The Whole World’s Watching

You can tell by the response that it’s true. Low-level leaks without credibility don’t draw joint statements of denial like that of Osborne and Alexander. Inconsequential briefings don’t attract instant rebuttals from Number 10.

They have been caught, bang to rights, telling giant lies to the British people and it’s now a mad scramble to recover in case the truth takes hold. And, of course, it has taken root. Every Scot now knows that the men who run Britain will look him in the eye and lie to his face.

The Guardian office in New York

What made the Nick Watt story in the Guardian so powerful was first, the detail and second, the way it fitted perfectly the scenario the critics outlined. The clue to understanding the campaign is to think of it as two parallel operations. The main one, the one we get pushed at us daily is the upfront, in-your-face fear programme. It is entirely focussed on winning a No, irrespective of content, effect or implication. And irrespective of aftermath…legacy doesn’t matter. This is confirmed in interviews with Blair McDougall where he talks about the constant attention to the Don’t Knows, especially the section who are known to be nervous and think of themselves as having something to lose. No doesn’t bother with No voters, nor does it take any notice of Yes people (one reason it is totally negative to us), but only and alone it is concerned with the several hundred thousand still wavering and the sub group who are malleable. They are the Worriers not the Warriors. Bank balance or Braveheart? No contest. That is the first strand of the campaign – unflinchingly concentrated on a No win, by a single point if necessary.

The second and deeper part of the project is what they will do after September 18.  As soon as the Scots vote Yes, a container-load of power shifts north. It is ours and it’s called the mandate. One more vote than No and the ability to prevent independence is snatched from London’s grasp, the moral authority is vested in Edinburgh and there is an urgent and unchallengeable need to resolve the Scottish question to our, as well as to their, satisfaction. No more lectures, no more insults, no more lies about the finances, no more synthetic emotion and obfuscation. The condescension stops and, the bit I like best, the whole world is watching.


Every other country stays clear of internal national politics so long as no breaches of human rights and international law are concerned. But a legal binding, democratic assertion of sovereignty by the Scots puts us on the same footing as the British representatives. For the first time since the signing of the Treaty 307 years ago, the Scots will look the English in the eye and they will both know they are equals in the eyes of the world. Only it won’t feel like that for Cameron. This will be withering defeat for the man descended from William the Fourth who was the last Hanovarian King of the United Kingdom because the line ran out with him. Similarly, Cameron’s epitaph will be as the last Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

That mandate demands results. It can’t be ignored or delayed and the world community will expect action and fairness. One of Britain’s strongest cards is its soft power in the global community and, having taken such a monumental dent to the imperial paintwork, will be desperate to confirm its democratic credentials in handling Scotland. You can’t tell Afghans, Syrians or Crimeans they are ignoring international norms when you’re playing dirty with your own people.


It is at this point, notwithstanding the tortuous negotiations, that Scotland and the rUK become partners again. The game is over and hands must be shaken. The damage must be minimised and that is best effected by appearing still to share so much. Look, we share a currency, cooperate on defence in NATO, vote together in the EU, live without a border, happily share our island as friends, trade easily, export electricity, aid each other’s carbon targets, support rUK’s UN seat and have even reached a controversial deal on nuclear weapons. As our anonymous minister said: “…. everything would change in the negotiations if there were a yes vote.” What that means is they will say anything- absolutely anything – before the vote and something entirely different afterwards. The door will open for Scotland on to a new world. London must hope they haven’t scunnered the Scots so much with their lies that the mood in the North doesn’t want currency, defence or any other kind of Union with people who treated us so badly.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

67 thoughts on “The Whole World’s Watching

  1. Actually Derek, none of this is news. Britain or indeed most countries with international interests spy on each other & lie to each other while pretending to have common ground. This is how diplomacy is usually executed; with two faces.

    Recall the most recent public example when William Hague puffed that Putin was breaking international law while simultaneously briefing his own team to do nothing more than that would jeopardize the inflow of Russian money to London.

    Politics & practicalities rarely converge. Thus we are told in no ambiguous terms that Scotland will laughably be denied its own currency. The reality of a YES vote means that England will really have little practical alternative but to agree to some form of negotiated currency union. There are multiple terms that will be traded but ultimately we will likely end up using the Pound for the foreseeable future until, we the people of Scotland chose otherwise.

