Be Kind to Your Workmates - Give Them a Germ!

The company I work for got worried a little while ago about the absence rate among its staff.
Now there are many possible reasons why there should be such a high rate, among them genuine illness, wanting the day off to go shopping, low motivation, lack of confidence in the management leading to depression, etc. I honestly believe that the first reason listed there is by far and away the genuine reason for most staff absence. Most of us are not lead-swingers, we try to do an honest day's work for our pay.
But the company decided that too much staff absence was due to reasons other than illness. Never mind that the lack of motivation could lead some to think perhaps it wasn't worth going in to work. Never mind that the lack of real one-to-one communication between manager and staff member made it difficult to discuss any problems, whether of health or other issues. No, we are all a load of lazy bastards and need teaching a lesson. So was born the slogan "Absence makes your friends work harder". And to back this up, when you get back to work after illness a manager goes through a questionnaire with you to find out your reasons for absence. Not to counsel you and find your problems with a view to helping you, because that would involve the manager having real contact with you, but questions dictated by the questionnaire with no variation. In other words you are just another absence statistic.
If you have more than one illness you are placed on a list of suspects. If the number increases, for whatever reason, you could face disciplinary proceedings!
Thus people who genuinely should not be in work come into work. Sometimes this just affects them and the way they work, for example an injured back. Other times it affects all their colleagues because they pass on germs and disease to their colleagues. Yes, absence does make your colleagues work harder - but causing them to have to absent themselves from work because you were too scared to stay at home causes your colleagues considerably more inconvenience and discomfort.
"So, Joe, why did you take yesterday off?"
"Well, Mr Blenkinsop, Sir," (tugs forelock, bows and scrapes) "I went to the Doctor in the morning and he told me I had bubonic plague. He said I should stay off work and I was feeling more than somewhat unable to work so I stayed at home, Mr Blenkinsop Sir." (More bowing, scraping, tugging of forelock and ass-licking for fear of losing job.)
"Only bubonic plague? You malingering little bastard! If I had my way you'd be horsewhipped within an inch of your life! As it is I'm feeling lenient today. Go and apologise to all your colleagues for making them work harder yesterday and I'll say no more!"
The following day the BBC announces "Blenkinsop's cotton-reel manufacturing plant has had to close down as all the staff were killed by a particularly virulent case of bubonic plague which was allowed to spread around the factory by one person with the disease going round and speaking to everyone on the shop floor. We tried to contact the owner of the factory but it turns out he's dead as well. Oh well, easy come, easy go . . ."

The Award for Best News Coverage - CBS

Scanning through various news sites on the web looking for international reaction to the Palestinian elections, I came across many angles on the subject. Perhaps the most thorough was streamed by - wait for it - CBS from America. Yes, definitely the best coverage of the statements made by a Hamas representative among the news sites I found. They showed a press conference held in the street by Mahmoud Zahar, a leading player in the Hamas party. His statements were forthright, his tone was not conciliatory, his objectives clearly stated. "We are not terrorists" was the title that CBS put on the piece and that was clearly stated by Mr Zahar. When asked where he would get funding for Palestine now that the US and Europe had said they would cut aid, he said words to the effect that they would take money from anybody, Islamic or not, who would not prejudge Hamas as terrorists. He also reinforced the Hamas line that talks and interaction would only take place with Israel if they were to cease their occupation and talk meaningfully about an independent Palestinian state which must include Jerusalem. That must be a tough nut to crack. That was the line that the Palestine Liberation Front took decades ago under Yasser Arafat but their stance was softened as reality showed that the best way was to negotiate. Fatah, under a changed Arafat, finally came to some limited agreements which brought forth a Palestinian Legislative Council elected by Palestinian people. Such an election has brought Hamas to power. In the new-found glow of success Hamas is accusing the previous governing body of corruption, of pocketing international aid money for their own ends. I don't know if this is true or not but most of the aid-givers like Europe and the US have stated that aid would be curtailed unless Hamas throws away its guns. Now they are democratically elected, Hamas will have to start to live with reality. I am not saying that they do not have legitimate claim to Jerusalem. Perhaps they have a right to claim the whole of what was, before the war, Palestine - including all the land which was arbitrarily given to create the modern state of Israel in the late 1940s. Whatever happens there will be more bloodshed, of this I am sure. The two parties are so far apart that it's hard to see if there is any common ground over which they could start to talk, let alone agree. The present state of affairs in the region can be traced back to stupid decisions in the past by governments of countries far away from the area. But it is the Moslems and Jews who are still paying the price of those ill-conceived actions from half a century ago. One thing that strikes me as being unfair is the fact that nobody talks about cutting aid to Israel when they use force against the Palestinians - is there some bias or is it that the world is still trying to justify decisions made in haste in the 1940s?

