Bondi Beach Bloodbath: How Jews Are Exploiting What Their Own Activism Created

Australia and Britain are on opposite sides of the globe. But mind annihilates distance and the mind of a leading Irish ethicist has recently pondered events in these two widely separated countries. Yes, the Trotskyist libertarian Brendan O’Neill has raised two very interesting questions about two pairs of energetic Muslims, one pair in Australia, the other in Britain. Alas, I can’t say Brendan has supplied good answers, so I’ll try to do so for him. Anyway, let’s review his questions. After a pair of Muslims slaughtered Jews on Bondi Beach,[1] Brendan asked: “Is nowhere safe from the pox of Jew hate?” And after another pair of Muslims raped a White girl in Leamington Spa, Brendan asked: “Why were these Afghan rapists even in Britain?”

The Jewish recipe for societal bliss

The questions are very easy to answer, but Brendan declined do so. Here’s the answer to the first: Yes, there are many places safe from the pox of Jew hate. There’s Hungary, for example. That’s the birthplace of Brendan’s guru, the Jewish sociologist Frank Furedi. Jews don’t get massacred there for a very simple reason. It’s because Hungary has never followed the Jewish recipe for societal bliss. Jews don’t like living as an obvious minority in homogeneous White nations, because they fear that Whites will turn on them for absolutely no reason, as Whites have so often in the past. Accordingly, Jews throughout the West have worked hard for non-White immigration, especially by Muslims. Jews have long seen Muslim immigration as “Good for Jews.” And what other consideration matters? In Britain, the Jew Dr Richard Stone has said “Muslims and Jews are natural allies.” In Holland, the Jew Arnon Grunberg has said “Joden en moslims […] zijn natuurlijke bondgenoten,” which means the same. In Australia, Jews led the campaign to dismantle the “White Australia” policy that prevented immigration by Muslims and other non-Whites (see also Brenton Sanderson’s 5-part series on the Jewish campaign to end the White Australia policy) . In America, Jews like Emmanuel Celler exploited the ethnic resentments of the Irish Catholic Teddy Kennedy, who fronted the campaign to open America’s borders to Third-World enrichment.

Some of the Jews who worked to end the White Australia policy

In Britain, Irish Catholics like Brendan O’Neill have been exploited by the Jew Frank Furedi in the same way. When they operated as the Revolutionary Communist Party, Frank and his resentment-filled, revenge-hungry disciples demanded “an end to all controls on immigration.” In 2015, under the no-nonsense title of “Let Them In,” Brendan issued a moving plea on behalf of energetic Muslims aspiring to enter Europe:

We shouldn’t demonise or infantilise African migrants. We should welcome them. […] We shouldn’t pity these migrants; we should admire them, for using guile, gumption and perseverance to come here. They’re precisely the kind of people sluggish Europe needs more of, an antidote to our students who can’t even clap without having a mental breakdown and our new generation who think that being told to ‘get on your bike’ to look for a job is tantamount to abuse. Let’s relax the borders and let them in to try their luck in our countries and see how they fare. If we do that, we’ll put the traffickers out of business, end the deaths in the Mediterranean, and, more importantly, do our part to enable the aspirations of human beings who have committed no crime other than wanting to realise their potential in our towns, our cities, alongside us. (“Let Them In,” Spiked Online, 21st April 2015)

That was ten years ago. In 2025 Brendan has seen — but not admitted — the error of his ways. Where once he waxed lyrical in support of open borders for sluggish Europe, he now lists that very support among the three worst examples of the “cranky shite” urged upon sane folk by the woke left: “transwomen are women, open the borders, Israel is bad.” You see, Brendan has belatedly realized that some unsluggish and guileful migrants have “aspirations” to be “fascist filth.” That, at least, is how Brendan described Sajid and Naveed Akram, the Muslim father and son who massacred Jews at Bondi Beach. I think that his description is both ideologically inaccurate and ethically inane. Calling one’s ideological opponents “filth” might be fun for the woke left and other self-righteous adolescents, but it’s not a label I expect to see used by ethically serious adults. A label like that justifies stripping people of their rights and torturing or murdering them (à la Frank and Brendan’s hero Leon Trotsky, in fact). Perhaps Brendan should have a word with himself, because he piped a very different tune in another of his articles:

One Afghan human being is worth more than a million Afghan dogs

There have been many disturbing things about the manner in which American and NATO forces have withdrawn from Afghanistan. It has been chaotic and bloody. The US has left a vast cache of weapons and humvees and helicopters for the Taliban to claim. But for me, one of the most disturbing things has been the British media elite’s warped focus on Afghan pets, on getting animals out of Afghanistan. I have always felt a little perplexed by British people’s soppy relationship with beasts; nothing reminds me of my foreignness more than seeing full-grown British adults cooing over their cats or snogging their dogs. And yet even I have been shocked by the undue emphasis — scrap that: the immoral emphasis — that the British media have given to Afghanistan’s four-legged creatures. It is a disgraceful failure of humanity to fret about animals when so many human beings are in mortal danger. […]

To my mind, every human life is almost immeasurably valuable, for the sentience and consciousness and promise that it embodies. One human life is worth a million animal lives. If saving just one Afghan person’s life might somehow have entailed condemning every dog in that country to destitution or death, I would not hesitate to do it. Until we rediscover what is different and important about humanity, we will be forced to inhabit the cesspit of moral relativism in which 150 cats and dogs tug at our heartstrings more than the cries of our desperate and scared human allies. (“One Afghan human being is worth more than a million Afghan dogs,” Spiked Online, 31st August 2021)

It’s interesting that Brendan regards himself as “foreign” to Britain but still feels entitled to lecture the British on how to conduct their affairs. As folksy Brendan himself might comment: Arrogant, much? It’s also interesting that Brendan thinks that “every human life is almost immeasurably valuable.” But what about the lives of “fascist filth,” Brendan? Did you ever stop to consider whether those “scared and desperate” Afghans might hold “fascist” views on Jews, women and homosexuals? Apparently not.