    Theresa May has warned Scots that security posts will be erected at the border. Despite none between NI & the ROI nor indeed between most European countries, she repeats threats to make travel to England difficult. If this were true, huge economic damage would be done to both countries. The only reasonable conclusion is that this threat along with all the others is simply political posturing to prevent an outcome that London doesn’t want.

    But as soon as the decision is made, practical considerations will erase all the political nonsense because the alternative outcome would look like a border between North & South Korea.

    One only has to study the unsuccessful political fights that took place to prevent the USA, India, Kenya etc from achieving their own full sovereign independence. If one is addicted to lists, Scotland will possibly be the last entry in a long table of countries that decided to take a chance by extracting itself from the financial & political ties to Britain.

    The more likely it looks like Scotland will chose independence, the louder & more extreme the British claims will become. We should view this as a positive sign because the more often we get to laugh at chaotic messages emanating from London, the closer we are to achieving independence.

  2. The nuclear weapons are the crux of this intrigue, the ‘leak’ was all about an attempt to tie Trident to the Currency Union. It was an early negotiating tactic and makes the leaker most likely Hammond, the Defence Secretary.

    The reality is there is NOWHERE else to put the subs that has the advantages of quick access to deep water and a land connection to Aldermaston. International law prohibits the transfer of naked warheads by sea and they must be returned to Aldermaston periodically for maintenance. So even if, for eg, they are based in Le Havre they must return to the UK mainland for warhead removal and that is the most dangerous part and thus cannot happen at Devonport.

    The SNP were elected in part on a promise to remove Trident and Alex Salmond has repeatedly stated that, given time for it to happen safely, the nukes must go. If they are traded away for a temporary currency union there will be hell to pay. I for one will give both my votes to the Greens or the Socialists as a result and never vote SNP again.

    • BTW I don’t know but I expect that the prospect of trucking or railing warheads through the Channel Tunnel, even in the dead of night might well be a non starter too. I’m not sure the French people of Brittany, Normandy and Pas de Calais will be happy about British nuclear warheads moving across their countrysides and and past their homes.

      I remain to be surprised on that matter, but if it’s Le Havre then at least it gets them out of Scotland and the French will have made a conscious decision to host them. But I can see lots of pain for the French government without much gain in that move. US pressure might well not be enough. Ditto wrt to pressurising the Scottish government to do a deal on them.

      The reality is NATO needs Scotland in to avoid a big hole in the Iceland Gap by air and sea. We need to hold our nerve on this one. We might be out of NATO for a while as punishment but realpolitik will see us in in time.

    • There is an ideal port for Nukes…it used to be the home of the biggest battleships so the harbour is deep. Pens could be made under its famous granite…where? Portland. Its kid on to say there is nowhere Trident could go. It could also go to Newport News the US Naval base in Chesapeake Bay. No problem about servicing the warheads there. Independent Nuclear capability? The UK does not have that at the moment….firing codes have to be authorised by the USA anyway. Actually….my hope is that the hassle will provide rUK with a way out with honour to scrap them as an opening gambit in a new Start talks.

      • Two problems with Portland. The first is it is heavily built over and around so the objections on safety grounds at Portsmouth will apply to Weymouth. The heavily built up nature of it also makes it very hard to see where they can build the bunkers to house the spare warheads as there are at Coulport (check it out on an online mapping service of your choice).

        Secondly the road link to the mainland is HIGHLY at risk of inevitable sea level rise already locked in over the lifetime of the replacements. This would at the very least require a very expensive bridge replacement.

        And finally, Alex Salmond has made clear, including over this last weekend, that the nukes will gone in the period of the first iScotland Parliament. Nowhere near enough time to build a base you describe, let alone get the whole thing through parliament and through the inevitable judicial review process, all the way to the ECHR.

        Of course the boats could go to the US in the interim, ferrying warheads on missiles to get around the laws. But that is not iScotland’s problem, is it?

        Also if the subs go to the US then rUK’s case that they are in possession of an ‘independent nuclear deterrent’ that entitles them to the Security Council seat will be even more unsupportable than it is now. So they will be very unwilling to take that option. Credibility about promises to build a new base and bridge and afford the eye watering costs of the replacements after losing Scottish inputs to the economy will be hard to come by as well.

