No, it's you who are posting the tripe. It's been pointed out that the postings that have come out of quidnunc are from a narrow, limited coterie of Anglophobic writers. You can count them on one hand. This is not a balanced picture. Furthermore, David has posted a quote that shows that quid is motivated by personal spite.
I would add in the strongest possible terms as someone who lives here that quite frankly, the writers that have been posted are either wrong or lying. And anyone who believes it is either wrong or a bigot.
One final thing - the one element that unites the anti-British bigots on this board is the willingness to take the worst behaviour of a minority and extrapolate it into a condemnation of Britain as a whole. To do the same to America would be to take the behaviour of blue staters and assume that Texans behave in the same way, and denounce America as being entirely without merit as a result. This is a bigoted, narrow minded form of behaviour, which only serves as a method of slandering other countries.
I am sick to death of people such as yourself acting like Britain is France.
Ivan
I declined to name you, but you have outed yourself as the one slinging mud on these threads.
Stick to debating the issues and omit the personal which is irrelevant. Quid's motives are none of your business, though I might add, yours are clearly no less biased.
The UK, while not France, is heading that way. Such experts as Daniel Pipes, an expert on Islamism, a Pres Bush appointee, refers to London as Londonistan and says it is worse than France in its internal failures in the WOT. France, at least internally, is quite tough on Islamic radicals. No Finsbury Mosques there.
In order to placate the Muslims in UK, the Brits have become anti-US and anti-Israel. Anti-Semitism is at an all time high. (you lost that discussion with me some time back). The BBC is virulently anti-US. Last I checked it was publicly funded.
As to Quids choice of authors, they are all reputable as is the conservative and world read WSJ the source of this thread. As to Anglophobes, they are usually British authors. Instead of the name calling and assertions of "they are wrong because I know better" challenge the facts if you can. I have considerable contacts in the UK and their anecdotal reportage, as credible as yours, confirms the anti-US picture.
Why don't you address Karl Rove's actions towards Michael Howard. Are you disputing this factually? Was Mr Howard, the head of the Conservative Party a rogue element? Why don't you adress the anti-US BBC reportage? Why don't you address the anti-Semitic reportage from the conservative UK Spectator? These are factual debatable issues not character assaults.