Let me begin, since this is about the WTO, and it is also - this day is framed around under-standing and uprooting corporate power. Let me be very clear, if we eliminated the WTO today, tomorrow nothing fundamental would be different in this country.

Let's start with that reality, ok?

The reason that I think it's so important to start from that reality, is to understand that the WTO as an organization, as horrific, anti-democratic, corporate-capitalist in nature that it is, it does not address the fundamental nature of corporate power or corporate rule. And I want to urge all of us in this room to begin to use a different language.

It's not corporate power that concerns me as much as the fact that corporations have become government.

The speakers yesterday and that breakout that I participated in was extraordinary because people were talking about how do we re-create public space. How do we re-create public space in order to have, express and exercise political power.

Those kinds of conversations have not been taking place for a long time.

Sisters and brothers let me suggest to you that we are living in revolutionary times. Because people are asking themselves fundamental questions about the notion of power, where does the legitimacy of theses institutions come from, and when we ask those questions, we find that they are illegitimate.

They are fundamentally flawed and illegitimate.

And when we begin to answer those questions, additional questions suggest themselves.

I've written on the board "we the people" / "government".

In this country, the phrase "we the people" are hallowed words. We are taught those in elementary school, the creation myth of this country, as a democracyÖto be an example, the light on the hill for the rest of the world, to be a shining beaconÖand do you want to know why I'm so mad? Because I bought that.

Now I admit that Iím a straight, white man, and maybe as a straight, white male it's easier for me to buy that myth, but I did buy the myth. And when I grew up and had to confront the reality that it was a myth, it makes me angry.

You know I basically have been able to get around the idea that there's not an Easter Bunny. I've accepted that there's not a Tooth Fairy. Hell, I even fundamentally accepted there's not a Santa Claus. But I cannot and will not accept that this is not a democracy. This is my birth right. It is your birth right. It is our birth right as human beings. As the speakers yesterday described, it is the natural condition for us to strive for and have the ability to create our lives, that is the nature of freedom. Political, social and economic freedom.

So I want to start again that "we the people" are highly charged words.
Let me rush in - I have to rush in and acknowledge that this country, and those words were a lie upon their original utterance and they're a lie today.

This country was founded on a fundamental violence against people of color, women, indigenous people and working class people everywhere, and we cannot forget that, we must not forget that, we must make it central to everything we do. But, as we say in Texas, I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Just because that was a lie to start with, as a structure of governance, the idea of "we the people" being absolutely sovereign is a good idea. Rejecting monarchy, rejecting hereditary monarchy as a form of government, is frankly a brilliant step forward in human relationships. So let's acknowledge that was a good idea, even though it was uttered by, as one famous historian has said, "the well fed, the well bred, and the well read." The rich white men who basically founded the Constitution of the United States.

This works by the way, at least in theory. We've never really seen if really can work because basically the entire history of the United States of America can be understood as a series of struggles by different individual groups to be defined legally as persons. So if we accept the assumption of "we the people" meaning all living, breathing human beings, we should give democracy a try under this idea. Let's see.

There's been conversation about direct democracy as opposed to representative democracy. I'd love to have that conversation. I'd like to experiment with either direct or representative democracy under an honest framework. Frankly we've never seen it. Ever.

So the point is -."we the people" and "government", this is the very framework of the Constitution of the United States. And what's so important about thisÖthis is the dichotomy of the Constitution of the United States, nowhere are corporations mentioned in the Constitution, suggesting that the Founding Fathers, those hallowed, mythical Öthose men who set-up a framework to make sure that property rights were protected at the expense of all human rights, this set-up, "we the people" and government, the fundamental reality is the people are sovereign with individual rights.

Government is described in terms of specific duties, they are an accountable body to the people. All legitimate government flows through "we the people", we are sovereign. Those are powerful words. Those are revolutionary words. Now if we are actually sovereign and government only exists to do the very specific duties that we in our wisdom allow them to do. We should understand, and by the way corporations are never mentioned, we should understand that this idea of the difference between rights and duties is the very definition of the law itself.

Let me repeat that because I think it's important. The whole notion of law is premised on rights and duties as it relates to either individuals or entities, groups of people.

What's so important to recognize is that corporations which were originally chartered by the King - the founding of corporations by the way were in 13th, 14th, 15th century Europe, they were created as institutions and mechanisms to exploit, colonize, rape, I mean are we getting the picture here? The whole point of it was to vacuum out the resources, including human beings as slaves from Africa, Asia, later North and South America. They are institutions of brutal oppression. Is anyone surprised that they act that way today? They were designed to do that. They do what they were designed to do. The difference is that corporations were originally designed by the monarchs, the kings. The kings were sovereign, they had the ability to create them. This new idea this new schema creates the idea that "we the people" are completely sovereign, state governments now, as the representatives, now charter these corporations.

My point is, under this framework, the corporation has to be understood to be on this side [the side with government], the reason, because government still creates these corporations. State governments charter them, state governments create them, they are creatures of the law, they are creatures of our government and properly understood, they are public institutions. A serious conversation needs to be had about whether these institutions should even be allowed in a democratic society. But, regardless of whether we allow them or not let's be clear that they are public institutions, they are not private.

