There are so many story lines coming from the Bondi Beach, Australia shooting massacre.

• Father-son Muslim terrorists targeted a gathering of Jews but also indiscriminately shot others at Bondi Beach.
• One of the terrorists apparently was on the government's radar and has some connection to ISIS.
• Lack of police response or should I say non-response - two female police officers at the scene dd not engage the attackers.
• The civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.
• And the Australian Prime Minister's clueless response. Perhaps he has no idea that this attack was radical Islamic Jihad.

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

Yup, Ahmed Al Ahmed had balls to walk up to someone with a rifle. He may be a Lebanese Christian, either way, it doesn't matter.

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

Yup, Ahmed Al Ahmed had balls to walk up to someone with a rifle. He may be a Lebanese Christian, either way, it doesn't matter.

---

He is Muslim and in the current political environment it matters a lot. It doesn't support the narrative pushed by White Christian Nationalists in this country or by the Right Wing populist movement in Europe.

What is the right-wing narrative?

Is it as clear as the left-wing narrative that white, Christian nationalism is a threat to Democracy?

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

What is the right-wing narrative?

Is it as clear as the left-wing narrative that white, Christian nationalism is a threat to Democracy?

---

I think he's referring to the people who want to continue to honor the Confederate effort with statues, which so happens to align with the people who continue to insist that there was fraud in the 2020 election.

Like, these people:

concordtom said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

What is the right-wing narrative?

Is it as clear as the left-wing narrative that white, Christian nationalism is a threat to Democracy?

---

I think he's referring to the people who want to continue to honor the Confederate effort with statues, which so happens to align with the people who continue to insist that there was fraud in the 2020 election.

---

I know bearister is referring to MAGA but what is the right-wing narrative he's referring to in relation to Muslims?

bearister said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

Yup, Ahmed Al Ahmed had balls to walk up to someone with a rifle. He may be a Lebanese Christian, either way, it doesn't matter.

---

He is Muslim and in the current political environment it matters a lot. It doesn't support the narrative pushed by White Christian Nationalists in this country or by the Right Wing populist movement in Europe.

---

I agree - it matters. But if it matters "a lot" that the hero was Muslim, than its equally relevant that the perpetrators (Naveed and Sajid Akram) were Muslim - apparently members of ISIS who were radicalized in a mosque. But you don't want to have that conversation and you want to simply dismiss anyone who does as "Christian Nationalist" or "Right Wing populist".

Basically you engage in name calling rather than addressing the issue - what is the effect of allowing mass immigration from a population/demographic that includes people like the Akrams or people who have no interest in supporting Western values? People who think America/Europe is evil. Whose mosques preach violence (some, not all). How has that worked out for the European countries? How has that worked out in Minnesota or New York? In Australia?

Islam will only be reformed where there are more Ahmed Al Ahmeds than Akrams. That is why Ahmed should be celebrated. Unfortunately, too often reformers are killed by Muslims like the Akarams (See Hamas in Gaza, and ISIS, not to mention genocides in Syria, Nigeria, Somalia and other places). Again, you don't want to have that conversation. You just want to call people names.

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

What is the right-wing narrative?

Is it as clear as the left-wing narrative that white, Christian nationalism is a threat to Democracy?

---

Everyone knows the narrative regarding Muslims. Your team posts it here multiple times a day.

"The white Christian nationalist narrative regarding Christianity is a political ideology, distinct from orthodox Christian theology, that fuses white racial identity with American civic life and asserts that the U.S. was founded as a divinely-ordained, white, Christian nation.

Core Beliefs of the Narrative

Foundation of America: The belief that the United States was established by and for white Christians, and its laws and institutions are based on "Biblical" (specifically Anglo-Protestant) Christianity.

A "Chosen People" with a Mission: Adherents see themselves as modern-day biblical Israelites, a "chosen people" with a divine mission to spread their version of religion and civilization, by force if necessary.

Exclusivity of Identity: Only Christians (specifically white, native-born, conservative Protestants) are considered "true" Americans, creating a framework of social belonging that excludes religious minorities, non-whites, and LGBTQ+ people.

Perceived Threat and Victimhood: The movement is often fueled by a sense that the U.S. is in decline and that white Christians' values and dominance are under attack by demographic changes and outside forces (e.g., immigrants, secularists).
Restoration and Coercion: The narrative demands "taking back the country" and restoring a perceived past hierarchy. It seeks to impose this vision on the entire nation, often using "proof texting" (decontextualized biblical quotes) to justify political power rather than persuade others of faith.

