Talk:2005 Cronulla riots/Archive 1

Sydney Civil Unrest

These riots are not "civil unrest". Civil Unrest is something that happens before a CIVIL WAR. Please look the term up and get a definition of it before using the term. Mattrix18 01:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

New talk should go at the bottom, though it is true that all this title changing is getting confusing. Let's just leave it where it is for the moment; breaking news should be over on Wikinews, as has already been pointed out. DaveSymonds 01:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thats right. But I wish people would not use the term CIVIL UNREST. Civil Unrest is what is happening in IRAQ. Any moron knows that. Mattrix18 01:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

More than just Cronulla

These riots are more than just Cronulla, they have spread to other suburbs and have the potential (and probably will) to spread even further into the Sydney Metro area. I think the page title is not appropriate and should be moved to Sydney Race Riots 2005. Mattrix18 17:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Broadly agree - see my comments at the bottom of the page. XmarkX 19:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

So how do we go about getting it moved? I mean does Cronulla have anything to do with Lakemba or Brighton Le Sands? Rather than just redirecting it back to the Cronulla page, perhaps the Cronulla page should be redirected to the Sydney Race Riots 2005 page. Mattrix18 23:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

White Australia Policy

The White Australia Policy has nothing (not even closely) to do with these race riots. That would be like saying the killing of American Indians had some contributing factor to the lack of response in the New Orleans releif effort. Mattrix18 00:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

This article characterizes the gang on the beach as being of middle eastern origin. That phrase is linked to an article on the religion of Islam. "Middle Eastern origin" does not necessarily mean Islam. This is racist or anti-religious. The White Australia Policy was a racist policy. It's reasonable to examine whether there is a connection to these riots or not.

Just because X is racist and Y is racist doesn't mean an article on X has to mention Y. Andjam 09:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

John Howard as cause

SOMEONE HAS GONE IN AND CHANGED A LOT OF THE KEY DETAILS BY PUTTING WORDS LIKE "sex" AND "lesbians" IN. COULD SOMEONE GO BACK AND FIX IT PLEASE? I don't see what is wrong about listing John Howard as a possible cause. Not a long bow to draw at all. --Mjspe1 06:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps, but it has to be done in a neutral way.

• It has also been suggested that John Howard and his rhetoric was one major cause of the Cronulla riots.

Very POV. Possibly true, but needs to be explained. Were the rioters chanting "for all of us and not for you" or "we will decide who comes to this suburb"? Not that I've heard. I think the most we can say is something to the effect that "Anti-immigrant sentiments in the area have been fueled in past years by Govt rhetoric blah blah blah." And I think we still need someone with local contacts to confirm.

• It has also been suggested that Government inaction against simmering ethnic tension was one major cause of the Cronulla riots.

Also POV. Also would need to be explained. Definetly fair to say cause, at worst, inaction allowed it to happen. I don't think anyone quite expected this to happen, which may be myopia on all sides.

I could be wrong. Regards, Ben Aveling 06:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

How about also including the counter argument that aggressive multiculturalism, which hides from the complexity of the world and and pretends that only white people ever do wrong, is also a possible cause? I don't know about the policing situation in Sydney, but based on experience in the UK, the possibility that the police neglected to do their duty out of a desire to avoid the risk of falsely being labelled racist by hardline liberals is all to plausible. Rhollenton 06:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd say the pathetic attitude of the gov (other than the lebs themselves) is to blame - they've done SFA for years in regards to these criminals. The whole 'only whites are racist' thing im sure is being broadcast worldwide by the media too. Completely POV (which is why its on the talk page) - but I want to see the Lebs either behave or go back to the Levant. These riots are a sign that Australia has had enough. - G^t 06:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Look, my girlfriend is of Lebanese descent. Had she been at Cronulla on Sunday, there's a good chance she would have been bashed. How do I know? Residents whose parents were Arabic got bashed and got told to "go home". They went to Jannali High. What do you say that that?! This has be one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen.

What this is a wake-up call about, is that racism is still live and kicking in Cronulla and the Shire. Who do they think they are to riot in the streets and attack innocent people? I'll tell you what is enough: young fools who feel like they have the right to use violence to "take back" their beaches. Even though my taxes go to maintain it, and besides which half of them appear to be too young to have contributed much anyway. Disgusting behaviour, and will be roundly condemned by most Australians.

And what of the white supremecist groups in the crowd? What have you got to say about them? - Ta bu shi da yu 07:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I have nothing for white supremacist groups and I have nothing for criminals of any race. I was perhaps hasty in using 'lebs', I should have used "Lebanese Gangs". I just want to see a peaceful place with criminals punished. Apologies to you and your girlfriend if you were in any way offended. - G^t 07:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

FOA, Are you saying that the people who were bashed deserved it because some other people of the same racial background have behaved badly in the past? Regards, Ben Aveling 07:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I have nothing for white supremacist groups, Lebanese Gangs or criminals of any race. - G^t 07:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

And I didn't ask if you did. But you did seem to be saying - and I hope I'm wrong so please correct me if am - you did seem to be saying that the violence was in some way justified? Regards, Ben Aveling 08:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Justifying violence of any kid is improper. Standing up and protesting against it on the other hand is commendable. I would have much preferred a peaceful protest on Sunday rather than mob violence. - G^t 08:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad that to hear that you condemn violence. But be careful of following this up with language like 'much preferred'. 'Preferred' is a very equivocal word.