In a very real sense, the public framework here is the public sphere, the private sphere, and the public sphere. Individual private rights, but when you go into public, a different reality happens. The civic sphere happens. The point that I'm making right now is that corporations are created by government and we can define what they can and cannot do.

Corporate personhood is the perverse, obscene, ridiculous notion that a corporation is and individual person, vested with inherent rights. My point about doing this whole exercise is that corporate personhood perverts the entire framework of the United States of America.

Whether or not you buy the Constitution, even the ability of those who believe it, is undermined and ultimately does not work. The point is that corporate personhood gives corporations the rights of individual citizens. The right to speech, the right to assemble, the right to be defended from illegal search and seizure. The point is that this legal doctrine, and it's not a law, it's an entire doctrine, is what is at the roots of corporate governance, the idea that corporations are making the fundamental ruling decisions in this country.

It's not just that they are spewing toxic poisons into our air and water, it's not just that they are exploiting human beings who are workers, it's that they undermine our very society and culture. And it prevents us from having reasonable discussions about the society that we want to live in. That is even to me the more dangerous - that doctrine, not just the law but the entire doctrine must be challenged. And the good news is - there is a long history in this country of citizen activism where that's done. And whether or not we look at the abolition of slavery, women earning the right to vote, the trade union movements, the whole notion of worker's rights. Those things have one thing in common, that is they culminate in changed legal doctrines. The entire law as it relates to groups of people ends up changing. And that's what I suggest what our new challenge today is.

How do we move beyond the environmental movement or the poor people's movement that are beginning to ask for individual change from individual law to individual law. To begin to challenge the very institution of the corporation as an unaccountable, unelected institution that acts as government and empower ourselves as self-governing people. The good news is that has already begun.

Davi Cobb

Mass murder in Australia: Tavistock's Martin Bryant
by Allen Douglas and Michael J. Sharp

http://www.alphalink.com.au/~noelmcd/lostlink/Martin-Bryant.htm

On April 28, 1996, twenty-eight-year-old Martin Bryant entered the Broad Arrow cafeteria in Port Arthur, in the Australian state of Tasmania.

After eating lunch, he remarked to a patron, "There are a lot of WASPS, not a lot of Japs." He then picked up his bag and walked toward the entrance, where he took out a military-style semi-automatic rifle. Within 15 seconds, he had slaughtered 12 people and injured several more. Some tried to escape; he gunned them down systematically, laughing as he fired. He chased one man onto a waiting bus and killed him, then shot the bus driver. Others tried to hide beneath the bus, but he climbed underneath it and killed them, too.

A young mother with a six- and a three-year-old daughter begged, "Please don't hurt my babies." He shot her and the three-year-old, then pursued the six-year-old behind a tree, where he put the rifle to the girl's neck, and fired. After executing others in the parking lot, he drove some miles to a bed-and-breakfast, the Seascape Cottage, whose elderly owners he had known for most of his life, and whom he had murdered on his way to Port Arthur.

Armed with an extensive arsenal, moving from room to room and firing at police, he kept dozens of members of the elite Special Operations Groups of Tasmania and neighboring Victoria at bay throughout the night. Finally, at 8:45 the next morning, after setting the building afire, Bryant emerged with his clothes alight, screaming, into the arms of waiting police. The final toll, including a hostage Bryant had taken with him to Seascape from Port Arthur, was 35 dead and 20 wounded--the greatest mass murder in Australia's history.

Within days, the Liberal-National coalition government of Prime Minister John Howard called for the adoption of draconian gun control laws, which proposal was protested with huge demonstrations in Melbourne and other Australian cities; Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer repeatedly made the false, outlandish accusation that the demonstrations were organized by American statesman Lyndon LaRouche.
The Tavistock Institute's lone nuts' -

As {EIR} has documented (see issue of April 4, 1997), Great Britain is the command center for world terrorism today.

This article will demonstrate, through examining the case of Martin Bryant, that the dozens of mass murderers who have exploded into the world's headlines over the last decade or so, constitute a special capability within the Crown's arsenal.

Already in May 1996, after a quick investigation of the Port Arthur massacre, including discussions with Australian police and counter-terror specialists, LaRouche's Australian associates in the Citizens Electoral Council charged in their newspaper, {The New Citizen}, that the incident

"bore all the hallmarks of the blind terror' campaigns pioneered by the Tavistock Institute in London, an arm of British intelligence which ... has conducted precisely the kind of experiments necessary to create and manipulate damaged personalities such as Martin Bryant."

The article recounted the evidence already in hand to support that conclusion; it was hysterically denounced by some of Australia's major media, and by the British Broadcasting Corporation, which broadcast the thesis all over Europe, in order to deny it.

Further investigations over the past year, supplemented by files on Tavistock which this news service has compiled since 1973, have established the following:

1. The Port Arthur events were indeed co-ordinated by Tavistock, the premier psychological warfare unit of the British Crown, which was founded in 1920 based upon studies of "shell shock" and related neuroses caused by the trauma of World War|I.

Tavistock's strategic mission is to replace a civilization of self-ruling, industrial nation-states with a "post-industrial," globalized world ruled by a tiny oligarchy.

Toward this end, Tavistock specializes in what its own psychiatrists call "brainwashing"--the use of stress-induced fear to artificially create neurotic states of mind, which may be programmed as desired.

