Posted on 12/14/2025 2:42:16 AM PST by FRinCanada2
Incident Analysis (High-Level, Non-Instructional)
1. Nature of the Event The video depicts an active terrorist attack in a civilian environment. A non-uniformed civilian (bystander) responds reactively, not offensively. The action occurs during the attack, not afterward—this is critical for legal and moral context.
2. Use of Environment The bystander uses a vehicle as hard cover, not merely concealment. This indicates instinctive or learned understanding that: Distance and barriers matter Exposure must be minimized before action The car serves as a temporary survivability position, not a pursuit platform. 3. Decision-Making Under Stress
The bystander does not flee blindly nor rush forward. Engagement appears measured and purposeful, not chaotic. This reflects: rapid threat identification prioritization of survival decisive action once conditions permit 4. Threat Neutralization (Conceptual, Not Technical) “Neutralized” in this context means: the attacker is no longer able to continue the attack The result: immediate reduction of lethal threat likely prevention of additional casualties Importantly, the bystander does not pursue once the threat is stopped (based on your description), which aligns with defensive action rather than vigilantism.
5. Civilian Intervention Context This is a rare but documented phenomenon in terror incidents: civilians acting under extreme necessity no time to wait for responders Such actions are typically: legally scrutinized morally differentiated from offensive violence The key distinction: stopping ongoing murder, not seeking confrontation.
6. Strategic Impact (Immediate) Disrupts attacker momentum Breaks psychological dominance of the terrorist Creates opportunity for others to escape Forces accomplices (if any) into disarray Language Accuracy Assessment Your phrasing is appropriate and restrained: “A bystander who took shelter behind a car neutralized one of the terrorists.” This avoids: glorification tactical description speculation
2025 HANUKKAH MASSACRE
How will they justify it? Has the Australian Jewish community invaded Gaza or taken “innocent lives”?
Of course not—because this has never been about Gaza.
It has always been about the very existence of the Jewish people—everywhere and at all times.
Tonight, we light the first Hanukkah candle and declare with clarity and conviction: Am Yisrael Chai — the people of Israel live.
From the images at the scene, it appears that besides the weapon, one of the terrorists carried a butcher knife on his waist. Authorities in Australia are also investigating a report of a bomb at the scene.
Cops are still wondering what the motive was.
/sarcasm
Given that it was a shotgun, I suspect the reason he didn't shoot the perp was because it was out of shells.
A common thought by many viewers. Would love to know if it was that or some extremely good law enforcement discipline.
Since I wasn't there, and if I were, I would likely have been scared shitless.
But sitting in he safety of my own home, I can easily say that if that were me and the shotgun were indeed empty, I would have used it to start beating the crap out of the coward.
It’s Australia.. he’ll probably be charged with assault or z hate crime.
He'll get one. Australia has a honours system that includes a range of bravery medals that can be awarded to civilians.
I suspect this man will get the Cross of Valour, which is ranked alongside the Victoria Cross, and which has only been awarded five times in Australian history.
The next general release of honours will be on Australia Day (26th January). I would not be surprised if this is fastracked to happen by then.
Lets hope so
Bookmarking
And THAT is exactly what some untrained or poorly disciplined law enforcement professionals would do as well. Look forward to a public interview with this hero !
He might have been blasted by officers mistaking him for one of the terrorists. Besides, in the longer version of the video showing the tackle you can see that the second shooter was close by and opened fire at the hero as soon as he realised what was going on. Mr.al Ahmed (that’s his name according to Aussie news) was hit twice and is currently in surgery. Channel 7 interviewed his cousin who told them that al Ahmed wouldn’t even know how to fire a gun.
https://www.patreon.com/posts/145816317
(( Excerpted )). Full context at Patreon LINK
A disgraceful statement by the Prime Minister of Australia.
No mention of the Jewish community.
No acknowledgment that the massacre took place during a Hanukkah celebration.
A complete refusal to name the antisemitism behind the attack.
This deliberate omission joins a broader atmosphere in the country that enabled such violence. Through negligence and moral failure, the responsibility rests squarely with leadership. The warning signs were clear, yet the Australian government chose to look away - effectively abandoning the Jewish community to terror.
This statement says everything by saying nothing.
It refuses to acknowledge that Jews were targeted.
It avoids the fact that the attack occurred during a Jewish holiday.
Instead, it relies on vague language, political caution, and moral cowardice.
When Jews are attacked, leaders suddenly forget how to name the hatred.
Silence is not neutrality - it is failure.
True leadership means calling antisemitism out clearly and immediately, not hiding behind promises of “further updates.”
What statement are you talking about? Not true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDCm0wDZDX4
https://www.patreon.com/posts/breaking-news-145816317
Please visit the FREE post shared on PATREON for AD FREE news and analysis
a verified X (Twitter) post by Ambassador Mike Huckabee (@GovMikeHuckabee).
