A terrorist attack on a Jewish Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia, killed at least 11 and injured dozens, authorities say, marking the deadliest antisemitic attack since Hamas’s October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel. The shooting occurred as roughly 2,000 people gathered to celebrate the first night of Hanukkah. Police say the attack deliberately targeted the Jewish community, involved at least two gunmen, and included improvised explosive devices found nearby. One attacker was killed, and another is in critical condition. “One of the alleged shooters in the deadly attacks at Bondi Beach in Sydney was Naveed Akram, a man from the city’s south-west, according to a senior law enforcement official,” ABC News reported. Video captured of the attack shows a long shootout between the terrorists and law enforcement. One terrorist was taken down as he fired at the Jewish celebration by an unarmed civilian, who can be seen in footage wrestling the gun away from the attacker. Witnesses described scenes of chaos, with bodies on the sand, blood everywhere, and wounded victims carried on surfboards due to a lack of stretchers. The event was packed with hundreds of families, with children ending up under fire from the terrorists. World leaders, including U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Israel’s Chaim Herzog, condemned the “vile” terrorist attack on civilians, condemning antisemitism. “The United States strongly condemns the terrorist attack in Australia targeting a Jewish celebration,” Rubio said. “Antisemitism has no place in this world. Our prayers are with the victims of this horrific attack, the Jewish community, and the people of Australia.” “At these very moments, our sisters and brothers in Sydney, Australia, have been attacked by vile terrorists in a very cruel attack on Jews who went to light the first candle of Chanukah on Bondi Beach,” Israeli President Chaim Herzog said. “Our hearts go out to them. The heart of the entire nation of Israel misses a beat at this very moment, as we pray for the recovery of the wounded, we pray for them and we pray for those who lost their lives.” The prime minister of India, Narendra Modi, reacted, “Strongly condemn the ghastly terrorist attack carried out today at Bondi Beach, Australia, targeting people celebrating the first day of the Jewish festival of Hanukkah. On behalf of the people of India, I extend my sincere condolences to the families who lost their loved ones. We stand in solidarity with the people of Australia in this hour of grief. India has zero tolerance towards terrorism and supports the fight against all forms and manifestations of terrorism.” Yet the initial response of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese neither mentioned the Jewish identity of the victims nor the Hanukkah celebration. The statement from Australia’s Prime Minister, no mention of Jews, no mention of Hanukkah, not a single word on terror or anti-semitism. pic.twitter.com/9zNa6qfb6Y — Amit Segal (@AmitSegal) December 14, 2025 Albanese has been a vocal critic of Israel, and split with the United States at the United Nations to endorse an anti-Israel resolution that called on it to withdraw from “occupied” Palestinian territory. Opposition leader Peter Dutton slammed the decision, saying Albanese “sold the Jewish community out for ‘green’ votes.” The Bondi massacre occurred amid a sharp rise in antisemitism across Australia since October 7. Jewish communities have faced antisemitic chants at rallies, synagogues have been firebombed, threats from healthcare workers, intimidation on university campuses, and vandalism of Jewish leaders’ homes. Intelligence reporting has linked some attacks to foreign-backed Islamist networks, yet the government has been slow and cautious in assigning blame. Among the victims of the shooting was Arsen Ostrovsky, a prominent voice against antisemitism across the globe who recently moved to Australia from Israel. “I saw blood gushing in front of me,” Ostrovsky said in a local interview after the attack. “I saw people hit, saw people fall to the ground. My only concern was, ‘Where are my kids? Where are my kids? Where’s my wife? Where’s my family?’” “It was an absolute bloodbath, blood gushing everywhere,” Ostrovsky said. “October seventh, that’s the last time I saw this. I never thought I would see this in Australia.” “I lived in Israel the last 13 years,” he said. “We came here only two weeks ago to work with a Jewish community, to fight antisemitism, to fight this bloodthirsty, ravaging hatred.” One of the attackers has already been identified as Naveed Akram, and authorities are reportedly raiding his Sydney home.