G, why do you have a link to http://www.muslimsout.org/ on your blog? Why is there always this talk about going back to your own country? This country doesn't belong to Anglo-Celtics, you know. Yeu Ninje 12:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Judging from G's userpage and reading bit of the link I think he's making the point anyone who lives in a country should follow it's core values rather than living in an isolate state within a state. I think this is fair enough. Integrationists Vs Multiculturism. I think these issues too often hijacked by White natinalists and neo Nazis(in Europe too. its one thing saying a group of people should conform or if they dont like leave its another thing saying you want "racial purity!". Hyperfeedback 12:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah that'd be my view. Nice work in decoding it from my blog! - G^t 12:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Some kid making edits on here links to a website called "Muslims Out", and then another user leaps to his defense. Incredible. Is religious-based deportation part of the "core values" of Australia now? Can people whose positions are so clearly sympathetic to utterly undisguised racism really make a useful contribution here? --spiralhighway 18:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Well said Spiralhighway. When Christians criticise their country, does someone set up a website called christiansout.org? Did the mob on the weekend demonstrate our core values? Why not kick them out too? To hide beind so-called "core values" when propagating racist attitutes is akin to the mob beating up innocent individuals while draping themselves in the Australian flag. Yeu Ninje 20:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

No mention of the mob that beat up the lifeguards, claiming the beach to be theirs? Be just as quick to denounce the violence on your side, as well as the other.ChiTwnG 21:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Be just as quick to denounce the violence on your side, as well as the other. - That is exactly the problem with this whole issue - it becomes about sides. People start aligning themselves along racial / ethnic lines - and that is the seed of nationalism and racism. Cnwb 22:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

More sources

I need to take a break now, but if someone wants to take over:

• nasty-reality-surfs-in-as-ugly-tribes-collide
• angry mob assault pair on train
• Iemma urges calm in cronulla
• Neo-nazis in beach riots

Dsol 18:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

http://www.sirhumphreys.com/adolf_fiinkensein/2005/12/the_australian_way#comment-15975 http://www.wog.com.au/article_main.asp?ArticleId=286

This is only a blog but it gives more of an insight into the rift in the community. I'll see if I can find some more authorative sources.

- James

Renaming

Is there a need to rename the article given the situation escalated dramatically yesterday? Some media outlets are calling it "race riots". Whilst that seems a bit over the top, "Sydney suburb unrest" seems very vague. Yeu Ninje 21:15, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree that its vague, but I think that might be a good thing. Some of the articles called it a "rally," others referred to "race riots." I think it would be POV to call it race riots, but if you have a better idea than my admittedly akward title then feel free to move it. Dsol 22:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Yep, it's extremely vague. "December 2005 Sydney Suburb Unrest" is watering it down. Apart from the fact that it doesn't address the motivation (race), it was more than just unrest. As a comparison to the recent riots in France; that I am aware of over there it was mostly damage to property (unrest) evewn though it was perpetrated by racially distinguishable segments of French society. Where as in Australia, really it was rioting of one group off Australian society (white Australians) against another distinguishable group. Meanwhile, property damage was secondary. Again, it was not unrest.

"December 2005 Sydney Suburb Unrest" hides the true disgusting racist nature motivating both sides. "Race riots" is the only title I have read and heard so far, and this is the most correct one, at least in the Australian context. The Sydney Daily Telegraph today reports it as "racial riots" in every article of its six-page spread. Channel Nine has referred to it as "one of the worst cases of racially motivated riots in Australia" and has just informed that the Premiers of New South Wales, Morris Iemma, will address the state live on "the race related violence in Sydney". Same goes with Network Ten and other media. Talk to Australians, and they all say it was a race riot. I just saw images of "Ethnic Cleansing Unit" slogans worn by white rioters assulting Middle Easterners, others pelting glass bottles and assulting and bashing in packs of twenty people against single individuals. The same violence was directed at the police who were trying to protect and cover the Middle Easterners. This kinda doesn't leave anything other than racial riots. They even infiltrated Sydney's City Rail train system assulting Middle Easterners on trains who were not actually in the suburbs where the violence was speading. There are images of these in the newspapers.

• 1 minute ago. in his live address to the state, Premier of NSW Morris Iemma says of the riots; "What it showed this weekend was the ugly face of racism in this country".
• 5 minutes ago. Asked on labelling the riots as racially motivated (due to the oposition by a member of the political oposition), Premier Iemma stated "Anyone who saw the television last night comes to a pretty clear conclusion."
• 3 minutes ago. Soon after, a member of the media quizzes the premier; "Is [Prime Minister] John Howard in denial of the racial elements [of the riots]?. Mr. Iemma replies; "It was quite clear from the vision and the sound that those sorts of remarks, that sloganism was something that was ugly racism. And the incidents that occurred before was just as ugly, thuggish, and cowardly." Al-Andalus 01:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC).

