Comments on: Inside USA: The Battle for Harlem – Part 1

By: Jason Gooljar: WFPman | A fire-breathing liberal New Yorker lost on the DC Metro… » Helll up in Harlem: Crazy City Councilors and Pinnalce the Halliburton of Harlem…

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 02:17:02 +0000

[...] happened to see that the blog Uptown Flavor had linked to a post of mine about how Harlem is not for sale. In that blog post of mine, I in turn [...]

By: MMP Brownstoner

MMP Brownstoner — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:54:23 +0000

Sorry for two posts in a row, but I just watched part 2 on youtube. The extent of Harlem coverage is several minutes at the end when the host turns the camera on one of the Marcus Garvey Park drummers for the “last word.” It was a little surprising to me that there was no counterpoint. There was simply a monologue by one of the drummers about the situation. No chance for anyone to rebut allogations–just a free forum. Not exactly balanced.

By the way, who produced this. At the end, the Aljazeera logo appeared.

By: MMP Brownstoner

MMP Brownstoner — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:34:35 +0000

There didn’t seem to be much input from newcomers. There were just some quick innoculous statements from the surgeon who bought a brownstone and a few from the Columbia rep. The host made a few statements about the issue being very complex and then cut directly to the woman claiming that white people were pushing her out.

The abuses of Pinnacle cannot be overdocumented, but it certainly was nothing new.

I was also surprised with some of the factual inaccuracies or omissions:

-The piece claimed that the River-to-River rezone first purported to include 50% affordable housing which then shrunk to 5%. In all of my reading about it, the initial plans called for about 25% affordable housing which rose to approx. 50% in the approved rezone;

-During a comment about the glass towers of 125th St., they showed the exterior of 111 CPN.

Interesting piece, but I wouldn’t necessarily look at it as fair and unbalanced.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:27:47 +0000

So what you’re saying is because it includes input from Ms. Bailey it is biased? Get outta’ here. It gives a clear overview of the situation that is taking place in Harlem with input from both sides. Seriously, I doubt the producer was coerced by Nellie Bailey to make this video.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:24:23 +0000

Laughable. I noticed the man BBQ’ing in Mt. Morris Park said, “Everybody in Harlem is working their butt off just to keep the little piece that they have”. That was nonsense however played into the agenda of the producers of the video. The fact is Black male unemployment is in exceeds 55% in Harlem. This video is biased and was produced with an agenda to favor the Nellie Baily agenda. Total nonsense was spewed uncontested.

Harlem lacked lots of basic amenities (and still does) for decades. It’s not like Harlem of 1985, or 1995 or 2005 was desireable and just fine. The video is founded on a false premise. Many Black Harlemites do not feel the Harlem Nellie Bailey speaks of was acceptable or desireable.

Harlem gentrification cannot be addressed without also addressing the mentality of “entitlement” by the welfare class. No one is entitled to live anywhere, including Harlem, in Manhattan.

Nellie Bailey and that crowd wants immunity from real life, fiscal responsibility and adapting. If gas cost $4/gal and that’s a problem, you adapt, no? Lots of people have had to relocate from Chelsea, from the UWS, from Little Italy, from the Lower East Side, from Manhattan entirely, why does Nellie Baily feel Harlemites should be immune from this real life circumstance that happens?

The whole thing is a joke beginning to end. I look forward to Harlem further gentrifying, changing and being less like Harlem circa 1975, 1985, 1995, etc. and more like the UWS.