Alex Salmond's Position Is Secure

Somehow I have an overwhelming desire to throw something at the television whenever Danny Alexander appears.

Often I've pondered on my dislike of the Libdem MP and only today I realised what irritates me.  Apart from his immaturity - which can be excused perhaps - it's his inability to express himself without avoiding a direct question and his obvious effort to stick to his pre-prepared script regardless of any question.

Johann Lamont has a similar style although I couldn't possibly accuse her of being immature, except in verbal debate.

Both are poor speakers but that deficiency doesn't make a poor politician.  Not all politicians are orators and the public understand for some it's a struggle to look comfortable in front of television cameras. Some take lessons, at taxpayers expense, yet improvement isn't always noticeable.  Iain Gray springs to mind and the Labour politician David Miliband who spent £7,000 on 'speech' lessons.

What does make a poor politician is one who pointedly insists on ensuring those who disagree with them are ridiculed.  The truth doesn't matter as long as they manage to get their insults recorded.

This past week, along with Danny Alexander, the leaders of the unionist parties have all criticised the character of the First Minister.  Their efforts were feeble and they only resulted in displaying how professional and competent Alex Salmond is when in the scrutinising eyes of cameras.

Yesterday I had a telephone conversation with a tory-voting friend and it was a more pleasant occasion than usual because for the past four weeks I had lost my voice (no sniggering please) but the third course of antibiotics seem to be solving the problem.

During our chat I asked what she thought of Ruth Davidson's performance at FMQs last week. 'Horrendous' was the reply. We discussed the 'legal advice' issue and both agreed it wouldn't cause Alex Salmond any long-term damage. "The public really aren't interested in politicians' petty squabblings and childish insults," she insisted.  I agree, although I don't think Jackie Baillie's latest nonsense should go unchallenged by the Scottish Government.  Telling the public that the removal of Trident would cost 11,000 jobs, when a Freedom of Information request by the Scottish SND revealed only 520 jobs at the Clyde Naval Base were directly dependent on Trident is lying. Surely?

We both said details of how an independent Scotland would survive enough to have the social policies and economy Alex Salmond desires were far more important.  Let Danny Alexander and his ilk continue to fill our screens with their soundbites, but none will produce a knockout blow on the First Minister - unless his economic proposals for an independent Scotland leave room for ambiguity.  We need clear details backed by international economists and figures which can be understood and verified by the voter.

I'm not a gambling woman but I would bet that, at present, Alex Salmond's position is safe in the hands of an opposition who are third rate by comparison.

Tweet

Will Faslane Be Scotland's Bargaining Tool?

Fifty years ago I doubt if any Scottish independence supporters would have dreamt that their country would be the talk of Washington and Moscow steamies, but it is and the interest of the Russians is said to be causing 'jitters' in senior American circles.

One of Putin's US political counsellors made an appearance at the National Capital Tartan Day Committee's (NCTDC) Tartan Day 2012 Symposium in Washington at the end of last month.  His attendance was unusual because it was the first time a Russian has shown up at one of these events.

But why was he there?  Maybe to admire the tartans (if there were any on show) but his main interest was discussing Trident and the future of Britain's nuclear deterrent should Scotland decide to vote Yes in the 2014 referendum.

A senior Congressional aide stated many US political experts believe that if Scotland does decide to become independent the SNP will be forced to abandon its opposition to basing nuclear missiles on the Clyde as part of the separation agreement. "A favourable outcome would be that the bases would still be available for the Trident fleet and would be leased to the new British government," he added.

All very neat and tidy for the US because some Americans are said to be worried independence would 'weaken the military power of America's staunchest ally'.  I don't agree that there is any 'special relationship' between the US and the UK. The US is well known for looking after its own interests and those of its allies are secondary.

Republican Congressman John J Duncan, who is co-chair of the Friends of Scotland Congressional Caucus, is one of the biggest supporters of Scottish interests in Washington DC.  He can't understand the SNP's opposition to nuclear weapons.

The SNP is currently reviewing its NATO policy and it is expected to decide that an independent Scotland would apply to be a member.

However, the NATO decision, or any others, will not belong solely to the SNP. When Scotland is independent all political parties will be forced to declare their policies and membership of NATO will be just one of them. Scotland could even decide to have a defence force similar to Finland - a non-NATO EU country.

The people should be asked if they want nuclear weapons to reside in their country and the SNP would be sensible if they included a NATO referendum in their independence proposals.

Negotiations between Westminster and Holyrood will be ongoing in the next two years or so, with oil and Faslane being prominent subjects for discussion. I can't see any political party in Scotland bartering North Sea oil, but will Faslane be the bargaining tool?

There's no doubt the Russians and Americans will be keeping a close watch on developments.

source

Tweet

Why is This being Publicised?

The MSM is publicising the start of a massive 'simulated war' involving ships, aircraft and submarine to be staged off the west coast of Scotland as part of a Nato military exercise.

The Royal Navy's flagship aircraft carrier, HMS Illustrious, will take the lead role in Exercise Joint Warrior.

Forces from the USA, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Norway, Turkey and Brazil are also taking part in the 21-day exercise which starts on Monday.

The scenario involves three nations fighting over disputed territory.

State-sponsored terrorism will also be introduced to the exercise, along with a period of built-up tension,, followed by simulated war fighting and open hostilities.

Ships have already begun to arriving at the Faslane Naval Base, which will host more than 100 British personnel and their allied counterparts.

HMS Illustrious will be the biggest ship involved and lead a nine strong task group. Her Harrier GR9 jets will be among 50 warplanes flying about 75 sorties a day. Type 23 frigates HMS Northumberland and HMS Portland are also taking part.

The United States Navy is sending four ships, as is Canada and there will be other ships from Denmark, France, Turkey along with the Brazilian frigate BNS Defensora.

Helicopters will be deployed from the UK, Canada, Brazil the USA and Denmark, while planes will fly from the UK, Germany, France, Canada, Norway and the USA.

Ground forces will be provided by the UK, Belgium and the United States Marines.

Certain areas of Scotland are often used for military exercises but these are never given publicity. This one is different. Why? I understand the message but to whom is it directed? Iran, Russia, the middle east?

Source: BBC

Tweet