Which Palestine?

Well, the most momentouus thing for me in the last three days is a seizure that confined me to hospital. I think it's all to do with over doing it, and a huge increase in the medication for 5 days. So, I have more or less confined myself bed until this programme ends - today. Last time my tumour gave me a seizure in October, I had to discharge myself from hospital as I had to go to see the Stranglers. No such emergency this time. With, the any luck, I should as back on my feet, as anyone with a grade 4 brain tumour can be, before long. Meanwhile, there have some political events I have yet to comment on.

I am not going to analyse here on Gaza too much. That has all been done. And so much analysis has been done badly. I saw a lady from Palestinian Solidarity Movement on BBC News 24 on Saturday. What solidarity? There is no solidarity between Hamas and Fatah. Hamas remain a terrorist outfit, whose leaders wish the destruction of the Jewish race. Fatah want to get down to business. They have a good chance now without Yasser Arafat. It was Bruce Anderson who said of Arafat: "He never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity." How accurate!

So what can we do? There is no point debating the last sixty years of wrongs and rights - there are plenty on both sides. There is little point trusting Hamas, who say they support extermination of a race. And if Hamas ever "do a deal" they always seems to break it again. Israel seem to be very heavy-handed as usual, but then were not we in Iraq, but with the UN critcism?

I feel desperately sorry for the Palestinian living under Hamas. But you are led by donkeys. Don't vote for them! Meanwhile, plug on with negotiation - Israel seem to be getting some security out of it. And Hamas are still donkeys!

Leave Harry alone

I started on the chemotherapy again yesterday. Fortunately, it is only five days, but it knocked the stuffing out of me yesterday afternoon. It also knocks the stuffing out of the NHS at £250 a day! Still, if it "prolongs" my life, so much the better. They have already told me that the tumour is not curable, and that about two years is average. Should make the general election at least!

Anyway, a week ago, the "hot" story was about something Prince Harry said three years ago. Sky News were determined to push this as much as possible on Saturday, in order to flog as many cheap rags of papers the following day. And the rest of the media, including the BBC though it was newsworthy.

Now I have historically not been a fan of Harry the lad. His incident with a Nazi unform was appalling. But he has grown up a fair bit since then. I admired the fact that after it had been said there was no way he could go on active service to Iraq, he snuck off to Afghanistan instead. That took guts. His choice of words in that video of three years was not intended to be offensive. I doubt if he would use them now, though many army in the may continue to do - and some with racist motive. It is interesting that the Conservative MP, Patrick Mercer, said that Harry's language was unaccepable. Is this the same Mr Mercer who that a couple of years ago that calling a soldier "a black bastard" was fine?

The media should grow up. I am sure you can find more racism in the Sun than in Price Harry. And the politicians should shut up. Three years is a long time. Speak up for Harry. He tries. He is probably pretty good at his job.

Heathrow? Or no?

After a month off, I start on some chemotherapy tomorrow. The last lot was a mammoth stretch of six weeks of radiotherapy and chemotherapy, with daily hospital visits. This time it will last just five days, and I don't need to pop into the hospital. That's good; it may make me tired, but I will still have to find ways of amusing myself. So what is going on in the news... ?

The Heathrow expansion seems to be the hornets' next at present. There are, it appears, three schools of thought:-

• There are those, including the Government, who back it. We know where they stand with them.
• There are those oppose it, and oppose every alternative plan. The Greens do this out of conviction, as they want to stop flights. But those who do like progress and the twenty-first century are being disingueous if this is their approach.
• There are those who oppose it, and want to built an alternative. Boris Johnson's idea is that this would be in Kent. It is true that Kent is more conveniently located than Heathrow, but the environmental damage, in terms of wildlife, could be substantial.
  

So what is the political reasoning behind the parties' viewpoints.

• Labour are untroubled by their decision. It is difficult to see how such a decision could cause them to lose Labour seats.
• The Conservatives are desperate to win seats in London, particular south-west London Liberal Democrat seats. But do they realise that the seven Labour seats in Kent that are meant to fall like dominoes to the Tories will be hurt by Boris's plan? The people of Cliffe or Sheppey, two purported sites, would far prefer Heathrow expansion. And so would the RSPB.
• The Liberal Democrats are tussling in south-west London, over the same seats as the Conservatives. I can't see an alternative they have proposed yet - they are sitting on their hands.

At least the Green are clear, although deluded.

Heathrow is far from ideal, but you can't uninvent it. I go with Heathrow.

The beginning....

You have to start somewhere with a blog. But I don't really know where. Or what I will blog on.

Perhaps a cheery mix of politics, my own tastes - books, music and drinks, for example - and stories of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and neurosurgery. I'm undecided.