Misinformation Spreads Amid Confusion and Grief Following Bondi Attack

In the wake of the Bondi terror attack that claimed at least 16 lives and injured dozens more at a Hanukkah celebration on December 14, 2025, a wave of misinformation has spread rapidly across social media platforms, attempting to manipulate public perception of the tragedy.

Australian authorities have officially declared the shooting, in which two gunmen opened fire on attendees celebrating the first day of Hanukkah, a terrorist attack. However, before many families could even begin to process their grief, conspiracy theories and false narratives began circulating online.

Several social media posts have falsely attempted to link Israel to the attack through elaborate but unfounded claims. One prevalent conspiracy theory suggests that users in Israel were searching for the name of one of the identified shooters, Naveed Akram, on Google days before the attack occurred.

These posts typically feature what appear to be screenshots from Google Trends showing search activity for Akram’s name originating from Tel Aviv on December 7 and 9—days before the attack. “Coincidence or False Flag???” questioned one post, implying Israeli foreknowledge or involvement.

AAP FactCheck investigated these claims and found no evidence supporting them. Searches of Google Trends revealed no results for people searching “Naveed Akram” in either Israel or India prior to the Bondi attack.

Another strain of misinformation claims that Akram served in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF). “Naveed Akram is an IDF soldier that served in Gaza and returned to Australia. Today, he lost his mind and killed 12 jews,” read one widely shared post.

These claims directly contradict verified information about the 24-year-old shooter. Authorities have confirmed that Akram was a resident of Bonnyrigg in western Sydney who attended Cabramatta High School. According to ABC reporting, investigators are examining potential links between Akram and the Islamic State terror group—not Israel.

The weapons used in the attack have also become the subject of conspiracy theories. Multiple posts claimed that “only Mossad agents are able to get those exact weapons in Australia being that guns are outlawed,” suggesting involvement of Israeli intelligence.

This assertion fundamentally misrepresents Australia’s gun laws. While Australia has strict firearms regulations, guns are not outlawed entirely. NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon confirmed that the second shooter, identified as 50-year-old Sajid Akram—Naveed’s father—legally owned six firearms that are believed to have been used in the attack.

“Ballistics and forensic investigation will determine this morning that those six firearms are the six that were licensed to that man, but also that they were used in the offence yesterday at Bondi,” Commissioner Lanyon stated on Monday.

Even artificial intelligence systems contributed to the confusion. X’s AI chatbot, Grok, mischaracterized viral footage showing Ahmed Al Ahmed, an unarmed bystander who heroically wrestled a gun away from one of the attackers. When prompted about the video, Grok described it as an “old viral video of a man climbing a palm tree in a parking lot.” X users subsequently added corrections, noting that Grok’s response was misleading and confirming the authenticity of the footage.

The identity of Al Ahmed has also been the target of misinformation. A website created in Iceland on the day of the attack falsely claimed that Al Ahmed was actually a man named Edward Crabtree from Bondi—another claim debunked by fact-checkers.

Foreign influence appears to be playing a role in the spread of misinformation as well. AAP FactCheck identified Facebook pages operated from Vietnam publishing false claims about Australian political responses to the attack, particularly fabricating statements allegedly made by One Nation leader Pauline Hanson.

The rapid spread of these false narratives highlights the challenges authorities face in managing both the immediate security response to terrorism and the information environment surrounding such attacks. As investigations continue, officials are working to provide accurate information while countering the flood of misinformation that threatens to exploit community tensions during this sensitive period.