General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Mark H
7 News Spotlight
comments

Comments by "Mark H" (@markh1011) on "" video.

"His iq is of a child for God sakes." He travelled a lot on his own. He was smart enough to work that out. You don't need to be a genius to point guns at people and fire.
15
@frankwoods4179 YOU yourself gave me witnesses supporting the official story. When I point this out to you, you get all evasive. When I ask you for a reference to the testimony you get all evasive. When I ask you about the implausibility of the conspiracy you get really evasive.
6
"Martin has never practised shooting before that dreadful day ," Neighbours said that Martin always carried an air gun with him. "yet many victims were shot in the head ." Some were. When the shooting started in the cafe people were sitting down and he was shooting from the hip.
6
@frankwoods4179 Lots of witnesses do.
5
@Noneed- " but even I know that if you take that many guns away from people, they won't have anything to protect themselves with." Countries with smarter gun laws don't have out of control crime rates.
5
1. He was smart enough to travel the world on his own. He was smart enough to point a gun. 2. Can you prove this? 3. Why?
5
"A child mentally who was supposed to have shot people using tactics that an ACE shooter " Don't be ridiculous. He shot a lot of people close range. He still missed people. Many people were wounded but not shot. The cafe and gift shop were very small and the people had nowhere to go. He was also smart enough to travel the world on his own. You don't need to be a genius to point a gun.
5
@frankwoods4179 Me - Tell me what you think really happened. You - I don't want to talk about the conspiracy. Me - Tell me what you think really happened. You - You're too scared to talk about the official records. Me - I'm asking about that. Explain the conspiracy. Tell me what you think really happened. You - You're too scared to talk about the official records. Me - But I'm asking about that. Explain the conspiracy. That's part of it. Tell me the errors and lies. Tell me what you think really happened. You're dodging. You - Not dodging. You're too scared to talk about the official records. Me - But I'm asking about that. Explain the conspiracy. That's part of it. Tell me the errors and lies. Tell me what you think really happened. You're dodging. You - You're too scared to talk about the official records. 🤦‍♂ You're running in circles. 😂
4
@frankwoods4179 If that vague nonsense is your best list of anomalies then you're actually undermining your own argument. What actual evidence do you have... .of anything to support a conspiracy that you're too scared to even explain...😂
4
@frankwoods4179 You were issued with this challenge. What do you think really happened and where is your evidence? Answer in the next post or it will be embarrassing for you. ...and big surprise.... you dodged. Anyone can see me answering your questions. While you are evading.
4
The people were trapped in the small cafe and gift shop. They had nowhere to go. No the deaths were not all head shots.
4
@frankwoods4179 " Just go through the questions I have posted here and provide a sensible response." I've done this to many of them but you just insult me for not going along with your hints at a conspiracy. You don't appear to be able to back up anything you claim.
4
@frankwoods4179 You're dodging. I'm here asking questions. I want to know more. This is your main hobby in life. Why are you dodging?
3
@frankwoods4179 A poor excuse because after all this effort you have no solid evidence of anything. This is your main hobby in life and you fail at it.
3
@frankwoods4179 "Yes there were mass shootings and thankfully they are in decline however firearms related deaths have been trending down for the last 53 years" You're diverting from the point constantly. I will repeat - the trigger for the change in laws was mass shootings. They were brought in as a result of mass shootings. You keep talking about something other than mass shootings. " I don’t think the laws were to address mass shootings alone" That was obviously the trigger as the laws changed as a result of one AND the laws coincided with a change in the trend of mass shootings. You're diverting to other things. "The is no conclusive evidence that the new laws made any material difference" They were brought in due to mass shootings and they appear to have clearly made a difference when it comes to mass shootings. You can't say that they made no difference when they clearly did - on mass shootings.
3
@frankwoods4179 " Why has the shooting at the toll-booth and the shooter’s interaction with the occupants of the BMW never been fully explored or explained?" So the shooter spoke to people before killing them. ..... and? Is this the best you have?
3
@frankwoods4179 " It would be common for police to have this." Not at all. Lacking paperwork for a gun used in a crime would be common. "Some reports suggest that it was first discovered by emergency workers not the police." I'm asking questions and you're starting to throw tantrums again. This topic is your whole life. I ask a few questions and you break down and cry. Why do questions concern you so much?
3
@frankwoods4179 You're insulting me because when actually pressed, you can't come up with anything. I can see you've put a lot of effort into this and really have nothing. Then when asked about the conspiracy you run a mile.
3
@frankwoods4179 Many witnesses identified him. He was caught at the scene. He admitted doing it. You have no answers to these... but you deflect to a lot of irrelevant questions.
3
You tell us. What is your theory?
3
@frankwoods4179 "I am claiming nothing but the explanation of a FACT. " So ....nothing happened? What sort of terrible evasive answer is that? lol.. Why are you too scared to answer? I will not stop asking now.
3
@frankwoods4179 " I don’t know what you are doing. " I'm asking you what you think happened at Port Arthur. You have over 1000 comments on this page but are too scared to answer this question for some reason.....
3
@frankwoods4179 " There is no forensic evidence presented to the court or available to the public to prove Bryant " He was caught at the scene. He was identified by numerous witnesses. Everything else you said was irrelevant. What's your theory on what happened? Of that's right you always dodge this.
3
He was capable enough to travel the world on his own. Travelling is actually hard work. Surely he was able to point a gun....
3
@michaelwillis373 Have you got sources for these?
3
@michaelwillis373 "Most accurate mass shooting in history," 1. Lets see your calculations for this. 2. Most of the killings happened in a small cafe and gift shop where the victims had nowhere to go.
3
@MrRecklessryan 🤣
3
Laycock also said "I only knew him as one of the local kids." and "I unlocked the door and stepped out and saw the young man and this blonde figure which I didn’t know was a female or male, because of the length of the blonde hair and the way it was flowing out and hanging loose." So he didn't know him that well. He couldn't even tell if it was a man or a woman.
3
@frankwoods4179 "Putting accurate shots on the victims with the noise, movement and chaos in the cafe was exceptional for an untrained person." The noise? You're being ridiculous. The cafe and the gift shop were small. It wasn't that hard to hit a lot of people at close range.
3
@burky5000 That you can still get guns in Australia is a fact not an opinion.
3
Have you got a source for that?
3
@eddx5758 "and obviously it was government planed" Any evidence of this?
3
@frankwoods4179 " You clearly do not want to discuss the Cheok statement" You're playing games. So much projecting. You raised Laycock's statement and now you're being all evasive about it. I don't think you've read it. I've asked what's important about *Cheok's statement and you won't answer*. " not only totally rejects the official story that the shooter acted alone " How? I keep asking you questions and you keep evading and accusing me of not wanting to discuss things. 🤡
3
@frankwoods4179 " When the Prosecution’s explanation of the toll-booth shooting is directly contradicted by an eye witness who was 15-20 metres away " Where was the contradiction? Bryant may have argued with the people before shooting them. That doesn't make it a conspiracy. "not one shred of forensic evidence from these items is presented in court to absolutely and positively identify the shooter I believe there is a problem." So they made a case from all the witnesses and him being caught at the scene.... Is this all you have?
3
@frankwoods4179 I have already given you answers on several things you've raised. I'm asking you what you think really happened. You're tap dancing around in circles.
3
@frankwoods4179 You're projecting. What do you think really happened? Why are you so scared of this question?
3
@frankwoods4179 ...so nothing then.
3
Are you still pushing this conspiracy nonsense? Is this YouTube channel your whole life?
3
He was capable of traveling the world on his own. Surely he could point a gun...?
3
@frankwoods4179 "There is a significant difference in the skills necessary to just pointing a gun and do what is alleged to have occurred at PA." Not really. Many of his victims were at close range and trapped.
3
@SuzyMcEwen "I prefer to go with my version thanks. " ....what is your version and what is your evidence?
3
@frankwoods4179 "After the first two shots the people would have been scrambling to escape or find cover. " There wasn't really anywhere to go. They were sitting ducks in the cafe and gift shop. "but we are expected to believe that he could act so calmly and professionally in the cafe." Is that really so weird that a person doping the thing they planned to do ...did the thing that they planned to do.
3
@SuzyMcEwen "And I could ask the same of you" You dodged and shifted the burden. He was identified by many witnesses and caught by the police at the scene. As I said, I'm willing to have my mind changed if someone can give me some evidence. You dodged doing so though.... That's not a good sign.
3
So what do you think really happened?
3
@frankwoods4179 Happy to address whatever that is. So what do you think really happened at Port Arthur? Haven't you looked into this?
3
@frankwoods4179 Nope. So what do you think really happened at Port Arthur?
3
@frankwoods4179 "What I think happened has not been considered in the official records." Great. So you think the official story is wrong. So what do you think happened?
3
@frankwoods4179 "nd the number of ‘coincidences’ and unexplained circumstances are ‘interesting" I keep challenging you on what they are and you've given me such minor things ... and then you get angry and evasive.
3
Are you actually serious?
3
"Was it just a coincidence that so many journalists had gathered in Hobart for a conference that weekend?" Prove there were more than expected. So reporters were allowed to see the crime scene...... and? Do you have anything solid that proves anything?
3
" 2 shooters reported by eye witnesses who were there." Point me to the testimony.
3
"Man, I bet you geniuses wish you had a 2nd" ....sigh... 1. No the country isn't disarmed. You can still get guns in Australia. 2. No every time we see the regular massacres and school shootings in the US we feel pity for you.
3
@frankwoods4179 The testimony you referenced only showed that that he spoke to people before killing them. That doesn't mean they were working together. Can you back up your claim?
3
@frankwoods4179 Then who?
2
@frankwoods4179 "There is no evidence " There are many witnesses. There is evidence.
2
@frankwoods4179 I've asked you for your best evidence and what you came up with was terrible.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Keep trying Marky boy." Trying isn't required to expose your constant failure Franky boy. This is your main hobby in life and 1. You have no evidence of anything. 2. Can't even say what really happened. That's hilarious.
