Fatal shootings at Christchurch Mosques in New Zealand

[BMJ]

NZ mosque shooting ‘hero dad’ caught texting in rehearsal video

Quote:
Martin Fricker reports for the (UK) Mirror, March 18, 2019, that a victim of the Linwood shooting is “hero dad” Zulfirman Syah, who saved the life of his 2-year-old son by shielding the toddler’s body with his own.

Fricker writes:
"A toddler clings to his dad to check he is alive, after his father was shot several times while shielding him from the Christchurch terrorist. In a tender moment after Friday’s brutal shooting, little Averroes, two, clambers on top of Zulfirman Syah’s chest, places a hand on his heart and looks into his eyes for signs of life."



But wait!

I’ve seen hero dad before!

Yesterday, in a comment, FOTM reader Keep up the good work had alerted me to a picture of a mosque-shooting victim texting (source: 12160.info):



Link: https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/nz-...ehearsal-video

[BMJ]

Troubling signs New Zealand shooting is being used to turn my country into Islamic State

I live in New Zealand. I’ve become alarmed at developments in my country since the shootings last Friday. What I see unfolding seems so disproportionate to the magnitude of the crime. It seems like I’ve woken up and all of a sudden live in an Islamic State.

(Article by Michelle Kaufman republished from LifeSiteNews.com)

Here are some highlights of what’s unfolding:

- The thought police are out in full force and people are being scrutinized for “hate speech”. Green ribbons are being worn as a symbol against hate.

- Mosques and many of the prayer rooms continue to be protected by armed police (police aren’t usually armed in my country).

- Vigils are being held all over the place in solidarity with the victims. These seem to have morphed into what amounts to support for the Islamic religion. One Catholic bishop held one last Sunday afternoon in the Ponsonby church. After prayers there, they processed over to the mosque, which is on the opposite side of the road and prayed and met there.

- Whitcoulls, one of our book stores, probably the oldest, has removed Jordan Peterson’s book “12 Rules for Life” from its shelves because he was photographed with a member of the public wearing an anti-Islamic t-shirt while he was in New Zealand recently. Apparently, that’s being construed as him having something to do with the madman’s agenda.

- On Tuesday a Muslim prayer was said in Parliament. Just recently all Christian prayer in Parliament was removed.

- On Friday March 22 at 1:30pm New Zealand will be called to prayer…Islamic prayer that is. And we will be expected to keep 2 minutes silence after they read the Muslim prayer acknowledging Allah as “great” and Muhammad as his “prophet.” The call to prayer will be broadcasted on national radio stations and TV as well.

- One top Catholic Church leader will go to the local mosque (Kilbirnie) as well on Friday to stand outside during their prayers as an act of solidarity. The Catholic bishops here have been very sympathetic and playing out their “inter-faith role” with great enthusiasm.

- Catholic school students have been praying inside mosques.

It seems like we’re living in a different world all of a sudden. It seems that showing our great respect for those who were killed has somehow been manipulated into showing affirmation of the Islamic religion.

New Zealand is now putty in the Islamists’ hands.

The shooting on Friday was terrible. But what has now unfolded is something else entirely and may just be the beginning of something very terrible for New Zealand.

Certainly, on a spiritual level, our crisis has become even deeper. Please keep New Zealand in your prayers.


Link: https://naturalnews.com/2019-03-25-n...zen.yandex.com

[DaveToo]

Posted by DaveToo (here)
Let's think this through logically, because to date, I have not seen anyone attempt this.

The event was either:

1. Authentic
2. Authentic + fake/manipulated video
3. Hoax/staged
4. False flag

Well well well... what a difference a day makes!

When I posted the above, it seemed to me that the event was probably 3. Hoax/staged.

But quite by chance I discovered an analysis of the event by Max Igan yesterday and my view has changed completely.

What he said forced me to go back to the 17 minute video and watch it more carefully.

(BTW, if anyone wants to analyze the video carefully, get your hands on the good quality one.
The first one I downloaded was just 7 minutes long and had very poor quality video.)

Watching the video carefully you will see that the killings were real.
The "disappearing" shell casings did not actually disappear.
Because of poor streaming quality they were lost momentarily, but a few seconds later they can be seen lying on the ground!!!

Watch the killings in the mosque. You will see dozens of shell casings on the carpet.

Also in an earlier post I mentioned a young woman screaming "Help me help me" before and AFTER she had been shot.
That is what you hear in the poor quality 7 minute video.
In the better quality 17 minute video, she is silent after he shoots her from close up range.

I am now firmly in the 4. False flag camp. There were killings. Tarrant did them, but he was likely a mind-controlled patsy.

Listen carefully to him as he is driving off to the second mosque. He is not simply talking out loud.
He is having a conversation with another man who at one point says "You should have stayed longer..."

I encourage members here to listen to this broadcast if you have the time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyEP...ature=youtu.be

[BMJ]

False flag I agree and were people injured and killed sadly yes they were. As to authenticity of the shooters video questionable.

Having Max Igan calmly telling me from a supposed position of knowing that the shooters video was real and we have to accept his word for it, well prove it with evidence Max.

People can make their own minds up, that's the point of presenting this information.

The article below also has an authentic video of the moment the shooter is captured "taken on a mobile phone from a passerby", the front windscreen does not look like it has any shotgun damage at all.

The video can be made full screen and paused for analysis.