For instance, Tavistock offered the anxiety-ridden American youth of the 1960s--hit by the Cuban missile crisis, the assassinations of political leaders, and the TV's incessant bloody images of Vietnam--a retreat from this horrifying reality, into the consolations of rock music, drugs, and sex. Taking the bait, the future leaders of America and other nations regressed into an infantile preoccupation with self; patriotism, and an agapic concern for the "common good," were replaced by a hedonistic obsession with "my body," "my feelings"--a {counter}culture.

More generally, Tavistock's "theory of turbulence" specifies that entire populations may be driven into a similar infantile regression by repeated terrorist shocks, such as the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, the sarin gas subway bombing in Japan, or the dozens of Martin Bryant-style mass murders around the world over the past decade.

It is precisely the "blind" nature of such events that makes them psychologically so devastating, since there seems to be no answer to the question, "Why?," and therefore, apparently there is little or nothing that can be done to prevent them.

2. British intelligence will trigger such terrorist events where it has control over the local media, and psychiatric, police, and intelligence networks.

It has this control in Scotland, where a pedophile well known to police murdered 16 five- and six-year-olds and their teacher, in the town of Dunblane on March 13, 1996;

It has this control in the Commonwealth nation of New Zealand, where five such massacres have taken place since 1990; and

It has this control in Australia, to which numerous of Tavistock's top operatives were deployed right after World War II.

Australia, which has seen a dozen mass murders since the infamous "Hoddle Street massacre" of 1987, has been subjected to particularly intense Tavistockian profiling and manipulation--in part, no doubt, because Australia broke with the British Empire in World War II, and allied with Gen. Douglas MacArthur and America, against Churchill's plans to cede Australia to the Japanese.

As an island-nation, Australia also offered a "controlled environment" for Tavistock's experiments; in turn, the most isolated part of Australia, the island-state of Tasmania, off the continent's southeastern tip, has served as the perfect Tavistock laboratory.

And, Tavistock specifies that, because of the power of the modern mass media, no matter where a terrorist attack takes place, the shock is felt worldwide--it is a "global event."

3. Martin Bryant was monitored, directed, and, in all likelihood, programmed by Tavistock networks in Tasmania, from at least the time that one of Tavistock's senior representatives in Australia, the now 88-year-old Dr. Eric Cunningham Dax, first examined Bryant in 1983-84, and set the parameters for all his future "treatment."

Dax was for decades an associate of Tavistock's longtime leader and World Federation of Mental Health chairman, Dr. John Rawlings Rees. Beginning with his collaboration with Rees in the late 1930s, Dax, by his own account, had specialized in "brainwashing."

To cover its tracks, Tavistock invariably circulates what might be called the "Lee Harvey Oswald theory of mass murder"--that each such incident is the result of a "lone nut," who one day just "went crazy."

Such was the "finding" of Melbourne-based British forensic psychiatrist Dr. Paul Mullen, in his evaluation of Bryant for Bryant's defense attorney, in which Mullen concluded,

"It would be more satisfactory if one could point to some simple and direct cause of the tragedy at Port Arthur"; unfortunately, Mullen said, one could not.

But, notwithstanding that Bryant was a "lone nut," Mullen confidently predicted to the {Herald Sun} of Feb. 4, 1997, that there would be "more such massacres because of strong evidence of a copycat element," a warning echoed by other Tavistock assets in Australia and abroad.
Curiously, Mullen himself reportedly participated in the investigation of two mass slaughters in New Zealand, before coming to Australia.

The Bryant case provides some guidelines on how to rip up this Tavistock capability, before the next atrocity is unleashed. -
Shock troops of psychiatrists' -

In 1944, Bank of England chief Montagu Norman suddenly quit his banking post in order to start a Tavistock spin-off called the National Association for Mental Health. Norman had been at the apex of the international financial oligarchy.

One of his proteges, longtime Australian Reserve Bank head H.C. "Nugget" Coombs, called him the "head of a secret international freemasonry of central bankers." As such, he had supervised the banking arrangements which put Adolf Hitler in power, as {EIR} History Editor Anton Chaitkin has documented.
Norman tapped his Bank of England assistant, Sir Otto Niemeyer, to be the NAMH's treasurer, and Niemeyer's niece Mary Appleby, to be general secretary of the association.

Niemeyer is well known to Australians: He headed the infamous "Niemeyer mission" to Depression-wracked Australia in 1930, to tell Australia to savagely cut its health and welfare spending, in order to pay her British creditors.

The British NAMH soon gave birth to the World Federation of Mental Health (WFMH), one of the first of the innumerable, anti-nation-state "non-governmental organizations" spawned by Tavistock. Affiliated with the United Nations, the WFMH was one-worldist from the outset.
To head up the new organization, Norman tapped Brig. Gen. John Rawlings Rees, the head of Tavistock in the 1930s, and then the chief of Britain's World War II Psychological Warfare Directorate.

Rees had commanded 300, mostly Tavistock-trained Army psychiatrists; since then, Tavistock has been almost indistinguishable from the various wings of British Military Intelligence (MI-6, MI-5, SAS, etc.)--a connection perhaps of relevance to the military precision with which Bryant planned and executed his mass slaughter.

