Home      Contents

Summary Inverell Forum 2002 - March 8-10
by Lindsay Johnson

Subject & Speaker Listing
 Hemp: The Miracle Fibre   Wayne Wadsworth
  The New Freedom Potentials   Jeremy Lee
The New Queensland Constitution   Ray Smyth 
 Freedom of Religion or Free-For-All Religion   Jim Donald 
No Juries, no Justice   John Wilson 
 Your Rights  Bevan O'Regan
Shaken Baby Syndrome on Shaky Ground   Dr Viera Scheibner 
Australia Women on Line   Betty Luks 
Bureaucratic Nightmares   Ken McFadzen
Irrationality of Economic Rationalism     Neil Baird
Toy Nazis, Phantom Battalions - the Real Game   Leon Gregor
The 2002 Sydney Forum   Dr Jim Saleam
Surviving the Consequences of Radical Liberalism   John Swinburne
Is Our Customs Service Doing its Job?   Bob Spanswick 
Port Arthur Update    Andrew MacGregor
Port Arthur Update    Wendy Scurr
A Gunsmith's Notebook on Port Arthur   Stewart Beattie

The 2002 Inverell Forum was a great success once again. The speakers were first rate and a synopsis of their speeches follow.
For me, the camaraderie of the four days together is the highlight of the Forum, especially the social day on the Monday.

This really is the place to meet and converse with everyone who is anyone in the freedom movement. It repeatedly seems to spotlight any innovation in conservative thought and action before anyone else. It prides itself on being the cutting edge in Australia. By their comments, ďour friendsĒ at Bnai Brith and elsewhere think so too.
It has been observed that one can best evaluate a personís worth by the quality of his enemies!

 Hemp: The Miracle Fibre
Wayne Wadsworth

Wayne lives in Nimbin. He believes this experiment in a new type of co-operative society has not worked. It is not uncommon to see drug addicts roaming the streets and bloody brawls in the main street, etc.
    He believes that marijuana should be legalized. He believes prohibition does not work. Hemp has thousands of uses. All strains of hemp do not have the drug content THC in them.
    The history of hemp shows that the Chinese and Indians used it for paper and fabric, and in the USA it was grown and used up until the turn of the century for the making of paper money. Dupont and his cronies lobbied to have it made illegal to protect the emerging petrochemical industry both in the USA and throughout the world.         There is a good video available called ďBillion Dollar CropĒ available from the Nimbin Hemp Embassy.
    The products from hemp include sun block, fabrics, shoes, chipboard, building blocks, plastics, and oil.
    Basically anything that can be made from petrochemicals can be made from hemp. Its main advantage is that it can be grown and processed locally.


  The New Freedom Potentials
Jeremy Lee

This is the 38th year of speaking by Jeremy.
    The history of Australia during the depression shows that the people did many of the things we are doing now and they learnt many lessons out of it. They were dealing with the banking question and with making members of Parliament into proper representatives and the danger of parties. All that is not new. There were over 250 groups meeting every week in Sydney to discuss what was going on. There were huge debates with economists and politicians because there was no television then and politicians had to come and meet the people face to face.
    We are still discussing creating more jobs. We should be discussing releasing people out of jobs if we had the right money system. There was a conference in 1995 in San Francisco where all the great economists and bankers and politicians met to discuss the problem of being able to produce all the products needed by the world with only 20% of the workforce. What will the rest do to occupy themselves? We donít need everybody working. We need people to be released from work into fulltime self-chosen activities. We then need an income for them to be able to do that. That income canít come from taxes because we have only 20% of the population to tax.
    We must have a vision of what it is we want and then we must know what we have to do to get it. The first lesson is that we canít get it by getting into power ourselves. It is not a power game. Parties and power movements are a disaster. Pauline Hanson is an example. Once they obtained some power they were open to infiltration. When Jim Killen was running for parliament he attended League of Rights seminars and we helped him. As soon as he got into parliament he could not do anything as a backbencher but as soon as he became a Minister that is the time he would help. He promised to take a stand on Rhodesia. Did he ever take a stand? No. You canít tell if a person is going to be any good or not before an election. Nothing will change in Parliament until the change has occurred amongst the people first.
    These words were written 45 years ago. ďWhat is left of our civilisation will not be maintained; what has been wrecked will not be restored by imagining that some new political gadget will be invented, some new political formula improvised which will save it. Our civilisation can be maintained and restored only by remembering and rediscovering the truth and by re-establishing the virtuous habits on which it was founded. There is no use looking into the blank future for some new and fancy revelation of what man needs in order to live. The revelation has been made; by it man conquered the jungle about him and the barbarian within him. The elementary principles of work and sacrifice and duty and the transcendent criteria of truth, justice and righteousness and the grace of love and charity are the things that have made men free. Men can keep their freedom and reconquer it only by these means. These are the terms stipulated in the nature of things for the salvation of men on this earth and only in this profound, this stern and tested wisdom, shall we find once more the light and courage that we need.Ē
Freedom potentials is a training school that starts off with simple basis ideas about the constitution. What is it? This is what it says and this is how we have to safeguard it. It is built on a series of principles in which all leaders are servants. The programme will be run in small groups of 15 to 20 people over 2 days. We hope by the end of it they will at least know which side they are on. With people educated and in place all over the country we can then concentrate on one issue, i.e. property rights or rights to a jury.
    Nothing will change until Christianity or any other faith changes from being a theory to one issue; is it actually alive and does it change things. Has it changed anything in my life? Can it change things around? That is where the rubber hits the road. To turn this country around we have to reach and activate 5% and that 5% will be decisive as to whether this country lives or dies.
    Our economic figures are worse than Argentina. When they decide to pull the plug we are going to have absolute chaos. The man or woman who has taken the trouble to equip themselves with the attributes of leadership will be absolutely decisive at that time.
    What is the difference between work and leisure? Leisure is the most creative period of your life and out of which the great civilisations have grown. The great cathedrals in England were built in leisure time and there wasnít a penny paid in wages for them. At present we are creating activities that are destructive, often polluting and not suited to a personís God given talents.


