Lesson from Christchurch: firearms are needed by those who would defend themselves against the perpetrators of terrorism

The Anglo-globalist Morloc(k)racy (explained here) that rules Britain and New Zealand would deny physics in its efforts to psychologically manipulate the populations of both countries (and many others) with false narratives explaining “shock-testing” incidents that it had perpetrated for pursuing, and activating through application of the Hegelian dialectic, its Masonic Great Work agenda (which is, international socialism). The example that must always be referred to so as to demonstrate an archetypal case in point is Building Seven of the World Trade Centre. Building Seven was a skyscraper, not struck by any aircraft on 11th September, 2001, that pan-caked one floor onto the next as it collapsed due to office fires (according to the official story), although the simplest sort of scientific analysis would observe descent of the building in free fall as if lower floors were removed as obstacles before they were struck by the ones above – denoting structural failure due to precisely timed controlled demolition.

Thus, whenever the Morloc(k)racy asserts a truth that produces a furtherance of its political ends (those things that, by the Luciferian motto, always justify the means, no matter how many are murdered, robbed or raped), the one thing that it should not elicit is blind acceptance. In New Zealand, after the attack on Friday, 15th March, on two mosques by a so-called lone gunman, Brenton Tarrant, while the “international rules-based order” (the New World Order) is to feel threatened by “white supremacist/nationalist extremism” (a phantom menace, that allows Government to target lawful opposition that is a threat to it), a local political outcome is to be a tightening of New Zealand’s gun control. In fact, the reaction in these regards was immediate. There was no time for questioning how an Australian (for that is what Tarrant is), could have got hold of a semi-automatic weapon (of the sort that is now to be denied New Zealand citizenry who, until now, have legally held those sorts of firearm without abusing them so heinously and provocatively). Of course, the New Zealand government, which is the same as the UK’s, would never publically venture to raise the question as to how there was an inexplicable failure of the already existent gun-licensing system that should have prevented the Christchurch incident, because to do so would undermine the persona of Tarrant as lone culprit, and introduce an element of conspirator with powers-that-be: the authorities who are either turning a blind eye, or proactively assisting.

Tarrant legally held firearms in New Zealand – so says the New Zealand Prime Minister herself – and some reportage at the time of the incident was extremely helpful for understanding how this was supposed to have been achieved – how difficult it was, to be precise. The following extracts are from Breitbart, taken from a list of live updates that were published at the time of the incident:

The alleged New Zealand Mosque attacker appears to have used a semi-automatic long gun. Caliber is not clear. The legal acquisition of such a gun involves numerous hurdles, including licensing and background checks…

As one American who emigrated to New Zealand, and who favors gun control, wrote in a 2012 article [which is here]:

“Purchase or import of military style semi-automatics and all handguns must be individually approved by, and registered with, the New Zealand police.

“Without a valid and current firearms license, you cannot legally purchase any firearm other than a pellet gun anywhere in New Zealand. There is probably a black market or some other means of acquiring a firearm illegally, but firearms recovered from drug busts or other organised criminal activities typically amount to hunting rifles or pump action shot guns. Handguns and military style semi-automatics are rare, difficult to obtain, and very expensive.

“So how do Kiwis go about getting their hands on guns?

“The process for obtaining a basic firearms license is long, complicated and expensive. In other words, designed to weed out a broad portion of the population that the law deems unsuitable to possess a firearm.”

The obvious torpedo that starts to wend its way towards the official storyline out of this excerpt is that, generally, Tarrant’s semi-automatic is of the sort that appears to be most easily got through illegitimate means (this includes being supplied by military intelligence). The specific problem with Tarrant and his ability to obtain a basic firearms licence – which is the type he had been issued with, and has sometimes been called an “entry level” licence in the corporate-media – is that it doesn’t seem to be clear that he could have been resident in New Zealand long enough to have undergone the process in order to obtain it. Tarrant is, by all accounts, a somewhat perpetual traveller, and the extent of his wanderings begs the question, was he in New Zealand as a mere visitor?

