When you’re on a war footing, it pays to plan ahead for the next attack. After softening up the enemy, the next strike must be decisive and then, to eliminate any chance of revival, you finish it all off with the final overwhelming onslaught – one that no-one can come back from. The names Project Fear and Operation Dambuster reveal to us exactly how the masters of British fair play regard the referendum – as enemy action to be repelled at any and at all cost. Why?*
I wrote last year how the British state was Scotland’s real enemy, not England and certainly not the English people. This is the best class preservation society in history and it will do anything and risk everything in the fight for its survival. To the Establishment, this is war. Instead of having an intelligent discussion to meet each others’ needs, instead of feeling out where there might be agreement and compromise – the very diplomatic arts that Britain urges throughout the world, including in the Ukraine right now – they put on their fatigues, broke open the weapons cabinet and prepared to blast the very people who are supposed to be on their side in this family of nations.
After the Dambusters the next assault from the Whitehall War Bunker is Operation Dresden. I suspect a spy in the England-conquers-all camp would discover that this involves throwing more legal principles and international norms out of the window after having declared first, in their legal opinion, that Scotland does not exist and then announcing collectively that the UK currency is theirs alone. Dresden will state that only assets currently situated in Scotland can be claimed by Scotland. There will be no share of facilities, staffing, resources or accounts which are positioned outwith the borders of Scotland. There will be access to some defence assets but these will require to be paid for. As for facilities overseas like embassies and consulates they will also be out of bounds. Likewise there will be no sharing of consular facilities, although London is currently proposing to share with Canada. The principle of agreeing a proportionate share of assets will be abandoned just as the jointly-owned currency has been. There may be sharing of UK services like vehicle licensing but that will be paid for on an agency basis. They will insist that Trident remains on the Clyde or they will not support our membership of NATO. They will also claim to have a replacement port to berth the submarines and store the warheads (but it can’t be named for security reasons) and if the Scots insist, they will be prepared to move Trident but the costs and the clean-up will be sent to Scotland.
They will say that what is theirs, stays theirs. They will be rewarded by resounding cheers across England to encourage their scorched-earth approach. Commentators will take up the call. Why should we give them what is ours? They didn’t pay for it – we subsidise them…
The Yes campaign will be left searching for experts – for there will be no political friends – who will contradict this Putin-style threat. But in the meantime, the top-line message will have got through – you have nothing, you ARE nothing. It is all ours and if you leave you take nothing with you.
Lastly will come the final crushing carpet-bombing codenamed Hiroshima. This will say that the oil does not belong to Scotland. When it first came ashore it was not designated as Scotland’s by the British, but was and still is, assigned to the Continental Shelf which is why 40 years later, oil and gas are not recognised as Scottish assets and our Treasury-produced national accounts appear without it.
Of course this is clearly ridiculous even to a bleeding-knees Unionist but the retort will be simple – you can have a population-based share of less than nine per cent.
No country, no currency, no external assets and no oil. Look up – that’s a mushroom cloud you see.
Now you may be thinking this is madness because it’s shot so full of holes. But so is their legal opinion and so is their currency position and until and unless they see a change in the opinion polling, they will believe this is working. It doesn’t matter that you lie, it only matters that you get away with it. By the time the pro-Yes voices can get in a logical response, the message to those who can’t or don’t find out for themselves, will be hammered home – they really do control us and there is no point in fighting back. Even if they’re only half right in the claims they make, many Scots will argue, it makes for a very bleak picture and nothing like Alex Salmond’s optimistic vision. Why was I taken in by him?
This is already one of the dirtiest campaigns in Britain’s history and no lie is too big to tell, no stunt too offensive to pull. The social democratic Scotland that devolution has carved out has created a perception that Britain was relaxed about our constitutional journey. We are used to easy relations between Edinburgh and London and began to believe that this was a mature and equal relationship which, faced with an independence-lite platform including sharing currency and debt, would elicit a fair, even generous, response.
Don’t be taken in. Britain is fighting on the beaches, in the streets and through the media and fighting for its life.
*You’d think this would be a major media talking point. If things are as bad in Scotland as we are told, why would the London mob not just wave us goodbye? The answer to this is simple and comes in sections.
One, they can’t afford to lose Scotland. We are 10 per cent of the UK economy. We contribute significantly more than we take out. We are net exporters adding serious foreign exchange heft to the UK accounts. Britain is bankrupt with ever-rising debts and a second housing bubble en route. Borrowing costs are coming under threat and without us would certainly rise.
Two, it would be a global humiliation which would seriously weaken Britain’s international reputation. It would destroy the Tories reputation and cause the earth to shake under the political establishment (Labour). Britain’s position in the G7 is jeopardised, as is the permanent UN seat and it loses voting power in Brussels.
Three, we’ve got the nukes. This is the basis of the relationship with the US which defines the UK’s world role. Remember the US general who doubted Britain’s capability as a full-on partner recently? Losing nuclear weapons would drop Britain to Ruritania status.
One of the saddest and most damning truths of the whole campaign is that it has become a boys’ gang-hut game with blood-curdling threats and militaristic language when it should be a mature and friendly negotiation. Instead they have made it Britain at War.