Authoritarianism and Hierarchy: The ideology is strongly linked to authoritarian views, support for traditional social hierarchies, and a desire to dismantle the separation of church and state."
AI Overview

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

He was shot by the responding officers. They mistook him for one of the suspects

BearGoggles said:

---

bearister said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

Yup, Ahmed Al Ahmed had balls to walk up to someone with a rifle. He may be a Lebanese Christian, either way, it doesn't matter.

---

He is Muslim and in the current political environment it matters a lot. It doesn't support the narrative pushed by White Christian Nationalists in this country or by the Right Wing populist movement in Europe.

---

I agree - it matters. But if it matters "a lot" that the hero was Muslim, than its equally relevant that the perpetrators (Naveed and Sajid Akram) were Muslim - apparently members of ISIS who were radicalized in a mosque. But you don't want to have that conversation and you want to simply dismiss anyone who does as "Christian Nationalist" or "Right Wing populist".

Basically you engage in name calling rather than addressing the issue - what is the effect of allowing mass immigration from a population/demographic that includes people like the Akrams or people who have no interest in supporting Western values? People who think America/Europe is evil. Whose mosques preach violence (some, not all). How has that worked out for the European countries? How has that worked out in Minnesota or New York? In Australia?

Islam will only be reformed where there are more Ahmed Al Ahmeds than Akrams. That is why Ahmed should be celebrated. Unfortunately, too often reformers are killed by Muslims like the Akarams (See Hamas in Gaza, and ISIS, not to mention genocides in Syria, Nigeria, Somalia and other places). Again, you don't want to have that conversation. You just want to call people names.

---

You are setting up arguments that you wish I had made so that you can spew your talking points.

I think it is important that the Bondi Beach hero was a Muslim because I believe most Muslims are decent hard working people and that the radicals like the father and son murder team are a very small minority.

I also believe most Christians are decent hard working people and that the White Christian Nationalists are a very small minority.

I am wondering why this elephant in the room has not found its way into the public discourse with regard to recent events. I know many Israelis and Jewish people worldwide have been very concerned about this potential blowback:
Antisemitism during the Gaza war - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_during_the_Gaza_war

“Bondi Beach Is What ‘Globalize the Intifada’ Looks Like”
~ Bret Stephens, New York Times

“The Intifada Comes to Bondi Beach”
~ David Frum, The Atlantic

“The Intifada Comes to Australia”
~ Walter Russell Mead, Wall Street Journal

“Shooting at Bondi Beach is what a globalized… https://t.co/Ro83vmLf2N

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) December 16, 2025

bearister said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

bearister said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

Yup, Ahmed Al Ahmed had balls to walk up to someone with a rifle. He may be a Lebanese Christian, either way, it doesn't matter.

---

He is Muslim and in the current political environment it matters a lot. It doesn't support the narrative pushed by White Christian Nationalists in this country or by the Right Wing populist movement in Europe.

---

I agree - it matters. But if it matters "a lot" that the hero was Muslim, than its equally relevant that the perpetrators (Naveed and Sajid Akram) were Muslim - apparently members of ISIS who were radicalized in a mosque. But you don't want to have that conversation and you want to simply dismiss anyone who does as "Christian Nationalist" or "Right Wing populist".

Basically you engage in name calling rather than addressing the issue - what is the effect of allowing mass immigration from a population/demographic that includes people like the Akrams or people who have no interest in supporting Western values? People who think America/Europe is evil. Whose mosques preach violence (some, not all). How has that worked out for the European countries? How has that worked out in Minnesota or New York? In Australia?

Islam will only be reformed where there are more Ahmed Al Ahmeds than Akrams. That is why Ahmed should be celebrated. Unfortunately, too often reformers are killed by Muslims like the Akarams (See Hamas in Gaza, and ISIS, not to mention genocides in Syria, Nigeria, Somalia and other places). Again, you don't want to have that conversation. You just want to call people names.

---

You are setting up arguments that you wish I had made so that you can spew your talking points.

I think it is important that the Bondi Beach hero was a Muslim because I believe most Muslims are decent hard working people and that the radicals like the father and son murder team are a very small minority.

I also believe most Christians are decent hard working people and that the White Christian Nationalists are a very small minority.

