Talk:2005 Cronulla riots/Archive 3

message: An ethnic man had been yelling anti-white comments at the crowd and had threatened to "blow youse all up"[7] before she was surrounded by the crowd and attacked by two white women.
Man or woman? Jarwulf 02:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Which is it?

message: ::That argument depends on illegal behaviour being overlooked becaue of cultural relativism.  Apart from a recent case in the NT involving an aboriginal man, I can't think of anything like that happening?  I believe the leader of the gang rapes being discussed is currently serving a record 55 year sentance?  In other words, he recieved a harsher than normal sentance, not a softer one.  Regards, Ben Aveling 10:12, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Muslim Gang Rapes and the Aussie Riots

message: The following contribution was removed:
Most of those rioting against the Lebanese were Caucasian, but Pacific Islanders are also members of the "Bra boys" ("Nasty reality surfs in as ugly tribes collide", Sydney Morning Herald 11 December 2005).
I think the role of Pacific islanders in the fighting is relevant, as some people (not necessarily wikipedians!) think that the anti-Lebanese side are all white supremacists.
As well as the SMH mention by Sheehan, I recall an article in Monday's Daily Telegraph about Tongans being on the anti-Lebanese side.
If anyone still objects to a mention of this information, can they please say so on the talk page? Thanks, Andjam 09:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't object outright, so long as it's inserted cleanly.  Someone else (maybe on the radio) made the claim that some Bra boys are Lebanese.    Regards, Ben Aveling 10:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Bra Boys didn't have anything to do with it. It was Da Shire Boys. - Randwicked 14:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  As reported in The Age, Alan Jones incited Pacific islanders to go down to Cronulla in the week before the riots. I can hunt down the article if anyone wants it... Benvenuto 05:16, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role of Pacific islanders 

message: Hey, I just added these two new sections, to make it easier to manage and sort information about currently happening violence, attacks, trouble and so on, and another section to document what has been said and done to prevent more racial tensions. The emphasis is on "LATEST DEVELOPEMENTS", not on the past two nights of rioting as they are mostly being grouped into the general topic of the Cronulla or Sydney Riots, and the large-scale mob violence and retaliation that followed for 2 nights. Latest Developements is for just that, and documents any small events that have unfolded since then, seeing as this story has fallen out of most mainstream media coverage now, as the violence died down.
Feel free to edit up my information, it could use a grammar check I think. I cited all my sources, and have placed all relative links, information and so on in the sections. If you do want to rephrase, edit out, and essentially chop up my sections, at least make some sort of notification of it. I would appreciate it, as every time I try to edit and crosscheck information or relate to previous events, things seem mixed up, changed and sometimes deleted. So at least notify me.
Thankyou.
211.26.41.76 17:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ***UPDATE: Latest Developements and Controlling the Violence... 

message: For discribing the original events it says "men of middle eastern appearence were attacked". It also mentioned medterranean people in a previous edit. Has that source been discredited? I think its important and not me just being pedantic coz attacking mediterranean people would suggest indiscrimite racial vioence rather than targetted revenge against the lebanese gangs. There was a picture of a man wearing "wog free zone" this suggests it wasnt just a protest against lebonese.Hyperfeedback 20:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure that if you interviewed all 5000 people involved you would get 5000 different opinions as to what they were there for. But I think the spirit of the protest-cum-riot was in specific response to obnoxious behaviour of Lebanese males over the past few weeks and years, not against Greeks or other south Europeans. Having said that you will always get an element of drunken yobbos with their own axes to grind, who don't care who they are bashing and are too stupid to know the difference between "Lebs" and "wogs". --Jquarry 23:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's important to keep in. What's the point in removing it? Earlier edits said the Greek and Jew had been attacked by accident - that they'd been mistaken for being Lebanese. By attacking those two non-Middle Easterners, it provess that the crowd was so rabidly focused on targeting innocents and was no longer an innocent protest. misanthrope 09:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd doubt there was anything innocent at all about it. It was well known before hand that the rally was being refered to as "wog bashing day". Footage of the rally reveals large numbers of nazi skinheads, who where clearly there for just bashing anyone not white. Lets not mince words about this. It was premeditated racist violence, and anyone there who didnt know that was an idiot. This is why the 100 arrests was a shocking failure of police to round up the participants of the rally. This should of resulted in *thousands* of arrests and man... Im sermonising again. I'll stop now. Duckmonster 20:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the change?

