This morning I was listening to an interview with a British economist. He is predicting that the pound will begin to fall against the dollar next year. The reasons he gives are that many of the same factors that have driven down the dollar, for example a poor balance of trade and overinflated housing prices, are present in the UK and will soon have their effects.

So, come on over - we'll be happy to see you!

We would if you would stop treating us all as potential terrorists.
See http://tinyurl.com/24llcd

This is a Minister of the Crown for crying out loud.
Can you imagine the howls of fury if we detained a US Senator in this way?

We wouldn't.

In the Land of Opportunity, there are no Muslim Senators.

While not quite a Senator, there is a Muslim Congressman from Minnesota.

Considering that only 0.6% (compared to 2.7% in the UK) of the US population described themselves as Muslim in the 2000 census, the representation isn't really out of line.

Snide comments are fine, flanneruk, but they only really work when they reveal a deeper truth. Throwing them out like grenades, diminishes the value of the ones that hit the mark, and makes you look uninformed when they don't, as in this case.

Yeah, and in the land of the Crown, even as Saudi Arabia pointed out just last week the Brits can't take care of business on the homeland security front, can't seem to deal with their ever-burgeoning terrorist problem (a mind-boggling 2,000 KNOWN terrorist suspects in England alone) thus causing a threat and danger to the entire WORLD-not to mention their own subjects-meanwhile, you continue to play your roulette games, unlike any other country in Europe, I might add.

Not ONLY that, but UK can't even undertake a review of their inadequate responses to terrorist acts, to see how poorly they responded in 2005 to the London bombings where over 50 people were killed, because, "it might not make our security services look good."

That, in itself, is a mind-boggling statement from your own former PM, and points to the very heart of what is wrong with this basket case of a nation-it can't really look at itself, where it is now, because it doesn't know really, who it is, and it doesn't WANT the world to see its inadequacies, moral, or otherwise.

Instead, it has to employ government PR folk to "spin" everything, and if a well-off British professional does something so incredibly monstrous, that could make the country as a whole look bad, so unbelieveable, and even, engage with other professionals in a conspiracy of silence on the subject, then, those nationals who are responsible have to have Government spinmeisters "assigned" to them as well, so they can fool the world into thinking they aren't really monsters, when they really are.

Amazing, really.

Ah the 63 year old teamster from Detroit is back.

Still as mad a ever I see.

Dear heart: I would prefer our security apparatus, as formed by 30+ years of fighting well organised, American funded and equipped, terrorists over the keystone cops you have over there.

Really - your Government is lying to you - the sky is not about to fall on your heads.

Governments lie? Thank heavens the UK has no such problems.

I see the that the press's tactic has worked. Highlight one outrageous story, and people will think it's the norm. Good to know that such a low-level tactic is effective somewhere besides the US.

>>> this would have taken two days out of [our] schedule. The US visa service ... will not use consulates outside London. This palaver of getting visas is mind-blowing.<<<

Also symphony orchestras are extra dangerous:

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/news/stor...742626,00.html

Wow! Amazing how these threads take on a new tangential life. My aim was and is to extend an invitation to our friends in the UK to visit before the cost goes up. Hope that you come on over.

It's not so amazing. Say "US" to some UKers and you may as well wave a red flag in front of a bull on Viagra.

"While not quite a Senator, there is a Muslim Congressman from Minnesota."

Shahid Malik is higher up than the equivalent of a Senator.

Can't find the American equivalent, but he is part of the Government executive.

Not as high as Condoleeza, but closer to her post than to a Senator's.

<i>&lt;&lt;It's not so amazing. Say &quot;US&quot; to some UKers and you may as well wave a red flag in front of a bull on Viagra.&gt;&gt;</i>

Whereas the highly moderated tone of the missives from Gypsytravel [sic] aren’t in any way contentious?

I do wonder about Gypsytravel – she’s always there ready to wade in with her size 12 Rosa-Klebb stilettos against the British. I wonder what real (or more likely imagined) slight she once suffered at the hands of a Briton to so curdle her milk. Arrest and deportation? Barred entry? Turned downed by a British University? Fired from the Peoria offices of a British multinational? Or, more prosaically, a failed love affair perhaps?

Her Pavlovian response to the words Britain, England, London etc are quite amusing to behold. However, congratulations are in order for her valiant feat in overcoming her Caps Lock addiction – even if only temporarily.

Dr D.

It can be inherited.

I have a French friend who rales about the Queen, not having the Euro, bad food, crappy weather, stuck up accents and she has only ever been to London for three days.

I couldn't understand it, until I met her mother.....

Similarly you get rabid Anti-Americans who have never been there and barely met one.

&lt;&lt;It's not so amazing. Say &quot;US&quot; to some UKers and you may as well wave a red flag in front of a bull on Viagra.&gt;&gt;

I think there is some truth to this, but just because some feel this way does not mean that anything the US does is actually beyond reproach.

I feel that the original point was correct. I think the US has every right to bring in any measures it wishes to protect its borders.

While the current situation remains, and I am going to be treated like a criminal if I wish to visit and give up any right to any sort of privacy, then I shall excercise my right not to visit.

I note that Girlspytravel didn't wade in until the bulls-on-Viagra started the anti-US tone to the thread.

It seems to be a low-level debating trick to make an accusation and then, when someone responds, to then say, &quot;See, they're defensive and overly sensitive.&quot;

J_999_9 - We have had the odd disagreement, but you generally look at both sides of an arguement and can agree to differ.

girlspytravel, in her various incarnations, does appear to rabidly attack the UK at every oppurtunity before running away when asked to justify or provide facts to back up her often absurd statements.

I think Jossers point is mostly correct. If a minister in the government of one of the US's supposed closest allies cannot travel unmolested, what chance do the rest of us have ?

willit wrote: &quot;If a minister in the government of one of the US's supposed closest allies cannot travel unmolested, what chance do the rest of us have ?&quot;

I bet you know the answer.

&lt;have a French friend who rales about the Queen&gt;

well there is a lot to rale about with Queenie - and her royals - which should be a huge embarrassment to any thinking Brit.

As for British security apparatus the bs they fed Bushies during the run up to the war - enough said

sexing up, etc.

and the mistaken detaining of the Brit cabinet guy or whatever pales to the dead Brazilian slain by security personel in that London tube station

Is there a US equivalent to a Cabinet Minister?

Only 20 people, each in charge of a Government Department, who with the Prime Minister make up the Government.

Yes it's called the Cabinet with secretaries of State, Defense, Labor and Attorney General, etc. probably about 20 or so.