US wants a 3day shutdown of central london for Bush.

If there's a terrorist threat, he doesn't need to go. He didn't mind flying around Air Force One on 9/11 to avoid them when none of the Bushies knew where the terrorists were going to strike next, what's the big deal.

Doesn't need to have a minigun to mow down all the protesters.

But as the last paragraph explains, apparently pride before anything else with the Bushies, as always.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49922-2003Nov16.html

Protests Loom In London for Visit by Bush
Trip Was Intended to Showcase Success of the Alliance in Iraq
By Glenn Frankel
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, November 17, 2003; Page A01


LONDON -- When an aging cargo ship from Virginia loaded with toxic waste crawled into Newcastle's harbor in northeast England last week, Peter Brookes, editorial cartoonist for the Times of London, quickly saw an analogy. He drew President Bush's face on the bow, with a sign reading "Highly Toxic."



Bush doesn't arrive here until Tuesday evening, but his four-day state visit to Britain already has set off protests and criticism aimed at him and his geo-strategic partner and close friend: Prime Minister Tony Blair.

The trip, planned months ago, was supposed to be a celebration of the Anglo-American alliance following the anticipated triumph of U.S. and British forces in Iraq. Blair's aides had looked forward to what they called a "Baghdad bounce" in the polls that would restore their leader's popularity at home. Bush's aides had relished the chance for the president to present his vision of the war on terrorism on the world stage in the relatively friendly and secure environment of America's closest ally.

But the escalating violence in Iraq -- combined with a series of lingering disputes between the two governments and perceived slights from Washington -- has tarnished the glow. The trip has become an opportunity for antiwar protesters to stage three days of demonstrations. One protest leader, Lindsey German, called Bush "the most unwelcome guest this country has ever received." Critics across the political spectrum here are raising anew questions about Blair's close partnership with a conservative Republican administration.

"Unless Saddam Hussein arrives and gives himself up personally to the queen, I can't see any upside at all for Blair," said Peter Riddell, author of "Hug Them Close," a new book about American-British relations. "You'd have to go back to the Vietnam War to find a time when a presidential visit would have been so controversial."

Many Britons say Bush is taking advantage of his junior partner by coming here for photo ops with Blair and Queen Elizabeth, his official hostess for the visit, to help launch his reelection campaign. Some Democrats, among them Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton White House aide, have chided their counterparts in Blair's left-of-center Labor Party for bestowing political aid and comfort on a Republican president. But analysts warn that the visit could backfire on Bush.

"I think Americans will be surprised to see the extent of the antipathy toward Bush here," said James P. Rubin, a former assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration who now teaches at the London School of Economics. "When they think of Britain they think Tony Blair, our stalwart ally, and they're probably not aware that in terms of public opinion Britain is not all that different from the rest of Europe."

Britain was America's closest ally before and during the Iraq conflict, thanks largely to Blair's personal commitment. But a large majority of Britons favored winning U.N. approval before launching military action. Although the public rallied behind British troops during the conflict, support for the war -- and for Blair -- has plummeted in the months since, especially among members of the ruling Labor Party.

Bush, labeled "the Toxic Texan" by critics here, has never been a popular figure in Britain. A poll last week for the antiwar Daily Mirror newspaper found that three of four Britons surveyed believed Bush's war on terrorism had made the world a more dangerous place. Things have gotten so bad that commentators noted the high number of compliments Bush paid Blair in a recent interview with British reporters -- Riddell counted 15 during the 40-minute session -- and warned that each one could further damage Blair's political standing.

On Sunday, Bush said he was not worried by the prospect of protests during his visit, the Reuters news agency reported from Washington. "No, not concerned at all," he said. "Glad to be going to a free country where people are allowed to protest."

Beginning with Harry Truman in 1952, Queen Elizabeth has met every one of the 11 U.S. presidents who have served during her reign. But the invitation to Bush is the first formal state visit ever for an American leader. It came about reportedly through the hard work of U.S. Ambassador William S. Farish, a Bush family friend and major Republican Party donor.

Farish has been all but invisible during his three years here, but maintains close ties to the royal family, due in part to a shared interest in horse racing and breeding -- the queen sends mares to Lane's End, his stud farm in Kentucky, and she reportedly has visited there four times. The trip was first broached 18 months ago, officials said, and final plans were cemented in the spring, just after U.S. and British forces rolled through Iraq.

