Wednesday, 25 January 2017

Melbourne Car Attack: Outstanding Questions.

Where did the FOUR official cars that followed down Russell Street DISAPPEAR?
Note direction of shadows cast.

Despite the police following this car and driver since early morning of the 20th January, 2017, and knowing he had stabbed his brother and taken a hostage (apparently), absolutely no attempt was made to disable him or the car in up to the ten hours involved and particularly at the Flinders intersection when there was more than adequate opportunity. 


At least three unmarked police vehicles, several more marked ones and at least three armed policemen were on scene, yet none attempt to disable the car or driver, or even instruct him to desist? They can all be seen to sedately follow him down Russell Street, with not even an attempt to block his passage. Knowing his route and the threat that he posed, why were units not deployed to block his progress as would be standard practice in a case of this sort? 

Had he been arrested at this stage, five lives would have been saved - if the reported deaths are genuine. Yet issues relating to the adequacy and competence of the intelligence and policing are not even raised let alone answered. If people have been injured and killed, isn't that partly the responsibility of the authorities, who in ten hours or so, failed to apprehend the assailant? What excuse could there be for this?

Further unexplained discrepancies that undermine the official story are detailed below. Why have none of these been addressed?

Horrified pedestrians have been filmed running for their lives from the car that smashed into at least 25 people in Melbourne 

A still from the following video:

Watch at 1.42 - 1.49 mins. (7 seconds) video here:

Please note the offending car travels from RIGHT to LEFT. How can this be reconciled with the shown direction of travel west down the NORTH side of the Mall? The Mail reports he turned RIGHT into Bourke Street Mall. ("He first was seen doing doughnuts near Flinders Street Station before speeding up Swanson Street and turning right onto the Bourke Street mall." Read more: ) 

As can be seen from the map, this must be inaccurate, as he must have turned LEFT into Bourke Street.

Further the above shop video can only be genuine if he drove the wrong way down the south side of the Mall. If he did, this then appears to conflict with the direction of travel indicated by the site photographs taken after the event!

Compare and contrast with this account from the Australian Daily Telegraph:

"Police are chasing a rogue car which has driven erratically through the Melbourne CBD.
It’s feared at least one pedestrian has been hit in the Bourke Street Mall.
A number of unmarked police cars and a police helicopter have been deployed in the chase.
People ran for their lives as the hoon sped through busy and oncoming traffic, narrowly missing pedestrians.
The hoon sped off down Swanston Street before police could arrive on the scene.
Police chased the car down Bourke Street, where they opened fire on the vehicle between William and King Streets.
The car then went off the road onto the footpath where a witness says it collected a baby in a carrying device or pram.
The baby flew out from under the car and is being treated by paramedics on the side of the road." (
This account is clearly inaccurate as the police in three unmarked vehicles plus more marked squad cars (see videos at base of article) followed him from the initial circular display at Flinders, without any attempt to stop him despite knowing who he was at that stage as he had been previously tracked by helicopter. And if he had turned down Swanston, how could he end up between William and King Streets???? And on which side of the Mall did he drive down. You would expect it to be the North or RH side in which case the brief video cannot be right. However if it was on the South LH side, I can make no sense of the images of the injured that indicate right to left direction of travel when viewed from street. A witness confirms this. Perhaps someone can explain these apparent conflicting reports and impressions?

There has been no explanation and no supporting evidence as to how the extensive damage to the car, shown below,  was caused!

There is no point in re-inventing the wheel, and Davidsson and Maxwell say it so much better than me. As regards likely fraudulent, state-inspired, "terrorism", the introduction to Maxwell's book, reprinted below, suggests the Cafe Lindt event in Sydney, was one such. The more recent Melbourne incident may well be another. It certainly has many of the signature features, disturbingly not least its desired effect on the public sympathy and blame attitude.

Common Features of these Recent Terrorist Events.

One of the major difficulties is distinguishing between elements that are true and false, because invariably there are both. 

Some may indeed be killed or injured, but not necessarily those stated or in the way described. Some of those shown in video clips may be injured, others incredibly may be paid actors! Injuries may be real or fabricated as demonstrated in multiple exercises, as if the film industry was not adequate proof that this can be done realistically. The alleged or real damage may be done by the alleged perpetrator or vehicle or by different ones. 

