This exposé proves the Christchurch mass shooter, Brenton Tarrant, could have been caught before he fired a shot. In spite of public statements made by New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, the attached manifesto sent by email to the Government’s HQ eight minutes before the attack contained the locations of the intended targets, which could have been identified in one minute flat.
Since the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) has oversight of national security and because the Prime Minister is also the Minister of National Security and Intelligence, the evidence strongly indicates Ardern’s Cabinet was the prime target in a coup d’état with a novel Trojan Horse twist.
Not only was the emergency response ‘failure’ covered-up by the Royal Commission, the NZ Police, and the NZ Government, but also New Zealand’s Security Intelligence Service has displayed a lack of forbearance about enjoining itself in this cover-up. Disturbingly, this lack of forbearance does not bode well for New Zealand, given that NZ’s National Security State plays a game of contrived ignorance about the role of state-sponsored terrorism to jolt the political trajectories of nations.
Former Māori Television news and current affairs editor, Steve ‘Snoopman’ Edwards, compares the damage control that occurred in the immediate aftermath of the 1985 Rainbow Warrior Bombing, to the cover-up of emergency response failure that followed the Ides of March Mosques Massacre. He finds the Director-General of the SIS ought to have been more cautious about going along with the Government agencies’ 30 year suppression of evidence submitted to the Royal Commission.
Because, nearly 32 years after the sinking of Greenpeace’s Pacific flagship in Auckland Harbour, the SIS Director-General Rebecca Kitteridge declassified a SIS report in 2017, that revealed the scope of the investigation was constricted to limit the fall-out with the French Government and the Western Alliance. It turns out, the over-arching meta objective of the Rainbow Warrior Bombing was to signal to Western Élites to regain control over their activist movements.
This series explores the supposition that the 2019 Ides of March Mosques Massacre was inflicted as a deus ex machina plot device, in part to resolve an impossible impassé whose narrative roots extended back to the 1980s. A full restoration of N.Z.’s security alliance with the U.S.-NATO Military Empire under a Labour-led Government in the 33rd year after the 1985 Rainbow Warrior Bombing appears to have also signalled to the Global Élites that a dark world reset was on the horizon.
Key Finding: Despite a specialist counter-terrorism coordinator being appointed to the Beehive by mid-2018, the Government’s was evidently unable to work out in one minute flat where the mass shooter was headed and sound the alarm with Christchurch Police. Subsequently, the entire National Security State doubled-down to cover-up the brutal truth: no one need have died.
By Steve ‘Snoopman’ Edwards
A Trojan Horse Cyber Attack Email?
The locations that the Christchurch mosque mass shooter targeted could have been worked out from the manifesto by any smart nine year-old with a laptop and internet connection — in one minute flat.
The convicted gunman, Brenton Harrison Tarrant, shot 100 Muslim worshippers at two mosques in Christchurch New Zealand, killing 51 and injuring 49. At the time, Tarrant was reported to be 28-years old, a white male Australian national and an ex-gym trainer who had travelled extensively.
The Christchurch Mosques Massacre of Friday March 15 2019 was the world’s fourth deadliest, first live-streamed civilian mass shooting. And, as New Zealand’s largest peace-time massacre — it came with a twist.
The gunman is alleged to have sent a Trojan email subject-lined — “On the attack in New Zealand today” — before commencing his horrific carnage.
Immediately, the subject-line prompts the reader to ask: Where?
The attacked Christchurch mosques — that were specified as targets in the manifesto — could have been located on Google Maps in one minute flat. I know this is true, because I tested myself once I found out the email subject-line.
When I learned that the manifesto had been sent by email to the Prime Minister’s office nine minutes (subsequently corrected to eight minutes) before the attack, I made a decision to hold-off downloading the manifesto until I had found out the email’s subject-line.
I wanted to test if the official story was true, since the world was told the manifesto did not contain any specific details or locations — by no less a figure than New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Kate Laurell Ardern.
And, Ardern had said the email was forwarded within two minutes of receipt to the Parliamentary Security Team in accordance with a security protocol. This fact made me wonder whether the email’s subject-line was attention-grabbing.
This subject-line had only been reported twice by the mainstream media, and on Snoopman News (May 9 2019), prior to the Royal Commission’s embargoed report of December 2020.
About a month after the attacks, I was sent an article published on March 21 2019 that mentioned the email subject-line in an analysis piece by Henry Cooke titled, “Christchurch terror attack: mistruths and conspiracy theories” in Stuff News. (The subject-line was reported by NZ’s media only twice*). Mr Cooke stated that while the body of the email did not identify the locations of the targets, “[t]he two mosques are mentioned many pages into his lengthy manifesto.”
Another mention of the email subject-line was in an opinion piece, “More than 20 years too late we’re banning semi-automatic weapons”, by Barry Soper appearing in The New Zealand Herald on March 19. Sopers article mentions the two targets mosques were identified on page 11 (actually page 12). I did not find this article until after I tested myself to locate the targeted mosques in the manifesto.
Neither Stuff or The New Zealand Herald followed up with the Prime Minister to question why she was advised that the manifesto did not contain a location or any specific details, particularly since New Zealanders were banned from reading the manifesto by the time they typed their articles downplaying skepticism about the emergency response.
Therefore, Cooke downplayed the fact that the shooter’s manifesto stated the two targets mosques were identified, despite the fact the Prime Minister had conveyed to the country and the world that the manifesto did not contain any specific details or locations. His article let the news media ‘off-the-hook’ to investigate the email’s significance landing at the Government’s headquarters.
Conspicuously, neither journalist actually printed the pronouns used in the manifesto to identify the mosques. In the news business, such fleeting treatments are termed ‘once over lightly’, so the media can say they reported it at the time. But, it comes with a lack a forbearance that this fallback position may one day escalate into an epic bombardment that changes the news-scape in favour of humanity — forever.
So, I searched for the ‘manifesto’ to see if it answered the “where” question.
While it was downloading via a file-sharing ‘cloud’ and my slow rural internet at the time, I brought up Google Maps.
The gunman’s manifesto attributed to the authorship of the terrorist, Brenton Tarrant, twice mentions in past tense on page 12, carrying out attacks on the “Christchurch and Linwood mosques” and also a “mosque in Ashburton” — if he made it there before being caught.
There are two Islamic Centres in Christchurch, which like the mosques are also identified on Google Maps with the Islamic crescent moon and star symbol. One is called the Linwood Islamic Centre. And therefore, the Rasol-O-Allah Islamic Center in the outer north western suburb of Bishopdale was likely not to be the “Christchurch mosque” that the accused-terrorist’s ‘manifesto’ was referring to — on page 12.
