PRIME MINISTER ALBANESE: BONDI JIHADIS WERE “DRIVEN BY AN EXTREME PERVERSION OF ISLAM”

Posted on by

This article is republished with thanks to The James Macpherson Report. Originally titled, “Albanese Says the Quiet Part Out Loud”.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has conceded the Bondi jihadis were “driven by an extreme perversion of Islam”. And just like that — after years of verbal gymnastics, semantic tap-dancing, and ideological denial — we’re allowed to say the word Islam in the same sentence as terrorism. Progress comes in strange ways. He told journalists…

“Tragically, in 2025, we live in a dangerous time and these two evil people have engaged in this act of anti-Semitism driven by ideology, [an] extreme perversion of Islam that has resulted in these catastrophic consequences.

“The clear advice that we have at this point is that there is no evidence of collusion. There’s no evidence that these people were part of a cell.”

He was quick to reassure us, of course. No collusion. No cell. Lone wolves. Always lone wolves. Radicalised by no one, influenced by nothing, emerging mysteriously from the ideological ether like murderous mushrooms after rain. And if you believe that, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Anyway, here’s the good news… Anthony Albanese has now said out loud what we have always known to be true — terror attacks are driven by an ‘ideology’ and that ideology has a name. Islam.

Yes, yes — before the outrage hotline lights up — the PM hastened to add that it was an “extreme perversion” of Islam. But still. Islam is now officially on the table. As it should be. And as it should have been at least as far back as 1988. Does no-one remember Salman Rushdie?

For too long we have been unable to talk about Islam for fear of being branded anti-Muslim or Islamophobic. Those days must now be over. We need to talk about Islam. And if the PM is now openly saying that an “extreme perversion of Islam” drove two men to shoot dead 15 Australians in cold blood, then if we will not discuss Islam now, when will we?

Albanese: A Trusted Source on Islamic Theology?

So let me start with the obvious question… is the killing of Jews a perversion of Islam? Or is it consistent with the life of Muhammad, the teachings of Islamic scripture, the curriculum of Islamic education systems, the stated goals of Islamic regimes, and the long and bloody history of Islam itself? If you need more than 30 seconds to work through that, it may be time to relocate from beneath your rock.

Yet, I’m curious… On what basis does the Prime Minster say that the killers were driven, not just by a perversion of Islam but an extreme perversion? Has he suddenly become a scholar of Islamic theology? A historian of Muhammad’s campaigns? A jurist of Sharia? How exactly does Albanese distinguish between “true Islam” and the version that manifested itself in Bondi on Saturday night?

I suspect his sole qualification is desperate hope. But if this was, as he insists, a perversion of Islam, then the next question is unavoidable.

Muslim Community Responsibility

What is the Muslim community now going to do about it? How will mosques be reformed? How will Islamic schools be reformed? How will doctrines that justify murder be confronted — openly, publicly, and relentlessly? If a “perversion of Islam” has resulted in the massacre of 15 Australians, then the responsibility to address that perversion rests squarely with the community from which it arose.

And no, chanting “Islam is a religion of peace” won’t cut it. No one is buying that anymore — not after 1,300 years of evidence to the contrary. There is, undeniably, a small but lethal subset of Muslims in this country who do not believe Islam is a religion of peace. And they didn’t get that idea out of thin air.

Islamic organisations should be acting with urgency to dismantle the beliefs that allow Jews to be murdered “in the service of Allah”. In addition, Islamic leaders should immediately stop the feigned tears every time their religion is criticised, critiqued and called out.

Grow up. People are dead. A forensic team is right now scouring blades of grass in a Bondi park for body parts. So spare me any tears that the real victim here is Islam. How, exactly, is a supposed perversion corrected if discussion itself is forbidden? No more cries of “Islamophobia” when Islam is scrutinised.

If you don’t want your ideology criticised, stop allowing it to be so easily — and so frequently — used to justify murder. That said, I won’t be holding my breath. Because the truth may be far more confronting than the Prime Minister is prepared to entertain.

What if what happened in Bondi was not an extreme perversion of Islam? What if it was, in fact, a faithful expression of Islam as taught by Muhammad, recorded in its scriptures, and practiced throughout its history? What then? That is the question our leaders dare not ask — because answering it would require a level of moral clarity and intestinal fortitude that modern Western politics simply does not possess.

