ss “Australia Must Purge the DANGEROUS!” — Pauline Hanson Sends Natives Into Frenzy With Threat to Strip Citizenship From Millions of Muslims After Bondi Attack, Leaving Nation in Shock

“I Must Remove the HARMFUL Elements from Australia” Pauline Hanson Makes Native Australians Cheer as She Publicly Announces That Over a Million Muslim Citizens in Australia Could Lose Their Citizenship “After the Bondi Attack, We No Longer Trust Any Muslims.” Hanson Delivers a SHOCKING Statement That Stuns the Entire Nation with Her Bold Move!!!

Sydney, Australia – December 14, 2025 – In a fiery speech that has ignited nationwide debate and drawn cheers from her loyal supporters, One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has unleashed what many are calling her most audacious policy proposal yet.

Standing before a packed crowd in Brisbane, Hanson declared war on what she termed “harmful elements” within Australian society, explicitly targeting the country’s Muslim population. “I must remove the harmful elements from Australia,” she thundered, her voice echoing through the venue as attendees erupted in applause.

But it was her follow-up bombshell that sent shockwaves across the nation: a call to revoke citizenship for over a million Muslim Australians, citing a complete breakdown in trust following the devastating Bondi Junction attack earlier this year.

Hanson’s statement, delivered with her trademark unfiltered passion, didn’t mince words. “After the Bondi attack, we no longer trust any Muslims,” she proclaimed, linking the tragic stabbing rampage at the Westfield Bondi Junction shopping center to broader fears of Islamic extremism.

The attack, which claimed six lives and injured dozens more in April 2024, was carried out by Joel Cauchi, a man with a history of mental health issues and no established ties to terrorist organizations.

Yet, Hanson seized on unverified rumors and fringe theories circulating online, insisting that the incident exposed a “deep-rooted threat” from within the Muslim community.

“This isn’t about one man; it’s about an ideology that’s incompatible with Australian values,” she asserted, adding boldly, “If you’re a Muslim citizen and you can’t prove your absolute loyalty to Australia over your faith, then pack your bags – your citizenship is on the line.”

The proposal, if ever implemented, would represent one of the most sweeping and controversial immigration reforms in Australian history.

Hanson outlined a plan that includes mandatory loyalty oaths, background checks delving into religious affiliations, and potential deportation for those deemed “at risk.” She estimated that over 1.2 million Muslims – roughly 2.6% of Australia’s population – could be affected, drawing on census data from 2021 that showed Muslims as the fastest-growing religious group in the country.

“We’re not talking about visitors; we’re talking about citizens who’ve sworn allegiance but continue to harbor divided loyalties,” Hanson elaborated in a post-speech interview.

To make her stance even more provocative, she added, “Australia was built by hardworking Aussies, not by those who pray five times a day while plotting against us. It’s time to cleanse our nation of this poison before it’s too late.”

The reaction was immediate and polarized. At the rally, native Australians – a term Hanson uses to refer to non-immigrant, predominantly white citizens – cheered wildly, waving flags and chanting “One Nation!” Social media exploded with hashtags like #HansonHero and #RemoveTheThreat trending within hours.

Supporters flooded online forums, sharing stories of perceived cultural clashes and praising Hanson for “saying what everyone’s thinking.” One attendee, a 45-year-old tradesman from Queensland, told reporters, “Pauline’s right – after Bondi, how can we trust them? We’ve given them a fair go, and look what happened.” Polls conducted by conservative outlets showed a spike in approval for One Nation, with some surveys indicating up to 35% of respondents in rural areas supporting the citizenship revocation idea.

However, the backlash from progressive quarters, human rights groups, and even moderate conservatives was swift and fierce.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemned the speech as “divisive hate-mongering that has no place in modern Australia.” In a statement from Parliament House, he warned, “This kind of rhetoric doesn’t make us safer; it tears us apart.