"They probably thought it would be a victory lap," Rubin said.

Already, officials say, the trip has been a planning nightmare. Bush and his wife, Laura, are scheduled to spend the first two nights at Buckingham Palace in the heart of London, and the Secret Service has demanded that a large area be sealed off to protect the president from potential terrorists and from the 100,000 or so demonstrators expected to protest in the streets. About 250 armed Secret Service agents have been assigned to supplement Scotland Yard's extensive forces. But the queen reportedly vetoed, as too noisy, plans for a Black Hawk helicopter to hover over Buckingham Palace.
Polls indicate that many Britons resent the planned show of force, the potential disruption and the estimated $10 million bill for presidential security. But there is much deeper resentment stemming from the widespread sense that Blair has gotten little but grief from a relationship that, viewed from here, looks increasingly one-sided.



While insisting publicly that relations have never been better, British officials privately keep a laundry list of complaints about the Bush administration, beginning with Iraq itself -- both the run-up to the war and the aftermath. The British had pushed behind the scenes for more time for U.N. weapons inspectors to complete their task before taking military action, but say they were overruled by impatient hawks in the White House and Pentagon.

After the initial fighting ended, they proposed maintaining the Iraqi army, albeit under a different command structure, and pressed for a faster handover to local authorities. Most of all, they have complained that they are seldom consulted, much less heeded, by U.S. officials despite having 10,000 troops on the ground in southern Iraq.

There are other sources of tension, from the ongoing detention without charge or trial at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, of nine British nationals suspected of terrorism, to Washington's alarm over British involvement in the new European Union defense project and the Bush administration's effective abandonment of the "road map" diplomatic initiative in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Washington has also viewed critically a British-French-German effort to negotiate an end to Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program. Apprised of Europe's carrot-and-stick approach to Iran, Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton mockingly told a recent seminar here, "I don't do carrots."

In all of these areas, British officials complain they have gotten little or no support from Washington. "The feeling is that every time something really matters, Blair has to go and beg personally for it," said Bronwen Maddox, foreign affairs columnist for the Times. "There have been a lot of bruises this year."

Blair, as always, has put the most positive face on the Bush visit, insisting in a recent speech that "this is exactly the right time for him to come."

"The first thing you learn in politics is that those that protest the most or shout the loudest aren't necessarily entirely representative of the whole of opinion," he said in an interview last week. "Most people in this country, I believe, are immensely proud of the American alliance and support it."

The queen and the president have met before, most famously in 1991 during his father's administration when he made her smile by wearing cowboy boots stamped with "God Save the Queen" during her visit to the White House. U.S. and British officials are hoping his quirky charm, combined with his deeply held belief that he is protecting the world from rogue states and terrorism, will somehow capture hearts and minds here.


"The president cannot back down from this fight," said one U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "If you don't address the issue, then the argument goes by default to the other side. And this is still the best European capital, the best environment, to make the case."
[\b]

 

Yes i know it's The Mirror (Some of the responses pretty much tell you all you need to know). Still a good laugh.

BUSH PULLS OUT OF SPEECH TO PARLIAMENT

Nov 17 2003

By Bob Roberts, Political Correspondent

GEORGE Bush was last night branded chicken for scrapping his speech to Parliament because he feared being heckled by anti-war MPs.

The US president planned to give a joint address to the Commons and Lords during his state visit to Britain.

But senior White House adviser Dr Harlan Ullman said: "They would have loved to do it because it would have been a great photo-opportunity.

"But they were fearful it would to turn into a spectacle with Labour backbenchers walking out."

The decision to abandon the speech came as extraordinary security measures costing £19million placed London under a state of virtual siege ahead of Mr Bush's arrival tomorrow.

Roads in Whitehall were closed with concrete blockades. Overhead, a no-fly zone has been established with the RAF on standby to shoot down unidentified planes. All police leave is cancelled.

The only speech Mr Bush, who will stay with the Queen at Buckingham Palace, is now due to give will be to an "invited audience" at the Banqueting House in Whitehall.

Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn said: "This is yet another slight on this country by the president of the USA.

