“This Was About Security. So Why Did Labor Make It About Race?”
Let’s slow this down.
Two men show up at a Hunter Valley mine.
A mine that handles explosives.
A mine that is critical infrastructure.
Someone raises a question.
That should not be controversial.
Stuart Bonds says: hang on — what happened here? Were questions asked about security? About explosives?
That’s not racism.
That’s called vigilance.
But within hours, Dan Repacholi isn’t talking about mine security. He’s not demanding a briefing. He’s not asking for transparency.
No — he’s calling people racist.
Why?
Because that’s easier.
It’s always easier to scream “racist” than to answer uncomfortable security questions.
And here’s where it gets interesting.
The police statement Repacholi relied on — the one that said there was “no evidence” the men asked about explosives — has now been quietly edited.
That paragraph?
Gone.
So let’s ask the obvious question:
If it was solid, why remove it?
If it was definitive, why walk it back?
Did the investigation change?
Was the language premature?
Or was it simply more convenient at the time?
You don’t get to smear your political opponents as racists — and then shrug when the foundation for that smear disappears.
Why did Repacholi go straight to calling everyone racist? That’s simple: because he knows we all know this Labor government under Albanese has the worst track record on national security and has presided over more terrorism-related events than any other Australian government in history. That’s a fact that cannot be disputed.
This was never supposed to be about skin colour or religious clothing. This was about strange behaviour at site known to house explosive materials and dangerous chemicals
It was about whether critical infrastructure in the Hunter Valley is secure.
It was about whether questions about explosives at a mine deserve answers.
Instead, we got outrage.
We got moral grandstanding.
We got a political hit job.
And now?
We don’t even have the original paragraph anymore so what is that? Has the investigation evolved as more evidence is collected or are police simply trying to calm the situation as it political fallout continues to sprial.
So ask yourself this? If you can’t ask security questions without being called racist, what does that say about the state of our politics?
And if key statements can quietly change after the damage is done, what does that say about accountability?
That’s the real story.
Not race.
Security.
And the people who didn’t want to talk about it.