By using the active noun “attack” from the censored email’s subject line, as a search term in the attached 74-page ‘manifesto’, the specified mosques were readily identifiable in online maps. A quick search for the active noun “attack” revealed a spike of 14 repetitions on page 11, and the following page identifies the mosques Tarrant intended to target.
Alternatively, by using the active noun “attack” and the pronoun “New Zealand” from the censored email’s subject line, as search terms in the attached 74-page ‘manifesto’, the specified mosques were also readily identifiable in online maps.
Taking the gunman’s details of locations — “Christchurch and Linwood mosques” — that he signaled were chosen in Christchurch to attack, I typed “Christchurch and Linwood Mosque”. Google Maps’ algorithm correctly sensed my location query lacked specificity for “Christchurch” and added the noun “mosque”, to find two mosques.
In 0.54 seconds, Google Maps returned the locations for the Al Noor Mosque on Deans Ave across the road from Hagley Park and for the Linwood Mosque at the Linwood Islamic Centre on Linwood Ave.
Next, I altered the search to allow for human variance, typing Christchurch Mosque and Islamic Centre, which returned the additional mosque, Rasol-O-Allah Islamic Center in north west Christchurch. Then I searched for Christchurch Police Stations to get a sense of their proximity to the two targeted mosques.
The Sunday after the mosques attack, Prime Minister Ardern said the gunman’s email, “did not contain a location, it did not include specific details.” N.Z.’s PM also claimed the email and the ‘manifesto’ did not supply “details that could have been acted upon immediately”.
Yet, any sharp nine year-old with a laptop and an internet connection could have worked out in one minute flat where the Australian national, Brenton Harrison Tarrant, was headed.
Because the manifesto was sent by email to the Government’s HQ eight minutes before the attack — it would appear the Ardern Government became compromised by this emergency response ‘failure’.
Especially, since the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet has oversight of national security. The news media avoided spelling out to the NZ public that the P.M. is also the Minister of National Security and Intelligence.
The Royal Commission omitted stating these inconvenient facts.
These facts indicate that someone in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, or in the Prime Minister’s Office determined that the email was threatening — as the email subject-line made clear. And that despite an imminent attack or threat of one occurring, or of an atrocity that had just happened — the emergency response was pedestrian.
This pedestrian emergency response occurred in spite of the fact that in the spring of 2018, a series of emergency training exercises took place, that featured elements in their scenarios that bore uncanny resemblance to the themes expressed in the terror attacks of March 15th 2019.
In October 2018, the National Emergency Management Agency ran an emergency 111 escalation exercise, which conspicuously appeared to have no name, involved the Southland Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group. The timing of this exercise roughly corresponds with a joint emergency response exercise between NZ’s Security Intelligence Service (SIS) and Police.
This uncanny joint table-top exercise involved several scenarios, including one that envisaged an extremist right-wing attack on worshippers leaving Al-Noor Mosque on Deans Avenue, involving a lone actor driving a vehicle at Muslim pedestrians, while shouting anti-immigration and Islamophobic slurs as he fled the scene.
The Royal Commissioners downplayed this inter-agency table-top exercise featuring Al Nor Mosque as a striking coincidence. The Commission’s Report was the first public mention of this joint table-top simulation exercise.
A June 2019 SIS review entitled, “The 2019 Terrorist Attacks in Christchurch: A Review into NZSIS Processes and Decision Making in the lead up to the 15 March attacks” stated that it would have been implausible for the SIS to have reacted in conjunction with the Police to Mr Tarrant’s deliberate dissemination of the manifesto (or his 8chan ‘farewell’ posting online immediately prior to the attacks.
However, the scope of this SIS report — and a mock tabletop investigation to determine if the SIS could have detected the gunman’s activities — were carefully limited by their terms of reference. Like the Royal Commission of Inquiry and two Police-commissioned reports released after Royal Commission report was published — the SIS review avoided examining the ‘elephant in the security room’: the email’s subject-line offered the search terms for immediate identification of the target locations.
Then, in November 2018, a cyber-security exercise called Exercise Actuator took place, with the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet being designated the lead agency. The DPMC hosts the National Emergency Management Agency.
And, despite the fact that a specialist counter-terrorism coordinator was appointed to the Security and Intelligence Group (SIG) within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet — in 2018 — the pedestrian emergency response of March 15th 2019 still occurred.
The Prime Minister also said on March 17th 2019 that this ‘manifesto’ was forwarded with the email to the Parliamentary Services Security Team, in accordance with security policy, within two minutes of receipt.
The head of Parliamentary Services bureaucracy, including Parliamentary Services Security Team, at the time was Speaker of the House, Trevor Mallard.
The Royal Commission report stated that 1.32pm, Mr Tarrant “sent an email to 34 recipients, including the Office of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, media organisations and the Parliamentary Service.”
Therefore, the email was sent eight minutes before the carnage commenced to two email addresses for the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, as well as to Leader of the Opposition, Simon Bridges, and the Head of Parliamentary Services, Trevor Mallard, who is the House Speaker, and also a Parliamentary Tours Desk (for guided tours), and 28 media organizations, or individuals who worked for news organizations.
Embedded in New Zealand’s largest peacetime massacre is that fact that the alleged lone gunman — whether wittingly or not — had in a sense captured the VIPs in government and the political opposition, as well as the news media, and the National Security State.
They are all hostage to the terrible truth — nobody need have died.
Since the security protocol in the N.Z. Parliament stipulated forwarding threatening emails to the Security Team this exploitable security weakness appears to have precluded common sense to ring the NZ Police South Comms Command Centre with a direct dial ‘bat-phone’ and forward the email with the manifesto.
Absent, quick thinking to use the noun attack or its combination the pronoun New Zealand, to search the manifesto, those eight ticking minutes became a deadly countdown because the shooter’s Trojan email turned time into a weapon.
Most New Zealanders do not realize the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch Attacks was a cover-up by design. The only agency that came under the purview of the Royal Commission was Parliamentary Services. Yet, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) is charged with overseeing New Zealand’s national security. This exclusion meant that in spite of the terrorist’s warning email arriving eight minutes at two electronic addresses for Jacinda Ardern at the Beehive, neither the Minister responsible for National Security and Intelligence, nor any departmental executives and officials were investigated, cross-examined or grilled over the squandered ticking eight minutes.
In a ministerial briefing dated October 20 2017 to the incoming Prime Minister, as Minister of National Security and Intelligence, Jacinda Ardern was informed:
“On your behalf, as Minister of National Security and Intelligence, DPMC stewards the national security system. Security and Intelligence Group (SIG) works to with other agencies to ensure that potential national security risks to New Zealand are recognised and assessed, readiness is built, maintained, and response to and recovery from emergencies is timely, coordinated, and effective.”
— Briefing to Incoming Minister of National Security and Intelligence, October 20 2017
While it may seem reasonable to say — as the Royal Commission claimed — that Parliamentary Service Security acted appropriately in relation to the email within a period of time that was reasonable in the circumstances — this assertion is founded on the construction of numerous logical fallacies designed into the Royal Commission’s Terms of Reference.