        • Not to mention that you have misinterpreted the point about depth. The subs do not require a particularly deep harbour. They need quick and relatively traffic free access to deep water to disappear into.

          Your reading about the need for the subs to be in tunnelled pens at Portland is real though. The reason that, unlike the French at Le Havre, Trident is not in buried pens at Faslane is that the deep narrow sea lochs are protection enough. If a nuke hits the glen one over then Faslane could well survive. Because nukes are so large and destructive they are not pin point accurate by and large.

          Just like the the Tirpitz on the box last night the glens on the West Coast of Scotland requiring attacking aircraft to cross the UK also provides protection.

          Building those pens will be highly expensive though, make Crossrail look easy. For a start they need to be built partly below sea level and with big thick blast doors.

        • Yep. I hear you on the difficulties of the Portland option….. But none of them are insurmountable given political will and funds. The hills at Glen Douglas are Swiss cheese will tunnels for ordinance as is the base at Charleston. If they have to use US bases in the interim,then I am sure their PR, folk would continue to make the case that the ruk detterent is autonomous….. Which it isn’t even now, requiring US codes to launch. As to the built up area around Weymouth…. Well Helensburgh is pretty built up but does not factor in. Nukes cost cash…. And the houses around could be purchased but the politics would be the problem and losing seats the issue. Similarly Milford Haven would work but the politics wouldn’t. Here it’s works because the Tory’s don’t win and Labour PS are easily bought off. The only reason it’s an issue now is because it’s central to the indy debate…. We vote No and they will stay in Faslane forever…. As you rightly point the out… The UK seat on the Security Council means more to Imperial thinking BritNats than the global disarmament of nukes.

    • When the SNP changed policy on NATO it was but the first step towards accepting Trident. This is the opening Eck requires to take Step 2

    • This was the intention, to cause a rift in the YES camp. It will never happen, Nicola says it will not and it won’t it is one of the building blocks of the alliance.

    • Careful their Muscleguy, i suspect a deliberate ploy to get people thinking that the SNP are going to back down on the nukes thing and perhaps change their vote in the indy ref. I know that it wouldn’t make sense to not vote YES cos we’d still have the nukes with a no vote but a wee bit of stirring is going on, divide and conquer perhaps. Expect the Nuke thing to be hit repeatedly from now on .

    • Bruce Alexander

      Me too – there must be no deal on Trident.

  3. Mervyn King, when he was Governor of the Bank of England, said to Alex Salmond, “Your problem is that they will say one thing to you the day before the referendum, but after a Yes vote, they, the Treasury, will say something completely different”.

  4. I have to say I am feeling pretty scunnered with Westminster politicians and their BBC mouthpieces. I suppose I will get over it after a YES vote but I will never forget it.

  5. No nukes. Ever. Get rid. That is an absolute red line. The politician reneging on that is politically and socially dead.

  6. Trident lies at the heart of everything. To hint at exchanging a currency union for an ongoing Faslane is such a feeble bid that I doubt Hammond would even bother to put his name to it. It’s worth much, much more. It’s by far and away the strongest card in the SG’s hand after September. They could exchange it for almost anything they want.

    And therein lies the dilemma for the SG. How far can they play that card without betraying their promises and the Scottish people? A ten year lease? A twenty year lease?

    But just to throw it on the discard pile…. well, that, too would be a betrayal of a kind.

    What to do?

  7. As a lifelong SNP member I can assure you that Trident will not be traded for a currency union.Don’t underestimate Salmond as others do.There will be no formal currency agreement.We are heading for Sterling but without a formal agreement and the debt will be Osborne’s problem.The RUK will change after a Yes vote but so will Scotland.No one will be dictating to us as we will be courted by Westminster after a yes vote.Trident goes and there will be a referendum on the monarchy shortly after.The British institutions will be unpicked and removed as they were in Eire.

    • I think you have called it right there Big Jock….. but currently having to reassure my aging mother that the Queen is safe.

