New Zealand pollies and the global media are presenting only one narrative – far right, Moslem-hating lunatic named Brenton Tarrant, acting alone, takes advantage of New Zealand’s lax gun laws and massacres 50 Moslems. There are several tiny wee flaws with this narrative however.
The first is that it’s bollocks. The second is that Brenton Tarrant has no known far right political associations. The third is that he didn’t use three of the four guns he purchased from Gun City. The fourth is that he didn’t plan the attacks and clearly wasn’t acting alone.
Of course I express my condolences to the bereaved. The attack was shameful and involved cold-blooded mass murder. The shooting of unarmed, defenceless women and the finishing off of the wounded was particularly egregious. It was the worst incident of mass murder in New Zealand since 1979.
Laying down flowers and hugging Moslems is nice, but won’t stop further attacks, nor will imposing yet more gun controls on New Zealand. Politicians love knee-jerk reactions and pointless gestures, so Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern will be able to rush her new firearms restrictions through. It’s unlikely that a single member of the New Zealand Parliament will ask a sensible question throughout the entire process.
New Zealand has no revising chamber, unlike Australia and the UK, and is particularly vulnerable to knee-jerk legislation. In fairness both Britain and Australia rushed through pointless and authoritarian firearms legislation after the Dunblane and Port Arthur massacres.
The promised New Zealand inquiry is likely to be as vacuous as the inquiry by Lord Cullen into the Dunblane Massacre, which amongst other things neglected to state that Hamilton, the shooter, had been shot by police. Since he had been supplying young boys to senior police officers for sexual abuse the Scotland Central Police had every reason to silence him!
The official position re Hamilton, by the way, is that he was still alive several minutes after shooting himself through the roof of the mouth with a .357 Magnum revolver. I do not recommend trying this at home, but generally speaking you are going to do yourself some real damage if you shoot yourself in the mouth with a magnum. Even with a brain as small as Thomas Hamilton’s it’s difficult to miss.
Is Tarrant a right-winger?
There is no reason to suppose that Brenton Tarrant was particularly liberal. I doubt he voted for the ALP in Australia, for example. However he does not seem to have any far right history at all.
Pollies, including Ms Ardern, have leapt to the conclusion that he’s far-right, because he says he is, and because he’s laying claim to the authorship of some nutty far-right manifesto.
The far-right claim needs to be fact-checked. Ms Ardern, with respect, isn’t going to do it. She’s a politician – she doesn’t believe in facts. There is no, repeat no, evidence of far-right political involvement on the part of Brenton Tarrant, nor that he had any part in drafting the daft manifesto.
A similar tactic was used by the DVD in relation to the Oslo Massacre, where they presented their man Anders Breivik, one of the shooters, as a far-right loony. He too had a rambling manifesto, which he hadn’t drafted. You may as well say that our community partner Adolf Hitler, who had trouble writing a letter, wrote Mein Kampf.
The tactic was tried again in Britain when GO2 arranged the assassination of Remain Labour MP Jo Cox in a desperate effort to boost the Remain vote in the 2016 referendum. There is no evidence of any meaningful far-right association on the part of the one member of the death squad who has been convicted so far, Thomas Mair.
It’s perfectly clear that one of the motives of setting up the massacre was to fool the New Zealand government into pushing more restrictive firearms legislation. That would explain the curious anomaly re the guns purchased from Gun City, to whom I am copying this article as a courtesy.
As I understand it, he purchased four guns from Gun City, but only one of these, a pump-action shotgun, was used in the attack. It’s unclear where he got the assault rifle, which was the weapon which did most of the damage.
We not only need to know where the assault rifle came from, we need to know where he acquired the ammunition. This point is missed time and again in mass shooting incidents. In most jurisdictions you don’t just need a license to acquire firearms, but ammo as well.
Even in Texas you’ll raise eyebrows if you go into a gun store and ask for 300 hundred rounds of .224 for a semi-automatic. If they ask you what you need that much ammo for and you reply ‘I want to kill some Moslems’ they’ll probably ring the FBI, even in Texas.
Who else was involved?
Tarrant clearly wasn’t acting alone, any more than Breivik or Mair were. Unusually it looks as though he didn’t have a driver. I’m quite sure he had a firearms instructor, for a start. That implies he had access to a firing range, either in Australia or New Zealand.
I’ve seen the video, or at least an excerpt. It doesn’t make for pleasant viewing. The shooter, assuming it was Tarrant, is practised and efficient. He controls the assault rifle well and doesn’t waste ammunition. So far as I could tell he was firing short bursts of three or five rounds each. I got the impression that he had killed before. There wasn’t much amateur about it.