Foremost among the structured logical flaws of the inquiry, is the restriction over the Royal Commission to only investigate the activities of one public agency, Parliamentary Services — once the mass shooter’s email was sent. This restriction was central to the structural cover-up, evidence laundering and a parallel construction of evidence — as I shall show in subsequent parts.
Parallel construction is a fraudulent law enforcement process of building a parallel — or separate — evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began.
The Chief Executive of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) — who chairs the national emergency group, Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Coordination (ODESC) — convened a meeting in the immediate aftermath of the mass shooting. The ODESC group is headed by government chief executives and is the primary committee of the National Security System, which swings into action during crises that threaten (or are perceived to threaten) New Zealand’s security, sovereignty or economy.
Yet, the world knows next to nothing about what occurred in the aftermath, because the ODESC’s proceedings — along with the emergency response of the Police, the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) and the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) — have been suppressed for 30 years.
In this kid gloves way, the Royal Commission was able to prepare its report so that no embarrassing black-inked redactions were necessary after conducting its non-adversarial proceedings behind closed doors.
Tarrant’s sudden guilty plea of March 26th 2020 — the first day New Zealand’s level four Great Corona Hostage Crisis lockdown — meant the evidence from either side of the case was not publicly scrutinized, tested in court and, therefore, the Crown avoided broad public exposure of its emergency failure.
Perhaps the PM’s Office knew the locations by 1:38pm, which is the time the Security Team within Parliamentary Services was phoned by the Office of the Prime Minister. At 1:39pm, the PM’s office forwarded the email and manifesto to the Security Team.
Conspicuously, the same minute that Tarrant opened fire at 1:40pm, Parliament’s Security sounded the trumpet to the Police. This time, 1:40pm is also when the more fortunate worshippers fled from the prayer room to the garden. Police Commissioner Bush stated that at 13:40:44, Parliamentary Security called South Comms, which is based in Christchurch. This indicates Parliamentary Security finally tweaked the attack was taking place in the southern city, whose potent name had been weaponized.
In the aftermath, the Government, the Police and other security services appeared to know the emergency response was slow. For one thing, during a 5:30pm media briefing dated March 17 2019, Police Commissioner Mike Bush was asked by a reporter when did the Police receive the gunman’s email that was sent to the Prime Minister’s office and other locations, and was there enough time for the police to respond. Commissioner Bush answered:
“No, by the time, um, we were advised of that email, this attack had taken place.”
— Police Commissioner Mike Bush, Media Briefing, 5:30pm March 17 2019
The moment Bush finished answering with an economy befitting of an official from a religious city state — whose only trade-able services are financial bonds denominated in its currency, secret chivalrous militant orders who design black ops and a mythology perpetuating the fraud of an afterlife resort or eternal damnation — his personal assistant called an end to the presser.
And, the first official mention of the text of the email subject-line, “On the attack in New Zealand today” was in the Royal Commission’s Report, publicly released on December 8 2020, nearly 20 months after the one of New Zealand’s ‘darkest days’ on the 74th day of the year, also known as the ‘Ides of March’.
Brazenly, NZ Police Commissioner Mike Bush bragged that Mr Tarrant was apprehended nineteen minutes after Police received the first emergency call.
This ‘swift’ and ‘heroic’ police work narrative was part of a cover-story to construct a new national myth: an exemplary emergency response.
Police Association President, Chris Cahill, claimed it was a “hell of a coincidence” that Brenton Tarrant was caught by two Police who had broken from a training exercise. This national level paramilitary police training exercise took place at Princess Margaret Hospital in Cashmere, Christchurch, and was comprised of the counter-terrorism Special Tactics Group and Armed Offenders squads and their Australian counterparts.
Curiously, the report of the Royal Commission did not mention this second ‘striking coincidence’.
Moreover, the official Police timeline states that New Zealand Police arrived at Masjid Al Noor at 13:51, meaning nineteen minutes had lapsed since the shooters email was sent to 34 recipients, including the New Zealand Government’s HQ.
However, the fact that Brenton Tarrant was caught by two Police from Ashburton, who had broken away from a training exercise, while the shooter was en route to Ashburton to attack a third mosque — breaches a key rule of story architecture.
While a story may begin with a coincidence, a story never ends with one.
Unless, a new story was began when the gunman’s triggers were pulled.
An ‘independent’ debrief Police entitled, “Operation Deans – The first 48 hours” debrief white-washes the emergency response failure by cementing the national myth of a swift and heroic police response. “The first 48 hours” debrief quotes Canterbury District Commander John Price describing the horrific day, “our darkest hour … but also our finest”.
A new national myth was clearly in formation, since the Crown Police, the N.Z. Government and the Parliament Services Security were all complicit in masking over the fact it was possible to work out where the mass shooter was headed — in one minute flat.
This national myth formation was potent.
Since the trumpet was sounded, via the emergency line, eight minutes after the mass shooter sent his email to the NZ Government HQ, the timing of the alarm being razed indicates the exemplary emergency response narrative was a cover-up of an actual failure.
This ‘exemplary emergency response’ myth also relied on the Royal Commission peddling a subtle ‘Pedestrian Theory to Emergency Response’, to explain away the emergency response ‘failure’.
The Royal Commission referred to a draft Standard Operating Procedure prepared by the Security Enablement Team of the Parliamentary Service in January 2019, that outlines the assessment and escalation procedures for responding to threatening calls and emails to the NZ Parliament.
That subtle ‘Pedestrian Theory to Emergency Response’, which essentially included numerous bullet-pointed excuses, appeared to work like masking tape over the mouths of a hostage government, and with its hands metaphorically tied behind its back, while their bodies were roped to chairs.
The Royal Commission produced a ‘Pedestrian Theory’ list in lieu of publishing an accurate, detailed account of the emergency response failure; note that the report acknowledges the “potential targets” were identified [actually on page 12, not page eight].
On this point of “potential targets”, it would appear that the Royal Commission took its cue from then-Chief Censor David Shanks, who misled New Zealanders when he said on April Fool’s Day of 2019, that the manifesto “identifies specific places for potential attack in New Zealand”. Because Mr Shanks spoke with an economy like an official who had been indoctrinated by the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders programming, he made it seem that “The Great Replacement” ‘manifesto’ did not specify the mosques that were attacked, but only other potential targets.
To any international Police counter-terrorism squads, anti-terrorist Army units and political élites examining the details of the Christchurch Mosques Massacre, they could not have helped but notice that all of the terrorist shooter’s 34 email recipients would rue the eight squandered minutes — since no one acted quick enough to stop his mayhem.