Further Yankee Invasions

They've done it again! Bloody Yanks!
While watching a nature programme on BBC I discovered another invasion by our North American "friends and allies". This time it is a further incursion of seemingly-harmless little creatures which end up wreaking havoc and threatening the very existence of native species. The offending species this time is Pacifastucus leniusculus to grace it with a Latin name, otherwise known as the signal crayfish. This animal lives in freshwater streams, under rocks, eating small fish. For some reason unknown to me fish farmers introduced them in the 1970s (why do these people do this without looking at all the possible consequences - money must rear its ugly head). The signal crayfish is an aggressive (it figures - it's from America) brute twice the size of our native white-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes. They eat the same food as the native crayfish and thus, being bigger, literally eat their way to ascendancy. But there's more - signals carry a fungal disease known as crayfish plague to which they are immune. Unfortunately the smaller, weaker white-claws are susceptible to this disease so they are hit on two fronts. The threat to the native species is so real that laws have been passed in this country prohibiting the introduction of these animals into any waterway in Britain. You aren't even allowed to keep them in captivity, even for research, without a licence the granting of which means strict regulations about where you keep them. But all these regulations are too little too late. In the wild these animals thrive and thus the white-claw, it seems, is doomed to extinction in many streams in the UK. Like the squirrels I mentioned in earlier blogs, the invasion is due to man's stupidity in introducing them. We have the same trouble with wild mink decimating other species. Again man's greed was the main cause.
Another American import is threatening native species globally. This time, though, it is something which previously invaded America from Europe. It then got hideously distorted beyond all recognition and re-exported to the whole of the world, where it is killing off the native species. This is universal genocide. I refer of course to the humble hamburger. Mr McDonald got hold of this innocent snack and sold it to the idiot citizens of his country. They bought it and consumed it because that is the American way - consume, consume, consume. When others started copying his idea Mr McDonald started dressing up his burgers with chemical additives and pretty-coloured dressings and so the Big Mac was born. (I feel appalled that such a vile, evil thing should have a name similar to mine!) This concoction was then exported across the world to anywhere the locals could be convinced to consume, consume, consume. The strange thing is that McDonalds have the nerve to call their establishments restaurants! To most civilised people a restaurant is a place where you can eat real food with real cutlery from a real plate not an expanded polystyrene box (that's Styrofoam, or something similar to you Yanks) and the person who serves it to you at your table (instead of standing behind a counter) does not command you to "enjoy your meal" but hopes you will enjoy it and says nothing unless you comment yourself. If standing in a queue for 20 minutes waiting to have this plastic thrown across the counter at you is described as "fast food" then I am glad that part of the true restaurant experience is a leisurely half-hour wait while sitting at your carefully-laid and spotless table with an aperitif or fruit juice and a good conversation with your fellow diners. It is all part of the ritual of a good meal in a real restaurant. When was the last time anybody in the world tipped any of the under-paid, pasty-faced, spotty, baseball-capped morons behind the counter in McDonalds because they gave good service?
I have to admit that both of my offspring have worked in McDonalds. One lasted a few weeks, the other - feeling the need for self-finance because of the love of various girlfriends - stood it for four years (they give you a long-service award at three years). The latter's view was that it was income and he needed the money. He delights in recalling the fact that his particular branch did not deal with credit or debit cards. When offered such a card in payment he would politely say to the customer: "Sorry mate, we don't accept plastic - we just serve it!"

Hamas or Fatah?

The Palestinian elections are underway. It seems that there are two main parties Fatah and Hamas. Hamas supporters still carry guns and carry out attacks on Israeli targets. Yet they are standing in a democratic election. Well, as democratic as the Israelis will let it be. Fatah is, at present the ruling party. It is the party of the late Yasser Arafat, once seen as the leader of all the anti-Jewish terrorists. He served his time with the bomb and the gun, back in the 60s and 70s. But he realised that the gun was not the only way to fight. As Fatah became more and more political and less and less physical, so Hamas took over the guns and bombs with increased vigour. But even they are now hedging their bets by campaigning and standing in the election. Word is that Hamas will do very well in the election, although no one can be sure if they will beat Fatah. Many people interviewed in the programmes I have heard talk of Fatah being favoured by the Americans. This will drive many Palestinians to vote for Hamas. They look on the USA, rightly or wrongly, as the supporter of Israel against Palestine and through many eyes this seems to be true.
Whoever wins this election let us hope and pray to whichever deity we believe in that some measure of peace will arise between all the factions. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians believe in their right to that piece of land. Wouldn't it be good if they could agree to live together, either as two separate states or in one land of common respect for the other man's point of view.
Dream on . . .