Link: https://www.9news.com.au/world/chris...7-e9fbcf67076a

[BMJ]

Door-to-door gun confiscations begin in New Zealand; one gun owner already dead, with thousands more targeted by armed government thugs

Quote:
The Truth About Guns is reporting that, according to the country’s biggest firearms forum, Kiwi cops are now going door-to-door to gun owners’ places of business, their homes, and even gun ranges “in an attempt to gather information and get gun owners to relinquish their firearms.”

Pay attention, Americans — because even if you don’t own a gun, these are tactics tyrannical Left-wing Democrats will employ to force us all to live a certain way if they are ever empowered enough.


Link: https://naturalnews.com/2019-03-28-d...zen.yandex.com

[DaveToo]

Posted by BMJ (here)
False flag I agree and were people injured and killed sadly yes they were. As to authenticity of the shooters video questionable.

Having Max Igan calmly telling me from a supposed position of knowing that the shooters video was real and we have to accept his word for it, well prove it with evidence Max.

People can make their own minds up, that's the point of presenting this information.

The article below also has an authentic video of the moment the shooter is captured "taken on a mobile phone from a passerby", the front windscreen does not look like it has any shotgun damage at all.

The video can be made full screen and paused for analysis.

BMJ, from the start I'd like to make a few things perfectly clear.

I have no skin in this game. It makes absolutely no difference to me if the event was authentic, a hoax or a false flag.

As far as Max Igan is concerned, I don't know the man from a hole in the wall. I had never heard of him before I happened to discover the video I mentioned above.

I watched it, listened carefully to what he had to say and remained skeptical as I was listening, because prior to that point I was leaning toward the hoax camp for the event.

I made careful notes of what he was saying about the shooting video and after I finished watching his entire video I went back to study the shooting video much more carefully than I had done previously.

Each and every point he had made (except for the shoes) was correct.
The "disappearing casings" re-appeared on the pavement a few seconds after they 'disappeared'.

You can see lots of blood in the mosque. You can see the victims' bodies move as they are hit.

You CAN see cracks/holes in the front windshield of his car after he shoots at it!
It is not immediately apparent, but if you keep your eyes trained to the windshield, you will eventually see them.
Play the video in slow motion if you need to. It is there.

As to the cracks/holes not being visible in the "authentic video of the moment the shooter is captured"...
That video was taken dozens of feet away from the car. You simply can't see the detail that is even hard to make out from the video that was taken just a couple of feet away from inside the car!

Please go back and watch the high quality video again. You will see the crack/holes.

But as Max said in the video, and he is entirely correct, arguing about small details like this is exactly what the deep state/perps want us to be doing. Their bigger agenda, which Max outlines perfectly is what is MOST IMPORTANT here.

Along these lines, here is another video that I just watched that connects all the dots too, about Tarrant and what the end game is all about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzdhefR6rTs

[KiwiElf]

Here's a Kiwi perspective along with several videos, related articles & links from the Kiwi "Conspiracy" website, Wake Up New Zealand. (We're not all sheeple down here! Readers may find other points of interest also).

http://www.wakeupkiwi.com/news-articles-64.shtml#Igan

There's a much bigger picture here, to be sure.

[KiwiElf]

On a side note, as of last week, only 36 weapons in the "banned category" had been voluntarily handed into NZ Police. (From an estimated 1,500+ - there will be variations of that).

Kiwi's will not give up their guns easily, either (at least, the ones who are awake!).

Where have we seen this predictable "playbook" before?

EDIT - ADDITION

@ DaveToo - here's Max Igan's Webpage (I hadn't heard of him either until now, but so far, I don't give him a great deal of credibility on the NZ Mosque Shooting situation - of course, he's entitled to his "opinion" which is not necessarily "fact")

http://thecrowhouse.com/home.html

[DaveToo]

Posted by KiwiElf (here)
On a side note, as of last week, only 36 weapons in the "banned category" had been voluntarily handed into NZ Police. (From an estimated 1,500+ - there will be variations of that).

Kiwi's will not give up their guns easily, either (at least, the ones who are awake!).

Where have we seen this predictable "playbook" before?

EDIT - ADDITION

@ DaveToo - here's Max Igan's Webpage (I hadn't heard of him either until now, but so far, I don't give him a great deal of credibility on the NZ Mosque Shooting situation - of course, he's entitled to his "opinion" which is not necessarily "fact")

http://thecrowhouse.com/home.html

Thanks I did discover his webpage after viewing the video I mentioned above.
Your previous post actually has a link to Max front and center.

http://www.wakeupkiwi.com/news-articles-64.shtml#Igan

Could you spell out what parts of his take that you don't give him credibility for?
I'm interested to hear about it and what your take on it is?
Personally I couldn't find any fault in what he was saying really.

[BMJ]

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by BMJ (here)
False flag I agree and were people injured and killed sadly yes they were. As to authenticity of the shooters video questionable.

Having Max Igan calmly telling me from a supposed position of knowing that the shooters video was real and we have to accept his word for it, well prove it with evidence Max.

People can make their own minds up, that's the point of presenting this information.

The article below also has an authentic video of the moment the shooter is captured "taken on a mobile phone from a passerby", the front windscreen does not look like it has any shotgun damage at all.

The video can be made full screen and paused for analysis.

BMJ, from the start I'd like to make a few things perfectly clear.

I have no skin in this game. It makes absolutely no difference to me if the event was authentic, a hoax or a false flag.

