>Bagpuss,

>Interesting article, particularly when you look at the dates. Highly selective with regard to the statistics it omits, due mainly to the fact that they don't support the sensationalised message the Guardian wants to put across.

>With regard to the Guardian, the best description of which I quote below:

>"description of the Guardian as a "subversive, institutionally racist, politically correct, anti-American, pro-Sinn Fein/IRA, anti-royalist, pro-EU, atheistic broadsheet, written by holier-than-thou sanctimonious prigs for others of a similar persuasion"

Firstly, its not a Guardian website - although it does link to guardian articles.

As to your opinion of the Guardian, that is your opinion (or perhaps the opinion of the person you quoted - and did not attribute...). However, many people here would disagree with you. It does have more leanings to the left than to the right, but most newspapers in the UK have political leanings - do you write off anything to do with them too? I would certainly say that the Guardian seems less racist than other papers I have read, so where the idea that it is institutionally racist comes from, I don't know. Oh, perhaps because they sometimes criticise the position of the Israeli govenment... that makes them anti-semitic doesn't it?

Bagpuss