I am wondering why this elephant in the room has not found its way into the public discourse with regard to recent events. I know many Israelis and Jewish people worldwide have been very concerned about this potential blowback:
Antisemitism during the Gaza war - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_during_the_Gaza_war

---

As I stated, you're not actually making arguments. You're just calling names ("White Christian Nationalists in this country or by the Right Wing populist movement in Europe").

The fact that most Muslims are good/decent hardworking people (true in a macro sense) doesn't change the fact that a significant minority are not because they advocate for terrrorism/violence and/or hate western values. The policy question is what do you do given that the later group is not small, is often indistinguishable from the former group, and commits violent acts? Does it make sense for countries to import these beliefs into their populace?

I have no idea what point you're trying to make in the final paragraph. What is the elephant in the room? Please elucidate.

"What is the elephant in the room? Please elucidate."


Continuation of the Socratic Method:

Casualties of the Gaza war - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

bearister said:

---

"What is the elephant in the room? Please elucidate."


Continuation of the Socratic Method:

Casualties of the Gaza war - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

---

Your so called Socratic method is lacking. The reality is you're just a coward for refusing to make a clear argument, mostly because you cannot actually defend it. You're the Tucker Carlson of the left, leaving a lot of implications and "just asking questions", but not backing up anything you say with actual thoughts or universal principles.

And to your apparent point, which I suspected, you are making vague arguments to either blame Israel for the rise in antisemitism and/or seeking to justify the terror attack in Australia. Certainly your correlating the events as the "elephant in the room." But you're too cowardly to actually say that or to even discuss the elephant you claim exists.

By your apparent "logic":

• 9/11 was a justified attack on mostly civilians, after all the US engaged in foreign wars/foreign policy offensive to many Muslims.
• I note that the people targeted in Australia were Jewish - not (for the most part) Israeli. By your twisted "elephant", Jews would be fully entitled to attack Muslims anywhere in the world because many (not all) Muslims support Hamas and other terror groups. Of course, Jews (and Israelis) don't do that.

There are principled criticisms of Israel including, without limitation, its conduct of the war in Gaza. You're not making those. Instead, your implying that terror attacks and antisemitism are appropriate responses to Israel's war. That's morally bankrupt and a very slippery slope as applied to other countries, including the USA.

But what was January 6?

It's entirely predictable that so many people are focusing on the background of a bystander instead of the main fact that the attack was carried out to kill as many Jews as possible. Whatever ideologies supports murdering families at a Hanukkah party is sick and need to be addressed seriously, and not by a casual dismissal that some bystander may have happened to be of the same religious background as the perpetrator so everything is fine.

BearGoggles said:

---

bearister said:

---

"What is the elephant in the room? Please elucidate."


Continuation of the Socratic Method:

Casualties of the Gaza war - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war

---

Your so called Socratic method is lacking. The reality is you're just a coward for refusing to make a clear argument, mostly because you cannot actually defend it. You're the Tucker Carlson of the left, leaving a lot of implications and "just asking questions", but not backing up anything you say with actual thoughts or universal principles.

And to your apparent point, which I suspected, you are making vague arguments to either blame Israel for the rise in antisemitism and/or seeking to justify the terror attack in Australia. Certainly your correlating the events as the "elephant in the room." But you're too cowardly to actually say that or to even discuss the elephant you claim exists.

By your apparent "logic":

• 9/11 was a justified attack on mostly civilians, after all the US engaged in foreign wars/foreign policy offensive to many Muslims.
• I note that the people targeted in Australia were Jewish - not (for the most part) Israeli. By your twisted "elephant", Jews would be fully entitled to attack Muslims anywhere in the world because many (not all) Muslims support Hamas and other terror groups. Of course, Jews (and Israelis) don't do that.

There are principled criticisms of Israel including, without limitation, its conduct of the war in Gaza. You're not making those. Instead, your implying that terror attacks and antisemitism are appropriate responses to Israel's war. That's morally bankrupt and a very slippery slope as applied to other countries, including the USA.

---

Once again, you are arguing with yourself:

There are Israelis and Jewish people worldwide who fear that the Gaza invasion will perpetuate and deepen a global cycle of violence, leading to increased regional instability and worldwide terrorism. I share their fear.

" ….you are making vague arguments to either blame Israel for the rise in antisemitism and/or seeking to justify the terror attack in Australia."

