20/11/2013 Newsnight

things. # And then I don't feel so bad!

# I simply remember my favourite things.

And... . Terrible things were done At least one of the fighters

And... . Terrible things were done during

And... . Terrible things were done one of them? Also tonight:

Some of the white people from our generation from the Deep South still

struggle with racism and how to overcome it. We talk to John GRISH

sham about the real south. TRANSMIT We have heard warnings about Jihadi

tourism, young men leaving for wars across the board. With the stated

threat that they will return to this country bent on continuing the fight

here. Precise cases are another matter though. On the day that it

emerged that a second British man has been killed fighting in Syria,

Newsnight can tell the exclusive story of a young man who has gone

from a British city to what he considers a holy war in Syria. Day

breaks over Portsmouth. And for a 23-year-old Britishman who has gone

to Syria to fight Jihad or holy war. Allah hu Akbar. We have obtained an

interview with him close to the Syrian front line. We speak to his

family here in the UK. If he dies in this cause he has not died in vain,

he has died doing a good deed or act. Our exclusive comes two weeks

after Britain's spies warned about the dangers to the UK of people

travelling to Syria to fight. They think you are a threat to national

security, what would you say to that? He was born in Britain, he

grew up in the seaside town of South Sea, part of the wider Portsmouth

city I can't remember. He has been a prolific user of social media and

working with academics from King's College London we have been

analysing his tweets. Some of which have been based on his experiences

close to the Syrian front line. We have been working with an academic

from King's College London, he has been researching Brits joining

opposition groups fighting the Assad regime. This is a British national

gone over in the last few weeks. You can see it is very macho, it is very

much appealing to the kinds of things young men are interested in.

Here is a guy standing there with ISI kit, he has his gun, his friends

are behind him undertaking military training. In the initial phases

people stayed under the radar. Now the next people going over, we have

a critical mass in Syria, they are seeking a slightly higher profile

and positivise it to people back in the UK and encourage people to come

over. He think this is him in Syria. We spent last week in Portsmouth,

investigating the story of the 23-year-old Brit who told us he as

fighting Jihad, or holy war. He's The man on the left is Portsmouth

born and bred. His family are from Bangladesh and arrived 50 years ago.

He used to work with the voluntary Dour Team, that is spreading the

word of Islam. By the end of last year, the young man who had grown up

around these quiet streets was showing an interest in radical

Islam. On the 4th of December on his Twitter account, he posted a video

of one of Al-Qaeda's key recruiters. The base from which the great Jihad

from the Arabian peninsula will begin, the place from which the

greatest Islam army will go forward. This was an American citizen who

returned to his ancestoral hope in Yemen. He was described as the Bin

Laden of the internet. He was killed by a drone strike in Yemen two years

ago. Back in Portsmouth, German was still spreading the word about Islam

as early as April. Soon after he left for Turkey and on to Syria. He

joined one of the most radical opposition groups in Syria ISIS, the

reference is to the Syrian region. He posted this ISIS video on

Twitter. It is an remist group, it is part of Al-Qaeda and in Syria.

You don't have any doubt that ISIS did form an affiliation with

Al-Qaeda? It is an affiliate of Al-Qaeda on the ground in Syria. In

sports mouth we contacted -- Portsmouth we contacted the family.

I spoke to his uncle and father who work in the family takeaway business

not far from here. Nearly wanted to be interviewed but they told me

about his early life. They told us he went to an Islamic school, a

Madrassa for about a year at the age of 11 or 12. He went to school and

college around here, we was very much part of British life. After

several days of negotiation his brother agreed to meet me. We

arranged to speak to Iftakar in Syria by Skype. We are break

on-line. That's good. He was ready to confirm he has joined ISIS, and

his aim was to create an Islamic state. He refers to doula, a shorter

term for the -- Doula, a shorter name for the group.

He said volunteers had come to Syria from far and wide. Do you think it

is then justified to take up arms in Syria to fight basically?

