A new referendum

Seeing those leftist luvvies protesting all over the world tells me that the US people got it right in electing Trump as President but what about his attitude to Muslims? He has signed an executive order banning for four months refugees from principally Syria being admitted to the country. As President, his first duty (as is that of the UK's prime Minister) is to protect his people especially after the 2001 attack on the twin towers and he, like May, will be aware that Muslims pose the biggest threat to world peace, being the principal protagonists in the majority of conflicts around the world today.
However, with all this outrage at his plans to make his country safer in mind, I wonder what would be the outcome of a referendum in the UK asking the single question, 'Should Islam be proscribed?'
I can see the majority of people saying 'yes'. The generous, sympathetic and broadly welcoming people of the UK have been sorely tested by an influx of people who clearly do not want to integrate and associate themselves with UK life, let alone values. They do not like the idea of gender separation such as is routinely seen in mosques; they do not like the wearing of the burka etc, seen as a provocation, a visual reminder that they have arrived and will do as they (or their menfolk) want. Nor can they understand why these immigrants would come from a hell hole, seeking a better life, but bring with them the culture (including their religion) of the very hell hole they are fleeing from. This would be understandable if they came as conquerors; but they didn't, they have arrived accepting the hospitality of the citizens of the UK.
The referendum, which will probably only be advisory, not binding on the Government, will lead Council leaders in some towns or districts in West Yorkshire, Lancashire and London seeking advice from Nicola Sturgeon about quitting the UK.
Of course, this will never happen because politicians need to harvest votes and the Muslim vote is critical in some constituents and the Imams are very aware of this. As are the quisling British politicians who have been queuing up to denounce Trump. Why is it that the leftie luvvies don't come out and march against the excesses of Muslims who are torturing and slaughtering people, destroying ancient monuments, enslaving and abusing women etc etc? Why is it that so called moderate Muslims are not doing more to stop their violent co-religionists?

The Oak Tree

Imagine, if you will, an oak tree. See it, its trunk, its broad lower branches becoming smaller as your eyes rise towards the crown. See the thousands of acorns and the tens of thousands of leaves on the branches and imagine the hundreds of different species of animals to be found, living and surviving amongst the foliage. Get up close and touch the trunk, feel it, put your arms around it, smell it; use your senses to perceive this micro world in all its glory.
But wait; is all you perceive the full picture? Is there anything else; something that your senses haven't identified? Of course there is but we cannot sense it because it is out of sight, underground. Nor is this hidden part insignificant. It is a fundamental part of the tree; its very existence depends on the system of roots and other aspects that play a part in the health, growth and wellbeing of our oak tree. Indeed there is as much below ground as there is above and yet when we first perceived the tree it didn't register.
I believe that the same situation obtains with our universe; we are all aware of what we can witness with our senses but do we need to dig into the unseen, use our imagination, to find the full picture of our existence.
In my book, 'Spiritual Man: An Introduction to Negative Dimensions', I propose an alternative ideology, digging into the unknown in search of our sister universe, challenging the orthodox views of science and religion.

Drone swarms

It had to happen; the US army have developed a mode of warfare using drones to swamp the battlefield with overwhelming firepower. Relatively cheap to produce and operate, technicians, behind front lines can deploy thousands of armed drones in a swarm, killing everything in their path and destroying soft buildings. And why not?
These drones would do the same job, only better, as cluster bombs, designed to inflict maximum casualties on people, combatants and non-combatants alike, on the ground. Many countries including the UK signed a protocol prohibiting the use of these weapons on humanitarian grounds, arguing that their deployment was in some way a war crime. The US sensibly did not sign this protocol, recognising the simple truth that when you are engaged in warfare, nothing should frustrate your aim of winning.
I have said it before and repeat it here; warfare is the crime, all that happens on the battlefield is a consequence of this simple rule. When war is waged it should be as General Sherman recognised fought to win at ALL costs. Losing is not an option. This said, the responsibility for war must be on the leaders who declare (formally or not) a state of war. In effect, this means that the witch hunt against UK soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is perverse, when the leader, Blair, is free to earn millions despite widespread condemnation of his role.
War is the worst human condition. Fear of annihilation is a major factor in maintaining peace and drone swarms sound ominous. If they therefore prevent the outbreak of war, stop aggressors attempting a land grab, they could yet prove to be a force for good.

Is Michelle Obama also a twit

I recently wrote that I thought Prince Charles was a twit for his ambition to be 'defender of faith' rather than 'defender of the faith' on his gaining the throne. Now I see that he has been followed by Michelle Obama in imagining that a future of coexisting faiths will lead to a better, more integrated and cohesive society. Is she also being a twit?
Mrs Obama, in her valedictory speech urged the young to have hope that in the future there will be greater tolerance of faith, colour and creed. Since faith (in religious doctrine) and creed are similar, she is essentially talking about race and religion. Again, she is being more than optimistic if she believes that all the followers of Islam will want to dilute their devotions by identifying with heretics or even Muslims from the wrong tribe.
It won't be easy reducing tensions in the world, life remains a matter of survival of the fittest, but we can't even begin to make things better if world leaders continue with their self delusion, their worthless rhetoric, often to garner votes, and their incessant urge to sweep the inconvenient truths under the carpet.

Travel chaos

It's 2017 and the UK is facing a hike in the price of rail travel coupled with more disruption as the unions threaten more walk-outs. It is an age old problem but as congestion hits the roads and people have to travel further to work it can only get worse; much worse. What are the Government doing about it? Building HS2, another, very expensive and invasive, rail track.
What is needed is a brand new approach.
How would you like:
High speed travel to work with guaranteed seat.
A guaranteed service, free from union interference.
Affordable travel, safe & efficient.
No car crime. No driver based accidents. No car insurance problems or costs.
No drink-driving problems.
No parking problems. No rogue parking firms.
These are some of the benefits from the transport policy I described in a newspaper article in 2009 ( see here ) and outlined in my 2011 novel, 'The Lamb at Nettlesham'. I reproduce the article in full but of course things, other than the problems, have changed. So! Come on Mrs May, give me a call so that I can begin my transport revolution and make the UK world leaders in the new technology, exportable to every country on the globe.