Mass Shooting at Bondi Beach, Sydney, targets Jews celebrating Hanukkah

[RedFox]

Good point, unless they are divorced or separated or not in good terms. The video footage is somewhat confusing. Here is one video on that line.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2001279266189615362

To answer the tweet, it’s obvious - he drops his weapon and backs off - to reload it! He’s taking shotgun shells out of the bag.

Also, for reference he’s not looking at those men. He‘s firing/looking this way:

When adrenaline is flowing, you loose peripheral vision. He probably doesn’t see the men until firing his last shot. He may spot them, but he’s simply reloading. His movement are most likely unrelated to those men.

There’s a lot of odd things there:

- the guy in a white shirt and black cap is completely unconcerned that there’s a gun pointing at his general direction. That’s not normal.

People do weird things. They don’t believe their eyes.
Do we know he can see dead or injured people? Do we know he can hear (he is old) or knows what gunshots sound like?
Do we know then that when he points he is even aware of the danger?
Or maybe he is brave and knows and points anyway.

- that man points at something and the shooter appears to follows his lead. That’s strange.

The shooter is most likely looking back at his son on the bridge. Also checking where cops are.

- the shooter immediately turns around, looks at something behind and slightly above him and lowers his weapon

His son on the bridge. He’s reloading his weapon. You can see him taking shotgun shells out of his bag.

- then looking down it’s looks like he also reaches for something in his belt bag (not clear what). Could he be reloading? Why point an unloaded gun when out of ammo?

It looks like a top loading shotgun. All he needs to do is slide some more shells in.
Any „pointing“ of the weapon at this point is to make reloading easier.

- he then looks up as if something is now directly above him and higher than before. Was that a drone? Was he having a hallucination? If he was under “mind control was the pointing a type of signal? Not saying there’s clear evidence of this take

His son was on the bridge where he was looking.

- right after that happens, the shooter (the father of the guy on the bridge) gets jumped on by the another man in a white shirt (but no cap) who takes his gun. That is the claimed “hero” (not saying he was a plant but open to the possibility)
- right after that the hero scene, the man with the black cap that pointed before is captured running towards the father/ shooter and throwing something at him. He puts himself directly in the line of fire again from the son but is still unconcerned. Again very odd.

If you watch the video of the son on the bridge you’ll see him wave away approaching people. They where deliberately shooting the people in that park, and not random Australians. With the exception being anyone who tries to stop them.
It’s likely that these men that attacked the shooter where full of adrenaline and having tunnel vision. Did they know their was another shooter on the bridge? Maybe or maybe not. Maybe their desire to stop this was greater than a sense of personal safety (the definition of heroism).

- later it appears that both men in white shirts are shot. The one with the black cap stumbles away presumably in shock from an initial shot and then another perhaps another to his leg when he falls.

To me it looks like he runs away and is shot when he breaks cover from the tree. You can see the jerk of his body/head as he is struck.

- But again, he was behind a tree and if shot there with some cover why stumble out where there is no cover and risk more likely getting shot again?

Fear? Panic?
He looks to be shot in the arm before running.
People react instinctively without thinking in such high adrenaline situations. That’s why they do earthquake drills so it’s automatic when the real one and real fear hits.
Did you know that in a building fire some people run towards the fire - even if they can do nothing about it. They are not thinking.

There’s always the he is “not all there” explanation but either way something is not quite right.

He seemed quite calm and calculated to me. Perhaps that level of deliberate mass murder is why it „doesn’t feel right“?

 

[Sol Logos]

To answer the tweet, it’s obvious - he drops his weapon and backs off - to reload it! He’s taking shotgun shells out of the bag.

Also, for reference he’s not looking at those men. He‘s firing/looking this way:
View attachment 114412

When adrenaline is flowing, you loose peripheral vision. He probably doesn’t see the men until firing his last shot. He may spot them, but he’s simply reloading. His movement are most likely unrelated to those men.

Is that "peripheral vision"? More than 30 degrees from the field of view of either men?

People do weird things. They don’t believe their eyes.
Do we know he can see dead or injured people? Do we know he can hear (he is old) or knows what gunshots sound like?
Do we know then that when he points he is even aware of the danger?
Or maybe he is brave and knows and points anyway.

The shooter is most likely looking back at his son on the bridge. Also checking where cops are.