The New Queensland Constitution
Ray Smyth

We get our rights from God. The Queen is there to uphold our rights and we form a little government to look after those rights. That little government is getting out of control.
    The pillars of private property are (1) the right to sell, gift, and bequeath your property. (2) The right of unrestricted use of your property. (3) The right to deny access to your property. (4) The right to hold your property without impost. If any of those pillars are removed, theft has occurred.
    In Queensland, Mr Beatty is virtually a dictator and has decided to rip up our constitution and rewrite it. The question is who owns the constitution? Does it belong to the administration of the day or is it a more enduring thing rooted in the historical heritage of the nation? That is the question that is facing us today.
    If golfers like to play golf with others rather than by themselves, they gather to form a golf club. Rules are agreed to and a constitution is written and a committee is formed to administer the rules. What would happen if the committee decided that golf is not good for the members? Baseball is better. They reprint the rules that golf can no longer be played; baseball is the game. That is the situation in Queensland. They have changed the rules and surrounded themselves with police and the judiciary and they spit in your face and say baseball is the game.
    What are we to do; gather together as a group and throw this crowd out? Take our clubs and go to NSW? Most people in QLD will learn to love baseball. We are only a small group. There was only a small group at Marathon and Marathon changed the world. There was only a small group at Valley Forge but that changed the history of America. But it was done by people who were willing to stand up and say, ďI hold my rights from God, not from you, and I will stand on my rights to the death.Ē
    Law should reflect reality. The right to self-defence is innate. No politician can take it from you. That is the common law. We must now have this passed through parliament again to restate it.


 Freedom of Religion or Free-For-All Religion
Jim D

There are a lot of good teachings in the Jehovahís Witness church and generally they aspire to a high moral standard.
    Things either are or they arenít. That is the way they think. There is no middle ground; no grey areas or other possibilities. Cults use this type of reasoning and dwell on the fears of individuals. They raise problems and incite your fear and then supply a very simple, soothing tranquillising answer. The Jehovah Witnesses will tell you that a new order will soon be coming to the earth, but they donít tell you immediately that if you donít join them you and your family will be destroyed by their God. They may compliment you on your home or garden but amongst themselves they will discuss who is going to get your house once God has destroyed you. They may welcome your expression of your faith but privately condemn it as filth and perversion.
    In the 1960ís organ transplants were forbidden by the Watchtower Society. In the mid 70ís Jehovah changed His mind. This was too late for some people who needed organ transplants and failed to get them. In 1974 certain sexual practices were condemned as sin. Some of those people were expelled and families broken up. Some years later they reversed this decree. Apparently Jehovah had changed His mind again. But those who had been expelled were no longer welcome back. If they doubt your sincerity they will ask you if you believe everything taught by them and whether Jehovah is directing this and only this organization. Like Orwellís 1984, the Witnesses change their history in later publications. He who controls the past controls the future. And he who controls the present controls the past.
    There are steps to the relinquishment of self-determination. (1) Acceptance. (2) Trust after testing their teachings. (3) Reliance, asking for advice in times of trouble. (4) Dependence, this is the organization that is teaching me the truth. (5) Abuse, inability to share in family celebrations. Also abuse from the hierarchy. What are the effects?
    Cognitive dissonance is the inattention resulting from the attempt to hold two contrasting thoughts at the same time. This causes aberrant behaviour in one way or another.
    There is much said about blood transfusion deaths being a form of suicide. This is not correct. Many of those people loved life and wanted to live. But because of their absolute obedience to religious teaching they died. They are held up as heroes, especially the young ones. There would have been thousands of individuals who have gone through that trauma over the last 50 years.
    The Commonwealth is the issuing authority for marriage celebrants. They have a duty of care for all the families who get broken up because of these religions. Other levels of government give various concessions to religious groups. Why donít the churches pay rates? The family Court when tied up with questions of child custody, most often has reasons of religious differences. This is not just a problem with Jehovahís Witnesses.
    For 10 years the Watchtower Society in contravention of its own stand of neutrality had been an official NGO member of the United Nations Organization. They consider the UNO to be the beast of Revelation. They have since ceased their association.


No Juries, no Justice
John Wilson 

The people have sovereignty. Our power has been taken away from us. The Courts Legislation (Civil Juries) Act has been passed and is in operation. It takes away your right to trial by jury. What is the purpose of a court? To administer justice, not to enforce the law. The reason we have juries is because they are the voice and conscience of the people. Juries overturn bad laws. Judges say they canít do that but they have had that right since juries were first formed. Justice is the protection of rights and the punishment of wrongs. That comes from the Oxfords dictionary of law. We are to take our grievances to court and yet the Supreme Court of NSW has actually put out a leaflet that says ďDo not bring your grievances to court.Ē They are undermining the very system. According to English common law, a judge and a jury constitute a court. There cannot be a judge alone unless you say, ďI choose not to have a jury.Ē This is in legislation. Both the plaintive and the defendant must agree not to have a jury. In my case they will not allow a jury because I will subpoena the judges and question them in front of the jury.


 Your Rights
Bevan O'Regan

I made the comment to a NSW Farmers meeting that ďA modern statute of law cannot overrule an ancient lawĒ. This resulted from the NSW Conservation Act and the Wilderness Act claiming to remove our rights. They took me at my word and said go and get some proof. I faxed a QC friend in London. He returned an answer. The opinion boosted the right to farm. Property law governs use. Western NSW has western lands lease. On those leases there is a clause that says you canít plough the land and you canít cut trees unless the Minister gives you permission. You go into the lease knowing this. There is now a National Parks proposal called the 30,30,40. You can only farm 30%, graze 40% and shut 30% up for posterity. 29 properties have been claimed as wilderness in the Narrabri area. There is an 800-year-old forest law that covers the right to farm. It is article 29 of Magna Carta. We have to disprove these quasi acts of parliament.