      Actually I suspect the Referendum on the Monarchy will come after QEII has abdicated/passed away, as it will be easier to win with Charlie boy about to take the Crown

    • 100% right Jock. I am sure we don’t really want a currency union but need to say it to hold the fearty vote. In the period before Indy day in March 2016 and Sept 19th Alex will draw Cameron onto a punch….and we will say to an Indy Scotland…its rUKs fault…they demanded too much…we as strong negotiators were forced to pull out because of our commitment to our own interests. Something we couldn’t attempt before the referendum in pre negotiations.

    • I agree. There is a major wake-up call heading Westminster’s way and if they want their problems to improve they need to start talking sensibly nice with Scots. We have our values and they won’t be shaken by misinformation and deceit.

    • My thoughts exactly. Most of us do not want any fiscal contact with England (rUK) we certainly do not want our finances intertwined with them.

  8. My suggestion for ‘Deep Thrapple’ is Vince Cable, King of Leaks!

    He hates most of his colleagues, especially Osbourne and Cameron, and he does have an unusual trait in UK politics today – he understands the reality of what’s going on in the murky depths of the City of London and sometimes lets slip a secret or two in the interests of the public.

  9. The chips are down. Westminster is trying to salvage something, anything, Fat chance. Trident is not on the table.

  10. when did we start to accept lies and misdirection from politicians,and yet we continue as if this is normal
    personally i would prefer the jim sillars of this world,his ambition is for his grandchildren,an honest man,a man who has remained with the same ideals for decades

  11. Well said big jock! The only negotiating to be done is how long it will take rUK to get its poison out of Scotland, and that will be ASAP with safety.

    Be nice to Scotland before the referendum because you’ll have to deal with us after it, win or lose. You have started a wedge between us and that will not be forgotten. Scotland is on track to become an independent nation, that will continue until it is achieved make no mistake about that.

    My kids, grand kids & great grand kids will decide their countries future and enjoy its freedoms, no more second class lifestyle run by Tory Eton toffs and London bankers.

    I would love to see my country free before I pop my clogs so let it be NOW.

  12. Ian Gray said Salmond tries to upset as few people as possible in order to get a Yes vote.Spot on as far as I am concerned.The press hate Salmond because he is the shrewdest politician they have to deal with.The journey is not more important than the destination!

  13. Helen Hemphill

    The No Campaign are crumbling. Scotland is fine either with or without a CU. Indeed many economists say that we would be better without it. Has anyone noticed who’s doing all the squealing. Danny Alexander said in his Edinburgh speech that three would under no circumstance be a currency union and that was final. He then in the next breath said that in the event of Scotland voting YES he would argue very forcefully against a currency union. This was all said in the same speech.

  14. A friend has suggested that hew sees no reason why the whole Trident operation could not be moved to Norfolk, Virginia US of A. One advantage being that the Trident sub skipper need only make a local call for the codes.

  15. The London elite just don’t get us Scots.
    They have listened to too many pretendy Scots who are out of touch with working people.
    The evidence shows that Scots are ambivalent towards EU membership and outraged about being told by snotty English public school boys that we won’t be allowed to use the pound unless they say so.
    Had the English public school boys listened to real Scots rather than the pretendy ones,they wouldn’t be in the mess they now find themselves in.
    What a tangled web we weave…..

  16. Have you forgotten? We don’t weave webs; we watch the spider then go out and win the fight!!

  17. I am of the same opinion as many others. Trident out. Years ago the government spent a huge amount of tax payers money to dig a massive dry dock for Trident at Rosyth as we were supposed to be doing all the refitting etc. Once built, the government did a purely political u-turn and moved Trident refitting down to England. Back then, in my opinion, everything to do with Trident should have been moved.
    No will be no trade-off for the pound, as it’s already been said – after a YES vote, everything changes.
    We will probably use the pound for a while but it has proven to be a very expensive currency to use and trade with but that is a choice for the future. Bring on September…

  18. I think that after a YES vote, the Scottish Government should play hard ball. There should be a core of non-negotiable demands, such as:
    1: The border to be moved back to Hadrian’s Wall, where it was originally, the last time there was an imperial power occupying London.!