As far as Max Igan is concerned, I don't know the man from a hole in the wall. I had never heard of him before I happened to discover the video I mentioned above.

I watched it, listened carefully to what he had to say and remained skeptical as I was listening, because prior to that point I was leaning toward the hoax camp for the event.

I made careful notes of what he was saying about the shooting video and after I finished watching his entire video I went back to study the shooting video much more carefully than I had done previously.

Each and every point he had made (except for the shoes) was correct.
The "disappearing casings" re-appeared on the pavement a few seconds after they 'disappeared'.

You can see lots of blood in the mosque. You can see the victims' bodies move as they are hit.

You CAN see cracks/holes in the front windshield of his car after he shoots at it!
It is not immediately apparent, but if you keep your eyes trained to the windshield, you will eventually see them.
Play the video in slow motion if you need to. It is there.

As to the cracks/holes not being visible in the "authentic video of the moment the shooter is captured"...
That video was taken dozens of feet away from the car. You simply can't see the detail that is even hard to make out from the video that was taken just a couple of feet away from inside the car!

Please go back and watch the high quality video again. You will see the crack/holes.

But as Max said in the video, and he is entirely correct, arguing about small details like this is exactly what the deep state/perps want us to be doing. Their bigger agenda, which Max outlines perfectly is what is MOST IMPORTANT here.

Along these lines, here is another video that I just watched that connects all the dots too, about Tarrant and what the end game is all about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzdhefR6rTs

I appreciate your point of view and if you can please provide a link to this high quality video your referring to so that we can all analyse it for ourselves.

This should very quickly dispell any misconceptions about the fact or fiction in relation to video and either support Max Igans claims or not.

Yes Max Igan maybe correct in that tptw will use this false flag video to discredit the alternative media.

But as always this is a reminder to not self censor our opinions, but instead be more diligent, analytical and provide the best and most objective opinion possible.

The truth always speaks for itself regardless of the narrative or my bruised ego, and I do not mind a bit of bruising so long as results take me closer to the truth.

[DaveToo]

Posted by BMJ (here)

I appreciate your point of view and if you can please provide a link to this high quality video your referring to so that we can all analyse it for ourselves.

This should very quickly dispell any misconceptions about the fact or fiction in relation to video and either support Max Igans claims or not.

Yes Max Igan maybe correct in that tptw will use this false flag video to discredit the alternative media.

But as always this is a reminder to not self censor our opinions, but instead be more diligent, analytical and provide the best and most objective opinion possible.

The truth always speaks for itself regardless of the narrative or my bruised ego, and I do not mind a bit of bruising so long as results take me closer to the truth.

Please BMJ, tone is everything.
Please show respect, no matter where you are in this conversation.

If you are a thorough investigator you would have downloaded the infamous shooting video a couple of weeks ago already!

https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=YOK4BKONYMB9

If I were you, I would grab this sucker as quickly as you can, because it may not last too much longer.

Just before 14:00 look to the right of the mirror/GPS, you will see some cracks in the windshield. Also around the 14:20 - 14:50 mark.
Lots of cracks.

But as always this is a reminder to not self censor our opinions,

I never try to censor other people's opinions!
If you think I may have done so, please show me where?

The truth always speaks for itself regardless of the narrative or my bruised ego, and I do not mind a bit of bruising so long as results take me closer to the truth

And as I stated in my previous posts I also don't mind being wrong and changing my viewpoint.
It's part of growing up and being a mature person.

[KiwiElf]

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by KiwiElf (here)
On a side note, as of last week, only 36 weapons in the "banned category" had been voluntarily handed into NZ Police. (From an estimated 1,500+ - there will be variations of that).

Kiwi's will not give up their guns easily, either (at least, the ones who are awake!).

Where have we seen this predictable "playbook" before?

EDIT - ADDITION

@ DaveToo - here's Max Igan's Webpage (I hadn't heard of him either until now, but so far, I don't give him a great deal of credibility on the NZ Mosque Shooting situation - of course, he's entitled to his "opinion" which is not necessarily "fact")

http://thecrowhouse.com/home.html

Thanks I did discover his webpage after viewing the video I mentioned above.
Your previous post actually has a link to Max front and center.

http://www.wakeupkiwi.com/news-articles-64.shtml#Igan

Could you spell out what parts of his take that you don't give him credibility for?
I'm interested to hear about it and what your take on it is?
Personally I couldn't find any fault in what he was saying really.

Yes, more recent links are added to the top of each article - Igan's POV is relatively new and sorry;
No,... I have neither the time nor inclination to dissect Igans' opinions in detail on this thread - to me, some of his points were good, and others "amusing" - he showed a clear lack of understanding on certain issues, particularly Kiwi culture, lifestyle & mindsets.

We are not like the USA, China, India, Canada, UK, France or Australia; perhaps a melting pot of all of the above. It's generally accepted that immigrants to this country will accept and adopt the "Kiwi way of life". Lately, that doesn't appear to be working too well.

Please do keep in mind that we have only a relatively small population of 5 million people (about the size of Sydney's population), spread over a landmass roughly the size of Japan but more usable. Yes, we have "assets," land and valuables that many countries are trying to get their (controlling) hands on. Many Kiwi's consider China our biggest threat. (That cozy relationship has soured in recent years). Many of us are starting to feel uncomfortable in our own country.

