"How Did the Trump Administration Lose an Aircraft Carrier?"

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/04/how-did-the-trump-administration-lose-an-aircraft-carrier/523458/

On April 9, as tension between the U.S. and North Korea over missile tests rose, the U.S. announced it was dispatching the USS Carl Vinson, an aircraft carrier, and its retinue, toward the Korean peninsula. “U.S. Pacific Command ordered the Carl Vinson Strike Group north as a prudent measure to maintain readiness and presence in the Western Pacific,” a Navy spokesman said at the time.

There was one flaw in the plan, as The New York Times reports:

The problem was, the carrier, the Carl Vinson, and the four other warships in its strike force were at that very moment sailing in the opposite direction, to take part in joint exercises with the Australian Navy in the Indian Ocean, 3,500 miles southwest of the Korean Peninsula.

The result is the sort of thing that would comical if it didn’t involve nuclear brinkmanship. The announcement of the Vinson’s movement jacked up the tension between Washington and Pyongyang, which called the travel “reckless” and thundered, in a statement to CNN, “We will make the U.S. fully accountable for the catastrophic consequences that may be brought about by its high-handed and outrageous acts.” Had the North Korean government, unsure how to interpret Trump’s tough rhetoric, actually started a hot war, the Vinson would have been 3,500 miles away, rather than ready to act.

How did this happen? Was it Trump’s vaunted unpredictability? Nah:

White House officials said on Tuesday they were relying on guidance from the Defense Department. Officials there described a glitch-ridden sequence of events, from a premature announcement of the deployment by the military’s Pacific Command to an erroneous explanation by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis—all of which perpetuated the false narrative that an American armada was racing toward the waters off North Korea.

The confusion might never have become public if not for another miscue: The Navy posted a picture of the Vinson steaming through the Sunda Strait in Indonesia, far from where the White House had placed it—a case of the government failing to take simple steps to cover its own tracks.

The boat blunder is only the latest example of how failure to communicate between units is undermining the Trump administration’s ability to articulate and execute a policy. In this case, the White House blames the Pentagon for providing misleading information and a premature press release, though a fuller story will probably emerge over time. (It’s important to remember that Mattis, a decorated and respected Marine general, was supposed to be one of the more competent figures in an administration full of thin government resumes.)

The cruise was part of joint exercises with Japan, which I here reported three weeks ago (with pictures).  See,  USS Carl Vinson w/ Japanese escort..., Technology section, April 1.  The US Navy actually published the fact, which story was where I got the details to report.  

WTF...if the rest of the world was confused, I trust at least everyone one on Newsfix was well informed.

In this mornings news (ABC) it was announced that the White House was the one that was confused (what else?).  They presented it as a sort of apoligia, saying the WH had not yet fully staffed up...which explains why they cannot recognize their ass from a hole in the ground.

Meanwhile, the Vinson just carried on, as we correctly reported on Newsfix.

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive....”

If creating the confusion and deception of the enemy are two of the arts of warfare, the US Navy appears to have done a pretty good job.
―

Now, later in the date of April 19th, after receiving so much criticism for not knowing where the Vinson is, it has become apparent that the White House was lying.  It tried to claim the carrier strike group was heading to the Korean peninsula for the protection of South Korea...when in fact, it was simply on maneuvers with the Japanese around the Philippine Sea.  Lies, lies, must tell lies!

South Korea is furious with Trump for lying about the protection it was supposed to be receiving from the Vinson..  I don't blame them...you Brits take heed.  If the US ever goes to war under the Trump administration, this is the kind of battlefield cooperation our allies can expect...yeah, we'll be right there...bullshit!

To paraphrase a radio message from Admiral Nimitz to Admiral Halsey during the Battle of Leyte Gulf, Admiral Trump, where the hell are you...the world wonders?

Far be it from me to defend Trump or, indeed, any lying politician, Quill...but isn't truth always the first casualty in any war, even an undeclared one?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:Far be it from me to defend Trump or, indeed, any lying politician, Quill...but isn't truth always the first casualty in any war, even an undeclared one?