Shaken Baby Syndrome on Shaky Ground
Dr Viera Scheibner 

My 2nd late husband was a biomedical engineer specializing in patient monitoring systems. I asked him to develop a breathing monitor for babies. Everyone knew that vaccines were stressing babies but there was much more to it than that. When we approached the profession they were evasive. They looked at us with hatred. They knew that vaccines were killing babies. They just didnít want us to tell the parents or anybody else. They destroyed the business with the monitor. Because of their attitude I became more interested. I am not afraid and I will research things I donít know very much about. I studied more than 30,000 pages of medical papers to write my first book on vaccination. Today it is more like 100,000 pages and there is no end to it. Everything I talk about has been published and proved by medical research. In 1996 I started getting letters from lawyers particularly in the UK and USA asking me to write an expert report being an expert on vaccination and SIDS, for these cases of shaken baby syndrome.
    When a baby dies from vaccination they accuse the parents or nannies of causing it. There was a conference in Sydney on shaken baby syndrome last year. They only produced the prosecution side and they were ridiculing the defence. In the centre on shaken baby syndrome at Salt Lake City Utah I am the number one enemy. That is a complement. They did not invite me to give a talk but I challenged every speaker including the feared prosecutor for Utah. I have prepared close to 60 reports for court cases but mostly they drop the case when they have my report. The prosecutor Mr Parish postponed the case I was to attend in Utah after I sent them my report. This is very wrong. After killing your baby they accuse you of shaking it and killing it that way. These defendants are very depressed people and so I have to make them laugh.
    Before 1985 it was only the triple vaccine so children had minimal pathological findings when they died from it. They called it SIDS. But in America they call it Sudden Immunisation Death Syndrome. With the added hepatitis B etc they are getting worse pathological findings. I am surprised any child survives at all. They now have brain and retinal haemorrhages, which are usually subdural or subarachnoid, so that is why they are accusing parents of shaking these children. When I started getting the reports of these babies they were almost always the same; carbon copies of each other and the parents were at a loss as to what had happened. They can end up in prison and still not know what happened to their baby. No one is shaking these babies. You canít shake a baby to cause those injuries. Isnít it co-incidental that all these people from all over the world from different educational and economic levels all know exactly how to shake a baby to cause these identical injuries and always after vaccination never after.
    When I consulted the medical literature I found that when experiments were done on animals, primates, with vaccines they got certain types of injuries, and surprise, surprise, they are the same as in those shaken babies. This was already published in 1973. They knew even then. When they want to develop encephalomyelitis they inject them with the commercial DPT vaccine. What else. When those poor animals develop the encephalomyelitis with retinal and subdural haemorrhages they never call it shaken rat or shaken monkey syndrome.
    The first thing the police confiscate is the vaccination certificate. Why? It is the only documented evidence in the case. They know the vaccinations are causing the deaths but they think they can get away with this forever. The vaccinations donít even work when they donít kill the baby.
    Australian doctors get about $84 for every vaccinated child. Donít believe what the doctor says.
    Polio vaccine is the worst because it is contaminated with monkey virus. This causes brain tumour. They claimed to clean the virus out of the vaccine but they didnít. They only temporarily deactivated it. You canít believe anything. Whatever they tell you, the opposite is the truth. And then they confess on my shoulder. Gee, I feel sorry for them.
    The common diseases such as measles, mumps, and rubella whooping cough are essential for children to get. They need measles to achieve proper speech development. Mumps prevents ovarian cancer. Having measles is good too. Not having measles is bad.
    I would take Dr Wooldridge on. I would say you are an educated man; a highly intelligent man; how can you believe this crap?
    Research shows that vaccinations do not immunise but make the recipient more susceptible to the disease. That is why children get whooping cough from the vaccine. That is why they get all sorts of other diseases. The vaccine weakens the immune system and it may last for weeks, months or even years. You see it in your vaccinated children. They are sick all the time. The profession benefits from the disease. It should not be a growth industry. We should have fewer and fewer hospitals. It is no credit to the medical profession at all to have more hospitals.


Australia Women on Line
Betty Luks 

Betty is the current National Director of the Australian League of Rights.
   Heresy is defined as an imbalance of one portion of a truth. As we battle we must learn that there are people we agree with, but with whom we violently disagree with over one particular issue. For me the role of the King or Queen is as the spiritual focus of the nation because his or her role is under God. From time to time we strayed as a people and had to return to a constitutional point that worked. The development of our constitution as a result has taken hundreds of years to develop. The word king comes from the old English root kind or kinder meaning one of us, but the leader. Under the king come the advisors or if we go back far enough, the aristocracy. They were to be the custodians of the culture. But barbarians and base, crass men have taken those roles over. They have drawn down a shutter between the people and the Queen. While we may say that the Queen is not doing her duty within this structure, neither are we.
    If one looks about us at mothers we notice that a mother can give more to life than she takes if she is secure in her status. The same goes for a father. The drive then of the enemy is to remove any status with this thing called equality. There is no such thing as equality but in the process we have lost the real quality, which is integrity and character of us as a people.
    One of the initiatives of the League was to produce a pledge to the Queen reminding her that we acknowledge her as our Queen and we look to her as our protector of our laws, institutions and systems and ask her to act to safeguard them. If you have complaints about the Queen and you donít let her know your will, then the only will she knows is that which comes through Parliament. If the Parliament does not represent that which we want, that is our responsibility. We cannot have freedom without accountability and responsibility. Why blame the Queen?
    Within this constitutional monarchy, democracy has its place. It is within constitutional monarchy that we look for our rights and insist on our rights. If we analyse our problems today it is invariably our right to property, our right to free speech, our right to have a representative in Parliament that have been taken from us. Democracy only has a reality where there is a family life; where the family is independent by owning the means of life.
    The final sanction we have is the courage and integrity to say enough is enough. That sanction is only yet a grain of mustard seed and yet it has the potential for life and growth because we are a complex association of associations.
    We all went to sleep and trusted government, trusted doctors, the education system; sent our children to universities where they were taught an alien philosophy, and alien system, and then wondered what went wrong. It is up to us to stop blaming our Queen; stop blaming the constitution; stop blaming the politicians and start to do something about it ourselves. Many families and individuals are feeling isolated in their individual trials and battles. We canít fight your battles for you, but we may be able to assist. We are going to develop a website and call it Australian women online. It will be an educational tool and a service for those who want to list themselves on the website. Subjects of interest will be listed alphabetically from drug addiction to home schooling and individuals and associations can come together for mutual co-operation and assistance.


Bureaucratic Nightmares
Ken McFadzen 

What we need are people who will do something. We want the totally uninitiated and get them involved. The Inverell Forum is good to attend but it is a form of entertainment. I would like to ask you what have you done since last forum?
    We find intimidation does work. While the undesirables are still there, their life is not as good as it could be. We hope at the next election that no matter who gets in they will do as they are told. We want representatives. Presently we hold public meetings and we canít get any information out of our council representatives. We have connected to the Free Association at Mackay who are also fighting for our rights.
    We had sewerage trouble last year. Both the council and we did a survey and between 75% and 95% of the people were against sewerage. That was not good enough; they just had to keep going. They hired consultants who wanted to survey our septic systems and bores etc. We decided not to allow them onto our properties. We were successful. We are at the stage where councillors will not talk to us. When we go to the council office the CEO has the police on standby. We set up our ute on the side of the road when they had their federation day parade. We put a dunny on top with a dummyís legs hanging out and pertinent comments about the mayor and the proposed sewerage system.
    We held a demonstration and the Council forbid any of the workers to come to the demonstration. One man came and the next morning he was summoned to the office. He knew he was in trouble for going, so he made an appointment and hour earlier as a ratepayer to speak to the CEO about the pipe in his front yard. He tore strips off the CEO and was never chastised about the demonstration.
    Apparently the council canít sell you up for failure to pay rates under three years. I feel we should all withhold our rates until one day under three years. We can starve them out this way.