  19. Independence will never happen. The majority of Scots are far to stupid to vote for it!

  20. Independence will never happen. The majority of Scots are far too stupid to vote for it!

  21. The SNP would have a death wish not to boot Trident out of Scotland it would rip the party apart in the way the 2012 NATO vote did not quite manage.

    The Yes Campaign is predicated on Trident leaving Scotland as quickly as possible – it will go.

    Portland is not suitable as a nuclear weapon store – it is limestone – Portland Stone ….

    Falmouth could be a good bet but opposition from the Cornish would be massive.

    The Welsh Senydd has said thanks but no thanks to Nukes in Pembrokeshire.

    If the Trident subs were based at Norfolk VA they would be counted as US weapons under START.

    On a Yes vote Trident and its replacement is finished, currently the US Military are stating the UK should give up on its nuclear weapons and create a balanced, modern, conventional force, more useful to Europe and NATO instead.

    As for the leak … the growing suggestion is the source is a Tory Minister disaffected with Cameron’s leadership.

  22. BritNat liars – stop at nothing liars… if only lies are the worst they will get up to – their spooks will be preparing nasty things.

  23. Why does it just have to be a ‘Scot’ Derek? I like your articles but this country is full of people from all ethnic origins who also want independence. Less reference to the ‘Scots’ would make your points more inclusive.

  24. Andrew Marr asked Hammond if the briefing of Nick Watt of the Guardian was from him.

    Hammond: ” I was in Washington.”

    Marr: “But was it you?”

    Hammond: “I don’t think so.”

    I think so!

  25. ‘Loving the Pantomime gravitas of Fozzy Carmichael and Beaker!

  26. I totally agree Jock WMDs are the red line, this far and no further. The SNP know that. I think Nicky is making a significant speech today to CND, according to her Twitter.

    Interesting and little reported news in Scotland on NATO. Nato secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen has confirmed Norway’s former premier Jens Stoltenberg will succeed him as new chief of the military alliance in October. Who would have thought it eh? A non nuclear country who are totally against WMDs, in the Northern Hemisphere, population around 5 million, oil and resource rich, independent, patriotic and proud of their country, not in union with their neighbour…Heading up NATO. Rather puts the UKOKS gas on a peep again. Proof if we required it that their is nothing sacred when it comes to talking down and stabbing your own country in the back.

    The world is indeed watching and willing Scotland on. Please God lets not let them down.

  27. Another well written article, well done again.

  28. What Westminster politics and BT have done to the electorate of Scotland on all sides throughout this campaign is unforgivable. They’ve deliberately and with premeditation set about instilling fear and uncertainty within their own constituents. Their full intent to sow as much division and acrimony as possible. The demonization of the independence vote, the fear and uncertainty thrown at the undecided on a daily basis and for what? To extend the life of an establishment and state entity which most agree is at best deeply flawed and at worst corrupt, self seeking and socially destructive.

    What government, what kind of people, charged with the care of the public participate in this kind of strategy? More importantly why should we support them with our vote?

    • Its just the facts TL. Say there wasn’t a referendum on the horizon. Would anyone seriously believe Westminster government was anything other than an establishment jobs for the boys house of gangsters? Running one of the most morally bankrupt, incompetent and socially slanted bureaucratic governmental systems in the developed world?

      Yet somehow the idea of the Scots electorate passing judgement on Westminster’s record of governance makes us the wrong sort now. Simply because this is a referendum, the leopard hasn’t changed its spots. These people aren’t defending a successful union, they’re defending a system of government and an establishment responsible for bringing the UK to the state its in today.

      Grump over.

  29. The straws are being grasped at today. An alleged off the cuff comment by an unnamed politician to an unknown source who will not be in government come 2015 and suddenly it has all changed. I believe the only thing this shows is that salmond is getting increasing desperate to salvage what he can from his train wreck of a currency policy.

    And on the nuclear weapons issue, would you rather have british nuclear weapons where you know where the are located, their status and now many there are or the snp’s mooted don’t ask don’t tell policy with the US? You know where the US will not have to tell us if their ships and subs entering scottish waters are carrying nukes because we will promise never to ask them? We will go from a known risk that protects us to an unknown risk that doesn’t. I believe this is how norway balances being anti nuclear but in NATO at the same time.