At the war's end, in a speech to U.S. Army psychiatrists in 1945, Rees called for the creation of "psychiatric shock troops," who would move out of the military and psychiatric institutions, in order to shape society as a whole:

"If we propose to come out into the open and to attack the social and national problems of our day, then we must have shock troops and these cannot be provided by psychiatry based wholly in institutions. We must have mobile teams of psychiatrists who are free to move around and make contact with the local situation in their particular area.... In every country, groups of psychiatrists linked to each other ... [must begin] to move into the political and governmental field."

The "mission" Rees outlined, was to create a situation "where it is possible for people of every social group to have treatment when they need it, {even when they do not wish it}, without the necessity to invoke the law" (emphasis added).

Tavistock's methods were outlined by Dr. William Sargant in his 1950s book, {The Battle for the Mind: A physiology of conversion and brain-washing.}

A pioneer in the study of "shell shock," Sargant also emphasized the work of Soviet psychologist Pavlov in the 1920s and 1930s, in particular an incident in which a rising flood trapped some of Pavlov's dogs in their cages, while the water rose up to their heads, before receding. Pavlov found that the intense fear the dogs experienced "wiped clean" the tricks they had been taught, following which they could be "reprogrammed."

Further experiments by the SAS/SIS during the 1950s, including in Malaya and Kenya, showed Tavistock that such stress, with resultant "reprogramming" capabilities, could be applied to entire societies.

In a 1961 series of lectures at the University of California Medical School, one of Sargant's closest collaborators, British novelist Aldous Huxley, assessed the notorious MK-Ultra mass drugging and brainwashing experiment which had been under way since the early 1950s. Huxley was the author of the 1952 book, {The Doors of Perception,} which first popularized LSD usage; he had long before fictionalized the results of such experimentation in his novel {Brave New World}. Huxley himself played a key role in MK-Ultra.

With such methods, Huxley now said, in 1961 lectures entitled "Control of the Mind," there will be a "method of making people love their servitude and producing dictatorships without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any real desire to rebel--by propaganda, or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods.

And this seems to be the final revolution." Another pet project of Huxley's from the 1930s on, was the creation of what he called the "somatotonic personality": one who would not hesitate to murder. The Tavistockians operate with a construct of the human mind as a {tabula rasa} that can be imprinted, or a mechanical system that can be manipulated by such techniques. Since the essence of the human mind is, on the contrary, its inherent creative capability, Tavistockian brainwashing works only if the brainwashers can create a "controlled environment," in which the victim sees only the alternatives presented by his tormentors. -

Tavistock deploys to Australia

In the early 1950s, Rees sent two of his "psychiatric shock troops" to Australia, Dr. Eric Cunningham Dax and Dr. Fred E. Emery.

Dr. Eric Cunningham Dax

Dax had written a chapter for Rees's 1949 book, {Modern Practise in Psychological Medicine}, and had trained at the same hospital where Rees had practiced.

Dax was also a protege of Sargant. Sargant had initiated a brainwashing technique called "deep sleep," in which patients were given massive doses of drugs, to keep them asleep 20 hours or more a day, which increased their susceptibility to "programming."
Under Sargant's tutelage, Dax performed 1,300 experiments in deep sleep, and rapidly became one of Britain's top practitioners of so-called "physical methods" of psychiatry, which included pre-frontal lobotomies, on which Dax wrote a monograph, and electric shock, which was often administered during "deep sleep."
The acknowledged problem with "deep sleep," was that up to 2% of the patients subjected to it, died; those who lived were often psychologically destroyed.

Arriving in Australia In 1952, Dax set up the Mental Hygiene Department of Victoria, which in turn set up Australia's entire mental health care system.

As Rees said in his introduction to the book he told Dax to write, {Asylum to Community: The Development of The Mental Hygiene Service in Victoria, Australia}: "The Mental Hygiene Service of Victoria, may, indeed, have provided a major training ground in psychiatry and mental health work for all the English-speaking populations of the South-western Pacific region, and this is a matter of very great importance."
Dr. Fred Emery

The second Tavistock brainwasher whom Rees dispatched to Melbourne around the same time, and whose work would help shape Dax's own, Dr. Fred Emery, set up shop as Senior Research Officer in the Department of Audio Visual Aids at Melbourne University.

There, Emery began conducting experiments on schoolchildren, as described in his article "Psychological Effects of the Western' Film," to see how "oedipal patterns" could be induced in schoolchildren--a subject of some relevance to 28-year-old Martin Bryant, and the mysterious deaths of both his father and Martin's own elderly girl friend.

By the early 1960s, Emery, together with the chairman of Tavistock's governing council, Dr. Eric Trist, was giving lectures to select audiences at Tavistock on methods to brainwash entire societies.

In this new age of mass communication, they said, a series of short, universal shocks would destabilize a targeted population, plunging it into a form of "shell shock," a mass neurosis.

If the shocks were repeated over a period of years, a more and more infantile pattern of thinking would develop.

Emery elaborated these concepts in his 1967 article in Tavistock's magazine {Human Relations,} entitled, "The Next Thirty Years: Concepts, Methods and Anticipations," and in his 1975 "Futures We Are In." In the latter, he outlined the three stages of this process:

#

People would "lose their moral judgment";
#

Next, "segmentation"--societal disintegration--would begin, in which the individual's focus moves from the nation-state to preoccupation with local community or family; and finally,
#

"Disassociation" would set in, "a world in which fantasy and reality are indistinguishable," in which the individual becomes the societal unit.