Both shots looking back at the son on the bridge? I've walked on that bridge. I've never seen it move around like that.

His son on the bridge. He’s reloading his weapon. You can see him taking shotgun shells out of his bag.


It looks like a top loading shotgun. All he needs to do is slide some more shells in.
Any „pointing“ of the weapon at this point is to make reloading easier.

His son was on the bridge where he was looking.



If you watch the video of the son on the bridge you’ll see him wave away approaching people. They where deliberately shooting the people in that park, and not random Australians. With the exception being anyone who tries to stop them.
It’s likely that these men that attacked the shooter where full of adrenaline and having tunnel vision. Did they know their was another shooter on the bridge? Maybe or maybe not. Maybe their desire to stop this was greater than a sense of personal safety (the definition of heroism).

To me it looks like he runs away and is shot when he breaks cover from the tree. You can see the jerk of his body/head as he is struck.

Fear? Panic?
He looks to be shot in the arm before running.
People react instinctively without thinking in such high adrenaline situations. That’s why they do earthquake drills so it’s automatic when the real one and real fear hits.
Did you know that in a building fire some people run towards the fire - even if they can do nothing about it. They are not thinking.

Majority hid or ran away. The guy pointing (not in peripheral vision) acted odd. Never claiming the other that tackled the shooter was acting odd btw.

He seemed quite calm and calculated to me. Perhaps that level of deliberate mass murder is why it „doesn’t feel right“?

Who? The shooter, I presume. When I said “not all there” explanation, again was about the guy pointing. It’s certainly possible that this pointing man is not all there.

 

[Arwenn]

Oh dear, here we go. What exactly will be classed as ’hate speech’- anything contrary to the mainstream narrative?

https://twitter.com/x/status/2001746157714743772

 

[palestine]

And who knows who has been greenbaumed or not? This spec is so difficult to assess that we can only rely on the C's for an answer.

I remember that the C's once said that one scenario was to activate all Greenbaumed individuals at once. The problem with this Greenbaum thing is that it's buried, nobody knows and people affected by it would simply walk, in society, among individuals. How to detect that stuff?

 

[Ian]

About the ISIS flag…I remembered a short video about a guy explaining that ISIS=Israel Secret Intelligence Service. Haven’t done any further research abot the original interview or the people in it (probably should be done) Here it is (1minute long):

 

[Jones]

So Albo has decided to implement the anti-semitism plan from the Special Envoy on anti-semitism, Jillian Segal. Here's a link to that plan which suggests adopting the IHRA definition of anti-semitism:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Weird that they include non-Jewish in the above definition. Haven't figured out what gives with that yet.

Some examples given:

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

1. Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
2. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
3. Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
4. Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
5. Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
6. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
7. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
8. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
9. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
10. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
11. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

Apart from the IHRA anti-semitism definition, Segals plan revolves around education and enforcement in the following areas:

- Law reform, training and enforcement.
- Education, awareness and public discourse.
- Institutional accountability and university reform.
- Security, law enforcement and co-ordination.
- Digital governance and online regulation.
- Culture, arts and public broadcasting.
- General community education about anti-semitism and cohesion building.
- Migration and citizenship.
- Multi-cultural and interfaith engagement.
- Global interaction and engagement.
- Vibrancy, and protection, of Jewish life.
- Community consultation, evaluation, monitoring and data collection.

The plan concludes:

Antisemitism in Australia has reached a tipping point that threatens social harmony, undermines trust in institutions and marginalises Jewish Australian citizens. The measures outlined in this Plan by the Special Envoy go beyond protecting a single community; they uphold our shared Australian values of democracy, equity and mutual respect.

Throughout history, Jews have been the ‘canary in the coal mine’. Attacks on Jews often signal broader assaults on society and the gradual breakdown of cohesion.

Through legislative reforms, institutional accountability, public education, enforcement and other initiatives, this plan offers a clear framework to confront the growing normalisation of antisemitism. The Jewish community, which has long contributed meaningfully to Australian life, deserves the nation’s full commitment to its safety and dignity.

Government support for these recommendations sends a strong message across all sectors of society that Jewish Australians, and all minorities, can live freely and confidently, contributing to Australia’s ongoing story.

These initiatives will continue to evolve as local and international circumstances change. They reflect the direction already undertaken by the Envoy’s office, with some measures already underway, some to commence shortly and still others intended for long-term rollout.