Especially, since Police counter-terrorism squads would likely have wondered if it was possible to work out the locations of exactly where Brenton Tarrant intended to target much sooner — with quick thinking, speed reading and key word searches of the manifesto, instead of the pedestrian approach evidently taken.
Christchurch Mosques Massacre as a False Flag Black Op?
Strangely, the SIS Director-General Rebecca Lucy Kitteridge does not seem to realize the Christchurch terrorist’s email sent to the Prime Minister eight minutes before the attack was, in effect, a Trojan Horse cyber attack.
The Security Intelligence Service’s obtuseness in comprehending it was possible to figure out in one minute flat where the active shooter was headed is odd, because for all of the security and intelligence expertise in the SIS, no one seems to have tested some obvious questions. For instance, was eight minutes enough time to figure out where mass shooter was headed?
Pertinently, in the TVNZ documentary Web of Chaos — which fingered the Christchurch terrorist for sparking an alleged rise of far-right extremism in New Zealand amid the covid measures — Sanjana Hattotuwa of the mysteriously-sponsored far-left propaganda organ, The Disinformation Project, stated that he scans the internet for ‘spikes’ in traffic, with key word searches, to catch what he describes as toxic discourses of hate speech.
Notwithstanding his dogmatic inability to see that the toxicity from frustrated Kiwis is the predictable result of the Government’s ‘failure’ to investigate whether or not the Great Corona Hostage Crisis was a geopolitical game to destabilize the planet, Dr Hattotuwa’s modus operandi is essentially the same as the one I employed to drill down into the ‘gunman’s manifesto’ with the search term “attack”.
Therefore, since the locations were stated with enough specificity, nobody in the SIS appears to have scoped out the obvious question: would overseas governments of the NATO Alliance have been sharper in their response?
This may seem to be an irrelevant comparison because the United States, the United Kingdom and Western Europe have experienced frequent terrorism, and mass shootings appear to be ‘endemic’ in the US.
However, when it is learned that all NATO countries inflicted an undeclared low-grade ‘dirty war’ on their populations through their intelligence services, military forces, and paramilitary squads, with dominant participation from the Anglo-American membership of NATO, between the early 1960s and 1990 — the question of the Christchurch terrorist attacks possibly being a false flag black operation, is an ultra serious one.
After World War II, the Atlantic Alliance covertly formed a secret ‘stay behind’ army by recruiting fascists, including former Nazis, to conduct terrorism operations code-named ‘Gladio’ (Latin for Roman sword).
Operation Gladio was a low-grade war that exploited a “Strategy of Tension” designed to frighten the mass populaces of Western Europe and thereby shift the political center of gravity to the ‘right’ and away from socialism by blaming left-wing communist groups, and associating freedom and democracy with capitalism. Swiss historian Daniel Ganser, showed the subversion of Western Europe by the fascist Gladio network, which represented a radical shift in warfare, in his groundbreaking study, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation and Terrorism in Western Europe.
This radical shift in war has been identified as Fourth Generation Warfare.
In the first half of the 20th Century, the mechanization of war during World I and II transformed armed conflict into Third Generation Warfare. The systematic use of security services, intelligence agents or special force units, or ex-personnel from such units, to inflict state-sponsored terrorist attacks and blame such atrocities on a terrorist group or patsies — is known broadly as Fourth Generation Warfare.
As Waseem A Qureshi observed in his paper, “Fourth- and Fifth-Generation Warfare: Technology and Perceptions Fourth Generation Warfare”, published in the San Diego Law Journal, many commentaries on Fourth Generation Warfare conveniently ignore the role the United States has played in using non-state actors to foment regime change, destabilize regions and fuel Western expansionism.
Because the world’s intelligence agencies, secret services and special force units play a contrived ignorance game about one another’s deep state machinations, the visible Public State comprised of Government institutions is largely clueless about the prevalence of Deep State-sponsored terrorism and the codified communications embedded into such events. This clueless-ness means that the earnest, decent citizens who work in the visible institutions of governments can be blind to how exactly a stealthy coup d’état can be set in motion.
The SIS Director-General’s apparent failure to comprehend what looked like a novel Trojan Horse cyber attack is also particularly strange, given that almost one month prior to the mosques shootings, in February 2019, Kitteridge — and her counterpart, Andrew Hampton, from the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) — cautioned Parliament that cyber warfare was a rising threat.
Kitteridge also noted that the Government was at the time seeking to review New Zealand’s counter-terrorism legislative settings. The SIS Director-General stated the Service was “actively working with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Ministry of Justice and Police to analyse the counter-terrorism legislation regime to ensure that it is fit for purpose.” But added she could not comment further since the “work [was] still underway”.
The Royal Commission’s report overlooked the possibility that the convicted shooter’s email may have been a Trojan Horse device to capture N.Z.’s political élite, establishment news media, Police and the security and intelligence agencies. Because — the convicted shooter’s email, in effect, transformed all computers and other digital devices that received the email, and its ‘manifesto’, into cyber-age siege engines.
A Trojan Horse has come to mean a mythological metaphor element derived from the Trojan War that symbolizes subterfuge, or trickery. Innovations in Trojan Horse tactics is a grand tradition of state-craft and is a key reason why the most sensitive records of states remained more or less permanently classified.
In the story of the final capture of Troy, the Trojan Horse plot called for one Greek soldier, Sinon, to voluntarily stay behind and pretend as though he had been abandoned, and sacrificed to the sea powers, in order to explain that the Greeks had given up on their siege of Troy. Helpfully, the Greeks had also left an explanatory note with their parting gift horse, which read, “For their return home, the Greeks dedicate this offering to Athena” [the Greek goddess of war, wisdom and handcrafts].
According to the epic poet Virgil in The Aeneid, Sinon convinced the Trojans that the Greek Army had gone, while Homer has it that Helen of Troy saw through the plot, as did King Piriam’s daughter Cassandra, but like Helen of Troy, she too was ignored by the ruling patriarchy.
Sinon spun the lie that the Horse is an atonement offering to the goddess Athena as redress for the desecration of her temple at Troy by the Greeks, and to ensure the Greek fleet were un-harried on their homeward journey. And, the Trojan Horse became a siege engine for the Greek Army to gain entry to Troy.
Because the tradition of a gunman leaving a manifesto is one sign of a false flag black operation — since a manifesto usually fixes the assailant’s worldview, like cement for the official story — it is fascinating to note its roots can be traced back to the Greeks’ capture of Troy.
Was the idea of the Greek’s explanatory note left with their parting gift horse, in essence, reworked into a script featuring a racist Australian ex-gym instructor — cast with a clichéd pseudo commander character — who was tasked with sending a manifesto by email?
Had Tarrant been lured into a black op with a Trojan Horse plot twist in which he would be sacrificed to reintegrate New Zealand into the ‘sea powers alliance’, comprising the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand?