They Shoot Horses, Don't They?

Dr Anne Turner was a 66-year-old retired medical practitioner who lived in Bath, just a few miles from my location. She was suffering from a disease called PSP - don't ask what it means, I couldn't pronounce it, let alone spell it. Suffice it to say that it is an incurable degenerative disease. Dr Turner was still able to walk and talk, albeit slurred. But she knew that it was only a matter of time before she became totally dependent on those around her for her every need. It would soon be that she could not stand up, let alone walk. She would even lose the ability to swallow so presumably would then have to be fed intravenously. Being a medic, she knew all about these symptoms of her disease and decided, while still in full control of all her faculties, that this was not for her. She wanted to end it before she became too helpless and totally dependent. The law in the UK is clear. Suicide is illegal. Helping someone to commit suicide is illegal. I have no doubt that Dr Turner thought long and hard before taking her final step. Her own medical career must have been based on saving life, not taking it. The Hypocratic oath which all doctors take puts the sanctity of life above all other things. The Christian faith, along with most others, believes that only God has the power of life and death over us.
I am scared of dying. But I think I would also be very scared if I knew I was going to die of this or a similar disease. I would wonder who would make the final decision on whether to stop feeding me and let me die. Would it be my wife or sons? What a burden to put on them. I don't know if I could take that decision if it were one of my loved ones in that situation. I wouldn't want them to suffer but it would take some real heart-searching to say "Let them die," however much the humanitarian angle said it was time.
In Switzerland they have an organisation called Dignitas. It assists people to take their own lives in such cases. It does not do it lightly, but counsels the patient so that he or she has accepted all the consequences of either staying alive or taking the suicide route. Dr Turner went there in the end after a campaign in this country to try to get the law changed. She was still cogent, could still talk, could still walk. She had the luxury of still being able to think it through for herself. She asked the BBC to film her as part of the ongoing campaign to legalise assisted suicide here. She travelled with her son and daughters and we saw her in the apartment where it was to happen, sitting at a table and taking refreshment with her children. They supported her to the end, which must be probably the hardest thing they had done in their lives. But they knew that it was really what their mother wanted. Anne Turner died of a self-administered overdose of barbiturates, peacefully and quickly - probably the way she yearned to.
Let's hope that the British police don't even think of prosecuting the son and daughters (as they could) for assisting her.
It's a strange world where, if a racehorse breaks a leg they shoot it "to save it suffering". Did they ask the horse? No, of course not. Where is the sanctity of life there? Or is it just that it would be too much bother to look after a lame horse which won't win them any money?
Once again I don't know the answers. Once again much greater minds than mine wrestle with the problem and still they don't know either. Surely the only person who really knows is the sufferer.