The issue of Tarrant’s tenuous ability to qualify for a firearms licence in New Zealand presented itself in the reporting of a “manifesto”, here by an Australian broadcaster, supposedly written by the suspect himself:

In the manifesto, seen by SBS News, Brenton Tarrant said he “only arrived in New Zealand to live temporarily whilst I planned and trained” but then decided to carry out an attack there.

It is unclear how long Tarrant has lived in New Zealand for, nor his connection with the other suspects. He did mention that he made some money from Bitconnect, which is a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin. He then used the money to travel across Europe.

The extract also introduces another suspicious and surprising detail: Tarrant apparently financed his very extensive travel by being able to take advantage of a ponzi scheme that, by its nature, is not supposed to make Every-day Joe Bloggs rich. All cryptocurrency is of the same ilk; the devisors – when their identity is known – are the main beneficiaries.

While such exotic destinations as North Korea and Argentina are revealed without explanation by excited corporate-media, beyond the stuff that sets him up as an adventurer, who also takes in the routine (there is mention made of travels through, France, Portugal and Spain in 2017, and Spain again in February 2018), it is the reports of his presence in places that are srongly associated with Anglo-globalist regime-change activity that raised the author’s eyebrow. We might first notice that Poland and Ukraine are mentioned in the same sentence in a Washington Post article (that had to remark in its headline about “The unusual travels of the New Zealand shooting suspect”). This pair of countries is interesting when one knows a little bit about the logistics of the Ukrainian Maidan.

To anyone following the events in Syria, it will surely be most interesting to discover that, in 2016, Tarrant was in the Balkans: Montenegro, Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia (please note; the official history gives him a very short period – two days, 29th and 30th December – to visit these countries, and we might not be surprised that it does). Indeed, before his Balkan trip he reportedly “entered Israel in October 2016 on a three-month tourist visa and stayed for nine days”. And before that, in the same year, “he also made two trips to Turkey… for a total of 43 days”. The dates given were 17th to 20th March, and then 13th September to 25th October.

Now, while other alternative media have declared possession of evidence (always from insider intelligence sources) that Tarrant was basically active in relation to the US/UK attempt to overthrow the Government of Syria, the author takes a different approach. Unnamed sources, especially for click-baiting sensationalism, are as unwelcome in alternative media as they are in corporate-media. At FBEL, the reader is asked to notice that across the border from Serbia and Montenegro is Albania, and appreciate the verifiable fact that the ranks of the US/UK mercenary forces in Syria have had more Albanians in them than any other European people. Additionally, of course, there is Kosovo (“in Serbia” itself), from whence a good percentage of those ethnic Albanians have emerged to fight in Syria. In fact, these people have also been recruited from Montenegro and other parts of Serbia. The phenomenon of recruiting from the Balkans into the foreign jihadist legions in Syria was something covered in a previous FBEL article, which can be read here. (We should also note that Tarrant has visited other parts of south-east Europe that have Ottoman-legacy Muslim populations: Bulgaria from 9th to 15th November, 2018, and then in Romania and Hungary from that date onwards).

Meanwhile, Turkey, and Israel are territories that have been implicitly linked with the Syrian invasion through the provision of access and logistical support for the US/UK jihadist mercenaries into Syria (not to mention military assistance). This is the underlying circumstantial evidence that makes the author suspect that Tarrant might well be British military intelligence (which is the same thing as Australian military intelligence), who may have been involved in the traffic of mercenaries to Syria. Moreover, it is reported that, as recently as October 2018, Tarrant was in northern Pakistan; i.e. on the border with Afghanistan. CNN cites “the owner of the Osho Thang Hotel in Nagar, in Pakistan’s northernmost Gilgit-Baltistan region, [who] said Tarrant had visited his hotel” as a “regular tourist”. And yet it is surely an irregular tourist who pitches up at a location that is just across the frontier from a country in which the US/UK has hosted training camps for its mercenaries – see the FBEL article linked to above.

