Ms. Phillips gives us more eloquence, honesty and common sense in a few paragraphs than the BBC in an entire day. Perhaps we should be sending our new £121 licence fee to her instead of that despicable organisation?

Melanie

The BBC and other media are getting quite hysterical about this visit, but I'm not sure it will be that bad (but watch this space!).

On Radio 4 I think this morning, they managed to go on and on about the protests (wheeling out people from "Liberty" etc to whine on about right to protest blah blah blah), but quite forgot to tell us why Bush was coming.

Naughtie and co. must do better (ie. a bit of objectivity).

I understand the Met are quietly confident that they can stop any trouble before it gets serious. CCTV obviously helps a great deal.I believe the protesting classes have rather lost impetus, and on a dank November wednesday will be unlikely to turn out in serious numbers. I am reminded of the hysteria after Diana's death which faded away remarkably soon. Of course,it may all turn into a re-run of the Gordon Riots. A middle-class mob with Sophie Raworth and George Alagiah triumphant on the 6 o'Clock news. Bitter medicine indeed.

I agree 100%.

The only thing is, Americans haven't all been wrapped up in a bubble: It's mainly our government, as well as those Americans who don't have the time or inclination to pay much attention to foreign affairs (admittedly, that's quite a lot).

However, ever since the Viet Nam War, many Americans have been keenly aware of the pitfalls in our foreign policy, and of our image in the world. But we've stood by helplessly as actions are taken in our name that don't reflect our views. Then we feel subjected to "anti-Americanism," as if anyone could be "anti" an entire nation and culture.

Many of us could see from the start that the Iraq war would be a fiasco, and that's taking into account the good in deposing Hussein. George Bush is not stupid, but he is not a bright man, either. Yale and Harvard mean very little in his case--he was admitted on legacy grounds and did very poorly while there.

(For the non-Americans here, legacies are students admitted to an Ivy League institution because their parents and/or grandparents went there. I've read that the average academic performance of these privileged students is actually lower than that of affirmative action students.)

My impression is that Bush is intellectually shallow, and that he's surrounded by advisers who do, indeed, live in a bubble. It is not surprising that they hadn't thought through the aspect of nation building. Look at Afghanistan. They probably thought of the after-war as a sort of epilogue. If I remember correctly, very early on Bush was willing to ask for only $4billion for the job.

It's true that too much immersion in one ideological world view can blind one to reality--whether one is of the left or right.

Americans know we're hated - we simply just don't care. In fact, we somewhat enjoy it.

"You can only be Cinderella once, and then you become that evil witch. You know what? We're fine with that." (This was from a football player, but I think it applies to Americans in general).

Sorry, Jeremy, I don't agree. I'm not fine with it, and neither is anyone I know. We may be resigned to it, but "enjoy it"?!! No.

I guess I'm from the "blue" part of America and you're from the "red."

If these demonstrators do cause mayhem and destruction I would think it would hurt their cause more than it would hurt Bush. Or will the general public blame the destruction on Bush as well?

"Or will the general public blame the destruction on Bush as well?"

I'm afraid the British public will blame whoever the BBC tells them to blame, so the answer to your question is - "Yes".

Pulling down a statue with Bush as Saddam should make great theater. Too bad we can't provide a downed Blackhawk helicopter for the assholes to dance on. Hmmmm, who knows? The London "street" is certainly unruly and, God knows, you guys badly need regime change.

Let's see, the media in Britain, as in so many countries, feed the people with a constant stream of vile lies and hostile propaganda against the US. Just how are we going to counteract that? "Please Mister BBC man, can you put on our side of the story?" Fat chance.

What did the Iraq campaign do?
1. Deposed Saddam, which we ought to have done 12 years ago but failed to in an excess of consideration for multilateralism. This was one of the things that convinced Osama and his fellow sheep-molesters that the US was a paper tiger and would run away after a couple of dead.

2. Saddam invaded two countries to steal their oil when he did not have nuclear weapons. What would so reckless a ruler, or his psychotic spawn, have done once he had nukes? We have ensured that Saddam would not become Kim Jong Il with oil revenues.

3. If you like the UN we enforced UN resolutions Saddam spent 12 years mooning.

4. We and Britain no longer have to fly patrols to enforce no-fly zones to ensure that Saddam does not murder another 300.000 Iraqis.

5. The roots of Islamist terrorism lie in the dysfunctional Arab/Muslim political culture. If we are going to destroy Islamist terrorism or even reduce it to a manageable level that political culture must be reformed, and it must be replaced with something halfway decent in the way of consensual government. Iraq has always been the favorite Arab state for the Arabists advocating a modernization of the Arab world. For what it's worth, they tell us Iraq is the most promising place for such a transformation. Now we are trying it.

