Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread!
Bookmark the permalink.
The page updates on the AP story and the second link are both from today, as is the BBC link to the trucker deaths.
p and a tale of one chip | 11.06.08 – 11:50 am
Ah yes, a picture’s worth a thousand words :-/
The story has only just been added:
Two dead in Europe fuel protests
Page last updated at 10:51 GMT, Wednesday, 11 June 2008 11:51 UK
PaulS,
Well spotted,I just went off the cliched style and patronising tone.
Daily Politics show. Female Beeboid banging on about Caroline Spelman again. I though Alan Duncan was rather weak. He attacked Michael Dick but never mentioned him by name. When female Nu Lab spourd up about Tory Sleaze and how their MPs are whiter than white how come no one mentioned Cashman?
Peter Hain anyone?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/2008/network_news.html
Report on the BBC’s network news and current affairs coverage of how the UK is governed in its four nations.
The report includes an independent assessment by Professor Anthony King and research from Cardiff University and the market research analysts, BMRB.
Professor King remarks as “striking” that almost no-one (including politicians) in any of the four nations he met whilst undertaking his review accused the BBC of bias and indeed went out of their way to praise the BBC’s impartiality.
The report is not all good of course and you can read the criticisms on the report above but worth noting a clean bill of health on impartiality in this area from an independent report.
“Labour ‘in denial’ over Immigration”
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/47797/Labour-in-denial-over-immigration
(-The BBC is in denial over mass immigration too.)
The Balen Report?
Publish the Balen Report – now!
Joel writes: ”
The report is not all good of course and you can read the criticisms on the report above but worth noting a clean bill of health on impartiality in this area from an independent report”
And you claim you don’t work for the BBC?
As for the report, what a shock: ‘independent’ report says BBC wonderful except for its coverage of the Celtic fringe.
We are bombarded with reports. They should be treated with healthy doses of profound scepticism.
Joel: “Professor King remarks as “striking” that almost no-one (including politicians) in any of the four nations he met whilst undertaking his review accused the BBC of bias”
So he obviously didn’t speak to Redwood, Nadine Dorries, Daniel Kawczynski, Philip Davies, David Amess, David Davis or Michael Gove, to take just a few of the MPs who have noted its bias. Nor presumably did he speak to Nick Cohen, Rod Liddle, pretty much every journalist working in the right wing press and a number of its past and present employees.
So a clean bill of health, then. We may as well just pack up and go on our way. We’re clearly just lone voices lost in the wind…
I’m with Teinte. He’s clearly a wise, and I dare guess very handsome man.
7/7 bomber’s wife Yeshi Girma guilty of keeping bomb plot secret
Times Online, UK – 10 minutes ago
Wife guilty of Tube bomb charge
The Press Association – 18 minutes ago
Wife Of July 21 ‘Bomber’ Convicted
Sky News 20 minutes ago
Wife guilty of Tube bomb charge
guardian.co.uk, UK – 22 minutes ago
21/7 bomber’s wife found guilty
Metro, UK – 33 minutes ago
Wife of failed suicide bomber found guilty of not revealing …
Daily Mail, UK – 36 minutes ago
July 21 bomber’s wife guilty
TeleText, UK – 36 minutes ago
Jury out in 21 July terror trial
BBC News, UK – 3 Jun 2008
Any moment now… The social workers are looking at it as we speak.
“Professor King remarks as “striking” that almost no-one (including politicians) in any of the four nations he met whilst undertaking his review accused the BBC of bias and indeed went out of their way to praise the BBC’s impartiality.”
The dog that didn’t bark. Nobody criticised Pravda either.
Hugh 1:53 – and it takes £ billions to achieve such speed of response to a breaking story by the BBC.
Another day, another ‘terrorist’ plotter convicted in the UK:
“Wife of 21 July plotter convicted”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7448312.stm
The BBC makes no mention of any religious affiliations of the convicted woman; perhaps the BBC doesn’t see it as relevant!
ITV, rather better, has some indication that the plot relates to ISLAMIC JIHAD:
[Extract]
“The court heard that Girma knew that her husband had fallen under the spell of radical Islamists.
“She even allowed him to take their young son away to a training camp in Cumbria where he met four of the five other July 21 plotters.