message: ===Proposal 1===
With these incidents now showing every sign of abating, the article will soon hopefully become stable enough to think about imposing a more formal, encyclopaedic and retrospective kind of structure. I was thinking something along the lines of, after a brief opening sentence or two:
#Initial confrontation —(description of the actual events of last Sunday)  
#Reactions and retaliations
##Community reactions — (initial reactions from community figures, etc)
##Retaliative actions — (immediate retaliative actions)
##Preventative responses — (community and police measures to forestall further incidents)
#Continuation and aftermath 
##Further incidents — (description of related following incidents over the succeeding days)
##Aftermath and controlling measures — (slowdown, détente, legislation, outlook, etc)  
#Background and analyses 
##Lead-up to the confrontation — (the earlier Dec4 incident, coverage of apparent provocation/incitement leading to the major clash)
##Participants — (explanatory discussion on the groups/cultures taking part)
##Analyses of contributary factors — (cited, notable commentary on the possible causes and factors, future implications, etc)
##Background and historical contexts — (give some of the wider context, similar events, etc for those unfamiliar with the background) 
Then the usual References, See also and Ext. links sections. Any comments or other ideas...?--cjllw | TALK 02:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to make minor changes! -   Gt 14:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So are you people opposing the structure proposition or the current content? I think we need to agree on the structure first, then we can start weeding out unnecessary information. —Quirk 13:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: opposing the current structure, as per above comments. Simply put, we need to follow a plain narrative: the spark (Dec4)—the buildup—the main event (Dec11)—the initial impact/reaction—the follow-on—the denouement—the sober analysis—any further background explanations warranted—the references etc. A slight modification on proposal 1 above (ie, putting brief factual coverage of Dec4 fracas and the subsequent week of hype before the main description).--cjllw | TALK 13:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structural revision proposal 

message: With these incidents now showing every sign of abating, the article will soon hopefully become stable enough to think about imposing a more formal, encyclopaedic and retrospective kind of structure. I was thinking something along the lines of, after a brief opening sentence or two:
#Initial confrontation —(description of the actual events of last Sunday)  
#Reactions and retaliations
##Community reactions — (initial reactions from community figures, etc)
##Retaliative actions — (immediate retaliative actions)
##Preventative responses — (community and police measures to forestall further incidents)
#Continuation and aftermath 
##Further incidents — (description of related following incidents over the succeeding days)
##Aftermath and controlling measures — (slowdown, détente, legislation, outlook, etc)  
#Background and analyses 
##Lead-up to the confrontation — (the earlier Dec4 incident, coverage of apparent provocation/incitement leading to the major clash)
##Participants — (explanatory discussion on the groups/cultures taking part)
##Analyses of contributary factors — (cited, notable commentary on the possible causes and factors, future implications, etc)
##Background and historical contexts — (give some of the wider context, similar events, etc for those unfamiliar with the background) 
Then the usual References, See also and Ext. links sections. Any comments or other ideas...?--cjllw | TALK 02:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal 1

message: # Background
## Provocation
## Leadup
## Ethnic and Beach Violence
# Chronology
## 11 December
## 12 December
## 13 December
## 14 December
## 15 December (and any further dates of violence)
# Response
## 6.1 Police
## 6.2 Political and Community Leaders
## 6.3 SMS Messages, Emails
# 7 References
# 8 See also
# 9 External links
Would I be able to get some assistance to reorganise the article in chronological order, by date, without the sensationalist headlines? It would make it a lot easier to read and interpret. -   Gt 12:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to make minor changes! -   Gt 14:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So are you people opposing the structure proposition or the current content? I think we need to agree on the structure first, then we can start weeding out unnecessary information. —Quirk 13:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: opposing the current structure, as per above comments. Simply put, we need to follow a plain narrative: the spark (Dec4)—the buildup—the main event (Dec11)—the initial impact/reaction—the follow-on—the denouement—the sober analysis—any further background explanations warranted—the references etc. A slight modification on proposal 1 above (ie, putting brief factual coverage of Dec4 fracas and the subsequent week of hype before the main description).--cjllw | TALK 13:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal 2 (Chronological Order)