"The least he could do is subject himself to questions from MPs."

And colleague John McDonnell said: "Bush might be able to run from the protesters, he might be able not to see the banners.

"But he must not be able to hide from the anger felt across the country at this unjustified war."

Previous world leaders, including Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela and Francois Mitterand, have all given speeches to the Lords and the Commons while visiting Britain.

Tony Blair gave a joint address to the American Senate and Congress in July.

But earlier this year, Bush was embarrassed when he was heckled by MPs in Australia.

Downing Street last night refused to comment on the president's itinerary.

A spokesman said: "We have said consistently the programme details will be announced at the appropriate moment. There is nothing to add to this."

The row about the speech came after President Bush set up a showdown with demonstrators by refusing to be apologetic on the Gulf war.

In an interview with the BBC's Breakfast with Frost show, he said they would not "cut and run" from Iraq. He added: "We will not be defeated by the terrorists."

Mr Bush also refused to grant British pleas for mercy for the six Britons held in Guantanamo Bay.

He said: "They will go through a military tribunal at some point, a military tribunal in international accord, or in line with international accords."


BUSH'S VISIT IS COSTLY AND CONTROVERSIAL. WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS?
Do you agree with the President's State visit to Britain?



Post a message

Fu from Louisville, KY 12:29:02 PM 17 November 2003
Its time people everywhere started showing their distaste for Bush's callous leadership. Stand tall and shout loud, these chickenhawks and their supporters need to learn their reasons for invading Iraq was a lie and just plain wrong.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dean from Belfast 10:48:48 AM 17 November 2003
Bush isnt welcome, he dosent deserve portection at all, let him face the public and the protesters, the protesters are right to protest!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Hanley from Port Angeles, WA., USA 10:44:57 AM 17 November 2003
There are many in America that are ashamed of Mr. Bush. Sorry that he has to defile your country with his visit. We will try to get rid of him in 2004. Hope that you can topple Blair from power.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Davidson from North Carolina, USA 01:41:55 AM 17 November 2003
Don't forget, British cousins, Pres. Bush would be first in line to rally to your side if you are attacked as we were Sept. 11. Don't think for one moment that Iraq didn't have something to do with that, and that it will never happen to you. And the mass graves in Iraq don't bother you at all? Do you really wish Saddam was back in power?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Hohnholt from Olympia, WA, USA 11:22:45 PM 16 November 2003
Go get 'em, Brits! If you're wondering why you don't hear more sounds of dissent here in the states, look no further than our corporate owned media which has been covering up for this ******* from Day 1. You can be sure we'll have to head to the internet to see pictures of Bush's statue being hauled down to the ground and stomped on joyously by the True Patriots fighting to stop this phony, disgusting, and unnecessary war built on lies about WMDs from start to finish.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony from Oklahoma City 07:10:35 PM 16 November 2003
I too would prefer if President Bush did not visit London. I would also like if all American Tourist did not visit England. Your respect for my president is an insult to my adopted country.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffry from Kansas City 05:54:06 PM 16 November 2003
Ironic! Isn't it? U-squared (Dubya) will not see U.S. families or attend soldiers' funerals who were KIA, but he'll toddle off to the UK to fain sorrow. Fraudulant little viper.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Russ Thomas from Wales 12:04:07 PM 16 November 2003
Mr Bush is even more stupid than i thought. We need to withdraw from Iraq asap,help rebuild thier Country' I never thought i would agree with Ken Livingstone, about anything, but he is right on this occasion. Just try and ring your Mp today and ask did they support the war against Iraq, then come the next election use your vote wisely.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nina from Victoria 09:31:16 AM 16 November 2003
God, how I love you Brits! You do what the American sheeple can't. Give the sociopathic moron absolute Hell. Run the Union jack up his ruddy ....! My sincere apologies for the moron Yank who dropped a bomb on the British convoy.. you know the one that had a British flag painted on the top? And, as well, the other moron Yank flyer who shot the Harrier jet out of the sky. They must have been trained by the ace flier, Dumbya. God bless you all and give him a rouser!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric from Johnstown, NY USA 07:11:11 AM 16 November 2003
Rest assured that any protest will be played down, (CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC) or completely ignored (FOXNews) by the US media. But know in your hearts that millions of Americans are with you in spirit. We have been under the control of a President who was not elected by the majority, but selected by a court that he and his conservative cohorts demean, until they need something. Our freedoms are disappearing as fast as our jobs and our money. When we cry out for sanity, we are branded traitors. When we question reasoning, we are called Un-American. So protest. Stand proud and tall. And think of us, the Americans that are with you in spirit. And, pray for us too. Pray that in the coming year, sanity will once again return to the majority, and dirty election tricks will be a thing of the past, and we can elect a President that will begin to heal the wounds caused by Bush and his right-wing cabal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Johnny from North Carolina 12:09:33 AM 16 November 2003
People of London! Show the world how much you disapprove of Bush and his war for oil power and money. The world can't stand another term under his police state tyranny