Emery calls this final result "Clockwork Orange," after the Anthony Burgess novel, in which habitual, random violence by gangs of youth is the order of the day, while adults retreat to their television sets and other forms of "virtual reality."

In 1980, Trist looked back at the last two decades of the assassination of the Kennedys, of Martin Luther King, the Vietnam War, the oil shocks, the Iranian hostage crisis, etc., and announced that the process Tavistock had predicted, had indeed begun, and would now accelerate.

Meanwhile, in Australia, Dax brought Sargant to Melbourne on Aug. 14, 1962, to lecture on "The Mechanism of Brainwashing and Conversion."

Another of Sargant's proteges, the Sydney-based psychiatrist Dr. Harry Bailey, was a fanatical practitioner of "deep sleep," and killed a number of patients during experiments at the Chelmsford Private Hospital in the 1960s and 1970s.

The resulting scandal led to the convening of an investigatory Royal Commission into Deep Sleep, and to Bailey's own suicide in 1985. As reported in the book {Deep Sleep,} by Brian Bromberger and Janet Fyfe-Yeomans, which chronicled Bailey's experiments, Bailey and Sargant "remained in constant contact for almost 30 years, and ... Bailey often spoke of the competition between them to see who could keep their patients in the deepest coma without killing them."

Dax himself pushed ahead with research on "turbulence," "aggression," and "brainwashing"--all from the Reesian perspective of using psychiatry to shape society as a whole, as exemplified by a speech he gave at the University of Melbourne on July 20, 1964, titled "Some Observations on Psychiatric Research." "It is no more than a few years past," he said, "when psychiatry was solely represented by the mental hospitals, before the child guidance clinics were first begun or the psychiatrists started to move into the outpatient diagnostic centres.... The mental hospitals may be likened to the grandmothers of community psychiatry....

Within the span of a single generation, psychiatrists have been thrown from the protective, circumscribed and alienating walls of these hospitals into a restless, changing and aggressive community, seething with turbulence, which struggles to adjust to the gathering speed of mechanization and the disrupting forces of a disordered society.

"Most of us are more experienced in the treatment of individuals than in correcting the pathological behavior of groups, though there may be an increasing tendency to seek our advice in these and related matters. For instance, the frightening implications of forcible indoctrination of individuals on the one level and communities on the other are closely related to our specialty. Yet almost paradoxically we are driven to consider as to whether modifications of such methods of indoctrination can be used in the treatment of some of the psychoses."

Foreshadowing his work on Martin Bryant, Dax continued: "In many of these fields, the {consideration of aggression is of the greatest importance. There is no more useful subject for research studies at the present time, whether it be in the individual or the group}.

Here, from the individual, the psychiatrist has much to learn. It may be that the aggression is turned inwards, ultimately resulting in suicide, outwards in homicide, or more specifically in hostility towards the community, in causing death on the road...

"Moreover many a murderer has the inability to postpone his strong emotional reactivity to thwarting, and this often has an association with a past history of repeated frustration of a variety with which he has been unable to deal.

Or again, the person who uses a motor car as an extension of his own aggressive body image may be using it in escaping from his anxieties and supposed rejection by the community. Yet it seems that none of these aggressive manifestations would be of the same magnitude were it not for the effect of alcohol. It releases these strains by depressing the inadequate control which spreads its thin veneer over the underlying aggression" (emphasis added).

Precisely these elements were to arise in the Martin Bryant case. In 1969, Dax left his prestigious, highly influential position in Melbourne to go to the backwater state of Tasmania, an island of some 300,000 people off Australia's southeast coast.

A prominent U.S. psychiatrist who specializes in ritual abuse, and who is intimately familiar with Australian psychiatry over the past three decades, when queried by this news service as to why in the world Dax would move to Tasmania, replied:

"Tasmania is the Appalachia of Australia. There is a lot of alcoholism, a lot of incest. It is the poorest of all the states, very primitive, with a lot of descendants from very violent criminals from the British days. You will find many people there with no value system, no super-ego.

"It is the perfect place for Manchurian candidates, and for all sorts of experiments. He could do whatever he wanted there."

Something of great interest must have been taking place in Tasmania, because two of Tavistock's leading international operatives, the Melbourne-based Dr. Alan Stoller, a past president of the World Federation of Mental Health and a close associate of John Rawlings Rees and of Dax, and Dr. John Bowlby, went to Tasmania for extended visits in 1971 and 1972, respectively.
Dax and Bryant -

From early childhood, Martin Bryant was a very disturbed individual, as British psychiatrist Paul Mullen could not help but record in his evaluation for the defense:

"Mr. Bryant was assessed on a number of occasions by psychologists and psychiatrists.... He was noted to be aggressive, destructive and very difficult with other children.... There are references to him stealing, to him having violent outbursts and to tormenting vulnerable children.... There are records of Mr. Bryant torturing and harassing animals and of tormenting his sister."

Bryant was notorious among his schoolmates for carrying a green can of gasoline, which he constantly threatened to pour on things and set them alight, as he once did so on himself. His schoolmates would frequently remark, "Here comes silly Martin with his can."

