- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,756
- 4,858
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
no amount of evidence will change your mind. people like you are intellectually incapable of making reasonable inferences from available information. that's why you believe the nonsense you do.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
You mean am I going to give you the names of people who were there, saw him and wish to god they could forget seeing the carnage?Any names or evidence?
I remember the day, kind of surreal. We were at a market just next to Port Arthur, aiming to head down there after the stalls closed, when our way was blocked off by this police officer. He wouldn't tell us why he wasn't letting us go in there, just telling us to go the other way. At first, we thought it was a car accident, then we saw cop car after cop car after cop car one after the other all roll by. Then came the mortuary trucks. So many of them. Everyone was in a state of panic because nobody knew who did it, and most people were saying that there were like 5 or 6 people doing it. They reckoned that there was no way they'd be captured, because it was so easy to get out, and everyone was panicking because they thought like whoever they were would come after them. People were inside their houses locking their doors and windows, not answering their phones. It was chaos. When we were told that it was a disabled man acting alone, the reactions ranged from sheer amazement and disbelief through to "do you think we're stupid?" That's when the theories started, as to what had really gone on. It didn't start with gun law reform, it started when they expected us to believe that a disabled guy acting alone could do all of that. Of course, we all are led to believe today that there was only ever one theory: that it was done by the government to try to take guns away from people, but at the time that one wasn't even mentioned as a possibility. Most of us thought it was some kind of terrorist attack, by a bunch of people angry at tourists for some reason. Before the massacre, it was even written in newspapers with people scared that it might happen, and Port Arthur, being Tasmania's largest tourist site, was said to be the most vulnerable one, especially when they started having foreign tour guides. No eye witnesses ever positively identified Martin Bryant, not from seeing him in person at least. Photos were taken, thousands of them, all showing someone else holding the gun. There was even video released. There were guns that were in Seascape that nobody can explain who they belonged to. There were people saying that others were there: and not just panicking eye witnesses either. Police thought that other people were there too. Noelene and David Martin were supposed to be assisting him. It made sense, since they were Martin Bryant's best friends. What didn't make sense was the idea that he killed them the night before then went on this rampage, then came back to the house where their dead bodies were, in order to have an 18 hour siege. If he was smart enough to do the massacre, then he was smart enough to get away. Nicole Louise Burgess and Elizabeth Jane Howard, two of the victims who worked in the Broad Arrow cafe, were black belt karate experts who knew how to disarm weapons at close range. Yet Martin Bryant, who had never fired a gun before, was able to kill them both before they had the chance to fight back. It takes someone who knows what they are doing to be able to do that. You can look at the various theories online. Just type in Port Arthur massacre and there's more about why the official story makes no sense than there is about the official story. Even here we have 18 pages talking about why it makes no sense versus 4 pages saying how sorry we feel. I don't think we can honestly call it a conspiracy theory when it is that popular. The term "controversy" seems more relevant. As for me, I always thought it was a terrorist attack, but in a time when we didn't use that term to refer to events on our own shore. While I am sure that Martin Bryant was involved, he had an alibi complete with photographic and video evidence that puts him a long way from Port Arthur during the main lot of shooting, and we certainly can't suggest that he acted alone. It is funny looking back that we just were expected to believe what at the time sounded like an absurd claim, that it was one man acting alone, a disabled man no less, who we were all expected to believe was able to do this just because he had an automatic weapon. Yeah, guns are that amazing, apparently. Since the law reform, gun-related deaths have gone down, but deaths haven't. Murders haven't. Suicides haven't. We just stab people now and people throw themselves in front of trains a lot more often than they used to. Gun-related deaths used to be 30% murders, but now they are 60%. So what we stopped with this law is people putting a bullet to their brain, not killing other people. Train suicides are way up thanks to this law change. I am sure that commuters are thankful to John Howard for that.