That simply comes from my being a born & bred Kiwi and having known the past 40+ years of "Deep State" involvement & corruption in this country's politics by "foreign entities". (It would take several books to detail that! You and other readers may like to research the original "The Gemstone File" and its sister publication, "The Opal File", both banned exposé's on earlier NZ & Australian Corruption - they were once available off the internet. They were later turned into books and are obtainable from the likes of Amazon, but labeled "wild conspiracy theories").

IMO, Igan, like Icke, (and a few others) is still banging the same old playbook and paradigm - note PAST TENSE. (They almost sound alike!).

I do not believe their viewpoints are as relevant as they once were prior to Trump's election - EVERYTHING changed at that point. "Their" Deep State plan went down the gurgler.

Both Icke & Igan rubbish Q & Trump, which is their prerogative; it is not my understanding of real events currently unfolding. (perhaps you might like to hop over to the Q thread and see what has been discussed over and above what is on this thread in the last few weeks)?

Like all false flag events, there is a hidden agenda (take your pick) and YES, real innocent people died; this was NOT a hoax. But to blame Trump, or Q or "White Nationalists" for this is nonsensical. That is straight out of the Deep State Leftist Playbook being pushed by the fakestream media narrative and American Democrats. And guess what? Q warned of that well in advance.

You perhaps need to understand that Jacinda Adern's Govt is completely aligned with the HRC/Obama/Leftist Agenda; she is openly an anti-Trumper and considered communist. You also need to study her past in detail, and see who she has been and is closely aligned with (and it ain't pretty - a far cry from the innocent persona she projects in the fakestream media!), not to mention her predecessors.

To put that in perspective, even as late as last year, this NZ Govt (and previous) were STILL donating $Millions of Kiwi Taxpayers Dollars to the Clinton Foundation and have been doing so for years - without the general knowledge, or permission of most Kiwis. For WHAT, exactly? That in itself should speak volumes.

(Also interesting that Adern saw fit to ban all Christian prayers in Parliament when she took over but Muslim prayers after the shooting are fine)?

All of NZ's MSM media is one-sided, anti-Trump and completely Deep State owned & controlled, as are our two major political parties, National vs Labour. (They always have been). That is no great secret. (Currently, Jacinda Adern heads up the Labour Party; prior to that, the National Party governed under John Key's leadership until he suddenly resigned, shortly after a mysterious visit from John Kerry, returning from Antarctica enroute to the US)!

Both political Parties are Coalitions, as neither have retained enough seats in Parliament to go it alone. That is how Jacinda Adern gained power in our previous elections; she was NOT the popular or majority vote of Kiwi's. The Wildcard was #3, the NZ First Party under Winston Peters (who is now the Deputy Prime Minister). To get the "numbers", it was necessary for both NZ First & the Green Party to join with the Labour Party to form our present Government, which barely scraped in.

We too have a new election coming up in 2020. Despite the "popular propaganda" of projecting Adern as some kind of Political Superstar to the World at large, if current trends continue, it's unlikely Adern will win. The majority of Kiwi's, local businesses & property owners - at least the ones who are awake - despise her. (see 8CHAN link below). She has milked this tragic shooting to her benefit. "Smoke & Mirrors" (The so-called "censorship" of 4CHAN/8CHAN & the "banned footage/manifesto" - and subsequent penalties for possessing/distributing either - should tell you everything you need to know about this governments' real agenda).

BMJ's earlier posts #142 & 145 are remarkably accurate as are SMS's. (And I know; I live here).

EDIT - ADDITION - CROSSPOSTED

If anyone wants the "lowdown" on New Zealand's involvement in all this, (more significant than some may realise), here it is from NZ Anons, irrespective of what anyone's opinions are about Q or Trump, this is solid background research of the Corruption in NZ:

https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/4664577.html

It's primarily a research board, (despite a good deal of "noise"), and mostly info, links and infographics; it's quite up-to-date. Since the Mosque Shooting, NZ/Australian readers may not be able to access these boards (funny that! - I wonder why??? Fortunately, I downloaded it weeks ago).

KiwiLand is not the "innocent paradise" many think it is. (note the articles on bunkers being imported, built & buried in NZ by "foreign elite" intent on fleeing here. You'll also get an "enlightening" background on Jacinda Adern, John Keys, Helen Clarke and other Deep State Players along with the Mosque shooting that "they" do not want you to know. Agenda 21/Agenda 2030 is at the forefront).

The Deep State NWO is alive and well in NZ - including ALL major MSM!

[Zanshin]

Max Igan doesn't mention bare feet/blue socks bloke in the hallway.

Jim Stone points to this singular discrepancy as definitive -

http://82.221.129.208/.wo2.html

Some scrolling may be necessary to find the relevant still shots.

[Hervé]

The "Forbidden" Christchurch Video - 22 Discrepancies

henrymakow.com
March 31, 2019

(Brenton Tarrant)

The video was suppressed because it is obviously bogus.

In 2003, German historian Wolfgang Eggert sounded the alarm about the Cabalist doomsday cult whose thinking now pervades the Trump Whitehouse.

Today he says it is vital that the Christchurch massacre fraud be exposed.

He says:

"The Christchurch „massacre" is our chance to destroy the power of mainstream media narratives. Although in most cases I usually reject the classification of terror attacks as hoaxes, this one seems to be such a false flag non-incident. And it threatens all of us truthers. The looming threat for us to be muzzled by increasingly rigid internet legislation is now spread by the mainstream media on a daily basis since 15th March.