Fighting the Yank Invasion

The Americans have invaded us one too many times. It's time to fight back. We've suffered the agony of eating the products of that cereal (or is it serial?) breakfast peddler Mr Kellogg, we've sucked-up to Mr Hoover, Mr Otis Lifts Us Up Where We Belong and Mr Gates crashes our computers with amazing regularity.
Now we're showing signs of fighting back - but, as usual, on the Yankees' terms and conditions. So, Mr Boeing is suddenly finding Airbus a real high-flyer. Mr Hoover has realised that Mr Dyson's appliance is far superior and has had to resort to copying it (why suck once when you can suck eight times?). The Pentagon is realising that it can no longer monopolise the GPS system because Europe is sending up its own satellites to do the job. Mr Otis is "going down" and out. Mr Gates is realising that Linux is a real threat not to be laughed at. But at last we have decided to fight against an American invasion which has lasted for about the last 150 years - I refer you to the ominous scourge of sciurus carolinensis. This alien came innocuously to our country in the 19th century. It insinuated itself - not into our society but by the back door - into our forests. It started to usurp, and finally threaten the very existence of, some of our most dearly loved natives. In case you haven't twigged it yet because of my unusual slip into Latin, the alien of which I write is that monster, that genocidal rodent the Grey Squirrel.
With their cute, bushy tails and the way they sit up and hold nuts in their front paws while eating them, everyone thought what lovely, harmless little animals they are.
The native species referred to, of course, is the smaller and more timid red squirrel which has been driven from most of its natural habitat by the more aggressive (typical Yank) grey. Like most Yanks the grey is a voracious eater, even eating acorns - which are inedible to the reds (perhaps they have a religious prohibition on eating acorns, or did Tony Blair make it illegal?). The red squirrel is now restricted to small areas in the North of England and parts of Scotland. There is, I gather, a small outpost of reds on the Isle of Wight who had planned to retreat further onto the Needles but the sea washed that landmark away, much to the annoyance of many nesting gulls.
Now we have joined the fight. Not because of the plight of the reds - more because the forestry people have realised how much the ever-increasing population of these "tree rats" is damaging the trees in our remaining forests in the UK. The Forest of Dean, renowned for its lovely stands of English Oak, is having problems with the little devils stripping ALL the bark from trees, thus killing the plants and destroying the habititat of the wildlife in the forest. They are now trapping and killing the squirrels in a mass "cull". Is this genocide? I don't know - but if it is then it could be looked on as just desserts for the genocide committed against the reds. Probably it's a case of too little too late. Many would argue that this invasion is all part of natural evolution - just speeded up by the inadvertent intervention of man introducing the greys into UK. Others (mainly religious fanatics) would argue that it is all part of God's Wonderful Plan for the world.
But I still like to dream of the last little grey fighting to the end in his little bunker as the reds come storming back. The little critter gets on his mobile, dials a secret number and says: "Never mind the robot menu - GET ME THE PRESIDENT! Urgent Priority First Class!" . . . . "Hello George - uh, I'm sorry, Mr President - well the truth is Sir we cocked up. We didn't take into account the fact that the Brits resent invasions. We should have taken more note of what happened to that other Right-wing leader . . . What was his name? . . . ah yes, Hitler, that's the guy . . . Yes Sir, I'm the last remaining Grey in the forest - they're all around me now and I can't hold out much longer. I'll sing The Star-Spangled Banner as I go down Sir. You needn't send the choppers with the body bag for me - by the time they get here the foxes will have eaten me anyway. What's that Sir? A posthumous Purple Heart? Oh, thank you Sir! . . . . now let me see, what were the words of the Star Spangled Bann . . . . . "

Oiling our Palms

I was idly listening to the radio this morning while preparing my lunchtime sandwiches to take to work when my attention was caught by a piece on the decline of Orang-utans in the Indonesian rainforests. It seems that a contributory factor is the continued deforestation of the region. So, we think, that's easy to remedy - we just need to stop using hardwoods and the bottom will fall out of the market for those who fell the trees for timber products. But there's another bogey in it. Palm oil. The demand for this oil is sky high. And guess where 80% of it comes from - the rainforest region of Malaysia and Indonesia. The growers get a double bonus - they chop down the trees and sell the timber, then they plant millions of palm trees to generate the palm oil. In the process of this endangered species like Orang-utans and the Sumatran Tiger are further squeezed towards extinction through lack of habitat. OK, I hear you say, let's not use palm oil. Hang on, that's not as easy as it sounds. Did you know that 1 in 10 food products found on supermarket shelves contain palm oil? All this "healthy eating" means that olive oil and palm oil become more and more in demand. The Indonesian government and the Malaysian government are to sign an accord to assist the palm oil industry in maintaining that 80% share of an increasing market and, needless to say, money is the key factor. All of us, in striving for a healthier lifestyle, are doing our bit to bring about the extinction of more and more of the species on this planet.
If you go to the Friends of the Earth page on the subject
http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/biodiversity/case_studies/palm_oil/ you can see the rantings and ravings of one section of the community. I wonder how many of them are vegetarians or Vegans and thus contribute more to the problem than they realise with their "healthy" diets? It's certainly not healthy for the Orang-utans or the Tigers.
Further coverage from a less biased source, the BBC, can be seen at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4273774.stm. Mention was made in the radio feature about creating palm plantations in drained mangrove swamps instead. What about all the myriads of species whose habitat would be destroyed by this? Doubtless if you search for palm oil on your search engine you will find sites such as the one I found from a Malaysian newspaper praising the multi-national cartel being created by the agreement between Malaysia and Indonesia.
To show that I have looked at other sides of the argument I would also direct you to http://www.mpopc.org.my/respond_to_CSPI.asp where a strong argument refuting the claims of Friends of the Earth and other campaigners is given.
I have no answers (I say that a lot) but greater minds than mine may be able to find a solution. If we were to give up every food that caused risk to other species we would be the species at risk, mainly because there are so many of us that eating simply and frugally and farming in the old, less destructive, ways it would simply lead to us all dying of starvation.
Once again, life's a bummer.