Irrationality of Economic Rationalism
Neil Baird

Neil edits and published a daily email News Report from 12 to 22 pages.
    The news report has been going since January 2000. In that period of time there have been 483 news reports. 7500 articles have been published and I have received upwards of three times that number to select 7500. There is probably another14000 that were not even opened.
    Information is one of the keys to what we are doing as well as raising money and organising, etc. Being able to see what is happening all over the world enables us to see more of the jigsaw puzzle in more of its entirety. When we see local things going wrong without a global perspective, we tend to put it down to incompetence, laziness or inappropriate people being in a position. There is a pattern to everything that is happening not just here but all over the world. It is deliberate, planned and of long-standing duration and it is heading where none of us would wish to go. Economic rationalism, globalisation, corporatism are all part of a plan to de-industrialise Australia. There will be no escaping the consequences of what is happening in this country. Growth is the mantra. Countries that donít grow fast enough are by implication poorly managed. Well what constitutes growth? Consumption of alcohol, consumption of clothing. We think to ourselves, does that really constitute real growth? It is, according to the way they construct the GDP numbers. The fact is that the growth of GDP at the expense of increasing borrowings is not a concern to Canberra because it is part of the plan. Argentina went through the same thing. When the financiers pull the plug there is collapse. In Indonesia during the Asian crisis 15 million people were thrown out of work in a week. The assets of these countries then became available for other international capitalists to buy at discounted prices. That is exactly what in due course, we will experience. Successful people, companies and nations do not give up their sovereignty and freedom. If you wish to take over someone they must be destitute. If one wanted countries to come together in a new global order, they first must be destituted.
    People like Keating can make outrageous statements and not be questioned because in this country we have a very compliant media. They are owned by the same globalizers. We no longer have an independent media.
If one looks at the definition of rational, there is nothing rational about the economic changes of this time. The elites have introduced and persisted with them despite public dissatisfaction and opposition and shown no willingness to admit they have made mistakes or monumental errors. They have persisted long after a sane man or woman would have taken stock, so we must conclude that the outcomes are not displeasing to them.
    Perfect competition is to them wasteful of resources but it should keep them honest and should mean no one ends up with more that 10% of the market. Murdoch has 70%. In the airline industry, Qantas has 70% Virgin 20% and there are a few minor regionals. There is no competition at all. In agriculture there is competition at the bottom. But as you go up the chain you no longer have perfect competition. Business has been deregulated in most nations around the world. The service sector is the only one not deregulated but they are about to be. Australia and New Zealand are the only two countries that have fully embraced economic rationalism. They define efficiency in terms of reduction of labour only.
    Once companies become too big and multinational they become more powerful than the countries in which they operate. Murdoch and Enron were good examples.
    A natural disaster or a crime wave become increases in GDP. Two women who look after each otherís children for money have just increased the GDP whereas if they had each looked after their own children that does not contribute to the GDP. As a people we would rather not have crime but from an economic rationalist view it is good for the economy. If Australia was going forward as we were from 1945 to 1975, with our foreign debt being about 40% of GDP in 1945. By 1975 it was down to 10%. Although Whitlam and others claimed we were inefficient, the fact is we paid down debt in that 30 years period. It is now back up to 90% plus.
    Free trade was adopted in the 1840ís as the policy of the Liberal party in Britain. It caused the disruption of Europe with 50 million farmers moving to cities for a better way of life. Free trade does that for you. The fact that there are millions who want to come to Australia at the moment is symptomatic of free trade. If we open our borders which the free traders want and which GATTS requires us to do, then we had better learn to eat a bowl of rice a day, because that is what will happen not more than 20 to 30 years ahead.


Toy Nazis, Phantom Battalions - the Real Game
Leon Gregor

Leon is the president of the NSW branch of the British/Israel World Federation but is speaking on his own behalf.
    The so-called Nazis and Ku Klux Klan in Australia, who are frequently given profile in the controlled mass media, are fakes working for the NWO establishment against the right wing. They are part of a strategy to discredit dissent against the globalist NWO. There have been in the past such fake counterparts in USA, Britain, Germany, and France.
    The aim of these people is to subvert the efforts, organization and reputations of movements and persons opposed the glaobalist NWO. For media and public benefit they produce a posture as overboard, rightwing, nutter fanatics indulging in fake hysterics in defence of the Aryan race. The try to get close to, observe, infiltrate and hijack targeted groups and destroy such groups and isolate them from the general population. The groups that have been targeted by these people have also been targeted by the Zionist lobby. The attacks have been prolonged, malicious and of serious consequence.
    Who do these fake Nazi/KKK not confront or target? If one listens to or reads their rhetoric one would expect them to be out there imposing themselves on Aboriginal, Jewish, lefty, republican and globalist groups. The only action to date is the posting of a few stickers at Darlinghurst and the use of bed sheets to frighten Aborigines at Casino. They donít target Unity party meetings. There are only about 6 members in the Sydney area and possibly another 6 throughout Australia. This has hardly changed in 10 years. They consist of mainly drug addicts, mental deficients, drunks and criminals. The media never get around to investigating these groups and allow their claims to stand as fact. Despite their small numbers they have an appearance of large numbers.
    These people have never been singled out for attention by the Jewish lobby, as have Fred Tobin and Olga Scully.
    They never attempt to build their group but instead invade other groups as Lenin and the Communists did. They hijack them and convert the stolen group and its assets to their own purposes. If they are foiled, they then set about sabotaging the victim. They set about displaying ďcredibleĒ racism.