message: *As of December 13 (AEST), the violence mob clashes have rocked Sydney suburbs for a second continous night. See this link for more information. REUTERS
"Gangs of youths, mainly of Middle Eastern background, attacked several people with baseball bats, vandalised cars and were involved in rock-throwing skirmishes with police on Monday night, officials said.
At Maroubra Beach, police said they found 30 Molotov cocktails and crates of rocks stockpiled on rooftops, as hundreds of local surfers gathered."
someone want to copyedit that to something? -   Gt 12:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this mornings news, a Molotov cocktail was thrown at Police in Cronulla.  Ben Aveling 22:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: December 13

message: The race riot has been reduced to about 3 paragraphs buried in the middle of "11 December".  If this is the way we want to go then I suggest we rename the page to make it clear that this page is not about the riot but is actually about how evil all lebanese are?  Regards, Ben Aveling 01:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest we rename this page 

message: the author of this article writes "The Uniting Church hall in Auburn, one of Sydney's more calm and tolerant suburbs...." so is the author is implying that cronulla is less calm and less tolerant? isnt that a POV, even before the riots Auburn wouldn't be a safe place at night for anyone especially young anglo-saxon women, also didnt Auburn make headlines recently when middle eastern youths firebombed a police car 
and when a group of middle eastern men attacked Iraqi immigrants who were trying to vote in the Iraqi elections.It might be not be a big deal but it is not NPOV nonethelesss.
: I agree. It is POV. It should be changed. -- Adz 05:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've taken this out. It's POV and it's basically meaningless anyway. --Alexxx1 05:27, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auburn 

message: Hmmm. There's a rather curious paragraph that has just been put into the article as follows
There is also speculation that the media has been instructed to downplay coverage of events, and in specific, to not include the ethnic background of perpetrators. This suspicion is brought about by the heavy coverage the events received until approximately 13th December; after this point however, despite continuing racially motivated events occurring, far less coverage and detail was given to events.
I don't think this can be left in as it is. I mean it seems to me that the media stopped reporting so heavily on these events because there basically wasn't anything left to report. This paragraph sounds rather like a conspiracy theory. Who is meant to have 'instructed' the media? And which media are being referred to? talkback radio, Sydney Morning Herald? SBS evening news? The claim is pretty vague as it stands. --Alexxx1 09:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The government has a formal D-note system dating to around 1915 that they can activate at will, significantly the media does not report when they have been instructed by D-note-ing.  Additionally, of course, the media have a variety of informal links with government.  But, on top of this, you should observe that the leftist media (GLW, 2SER, Indymedia) don't actually have the resources to seriously cover Cronulla, so there's no way to objectively evaluate if the media have been under-reporting except for a letter to the minister or FOI against the Police.  Good luck getting either of those producing meaningful results.  Fifelfoo 09:54, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Leftist media? Appropriate thing to mention in regards to conspiracy theories, I suppose. misanthrope 10:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media instructed to downplay events 

message: This article, Sydney Race Riots, from Driptray, posted to Kuro5hin, says it best. Brilliant article, doesn't muck about and tells it like it is. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kuro5hin article that says it all 

message: Just so that everyone knows, people are "Arab", not "Arabic" - which is why we don't call them "Arabics". Arabic is the language. It's a common mistake, but something to look out for and correct if you see it. Thanks. misanthrope 11:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Arab" not "Arabic" 

message: is the picture of the lifesavers' house at the top of the article, while the pictures of the article's subject (race riots) are below? Dsol 00:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah nevermind, it's part of the bg section.  I guess we could use a map showing areas of unrest, though.  Dsol 00:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We should move the bg section after the section about the riot.  Regards, Ben Aveling 10:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: why oh why

