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?