The 2002 Sydney Forum
Dr Jim Saleam

The Sydney Forum was indeed an outgrowth of the Inverell Forum and thanks was given to Robert Balgarnie for his assistance.
    There is a new climate since the Moslem attacks on New York and it has manifested itself as legislatively endorsed spying on nationalist and patriotic groups of all sorts. The next Sydney Forum will discuss the theme of what it means in this country now that there is a developing politics of permanent war. This is backed by an internal terror in which the state must organise against its own citizens to endorse the globalizerís war. We must become adept at explaining the globalizers system as it affects our lives both in the macro and micro picture. These globalizers seek the recrafting of your country as an open borders free market zone with all of your identiy is lost in a consumer herd mass. These people are very big on slogans about democracy; they are even fighting a war for it but they are very bankrupt on substance.
    To govern such a system, as well as to put it in place block by block, only force will suffice. The 1990ís have seen war and suppression right throughout the world to implement this system.
    The attack on New York was based on a perception that the USA and Israel are the axis of evil and any involvement of Australia in any such war is unnecessary as this is not our war, but while our country is a part of the New World Order arrangement then we are in fact a target of Islamic extremism. This declaration after September 11th is in fact a declaration of a war without end. Without multiculturalism there would have been no such attack. We now face not only people who hate the liberal (sick) west but also European people in general. This does not sit well with the extolled love of diversity coming from the NWO boys. The enemy of the globalizer and yours too can live right next door.
    What the enemy is proving to you in waging the war which he is waging right now externally and internally is that he is a deadly machine for armed violence backed by psychological terrorism, fronted by facade institutions which in fact manipulate and time waste.


Surviving the Consequences of Radical Liberalism
John Swinburne

We are a body and a consciousness. One of the sanctions used against us is the threat of death and we react because we have a fear of death. All of us have belief systems about things, men, women, money, government etc. We fight wars over belief systems. Life and death are natural phenomena and donít need institutionalised belief systems to explain them.
    If I could sit outside my body and see my body sitting there that would be reasonable evidence that I as an aware consciousness was not my body. I could then reason that if I am not my body and if my body dies, here am I. There are near-death experiences where people are pronounced dead but return to their body and speak of being somewhere else and seeing God or others. The end result is that we are afraid of dying because we think that is the end and we protect our bodies at any cost and continue to produce more and more bodies.
    Globally the large populations are now ungovernable. Our belief systems say populate. That is an absurdity. If population control is not top of your list, all other issues are irrelevant.
    The children of today have been brought up to believe they have an entitlement without an obligation. Their teachers have ingrained this in them, because those teachers are university graduates. We advocate the education of our children but we are supporting the very system that is perpetrating this stuff (political correctness) on us. The great flaw of this belief system is that people must be protected from the consequences of their actions. They must not feel pain. How else do we find out we have screwed up? We get it wrong and it hurts. Get it right and we feel good.


Is Our Customs Service Doing its Job?
Bob Spanswick 

The customs service doesnít work properly. It is badly structured and is run by quite inappropriate people.
    In the 1980ís a customs office was shopping in a gun shop in Sydney and saw displayed American armalite rifles. He was told about the expected import of the AK47. He reported to his supervisor but was eventually told that the resources of the department were such that staff were not available to undertake a seizure of the weapons. The matter was reported to the union and I brought the matter up with the Minister responsible. The member custom officers were about to visit the gun shop on their own time, which they could do under their Queenís warrant. At 9am the following morning after the meeting with the Minister, those warrants were withdrawn.
    I was working on the Sydney wharf and a waterside worker drew my attention to some publications. They were called ďhigh timesĒ and advocated the use of cocaine and heroin, even by children. My supervisor advised that he had been reporting this matter for some time and was told from above that there was nothing customs could do about the publications. I went on television and the next day we had the Attorney Generalís Department telling the Customs Department that these publications were prohibited imports. Two months later we addressed the problem. People went to jail over that. The administration were not impressed with an officer embarrassing them on television so they decided to amend the legislative arrangements. While doing this they finished up with prohibition of books only and nothing else. So everything else that were used for drug taking such as scales and bongs, were now allowed to be imported. It was rectified 6 years later.
    A prominent retailer imported a number of porcelain pieces; eleven 20 ton containers. Nine containers were delivered, but an officer decided to test the porcelain against the documents supplied by the agent and stack it up against the regulations concerning the lead content. He took a sample and sent it to a laboratory. The report stated that the lead content was 1,000 times the lead content allowable under the act and therefore were prohibited. We seized the two containers but did nothing about the rest that were on the shop shelves. In my time that was the last time porcelain was tested. After that the government introduced self-regulation and there were never any problem shipments after that.
    Customs used to search vessels. We used to search containers once. We donít do it any longer. The administration decided we didnít need to do this any longer. Like a fire station, if there havenít been any fires for 5 years, we might as well close the station down. We never searched one ship in seven years and of course we lost our expertise. Then suddenly there was a ship coming in next week and we have information that it is going to be carrying whatever illegal products. We had no one with the expertise to search it. The Customs immediately dispatched 12 officers to the UK and 12 officers to Canada to teach them how to search ships again. They didnít call on the retired officers on a short-term arrangement to come back and do just that. Instead we sent these people away on a 12-week junket at the end of 1999. It is 2002 and my information is we still havenít searched any ships because we still havenít anyone who can use essential breathing apparatus yet. Searching people is just out of the question because once upon a time we had a woman arriving and we had some information about her. She was a suspected heroin carrier and when she arrived the women officers at Sydney airport took her away, where she disrobed. Towards the end of the procedure she burst out of the room into the baggage hall naked screaming that if the Customs officers wanted to see her naked, everyone else should see her also. After this the legislation was changed and took all those powers away. The woman was found dead a month later of a heroin overdose.
    We donít have patrol functions any more in the ports of Australia. We have video cameras though. We have upgraded them now to colour. The only problem is that the people who look at these cameras when they are pointed in the right direction donít know what they are looking at because they are not selected and trained officers for the law enforcement function of customs. An incident happened over the weekend. The staff diligently looked through the footage on Monday and they were a bit worried about one in particular. They could not see exactly if anything illegal was happening so they sent the video to an old hand who looked at the video in his own time and wrote a report out. They thanked him and filed it. The film was of crew coming down the gangplank with 3-foot boxes marked Marlborough.
    We have a lot of ships entering Port Kembla. The Customs decided to search the cabin of a crewmember but they had only been in the job 4 years and didnít know how to do it. They rang Sydney and asked for an officer to come down to search this cabin. They replied that they didnít have anyone available but they would get an old hand from the baggage check to go down a day later. He duly arrived and went through the protocol with the captain and searched the cabin. The other Customs officers were astounded. ďHow did you know how to do that."? ďI was trained to do it.Ē They had been in the job for 4 years and didnít know how to search a ship.
    We have a Customs Service that is there and we have a dressed up window like Sydney Kingsford Smith airport where we have all the smoke and mirrors and where the publicity officers are, who keep telling the public how marvellously we are going. Unfortunately we have this other thing called a coastline. There is nobody there.
    We also have shooting galleries here. It is not my place to discuss the merits of this. My concern is the Federal legislative arrangements that are being broken by the activities of the so-called shooting galleries. There are people there who have heroin in their possession. The Customs Act says you canít. The Customs officers and police officers are required to seize the heroin under the Customs Act. And if they donít they get jailed.
    The Customs Service needed to be fixed 15 years ago. We didnít fix it then and we are not fixing it now. It needs to recruit, select and train people for a customs law enforcement function. We need to have systems in place, which donít just process things but actually have restraining capacity about them to look after your good interest. We have a new customs system coming on line that has cost us millions to date but when it comes it will not have a law enforcement control programme in it. That is referred to as phase two of the computer system that will be implemented sometime in some century.
    I would like to think that this all results from a massive ďyes MinisterĒ syndrome. While I would like to think that is the case, I am not sure and I have a reservation about it. I suspect we are being systematically put out of business as a country.
    In relation to a question about a container of pistols stolen off the wharf in Sydney, yes I know of this matter. Customs and police officers have a duty with regards this matter and they donít do it.
    About a question relating to Tipperary station in the Northern Territory reportedly owned by Indonesians and where aeroplanes come and go regularly without customs checks; this is not an isolated case and a number of these matters were reported by submission to a committee on coast watch and was filed by the chairman of the committee and never saw the light of day. Nothing whatsoever is being done about that sort of a situation and it isnít isolated to Tipperary station.