message: I really don't like the section title Provocation because it implies intent.  And whatever the motivation behind the assault, I don't see any evidence it was done to provoke anything.  Regards, Ben Aveling 10:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Provocation 

message: I think the following paragraph should be removed from the article -
:It has been suggested that the random violence was a delayed response to crime perpetrated by other middle easterners, such as gang rapes that occured in 2000 and 2002....
My main problem with it is that the claim being put forward is totally unsourced and unsupported. Yes, whoever put it in has provided an article from the Australian as a source. However, if you actually read this article, it doesn't say anything of the sort about the violence being some kind of delayed response to events in 2000 and 2002. In fact, it only mentions rape once. Here is the relevant section of the article -
:In an article on this page nearly two years ago ("Don't turn a blind eye to terror in our midst," January 12, 2004), I argued that the increasing frequency of racially motivated attacks on young Australian men and women - including murders, gang rapes and serious assaults by young men of Lebanese Muslim descent - would rise dramatically throughout Australia. These problems remain widespread and have been documented in the ensuing two years.
So no mention of any kind of delayed response. Therefore, the idea is completely the POV of whoever wrote it, hiding behind a misrepresented source. It should go. --Alexxx1 03:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnic Violence

message: Hey, any word out there about ASIO actions, or lack thereof, targeting white suppremacist groups leading up to and following the Dec11 protests? There have been raids on houses of suspected neo-nazis, but no mention of how the intelligence about the location of these weapon caches was derived. The case here  the cache was found as a result of random car searches of people entering the beachside suburbs, but there was a report on channel 7 news that mentioned houses being raided as well...
Has all the focus on islamic extremism meant that the intelligence community has been unwilling or unable to follow up other threats?
143.238.175.69 09:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ASIO and neo-nazis

message: I have removed the following sections from the article because they are poorly written and incorrectly sourced: 
===Perceived causes of ethnic tensions===
====Hate crimes====
It has been suggested by some media that the anger towards groups of young Lebanese men, caused by the crimes perpetrated by young Lebanese and other Middle Easterners, has been simmering for years, particularly since the gang rape case in 2002. Media coverage on similar racially motivated gang rapes in Sydney could have gradually increased this tension. According to these media, this anger was merely triggered by the beach incident and erupted in the random violence. CNN   Al Jazeera    
The Australian - Opinion
====Discrimination====
Others have pointed to racism within the sections of the Australian community. 
These points surely belong in the article, but not in this state. Hopefully, somebody will be willing to rewrite/expand them and return them to the article (beneath "Beach violence").--cj | talk 05:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Excised text

message: ====Hate crimes====
It has been suggested by some media that the anger towards groups of young Lebanese men, caused by the crimes perpetrated by young Lebanese and other Middle Easterners, has been simmering for years, particularly since the gang rape case in 2002. Media coverage on similar racially motivated gang rapes in Sydney could have gradually increased this tension. According to these media, this anger was merely triggered by the beach incident and erupted in the random violence. CNN   Al Jazeera    
The Australian - Opinion
====Discrimination====
Others have pointed to racism within the sections of the Australian community. 
</blockquote>
These points surely belong in the article, but not in this state. Hopefully, somebody will be willing to rewrite/expand them and return them to the article (beneath "Beach violence").--cj | talk 05:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Perceived causes of ethnic tensions

message: Others have pointed to racism within the sections of the Australian community. 
</blockquote>
These points surely belong in the article, but not in this state. Hopefully, somebody will be willing to rewrite/expand them and return them to the article (beneath "Beach violence").--cj | talk 05:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discrimination