Conspiracy boardI remember the day, kind of surreal. We were at a market just next to Port Arthur, aiming to head down there after the stalls closed, when our way was blocked off by this police officer. He wouldn't tell us why he wasn't letting us go in there, just telling us to go the other way. At first, we thought it was a car accident, then we saw cop car after cop car after cop car one after the other all roll by. Then came the mortuary trucks. So many of them. Everyone was in a state of panic because nobody knew who did it, and most people were saying that there were like 5 or 6 people doing it. They reckoned that there was no way they'd be captured, because it was so easy to get out, and everyone was panicking because they thought like whoever they were would come after them. People were inside their houses locking their doors and windows, not answering their phones. It was chaos. When we were told that it was a disabled man acting alone, the reactions ranged from sheer amazement and disbelief through to "do you think we're stupid?" That's when the theories started, as to what had really gone on. It didn't start with gun law reform, it started when they expected us to believe that a disabled guy acting alone could do all of that. Of course, we all are led to believe today that there was only ever one theory: that it was done by the government to try to take guns away from people, but at the time that one wasn't even mentioned as a possibility. Most of us thought it was some kind of terrorist attack, by a bunch of people angry at tourists for some reason. Before the massacre, it was even written in newspapers with people scared that it might happen, and Port Arthur, being Tasmania's largest tourist site, was said to be the most vulnerable one, especially when they started having foreign tour guides. No eye witnesses ever positively identified Martin Bryant, not from seeing him in person at least. Photos were taken, thousands of them, all showing someone else holding the gun. There was even video released. There were guns that were in Seascape that nobody can explain who they belonged to. There were people saying that others were there: and not just panicking eye witnesses either. Police thought that other people were there too. Noelene and David Martin were supposed to be assisting him. It made sense, since they were Martin Bryant's best friends. What didn't make sense was the idea that he killed them the night before then went on this rampage, then came back to the house where their dead bodies were, in order to have an 18 hour siege. If he was smart enough to do the massacre, then he was smart enough to get away. Nicole Louise Burgess and Elizabeth Jane Howard, two of the victims who worked in the Broad Arrow cafe, were black belt karate experts who knew how to disarm weapons at close range. Yet Martin Bryant, who had never fired a gun before, was able to kill them both before they had the chance to fight back. It takes someone who knows what they are doing to be able to do that. You can look at the various theories online. Just type in Port Arthur massacre and there's more about why the official story makes no sense than there is about the official story. Even here we have 18 pages talking about why it makes no sense versus 4 pages saying how sorry we feel. I don't think we can honestly call it a conspiracy theory when it is that popular. The term "controversy" seems more relevant. As for me, I always thought it was a terrorist attack, but in a time when we didn't use that term to refer to events on our own shore. While I am sure that Martin Bryant was involved, he had an alibi complete with photographic and video evidence that puts him a long way from Port Arthur during the main lot of shooting, and we certainly can't suggest that he acted alone. It is funny looking back that we just were expected to believe what at the time sounded like an absurd claim, that it was one man acting alone, a disabled man no less, who we were all expected to believe was able to do this just because he had an automatic weapon. Yeah, guns are that amazing, apparently. Since the law reform, gun-related deaths have gone down, but deaths haven't. Murders haven't. Suicides haven't. We just stab people now and people throw themselves in front of trains a lot more often than they used to. Gun-related deaths used to be 30% murders, but now they are 60%. So what we stopped with this law is people putting a bullet to their brain, not killing other people. Train suicides are way up thanks to this law change. I am sure that commuters are thankful to John Howard for that.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
I remember the day, kind of surreal. We were at a market just next to Port Arthur, aiming to head down there after the stalls closed, when our way was blocked off by this police officer. He wouldn't tell us why he wasn't letting us go in there, just telling us to go the other way. At first, we thought it was a car accident, then we saw cop car after cop car after cop car one after the other all roll by. Then came the mortuary trucks. So many of them. Everyone was in a state of panic because nobody knew who did it, and most people were saying that there were like 5 or 6 people doing it. They reckoned that there was no way they'd be captured, because it was so easy to get out, and everyone was panicking because they thought like whoever they were would come after them. People were inside their houses locking their doors and windows, not answering their phones. It was chaos. When we were told that it was a disabled man acting alone, the reactions ranged from sheer amazement and disbelief through to "do you think we're stupid?" That's when the theories started, as to what had really gone on. It didn't start with gun law reform, it started when they expected us to believe that a disabled guy acting alone could do all of that. Of course, we all are led to believe today that there was only ever one theory: that it was done by the government to try to take guns away from people, but at the time that one wasn't even mentioned as a possibility. Most of us thought it was some kind of terrorist attack, by a bunch of people angry at tourists for some reason. Before the massacre, it was even written in newspapers with people scared that it might happen, and Port Arthur, being Tasmania's largest tourist site, was said to be the