He told me he supported the principle of Jihad when he lived in

the UK. Before he left for Syria. He then explained that when he said

he was a Jihadi, he meant someone committed to the Islamic principle

of Jihad. You are quite clear that you were a Jihadi basically and you

are now, I suppose? By early this year some people in

mortages mouth's Muslim community were concerned. This man owns a cafe

where Iftakar and his friends used to eat. I had my son brought to the

chairman of the mosque and a few other people who I know, and who I

know their sons have tried to talk to them and tell them that please

tell your boys keep an eye on your boys and see what they are doing.

Iftakar's brother, who is clearly sympathetic to his views said the

west had let Syria down. Syria called for the world to get

involved, nobody stepped in. Now that people from around the world

are coming in, everyone is calling them terrorists, when this should

have been a job backed by the UN, NATO, whoever, they should have come

in three years ago when this was all going on. Nobody came to their call.

So the Muslims came in. Iftakar said it was too late for western

intervention, help would be rejected. A term which means in this

context that forces would be attacked. Is part of the reason why

you have felt you had to go to Syria was because the west did not

intervene early enough? ISIS has been accused of brutality

in some Syrian towns where it has control. Ruthless summary

punishments of those who oppose their hardline vision of an Islamic

state. But Iftakar's brother says ISIS does good works and they

shouldn't be considered terrorists. Terrorists don't open schools and

places for educating children. They don't fund kids and families. This

is what Doula are doing. They provide the community with food. But

winning hearts and minds can tactically go hand in hand with

fighting. Al-Qaeda h learned, as an overall movement. It realises it

needs to do social welfare and reach out to people. So, yes, they are on

the ground in Syria distributing food, making sure people have

electricity to stay warm at night in their homes, making sure people are

well protected, fed, that they have bread, access to medical cautious

all the civil societies that we have traditionally seen other Islamist

groups do, Hezbollah and Hamas, never Al-Qaeda. That is something

they are exploring and exploiting well on the ground in Syria. I asked

Iftakar about this video posts on the net, it shows an ex-- posted on

the net, it shows extremist group executing lorry drivers who they

believed were Shia mums. I wouldn't shoot nobody, it wouldn't be

something I would do. That is my stance on it. Have you ever seen

ISIS behave in that way in Syria? British authorities view you as a

national security threat, what would you say to that? Are you willing to

die for this cause? If he dies in this cause he has not

died in vain, he has died doing a good deed or act. Newsnight

understands that four or five others from Portsmouth followed Iftakar out

to Syria. We don't know their identities, but before they went

they left letters for their parents. They used to meet at the local

mosque. When we turned up last week we found Hampshire Police were there

to talk about extremism and Syria. Some in the community told us that

the mosque committee were slow to act about this group. I know their

parents and I know these children also here. They come here for a

prayer time, but I did not know what they are discussing about or

anything about it. But you don't know what they were discussing. No I

don't know. I was unaware of it completely. But it was enough for

you to put some posters up saying you can't stay here? Yes. But the

younger generations say their he willeders were out-of-touch. On

controversial issues such as are Shias true Muslims, they were taking

resources from the Internet. Say there was a fatwah produced from

Saudi, we would hear it, they don't because they don't have that source

of information. We can look around on the Internet. We found Shias are

not Muslims, they have been classed as non-Muslims, if we tell them that

they will say you are young and you don't know what you were talking

about. If they were able to use the Internet they would see that the

scolars have announced they are not Muslims.