We have to fight this shutdown. We do that best by eventually (!) once (!) clarifying/solving one - THIS - "terror" case completely."

------------------------------------------

by Wolfgang Eggert
transl. by Laura Kölsch
(henrymakow.com)



What we know
1. The official offender Brenton Tarrant. This unemployed man has travelled to exciting crisis areas halfway around the world in recent years, allegedly radicalizing himself to the far right. Whether this happened in North Korea or in the Balkans, in Israel, in Turkey, in Iran, in Afghanistan or China's civil war region Xinjiang is not explained. In Pakistan, where the alleged racist and Islam-hater also stayed near the embattled Kashmir area https://www.thequint.com/news/world/...rkish-invaders only 5 months before the gunshots of Christchurch, he seems to have felt totally at ease. In a Facebook post he praises the inhabitants and indirectly also the government of the Muslim country. That is the vita, the official vita, which seemed "complete" until a few weeks ago.

By now we know that Tarrant was a member of the right-wing Knights Templar Order, which, among others, has the goal to "infiltrate Islamist groups to report their terrorist plans to the authorities" https://www.zeit.de/2012/21/DOS-Breivik/seite-3.
Might one think of intelligence work looking at this vita?

(Wolfgang Eggert)

2. As already mentioned, a reality-based anti-terrorism exercise also took place in Christchurch on the very day of the drama, topic: how to deal with armed offenders.

https://m.focus.de/politik/ausland/t..._10464998.html
Members of these training forces, not ordinary police, secured, possibly according to the training script, "explosives" in several cars, including the vehicle of the mosque shooter.

Commissioner Bush, three hours after the attacks:

"several IEDs attached to cars have been made safe now."

"This speaks to the seriousness of what occurred."

And it was they who arrested Tarrant. There is a video showing the "arrest". The professional action - the car was rammed - may indicate that the "arrest" was part of the ongoing training.

Considering Tarrant's resume, which suggests anti-terrorist activities, the headline could read: How special forces correctly retire a colleague. In fact, the New Zealand Herald reports that Australian snipers participated in this or an accompanying exercise and were also seen near the crime scenes.

3.The suppression of the "evidence video"

Tarrant's video, still to find HERE
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=WO4NOH7OD8Y2 (New Zealand Mosque Shooting Uncensored) https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ik6VYAJGF7os/ https://videos.files.wordpress.com/A...-2019-1_hd.mp4 has been "classified by the Chief Censor's Office as objectionable," under a 1993 New Zealand law, which allows convictions up to 10 years of prison for downloading and/or distributing incriminating films. New Zealand Police have also been searching personal data of users who even controversially discuss Tarrant's 'manifesto' or video.

These censorship measures took over the entire world network within hours and subsequently made it impossible for non-New Zealanders to form an opinion on the video.

Remarkably, such measures have NOT been applied to the much crueller ISIS videos, which show beheadings, drownings, and burning alives. The relevant "Charlie Hebdo videos" are still available on the internet.

Why this time is different, so say the Hoaxer, has its reason in numerous vulnerabilities of the Christchurch perpetrator's video.

And they have more than a few arguments on their side.

What the video shows
4. The „perpetrators" selfie -13.46 (3.09) Tech-Fail (Above)

The driver intentionally swings the camera over to his face at one point, allowing to 'recognize' him. It's the only 'evidence picture' because there is no surveillance camera footage of the attacked mosques. The mask-like face seen in the car video may well be that of today's "offender" Brenton Tarrant. But it looks like it has been cut out and does not fit in with the body, or -the stills show it particularly clear - the body seems too far behind the head. Post-production comes into mind.

https://s3.ap-southeast-1.amazonaws....1031.Medi.jpeg

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/wp-conten...on-Tarrant.jpg

https://fijisun.com.fj/wp-content/up...nt-750x403.jpg

5. The blind „eyewitnesses" -10.28 (6.25) Basis-Video vs Endproduct

The "shooter" walks past two people in front of the gate of Al-Noor mosque. They are not surprised by the helmeted, camouflaged and armed passerby, who in turn ignores both "witnesses"

6. To counter the impression, that the guns might have been "invisible" when the film was made, we have an eyewitness. The msn-article reads as followed:

Mohamed Yama was praying in the Al Noor mosque having the closest of escapes after bravely confronting the gunman.

"I am shocked," he said.

"I say hey. What are you doing? What's the gun? This is a mosque."

Mr Yama then recounts the moment the gunman turned to him and fired miraculously missing him by the slimmest of margins.

As worshippers tried to escape, Mohamed fled onto the street calling ambulances.
https://www.9news.com.au/national/ne...5-e475448a30e4

BUT: We don´t find this "occurrence" on "Tarrant´s film" - it is neither to be seen nor to be heard there.

HERE https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=1XMGXKR2W7WU (0:37) we see and hear a second Mohamed Yama, another man under the same name who recounts the same incident. Watch "Tarrant´s film", when he passes the cars, that this man is talking about. There is no voice to be heard by someone speaking to him in this area. And there is not the slightest reaction by the film-maker, that he might had been touched from behind. Besides the man recounts a false position of the film-camera. He points to his upper breast, instead of the head.

The aggressor greeted like a friend -10.19 (6.36) Basic vs Finished Product
This obvious discrepancy continues at the entrance gate to the mosque, where the "perpetrator" points his gun at people standing at the door while these first "victims" greet him with the words "hello brother" which is common among Muslims.