Above all else, we should not fail to digest the information provided to CNN by Tracey Gray, manager of the Big River Squash & Fitness Centre, a New South Wales gymnasium where Tarrant once worked:

Gray wondered whether Tarrant might have been radicalized during a trip to Europe and Asia in the early 2010s.

Therefore, it appears that Tarrant was active in these dubious locations (where his presence is made all the more suspicious because of the timing), if not right from the outset of the military operations by the US/UK against various countries of the Middle East and North Africa, then pretty much as near as damn it to the exact time of their commencement.

Needless to say, if Tarrant was a military intelligence operative, then the real incident at Christchurch would have been like chalk is to cheese in terms of the narrative where a relatively spontaneous lone wolf performs an ad hoc act of derangement. Indeed, news now comes that at the same time as the incident was ongoing, there was an armed police training exercise taking place in the city:

The police said a special armed tactical unit arrived at Al Noor Mosque four minutes after the first officers, or 10 minutes after the initial emergency call.

Mr. Cahill [detective inspector] said it normally would have taken longer, with team members summoned to a police station to suit up. On Friday, though, they happened to be in a training session in the city center and wearing their gear, he said.

If the reader is new to this experience, it should be explained that simultaneous exercises by emergency services have long been recognised as a feature of a false flag. The purpose would be to prevent any intervention that would disrupt the execution of the incident. In other words, drills are necessary so that anyone who is out of the loop, who would ordinarily respond to reports of an incident in a natural way, will instead stand down in the apparent knowledge of a false alarm.

Further evidence of a broader operation is how it came to pass that, not only did witnesses report seeing more than one shooter, but there were actual arrests of other individuals who were described as being “armed”. Please consider the following examples of reportage that clearly state police reports about more than one culprit:

Police in the New Zealand city of Christchurch have said that there are “multiple fatalities” after active shooters opened fire in two mosques in the city center, with one suspect in custody.

(Source).

#BREAKING: There are reports an Australian man is one of the active shooters in Christchurch. #9News

(Source).

BREAKING: New Zealand Police reporting the possibility of three active shooters in the Christchurch mosque attacks

(Source).

One man was arrested and charged with murder, and two other armed suspects were taken into custody while police tried to determine what role, if any, they played in the cold-blooded attack that stunned New Zealand, a country so peaceful that police officers rarely carry guns.

(Source).

Two others arrested at the scene with guns are being investigated. A fourth person arrested may have had nothing to do with the attack, according to New Zealand’s police commission Mike Bush.

(Source).

Despite the experience of Christchurch police, that translated into the description of the incident as a sort of operation by death-squad, by the end of a weekend that followed on the heels of the fateful Friday, the BBC was not alone in calling Tarrant a “lone gunman”. But of course, in the fictional creation that is the world as presented by corporate-media at the behest of those higher up the Anglo-globalist hierarchy, there is no recognition of a Modus Operandi that is well established and understood by students of government-by-deception. A number of operatives perform the outrage for the necessity of its effective execution, and one man, a patsy, gets the blame. It is a technique that has been used over again, and that extends as a feature in modern State Criminality from the Oklahoma City bombing to the Panjwai massacre.

As for the other arrests made, the BBC article linked-to above gives an impression that there is a certain official ambivalence about them, and the reader will see what is meant when he reads the following: “Police did not believe that three other people arrested were involved but he [Police Commissioner Mike Bush] said he could not be conclusive… A man was charged with firearms offences [reported in places as illegal possession of a firearm] while an 18-year-old would appear in court on Monday”. In fact, the “teen” was charged with offences related to what could be called the promotion of the incident on social media; obviously, this has nothing to do with being armed, and one must suspect that this is a substitute case, or a decoy, for a shooter who has already been released.

