Well someone's gotta do it.

After all, it is one of the most consequential events in Australia's recent past. Fifteen people dead with many more still in critical conditions.

The facts of the issue remain very unclear although it is clear that the authorities screwed up and are now anxious to deflect from that. So the go-to response has been to blame the guns as though the terrorists were mere instruments of the weapons.

I've said it on the pages many times before - Australia made and continues to make a terrible error by allow people from the Islamic world to come an live here. In the end, their ideology is incompatible with western values and it will always be so.

But they are here and there's no getting around that or reversing it. That's not to say it can't be managed or at least the damage mitigated. The problem however is that the authorities are not prepared to countenance let all implement the policy what would lead to such mitigation.

Islam should be confronted in this country and bought into line, suppressed and a cordon sanitaire placed around its adherents. Yet such a thing is impossible with our current leadership. Thus, they pretend that bringing in new guns laws will solve a problem that has nothing to do with gun laws. These people did use legal guns. Yet had they so wished, illegal guns are prevalent throughout their community.

Even now the PM, and his compliant ASIO advisors, want to pretend that right-wing violence is the real danger. Roam the streets of Sydney advocating for the deaths of Israelis, openly calling for the re-introduction of Zyklon B, and the authorities will turn a blind-eye. But raise your right arm to 45 degrees and the full force of the law will descend on you.

It is said this type of Islamic radicalism has no place in Australia. The politicians repeat it like a mantra. But the fact is, in reality it does have a place - on the outskirts of our major cities, dutifully voting Labor.

mhaze,

You begin by saying the facts are "very unclear", but then proceed as if motive, ideology, community responsibility, and policy failure are already established. Those two positions don't exactly sit comfortably together.

If the facts are unclear, then conclusions about Islamic terrorism, community prevalence of illegal guns, or deliberate deflection by authorities are, at this point, speculative rather than evidential.

Several different claims are being run together here:

1. That there were specific operational failures by authorities
2. That the attack was Islamist in nature
3. That Islam as a religion is incompatible with Western society
4. That gun laws are irrelevant to the incident
5. That enforcement priorities are politically biased

Each of these would need to be argued separately, with evidence. At present they're being treated as if they naturally imply one another, which they don't.

For example, if legal firearms were used, that doesn't make gun availability irrelevant. Equally, asserting that illegal guns are prevalent in a particular community is a factual claim that requires data, not inference.

Likewise, proposing the "suppression" of a religious group is a sweeping policy position. If that's the argument, it needs to be defended on legal, ethical, and practical grounds, rather than implied via a tragedy whose details are still emerging.

None of this precludes hard discussions about extremism or security. But those discussions are weakened, not strengthened, when uncertainty is used as a licence for certainty.

If you want accountability, the first step is clarity about what is known, what is unknown, and what is belief rather than evidence.

This'll elude you JD, but just because some things remain unclear doesn't mean all things are unclear.

Also what seems to elude you even though I've previous explained it and given proven examples (remember you embarrassment over the Australia banning of US meat issue?), some things can be known based upon past experience and history. That Islamism is incompatible with western values fits that category.

mhaze,

No one has argued that everything is unclear. The issue is which things are being treated as settled, and on what basis.

You are asserting three different categories as if they were equivalent:

1. Facts established by evidence about this specific event
2. Inferences drawn from documented patterns, with clear scope and limits
3. Broad civilisational claims about an entire religion and its adherents

The problem is that you are moving directly from (2) to (3), while using (1) as rhetorical cover.

"Based on history" is not a free pass to bypass evidence. History can inform hypotheses, but it does not justify collective attribution without specification. If "Islamism" is the subject, then it needs to be defined precisely and distinguished from Islam, Muslims, or migrant communities generally. That distinction is doing a lot of work here, and it is not being made.

Nor does past experience relieve you of the need to show relevance. Even if one accepts that certain ideological strands are incompatible with liberal democracy, it does not follow that:

- this attack was motivated by them
- suppression of a religious group is lawful, workable, or effective
- gun availability is therefore irrelevant
- or that entire communities can be treated as risk vectors

Those are additional steps, each requiring argument and evidence.

As for appeals to past debates, they don't substitute for engagement with the point at hand. If the case is strong, it should stand on its own logic and evidence, without detours or characterisations of the interlocutor.

The core issue remains unchanged: tragedy does not convert belief into fact, nor history into a blank cheque for certainty.

Not sure which “authorities” are being referred to - eyewitnesses say the police were hopeless (with just the TV vision to go on, a police marksman should have been able to take out the one with the rifle on the bridge easily enough).

Politicians, particularly Albanese and Burke, are responsible for this terrorist act, and they should resign or be sacked. I wonder if the GG's reserve powers would be of use.

Blaming guns, like blaming machetes (Victoria) is just another slippery way of avoiding judgement for the terrible immigration, multicultural policies of both parties.

Welcome to Australia today. No more of the un-Australian claptrap. This is Australia now.

The 4,000 antisemitic occurrences - and that's just those recorded - are Australian.

The mass immigration of people who hate us is Australian.

Antisemitism is a global disease, and it is an Australian disease.

There is nothing exceptional about Australia; it is the same as any Western country ruined by mad politicians, mass immigration, multiculturalism and self-hatred.

Hi John Daysh,

1. That there were specific operational failures by authorities
- It's clear they from the complete 10+ minute footage they could've done things better, but I don't want to criticise them too much, they stopped the shooting.

2. That the attack was Islamist in nature
- We may not know this for absolute certain, I've heard different things that he may have been a Christian who recently converted to Islam, I've seen x posts claiming that the shooters were in the IDF.
We can probably assume it was Islamist in nature, we can 'hypothesize'.

The discussion needn't stop waiting for evidence, we can make judgements based on likely different scenarios.
Fine tune when more info comes to light.
3. That Islam as a religion is incompatible with Western society
- I think its fair to say there are conflicts, maybe we should identify them.

'What is the cause of the conflict?'

"Likewise, proposing the "suppression" of a religious group is a sweeping policy position. If that's the argument, it needs to be defended on legal, ethical, and practical grounds, rather than implied via a tragedy whose details are still emerging."

- I say we hold an inquiry on all religions.
I'm not sure that 'religious' and 'ethical' are mutually exclusive.
We should take all these religious texts, take them apart piece by piece and work out which parts promote conflict and hate.

4. That gun laws are irrelevant to the incident
- They actually are. A determined person who planned, would've found a way even if they drove a RAM through the park instead, and there's little to nothing anyone can do to stop it.

Hi mhaze

"Even now the PM, and his compliant ASIO advisors..."
- Yes, they'll probably come out and say they've received Israeli intelligence that this attack was sponsored by Iran.
(Until they prove their last claims I have doubts their intelligence can be trusted.)

Well, we have a likely Muslim attack on Jews and the only person who stepped in was a Muslim, this will break everyone's minds.

Israel and it's supporters are trying to blame the PM for lack of anti-Semitic crackdown.
I certainly have issues with this.

As for the victims, Jews and non-Jews alike I WOULD offer condolensces, as I take no sides with the innocent dead.

But the way pro Israel supporters have carried on already blaming anti-Semitism and those who critised Israels war (like me), I will only offer my condolences to non-Jews.

‘You’re a coward’: Ray Hadley calls for Albanese’s resignation over Bondi Beach terror attack
http://youtu.be/_zFO49GxXl8
Quite the performance there from Mr. Ray 'which Jewish d-ck do I gotta suck 'round here' Hadley.

You built this, brick by rhetorical intifada brick. So spare us your shock and save your prayers
[Paywalled article in the Australian]
I believe a copy of the article may be here
http://scottaaronson.blog/?p=9416#comment-2020876
'We saw this coming. We warned that anti-Jewish rhetoric, disguised as war criticism, would pave the way for violence. Now, as the Intifada you globalised arrives, spare us your feigned surprise and condolences.'
- As you wish.

They are also trying to link this to Palestinian marches and support for 2 state solution, and recognition of Palestine at the UN, and force Albo to say he guarantees Jews safety.
I have things to say about that.

It's been more than a day for respect of those who killed and injured.
I'm going to throw out a word that should get everyone in a frenzy.

'BLOWBACK' - the unintended adverse results of a political action or situation.

Armchair Critic,

Thanks for engaging substantively. This is a more productive direction, but a few distinctions still matter if the discussion is going to remain grounded rather than drift into assumption.

1. Operational failures
I don't disagree with your framing here. It's entirely possible to acknowledge that police ultimately stopped the attack and that, with hindsight, aspects of the response could be examined for improvement. That's precisely what inquiries are for, provided they're evidence-led rather than blame-driven.

2. Motive and "hypothesising"
This is where I'd urge more caution. Hypotheses are fine, but they need constraints. At the moment you've listed mutually incompatible claims circulating online, including some that are clearly implausible. That should itself be a signal that confidence is premature.

Hypothesising is most useful when it's bounded by known facts and probabilities. Otherwise it risks becoming a Rorschach test where people project prior beliefs onto an event before evidence arrives. Fine-tuning later doesn't fully undo the damage of early misattribution.