2
@frankwoods4179 " PA was the final straw. " You're just repeating the same dumb claim I tore apart. The worst shooting in Australian history was not a straw. It was a monumental event. That's what triggered the change. You have no idea ...😂
2
@frankwoods4179 " There is no conclusive evidence that the new laws or the ‘buyback’ made any material difference " The change in laws and buyback coincided with a clear reduction in mass shootings that were happening regularly to that point.
2
@frankwoods4179 "There had been a few mass shootings before 1996 and there have been at least four since" Sure but there was a string of many in a short time before Port Arthur. There was a trend that changed around the time of laws. I'm not claiming it never happened again but the regularity undeniably changed. "The new laws have had no material impact" They were really brought in to address mass shootings and they appeared to clearly have an effect on them.
2
@themanwhosoldtheworld5350 Yep. All your suggestions are plausible. He's too afraid to actually say anything beyond his script though.
2
@frankwoods4179 What do you think really happened?
2
@frankwoods4179 What do you think happened on 96? You keep pointing to witnesses that confirm what happened... so you're not presenting a coherent argument.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Provide an intelligent response to the toll-booth shooting, explaining the actions of the BMW four and the Cheok statement. " I already have. He spoke to some people before he shot them. "Provide an intelligent response to SQoN 760 and the ramifications of political interference " That's irrelevant to what happened on 96. You're deflecting. "Provide an intelligent response to the lack of forensic evidence." Not required due to all the other evidence and the admission of guilt. Is this all you've got? 🤦‍♂
2
@frankwoods4179 That's it? When challenged all you do is squirm and evade.
2
@frankwoods4179 "d were sitting in the Volvo with the shooter when he (Cheok) arrived on the scene. " So they were in a car.... perhaps they had no idea where he was... perhaps they had no idea what was going on.... perhaps there was chaos and they didn't psychically know where the shooter was.
2
@frankwoods4179 " The mystery of the Browning FN FAL in .308 that seemed to materialise from nowhere and was never publicly linked to Bryant. " So he got a gun from somewhere....? Where was this gun found?
2
@frankwoods4179 " If Bryant had purchased the Browning through a newspaper advertisement as alleged in the official version, where is the proof of the transfer ?? " So he didn't keep any... lack of evidence of a firearm purchase, particularly back then isn't a smoking gun. "It proves nothing that the gun was found on the verandah of the building adjoining the Lodge. " It proves it was found at the scene. " If Bryant allegedly said that he owned three firearms why would he continue to deny owning or ever seeing the Browning." Where did Bryant deny that the gun had anything to do with him?
2
@frankwoods4179 "But marky-boy where is the copy of the alleged advertisement from the newspaper. " No idea Franky-boy. But not having all the paperwork for your firearms doesn't mean you didn't do it. It would be common for criminals not to have this. "The Browning may have been found at the scene" Found by the police? "Look at the police transcript" Point me to it. Where can I read it?
2
@frankwoods4179 " There is no forensic evidence presented to the court or available to the public to prove Bryant " He was caught at the scene. He was identified by numerous witnesses. "Bryant was intellectually impaired" He was capable of traveling around the world on his own..... he could point a gun. What's your theory on what happened? Of that's right you always dodge this.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Being caught at Seascape does not prove that he was the shooter. " The police caught him red handed. "There is no forensic evidence to prove his guilt, " You squeal this over and over. It's not the only form of evidence. "Why did the DPP only present the dodgy DNA sample as evidence when all the items from the cafe were ignored" What do you mean that they were ignored? "Bryant was mentally impaired simply read the court transcript" Again - he managed to travel the world on his own. If you've ever done that you'd know what was involved. It's harder than pointing a gun.
2
@frankwoods4179 "My theory does not matter." So this is your main hobby in life. You have no evidence. You have no theory. You have nothing. A total failure.
2
@frankwoods4179 You've given me your supposed best anomalies and they don't amount to anything.
2
What are you claiming really happened at Port Arthur?
2
@frankwoods4179 "Does it directly and unambiguously accuse John Howard of interfering in the legal process by ordering the termination of the Coronial Inquiry and the suppression of evidence?" No idea. Does it? I'm asking you what you think really happened. You're tap dancing around in circles. Why are you too scared to answer?
2
@frankwoods4179 "What really happened is that the 2018 Senate Record contains a very serious accusation against a former Prime Minister that has to date, gone unchallenged. " Ok cool. So what do you think happened at Port Arthur in 96?
2
@MrRecklessryan Over 1000 comments but runs away when you ask him a question...
2
@frankwoods4179 ....so again... you have no evidence of.. well, anything. You can't even explain what you think happened. This is your main hobby in life and you've got nothing. 🤦‍♂
2
@frankwoods4179 He was identified by multiple witnesses.
2
@frankwoods4179 That happened a long time ago.
2
@frankwoods4179 " no forensic evidence," So what? Witnesses... caught at the scene... admitted guilt... " no positive ID, " He was identified by many witnesses. " a highly contaminated identification process" That's your weak excuse. He was identified by many. That ruins your story so you just discard that with bad excuses. ", a mentally impaired person without legal or guardian representation at police interrogations who four five months " So what? Witnesses... caught at the scene... admitted guilt... You're flailing about ...you have many bad claims. Quantity won't substitute for quality.
2
"No empirical evidence presented," He was caught at the scene and identified by many witnesses....
2
@lennytime8057 There was a witness who didn't think it was him but later didn't deny that it was. I'm told there was a witness (a women, forgot her name) that claimed it wasn't him. I've asked for the source of this (testimony or similar) but no one has been able to provide it. I'm not here to push a story. I'm after evidence to have my mind changed.
2
@billhesford6098 "He got 28 headshots out of 35." What is your source for this? He missed many times. He hit many people in the body.
2
@michaelwillis373 "but have said from the get go Martin was no responsible for this." What's your evidence?
2
@michaelwillis373 "she also seen the perpetrator face to face " Where can I read her testimony?
2
@michaelwillis373 I've read Laycock's statement before. He didn't recognise him but the description fit. From memory Bryant came in his show when younger. I didn't find it strange that he didn't recognise him. He wasn't close. He didn't know Bryant well. He'd grown over the years.
2
@michaelwillis373 "The police picked and chose which eye witness statements were used," Plenty identified him though.
2
@michaelwillis373 " I’d say he knew his appearance pretty well. " Kids change a lot during that time. He said he saw him a dozen times over a 5 year period. That isn't a close relationship.
2
@michaelwillis373 Here is his testimony. " On this Sunday the 28th April 1996, I did not recognise the male as Martin BRYANT. The person I saw shooting appeared to be in then low twenties about 5’10 tall, it was impossible to determine his build, (the coat was shapeless). His hair stood out, it was blonde, I thought it was bleached blonde and possibly a female. His hair was shoulder length. His walking appeared to be mannish." While it's certainly worth looking at why he didn't recognise him, note that the testimony isn't clear. He describes someone like Bryant but say it was impossible to determine build because of the jacket. He said that it might be a female but was also mannish. That's not a crystal clear description at all and is even a little contradictory.
2
@Euro.Patriot That doesn't happen in Australia much because we don't have so many firearms per capita. Think about that. People thinking that guns solve the problem simply haven't thought it through.
2
@Euro.Patriot What a pathetic response. You have such a simplistic, short sighted understanding. Let me educate you... Australia ranks higher than the US in the categories of Safety AND Freedom ... AND has lower crime rates. Guns aren't keeping people safe in the US. You proved my previous comment to be quite correct - you haven't thought this through.
2
@Euro.Patriot "Stats don't matter," lol... so you just dismiss facts because you don't like them. Not surprised.
2
@Euro.Patriot " if you lived in Australia you would know how violent and rampant gangs are in cities. " I do live in Australia which is just another reason why it's easy to destroy your simplistic arguments. "You sound like someone who's never had his life in danger because of a 12 year old who thinks he's a tough guy because he has a knife." You're not getting it. You're still thinking simplistically. In your scenario the 12 year old has a gun.... everyone has guns... you're not safer.
2
@Euro.Patriot You've going to have to do a lot better than these terrible arguments kiddo.
2
@Euro.Patriot "not hard to understand." Your argument is painfully simplistic and flawed. It's easy to understand and destroy your short sighted argument.
2
@Euro.Patriot "No it is not, there's nothing wrong with preparing for a scenario." .... which is what the US have done... Australia ranks higher than the US in the categories of Safety AND Freedom ... AND has lower crime rates. Guns aren't keeping people safe in the US. Arming everyone isn't such a great answer....
2
@morskasvinja2049 "And the accuracy a military guy" What accuracy? He didn't always hit. The kills in the cafe were at close range. The people were trapped in a small space with him.
2
@frankwoods4179 You gave the usual copy paste evasion of my question. 🤦‍♂ What do you think really happened and what's your evidence to support it?
2
You can still get guns in Australia. What are you talking about?
2
@burky5000 You diverted from the point. You can still get guns in Australia. In fact from recent estimates there are more guns in Australia now than there were in the mid 9s when this happened. So your whole argument doesn't work.
2
 @frankwoods4179 I am yet to see your response to my question about what really happened.
2
@frankwoods4179 Your evasions speak volumes. You can't even make an argument. This appears to be your obsession and you can't even say what happened. What a mess.
2
@frankwoods4179 I've answered this over and over.... we don't know for certain. But the fact that Bryant spoke to his victims before shooting them isn't such a surprise. Perhaps they didn't know what was going on. Perhaps he threatened them. Perhaps he conned them, asking for a ride to get away from some shooter. The point is that there are more plausible options than what you have.
2
@frankwoods4179 "What plausible options? " I just gave you some. " The DPP’s version and the Cheok version leave no room for believing that this was anything near what you are suggesting." I'm going from Cheok's version. You asked a question. You got the response. Now you look cornered.
2
@CommonwealthDank " Oh wait you guys already had multiple false flags, 9/11 being the main one," It's not surprising that someone so gullible would also support that one....
2
@CommonwealthDank "Let me guess you think it was the arabs with box cutters who did it" It was Al Qaeda members yes. The details of the Hamburg cell were put together by many people. "What about building 7..." Burned away all day and collapsed. The FDNY described it as looking so unstable that it might collapse. So they back away from it. They were right.
