Funny Live TV Interview by ‘Big Jim’ on the London Riots, Brilliant

YouTube, August 9, 2011

Victim: “. . . there was at least 100, 200 black youths with hoodies and stuff, just rampaging, every shop”

Reporter (interrupts): “You’re not being stereotypical there . . . . Are you sure they were black? I’m sure they weren’t all black were they?”

Victim: “O.K. then let me just say they weren’t all black, I was the white guy there.”

Reporter (interrupts): “Well there were probably other white guys there as well . . . .”

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • bitterly clinging to our white privilege

    Don’t be fooled by this stunt.

    It was a set up. Staged. They are obviously lovers.

    He agreed to help her career. He could sound like a racist, she would challenge him, and her “Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion” embracing bosses would know for sure that she was a “safe” White reporter.

    Her career is about to take off. She just gave herself a huge raise.

    She performed the script perfectly. Always challenge White attitudes about blacks by forcing Whites to admit that Whites are just as bad, or Equally bad, that is. All men are created Equal, so Whites just MUST have been rioting with blacks.

    Listen, Whiteys, to get ahead, you play the Diversity Game, and just hope that when the Diversity Curse comes to roost, you’ve made your money and have fled to the hills of Alabama.

  • Anonymous

    The comrade reporter’s main purpose of the interview seems to have been to assure us that there were white people rioting, even though a witness indicated otherwise.

  • Anonymous

    “Note the typical British understatement!

    Reporter:- “Were you affected?”

    Big Jim:- “Yeah, slightly” !

    It’s worth noting that Ealing is a mainly White, fairly affluent area (you don’t get many Cafe Rouges in majority black areas), so this probably wasn’t local “yoofs”, they travelled to the area from elsewhere. They wanted to stick it to Whitey.”

    I may have been a bit hasty there. Apparently , Ealing is home to the largest Somali population in the UK! Shows how much it’s changed in a few years! It’s 40% minority population, with about 10% black.

    Remember the old Ealing comedies from the 40’s and 50’s? How things have changed!

  • Anonymous

    Reporter; “Well, there were probably other white guys there. There were other whites guys there. White guys were there. This was done by white guys. This was done by EDL and BNP thugs. I’m sure glad the black guys drove them off.”

  • sheila

    gosh…I really hate to say this but these kinds of liberals (news reporters here) can’t be helped. If the old man reporter had been shot and the female reporter had been beaten and raped by the *thugs* and if they had all been black she would have denied there was a racial *factor* at play. There is such a deep pathology here and it really is interesting, how it all came to be this way. These people are really *distrubed* individuals…truly suffering from a mental disorder…and it has a name too. Can you guess what that lable is? Are these kinds of white people worth saving when the time comes? I don’t think so.

  • David

    The reporter’s name is Kay Burley. I had thought she was BBC, but I have since been told she is with SkyNews. You can find clips of her on You Tube. Attractive, engaging, but she has a habit of interrupting the people she interviews. She tries to force the direction of the discussion.

  • BannerRWB

    The rioting in Britain is an effect of the movement of populations outside their “home” areas. Similar “rioting” occured when Whites moved out of Europe and across the globe. It has been described in various terms, such as conquest, exploration, or development, etc., but it remains the same – a movement of one group of people into another groups’ territory, followed by the subsequent conflict and death that is always involved. Even if we call it “immigration” legal or not, it is still a movement of peoples to a new area, where they are neither needed nor wanted by the host population. If we would stop such movement, we would force ourselves to figure out how to keep our population levels consistent with our resource levels. Until we do that, we will continue with the conflict we cause among ourselves.

  • John L.

    Notice the Reporter emphatically making the point that there were White Rioters there (even though there were hardly any). This is what We have now. That is Media People have obviously become quite inditimidated, and They feel They have to “not come across as being in any way Racial”. They probably fear being fired for being accused of Racism. This is why We get the Reporting We do.

  • Anonymous

    Reporter (interrupts): “You’re not being stereotypical there … . Are you sure they were black? I’m sure they weren’t all black were they?”

    Victim: “O.K. then let me just say they weren’t all black, I was the white guy there.”

    —————————————-

    What a good come back by the White victim!

    That “woman” reporter is representative of all so-called journalists today in all White lands. Wonder if she is really “white” or just has white skin. Just another Tim Wise, I am sure.

  • HH

    There you have it – the poisoned mind of the modern White liberal in full effect! She absolutely NEEDS there to be a White involved…her whole worldview DEMANDS IT!! Her desperation is palpable. And her devotion to her “faith” is indeed religious, nay, positively zealous.

    What a pathetic, deluded soul this is – but one that is far too dangerous to feel sorry for!

  • the Guru

    There is an old adage, ‘exceptions don’t prove a rule’, I would expect that this journalist would have a scant understanding of that. Opportunists abound!