“Her own fingerprints were discovered on tapes featuring ‘extremist Islamic preaching’ by firebrands such as Abu Hamza.
“Max Hill QC, prosecuting, said: ‘Yeshi Girma had prior knowledge of the events of 21/7. She had some information about what the bombers intended to do on 21/7, but failed to bring this to the attention of the police.
‘Had the bombers successfully and completely detonated the bombs on busy Tube trains that day, there would have been carnage and mass murder.
‘Armed with that prior knowledge of what was going to happen, Yeshi Girma could have attempted to prevent the attacks, which, but for shortcomings in the production of the explosive devices, would have killed and injured many people’.”
http://www.itv.com/News/Articles/July-21-plotters-wife-convicted-31840777.html
Actually, I stand corrected – they have covered it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7448312.stm
and in fact, they covered as quick as anyone. Mea culpa.
Not wise no, but devilsihly handsome Yes!
Where’s Poll Watch?
Every month the BBC’s political research editor David Cowling reviews the month’s opinion polls.
Given that May was the month where the tax cut failed to raise Labour’s standing, the Tories broke the 20-point lead barrier and Labour sank to their worst polling in history, I’ve been sort of looking forward to it.
If you check the website, it’s never been put out this late in the month before. So where is it?
Perhaps if Sara Jane’s still lurking on this site he could chivvy Dave up.
Hugh: I don’t think the BBC have reported on a single poll since the Tories took a massive lead?
Hugh. . .
Very funny. April’s Poll Watch was out on May 2; March’s was out on 9 April; Feb’s was out on 3 March; and Jan’s was out on 8 Feb.
So far nothing for May! C’mon Dave, stop blubbing the corner, straighten up and act like a man. Look the evil tiding straight in the face. . .
Did anyone else spot that according to the saintly Plett the Americans alleged air bombing of Pakistan troops has caused widespread anger across the whole of Pakistan?.
I have just checked with a colleague based in Pakistan and he mentioned that the saintly Barbara is as discredited there as she is the UK, although she is supporting the Pakistan view, her previous pro-Terrorists rhetoric seems to be causing her problems in actually getting to speak with independent groups, rather than nameless groups who seem to be either pro-Taliban.
“Auditors ‘horrified’ by LDA” (London Development Agency) “funding practices”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23492327-details/Auditors+%27horrified%27+by+LDA+funding+practices/article.do
Extract:
[Extract from above on London Developmant Agency:-
“Former financial journalist Patience Wheatcroft admitted she was ‘somewhat horrified’ by the mismanagement she has found so far.
“Ahead of publishing the panel’s interim findings today, she said: ‘We may well recommend that the LDA should concentrate on backing fewer but potentially bigger projects and certainly that there is more emphasis on value for money.’
She singled out what she described as soft’ policy areas – job creation, the environment and diversity – which are likely to lose out on funds.”
I hope the auditors at the BBC are on the look in the areas of ‘soft options:
‘job creation, the environment and diversity’.
BBC likely response: ‘What do you mean, “soft options”? That’s the core of what we do.’
George R | 11.06.08 – 4:15 pm
You may think that’s important story (and The Times, Guardian, Standard, Metro, Press Association, MSN, Channel 4 News, Express and The Star might also), but that doesn’t make it so.
But there’s still space to report a Tory councillor being nasty:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7448472.stm
Going back to the 5 live phone in this morning. VD had some Muslim on who was arrested for downloading an Al Qaeda terrorist handbook as part of his “research project”.
But when interviewed on Sky News he said he’d given the file to someone to print off. Now perhaps I’m the only one here who would go to the Police, but if some beared Muslim asked you to print off a Jihadist terror manual, would you think nothing of it?
And again. I thought it was against the law to download this stuff? Just like kiddie porn?
Livingstone gives taxpayers money to political cronies and ideologues.
Ben “Love Monkey” Bernanke gives taxpayers money to banks so their CEOs can buy their Maseratis, and lies to the American people.
At least we in Britain have got rid of the vile Livingstone. The equally socialist Bernanke is an unelected buffoon who steals money from the poor and middle class.
