“…we are being shut down to really discuss and debate the whole issue,” Ms Hanson said.
The One Nation leader said the government should be looking at immigration and what was “happening in our mosques”.
On Thursday, the Royal Commission into Antisemitism handed down its interim report into the Bondi Beach terror attack.
The first of the recommendations suggested that police increase presence at “high-risk” and public-facing Jewish Australian festivals and events.
It also recommended the counter-terrorism “handbook” be updated at least every three years, and that the ANZCTC provide annual briefings to National Cabinet.
Speaking to Sky News host Chris Kenny, Ms Hanson said the interim report was “pathetic” and that she did not “hold any hopes” for the final instalment.
Ms Hanson said “Islamists” were referred to only a handful of times in the 159-page report, while the “gun issue” was mentioned at least 100 times.
In the nine unclassified recommendations, the National Gun Buyback Scheme is mentioned, but Islamic extremism is not.
Ms Hanson said Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was not addressing the “elephant in the room” – Islamic terrorism and the ideology behind the terror attack at Bondi, and why it happened in Australia.
“It’s happening all around the world, and yet we are being shut down to really discuss and debate the whole issue,” Ms Hanson said.
The One Nation leader said the government should be looking at immigration and what was “happening in our mosques”.
“It should look at immigration, the people brought in the country, the imams, the preachers, the hate preachers, what’s happening in our mosques to create this hate in the country,” she said.
Ms Hanson warned that if Islamic extremism was not curtailed, Australia would experience more attacks, not just against Jewish people.
“They’re going after Jewish people now at this moment,” Ms Hanson said.
“Don’t worry, they’ll turn around. They’ll go after Christianity and the people after that, you know, white, anyone who’s not a Muslim in Australia. That’s our future.
“If we can’t look at what’s happening in other countries around the world, we are absolutely fools.”
Earlier, Mr Albanese confirmed that his National Security Committee has accepted all the recommendations and will work to adopt a national approach with the states.
“The Interim Report contains a small number of classified recommendations which cannot be publicly released because they could compromise sensitive national security information,” he said.
“The government will respond swiftly to these recommendations, and Australians will see practical outcomes through a range of policy, program, and funding measures.”
******
𝑊𝑒’𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝ℎ𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑒 “𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑚” 𝑜𝑟 “𝐼𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑠.” 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡’𝑠 𝑔𝑜𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒.
𝐖𝐇𝐘 𝐂𝐀𝐍’𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐘 𝐍𝐀𝐌𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐋 𝐓𝐇𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐓?
𝐼𝑓 𝑒𝑢𝑝ℎ𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑚𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑚, 𝐴𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑦 𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ.
Federal Parliament is being dragged back to Canberra early, not because the Prime Minister suddenly discovered urgency, but because the politics demand theatre. Anthony Albanese wants laws. Fast ones. Loud ones. Preferably vague ones. And above all, ones that don’t require him to say the unsayable: Radical Islam is the problem.
Instead, we are promised a crackdown on “hate preachers”.
Pause for a moment and enjoy the absurdity. It’s “preachers” who are the problem. Really?
When did you last hear a Baptist minister call for holy war? When did the local Catholic priest issue a fatwa on Anglicans? Yet that’s the elastic language Labor prefers, broad enough to frighten ordinary folk, but slippery enough to avoid naming the real problem.
We all know who they mean. And just as importantly, who they don’t want to say: Radical Islamist Imams and Sheikhs who promote jihad.
This is the same evasive instinct driving the rush for new gun laws.
I recently saw an American talk show where one of the guests, in response to some politician raising the prospect of gun control, relayed a tale of placing his loaded pistol on the kitchen table and monitoring its behaviour. Miraculously, the American opined, it didn’t shoot anyone. It just sat there. Menacingly inert.
That anecdote reminds me of the old saying that barely deserves repeating to intelligent adults, but here we are: Guns don’t kill people. Radical Islamists do.
Australia already has some of the strictest firearms laws on the planet.
A gun buyback in response to an ideological terror attack is not public safety, it’s ritual cleansing. It gives politicians something to announce while carefully stepping around the real cause of violence: A radical Islamist ideology that glorifies death. Add on to that the fact that authorities are too timid to confront (or even mention) radical Islam and its adherents.
Labor’s resistance to a full federal royal commission fits this pattern perfectly. A genuine inquiry would force ministers to answer questions they don’t want asked. About intelligence failures. About radicalisation networks. About whether fear of being called names trumped public safety.
Instead, we get an internal review, bureaucratic language, and legislation drafted at speed, which is always a red flag when liberty is on the line.
The Liberal National Coalition, led by Sussan Ley, at least talks about a royal commission, and that is to be welcomed. But even there, the language often tiptoes around the core issue. You can’t defeat an enemy you refuse to name.
Instead, they (along with the media) demand a royal commission into “antisemitism”. Again, a word carefully chosen to misdirect.
Antisemitism exists, and it is vile. But it was not a pack of neo-Nazis in black Helly Hansen jackets quoting Mein Kampf who opened fire on Jewish families at Bondi. There were no goose-stepping skinheads storming the beach that fateful day.
The fixation on antisemitism without ideological context is political sleight of hand. It allows the political and media class to avoid the uncomfortable truth that the violence came from radical Islam, not nostalgic admirers of the Third Reich.
Now, don’t get me wrong: Neo-Nazis are vile cranks. But radical Islamists are organised, ideological, transnational, and lethal. Pretending otherwise might soothe inner-city sensibilities of soy boys who call police over tattoos they don’t like, but it won’t stop the next attack.
This entire debate has been framed by avoidance. Hate preachers instead of jihadist imams. Gun buybacks instead of border integrity, intelligence competence, and cultural confidence.
Antisemitism instead of Islamist ideology.
Oh! And I nearly forgot: they want to amp up ”hate speech” laws, because it was apparently free speech that pulled the trigger and killed 15 innocents at Bondi Beach on 14 December 2025. Having less free speech will somehow stop terror attacks and save lives.
Here’s the reality: Australia does not have a free speech problem. It has a truth problem.
Until our leaders find the courage to speak the truth, plainly, they will keep either mistaking the wrong things as threats or, worse, concocting false threats for political ends. And that leaves the real danger of radical Islam untouched.
𝐓𝐇𝐎𝐔𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐃𝐀𝐘
𝑊𝑒’𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑙𝑑 𝑤𝑎𝑟 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 𝑎 𝑚𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑐 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑚𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑙 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒, 𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑝𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑎 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦: 𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑚. 𝐵𝑢𝑡 𝑤𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘 𝑜𝑟 𝑤𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑡𝑤𝑜 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑠, 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑓𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒. 𝑊𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑛’𝑡 𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 𝑖𝑓 𝑤𝑒 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑓𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑛’𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡. 𝑊𝑒’𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝ℎ𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑒 “𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑚” 𝑜𝑟 “𝐼𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑠.” 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡’𝑠 𝑔𝑜𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒.
– 𝗟𝘁. 𝗚𝗲𝗻. 𝗠𝗶𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗲𝗹 𝗙𝗹𝘆𝗻𝗻