A radical view indeed. Though there is clearly support for this in

speeches on the Internet, if you know where to search. The story of

how this group of young men traded their safe lives in Portsmouth for

the battlefields of Syria, touches on many questions, the gulf between

young and old, the power of the internet and the lure of Jihad. We

have our Richard Haass from the Quilliam Foundation, radicalised in

the early 1990s and went to fight in Afghanistan. He has since sought to

pre vent radicalisation. Any idea of how -- prevent radicalisation. Any

idea how many men there are like this? A few hundred from the UK and

a few hundred from other European countries. Do you judge what you

know of them that they are danger to this country? Not all of them. We

hope if most of them come back, those who do come back, the majority

will find an occupation or profession. But there is certainly a

significant danger of some of them being taught by Al-Qaeda especially

when they are with Al-Qaeda groups that the west is a legitimate target

and a land of war. We have seen that with the 7/7 bombers. It is

interesting this element that was mentioned in Richard Watson's film

there, of the power of the Internet to prevent there being one orthodox

view which might restrain or shape behaviour. How real is that

phenomenon? It is certainly real for younger generations, of course, in

the west and the developed world. People use the Internet all the time

and they are watching all kinds of videos, especially somewhere fairly

marginalised like Portsmouth, from the mainstream Muslim communities. I

lived in Portsmouth myself 15 years ago, it is fairly isolated

community. And those young men would have probably found it exhilarating

to watch preachers and Jihadist videos from around the world on the

Internet and say they want to be part of that. It is the pull of

adventure for young people to go and fight somewhere. I did that myself

when I was younger. That was pre-9/11. These people are

westerners and talking about "they" are not welcome here. They have that

same identity crisis the Islamist ideology means they feel they can

only be with Al-Qaeda fighters against the west. What they need to

be is integrated British citizens and the only way to go abroad to

fight is with the British Armed Forces. Yet we would have to

recognise, wouldn't we that there is a long and not ignoble tradition of

people going from this country to fight in foreign wars, you think

about something out of the Spanish Civil War, people for political

reasons went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War, they are not

being treated in the way these young men are being considered? There is a

kind of heroism and youthful ideaism -- idealism, much like those

fighting in the Civil War. But post-9/11 Al-Qaeda is ideology is

clear, They have incited attacks and carried out attacks in the west.

They have recruited young men like this in Afghanistan, Afghanistan,

Syria and other places to come and attack this country. The Glasgow

bombing, and the 7/7 bombings, we have to be careful about what they

may do when they come back. The Terrorism Act of 2006 allows

prosecution of these young men, but nobody has been prosecuted yet. I

think in this country we would like to see people come back and settle

peacefully into jobs and things. And nobody would be too worried about

that. But there is a significant danger of extremist or terrorist

activity when people do come back. Thank you very much. Thank you. Now

the Prime Minister announced today that there would be another inquiry

into the unfolding nightmare at the Co-operative Bank, by our

calculation that takes the number to five. Inquiries of one sort or

another are what you might expect when it turns out an avowedly

ethical financial institution has been run into ground by an

unqualified Methodist minister with decidedly unecclesiastical tastes.