3. Islam, conflict, and inquiry
I agree that religions can and should be examined critically, including their texts and historical interpretations. That's already a long-standing academic field.

Where I'd draw a line is between:

- analysing doctrines and texts, and
- attributing present-day violence or incompatibility to entire religious populations living within liberal democracies.

Those are very different moves. The former is legitimate scrutiny. The latter risks collapsing descriptive critique into collective suspicion unless handled with extreme care and specificity.

4. Gun laws and inevitability
I don't think "a determined person would find another way" is sufficient to dismiss gun laws entirely. Policy isn't about eliminating all risk, it's about shaping probability, lethality, and opportunity.

A vehicle attack, a knife attack, and a firearm attack don't have identical dynamics, casualty profiles, or intervention windows. Acknowledging that doesn't mean guns are the sole factor, just that they remain part of the environment being assessed.

None of this precludes difficult conversations about extremism, ideology, or religion. It simply insists that those conversations be sequenced properly: evidence first, attribution second, policy last.

Otherwise we risk answering the wrong question very confidently.

These facts are known.

- The attackers targeted a Jewish community event celebrating Hannukah
- They had the flag of an Islamist terror organisation in their car.
- One of them has been investigated by ASIO for links to Islamic State

It is unbelievable than anyone could think this was not an antisemitic terrorist attack.

This government has been warned loudly and repeatedly of the growing prevalence and vehemence of antisemitism in Australia, and the likelihood that it would become more violent. We have also witnessed more frequent and more violent antisemitic attacks overseas. While it is not true to say that it has done nothing in response, its response has clearly not been strong enough or quick enough. It has sat on antisemitism envoy Jillian Segal’s report for months, implementing some of its recommendations but ignoring the hard and controversial ones.

Many of its actions have encouraged antisemitism. It has allowed demonstrations to proceed that celebrate the murder and rape of Jews, and lionise terrorists. Its move to recognise the non-existent state of Palestine legitimised the regimes that claim to govern it – one a group of islamo-fascist terrorists; the other corrupt, incompetent and deeply unpopular with its own citizens. Until recently it has done almost nothing to prevent antisemitism and intimidation of Jewish staff and students at universities and in arts organisations it funds. And in true Albanese style, its main action has been to commission another report.

It is the government’s job to keep its citizens safe. If has failed.

Lots of anger towards the government. Burke booed. He and Albanese would resign if they had any decency. But, there's no such thing as decency in politics, particularly from a PM whose best effort is to "stand by" Jews instead of protecting them. And Burke brought in 3,000 Gazans on tourist visas!

Australian Jews would be safer in Israel than they are in Australia, now a bloody awful country, filling up with undesirables.

At least Israel protects its citizens, something no Australian government has done since they started importing trash who despise and hate us, our way of life, our values and the democracy we used to have.

mhaze,

I think you are barking up the wrong tree. A principle of treating others as you would have them treat you is all that is needed. Saying that people are incapable of assimilating or have conflicting values is the foundation of hatred.

What angers me is the repeated failure of cult leader Albo and his minions to act against the hatred. There should be freedom to be who you are, but hatred should have no place.

The crowd chanting "F the Jews", "Gas the Jews" etc on the steps of the Sydney Opera House should have been dealt with harshly instead of meekly tolerated, as were the rolling marches that followed ad nauseam across Australia. By not acting, Albo endorsed the hatred.

I can not believe how many people still don't understand what Islam is so glaringly openly stating !
Islam's doctrine is to take over the World !! What is it the Woke don't get ? Are they even more stupid than we give them credit for ?

There's going to be a lot of ugly questions and scenarios come out in this discussion I think.
The bigger question I think is whether or not people can handle it or not.

Lets start with the footage.
10 mins and 36 seconds of uninterrupted footage.
Full side view across the little bridge.
(I wonder if they will bulldoze it or turn it into some Jewish forever memorial to remind us forever like the holocaust but I digress)
- 6 minutes of uninterrupted footage before the perpetrators are shot, and 4 and a half minutes of footage afterward.

Shown here
http://x.com/CRYPTOBAE8055/status/2000223896339882096

What's interesting is police did not rush in and secure the area including weapons before locals stormed the bridge.
Young drunk-ish Aussie bloke kicks the older father perpetrator in the head
http://x.com/Dear_Men_Life/status/2000420975461208201

It is claimed:
'Bondi hero Ahmed Al Ahmed did two years military service in the Syrian Arab Army.'
http://x.com/Partisangirl/status/2000468479909183683
- That is, one of the nations Israel and America engineered the destruction of during theirs and Israels War of Terror.
Ahmed Al Ahmed came to Australia in 2005, Ex Syrian President Bashar Al Assad had only taken over from his father Hafez 5 years prior.

Hi Rhian,

"- The attackers targeted a Jewish community event celebrating Hannukah
- They had the flag of an Islamist terror organisation in their car.
- One of them has been investigated by ASIO for links to Islamic State"

I just saw some news footage of that flag on the windscreen. here.

Couple in dashcam footage who were killed trying to fight off Bondi shooter identified as Boris and Sofia Gurman
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/dec/16/boris-and-sofia-gurman-identified-as-couple-who-lost-lives-trying-to-stop-bondi-gunmen-as-attack-began-ntwnfb
Also news reports they went to Philippines for 'military style training' a few months back.

"This government has been warned loudly and repeatedly of the growing prevalence and vehemence of antisemitism in Australia, and the likelihood that it would become more violent."

I reject the idea that criticism of Israel is in any way responsible for the actions of other individuals.

I'm probably the most critical of Israel here, why don't you all just come out and blame me for it, like I did it?
I absolutely denounce and condemn what the perpetrators did, what they've done is no better than what Israels been doing, killing innocent people.

I reject the idea that denouncing Israels actions over the last few years somehow makes me worse than what they've been doing.

It's like Netanyahu issuing a directive 'Silence those witnesses'

It's a false narrative, in the same way Netanyahu blamed Tik Tok and X for displaying footage of atrocities in Gaza on their platforms rather than the fact he was conducting these atrocities himself.

By taking this position you and others would be effectively arguing that Israel should be allowed to commit said atrocities in Gaza and the West bank without criticism, and that Israel was right to have assassinated 280 journalists and their families to stop the world from seeing what they were doing.

[Cont.]
You're blaming the reaction to an event, without recognising the events themselves.
And the reason they wish to blame the reaction to the event, is they wish to continue their genocide without criticism.

It's like McDonalds adding arsenic to their burgers and then getting upset about the bad publicity.

Antisemitism is just a made up word to stifle criticism of Israel, when Zionist aims have always been to take more land whilst blaming the Palestinians as cover.
And if there is such a thing as Anti-Semitism, Jews historically kicked out 155 countries 1039 times, then why are they despised?
- I've seen plenty of evidence of why that may be in the last few years.

You say this is an anti-Semitic attack, an 'attack on Jews'
But I'm not sure it's entirely accurate to portray it this way.

Reason: How many non-Jews were killed and injured at Bondi being caught up in the middle of an ongoing beef between one group and another?
Aussies, for which they had absolutely nothing to do with Islam or Isreals atrocities and ethnic cleansing.

I say it's an attack on Australians, on an Australian beach by 2 groups that can't sort their own BS out.

Non-Jews wouldn't have been caught up in the middle of all this if Jews hadn't been holding their event during an ICC genocide which is accepted by quite a few prominent Jews themselves, and what does Hannukah celebrate, the reconquest of Jerusalem?
I think this kind of public religious oriented celebration is divisive and asking for trouble in a nation with a Muslim population.

Furthermore...
If you want to state anti-Semitism is the cause...
(Of which I'm guilty by their own definitions, which has nothing to do with me)

If any of you dare to say that I caused this, you'd be implying guilt by association for something I didn't do and have denounced;

Then I'd have to respond by asking if all Jews are guilty by association of the atrocities committed against innocent men women and kids that IDF commit?

That's what awaits if you wish to go down the 'guilt be association' path.

It's Israels atrocities that painted a target on Jews backs, not my opposition to something for which the opposition is indeed well deserved.
Standing up for innocent men, women and kids in Palestine is no different to standing up for the innocent men women and kids in Bondi.

Going by the posts here, I find it rather difficult to detect any difference in mentality between the Jewish & Arab mentality ?
Western stupidity as it presently is evidenced by the Woke Left is another mentality that is not from the text books !
Are conservative folk really the only blessed (or cursed) with at least some sense ?
Looking at the mentality of die hard Labor in the face of such massive evidence is literally an inexplicable phenomenon !

While weasel words are part and parcel of Albanese, his detractors are no better: one this morning calling him a “decent man” trying to do the “right things"; he is just “struggling to show real leadership”. Australians seem incapable of honest, straight up criticism - particularly Liberals.