WHY PENNY WONG AND ANTHONY ALBANESE GOT IRAN-ISRAEL CONFLICT SO WRONG

Posted on by

It is almost impossible to grasp the true nature of the Iran-Israel conflict if you do not understand religion.

While analysts pontificate about geopolitics, military strategy, and nuclear ambitions, the conflict is not really about any of those things.

At the heart of what’s going on lies a deeply religious and ideological struggle – particularly from the Iranian side.

It’s important to understand that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not merely a nation-state. It is a theocratic regime founded on the belief that politics must serve a divine mission.

Return of the Mahdi and Annihilation of Israel

Central to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s mission is the Shia concept of wilayat al-faqih – clerical rule until the return of the Mahdi, also known as the twelfth Imam.

Iranian leaders believe that global injustice, including the existence of Israel, delays the Mahdi’s return.

When you understand that, you understand how the Iranians view Israel. Israel is not just a political enemy – it is a theological offence.

The Jewish state’s presence in what Iran considers Islamic lands is viewed as a religious desecration that must be dealt with before the Mahdi can be revealed.

If you’re thinking this makes Penny Wong’s calls for “dialogue” rather childish, you’d be spot on.

Negotiation is exceptionally difficult, bordering on impossible, since the conflict is not merely over borders, but over prophecy, purity, and divine destiny.

If you are ignorant, wilfully or otherwise, of the religious dimension to this conflict, then it is easy to misread Iran’s motivations as irrational or purely strategic.

But within its own religious worldview, Iran’s posture toward Israel is not just logical – it is sacred.

Without understanding that, any diplomatic approach is hopelessly naive.

In fact, without understanding religion, it is almost impossible to understand messages the Iranian and Israeli leadership are sending to each other.

Benjamin Netanyahu Refers to Cyrus the Great

Let’s start with the Israeli PM’s reference yesterday to the Persian King Cyrus the Great.

Benjamin Netanyahu made a speech broadcast to the Iranian population in which he said…

“Cyrus freed the Jews, and today the Jewish state might free the Persians. Not in the sense that we’re doing it for them. In the end, they have to rise up themselves, but we are creating the conditions. And that’s why it could be consequential.”

King Cyrus is renowned for liberating the Jews from Babylonian captivity in 539 BC.

Unlike previous rulers, Cyrus allowed conquered peoples to return to their homelands and practice their religions freely. He issued a decree permitting the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple.

This act earned him lasting praise in Jewish tradition; he is even referred to as the “anointed one” in the book of Isaiah.

The Lord says this to Cyrus, his anointed,
whose right hand I have grasped
to subdue nations before him
and disarm kings… (Isaiah 45:1)

So in June 2025, Israel’s PM is reminding Iranians of what one of their great leaders did more than 2500 years ago, and saying he is now returning the favour.

Netanyahu sees himself as a historic figure, repaying the kindness of a Persian lionised in the Bible.

He will precipitate the liberation of Iranians held in captivity by the Ayatollah, even as Cyrus precipitated the liberation of Jews held in captivity by the Babylonians.

Ayatollah of Iran Refers to Ali ibn Abi Talib

Meanwhile, the Ayatollah also released a statement yesterday.

On Twitter, he wrote, “the battle begins” and posted a picture showing a man walking into a fortress as streaks of fire light the sky.

The caption read: “All returns to Kybhar”

The statement is a reference to the first imam of Shia Islam who lived 600 years after Christ.

Ali ibn Abi Talib, a cousin and son-in-law of Muhammad (work that one out) was supposedly miraculously healed of blindness so that he could fight the Jews in hand-to-hand combat.

He killed Jews and made those who remained subject to heavy taxes.

The Ayatollah claims to be the modern day equivalent.

The contrast, then, between Netanyahu and the Ayatollah is stark. One claims to be the modern day liberator. The other boasts of being a modern day killer and oppressor. Both use religious history to illustrate their intentions.

I say again, if you’re unfamiliar with religion, you’ll miss so much of what is really going on in this conflict.

And that, of course, explains the Albanese Government’s position.

Article by James Macpherson, 20th June 2025, Substack