If I had my way they would both be blasted off into space, preferably to a gas giant, where their hot air would blend right in.
“Gordon Brown wins Commons vote on 42 day terror detention by 315 votes to 309” – is what is currently going across the scroller.
Not “the government wins terror vote” or even “MPs vote to extend detention time limit”, but ‘Gordon wins, it was all down to Gordon, we love Gordon, Dave is a loser who lost’. I hate the BBC so much.
Zevilyn,
Not that I am in favor of corporate welfare, but in the case of Bear Stearns, allowing JPMorgan to buy the firm for pennies, and at the same time offering loans to others will, in my opinion, turn out to be much cheaper for the country in the long run.
Certainly if we had let Bear Sterns collapse and then had the usual creditor battles, things would be much more complicated and costly. And that’s even less compared to Mr. Brown’s nationalization of Northern Rock. All the deals would have to completely restructured – which costs money – and all of that will have an affect on the costs of future deals as well. If Bear Sterns was allowed to collapse entirely, and no cash was made available to others, all it would take would be for one or two others to either go bankrupt or fold the mortgage division and you get less competition all round and the consumer is screwed.
What Bernanke and the Fed did may look ugly (and I am sympathetic to your disapproval of the loans), but it was a cheaper option in the long run.
The UK Labour Government’s continuing 11 years-old stealth ‘policy’ of mass immigration continues apace, despite the recently announced, ineffectual ‘points’ system.
So, is Labour changing its policy on mass immigration? NO. Instead, it is going through the ludicrous exercise of appointing ‘experts’ in ‘social cohesion’ to try to organise for a further mass immigration INCREASE!
And, of course, the BBC report on it all is 90% positive, as we have come to expect from that subsidised Multiculturalist party:-
“First migrant team to start work”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7448052.stm
Hazel Blears is ‘in charge’ of all this.
[Extract from BBC report]:
“Government figures show a record 164,635 people were granted British citizenship last year – almost a third of them were from Africa and 22% from Asia.
“And about 665,000 nationals from the 10 newest EU countries were living in the UK in the last quarter of 2007 – an increase of 548,000 since the first quarter of 2004.”
There is no suggestion in either her words or in a BBC analysis that the only solution to the ever increasing, and high rate of mass immigration into the UK is TO PUT A BLOCK ON. (Of course, Labour has given away its powers of national control to the European Union, re-EU labour, but Brown-Miliband want 75 million Muslim Turks into EU, with over 1 million into the UK.anyway.) Oh, and just to give Labour more food for thought on why it is so unpopular:
“Ministers unaware of present migrant numbers”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1d9176b0-373c-11dd-bc1c-0000779fd2ac.html
Not to worry all those Muslims means more Peace.
Praise be unto Allah…
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!
(I know, not PC)
Call me a cynic BUT. Gordon Brown is up against it today, perhaps if he lost the vote in the Commons he’d be out (or at least the media would be baying for it) so just BEFORE the vote in the Commons the BBC suddenly announces that a top secret document was “left on a train”
Left on a train? Really? What a load of top secret documents stuffed into an envelope?
And the “concerned citizen” who saw TOP SECRET written all over it decides not to go to the Police, but to the BBC instead?
Sorry. But I just don’t buy this. Funny as well that Frank Gardner had the documents this morning. So why wait until just before the vote to release them?
Anybody who really found this stuff would have gone straight to the Police or if they were up for a few quid gone to a tabloid.
Sorry but I smell another Nu Labour “good day to bury bad news” stunt.
Secret intelligence dossier on al-Qa’eda ‘left on commuter train’ in latest data breach
Wonderful stuff, but why hand it in to the BBC? Normally this sort of stuff finishes up at the Mirror or the Sun. The BBC???
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2112430/Secret-intelligence-dossier-on-al-Qa%27eda-left-on-commuter-train-in-latest-data-breach%2C-say-reports.html
Note that whereas the Telegraph reports that the Met are on their way round to seize the documents from the BBC, their website doesn’t.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7449255.stm
TPO: As you can see my thoughts exactly. Something smells here and the stench is coming from the BBC and Nu Labour.
And again. I thought it was against the law to download this stuff? Just like kiddie porn?