There is no doubt that the violence is racially motivated, and that racial element should be reflected in the title. I think yesterday's events probably also also satisfy the definition of riot as a violent disturbance by a crowd of people. Yeu Ninje 00:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't hype it up into race riots. The tension isn't there because they're specifically "Leb" or "Aussie" but because one group finally couldn't take any more of the other's nonsense. - G^t 01:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

As if it wasn't!? The white mob was chanting, "kills the lebs", spurned on by ultra-nationalist groups. Of course it was racially motivated. Yeu Ninje 01:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

How incredibly racist. I think it is very clear that not all Lebanese-Australians support what gangs do, just like not all Anglo-Australians support the racial violence of the riots. - Quirk 14:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This rioting was a very good example of racism in Australia. Tonearm 02:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)tonearm

2005 Cronulla riot ties in nicely with the title 2004 Redfern riots which was also a racially based riot (to my political mind a riot of white cops against the local population...). I'd also be happy with 2005 Cronulla race riot. Fifelfoo 02:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Regards, Ben Aveling 02:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It's been moved again I notice. Riot/Riots I can understand. But why Sydney? We didn't call the Redfern riot the 2004 Sydney riot, nor Macquarrie fields. Explaination please? Ben Aveling 02:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Al-Andalus moved the page. Hopefully we won't see a move-war about the particular suburb definitions.Fifelfoo 02:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Sydney, because it wasn't confined to Cronulla, it spread to Maroubra, Rockdale, Brighton, etc. And if my gut feeling is right (and I hope I'm wrong), we can be sure to expect its spread unnanounced further throughout Sydney (Southwestern or Northwestern suburbs, such as Bankstown, Punchbowl, Lakemba, or Parramatta) later in the week if not tonight.

Unlike the Redfern Riots, which were confined to Redfern, outside and around Redfern train station really. Al-Andalus 03:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC).

But that is a long way short of all, or even much of Sydney. And they were minor compared to what happened at Cronula. Even if that's not where all the riots took place, it (or strictly Cronula Beach) was the trigger for them. Most importantly, Sydney or Sydney Surburbs riots is not an expression which will allow people to find the article. In common usage, it's being refered to as the Cronula riot(s). Regards, Ben Aveling 03:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Ben Aveling. The main riots were in Cronulla, all other incidents were peripheral to the acts of violence committed in Cronulla. The article should be called 2005 Cronulla race riots. Yeu Ninje 03:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Or maybe 2005 Cronulla Beach race riots ? Ben Aveling 03:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe it should be 'Cronulla race riots,2005' Using the word Sydney is too vague and inaccurate. And in historical terms say twelve years fron now it would be the most apt. Lentisco 03:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Consistency with other articles would put the year first. Otherwise, agree with every word. Regards, Ben Aveling 04:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I think 2005 Cronulla race riots would be more appropriate. Cronulla's not a very big suburb and the violence was certainly not confined to the beach. For example some of the most widely publicised attacks were at the train station. Yeu Ninje 03:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Where the riots took place should have precedence. Think of the few Aust. riots in the past-where they took place is what matters. Still cronulla in title is way better than Sydney. Lentisco 03:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It's interesting that 2005 French riots was moved to 2005 civil unrest in France, whereas this is at 2005 Cronulla race riots. --Delirium 06:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Maybe you should go read the talk pages for that article. IIRC, it was moved because it was hard to categorize the rioters, who were of African, Arab and Turkish descent, by race, and there was a political discussion that coincided with the rioting. Here, it doesn't seem to be anything more deep than a bunch of hooligans and criminals brawling. Identity0 12:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

"Beach" may be better than "race", as the former is less speculative than the latter (not that I'm saying the latter is necessarily incorrect). Andjam 10:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Anglo-Celtic

A good definition is given at the Anglo-Celtic article. Note, "It is also common for Australians of other North-Western European backgrounds(eg Dutch) to be mistakenly labelled Anglo-Celtic based on physical appearance". Strictly speaking, Anglo-Celtic shouldn't include mainland European peoples. Yeu Ninje 02:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

We should have a catagory or article Australian conceptions of race. Material from White (people) Wog Anglo and Skippy Australian should be included. Its a sufficiently diverse and changing item to be seperate from White Australia Policy Yellow Peril Aboriginality or Torres Strait Islander identity. I noticed that there isn't a Patriotic Youth League article yet. They're moderately notable, there have been a number of PYL rallies, assaults by PYL aligned individuals and leftist counter-marches against them. Fifelfoo 02:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Anglo-Celtic is the most accurate definition to use in absence of a better one. It envelopes more than 90% of "Aussie/Skippy" Australians. White is too broad to be used, and "Skippy Australian" is a bit of a joke. - G^t 02:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I know. I just stick with "Anglo" without a hyphen in my own language. I know a bunch of Anglo-Celts who get really irritated at both Anglo-Saxon as a generic, and Anglo-Celt being applied to non-Celt background Anglos. Australian racism is a bloody mess anyway. "Skip" might be a joke, but its active slang with a somewhat better coverage than the euphemistic "polite" attempts to cover "Anglos" as the dominant ethnic group. I still reckon we should do an article on Australian racism/conceptions of race. Fifelfoo 02:39, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

The problem with Australian defintions of race is that they're all either slang or offensive words! It'd be one hell of a hard job to get a good article out of that. You can try, I'll help out if you do. - G^t 02:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Its an important subject. Lets try it at Australian conceptions of race and ethnicity and have a redirect from Australian racism. Fifelfoo 02:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree with the Australian racism redirect. It directly implies that the conceptions are racist, when they are simply conceptions of race and ethnicity. - G^t 03:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

"surf lifesavers"

"surf lifesavers" is this proper Aussie English?