Port Arthur Update
Andrew MacGregor & Wendy Scurr

 Andrew MacGregor 

We would like to thank the Inverell Forum for making all this possible by having us here last year, when Wendy and I launched our campaign into the Port Arthur massacre. Wendy has always been fighting for proper and legal treatment for the survivors of the Port Arthur massacre and the constitutional rights of all Australians with regard to that terrible event which occurred almost six years ago. The role of the constabulary has always been to protect and preserve the people within our community. It not about going out and collecting taxes, speed cameras, or using our military might to overpower the legal rights of people. It is obvious that the Tasmanian police were not permitted to fulfil that obligation to the people of the Tasman peninsular and all investigations into the Massacre have been more that just stifled. After making this report I shall be stepping aside. Wendy will still be going and she has another supporter by the name of Gillian McGuire who is extremely competent in her field and has done a magnificent report on Damien Bugg.
    What have Wendy and I accomplished since last Inverell Forum? Not heaps, but some extremely important facts have been clarified. Mrs Julie Butler, who approached us at the Forum last year and pointed out that relatives of Mr Russell Pollard had been informed of his death at Port Arthur by a local policeman at approximately 4.30 pm on the Sunday afternoon. How was it possible for a NSW local policeman to travel for over 30 minutes to be able to inform the relatives of the death, before a Tasmanian policeman was recorded as entering the Port Arthur historic site? From this information we were able to determine that constable Gary Whittle did in fact enter the toll booth area of the Port Arthur site at about 2pm and he was the only policeman in the position to inform police headquarters at Hobart of the names of the deceased and their addresses and normal police procedures than took place. We have been continually informed that there were no police communications between Port Arthur and Seascape and police headquarters and the police command post at Taranna. However Whittles ability to pass on details of the death of Pollard and the fact that Whittle even makes the statement that he communicated with police headquarters after talking with Jim Laycock and Yannis Kateros suggests there were adequate radio communications for the local police. Local SES volunteers had been listening to police communications and had heard orders to members of the constabulary at Seascape that they were not to shoot the gunman and suggested that police communications were in fact operating normally. Final evidence that police communications were operating normally was the fact that at a debrief of the event where police communications between police at Seascape and elsewhere was part of that debrief.
    We must not forget Sergeant Fogarty who was driving from Belrief police station to Seascape at an average speed of about 125 Kph and was also issuing instructions to police to man roadblocks and other actions. It was an established fact that mobile phones did not operate in the area. The ambulance communications also had numerous black spots in the area but communications were connectable within certain areas such as the boat jetty at Port Arthur or on the townís local sports oval. It is logical to suggest that the local police would also have experienced similar difficulties, but again the evidence says they did not. We are aware that the police and other emergency bodies had held exercises within this very area in the past few years and would have been alerted to the communications problems and aware of the solution of putting in a mobile relay station. Superintendent Barry Bennett admits to having been in charge of the Police Special Operations Group prior to his promotion to district commander and was well aware of the communication problems.
    Through the Inverell Forum we received a copy of a letter from QLD Police Commissionerís office in relation to new national firearm laws 6 months prior to the Port Arthur massacre. That gave us positive proof that there was a federal government agenda in relation to the new gun laws and some of the bureaucrats and politicians who were involved such as Darryl Smeaton and Duncan Kerr. Then we found positive proof that Martin Bryant was not alone inside Seascape cottage. There were 20 ďcoughsĒ placed in the court transcript and credited to police negotiator Terry McCarthy in his conversation with ďJamieĒ aka Martin Bryant. The coughs on the tape sounds remarkably similar to an SKK. Trained police negotiators do not cough once when they are talking to people. That could mean another person inside the Seascape cottage fired up to 20 shots while Bryant was talking to police. We were able to ascertain that Mrs Sally Martin was alive in the afternoon during the siege at seascape as she was seen by constable Gary Whittle and it is recorded in his debriefing notes. Constable Paul Hyland also saw a naked person and we safely assume that that person was Mrs Sally Martin. If Mrs Martin was still alive during the Port Arthur massacre then who was minding her?
    Wendy and I have also been interviewed by mainstream media, the Channel Nine Sunday programme, in relation to our presentation on Port Arthur. We were not the only people interviewed, but it was the list of people who refused to be interviewed that makes the programme interesting. Senior members of the Tasmanian police initially wanted to voice their side of the story but when the time came were not permitted to do so. Ray Groom was not interested, nor I believe, was Damien Bugg. In fact all the Tasmanian politicians requested, declined to put their side to the media.
    Another important aspect of the Massacre was the role that ASIO played. I continually refer to the Protective Security Co-ordination Centre (PSCC). We are aware that ASIO is part of the committee that is called (SACPAV), the Standing Advisory Committee for Prevention Against Violence, and it is controlled by PSCC and so there may be some confusion as to exactly who played what roles within the Port Arthur incident. We do know however that the federal Attorney Generalís department has stated categorically that there was ASIO involvement within the Port Arthur massacre. The Attorney Generalís Upfront magazine made certain statements, which included that the PSCC was involved in the incident very early dealing with requests and advice for assistance. The Defence Force, ASIO and the NSW Police all provided assistance.
    What did we have at Port Arthur? We had the Tasmania police, the Tasmania police Special Operations Group, the Victoria police Special Operations Group (six members), the NSW police Special Operations Group, the Australian federal police Anti-terror Squad, ASIO, PSCC, the Australian defence forces helicopter pilots and the SAS. It was a bloody big exercise and much of that had to have been organised prior to the event. Three army helicopter pilots to fly the rescue helicopters on the Sunday. They were there prior to the event. The SAS van arrived at the oval to guide in the helicopters. This van indicates the preparedness, as they could not just have been in the area at the time.
    Mr McLeod of Warwick offered to host a meeting for us but was approached by a retired ASIO operative who stated categorically that the Port Arthur gunman was a former SAS soldier. Corroborating information came to me at Bernie in Tasmania. I was questioned about the name of the person responsible for the shooting and I stated that the name David Everett had been given to us from Queensland. The man then informed me of certain aspects of David Everett that fitted the Port Arthur gunman. The man stated he had just moved back from WA where David Everett was notorious for many crimes and was currently in a secure H M prison. This Everett was 34 years of age at the time of the massacre and yet all the witnesses informed us prior to the arrest of Bryant that the gunman was aged between 18 and 25 years of age, so we know that this Everett is not the man. There are many precedents of security forces setting up sting operations and infiltrating legitimate organizations. We must question all aspiring new members and question all new information given, to ensure it is not false information deliberately given to deflect us.
    I have mentioned that SES workers and other people had listened to police communications and then certain police were debriefed after the massacre and part of the debriefing was listening to a taped conversation by uniform police with hand held radio outside Seascape cottage to their controller. Pat Allen had the hand radio. The conversation goes like this, ďWe have the Port Arthur gunman in sight. We have the gunman in sight. Permission to shoot.Ē ďPermission denied.Ē ďWe have the Port Arthur gunman in sight! Permission to shoot!Ē ďPermission denied. This must happen.Ē