Utter rubbish. Albanese is the very opposite of decent, and he is not a leader at all. Bondi has been coming to us for his entire failed prime ministership, and he has done nothing but encourage antisemitism by doing nothing; by mass immigration; squealing about near non-existent “Islamophobia” ( an invented word), and completely ignoring the antisemitic advisor of his own creation.

The man is incompetent, and he is rotten to his hard-left core.

If people want to play this game of 'we don't know everything about the massacre therefore we know nothing' then go for it. But I'm not playing.

We know more than enough about the Islamist adherents from past experience to know a lot about why this happened and how its going to play out. We know that they despise Jews based upon the horrendous texts in the Quran. We know that they hate western culture and intend to overthrow it. We know that they love death more than we love life. We know that they seek death as a martyr as a path to eternal paradise.

And we know we imported them. Not all Muhammadians are so affect. Not even a majority or even a large minority. But a small minority are so affected and are irredeemable. And we imported. We also that even if those we imported aren't so affected, a percentage of their offspring will be.

We also know that the political class will do their best to paper over the cracks. John Howard is right to say that the emphasis on changing the gun laws is a diversion from the need to forcefully address the radicals within the Islamic community.

"“We’ll do anything to keep Australians safe”

“So you’ll monitor mosques for radicalism?”

“No, too far”

“You’ll restrict immigration?”

“No, too far”

“You’ll take more rights from law-abiding Australians?”

“Yes, perfect.”

The Muhammadian community is integral to the ALP's election strategy. They will be protected. The safety of other Australians, particularly those the Muhammadians view as enemies, will run a distant second.

Nigel Farage, the like of whom we need here along with a Trump, has opined that, of all the Western countries, Australia has been the most encouraging of radical Islam and Bondi for the last two years since October 7. The least not being the maniacal recognition of non-state Palestine. The catalogue of events that have preceded Bondi are worse than in any other Western country.

One section of one group has been allowed to do as it pleases.

Extremism has flourished under Albanese.

Imam's are allowed to spout Jew-hatred as they please.

Demonstrators on our streets have been allowed to call for ‘intifada’ without consequences.

Albanese, Burke, Wong must go.

Another Cronulla riot coming up, I’ll be there. That’s action

mhaze,

Again, no one is arguing "we don’t know everything, therefore we know nothing." That’s a strawman.

The position I’ve stated is much narrower: that knowing some things does not license asserting everything, especially when the assertions move from specific actors to entire populations and their descendants.

You are no longer talking about this attack, or even about radical Islamism in a defined sense. You are making claims about:

- what Muslims as a class believe
- what their children will become
- which citizens deserve fewer rights
- and which political party is allegedly protecting them as a voting bloc

Those are not inferences from "past experience". They are predictions of collective guilt.

Saying "not all, not most" does not neutralise the argument when the policy implications are explicitly collective: surveillance of mosques, immigration restriction based on religion, and pre-emptive suspicion of future generations. That is punishment and suspicion by category, not by conduct.

If the concern is radicalism, then the unit of analysis must be radicalism: defined behaviours, networks, financing, recruitment pathways, and demonstrable incitement to violence. That work already exists, and it does not require declaring an entire religion hostile, nor asserting that its adherents "love death" or inevitably hate the West.

Invoking religious texts as explanatory shortcuts doesn’t help here either. Texts do not act. People do. Every major religion contains passages that can be read violently - liberal democracies function by policing actions, not scripture.

The irony is that you accuse others of diversion while performing one yourself. Gun policy, immigration settings, intelligence operations, and counter-radicalisation are not mutually exclusive choices. Framing them as such is rhetorical, not analytical.

Finally, once you assert that people were "imported", that their children will be dangerous, and that political protection explains state failure, you have left evidence-based security discussion and entered civilisational blame politics.

That may be the argument you want to make. But it should be owned honestly, not presented as the unavoidable conclusion of "what we already know".

"That is punishment and suspicion by category, not by conduct."

Well done. You finally got it. That's exactly what it means.

"If the concern is radicalism, then the unit of analysis must be radicalism: defined behaviours, networks, financing, recruitment pathways, and demonstrable incitement to violence. "

And that analysis is done by targeting radical mosques and Muhammadians groups to early identify the dangerous radicals. If mother's play groups were nurturing murders then I'd advocate the same thing. The way to find and stop radicals is to look for them where they exist and if that means suspending certain democratic freedoms, so be it.

"That work already exists"

And we saw how well it works last Sunday.

"asserting that its adherents "love death""

Well that's not my assertion. Its an Islamic slogan. If you're that ill-informed why are you so strident in your views?

"Finally, once you assert that people were "imported", that their children will be dangerous,'

But they were imported. And their kids have become radicalised and dangerous. If you want to just ignore facts because they're inconvenient to your views well you've got little of use to say.

New research is throwing light on why Islamophobia exists...
http://x.com/TheBabylonBee/status/2001036570451669247

It seems that the government has put out adverts against extremism with a Swastika but the St Kilda event seems to be a direct result of the Pro-Palestinian so called Anti-Racism protests. Anti-Racism is the problem.

Presumably the government is blaming Traditionalist's (on the right) for the incident when it was the Marxist's / Woke/ Labor Party policies (so called leftist's) that caused this. Even the Jewish community has been pointing at the recent Labor party recognition of Palestine. Of course anglos need to be the dominant culture within Australia otherwise there will be those that think that their culture can dominate Australia as it becomes weaker.

But the problem isn't just in politics- Universities, Main Stream Media, and other institutions have become dominated by loosely leftist ideologies encompassing Marxism, Wokeism, and the Labor movement, and even large companies that support multiculturalism at the expense of stability. Many of who attended and supported the Pro-Palestinian movement and rallies, as well as the Aboriginal movement (who are cutting down Anglo history and culture), mass migration, and other movements that want to destroy our traditions.

Loosely the left is the most responsible for the growing incidents within Australia.

But rather than take responsibility for their policies over 50 years they choose to play politics and blame it on their ideological enemies, the Neo-Nazi's.

The Neo-Nazi's had nothing to do with the St Kilda incident, the more they try to shoe horn Neo-Nazi's into everything, the more they look like idiots.

If anything the Neo-Nazi's warned us, and we ignored them.

Guns don't kill people, people do. Some people shouldn't be in Australia. We need to manage our diversity not encourage it. Diversity is being used as a weapon in the workplace, schools, institutions and breeds the results we've recently seen.

Tyranny is often preceded by disarmament.

Good fences make good neighbours.

The complicit government is proposing 1. gun laws and 2. protest restrictions, both authoritarian measures of control because they are unable to admit to the failure of their multiculturalism delusion.

Our governments have got themselves into a logical trap, where they can't move. They need to take a leap of faith to a more stable position in the tactical landscape. Because they've invested so long in this political mirage, it will be costly and painful to fix. And under the gaze of China who seeks to exploit our weakness.

I hope that the public sees through the ruse.

I see the rise of the Traditionalist Movement throughout Europe and the Western World as the solution. Every culture and people living according to their own principles supported by their own institutions in peace with their neighbours, but understanding that their views are not ours. For the years ahead terms like reimmigration, self sufficiency, minimal compliance, traditional families will become our language. But through the struggle we will see the long lines of our futures spread out before us. To be humane but not naive. We have a new language to learn. I hope you join me.

Ironically the Labor Government is blaming everyone else while stalling for time saying "we shouldn't be blaming anyone yet". The Labor Government can't be trusted.

The Aboriginals are saying similar things to the Palestinian's "from the river to the sea". Those Aboriginals can either live on Aboriginal reservations and obey Aboriginal laws or they can live in Anglo society and accept that they are a disadvantaged minority.

In my view Aboriginal's need their own economy and social system but they need to create it. No one can create stability for them.

We need to think about what is good for our society not minority societies. What is good for our children. To produce living goods for our families and communities. To defend our territories from those that seek to destroy it. To do anything less is to be irresponsible.

Remember that Palestinian's voted Hamas into government.

The police were supposed to have long arms in their vehicles. This lesson was learned at Port Arthur thirty years ago. Lady police officers reported as hiding with the public rather than taking control of the situation (so much for feminism). Public Protection. Farcical.

Western countries, Australia in particular, have been cowardly and hesitant when it comes to terrorism. Bondi is our worst, but not the first. Nothing was done about the minor events and hate-speech. Nothing will be done about Bondi.

A country that allows back in people who have left to give succour to terrorism overseas (Isis Brides) is led by cowardly, shite politicians. These gutless creeps need to go. But first, we need voters to start thinking and taking voting seriously, not just going through the motions because it's compulsory.

Each one of us of voting age has the responsibility to kick out politicians who are not doing their basic job of protecting us and our country.

If people were logical and truthful, they would not be religious.
If people were logical and truthful, they would not be involved in needless destruction.
So why do they do these things?
And could education be the answer to the current unhealthy situation?
But how could persons who are not logical and truthful teach logic and truth to students?
It appears man is limited by his inability to control and direct his instincts.
Is there a way out?
Yes, but it will take a million of years of evolution.
If the human race survives that long.
In the meantime, I will enjoy the advances we have made so far, and hope for more.
If I am allowed to.

