Indo-UK: News & Discussion

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 12 Jul 2009 15:36

Unfortunatly Labour are not the only ones who pander to these choots.

The conservative has Syeeda Warsi, who they think will negotiate peace with the islamists.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mm ... RkY2QzZDA=

What I cannot understand is why the Indian Govt doesn't raise this issue.
In effect Labour/Conservatives want the money from the Indians & the votes of the muslims. Because we have no effective border controls here the govt has no idea how many people are actually here. The muslim population is officailly about 1.5-2 Million, however some think it could be 4 million.
They are concentrated in little islamic islands, which are important for votes.

Why can the Indian govt not say quite clearly to the UK govt "if you harbour islamists who fund raise & wage war against us, then this will effect trade relations"??

The UK desperatly need trade with India, which is fine:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Busine ... rchresults

In one of the Youtube videos above there is a scene where a big paki bus is driving around during the cricket celebrations.
It is owned by the TKC restaurant group, paki islamists who fund raise and are anti Indian. If you look on their website they boast about Indian celebs who visit them !!!
What the hell is going on ????

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 14 Jul 2009 04:41

Helmand deaths trigger debate on UK role

Given the scale of the fiscal crisis now facing the UK, the government faces hard choices. Does it want to go on being a nation that tries to punch above its weight in military and diplomatic terms? If it does, where will it find the money to go on doing so? Alternatively, if it cannot find the cash to maintain a functioning defence budget, will Britain be forced to abandon its ambitions to be a second-tier global power?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 14 Jul 2009 04:47

British Army may axe Gurkhas

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Jul 2009 04:33

Are the Tories ready to pay to keep Britain a power in the world?

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 25 Jul 2009 08:22

Gerard wrote:Are the Tories ready to pay to keep Britain a power in the world?

The modesty is refreshing.

Should one take it then that UKstan no longer considers itself more than 'a power in the world'? Something is fishy here.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 25 Jul 2009 15:34

vsudhir, you might be surprised to know that many in the 'hierarchy' openly speak of themselves as a 'former brand'. just attend a few lectures at the various think tanks and you'll see

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Jul 2009 17:48

British economic collapse rivals Great Depression

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 26 Jul 2009 11:44

Gerard wrote:Are the Tories ready to pay to keep Britain a power in the world?

An interesting comment from a wise Old Man....

Britain is one of the most incompetently governed countries in the world.

We can�t even secure our borders against illegal immigrants and when we catch them we have no idea what to do, so we let them go.

Talking to an American he would not believe that we have an illegal immigrant problem �But you are an island�. He cannot comprehend the enormity of our stupidity.

It is impossible to imagine now, but Britain used to be a great country. Now it is a nothing country. The British people are nothing more than coolies and metal bashers. Virtually everything is foreign owned. We even have to import football managers.

No country can be great if it has no industry and we have virtually no industry. Our car industry, our ship building our nuclear capability our science and technology, virtually now all gone.

What�s the good of proclaiming we are wonderful by parading our aircraft carriers around the world when we have to go cap in hand to the French and say please Mr Frenchman please tell us how to design a great ship; and then show us how to build it; and then supervise it�s construction because we are no good at that sort of thing.

This is supposed to impress our friends and enemies?

In the Western world we have one of the lowest standards of living (from having one of the highest) the worst quality of life, the worst education the worst health care, the highest crime rates, the highest drug addiction rates, the highest rates of teenage pregnancy, the most obesity etc etc.

The Royal navy proved its uselessness the Iranian hostage crises. If there had been wholesale Courts Marshall it might have been just about acceptable but none of the deadbeats were taken to task. And why was a morbidly obese mother of two doing on board one of our so called �fighting� ships?

Then I saw the spectacle on American TV when they showed clips of the two �officers� (god knows, it must be easy to be an officer in the navy now-a-days) lying to the world. The contempt in the voices and faces of the American news readers was sickening to behold.

We are rubbish, worthless people who have no business telling anyone, anything, about anything at all, absolutely nothing. {are you listening Miliband, your fellow countryman is showing you a mirror}Instead we should be asking the others to come here and tell us what to do.

Oh yes, and of course we can�t make ammunition any more so it is Belgium (who make most of it) which will decide when we fight; not our corrupt worthless politicians.