2
@frankwoods4179 So what do you think really happened?
2
ugh conspiracy theorists.... 🤦‍♂
2
 @frankwoods4179 Search for the definition online.
2
@frankwoods4179 See how the dictionary defines it. That's how I mean it. Do I need to explain the emoticon as well? Any other general questions you have?
2
@frankwoods4179 "The ‘conspiracy theorist’ tag seems to be most often used by people who afraid of debating an issue" If you'd had any credibility it would have been gone at this statement. "Or do you find anyone asking reasonable questions" The conspiracy that the government was behind Port Arthur is not reasonable. Conspiracy theorists don't just ask questions. People posting on this page are not just asking questions. They are making claims. " and/or media reports unsettling or uncomfortable?" What an odd thing to say. Are you projecting some sort of issues you have? You seem pretty keen on trolling me... did my comment hurt your feelings?
2
@frankwoods4179 So you dodged my post entirely. What a surprise. Run along troll... go make yourself a shiny new tinfoil hat. Treat yourself... lol
2
@frankwoods4179 So you dodged my post entirely. What a surprise. Run along troll... go make yourself a shiny new aluminum hat.
2
@frankwoods4179 So you dodged my post entirely. What a surprise.....
2
@frankwoods4179 "the police had “overwhelming evidence”, if so, where is it?" There were many witnesses. For this to be a conspiracy would require significant planning and people involved. There is no way it would be kept quiet all this time. The motive for it is also not plausible. But if it was the type of absurd conspiracy that you might imply then don't you think it would have been easy to line all the evidence up perfectly? Conspiracy theorists try to have it both ways. The all powerful government are orchestrating everything yet at the same time they apparently can't do anything right.
2
@frankwoods4179 Hold on. You're referencing testimony that confirms Bryant. You can trying to point at details here but the description puts him there. So you are raising evidence that refutes the implications in your previous post. You appear to be all over the place.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Let's forget the conspiracy angle" You can't denying your own argument while you're making it. You're trying to divert from implausibility that destroys is. "but not once does he state what that evidence was although he was " ...and? "Show me one witness statement that positively identified Bryant as the shooter?" You just referenced testimony that describes him accurately. " The identification process was conducted over many weeks using photographs only but this process was highly contaminated by Bryant's photo " You're making excuses. " the did not recognise the person as Bryant." There are plenty of explanations for this. He may not have got a good look at him. He may have had only a passing acquaintance and never really paid close attention to him. He may not have wanted to accept it. He may have just mistaken him from whatever distance he saw him. It's pretty flimsy. Where is the transcript?
2
@frankwoods4179 "Both firearms allegedly used were damaged beyond ballistic identification. " You're anomaly hunting and it never gets you anywhere. If there was a government conspiracy then it would be easy for them to plant all this. These kinds of problems don't help your case at all. Now you might want to claim you're not making a case but its too late for that. "Both firearms allegedly used were damaged beyond ballistic identification. " You don't know specially how/why. "Where is the SKK rifle in 7.62*39 that Bryant is alleged to have used during the siege at Seascape?" No idea. Someone can go on a spree and still have 1 firearm not found. None of these are getting you anywhere.
2
@frankwoods4179 " it then why not simply admit what is was." Had someone asked the question at the time then he would have. You're arguing against a statement that someone made. You can't debate a quote. " Where is this evidence in the court records? " I've already answered this. Many witnesses. Bryant was captured there. The same guy who pleaded guilty. " Show me just one witness statement of the hundreds" I've already answered this as well. There are many witnesses but I don't even need to go looking because you have already referenced a witness that saw someone fitting the description of the man who was captured there. "James Laycock had known Bryant for some time and was in close proximity to the kidnapping and shooting" I asked you for the transcript. You don't have it? " Your excuses are pretty flimsy. " The irony of you saying that....😂😂 I'm guessing you're not aware enough to get why that is so funny. Your whole position so far has been excuses, contradictions and desperate anomaly hunting that goes nowhere. It's also not forgotten how you want to distance yourself from the total implausibility of what you're suggesting. I'm genuinely waiting for you to give me something of substance.
2
@frankwoods4179 "If the evidence existed that proved Bryant was the shooter why not identify it?" The response is the same. You're cherry picking a quote. If someone says that there is a lot of something they don't automatically list it because they are making the point that there is a lot. " Being “consistent with” is insufficient without further corroborating evidence." Many people seeing him do it is corroborating evidence. "Where is that??" You referenced a witness! 🤦‍♂ "Do your homework. " Your excuses don't require me to do homework. People identified him. You're dismissing any evidence you don't like. " The transcript is available if you care to look. " Where? Be specific. I'm no expert. Try again. So do you have any good evidence or any good claims of any sort?
2
@frankwoods4179 "Where did I reference a witness and to what?" Nicholas Cheok for one. "You definitely are no expert " Being an expert in a conspiracy theory is not something I strive to be. Perhaps you do. ...you and the flat earthers.
2
@frankwoods4179 " Go and read the police and court transcripts " I've repeatedly asked you for the testimony of Jim Laycock and you are evading. I have repeatedly asked you if you have anything significant and you continue to evade. I point out the implausibility of the conspiracy and you run a mile...
2
@frankwoods4179 " Let me hear your theory on the actions of the four occupants of the BMW.." No idea... he asked them to give him a lift. He threatened them. We'll never know. So you're conceding that a man resembling Bryant was seen?
2
@frankwoods4179 "Let me hear your theory on how a spent .223 case fired from the Colt AR15 ended up underneath the body of little Alannah Mikac" Someone kicked it.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Bryant is alleged to have told her that he wanted the bag strong enough to hold ammunition but her identity and any associated sales documentation seem to have evaded the police." Seriously? They didn't get the name of the person who worked at Myer so it's a conspiracy? This is the best you've got? lol
2
@frankwoods4179 So you can't seem to find that transcript. I guess you've never read it. You can't seem to come up with anything.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Why are you so focussed on the Laycock statement?" You brought it up. When challenged about it you get all evasive. For the fourth time - tell me where I can read it. You've never read it have you?
2
@frankwoods4179 "The sales staff and records at Myers, Hobart can’t be that hard to identify." Easier now.... but in the 90s... maybe not so. It's an irrelevant detail. All you seem to have are irrelevant details. I keep challenging you to give me something. It's not merely rhetoric. You're responding with evasions and vitriol.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Clearly you have not looked for the Laycock " You're evading. FIFTH TIME - where can I read this transcript? This is getting embarrassing for you now......
2
@frankwoods4179 "Let’s talk about the toll-booth shooting and the actions of the occupants " We have been. Where is the contradiction?
2
@frankwoods4179 "It was easy to identify both the staff and the sales docs. " Whoever sold it to them is such a minor detail that you only make your case look hopeless by focusing on it.
2
@frankwoods4179 "You, just like the police and the DPP are too afraid to discuss the toll-booth shootings and the actions of the four occupants." I've been asking you for transcripts. Why are you lying? I am asking you for information and your response is to tell me I'm afraid to discuss it. Why do you need to lie so much? It's not a good sign.
2
@frankwoods4179 I've read that one. I'm waiting for you to show me the Laycock one. You made a big deal about it. You've dodged 5 times now. Do you realise that's not a good look for you?
2
@frankwoods4179 "The transcripts are available. " Jim Laycock. Where? That's 6 dodges. I don't think you've read them. You're looking cornered right now.
2
@CommonwealthDank Hope you're wearing a certain shiny hat to protect your thoughts. 😉
2
@CommonwealthDank Yeah those hats will do amazing things... they will stop da gubment reading your thoughts and feeding false ideas to you about the spherical earth....
2
@frankwoods4179 "It is interesting that of those who have pointed and squealed “conspiracy theorist” " You're tap dancing and throwing out lots of insults. It's quite telling. I have asked you about your claims and you got all evasive. So in the end, you have nothing. Just insults. No different from your flat earther buddies.
2
@frankwoods4179 "There’s no dodging." Stop. Just with tap dance routine. Answer the questions. 1. Have you read his testimony? 2. Do you know where it can be read? 3. Why won't you tell me where it can be read? You've dodged EIGHT TIMES. This is looking very akward for you.
2
@frankwoods4179 "If you had read the Cheok statement you would know that he states that a man and a woman were in the Volvo with the shooter, the man alighted" We've already been through this. So perhaps he demanded a lift or threatened them. to let him in the car. You're clutching at straws. " that the shooter acted alone." He did but could also have interacted with people before killing them. That makes perfect sense. You raise testimony then don't want to talk about it any more. You raise testimony and when I respond about it you change the topic. I ask you specifically about testimony and you evade. I ask you specifically about testimony and amazingly you respond by telling me I don't want to talk about it. Your best evidence as that we didn't get the girls name from Myer. So it seems you have nothing. Have you got anything worthwhile at all?
2
@frankwoods4179 " I also accept that the official story about Port Arthur is flawed" You just can't point to anything of relevance.. When asked about the conspiracy you are afraid to talk about it.
2
@frankwoods4179 "My beliefs are not the issue as they do not form part of the official narrative" Yeah we've picked up on that. So what are they?
2
@frankwoods4179 " Interesting that none of you ‘true-believers’ ever want to discuss the official story" I keep asking you about it and you keep squirming.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Perhaps how Bryant’s vehicle could have been witnessed at the Seascape Lodge at 11.45am" Who saw it there? Where can I read the transcript?
2
@MrRecklessryan "The only link to Laycocks full statement is on two completely wackjob conspiracy websites, I suspect you know that " Didn't know but suspected something like that yeah. What's one of the sites?
2
@MrRecklessryan "Portarthurinquiry" Thanks. Will have a look. "When you read Laycocks statement" Just read it. His testimony is consistent. He says he only knew him as one of the local kids. It wasn't like he was a close friend... He visited the store over a period of several years. During that time he probably would have grown a lot.
2
@frankwoods4179 "It has no bearing on the case." What actually happened has no bearing? You're not all there are you?
2
@frankwoods4179 "You only want to chase some wild speculation." Nope... an evidence based conclusion. Do you have one?