Where to start; A 10 year old girl named Matilda seems to
sum it up. Her parents gave her a name that echos Australia.
So they all seem to be truly Australian.

We are divided into Australians and those who hold back
that affirmation because their religion tells them that they are different.
The Koran tells Moslems not to make friends of infidels as they will
not be your friends.
The Koran has many verses instructing moslems to kill unbelievers.
Islam is a separatist religion from the 6th century with an outlook
based in that time concreted into time by Mohammad.

For our long time peace we have somehow got to eliminate Islam from
Australia as I do not see how Islam will ever change.
Perhaps we should adapt their technique and start with a Jizaz tax
on all moslems. I am not joking, it has worked for 1400 years for the
caliphates gradually changing many countries to Islamic.
Problem is I do not think they will give us the time to do that
and more direct methods will be needed.
We could start by banning Islamic schools.
Perhaps already mosques are monitored, if not they should be.
Some of the sermons we have heard would call for deportation.
I know this will generate the usual reaction but that is better than
looking down the wrong end of a rifle barrel.

Ttbn

Your infuriatingly stuck down a bricked off one way lane .
When will you understand that blaming the voter, your fellows, will not solve a thing towards saving the unsaveable, through any conventional electoral processes that exist.
Without blood flowing in the streets, nothing will change, an historical fact with endless example.

Australia is a lost cause to an increasingly growing disparate and abandoned swathe of our communities. You live in a dream, they live the nightmare!
You really need to get out and about, and open your eyes to the abandoned: Identify them and discuss with them their hopeless plight, you may learn something relevant hopefully.

Tony Burke refused to answer the following questions:

. Does allowing ISIS brides back into Australia create a culture that emboldens radical Islam?
. Were there failures by the AFP and ASIO, given Bondi gunman Naveed Akram was previously cleared?
. Will the government move to deport hate preachers?
. Will the Al Madina Dawah Centre, linked to Akram, be shut down?

Burke denied visas to Israelis and other Jews, but allowed ‘Isis Brides’ back into Australia and gave visas to a couple of thousand Gazans when there is no way in the world that they could have been vetted.

Jewish Australians are calling for his and Albanese's resignations. The rest of us should be doing the same.

The CEO of the Australian Jewish Association has called for Burke's resignation for weakness and moral failure to confront antisemitic threats.

“We needed to have seen a much tougher line taken against the hate rallies where incitement was allowed to spread. Calls for an Intifada were a direct threat which has now been carried out”, he said.

Burke has been sneaking around after dark to avoid the public's anger.

Premier Minns was at a child's funeral today, but Albanese was apparently told by the family that he was wanted there.

The Albanese government's failure to act over at least the last two years created a climate for antisemitism. They were complicit in the Bondi terror.

In the meantime ABC idiot, Laura Tingle, advises that the terrorist attack had ‘nothing to do with religion’; probably geed-up by a Muslim lunatic recently saying that religion (Islam) shouldn't be included when talking about terrorism.

best to let authorities to come up with the wherefores of what happened.
Loos toung of would be journalist are far worse than sky news ever was.
Any one with intent is always going to be problematic in society.

Any person that exceeds the speed limit is associated with the same crime.

Ttbn

You’re either a snob, or gutless or both. I’m calling you out on your endless whining over your fellow Australians and their voting preferences, as root cause of all ills: if anybody is to blame, you are; you admit to casting your useless vote.

After Bondi, the Muslims now control our streets.
The sickening sight of Howard fawning to Jews shot up by Muslims, needs calling out for what it is; this the authoritarian form of Democracy Howard style, has left us unarmed and obviously undefended.

The call to allow Jews to arm themselves ( exclusively), since the Bondi massacre, is another blow to Democracy, and another gutless response and underhanded cop-out to the rest of society, which was unilaterally disarmed by Howard against the backdrop of Muslim crime gangs which obviously were not, and still are not, as evidenced in the Western suburbs of Sydney with nightly shoot outs on the streets, proving the point.

The Western suburbs is a no-go zone for police: God help you ( and particularly your daughters), if your not a Muslim and you live there.

Urgently stopping ALL Muslim immigration to Australia, is the obvious imperative, until WE, which will obviously include civilians, can disarm the existing lawless barbarians.

The Jewish response to such tragic deaths is found in the "Wunetaneh Tokef" prayer.
It says:
“But repentance, prayer and charity, avert the severity of the decree”
- http://jewishjournal.com/judaism/holidays/224545/chilling-words-high-holy-days

How ridiculous it is to expect governments to protect you:

If you did wrong things that harmed others in your past, then surely you will suffer for it and be harmed yourself in turn - and in that case, not only human governments, but even the angels cannot protect you.

However, there is one way to mitigate your punishment - not by force, not by legislation, not by policing, not by further harassing and suppressing others, thus creating even more misery in the world. This is the authentic Jewish response and the only thing which truly works, they are the words of wisdom:

“But repentance, prayer and charity, avert the severity of the decree”

Let us pray for better times, a speedy and full recovery for the wounded and solace for those who lost loved ones.

Yuyutsu

#… How ridiculous it is to expect governments to protect you…#

It’s a long bow to suggest God takes you out for not being a good Jew.
Life is random. You can’t deny that wealthy people with access to better medical care can succeed better than poor people with limited access to medical care for example.

Better to believe that God is good, and the Devil is representative of evil, and evil befalls us all at some time. We can recognise evil with the help of God as a guide, and we should fight evil with gallantry in spite of weak leadership, evident in such times as now. God is on the side of good; but isn’t that exactly what Muslims believe, and killing Jews is acceptable to them as taught through the Koran.

The leadership is confused with recognising this simple point, you must take sides or you die prematurely. Both sides can’t be right, therefore death must befall both sides, Muslim and Jew. That fact is more profound!

Dear Dan,

«It’s a long bow to suggest God takes you out for not being a good Jew.»

And indeed I never made such a claim.

What I said was that if you make other people suffer, then surely, sooner or later, you too will suffer as a result.

«Life is random.»

Life only SEEMS random.
(otherwise you would not experience free choice)

«You can’t deny that wealthy people with access to better medical care»

Yes of course, but how come they are wealthy?

«Better to believe that God is good, and the Devil is representative of evil»

Believe what you like, but an existence of some "Devil" is a logical impossibility.

«we should fight evil with gallantry in spite of weak leadership»

Certainly by all means: do fight the evil within yourself. Every moment.

«but isn’t that exactly what Muslims believe»

Surprise surprise: many Muslims, especially Ahmadiyyans and Sufis, define "Jihad" just as that: "do fight the evil within yourself. Every moment."

«killing Jews is acceptable to them as taught through the Koran.»

Only to SOME Muslims.
Certainly not to Ahmed El Ahmad!

Yet I say unto you: if you hate Islam, then fight and eradicate the Islamist within you!

«you must take sides or you die prematurely»

Nobody ever dies before their time.
It only seems so from a limited human perspective.

«therefore death must befall both sides, Muslim and Jew.»

But of course, death will eventually befall us all, anyway, we don't need to do anything special about it.

Australia has become a “world leader in hatred” , says Mike Pezzullo (former Home Affairs Secretary) who was booted out by the stinking government because he told the truth: a big no-no for our appalling politicians.

Universities. Hate preachers. Nothing done.

ASIO announced in August last year that there was a 50% chance of a terrorist attack in Australia within 12 months.

Bingo. It happened. Why?

According to Pezzullo it will take 3 or 4 months to sort that out - if anything is actually done.

It's not looking good with Albanese banging on about more gun control instead of getting stuck into the real problem: radical Islam and his part in importing it into Australia; his failure to deal with antisemitism and his failure to protect Jewish Australians. And that's what it is all about - not his crap about an attack on “all Australians”.

Unless Albanese and all of our politicians grow backbones, Bondi will just be the start.

Albanese has not shown a skerrick of anger at the slaughter of 15 innocent Australians, including a 10 year old child. He is playing politics all the time. He is incapable of dealing with real issues.

It has been reported that an increasing number of Muslims are joining the Labor party. The organisation Muslim Votes Count is spruiking how they can cause change.

We are being colonised - with the help of Albanese.

Albanese is not up to the job. He is cowardly and incompetent. He is totally responsible for antisemitism in this country, merely even now chuntering about ‘gun control’ and ‘intelligence sharing’.

The voters who put him back in power after his last disaster are not blameless either.

Some more news starting to come out:

* It seems that the two Bondi murderers were prominent figures at the "Gas the Jews" protest held in Sydney a coupla days after the Hamas invasion of Israel in 2023

* it seems that the two Bondi murderers made a trip to the Philippines a few months back and went to the south of the country to receive weapon training from ISIS.

* a prominent bagel shop in Bondi is closing down because the police have advised the owner that he was a target and there was nothing they could do to protect him or provide security . Well at least the jihadists didn't smash his windows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht)...... yet.

mhaze,

Your last reply to me, was refreshingly explicit. I don't think I've ever seen you so willingly forego any chance at the imply-the-deny approach.