Thar She Blows!

Whale watching is becoming more and more the thing to do. People go to the Scottish coast, Iceland, Norway, American coastal waters, just to see these majestic creatures of which we still understand so little.
So today where is the hottest place to see a whale?
Central London.
I kid you not. Central London in the River Thames is the place to see a whale. A 6-metre (20ft to you ignorant stick-in-the-mud pedants who won't adjust to a standard which you didn't decree) bottle-nose whale has got itself lost and has swum up the River Thames right into the heart of the city. It is probably confused and very frightened and doesn't know which way to go. If it stays it will die. If it continues to swim further upstream it will die. Its only hope is that it will realise its mistake and turn round and head back out to sea where it can feed and recover. Already it has beached itself once on the bank - some well-meaning whale lovers managed to coax it back into deeper water where it could swim.
The good news is that it was at the time of writing seen in Greenwich, which is nearer to the sea. So perhaps it has seen the error of its ways and turned around.
I hope it gets back to its own world where it can be free to do what whales do and go where whales go and live like whales do. If it does regain its freedom I wonder what impressions it will take back of the day it went to London?

Toads take over Australia

I love seeing what's important in the news to other people in other countries. I look at CBS, which is very parochial. I also keep up with home and worldwide news on www.bbc.co.uk. Viewing the Australia Wide site on www.abc.net.au, I see a little of what's important to our antipodean cousins. It seems that the rare Tasmanian Devil is having a rough time of it at the moment. A large proportion of the dwindling population of these creatures is suffering from a disease which causes growths on their faces. Now I know that the Devil has had a bad press, partly because of the Taz cartoon which paints it as a monster which destroys everything in its path, but they're still an endangered species and something must be done as everyone says when they don't know what to do. I hope the species pulls through. There are doubtless many good people in Australia who will be able to find the cause of this disease and do something to cure it. I hope so, otherwise what on earth else could Tasmania be famous for?
It seems that wildlife is dominating the news in Oz at the moment. Queensland and Northern Territory are both having a plague of Cane Toads. The "poisonous little bastards" are breeding fit to bust at the moment. This is affecting other wildlife in all sorts of ways. Thousands of toadlets eat millions of insects, thus leaving not enough food for all the other insectivores in the area. And I don't suppose the insects are too pleased either. The locals have taken to toad hunts - gangs of them, children included (have they no shame, teaching little children to kill?), mooch around with torches after dark catching the little critters and putting them in plastic sacks. They are then frozen to death and disposed of I know not how. Talk is of keeping the balance of nature. But very often a surplus of one animal is an indication that the balance of nature has already been disturbed - usually by man. Perhaps we should leave them alone and let nature balance itself.
Viewing the BBC I came across a story about brave (or foolhardy) Muscovites celebrating Epiphany by cutting a hole in the ice on the Moscow river and, with a few priests muttering incantations, stripping off and immersing themselves in the water. Apparently the temperature is minus 30C! One woman said that she had done it three times that day to harden the body! I think that is taking it a bit too far. Meanwhile in other parts of Russia the temperature has gone as low as minus 60C - that's bloody cold - and people are dying. This is unusually cold even for that neck of the woods and it is already being referred to as Russia's mini ice age. They also showed pictures of another endangered species - the down-and-outs in Moscow. These people are existing (or not) thanks to hand-outs of cabbage soup. Like the Tasmanian Devil I hope they survive but the influence of money and capitalism seems to have gripped Moscow and the weak are going to the walls.
I am complaining of cold even though here in Bristol it is unusually warm with a daytime temperature of 10C. I don't think I could survive in Russian winters.
I haven't made one political statement in this entry.
What do you mean - thank goodness?

From Disaster to Hope

Thalidomide - the very name brings back vivid memories of deformed children with missing limbs, deformed hands, no legs, strange-looking bodies. The drug was used in the 1960s to aid pregnant mothers with morning sickness. The results were sickening. No-one had realised the after-effects of trying to relieve such a commonplace symptom of pregnancy. When the true effects were realised the drug was banned. Never would we make the mistake of using drugs without knowing their true side-effects again. In the UK, which used Thalidomide quite widely, the results were seen across the country. Everyone knew someone who had been affected. Babies with physical deformities were everywhere, it seemed. They became almost a peep-show. You looked away, partly to avoid embarrassing the poor deformed child, but mainly because you were disgusted by the sight. Everything was done to make their lives more bearable - but it seemed like an attempt to rid ourselves of the guilt we felt for letting such things happen in the first place. Partly because of this episode drug testing has become much more rigorous - but it is much too late for the victims of Thalidomide.
Viewing Australian Broadcasting Corporation news tonight I see that the drug is once again in use. It seems that it has beneficial effects on certain types of blood cancer. A woman is seen having treatment and saying how it has increased her quality of life. Needless to say they have built in several safeguards with regard to pregnancy. If a woman is still fertile she must undertake to use at least two forms of contraceptive to avoid accidental pregnancy. No recipient of the drug may give blood. The lessons, hopefully, have been learned. Now the Australian government has taken the drug off the experimental list and made it available on its Pharmaceutical Benefits System - thus bringing the cost of using it down to proportions where it will be viable to use. Let's hope that this time they have thought through all the side-effects. I hope so. If this one-time scourge can now give hope and extra time for cancer sufferers then I wish all those people who use it all the luck and love in the world.