Before long, this behavior brought him to the attention of Dax, as Mullen noted: "In February 1984 Mr. Bryant was assessed by a very experienced clinical psychiatrist, Dr. Cunningham-Dax," an evaluation which set the parameters for all further treatment of Bryant.

Contacted by an American academic on April 16, 1997 about his evaluation of Bryant, Dax said, "I left Tasmania in 1983, I think it was, and I had seen him a few times before that, but I had no notes on him, except that I thought that he was below normal intellectually and that his father was very permissive about him. And I wondered about the boy, whether later he might have some schizophrenic features. But that is as far as I went."

Judging by the impact Bryant made on another psychiatrist who examined Bryant soon after, Dax was singularly unobservant. Dr. Ian Sale, psychiatrist for the prosecution, recalled in a discussion on April 16: "When he was about 16 or 17, he was examined by a government doctor for the purpose of a pension assessment. It was to that doctor that he made some reference to having a wish to {shoot people}. She still remembers that to this day" (emphasis added).

Dr. Sale noted that, not only did Dax have "no recall of the assessment," but that, "unfortunately, the clinical notes that were made, were destroyed," ostensibly because Dax "was practicing in the rooms of another psychiatrist. When that psychiatrist died, it was a provision of his will, that his notes be destroyed, apparently, which is remarkable.

And not only were his notes destroyed, but also Dr. Cunningham-Dax's notes were destroyed." The psychiatrist, Dr. T.H.G. Dick, was also British, and had served as Tasmania's medical commissioner beginning in 1969, the year Dax moved to Tasmania. Shortly after, Dax joined Dick on the Medical Advisory Committee to Tasmania's Mental Health Commission. Despite Dax's fascination with aggression, suicide, and murder, Dax claimed he knew very little about Bryant. And, when asked to comment on the relevance of his associate Emery's "theory of turbulence" for the Port Arthur events, Dax replied, guardedly, "I don't think I can answer your question usefully."

Emery himself died in early April 1997, and thus could not answer the question either. But, Dax said, "The person who knows a good deal more about Bryant is in the University of Tasmania, at the hospital there, the Royal Hobart. They did a good deal of study of Bryant at the time. Professor Jones is his name, but the person who knew more about him was the research person, who was particularly interested in Bryant."

Dr. Jones, who is British, and who, until his retirement, headed the two floors of Royal Hobart Hospital which are devoted to psychiatric studies, was unavailable for comment. -
What the police knew -

As well known as Bryant was to Tasmania's Tavistock networks, he was equally well known to the police--despite post-Port Arthur protestations to the contrary--as evidenced in the following:

1. He had repeatedly threatened to kill some of his neighbors in Tasmania, several of which incidents, at least, had been reported to the police.

2. On one of his frequent international flights, he had been arrested at Melbourne Airport on suspicion of being a drug courier, in part because he travelled without luggage; he was taken to the Royal Melbourne Hospital and examined before being released.

On another occasion, pornographic videos depicting bestiality were found in his luggage. According to one police source interviewed by this news service, Bryant's police records indicated a profile of a "psychotic multiple killer."

3. That profile accorded well with what his neighbors thought of him, and not merely because of his frequent threats.

There was intense suspicion among them that Bryant had murdered, first, his spinster friend and protector, wealthy heiress Helen Harvey, and then, then months later, his father, Maurice Bryant.

Eyewitnesses had seen Bryant wrench the steering wheel from Harvey while the two were out driving, and Harvey had told the mayor of Tasman Council, not long before the fatal car crash that killed her and seriously wounded Bryant, "Oh, he's a worry to me sometimes. He grabbed hold of the steering wheel coming down today, and nearly pulled me off the road, going silly. What would you do with him?"

On Aug. 16, 1993, Maurice Bryant was found, wearing weight belts, dead at the bottom of a dam on the property formerly owned by Harvey, which she had willed to Martin Bryant.

Bryant had had numerous arguments with his father, who moved onto the property the same night that Harvey was killed; his son was particularly bitter that his father was getting rid of the menagerie that the younger Bryant and Harvey had collected. After his father had disappeared, {but before his body had been found}, Martin ran into neighbor Marian Larner outside the local hospital.

As Larner reported to the police shortly thereafter--who never questioned her further--Bryant had accosted her excitedly, grabbing her by the shoulders: "Oh, Marian, it's so exciting. So exciting!" She asked, "What are you talking about, Martin?" "Dad's at the bottom of the dam," he replied. "You'll hear all about it soon. You'll read all about it." And, when the elder Bryant's body was soon after pulled from the dam, "The searchers were amazed to see Martin walking back from the dam, laughing," according to a book about Bryant, {Suddenly One Sunday,} by local journalist Mike Bingham.

Several days before, another neighbor, John Featherstone, had run into strangers inquiring about a boat which a man named "Martin" had advertised for sale. When asked why he was selling the boat, Martin Bryant had told them that his father had just recently passed away.

After recounting the incident to his wife, Featherstone told her, incredulously, "I saw Maurice just this morning!"

4. But, it was not only local police who noticed Bryant. In early 1994, on one of his trips to the United Kingdom, he checked into a hotel in Hereford, the super-sensitive home of Britain's elite Special Air Services (SAS).