message: I believe we should try to keep POV statements out of the names of our articles. We have 7 July 2005 London bombings, September 11, 2001 attacks, 2002 Bali bombing, 11 March 2004 Madrid train bombings, 2005 civil unrest in France - not Islamist London bombing or Terrorist September 11, 2001 attacks  or 2005 racial unrest in France, etc.
Race was certainly a factor in 2005 Sydney riots, but was it the only factor? Was it the factor for the brown Pacific Islanders who took part in the Cronoola mob? Was it the factor when Lebanese Christian Churches were attacked by presumably Lebanese Islamic Thugs? When we speak about the aftermath of the 11 December it appears that the faith is similar or even more important factor than the race. Thus, I think the race is a POV word in the title of the article. It should be renamed 2005 Sydney riots or December 2005 Sydney riot to be in-line with the other article names. abakharev 00:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that these were not race riots, but what does google say? We should name the article the most common term people use. Sam Spade 01:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There was one race riot.  The press have and continue to refered to it as the Sydney race riot, so I think race riot (not riots) is the correct title.  I accept that the title doesn't really capture all the other violence, so may there is a better title, but I don't know what it would be.  Regards, Ben Aveling 01:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of the article 

message: I've reworked the controversial section referring to rape. Here is a draft. If others find this reasonable, perhaps it can be moved to the article and further improved:
Some media reports have suggested that the rioting was at least partly the expression of what they describe as simmering "anger towards groups of young Lebanese men". A December 13 article from CNN claims that although the assault on volunteer surf life savers was what triggered the violence, there was already anger over a gang rape in 2002. It says that the details of the case emerged were particularly responsible for this anger, noting,
:At a trial in Sydney, prosecutors and witnesses said members of a Lebanese gang hurled racial abuse at their rape victims, all of whom were white. The ring leader, Bilal Skaf, was sentenced to 55 years, an unusually severe sentence in Australia.
A news report making very similar claims was run by Al Jazeera on December 14, stating that the "gang rape case in 2002 exacerbated tensions". Both of these articles also mention the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the 2002 Bali bombing as another source of tension "...between youths of Arabic and Middle Eastern descent and white Australians...".
The Australian published an article on December 16, attempting to trace the origin of the violence. The article notes that there "...is no doubt anti-Arab feeling in the shire also can be traced to the violent rapes of young Anglo-Saxon girls by gangs of Lebanese boys in 2002, which culminated in the sentencing of Bilal Skaf to a maximum of 55 years in jail."
Other commentators have also mentioned rape in connection to the violence in Sutherland Shire. For example, Bruce Baird, a member of parliament, stated:
:There has been high-profile rape cases in Sydney, and of course the Sutherland Shire itself is very much an Anglo-Celtic enclave... I can understand at one level people's frustration because they all feel that the beaches belong to them and it is a Sutherland Shire thing and when anybody disturbs the equilibrium, given all the events that have happened since September 11, I just think that's the match that sets alight the fuel.
Five days prior to the riot in Cronulla, 2GB radio broadcaster Alan Jones referred to gang rape during his broadcast. Some news reports have raised the role the media has played in stirring up anger against Lebanese Australians. For example, The Sydney Morning Herald noted that "Sunday's trouble did not come out of the blue. It was brewing all week on talkback radio - particularly on 2GB". The article cites the following comment from Alan Jones to a caller:
:Let's not get too carried away, Berta. We don't have Anglo-Saxon kids out there raping women in western Sydney.
--Alexxx1 (talk/contribs) 22:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: References to rape cases in the media

message: I am not the original author of the neo nazi section.  I do not agree with the comments, and have said so.  But I do not believe that deleting the section is the best response, and therefore I have restored it.  If you disagree with it, which is your right, please explain why; don't just delete it.  Talk pages are not article pages - they are allowed to contain stuff which is wrong.  Regards, Ben Aveling 01:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was asked to take a look at this situation above, the user is obviously the author in question as it is a static IP address.  The author retracted his statement immediately on posting it.  It is in my judgement and common sense that we allow such retractment due to the fact there are at present over three hundred people facing criminal charges all based on circumstantial evidence related to this subject, most of which had no involvement with the riots other than being the wrong colour in the wrong suburb.  Jachin 02:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disageeing by deleting