The “fascist filth” and Afghan rapists whose lives are “almost immeasurably valuable” to the mind of Brendan O’Neill

Anyway, Brendan’s article waxing lyrical in support of Afghans supplies the simple answer to his second question: “Why were these Afghan rapists even in Britain?” It’s because of leftists like Brendan O’Neill, who regard Afghans not as autonomous human beings with their own agency but as faceless, fungible tokens in a narcissistic game of moralistic posturing. As for me: I would have welcomed Afghan dogs into Britain and refused entry to Afghan humans. This is because, unlike Brendan O’Neill, I take humans seriously and properly understand their “promise” and “potential.” You see, I’ve noticed that dogs from Afghanistan don’t commit rape or throw flesh-eating chemicals into women’s faces or stab women to death and lick the bloody knife afterwards. Dogs from Afghanistan enrich the lives of British Whites. Humans from Afghanistan blight the lives of British Whites. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to animals and humans from other vibrant Third-World countries. That’s why I say “Yes, by all means” to the dogs or cats, and “No, absolutely not” to the humans.

Hamas-hating fascist Itamar Ben-Gvir at a Jewish Power rally

Does my preference for Third-World animals over Third-World humans make me “fascist filth”? If it does, then the same label must apply to Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian prime minister who has kept Hungary free of the “pox of Jew hate” by declining to “Let Them In” when Hungarian leftists and libertarians have called for Third-World enrichment. And if Brendan is so concerned about “fascist filth,” perhaps he should investigate some of the ministers in the Hamas-smiting Israeli government he has just spent two years loudly supporting. There’s Itamar Ben-Gvir, for example. He’s the current Israeli Minister for National Security and heads a party called Otzma Yehudit, which means “Jewish Power.” Does that name sound a trifle fascist to you, Brendan? It should, because Otzma Yehudit is the direct “ideological descendant” of a now banned party called Kach (“Thus”), which was headed by a notorious Jewish fascist called Rabbi Meir Kahane. Before Ben-Gvir entered politics and had to clean up his image, he proudly displayed a portrait of someone called Baruch Goldstein in his living room. As I described in “Fingernails and Fascism,” Goldstein was a martyr with a machine-gun. He entered a mosque on Purim Day in 1994, murdered dozens of innocent Arab Muslims, and was beaten to death by the survivors.

That obviously racist massacre surely makes Goldstein and his admirers “fascist filth” to Brendan O’Neill. If it does (and how can it not?), then Brendan should note that Goldstein has a lot of admirers in Israel. The Jerusalem Post has reported that “10% of Israeli Jews think terrorist Baruch Goldstein is a “national hero’.” By Brendan’s logic, there must be huge amounts of “fascist filth” in Israel, including powerful government ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir. And yet Brendan is a firm supporter of Israel and only ever applies the label “fascist” to Hamas. Inconsistent, much? As for me: I’m happy to call Ben-Gvir “fascist,” because that’s what he is.[2] But I would never describe him as “fascist filth.” I’m not a self-righteous adolescent or a member of the woke left, you see, and I don’t want to think or act as though I am. You should try it, Brendan. It’s much easier than it might look. It might also help you understand how Jews and their “natural allies” are very bad for something you claim to hold very dear. Jewish activism created the Bondi Beach Bloodbath and Jewish activists are now exploiting the bloodbath to further restrict free speech. Otzma Yehudit!


[1]  The Jews on Bondi Beach were “celebrating” Hanukkah, the minor Jewish festival that Jewish ethnonarcissists have used to compete with and dilute the significance of Christmas.

[2]  I don’t think Hamas and other Islamists are fascist, however. Fascism is racially exclusive and supremacist in a way that Islamism isn’t. For example, Itamar Ben-Gvir and other fans of Baruch Goldstein follow venerable Jewish tradition in regarding Blacks as halfway between humans and monkeys (see the teaching of the great Jewish scholar Maimonides). In complete contrast, Islamism regards Blacks as fully human and welcomes them as recruits and fighters.

2 replies
  1. McGregor
    McGregor says:

    The average person has zero idea that the Jews are behind Mass immigration.
    Just one example: go to the Alejandro Mayorkas wiki entry. If you go back through the entry’s history and talk page they completely eliminated the fact that he had been on the board of Hebrew immigrant aid society (HIAS) from the entry. It was there, you can see it, but they just got rid of it. That such a fundamental fact can get erased, just shows their resolve.
    Go to the talk page and BITCH, everyone, right now

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.