Bryant started acting so strangely, that the hotel management notified the police, who notified Interpol, which in turn put in inquiries to the police in Tasmania, who replied that his slate was clean. -
The guy had military training' -

Beyond all these and other run-ins with the police, which curiously never resulted in anything, still another anomally is the obvious planning and skill which went into the commission of the mass murder itself--well beyond the capabilities of someone diagnosed as "borderline intellectually disabled," in the lowest 1-2% of Australia's population, and unable to manage his own affairs.

After reading Mullen's psychiatric evaluation, one of Australia's senior counter-terror experts, who had himself investigated the case, observed to this news service on the subject of Bryant ostensibly having learned all he knew about weaponry and tactics from "survival magazines":

"If this guy had weapons and survival skills from magazines, then that conflicts with his learning difficulties--how could he understand the books in the first place? Any decent lawyer would have a field day with this report. They could pick it to pieces. For a start, Bryant worked out the military aspects of the shooting.

Most soldiers couldn't do that on their own, but Bryant did. What's more, he outsmarted the police by doubling back to the Seascape--that's not a low IQ. Then, look at the planning of the assault, the equipment required, the weapons stash, the most effective weapons to use, how much ammunition to take with him, how to use the weaponry, planning an escape route, creating havoc in multiple areas to keep the authorities guessing, and so on.

Now, how could he have learned all that from books, with such a low IQ and poor reading skills? This guy had military training." Tasmanian Deputy Commissioner Lupo Prins, who directed the overall police operation at Port Arthur on April 28, 1996, observed drily to {The New Citizen} in mid-April 1997, that Bryant had "set up six different areas of activity--he had police running in circles.

That's pretty good for a guy who's a slow learner." Prins also told the {Courier Mail} on April 28, 1997, that he believes Bryant "was playing out some pre-arranged script. What that script was, we don't know," because even though Bryant, unlike most mass murderers, did not commit suicide and was not killed, and thus "is able to tell the story ...|, he hasn't. It's really frustrating."

That Bryant's actions, and even his very words, had been choreographed, was also the assessment of the man who dealt most closely with him, Sgt. Terry McCarthy, the police negotiator during the siege at Seascape. McCarthy recalled with some amazement how very calm Bryant, who was then calling himself "Jamie," was throughout the siege.

Author Mike Bingham interviewed McCarthy and summarized his observations in his book: McCarthy had "found that parts of his [Bryant's] conversation seemed prepared in advance, and it had become clear that some of what Bryant had done was extremely well planned."

And, as Bingham further recorded, in the observations of Broad Arrow kitchen supervisor Brigid Cook about Bryant: "The care that he took of himself struck her. He appeared to be having a fine time, a very exciting time, but he made sure there was no way he could be snuck up on." And, where did the well-trained Bryant get his military-style weapons?

In an interview with the {Herald Sun} on June 23, 1996, Victorian farmer and gun collector Bill Drysdale said that he had turned his Colt AR 15 in to the Victorian police in February 1993, but he was virtually certain that the AR 15 Bryant used was his, both because of the rarity of that weapon in Australia at the time, and because of the unique mark a gunsmith had made on the barrel of his rifle, which matched that on Bryant's rifle.

The serial numbers were almost identical, and "my rifle also had a collapsible stock and a Colt sight, just as the massacre weapon has," said Drysdale.

The {Herald Sun} noted, "One of Australia's largest firearms importers told the {Sunday Herald Sun} that firearms matching the Port Arthur weapon were as scarce as hen's teeth,' and that the chances of two weapons of the same type, with almost-matching serial numbers, being imported into Australia, were next to nothing.'|

" After an interview with police, Drysdale was ordered by them not to talk to reporters any further.
Why did the Tasmanian police repeatedly overlook Bryant's activities?

The chief police official for Tasmania until his recent retirement was Commissioner of Police John Johnson, who was also the head of the Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence. Johnson commanded the police team which carried out a 15-week investigation of the Port Arthur events, and somehow managed to miss all of the anomalies recorded above.
Who is Johnson?

Among other things, he was the first prominent Australian police official to call for the legalization of drugs, which he did in 1995. As a series of articles in the {The New Citizen} in 1996 demonstrated, those pushing the decriminalization of drugs in Australia--whose major funder is George Soros--are precisely those London-linked financial circles who are already benefitting from drug-money laundering.

Right after the Port Arthur investigation, Johnson retired, and has seemingly disappeared. Said a police source to {The New Citizen}, "You can't find him, because he doesn't intend to be found."

There are still other anomalies in the case, beyond Bryant's contacts with psychiatric networks and with the police.

Despite official pledges to "get to the bottom of the case, so such a tragedy would never happen again," all evidence about the case, including the psychiatric evaluations of Bryant, was ordered sealed by the judge.

In addition, an expose which had been produced by the TV show "Four Corners," on the Tasmanian Mental Health Department--which had had extensive contact with Bryant from the time he was a child--was suddenly cancelled, just before it was to air.

Then, several weeks after the Port Arthur massacre, 23-year-old Dion Garry Yost went on a shooting rampage in the Northern Territory town of Palmerston, in which he wounded one civilian and four police officers. Yost had attended, several years after Bryant had, the same Tasmanian high school! According to psychiatrists, Bryant modeled his murders, at least in part, on that of Thomas Hamilton's March 13, 1996 slaughter in Dunblane, Scotland, an act that horrified the world. Bryant's neighbors even said that he was in the U.K., on one of his many trips there, when Dunblane took place.