Then there’s the money. As one of the best intelligence officers the CIA ever had once told me, ‘Michael, always go after the money’. Tarrant was a gym instructor, it would seem at a pretty small gym. There’s no family money and no way was he earning enough to pay for his foreign travel. Then there’s the question of what he was doing over in Europe in 2018. Who did he meet and why?
There’s an unresolved question as to why the video feed kicked out before the attack on the Linwood Mosque. Was it the same shooter as at the Al Noor Mosque? It seems likely but there’s a dearth of photographic evidence.
Then there’s the timeline. This was clearly a well-planned attack, but then the shooter, assuming Tarrant was the only shooter, waits around in the target area in the same Subaru vehicle in which he apparently drove himself to both mosques. Why? The attack on the Linwood Mosque concludes at around 1400 local time, but the arrest doesn’t happen until 1500.
So what was Tarrant doing in this missing hour? This wasn’t a suicide attack, so presumably an exit was planned. If Tarrant was exfiltrating himself he would hardly continue using the same vehicle, not least in these days of CCTV and mobile phone cameras. My analysis is that his control promised to exfiltrate him but betrayed him, i.e. he was waiting for somebody.
He may not even have known about the email to the Prime Minister’s office, or the manifesto. There must have been lookouts at the mosques as well, to give the all-clear before he moved in.
This attack was planned by an intelligence officer, I presume from the DVD’s Wellington station. It is severely doubtful if all the firearms and ammunition used were lawfully acquired. Tarrant was also being bankrolled. This was a team effort by the Bad Guys.
Serious questions need to be asked of NZSIS. They must be aware, surely, of the DVD. My book was partly written in a fairly remote corner of the North Island after all, and I had discussions with New Zealand intelligence when I was last there. How is it that the PM is seemingly unaware that the world’s deadliest and most powerful intelligence agency, and one moreover which specialises in false flag massacres, is operating in her country?
Jacinda Ardern should have been briefed about the DVD when she took office. Because she wasn’t no steps were taken to prevent this entirely foreseeable massacre taking place. NZSIS, apparently, are not too worried about 50 dead Moslems. The PM is, and she’s right. Whatever questions might be asked about how they got to New Zealand the fact is that they were there, lawfully or not, and living under the protection of her laws.
I shall be sending some courtesy copies of this column to some key Kiwis.
The 737 Max sabotage program
The DVD is the only intelligence agency in the world with a specialist aviation sabotage section. It’s been part of the agency since the beginning and took over the Abwehr’s experts. They are highly competent and used to bringing down civilian airliners.
German penetration assets in Western capitals are sufficiently highly placed to run interference on air crash investigations, many of which are a joke. (the NTSB’s with respect facile report on TWA 800 is a case in point.) The DVD has never had to fear a serious accident investigation.
Ironically enough one of only two serious judicial inquiries in the Western world since World War II (the other was that nice man Lord Widgery’s inquiry into ‘Bloody Sunday’) was in relation to the mass murder of passengers on a New Zealand airliner, TE 901, at Mount Erebus, in 1979. That inquiry was chaired by Justice Peter Mahon QC, a serious legal figure, with respect. Sadly his careful report was overturned, on dubious grounds with respect, by the Privy Council in London, who weren’t half the lawyers Peter was.
The DVD carefully assess each new airliner for weak points. It looks as though there was a weak point on the 737 Max – the new Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) software. Inserting self-deleting lines of code would allow the DVD to jam the stabilizer. On the Max the MCAS takes its feed from only one Angle-Of-Attack (AOA) indicator, another vulnerability.
The initiative for the sabotage seems to have come from China and may have been prompted by that big order from Vietnam for the Max. Peking were the first to ground the plane.
As presently advised I’m calling this one as sabotage of the MCAS software, causing the stabilizer to jam in such a way as to cause the pilots in command to lose control, with the aircraft diving into the ground shortly after take-off, with insufficient height to permit recovery. Both Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 seem to have crashed from the same cause.
The Indonesians won’t do anything, but the Ethiopians, who still resent the German-backed invasion by our community partner Benito Mussolini in 1935, might. In my opinion the sabotage of Flight 302 and the murder of the crew and passengers amounted to an Act of War by the Federal Republic of Germany, whose principal intelligence service was responsible, on the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.