--grazon 02:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It is correct Australian English if that's what you mean. The standard reference dictionary of particularly Australian English is the Macquarie, followed by reference to the OED if the language isn't adequately covered by the Macquarie. Fifelfoo 02:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Fifelfoo I just wanted to be sure. 8).

--grazon 02:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Background Section

We need a section to give background to the unrest - the social situation in Cronulla, the Lebanese gangs from the west and all of it. This source might be useful - G^t 02:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It depends on what you want to do with it. As a blog, and an extremely biased one at that, it must only be used very carefully and to minimal extent.--cj | talk 03:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm aware of it's (striking) bias. The problem is I've having trouble finding articles that document the animosity between various ethnic groups in Sydney. Thank god I live in Adelaide! - G^t 03:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, Adelaide has its issues. We're just better at containing them (which is not necessarily good). I'll try and find some legitimate sources for use.--cj | talk 03:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

gang declared Arab beach,

• and demands to leave the newly gang declared Arab beach,

WP:V. This needs a reference before we can add it to the main article. Regards, Ben Aveling 08:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Crime in Aust. template?

Is use of the {Crime in Australia} template really warranted here? Sure, there have been some arrests (no criminal convictions yet, of course), but in the scheme of things I don't see how these unfolding events really match up with the other content in that infobox. Thoughts?--cjllw | TALK 08:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Just wanted to point out.

Just wanted to point out that the life savers were told to leave the beach as the beach was now Arab owned.

Arab gangs have said Australia is to become an Islamic State. The migrant gangs are everything anti-White and anti-European.

Yes, but the press doesn't write about that. It's all about the dodgy Aussies and their racist behaviour. All I want is a bit of balance. - G^t 08:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Unless valid references can be provided, that qualifies as original research, and is not allowed.--cj | talk 09:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

What papers do you read? I've read a lot of papers (i.e. the press) which have commented on these supposed migrant problems in Australia and elsewhere. For example, they were a hot topic in ~2003 when there were those high profile rape case (again, there seemed to be a suggestion the entire Lebanese community was at fault even those these actions were limited to about 50 people at most who were not supported by the vast majority of the Lebanese community). These problems, especially as related to gangs exist worldwide, whether it's the Italian mafia in the US, or the Russian and Lebanese gangs in the UK, or the Chinese triad or whatever the problem of crimianl elements in migrant societies is not confined to Australia nor is it confined to Muslim or Arab socieites. I've also seen many papers etc which have commented on these riots and seem to be suggesting the Lebanese community is at fault, even tho, as far as I can tell the problem is mostly confined to the criminal/gang element of the Lebanese community which AFAIK is not supported by the vast majority of Lebanese. However although white supremists groups have played up the situtation, it does appear a significant number of the angol-celtic or whatever you want to call them participants are 'ordinary' Aussies, not white supremists. Even worse, it appears a fair number who did not participate, although I hope not a majority, are only willing to criticise the violence but appear unwilling to criticise the sentiment behind the riots. I.e. the seem to think that it is acceptable to demostrate against one element of the Australian community due to the actions of the criminal/gang element of that community. This is rather shocking to me. Even singlying out the Lebanese gangs for demonstrations seems a bit unfair to be but I find it baffling that a fair number seem to think it is acceptable to criticise the entire Lebanese community for the actions of the gangs. P.S. whites and Europeans can be Muslims who so if gangs simply want Australia to be an Islamic country, they may not be anti-white or anti-European Nil Einne 10:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

"Dumps"

"The violence was first reported in Cronulla and later spread to other dumps of Sydney."

I may be missing the meaning of 'dump' here, but is this an appropriate beginning to an article which is of fairly large social importance right now? (As far as Australia is concerned. Well no, as far as a bunch of isolated barbarians are concerned.)

That was a large piece of vandalism, has since been reverted. Remy B 09:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Article has been defaced

The article was defaced. Lots of sex references. I don't have time/knowledge to clean it up, just wanted to let you know.

Has already been reverted, thanks for the heads up though. Remy B 09:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

That sort of thing is unavoidable with high-profile articles. Luckily, enough good editors are drawn to limit its stay to seconds. --Kizor 09:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

More background

• I've heard that beach-related violence isn't a new phenomenon. I'm pretty sure I saw Mambo shirts about "surf nazis" well before September 11. That's one reason I'd rather the title be 2005 Cronulla beach riots rather than race riots.
  • Thugs ruled the streets, and the mob sang Waltzing Matilda supports the claim of beach violence not being new, mentioning that it existed in the early 1960s. Andjam 11:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

• The conflict didn't just involve "whites" versus Lebanese. I've read that Tongans sided with the "whites". Andjam 10:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

• From the article and the press reports I've read, it seems a bit unfair to characterise the riots as 'whites' vs Lebanese. As far as I can tell, most of the people doing the rioting were 'whites' (or anglo-celtic or whatever). There may have been a small number of Lebanese counter rioting but I haven't really seen anything to suggest there was much counter rioting. (Indeed, I suspect it was rather fortunate the gangs did not decide to counter-riot since if they did, I suspect things would have been much worse The actions of Lebanese gangs have been cited as catalysts for the rioting but unless there was much rioting by Lebanese or Lebanese gangs, surely it is more fair to characterise the riots as rioting against Lebanese rather then vs Lebanese? Nil Einne 10:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Failure to behave like ordinary Australians.

