Indeed, on the TV news this week the Dutch government were reported to
be sending thousands of illegal 'asylum' seekers home, and demolishing
the seedy, infested blocks of 'soshal housing' with the intention of
replacing same with up-market housing. The pictures broadcast did not
give me the impression that here was an example if IMM's vision of a
clean, well-ordered Euro country. It looked more like down town (= run
down) Lahore or Cairo.
There is a difference between London -- and particularly Heathrow --
and the rest of the country. London and its major airport are, IMO,
vile: a friend of mine (visiting from the US) described London as
having " a pervasive smell of rotting Big Macs" :-( London's all
round unpleasantness is matched only by the baffling belief of its
inhabitants that they live in a "world class" city.
This country does seem intent to make its major airports follow the
traditional path of its main railway stations: i.e., to immediately
confront the arriving passenger with the worst the country has to
offer. I have wondered in the past how first-time visitors to the UK
react if they have an early-morning arrival into LHR T3 and have to
transit to another terminal, given that the conditions in both the T3
waiting area and the transfer buses would be illegal if the passengers
were farm animals ...
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk
Airports anywhere are not great places and especially when extended
piecemeal as LHR has been. All of the terminals in the central area
are appalling bad in terms of the arrivals waiting areas partly
because too many people show up when one or two would do, not to
mention some of the ridiculous arrangements for arriving and departing
Even the airports that were built from scratch don't hold their
glitter for very long. For example Franz Josef Strauss in Munich was
so clean at one time that it could be mistaken for a hospital it was
so sterile. Now it's starting to look distinctly shabby.
Lower traffic airports like Oslo Gardermoen have superb wooden floors
etc. and have managed to maintain a good appearance, but have a tiny
fraction of LHR's traffic.
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Heathrow is 100% better than it was 20-25 years ago. I used to arrive from
Middle Eastern airports, such as Riyadh, which has fountains and large
marble Busy Barclay staircases spiralling around them, then arrive in
Heathrow, which had cheap polyurathane varbished wooden doors with
reinforced glass in them, like they use in cheap school buildings.
Everything was tatty, cheap and nasty, with very low ceilings. Look at the
height of the ceilings in Terminal 2, my flat is about the same. The
contrast was amazing, and Heathrow was the busiest international airport in
the world, in a rich country. Liverpool John Lennon is better than any
terminal at Heathrow.
I recall landing at Heathrow with a French lady, she didn't say anything
bad, but it was T4. When we got on the tube (before Paddington link) she
Look at Chicago then. I would not call O'Hare shabby at all.
That's socialism for you. Now if they had only privatised it a few years
IMM who do you think is responsible for the filthy state of LU ?. Is it
all those 'Middle Englanders' who chuck their Daily Mails and FT's on
the floor ?
1. Phoneys bedrock supporters travelling from their socialist-provided
ghettos to their drug dealing patches (having jumped the barriers of
2. The tidal army of tourists and other non-resident people, leaving
litter, carving graffiti on the glass, spitting chewing gum.
3. The fact that Underground is 'run' and 'cleaned/maintained' by
residents of nearby relevant LU termini (now I wonder who they could
I used to use it regularly and hated the place. Dirty, nowhere to sit, rude
staff and musak blaring out from "food" (deliberate inverted commas) outlets
right opposite the gates. IMO, the only decent airport in North America is
Toronto. As for Europe, I'd rate Charles de Gaulle tops, though many UK
flights are now in that dreadful new glass bit. It's clean but terrible
glare on a bright sunlit day.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.