Fair point
I do think Trump was set up a bit
In that I really doubt he'd have the capacity to confirm anything, as the issues with Bannon has shown he has blind acceptance of what he is told. Quite likely he has the reading capacity of an 8 year old

Fred Moletrousers wrote:Far be it from me to defend Trump or, indeed, any lying politician, Quill...but isn't truth always the first casualty in any war, even an undeclared one?

It depends upon who you are lying to.  If you can't be truthful with your friends, you are aiding your enemies.  Imagine if South Korea were sending a strike force to meet the Vinson, and when they get there there's no Vinson, but there is a Chinese or N. Korean fleet...that sinks them.  What does the liar say?  You got there too soon? or we had to finish these exercises with Japan we forgot to tell you about!
 
Trump's defect is that he is ignorant of Washingtonianism (and this is an example), and that he occasionally takes advantage of what we lawyers call easy language.

He is an amateur.  He is sloppy, and in this case he was sloppy in not knowing the whereabouts of a fookin' super carrier...and fudging on it's mission!  This is what spoiled little rich kids do...talk before they are spoken to.  They are incautious, and it gets them into trouble because in certain situations they are supposed to know what's, what!

Also, Trump is not above using some easy language.  Lock her up?  Build that wall?  Mexico will pay for it?  China is a currency manipulator?  Our generals are rubbish?  Our military is a bunch of losers?  Disabled people are funny?  These, and many more, are images that Trump will raise from time to time to take advantage of the moment.  If the super carrier Carl Vinson is on maneuvers in the Java Sea, why not slip in that it's mission is the Korean peninsula.  An idiot like Trump doesn't know the Java Sea from the Sea of Japan (it's over there somewhere...), or the Korean peninsula from the Kamchatka peninsula...so of course he expects the average American to be equally ignorant.  Hey...it works with his base.

The problem is, he has the resources to know better.  And people who are depending on him expect him to know better.  Now you may find excuses for him, but there is little margin for excuse when one is in that position.  He's either too lazy, or too dishonest to be in that position.  He could easily start WW III, and I expect he will before his term is out.

Original Quill wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:Far be it from me to defend Trump or, indeed, any lying politician, Quill...but isn't truth always the first casualty in any war, even an undeclared one?

It depends upon who you are lying to.  If you can't be truthful with your friends, you are aiding your enemies.  Imagine if South Korea were sending a strike force to meet the Vinson, and when they get there there's no Vinson, but there is a Chinese or N. Korean fleet...that sinks them.  What does the liar say?  You got there too soon? or we had to finish these exercises with Japan we forgot to tell you about!
 
Trump's defect is that he is ignorant of Washingtonianism (and this is an example), and that he occasionally takes advantage of what we lawyers call easy language.

He is an amateur.  He is sloppy, and in this case he was sloppy in not knowing the whereabouts of a fookin' super carrier...and fudging on it's mission!  This is what spoiled little rich kids do...talk before they are spoken to.  They are incautious, and it gets them into trouble because in certain situations they are supposed to know what's, what!

Also, Trump is not above using some easy language.  Lock her up?  Build that wall?  Mexico will pay for it?  China is a currency manipulator?  Our generals are rubbish?  Our military is a bunch of losers?  Disabled people are funny?  These, and many more, are images that Trump will raise from time to time to take advantage of the moment.  If the super carrier Carl Vinson is on maneuvers in the Java Sea, why not slip in that it's mission is the Korean peninsula.  An idiot like Trump doesn't know the Java Sea from the Sea of Japan (it's over there somewhere...), or the Korean peninsula from the Kamchatka peninsula...so of course he expects the average American to be equally ignorant.  Hey...it works with his base.

The problem is, he has the resources to know better.  And people who are depending on him expect him to know better.  Now you may find excuses for him, but there is little margin for excuse when one is in that position.  He's either too lazy, or too dishonest to be in that position.  He could easily start WW III, and I expect he will before his term is out.

I'm not sure why you think that I'm "making excuses" for him, to be honest. I don't think that anyone who has read my posts about Trump could reasonably assume that I'm some sort of apologist for the man.

And he may very well be, in US lawyerspeak, guilty of "easy language," though I much prefer the rather staid British political definition of "...being somewhat economical with the truth..."

The fact is that I do not know, though I really do find it somewhat difficult to accept that the President of the United States is speaking to the rest of the world in the absence of guidance and advice, at least, of his most senior generals and admirals.