For this is surely what an element in a death-squad would expect to occur if it so happened that it was picked up by police who were unaware that an operation was taking place. No need to shoot one’s way to safety, like a real and desperate fugitive might choose to do, when surrendering is a safer option; sure in the knowledge that orders would soon come down to the local police department demanding release. At that point, tall stories would be provided to the public. It must be noted that, as far as the author has been able to discover, we still don’t know the name of the suspect on the firearms charges, and we might not be surprised if we never do.

But what always becomes folk lore in the shared memory of a public, begrudging the fact that the authorities are apparently once again getting away with a grand deception, will not go away so easily, and despite the best attempts of Government; see 9/11, and Building Seven – the topic with which this article opened. Please examine two accounts of what appears to be the same incident: the last act in the Christchurch mosque shootings. The first was published on 15th March, the second on 17th. Common to them both, please notice, is the surrender of the individual that is supposed to be Tarrant.

The first:

A second shooting happened at a mosque in the Linwood area of the city.

One Friday prayer goer returned fire with a rifle or shotgun.

Witnesses said they heard multiple gunshots around 1.45pm.

A well known Muslim local chased the shooters and fired two shots at them as they sped off.

He was heard telling police officers he was firing in “self defence”.

“They were in a silver Subaru,” he told police.

The second:

Abdul Aziz was praying with his four sons in the Linwood Mosque when he heard the gunshots. Rather than run from the noise, he ran toward it, grabbed the first thing he could find — a credit card machine — and flung it at the attacker.

The man dropped a shotgun, and Mr. Aziz picked it up. “I pulled the trigger, and there was nothing,” he recalled. The gunman ran to his car, where he had other weapons, and Mr. Aziz followed, throwing the shotgun at the vehicle and shattering a window.

Could it ever be, dear reader, that Mr Aziz has been leant on so as to alter his story – but remain the hero in the process (as reward)? For instead of learning by this escapade that he (and we are presuming he is the same man as the “well known Muslim local”) saw off a number of assailants with his own weapon (and the author cannot help but wonder if he is the individual up on a firearms charge), we discover how he created a situation by wielding a credit card machine, of all things, whereby Tarrant, after mercilessly killing so many, just decided to throw down his gun and retreat. The author thinks that such a determined assailant, up to his neck in so much blood, would have advanced towards the threat and, if he was suffering from a problem whereby he had expended all cartridges, used his weapon as a club. Incidentally, wasn’t Tarrant supposed to have used a semi-automatic?† Please also note that the second story takes all the civilian gun-toting out of the heroism – obviously that sort of thing surely cannot be tolerated by Government that is trying to disarm people. And of course, the second story fails to mention that there was more than one shooter.

All those who set out on the journey looking for it will arrive at a moment of clarity – and not just one – where all things make sense in the world. The Aziz story should lead the reader to one such juncture: Government wants the citizenry to be disarmed in the first instance because it wants to terrorise the public with agenda-change provocations without running the risk of losing its personnel. It doesn’t want Have-a-go Joe shooting back. The domestic fronts in the wars that the Morlocks (Anglo-globalists) wage on humanity are not supposed to be like the foreign ones that they have engaged in – Syria for instance – where hundreds of affronted individuals, organised into a defensive force, can shoot back and, as Assad put it, proved very expensive to Western resources. A lesson, therefore, must be learnt. The way to deter the psychopaths on the domestic front is to make the risk too high – even in the UK, where very few are allowed to own firearms, but Every Man Jack has a set of punching fists and kicking boots. It has to be that anyone in the British Praetorian class (explained here) who is thinking of going down amongst the people to kill them in the name of terrorising them for furthering a political agenda, needs to worry about enough folk getting hold of them and, like that “well known Muslim local”, acting in self-defence.

† Apparently, there was a stash of different weapons in Tarrant’s car.