The Prime Minister had a rather enjoyable Prime Minister's

Questions. The first priority is to safeguard this bank and make sure it

is safeguarded without using tax-payers' money. That must be the

priority. My Right Honourable friend the Chancellor will be discussing

with the regulators what is the appropriate form of inquiry to get

to the bottom of what went wrong here. Now our reporter is taking a

close interest in the story and is here now. How independent can this

inquiry be? Well it is a very good question. The big question really is

who is investigating who? And whether anybody can maintain a safe

unembarrassing distance from any of the inquiries going on. The Treasury

has initiated this inquiry, it is not clear they are at a comfortable

distance and the Labour Party has a few issues. There are a few distinct

issues around the Co-Op under the spotlight. One is the appointment of

Paul Flowers as the chairman of the group. How did that happen, the role

of the politician, the bank and the board. The other is how it ended up

with a ?1. Five billion black hole when the regulators were saying you

should buy branches of Lloyd's. We had a bit more from the Labour Party

today, when we heard about the revelations of Paul Flowers

resigning from Bradford council back in 2011 there was this question of

whether he kept his membership of the Labour Party. Because he stayed

as an adviser to Ed Miliband until March 2012. Now we heard earlier

this week from the Labour Party that actually they just suspended his

membership, that was their line. But we have spoken to the Chief Whip on

Bradford City council who says that actually it was his understanding

that back in 2011 Paul Flowers resigned his membership of the

Labour Party. Embarrassing for the Tories too? Not so much on the issue

of Paul Flowers' appointment, the other issue which is hold the Co-Op

below the water line, that stemmed from the transaction of the the

buying of the Britannia Building Society, we know that Ed Miliband

was banging the drum for that when he was at the Treasury. The Treasury

in the coalition Government said as recently as October last year that

it was a transaction in the interests of Co-Op members and

George Osborne can't claim not to have had an interest. We dug up a

clip of George Osborne in July last year saying how good he thought he

thought the purchase would be for the economy. We have been on the

phones in the recent months to try to get these Lloyd's branches into

the hands of the Co-Op, we want new names on the high street to deliver

more choice for customer, to make sure we have got more banks out

there offering good deals for people. We are very happy with this

deal, it is a good thing for the British economy. What about the

regulators, are they investigating themselves? The short answer is,

yes. This inquiry has been arranged by the potential regulation

authority. Now that's one of two bodies that was set up just at the

end of last year. There is the consumer body, the financial conduct

authority. And there is also the Prudential regulation authority,

which is in charge of ensuring the banks don't go bust so we all have

to bail them out. The potential regulation authority, which is

setting up this inquiry is also full of people who were at the Financial

Services Authority before, when the transaction was being approved. Mark

Tabour is a campaigner for the bondholders, pensioners who wanted

income from the bonds, he's not sure the regulators are in a position to

investigate themselves. Well he's just disappear, but don't you worry

about him. Of course all these things are retrospective, all

looking back. In the meantime there are a lot of rather pressing issues

going forward? Yes, there are. Looking forward we have to secure

the recapitalisation, that has to be the priority. 15,000 bondholders are

hoping that the hedge funds who are putting money in aren't going to

lose faith and will stay with the transaction, they are bound to it,

they should do. So on the 11th of December when the votes for the

favour of recapitalisation, there will be money enough to keep the

Co-Op alive. The ratings agencies have warned that obviously if that

doesn't happen the alternative may be nationalisation, we are not there

yet, if you have less than ?85,000 with the Co-Op, don't worry the

Government is guarnteeing it. Now there were howls of outrage from

either side of the sectarian divide today in Northern Ireland. After

suggestions from the senior legal official that instead of

investigating and prosecuting the police and the rest of the law

machine draw a veil over some pretty hidious crimes. John larrikin the

Attorney General in Belfast believes the police should give inquiry over

some Should give up inquiries over some of the most atrocious crimes in

the troubles. The Good Friday Agreement signed in

1998 the agreement led to a number of provisions on historical

killings. When paramilitary weapons were decommissioned, forensic

evidence gathered couldn't legally be used in prosecutions. Nor could

it be used when the IRA assisted the authorities to find the bodies of

some of the disappeared. What's more, it meant that the maximum

sentence that could be given to members of paramilitaries, who were

prosecuted for pre-1998 offence, was just two years, even more murder.

This, according to Mr Larkin makes it almost impossible to solve many

of the crimes. He thinks the interests of peace would be better

served by drawing a line under it all. Politicians on both sides and

victims' relatives have lined up to criticise the proposal. Calling it

dangerous and disgusting. Proving that even 15 years after the

agreement, Northern Ireland's attempts to come to terms with its

toxic past remain far from resolved. In Belfast now is the son of the

lisenceor pat Finucane murdered by loyalist paramilitaries in 1989.

