Following Amnesty International's human rights report I've been thinking about how the UK and the US have reacted post-911. Both have been racing towards an authoritarian state, however the approaches have been very different. Whereas Bush has charged forward like a frenzied hare, Blair has managed to convince many people that he's a harmless tortoise.

Bush has been running fast towards a police state, for example with the Patriot Act. Blair has proceeded more cautiously, doing things piecemeal.

So Bush has Guantanamo Bay. Blair would never do anything like that, of course not. But there are accusations that the government has turned a blind eye to US "rendition" flights. Oh, and don't forget control orders which allow the Home Secretary to place anyone under house arrest without the inconvenience of a trial. Plus the recent extension of the period terror suspects can be detained without charge from 14 to 28 days (Blair wanted 90 - he still does). Remember, innocent people like you and I can be suspects.

In the US there was recently a fuss over Bush's alleged harelike rush into data retention. Here things were done slowly and "by the book". So we had the 2002 RIPA Extension followed by further invasions of privacy.

The US government still at least pays lip service to the constitutional right to free speech. Here in the UK we have no written constitution, so Blair was able to force through his dangerous glorification offence.

There's more, for example the introduction by stealth of a national DNA database plus, of course, the proposed ID Cards and the huge, intrusive National Identity Register.

In the race to a police state, Blair may be a tortoise but he's a determined one.

We all know how the fable ends: the tortoise wins. And the people of Britain lose.