2
@frankwoods4179 "I have already told you it was the Russians and you never responded." I assumed that was a your attempt at comedy.
2
@frankwoods4179 " I will leave it up to you to find" Sure sure... squirm and run.
2
@frankwoods4179 Lots of people identified him as the shooter....
2
@frankwoods4179 "The eye witnesses gave differing accounts of the shooter’s appearance." Whose account differs? "This process was contaminated by Bryant’s colour photo and details being illegally published on 30 April 1996" How does that matter? "The damage to the AR15 was such that the operator should have received some injury but Bryant did not display any such injuries. " Prove it. How do you know it wasn't damaged some other way? "Read through my other comments here." Where you never back up anything.....
2
@frankwoods4179 Why is it that you can never back up anything you say?
2
@frankwoods4179 "I have a particular view based on the official records and what I believe are significant anomalies." What is that view? What do you think really happened?
2
@frankwoods4179 You dodged her question.
2
@frankwoods4179 "1 Why are you afraid to respond to these issues? " I've asked you what you think really happened and you are afraid to answer. "These are real issues taken from the official transcripts" You've given me the supposed best issues and they were inconsequential. You were clutching at straws. I even asked you where I could read the transcript of a witness you raised and you got all evasive.....
2
@frankwoods4179 You are projecting. You are the keyboard warrior who insults everyone who doesn't agree with them. I repeatedly answer your questions. What do you think really happened? I'm waiting for your answer still. Tell us about the conspiracy. Over to you keyboard warrior.
2
@frankwoods4179 You dodged again. You dodged my question with a lot of insults. Does my question scare you keyboard warrior?
2
@frankwoods4179 "and your fear of discussing the official documentation." That line doesn't work keyboard warrior because I'm asking you about that and you're too scared to answer.....
2
@frankwoods4179 "All that I have put to you is contained within the official documentation and is a matter of record. " Another dodge. I keep asking you what you think really happened and you keep evading.
2
@frankwoods4179 "I am not dodging anything" Of course you are. You won't answer the question. " it’s just your refusal to directly and sensibly provide a response. " You're projecting. You've been asked a question and cannot provide a response. Telling me I can't provide a response when you have been asked the question doesn't make sense. You appear to be panicked.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Not true, there have been 4 mass shootings using the official standard as four deaths or more. " Your response doesn't make sense. You say 'not true' but then use a different definition. So what I said was true but you had to change the definition to try and make a different point. So, like you always seem to do, you evaded again. My point stands.
2
@frankwoods4179 "The downward trend has been occurring for the last 50 plus years and the ABS figures prove it. " Not for massacres. In the years before port Arthur massacres increased. AGAIN - In the 18 years up to and including the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, there were 13-gun homicides in which five or more people died, not including the perpetrator. It was 22 more years until there was a shooting with 5 involved. That is a change in the trend. You're trying to use a definition that avoids the stats. Even if you went with a different definition it's still makes my point. The change in laws impacted the constant massacres that were happening. You really don't like statistics do you? " It really is that simple, well for most people that is." Silly insults and evasions seem to be about all you ever bring to the table kiddo. Once again you've been destroyed.
2
@frankwoods4179 "The Australian definition of a mass shooting is 4 or more deaths not five. " So the deaths no longer matter if you change the definition? We've got a very clear change in trend here. Using a different definition doesn't change that! You're just trying to avoid the stats you don't like. But that still doesn't work for you. Because then you go up to 14 in 18 years compared to 3 in 27 years. That's still a clear change of the trend. "Three or more" So you're now going from 4 to 3? You're all over the place trying to hide from the stats. However you want to try and fiddle with the stats, there was a clear change in the trend of the mass shootings.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Now go back and answer my question about the lack pf forensics," Once again you've lost an argument and are trying to change the subject. They didn't collect DNA. I've answered that over and over. The tool booth shooting there is nothing suspicious. I've answered that over and over. The BMW being blocked, I'm waiting for you to prove. You were too scared to do so. "You might try to lie and obfuscate but you still don’t have the courage to provide an answer." You're projecting. I answer your questions. You always run from mine. What do you think really happened? Keep running Franky-boy. 🏃‍♂🏃‍♂🏃‍♂ 😂
2
@frankwoods4179 "Keep dodging marky-boy." Keep projecting Franky-Boy. You keep dodging by talking about DNA and I keep answering that they didn't collect any. Next thread you lose the argument again and you then change the subject to DNA and pretend I haven't responded. You're always on the run. 🏃‍♂🏃‍♂🏃‍♂
2
@frankwoods4179 "Nothing suspicious about the toll-booth shooting?? Keep dodging marky-boy." How is that dodging? There isn't anything suspicious about it. You ran from the topic to go to another topic that I have addressed. You're running Franky-boy. 🏃‍♂🏃‍♂
2
@frankwoods4179 "marky-boy you tried to lie by going only to 5. " That's not a lie. That's a statistic. You don't seem to know what a lie is. My statistic is correct AND proves a point. It proves you wrong. Again. Cope... 🤣
2
@frankwoods4179 "he standard definition is four (4) in Australia and three (3) by the FBI. " I addressed this in the last post. I never declared that it was or wasn't the standard definition. Whatever definition you use, I am right as i showed in the last post. " You cannot hide the fact that multiple death shootings have occurred since 1996" Nor am I trying to. I'm including them in the statistics and I'm still right - as I showed in the last post.
2
@frankwoods4179 "and you cannot avoid the fact that the 50 plus years of the downward trend in firearm related deaths" There you go changing the topic again. I gave you a statistic about massacres - because that's what caused the change in laws. You tried to avoid the statistic by focusing on which definition we use - that still backfired for you. You tried to declare that people have still died - the statistics still show a change in the trend and prove me right. You are now trying to change the subject away from mass shootings because you were beaten - like you always do Franky-boy. Now you're just squealing that I'm lying even though that doesn't make any sense. 🤦‍♂ I own you every time Franky-Boy. 😂
2
@precociousprairiepecker2468 An ironically funny comment.
2
@precociousprairiepecker2468 So you don't even know what witnesses you're talking about. Do some research and get back to me when you have some idea....
2
@frankwoods4179 "No forensics, why? " Wasn't required. " The toll-booth shooting, highly suspect." Nope. Consistent with the official story. " Senate Question on Notice 760, highly suspect and damning?" Neither. "What possible legal authority could he have had to make that order?" Prime minister.
2
@frankwoods4179 You were issued with this challenge. What do you think really happened and where is your evidence? Answer in the next post or it will be embarrassing for you. ...and big surprise.... you dodged. Anyone can see me answering your questions. While you are evading.
2
@frankwoods4179 " There is no context and no time/date stamp on the supposed ’admission’ in the video." ....and? Was that supposed to be him admitting something else in the past? What are you implying here? He pleaded guilty in court! 🤦‍♂ "here is no proof that he drew the sketches, there is no evidence that after five months he willingly and freely changed his plea to guilty," If we was being misrepresented it would have been very easy for him to make this clear. "there is no forensic evidence to prove " Again - He admitted doing it. He was seen doing it. He was caught at the scene. "The police ignored his version of events of the kidnapping and the presence of a child." No, they are consistent with the official story. " There was no positive identification," He was identified by many witnesses. Everything you say is nonsense. "He had no injuries from the exploding AR15," So what? Perhaps he got lucky... perhaps they were destroyed another way... you cannot know for sure what happened with the guns. "here is no explanation of how the Browning ended up on the roof of the nearby building, t" So he climbed. ? lol... your best evidence is an outright joke.
2
@frankwoods4179 What do you think really happened?
2
@frankwoods4179 " malarka-boy, " Insults because you lost your argument again. "Maybe you should change your name to chickenmalarka" You're the one who always runs from me...terrified... you're projecting.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Why are you so scared to address the lack of forensic evidence, SQoN 760 and the BMW4?" I just did in the previous post. You are too scared to address my post. You're projecting.
2
@frankwoods4179 What a clown. Franky - Loses argument. Changes topic. Franky - Posts his go-to diversion. Me - Responds. Franky - Why won't you address it! Me - ??? I just did. lol... 🤡
2
@frankwoods4179 "SQoN 760 is a serious allegation of misconduct and interference yet you want to dismiss it out of hand. " I'm waiting for you to make an argument. What are you so scared of? "chickemalarka-boy?" Throwing insults because you lost again.
2
@frankwoods4179 This topic is your whole life. 😆 Your best evidence is a joke. I'm willing to be convinced. But you don't seem to have anything. Was that it? Tell me you have something better than that. 🤦‍♂
2
@frankwoods4179 "Why make an argument ..." LOL... look at the chickenmalarka-boy dodge. 🤣 Your main hobby in life and all you can do is evade. 😆
2
@frankwoods4179 So that's all you could come up with as a response? Once again you've been exposed and thrown a tantrum. 😭😭 This topic is your whole life. You can't produce any good evidence of anything. All you can do is keep asking the same question and then look confused and panicked when that doesn't work. This is your main hobby in life and you can't even make an argument....🤣😂
2
@@StartGardening-xe8po "Peter Crosswell, the "gunshot victim/witness" is actually a cia agent/false flag operativ...." What's your evidence for this?
2
"So this one shooting disarmed Australia ." There was a string of mass shootings leading up to this. But this was clearly the tipping point. ..and no Australia isn't disarmed. You can still get guns in Australia.
2
@frankwoods4179 So what do you think really happened at Port Arthur? Haven't you looked into this?
2
 @frankwoods4179 So you're having a meltdown because someone asked you about the very topic you seem obsessed over....?
2
@frankwoods4179 " I am just staying with the official story as it has been told and what the records tell me. " ....and what do you think happened?
2
@frankwoods4179 "What I think happened is not part of the official record." Yeah we get that you think that... hence the question... what do you think happened? Why are you so scared to talk about what happened in 1996?
2
@frankwoods4179 "Why are you scared to discuss the details of the official version?" I keep asking about what's wrong with the details. You're too scared to answer. All you ever do is squirm and evade while projecting your actions onto others....
2
"All experts agree , not only was Martin physically incapable of pulling off the shootings " He travelled extensively overseas on his own. If he could work out how to do that, he could point a gun... and no "all" experts do not say that.