6. The three states that are the greatest supporters of Islamist terrorism are Syria, Iran, and the Wahhabist Entity. We now have the opportunity of having a US army in the central position between them to pressurize them and, if necessary, use force against them, in cleaning up terrorism. This should concentrate their minds wonderfully.

7. Not coincidentally, the Iraqis now have, for the first time, the opportunity of haveing a free and prosperous country, not a tyranny where the tyrant takes all the moolah and lets the peasants starve, as is so common in the Arab world. This is their chance for freedom, probably the only one they will ever get.

The Iraq campaign was a necessary step in the War on Islamist Terrorism. It should have beneficial effects in the long term. Our enemies are hoping to outlast us, and people screaming in the US that we should leave Iraq embolden them. As for so many people around the world hating us I doubt we can do too much about that no matter how much harder we try.

As for sneers about McDonalds, no US soldiers are forcing people into them at gunpoint. Somebody eats there, or the local people who are the frachisees would not put money into them. But I can see how ordinary people making their own decisions, as in America, would annoy the pissants among the members of the political and chattering classes abroad. It annoys American leftists too.

Mr Bush's recent visit to Australia was highlighted by small scale violent demos by the usual rent-a-mob and a couple of watermelons interjecting during his address to the parliament. Despite the best efforts of the communistos at the ABC and Sydney Morning Herald, most Australians saw straight through the shrill hyperbole of the Bush/Howard haters. The average Aussie certainly did not like what they saw. The result was that Bush and Howard came out on top. I say let them demonstrate, let them explode with rage, let them burn Stars and Stripes, Stars of David and Union Jacks. All they'll achieve is a backlash against their stupidity.

What Michael said. With bells on top. It's a shame the BBC is too busy decrying the US and Israel, when they could be broadcasting the mass graves, the industrial shredder people were fed into, the brides/school girls raped by Uday and the torture of Olympic athletes who didn't perform (another feather in Juan Antonio Samaranch's cap). Let alone the average citizens who got that knock on the door in the middle of the night. But heck, it's just so much easier to sneer at the US and equate Bush with Hitler and then go to the pub feeling like they've done their bit for their friends at the Guardian and Independent.

Ms Phillips is quite right to be concerned about those horrid plebs threatening mayhem on the streets. Mr Blunkett should clamp down on them properly. If he can't do it, bring in Mr Howard.
Back in the 1960s, in the US, the police used dogs and water cannon on these whiners. Things have only gone downhill since then.

Demonstrators against the visit of Pres Bush are highly vexed that the police will not qllow them to come in proximity to the President. And quite rightly, as there are muslims in the UK who would like to assasinate the President.

http://forum.ymuk.net/showthread.php?s=ecc95aa772e3d0da5389a020dc423761&threadid=5883

This is what it has come to, in allowing a culture into the West that is totally alienated and unaccustomed to the norms of tolerance.

Why is it not legitimate to protest against Bush for other reasons - his breathtaking arrogance in regecting the Kyoto protocol, his widespread human rights abuses, his spurious pseudo-moralistic excuses for withdrawing 3rd world AIDS support, the fact that he has overseen the highest execution rates in US history...

We have a duty to protest against our OWN government first and foremost, however since Bush was the main proponent of the invasion of Iraq it would be a shame to waste the opportunity to express how we feel about him while he's here.

E. Kent: Clinton signed on to the Kyoto prototol knowing the US Senate would never ratify it's approval. Bush at least had the "juice" to be honest about it's prospects (i.e., none in it's current form). Is it better to sign on to Kyoto, ala France and Canada, and then just ignore its requirements? Bush's $15b commitment to AIDS in Africa even got the approval of Sir Bob. Despite years of talk, an American Administration has actually put some serious money behind the rhetoric. What are the "widespread" human rights abuses? Specificity is always appreciated when making such remarks. If you're against the death penalty (which it sounds like you are), then one such death is too many, isn't it?

Enjoy your demonstration, it IS your right. Just know that a whole nation of Iraqis now also share this right. Thanks to the dumb, arrogant Texan and his poodle in No. 10.

Wonderful comments as always. Whether or not one agrees with all of these comments, they are thoughtful, and well worth reading. As one in Texas who does not always agree with Bush, one does worry about his visit to the UK.

Will the demonstrations get out of hand, and result in those from the US not being welcome in our next visit to the UK.