  • Intelliboy

    One particular video that was broadcast across the world shows an Asian boy sitting on the ground apparently having been hit in the face. A black guy help the Asian up and then a white boy comes over and searches the Asian’s school bag. It supposedly proves beyond any doubt who is the rioter and who is the victim and who is helping the victims. For one thing this video demonstrates that the white guy must have been doing the very first robbery of his life. Everyone knows school bags do not contain valuable items. The other thing this video proves is that asians can grow back teeth overnight! The asian victim is shown in hospital later missing several teeth but next day he is on TV will a full set of teeth and no bruises at all! Miraculous how these asians recover so quickly!

  • olewhitelady

    My husband was listening to MSNBC this morning, and I heard people on “Morning Joe” commenting that the “uniform” of the England rioters was SWEAT PANTS. Not hoodies or ski masks, but sweat pants! I wondered out loud just how far the excuse-giving liberals will go in this matter to dissuade people from the knowledge that almost all the rampagers were black. Since hoodies and ski masks are more identified with blacks, they apparently had to come up with a race-neutral item of clothing to represent the criminals!

  • Anonymous

    Somewhere in the coverage of riots there ought to be a prosaic

    listing of the technology available to our military (and thus

    to SWAT teams that the like ??? ) that would stop a riot within

    less time that it takes to unwrap a Big Mac: balance-disabling noise machines; helicopter sprayed dye; (temporary) blinding light; various short-lived (relatively innocuous) nerve gases; and so on; and communication disrupters Given that folks tend to have naughty fun at whatever they can “get away with” , Is there some compelling reason this technology has to be kept up the sleeve?

  • Madison Grant

    So the reporter who wasn’t even there “corrects” the eyewitness and tells him there were whites rioting and looting, too.

    And liberals say Fox News is biased.

  • Dave

    She’s only a chav made good herself. Listen to the way she talks for a start (thick as two short planks).The news and morning breakfasts shows are full of these idiots. Years ago you had to be fairly articulate and quick thinking to do these on the spot interview jobs where anything can happen. So it seems it isnt just the blacks and ethnics the media dumbs itself down for. Daft bitch. I’m sure if there was even just one white there it would have been as conspicuous as the white spot on a domino.

  • Anonymous

    @ “bitterly clinging to our white privilege”:

    This interview is more likely to get her fired than promoted–her agenda and desperation are completely transparent to anyone. She wasn’t reporting the news–she was imposing the government’s official position on the facts.

    I don’t know where you’re from, but Whites in America won’t be fleeing to the “hills of Alabama” because, well, Alabama, if you’d actually look at a map, isn’t known for its hills. “Fleeing for the hills” applies much more appropriately to states that are actually “hilly” like Tennessee, Kentucky, or North Carolina.

    But thanks for the awkward attempt at a putdown. To quote Lynyrd Skynyrd, “…Southern man don’t need you around anyhow…”

  • Conan

    bitterly clinging to our white privilege –

    Was that a parody post? Burley has been a prominent news anchor and interviewer since 1988 – how in the hell is her career “about to take off” because of this?

    Please don’t comment on things you no nothing about, and also don’t inject wild conspiracy theories (they are obviously lovers) into it either as you only make yourself and everyone on this site look bad.

  • Anonymous

    7 — BannerRWB wrote at 7:51 PM on August 15:

    “The rioting in Britain is an effect of the movement of populations outside their “home” areas. Similar “rioting” occured when Whites moved out of Europe and across the globe. It has been described in various terms, such as conquest, exploration, or development, etc., but it remains the same – a movement of one group of people into another groups’ territory, followed by the subsequent conflict and death that is always involved. Even if we call it “immigration” legal or not, it is still a movement of peoples to a new area, where they are neither needed nor wanted by the host population. If we would stop such movement, we would force ourselves to figure out how to keep our population levels consistent with our resource levels. Until we do that, we will continue with the conflict we cause among ourselves.”

    Too simple and completely Marxist in your method of equalizing histories that are completely different. Technical advances that occurred in Europe were destined to spread throughout the world. Try to imagine that not happening. The wealth that brought to Europe was reinvested in the world at large and it worked for a long time benefiting far more than it harmed. Two World wars ended that period and severely decreased European populations. Marxism stepped in as the victor in Europe and has finally grown bold enough to espouse an impossible, world utopia vision via the EU. Most Europeans lean toward socialism because the most evil in WW2 was done by Fascists – nationalists, AND they have been coddled by socialism up to recently. The plan to bring in immigrants to shore up their system has failed. Instead, they just have third world squatters who demand the same social services. The conceit of the Marxists is that they assumed superior European culture would convert the radicals and educated the ignorant so that only skin color would change. And that is their tragic and terminal error.

    Critical readers should always be aware of the Marxist style of equalizing issues by generalizing and covertly implying a just comparison.

  • Intelliboy

    >> 1

    Your definition of the word “obvious” is roughly equivalent to that of the word “perhaps” as is used by everybody else.