Antisemitism is both an ancient hatred and a modern threat. It shifts with societal change and political climates, exploits digital platforms and intersects with ideologies including far-right and far-left extremism and radical Islamism. Its spread online demands coordinated, effective responses across sectors. Targeted, strategic actions are needed, particularly in respect of younger Australians who, research suggests, may be more susceptible to antisemitic views than their parents or grandparents.

The Envoy intends to provide annual reports detailing progress on the implementation of this Plan and will periodically review the need to update it to ensure its continued relevance and responsiveness.

As the world’s oldest hatred, antisemitism will never be totally defeated but, with resolve, unity, leadership and purpose, it can be marginalised and returned to the fringes of society. This requires a holistic framework of initiatives grounded in Australian law, aligned with global standards and supported by strong leadership.

We are determined to succeed. Jewish Australians, and indeed all Australians, deserve to live with safety, dignity and a true sense of belonging. The future of Australia as an inclusive democratic country depends on it and we are optimistic about what we can achieve together.

There was an anti-discrimination case here this year, Wertheim v Haddad [2025] FCA 720 where the judge concluded that it is not anti-semitic to criticise Israel, the IDF or Zionism. However, Haddad was found guilty of racial discrimination in regards to some of his statements about Jews.

107 I do not consider that the ordinary, reasonable listener would understand Mr Haddad in these passages, either in isolation or in the context of the sermon as a whole, to be saying anything about Jews generally or about all Jews. He is quite specific in the sermon. He is critical of Israel, the IDF and Zionists. As mentioned, Jews are only mentioned in relation to the Holocaust, and not in a critical or disparaging way. It is only if the ordinary, reasonable listener heard the sermon in the knowledge of what Mr Haddad had said in Speech A that they might conclude that the references to Zionists was a reference to all Jews because of what he says about Zionists in Speech A. But that is not how Speech B is to be understood. The ordinary, reasonable listener would understand that not all Jews are Zionists or support the actions of Israel in Gaza and that disparagement of Zionism constitutes disparagement of a philosophy or ideology and not a race or ethnic group. Needless to say, political criticism of Israel, however inflammatory or adversarial, is not by its nature criticism of Jews in general or based on Jewish racial or ethnic identity: see South African Human Rights Commission on behalf of South African Jewish Board of Deputies v Masuku [2022] ZACC 5; 2022 (4) SA 1 (CC) at [4]-[6] and [161]-[166] per Khampepe J for the Court. Indeed, the applicants did not submit that it is. The conclusion that it is not antisemitic to criticise Israel is the corollary of the conclusion that to blame Jews for the actions of Israel is antisemitic; the one flows from the other.

 

[Ruth]

Good point, unless they are divorced or separated or not in good terms. The video footage is somewhat confusing. Here is one video on that line.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2001279266189615362

Was he reloading?

 

[Corvus]

One thing you should never do is try and grab a police officer's gun (wounded or not). In fact, if I were to guess, not even another police officer would be so foolish as to do that. This woman could have got into serious trouble if she'd been successful in that regard, and may have end up getting shot herself. It's a really bad idea to interfere in a tense situation like that, especially as a civillian.

This woman is very "sus" in my opinion, trying to make out the police response as 'inadequate" when they have protocols and proceedures which they HAVE to follow. It's a deliberate attempt to turn the public against the police force, where the only response is to turn them into paramilitary.

It reminds me of all the "staged" media responses/commentators from people who were at the Charlie Kirk assassination. Normal people are usually in shock and don't have very much that is coherant to say. My first question is: What is she trying to do and why is she being promoted? Very "sus" to me and not even Australian.

Police were probably ordered to bunker down if under heavy fire and with no long barrels and hold the perimeter until the special police came. But in these situations when there are people being killed at the moment it is not unusual for someone to try to do something or to look like a hero depending on the individual. Imagine if there were more of them with more powerful weapons and well trained, even one fire team of 4 men not mentioning squad would make a swiss cheese out of whole police department that is weakly trained until more specialised units and numbers came to the scene.

 

[ApotheosisMMC.]