Jim Comfort

"Ms Phillips is quite right to be concerned about those horrid plebs threatening mayhem on the streets...."

This isn't written by THE Taki, right? Or is it?

I'm sorry, but I find your tongue-in-cheek a bit heavy-handed.

Attempting to win the hearts and minds of those protesting Bush would be an exercise in futility.

Nudging Iraq to become a pluralistic and prosperous nation is doable.

A few thousand demonstrators is not Britain. It will be the same demonstrators who demonstrate at anything just for the hell of it. I am one Britain who welcomes Mr Bush to this country at least he has the power of his convictions - if it had been up to the EU to decide what should happen to brutal dictators Saddam would still be in power.

The BBC asked a few relatives of the British soldiers who died in Iraq if they were happy to meet Mr. Bush, although I have the deepest symphathy with them - the ones that were interviewed said they would like to ask him face to face why he had started a war that was not needed - implying that Mr Bush was responsible for the soldiers deaths. It was not mentioned by the interviewer that it was Tony Blair that had sent the British troops into Iraq not Mr Bush

E. Kent and other Brits should be advised that the US is a _federal_ system and that the choice of capital punishment vs life in prison is a matter for the _state_ governments (although, thanks to Bill Clinton, the Federal Government now has capital crimes on the books, which led to Timothy McVey's execution); when Bush was governor of Texas the state executed criminals, as did Bill Clinton's Arkansas.
And, given that it has been Putin who put the final nail in Kyoto's coffin, do you people plan to demonstrate against the Russians?

George Bush is an ignorant and very dangerous fool. His jaunt over to London (nice and handy for a photo op with the Queen) brings shame to our country. More power to the protesters I say. Scuttle off back to the US, George. You aren't welcome here.

Richard (of Richard & Judy) is a (surprise) star.

Friday evening had Bonnie Greer (famous just for being a black American living in London?)giving full vent to her anti-Bush opinions.

As is usual, these people all seem to deliver the same script. Ms Greer had heard the fool Livingstone say that Bush was coming to provide footage of meeting the queen for his election video, take minds of the Iraq situation.
One would think that as an American Ms Greer would know that such scenes would cut little ice in Moose Jaw Montana. But no, she repeated this nonsense.

Richard pointed out that the visit had been arranged 21 months ago & therefore was not a diversion from Iraq.

Ms Greer was effectively shot off at the knees, but had no other argument, so stuck with it regardless.

Bush is a war criminal. Keep him out!

To Nick & Elkajim: Did you feel the same way when Assad of Syria had tea with the Queen? Thinking very hard... back to thousands and thousands of demonstrators against his visit... oops... guess not. I suppose this particular group of demonstrators like to reserve their bile not for dictators who are sending terrorists into Iraq to kill US and British troops, but for democratically elected leader of Britain's greatest ally. How special.

the guy is a nutter. has launced 2 wars while in office, already contemplating more (syria, iran and korea come to mind )

Hundreds of thousands of Americans died in two world wars. In either of these, the US was not obliged to come and rescue Europe from its lunacy.
But it did all the same, sacrificing men and material and then gave generously to reconstruct Europe. It then went on to put its own survival on the line by shielding Europe from the likes of Stalin. In all of this, it was not about oil but establshing and protecting freedom.

So among all the chants of 'Its about oil', Americans are yet again pouring lives and treasure to construct a free democarcy in the Middle-East. Yes, Americans are naive, for certainly if it were up to Europeans, they would never do such things. For all the modern wars that Europe has been involved in, were for gaining or retaining colonial possesions and its not surprising that such motives are imputed by Europe to America as well.

So to those who would like to ask the American president about the death of their loved ones, better be prepared to apologise to America for the death of hundreds of thousands of Americans in two world wars that were of European making.

Bravo DP. I wrote a post to address Nesrine. But then deleted it. Sounds like he needs to come off the BBC teet.

I'm in agreement with Melanie, yet as an American I fail to see how it is either the Americans responsibility or business to hold British Press accountable. How anyone could accept paying the BBC to propagandise the air ways is beyond comprehension.

This is not America's problem and I've a hunch that will be apparent to a lot more Brits than you think next week. The Two Ausie MP's and protestors down under tried to embarass Bush and they succeded only in embarassing themselves. The same papers who lampooned Bush over the war lambasted the themselves after he left for their own foolishness.

There is nothing for Americans to understand about Britain in my view. It's not our business
to do PR in what is suppose to be a free Britain. The US can't PR the world and if we did nobody would beleive us anyway. If standing by Britain for over a century isn't enough, including two world wars and the cold war, the Brits are beyond hope anyway.