most vulnerable one, especially when they started having foreign tour guides. No eye witnesses ever positively identified Martin Bryant, not from seeing him in person at least. Photos were taken, thousands of them, all showing someone else holding the gun. There was even video released. There were guns that were in Seascape that nobody can explain who they belonged to. There were people saying that others were there: and not just panicking eye witnesses either. Police thought that other people were there too. Noelene and David Martin were supposed to be assisting him. It made sense, since they were Martin Bryant's best friends. What didn't make sense was the idea that he killed them the night before then went on this rampage, then came back to the house where their dead bodies were, in order to have an 18 hour siege. If he was smart enough to do the massacre, then he was smart enough to get away. Nicole Louise Burgess and Elizabeth Jane Howard, two of the victims who worked in the Broad Arrow cafe, were black belt karate experts who knew how to disarm weapons at close range. Yet Martin Bryant, who had never fired a gun before, was able to kill them both before they had the chance to fight back. It takes someone who knows what they are doing to be able to do that. You can look at the various theories online. Just type in Port Arthur massacre and there's more about why the official story makes no sense than there is about the official story. Even here we have 18 pages talking about why it makes no sense versus 4 pages saying how sorry we feel. I don't think we can honestly call it a conspiracy theory when it is that popular. The term "controversy" seems more relevant. As for me, I always thought it was a terrorist attack, but in a time when we didn't use that term to refer to events on our own shore. While I am sure that Martin Bryant was involved, he had an alibi complete with photographic and video evidence that puts him a long way from Port Arthur during the main lot of shooting, and we certainly can't suggest that he acted alone. It is funny looking back that we just were expected to believe what at the time sounded like an absurd claim, that it was one man acting alone, a disabled man no less, who we were all expected to believe was able to do this just because he had an automatic weapon. Yeah, guns are that amazing, apparently. Since the law reform, gun-related deaths have gone down, but deaths haven't. Murders haven't. Suicides haven't. We just stab people now and people throw themselves in front of trains a lot more often than they used to. Gun-related deaths used to be 30% murders, but now they are 60%. So what we stopped with this law is people putting a bullet to their brain, not killing other people. Train suicides are way up thanks to this law change. I am sure that commuters are thankful to John Howard for that.
With big life events, you're usually meant to remember where you were and what you were doing when you first heard of the event occurring. With the Port Arthur Massacre, I was ten, but I can't remember hearing about it. At least I couldn't until I read your post.I was in the car at VFL park. It was the Sunday after Trevor Barker had died and the minute's silence for that is still vivid in my mind. There was complete silence, with the only exception being the metal halyards banging against the metal flag poles.
It was a good day, Stewie Loewe kicked a bag and the Saints knocked off the doggies, and there was a great atmosphere in celebrating Trevor Barker, one of the Saints big 5 names.
Then we left, hopped in the car and turned the radio on, and again vividly, I remember facing that big mural when I heard the news, so whenever I see it it always takes me back to Port Arthur.
I went to Port Arthur for the first time last year, and was semi surprised at the lack of recognition it's given.
They should have put a bullet in the c***'s head when they had a chance. Same with Julian Knight.
Google "Port Arthur Police training video." I doubt I'd be allowed to link it, and I don't really have the stomach/mind power to watch it and not get affected by it...
Mr Bull said of his first encounter with Bryant, a few months after his killing spree.
“In some ways he seemed like a dumb child — but then, he’s a very good chess player, so he’s got a lot more going on than you would think.”
A POLICE officer who was instrumental in Martin Bryant’s arrest after the Port Arthur massacre 19 years ago has warned more needed to be done to protect front line workers exposed to monsters such as Bryant in jail.
has been referred to as "porky Pig" by officers and inmates.
Coward alert. Winged about how a prisoner treats him, yet teases him behind his back.


There has been a bit of news about this convicted mass murderer over the last few days.
http://www.news.com.au/national/cri...in-arresting-him/story-fns0kb1g-1227525400242
A POLICE officer who was instrumental in Martin Bryant’s arrest after the Port Arthur massacre 19 years ago has warned more needed to be done to protect front line workers exposed to monsters such as Bryant in jail.
“We absolutely have a concern for the workers in there,” said Police Union president Pat Allen.
“As a person who was at Port Arthur and as a union president I would be concerned if that was happening to my members.”
In the years Bryant has become morbidly obese blowing out to 160kg, threatens other inmates and has been referred to as "porky Pig" by officers and inmates.
They show a balding, heavily overweight loner whose only access to the outside world is a heavily fortified steel screen in the exercise cage he has access to for up to six hours a day. Bryant’s only visitor has been his mother, Carleen Bryant, who would not comment on this story.
yeah, who would have thought that an aging male that spends all day sitting around might gain weight
and why would a guy who's clearly not all there require psych medications?!
some amazing deductive work there, even by your horrifically low standards![]()
I actually can't believe that people legitimately believe that he didn't do it. It's mind blowing.
Something more dodgy about this story is, how he's come to be that heavy. He's in prison for fracks sake, they control everything he eats.
The only way he could be that big, is from psych drugs.
I actually can't believe that people legitimately believe that he didn't do it. It's mind blowing.