7. No weapon recoil -10.18 (6.37ff) Tech-Logic-Fail

The "shooting" starts at the mosque gate. The tremble-free video does not show any weapon recoil which gives rise to the assumption that the filming person was unarmed. For comparison, see 3.00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=ItILe1yWvZ8

8. 52 shots from a 30 shots magazine -10.11 (6.44ff) Tech-Logic-Fail

After the entry scenario (9 shots) the "shooter" drops the weapon and changes to his second rifle. Here the shot sequence: Creeping: 3 shots; side room: 4 shots; forward in the hallway: 4 shots; entrance to the prayer room (crawling and second body): 9 shots; on group right in the room: approx. 24 shots; on approaching person: 5 shots plus 3 on the ground. That makes - with a 30 shots magazine! - about 52 shots without apparent magazine change.

9. Why is no one escaping? -9.59 (6.57) Logic-Fail

When the shooter first enters the prayer room, he spares the group already crammed into the left corner. At -9.49 (7.06) he is back in the corridor, where he reloads --9.41 (7.14) and then goes back to the prayer room and only now, -9.36 (7.19) shoots at the body pile on the left. They had until then been able to escape to the garden through a glass door just two steps away, but with one exception - -9.36 (7.19) no one did.

10. No room damage Tech-Logic-Fail

In the same scene the "perpetrator" fires with high salvo density especially at the right side of the room. It is completely inexplicable why the walls and windows show no ammunition effects.

11. Barefoot "victim" in socks -8.13 (8.42) Different takes within filmmaking
A „victim", which at the beginning crawls barefoot on the hallway's floor, -10,06(6.47) wears blue socks in a later camera shot. http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1553029204727.webm

12. Water without rain -7.58 (8.55) Different takes within filmmaking
The "shooter" leaves the mosque and takes to the streets. At the entrance to the mosque there is a large water mark, which according to the video time code two and a half minutes before -10.27 (6.27) was still considerably smaller or narrower. In the short meantime - a cone locking the exit underlines this - no cars can have come out. This is an indication a prolonged stage setting, disguised by a hidden camera cut.

13. Senseless shooting & cool vehicles -7.58 (8.57ff) Basic vs Finished Product

If the scenic routes "sidewalk/street/side road" were pre-recorded like all tracking shots in the open air, then there was some action required to put on top the pre-recorded material. The senseless shooting on the streets when no one was around, appear suitable for such a use. Strikingly, the car traffic on the road continues undisturbed!

14. Dissolving cartridges -7.58 (8.57ff) Tech-Logic-Fail

The phenomenon of the "phantom cartridges", which has already been mentioned in 15, is particularly clearly confirmed when the shooter takes the street in front of the mosque under "fire". Here you can see the ejection of the cartridge cases - which, however, a thing of impossibility, DISSOLVE in the air! The few cartridges that seem to reach the ground without the typical clanking noise magically disappear within seconds.
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=W9956S2AYY9H
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpdRzQZAGxw

15. No consequences for cars -7.04 (9.52ff) Basic vs Finished Product

While the "shooter" passes the entrance area of the mosque on the road, we notice in the right angle that a silver van parked in front of the gate is moving in the yard. https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=BGORUSUB2H4N However, the "perpetrator" ignores the car and rather shoots in the empty side road. As he walks back down the alley to the mosque, the van is already gone. There is only one (!) scene in which "shots" are aimed at a car: This is the front window shot at -3.58 (12.50) where the "shooter", despite three attempts, hits nothing.

16. Music contradicts live stream -6.55 (10.01ff)Post-production

In the video, you can almost continuously hear music, regardless of whether the 'offender' in the car, outdoors or in the mosque. This would only make sense if he had a portable music device with him. If he had, then still the question arises, why the temporal settings of the shots is not backed by music. This can actually only be explained by post-production. An additional indication is the 'suitable' mood influencing use of music after the head shot at an 'escaping woman' -4.45 (12.13). The background music changes to the song "I am the God of Hellfire" then.

Additionally, it should be noticed, that the reloading of the weapon(s) always sound the same, so as if someone used one and the same sound-effect on multiple occasions.

17. The mumbling and tipping over Tech-Fail

The background acoustics from the "victims" are striking as well: throughout the massacre, we only hear some sort of a continuous murmur. Individual screams of pain, shouts, or warning calls are nowhere to be heard. Almost all "victims" are already motionless on the ground when the camera hits them the first time, without any visual effect of being hit or of suffering, sometimes -9.59 (6.56) even related shot on (seemingly) targeted people are questionable.

18. Dolls and Photoshop? -6.00 (10.55) Basic vs Finished Product

There is too little blood caused by the massacre. This is 100% correct for the first run; what would explain - in case of a virtual manipulation of the film - why the "perpetrator" had to leave the mosque and "return" to document at least "standing" blood near the entrance and in two or three places of the prayer room. The hoax community, therefore, suspects fake victims. The analysis of one scene out of this community https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=XSY1S9AM6W8X judges by a 'victim's' arm movement that the bodies were not on-site as a group at the time of filming but are individually extracted from other picture and film footage and merged into a group per mouse click. However, this arm movement is less compelling than the leg posture of the jeans wearing 'victim' lying next to it. His legs (a short-term illumination underlines it) seem to FLOAT.

Another example for unnatural body positions is the man "shot dead" at the main room's entrance, -7.20/8.13 lying face down but legs somehow bent in the air, looking rather like a doll than a human being.