As to him starting WW3, well let's just say that I have laid in a good stock of candles and tinned food...

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It depends upon who you are lying to.  If you can't be truthful with your friends, you are aiding your enemies.  Imagine if South Korea were sending a strike force to meet the Vinson, and when they get there there's no Vinson, but there is a Chinese or N. Korean fleet...that sinks them.  What does the liar say?  You got there too soon? or we had to finish these exercises with Japan we forgot to tell you about!
 
Trump's defect is that he is ignorant of Washingtonianism (and this is an example), and that he occasionally takes advantage of what we lawyers call easy language.

He is an amateur.  He is sloppy, and in this case he was sloppy in not knowing the whereabouts of a fookin' super carrier...and fudging on it's mission!  This is what spoiled little rich kids do...talk before they are spoken to.  They are incautious, and it gets them into trouble because in certain situations they are supposed to know what's, what!

Also, Trump is not above using some easy language.  Lock her up?  Build that wall?  Mexico will pay for it?  China is a currency manipulator?  Our generals are rubbish?  Our military is a bunch of losers?  Disabled people are funny?  These, and many more, are images that Trump will raise from time to time to take advantage of the moment.  If the super carrier Carl Vinson is on maneuvers in the Java Sea, why not slip in that it's mission is the Korean peninsula.  An idiot like Trump doesn't know the Java Sea from the Sea of Japan (it's over there somewhere...), or the Korean peninsula from the Kamchatka peninsula...so of course he expects the average American to be equally ignorant.  Hey...it works with his base.

The problem is, he has the resources to know better.  And people who are depending on him expect him to know better.  Now you may find excuses for him, but there is little margin for excuse when one is in that position.  He's either too lazy, or too dishonest to be in that position.  He could easily start WW III, and I expect he will before his term is out.

I'm not sure why you think that I'm "making excuses" for him, to be honest. I don't think that anyone who has read my posts about Trump could reasonably assume that I'm some sort of apologist for the man.

This is not about you. It's about a person who is in Trump's position. There is no margin for any excuse when one is in control of such power, and one is so loose with the truth.

Fred M. wrote:And he may very well be, in US lawyerspeak, guilty of "easy language," though I much prefer the rather staid British political definition of "...being somewhat economical with the truth..."

That's not "easy language". That's withholding the full story. BTW, that has been made a crime (fraud) in recent revisions to California's Elder Financial Abuse law. http://www.canhr.org/factsheets/abuse_fs/PDFs/FS_FinanElderAbuse.pdf

"Easy language" is when a case opinion uses a metaphor or an adjective from another arena (he admits he 'stole' the idea...he must be a thief!), and then uses it in a literal context...or vice-versa.

Fred M. wrote:The fact is that I do not know, though I really do find it somewhat difficult to accept that the President of the United States is speaking to the rest of the world in the absence of guidance and advice, at least, of his most senior generals and admirals.

The president of the United States is always speaking to the rest of the world. When he makes a statement that is demonstrably wrong, either he hasn't taken advantage of the information and advice around him, or he is lying.

Fred M. wrote:As to him starting WW3, well let's just say that I have laid in a good stock of candles and tinned food...

Much as I love San Francisco, it's one of the closest cities to North Korea. I'm thinking of coming over there.

SF Weekly wrote:North Korea Nukes San Francisco (in a Video)
All our pretty Victorians razed to make room for glorious new tractor factory and giant, empty pyramid-shaped hotel.
Peter Lawrence Kane
Wed Apr 19th, 2017



In the movie Wargames, Matthew Broderick has to convince NORAD’s high command that radar maps of nuclear warheads repeatedly destroying civilization on both sides of the Iron Curtain are only simulations. He’s right, the computer eventually learns to prefer chess instead of thermonuclear war, and nobody dies except for Ally Sheedy’s career and even that took time.

Still, it’s scary to watch San Francisco (along with every worldwide major city) be destroyed over and over on film. But we’re creeping closer to it happening in reality. On Saturday, April 15, to honor the country’s 105th birthday, North Korea held a stirring, martial concert complete with video footage of missiles flying across the Pacific and landing in downtown San Francisco, with graphics of a burning American flag and a field of white crosses thrown in for good measure.