message: I believe the references to Ahmed were both POV and also irrelevant. I saw no mention to the Anglo Australians who helped save many of the victims of the mob violence in the earlier piece. It was also un-encyclopedic as it was based entirely on his own testimony.
Licinius
:Well, I've restored it. Although it (and much more in the article) could easily be better written, I really don't see how it is POV. What's more it has a cited reference, was widely reported and I'm not aware of any challenges to the accounts of this incident. If you think it lacks balance because similar exploits by Anglo Australians are lacking, well go and find some references and reports and add them in, if there are any.--cjllw | TALK 22:57, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rugby League Hero 

message: Does anybody have the actual figures for the amount of people assaulted at Cronulla on December 11?
It seems odd that I cannot find them anywhere in the media as a round-up and can only assume that there was between 5-9 persons assaulted.
:From the media articles I have been reading through I have concluded that there were five people assaulted.  No figures have been released on the subject, nor are there any going to be released in the foreseeable future. Jachin 02:12, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queries 

message: Hi RoLeoVers, firstly, if you are going to link to a topic it would be better to use the title of the actual article concerned. Secondly, as per your invitation here are the reasons why I maintain that mention of the above in the context of the present article is irrelevant:
* There is no causal, or even casual, link between the two incidents, despite happening within months of each other;
* The Jyllands-Posten issue originates from half a world away, and what is / is not published in Denmark and the reactions to it give no insight into the situation in Sydney; although there has been global outcry to the cartoons, reaction in AU has thus far been somewhat muted;
* Unlike the Jyllands-Posten incident, the religous affinities and interpretations of the participants is not at the fore in the events and analysis of the Cronulla incidents; in the former case religous perceptions are heavily implicated, in the latter case they are not, and are as much to do with the territorial behaviour of young males (on either side) as anything else;
* Claiming Huntingdon as a connection between the two is highly tenuous, or at the very least arguable. To say that Clash of Civilizations or any of his other works 'predicted' either of these incidents, or that either represent some inexorable  'increase' in clashes between Islamic/non-Islamic forces is contestable; unless he himself has made a statement to the effect "a-ha! Cronulla! Told you so!", connecting his ideas with this is pure speculation. Even were he to do so, it would seem that just about any random event of intercultural-conflict since he wrote his book could be marshalled as 'evidence' for his prescience.
Since at least one other editor is in agreement, I believe it should be removed, unless a consensus to keep can be demonstrated.--cjllw | TALK 04:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just having a link with no comment seems odd. If someone in the media has drawn a comparison between the two I would support its inclusion. That is reporting the comparison, not making a comparison via 'some people have linked...' style wiki-editorialising. Ashmoo
===Straw poll to the inclusion of Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy===
Support inclusion of the link:
#Sign here
Against inclusion of the link:
#abakharev 04:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevance of [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]] 

message: Support inclusion of the link:
#Sign here
Against inclusion of the link:
#abakharev 04:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Straw poll to the inclusion of [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]]

message: The newest additions to the articlr refer to the Australian Muslim Lebanese Ethnos. Does such an ethnos exist? There are certainly important differences between the Lebanese Christians and the Lebanese Muslims and the later seems to be much more involved, but is it right to refer Lebanese Muslims as a separate ethnos? abakharev 11:51, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are all of the one same people. They share the same history, culture, but not religion. Before the Lebanese Muslims were Muslims, guess what they were. That's right, they were Lebanese Christians, thoufh many don't like to acknowledging anything of their non-Islamic past. And guess what else, before that, some of those Christians' ancestors (who later either became Muslim or stayed Christian) were originally Jews. Al-Andalus 17:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Then probably the Muslim word should go from the Lebanese Muslim ethnicity clause? abakharev 22:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The word Lebanese should also be replaced with Middle Eastern. As already stated, in the reprisals there were also Lebanese Christians present, although in a smaller proportion. Then there is the fact that not all of the Muslims in the reprisals were Lebanese anyway. There were Syrians, Egytptians, etc. Furthermoe, those that went to "defend" the mosque at Lakemba included Muslims of non-Middle Eastern descent (ie. Pakistanis, Bangladeshi, black Africans) that lived around the mosque. Additionally, even among those "ddefending" the mosque at Lakemba, there were a few Lebanese Christians. On the ABC's Insight programme, Lebanese Christians addmitted to heading to "defend" the mosque after the mobile calls and messages calling Muslims and Lebaneese (Muslim or Christian) to do so. However, the Lebanese Christians went not specifically to defenf the mosque, but as support to fellow Lebanese. At Cronulla, Arabs and Middle Easterners (or those percieved to be Arab or Middle Eastern) were attacked by the White supremacist segment of the White rioters/protestors due to their ancestry, not their religion. I didn't see any of the attackers asking the Middle Easterners if they were Muslim or Christian before their attack, nor do I know of any non-Middle Eastern Muslim (Indonesians, Pakistanis, etc.) being targetted. The attacks were puerly base on the Middle Eastern factor, and was entirely race-based, not religion-based.  Al-Andalus 05:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a good time to remind all editors that muslims ARE NOT a race, hence removal of the label or it being replaced with "Middle Eastern."--Rcandelori 04:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian Muslim Lebanese Ethnos? 