Were the Ides of March Mosques Massacres a plot to politically capture a jurisdiction that had gone off-script, and did this event unfold like clock-work by spinning on a fulcrum of time?
In effect, the ‘gunman’s manifesto’ weaponized the dimension of time and jolted the political center of gravity, regardless of whether Tarrant acted alone, or as part of a conspiracy by far-right white supremacists, or as a näive patsy recruited by agents of a transnational deep state network for an orchestrated Deep State false flag operation.
In conventional warfare, a belligerent state conducting a ‘false flag’ terror operation uses another country’s ‘flag’ to carry out an attack with the intention to frame the enemy as the perpetrator.
In asymmetric warfare, a state-sponsored terrorist attack is carried out by security services, intelligence agents or special force units, or ex-personnel from such units, and is blamed on a terrorist group or patsies, as historian Daniele Ganser showed in his book, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe.
As a former U.S. Special Operations Officer, Brian Michael Jenkins, found in 1973-74, ‘[t]errorism is theater”, meaning the real targets of terrorism are not the victims, but the audience. Jenkins made this observation while working as a Research Analyst in Terrorism at the Rand Corporation — a key American think-tank, where game theory strategies were developed during the ‘Cold War’ to stabilize the power structures of the Russia Empire and the Western Empire.
Game theory strategies such as ‘Hostage Exchanges’ are used by nation states, international syndicates and monopolistic cartels to stabilize power structures while aggressive colluding rivals seek to construct new areas of market dominance by illegal, fraudulent and repugnant means that harm their more dynamic, innovative smaller and peaceful competitors, societies or organizations cast as enemies.
Although Hostage Posting Rituals can take many forms, the underlying logic is always the same. ‘Posting a hostage’ is a mechanism to construct stability and is predicated on a provisional promise to cooperate if other players post hostages too. The game requires an implied threat, which amounts to defection on the next move if the other player does not post a hostage. Since game theory requires colluding players to issue and respond to threats and rewards to maintain the motivation, discipline and purposes of the cartel (or cartels), their simultaneous actions are political and also betray economic evidence of an unfolding plot. The data of such parallel moves made prior, during and after false flag attacks can be arranged as clustered events to reveal the anatomy of a criminogenic environment, since élite criminal actors exploit the speed of the unfolding power crimes by controlling the crisis rituals.
As trigger events, engineered false flags always direct the blame elsewhere, and are designed to emotionally hijack mass populaces, politically capture Public State authorities and reset the trajectory of a society onto a fully-fledged Police State path and beyond — as the author of The Spectacle of the False Flag: Parapolitics from JFK to Watergate, Eric Wilson states.
The lecturer in international public law at Monash University adds that the spectacular power of a false flag deep event is that the spectacle is unifying, yet totalitarian in nature, and causes a permanent severance between the visible public state and the national security state. Wilson emphasizes the need to identify the battling factions whom wage civil battles beyond the public state’s legal boundaries.
Deep State factions in a Dual State seek to slice up the administrative apparatus, and redirect the accumulated resources in preparation for a looming “season of escalating hostilities”, as the author of Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich, Guido Giamomo Preparata explained in his foreword to Wilson’s The Spectacle of the False Flag. Preparata stated:
“The fictionalizing beauty of the set-up is that while the fight among the clans unfolds ‘deeply’, i.e. entirely hidden from public scrutiny, there concomitantly ‘forms’ on the media stage, as if inevitably bubbling over, a game of theatrics for mass consumption. The game is designed to sway ‘public opinion’ with the final objective topping off the ‘deep’ victory with popular acclaim.”
— Guido Preparata, Foreword to: The Spectacle of the False Flag: Parapolitics from JFK to Watergate
Thus, the covert power of the spectacle exists within this perpetually unstable migratory contest, or double movement, between the visible public state political decision-making and the covert deep state factions. Therefore, the reverberations of deeper machinations between the Public State and Deep State factions may be detectable in clustered events prior to, during and in the aftermath of the Christchurch Mosques Massacre event.
University of California Professor Peter Dale Scott, who popularized the term deep state, locates the phenomena in an American context in his 2015 book, The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil and the Attack on U.S. Democracy. Scott describes the deep state network as a private parallel government, who can be observed on the surface, in the background and the subsequent cover-ups of structural deep events from the JFK Coup D’état, Watergate, the October Surprise, the Iran-Contra scandal, BCCI, the Oklahoma City bombing, the 9/11 Coup D’état.
Whereas, Aaron Good describes in his book American Exception: Empire and the Deep State, a tripartite state to account for the democratic public state, the security state comprising the CIA, the Pentagon and the NSA and other actors who represent a deep political top-down veto power on democratic, legal and transparent processes. Such deep state networks penetrate the government administration, the national security state, the corporate world and beyond, to exert a hyper-power outside and above government.
Therefore, an observation made some years ago by Professor Scott is now profoundly relevant. Scott observed that every decade there is a ‘deep event’ that resets the political trajectory of the United States, and by consequence the rest of the world, and as such, resets are perpetrated by the deep state network.
The over-arching meta-objective appears to have been to signal a dark global reset was on the horizon, because the apparent Trojan Horse cyber attack seemed to demonstrate to Western Élites how easy it was to politically capture a government by coercing elements of the executive to enjoin themselves in a cover-up of the brutal truth.
Since the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet has oversight of national security and because the Prime Minister is also the Minister of National Security and Intelligence, the evidence strongly indicates that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s Cabinet was the prime target in a coup d’état with a novel Trojan Horse twist.
On Sunday March 17th, New Zealand’s Minister of National Security and Intelligence Jacinda Kate Laurell Ardern had told the world the manifesto did not contain a location or any specific details.
Not only were Ardern’s statements untrue.
But also, because the nation’s security and intelligence apparatus was on a high alert, the Government’s public posture that the manifesto did not contain any specific details or locations, was in fact the logically fallacious argument of lying by omission — as any newsroom would know if they possessed a copy of Professor T. Edward Damer’s Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments.
Therefore, by her own rhetoric, the Prime Minister appears to have performed an Inoculation Ritual, which is a public relations (PR) tactic that acknowledges the weakness of the matter at hand, and then it is quickly brushed aside.
The intention of the inoculation tactic is that the news audience will think nothing more of it, satisfied that there is nothing under-handed to see. And the purpose is to emotionally hijack newsrooms, and leverage their lack of skepticism about an obvious gap in the timeline of events. In this gaslighting way, newsrooms became a vector for the cover-up to manipulate news audiences to fall for the surface evidence that the attacks were simply carried out by a racist lone-wolf sociopath, and that there was nothing that could have been done differently to stop Mr Tarrant.