Martin | 11.06.08 – 5:15 pm
If you’d paid any attention to the interview on Sky you would have noticed that he claimed he downloaded it from the US State Department web site.
Al Beeb Lingo
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_6040000/newsid_6044000/6044090.stm
Biodegradable: So what? The laws in the UK and USA are different. And again I ask what sort of PhD requires you to download terrorist handbooks then print them off?
Only a total moron would download something like this. His excuse was it was for “research purposes”. Sorry but that does not change the law.
No sympathy from me.
I accept that judges have overturned some of the intentions of the legislation, here is a link that explains it. Read the bit about the comment on what the Police think.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article3365890.ece
Sorry but on the 42 days Cameron has misjudged this (no real surprise to me) and Davis has hugely disappointed me (much more of a surprise).
They know they would be the ones supporting it if in power and they are risking the security of the nation for quick political gain.
I think it will backfire – the British public are more than 2 to 1 in favour of the legislation and the Conservatives will appear weak on security allying itself to the surrender monkey refuseniks of the Liberal Democrats and far left of old Labour.
Whats worse they knew all the way that there was little chance they would not lose.
And if they had won, even forced Brown out, it would only have played into Labour’s hands. The Conservatives best chance is that Brown remains leader. Similar situation as when lair and New Labour let Major off the hook some times in the last years of his government.
Perhaps the BBC is bias in covering it all for Gordon Brown, the Conservatives had better hope it stays that way and in the wider media and covers up their own misjudgement.
Momentum can be a strong thing in politics, this does nothing for Cameron. Its his good fortune that the housing crisis and fuel problem should still do for Brown whatever else comes.
“Thinking Allowed” at $pm on Radio 4 took the BBC to new depths. The program was about white people moving into Haarlem in New York, (giving the presenter a nice freebie ther), which hitherto has been virtually all black. A succession of speakers, including black church leaders, poured forth virulant anti-white racism. Even the old complaint that the newcomers ate different food was made. No attempt was made to confront these speakers about their racism. The biggest joke was when it turned out that at the last census only 2% of the population was white. Can you imagine a similar programme about white people objecting to an influx of black people in their area, with no attempt made to criticise their racism?
Yeah, you’re right Baggie. Parties should always do what opinion polls tell them to do, and not what they believe to be right. And the same opinion polls that say people are 2 to 1 in favour also say the Conservatives are better equipped to deal with terrorism, and have the right idea on policy. It’s the one party that cannot be painted as soft on terror, however much Brown would like to do so.
The BBC is the world’s most perfect news agency.Beyond criticism.The Jerusalem Post did not run an article this week-Time to give up on the BBC-complete with very anti BBC comments from around the world.I read it but must have imagined it or created it out of my fevered biased imagination.There is no case to answer.The BBC is perfect.It says so as do the apologists on this site.I need re-educating.Israel is bad,The US is very bad,George Bush is an evil idiot,Global warming sceptics are the spawn of Satan,the BBC is good very good and is the only repositiory of truth.I feel better now.Is this 1984 or 2008.The BBC will tell me.It is the new Ministry of Truth.
Martin:
Biodegradable: So what? The laws in the UK and USA are different.
What did not invent the steam engine.
Yes, the laws are different and the person in question has not apparently broken any UK laws (he hasn’t been charged with anything) by downloading a file from the US State Department website.
The article at The Times deals with a completely different case. The man interviewed on Sky was not one of those named in The Times.
No doubt the screenplay is being written to a TV production, possibly with a title like ‘A Very Peculiar Secret’.
Scene 1.), in which some gormless ‘Intelligence’ officer, associated with the Cabinet Office, leaves Whitehall, breaking all national security rules, manages to leave Top Secret files on a train.
Scene 2.), some incipient multiculturalist commuter picks up said Top Secret file, and being such a budding multiculturalist, showing as much interest, intelligence, and national loyalty as the galoot who
lost the file, decides to give the secret file to the BBC multicultural party.
Scene 3.)At the BBC:- the Top Secret file is certain to be treated with the sort of priority for British national security which we would all expect from the BBC:
THE CONTENTS OF THE TOP SECRET, BRITISH NATIONAL SECURITY FILES ARE ANALYSED ON THE POLITICALLY RELIABLE AND RESPONSIBLE ‘NEWSNIGHT’ PROGRAMME.