It seems you have openly advocated suspicion, surveillance, and rights-restriction based on religious category rather than individual conduct, including extending that logic to future generations. That's not counter-terrorism, it's collective punishment.

At this point the disagreement is no longer about evidence gaps, sequencing, or policy trade-offs. It's about first principles.

Liberal democracies are built on the idea that:

- people are judged by actions, not ancestry or belief
- guilt is individual, not inherited
- rights are removed by due process, not pre-emptive classification

Once you abandon those principles, you don't "defend Western values". You suspend them in the hope that doing so will save them.

You say you are willing to sacrifice democratic freedoms to find radicals "where they exist". History is full of regimes that made exactly that argument, always insisting it was temporary, targeted, and necessary. It never remains so.

Regarding slogans and texts: citing rhetoric or scripture does not substitute for behavioural evidence. Texts do not commit violence. People do. Every major religion and ideology contains language that can be weaponised; pluralist societies function by policing conduct, not belief.

As for ASIO and Sunday's failure: intelligence failure does not validate collective punishment. It demonstrates the limits of intelligence, not the moral legitimacy of abandoning individual rights.

You are entitled to argue for an authoritarian model of security based on religious categorisation. But it should be named honestly for what it is, and its consequences accepted. It is not a fact-driven inevitability. It is a choice.

Hi John Daysh,

>>Again, no one is arguing "we don’t know everything, therefore we know nothing." That’s a strawman.

The position I’ve stated is much narrower: that knowing some things does not license asserting everything, especially when the assertions move from specific actors to entire populations and their descendants.

You are no longer talking about this attack, or even about radical Islamism in a defined sense. You are making claims about:

- what Muslims as a class believe
- what their children will become
- which citizens deserve fewer rights
- and which political party is allegedly protecting them as a voting bloc

Those are not inferences from "past experience". They are predictions of collective guilt.<<

I think you might have to entertain some uncomfortable truths here.

They're probably not inferences, rather outright statements.
They ARE based upon 'past experiences', therefore a 'basis of merit' exists, and THEY ARE predictions of collective guilt.

Why?

Because we see what's happened in the European countries through Islamic immigration already.
*Take specific note of the word 'COUNTRIES' - plural.
You may think the conflict created in these countries is acceptable, women and young girls frightened to walk alone for fear of being raped and it happens. People being attacked for taking photos in public places.
Unless you have some secret recipe how we can do things different, and break that proven trend, - a foolproof one that insures our women don't all eventually end up as ISIS brides...

If you wish to call it collective guilt, then fine.

"- what Muslims as a class believe
- what their children will become
- which citizens deserve fewer rights
- and which political party is allegedly protecting them as a voting bloc"

Wish to dig into all the nuances... fine.

Based of what we've already seen in other western countries
- And let me see I'm not attacking every individual
[Cont.]

[Cont.]
In regards to what we've seen in numerous other western countries
I say guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty.

If we could round up the 1 million Aussie Muslims and sit them down and say 'we see the crap that goes on in other countries, and we don't want it. How do we trust YOU to act differently than you have in other countries? We can't'

Expecting a different result that what we've seen in other countries already is an irrational assumption,
As in 'do the same stupid thing over and over expecting a different result'

We'd be fool to expect a different result, we should expect the same result as other European countries - that's is the rational position, therefore call it collective guilt or whatever you want, but if you fail to recognise the feelings of your fellow countrymen, then you are putting foreigners ahead of Australians and endangering the country.

Also, lets all face another unfortunate truth.

People screaming for equality for foreigners and support for immigration including Muslims are inadvertently creating the conditions for a full AI surveillance state, because when people scream 'this is all the governments fault' the result will be increased surveillance of everyones calls, text messages, emails, bank accounts, friends and network (facebook) everywhere you go, (location data from google from your phone) and travel visas and flights in and out of the country;
They will just throw more money into collecting all this data, collating it in one place and analysing it with AI.

"But they were imported. And their kids have become radicalised and dangerous. If you want to just ignore facts because they're inconvenient to your views well you've got little of use to say."

I don't know if 'we imported' them or not.
Whether we put guns to their heads and forced them to come.
I certainly did no such thing.

But if so, who is behind every part of the immigration issue, why has the West imported all these Muslims, in all these countries, either wanting the same outcome as other countries, or foolishly thinking they could have a different outcome.

We imported 'them' isn't entirely the full story.
We imported 'them' who are they?

Muslims? Well not just any Muslims...
Muslims from countries who were displaced after the West's wars upon them, many of these wars were on behalf of Israel.

That's what makes this 'BLOWBACK'
Not an unfortunate tragic even without any cause or meaning.

Beyond that it the result of an individual with an extremist mentality.

For all we know Mossad may have had some hand in helping to radicalise these men, they did give support to ISIS fighters in Syria.

I'm watching TV and there a member of Chabad lecturing about 03 cops and other officials, like somehow they annexed a part of our country now, and everything has to be built around 'Anti-Semitism' and I'm the fecking enemy for not going along with their own murderous clownshow.

It just makes me more critical of them.

Jews use attacks upon them to scream for more obligation and loyalty.
Like tightening a noose around your neck.

The majority of voters still have to take the blame for our awful government.

The latest poll of the unaware/don't care has the after preferences vote at 54.5% Labor; 27.5% Coalition, and 17% One Nation.

Jews response to this atrocity
- "Please don't criticise our atrocities or support Palestinan animals or we'll have YOUR own leaders who are in our pocket arrest you, and we'll defame and vilify you publicy as the kind of NAZI that WE TRULY ARE.
All our accusation against others are actually designed to accuse others of things WE DO. We constantly fotce you to answer our made up charges so that you never confront us about ours -which we would ignore anyway!
Also accept our guilt trip that this was all your fault, we told you so, this was because you supported the 2 state solution and Palestinian soverignty,
We were quietly exterminating them just fine. Why did you have to go and rock the boat and throw a spanner into our genocide / ethnic cleansing / land theft plans?"

No you stupid Jews
You screamed racism, you screamed hate speech, you cut off our balls when it came to Nationalism, you supported the left !
Then you expect us to flip and support the right!
Act like Israel does, a hate filled racist apartheid state that knows nothing other than murderering or vilifying its detractors (even those amongst you) and provide you the security in our country you expect, when you chose to live in a secular country that has Muslim citizens, and it was your damn wars that brought the Muslims here!.

Also you exploit brainwashed Christians to blindly support your crimes against humanity reinforcing false Judeo-Christian values, like you're trying to turn Jesus into Vlad the Impaler or Pol Pot.

You turn us into a surveillance state, but that's just fine for you, that's what you want because your people run Palantir.

guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty.
Armchair Critic,
Australia doesn't have the luxury of time for such ideological stuff ! No need for it anyway because the evidence is already as blatant as can be !
The question Australians need to ask themselves is; Should this Nation become Islamic or remain Western ? If they choose the latter then they'd better start on rectifying society ! Getting Labor, correction ALP, off the register is the very first step required to make Australia as it was planned by the founding fathers & the visionaries then.
If this is not agreeable try asking Islamic nations to change to Christianity !

"Liberal democracies are built on the idea that:"

Liberal democracies are built on a consensus of the citizenry to abide by the rules and mores of the society. When one group or a significant portion of that group don't accept those rules and openly flout them in their search to replace the liberal democracy, then some of the niceties have to be suspended. Those seeking to replace the rules of society aren't entitled to benefit from those rules but do rely on us not having the stomach to confront them.

Of coarse in this case they also rely on their electoral clout to maintain special privileges.

"citing rhetoric or scripture does not substitute for behavioural evidence. "

I didn't say it did. I was merely pointing out how clueless you were in not knowing it was part of their belief systems.

"Every major religion and ideology contains language that can be weaponised;"

I'm not entirely sure that's true. But it is so of the Abrahamic religions. We've litigated this in previous threads and I don't want to go down that path again, especially with someone whose knowledge on the issue is minimal. But just as a summary, the difference between Islam and Christianity is that the New Testament negates the violent parts of the Old Testament whereas the Meccan texts in Islam, which contain the encouragement to violence, superseded the Medinan texts.

"intelligence failure does not validate collective punishment"

This isn't collective punishment. This is just how people try to protect the real problem members by using those who aren't a problem. Its the equivalent of Hamas hiding in schools and hospitals. We are just talking about heightened vigilance. We are saying that if a Muhammadian shows Islamist tendencies they aren't then given a free pass to carry on unobserved, allowed access to guns, allowed to travel overseas for military training. Muhammadians who adhere to the Medinan texts wouldn't shouldn't and couldn't be interfered with.

Hi ttbn,

"It has been reported that an increasing number of Muslims are joining the Labor party. The organisation Muslim Votes Count is spruiking how they can cause change.

We are being colonised - with the help of Albanese."

- No more than you conservative evangelicals are bringing it upon yourselves.

You lot make it so that I have to support Mr immigration.
Mind you conservatives aren't much better, they just like Labor getting the blame for it.