He criticizes the Australian Prime Minister for a public statement that failed to identify a violent incident as a jihadist attack against Jews, which occurred on the first day of Hanukkah.
Huckabee’s two core accusations are:
1. Omission of motive – He argues the PM deliberately avoided calling the attack jihadist or acknowledging that Jews were targeted.
2. Pattern of antisemitism – He links this omission to what he calls antisemitic statements over the past year, suggesting the silence is not accidental but consistent.
Why Huckabee is making this point
This is part of a broader international debate over:
• Whether governments name ideological motives (jihadism, antisemitism) after attacks
• Selective language used when Jewish communities are targeted
• The growing concern that antisemitic violence is being downplayed or euphemized by Western leaders
Huckabee’s framing implies that:
• Refusing to name the ideology protects the perpetrator’s narrative
• Failing to name Jewish victims erases the hate-crime dimension
• Silence itself becomes a political statement
Why the timing matters
• Hanukkah is not just a holiday—it commemorates Jewish survival against religious persecution
• An attack on Jews during Hanukkah carries symbolic and ideological weight
• Ignoring that context is seen by many as moral evasion, not neutrality
Bottom line
Huckabee isn’t just criticizing wording—he’s accusing the Australian government of:
• Moral cowardice
• Double standards in terrorism coverage
• And contributing to the normalization of antisemitic violence by refusing to name it
If you want, I can:
• Break down what the Australian PM actually said line-by-line
• Compare this to how other attacks are labeled in Western media
https://www.patreon.com/posts/145927139
Chapter 815.202 | Update & Analysis: 15 December 2025
Source link above :
Chapter 815.202 — The Known and the Unstopped
Subtitle: When Travel, Terror, and Silence Converge
⸻
There is a pattern that repeats itself so often in modern terrorism cases that it has become almost ritualistic.
After the blood is cleaned from the streets.
After the victims are counted.
After the press conferences end.
We hear the same sentence:
“The suspects were known to authorities.”
Chapter 815.202 belongs in that category — not because it is unique, but because it is tragically familiar.
⸻
The Australia Case
According to The Daily Telegraph, the father and son responsible for the massacre in Australia had traveled to the Philippines just months before the attack — specifically to regions where ISIS-linked training camps are known to exist.
This alone does not prove guilt.
Travel is not a crime.
But this detail becomes explosive when combined with a second fact:
Both individuals were already known to police.
That is the convergence point — the moment where coincidence ends and systemic failure begins to demand explanation.
⸻
Why the Philippines Matters
Southern Philippines, particularly Mindanao, has been a persistent hub for:
• ISIS-aligned groups
• Foreign fighter facilitation
• Weapons training
• Ideological indoctrination
For years, Western intelligence agencies have tracked:
• Australians
• Europeans
• Southeast Asians
traveling into these regions for radicalization and tactical preparation, often returning home quietly — until they don’t.
This is not speculation.
This is established counterterrorism history.
⸻
The Red Flags That Aligned
In modern threat assessment, the following combination is considered high-risk:
• Prior law enforcement awareness
• Travel to extremist-controlled or influenced regions
• Return without debrief, monitoring, or intervention
And yet — nothing happened.
No visible escalation.
No preventative disruption.
No apparent questioning before the attack.
⸻
The Uncomfortable Question
Chapter 815.202 does not accuse.
It asks.
Why were they not investigated?
Was it:
• Legal thresholds?
• Intelligence silos?
• Resource exhaustion?
• Political reluctance?
• A belief that the threat had passed?
Or something worse — normalization?
When “known to police” becomes a bureaucratic placeholder rather than a trigger for action.
⸻
A Pattern Across the West
This chapter does not stand alone.
It echoes:
• London
• Paris
• Brussels
• Nice
• Orlando
• San Bernardino
Different countries.
Same after-action reports.
Known individuals.
Known ideology.
Known travel routes.
Unknown urgency — until it is too late.
⸻
Ezekiel’s Watchman Warning
“Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.”
— Ezekiel 33:7 (KJV)
The watchman is not judged for the sword —
but for whether he sounded the alarm.
When warning signs are seen but not acted upon, responsibility does not vanish with silence.
⸻
The Shift in Modern Terror
ISIS no longer needs mass training camps or centralized commands.
Today’s model is:
• Short foreign exposure
• Ideological reinforcement
• Tactical inspiration
• Autonomous execution
This is harder to detect — but not invisible.
Which makes inaction more troubling, not less.
⸻
The Spiritual Parallel
In the 815 series, patterns matter.
Just as nations ignore warning signs before collapse, institutions ignore indicators before catastrophe.
Scripture warns repeatedly:
• Before judgment
• Before exile
• Before disaster
The signs were present — and dismissed.
⸻
Closing Reflection
Chapter 815.202 is not about hindsight outrage.
It is about accountability in the age of warning overload.
When every signal is normalized, none are acted upon.
When every suspect is “known,” no one is stopped.
And when watchmen stop warning, the sword comes anyway
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.