Besides, if you support the US effort against terrorism, economic turmoil, and a host of other problems you will quickly note that messrs. Bush, Powell, Rice, and Rummy simply don't have time to travel the world or do non-stop interviews. This is Britain's problem. Stupid is as stupid does.(no offense intended)

It's like Bush said in his interview, if he paid any attention to polls he would be running around in circles.
Sorry Britain, but this American says if you can't manage your own internal business, or if you don't want to help us, Don't...

very relieved to read others have noticed the bbc is trying to censor british news according to a soviet doctrine thank god for sky and the internet - if you only watched the bbc you would think you lived in east germany during the cold war - its actually quite funny - if anyone is trapped in a bubble it is the british 'establishment' !

With all due respect, Ms. Phillips appears to be judging America's opinion of Bush and his policies by what is expressed through the American news media. This is a mistake. There are MANY of us in the US who are opposed to Bush, his policies, his war, his true lack of compassion for the victims of Sept. 11, and his utter contempt for ALL humanity in the face of corporate interests. We feel a deep sorrow for what he has done and some of us are ashamed to admit that we're Americans. We envy your right to protest. We used to have it but this administration has taken it from us. Don't let him do this to you, British citizens. Protest vigorously. Do it for all of us.

Compassion my ass.

Murph,

Was your comment about compassion in response to what I just wrote? perhaps you should read it again.

Bush has taken the right to protest away from Americans? Tell me, Oh brilliant Neal, did I just dream up the violent, noisy, hateful, pro-Saddam ANSWER protests we saw all over the US in March? You know, the ones where thousands of people carried banners reading "We Support our Troops -- When they Shoot their Officers"? Or was that just a photoshop lie created by the evil Bushcroft propaganda machine?

Perhaps Neal is a member of the Looney Left who confuses disagreement with censorship. You see folks, in the US, the Left has had its way in the media, in Hollywood, on the university campus, for so long, without any challenges whatsoever, that they consider disagreement with their viewpoints to be "censorship." They haven't yet recovered from their shock that in the post-9-11 world, numerous AMERICANS ACTUALLY DO NOT CONSIDER THEM TO BE THE REPOSITORIES OF ALL THAT IS RIGHT AND TRUE AND GOOD WITH THE WORLD.

Get over it, Neal, you are lying through your teeth to these good Brits and deep down, you know you are. Your dishonest post is a good reason why the Left is losing support all over the US, yes even from former Liberal, Clinton-supporting Democrats like myself.

We can believe the evidence of our own freakin' eyes, you know!

'We can believe the evidence of our own freakin' eyes, you know!'

The only evidence apparent from the behaviour of the Bu$h regime is that it is leading the US into economic and diplomatic chaos.

Umm, Mel, what is that supposed to mean? I was specifically referring to the numerous photos and news articles I saw of protestors against the war and Bush in the US, covered by the US press. See my reply to "Neal" who claims that this right has been denied to Americans by the evil Bushcroft mafia.

Trust a lefty to issue a dim-witted non-sequitur. Do try to stay on the same page, dear boy.

Susan, or should I say Ann Coulter, what DO you believe with your "own freakin' eyes" what you see on the 6 o'clock news? Thousands of protestors? really? And when people protest AGAINST Bush, where do you suppose they're allowed to do it? Near the White House? or wherever 'W' is brave enough to show his face? or any place of real consequence? Think again. Protestors are forced to give those who have the power to respond a very wide berth--as in BLOCKS away! (research Portland OR 8-03, or 8-23-02 when protestors were shot with rubber bullets. Did your "freakin' eyes" see the Florida SENIORS who paid to attend a Bush rally and were beaten and arrested for carrying anti bush signs? Or the law abiding family with an infant who were maced by police on
world Protest Day? I could cite countless other examples but space will not permit. As for the "left" in the media, or even liberalism, don't make me laugh! If you'd been paying any REAL attention you would have noted that liberalism vacated the media quite some time ago. And what we're left with now are lies driven by censorship. All that from the oligarchy (or should I say "oilagarchy") who obviously believe THEY are the only rightful REPOSITORIES OF ALL THAT IS RIGHT AND TRUE AND GOOD WITH THE WORLD. Funny how much of the world doesn't see it that way. You're so consumed with your own lies and blindness that you wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit you on the butt.

Whoever, whatever, who addressed me as "Ann Coulter": thanks for the full-on display of rabid lefty moonbattery. I hope you wipe the spittle off your monitor before posting further. Who the hell cares if people can't protest near the White House? The moonbats on DU, Nazimedia and the Guardian talkboard talk openly of assassinating Bush.