    A mainstream media reporter is a reporter not because he or she can memorize scripts but because they can manipulate facts on the fly, that is what they are trianed for and have proven good at.

  • Intelliboy

    >> 7

    I have a feeling of deva vu when I see comments like that. These “arguments” play the same role in politics as a locking pliers plays in opening nuts. Even the most stuborn nut is turned but it is also ruined. Europeans brought with themselves electricity and antibiotics to the outside world, what the outsiders brought to europe? except AIDS and dependancy I mean.

  • white is right, black is whack

    I love it when you talk about bad black behavior and someone will say, “What about the white person that stole a car last week” or “What about that all the serial killers were white?” It’s as stupid as saying, “A bee once came near me and didn’t sting me” or “Not all cats try to kill birds. Heck I’ve seen dogs try to do that.”

  • Anonymous

    Reporter (interrupts): “You’re not being stereotypical there … . Are you sure they were black? I’m sure they weren’t all black were they?”

    The man may or may not have exaggerated the number, but he wasn’t stereotyping. He observed a sea of blacks, and no whites. What does that have to do with stereotyping?

    Stereotyping would be something like, “I saw 100 or 200 stupid blacks”. While he could say with certainty he saw many blacks, the stereotype would be they were stupid as he had no knowledge only experience to make that accusation.

  • RegvlvsSeradly

    I don’t understand how the involvement of a few whites makes the rioting suddenly “non-racial”. This was a storm of multicultural, multiracial terror which would not have happened without the multiculti atmosphere.

  • BannerRWB

    19-Anon: “Too simple and completely Marxist in your method of equalizing histories that are completely different. Technical advances that occurred in Europe were destined to spread throughout the world. Try to imagine that not happening.”

    – I well understand that technical advances spread throughout the world. I do not have any idea though, as to how that applies to my original comments.

    “The wealth that brought to Europe was reinvested in the world at large and it worked for a long time benefiting far more than it harmed.”

    – Here I would ask: From whose point of view? Just what great benefit did we bring to the natives of what are now called the Americas? For another point of view, if the Chinese wipe out 95% of the Europeans in America but consider such action to be of benefit to more than it harms, would you as well consider such a movement of Chinese into America to be a good thing?

    “Two World wars ended that period and severely decreased European populations.”

    – I agree with you here (I think we’re on the same page anyway), in that the Two World Wars were disasters for the White world.

    “Marxism stepped in as the victor in Europe and has finally grown bold enough to espouse an impossible, world utopia vision via the EU.

    – I not so sure I agree here though. What we have in America could be seen as sort of an EU as well. We have (at least until 1965) a mostly White European culture, where the different nationalities are mixed and where one currency is in use. The various States have borders, but the people can move freely between them. Europe, and the EU may well have been able to succeed had they left it to being just for White Europeans. They have failed on various levels, not the least of which is the importation (movement of peoples if you will) of non-Whites into Europe.

    “Most Europeans lean toward socialism because the most evil in WW2 was done by Fascists – nationalists, AND they have been coddled by socialism up to recently.”

    – Hmm. Not so sure I agree here either. I would say most Americans also lean toward some form of socialism. It’s when we have massive immigration -AND- high levels of socialism that the system breaks down.

    “The plan to bring in immigrants to shore up their system has failed.”

    – Oh, you mean the – Movement of populations outside their home areas – Where they are neither needed nor wanted by the host population? Why yes, I agree with you on this point.

    “Instead, they just have third world squatters who demand the same social services. The conceit of the Marxists is that they assumed superior European culture would convert the radicals and educated the ignorant so that only skin color would change. And that is their tragic and terminal error.”

    – I agree with you here as well, or to put it another way, I believe you agree with me. Why it is that you think the immigration of 1st world Whites into a 3rd world nation, where the 3rd world population is destroyed is of benefit to the 3rd world people is where I’m missing your point.

    “Critical readers should always be aware of the Marxist style of equalizing issues by generalizing and covertly implying a just comparison.”

    – As well they should be aware of those who wholly misunderstand a comment and then spin what some may think is a rather odd response.

    21 – Intelliboy: “I have a feeling of deva vu when I see comments like that. These “arguments” play the same role in politics as a locking pliers plays in opening nuts. Even the most stuborn nut is turned but it is also ruined.”

    – What?

    “Europeans brought with themselves electricity and antibiotics to the outside world, what the outsiders brought to europe? except AIDS and dependancy I mean.”

    – I believe both of these came about long after the movement of Whites to areas outside of Europe, but that they would have been discovered by Whites in any case. I agree with your second comment here. So again, it is the movement of peoples that bring just what advantage to our world?

    19 & 21: Do either of you think that the movement of peoples is a good thing? If so, are you in favor of the masses of non-Whites coming into America? My comments were a general condemnation of all immigration, no matter what the context of that immigration. I do not understand how you came to your responses. If you are still reading this thread, please make efforts to enlighten me. Thank you.