Death of a Murderer

A septuagenarian was killed today. Clarence Ray Allen was a "Native American" as they quaintly describe it for fear of offending the descendants of the original inhabitants of that country. There is no doubt he was guilty of murder and incitement to murder. He received the death penalty for ordering a hit man to kill the seven witnesses who testified at his previous murder trial. Apparently one witness was murdered and two innocent passers-by were also killed. In no way do I condone these acts. They are barbarous. They are unforgivable - mainly because human beings are not capable of truly forgiving the taking of a life (after all we are not deities). But, by the same token, neither are we morally able to take the decision to end his life. We as individuals are not gods. The State is not a god. Whether you believe in God (or a god) or not do you have the all-seeing, all-understanding wisdom to decide who should live and who should die?
Clarence Ray Allen was old, frail, blind and deaf when they wheeled him in his wheelchair into the death chamber. He had been on Death Row for more than 20 years and it is my sincere hope that during that time his conscience made him regret his awful deeds. I do not know the whole story of his horrific crimes so I cannot pass judgment on him. But I wonder how much of a threat he was to society by the time he was executed. Or was it just that retribution - or to put the word more bluntly revenge - needed to be seen to be taken? An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth. A life for a life. Gandhi said words to the effect that and eye for an eye leaves both men blinded. Is anyone really satisfied with this outcome? Possibly the relatives of the innocent people who were killed feel a closing to the saga - I don't know. I just have a very uncomfortable feeling whenever I read of state executions. I can only speak for my own feelings so - just as I could not kill a man myself - I could not ask any person, or any state, to take a life in my name. In some states you can possibly think you don't understand the culture enough to comment on their actions. But in the "Land of the Free" whose motto is IN GOD WE TRUST, one wonders which God they are talking about. Do they not trust God enough to do what is necessary to this person? Is the state taking on the mantle of God? My feelings about executions in a "Christian" country are more than uncomfortable, they are downright sickening.
God bless America.
God Save America from itself.

Just the Two of Us

Offspring Junior has duly been taken back to Uni with fresh supplies of food, and all his other accoutrements, including a new office chair which had to be assembled. All went well with this until we mislaid the screws - oh bugger! Where are they? After frantic phone calls home to see if we had left them there they turned up hidden behind a flap in the box! Phew!
Arriving home again it seemed quite strangely quiet. Offspring Senior is in Birmingham visiting his fiancee so it was just the two of us. We spent a merry couple of hours searching the net for a holiday in August. I know that's the most expensive time but 'Er Indoors is a teacher so we're lumbered with peak time holidays. We like the look of Bretagne in France. We went there camping with the kids years back. This time we're looking for a self-catering cottage in an area where we can explore both the scenery and the coastline. One or two ideas came up and now we just have to see if there are vacancies left at a price we can afford. Wish us luck.
'Er Indoors has gone to bed now, and so should I - Goodnight.

Fame at last

Blogging is dangerous - it's official. I started blogging a few weeks ago with the intention of keeping a personal diary with perhaps a few observations on the world around me. It's turning more and more into a comment column on selected events and political happenings. Not content with letting loose with my blog I finally did what I thought only "armchair politicians" do and responded to a current affairs programme on national radio!
The programme in question is on BBC Radio 4 on Friday evenings (repeated Saturdays) called Any Questions in which politicians, thinkers and celebrities are questioned by the audience on various topical subjects in the news. There is a corresponding programme on the Saturday afternoon called Any Answers to which members of the listening public are invited to contribute their own views by phone or e-mail. I frequently listen to these programmes if I am near a radio at the right time. In fact you could listen to them on the web by going to www.bbc.co.uk/radio4 and clicking on the listen again link. You can listen to almost any programme that they air until the next one in the series supersedes it. Remember all times listed are in British local time.
One particular subject got me sufficiently agitated to actually e-mail a comment and - surprise, surprise - my e-mail was aired in full!
The distinguished chairman actually made it sound quite intelligent and cogent.
It lasted a full 40 seconds. My 40 seconds of fame . . .