That�s the best news there is.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 26 Jul 2009 14:18

^^^ the voice of joe public, disgusted with political correctness, appeasement of jehadis and a political voice that heralds a return to the right in the coming elections. Not unusual during a severe recession, but it has been building for the past few years. It was going ok until the banks collapsed, now its a little more exposed. britain is probably ready for another political evolutionary stage. After Thatcherism and then the Blarist correction, now there needs to be a new correction back towards the 'centre'. The fear is that right now it will go further to the right than anyone wants. What he forgets is that its all relative, despite the complaints, he enjoys a better standard of living, state services and civic ameneties than many people around the world.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 26 Jul 2009 21:38

1 - People wanted the greatest possible comfort at the least possible cost. They'll get more than the ability to buy the best of what others make if they're willing to pay for it. That's the nature of government by consent.

2 - No one in the West can whinge like the British, which is why their whinges can almost never be taken at face value. They've been moaning about the same things since the 1919, yet life for the average Briton has improved beyond measure, while the country has outlasted every threat to its security.

3 - The disconnect between Britain's ruling class of globalised liberal internationalists, and its resentful, politically and culturally marginalised locally rooted working classes is its greatest source of pent up political energy.

4 - As in most liberal democracies, the British middle class is the decisive political vote - they're tired of the status quo, but fear leaping in to the dark, or more precisely fear that the far more fed up working class will blindly vote for the person most likely to upset the applecart.

I remember the 1970s and early 1980s, which were a much uglier time with the violent and racist National Front on the march amongst the working class as the twin oil shocks and unionist madness pushed the economy in to crisis after crisis. I also remember how both the left and right fought the National Front - the Tories by attacking the unions political power while restructuring the economy, and the left by confronting the NF with a presence on the streets, and through music that pulled young people in.

One of the reasons Obama (and Lula in more academic circles) is so phenomenally popular across classes in Britain is the appeal of a figure who can combine centrist pragmatism, empathy for the working class, national pride, and multi-ethnic integration in to one package.

David Cameron will probably be the next PM, but he is a transitional figure without a real following, perhaps the most plastic-like British politician of the century. The search is for a Lula or Obama, not for a Thatcher - the general British consensus is that Thatcher was far too destructive at the social level for all of her economic and foreign policy acheivements. This person will emerge out of the activism on the streets of council housing estates to counter both the BNP and the beards, and there is a very good chance they may be Black or Indian, a non-practicing Muslim or of mixed parentage.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 Jul 2009 21:57

Anglican Church in India mine row

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 26 Jul 2009 22:13

2 - No one in the West can whinge like the British, which is why their whinges can almost never be taken at face value.

Does not seem to square with the "stiff upper lip" so readily bandied about.

They've been moaning about the same things since the 1919, yet life for the average Briton has improved beyond measure, while the country has outlasted every threat to its security.

Just because something hasn't happened till now is no guarantee it won't happen tomorrow. The Black swan conundrum that envelopes the insane bets FIs such as banks (as well as dream merchants, governments and households) took in the runup to the current economic crisis is a case in the point.

P.S.
For the record, I think its likely UKstan will *survive* the current ekhanomic threats and perhaps demographic threats to its state's existence. Whether life for the avg UKstani continues to improve beyond measure, time will tell.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 26 Jul 2009 23:29

vsudhir wrote:Does not seem to square with the "stiff upper lip" so readily bandied about.

Cultural norms can and do change from generation to generation, often drastically.

Britain's last two WWI survivor died this fortnight - they belonged to perhaps the last generation that never complained.

The more individualistic society has become, the less embarrassed people have become in complaining about conditions and demanding more for themselves.

I would also say that loud whingeing is the other side of the coin from smug self-satisfaction - we often see the same oscillating dynamic in forum discussions here as well.

Just because something hasn't happened till now is no guarantee it won't happen tomorrow. The Black swan conundrum that envelopes the insane bets FIs such as banks (as well as dream merchants, governments and households) took in the runup to the current economic crisis is a case in the point.

Many of the improvements in average household's prosperity after 1945 came from extending opportunity to the working classes, through education and healthcare in particular, which helped them become more economically productive, and allowed them to reap some of the benefits of that productivity.

Ultimately comprehensive national growth comes from investing in your people and maximising their opportunities to produce, and reinvesting those profits back in your people.