Careful inspection of the 'video evidence' immediately uploaded to the Internet and all media outlets - always to be treated with great caution by the way - may have been concocted, to provide additional drama. But often it is pre-prepared material that may give the game away. 

One of the most notable examples of this was the video circulated of the attack on the Casa Nostra bar in Paris, where all initial reports (from official sources) put the death toll at five. Not only was no one killed there, the time stamp reveals an hour discrepancy and many other discordant features that I have discussed previously.

So have I discovered a video feature of the Melbourne attack that proves fraud at some level or other - probably a fraudulent reconstruction purporting to show the vehicle passing a shop in the arcade and people running to safety in panic?

So for better or worse, what are familiar features that yet again appear in the Melbourne case, almost as if there is a common director and a common script?

  • Some form of pre-warning or 'exercise'. Warnings of likely attacks specific to Melbourne, including the arrest of six suspects, were issued with much fanfare in November and December. Channel 7 made much of an "ISIS" it had come by, making it clear that Melbourne was in its sights. I even found a dead body protest a few years back in the very same street this alleged attack took place.
  • The assailant is well known to the police and may have spent time in custody.
  • Despite this, an abject failure of intelligence or anticipation. 
  • An inexplicable failure of intervention despite a high level of risk and with police in close proximity. In this case there is literally no explanation for the non-intervention as the assailant had been identified and followed for no less than ten hours!
  • Some brutal act before or during the event, preferably with a knife, to prove the primitive and desperate nature of the man (usually)
  • Something to clearly link him to the Muslim faith. Shouting 'Allah Akbar' may suffice, but photographs or video in some militaristic or otherwise identifiable pose, that miraculously become available after the event (why never before?) may be even better.
  • Some evidence of mental instability or extremist belief is helpful. And whilst we are at it why not throw in anything to colour his character in the eyes of media or public, such as questionable associations or activities, petty theft, violence, drunkenness, drug taking, sexual activity, even if to do so is likely to undermine the suggestion this is a person who takes his religion seriously. A hint that the person is homosexual (as in this case and others) can also be helpful.
  • The choice of a name that embeds connotations of evil and clear links to Islam, should be included. Thus Mohammed or Ibrahim are popular, or names containing "bad" or "mad". In this case of course the name is "DIMitrious “Jimmy” GargaSOULAS".
  • A hostage element either before, during or after the main event. In this case a mysterious woman in the car who somehow either escapes or is allowed to go. (Was this element required to excuse the fact that the police took no action sooner?)
  • Filmed dramatic elements especially of people running in panic and aftermath scenes of the dead and/or injured. Red blood in some places but not others (real or imitation as the case may be) will be required.
  • The perpatrator is often 'neutralised', or kills himself, or is otherwise removed and silenced. Note in this case the dramatic arrest and public undressing with red underpants. There is no explanation for the extreme damage to the car including the roof!
  • If hired actors are involved these can sometimes over-act as in one specific case here.
  • Heroes. These are useful to deflect attention away from a detailed examination of events or problems. In this case we have two specific cases: the two youths that supposedly try to stop the car doing its circular performance; and a taxi driver who lends assistance to a recumbant victim. In neither case can it be claimed heroism was demonstrated as indeed the taxi driver himself insists. But in the former case it is far more suspicious as it has to be asked why the lad was carrying a baseball bat and even more significantly why he just abandons it, to be picked up by another lad who had been standing on the opposite side of the junction.
  • Inexplicable inactivity by the police when they had opportunity
  • conflicting reports resulting from a pre-prepared script going to the media not able to reflect the developing action. In this case the number of deaths and identities were firmly three, but this had to be increased to five. Incidentally none of the video prior to arrival of ambulance men, gives evidence of victims equating to those described. 
  • Great prominance is given to a push chair and of reports that a child was hit by the car, but no actual evidence of such. Where was the injured child?
  • Images of the alleged victims and biographical details immediately available. This was particularly notable in the case of the Bataclan despite the huge difficulty to obtain and collate the images.
  • Victims should preferably be young with smiling faces and good looks
  • Witnesses and those able to capture events on video appear to have a preponderance of links with the media or Jewish organisation
  • Witnesses similarly tend to be young and attractive physically
  • The video that is distributed by the media is highly selective and no one ever explains how that and nothing else is used by everyone.
  • politicians immediately get in on the act expressing condolences and promising swift 'justice'. This is often by appeals to be 'calm' and not to blame any particular religious belief which makes them look 'liberal' and tolerant, but is largely irrelevant to the true impact
  • a PR campaign is miraculously at an advanced stage such as "Pray for Paris"
  • the event frequently coincides with ritual, religious, political or sporting events - in this case a tennis championship
  • it is often used to disguise or distract from (military or political) events elsewhere
  • public display of sympathy is orchestrated and encouraged. Large crowds, carpet of flowers and other outpourings common encouraged by the use of images that may be genuine or staged
  • the event is subsequently unchallenged as to the facts and is used by politicians both at home and abroad to further both a domestic and foreign agenda, that may be short-handed as more repression and surveillance at home and war abroad.
Apologies if I have overlooked any of the common features of this fairly recent phenomenom that can usually be traced back to a relatively small, discrete and deeply immoral cobal centred on covert elements of certain nation government institutions and not necessarily those it is blamed on. 