Even if the attacks on the two mosques were simply carried out by a racist lone-wolf sociopath, the fact that this big lie was fed to the public by the Prime Minister and the Police Commissioner to cover-up the emergency response failure — indicates the codified communications embedded into the Ides of March Mosques Massacres.
In effect, the two top officials in charge of the national security and intelligence, and policing were posted as hostages to sow the seeds of the exemplary emergency response myth — in accordance with game theory.
That the exploitable security protocol regarding threatening emails existed under Ardern’s watch is odd, because when she worked in London in the Blair Administration, she was seconded to the Home Office to help with a review of policing in England and Wales. It is an especially embarrassing fact for the Prime Minister, given that her father, David Ross Ardern, then-Administrator of Tokelau, had previously worked in the Police Criminal Investigation Branch, and was area sub-commander of Matamata–Piako, a productive farming area developed out of a drained swamp after the New Zealand Masonic Revolutionary of War 1860-1872.
Blast from the Past — New Zealand as a Periodic Force Multiplier for State-Sponsored Terrorism?
The unexpected massacre may have served as a deus ex machina plot device, to resolve an impossible impassé whose narrative roots extended back to the 1980s. A full restoration of N.Z.’s security alliance with the U.S.-NATO Military Empire under a Labour-led Government some 33 years after the 1985 bombing of Greenpeace’s Rainbow Warrior presented ‘bad optics’.
Especially, because the Ardern lacked an election mandate to commit to a $20 billion military upgrade inherited from the Key-era. Absent popular acclaim, there was no way for the Ardern Government to navigate the awkwardness of failing to pass the ‘political hygiene test’.
One would have thought that the SIS Director-General, Rebecca Kitteridge, would be more circumspect about enjoining herself in the suppression of evidence, given that in 2017 she signed off on the declassification of a top secret report pertaining to the Rainbow Warrior Bombing of 10/7 1985.
The declassified 1996 summary report, revealed that in the immediate aftermath of this episode in French state-sponsored terrorism, NZ’s SIS officials claimed they argued for a counter terrorism operation. The SIS wanted to establish the dimensions of the Rainbow Warrior bomb plot, especially since there was the possibility that French DGSE agents were laying low in New Zealand — as the drama unfolded.
Because the mission went awry when two French DGSE agents were caught, the chairman of New Zealand’s Intelligence Council, Gerald Hensley, who was also the head of the Prime Minister’s Department and who also just happened to be the Chairman of the Officials Terrorism Committee, was very accommodating to constrain the scope of the investigation. Such constraint meant the DGSE combat dive team were able to ski at Mt Cook/Aoraki, and fly out of Auckland on July 26th 1985, without the SIS, the Police or the Aviation Security Service catching them — in spite of the PM’s assurance that no effort would be spared.
On the eve of the 32nd anniversary of the Rainbow Warrior bomb plot, Stuff news interviewed former Detective Superintendent, Allan Galbraith who was the head of Auckland’s Criminal Investigation Branch (CIB) at the time the bombing. Mr Galbraith — who, along with Stuff, appeared to be unaware of then-recently declassified SIS report, “Rainbow Warrior – An NZSIS Perspective” — spoke of the subsequent release of the two convicted French DGSE agents, Major Alain Mafart and Captain Dominique Prieur, to the French jurisdiction of Hao Atoll in 1986. The former top cop said their release to French custody seemed to be a “politically managed event resulting from French pressure on the New Zealand government.”
In my investigation ‘Price of Power’ Themed-Terrorism: Rainbow Warrior Bombing Inflicted to Save the Western Empire from Losing N.Z., I found the over-arching meta objective of the French mission codenamed, ‘Opération Sataniqué’, was to send a cryptic ‘Morse Code’ signal to Western Élites to get their domestic grassroots movements — including anti-nuclear activists — back under control.
In an early 1985 press conference, one U.S. State Department Official emphasized there would be costs to the courses pursued by citizen movements deemed a threat to the Western Alliance. Four Western Alliance countries — France, the Netherlands, Norway and Italy — as well as Japan and Singapore — worried that if there was not some sort of cost inflicted on New Zealand, anti-nuclear activists elsewhere would be emboldened, as former head of the Prime Minister’s Department, Gerald Hensley stated in his book, Friendly Fire: Nuclear Politics and the Collapse of Anzus, 1984-1987.
The defiance of activist movements might have snowballed into widespread rebellion.
This act of terrorism, which was embedded with an ‘orgie of evidence’ designed to signal French Deep State-sponsorship, worked against the French Government when Major Alain Mafart and Captain Dominique were caught within 34 hours after the attack. Yet, because the Lange Government enjoined themselves in the subterfuge, the Western Alliance’s geo-political objectives remained hidden.
In Secret Power, Hager named Hensley as one of two “most influentially placed ex-Foreign Affairs men” during the ANZUS-rift period whom were critical of the Lange Government’s nuclear-free policy and strong advocates for the FIVE Eyes intelligence alliance.
Prime Minister David Lange said that his government’s advisors took for granted that once Labour won power they would renege on the anti-nuclear policy, and those advisors got heavy after paternalistic pep-talks about “the realities of global power politics” failed to dissolve their resolve.
The rift over the military alliance between Australia, New Zealand and the United States widened in the aftermath of the Rainbow Warrior Bombing.
Crucially, on November 4th 1987, New Zealand’s little known Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) gained Prime Minister David Lange’s approval to purchase a site for a satellite interceptions station at Waihopai, near Blenheim. In the press conference, Lange claimed the then little-known intelligence-gathering agency called the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), needed to fill the gap in lost intelligence that supposedly occurred following the political fall-out with the United States over the ANZUS Alliance.
Yet, the planning for a new satellite interception station had been proceeding “in tandem” with the Geraldton Station in Western Australia for “some years … in secret” by the time Lange approved the purchase of the Waihopai site on November 4th 1987, as Nicky Hager observed in his seminal 1996 book on the GCSB, Secret Power: New Zealand’s Role in the International Spy Network.
Similarly, three days after the Christchurch Mosques Massacre, a merger between the tech directorates of two security agencies’, the GCSB and SIS was announced. This merger was signalled in a 2017 GCSB report.
Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating revealed the internal logic of state terror. Following the Rainbow Warrior attack, Keating said, “the centre of gravity had shifted” and the perceived need for anti-nuclear legislation became inevitable. This ‘centre of gravity’ terminology is the language of geopolitics, which is the struggle over space and power. It is the langauge of Fourth and Fifth Generation Warfare that harness the concept of a ‘strategy a tension’ usually inflicted by a false flag black operation.
Keating made the observation that ‘the goal in the end had been to produce legislation that would allow a framework for negotiating the issue with the Americans “as well as something transparent for the public of New Zealand to see” — and on both scores the government delivered’.
Strategy of Tension: Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating said that following the Rainbow Warrior attack “the centre of gravity had shifted”. This ‘centre of gravity’ terminology is the language of deep state terrorists’ ‘strategy of tension’ objectives.