19. Shoes taken off -5.08 (11.47ff) Logic-Fail

Finally leaving the mosque the "shooter" at the entrance targets two "refugees" escaping through a side gate in the property wall. To hit them is actually impossible because of the distance, the moving target and the very narrow shooting angle. But he seems to make it with two shots. The camera moves to the "victim" on the sidewalk, passes the (again?) closed gate and captures one meter next to the "victim", for whatever reason, her shoes. The "assassin" "shoots" her in the head, blowing her hair to the side like under the effects of a hairdryer. The mortally hit woman's hand reaches for her head. Meanwhile, the car traffic moves calmly. The second person, who escaped, has not been presented by the media yet.

20. No bumpers whilst run over -4.29 (12.26ff) Basic vs Finished Product

Leaving the crime scene the "perpetrator" drives over that woman's body. The noticeable "bumpers" in the car are far too small to have come from overrunning a human body.

21. Silence on chaos day -4.27 (12.28ff) Basic vs Finished Product

Although the police was alerted already 2 minutes after the first shots at Al Noor mosque and 20 ambulances were on their way there, you can only hear one siren during the "shooters" drive away from Al Noor mosque to Linwood mosque.

22. The unbreakable front window -3.58 (12.50ff) Tech-Logic-Fail

The "offender" fires his weapon from in (!) the car through his front window without causing any visible destruction. The video footage of his arrest as well shows no damage to the front window.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/cri...ting-suspected

In reality, the blast - multiplied in a closed and even more so in a small space - is enormous with live ammunition. The "shooter" should have been "deaf" first and the microphone should have had to override at this point. This means that the recording device could not have processed more sounds in the same line, but in this case, it surprisingly can.


CONCLUSION
The fact is that those who point out the possibility of a faked attack have a number of points in their favor:

• 52 shots from a 30-shot magazine
• Self-dissolving cartridge
• Missing ammunition effects on walls and car windows
• A barefoot victim with socks
• All these are real killer arguments against the credibility of the video and thus against the official narrative.

Furthermore, there is clear evidence that the video was "produced" and processed in two rounds, and this before the crime. The first round is a pure video recording of only the car drive and the mosque. In the second round, the hoax-community says, the shocking action scenes were subsequently layered on top of the plain drive-location video, partly with the help of blue box / green screen effects and Photoshop, possibly even with the use of dolls and so-called crisis actors, the latter typical for training scenarios.

The question is: who then was the political director? The mosques operators and the New Zealand government, together with the subordinate investigating police would be the first to suspect because they 'behaved' according to the - supposedly fictional - narrative. But the reason for them to make such a dubious evidence video remains puzzling. It may have been a pure training movie, designed for internal drill use, on this day. But New Zealand may have pursued further external intentions with the film.

Anyway, there is the suspicion that this very product was seized by third parties and modified in a way that literally produced their own movie and put New Zealand's government under pressure. We probably will never know the whole truth.
----
Related:
The Christchurch "Shooting" Is Indeed A Fake: New Updates Show What Else Is WRONG With That Event!

Miles Mathis on Christchurch Shooting Hoax Pt 3


Note from Eggert- Guide to Investigation
The Christchurch „massacre" is our chance to destroy the power of mainstream media narratives. Although in most cases I usually reject the classification of terror attacks as hoaxes, this one seems to be such a false flag non-incident. And it threatens all of us truthers. The looming threat for us to be muzzled by increasingly rigid internet legislation is now spread by the mainstream media on a daily basis since 15th March.

We have to fight this shutdown. We do that best by eventually (!) once (!) clarifying/solving one - THIS- "terror" case completely. This can be done using the search instructions below. Of course, we can hardly accomplish this work alone from the US or Europe as the research requires being on-site. I, therefore, ask you to send the search instructions to friends, readers, followers, ex-Muslims etc. (ideally in NZ) to move things forward and find people to investigate in Christchurch. In view of the increasing persecutions (possession and distribution ban regarding the Christchurch shooting video), the volunteers are well advised to obtain press accreditations from alternative media.

Groups worth investigating
1.Problematic because potentially ‚part of the game':

⦁ Members of forces conducting the exercise
⦁ Members of conventional police forces
⦁ Members of emergency medical care
⦁ Hospital staff

2.Partly problematic because potentially (already) included:

⦁ Residents with views on the mosques
⦁ Muslims (Questions, e.g.: does the time of crime match the Friday prayer time window? Were the mosques on 15th March accessible for usual worshippers traffic? Did family, friends or the like visit the mosques on the day/time of the crime? Who knows the victims portrayed in the media? https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/03...2743767140.jpg)

3. Unproblematic

⦁ Investigations in nearby shops, offices
⦁ Identify and locate people who were near the ‚crime scene' on 15th March (e.g. by publishing still images of people /cars taken from the shooting video, combined with interview requests/search queries)

Facts, unproblematic to check

⦁ Were the streets shown in the shooting video accessible to the public on 15th March? Did they appear as in the video or were circumstances/objects noticed which contradict the video's narrative (e.g. construction sites, traffic signs, billboards)?

⦁ Technical forensics: The suspected greenscreen shooting video should be reviewed in depth. Possible starting points are the audio track, the camera move on the suspects face, the disappearing cartridge cases, the gunshots on the car's windscreen, noticeable cuts.

=======================================================


So, what are we ending up with?

