrative.
Tierney’s Recollections
“The media, hearing what was happening in this usually quiet and relatively remote location, assembled with extraordinary speed. The ‘mainland’ journos arrived with their editing and satellite kits… Bryant, at this stage, had not been captured. [When exactly did the ‘mainland’ journos arrive?]
“It was a kind of odd atmosphere in the area that had been set aside for us. We were corralled in the Tasmanian Devil Park up the road a few kilometers from the Port Arthur site. It would be the next day before we’d be ferried by bus onto the actual grounds where most of the killing had occurred.
[Judy and the other journalists had been “corralled” in the park just up the road. She was hosting a lunch, so we can assume that she might have arrived at the park around 4.00pm. So were the journos corralled and organised before the police even arrived at the Broad Arrow Cafe?]
“…The police were incredibly helpful, the Government had done an exceptional job in providing avenues of information but it was still surreal… Jokes were told as we warmed our freezing hands over 44-gallon drums filled with burning logs.
[She then tells of a scene that we had not previously heard]:
“When buses began passing the Devil Park filled with pale people with hollow eyes, the mood changed dramatically. The lights were on in the cabins of the buses. You could tell these people had seen unforgettable, brutal death. Fear had frozen their faces.
“The media contingent was huge. There must have been 50 or more of us on the buses provided to take us onto the historic site the day after the massacre. We were forbidden to enter the café where the bloodiest carnage had taken place. I, for one, was relieved as the remaining evidence of death was enough to remain etched on my brain forever.
“All this surrounding us and yet someone stole my handbag which I’d left on my seat in the bus. We all left our gear on board when we got off to view another area of Bryant’s murderous rampage. Why would anyone do that, steal a handbag at a moment like this? Who cares about a bloody handbag when 35 people have lost their lives? It’s just something I’ve pondered in more recent years.
“One of the cameramen with our [ABC] team was distraught and angry with members of the media pack who appeared unaffected by this catastrophe, who remained distant and even cynical…”
In another article Tierney wrote:
“The media had been corralled a few kilometres from the site at the Tasmanian Devil Park. Shots were still being heard, Bryant had not been captured. I quickly began getting my head around what facts were available. Fortunately the Police Media Unit was well organised and whatever news came to hand was quickly shared with the journalists and TV crews.”
Commentary
The above confessions by journalists reveal that someone must have known well before the shooting started that it would occur that day — April 28, 1996. We later realized that not only was there a conference of newsmen from around the world happening in Tasmania, “coincidentally” that day, there was also a gathering of trauma surgeons at Royal Hobart Hospital — coincidentally.
In this day and age, when we understand the media’s proclivity for faking the news, and when we understand that the media must be a full member of the Deep State team, would it be asking too much for individual ABC journalists to distance themselves from their original Port Arthur story?
In 2016, Mary W Maxwell and I performed a show at the Adelaide Fringe in which Mary read out “the fodder note.” It shows Martin Bryant, at age 21, to have been already mind controlled by cruel methods. We are not sure of the source, it is from a page torn out of a book. I don’t think the source is ASIO as it mentions ASIO in the third person. But it does give other incriminating names.
Without revealing the names here, I can tell you that it catalogues persons who had “prior knowledge of Port Arthur ” – and also “prior knowledge of Dunblane”!!!
Judy Tierney concluded her article with:
“The Port Arthur massacre has had an everlasting and deeply scarring affect on hundreds of people… Even after 10 years, the memory is raw and tormenting… every attempt has been made to write the killer out of the script. He is simply too monstrous to exist.“
Indeed the massacre was monstrous, but no MSM person has bothered to investigate who committed it!
The more I think of the “set up” of that day, the more I cannot believe that these “used” groups like the journalists from around the World, the surgeons that attended the “trauma” exercise and others involved in the “code brown” exercise, do not know that they were involved in a SETUP.
Surely everyone in those groups must question, “how is it that there was a 22 corpse freezer mortuary truck in Hobart at time, when there has never been one elsewhere in Australia?” And of course that truck will supposedly never be required again, as it has been sent off to who knows where.
These individuals either alone or together, by not speaking up, are as much to blame for the massacre as those who planned it. While this incident is not brought to court, the perpetrators are bound to attempt another such attack. Next time any one of those who stood idly by, while allowing these criminals to escape justice, could be one of the next victims.
Mal, can you imagine their planning board… like a war strategy with pins it it — and a schedule. Help us!
I must add to my above comments. Although, so far those groups I mention above may not yet have become victims, but there have been many victims, around the World, that may not have been, had certain people in Australia been sent to jail for their crimes that day.
Events that come to mind are: New York’s 9/11, London’s 7/7, Mr Mende’s murder by police on the railway platform in London, the chemical attacks in Syria, the Lindt Café siege, the falsified accusations against Russia in regard to nerve gas attack in Britain. If Australia had taken the lead and jailed the individual criminals in positions of authority that day, the World, as a whole may have been safer.