The fundamental problems of the Thatcher and to a lesser extent New Labour years is that in many ways they chose to invest in the world (thereby avoiding the demands and constraints of domestic politics and law) at large far more than they chose to invest in the British people, whose primary economic importance was transformed from producers to consumers.

New Labour is paying a huge political price for the economic and social costs of their model of speculative, globalised debt-driven growth on the one hand, and populist social policy on the other. Politically, the middle class is demanding a better balance between domestic consumption and production, and the working classes will respond strongly if there is renewed serious interest in extending really productive new kinds of opportunity to them. What is missing at the moment is the right iconic figure to rally around for that sort of change.

The average Briton, like the average person everywhere cares most about their quality of life, and the quality of life of their family. What plays out in public arena are the arguments of how best to get there, and who is the best person/party/ideology to lead. It is only at certain points that public opinion crystallises, but the power of democracy is that people as a whole ultimately get what they really want

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 Jul 2009 23:43

US shock jock Savage targeted 'to balance least wanted list'

Former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has suffered a major setback in her legal battle with American 'shock jock' Michael Savage after her officials were accused of banning him from the country on racial grounds.

Emails written by Home Office officials privately acknowledged the ban on Mr Savage would provide 'balance' to a list dominated by Muslims - and linked the decision to Gordon Brown and Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

The officials admitted their action could look 'duplicitous' and cited his 'homophobia' as a reason the move would receive public support.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 Jul 2009 00:12

This person will emerge out of the activism on the streets of council housing estates to counter both the BNP and the beards, and there is a very good chance they may be Black or Indian, a non-practicing Muslim or of mixed parentage.

I am not sure whether a Muslim of any description will fit the bill.

Why is it that even in casual interaction with the British public, they seem wary of my brown-ness until they learn I am ethnically Indian; and it may be from as innocuous a source as a query on a good local Indian restaurant? You can see the relief on their faces. Why is it that the tube station man evidences relief and pride when you ask for tourist directions to Westminster? That is, they see evidence that you are not living in an autistic world-behind the veil as it were.

Why is it that my Indian friends have no problem using terms such as 'bless the troops' but Muslims are only known for their anger?

I don't know if the average Brit is sophisticated enough to differentiate between Muslims and Indians, or indeed cares to, but I do not see a Muslim PM of Britain, ever. The remarkable tribute to British society is that the same cannot be said of an Indian PM- I don't think it will lead to outrage in Turnbull Wells.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 27 Jul 2009 01:26

Sanjay,

Many non-blacks in America find angry black men threatening. Obama's asset was his ability to genuinely reassure many whites that he isn't angry, and that he really is just like them - unembarrassed by his heritage, against unfairness, yet thoroughly assimilated in to the system.

There is a pool of people of Muslim origin (many of them non-Sunni, or of mixed parentage) in the UK who are capable of doing the same thing. People whose primary identity and cause is not Islam, but progressive politics - those are the kind of people who can take leadership positions, if the political party establishments have the imagination to allow them to lead.

The particular kind of communitarian multiculturalism that emerged in the 1980s in response to the Brixton riots has never been under so much intellectual pressure within liberal spaces as it has been since 7/7. To me a turning point was when liberals, not conservatives pressured the Brown government in 2006 to drop their strategy of working with the Muslim Council of Britain to influence young Muslims.

Plus I believe what happens in Iran will matter a great deal - no one in the UK paid any attention to the Paki and Saudi fatwas condemning the Satanic verses until Khomeini issued the death fatwa against Rushdie.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Jul 2009 03:02

The eagle-eyed MI6 spooks – who can’t even spell

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 27 Jul 2009 03:14

Johan, isn't it far more likely that such a candidate will be a Hindu or a Sikh?

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 27 Jul 2009 08:28

Theek hai. All my flippant banter apart, I am concerned for the well being and safety of ordinary decent folk of Indian stock currently in the British isles.

Sanjaykr, heartening to know that the avg Briton can and does try to differentiate between the ethnic/cultural Indic and the Packee-at-heart.

Will now continue to observe how *official* Britain changes (or not) its stance towards its bleeding heart condemnation of India's treatment of its muslim minorities. Can one forget Sri Miliband's verbiage from on location in Mumbai just after 26/11? Or should one overlook the fact that UKstan opposed the includionb on the UN watchlist of known packee terrorists responsible for crimes against Indians? {Were they UKstani assets? One has to wonder.}

If the surcharged street-level prejudice against the state of Israel is any indication, regardless of UKstan's domestic troubles and cures against the rising tide of islamic identity grievances and anti-assilimilation, their India posture won't change surrealism and superciliousness anytime soon. Will wait and watch.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 27 Jul 2009 11:34

Johann wrote:
vsudhir wrote:Does not seem to square with the "stiff upper lip" so readily bandied about.
Cultural norms can and do change from generation to generation, often drastically.