2
@frankwoods4179 "The finalisation of the Hospital’s Code Brown implementation" The document I saw showed it was approved in 1997.... but either way what does that have to do with anything? Wouldn't they not want that in effect if it was all a conspiracy as you imply? Your argument here doesn't make sense.
2
@frankwoods4179 "the journalists forum," These things happen all the time. You're reaching.... desperately.... and again.. .how would this show it was planned? You don't think a journalist would be around if there wasn't a conference? "the seminar of trauma surgeons at the Repatriation Hospital, " Show your source. "all just by sheer coincidence or perfect planning" What coincidence? The fact that there were conferences isn't a surprise at all. You've yet to show that this is the case anyway. Your best evidence is always terrible. I'm actually ready to believe you if you have something solid but you never do.
2
@frankwoods4179 "Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that so many ‘coincidences’ occurred on that Sunday. " You've yet to show any coincidences. You've been challenged to. You can't. Repeating a claim isn't the same as supporting a claim and it seems you can't support your claims.
2
@frankwoods4179 1. Show me a reference that code brown didn't start until 96. 2. Explain how that is the least bit relevant at all! lol
2
@frankwoods4179 " It’s not hard to find. " Another dodge. When pressed about this subject you get very evasive. It appears you don't actually have anything solid even though you're obsessed with the topic. Now...try again. Give me something.
2
@frankwoods4179 You made some very specific claims. I called you out to demonstrate that they were accurate. You instantly evaded. This is what you always do. It speaks volumes.
2
@frankwoods4179 "But you are the ‘expert' and you don’t believe anything I write." You've yet to bring up anything significant. Your 'best' evidence is poor.
2
@frankwoods4179 " The reference is easy to find" So tell me where to find it. " but you prefer evasion." Actually that's what you're doing. I'm calling you out to back up your claim and you're offering me sniveling evasions.
2
@frankwoods4179 "I don’t have to evade anything " Yet you evade everything. You made some claims. Back them up. Or keep running and looking beaten. Try again.
2
@frankwoods4179 Another dodge. So you've got nothing. You're beaten. Done. Try again.
2
@frankwoods4179 Keep digging that hole and you might just reach china.... 🤣🤣
2
@frankwoods4179 So you made some claims. You were called out to back up your claims. Your response? Evasion... dodging... tap dancing.. mumbling of excuses. Your claims can be dismissed. You're not capable of defending your position.
2
@MrRecklessryan I think he just repeats claims from one of the sites you mentioned, but has never actually checked if they are factual. So when challenged about the claims he's repeating, he doesn't know what to do so he starts to get frantic.
2
@frankwoods4179 "I have multiple times but you baulk at providing a sensible response" Actually I question your responses and you run away. "The toll-booth shooting is just one example where all the evidence provided by the DPP points to a highly suspect action " Already discussed. He spoke to the people before he shot them. That doesn't tell us anything. " the prior warnings, the timing of the incident and the proximity of the shooting of the three Mikacs are taken into account. " So perhaps they didn't know it was him. Perhaps they didn't know what was happening at all. Perhaps they didn't see him coming then he threatened them or tricked them. There are plausible explanations for this.. So is that it? If that's your best evidence ... you don't have anything.
2
@frankwoods4179 "So you don’t find the toll-booth shooting and the actions of the BMW 4 at all suspicious? " He spoke to people before shooting them? I've already given possible reasons for this many times. "If they did the latter they would have seen the Volvo stopped 50 metres away and most likely have witnessed the shooting of Mrs Mikac" The Buckley's apparently saw something of the shooting of one or more of the Mikac's. "How could the BMW 4 not hear the six shots from about 70 metres away" The Buckley's probably did. What are you claiming here? " Salzmanns not notice the two bodies of the Mikacs" They were in their car at the time. Who knows what direction they watching. Bryant drove between the two incidents so they weren't close. So your big smoking is that a couple of the victims (50 and 57 years old) didn't see the murderer coming?
2
@frankwoods4179 "when they left the BMW to get into the Volvo with the shooter" The shooter switched to the BMW. He probably told them to get out ...they got in the Volvo...argued... he shot them. This is all you have? Tell me you have something better than this.....
2
@frankwoods4179 What information do you have?
2
@frankwoods4179 I asked a yes/no question.
1
@frankwoods4179 Why are you scared to answer questions about this topic? It's your main hobby in life.
1
@sou007 You have no idea mate. I'm here wanting to discuss this topic. I'm here wanting to see the good evidence that shows there are lies here. I'm willing to be convinced but just asking questions and reminding of the other evidence triggers people. That's generally a bad sign for those supporting that idea. The same thing happens at the flat earth and UFO sites.
1
" Since thr buy backs gun violence has increased because guns" Gun deaths in Australia has been declining for decades. You're making things up and hoping no one will call you on it.
1
@frankwoods4179 "But the “something” they did had no material affect on the rate of firearm related deaths in Australia" The laws were brought in to curb the relatively recent trend of mass shootings that Australia had experienced.. They succeeded in doing that.
1
@frankwoods4179 " But there is no conclusive evidence that those measures made any material difference" There was a clear change in the trend of mass shootings after the law changes and buyback. That's what triggered the changes. " But there is no conclusive evidence that those measures made any material difference." That's not what they were brought into address.
1
@frankwoods4179 "So it was OK if shooting deaths overall were to increase as long as they weren’t mass shootings?? " What a strange argument. Logic really isn't your thing Franky. Different fixes are implemented for different problems. The changes were implemented to address the mass shootings. It's like your argument that a cure for cancer is useless because people will still get the cold. 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 "There was no clear change in the existing downward trend in overall firearms related deaths " That's not what the laws were brought in to address. Every time you change the topic you're conceding you don't have a real argument.
1
@frankwoods4179 "The changes were introduced to reduce the overall number of firearm related deaths and surprise" Wrong. They were brought in as a direct result of Port Arthur and the regular mass shootings that Australia had been experiencing in the previous decade or so. It's undeniable that they were a result of what happened at Port Arthur. Your argument fails.
1
@oods4179 "PA may have been the final straw " You're trying to make out that the country's worst mass shooting in history was just a little... final straw?! Are you serious? 🤦‍♂ The level of silly arguments you'll go for to avoid awkward facts is amazing. 🙄
1
@frankwoods4179 "Now let’s discuss the real issues like the lack of forensic evidence" ....and there it is... you've lost another argument and panic, change the argument and run through the same script I've addressed over and over. Changing the subject because you lost the argument. Nice work.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Now let’s talk about those other awkward facts you avoid like the lack" Translation: Change the topic because you lost an argument. To a topic I've already addressed over and over. You're not even good at dodging when you lose. 😆
1
@frankwoods4179 "just answer the question of why the police did not produce one skerrick," I've anaswered this many times. No idea but they had plenty of other evidence chickenmalarka-boy. 🐔 Is this all you have?! 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 Another dodge. I've answered this many times. No idea but they had plenty of other evidence as well as a suspect admitting it. You're dodging my response. You dodge because you don't know what else to do... You've crumbled so easily... So that's all you've got? Poor scared franky....🤣🐔🐥
1
@frankwoods4179 This is your main hobby in life. All you can do is dodge?! 🐤🐥🐔 😆
1
"by witness statements will tell you the real shooter was right handed, Martin shoots with his left hand he also says that to Police" Evidence for this? What are your references? "as for John Avery why did he bully, threaten and lie to Martin forcing him to plead guilty, " As with above. Where is your evidence?
1
So what do you think really happened in 96?
1
Yes there were many witnesses who saw him. Forensic proof wasn't required when he was seen doing it and even admitted it.
1
@frankwoods4179 So what do you think really happened?
1
So no answer then....
1
@frankwoods4179 "Because the Australian response made no material difference" It did have an effect on the trend of massacres. That was what it was brought in for. In the 18 years up to and including the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, there were 13-gun homicides in which five or more people died, not including the perpetrator. It was 22 more years until there was a shooting with 5 involved.
1
@CA18TAstra Fair enough.
1
@frankwoods4179 He was seen by many witnesses. He was caught at the scene. He admitted doing it. The public have already heard about this proof. What do you have to counter it?
1
@frankwoods4179 "There is NO PROOF." Caught at the scene. Identified by many witnesses. Admitted he did it. You are simply lying.
1
@frankwoods4179 You're not even rational. You just wave away evidence because you don't like it.
1
@frankwoods4179 "There is NO EVIDENCE." Being seen my many witnesses is evidence. Confirmation from the police that he was caught at the scene of the burning guest house is evidence. You aren't being rational. You're just stamping your feet and denying what you can't deal with.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Where is the irrefutable forensics from all the items left in the cafe by the shooter?" That isn't the only type of evidence. It wasn't required as there were many witnesses and he admitted he did it. " If it existed why did the DPP " No idea. The fact remains though is that there is evidence. You running away from it.
1
@frankwoods4179 "There was no positive ID of Bryant" Many people identified him. You're simply lying.
1
@frankwoods4179 "and the process was contaminated " This is your excuse to avoid the problem that many people identified him. You're digging yourself into a hole. You're trying to claim it didn't happen but also offering excuses why it happened.... 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 " Just answer the question of the lack of forensic evidence" I responded to this in the last post. Why is this such a problem for you?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Just answer the question of why there was no forensic evidence " I responded to this several posts back. You're dodging. Why is this such a problem for you?
1
@frankwoods4179 You're dodging the problems and throwing a tantrum. You claimed that there was no evidence. You are wrong. You're focusing on one type of evidence but that doesn't make the other evidence go away. You're not being logical. Your tantrum isn't helping you.
1
@frankwoods4179 "No, you are dodging the question. " I have answered your question. You are dodging my response. I said I don't know why it wasn't used. It's irrelevant. There was plenty of other evidence. You tried to claim that there was no evidence and you were wrong. So quit dodging. You're only making it look worse for yourself. Why is this a problem for you?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Just answer my previous question on the DNA " I keep responding to this. You keep dodging my response. You're only making yourself look more irrational.
1
@frankwoods4179 Caught at the scene. Identified by many witnesses. Admitted he did it. Why do you have such a problem with this?