As long as the Coalition party pledges allegiance to Israel, then you made politics about Jews V's Palestinians, or the oppressors V's the oppressed.
Christians aren't a majority in this country, that means no-one with an actual conscience will vote for the right or support Israel during a genocide no matter what crap message the right comes out with regardless of whatever religious loyalty fanstasyland you live in.

I've got to choose the lesser evil.
Being colonised by Israel or Islam is the only choice you fools give me, and I won't support any government that pledges its loyalty to another. I support unity in self sufficiency and being non-aligned, neutral, secular and militarily staying out of other peoples conflicts.

Only fake Christians with religious loyalty to Israel not Jesus will support wholesale slaughter of innocents.

You can scare the crap out of them with Islam, and invoke scripture about Israels biblical destruction but only if you can hide the truth, which is that Muslims presence here is a direct result of U.S. and Israeli wars, and that Israels plans to divide, conquer and steal land is at the heart of this problem.

Blaming Anti-Semitism, is like blaming criticism itself to coverup international war crimes, conducted by Israeli leadership.

Who on earth would vote for the coalition?
And of course the 1 million Muslims in Australia are a larger voting block than the 110K Jews, and they're hardly going to stand by Israel over Palestinians, so what do you expect a politician that actually wants to win will do?
Deliberately lose supporting you traitors.
I have to support the other traitor.

You know who I blame for this?
Religious extremism, and all the Abrahamic religions are to blame.

The question I ask is whether this event would've happened without the events in Gaza?

If not, then the cause is Jewish religious extremism, obsessed with taking their biblical assigned lot as much as it is Islamic extremism.

Religion is what got Aussies killed.
And Jews on TV saying they are a light upon the world is total bs, when most of them support the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and attacks by Israel on Muslim countries.

If it didn't get me in trouble I'd say all you lot should go back to where you came from, take your Jews v's Islam BS elsewhere.
Jews wanted a home for the Jews right?
Well why don't you go to your home?
Go kill some Palestinians if that's what your so determined to do.
Why are you annexing Bondi?
Take the Muslims and the problem you created with you.
But don't try to make be swallow your garbage.

Religions are all flawed and shite, and only get people killed fighting over crappy ancient hate doctrine.

Chabad provides support for Israels genocide.

'Support for the IDF: Chabad demonstrates strong support for the State of Israel and the safety of its soldiers through fundraising and practical aid. Chabad emissaries have set up a presence in areas that critics view as occupied territory, which has been controversial.'

If these Jews at Bondi support those committing murder, rape and war crimes for biblical land theft, then they inadvertently put a target on their own backs, and put Australians in the line of fire as well.

IDF is no less a terrorist organisation than Hamas whether designated as such or not, and Israels flag is a symbol of genocide, while the Palestinian flag is a symbol of freedom from oppression.

Religion is what got Aussies killed.
Armchair Critic,
No ! Wrong migration is back-firing !

Islam has been advocating the killing of Jews for 1,400 years. Muhammad himself was keen on killing followers of any religion not Muslim. Islam has always been a threat to non-Muslims, including atheists.

Neither Albanese nor Sussan Ley have had the courage to say of the Bondi terror attack, “Muslims did it”.

Everyone is talking about ‘standing against hate’, but not naming the hate behind Bondi. Pathetic and cowardly.

It's Islamic hate, you gutless wonders! The killings were on behalf of Islam and the Koran. It's nothing to do with gun laws. It is ONLY to do with Islam, and mass immigration of dangerous people who hate our values and way of life; and your multiculturalism horseshit.

The NSW police commissioner seems to be in denial too.

Mal Lanyon said it was “important to find a motive” for the Bondi terror killings.

Hell's Bells! What sort of cop is he? ISIS flags; previously investigated by ASIO; Terrorist training in the Philippines; Jews only targeted.

The bloke had already declared it a terrorist attack. Who else does terrorism these days apart from Islamic types?

Two of the blighters. No ‘lone wolf’ head case.

But, we all know that any “investigation” will be worth squat. Nothing useful will be done. And Bondi will occur again somewhere in Australia, given that ASIO's “possible”/50% chance within a year warning still stands.

Dear Ttbn,

«Muhammad himself was keen on killing followers of any religion not Muslim.»

Muhammad, peace be upon him, was a Christian. More precisely he was a pagan who converted to Christianity and then led a Christian military unit to conquer the city of Gaza. Following that he became a successful merchant. Coins were found from the 7th century with "Muhammad" on one side and a cross on the other. Islam only existed since the 790's at the earliest.

You seem to pay more attention to fake Islamic sources like the Quran and the Hadith than to modern archaeological science.

That framing already shifts the ground, mhaze.

//Liberal democracies are built on a consensus of the citizenry to abide by the rules and mores of the society.//

No, liberal democracies are built on limits to state power precisely because consensus is never complete. Rights are not conditional on cultural alignment. Once they are, citizenship itself becomes conditional.

//When one group… don't accept those rules… some of the niceties have to be suspended.//

Suspending rights based on group judgement is not a temporary adjustment within liberal democracy. It is a replacement of it. Liberal systems expect dissent, even radical belief, and respond to conduct, not presumed loyalty.

//Those seeking to replace the rules of society aren't entitled to benefit from those rules.//

That is collective disqualification in principle. It abandons individual responsibility and due process in favour of categorical judgement. Liberal law does not work that way.

//I didn't say [scripture] substituted for behavioural evidence.//

But you are using doctrine to justify heightened suspicion prior to behaviour. That's the issue. Texts do not commit violence. People do. Liberal societies police incitement, recruitment, training, financing, and violence, not belief systems or theological lineage.

//The difference between Islam and Christianity…//

Internal theological disputes do not solve the evidentiary problem. Once the state decides which religious interpretations are acceptable and which justify surveillance, it has crossed from policing conduct into policing belief.

//This isn't collective punishment… just heightened vigilance.//

If vigilance is triggered by religious category first and behaviour second, it is collective in structure regardless of how it's labelled. Saying some adherents "wouldn't shouldn't and couldn't be interfered with" doesn't change that; it simply describes uneven application of a categorical policy.

//They rely on their electoral clout to maintain special privileges.//

That adds another layer of collective suspicion, this time political. It doesn't rescue the argument, it broadens it.

At this point the disagreement is foundational. What's being advocated is conditional rights, group-based suspicion, and suspended liberties in advance of wrongdoing.

That is an authoritarian security model. It can be argued for. But it should be named honestly.

It is not liberal democracy.

When the bungling defence minister who prefers be called Deputy PM - which he is of course, but it's not as important as defence minister - was asked if there should be greater emphasis on hate speaking by Muslim clerics, he didn't give the obvious answer - YES; he said, “ er ah um, ah er ah ahem”, then eventually, “We will go through all of this”.

How could we possibly expect an idiot like that to do anything at all, let alone protect Jewish Australians, or the rest of us in an emergency! The clown is frightened to upset Islamists.

His mad mate Albanese yabbers about not letting us be divided, whe he is doing more dividing than anyone, with multiculturalism, aboriginal exceptionalism, and three different flags.

“The Paradox (of tolerance) states that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance”.

Some of the things the Albanese government has tolerated:

. Hundreds gather at Sydney Opera House to chant ‘Gas the Jews!’
. Multiple bomb threats are made to several synagogues across Australia.
. Australia’s largest Jewish school is graffitied with hateful slogans
. Antisemitic graffiti is sprayed on a Jewish bakery in Sydney.
. A kosher restaurant is torched in an arson attack.
. Cars are set on fire and buildings vandalised in Sydney’s Jewish neighbourhood.
. The Adass Israel Synagogue is torched in Melbourne during an arson attack.
. A man allegedly threatens worshippers at Chabad North Shore Synagogue in . Allawah Synagogue in Sydney vandalised with . Attempted arson and vandalism of . . Newtown Synagogue vandalised in Sydney.
. A Jewish childcare centre in Sydney is set on fire and vandalised.
. Two Sydney nurses allegedly declare they would harm Jewish patients.
. Activists march across Sydney Harbour Bridge, some of them waving Ayatollah placards.
. A large pro-Palestine rally takes place on Bondi Beach
. Shabbat dinner at East Melbourne Synagogue is targeted in.

Result : Bondi Beach terrorist attack on Jews.

ttbn,

Thanks for showing us what a textbook misuse of Popper's paradox looks like when combined with a post hoc fallacy.

Popper's point was not that a liberal society must suppress any intolerant expression, nor that the existence of intolerance automatically explains subsequent violence. His argument was narrower: that a society may justifiably defend itself when intolerance becomes organised, violent, and actively seeks to destroy tolerance itself, and when persuasion and law enforcement are no longer sufficient.

That distinction is being collapsed in your list.

Several of the items you cite are serious criminal acts: arson, bomb threats, vandalism, threats against worshippers, threats by medical staff. Those are not examples of "tolerance". They are crimes, and they should be investigated and prosecuted accordingly. Failure to prevent or solve crimes is not the same thing as tolerating them.