• there has been heightened concerns in Australia and other Western countries about the status of Muslim communities and the failure to integrate. Civil society is struggling to find a response, on one hand wishing to protect its citizens that come from Muslim communities or perceived as being Muslim and on the other frustrated by the seperatist and exclusive nature of many Muslims. [1]

The linked article is dated Sunday October 16, 2005 and has nothing to do with these events.

No significant mainstream voices are saying that this is arising from the desire of arabs to be seperate. Ironically, if anyone wants to keep the communities seperate, it's the rioters who want the Lebanese to stay seperate from them, and thier beach.

The universal response is that random vigilantee payback violence is a totally unacceptable response to the actions of a small minority.

Regards, Ben Aveling 11:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

We need verifiable sources.

• Since the police, in the eyes of these people, had failed to deal with these gangs, they took matters into their own hands. The ongoing and well publicised criminal activities of the so called Lebanese gangs [2], along with the recent high profile arrests of Muslim terror suspects in Sydney [3] against the international backdrop of Muslim terrorism no doubt contributed in inflaming local passions.

• The delinquency of second generation immigrants is a well studied phenomenon [4] and neither unique to Australia or Arab-Australians. Comparisons can be drawn to recent riots of mainly Muslim French youth in major French cities and the ongoing Yardie (Jamaican) gang activities in the UK. These volatile situations are open to exploitation by racist elements.

The rioting was not by second generation french immigrants, nor did it target international muslim terror suspects. It's fine to discuss what happened and why on this page, but the articles are not the place to be creating knowledge. We need verifiable sources. Regards, Ben Aveling 11:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Do I see Jihad Watch used as a source there? --Kizor 12:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Exactly, we can't be using that shit in an encyclopediac article...User:XYaAsehShalomX 14:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

anarchists?

• Various anarchist, skinhead, White Nationalist and racist organisations were present at the riots, handing out leaflets advocating their causes

I don't know, I wasn't there, but most anarchist groups don't exactly have white supremacy on their agenda. Unless the anarchists were there handing out leaflets about how racism is the tool of the patriachal hegemony.. of course I understand how that could easily be misconstrued by a drunken yobbo.--stib 11:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

- I agree. I wasn't there either but as an anarchist myself i did a double take reading that. While anarchists vary in their views on how to achieve anarchy and what is or isnt acceptable behaviour, i feel our primary goal is that of mutual assistance and acceptance. I suspect the writer of the article simply used anarchist in the wrong sense, ie. the incorrect idea that anarchy = violence.

- I agree with its deletion. I haven’t seen any media releases claiming anarchists are behind or involved in the riot. Moreover philosophically I can’t see an anarchist group supporting patriotism or racism. --Monty Cantsin 16:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I put in anarchist, because on Monday's Daily Telegraph, there was a photo of a banner saying "Locals only", with an anarchist symbol for the "A", if I recall correctly. Andjam 09:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Neo Nazi or protest against a community?

The picture on the page shows a man with "wog free zone". I'm from the UK where wog is a term against mainly black and asian (indian/pakistani). What is its meaning in austrailia. does it mean anyone who is not white?. Was this mainly indiscrimate neo Nazi vilolence against anyone not white or a protest against the lebonese commutiy which some people have said (or bit of both. 5000 is a large number for it to be a "minor problem!"Hyperfeedback 11:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Wog generally means someone of european decent. Especially greek, macedonian, lebonese etc.

more correctly it means someone of olive complextion, so italians, greeks, macedonian, et al

- strange i though greek and esp italian was european . they are in the EU after all! Wonder if all the neo nazis around the world have agreed on what is a "white race" exactly! Itresting to see how race is defined differently in other countriesHyperfeedback 12:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

"Race Riot"

If it's a riot by white people, it's automatically a "race riot".

If it's a riot by the poor, oppressed Persyns of Color, it's a "demonstration" or "civil unrest".

I thought the paris riots and LA riot were described also as "race riots" even though from reports different races, even french parentage joined in. Hyperfeedback 12:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I think if it's a riot in which the mob are proclaiming 'wog free zone', 'lebs go home' etc etc, it is a race riot. If racist slogans are used to spur the mob on, and race was a factor in the spark, then they are race riots. If the mob hadn't turned on brown-looking people in the area, it could have just been an anti-gang riot.13:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC) (Skittle)

See Race riot's list - plenty of riots involving "persyns of color". — ceejayoz ^talk 14:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Tsk. Perkins of colour. 00:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC) (Skittle)

"5,000 white youths rioted"

Really? did someone count them? did they all riot? How was it determined whether the individuals were rioting? Were all the rioters 'youths'? what is a 'youth'? Were they all 'white'? Who is defining 'white'? This introduction reads more like the banner headline in a sensationalist newspaper. Markb 13:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

--I agree. They were not all 'youth', youth, assuming the writer meant 15-25. I would say it was predominantly that age group, however, the sentance is not representative of who was really there, I would say there were ahell of a lot of older people involved. 5000? Probably, but best change it to an estimate of 5000. smerk

I've deleted the sensationalist rubbish already. Pay no more thought to it. - G^t 13:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

For future edits to this page we should also be careful using the ambiguous term "white". Under many definitions, Lebanese are "white", so this is really ethnic tensions between two different white ethnic groups, not between whites and non-whites. --Delirium 16:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

australia first

some guy from the "Australia First" (?) party was on the news and had a few quotes saying how "good" the riots were... i can't find the quotes, i think they might be useful to show those types of reactions to the riots. AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 13:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Try over here [5] Agnte 15:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Images

I have news stills, do they come under the Tv/Film screenshot tag? If so I will upload them.

