"The typical Brit is monolingual, thinks everyone will understand him if he shouts louder in English and believes firmly that the real world ends at the entrance to the Euro tunnel (which should never have been built as it makes it more easy for foreigners to get into England.)

"The typical American is gullible, lacks subtlety, cannot read between lines, has the most perfect knowledge of what is the best form of government for the world, has lots of money, is old and grey haired, has a terrible sense of dress and an alarming inability to hear what others are saying - example, the former Secretary of Defense.

"I remember the first time I visited the US and made some statements in the same way as I would make them in Britain or in Mainland Europe. I was quite alarmed that my statements were accepted almost without question. In Europe you have to make your case every time. What this means is that I had to tone down what I said unless I was absolutely certain of my facts. If I made a statement which was later found to be incorrect, then my credibility would be destroyed for life. Americans believe you; Europeans doubt you. This means that Europeans are more inclined to wait and assess; Americans go and do.

"Global, Worldwide and International ought to mean the same thing. In America, I have found that 'International' means the whole world outside of North America. Canada is regarded as a poor, second cousin, but not international. In view of NAFTA, Europeans are amused that Americans include Mexico as International.

"These are just a few imperfect and fairly scattered scribblings on my thoughts. Note that the effect of Chinese and Indian contributions haven't yet been considered."

Martin Greenwood [Martin.Greenwood@iesystems.com.au] from Australia suggests that the elected Presidency is a flaw in the US constitution:

"I am an admirer of the Declaration of Independence (the most important document ever drafted in the English language, with one of the most magnificent and memorable opening lines ever). We must always be grateful that America showed the world that democracy was not only possible, but desirable. It was an heroic achievement, given that the conventional wisdom at the time was that Democracy was a nice idea but totally impractical. It was assumed that the new nation would soon descend into chaos.

"However, we should not be surprised, given the circumstances under which it was written, that the US constitution was flawed. Indeed, precisely because it was the first modern democracy, we should expect it to be less than ideal. America should be capable of learning from history and experience.

"To those of us in a Parliamentary Democracy based on the British model, it never ceases to amaze that the US Government, now among the largest and most powerful bureaucracies in the world, is based entirely on the election of one individual. His deputy, whether good or bad, is just along for the ride.

"Given that all Presidents and all Prime Ministers are humans, and that all humans are imperfect, it is unreasonable to expect that there exists anywhere an individual competent to be an ideal President.

"The big flaw is the separation between Government and Legislature, and the separation of electing the President from electing the Legislature, combined with a rigidly fixed term of office. It seemed like a good idea at the time the Constitution was written. The founding fathers could not have imagined the size of the current US Government.

"Most importantly, if America discovers that it has a disastrous President - or even a criminal one - there is no effective and timely mechanism to remove him from office. And even then, there would be a power vacuum until the next Presidential election.

"Britain has (in my opinion) made a mistake by adopting a presidential style election of the Prime Minister at the party conference. Tony Blair survived a vote of no-confidence in Parliament, but only with the support of the Opposition(!!). If only they had been able to tell Blair to pull his head in, maybe GW Bush would have not started the disastrous war that now consumes not only his Presidency, but America and the world. If only...."

Harry Ebbeson [hlestringman@hotmail.com] complains about energy mismanagement:

"I am really tired of being accused of energy mismanagement. I have to manage my energy usage because it is expensive. I walk or ride a bike when I can. I keep my thermostat down because natural gas is costly. I don't listen to these self appointed pundits who spout out what I should do.

"Paying additional taxes is not the answer, I heard the same line of bull when the last round of taxes went into effect. It was going to solve the problem then - just as they claim now. Giving more taxes to a bureaucracy is like putting gasoline on a fire. The sole purpose of a bureaucracy is to proliferate itself and grow. All the money paid in taxes in Europe over the last several decades should have gotten them almost totally energy independent. Instead they have near-welfare states.

"In the US, the oil companies were given special tax incentives to find and produce gas and oil within the US. They did that, and now they make huge profits and those same incentives are now called 'giveaways to big oil'.

"So I end my rant - but I can tell you that many people feel the same way and are tired of being blamed for something they did not start, continue nor endorse. If Al Gore were so concerned, why was this not a platform of his first election bid? Why, because he has seen a political reason to continue his 'relevance'. GW Bush has already indicated his priorities and allegiances - to Oil."