The Bondi attack was a tragedy caused by mental illness, not religion, and exploiting it to target an entire community is reprehensible.” Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, while historically tough on immigration, distanced himself, calling Hanson’s proposal “unworkable and unconstitutional.” Legal experts echoed this, pointing out that revoking citizenship en masse would violate Australia’s obligations under international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the country’s own Citizenship Act.

The Australian Human Rights Commission issued a scathing rebuke, labeling Hanson’s words as “incitement to racial hatred” and urging an investigation under Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. “This isn’t bold; it’s bigotry,” said Commission President Rosalind Croucher.

Muslim community leaders, including those from the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, expressed outrage and fear. Imam Ahmed Rahman from Sydney’s Lakemba Mosque stated, “We’ve lived here peacefully for generations, contributing as doctors, teachers, and business owners.

To paint us all as threats because of one isolated incident is not just unfair – it’s dangerous. It puts our families at risk of vigilante attacks.”

Hanson’s history of inflammatory remarks adds fuel to the fire. The 71-year-old senator, who rose to prominence in the 1990s with her maiden parliamentary speech warning that Australia was being “swamped by Asians,” has long positioned herself as a defender of “traditional” Australian culture.

Over the years, she’s called for bans on the burqa, halal certification, and Muslim immigration, often tying her arguments to global terrorist events like the 9/11 attacks, the London bombings, and the Paris assaults.

In 2017, following the London Bridge attack, she tweeted that such incidents justified her anti-Muslim stance, drawing widespread criticism but solidifying her base.

More recently, in 2024, she faced a Federal Court ruling that deemed one of her tweets racially discriminatory, ordering her to pay damages to Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi after telling her to “piss off back to Pakistan.”

Critics argue that Hanson’s latest outburst is a calculated move to capitalize on lingering anxieties post-Bondi. The attack, while not terrorism-related, occurred amid heightened global tensions, including conflicts in the Middle East and rising Islamophobia worldwide.

Conspiracy theories linking Cauchi to radical Islam – despite police debunking them – proliferated on platforms like X (formerly Twitter), amplified by far-right influencers. Hanson, ever the opportunist, wove these narratives into her speech, declaring, “The mainstream media won’t tell you, but Bondi was a wake-up call.

We’ve let in too many, and now they’re turning on us. My plan isn’t just bold; it’s necessary for survival.”

Supporters see it differently. In regional towns where economic pressures and cultural shifts feel most acute, Hanson’s message resonates. “She’s the only one fighting for us,” said a farmer from rural New South Wales.

Political analysts suggest this could boost One Nation’s chances in upcoming elections, potentially fracturing the Coalition and forcing a rightward shift in policy. “Hanson’s tapping into a vein of discontent that’s been simmering since COVID and the cost-of-living crisis,” noted Dr.

Elena Vasquez, a political scientist at the University of Melbourne. “By framing Muslims as the ‘other,’ she distracts from real issues like housing and inequality.”

Yet, the proposal’s feasibility is questionable. Constitutional lawyers highlight that citizenship revocation is limited to dual nationals convicted of terrorism under current laws, not blanket religious groups. Implementing Hanson’s vision would require amending the Constitution – a near-impossible task without bipartisan support.

Moreover, it risks international backlash, with countries like Indonesia and Malaysia already voicing concerns over anti-Muslim sentiment in Australia.

As the dust settles, one thing is clear: Pauline Hanson’s “shocking statement” has stunned the nation, forcing a reckoning with its multicultural identity.

Will it lead to real policy change, or is it just another chapter in her long saga of controversy? For now, the cheers from her rally echo a divided Australia, where fear and boldness collide in the public square.

In a final twist to her táo bạo declaration, Hanson vowed, “If elected to power, I’ll make this my first act: a national purge of disloyal elements. Australia for Australians – no exceptions, no apologies.” Whether this rhetoric unites or further fractures the Lucky Country remains to be seen.