Yes they do. Go for it. - G^t 13:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Proposed name change: to 2005 Cronulla civil unrest

To keep consistency in how recent events have been described (IE, Paris car burnings), and because it could be said that this encompasses more than just riots. I find the action to be repugnant, but if it's 'civil unrest' in France, it must be 'civil unrest' in Australia.

It doesn't have to be. Most of the Australian media is reffering to this as 'race riots' and right now that appears to be the primary cause. Agnte 14:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, "riot" really makes sense in both cases, and is what the media has mainly used in both cases as well. Fortunately, we don't have an equivalent of User:172 editing this article to force us into a politically-correct title, though. --Delirium 16:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I've move to Cronulla beach race riots, because a lot of foreign papers are using the words "beach riots" and because it's a better mental hook than just Cronualla race riots. The French incidents were slightly more widespread and slightly more serious than this. Civil unrest is more than just a riot or three, it's half way to revolution, which this isn't. And I, for one, do not want to have to start talking about the Civil unrest in Redfern.  ;-) Regards, Ben Aveling 20:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Delirum, as I stated last time, if you do not eventually review Wikipedia:No personal attacks, I may post the email that I received from Jimbo Wales stating that you were to be admonished for a prior incident pertaining to your ad homienm remarks directed toward me on the mailing list. On a related note, I requested arbitration against Silverback a couple of months ago for a similar pattern of politically-motivated personal attacks, and was successful. I politely request that you follow Wikipedia's civility guidelines, in order that the two of us do not have to go through such tedious and unproductive proceedings. 172 23:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Latest News Articles

• The Age: A little contemplation on the beach
• The Age: Riots fire debate on racism
• The Age: Bali, Tampa, 9/11: a potpourri of causes
• SMH: Police act swifty to curb attacks

- G^t 14:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

Let's not use terms like "middle easterns", eh, at the very least not when it's not in quotation marks as a direct quote from somewhere. And if we're quoting a news source, let's try and make that damned clear so Wikipedia doesn't get accused of racism. — ceejayoz ^talk 14:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It's racist to point out superior/inferior differences between races, not to distinguish between them. It's political correctness and inappropriate writing not to do so. Otherwise the whole world will just think poorly of one ethnic group instead of being able to distinguish between the actions of both. - G^t 14:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think this article quite at the point where we need to use {{npov}} yet. I've removed it from the main page. Agnte 15:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Question... How much coverage is this getting?

Over here in Australia they can't stop playing it on the news but I was wondering how much the media in other nations, USA, UK, Europe, Middle East and so on are paying attention to this and what they are saying of it (Whether they think it's race-related, condemnation, etc.). It might be good to add other nation's reactions in here too, or how this has been covered by the media internationally.

It's getting a moderate but not particularly large amount. Wikipedia was the first place I saw it, but by now it's on the front page of BBC News Online and CNN, although in both cases not the main article. For the US, at least, the international news is being dominated by the UK oil depot fire, a bomb in Beirut, and torture allegations in Iraq, relegating race riots in Sydney to quite a bit down the list. --Delirium 16:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

In the UK it was the 5th story on Sky News and there was also a mention on the BBC. Page 5 in The Guardian. Agnte 18:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

There was a short report on Hong Kong's Pheonix Television, which is broadcast to Taiwan and mainland China. There was some footage of mounted police dispersing crowds and discussion of "racial disturbances". Yeu Ninje 20:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Reasons for outbreak

What are the reasons for this riot? Is there tension within the non-libanese Sydney community towards Libanese that could "explain" it? --Abdull 16:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

--- Yup thats basically it dude, although the reasons maybe controversial and highly disputed it was basically, Anglo-Non-Aussie Tensions in Sydney (going on for a while), then a lifesaver got bashed by some "Middle Eastern" dudes apparently, some bozo has the great idea of sending out SMS's to everyone to gather on Cronulla and "support" and "defend" their beach. Before you know it the booze is flying around, and Aussies and Booze are generally a cause for trouble. And BAM! riots are on. And then the retaliation attacks keep goining on and on.

Even here in Perth, there's always been hostility between Lebanese and Anglos and such. I go to a school where just about a third are non-Australian, and my Lebanese friends and the Anglos are always getting into fights and trouble. But most of the violence was sparked by gangs, and those white supremacists over there, so I don't know exactly what Sydney is like when it comes to tolerance. 211.27.205.41 17:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)Perth

Intro section: who what why where response and source

On December 11, 2005, a series of violent race riots occurred in several Sydney suburbs. The violence was first reported in Cronulla and later spread to other suburbs of Sydney. The race riots are continuing tonight, December 12.