What do you make of the proposal from the Attorney General? I'm

slightly surprised that the Attorney General has sought fit to enter this

debate so publicly, without any prompting. And from what it seems

without any consultation with any political party or victims' group. I

find it very surprising that he offers no alternative and seems to

make an arbitary suggestion that not only should there be no prosecutions

and that there should be no legal redress for families and victims to

gain an explanation or the truth as to what happened to their loved

ones. He He seems to be suggesting it as a practical course of action

rather than an ethically or morally desirable course of events. You

accept it will be immensely expensive and there is a law of

diminishing returns in these inquiries? Well, the justifiable

calls for inquiries is one thing, but I don't agree with Mr Larkin and

I think what is glaring by its absence is the absence of any

credible material put forward. He says perhaps families should have

greater access to documents. That is incredible, and Mr Larkin will be

well aware of many victims' campaigns, especially my family we

have campaigned for 25 years, we have had it onfirmed by the Prime

Minister that there was conillusion in the murder of my father. Without

the calls for the public inquiry I don't think they would have been

pressurise today provide anything close to the truth and other

families feel the people. Same. -- the same. If it is a maximum of two

years in prison is it worth to pursue the issue? He's trying to

equate the standard to secure a criminal conviction. The two-year

sentence that would follow with the inquest and inquiry system. What I

find very insulting is in his interview he seems to say that to do

away with inquests is to strike some sort of balance with doing away with

criminal prosecutions. To me that is entering into the political arena

and making a very charged comment, it is not for the role of the

Attorney-General. It is possible also isn't it though that mechanisms

can be pursued other than legal mechanisms through the courts and

the police, there is a greater possibility of some sort of

reconciliation at the end of it? I agree with that, but the sad fact is

that there doesn't appear to be any political will for that to happen.

The debate today again compounds and highlights the fact that political

parties here, and more importantly the British and Irish Governments

have yet to deal with this issue in a serious manner. And if they are

committed to healing our past, then they will let families see files,

they will let them have a truth. They will allow them to challenge

the narrative, which invariably turns out to be a false one put

forward by the state. Thank you very much for taking the time to join us

thank you. Now the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, had a bit of fun at Prime

Minister's Questions today by claiming that even David Cameron's

friends now think he's a loser. Spots and kettles thought d -- pots

and kettles thought the Conservatives. Are things changing,

Ed Miliband was written off as too awkward, too brainy, too much a

union man to be a winner. Then then he caught the public mood on the

cost of living and made his claim to be able to delay energy prices. Does

it add up to a coherent hold we will discuss that in a moment. We invited

the political editor of the New Statesman to tell us what he thinks.

Not every leader's name becomes an "ism", thatcherism is progress, and

Blairism was achieving social justice and harnessing markets. Next

to those, David Cameron, John Major look like also-rans. Ed Miliband is

the unlikely leader, smuggled in by trade union bosses, not really

knowing what to do and short-term tactics. Over the summer his opinion

pole poll started to shrink. What was Labour going to do next, where

was the fightback. Meanwhile in this cafe in North London, Ed Miliband

and his advisers were working on a speech and idea that would turn his

fortunes around. If we win that election in 2015 the next Labour

Government will freeze gas and electricity prices until the start

of 2017. That was portrayed by sceptics as a mad socialist lung

back to the 1970s. But the price freeze was a hit. The Tories were

wrong-footed, the terms of economic debate shifted to the cost of

living. Terrain where Ed Miliband had something memorable to say and

David Cameron didn't. Ed's friends say he has always been

underestimated, but there was plan all along. They say he isn't

bothered by the volatility of the news agenda, the froth, because he

has a deeper and strategic understanding of what is wrong with

Britain and what needs to be done about it. Think of it like the

espresso at the bottom of this cappuccino, a double shot of

intellectual rigour underneath the foam. A doctrine and programme for

Government they called Miliband-ism. It takes the long view of history,

it charts the story of British politics since the Second World War,

as a series of grand ideolgical arcs. These campaign posters at the

people's history museum in Manchester show the consensus after

1945, that Government as job was to build and provide and the state was

on your side. That fell apart in the 1970s a time of stagnation and

division. Until Thatcher made her breakthrough. A Government of

practical measures. In pursuit of mobile causes. For much of the

Labour Party Blairism was a surrender to the spirit of the

1980s, it idolised the big business in thestitious it taxed and spent

more but never dealt with the root causes of inequality. Along comes

the financial crisis that shows what turbo-capitalism runs amock. We are

back in the 1970s where no-one is winning and everything is up for

grabs. The dark blue line is the cost of

living The light blue is the rise in wages,

and the gap between is the cost of living. Ed has been accused of

jargon. Are you on the side of the wealth-creators or the producers or

the creditors. The coauthors of the document says there is a simplicity

of the market at the core. Ed was keen we use the speeches to develop

an argument. The producer speech was a controversy getting at the heart

of something we thought was wrong about the way our economy worked.