The former Australian Prime Minister stopped short of admitting that the overarching objective of the Rainbow Warrior Bombing was for the event to be a deus ex machina plot device, to resolve an impossible impassé, while signalling a warning to Western élites. The myth that Opération Sataniqué was inflicted merely to sabotage Greenpeace’s supply ship mission to an impending flotilla at Mururoa Atoll had to be maintained.
In other words, the ‘strategy of tension’ had worked because the radicalized political left of the Labour Party were delivered a cause célèbre on a French platter, to distract them from the economic warfare inflicted by the right-wing of the Labour Caucus as part of orchestrated corporate heist of the economy. Therefore, the ‘strategy of tension’ also worked as warning to Western élites, who were being sent a stiff message since the terrorist attack was alleged to have been the first (in modern times) in a relatively peaceful Allied Nation.
Unfortunately, because the Christchurch Attacks Commission failed to model for state-sponsored false flag terrorism, the inquiry led by Sir William Gillow Gibbes Austen Young did not code phenomena that might have otherwise been flagged as key signs of a black operation. As I showed in my review of the Rainbow Warrior Bombing, such codified signs left by the French DGSE served as the embedded thematic warnings to those élites of the Western Alliance attuned to decipher moves played out as ‘terrorism theatre’.
The Royal Commission’s capacity for modelling a possible state-sponsored power crime — to ensure robust testing of evidence against counter-factual arguments — was deficient from the outset, due to structural limitations set by the Royal Warrant’s constricted terms of reference, choice of Commissioner, and others factors including budget, time and the interruptions wrought by the corona bio-terror theater.
Because the Royal Commission failed to code the phenomena for a possible sophisticated false flag terrorism plot — including those perpetrated under the auspices of Operation Gladio — such phenomena were consigned to the ‘National Memory Hole’.
The apparent casting of Brenton Harrison Tarrant as a stereotyped pseudo-commando lone-wolf villain by law enforcement is indicative of a possible parallel construction of evidence to hide how exactly the Australian national may have been ensnared.
Given that 28 recipients of the shooter’s email and manifesto sent eight minutes before the attack started, were either media organizations, or individuals who worked for news organizations — these counter-factuals also belie a possible Trojan Horse-esque capture of news organizations.
Their across-the-board failure to maintain skepticism about the official narrative meant their failure to investigate was predictable. New Zealand’s newsrooms took at face value that the spectacle of a racist lone-wolf sociopath was all there was to see in a realm considered stable by international standards.
In their study “The proximity filter: the effect of distance on media coverage of the Christchurch mosque attacks”, Gavin Ellis and Denis Muller stated the core editorial issue in New Zealand’s newsrooms was not to “give oxygen” to the shooter’s racist ideological motivations, or self-aggrandisement and instead focus on the victims.
For example, Ellis and Muller reported that the head of content at radio network NewstalkZB, Nadia Tolich, said she spoke of the attacker’s claim that he had chosen New Zealand for the attack because it was regarded as a safe place. Evidently, Tolich’s immediate reaction was, “I thought: How dare you stop us from being who we are. Damn you. We’re not going to fall for that.”
And yet, the predictable decision of New Zealand’s news media to focus on the victims meant they dropped their journalistic balls by frequently sipping on the Government’s Kool-Aid. Rather than rising above the emotional contagion that consumed their newsrooms in the first minutes, the media let the Beehive, Police HQ and the Canterbury District Command subsidize the news by providing expert sources.
In this näive way, New Zealand’s newsrooms adopted the features of crisis journalism by falling for the theater of terrorism and by, essentially, copying how America’s media covers massing shootings.
After all, NZ’s media regularly reproduces the official narratives from the world’s super-dome home of mass shootings — the ‘Gaslighted States of America’ — that frequently features the stereotyped pseudo-commando lone-wolf.
Just as NZ’s public media failed to report what actions those media institutions and individuals took in those eight ticking countdown minutes, it has also failed to investigate what unfolded inside the Beehive, at Parliament’s Security Services and its Security Team, as well as with the Police.
In part four of this “Darkest Day Deception”, I demonstrate that following the cover-up of the Christchurch 15/3 emergency response ‘failure’ by Jacinda Ardern and other high officials, New Zealand’s Government became compromised, vulnerable to exploitation and were cast as puppets in a broader dark global reset to change the arc of history.
Ironically, in the 33rd year after the Rainbow Warrior Bombing, New Zealanders remained unaware of the over-arching meta-objective underpinning that episode of French state-sponsored terrorism. The hidden objective was to send a ‘Morse Code’ signal out to Western Élites to gain control over their domestic activist movements, because the Overlords of the ‘Western Alliance’ feared any further challenges to their power during the Cold War would be exploited by the Russian Empire. This is the real reason why the Beehive’s Official Terrorism Committee limited the scope of the investigation into the sinking of Greenpeace’s Pacific flagship — to mitigate fallout with France, the FIVE Eyes Echelon spy network and the ‘Western Alliance’. If New Zealanders did comprehend that this proven historical terrorism event came packaged with a hidden geopolitical objective, they might have wondered if the ODESC national emergency group, that convened in the immediate aftermath of the Christchurch Moques Massacre set the stage for cover-up.
To be super-clear, I’m not saying that everyone who works in the Beehive and the Parliamentary bureaucracy, or in the Police, the SIS, the GCSB and on the Royal Commission — knows there was a cover-up of the emergency response failure. Most human mortals are educated to be just smart to become plumbers, police, pianists, politicians and professors.
And few get invited to a ‘privy parley’.
What I am saying is that the Security Intelligence Service’s report on the 1985 Rainbow Warrior Bombing shows that on Lange’s watch, the Officials Terrorism Committee limited the scope of the investigation at a time when such officials were advised by the SIS that there could still be other French secret agents in the country. Consequently, the French DGSE bomb team were able to ski in the Southern Alps — in James Bond style — without their cover as tourists being blown-open as terrorists by SIS spooks. This Officials Terrorism Committee was chaired by Gerald Hensley, who was also head of the Department of Prime Minister — and on his watch, there were no reports written on the 17 meetings convened over the Rainbow Warrior bomb plot.
And what I am saying is that in the aftermath of the Ides of March Mosques Massacre, we are supposed to believe that the policing, security and intelligence experts feeding analysis into the Officials Committee for Domestic and External Security Coordination (ODESC) somehow could not see it was possible to work out where the shooter was headed in one minute flat.
In other words, I’m saying that the real target of terrorism is the people most paid to worry. It is possible to manipulate them with the horror, fear and catharsis to jolt the political center of gravity in favour of state-funded policies, budgets and propaganda that benefits the National Security State, the ruling foreign and domestic super-rich oligarchs and their transnational corporate interests. And those manipulations don’t necessarily need to be overt.