I am suggesting there could be a correlation between the Gaza Invasion and terror attacks worldwide regardless of whether the invasion and the method in which it was conducted was justified or not. "Blame" is your word.


"……your implying that terror attacks and antisemitism are appropriate responses to Israel's war."

No terror attack is justified. The father and son shooters are murderers that killed innocent people. For you to suggest I support their conduct goes a long way to explaining why you and your straw man arguments have zero credibility.

I think what makes you so angry is for anyone to suggest that the Invasion of Gaza may have spawned an endless cycle of violence. Even if you believe that the manner in which warfare in Gaza was conducted was completely justified, what is the reticence to admit the linkage and why is it antisemitic to do so?

*There was linkage in Northern Ireland between British policies and the terror campaign of those murderous b@stards in the IRA that slaughtered innocent people, and that linkage existed regardless of whether British policies were justified or not.

* Straw man - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

bearister said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

What is the right-wing narrative?

Is it as clear as the left-wing narrative that white, Christian nationalism is a threat to Democracy?

---

Everyone knows the narrative regarding Muslims. Your team posts it here multiple times a day.

"The white Christian nationalist narrative regarding Christianity is a political ideology, distinct from orthodox Christian theology, that fuses white racial identity with American civic life and asserts that the U.S. was founded as a divinely-ordained, white, Christian nation.

Core Beliefs of the Narrative

Foundation of America: The belief that the United States was established by and for white Christians, and its laws and institutions are based on "Biblical" (specifically Anglo-Protestant) Christianity.

A "Chosen People" with a Mission: Adherents see themselves as modern-day biblical Israelites, a "chosen people" with a divine mission to spread their version of religion and civilization, by force if necessary.

Exclusivity of Identity: Only Christians (specifically white, native-born, conservative Protestants) are considered "true" Americans, creating a framework of social belonging that excludes religious minorities, non-whites, and LGBTQ+ people.

Perceived Threat and Victimhood: The movement is often fueled by a sense that the U.S. is in decline and that white Christians' values and dominance are under attack by demographic changes and outside forces (e.g., immigrants, secularists).
Restoration and Coercion: The narrative demands "taking back the country" and restoring a perceived past hierarchy. It seeks to impose this vision on the entire nation, often using "proof texting" (decontextualized biblical quotes) to justify political power rather than persuade others of faith.

Authoritarianism and Hierarchy: The ideology is strongly linked to authoritarian views, support for traditional social hierarchies, and a desire to dismantle the separation of church and state."
AI Overview

---

This garbage reads like something you got from Politico. If a dominant right-wing narrative exists, wouldn't you be able to find it from right wing sources like, I don't know.....Donald Trump? The left-wing narrative regarding the threat of white, Christian nationalism came straight from the mouth of Joe Biden. That was the key message of his campaign.

concordtom said:

---

But what was January 6?

---

Worse than Pearl Harbor or 9-11, just like Kamala Harris said.

Because the FBI was involved.

Everything you post is garbage.

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

It's entirely predictable that so many people are focusing on the background of a bystander instead of the main fact that the attack was carried out to kill as many Jews as possible. Whatever ideologies supports murdering families at a Hanukkah party is sick and need to be addressed seriously, and not by a casual dismissal that some bystander may have happened to be of the same religious background as the perpetrator so everything is fine.

---

I've kinda been in media blackout recently so forgive the ignorance here.

How do we know that "the main fact that the attack was carried out to kill as many Jews as possible"?
People of all faiths and ethnicities gather at Bondi Beach on any given day, right?

concordtom said:

---

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

It's entirely predictable that so many people are focusing on the background of a bystander instead of the main fact that the attack was carried out to kill as many Jews as possible. Whatever ideologies supports murdering families at a Hanukkah party is sick and need to be addressed seriously, and not by a casual dismissal that some bystander may have happened to be of the same religious background as the perpetrator so everything is fine.

---

I've kinda been in media blackout recently so forgive the ignorance here.

How do we know that "the main fact that the attack was carried out to kill as many Jews as possible"?
People of all faiths and ethnicities gather at Bondi Beach on any given day, right?

---

It occurred during a Jewish celebration on the beach. Unless I'm mistaken, that seems like evidence enough. Sure I guess that COULD be a coincidence but idk

The murderers were targeting Jewish people and anyone else killed was acceptable collateral damage to them.

bearister said:

---

The murderers were targeting Jewish people and anyone else killed was acceptable collateral damage to them.