We have Urban and Gardner telling all the world how there are ‘sensitive’ comments in the ‘Top Secret’ files, which they appear to heve gone through with a toothcomb, and the BBC ‘Newsnight’ team give examples relating to Iraq and Pakistan. ‘It’s what we do’.
Following yesterday’s Panorama about American taxpayers’ money going down the drain in Iraq, Newsnight is tonight investigating American taxpayers’ money going down the drain in Afghanistan.
Next week, I understand Panorama will be doing a programme on the torrent of British taxpayers’ money that’s gone down the drain on Gordon Brown’s tax credit fiasco and efforts to end “child poverty”; Newsnight will be doing a slot on the uncountable billions wasted on the NHS, and Today will be covering the education spending bonanza and why it has achieved nothing at all. They also hope to cover the £500 billion increase in the public sector employee pensions liability next month. The VFM analysis of our £200 billion EU contributions over the years is planned for September. The £60 billion EU mandated water quality “improvement” black hole will get a programme early next year. Only kidding.
I think the BBC backing Brown is great. The man is a loser. Despite all the dodgy dealings today with the “TOP SECRET” documents that just happened to have been left on a train (as you see all the time people sitting on trains reading TOP SECRET documents don’t you?) because Brown only won in the Commons because of the DUP it makes him look weak. He couldn’t get the backing of his own party.
Forget the 42 days and the Tories, what was important about today was the BBC wanted to make sure that whatever happened Brown wouldn’t have been pressurised to resign.
Make no mistake if Brown had lost tonight, there would have been intense pressure and speculation and pressure from the media. There still will be some.
But hey. Thanks to the BBC and some dodgy goings on, when Brown does with press conference tomorrow guess what will be the top question? Yep the BBC will pack out the audience with their own staff who will all ask not about 42 days but the TOP SECRET files. Brown of course can simply say that he can’t comment as there will be an inquiry and that they will learn from their mistakes blah blah blah. The GMTV dopey bird will ask about what sort of toys does Gordn’s kids like and by the time the rest of the media have a go, no one will give a shit.
What also annoyed me is that Frank Gardner and others at the BBC have sat filmed and read a Top Secret document. Isn’t that an offence? I know I signed the Official Secrets Act and was told disclosing anything could lead to imprisonment. And why did the Police take so long to come and collect these TOP SECRET documents? Were they handing out parking tickets instead?
What story will Radio 4 lead on tomorrow? Brown’s weakness? NO. The TOP SECRET documents of course. The Radio 5 phone in will be “Have you ever read TOP SECRET documents on the train?” (no only the Daily Sport luv!)
By mid afternoon the BBC will have hoped the public will have totally forgotten all about 42 days. And within another 24 hours the BBC will be back to attacking that evil Tory Caroline Spelman again.
Does anyone ever remember (or care) about the 25 million names and bank details that have NEVER been found? BBC soon buried that one (always another evil Tory story along)
This whole story stinks of a “Baby Milk” story to me and the BBC are at the heart of it.
Lee: Don’t forget the billions lost in corruption at the UN or the billions in aid wasted in Africa on private jets and Russian weapons.
David,
I don’t suggest government by opinion poll, though a dose of populism would do all of the parties some good, after all the election is a special poll, you are guided by that.
I am suggesting that the hard earned leads you describe on the conservatives policy on terror is in danger of being undermined by this mistaken policy, I suggest you read my post again.
Some people seem to confuse this blog with a conservative party blog by another name, that will defend everything it does. In fact that is the accusation of some BBBC detractors – thankfully it is nothing of the sort.
Notice how the BBC have’nt gone big on one of Obama’s chiefs has had to resign.
Not content just to report he story, the BBC mixes in more crap about McCain.
I’ve been watching US news. Obama is the BIG STORY.
Typical BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7449547.stm
Watching BBC World yesterday and had to endure some editor’s idea of comedy as a Bush collage of his farewell trip to Europe was shown to the accompaniment of that song from the Sound of Music:
“So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, good night”
Silly, gloating and so terribly BBC.