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
michelle from london 09:28:23 PM 15 November 2003
Stu - is your child a terrorist? Your claims are repulsive.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirk Lennon from Tyler, Texas 07:58:55 PM 15 November 2003
Such vitriolic hatred! It is just an official state visit from the (well educated) American president. He's not a Prime Minister; regardless of the President's actions, he (whoever he is at the time) is always the #1 assassination target in the world. Furthermore, this whole notion of an "invasion" is just pandering. He has Secret Service agents with him. They are not the Marines or anything like that. How can anyone object to some guys in suits? Get over it. One more thing: you shouldn't care if his visit lowers the opinion of the "international community" with respect to the UK. Are your egos so fragile that you would let the opinions of third-rate nations affect you? The ad on this page for the PRIDE of Britain Awards is what makes it so funny.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harry Mason from Perth - Western Australia 06:37:17 PM 15 November 2003
Most of you guys have got it all wrong. Don't keep Bush out of London....... Keep him there - in the Tower !!! Then treat him to one of those great historical ceremonies - beheading drawing and quartering - a fiting end for all traitors to mankind. Do you think the rest of his cronies could be persuaded to visit London too ??? Give him hell London -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enid from Marlborough 05:18:24 PM 15 November 2003
It disturbs me that so many american security guards are insisting on accompanying Bush on his UK visit. It is clear that it is far more dangerous to be a 'friend' of the US than an enemy - their trigger-happy louts cannot catch people like Saddam or BinLaden but keep their spirits up by massacring allies with 'friendly fire' God help us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Roberts from London 08:34:31 AM 15 November 2003
Diane, I just want to make it clear that I for one am not anti-American. I am anti-Dubya, and have a problem with your present Government. I love the American people, from former President Clinton to Jennifer Aniston. I'm just immensely upset that the Bush family have been allowed to steal the leadership of such a great nation and use it to such appalling ends.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Prodworthy from Santa Clara, CA, USA. Former province under George III 01:19:58 AM 15 November 2003
Joe from Zurich, or Texas more likely: You keep Mrs Slocombe's moggy out of it. Mr Bush is going to get the wigging of his life when he shows his unwelcome mush in our country. And if that shower in Washington think an exclusion zone will work, they haven't seen me disguised as lamp post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jimmy from Jax 12:26:20 AM 15 November 2003
Wished the SOB's didnt have security---then maybe we would. An American

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebecca from London 11:44:35 PM 14 November 2003
One third of all UK children are living in official poverty, a far higher proportion than in our neighbouring European countries. The money our government should be spending on our poor and sick is being used to fight Bush's wars and protect this ultimate war criminal when his presence besmirches our country.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter F from Middlesex 11:22:58 PM 14 November 2003
Ken is right. There is no excuse for an army of hundreds of trigger-happy US bodyguards to invade London. But the real horror is that Bush is coming. Britain's status in the world will sink even lower, if that's possible after what Bush and Blair have done together. It is getting to be embarrassing for a British citizen to travel abroad. And we are inviting terrorist reprisals in our capital, which experts have just rated more dangerous on that score than anywhere in America or Europe. However, the vast majority of the

