Theresa May visited Scotland yesterday. She came to Edinburgh and launched the latest guided scare into the heart of the Yes campaign.
To paraphrase the latest claim from Westminster, Scotland will be vulnerable to a terrorist attack if we leave the Union.
Here is how the BBC introduced the 'May Day' alert:
"An independent Scotland would have a reduced ability to detect and prevent terrorist and criminal threats, the UK home secretary has said.
Theresa May said the current intelligence and security network would be difficult to replicate."
So there we have it. Scotland won't be able to defend itself against the army of terrorists that will descend on what Westminster also claim will be a small, insignificant state devoid of London clout.
Scotland will also, it should be noted, be in the process of negotiating the removal of Trident Nuclear Weapons from the Clyde. Our troops will no longer be compelled to take part in the former UK's imperial adventures.
In short Scotland will be harmless. Why any terrorist would want to attack a nation that has just wrenched itself from the rule of the former colonial power isn't explained. Scotland will most probably be rendered safer after a Yes vote than a No.
But most people who are willing to apply logic to Theresa May's claims will have already reached the same conclusion. The SNP's Christine Grahame summed it up best when she suggested that May would have been better to have kept her mouth shut.
I'm not sure whether May's visit is the seventh or eighth in the orchestrated list of Project Fear 'yes-plosions' but there's something rather unsettling about the tone of these statements.
When trying to persuade a partner to remain in any relationship, it's usually not a good idea to issue veiled threats. But that's what London appears to believe offers the most effective way of ensuring a No vote in 2014.
We are told that they'll block a currency union, that guards will patrol the border, that the English will suddenly refuse to take our electricity and that our skilled shipbuilders will suddenly be deemed of such poor quality that they'll be prevented from bidding for MoD contracts.
This isn't a bid to woo Scotland with the promise of a second honeymoon, this is the actions of an insecure bullying partner who is used to using threats in order to get its own way.
Charles Bird, Teaching Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence (CSTPV), University of St Andrews, speaking on STV even suggested that Scotland would house terrorists intent on launching attacks south of the border.
The really sad part of the whole thing is that those who ought to be on Scotland's side are colluding with the Westminster bully. Our institutions, faced with attacks on this small nation, lend credence to the scares by headlining them.
We've seen this before when the Lockerbie bomber was given compassionate release. Our media institutions, in the face of some particularly unseemly bullying from the USA, aided by our own London based Government, turned on the fledgling SNP Government and actively sought out those seeking to launch politically motivated attacks.
Indeed, BBC Scotland rarely passes up an opportunity to invite a US Dignatory to attack Scotland over the compassionate release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and yesterday was no exception when US Ambassador Matthew Barzun visited.
Scotland is the only nation on earth which, when attacked by another country, sees its own media join the baying mob.
Theresa May's attack didn't dominate the headlines. But that was more down to reports from the CPPR and the IFS who launched their own inimitable 'independent' reports. The message from both was the same – leave the Union and you'll regret it.
Douglas Fraser wrote of the IFS report: "The independent think-tank concluded if Scotland were to leave the UK, it could face fiscal pressures at least as strong as the rest of the UK and may want to consider increasing taxes.
"...If oil revenues fall away as fast as forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility (though these forecasts are contested), there would be an additional £3.4bn gap in the budget."
According to the BBC the CPPR claimed: "There is a gap of more than £1bn in forecasts for the oil and gas tax an independent Scotland could expect, according to an academic study."
These aren't well researched warnings from May, the IFS and the CPPR. This is blackmail, pure and simple, aimed at terrorising the politically unaware into voting No.
All welcomed by the anti-independence campaign group Better Together.
Surely this organisation ought to be re-named 'Better Stay Together ... Or Else'.