Yoel Zilberman, CEO and founder of HaShomer HaChadash, the armed paramilitary organization with strong ties to the Israeli government and primarily dedicated to defending land and farms in rural areas (i.e., illegal settlements), wrote this opinion piece about two weeks before the shooting:

There is only one way to protect Jews against antisemitism

Jewish communities often find themselves on the front lines alone, without a coordinated Jewish defense system and without any rapid, professional response. A new approach is needed, one that creates a permanent global structure capable of providing a safety net and an immediate response in an emergency.
On campuses, in the streets and in synagogues, Jews encountered rising hatred while relying almost entirely on local security forces. Some communities hired private security companies, but these companies cannot truly stop a mass-casualty attack, detect emerging incitement or deter extremist organizations.

This reality demands change. The world has shifted, and threats no longer develop only on the ground but also online, in politics, in protests and in acts of vandalism that spread at extraordinary speed.

Jewish communities often stand alone on the front line, without a coordinated Jewish defense structure and without a rapid professional response.That is why a new move is required: establishing a Jewish People's Guard. Not a local organization, not a security company and not a temporary initiative, but a permanent global structure that creates an international Jewish safety net.Such a system would connect communities around the world with the State of Israel and official security bodies. It would enable rapid emergency responses, provide orderly training for community response teams and identify incitement processes before they turn violent.

There is only one way to protect Jews against antisemitism

Jewish communities often find themselves on the front lines alone, without a coordinated Jewish defense system and without any rapid, professional response. A

www.israelhayom.com

Sharri Markson of Sky News Australia, in her conversation with Chris Minns, asked him about arming Jewish Community Security Group, Apparently, the possibility has already been raised, minute 18:40:

S. Makson: Just finally, do you think there is an an argument for the Jewish security, the CSG to have to have weapons so that they could respond to serious threats like this?

C. Minns: Yes, I do. Um, now CSG have been in discussions with the New South Wales government in the last 24 hours. uh they're given permission at Jewish places of worship, Jewish schools to be armed on site, but we're in discussions with them about events, Jewish events in particular. Now, there needs to be what's called a deescalation protocol. I mean, it's specific tactical approach because if there are guns on site and police approach the scene, we need to be in a situation where everybody is safe. The CSG, the Jewish community, members of the public, and police. But I'm confident we can work our way through that.

Sharri Markson again, now with Netanyahu, who is once again repeating the idea of arming the Jews, minute 3:00:

S.Makson: Well, let's talk about the action. I mean, the reality is Australia has let too many people in who have a hatred both of Western values and of Jews. Our authorities, our intelligence agencies can barely keep up with monitoring them. So what would be your advice to Australia, to the government, to Albany on how to contain now the threat of Islamic extremism?

B. Netanyahu: Well, there is intelligence and you have to act on intelligence. Intelligence is worthless if you don't act on it. Uh if you know that somebody is a is a radical uh uh Muslim, the last thing you do is give him repeated and multiple permits for weapons, that's crazy. Uh you should see if this was done. If this was done, that's completely insane. There's no other word for it. On the other side, you know that Jews are going to be targeted. So, have the ability to have armed guards. Uh, look, in Israel, we foiled hundreds, no, maybe more than hundreds, maybe thousands of terrorist attacks, but certainly hundreds by having onsite people who had weapons. You cannot fight with your bare hands against somebody who comes with a Kalashnikov rifle or an automatic rifle. It's impossible. And just imagine if you had on that beach, on that Kanuka gathering, if you had uh several armed people, several armed guards of 10, 15, even five, it would be over. That's what we've seen time and again in Israel, time and again. And that saves the day. And I think that's required right now. The world has changed. Recognize the change. You can recognize

 

[palestine]

In reference of this post (describing Hannukah as a sort of ritual, performing a spiritual feeding connection, towards an "egregore")

---

Thank you @thorbiorn for the extensive research

The consideration of this Bondi beach event may change!

Quotes about various specs, consequential to a spiritual connection to the egregore linked to "Hannukah":

An attempt to shift the energy support of the territory.

From what I understand in your post, Hannukah (or whatever momentum performing a connection to an egregore) fundamentally translates as a sort of "attack" against normal people (on the world of normal people - or, the stable layer of normality / humanity). It would kind of "disrupt" normality, even only temporarily.

Humanity decreases, in favour of ... ?

An increase of psychopathology would be the basic counterpart, I suppose. We could extrapolate, and think of STS or the various unpleasant manifestations that we know of. Openings, negative portals.

I suppose that this imbalance can vary.