Many fell for the propaganda that the Royal Commission needed to occur in closed sessions, be non-adversarial, and be limited to investigating one government agency in the interests of national security reasons, to protect government staff, witnesses and participants in accordance with the Inquiries Act 2013.
This spin was laundered against a backdrop of right-wing extremism.
Meanwhile, the long history of the US-NATO Military Empire’s terrorism that has been inflicted on domestic citizenries after World War II, was consigned to the ‘Nation Memory Hole’.
Or, to right wing nut-bar conspiracy theories.
And all the while, it is palatable for left-leaning liberal public intellectuals — such as Noam Chomsky, Chris Hedges, Naomi Klein and Amy Goodman — to howl at the moon and back about the Anglo-American-led Empire’s imperial atrocities abroad, while missing the patterns underpinning the 9/11 Coup D’état, the London 7/7 Bombings and the phenomena of mass shootings that are treated like scared cows.
However, this pattern of myopic investigative focus leaves one’s government safe from domestic outrage. And such myopia is not limited to high profile liberal public figures, who should know better.
New Zealand’s ‘response and recovery’ to the Christchurch Ides of March Massacre also has the feel that it had been carefully crafted in the design of legislation governing inquiries. And in the coordinated ‘all of government’ compartmentalization directing investigations, reviews and inquiries.
And in the sudden show of force, the ritualistic crisis management public briefings and the cathartic public grieving events that unfolded, and that have ensured the carnage was neatly, yet horrendously limited to hapless Muslims living in a New Zealand city — potently named after the legendary Christ figure — and those in their circles who loved them.
Later in 2019, on the 40th anniversary of an Air NZ DC-10 crashing on Mt Erebus, Antarctica in 1979, Prime Minister Ardern apologized to the families of those who had lost loved ones, for the Government’s lack of compassion, the negligence of Air New Zealand and by implication, the cover-up, since the airline was 100% state-owned at the time. Ardern’s apology was evidently closure for what were subtle ‘acceptance rituals’ spanning four decades.
Notably Prime Minister Robert Muldoon accepted the Inspector of Air Accidents report by Ron Chippendale, which primarily found fault with the pilots, while the cantankerous Chief Minister of the nation rejected the report of the Royal Commissioner, Justice Peter Mahon, who found fault with the Air NZ and the Civil Aviation Authority.
On becoming Prime Minister, Ardern had met with the ‘Erebus Families’, and in 2018 she also studied the archived evidence, and testimonies, as well as read the reports. In other words, Ms Ardern, as the Minister of National Security and Intelligence, knew how to control a probe. As Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, became very familiar with the wide-ranging Royal Commission into the ‘Erebus Disaster’, ostensibly in preparation for the 40th anniversary of an Air NZ DC-10 crashing on Mt Erebus, Antarctica in 1979.
In other words, while Ardern was performing an acceptance ritual before the ‘Erebus Families’, the ‘Mosque Massacre Families’ were being played since the Royal Commission was part of the cover-up — on her watch.
Let’s suppose the official narrative has been conducted by a gifted ‘Shakespeare’ who had re-incarnated in New Zealand and had grown-up to become a totalitarian technocrat, due to parental stock, cultural milieu and relentless testing of political strategies, technologies, and social engineering in the Smurfish, näively optimistic, but easily-and-temporarily-frightened geographically-isolated South Pacific Archipelago.
And, due to this grooming to become a charismatic technocrat, ‘Shakespeare’ was able to coordinate the government apparatus on behalf of an evil genius magician gifted in casting epic spells, while drawing upon his past-life work experience as a playwright, bard and actor to script, recite and perform the most persuasive communications imaginable — behind the scenes — to convince his B-Grade cast of public figures to steal the country’s wits.
Because, isn’t strange that the Royal Commission’s inquiry to ensure that the lessons were learned was actually restricted to investigating only one agency, Parliamentary Services, by its Royal Warrant? And is it not concerning, therefore, that the submissions to the Royal Commission made by all other Crown officials, agencies and departments — including the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet — were all presented in closed, non-adversarial proceedings, and suppressed for three decades?
Especially, when we keep in mind that most New Zealanders don’t know that SIS Director Rebecca Kitteridge oversaw the declassification and release of a top secret report into the 1985 Rainbow Warrior Bombing, that revealed the Officials Terrorism Committee ignored the SIS’s advice to broaden the investigation into that episode of state-sponsored terrorism.
The brutal truth is that New Zealand’s National Security State officials didn’t want to admit that all of the King’s horses and all of the King’s men couldn’t put the Humpty Dumptys back together again after they’d been knocked off the Beehive’s security-intelligence ‘fire-wall’ — without a Royal Commission to supply the ideological glue to cement the broken pieces.
Every official report skirts the central issue of the emergency response failure; that the email’s subject-line offered the search terms for immediate identification of the target locations.
Once seen, this brutal central truth of the Christchurch Mosques Massacre cannot be unseen.
Given the foregoing, one has to ask if the horrific attacks had instead been inflicted upon white Christian first families of Christchurch at churches or chapels in the posh suburbs of Fendalton and Merivale: would the non-adversarial closed sessions of the Royal Commission — with its extremely limited scope — have withstood a backlash from a well-resourced community with such deep roots?
Numerous survivors of the Christchurch Ides of March Mosques Massacre complained that the police and medical response was too slow and that several victims bled to death inside the cordons. They said the Royal Commission report raised more questions than it answered and that crucial details were missing.
Members of the Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand, Anjum Rahman and Aliya Danzeisen, said there was a lack of transparency in the report “under the guise of confidentiality and national security”.
Evidently, the only place that transparency can be found in New Zealand, is in department store lingerie sections.
=======
Steve ‘Snoopman’ Edwards is a dissident journalist, who worked at indigenous broadcaster, Māori Television, for 14 years as an editor of news, current affairs and general programmes. He forged his ‘Thunk Evil Without Being Evil’ super-power while writing his ground-breaking thesis on the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), titled —“It’s the financial oligarchy, stupid” — to figure out the means, modus operandi and motives of the Anglo-American Oligarchy. He encourages humanity to develop their ‘superpowers’ to overcome conditioning to think with left or right wing political mindsets, fear-induced obedience and regulated doses of hopium.
Editor’s Note: If we have made any errors, please contact Steve ‘Snoopman’ Edwards, with your counter-evidence. e: steveedwards108[at]protonmail.com
In part two of this Darkest Day Deception series, I summarize the training exercises that were taking place at the time of the Mosques Massacre, as well as those prior, showing how the Royal Commission avoided the striking coincidences and was constricted by its terms of reference.
In part three of this Darkest Day Deception series, I take a second look at the unfolding clustered-events of 15 March 2019.