The people of the world need to be far more alive to this pernicious activity in order to prevent it. A first step is education and awareness. The second is scepticism. The third is detailed examination of every one, testing the story against the facts. The fourth subjecting politicians and representatives of the agencies involved to cross examination and accountability for what was done or not done as the case may be.

Reblogged from:

Commonalities among Various Terrorist Operations

  o-sydney-siege-policeAt the Sydney siege
by Elias Davidsson
Editor’s Note: This is the Foreword to Mary W Maxwell’s book “Inquest: Siege in Sydney,” written by Davidsson who has studied many terrorists incidents.
This book demonstrates that the fear from terrorism did not skip Australia.  But terrorism is not limited to what lonely or depressive individuals wish to impose on us. The most potent form of terrorism is that planned and executed by cool minds in comfortable offices for strategic reasons and profit — in short, by governments.
Maxwell’s book suggests that the incident at the CafĂ© Lindt in Sydney belonged to the category of terrorism often designated as “false-flag” terrorism, or simply covert state terrorism.  False-flag operations are planned and executed covertly under the auspices of state agencies but staged to appear as authentic terror.
The purpose of false-flag operations is to generate public revulsion towards those who are presented as the perpetrators and their alleged cause. Such revulsion provides governments with popular legitimacy to proceed with foreign or domestic measures, that they would hardly be able to adopt otherwise.
During the Cold War in Europe, NATO organized and trained terrorist cells, operating under the code-name Gladio. They carried out bloody terrorist operations attributed publicly to leftist organisations – in order to diminish the attraction of Communist parties.
The existence of the Gladio network was revealed by no less than Italy’s Prime Minister Andreotti in a speech to the Italian parliament in 1990. It was followed by a resolution of the European Parliament calling on all its members to dissolve these secret networks and reveal what they did during the Cold War. Only Switzerland, Italy and Belgium complied, and only partly.
Creating and maintaining the perception of a fictional threat is thus a well-established method of governance.
The present study by Mary Maxwell raises two sets of questions. The first one is what motivated Monis, the accused, to carry out the reported operation, if he acted alone. The second is whether the police or other unidentified actors, were involved in facilitating this operation.
Mary Maxwell has ranged broadly, in her typical way, in attempting to tackle this forensic question. As state authorities do not relish disclosing all the evidence, she cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt the role of the State in staging the Sydney siege, but she provides sufficient evidence to presume such a role.
Her strong conviction is manifested by her courage to openly accuse her government for this criminal operation. I find her accusations justified and join myself to her accusations.
Was the Sydney siege a sui generis attack committed for domestic reasons (or private motives), or part of a global strategy that transcends Australia?
The 1990s were used to build up that enemy perception, including the promotion of icon Osama Bin Laden. American strategists realized however, that absent a traumatic event, akin to Pearl Harbor, it would be difficult to rally the population behind an aggressive and focused policy. That traumatic event is now known as 9/11, a brilliantly staged horror show that made US citizens support war and restrictions on their own liberties.
There are commonalities between the various terrorist operations carried out in recent years. Let me list some:
  1. In virtually all major terrorist operations since 9/11 (outside zones of armed conflict), the alleged perpetrators died. We are told that the suspect killed himself or was killed by police forces acting in self-defense. Typically, no independent person witnesses the circumstances. We have only self-serving testimonies by anonymous police officials to go by.