Should we could basically consider an EM opening? Window fallers, etc?

It is part of a big game in which the people do not participate, but are a resource.

I was wondering if such a moment would make phenomenons turning against the people feeding the egregore.

Here are two very hypothetical (and black & white) takes about the two shooters at Bondi beach:

• manifestations of the egregore <> the festival literally manifested those guys.
• disruptors of the whole feeding process? Conscious? Seems that they killed a very Zionist "rabbi". In doing so, they may have neutralized an important "cog" and disrupted the feeding motion.

Transferring ritual energy to foreign land = an attempt to ‘mark territory’

It may be that there were people consciously engaged in this process (at the Bondi beach event).

Thank you! Your post literally unveils a good chunk of this sad event. We get an objective "reading lens".

 

[Jones]

Yoel Zilberman, CEO and founder of HaShomer HaChadash, the armed paramilitary organization with strong ties to the Israeli government and primarily dedicated to defending land and farms in rural areas (i.e., illegal settlements), wrote this opinion piece about two weeks before the shooting:

There is only one way to protect Jews against antisemitism

Jewish communities often find themselves on the front lines alone, without a coordinated Jewish defense system and without any rapid, professional response. A

www.israelhayom.com

Sharri Markson of Sky News Australia, in her conversation with Chris Minns, asked him about arming Jewish Community Security Group, Apparently, the possibility has already been raised, minute 18:40:

Sharri Markson again, now with Netanyahu, who is once again repeating the idea of arming the Jews, minute 3:00:

Well, there was an attempt to put federal legislation in place to protect foreign military or police forces from civil or criminal liability in Australia back in 2020.

Cross posted from the Corona Virus thread October 2020:

Well, Australia is still on a roll. A bill before parliament to amend the 1903 Defence Act seeks to give immunity from civil and criminal liability to authorised persons (including members of the Defence Force, APS - Australian Public Service, and authorised persons appointed by the secretary or the Chief of the Defence Force) in relation to disasters or emergencies. It includes members of a foreign defence or police forces. They only have to have 'reasonable belief' that they were acting in the interests of public safety during a state of disaster or emergency. This is commonwealth or federal legislation. I guess the govt has learned something from the situation in Victoria and is adapting.

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r6594_first-reps/toc_pdf/20117b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf

It look like the above bill was actually passed into law by amendment of the 1903 Defence Act in July 2024. Here is the amendment in it's final form.

123AA Immunity in relation to certain assistance

(1) A protected person (see subsection (3)) is not subject to any liability (whether civil or criminal) in respect of anything the protected person does or omits to do, in good faith, in the performance or purported performance of the protected person’s duties, if:

(a) the duties are in respect of the provision of assistance, by or on behalf of the ADF or the Department, to:
(i) the Commonwealth or a State or Territory, or a Commonwealth, State or Territory authority or agency; or
(ii) members of the community; and
(b) the assistance is provided to prepare for a natural disaster or other emergency that is imminent, or to respond to one that is occurring or recover from one that occurred recently; and
(c) the assistance is provided at the direction of the Minister under subsection (2)

(2) The Minister may, in writing, direct the provision of assistance in relation to a natural disaster or other emergency if the Minister is satisfied of either or both of the following:

(a) the nature or scale of the natural disaster or other emergency makes it necessary, for the benefit of the nation, for the Commonwealth, through use of the ADF’s or Department’s special capabilities or available resources, to provide the assistance;
(b) the assistance is necessary for the protection of Commonwealth agencies, Commonwealth personnel or Commonwealth property.

(3) Each of the following is a protected person:
(a) a member of the Defence Force;
(b) an APS employee in the Department;
(c) a person authorised under subsection (4) to perform duties in respect of the provision of assistance mentioned in subsection (1).

(4) The Chief of the Defence Force, or the Secretary, may, in writing, authorise a person, or each person in a class of persons, to perform duties in respect of the provision of assistance mentioned in subsection (1), if the person, or each person in the class of persons, is any of the following:
(a) an APS employee or other employee of the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth authority or agency;
(b) a member of the naval, military or air force of a foreign country, or a member of a foreign police force (however described).

I think that all means that the IDF could actually operate on Australian soil under the authorisation of the Chief or Secretary of Defense, and if that authorisation is granted, they will be exempt from criminal or civil liability if they believe they are acting in good faith in an emergency situation.