The one-nation speech was setting out a philosophy, if you like, an

approach to governing and economic society and politics. And this year

with our energy price freeze and other announcements you saw some of

the policy flesh being put on the bones of that vision. So I think you

can see a sequence there. If Ed is right, economic recovery won't help

the Tories because the proceeds of growth won't trickle down into

voters' pockets. New Labour was fine as a compromise with British

capitalism when the economy was working for the majority. But it

isn't any more. Ed Miliband sees an opportunity to have a new populisim

of the left. Fixing broken markets and protecting consumers from

corporate greed. It isn't just nostalgia for the socialism of old.

It is a belief that the traditions of the left can still inspire

mainstream politics in the 21st century. Miliband-ism doesn't roll

off the tongue, but if Labour win the next election it could be the

idea that governs Britain. I have my guests with me.

Do you reckon Miliband-ism exists? It is never existing until it

embodies an action. After watching the film I longed for the days when

Ed Miliband was vague. The clearer gets the more I don't like him.

There are two propositions that he makes. The first of which is the

2008 marks a major departure, but the crash means we have entered a

new era of history. The second proposition that follows from that

is therefore that license is more left-wing politics in Britain. They

are both empierically false. That we haven't interered a new tran --

entered a new transition phase and the future doesn't belong to the

left? When there is a transition point everybody believes the future

belongs to them. Nobody says we have had a major transition and everybody

is moving away from me! It is the fantasy of the left that we lift in

a left-wing country has come true because of the failure of

capitalism. It is a fantasy. I question the idea that the financial

crisis in 2007/08 wasn't the cattism, if you -- cat cliff. The

entire conversation in politics was things can't go back to the way they

were. At the root of that was an ideology about deregulation and

markets gone wrong. Why I would agree is Labour had a bit of a shock

thinking that naturally if something had gone wrong with markets that

meant people would suddenly swing for the left. They were surprised

when UKIP turned out to be the insurgent force in British politics.

For card-carrying Milibandites were here to defend his position, they

would say it is not about the old left but a new populisim which can

engage with the failure of markets and speak on behalf of ordinary

people Will Ed Miliband be the Prime Minister after the next election? It

is very likely that he will be in a Government, even if it is a

Government of coalition, just because of the way the numbers

through the electoral system pan out. I would say it is also possible

that he won't. What I'm not sure is clear is that... He will and he

won't? Let me explain that. Both are true claim Ultimately it is very

hard to call, because a bunch of Conservative voters are going to

vote for UKIP. A bunch of Liberal Democrat refugees will vote Labour.

That means actually Ed could end up in Downing Street by accident. What

I'm not sure the arguments that I have outlined will be the ideas that

people will rally behind and march. This is precisely the problem, this

is a man more associated with wanting an "ism" and wonky ideas

than he is with governing? I think that is not a bad criticism of what

the Miliband project has been about. What he would say in defence is

unless you spend this time in opposition completely re-thinking

what you had and what went wrong under the last Government. You will

never persuade people to bring you back. The really cogent part of the

Ed Miliband team is they lost that time. There was a big change, it

took place after 2008. That question which is an existential question for

the left, what are you for if you haven't money for the social

programmes, it hasn't begun to answer. If you look at health, what

beyond the sentimental agonies of Andy Burnham does the Labour Party

offer. We don't know. You could write a PhD thesis about their

thinking on legislation, crime. We have an absence. You can't suggest

there is any ideolgical position here, if we have no guidance for

what the Labour Party would do on any of those things and no notion of

how it would govern the state when there was no money. If you want a

apockal change that is it, the Labour Party is miles away from

knowing what it wants. They are trying to erect a tripod and it is

how you reform the state. They will say that is not what people are

worrying about right now. They are worried about. Schools, hospitals,

crime, welfare. I think they will find... What they don't want is an

ideolgical crow side from the Michael Gove point of view to tear

it up and start again. They want a decent well-funded school at the end

of their street and services that will work and money in their pocket.

