Police officers stand guard following the attack on a Jewish holiday celebration at Sydney’s Bondi Beach, in Sydney, Australia, Dec. 15, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Flavio Brancaleone

On Sunday, December 14, the Australian Jewish community was shattered by a horrific terrorist attack that claimed the lives of 15 people, including a Holocaust survivor, a rabbi, and a 10-year-old girl.

This was not random violence. The attackers did not open fire indiscriminately on beachgoers or people passing by, nor was this an abstract failure of gun control or public safety.

The shooters deliberately targeted Jews gathered for a Hanukkah event, firing toward a clearly identifiable Jewish celebration. The intent was unmistakable. This was a targeted, ideologically motivated antisemitic terror attack.

They didn’t shoot the surfers or swimmers, bathers running for their lives or the brave lifeguards at Bondi.

They just shot the Jews.
Only the Jews.

That’s the issue. Everything else is spin and gaslighting

— Brian Carlton (@Spoonyman) December 15, 2025

Yet some public figures rushed to reframe it as something else.

Musician Billie Eilish, for example, described the attack as “devastating” while emphasizing the need for stricter gun control in the United States and Australia — a response that sidestepped both who was targeted and why.

That framing is difficult to separate from Eilish’s own record. She has publicly accused Israel of committing “genocide” and proudly worn the Artists4Ceasefire pin featuring a red hand, an image uncomfortably reminiscent of the blood-stained hands displayed by terrorists after the lynching of Israelis in Ramallah during the Second Intifada.

Australia already has some of the strictest gun laws in the world; its last mass shooting occurred in 1996.

In the wake of last week’s attack, the Australian government again pledged to enforce even tighter restrictions. Whether Eilish was aware of this context is ultimately beside the point. What matters is her refusal to acknowledge the antisemitic motivation of the attack and the Jewish community it targeted.

A similar omission appeared in Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s initial statement following the attack, which made no mention of Jews as the intended victims, despite the well-known presence of a large Hanukkah event nearby. Although Albanese later corrected course, that first statement helped set the framework through which much of the public understood the attack, blurring its antisemitic nature at the outset.

This instinct to default to safe political talking points while avoiding uncomfortable truths about antisemitic violence is increasingly common among celebrities and politicians alike. But the terror attack in Australia did not occur in a vacuum. It followed more than two years of escalating antisemitic incidents across the country, during which Jews have been physically threatened, verbally abused, and spiritually targeted.

Synagogues have been firebombed. and Jewish-owned businesses vandalized. Crowds openly chanted calls to “gas the Jews.”

Notably, some public figures did acknowledge this context. Film star Ashton Kutcher warned that antisemitic rhetoric “carries a cost.” Actor Josh Gad observed that the tragedy occurred because antisemitism has become “acceptable and cheered.” Their responses recognized a reality others chose to obscure.

Those who removed antisemitism from their condemnation of the attack did not merely omit context; they distorted it. By refusing to name the motive, they minimize the danger facing Jewish communities and help sustain a climate in which hatred can continue unchecked.

Naming the problem is not divisive. Refusing to do so is.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.