We can go on about the Port Arthur Massacre and the Boston Marathon, what we need is a radical change within the society we live in, a start would be reformation of the CIA, MI5/6 and so on who are beyond the law and work as a autonomous group un answerable to any, the fact is no group can ever be trusted who are considered above the law, the fact is humans are somewhat prone to be criminals, few individuals having developed a moral and ethical code they live and work by, those who do are from my point of view persecuted by either by agencies of state or individuals, in the main you can expect those who persecute are unbalanced or insane and many are indoctrinated to become evil.
The news got out quick. Remember the skeleton crew of ABC in Hobart saw the police vehicles go screaming past with sirens on and decided to find out what was happening. They drove to the Police Media center and were surprised to see Roland Browne from the Coalition for Gun Control already there, waiting to push the gun control agenda.
I expect it didn’t take too long after that the word got out and Judy got her message. Since the main contingent of Police didn’t arrive until 6 hours after the massacre, it does appear that the media had to be held back or corralled until the Police could set up the bus tour the next day.
By then the ‘grief counselors’ had done their job the previous evening of getting the stories right and the narrative established. Had the journalists arrived and started taking stories, there may have been some major discrepancies with the approved narrative.
It would be interesting to find out if ANY of the media pack suspected that they were being used as pawns. From an earlier article on Gumshoes that repeated some of Darren Hinch’s comments, it is clear he was clueless. What I find so shocking is that he and so many other alleged ‘journalists’ continue to remain locked in the official narrative when there is so much objective evidence readily available to disprove it.
What is it with these people?
Derryn Hinch is protecting his parliamentary pension these days….
Yeah, that seems to be the case, but what about people like Judy Tierney? If someone has a contact for her, perhaps she could be contacted to leave a comment.
Terry, I have written to Judy via Facebook. I hope she provides more information of the day.
Two days and no reply. Hopefully she just hasn’t checked her Facebook page (or maybe with all the recent revelations about Facebook, she’s staying away from it).
It would be good to get more information about how they controlled the media. I didn’t know about the ‘corral’ the day before the bus rides. – She’ll probably be spitting chips when she finds out that not only was she being mislead, but that she ended up working for the ‘bad guys’.
Why has no “investigative journalist” asked why a judge that was not criminally involved in the case, locked away for 30 years the supposed evidence in an ordinary criminal case, that we are told was not a National Security risk? Well both of those situations are incorrect. The evidence locked away is only the make-believe evidence of the Public Prosecutor along with the non-evidence of the so called Defence Attorney.
The real evidence has always been in the public domain. All one needs to do is read writings by Andrew MacGregor, Stewart Beattie, Carl Wernerhoff, articles printed over a period of time here at Gumshoenews and any story given out by Wendy Scurr.
The crime was a National Security threat as it was instigated on behalf of the United Nations Organisation and the City of London Bankers. The reason was to try and rid Australia of private gun ownership. That has not succeeded, thankfully. Unarmed Australians would have put citizens at greater risk from the Globalist Cabal.
I’ve not yet seen any proof of the ’30 year embargo’ which has always been talked about in various circles so I’ve always been very dubious about that. But there is a D25 notice on the Victims’ Compensation payouts which ends 2023.
In the above photo, look how the many sheep won’t listen to the one who is informing them of the relationship between the Deep State and the Media, oops I mean the relationship between the stockman and the dog.
And you ### galahs expect us to believe that the media, judicial, and all, infrastructure just “happened” to be on hand in the “right place and right time”. Or, on the other hand, you expect us to believe that the MI6, CIA, ASIO, etc. informed the participants: “This is your secret service handler speaking. You will go to Tasmania with all your prejudices and “reporting tools” to the pre-booked venue where you will get further instructions according to “need-to-know” or convenience of the ideology.
I still suspect that “Glugshoenews” is but another paid con-job to distract ordinary people from their proper purpose and end.
I do not understand your last two and half lines.
Sorry: one and a half.
As for the first paragraph, I take it that is mere sarcasim?
Fair enough, Ned.
No, it’s not “mere” sarcasm, it’s intended to be very pointed sarcasm. To sanctimoniously attempt to ascribe all blame on people and institutions that are so remote and nebulous as to be untouchable is tantamount to saying; “complain and cry all you want but the bullies own this playground”. These crooks are only apparently invincible because they have a whole lot of goons and lackeys and “useful idiots” to surreptitiously implement, orchestrate and protect their nefarious ideologies and activities. The “useful idiots” I refer to are low level ‘Masons who can be relied on to unquestioningly (very often unknowingly) do as their all-seeing, all-knowing Craft suggests or requires according to its very secretive agendas. The real crooks will remain invulnerable while their protection/diversion racket remains in the dark.
I still suspect that “Glugshoenews” is part of the diversion racket.
I disagree, “glugshoe news’ is part of the exposure scenario and does not look like or act like a ‘low level masonic’ outfit.
“Today, if journalists did what they did at Port Arthur, we would recognize it immediately as blatant fakery, but in those days – 1996 — Australians were innocent”
Don’t you mean ignorant ?
And doesn’t such a state remain commensurate to a literacy level that’s been steadily declining since the advent of compulsory(State-controlled) education) ?
And doesn’t the problem go to a complete failure to grasp the fact that no form of knowledge can be disseminated in a political/spiritual vacuum ?
So far as I’m concerned THAT’S the disease: sloppy journalism is a mere symptom