Other items on your list are lawful political expression or assembly, however offensive or misguided one may find them. Marches, rallies, placards, and protests do not become criminal by association with later violence. Liberal democracy does not treat political speech as causative guilt.

Conflating these two categories is the core error in your most recent attempt to pin this on a person (or people) you dislike.

Finally, your conclusion:

"Result: Bondi Beach terrorist attack on Jews"

does not follow. It's a post hoc assertion, not an argument.

Where are the organisational links? The incitement pathways? Or coordination between those events and the attackers? Listing prior incidents and placing "Result" at the end is narrative construction, not evidence. You could do it with just about any list of random events slapped together.

Nothing in Popper's paradox licenses collective blame, suppression of lawful dissent, or the abandonment of due process. In fact, Popper explicitly warned against precisely that slide.

If the concern is antisemitic violence, the correct response is targeted law enforcement, intelligence work, and protection of threatened communities, not retrofitting a chain of guilt across unrelated acts and lawful speech.

Getting this distinction wrong doesn't defend tolerance. It undermines it.

Hi John Daysh,
"Liberal societies police incitement, recruitment, training, financing, and violence, not belief systems or theological lineage.
Internal theological disputes do not solve the evidentiary problem. Once the state decides which religious interpretations are acceptable and which justify surveillance, it has crossed from policing conduct into policing belief."

What happens when religious texts incite and preach hate and discriminate against others?
Should liberal societies not police the source of the conflict, or at least expose it?
Will religious leaders not stay true to the word of their religion, regardless of whether it incites and promotes hate, intolerance, discrimination, violence or not?

If liberal societies allow these religious texts and the conflicts they cause, are the societies really liberal or just pretending?

When those beliefs become Bondi, don't we have an obligation to police them? My personal opinion is that religions texts contain aspects of both good and bad.

Usually perpetrators of these attacks end up killed during their rampage, but this time we caught one alive, and we all watched what he did in footage, no need to wait for a court to find him guilty.

I don't want to wait a year for some court to tell us nothing...

Why can't we just offer some deal that he spill the beans right now, today, live broadcast confession, tell us all exactly why you did it, exactly how it came to pulling the trigger and face life imprisonment or keep your secrets and face a public firing squad instead.

mhaze said-

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10712#373686
"intelligence failure does not validate collective punishment"
This isn't collective punishment.

Answer- Yes I agree. Denial of a reward isn't usually considered a punishment.

In this case migration of Muslim's to Australia doesn't pass the common sense test. It would be good if Muslim's could be left alone to their own territory but stability requires that sane nations control the oil. So a compromise is necessary.

Hopefully we can find an alternative to reliance on Middle Eastern Oil. Sadly those that are sane aren't always the strongest. We need to create some sanity sometimes at the cost of other attributes. We are heading into a period of insanity, be careful what you wish for.

Europe and the West is a source of soft power inspiration in the world, not perfect, of course it's necessary that inspiration is achievable. I believe that Catholic European Subsidiarity Aristocracy is superior to Asian Authoritarian Rotating Officials Sovereignty. Many more successful Asian nations have moved past the authoritarian rotating officials model, to a Confucist model of "the family nation" (that Marxist's would probably label as evil patriarchism).

The repeated prisoner's dilemma with randomness can be a good model to understand geo-politics. The Chinese don't play "tit for tat" very well, and have been killing their citizen's for monolithic politics, creating citizen drones, for thousands of years, hard rather than soft negotiating tactics, avoiding learning the benefits of long term relationships. While killing your enemies does have it's advantages, it doesn't allow multiple social experiments to be tested, and reduces opportunities for development. Perhaps it's time for the homeless Chinese diaspora, settled in various parts of the world, to take back their territories. Maybe we should return to the territories of ancient China during the warring states period (Zhan, Yan, Qin, Wei, Qi, Han, Chu) many of the people being thrown off the castle walls to crystalise their gains.

Despite the Chinese diaspora being spread to the four winds, through Chinese authoritarianism, currently in the form of Marxism, some western people believe that their political authoritarianism is something to aspire to

Armchair Critic,

Apologies for the delayed reply. I have a nasty habit of responding to the least sincere first.

//They ARE based upon past experiences… therefore call it collective guilt or whatever...//

The problem is that once guilt is presumed at the group level, evidence no longer functions as a safeguard - it becomes something individuals need to produce to escape suspicion. That's the inversion of the rule of law.

//I say guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty.//

The presumption of innocence isn't a sentimental nicety, it exists because states are bad at predicting who will commit future violence and very good at abusing predictive power once it's granted.

Every system that has adopted "guilty until proven innocent" has eventually applied it far beyond its original target.

//Based on what we've already seen in other western countries…//

Invoking outcomes elsewhere doesn't justify abandoning first principles here. If "other countries" are the standard, then the question is which policies reduced violence without dismantling civil rights. That requires specificity, not generalisation across countries.

//What happens when religious texts incite hate?//

Liberal societies already address this: through laws on incitement, threats, recruitment, financing, and conspiracy. What they don't do is criminalise texts, adjudicate theology, or surveil belief systems. The moment the state decides which interpretations are acceptable, it ceases to be neutral and becomes an arbiter of conscience.

That's confessional governance, not liberalism.

//When those beliefs become Bondi, don't we have an obligation to police them?//

Beliefs don't "become" attacks. People do. Policing belief rather than conduct guarantees overreach while missing actual threats.

//Why not a live confession… or a public firing squad?//

This would abandon the last remaining constraint entirely. Coerced confessions and extrajudicial killing aren't methods of truth-finding, they're methods for terror. They produce false information, legitimise vengeance, and destroy any remaining claim to moral authority.

At this point the disagreement is no longer about Islam, immigration, or security effectiveness. It's about whether fear justifies discarding due process, individual rights, and the rule of law.

That choice doesn't protect liberal society. It ends it.

I don't like "Poppers Intolerant Tolerance", and believe that good fences make good neighbours. Of course it also depends on how intolerance and tolerance is defined. I don't believe cultures should tolerate their own annihilation- if that is what Popper wants us to tolerate, I'm going to reject him, in spite of his other contributions to science. Of course other philosophers also lost the plot such as Jean-Paul Sartre.

In the talk of Palestinian protests on one side and the ISIS flag on the other, it raises the question. Are Palestinian protests being run by ISIS, or is ISIS being influenced by Palestinian's? And what is the role of the Woke Marxist's that are closely involved in the protests, and what about the many Labor and Green's party members marching??

About the absolute nonsense of gun control in relation to the terrorism on Bondi Beach. What if Jewish citizens had been armed, as people are permitted to be in countries without draconian gun laws like Australia's? What if they had been permitted a couple of armed guards?

I'll tell you. The terrorists would have been dead. More, if not all, Jewish Australians at the event would be alive.

In countries where citizens are permitted to carry arms, deaths of innocents by rogue shooters are reduced by 53%. Waiting for police to show up reduces deaths by only 35%.

An armed citizenry is an asset: a safeguard.

Australians governments prove time and time again that they cannot defend us. Worse, they won't allow us to defend ourselves.

Well it looks like the ALP's plans to ride out the community anger over the kid-glove treatment of Islamists is falling apart. Their private polling must be horrendous because Albanese et al are running as fast as they can away from all that.

They originally hoped changing a few gun laws would placate the populace. But that's failed. So now they are promising to implement the type of laws many have been advocating for two years but which were staunchly opposed by the Islam friendly ALP.

Expect those who mocked the proposed changes as an attack on liberal democracy and collective punishment (yes we're looking at a few members here) to meekly fall into line behind the ALP. Suddenly policies based on religion will be not only acceptable but desirable.

In a sign of how incompetent the current opposition is, the ALP has been forced into doing what's good for the nation (as opposed to what's good for its electoral prospects) by the likes of Howard, Josh Frydenberg and the ubiquitous Pauline as well as an outpouring of rage from a populace who've had enough. The opposition is trying to go along for the ride, rather than leading. Pathetic.

I hope so. But its hard to believe that they won't tough it out, as they usually do, until things die down: a distinct possibility with our complacent, navel-gazing population, that reacts emotionally to horrible events, but soon forgets.

“For most of the past two years, the Albanese government has been all but clinically unable to utter the word antisemitism without referencing Islamophobia as well, as though they were equal phenomena… This is one of countless ways the fatal ideology of antisemitism was minimised and marginalised” – Greg Sheridan, 16 December 2025

Hi John Daysh,
"The problem is that once guilt is presumed at the group level, evidence no longer functions as a safeguard - it becomes something individuals need to produce to escape suspicion. That's the inversion of the rule of law."

I don't disagree with your arguments.
I said this discussion was going to get ugly.

"If 'other countries' are the standard, then the question is which policies reduced violence without dismantling civil rights. That requires specificity, not generalisation across countries."

Exactly.
Which policies? Apparently none of them.
That's my point.

I can't point the finger at individual Muslims.
But it's probably not wrong to point the finger collectively.