Note: if these operations had been committed by authentic militants, one would expect public authorities to do all they could to capture the suspects alive in order to question them, describe their modus operandi, reveal financial sources, and explain their motives.
  1. Despite police forces and commandos possessing a vast arsenal of non-lethal means (such as tear gas or smoke bombs) with which to neutralize dangerous individuals, these have not been employed. It follows that that death of the “terrorist” was desired.
  1. Investigations are not done properly. For authorities striving to establish the truth about a terrorist incident, the death of the suspected perpetrator represents a loss. For authorities implicated in the crime, it is, however, a boon: The suspect cannot be brought to court and cannot, therefore, spill the beans or demonstrate that he had been framed. Also, relevant information becomes “classified”.
Even in those few cases where an investigation or inquest had taken place after a terrorist incident, it is marred by omissions, irregularities or worse. The work of the 9/11 Commission is a sorry case in point. None of these investigations were in any way impartial and independent.
  1. Another similarity between many (though not all) of the terrorist operations is that the alleged perpetrators had been previously known by the police or by intelligence services, and were no pious Muslims. Their personal and legal vulnerability makes such individuals easy to recruit to serve as patsies.
  1. A further common feature of numerous recent terrorist cases is that they were not claimed by any bona fide organisation nor accompanied by a clear political demand, both of which are hallmarks of an authentic terrorist operation. Al Qaeda and the Islamic State are certainly not bona fide organisations:
Statements allegedly issued by these entities cannot be authenticated, their leaders cannot be questioned, they possess no physical address, telephone number, or website, they have no recognized manifesto or program that details their objectives.
There exists circumstantial evidence that statements and videos allegedly published by Al Qaeda and the Islamic State are actually produced by US and British corporations. These “jihadist” products may be distributed to media by Zionist outfits such as SITE Intelligence Group, Jihadology, and IntelCenter.
The Sydney siege appears to me, therefore, as a contribution by the Australian government to the aforementioned global strategy, namely the maintenance of the fiction of a global Islamic terrorist threat.
The Security Council of the United Nations claims periodically that international terrorism represents “one of the most serious threats to peace and security.” To the eminent members of the Security Council I bring some news.  Had they examined global and regional statistics on terrorism, they would have discovered that the effects of terrorism outside zones of armed conflict – authentic and synthetic combined – are statistically very small.
While it cannot be excluded that occasionally a crazed person would kill someone and claim he acted in the name of Islam, such rare cases do not threaten peace and security. Their effects are even negligible in comparison to ordinary crime.
A last observation relates to citizens’ investigations, such as the one undertaken here by Dr Maxwell. Although it is tempting to dig into each case of a suspected false-flag operation, I argue that the case has been sufficiently made: Western governments engage in a long-term policy of maintaining the fiction of a global Islamic terrorist threat.
Spending efforts to forensically examine each case of suspected false-flag attack, is therefore superfluous. Identifying typical hallmarks of a false-flag operation should by now suffice for presuming state complicity. The onus must be on state authorities to debunk this presumption of guilt by proving their good faith.
While “presumptions” are not sufficient for a legal case, they are sufficient to put state authorities on notice as the main suspects.
Regarding the contrived justifications for wars and for establishing the infrastructure of an Orwellian state, citizens should name and shame those responsible for promoting the legend of 9/11 and the fiction of a global Islamic terrorist threat. They should demand the removal of such persons from positions of influence.

"Garbage in; garbage out."


