Terry in Oz

Hi Guys, I just joined your forum and started posting about the massacre in this thread -

https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....28/index2.html

My first post is at 5:14 on the second page. It was suggested that I introduce myself. OK, I'm a retired barrister (21 years), 72 years old, married and a shooter. I'll edit this post with some links to some articles I wrote to further introduce myself.

The first one is a link to a video I helped with. It is only 10 minutes long and is about the Port Arthur Massacre. Take a look in the comments, the second one is from me and is a scene from a rough draft screenplay on the massacre. - https://gumshoenews.com/2019/03/31/j...lucky-country/

Here is a link to an article on Australian Constitutional Law. - https://gumshoenews.com/2018/06/19/r...d-its-decline/

Here's a link to a long article on the background of the Australian gun laws - http://northwestvets.com/g_runner.htm

Here's an article I did for ANZAC Day. I used to write the technical articles for the magazine, but ANZAC Day came up, so I did a veterans article - http://northwestvets.com/spurs/shulze.htm

Welcome Terry. We could well do with a new member that can offer balanced, well considered and non emotive (outsiders) commentary on the events of this year in New Zealand. I have long considered myself a rational thinker but I proved to all on Christmas Day that when it comes to our current government and political issues of the day, I am still emotively charged by the fallout (prohibition and confiscation of formerly legally held firearms) from the Christchurch Mosque events in March. In my own defence though, my irrational eruption on Christmas Day was the result of being engaged by my father in law over a matter that he supports and I hold a contrary view to and the mere fact that it was my FIL was a catalyst as our relationship is very much like that of match to touch paper or red rag to bull.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rushy

Welcome Terry. We could well do with a new member that can offer balanced, well considered and non emotive (outsiders) commentary on the events of this year in New Zealand. I have long considered myself a rational thinker but I proved to all on Christmas Day that when it comes to our current government and political issues of the day, I am still emotively charged by the fallout (prohibition and confiscation of formerly legally held firearms) from the Christchurch Mosque events in March. In my own defence though, my irrational eruption on Christmas Day was the result of being engaged by my father in law over a matter that he supports and I hold a contrary view to and the mere fact that it was my FIL was a catalyst as our relationship is very much like that of match to touch paper or red rag to bull.

---

You should have made you FIL face the wall as in "Turnardern" every time he opened his gob.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidGunn

You should have made you FIL face the wall as in "Turnardern" every time he opened his gob.

---

Or I could just stitch up his lips with a sacking needle and some baling twine. He is fun really as we are so diametrically opposed in our viewpoints and for that matter our life experiences that our discussions and debates are what you would imagine a debate between Ghengis Khan and Jacinda Ardern would be like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rushy

Or I could just stitch up his lips with a sacking needle and some baling twine. He is fun really as we are so diametrically opposed in our viewpoints and for that matter our life experiences that our discussions and debates are what you would imagine a debate between Ghengis Khan and Jacinda Ardern would be like.

---

I cant see you as Ms Adern, that’s a step to far!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maca49

I cant see you as Ms Adern, that’s a step to far!!

---

Maca The Mongol Marauder and I are the same individual reincarnated.

Gday mate :thumbsup:

Welcome

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

Welcome to the forum

Sent from my S60 using Tapatalk

What video is this exactly?

It is an analysis of Tarrant's video. It has clips of Tarrant's video in it for discussion.

Like I said, the first part deals with all the 'disinformation' that was put out initially on the 'net to deflect attention to absurd topics like 'crisis actors', nobody was killed, blank rounds, CGI, etc. The last half deals with Tarrant receiving instructions of where to go, the man in red, the car that left during the massacre. In other words, the IMPORTANT bits of the video that show that this was not a 'lone gunman' scenario.

If someone can check with a legal team in NZ to confirm the actual wording of the legislation/regulation or whatever, as to whether the alleged 'ban' only relates to POSSESSION and not to VIEWING of clips of the massacre from an overseas site. If the ban only relates to possession and does not extend to viewing of an overseas site, then posting that information would likely relieve some of the fear I detect from Kiwis about doing more research.

@jakewire probably worth removing video link as I think its borderline illegal and generally not a good look. (Havent watched but op has given a fairly good description that it contains images of shooting)

@PerazziSC3 100% agree. If this is a link to 'the' video it will very likely get someone in NZ into trouble. It should not, but it will.

Gone.
Terry, don't post it again.

No problem, don't want you guys to get in any sort of trouble, you're in enough deep stuff now without complicating things. Perhaps if any of you go overseas you can look up the video for yourself and assess it. The analysis was done by Max Igun on his 'Crowhouse' channel, click on the Bitchute logo and it is well down the page. For those who won't look at the analysis, here is what it reveals.

This massacre was DEFINITELY NOT a lone gunman shooting. At least three times Tarrant takes off running to shoot people that were not within his line of sight. He was working with others.

The first time that I could see was when he runs out the front of the Mosque, turns and points his rifle at a parked car, apparently recognizes the people, does not shoot but continues to run out to the sidewalk and then shoot at a fleeing person that is down the street.

That parked car is important. License number FQH875, as it leaves during the massacre and then is filmed later being flagged through a Police roadblock.

The second time he gets instructions was when he was out at his car getting petrol out of the boot. He drops what he is doing and runs up the alley, turns around the wall and goes to shoot people in the FAR corner of the compound.

The third time he gets instructions is when he is back in the Mosque, then runs up the hall and out onto the sidewalk to shoot at two women. One of the women is killed and the other escapes.

What is important in this sequence is that the video shows that there is a man dressed all in red standing in the compound watching the massacre. Tarrant looked at him and did not shoot at him, he went after the women. Those two women likely ran past that man in red while trying to escape. The surviving woman could confirm the existence of the man in red at a Royal Commission.

This is not my problem, it is YOUR problem. I was only trying to help as you have been denied the opportunity to view very relevant evidence. Good luck.