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stu from London 11:20:36 PM 14 November 2003
The 2 most dangerous men aroud to meet in London - all we need now is Sheron to complete the unholy trio. I fear between them they may well have signed my children,s death warrant. Protest,Protest,Protest!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lily from London 11:10:06 PM 14 November 2003
GWB is an illiterate red neck idiot who has no more right to run one of the world super powers than a weasel. He is illeducated stupid and arrogant. How can so many people wrong? Open your eyes, world. This guy is a puppet. Cut his strings. We live in the free world - stand up for what you believe in. This war is nothing but a fight over oil. Why should we pay? Go Red Ken!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jerry from Exton PA USA 09:15:04 PM 14 November 2003
Dear Brits, Please, stage a Boston Tea Party in reverse when Bush visits your country. How about it? Ole King George certainly was no worse than our present leader. There is one exception, however. King George always had to ask for permission to enter the City. And he did! Doubyer takes it for granted. Please show him your disrespect by turning your backs on him. Or better still, purchase products only from companies that did NOT contribute to his election campaign.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True Patriot from Little Rock, Ar 09:05:03 PM 14 November 2003
President Bush has been labeled a liar and a 'war criminal' by numerous individuals and media oulets within the U.S. and without. It would be refreshing if someone would please state specifically what Bush knowingly and intentionally lied about, and then provide cited sources to back up their claims. Anything less will certainly not do. Finally, war criminals are those who unwarrantedly attack other countries or brutally inflict harm upon their own civilian within their own country, as Saddam did.The U.S.was within warrant for attacking given what the U.N. stated in 1998 about WMD's in Iraq, and Saddam not fully complying with weapons inspections. The U.S. waging war against a despot(Saddam) saved countless lives that Saddam would have sooner or later added to the estimated 250,000 murdered that are being found within mass graves all over Iraq. Too bad for many that America isn't like the French who are silent to atrocities, unless they are the ones being attacked, as in WWII

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack from Albuquerque 08:30:07 PM 14 November 2003
Joe from Zurich, you got the part about Bush&CO right - it's the rule of the corporate special interests, an oligarchy. Anyone making less than $100k a year is a total fool to support the conservatives, they look upon you as single fodder units. Hey, they sure found a bunch of WMD's in Iraq, eh Joe?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnew...USH-PULLS-OUT-OF-SPEECH-TO-MPS-name_page.html

 

There are all kinds of criticims of President Bush...the fact that he stayed in the air on 9/11 when the Pentagon and WTC were hit, and another plane crashed into a rural area in Pennsylvania is absolutely the dumbest.

 

Not to derail the thread, but I disagree. First, we don't truly know the reason he stayed up because the stories coming out of the administration that were to explain it differed and some were later proved false. We do know that when he did first make a speech, he looked shaky and starkly un-presidential. Contrast that with Rudy's performance and the conclusion is the President wasn't ready, be it emotionally, intellectually or whatever. Couple all this with the fact that he chose to capitalize on the flight by sending donors photos of him looking severe on Air Force One and the political door is opened. As with the current question of the London visit, there's not a President in our history (especially since we became a power) that would not have immediately overridden whatever political or security flack (and that includes Cheney) was telling him to stay in the air. Every other President would have directed Air Force One to DC or NY immediately. And every other President would have made a joke to the kids and gotten out of the photo op ASAP instead of wasting 20 minutes.

 

rimrocker -- you're judging the president of the united states in the midst of multiple foreign attacks on the country simultaneously...and you're admittedly doing it with guesswork. even the harshest critics of bush commend nim on his work the days immediately following 9/11. why in the world would we want the president on the ground for those hours immediately following that? we knew there were still planes unaccounted for that hadn't landed yet...we've been told that the white house itself was a target...you're judging him with guesswork and in hindsight. that's an impossible standard for anyone to live by.

 

I'm not sure we can accurately say what other Presidents would've done in the same situation since nothing like that had happened on American soil.

 

exactly...it's a guessing game.

 

Can you imagine FDR or Truman Or Eisenhower or Kennedy or LBJ or Nixon or Ford or Carter or REAGAN or BUSH I or Clinton not doing something? Because nothing is pretty much what George II did. I think you can accurately say that none of these Presidents would have selected the path that George II took. And while it may be difficult to say exactly what they would have done, I have no doubt that in all cases it would have been significantly more substantial than George II.

 

Of all the good newspaers in England, Bush gives an exclusive interview to this one...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/

Check out the other stories so you can get an idea of how probing this newspaper really is...