• An anti-terrorist training drill being conducted in the area at the same time that
• a real mass shooting occurs
• an alleged "live-stream" montage video of a shooting to distract and confuse
• a windfall of new regulations and restrictions

Whatever the case may be, it definitely was a false flag attack:

[mountain_jim]

I am not going to seek out or watch this video, but this seems obvious to me:

It's the only 'evidence picture' because there is no surveillance camera footage of the attacked mosques. The mask-like face seen in the car video may well be that of today's "offender" Brenton Tarrant. But it looks like it has been cut out and does not fit in with the body, or -the stills show it particularly clear - the body seems too far behind the head. Post-production comes into mind.

later edit- my spouse says not conclusive.

[BMJ]

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by BMJ (here)

I appreciate your point of view and if you can please provide a link to this high quality video your referring to so that we can all analyse it for ourselves.

This should very quickly dispell any misconceptions about the fact or fiction in relation to video and either support Max Igans claims or not.

Yes Max Igan maybe correct in that tptw will use this false flag video to discredit the alternative media.

But as always this is a reminder to not self censor our opinions, but instead be more diligent, analytical and provide the best and most objective opinion possible.

The truth always speaks for itself regardless of the narrative or my bruised ego, and I do not mind a bit of bruising so long as results take me closer to the truth.

Please BMJ, tone is everything.

Please show respect, no matter where you are in this conversation.

If you are a thorough investigator you would have downloaded the infamous shooting video a couple of weeks ago already!

But as always this is a reminder to not self censor our opinions,

I never try to censor other people's opinions!
If you think I may have done so, please show me where?

I am usually short and to the point with my writing style and maybe that can be misunderstood at times.

But I will be clear now in saying that I am not going to be baited by your comments into an argument with you Davetoo.

I have better things to do.

[Zanshin]

So I've listened to Max Igan's take and downloaded the footage linked by DaveToo which I viewed using VLC.

As Dave has said the footage is much higher quality than the 7 min. footage I saw before, alleviating the surreal,
video-game quality of the compression Max referenced.
Suffice to say I think I just saw real footage of real people being murdered.

The clearing of weapon jams seems consistent; the ammo in the mags looks real - although more likely Nato 5.56 than .223
given the military nature of the weapons; and in one image, (4th down) on the page KiwiElf links in post #147, the shooter's
subaru being loaded onto the tow-truck clearly has 3 holes in the windscreen.
The 'socks' stillshots when paused in the playback seem to be simply ambient light anomalies.

As Dave said this would move the event into the area of false flag for all the other anomalies surrounding the event.

My condolences for all those who have suffered loss in this tragedy.

[DaveToo]

Posted by Hervé (here)
The "Forbidden" Christchurch Video - 22 Discrepancies

by Wolfgang Eggert
transl. by Laura Kölsch
(henrymakow.com)

This is completely amateurish Herve.
I am surprised that you have bothered to post it here.

I took the time to go through his "22 discrepancies" and had no problem explaining why most are not discrepancies at all.

Most notable:

4. Identification of Tarrant with camera. He claims it is probably a cut and paste!
He says "It's the only evidence picture".
First off it is not "mask-like". There is no "cut out" and it does "fit in with the body".
Second of all it is NOT "the only evidence picture" of Tarrant. There are other times in his video where you can see him
through the rear view mirror !!!

7. "No weapon recoil" Totally false!!! Recoil on each and every shot !

9. "No one escaping?" Numerous people tried to escape. They were shot.

11. "Victim has bare feet. Same victim now wearing blue socks"
Same body from two different views!!!
When Tarrant enters the mosque the second time, the same man is lying there, with no socks on!
Tarrant quickly turns around and guess what? The man now looks like he's wearing socks !!!!!

12. "Water without rain" All water marks are consistent. Nothing changes.

13. "Senseless shooting" He does seem to waste a lot of bullets shooting down the street. But what does this prove?

14. "Dissolving cartridges" NO !! They re-appear on the ground! It is just poor streaming resolution.

15. "No consequences for cars" Why would he shoot at cars? This would draw attention to him and his objective!

17. "The mumbling and tipping over. Individual screams of pain, shouts, or warning calls are nowhere to be heard."
Not true. There are screams/moans of pain throughout.

19. "The mortally hit woman's hand reaches for her head."
No the mortally hit woman is dead and does not move or say anything after she is shot at close range!!!

22. "The unbreakable front window"
"The "offender" fires his weapon from in (!) the car through his front window without causing any visible destruction. The video footage of his arrest as well shows no damage to the front window."
Wrong. As I have shown in previous posts, there are cracks/holes in the front window.

[Hervé]

...

Inconclusive...






... very conclusive...

[DaveToo]

Posted by Zanshin (here)
Max Igan doesn't mention bare feet/blue socks bloke in the hallway.

Jim Stone points to this singular discrepancy as definitive -

http://82.221.129.208/.wo2.html

Some scrolling may be necessary to find the relevant still shots.

Zanshin, I covered the bare feet/blue socks 'anomaly' just above.

I honestly can't believe how amateurish/sloppy name truthers such as Jim Stone, Wolfgang Eggert,
Gordon Duff, Jim Fetzer, Robert Steele etc. can be!

It blows my mind really. This is not the first and likely won't be the last time I have found
careless analysis by well-known truthers.

Please I implore you, before posting some article or video here that you have found on the net as proof of something, try to take the time as I did, and do due diligence work yourself, checking and double-checking the claims being made.