Recently in The Wall Street Journal, Neera Tanden, CEO of the Center for American Progress, a major foghorn in our nation’s capital for America’s Left, explained “Why Democrats Won the Shutdown.” The most accurate declaration in the article is “fights tell the country a lot about what—and who—the fighters care about.” And, indeed, there should be no question what the Democratic Party is about. That is—to miss no opportunity to accumulate political power by fostering, as widely and as deeply as possible, a culture of government dependence in America. And to pay the bill for this by bankrupting our country. “Affordability” is the political buzzword du jour now. And, indeed, no one wants higher prices. But the way to lower prices is greater efficiency in businesses delivering the products and services we care about. The government’s role in this is removing, to the greatest extent possible, unnecessary regulations and taxes. However, for those that love political power, the way to lower prices—to “affordability”—is subsidies. Shield those who you want to depend on you from the true costs of what they are consuming. And, indeed, this is the way of Obamacare. Shield the true cost of health care by sending the subsidy funds to the insurance companies to keep premiums to the consumer artificially low. Per the Paragon Health Institute, “in 2023, federal subsidies through the ACA Medicaid expansion and the exchanges, which almost all flowed to insurers, totaled $218 billion.” Not surprisingly, as Paragon reports, since 2010 when Obamacare was enacted, a weighted average of stocks of health insurance companies is up 1,032% (though the end of 2023) compared to 251% in the overall market, measured by the S&P 500. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the federal government went to your local grocer and said they will pay for all his stock if he gives it all away free to all his customers? How can things get more affordable than this? The next question is: How can we pay for this plan Democrats have for making things more affordable? Unfortunately, here we have even more subterfuge to shield Americans from reality. Or, in the words of former United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, “the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.” There are two ways the federal government can get its hands on more money. Tax us. Or, not tax us now and borrow the money on global credit markets, basically putting us all on the hook without us knowing about it. That is, commit to higher taxes in the future. Our federal government has been running a fiscal deficit every year since 2001. Expenditures are greater than income. The only way to get more tax revenue without raising taxes is adequate growth in the economy so that with the same tax structure, people have higher incomes and pay more taxes. The other way is to raise taxes. We’re not growing fast enough to generate enough new tax revenue without raising taxes. And this stunted growth is just another symptom of the same problem: more government larding down our country and slowing things down. And raising taxes is not popular. Raising taxes means that taxpayers become aware that they are paying for political ruses such as Obamacare subsidies. And of course, Democrats have no interest in cutting spending. The result is that in 2001, the last year we had a fiscal surplus, federal debt as percent of gross domestic product was 30%. Now, per the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, it’s 95%. Projections from the Congressional Budget Office show our debt burden will continue to grow to unimaginable levels. Step one to solving the problem is getting honest and realistic that we have a problem. And this is the last thing that Democrats want. COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Last Thing on Democrats’ Agenda—Telling the Truth to Americans appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Flashback to 2009: Obamacare Creates a Mess for Others to Clean Up

