These agencies exist for one purpose: threat identification and prevention.

Not reaction. Not excuses. Prevention.

If it is true — as has been reported — that one of the men involved was:

• Known to ASIO, and

• A registered firearms owner,

then Australians are entitled to ask a very basic question:

What is the point of a watchlist if it carries no consequence?

A list that does not trigger mandatory intervention, monitoring, firearms removal, or lawful containment is not public safety. It is bureaucracy masquerading as protection.

You cannot tell the public:

• “This person is a security concern,”

and then

• Allow them to legally possess weapons, move freely, and act without restraint.

That is not an intelligence failure — that is a policy failure.

As Brigitte Gabriel has said repeatedly, it does not take large numbers to commit atrocities. It takes a small number of extremists, while the consequences are borne by the wider public. That is precisely why lists without enforcement are dangerous — they allow known risks to escalate until people are killed.

If the state assesses someone as a genuine national security risk, then the state must act decisively and lawfully:

• remove access to weapons,

• impose restrictions,

• intervene early,

• or pursue removal under existing national security laws.

Anything less is negligence.

Bondi was not an accident.

It was not unforeseeable.

And it was not the responsibility of ordinary Australians to absorb.

The failure belongs to the institutions that claimed they were watching — and did nothing.

https://codeblackmk.com

Support the show