Anti-Muslim sentiment has risen in Australia since the 11 September 2001 attacks in America. 5,000 white youths rioted, attacking people of Arab appearance in southern Sydney. 31 people were injured and 28 were arrested. " The violence shocked this city of 4 million which prides itself on being a cultural melting pot." [6].

Political Correctness the intro to the point it doesn't tell the reader anything but vague generalities. 4.250.27.239 18:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Just don't start talking about Sydney being a "cultural melting pot." Nobody uses that terminology; stick with "multicultural".

Flickr photos

Warren Hudson has now generously put all of his Cronulla photos under the Creative Commons attribution license.[7] We should probably put a few on the Wikimedia Commons and use them in the article.--Pharos 18:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

OK! Added Large Section on Further Violence and Retaliation....

OK, this was getting no mention as the violence is still very much going on in Sydney and there are on-going "revenge" and "retaliatory" attacks, and talk of more to come, so it needs some mention.

I tried to this as best as I could, it needs a quick overview and grammar check possibly, and I'm not sure about my source formatting as I am not familiar with Wikipedia's rules. I put the links there, could someone who knows how it should be formatted please edit my sources, thankyou. Other than that, I typed it up as best as I could and quickly (I might add) as I'm busy. If anything is wrong, inaccurate or not correctly structured, feel free to change it.

Thankyou... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.27.205.41 (talk • contribs) .

Thanks for that. It's going to have to be split up and worked in with the other sections. Regards, Ben Aveling 19:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC). PS. Please Sign your posts on talk pages.

---

Sure, I'll try to get around to fixing it all up at some time in the future. Um, I'm not sure about working it into other sections, though. I think most of it is relevant to retaliatory actions and continued violence, but if you want to cut it down a bit, you can. I just think some pictures will break it up well and make it more "digestable" heh. 211.27.205.41 20:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)211.27.205.41

Aussie vs French Riots termonology

The article on the 2005 riots in France are called "2005 civil unrest in France" yet these are called "2005 Cronulla race riots". There seems to be some inconsistency here. Barneygumble 19:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

A big difference is that in France, it was people ethnically labelled and economically oppressed by the state (and by "ordinary racism" in the community due to not yet having come to terms with Algerian decolonisation), who were physically harrassed(sp?) and attacked by the state and by a vicious, racist police minister, and responded by attacking inanimate objects (cars) and police. In Sydney, it's two economically oppressed groups (i'm hypothesising here), ethnically labelled, fighting against each other instead of against the state which is doing the repression. Both cases are probably also provoked by the global context of the slaughter of Iraqi civilians, and probably more so in the Australian case, since French troops officially have not participated at all. But i don't know if any of this has to go in the title, so this is more of a rant than anything else... Boud 23:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I think there is a definite need to change the name of this article. My suggestion is "2005 racial unrest in Sydney", since so much of this article is now not about Cronulla, and since alll but the Cronulla incident has not been a 'riot'. I'm actually going to go ahead and do the move - that's probably bad etiquette, so apologies in advance. XmarkX 19:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

The problem with the current title is that it is a description of the incidents. But the current title also covers all racial disturbances in Sydney this year. That's a lot more than the Cronulla riots. If you went up to someone and asked "what do you think of racial disturbances in Sydney" or asked "what do you think of the cronulla riots", you would get very different answers. The first question would drag in a lot of other stuff and might even miss cronulla, at least if you were to ask in a few weeks time. Regards, Ben Aveling 19:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Where to put this, and how?

• Violence relating to access to beaches is not a new phenomenon, with violent clashes between outsiders and locals happening decades ago.

^{Citation needed}

• On 21 December 2002 there was a vicious and violent brawl between the "Bra Boys" and a group of police officers at the Coogee-Randwick RSL club. Many police were injured.

I believe this is all true. Everyone remember the baby in the jacket incident? But it needs to be referenced and worked in properly. Regards, Ben Aveling 19:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

The SMH covered this yesterday in an editorial. I'll dig it up. - Ta bu shi da yu 22:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

References

Can someone please fix the references? Thanks, Ben Aveling 20:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Should be okay now I think. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 21:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Puberty Blues

What the hell is Puberty Blues doing here? I don't think that whimsical piece of crap has any relevance. --Jquarry 22:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. It's semi-vaguely-sort of useful to explain Cronulla's surfie culture, but it's not really relevant for this article. It should be added to the Cronulla article though, some I've now moved it there instead. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 22:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Making into unified timeline

I'm going to try making the article more into a timeline, because the moment it's not in any linear fashion and my simple brain can't easily follow it.... -- All the best, Nickj (t) 21:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

That should be done now, hopefully it still reads ok. If we can use a timeline format it makes it easier to update with events as they unfold (you just make a new section near the bottom of the page, with the date as the name of the section). -- All the best, Nickj (t) 22:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Rumour On Payout To Bra-Boys

Rumours are spreading that Bra-Boys surf club has been promised a budget allocation from State Government for an upgrade on their facilities if they can stem the violence at their end.

Talk about white-feathered cowards.

An independent reference would be good, to prevent descent into rumour, innuendo, and hearsay. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 22:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC) P.s.: Please sign you comments (use four tilde signs, like so: ~~~~ and they will be replaced with the appropriate signature)

I find this hard to believe. More likely the Government will give money to Lakemba Mosque.