Wendy Scurr

I would like to thank Andrew McGregor, without whose help the story would never have gotten out. I donít know if we will ever do any good or not but I am not going to stop trying because there have been too many people hurt through all this.
    I was very surprised at the number of people who gave me support and that has led to me touring. I have been right up to Cairns, into South Australia, but not a lot in NSW. I havenít been to Darwin or Western Australia. The Inverell Forum was what gave us a chance to get the word out. The people here seemed to believe me and I became very calm after that happened. I felt then that someone else cares about it. Andrew and I have now spoken to over 3000 Australians. Since I last spoke I have received a writ for defamation. It is the mortuary contractor and it looks that I am going to have to go to trial.
    We have had two of our venues cancelled. The first was at the Victoria hotel in Melbourne but the meeting went ahead because a very kind doctor offered us his medical centre to use. The other venue closed to us was in Tasmania. All this did was to give us more advertising because it was in the Mercury every day talking about conspiracy theorists and right-wingers who support us. We eventually used the town hall, which was an excellent backdrop for the filming by the nine network.
    Mr Bugg of the Department of Public Prosecutions referred throughout the sentencing hearing to a certain door as being locked. During his summing up of the case Justice Cox also stated the door was locked. But on page 17 of the DPPís own report states that on 30th April a carpenter employed by the Authority was required to paint out the windows of the cafe. He along with a police officer, who was inside the building, examined the lock. The police officer operated the handle inside while the carpenter examined the tongue of the door locking mechanism. The tongue moved slightly but would not retract sufficiently to enable the door to open. I also tried to get out of that door when I attempted to get help. The door handle moved but it would not open. It is a well-known fact that this door was malfunctioning prior to the day of the massacre. Mr Buggís 52-page report made two key findings. They are (1) the door was not marked as an exit.  It should have been because it was the only one. (2) He was not able to determine that any person was not able to escape through the door. (Why wasnít this door photographed and examined insitu by a locksmith and kept as evidence? If this lock was functioning these poor unfortunate people and many others would have had time to escape. They wouldnít have just thrown the guns used at Port Arthur into a shed because they were ďimportantĒ evidence and were treated as such. The same procedure should have applied to that door. To make matters worse the inside handle of the door was accidentally broken off during demolition. Then Mr Bugg whilst writing his report travelled to Port Arthur to retrieve the door and the lock. He was unable to fit the door in his vehicle so the lock was removed. Mr Bugg then returned to the locksmith with the lock, which he had removed, from the door, minus the handle. Because that handle was missing, the locksmith was only able to identify it as a fire exit lock, but without the handle he was unable to determine the model. Where is this handle? Isnít removing this lock form the door tampering with evidence? To the transcripts that tell us that people did try that door, but Bugg has denied this in his own report.