Ted Nugent is known for many things. Subtlety isn't one of them.This is a man who treats volume knobs the way toddlers treat bedtime: with open defiance. So when a mosque in his Michigan town began broadcasting the early-morning call to prayer over loudspeakers, Nugent reacted in the way only Nugent would. He turned his back yard into a launchpad for a one-man rock assault.You don’t need to be religious to see the problem. You only need to have ears.Excessive? Perhaps. But it tapped straight into a frustration millions feel but rarely voice — not loudly, anyway.The early-morning Islamic call to prayer echoing through American suburbs isn’t “diversity” or a charming cultural detail. It’s noise — loud, sudden, inescapable noise. It jolts families awake, spooks pets, startles infants, and demands that the entire block adapt.Nugent’s counterattack may have been a little over the top, but beneath the distortion pedals sits a simple point: Public peace matters. In a free country, quiet hours come first. And no imported custom, however sacred to some, earns an automatic exemption.Richard Dawkins once called the Islamic call to prayer “hauntingly beautiful.” This from a man who spent decades explaining that God doesn’t exist. It’s a strange kind of aesthetic tourism: Romanticize a religious ritual while rejecting the very religion that produced it. Dawkins was wrong about the existence of God, and he is equally wrong about the Islamic call to prayer.The call to prayer wasn’t designed as background music, and it wasn’t conceived for multicultural suburbs where everyone keeps different hours and believes different things. It was forged in a seventh-century society where faith and authority were fused, where religion structured public life down to the minute, and where submission — literal, explicit submission — wasn’t merely encouraged but expected.Islam’s founding worldview assumed a unified religious community, a shared legal and moral order, and a sharp distinction between believers and nonbelievers. That distinction shaped status, obligation, and allegiance.In the Muslim context, the adhan makes perfect sense. It is a public summons for a public faith, a declaration of dominance over the rhythm of the day, and reminder that life moves according to Allah’s schedule — not yours. It reminds everyone, believer or not, that the community’s obligations take precedence over the individuals’ preferences.But transplant it into America (or any predominantly Christian society), and it makes zero sense. The operating systems and expectations are different. The very idea of a faith dictating the morning routine of people who don’t share it runs directly against the grain of Western life.RELATED: Why progressives want to destroy Christianity — but spare Islam AlxeyPnferov/iStock/Getty Images PlusThis is the part Dawkins missed entirely when he praised the adhan.It’s easy to romanticize a sound when you encounter it on holiday, filtered through distance, novelty, and sand-warm nostalgia. It’s quite another when it is broadcast at 5 a.m. into a neighborhood that never agreed to have its eardrums shattered before the coffee even brews.Dawkins hears melody, but he ignores meaning. He praises the tune while overlooking the text, which was never written for pluralism. It was written for a social order in which Islam set the terms — and nonbelievers either complied or faced the consequences.You don’t need to be religious to see the problem. You only need to have ears.The adhan doesn’t float gently on the breeze. It is projected through megaphones with the explicit purpose of commanding attention. It is designed to override the soundscape of daily life. Barking dog? Buried. Garbage truck? Drowned. Your alarm clock? Irrelevant. The Islamic call to prayer cuts through everything because that is precisely what it was built to do.And that is where the first collision occurs. In America, no foreign religion should be granted the right to reorder everyone’s routine. Christianity, which most readers know intimately, offers a useful contrast. Church bells ring, yes, but briefly and symbolically. They don’t deliver multi-minute recitations meant to summon or correct anyone.But with fewer bells ringing, other sounds inevitably move in to fill the void. These include ones far louder, far longer, and far less rooted in America’s traditions.There’s a difference between freedom of religion and freedom to dominate the public square.In a predominantly Christian society, faith is personal, chosen, and interior. Prayer happens inside churches, inside homes, inside hearts — not broadcast across rooftops as compulsory ambience. The Western idea of worship is reflective and voluntary. The call to prayer, by contrast, is commanding and public by design.Sound, as Ted Nugent knows well, is anything but neutral. A community’s soundscape shapes its psychology. People become anxious, irritable, exhausted, and far more prone to accidents when their sleep is disrupted. After all, we prosecute noisy neighbors for far less.Yet Western elites recoil at the idea that a religious practice might be subject to the same standards as the guy who revs his motorcycle at midnight. If anything, a more intrusive and more extended ritual deserves more examination — not less.Although I truly dislike what Islam represents, this isn’t about hatred. It is about the delicate, daily compromises a pluralistic nation depends on. When one group insists on broadcasting its obligations to everyone else, the common ground cracks, the social contract comes apart, and people start to feel like strangers on their own streets.The call to prayer has no place in polite society. There’s a difference between freedom of religion and freedom to dominate the public square. One belongs in America. The other never will.

Newsom Press Office Troll's Sexist, Racist Nicki Minaj Dig Shows How Dems Trash Black Women Who Disagree

CBS Town Hall With Erika Kirk Offered Insight Into the TPUSA CEO and Fodder for Bari Weiss Detractors

Dumb TVs don't offer smart features and can't connect to the internet. With most models today being smart TVs, how easy is it to find a non-smart option?

Duolingo is one of the most popular free language-learning apps out there, but these Android apps are great alternatives if you have a different learning style.