---

Yes, it was certainly targeted. You might call them murderers but they are terrorists, plain and simple. Maybe semantics to you but to me those are different.

I was just responding to CT asking how we know they were going for highest level of Jewish casualties. CT might have me on ignore though still

Yes, they committed acts of terrorism under Australian law. They are terrorists. The old man is a dead terrorist.

https://www.ag.gov.au/national-security/australias-counter-terrorism-laws

The Hanukkah event took place in a grassy park area that is separated by a parking lot from the sand so the sun bathers and people walking on the beach were not mixed in with the event.

🕯️Blessed Is The True Judge: Matilda
Victim of Sydney Hanukkah Massacre

Matilda was 10 years old and described as a lively child who brought light to everyone around her. pic.twitter.com/enzYrwjQVK

— Chabad.org (@Chabad) December 15, 2025

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

🕯️Blessed Is The True Judge: Matilda
Victim of Sydney Hanukkah Massacre

Matilda was 10 years old and described as a lively child who brought light to everyone around her. pic.twitter.com/enzYrwjQVK

— Chabad.org (@Chabad) December 15, 2025

---

Look folks, @CaliforniaEternal has finally decided he cares about children being killed!

bearister said:

---

The murderers were targeting Jewish people and anyone else killed was acceptable collateral damage to them.

---

But wouldn't the attackers have gone to a place where Jewish people gather rather than just anyone gather?

Or maybe it's like if you exploded a bomb in Times Square on Christmas morning - who care who is killed, just mar the day.

Such randomness to murder shows that people are ill in the head, above all else.

I don't think we should allow such illness to drive a religious or cultural divide. The takeaway should be that idiots did this, the date or target matters less.
Jeffrey Dalmer. Jack the Ripper. Mentally sick people do mentally sick things.

I'm definitely not trying to reduce Jewish angst. I guess I'm not choosing my words well. That's what happens when you reach for your phone first thing upon waking and don't have time to choose better ones.

Have a good day everyone.

Aunburdened said:

---

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

🕯️Blessed Is The True Judge: Matilda
Victim of Sydney Hanukkah Massacre

Matilda was 10 years old and described as a lively child who brought light to everyone around her. pic.twitter.com/enzYrwjQVK

— Chabad.org (@Chabad) December 15, 2025

---

Look folks, @CaliforniaEternal has finally decided he cares about children being killed!

---

You post sarcasm to mock a child's murder? I'm sure you'd laugh giddily if my family were killed too.

concordtom said:

---

bearister said:

---

The murderers were targeting Jewish people and anyone else killed was acceptable collateral damage to them.

---

But wouldn't the attackers have gone to a place where Jewish people gather rather than just anyone gather?

---

Every non-Muslim is an infidel. The 9-11 terrorists didn't choose to fly into synagogues, did they?

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

Aunburdened said:

---

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

🕯️Blessed Is The True Judge: Matilda
Victim of Sydney Hanukkah Massacre

Matilda was 10 years old and described as a lively child who brought light to everyone around her. pic.twitter.com/enzYrwjQVK

— Chabad.org (@Chabad) December 15, 2025

---

Look folks, @CaliforniaEternal has finally decided he cares about children being killed!

---

You post sarcasm to mock a child's murder? I'm sure you'd laugh giddily if my family were killed too.

---

Dave Chappelle: "The fear I have that I need you to protect me from is co-option. What if they make me say the things they want me to say? So just in case we need a code. If I say it you know they got me, and don't listen to nothing I say after. The code is: I stand with Israel." pic.twitter.com/Hh4EhieL9z

— ☀️👀 (@zei_squirrel) December 20, 2025

bearister said:

---

The Muslim civilian hero who took a rifle from one of the attackers and was shot in the process.

---

This couple who tried to do the same, unfortunately, wasn't successful.

Heroic couple died in each other’s arms after trying to disarm Bondi Beach terrorists, devastating video shows https://t.co/Qrdbk0RpOM pic.twitter.com/X9Qaob3v26

— New York Post (@nypost) December 16, 2025

concordtom said:

---

The takeaway should be that idiots did this, the date or target matters less.
Jeffrey Dalmer. Jack the Ripper. Mentally sick people do mentally sick things.

---

Per Australia ABC, an ISIS flag was found in the vehicle of the Bondi Beach terrorists.