There, too, the "lone nut" Hamilton, a pedophile well known to police, had nonetheless been allowed to organize "Scouting clubs" all over Scotland. -

The Monarch Project -

The Tavistock-sponsored form of "blind terror" of which Bryant is an example, has the great advantage to its authors, that its programmed zombies almost invariably kill themselves, or are killed during the course of the events, leaving little or no evidence.

"One of the essential elements ... is they are looking to kill and be killed," as Mullen put it. Bryant stated that he was sure he would be killed; though he has not yet killed himself in prison--despite two attempts--prison authorities have publicly stated that they expect a fellow inmate to kill him.
Was Bryant programmed?

Perhaps hard-core programming was not necessary; given his psychological make-up, it may have been sufficient just to "steer" him. But, he did show signs of one known form of Tavistock brainwashing in which individuals can be programmed to kill, and then to kill themselves, as a "sub-routine" of Tavistock's MK-Ultra known as the Monarch Project. The best documentation on Monarch, although still sketchy, is provided in the second edition of former Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp's book, {The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism and Murder in Nebraska}.

One of DeCamp's clients, child-abuse victim Paul Bonacci, was a Monarch trainee, and has described in detail (not all of which DeCamp records in his book) some of the processes involved. These are much more sophisticated than the average psychiatrist is equipped either to recognize, or to treat.

Monarch, or related conditioning, leaves certain tell-tale signs in its victims:

1) Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD);
2) bizarre sexual behavior; and, frequently,
3) involvement in Satanic cult activity.

The normal, healthy personality could not be "programmed" without going through degrading conditioning, which involved or resulted in the above. Bryant did show signs of MPD, a disorder in which anywhere from two to over a hundred distinct personalities are present in the same individual. A neighbor, John Featherstone, told {The New Citizen,}

"Bryant had at least three or four very distinct personalities. One I would call the surfer personality, in which Bryant used to dress in surfer-type clothes and put a surfboard on top of his car, {even though everyone knew he never surfed}." Then, there is the cool and calm personality, "Jamie," who spoke with police during the siege at the Seascape cottage, and who was strikingly different in demeanor, and even in voice, than Bryant's usual self.

The "occasional sudden switches in the direction of Mr. Bryant's discourse," which Mullen recorded, are also characteristic of MPD, as different personalities emerge. Bryant's interviews with police after the slaughter, in which he denied that he had even been at Port Arthur and seemed genuinely astonished at the charges against him, are also consistent with MPD.

The great usefulness of MPD for Tavistock controllers, is that different personalities, whose existence is not even known to the main personality, may be programmed to carry out distinct tasks, but unless those personalities are later "accessed," the main personality will have only a fragmentary idea, if any at all, of what has happened. As for the bizarre sexual behavior, besides the pornographic videos Bryant brought back to Australia depicting bestiality, he was known for sleeping with a pig in his room.

Satanic activity has not been reported (it rarely is in such cases), but his favorite video was reported to be "Child's Play 2," in which a doll comes to life and goes around slaughtering people. On Nov. 22, 1996, Bryant was sentenced to 35 terms of life imprisonment, and to 21 years each on 37 other charges, the terms to run consecutively, and without parole.

He originally pled "not guilty" to 72 counts of murder and mayhem. With a new lawyer, and under pressure, he changed that to "guilty," which ensured that there would be no trial. Indeed, as Mullen stated at the outset of his psychiatric report for Bryant's new lawyer,

"This report is intended to clarify for the court why an insanity plea was not considered appropriate...."

However, the decision to find Bryant sane, together with his sudden change of mind to plead "guilty," is of enormous benefit to those who want to make sure the truth never comes out.

Under Australia's law, if Bryant were found insane, then he would be monitored and periodically re-evaluated, to see if he regained his sanity.
Were he to do so, he would then be put on trial--and some more of Tavistock's handiwork would undoubtedly be exposed to the light of day.



For further reading Citizens for LaRouche, "Stamp Out the Aquarian Conspiracy," 1980. Richard Condon,

{The Manchurian Candidate} (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959). The classic fictional treatment of MK-Ultra experiments of the 1950s. John DeCamp,

{The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism and Murder in Nebraska} (Lincoln, Neb.: AWT Inc., 1997, second edition). H.V. Dicks,

{Fifty Years of the Tavistock Clinic} (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970). Carol Greene,

{Morder aus der Retorte: Der Fall Charles Manson} ({Test-Tube Murder: The Case of Charles Manson}) (Wiesbaden, Germany: Dr. B”ttiger Verlags-GmbH, 1992). John Rawlings Rees,

{The Shaping of Psychiatry by War} (New York: W.W. Norton, 1945). William W. Sargant,

{Battle for the Mind: A Physiology of Conversion and Brain-Washing} (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1975

[first edition, 1957]). "The Tavistock Grin," {The Campaigner,} 1974.From {EIR}:

"The Tavistock Psychiatrists Behind the Rape of Bosnia," Feb. 12, 1993.

"British Psychiatry from Eugenics to Assassination," Oct. 7, 1994. "Newt Gingrich Looks at the Future," Jan. 12, 1996.

"Tavistock's Imperial Brainwashing Project," May 24, 1996. "The Media Cartel That Controls What You Think," Jan. 17, 1997.