Appalled by the excessive punishments doled out to convicts, Bourke initiated the Magistrates Act, which simplified existing regulations and limited the sentence a magistrate could pass to 50 lashes (previously no such limit existed). The bill was passed by the legislature because Bourke presented evidence that magistrates were exceeding their powers and passing illegal sentences, in part because regulations were complex and confusing. However, furious magistrates and employers petitioned the crown against this interference with their legal rights, fearing that a reduction in punishments would cease to provide enough deterrence to the convicts, and this issue was exploited by his opponents.
In 1835, Bourke issued a proclamation through the Colonial Office, implementing the doctrine of terra nullius by proclaiming that Indigenous Australians could not sell or assign land, nor could an individual person acquire it, other than through distribution by the Crown.[2]
Bourke continued to create controversy within the colony by combating the inhumane treatment handed out to convicts, including limiting the number of convicts each employer was allowed to 70, as well as granting rights to emancipists, such as allowing the acquisition of property and service on juries. It has been argued that the abolition of convict transportation to Australia in 1840 can be attributable to the actions of Bourke.
Bourke abolished the status of the Anglican Church as the state church of New South Wales, declaring each religious denomination on equal footing before the law. He also increased spending on education and attempted to set up a system of public nondenominational schools. He was credited as the first governor to publish satisfactory accounts of public receipts and expenditures.
In 1837, the year of his promotion to lieutenant-general, he was made colonel for life of the 64th (2nd Staffordshire) Regiment of Foot. The same year, he named the town of Melbourne after Viscount Melbourne, the UK Prime Minister.
Bourke Street in Melbourne's central business district and the town of Bourke, New South Wales were named after him, in turn. The County of Bourke, Victoria, which includes Melbourne, and Bourke County, New South Wales, were also named after him. Elizabeth Street, Melbourne is generally considered to be named in honour of his wife.
The bronze statue of Bourke outside the State Library of New South Wales in Sydney was the first public statue ever erected in Australia. It was dedicated on 11 April 1842.[3] It records his accomplishments as governor in florid detail. It was funded by public subscription and made by Edward Hodges Baily in London.[4]
Bourke was promoted to general in 1851. He died at his residence Thornfleld, in County Limerick, Ireland, on Sunday 12 August 1855[5] and is buried in Castleconnell.

To 'Gumshoe News' 31.1.2017


"I use the term "Police" advisedly. In practice, in incidents of this sort we must distinguish between genuine police and those that act behind the scenes in the Intelligence/Military community. This particular event was immediately classified by a politician - after a whispered comment by a man in dark glasses, apropos George Bush - a sure sign of the above if ever I saw one - whilst other sources, suggested the opposite. This demonstrates the difficulties of reconciling on the one hand, "telling only those that need to know", with, on the other, making sure "everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet." Similar disagreements on the basic nature of the event have emerged in both Germany and Canada recently. The relationship between what Ole DammegĂ„rd, with hard evidence, has suggested is a specialist team that moves from place to place, or 'dark state' working to common objectives, and the Police is a tricky one. First, in most states there is more than one police force, dependent on territory or function and these are usually separate from but subservient to, the security services. In Britain of course we have largely secret branches (originally of the Military hence the nomenclature of 'MI') that pull rank over Chief Constables, alough in addition in the Metropolitan Police, "Special Branch" acted as an arm of the Secret Services, and not always in an honourable fashion. In addition it is recognised in the hierarchical  police, the view from the top or bottom may be very different. So there is much room here for discrete groups to operate. Now in this case, what is inexplicable, is that conventional police apparently tracked the car and driver for hours, knowing his past record and that he had carried out a knife attack, yet fail to intervene, even when an ideal opportunity presents itself outside the station. This must have an explanation though I have not availed myself of one. As to those three unmarked silver cars and an additional white 4x4 that follow the red Holden down a tram-only street, I find it difficult to believe these could be other than "official" vehicles. We can surely rule out members of the public on the basis that they are identical models, they would be breaking traffic laws and who would want to? They are clearly not taxis. Criminals don't act that way and motivation is difficult to  imagine. So we are left with 'officials' and it is crucial that these are revealed. It is clear that they do not fit traditional 'police' label or they would have been in marked police vehicles. Did no one get their registration numbers? Has the Press not asked the question? And even if 'we' the public don't know, the Police must. What could prevent them from sharing this information other than some degree of collusion in the event itself?"


  1. The Blue Man:

  2. The "Blue Man" pointing where to go:

  3. Gargarsoulas car route clarified and proof no one struck on Mall footpath:

  4. Peekay Truth has been silenced. A sad day in the truth community.

    Harkin' to the truth:

  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  6. Thorough and excellent analysis. Those responsible (due to their inaction) have instead acted against the family of a respected Youtuber, and arrested the Youtuber instead of dealing with their own insane hypocrisy and misuse of public funds.

  7. I agree with this blogger; It is critical that we find out who was driving the three silver state cars, and white 4x4, and who gave them orders. They are culpable, as are the bystanding apparent police people (apparent by their uniforms).

    1. Over to you and like minded Australians Freddy! Someone has to challenge this stuff.

  8. the latest coronial inquiry (sic) will have to ignore the photo discrepancies of pram on car and pram on footpath away from car????????????????????????/


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.