Britain's last two WWI survivor died this fortnight - they belonged to perhaps the last generation that never complained.

The more individualistic society has become, the less embarrassed people have become in complaining about conditions and demanding more for themselves.

I would also say that loud whingeing is the other side of the coin from smug self-satisfaction - we often see the same oscillating dynamic in forum discussions here as well.

I may have alternate explanation for this. "You don't complain when you live in luxury". Till WWI Britain was looting every penny available in India and other colonies, making them dirt poor. By the end of WWI the rate of extraction of wealth from their colonies started slowing down. When you start losing the special previleges, you start losing the stiffness of your upper lip.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 27 Jul 2009 23:09

Muslims welcome police scarf move

Avon and Somerset Police is issuing head coverings to its female officers so they can enter mosques.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 28 Jul 2009 02:28

Shyam - thats only partially correct. as Johan pointed out, only the rich upper classes had the stiff upper lip. the ordinary working man was dirt poor despite empire until well into the 20th century. true prosperity for the working classes has only come much after the end of empire. also WW2 left whatever was left of the looted accumulated wealth up in smoke. it was american largesse which kept all of europe afloat after the bankruptcy of ww2. Note - east india company officers made money and moved back to britain to live a life of luxury and buy up parliamentary seats - but that wealth only affected them and their immediate family. many who came out to india to work made decent but not amazing livings. the tax collected from india did fund the rest of empire, but the wealth was concentrated in the hands of a few. from an indian perspective ofcourse, the wealth was gone. that said, industrialisation (in which we were forcibly late) also created a new wealth paradigm, our old wealth gone, we had to wait a long time to build our new wealth, unlike other nations.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 28 Jul 2009 11:21

Return of the east India company?

'Walk the talk': Hindus tell Church of England ’

'Walk the talk': Hindus tell Church of England

Nevada (US), July 27 : Hindus
have blamed Church of England for double standards over the issue of environment.

Indian American community leader Rajan Zed, in a statement in Nevada (USA) today, said that Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Douglas Williams should clarify where he and the Church stood on the issue of bauxite mining by a company in remote tribal area of Orissa (India) in which Church of England reportedly had a financial stake and which the environmentalists described as devastating to the area environment.

Zed, who is president of Universal Society of Hinduism, stressed that Church of England should practice what it preached. Its Environmental Policy stated: “The whole creation belongs to God. As human beings we are part of the whole and have a responsibility to love and care for what God has entrusted to us as temporary tenants of the planet. We are called to conserve its complex and fragile ecology, while recognising the need for responsible and sustainable development and the pursuit of social justice.”

It has said, “We are not consumers of what God has made; we are in communion with it”, and “…challenge itself and all members of the Church of England to make care for creation, and repentance for its exploitation, fundamental to their faith, practice, and mission…”

Rajan Zed pointed out that Church of England was member of Church Investors Group (CIG), an ecumenical gathering of 37 investors connected with the Churches of Britain and Ireland launched in 1973, which encouraged members to “formulate policies relating to investment that are based on Christian ethical principles” and which seeks to “reflect the moral stance and teachings of our faith in our investment portfolios”.

Zed also asked the CIG to investigate whether Church of England’s investment in this concerned multinational mining company (headquartered in London) met the “ethical principles and moral stance” set-up by CIG. The Church of England has reportedly about 4.1 million dollars stake in this mining company.

According to reports, area tribes view the mountain where mining is proposed as sacred and they have stressed that their traditional and sustainable lifestyle and culture would be disturbed by mining. Environmentalists have asked for a halt in this project arguing that the area is ecologically sensitive and mining would result in displacement, deforestation, affecting water sources, wildlife and ecosystems destruction, water pollution, complicity in human rights violations, etc. Area is said to be home of some endangered species.

--- ANI

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 28 Jul 2009 14:13

Return of the east India company?

Yup. And this time they'll have your unwashed heathen SDRE soul, please.