Let's say we got them all together for a public meeting.

"I don't know that any of you individually are going to do something stupid, but I'm pretty certain a few of you will, sooner or later."

But acts of terrorism isn't what concerns me.

It's constant daily attacks on women and girls that concern me.
Not able to walk down the street for fear of being raped by people who were happy to parade them in cages and marry them off as sex slaves.

We talk about the rights of women to feel safe etc.
That claimed virtue goes strait in the toilet once their numbers go up and get emboldened.

The question IS NOT whether or not we should stick to 'principles'
Instead, the question is 'Do you love your daughters and granddaughters'
Because in light of the second question, the first one does not matter as much as you think it does.

Islam says 'Make treaties with them when you are week, until you are strong enough to ignore them'

None have managed to beat religious nuts with their religious texts, they can't be told.

We've brought in people from countries the West has attacked.
Many harbour past resentments and want to settle scores.

I don't want this shown below for Aussie women and girls.
We owe our girls that, their future is worth fighting for.
Policy-makers live in safe gated communities.

Everyone Is Sick Of It
http://youtu.be/iEWSRJo9gbE

The Bondi terror is being described as the worst slaughter of Jews since Oct 7 in Israel, and more Jews were murdered (let's drop the ‘died’, ‘lost their lives’ and so on bollocks; they were shot down, slaughtered like animals) than were murdered in 2018 Pittsburgh US synagogue.

Good one Australia! We weren't on everyone's lips globally (one US senator repeatedly called Australia ‘Austria’) but two people who should never have been in Australia have put us on the map. And, now, the world is finding out that the atrocity has been coming for 2 years, and the three people they might have heard of for the taxpayer funded world travel, Albanese, Wong, Burke, did absolutely nothing to stop it.

The world now knows one thing about globally insignificant Australia - it's not a safe place for Jews; and if its politicians keep bringing in unsuitable migrants as they are, and lying about the “benefits” of multiculturalism, it won't be a safe place for the rest of us.

Were I a Jew with a family, I would be applying to go to Israel, where they actually defend themselves - Jews and Arab Muslims together.

“Antisemitism is the single most lethal hatred known to man – it always leads to lethal genocide”. (Qanta Ahmed). That “lethal genocide” occurred here, despite the warnings from ASIO over at least two years, should be enough to bring legal charges against Anthony Albanese, who has pretended to be a leader, but has proved to be nothing of the sort. If he was a private sector CEO, he would be sacked in disgrace.

The above-mentioned Qanta Ahmed, an observing Muslim herself, feels increasingly unsafe in the West, where she has lived for decades. On a visit to Iraq, where she asked about the Muslim Brotherhood, she was laughingly told there was more of that stuff going on in Columbia University in New York than there was in Iraq.

Her friends in the Middle East are astounded at the spread of radical Islam in the West.

On a different note..

Muslim Bondi Hero Ahmed Al Ahmed has been visited by the PM, NSW Premier and the Governer-General.
The PM brought thanks and well wishes from the King.

Bondi hero receives thanks from the PM and the King
http://region.com.au/bondi-hero-receives-thanks-from-the-pm-and-the-king/930251

As much as we discuss the drawbacks of Islamic extremism and what we see in other coutries, the fact remains that we have a million Muslims now, and they're likely not going anywhere.

Maybe if we show them that if they act like Aussies they can be accepted.
And maybe if we stop blindly supporting Israel and don't take part in wars against Muslims, maybe we can have a different relationship with these citizens than the kind Europe has.
(though I'm sceptical)

One thing that's different here than in Europe is that Muslims here at least came legally not gatecrashed as refugees.

The bloke does deserve to get a medal for heroism.
He confronted one of the gunmen, disarmed him.
Did what the cops should've done.
He not only put himself into the line of fire but was shot twice.
The U.S. and U.K. won't even admit he was a Muslim, as it doesn't fit their narrative.

I suspect that many people are starting to realise that moslems
are not going to adapt practices and beliefs that are compatible
with the rest of us.
Such beliefs would make them initially against their own family.
They could also be considered as apostates.
That could leave them open to be killed by others.
The Koran can NEVER be altered in anyway.
The death penalty applies to anyone who does.
So as a result there will never be a new testament of the Koran.
It is this rigidity that is behind the terrorists fanaticism.
As a result there is no point in trying to be accommodating to Islam.
We are doomed to a forever war with Islam.
1400 years and counting.

There was recently a news item about firearm licenses.
It appears that a licensee has no restriction on the number
of guns he may possess.
One of them had 300 guns !
Do you see an opportunity for a terrorist organisation ?
Such an organisation could establish an armory quite legally
and then infiltrate very gradually a large number of members
into a country and then suddenly they have perhaps several
hundred fanatics ready to kill thousands !
I bet they have already thought of that.
Is it feasible that the seven stopped at Liverpool were on
the way to pick up their guns. Only theorising of course.
Perhaps not but who knows ?

One licence holder and they could supply a entire battalion.

The situation is now so dire that we'd literally need to do DNA testing for migrants !
Knowing the bureaucracy here though they'd probably only employ people of Palestinian background as the testing officers !

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10712#373726

Armchair Critic said- "Maybe if we show them that if they act like Aussies they can be accepted"

Answer-

Some don't negotiate in good faith. Negotiation theory says you have to be willing to walk away. There are hard and soft tactics. Perhaps Armchair is saying that the Muslim community is too big to fail, similar to the banks during the Mortgage Crisis. The end result of this is death. Is that what Armchair Critic wants? Treason?

"Repeated prisoners dilemma" says players too vindictive lose, but also naive lose. (See tit-for-tat strategy)

Martin Luther said something similar to Armchair Critic about a minority, until understanding they weren't negotiating in good faith.

Any community that fails to protect itself will be destroyed, if only based on economics. DuckAI- "Economics is the social science analysing how people and groups allocate scarce resources to satisfy their insatiable desires for goods and services."

Some, probably all, cultures are incompatible with other cultures. (We've been in denial.) This is called cultural relativism. Marxism and Wokeism and Critical Race Theory and Postmodern Deconstructivism deny this and calls the opposing view “racist”. Even if those expressing belief in cultural relativism don't advocate expansionism. In fact Marxism, Wokeism, CRT, Postmodernism (the so called left) seem to be the expansionist's that they proclaim to be against.

For our survival we need to separate ourselves from those that want to replace our culture and ourselves territorially, institutionally, intellectually, financially, militarily. We need intellect, resources, arms to protect ourselves, be wary of those that deny these tools of survival, because they would deny your survival. Don't be afraid of strong trustworthy friends. Don't allow your enemies to divide you from your friends.

There are those that divide you from your friends and call it cohesion.

Those that want to stay in Australia are at our mercy, we should not be at their mercy.
We decide who stays here- we do not need to give a reason!

Remigrate those that shouldn't be here, be humane and even generous where you can, but not weak

We need to remove the uniparty, of the blind rusted on paleo-Labors and Liberal Free (Trade) Traitors that identify with instability such as unstable family structures of stupid genders, beach head communities of invaders, traitorous nihilistic fifth columns, the blinded who believe that all problems can be solved with money, those that believe in manipulating the market when it suits themselves, the institutions designed to destroy us. These traitorous beasts are the antithesis of the US Declaration statement "a government of a people, for a people, by a people". The Labor and Liberal parties are not the same as they were, not the parties of your dreams, but your nightmares. Their propaganda refers to the dreams of your ancestors as quaint misguided delusion.

When you believe in everything, you believe in nothing. (Alexander Hamilton's quote, "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton)

When the principles and ethnic culture that have developed over a thousand years are refined to a high level, then we are safe and stable. We protect and counsel our neighbours that are like us, and encourage them to behave with community interest, help those unlike us to form their own separate stable communities, depending on their friendliness.

Bring back the dreams of your ancestors, have the courage to protect your birthright, to be a strong friend of the good, destroyer of the bad. Don't fear, everyone dies for their children.

You can't break the laws of physics, only break yourself against them.

Ethnic identities need nations.

Evil can only thrive, when men are weak, and women don't stand up for their defenders, and children don't stand up for their ancestors. Everyone has a role in the battle against darkness, like with like in battalions, in divisions, working together with the foreign in their place, but not out of place.

Ethnicities of the west- stand up for yourself- be upright- a wall against the darkness- shoulder to shoulder- an expanding circle of greatness. Others may have different definitions of greatness in other lands, but we have ours.

Friendship requires respecting boundaries, enemies don’t.

There was no real antisemitism in Australia (the odd tasteless joke, but no real interest or who was what) until mass immigration, for which both major parties are responsible.

The Coalition and Labor have both wrecked Australia. While we have a two party, compulsory/voting/compulsory preferential voting system things will only get worse.

With another election two long years away, the emergency actions that should occur now are; no immigration at all; the removal of all non-citzens from the country - giving the voters time to take a good look at themselves and do the right thing for themselves and their country at the next election. The right thing would not include many of the current useless, dangerous politicians who are just in the job because it pays well.