message: It seems that we have a low intensity edit war between images :Image:Cronulla riots 2 - no lebs.jpg and :Image:Cronulla riots 2 -- no lebs.jpg with one and two dashes. The article is long and we can easily accomodate both images. abakharev 13:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, and since those who seem intent on replacing the original img with the (misnamed) alternative one have not provided their reasons for doing so, one can only guess at their motives. Perhaps out of some concern to present a more innocuous view of the crowd that day--who knows? Anyway, per the suggestion both imgs have now been included, let us see if the original still gets deleted. It would help matters if those who seem to object to that img were to provide their reasons for doing so, rather than unilaterally removing it time and again.--cjllw | TALK 23:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two images

message: I think that the picture from the revenge attacks should also be included in this article. However I am unsure how to do upload them. There is a link to them at the bottom of the main page if "better"(more knowledgeable) people think they should be included. All the best. --Licinius 06:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions of Photos 

message: I've added this section following the comments made on the recent Four Corners episode transcript. Several Australian Anglo-youths have attempted to explain their behaviour during the riots, which clealry highlight the increasing xenophobia in the area. Posting this to let everyone know, seeing as how conetntious this page is. >BuffySlayer 10:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response from Rioters 

message: I think this article should be moved to the above title. Sam Spade 14:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cronulla riots]] 

message: There is a major mistake with the article, in the part mentioning Steve Price. It links to the wikipedia article on the Rugby League player Steve Price, not the radio presenter. Unless I am very mistaken, the Rugby League player is now in New Zealand, and was in NZ at the time of the riots. Not in Sydney on talk radio. This link associates him with the riots, and the racist comments, which he was not a part of. They are 2 different people210.211.110.155 11:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Price 

message: The external link entitled "Macquarie University Professor Andrew Fraser on the 2005 Sydney race riots" is:
a) wrong, and
b) inappropriate,
and so should be deleted
It is merely a link to a chat page on which someone has cut up and posted the article by Associate Professor Andrew Fraser entitled "Rethinking the White Australia Policy". Which was published on the internet, at latest, in September 2005. 
The insertion of the link was clearly just an opportunity taken by someone who agrees with Andrew Fraser's POV, to give him a free advertisement. The fact that Andrew Fraser, prior to December 2005, expressed the view that the white Australia policy was (and is) a good policy, is not a relevant link from a page on the Cronulla riots. This page is not on that topic.
I would also (less dogmatically) suggest that the links to FrontPage Mag not be the first 2 links under the heading 'External Links'. Unlike Fraser's piece, the FrontPage Mag links are to pieces that have the riots as their subject. However, I doubt whether it's appropriate for the first two links to be to FrontPage Mag, though, as its unambiguous goal is to produce one-sided POV (i.e. given its clear political agenda, it would not publish a piece that argued that the race riots were the fault of intolerant Anglo-Celtics and didn't point any blame at 'Lebanese Muslims'). One would have thought that the first links would be to the most comprehensive/reliable/NPOV sources, and then to partial and opinion pieces, and pieces of more marginal relevance, at the end.211.30.154.175 05:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links: Andrew Fraser and other

