Editorial Bear

I think security has a lot to say for this. The last six years have seen an explosion in intelligence. There's now one CCTV camera in the UK for every 14 residents. You can't enter the United States without your biometric data getting whipped around the FBI, CIA and BCIS computers.

Al-Qa'eda's ability to organise and enable large scale terrorist bombings, like 9/11 or the Madrid attacks, has been fatally compromised by American and British security services.

But wiping out al-Qa'eda's organisational ability hasn't wiped out the terrorist attacks in Britain. In fact, it's just highlighted the danger Islamic Fundamentalism poses. Unlike the IRA - or perhaps any terrorist organisation in recent history - the fundamentalists are capable of operating entirely independently.

The car bombs found in London and the SUV which plowed into Glasgow Airport were home made. Simply cars stuffed with ineffective explosives, nails, screws and propane canisters. The kind of weapons blokes like me could have made.

And that's the whole point. The lack of a cohesive organisational structure has not made the Islamic Fundamentalists any less dangerous. Now, it's small groups of determined men and women (many of whom were born and raised in England) making the spontaneous decision to attack when and where they can. This will make any future attacks in England very unpredictable and dangerous.

Because the minority of Islamic fundamentalists blend in seamlessly with the majority of peaceful British Muslims, it's almost impossible to keep track of them. It creates more and more disparity between the Muslim population and the rest of an increasingly suspicious Britain.

This will make the lives of Britain's peaceful Muslims more and more difficult and, inevitably, that will make the ambitions of the al-Qa'eda taskmasters easier.

Now during the race for Congress and the Senate, I was pretty keen on getting some democrats in there. The Republicans absolutely dominated the political circus for far too long and we needed some contrast and conflict to keep things real.

Fortunately, if the Democrat/Republican balance is going to be preserved, the Republicans have two pretty good candidates running for the presidency. John McCain is considered a bit of a Republican maverick and although, at 72, he'd be the oldest US President in History I know for a fact that some septuagenarians are sharper than the average 29 year old.

My favourite has to be Rudy Giuliani, though.

After Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani is the most famous candidate for the 2008 Presidency. He's known as "America's Mayor" for his amazing leadership during 9/11 and for transforming New York City into the shining beacon it is today.

What I like about Rudy is the fact that he's an individual, not just a 'Republican.' In fact, Rudy started his political career as a member of the Democrats.

Rudy's political beliefs fit neatly with mine. He's really a centurist, rather than a Republican. What's more, he's got real personality. A working class boy from Brooklyn, he scrabbled his way to the top and has never let politics get in the way of what he believed in - like the time he ejected Yasser Arafat from the Lincoln Centre during a do for the United Nations.

My experiences of America are actually quite limited. I really only know New York. But from what I know of New Yorkers, you could do a lot worse than a self-made kid from Brooklyn in the White House.

It would be a delicious contrast to the last two terms. George W. Bush was born into spectacular wealth. Rudy's father was an ex con. I think Giuliani will bring a down to earth attitude to American politics that the Bush legacy could never match - despite Dubya's cowboy pretensions.

I'd be very interested to hear what tickets you'll be backing for 2008. Please comment below.