I just saw another report on BBC World News (maybe same footage, different intro) on those Top Secret files somehow left on a train and handed in to the BBC.
I can well imagine some mindless attaché being careless with important documents (as we’ve seen confidential discs growing feet and walking away, laptops doing the same). But I honestly cannot understand why anyone would go to the BBC with them rather than the police or some other actual authority.
Are the British Public so in thrall to Auntie that the first thing they think of is going to the BBC? I don’t see anything for Labour to gain by pulling a stunt. It doesn’t make any sense.
Unless the documents have some value in for the anti-this-war crowd at the BBC, that is. Perhaps the civil servant who “left them on the train” has a close relationship with a Beeboid, and the rest follows logically.
I’d like to hear the explanation of the person who turned in those documents. Bet we’ll never hear the reason. Don’t news shows usually like to get civilian heroes a little air time? Curious.
Dagobert:
“Thinking Allowed” at $pm on Radio 4 took the BBC to new depths. The program was about white people moving into Haarlem in New York, (giving the presenter a nice freebie ther), which hitherto has been virtually all black. A succession of speakers, including black church leaders, poured forth virulant anti-white racism. Even the old complaint that the newcomers ate different food was made. No attempt was made to confront these speakers about their racism. The biggest joke was when it turned out that at the last census only 2% of the population was white. Can you imagine a similar programme about white people objecting to an influx of black people in their area, with no attempt made to criticise their racism?
Did you ever see the Louis Theroux BBC documentary about black racism in Harlem? You can watch it on Google Video unless they’ve taken it down by now. After scenes in which Louis is told by a prominent black church leader (and friend of Al Sharpton) that all whites are devils, you hear a voice-over in which Louis expresses a pathetic sense of white guilt and feels shame at what whites have done to blacks. The insinuation being “it is not this man’s fault that he is a racist, and we deserve to be called devils”.
Then he has a very chummy interview on the top of a tour bus with disgraceful career racist Al Sharpton. Just 3 or 4 years prior to the filming of this interview, Al Sharpton had conducted a campaign of outright racial hatred against the Jewish owner of Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a store in Harlem which had had its rent raised by the black church which owned it – and Freddy’s in turn naturally raised the rent of a black guy who sold reggae records in a section of the store. Sharpton immediately mobilized his band of racist goons and gave caustic hate speeches outside of Freddy’s, calling the Jewish owner a “white interloper” and whipping the crowds of blacks into such a frenzy with his anti-white and anti-Jew rhetoric that one of his followers in the crowd stormed Freddy’s, shot multiple people inside and then set fire to the store, killing seven innocent people. It was the worst race hate crime in New York City to that date (and since, unless you count 9/11) and Sharpton has yet to admit to his part in inciting the violence. He even denied using racist language until a radio show played him a tape of his own speech live on air.
Naturally Theroux makes no mention of this atrocity and other examples of Sharpton’s bigotry, and interviews him as if he were a perfectly legitimate political figure.
The segment you describe on Radio 4 doesn’t surprise me at all. The racism of blacks in Harlem is well documented but rarely challenged, and the BBC adheres to the usual left wing narrative in which “racism” has an alternative definition by which a person cannot be considered to be racist if they are a minority victim group which the left has declared to be “without power”.
Contrast that segment with recent reports about Australians resisting the building of an Islamic school in their town – they were characterized as ignorant, uneducated racist bigots. And also the reporting of Swiss attempts to curtail foreign immigration – again no attempt was spared to highlight how disgraceful these “racists” were.
The BBC is not alone in sparing judgment on the black racists of Harlem – the New York Post is virtually alone in exposing the hate. The rest of the New York media and New York politicians treat their bigotry as perfectly reasonable objections and say nothing as blacks are interviewed on the streets saying that their “culture is at risk from white interlopers” and that Harlem should be for blacks only.
The irony being that Harlem has been a “black area” for a relatively short time in its history – before that it was predominantly Jewish and white, and it was these groups that constructed and paid for the buildings which make up Harlem (and which ghetto blacks on welfare do everything they can to destroy and deface).
But what are the chances of the BBC pointing out that blacks ultimately drove Jews out of Harlem? Zilch.