1
@frankwoods4179 You tried to claim that there was no evidence. You even through a tantrum about it. You were schooled. Publicly schooled. I love it. Try again.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Does the question about the forensic evidence make you really, really nervous Marky boy?" I've answered it over and over. Does my response make you nervous? This game your playing only exposes how hopeless your situation is. You ask a question. I respond. You pretend I didn't respond. ...and repeat. Only a beaten fraud would do this.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Just answer the question directly, there is no reason for obfuscation or evasion" Already done so multiple times. You're avoiding my answer. Does projection ever work for you? Your argument seems to have fallen apart and now you're forced into evasion and dishonesty. I don't mind. You're destroying yourself here.
1
@frankwoods4179 "There were no witnesses to the murder of David and ‘Sally’ Martin" Just the way you worded this implies that you know there were witnesses to the many other murders. You're avoiding this problem. Even if there was a murder that wasn't seen, that doesn't make the other evidence go away.
1
@frankwoods4179 So you claimed that there was no evidence. You put it in upper case. You stamped your feet and shook your fist. I showed you were wrong. You made some weak excuses but that only made it worse. You were wrong. Is this sinking in yet franky boy?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Not once have you directly answered a question " I have repeatedly responded. I don't know it wasn't used. It's irrelevant because there was so much evidence. You've got nowhere to go now. So you're doing a tap dance routine. I've destroyed you. Keep dancing 😉 Try again.
1
@frankwoods4179 "There are no known witnesses to the murder of the Martins." I just addressed this argument. I will repeat my own words. You're avoiding this problem. Even if there was a murder that wasn't seen, that doesn't make the other evidence go away.
1
@frankwoods4179 Watching you dig the hole deeper is hilarious. You tried to claim that there was no evidence. You were wrong. You mumbled some excuse about the evidence not counting. That didn't work. You threw a tantrum. That made me laugh. Now you're pointing to one of the murders that wasn't seen. That doesn't get you out of the problem - many were. You're still stuck in the corner squirming. Keep trying. 😉
1
@frankwoods4179 "Show me the evidence." Look at the testimony. Multiple people identified Bryant as the shooter.
1
@frankwoods4179 You're having a meltdown now because were just dismantled and it was so easy.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Come on Marky boy, you are starting to choke.😀😀😀" Come on franky boy you're starting to project your problems.....
1
@frankwoods4179 You tried to claim that there was no evidence. You were wrong. You mumbled some excuse about the evidence not counting. That didn't work. You threw a tantrum. That made me laugh. Now you're pointing to one of the murders that wasn't seen. That doesn't get you out of the problem - many were. You're still stuck in the corner squirming. This was a humiliation for you. 😂
1
@frankwoods4179 You've been broken and you're having a meltdown now. It's quite entertaining. 🍿🍿
1
@frankwoods4179 I've answered you over and over. You don't know what to do next because you have nothing. I've broken you...hence the frantic tap dance routine. I particularly love this ranting..."There is NO EVIDENCE"... yet when challenged with the supporting testimony you mumble "...er...well.... umm... you see.... er.. it was compromised... er...." lol... 🤡
1
@frankwoods4179 "Just answer the simple question: " I keep answering. You keep running from my answer because you don't know what else to do. No idea why they weren't able to get forensic evidence but it didn't matter considering all the other evidence. You cannot seem to deal with this. "Just answer the question directly, " I keep answering. You keep dodging. You tried to claim that there was no evidence. You were wrong. Now you're putting on a tap dance routine, trying to recover. It's not working... but it's quite funny. 💃👯💃👯 😂
1
@frankwoods4179 "There is NO forensic evidence proving Bryant was the shooter and no matter how much you squirm, obfuscate and waffle" You're projecting your own problems there franky boy. You tried to claim there was no evidence. You stamped your feet and threw a tantrum. But then you were reminded of reality and now you're panicking.... ...hence the squirming, obfuscation and waffling. Keep going though franky.... your failure is hilarious. 🤣🤣
1
@frankwoods4179 "There is NO forensic evidence" So after your embarrassing lesson you're now changing to "forensic evidence". 😂😂 That must have stung you. It's irrelevant whether there is forensic evidence as there was plenty of other evidence. Squirm franky boy. 😉
1
@frankwoods4179 "! have been chasing and answer to the question" I keep answering. Why are you so afraid to respond to my answer? You keep running from my answer because you don't know what else to do. You've backed yourself into a corner. Poor franky boy... one trick pony and the tick doesn't work.... 😂😂😂😂
1
@frankwoods4179 It's hilarious because you've spent so much time on this topic and when challenged you fall apart and seem to have nothing.... then you're forced into a tap dance routine to try and save some dignity...... 😂 👯💃👯💃
1
@billhesford6098 Still waiting for your evidence of this....
1
@frankwoods4179 "Show me the forensic evidence from any of the numerous and readily available sources that proves Bryant to be the shooter. " No forensic evidence was required due to all the other evidence making it undeniable. "Being caught at Seascape does not prove he was the shooter. " Being caught by the police red handed and being seen by many people shooting people... .does. "Name those many witnesses who positively identified Bryant. " Numerous witnesses identified him. You have already conceded this before. "Where did the Browning FN FAL come from? " No idea. "Why did Bryant suffer no injuries when the AR15 exploded? " How do you know he was holding it when it did? Perhaps he threw it. Perhaps it exploded in a way that would not have hurt him. This isn't complicated. "Where is the video camera, the police asked Bryant about at interview? " No idea. "Why would the shooter carry a large video camera with him if he had no intention of using it?" Perhaps he did and screwed up.. he wasn't very smart remember? "Explain the toll-booth shooting and the conflicting Cheok statement. " I've explained it to you many times...you've not shown any conflict. " You have never been able to provide a sensible answer to date" I've provided answers to many of these. Merely having a question I can't answer doesn't mean it's a conspiracy. You need to actually provide some evidence that there is. You can't. I'm willing to believe it is a conspiracy. I'm challenging you to provide evidence and instead you evade every time.
1
@frankwoods4179 Yep. So what do you think really happened at Port Arthur? Why are you scared to answer?
1
@frankwoods4179 🤦‍♂ Youtube counts them. Why are you so scared to answer a question about what appears to be your hobby?
1
@frankwoods4179 " I have provided information drawn directly from the official records" ...and do you think that accurately reflects what happened?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Do you and why?" From what I've seen. But I'm open to other explanations. What's yours?
1
@frankwoods4179 " He was not positively identified because the descriptions varied." He was absolutely positive identified by many people. You're just flat out lying. "No forensics after seven months of investigation," I've already addressed this. You're deflecting. " The toll-booth shootings" Consistent with the official story. "I have tried to keep the number of issues small so it doesn’t overwhelm you. " You don't seem to have anything....
1
@frankwoods4179 "Name these many people who positively identified Bryant. " Even you have raised witnesses who positively identified him. "Other than having long blonde hair and being youngish does not count. " That people mentioned his features doesn't make the ID invalid. That's simply an absurd argument. 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 "You haven’t addressed the lack of forensics" They didn't get any and didnt need any. "The actions of the BMW four have you stumped even without the Cheok statement." What are you even talking about?! The actions aren't an issue at all. You spend so much time on this and you have nothing it seems. "You don’t seem to have anything as a counter, except your nonsensical responses" Hilarious irony... 🤣🤣 This is your main hobby and you have nothing. When asked what really happened you can't even answer. 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 "Evidence: they didn’t get any that identified Bryant as the shooter even" Multiple people identified him as the shooter. You fail again. "The BMW 4: waiting to engage the shooter after being warned?" So they didn't know where he was.... "The Salzmanns being seen in the Volvo with the shooter? " So he threatened them... or they didn't even know that he was the shooter.... You're really grasping at straws....there are plausible answers... but you don't want that. You want a conspiracy.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Between going on a holiday or committing a mass shooting with calm, expert precision? " That wasn't required at all so your argument fails miserably again chickenmalarka-boy. Even more embarrassing your you is that this is your main hobby in life and you fail so badly at it chickenmalarka-boy. 😆 So the point remains. He was smart enough to work out how to travel the world - he could point a gun.... Want to try again? 😉
1
"I played football with a guy who's dad was in this whole set up." What a load of nonsense.
1
@eliphaslevi9589 Ah yes a predictable response. Let me guess you think the spherical earth is a NASA conspiracy.....
1
@frankwoods4179 You're resorting to weak insults, presumably because you cannot handle people asking questions. You undermine your own arguments.
1
"betcha a few Aussies wish they still had theirs You can still get guns in Australia. There are plenty of guns in Australia.
1
@frankwoods4179 Witnesses... caught at the scene... admitted guilt... Try again.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Then of course we have multiple unexplained issues like the toll-booth shooting" These are not issues. It's been explained to you many times. When pressed to present your best evidence it becomes quite clear that you don't really have anything. Keep trying.
1
@frankwoods4179 "who stopped and waited for the shooter to arrive." He blocked their car.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Not so, and you know that to be false. " No that's the official story and I don't have any reason to think that its false. Martin blocked the BMW owned by Mary-Rose Nixon.
1
@frankwoods4179 " The Cheok statements confirm." How so?
1
@frankwoods4179 Can't you explain it?
1
@frankwoods4179 What are you claiming is clear? Be specific. Why are you being so evasive?
1
@frankwoods4179 Tell me where to read. I'm asking you what you're referring to. You only end up looking panicked when you evade like this.
1
@frankwoods4179 You're still dodging. You made a claim. You refuse to back it up. "Seems that every time I pose a simple test you run for the hills." Projection. You have been called out to back up your claim. You are running scared..... What are you so afraid of? This topic is your whole life and you're so bad at defending it... franky boy.
1
@frankwoods4179 "But Marky-boy simply read the Court transcript, it really is that easy. " Where specifically? Why are you too scared to answer franky-boy? What a failure.... "Explain the official version of the toll-booth shooting and the Cheok statement." More frantic deflection. You do this in every thread. This topic is your life and you panic whenever anyone asks a question. Poor Franky-Boy... 😂
1
@frankwoods4179 "Marky-boy you are the self-proclaimed expert" I'm not an expert at all. I know hardly anything about the topic. I'm asking you. You're supposed to be the expert. You're still deflecting Franky-Boy.