message: User:RussellE, this article is already 45kb long, much longer than the suggested 32kb limit. I'm wondering whether a news article on police tactics on an individual incident is notable enough to increase the article size further? What do you think? Ashmoo 03:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the length, I do think the article could do with a complete re-write to make it more concise and coherent. However I defend my inclusion and would argue that in fact there should be a paragraph or so devoted to the police response, and support or criticism of it from politicians and others in the media. This, after all, was a significant issue at the time. The incident in question is one of the most important of the so-called "riots": offences committed that night by those convoys were much more numerous and more violent than the couple of incidents on the beach that give the article its name. For the police to have allowed this to happened unopposed is surely worth mentioning?! There is in fact already a section on the police response but it somehow manages to say virtually nothing. My addition could go there instead, but it would look silly without some further information of the type I suggested in my second sentence above. --Russell E 05:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Police response

message: As per my previous message, I've reworked the article.  I've tried to leave as much substance in there as possible, while cutting down on repetition (for example, Iemma's statement on new laws was repeated three times in various forms), unnecessary or unhelpful information (the Melbourne rally and the Four Corners quotes) and summarising some of the exhaustive lists of incidents into a more general commentary on events.  I haven't done anything with the "Violence and harassment by Middle Eastern youths" bit yet - I'll get onto that tomorrow. Tpth 06:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate to nitpick, mate, but it doesn't appear as if you've actually done anything to the article, besides this change:  Technical glitch, maybe??? Drett 06:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just been proof-reading them.  I made the mistake of saving the talk page before saving the article itself :) Tpth 07:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha!  Two things I think should be put back in though: 1. Anti-racism rallies. There were large rallies in Melbourne and Sydney (and other states too maybe?) regarding the violence the week after the riots. I think that's relevant as far as giving the reader a bigger picture of the reaction of the public. 2. Text message things.  Looking at the bit you've taken out, it's not worded fantastically, but in the wake of the events there were other text messages going around "meet up at brissy beach for whatever" etc. which attracted a fair bit of police/media attention. What do others think? (I have to dash now) Drett 07:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have a look at this once I've restore my edits, which have predictably been unilaterally reverted by the anonymous user who seems to think that this page is his personal fiefdom. Tpth 23:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I can and I will.  This article presents one side of the picture in excruciatingly tedious detail at the moment, and my edits to summarise it were long overdue.  If you've any constructive suggestions to make, please make them here.  In the meantime, I'm reverting your edit. Tpth 23:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits

message: The ensuing melee soon became widespread; in the course of it a number of police, ambulance officers and individual members of the public perceived to be Middle Easterners were assaulted.
How many people were assaulted?  Were the assaults random?  Was there a casusal point?  The first person assaulted and chased into a hotel had, according to camcorder footage of the first punch thrown, been abusing members of the crowd for being 'fucking racist skips'.  As a member of the middle eastern community I feel it is a social obligation that to cover this shameful day for all Australians that we at least cover it accurately.  You paint us as saints, when we are all equal in the guilt of that day whether we were there or not.  211.30.71.59 21:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Numbers: The Cronulla Report

message: This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it.  Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed.  I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy.  In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright.  If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally.  Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 06:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube links 

message: Subtle Australian bias? (...hey i dunno)
iv just realised that the picture of the papers front page is the one for the cronulla riots on almost every major Australia papers wiki page including
The Courier-Mail, The Herald Sun, The Daily Telegraph, The Sydney Morning Herald & The West Australian
and that's just out of the ones I checked
WHAT IS GOING ON its not like this is the most defining moment in Australian history... (if anyones thinking of saying "well actually i think it IS the most..", Dont even start, iv seen how you guys argue above and it aint pritty) Viva43 11:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Attention! Newspapers!

message: Inadvertently removed text from the article; immediately restored it.  Apologies.  Bpdx 06:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  inappropriate edit