>> ^MINK:
@notarobot: Blair is Catholic, it was kind of a big deal.
@dannym: "protests outside parliament were probably banned around the time terrorism was stepped up and people started crashing planes into buildings" ...
sorry danny, before saying things like "probably" you could just, you know, google, and find out "actually" that protests were banned outside parliament for only one reason, and that is Brian Haw kept insisting on telling the truth about serious war crimes, every day, in parliament square. They made an orwellian exclusion zone, after several failed attempts to remove him.
Also, it is very easy to block traffic in parliament square, I know, because I did it on the day they "debated" whether or not to go to war in Iraq. Kinda embarassing for them.
You could at least explain to me how banning protest makes London any safer from terrorist attack.
@Kerotan: wow, well done, americans are "way more exciting" than the reserved british, who i have only seen go mental for tony blair, princess diana, and soccer. But regardless of the amount of tickertape thrown around, the situation was very similar, years of supposedly "conservative" bungling, followed by a fresh new face promising "change"... people gave him a landslide.


Wow, well done for sounding like a patronising arsehole, it was difficult, but you managed it, here have a gold star you good boy! I'm well aware of the perceived British reserve, but even so I can't agree that it was that bigger deal (And I think how big the deal is important too), yes Tony Blair was a staunch catholic, but in the same way Obama might be secretly gay in a shame marriage, the point being that Blair took great care not talk about religion and politics in the same sentence, its not like we elected the pope to be PM.

On most of your other points I agree with you, it was a landslide victory and yes the situation was very similar but I don't exactly equatable to Obama's win, even if I was an American living the UK, I don't it would have been possible for me to get any more excited than I was at the time, which to be frank wasn't much.

@notarobot: Blair is Catholic, it was kind of a big deal.

@dannym: "protests outside parliament were probably banned around the time terrorism was stepped up and people started crashing planes into buildings" ...
sorry danny, before saying things like "probably" you could just, you know, google, and find out "actually" that protests were banned outside parliament for only one reason, and that is Brian Haw kept insisting on telling the truth about serious war crimes, every day, in parliament square. They made an orwellian exclusion zone, after several failed attempts to remove him.
Also, it is very easy to block traffic in parliament square, I know, because I did it on the day they "debated" whether or not to go to war in Iraq. Kinda embarassing for them.
You could at least explain to me how banning protest makes London any safer from terrorist attack.

@Kerotan: wow, well done, americans are "way more exciting" than the reserved british, who i have only seen go mental for tony blair, princess diana, and soccer. But regardless of the amount of tickertape thrown around, the situation was very similar, years of supposedly "conservative" bungling, followed by a fresh new face promising "change"... people gave him a landslide.

^ Well if you walk past Parliament Square you'll see Brian Haw protesting there, and he'll be more than happy to show you pictures of the babies maimed and killed by Blair & Bush policies, and explain to you what you might have missed over the last 8 years.

http://www.parliament-square.org.uk/