The Atomic Split

So Iran is going ahead with its nuclear programme. The world is up in arms. Is Iran's intention to build a nuclear weapon? The present state of their missiles programme shows that within a very short time they could have the means of delivery of nuclear weapons. It could gravely affect the balance of power in the whole of the Middle East. Oh my God - both Iran and Israel with nuclear weapons. This is a recipe for total disaster in the Middle East which would bring in the whole world.
BUT - who gave the Israelis their atomic weapons? And why? If Israel has this power of destruction why should an Arab state accept it without counter-measures?
Don't get me wrong - there are grave doubts about Iran's claim that their only aim is to produce nuclear power for domestic purposes. After all, Iran will be self-sufficient in oil for decades - if not centuries - to come.
Oops - I mentioned the forbidden word oil. George W's country is hungry for it. They consume more of it than they produce and their capitalist system locks them into using more and more of it rather than finding other sources which would put their huge multi-national oil companies at risk. Am I being cynical again?
America supplies nuclear technology to Israel because of the strong Jewish lobby in the US.
America needs more oil to fuel its energy-hungry, ecology-destroying, consumer-satisfying needs.
How long before they are sending troops into Iran to "retain stability" in the Middle East?
The Iranians are scared by the attitude of the West.
What would you do under threat? Would you kow-tow or would you try to find ways to resist?
Make your own choice.
Come to your own conclusions.

Trees Fart - It's Official

Yes, it's true. German scientists were conducting experiments to see exactly what gases were emitted by trees. It is well documented that they ingest carbon dioxide and so it has always been thought of as a way of slowing down the greenhouse effect to plant more and more trees. But it seems that one of the gases given off by trees is methane! So all these extra trees we're planting to save the planet could be hastening its downfall into greenhouse hell.
Now, as many people know you can burn methane in an internal combustion engine. In fact during the war some enterprising people collected farm manure and stored its gaseous emissions in large canvas bags strapped to the tops of their cars. The mainly methane emissions from the manure burned reasonably efficiently in their cars - thus saving vital fuel for the war effort but at the same time creating more CO2 to destroy the ozone layer. We were already on a loser to nothing.
So - methane comes from manure.
Thus, it is also predominantly present in farts.
Trees also give off methane.
So ipso facto TREES FART.
I rest my case.

Respect

So Aretha Franklin was right. All we need is a little Respect for each other. Tony Blair has finally realised that we need it, one for another - or has he? Is he really talking about the loony Respect Party started by Saddam-loving Scots freak George Galloway or is he talking about Respect for Tony Blair? Either way true Respect is only earned. Galloway does not earn respect because, although he has apparently sincere beliefs to which he holds fast, he has too many skeletons in his cupboard. Tony Blair? Respect? I think not. He is just a failed lawyer with a wife who inspired Aardman to design their puppets' mouths, who decided he wanted the limelight and so he went into politics - not for the benefit of his fellow citizens but for his own ends.
Respect goes to those who really believe in their fellow man; dealing with all honestly and sincerely. People who deserve such respect are almost non-existent in politics. A love of political life almost totally precludes respect.
Having mentioned respect eight (oops, nine) times in this blog I think I'll call it a day.

Strength and Weakness

I see the US is to build an embassy in Baghdad. Not the open, friendly place you would normally associate with an embassy whose job is to promote peace and harmony between nations - no, a fortress costing millions of dollars, guarded day and night against attack by "insurgents". We make war on your country, we kill and maim the guilty and the innocent, we dominate your politics by imposing our "democracy" on a people which neither understands nor wants our version of it. We do it in the name of freedom. But you won't be free to talk to our representative in your country. The guards will only let those people in who comply with the rules, made by George W and his ilk. The illustrious President Bush, aided by those who think that they have to kow-tow to him (Blair etc) stated that the war against Iraq was won. This is why we still have American, British and other troops occupying the country. This is why Iraqis who join the security service are killed and maimed by their own people. This is why the Americans are to build a bomb-proof embassy. The fortress only goes to prove the weakness of the hold the troops have on the country and the system in Iraq. Bush won the war. Some victory . . .
Kennedy is a name known and revered across the world. Charles Kennedy? Who is he? For those of you who don't know he is the leader of the strongest of the minor political parties in UK. There are always visions of the two-party system being turned into the three-party system by the Liberal Democrats, thus making extreme policies impossible to carry through to law because no one party would hold an absolute majority. Many think this would be a good idea. Mr Kennedy showed real (some would say foolish) courage today by announcing that he had a serious drink problem which he had now overcome, thus acknowledging a major weakness. It had been evident in some previous public appearances that he had been drinking to excess but until today he had always denied it. His announcement today was accompanied by the fact that he would stand again for re-election as leader of his party. Initial indications are that this has rallied his party around him and many notable figures in the group have openly stated that they will not stand against him. Some would say this is pure bravado - bluffing out the problem to regain full control of his party. But many hold the view that today's events show true strength on Mr Kennedy's part. Whatever the outcome Charles has to be admired for his candidness. And his strength in recognising and overcoming his problem.