    • So many misunderstandings in your post but to start with your last point Apropos nukes. I would rather not have them at all and that is what’s going to happen. We have no control over them at the moment as Scots. You have no clue control over them either. The US retains parts of the firing code. That means you have to ask the US for permission to launch. You don’t think they would let you loose with Nukes do you. They also service the important parts regularly in Newport News Chesapeake Bay so we yes… Scotland too…. Paid a vast amount of money for a faux deterent. As to your point about our currency policy. It’s going to happen… We will use the pound as a tradeable world currency while it suits us. Certainly, from Sept 19th to March 2016 and formal Independence day. After the 2016 elections it will be up to the sovereign Scottish Parliament to decide whether we stay with the pound the Euro or our own currency. So Don, the look for a long term deal on a negotiated currency union….. And the chances of us paying for your ruk dedb is nil. You created it…. You pay for it. It’s worth noting none of the other colonies like Canada US Oz India etc ever paid a penny of your dedt. What I can’t understand is all the nastiness you show…. Isn’t it a good thing we want to be part of the world and an ally… Why annoy us? Are you in a fit of pique because we want to leave the Union we entered as a free country?

      • The us does not retain the firing codes and the subs can fire autonomously so I’m afraid that nullifies most of what you are saying. Just think about it for a second, according to you all the enemy would have to do to neutralise the uk subs is kill the
        person in the us holding the codes or jam the subs coms. You do know that the sub commanders are each given a letter telling them what to do if the uk falls, these letters can say anything up to and including nuking wherever and the clearance of the us isn’t required.

        Using the pound like Panama or Guatemala uses the dollar is not a currency union.

        Who’s don?

        I’m scottish so don’t know who you are havering to… and we are part of the world already, drawing a order across the country and possibly getting turfed out the EU until membership gets sorted will not take us closer to anywhere.

        • Predictive text to blame for the mis spell but you are wrong in all you say. The USA does have the final say on launch…. And that would be illogical. It is after all their technology and slow communications are by very low frequency radio while the submarines are submerged (yes it works) to receive codes. You are right…. If the President hasn’t, access to the codes then the Commander with his sealed orders cannot autonomously release a nuclear weapon. You can surely see that they would never have that power. I’m sorry to say we do not as Scots have a say in World affairs…. In fact we are invisible to the world. Our own independent Parliament would have rejected our involvement in the Iraq war.

          • Sorry but we will have to agree to disagree on the control of the missiles point.

            Bringing up iraq is a mistake, that invassion was pushed through by a scottish PM, a scottish chancelor and a scottish domniated labour cabinet. Scots share some balme for iraq and you cant deny it. It was srong but we cant pretend it had nothing to do with us.

            Just look at the recent sryia situation, Salmond was all for piling in when westmister decided against it and helped keep the US back as well. If the world had followed salmond we could be heading to WWIII right now.

          • Yes agree to disagree. Alex S was never for a war in Syria…I don’t know where you got that but given not one newspaper is for us, nearly all being owned by Unionists its not surprising where you get your opinions from. Indeed you are right on the significant part played by Tony Blair….I wouldn’t see him as being in any sort of empathy with the Scottish people having been educated at an effectively English public school . Yes, other Unionist Scots were involved but my point was not about race but Parliament….a Scottish Parliament, voted in on PR would never have given in to the pressure of the USA to join an illegal war. Thats one reason for Independence…..there are many others to do with fairness and social justice. My problem is I can’t understand folk with your attitude who after scratching the surface are Nationalist…albeit British Nationalists. Oh and I am not simply a keyboard Nat….I was out on a street stall in Kinglassie on Saturday….a huge majority canvassed were for YES. The many photos I have seen of no one turning up to Better Together events is testimony to the grass roots of our campaign which will have a comfortable majority in September 19th…..I hope you will accept the result and work for a better Scotland….one that realises we are not a world player, but like Denmark Holland or Switzerland, happy to contribute to the defence of our nation …bout not offence against others.

    • Whoa there cowboy, have you forgotten the pills today?

      From reading your comments it would appear that you are a prime example of the ‘cringe’. I find it sad that there are people like you around who think Scotland is such an incapable backwater.