Article title again

Isn't it time we changed it back to "2005 Sydney race riots", and not "2005 Cronulla race riots"? Actually, who on earth changed it to "2005 Cronulla beach race riots"?

Watching international media on cabel I don't see any mention of it as Cronulla race riots, much less Cronulla beach race riots. It's denominate "Sydney race riots" by everyone, everywhere.

To be frankly honest about it, now that the violence has reached my part of Sydney, as well as the suburbs of some of my mates in Western Sydney, I don't see the point in containing it to Cronulla anymore. Fine, let's point out that the whole thing started by a mob of racists (obviously not all of them, but most) in Cronulla, but it has spread from there to South Sydney, the Inner West and Greater Western Sydney. Last night was worse, as I predicted yesterday in my post. And I know hundreds of people are preparing (on both sides) for tonight, and it's going to be spread further. Al-Andalus 22:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC).

Agree. Personally I think once Maroubra and Brighton-Le-Sands got involved on Sunday 11 December, that it was no longer a Cronulla-only mess; and now that we have reports coming in from yet more Sydney suburbs, I think to restrict this to just one suburb seems no longer appropriate. I'd support "2005 Sydney race riots", on the (rather frightening) chance that they may happen in future years too. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 22:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, we already have 2005 Sydney race riots, which redirects here. Maybe a swap of this article and that redirect? -- All the best, Nickj (t) 23:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Also, you can't restrict this to Cronulla Beach, as suggested by the current title. On Sunday 11-Dec it happened at Cronulla train station too, which is a 5-minute / 800 metre walk, through the shopping precinct, from North Cronulla Beach. If the beach and station were right next to each other, then fair enough, but they're not. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 23:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

So is anyone gonna make the change? Al-Andalus 00:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC).

Calling it "Sydney race riots" seems to imply a larger scope than simply "Cronulla". Perhaps "South Sydney", or "Shire-Area" race riots would be better? DaveSymonds 00:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Calling the article "Cronulla beach race riots" doesn't mean the riots were limited to Cronulla beach, just that they started there before they spread elsewhere and that they are (at least nominally) about who 'owns' Cronulla beach. It doesn't mean that all of Cronulla was affected, it doesn't mean that only Cronulla was affects, it just means that the page is about the riots that started in Cronulla. A page called 2005 Sydney riots should be about the riots that happened in Sydney in 2005 and I'm sure that we don't want to merge this page with Macquarie fields riots? To put it another way, the article is more about Cronulla than it is about Sydney. Regards, Ben Aveling 00:49, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Wherever we wind up leaving the bloody article (I'm with Ben on this one), can we at least format it properly? ～J.K. 01:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Text to be merged, perhaps

Somebody overwrite the latest redirect with the following. In case anything is worth merging into the existing page, I've moved it here. Regards, Ben Aveling 00:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

It is perhaps notable as a background to what happened, so I have trimmed it to just the facts, found a link, and added it to the "background" section, but please feel free to remove or edit it as you see fit. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 01:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

---

In November 2003, a retired NSW police detective, Tim Priest, delivered a scathing presentation to a dinner hosted by Quadrant magazine. Having worked on two National Crime Authority taskforces on organised crime, Priest warned of the risk of parts of Sydney degenerating into Los Angeles-style gang warfare unless police chiefs recanted the "softly-softly" approach adopted since the mid-1990s to ethnically based criminal gangs.

"The Middle Eastern crime groups and their associates number in the thousands," Priest went on to say, adding, controversially, that much of their violence was racially motivated. "That these groups of males can roam a city and assault, rob and intimidate at will can no longer be denied or excused. Even more alarming is that the violence is directed mainly against young Australian men or women … victims … because they are Australian."

The Lebanese gangs, he said, were ruthless in the extreme: "They intimidated not only innocent witnesses but even the police that attempted to arrest them. As these crime groups encountered less resistance in terms of police operations and enforcement, their power grew not only within their own communities, but also all around Sydney."

Priest drew a comparison with the no-go zones of inner-suburban Paris. "Police began to use selective law enforcement," he said. "In hundreds upon hundreds of incidents, police have backed down to Middle Eastern thugs, taken no action and allowed incidents to go unpunished. Again, I stress the unbelievable influence that local politicians and religious leaders played in covering up the real state of play."

In the flip side to the contentious policy of racial profiling, Priest asserted that police in NSW have tended to prosecute those who were less likely to use their ethnic background, or cultural beliefs, to hinder investigations. This kept the police out of trouble with the Anti-Discrimination Board, the Privacy Council and the internal investigations unit. But one effect, argued Priest, was to give Lebanese crime gangs the run of the streets.

Priest has been attacked as a nutter, a racist and a liar, for raising these confronting questions about cultural sensitivity in NSW policing. Pity is, his grim prophecy might now have to be taken far more seriously. And not just on the beach.

Sounds good to me but then I wrote it. However, I agree with the editor below this section that Wikinews seems a more suitable way of portraying a current event like this. An article should be written after this episode becomes historical and can be written of in the cold perspective narrative of a past event. I suspect there will be more news unfolding over the next few days. Camera footage has yet to be analysed by police.

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:2005 Cronulla riots/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

A neutral point of view would be nice in this article. While the bias is subtle, it leaves no doubt to the writer's sympaties - and probaby ethnicity

Last edited at 12:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 20:14, 2 May 2016 (UTC)