1
@frankwoods4179 " You cannot find any forensics" You're changing the topic again. Why are you always on the run? This subject is your whole life. Someone asks a question and you fall to pieces looking scared. How embarrassing for you Franky Boy.... 🤣
1
@frankwoods4179 Another weak deflection franky-boy. I'm asking questions. Why are you too scared to answer franky-boy? This is your main hobby in life and you're failing at it.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Just one simple question Marky-boy, where is the forensic evidence" You're dodging again. You made a claim about the testimony showing that Bryant did not block their car. You were asked where it shows this. You've dodged for a dozen posts. This topic is your whole life and when someone asks you a question about it you panic and start tap dancing. 👯💃 Weird.
1
@frankwoods4179 Plenty of questions Franky-boy.. you said "Cheok statements confirm" that Bryant never blocked the BMW. Is that what you're posting now? Does that make it clear that it didn't block it? Where the the suspicious behaviour?
1
@frankwoods4179 You didn't answer any of my questions. I'll say again Franky-boy. You don't understand. I ask questions because I could be convinced. But you are so evasive that it only raises doubt about your arguments. So I will repeat: you said "Cheok statements confirm" that Bryant never blocked the BMW. Is that what you're posting now? Does that make it clear that it didn't block it? Where the the suspicious behaviour?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Waiting for an answer mark-boy." Irony.
1
@frankwoods4179 All you ever do is dodge. Why are you so scared of questions?
1
@frankwoods4179 " His “admission” is not clear at all because we do not have the full context of the discussion " He's on video talking about how it he did. Have you not watched the interview!? So we have him admitting it....and here you are mumbling about all these excuses while a confession doesn't count. 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 "The big question you will never address is why, after all the months of investigation did the police not recover any trace of forensic evidence? " This appears to be your distress signal. When you lose every argument you just keep ranting about this hoping it will deflect. No idea why they didn't get forensic evidence but there was plenty of other evidence. It's not the only type of evidence. I've answered this 20 times You don't know what to do when it's answered. You just look panicked and cornered. So you just ask again.... 🤣🤣🤣 You're beaten and you know it. 😉
1
@frankwoods4179 "He did not talk about how he did it, but did what?" He explained how he did it. He is clearly confessing. Look at the squirming. Look at the level of denial and excuse making you are forced to produce. No matter what evidence you're given you panic, throw out some excuses and change the subject. You don't get it Franky. I'm here willing to be convinced. But you dodge and tap dance around everything so much that it appears you don't really have any arguments.... Your responses refute your own claims.
1
@frankwoods4179 That's all you've got? Weak franky. Beaten. Broken.
1
@frankwoods4179 So witnesses and the police testimony doesn't count?
1
@frankwoods4179 " They weren't there " They are the ones who apprehended him at the scene. " and they didn’t produce any forensic proof" This seems to be all you have. You're a one trick pony.....DNA isn't the only evidence. "The ‘police testimony’ in this case is so flawed it’s useless." How is it flawed?
1
@frankwoods4179 Yet there are plenty of witnesses.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Perhaps but not positively identifying Bryant as the shooter. " That's exactly what they did. "No corroborating forensics" You're changing the subject. The subject is the witnesses. He was identified by multiple people.
1
@frankwoods4179 You're constantly skirting around the point. I'm ignoring your deflections. He was identified by multiple witnesses. You have to concede this.
1
@frankwoods4179 "He was not positively identified. There is NO FORENSIC EVIDENCE" You keep deflecting to the forensics. We are talking about witness testimony. It's quite telling that you keep deflecting to a different topic. "The interaction with Salzmann at the toll-booth cannot be ignored." Nor is it. But again - that's a different topic. You're frantically deflecting all over the place.... It looks very bad for you. Talk about failure.... Keep up the good work franky boy.😀🧑‍🎓😂
1
@frankwoods4179 "There was no positive identification" Multiple witnesses identified him. You're lying. "where is the forensic evidence" You're deflecting. You're trying to change the topic. Wonder why Franky-Boy. .... This is your main hobby in life and you're so bad at defending it. 😂
1
@frankwoods4179 "There was no consistent identification of the shooter. " What was consistent is that plenty of people identified him. "The witness ID’s varied, descriptions were taken over weeks and most if not all statements after Bryant’s colour photo" You're really reaching here. It doesn't matter if it took weeks. The fact is that many people identified him. You don't get it Franky-boy. I could be convinced that there was something going on here. But you get triggered and try to change the topic a lot. I'm asking you questions and you turn into a panicked troll. It makes you position look very weak. It makes you look weak. "Why are you afraid to answer this question?" You're just projecting Franky-boy. You're the one afraid to discuss the topic. They didn't collect dna. Is that your question? Answered. So back to the point - many people identified him. This seems to be a problem for you.
1
@frankwoods4179 "There was no positive ID." This is like watching a child kick and scream. He was positively identified by many people. "There is POSITIVELY no forensic evidence" You're changing the subject. We're talking about witnesses first. You're proving my point. It makes you look panicked and weak to keep changing the subject like this. 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 "List those people who positively identified Martin Bryant as the shooter in the cafe." You tell me. You're the expert. Tell me how many people identified him. I'm just trying to work out what happened and you keep acting scared for some reason. "Why are you so afraid to discuss the lack of forensic evidence?" I've addressed this already. They didn't collect any. You're changing the subject What are you so scared of Franky-Boy....?
1
@michaelwillis373 "No trial, no inquest, no dna evidence against Martin. " Multiple witnesses identified him and he admitted he did it. He was apprehended at the scene. "I’m not going to sit here and write a 100 page book on all the facts," That's fine lets just stick with Wendy. I genuinely want more information on what he said.
1
@michaelwillis373 Don't post links. The post will get blocked. If you find a video just post the title and I'll find it.
1
@michaelwillis373 I just skimmed Wendy Scurr's testimony and saw no mention of her getting a good at the gunman.
1
@michaelwillis373 I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just taking a sceptical look. As I said, I looked at Wendy Scur's testimony and I didn't see her saying where she saw the gunman. Have I missed it?
1
"Why weren't the citizens allowed to carry and arm?" Because that's stopped all mass shootings and gun violence in the US.... 🙄
1
@Euro.Patriot A poor response. Let me educate you... Australia ranks higher than the US in the categories of Safety AND Freedom ... AND has lower crime rates. Guns aren't keeping people safe in the US. You proved my previous comment to be quite correct - you haven't thought this through.
1
@Euro.Patriot "It's simple, when you're in physical danger a gun is a reliable tool " In a country loaded with guns, you're in danger more often.... guns don't make everyone safe. Australia ranks higher than the US in the categories of Safety AND Freedom ... AND has lower crime rates. Guns aren't keeping people safe in the US. Your response 'waah I don't like facts'.....😂
1
@morskasvinja2049 " Whoever was on the trigger in Tasmania managed a kill rate well above that required of a fully trained soldier, an impossible task for a man with Martin Bryant's mid-sixties IQ" Point gun. Shoot. A lot of people were at close range. He had been shooting for years. Lets not pretend he had to understand quantum field theory or something complicated. "we have already proved in absolute scientific terms that Bryant could not have acted alone." Your argument from incredulity is not scientific.
1
@frankwoods4179 Prove it. Give me your best evidence.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Show me the forensic evidence from any of the various sources available to police at the time that proves" They didn't rely on forensic evidence because he was identified by multiple witnesses and was caught red handed by the police. " These are two facts you want to ignore." lol how ironic. You centennially project your own actions. So what do you think really happened and what's your evidence to support it?
1
@frankwoods4179 Running again.....
1
"1. Theres no evidence that he was the shooter, " He was caught by the police at the scene with guns.... he was identified by many witnesses. You're simply outright lying.
1
@eddx5758 I'm only interested in evidence....facts.
1
@eddx5758 ....so lets see these facts.
1
" Try 2 shooters. Try 2 master marksmen." Prove it.
1
Is dna the only evidence?
1
@frankwoods4179 ?? You're dodging my question kid.
1
@frankwoods4179 Is dna the only evidence?
1
@frankwoods4179 Come on malarka-boy, defend yourself like a man." You're running from me like you always do and projecting.
1
@frankwoods4179 🤦‍♂ Quit dodging clown.
1
@frankwoods4179 You keep dodging the question.... 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 Is dna the only evidence?
1
@frankwoods4179 That's 3 times.
1
@frankwoods4179 That's 4 dodges. This topic is your whole life and all you can do is evade everything?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Is this you new evasion technique malarka-boy?" Throwing insults because you lost another argument. Every thread is the same. 😂 "You know that no forensic evidence" That isn't the only type of evidence. He was identified by many witnesses and captured at the scene by the police. He admitted doing it. DNA isn't the only evidence.
1
@frankwoods4179 "malarka-boy how many times have you dodged " Projection. ..and more insulting because you keep losing. YOU are the one who keeps dodging. I keep destroying you on each point and your distress signal is "but but no forensics!!!'... That isn't the only evidence. There was other evidence. Give me solid evidence of... something....🤦‍♂ How many times will you dodge this? 🐥🐔
1
@frankwoods4179 I am yet to see your response to my question about what really happened.
1
@frankwoods4179 "The Coroner’s comments make interesting reading." What comments?
1
@frankwoods4179 "You have not yet responded to my various questions on SQoN 760" I keep asking you about it and you keep dodging. What does it prove? Tell me. Why are you so scared to answer?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Answer the questions about the firearms, the DNA evidence, the lack of forensics from the cafe," You're flailing now. I have given answers to the questions you've specifically asked. If you have another then one then ask it. " The transcripts you want to see are available and relatively easy to find. " SEVENTH dodge. You haven't even read them. lol
1
@frankwoods4179 Ok but where is the rest? Where do I find this?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Keep looking." Can't find it. SIXTH dodge. Why do you keep evading?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Did you find anything unusual in the Cheok statement?" Nothing that undermines the whole narrative. What are you claiming was unusual?
1
So what's your point?