This is a transcript of a lady who was on a phone hook-up. I have to keep her name private at this stage but she will give evidence to a coronial enquiry. She said, ďIf the door would have opened it would have been a different scenario. I would have been out of there. I know I would have got out of there. An amount of people would have got through.Ē When speaking on the telephone to MR Bugg during his investigation into the matter of the door she made comment saying, ďWe didnít have a chance. I meant that one man who was shot across the counter didnít have a chance then, but we actually had to wait towards the end before those at the door were shot. He cut me off straight away and just took down what he wanted to and didnít give me a chance to say ĎLook had that have opened those people who were right there at that door, who were shot, would have been out.í So I am angry over that because I was so traumatised in the back of my mind I let it go. The people at the door were still standing there while he went back into the cafe shooting and then when he came back and shoot down towards the door. It was a different scenario then and I am saying if the door had opened then we would have got out, and I would have been out of that door.Ē This lady was behind a Hessian screen within touching distance of the people who were shot there. Those five people.
    I am now going to read you an extract from a witness police statement. This lady lost her husband behind the door. This is exactly as it is in the police statement. ďAbout one thirty pm Peter and I went to the Souvenir shop which is in the same building as the kiosk. We heard some shots. I heard three really quick bangs and we looked around and I say a man with a gun. He was wearing a khaki green jacket or parker type jacket. The gun he was holding was long. He was holding it out in front of him. The bangs kept going off. It didnít seem like a machine gun because it wasnít that quick. I only glanced at him quickly just enough to realise it was someone with a gun. Peter then pushed me and said we have got to get out of here. So we ran around to try to find a was out. We went to a small, enclosed area where there was a glass door. We desperately tried the door, but it was locked. Peter said get down. I crouched down on the ground against the glass door. I put my face into my hands and Peter crouched over me. All this time I could still hear the shots. There didnít seem to be a break. It just kept on going. I stayed crouched until the shots didnít sound so close. They were still continuing regularly as they were becoming more distant. But from the time when I first saw the man with the gun to when the shots werenít so close was no more than a few minutes. I waited until the shots were distant and I knew that I wasnít hit. I heard Peter making funny noises. I checked him and he was hit on the right side of his face. My hair at the back was matted which may have been his blood. I felt the back of his head and it seemed alright. I saw two other people werenít moving or making any noise so I presumed they were dead. When I looked at Peter who was unconscious and making gurgling noises there was blood coming out of his nose and mouth. I started screaming and someone said something like ďBe quite. He might come backĒ. I sat up and took my jacket off and I put it on my lap then rested Peterís head on the jacket to try and stop the blood. I felt he was still alive because he was warm and had a pulse. I tried to give him mouth to mouth but that didnít seem to do any good because of the injury to his cheek and more blood seemed to come out. I stayed there crying with Peter for about twenty minutes. Somebody came and asked me to go outside. I then said that I didnít want to leave him if there was a chance he might still be alive. Some first aid people went inside and checked him. They came back out and told me he was dead. I was then taken care of and at one stage I was checked by first aid officers and ambulance officers because of the blood on my shirt which I think was Peterís.Ē
    As Mr Bugg was commissioned by the Joint Parliamentary Group to write a report, the Bugg Report, to investigate the issues relating to the door, has he not misled Parliament by making the comment that he was not able to determine that anyone tried the door?
    Why no coronial enquiry? A coronial enquiry is the only way the many anomalies can be answered. A coronial enquiry into the massacre at Port Arthur was initiated at about 3.55 pm on Sunday 28th April 1996, when the coroner Matterson was informed of the matter and that he was required at police headquarters Hobart for a briefing. It was 7.30 pm before it was considered safe for him to enter. The coroner arrived at the site at 8.05 pm. As no person had been apprehended and charged with any offence he advised the police he would take over the area as a coronial site. At about 8.40 am the following morning on the 29th April, Martin Bryant had come out of Seascape. The police expected charges would be laid. He then advised police that his role as coroner on site would become secondary and he ceased to have control of the scene. In a letter dated the 31st January 1997, from the coroner, to a person who had lost his wife, ďAs a result of the outcome of the charges preferred against Martin Bryant in the Supreme Court of Tasmania I write to advise I do not intend to resume the inquest that I opened on the 29th April 1996. I believe it is not in the interests of family, friends or witnesses to again traverse the factual situation in a public hearing, particularly when any finding I make must not be inconsistent with the decision of the Supreme Court. I have today written to the Attorney General advising of my decision. May I take this opportunity on behalf of the staff of my office to extend our condolences for your sad loss?
    Several talk to me of a Royal Commission. We must not have a Royal Commission in the first instance as the government get to set the terms of reference. The door situation should have been enough on its own to have instigated a coronial enquiry.
    It would appear that Mr Groom had complete control of everything related to the Port Arthur massacre with the complete support of Parliament.
    Some young girls were asked to go back into the Broad arrow cafe to work 2 hour a day after the massacre!


A Gunsmith's Notebook on Port Arthur
Stewart Beattie

All despotism is bad, but the lowest form is that which works with the machinery of freedom.
   There is a great urgency to have every high level bureaucrat, politician and person in authority who had even the slightest brush with that which drove the events encapsulating Port Arthur be made defend their own actions and statements regarding this dreadful event before an open public enquiry. I met with my newly elected member for Riverina. Initially I was encouraged by her interest in concerns I raised about the Port Arthur massacre. Her change in demeanour was dramatic. Within a very short time I received a letter from her electoral office and I was told emphatically and in embolden capitals, the member will not enter into any dialogue with you either written or verbal in the future. I was informed that any communication on any matter would be futile. The situation has not changed. That galvanised me into doing all in my power to uncover and publish whatever it was that petrifies politicians, sparks vitriol and scoffing from more than a few media editors, even from areas we may once have regarded as our friends, when the words Port Arthur massacre are uttered.
    My area of interest in the Port Arthur massacre is in firearms and ammunition allegedly used there. My fulltime research over the last two years has led me to conclude the two principle firearms claimed by the DPP as weapons used to murder the 32 people and wound 21 others were never used to that end at the Broad Arrow cafe or indeed any of the other crime scenes. Let us look at the DPPís two primary firearms. The first is a Colt AR15 it is an SP1 carbine in 223 Remington calibre. The word carbine only appears twice in the court documents and the correct model of this firearm only appears once in the wound ballistic review document released in America and not intended for Australian eyes. The other weapon, FN FAL G series, is probably better known to you as the Australian SLR or L1A1, but it is very different. Somehow they rebuilt the one that was supposedly used and I find that quite impossible. It is made in the metric pattern whereas the Australian one is made in the inch pattern. Even the magazine will not interchange. Both primary weapons were self-loading. I found a whole raft of anomalies in relation to Port Arthur from a prolific author from Western Australia.
    Martin Bryant exhibited no confusion whatsoever in identifying the firearms he had purchased, owned, used and taken with him to the Tasman Peninsular that day. Only police interrogators exhibited and admitted confusion.
    There is not one shred of evidence that I have found that can positively link either of the DPP primary firearms entered into the court documents with any of those shooting murders. Inconclusive physical examination only was employed and that quote, ďNo chemical tests were carried out and were not planned because of cost considerations and time considerations.Ē One person is murdered and they do these chemical tests. Thirty-five people are murdered and they ignored them.
    In my book ("A Gunsmith's Notebook on Port Arthur") I explain and destroy each of the scenarios put forward by Gerard Dutton, ballistics officer for the Tasmanian police and I go much further as to the reasons for the severely damaged state of both primary weapons.

 Top     Contents