 

what??? rimrocker, we were under attack...government buildings were targeted?? what would you have him do??? get on a white horse and wear a tri-cornered hat? what in the world would he have done? the security of the president, during time of attack, is always paramount. that's why we've invested billions of dollars in underground networks in D.C. and elsewhere....there was reason to believe the white house itself was targetted. why would you subject the country to the trauma of losing the WTC, seeing the Pentagon smashed in...AND losing the president all in the same day? you simply wouldn't. but i'll remember to thank God every day you're not on security detail!

 

Please. After every plane in the country is grounded and the military finally woke up and is on patrol and cops all over the country are wired, he's still flying around the midwest.

 

You're right...every other president would have landed the plane and stood on the roof of the White House. We KNOW that, of course. And the fact that there were multiple attacks across the country which we clearly were incapable of stopping should have been of no concern to the president. Hey...he's just another guy, so it's no big deal if he gets taken out.

When you criticize the president for things like this, it diminishes the veracity of your criticism on things he's far more deserving of criticism for.

 

And I'll thank God you're not the leader of the free world (maybe you will too.)

Anyway, I rarely use this stupid cliche, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

i just think it's way too easy to criticize people, in hindsight, in the kind of once-in-a-lifetime crisis situation that was 9/11...particuarly where there was/is reason to believe the president was a target. that smacks of blind partisanship to me. it's seeking another reason to not a like a guy you already don't like.

believe me...i don't want the job...

 

By the way, Bush just pulled out of his scheduled speech to the British Parliament. His only speech in Britain will be to an "invited audience." It's best that way, as we don't want any heckling or walkouts going on... that would be so unflattering.

Past speakers to the Lords and Commons included Mandela, Mitterand, and Clinton.

 

The chickenhawk has now become a true chickensh*t.

 

More fuel for the fire... and if this is really true, a really stupid thing to do... we've only got one solid ally and now we want to upset that applecart? And what about British jobs over here... are we ready for retaliation? Do we really think by doing this we'll create more jobs here? Will this create a rush to incorporate in other countries so companies can go about their usual business? This is dumb politics and dumb economics.

And this is not a labor cost question. If the administration did something about moving IT and tech support jobs to India for example, I might be more sympathetic... and Clinton almost had me convinced on free trade. What ever happened to competition? What ever happened to allowing capital to flow to where it's most efficient?
_____________
This is
LONDON
17/11/03 - Business section

US firms told 'take UK jobs home'
Robert Lea, Evening Standard

GEORGE Bush's administration has called on US companies in Britain to relocate jobs to America in an astonishing move that could trigger a major trade war.

US-based multinationals have been told they will receive compensation from American trade authorities if they cancel contracts in Britain and take jobs home, according to CBI director-general Digby Jones.

The allegations come only a day before Bush arrives in London for his controversial State visit and escalate the storm of protest he has already caused by slapping big protectionist tariffs on European steel imports.

Speaking at the CBI's annual conference in Birmingham, Jones said: 'Three chief executives of American companies investing in Britain have told me to my face that they have been told to close down, bring their stuff home and make it in the US.'

He said the companies were major employers in defence or manufacturing.

Jones continued: 'Whether flouting international law with their steel tariffs or telling their companies to come home, this bullying affects Britain and British jobs.

'We are America's biggest trading partner, but if this escalates into an international trade war it hits us worst because we are such a big player in the world market.'

Unilever chairman Niall FitzGerald said: 'There is a mid-Atlantic trade storm whipping up. There will be retaliation and then retaliation to that retaliation, which could lead us to a 1930s decline.'

FitzGerald said it was unlikely Bush would back down over steel as Presidential elections take place next November.

A spokesman for Trade Minister Patricia Hewitt said: 'It is extremely worrying and just emphasises the damage, the negative effects, a trade war can have.'

 

rim you got a link to that story?

BTW did anyone see the clip of Bush when he was heckled in the Australian parliament?

He just stood there and smirked like it was some kind of joke.

It was clear he was embarrassed. It was kind of sad.

 

http://www.thisislondon.com/news/business/articles/timid70616

 

Caption Game!!!



Bush: "If you keep your head down like this, you can't see the protestors."