      I also assume from your comments that you are also one of those ‘internationalist socialists’ beloved of the Labour party. Ah the solidarity between the working class across the entire UK, strange that we never seem to hear if that solidarity stretches to say the working class in the Republic for example. What kind of socialist would sacrifice the opportunity to make real change happen in Scotland in order to preserve the order of the British establishment? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face, well of course that is unless you are British first at all costs….

      • never voted labour in my life, have voted snp 3 times though. shows how good you are at working people out.

        • I seriously doubt whether you voted for the SNP once never mind 3 time Mr McMad….if you did…what did you think you were voting for. No, given you have chosen to call yourself McMad….no Scot would be so cringeful, I suspect you are a Troll…and from south of the Border. If I am right….why should you care if we go our own way? Do you feel angry or piqued at the upstart Colony having the cheek to unfriend you? Is your attitude latent racism? Why don’t you just play nice and give us your blessing as we make our own way in the world?

          • ahhh so im not scottish… and i don’t live here… and I’m being racist to myself.. looks like someones lost the argument.

  30. I would suggest, Mr McMad, that the person grasping at the aforementioned straws would be your good self. The “off the cuff comment”, as you describe it, was proffered by an un-named politician to a reputable journalist working for a leading national title with the full knowledge and consent that it would be published on the basis of anonymity. This can be verified be listening to the interview conducted by Isobel Fraser with the journalist, Nick Watt, on Radio Scotland. On your comments regarding nuclear weapons, your train of thought is so disjointed is doesn’t warrant a response.

    • Yeah I’m sure it was. Yeah it definately gospel. Yeah right… As I said, clutching at straws. Interesting to note that you are another one who can’t face up to the actual don’t ask don’t tell policy in the white paper.

      • …which is why the UK Government is busy trying to hunt the culprit down and The Spectator is frothing about the need to “execute” the guilty Minister.

        • so what, if there is a leak it has probably come from a half drunk lib dem mp trying to impress someone. The lib dems will not be anywhere near government after the next UK GE.

  31. If the SNP Government wanted to indulge in Realpolitik, they could easily say, “That’s fine, Westminster – keep your currency and your debt. We’ll just sell the nukes back to the USA and make do with our own resources. Oh, and Uncle Sam, how much are you willing to pay to make the world a safer place without these WMDs? I’m sure that Russia would, er, be able to decommission them if you aren’t.”

    If there is a Yes vote, then the current SNP Government will be in a tremendously strong negotiating position.

    Of course the UK’s politicised security services will be working on this problem full-time, doing all they can to call in favours and twist arms to raise a chorus of Nay-sayers, but remember – these are the people that gave Kim Philby control of British spies in the Soviet Union.

    It’s also not possible for the US Executive to say, “Oh, the Scots mustn’t try to gain independence from the UK!” That would be too much for many American citizens to stomach.

    • oh thats a great idea, lets kick kicking off a nuclear war over a currency union. the further people like you are away from any decision making the better..

  32. Lillias Fabbroni

    I haven’t been getting my e-mails for a week now. I thought you had stopped blogging and was deeply depressed. What can I do?

  33. Poor Cameron – more like the role in The Last king of Scotland

  34. Negotiations – The White Paper states a cross party group would negotiate for Scotland – seems fair. Obviously Westminster would delegate it’s own group BUT I can see a situation where the Westminster government would object to the Scottish group, saying that they had no mandate to negotiate and as it was still the UK it should be a Royal Commission making the decisions. I don’t think this has legs but I DO think they will try it on and want their own plants in the Scottish group

  35. Dr JM Mackintosh

    John McMad.

    You need to relax or up your name to John Mcfurious.

    You are wasting your time here – you need to concentrate on your colleagues in the disparate No campaign. They are in desperate need of your knowledge, advice and guidance if they are not going to blow all their advantages and lose the referendum

    To say that Alex Salmond was in favour of an intervention in Syria is an insult to one of the most principled politians in Europe today.

    One of the main reasons that I have the upmost respect for Alex Salmond is that he stood alone as the only major politician who opposed the illegal Iraq War. He could see right through the hypocrisy of Tony Blair and his acolytes.

    To me this was the making of Alex Salmond and I will follow him to the ends of the Earth.

Leave a Reply