I used to be a liberal democrat who voted for Clinton twice and Walter Mondale twice, but I stopped caring about the lies of the Leftoids on 9-11-2001. That's why I read blogs like this one. Why it bothers you that people like me express an opinion, God only knows. Kinda proves my statement that the Left regards honest disagreement as "censorship" doesn't it?

OK Susan, so you're politically bipolar. How's that psychotherapy working out for you? Don't forget to take your Zoloft. "lies of the Leftoids on 9-11-2001??? Like the "Leftoids" were asleep at the switch and allowed us to be attacked??

Channel 4 live pictures showed the crest on the door of Air Force 1; I thought of the Space Shuttle or LEM ad Bush stepping out onto the lunar surface on an alien planet. Then again it is the only country in Europe where English is spoken (okay, Scotland too, just !) and although I hear the BBC and Jon Snow hyping up the alien-brigade to do their media stunts, I somehow doubt they will be important.

Bush said he was another Ronald Reagan in the election; well he gets the same reception, so what ? He is a strong enough man to weather it, and Ken Livingstone can trash London's hopes of filling hotel rooms with American visitors by showing them chaos on TV. Any stunts against Bush do him no harm, just make London look stupid, it will be so funny to see the Joker Livingstone rendering the decrepit city completely unmarketable........and they want the Olympics ? Ha Ha Ha !

Livingstone cannot resist a self-promotion exercise.....he and Lindsay German can rave on about the great 'happenings' the Left love so much; and we can treat it as "kids day out"

Neal: Your frothing mouth posts make it sound as if you're the one who needs to up the meds. You sound just like Tim Robbins who spoke about the "chill wind of censorhip blowing" from the podium of the National Press Club that was reported on TV and in most newspapers across the country. So much for censorship. Susan's right on when she says that when the extreme left complains about censorship they're really talking about their views being questioned and challenged. That's not censorship. That's debate. And quite healthy. Perhaps what you don't like is that your ideas and beliefs are being exposed as intellectually bankrupt.

Now go back into your basement before Bush's henchmen come and drag you away from your outlawed computer and internet connection.

To: Anonymous Moonbat, whom I take to be "Neal". Re: 9-11

Well, since it was Clinton's secretary of state who turned down the chance to nab Bin Laden when the Sudanese offered him up to the US in 1996, who else would I blame?

It also hasn't escaped my notice that the more the Leftoids find excuses for the actions of radical Islamic "freedom fighters", the more attacks their beloved "freedom fighters" happen to carry out. Funny how that works, innit? If Bin Liner is still alive he probably reads the Guardian talkboard every single day.

Susan - surely you know what the Bin Laden family, the Bush family, Cheney and most of the Neocon ratpack have in common.
Thats right - The Carlyle Group.
'There's no business like war business....'

"oilagarchy" - LOL !

Mel: That doesn't excuse Albright's refusal to take Bin Laden off the hands of the Sudanese. Nor does it excuse the excuses and justifications and often, cheerleading, that the Left so frequently preforms for its Islamofascist "freedom fighter" buddies.

Italian "anti-war militants" (the BBC's term, not mine) are now collecting money to buy arms for Saddam and Al-Qaeda in Iraq. So the Left is not only excusing and cheerleading for Al-Qaeda and Saddam, they are actively supporting it with money and guns.

"Oilagarchy" - does that term refer also to the European oil companies that had contracts with Saddam they were desperately hoping to keep?

"Susan - surely you know what the Bin Laden family, the Bush family, Cheney and most of the Neocon ratpack have in common.
Thats right - The Carlyle Group.
'There's no business like war business....'"

Yes, nice hotel but a bit pricey. Didn't Andre Meyer, Head of Lazards used to live there and entertain the Kennedy clan. He was an inside trader, still that's how the Kennedy clan got rich.

Carlyle Group has started buying automotive companies making aluminium wheels and gearboxes, I find this quite perplexing, when they should be joining with The Bilderberg Group and The Trilateral Commission to seek world domination.....after all Cecil Rhodes wanted his Scholars to become the Guardians of World Peace, but instead he got people like Clinton....always football players...poor Oxford.

"London is going to greet Bush with what at best will be massive demonstrations against him, and at worst violence, rioting and maybe even terrorism."
Looks like the worst didn't happen. Still it sounded impressive... The best did though :)

I have become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

Reality is not affected by our apprehension of it.

Good people strengthen themselves ceaselessly.