The UK establishment has never, ever expressed any regret, apology or sympathy for the atrocities committed in foreign lands under crown and/or crown-proxy rule. None. They keep, display and profit from priceless stolen treasures and loot.

On top of it, they've attempted to shove BS of the highest order (start with AIT) seeking to prove the assumption that the colonized are/were/will always be inferior creations of lesser gawds. Their divide and rule has opened and singed scars that are yet to heal in much of what is now the commonwealth. (e.g., the pana-kandha conflic and even the tamil sinhala conflict has roots in Brit policies of deliberate enmity sowing).

Worse, the policies continue to this day. The divide and rule continues in their granting amnesty to every 2 bit insurgent, criminal, thug, murderer and willing tool from our land.

And yet, at the end of it all, they hang around and pretend to be India's friends! And many in India actually buy that line with a straight, unquestioning face. If anyone can fool all the people all the time, only the Brits can pull it off. And that is almost a compliment.

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 30 Jul 2009 02:47

The British armed forces views on India & India's nuclear submarine:

http://www.arrse.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=129331.html

http://www.navy-net.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=21200.html

The strange thing is they just don't realise that the so called "AID" Britain gives is really just a sop to try and buy business.
The USA has just walked away with $40 million worth of business from India.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 30 Jul 2009 12:10

Fvuk the poopersayers bemoaning why India has to build nuke subs and space programme when they're receiving aid. I call it balderdash. I say that this is merely a repayment for all the trillions of dollars that the British have looted to fund their Industrial Revolution.

tripathi · Post by **tripathi** » 30 Jul 2009 20:58

Haresh wrote:The British armed forces views on India & India's nuclear submarine:

http://www.arrse.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=129331.html

http://www.navy-net.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=21200.html

The strange thing is they just don't realise that the so called "AID" Britain gives is really just a sop to try and buy business.
The USA has just walked away with $40 million worth of business from India.

wow....never knew that british loves us so much as pakis do.

They truly deserve the watever luv that they get from islamists.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 30 Jul 2009 21:32

tripathi wrote:wow....never knew that british loves us so much as pakis do. They truly deserve the watever luv that they get from islamists.

yup, the islamists and the UK deserve each other. And for that love-fest to continue, Gordon Brown should become the PM for next term too. But regardless of who becomes the PM, both conservatives and liberals have screwed India by supporting various terrorists based in UK. So her is wishing the best to the UK-islamists marraige, may it go on for a hundred years, after which it can be renamed West Pakistan

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 01 Aug 2009 22:04

Pakistan... the gift that keeps on giving...

Anjem Choudary

Fanatics’ call to prosecute Queen for Genocide

"She is the one who applauds her sons and daughters to go out and massacre hundreds and thousands of innocent people. "Shouldn't she be tried for genocide and the extermination of a nation?"

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 01 Aug 2009 22:32

Rajan Zed pointed out that Church of England was member of Church Investors Group (CIG), an ecumenical gathering of 37 investors connected with the Churches of Britain and Ireland launched in 1973, which encouraged members to “formulate policies relating to investment that are based on Christian ethical principles” and which seeks to “reflect the moral stance and teachings of our faith in our investment portfolios”.

Colonialism was founded on the principles of the Bible-let there be no doubt about that, these were people living up to the ideals of their god-extending their dominion over territory that was not the natives', but their very own god's. Their mission was a by definition a civilising one-to bring their god to the heathens (in exchange for some involuntary payment that had to be carried out of the jungle on the heads of Europeans-hence white man's burden, hehe).

The great irony of history is that contact with the heathen destroyed Christianity in those lands that had extensive overseas territories. Whilst East Europeans and Russians continue much poorer but with their Christianity intact.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 02 Aug 2009 02:07

Article in Newsweek on the decline of Great Britain. It should be posted in the forum where people are spewing venom on India for launching a nuclear submarine using its own money.

Forget The Great In Britain
Its fall was inevitable, but the economic crisis will shrink the last pretenses of empire faster than anyone expected.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/209953

Even in the decades after it lost its empire, Britain strode the world like a pocket superpower. Its economic strength and cultural heft, its nuclear-backed military might, its extraordinary relationship with America—all these things helped this small island nation to punch well above its weight class. Now all that is changing as the bills come due on Britain's role in last year's financial meltdown, the rescue of the banks, and the ensuing recession. Suddenly, the sun that once never set on the British Empire is casting long shadows over what's left of Britain's imperial ambitions, and the country is having to rethink its role in the world—perhaps as Little Britain, certainly as a lesser Britain.