If the Ethiopians, who have a large, battle-hardened army, declare war on Germany we should support them, in battle, which would add a new dimension to Brexit. It would be quite fun to have a bunch of pissed-off Ethiopians running around Germany with guns and bayonets getting revenge for ’35!
Addis Ababa will probably cave in to German pressure, however, so there’s no need to start getting your tin hats out yet. Sahle-Work Zewde, no offense intended, is no Emperor Haile Selassie, indeed she’s a meek kitten in comparison. (If I called her a pussy I might be misunderstood!) Haile Selassie was a gent of course, indeed we shared the same tailors.
It’s not all over bar the shouting (there’ll still be plenty of that!) but the UK is on track to break free of the Evil Empire, putting the matter as neutrally as I can, at 2300 hours Zulu on Friday March 29th. It’ll be the biggest break for freedom since Luke Skywalker teamed up with Princess Leia.
Sadly the government and the EU are running serious interference on everybody’s party planning. Prime Minister Theresa May, arguably the silliest Prime Minister since Neville Chamberlain, has asked the EU for an extension of UK membership until June 30th, in the desperate hope that she might be able to bully or blackmail enough MPs into voting for the Surrender, sorry that should be Withdrawal, agreement dictated to us by the Germans in November.
On Monday Speaker Bercow gave an entirely correct ruling, with respect, that the government could not bring the Surrender, sorry, Withdrawal, Agreement, back to the House of Commons in the current session of Parliament. Indeed not. In fact the House should not have been asked to vote on it a second time, given that they were voting on the same, shameful agreement.
Commission Führer, sorry President, Donald Tusk has said that May can only get an extension if the Commons caves in to Germany, although that’s not quite how he put it of course. The Germans are as baffled by our defiance as they were in 1940. Every hour seems to bring a new development and the Commission are now talking about an unconditional extension. It’s unlikely that any of the EU27 will stand up to Germany, but who knows.
The Surrender (Withdrawal) Agreement is of course Germany’s planned Final Solution for the UK. Neither the Commission nor the Cabinet Office, to which Theresa May reports (she’ just the monkey – Sir Mark Sedwill is the organ grinder) have the slightest intention of agreeing a free trade deal. The European Commission is talking about talks but they’re just blowing smoke.
Once locked in we’d have to fight our way out, in a general Anglo-European war. The arbitration mechanism is a joke. There’s no way that the DVD would ever allow arbitrators willing to act in good faith to be appointed. They’ve been buying up or blackmailing international judges for decades. Undermining international justice in this way was always a dangerous policy, given Germany’s postwar military weakness.
Nobody on the right trusts judges anymore on the EU issue, nor should they. With respect, judges have been handing down junk law decisions on EU law for decades. In the Factortame cases in the UK they even managed to persuade themselves that Parliament can bind its successors!
The wheel has turned full circle. The only way to stop judges or arbitrators giving bad faith rulings is to deprive them of the jurisdiction to do so in the first place.
Much light on the Withdrawal Agreement has been shed by James Delingpole and John Petley. John’s article appears here: https://www.politicalite.com/brexit/brexit-bombshell-a-german-brexit-a-scandal-of-subversive-statecraft/.
These explosive revelations suggest that the text was drafted in the German Foreign Ministry (shades of the surrender document our community partner Reichsminister Rudolf Hess brought to Britain in May 1941) and translated into English. It was certainly written in Europe, there’s no doubt about that.
It is also suggested that the meeting between Theresa May and Angela Merkel before the notorious Chequers summit last year was even more sinister than has been supposed. May is said to have agreed with Merkel that the UK would track European rules closely in preparation for a reversal of Brexit in the next Parliament.
If the transcript becomes available and lives up to its billing it may lead to calls for the impeachment or trial of Theresa May. (Your impeachment procedures are modeled on ours, but Parliament has an additional remedy, not available to Congress, of sentencing the Prime Minister and Cabinet Secretary to death by decapitation at the Tower.)
Whilst it’s likely to go down to the wire it’s still looking like a clean break on March 29th. There may be an extension until May 23rd (European Parliament elections) or June 30th (shortly before the new parliament convenes in Strasbourg), but there would be little point. May’s deal (in reality Merkel’s deal) is dead. It may do a bit of stalking, like a zombie, but it’s still dead.
Michael Shrimpton was a barrister from his call to the Bar in London in 1983 until being disbarred in 2019 over a fraudulently obtained conviction. He is a specialist in National Security and Constitutional Law, Strategic Intelligence and Counter-terrorism. He is a former Adjunct Professor of Intelligence Studies at the American Military University.