What scares people on the left is not losing but winning. If you don't

have guidance on what you will do on critical things then it will be a

very difficult period in Government. This will be the question of fact

which the left confronts if it were to come into Government. Which is it

doesn't have great deal of money. It has to reform the state. It has

foresworn every kind of reform of the state that it used to do in the

old carnation under Tony Blair. What does it have in its place and it

doesn't have the answer. That is the central question that the left will

face. I think there's probably a number of people in the Conservative

benches who think if they don't know what they are doing next it might

not be a bad thing to let Labour sneak in, and reveal themselves as

not having this programme and the whole thing fall apart. This

wouldn't be a bad one for the Conservatives to lose. The missing

plank of this, Miliband-ism isn't how you reform the state. What Ed

would say that is not what voters are concerned about. We begin with

the ideas and then we roll it out as a programme. Essentially the kind of

policy you get is a few labour market economies sit in a room and

go capitalism is fine but we wish you were nicer. The energy price

freeze is a good example. Of course we want prices lower rather than

higher, it doesn't seem to get beyond that level of banality. You

end up with a policy that is commanding something into existence.

In fairness they have a policy to reform the energy market, I can't

disagree with what you said. That didn't last long. Thank you very

much both of you. There are few enough people in the world who can

boast of having sold run moneys of millions of books. John Grisham,

author of one thriller after another can make that claim. His website

claims with no false modesty that his first novel A Time To Kill is

one of the most popular novels of our time. The next offering is Sick

more Row. It has just been published here. Was it always your intention

to revisit Jake Brigginss and Clanton? I think so, I didn't know

when. Everything is driven by a story, you have to have a story

before you write a book. For many years I thought about a sequel or

another visit back to Clinton. Another visit to all those

characters but there was no story. So it took a while to get the story.

You like writing about the south because that is where you come from?

I would much rather write about the south. Because it is what I know, it

is easier at times. The stories are richer. More layered. The characters

are far more fun to write about. On On the question of race, in that

territory, was there still a huge race issue when you were there as a

young man? I struggled with racism every day. Because the way I was

raised. I was raised in an all-white world in Mississippi. We thought it

would always be white. What were your parents like about that? They

were wonderful people, but not the least bit tolerant towards black

people. That's my DNA and the way I was raised. It took a long time to

become more tolerant. Is there any way you think that A Time To Kill

and even this book is about alonement? For me, for Jake. For the

attitudes you were raised with? Maybe, because I'm Jake. The book

was very autobiograical, a lot of white people of my generation from

the Deep South still struggle with racism. And trying to overcome it.

We're all-racist because we refer our race and we are quick to condemn

others, we are we don't want to look at life through coloured glasses. It

is difficult for me many times. And how does that manifest itself? Well,

stereotype, you expect certain things out of certain people. You

see a gruesome crime, you see the suspects arrested, and they are two

black punks who killed a white businessman. And you think they are

guilty, you know, there is a level of tremendous dislike, you know.

Then you get passed that -- past that, you think maybe they are

innocent, the cops have got the wrong people. Maybe you should try

to understand where they came from, they probably never had a chance,

they were probably born on the streets. Raised on the streets,

probably never were taught right from wrong. Your initial reaction is

to react negatively. To many situations. And then you have to

work through it. Do you think that the election and re-election of

President Obama has fundamentally changed things for black people? I

don't know. It's change things for black people because there is such

an enormous sense of pride and almost disbelief on the part of most

black folks when he got elected, they never thought it would happen.

Nobody thought it would happen ten years ago. The downside is a lot of

black people thought that change would finally arrive at a certain

point and change would happen overnight. But the expectations were

so high that no-one could ever achieve those expectations. Thank

you very much. My pleasure, always fun.

You can see a longer version of our interview on our YouTube channel.

That is it for tonight, unconfined joy in Hull over the news it has

been named City of Culture. We asked the Hull photographic society why?

They showed us. # Skies are blue

# Dreams come through # While I'm holding you

# In