History has been closing in on Britain for some time. The rise of giant emerging economies like China and India always meant that Britain would have a smaller seat at the increasingly crowded top table of nations.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 02 Aug 2009 02:15

Nanha Bratain is so apt for UQ.
Look at the positive side, it will make very easy for NB to jump from one lap to another lap whosoever does the soft patting.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 02 Aug 2009 02:29

I will miss James Bond movies

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 02 Aug 2009 02:55

Many older generation conservative UK and Australian have lot of contempt for Indian culture (esp. Hindu) and fear as well, of loss of importance. On Online forums, people from these generations (40 upwards) are usually found ranting about India and actually acting as lapdog for US poster, trying to incite comments about India & Hindus. They simply dont appear to be able to deal with loss of importance.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 02 Aug 2009 02:56

Yeah for an Indian, Not-so-great Britain may be more annoying than Great Britain.

(I must say I don't like to see Germany and Japan so much cleaner and obviously wealthier than England. Interestingly one may need a little dirt and disorder for creativity).

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Aug 2009 03:43

MI5 targeted by Islamic extremists in rushed recruitment drive after July 2005 attacks on London

The Security Service was desperate to understand why and how four men from Leeds had plotted the attacks to give them a better chance of identifying future threats.

The Daily Telegraph has learned that six new Muslim recruits were thrown out of the service because of serious concerns about their pasts.

Two of the six were said to have attended training camps in Pakistan where they could have come into contact with al-Qaeda recruiters. The remainder had unexplained gaps of up to three months in their curricula vitae.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 02 Aug 2009 05:35

sanjaykumar wrote:Yeah for an Indian, Not-so-great Britain may be more annoying than Great Britain.

much more annoying, you are right. previously, it was patronising establishment and dirtbag media (economist) making comment on india and hindu and caste system and usual sewers and dirt
now otherwise sane british/aussie people are making such comments more often.

but i am reminded of MK Gandhi comment:
"First they ignore you, then they mock you, then they fight you, then you win"

so thing is we are in second stage, and third stage is yet to come (of the mental fight) as indian economy rises to level of china in next decade while UK/aussie economy slides.

in US, only people ranting against hindus and indians are conservative christians who believe everything evangleical community feeds them and Might is Right conservatives or the loony left liberals. Bulk of middle class types appears to see India as positive and hindus as non threatening.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 02 Aug 2009 05:44

That statement was (rightly) ambiguous. I think Britain as an eminent power would be much more acceptable than a Germany, for Indians. It is a little disconcerting that they are on an accelerated downward trajectory.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 02 Aug 2009 15:03

IMF puts UK banking bail-outs at £1,227 billion

The total amount of support handed to Britain's financial sector by the taxpayer and the Bank of England now exceeds £1.2 trillion and is bigger than for any other major economy. Fresh calculations from the International Monetary Fund have revealed the full scale of assistance meted out to Britain's collapsed banking system. The Fund said that when one combines all the support for banks, including capital injections, the buying of frozen assets

In its report, the IMF, which has repeatedly warned Britain over the size of its deficit, said that as a result of the global recession, Britain faces the biggest projected budget deficit of any G20 country, amounting to 13.3pc of GDP in 2010, compared with a deficit of 9.7pc in the US. However, the scale of the support for Britain's financial system will attract as much attention – particularly since it comes as the major banks prepare to update the market on their profits next week.

The Fund said that in the UK the support was divided between capital injections, comprising 3.9pc of GDP (£58.5bn), purchases of assets and lending by the Treasury, comprising 13.8pc of GDP (£207bn), guarantees, making up 49.7pc of GDP (£745.5bn), and central bank liquidity support of 14.4pc of GDP (£216bn).

Britain's total tally accounts for a fifth of the amount rich countries have spent supporting their financial systems, the total for which now amounts to $9.2 trillion (£5.5 trillion), according to the IMF research. The Fund said that although Governments would be likely to recover the initial outlay, they would still rack up large deficits in the coming years due to the economic repercussions.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 02 Aug 2009 22:39

War effort is being hampered by troops too unfit to deploy

Leaked army memo reveals many British soldiers are so obese they cannot be sent to Helmand