1
@frankwoods4179 "how about no evidence" He was identified at the scene. ...shooting people. So when you say that there is no evidence, you're missing a few screws. This topic is your whole life and you're so bad at it.
1
@frankwoods4179 " You are big on chasing the little issues " You're projecting. You only seem able to give me little issues. " Over to you chickenmalarka-boy." Throwing insults because I always own you and you hate it. 😂
1
@frankwoods4179 " The witness descriptions varied." That always happens! But they consistently identified Bryant. 2. Making excuses. 3. Making excuses. 4. Making excuses. 5. Already addressed. That isn't the only type of evidence. 6. You're really hitting the bottom of the barrel here. We have him on camera admitting he did it! 7. Of course it does. I've schooled you on this already. "Then of course we have Senate Question on Notice 760." Again - and?! "If you believe that the actions of the BMW four are not suspicious" I've schooled you on this many times. It's up to you to make a case that it's suspicious as it's your claim So when it comes down to it, you don't seem to have any good evidence. You tried a gish gallop here but it was so bad that it actually backfires on you... franky boy.
1
@frankwoods4179 This is your main hobby in life and you're so bad at it. Give me something solid. Tell me what you think really happened. Have you got anything!?
1
So what do you think really happened?
1
@frankwoods4179 What's your theory?
1
@frankwoods4179 You're dodging the question. What do you think really happened? This appears to be your entire life. You must have a theory. It would be embarrassing for you if you didn't.
1
@frankwoods4179 "What I think happened is not the issue" I'm asking you. So it is the issue. This topic is your whole life. What do you think really happened?
1
@frankwoods4179 " This topic is not my whole life but it is an experiment and a bit of fun seeing you duck" You're the one doing all the ducking and weaving here. In fact you seem to do it in every thread. This is your main hobby in life. Someone asks a question and you panic and start squirming. 😂😂 What do you think really happened? Come on scared little Franky Boy..
1
@frankwoods4179 You're squirming and changing the subject franky-boy. What do you think really happened? You're so weak you can't even answer this?
1
@frankwoods4179 "What I think happened is not under question." But it is. By me. This subject is your whole life. You don't even know what happened? That's pretty embarrassing for you.
1
@frankwoods4179 So your main hobby in your life.....and you have no idea about it? That's all you've got to show for devoting your life to this? Wow. That's pretty embarrassing.
1
@frankwoods4179 Another evasion. So your main hobby in your life.....and you have no idea about it? That's all you've got to show for devoting your life to this? Wow. That's pretty embarrassing.
1
@frankwoods4179 You're the one running. This topic is your life and you are scared to answer a question. It doesn't look good for you.
1
@frankwoods4179 Will you ever stop dodging franky-boy? "Exposing you as a lying, faker troll has been a pleasure." You've only exposed yourself. You are projecting. I'm asking you what happened and you're unwilling or unable to answer. This is your main hobby in life. Are you too scared to answer or are you really this clueless about your main hobby in life? Come on franky-boy... what's wrong?
1
@frankwoods4179 You're avoiding the question Franky-boy. What do you think really happened?
1
@frankwoods4179 " I notice that you went completely silent on the BMW/Volvo issue😀 after the court transcript proved you a liar" You're wrong and you're changing the subject. That's another thread where you ended up evading forever. You're avoiding the question Franky-boy. What do you think really happened?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Why am I wrong? " Because I haven't lied about anything. "Why does the truth hurt so much? " I'm waiting for you to tell me the truth. What do you think really happened? Will you ever stop dodging?
1
@frankwoods4179 So you don't actually have a view. You lied.
1
@frankwoods4179 " My view is that the official story of PA is flawed a" So then what really happened?
1
@frankwoods4179 I'm asking you. You are obsessed with this topic. You have over 1000 posts on this channel alone.
1
@frankwoods4179 "No Answer to SQoN 760?" What's the question? You're dodging a question within a question. "Evading again are we?" Projecting again are we?
1
@frankwoods4179 So then what really happened? Do you have no idea?
1
@frankwoods4179 "Evading your fears are we?" Projecting are we? I keep asking you.... you keep dodging. Tell me about it and what it means. Go. Don't dodge like you always do.
1
@frankwoods4179 " SQoN 760 is self-explanatory, " Yet you can't explain it... You panic and throw a tantrum when asked about it. lol
1
@frankwoods4179 " Stop projecting, stop evading, stop dodging and just answer the question. " Projecting about projecting ...nice! I asked you a question. You dodged it. " It seems SQoN 760 has left you no wriggle room." ..and why is that? I don't even know what it is. You refuse to tell me. You get scared when anyone asks lol
1
@frankwoods4179 "Why are you evading the question?" Projection. Comical projection too. I just asked you a question. You dodged the question. You then asked me why I'm evading. Why are you too scared to answer?
1
@frankwoods4179 "There is no conclusive evidence that the laws made any material difference" You're in denial. In the 18 years up to and including the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, there were 13-gun homicides in which five or more people died, not including the perpetrator. It was 22 more years until there was a shooting with 5 involved. 13 in 18 years. 0 in 18 years.
1
@frankwoods4179 "The BMW blocked by the Volvo. I posted the court transcript proving you are al iar." I never lied. I said what the official story was. I challenged you to show it was wrong. I'm here asking for evidence and that makes you uncomfortable. You tap danced for about 20 posts and refused to do so. Now you're running from this topic to go back to that one.... Franky-boy you're terrible at this. More running.... 🏃‍♂🏃‍♂🏃‍♂
1
@sou007 " Is it normal for police to not lift print or DNA from a murder scene? " Yes it is if its available.
1
_"An attendant/guard at the Main Port Arthur Entrance knew Martin Bryant, and, he saw the shooter, he stated that Bryant was definitely not the shooter!"- Who? Name the witnesses you are referring to.
1
@precociousprairiepecker2468 So you don't even know.... I've read the testimonies.. it appears that you have no idea what you're talking about.
1
@frankwoods4179 "But they had no forensic evidence But they had other evidence.... you're avoiding this.
1
@frankwoods4179 What do you think really happened? You're too scared to answer this. All you ever do is whine about forensic evidence and put on a full tap dance routine....💃👯
1
@frankwoods4179 "I notice that once again you have failed to answer my questions." I repeatedly answer your questions. You always dodge mine What do you think really happened and where is your evidence? Answer in the next post or it will be embarrassing for you.
1
@frankwoods4179 "The official fairy-tale of the toll-booth shooting is only consistent with itself but not reality." Entirely consistent with the official story. "You simply cannot explain the highly suspect actions" I have given explanations. You can't counter them. " We now have confirmation that Howard ordered the termination of the Coroner’s Inquiry and ordered the suppression of evidence." ....and this is your best evidence? This doesn't get you anywhere. When it comes down to it - you have nothing.
1
@frankwoods4179 He admitted doing it. He was seen doing it. He was caught at the scene.
1
@frankwoods4179 "Why are you petrified to discuss SQoN 760?" You keep projecting. I've challenged you to make an argument with it. You've evaded doing so. "As the Senate record of SQoN 760 remains unchallenged" So you're saying that a claim was made.... and?
1
@frankwoods4179 " chickenmalarka-boy" Throwing insults because you keep losing. 😁
1
@frankwoods4179 "The permanent record of the Australian Parliament contains an extremely serious allegation " I've after evidence and you're claiming there was an allegation. Is that it? I'm challenging you to give me evidence.... This is what you've got? This is your best evidence?! This is your main hobby in life .... give me some good evidence. 🤦‍♂
1
@frankwoods4179 At least tell me what really happened... Oh that's right... you're too scared. 🐔🐥 😆
1
@frankwoods4179 "the evidence you seek is SQoN 760" So make an argument instead of constantly evading chickenmalarka-boy?....🐥🐤🐣
1
@frankwoods4179 1. No one collected any. They had plenty of other evidence. You're dodging. 2. There were vehicles at the toll booth. He drove in front of one and got in the car. What about that confuses you? 3. You have some vague claim about an accusation... that's it? So .. 1. Dodging. 2. Not surprising. 3. You offer nothing. Is this all you have?!
1
@frankwoods4179 " police did not present any forensic evidence of any kind that identified Bryant a the shooter. " They had other evidence. " keep asking the same questions because " ...and I keep responding. But you don't know what to do next. So you panic and repeat the question. 🤣🤣 You're not very good at this topic. 😆
1
"No one has explained the soldier in camouflage seen been driven out of Port Arthur after the final shootings !!!" What is your source for this?
1
" further suggests a conspiracy setup to remove guns from Australia!" Except you can still get guns in a Australia. So doesn't work.
1
Guns are not banned in Australian. Do some more research.
1
@frankwoods4179 Your "coincidences' were nothing. I even challenged you to back one of them up.... of course you didn't. You never back up anything it seems.
1
@frankwoods4179 ?? 5 what? Are you referring to your post above that I responded to? You're dodging again. If you have something then bring it. Try agai.
1
@frankwoods4179 I keep answering. You keep running from my answer because you don't know what else to do. No idea why they weren't able to get forensic evidence but it doesn't matter considering all the other evidence. You cannot seem to deal with this. There evidence. You're forced to avoid it and demand for some other type of evidence. That you do this shows how hopeless your situation is. 😉
1
@frankwoods4179 " Why are you and Marky boy so terrified of this simple question?" I keep answering your question franky boy.... you avoid my answer. You do so because you're stuck. You're stuck in a corner with nowhere to go. ...and it's quite funny. You know you're beaten.
1
@frankwoods4179 So you made some claims. You were called out to back up your claims. Your response? Evasion... dodging... tap dancing.. mumbling of excuses. Your claims can be dismissed. You're not capable of defending your position. Now the tap dance routine is in full effect.... 👯💃👯💃
1
@MrRecklessryan Yeah I've come across quite a few conspiracy theorists in my time and they tend to do that. They act more like cult members.
1
Australia isn't disarmed. You have no idea.
1
@frankwoods4179 "The case against Bryant has far too many anomalies," I've asked for your best anomalies and they were insignificant. Tell me what your best ones are. Go on.
1
You've never been to Australia have you?
1