What a Gas

So the Russians have carried out their threat and cut off Ukraine's gas. Repercussions are expected - indeed are already evident - elsewhere in Europe because some European countries import up to 30% of their gas from Russia and their supplies come down a pipeline through Ukraine. The dispute purports to be over the price Ukraine pays for its gas, which Russia wants to raise by around 400% to bring it up to "market value". Never mind that Ukraine is moving towards political alignment with Europe rather than Russia. Oh no, they'd never let politics get in the way of market forces. Perhaps it's a plot by both countries to gain economic clout by rationing gas - thus increasing its market value. I seem to remember OPEC doing this with oil on more than one occasion. Come to think of it, is it political at all? Could it be that the oil and gas companies are engineering a price hike in the middle of winter when they know they can do most damage. Or, even worse, the Russians have got together with the oil giants to do it?Perish the thought.
People in Britain are saying that we are still 90% self-sufficient in gas and the other 10% comes from the good old Norwegians so we have nothing to worry about. Hang on - if the world price of gas goes up do you think the British and Norwegian gas companies will sit back and still sell at the old rate? Not when they can claim "market forces" and increase their profits. Once again we are shit upon by our own greed and consumerism. Until we all learn that the world has finite resources then we will always be at the mercy of those who want to profit from our needs.

Goodwill to All
So the time has come for the annual get-together with the in-laws from Shropshire. Every year around Christmas one family travels to the other's home to swap presents and catch up on the news and small talk. This year they came to us - that is Diana (the sister) her husband Peter and one of their sons Melvyn. Another son is in Slovenia visiting his girlfriend's family and the eldest remained in his home with his live-in. We had the usual double casserole (one veggie the other normal) and laid on lots of eats. We even got veggie sausages and ham(?) so that everyone had something of a treat. We always have a pile of presents under the Christmas tree - so it's like a second Christmas. I was very fortunate to receive a DVD of "Life in the Undergrowth" (see previous blogs) and - joy of joys - a bottle of Vouvray! This has made my Christmas complete. Thanks Diana and Co and I really hope you enjoyed your visit.

It's All a Filthy Plot

Here we are in 2006. Fireworks all over the place at midnight. Noisy buggers - they're determined to pollute the atmosphere and nobody's allowed to sleep while we're celebrating. No resolutions made because I know I won't keep them. No headache - surprising considering how much the wine flowed last night. Spent a lazy morning watching Bill Bailey concert on DVD - very funny, very droll, very dry. He makes you laugh at yourself because he's not afraid of laughing at himself.
In the afternoon Ros and I decided to go for a gentle country stroll. It was drizzling and it wasn't too warm but the "fresh air will do us good" - she says. We were ambling down the road with soggy fields either side. We could see a patch of blue sky in the distance and a small part of a rainbow appeared on the horizon looking like a ghostly watery monolith. Pied wagtails and gulls skipped around the mud in the fields, presumably looking for an easy meal of a worm or something. Blackbirds and great tits were in the trees and hedgerows. All was peace and calm. A variety of farm animals were in the fields - cows, sheep, horses. It suddenly struck us that whichever field you looked in there was always a percentage of the animals staring directly at you. Strange . . . No, more than strange - downright eerie. The blinding truth hit us. It was obvious. It was part of a filthy plot by the guv'mint to keep us under surveillance. They'll go to any lengths to keep us under control. 1984 has nothing on this insidious plot to keep us all in our place. The staring cows and sheep were nothing but animatronic robots with high definition cameras instead of eyes. You can almost hear the strong West Country accents in the UHF radio traffic going on around you: "Daisy to Ermintrude. They're comin' down towards Long Field. Keep yer cameras at the ready and alert Shaun the Sheep in the meadow next to the barn."
Creepy or what?