Yikes. Let me go on record here as being in total opposition to nuclear brinksmanship, let alone dying in a radioactive conflagration. But let it also be noted that North Korea is famously bad at getting its missiles to function properly, and even if they did manage to get one over here, the weapons they do produce are nowhere near powerful enough to wipe out the entire Bay Area.

For me, the most interesting interpretation of the phrase "...being economical with the truth..." (which, incidentally has been around for a couple of hundred years) arose when it was used by the UK Cabinet Secretary, Sir Robert Armstrong, during the Australian 'Spycatcher' trial in 1986.

Lawyer: What is the difference between a misleading impression and a lie?
Armstrong: A lie is a straight untruth.
Lawyer: What is a misleading impression - a sort of bent untruth?
Armstrong: As one person said, it is perhaps being "economical with the truth".

Most people now just seem generally to regard it as a euphemism for a "porkie."

I won't invite you to visit me if you feel the need to seek refuge in the UK...my house is a mile and a half as the crow flies from a known high priority target. Even worse, the local pub is half a mile away.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:For me, the most interesting interpretation of the phrase "...being economical with the truth..." (which, incidentally has been around for a couple of hundred years) arose when it was used by the UK Cabinet Secretary, Sir Robert Armstrong, during the Australian 'Spycatcher' trial in 1986.

   Lawyer: What is the difference between a misleading impression and a lie?
   Armstrong: A lie is a straight untruth.
   Lawyer: What is a misleading impression - a sort of bent untruth?
   Armstrong: As one person said, it is perhaps being "economical with the truth".

Most people now just seem generally to regard it as a euphemism for a "porkie."

As a lawyer (JD) and a philosopher (PhD), I’ve made it a game to study argument/answer forms in both legal and political dialogue.  It’s a short-cut in my profession, to understand the structure of the argument, so as to quickly ferret-out the direction.  For example, most people have heard me describe the ‘mirror-image’ analogy, of which conservatives are so fond.  Another example is the ‘pivot’, which has gained notoriety with the likes of Kellyanne Conway.  Most of these stratagems are described in my book, Why Elephants Lie.

So your dialogue example, while it works as a joke, wouldn’t really describe enough for a real student, who is looking into it in much greater detail.  Unfortunately, the dialogue is too loose, and goes astray:  “Economical” means parsimonious or sparing…less than full.  So “economical with the truth” means withholding something, not simply deceiving.  It’s a more subtle deception, because it obscures the fact that there is deception.

“Easy language” means something different.  It relies upon the stupidity of the listener.  It involves finding some term (metaphor, adjective, adverb or simile) with duplicate meaning, and knowingly using the wrong meaning for argument advantage.  It’s slippery…some might say, sleazy.  Because there is usually a source or orgin, one can check for oneself, and easily find the deception.  Only those who don’t check—or don’t want to check—are fooled.  It usually results in giving the speaker a bad reputation, no more.  I’ve seen judges get angry and dismiss whole cases for ‘easy language’ lawyering.

Trump is an ‘easy language’ artist.  Typical of spoilt children, he’s never been challenged to learn more sophisticated techniques.  His followers—the Trumpsters—are those too intellectually lazy to check the source, and this is consistent with conservative habits.  Typically, conservatives are too intellectually lazy to think—a thesis I have spoken of very often on this site.  It’s no surprise that Trump aligns with conservatives.

The example of the fate of the USS Carl Vinson is a case of ‘easy language’ announcement, because the source is so easily checked.  The US Navy announced it.  I found it in my own posts.  The Vinson was on maneuvers…no more.  Trump and the WH tried to misconstrue the destination as northbound, toward the Korean peninsula, to associate it with a position that we (US) are building up our military presence there.  In fact, the Vinson was southbound toward the west coast of Australia.  The Trump people thought no one would check.  Alas, there are deeper intellects out there, and conservatives always get caught by their lack of attentiveness (intellectually lazy…see, Why Elephants Lie).

So you see, the Trump people thought they would slide an ‘easy language’ (north, south…whose looking?) stratagem over on the world and no one would be the wiser.  The ‘easy language’ stratagem is the lowest in terms of sophistication, because it is readily checked (hence the term sleazy).  Consequently, the speaker—in this case Trump—is lowered in the eyes of the world.  He is, therefore, less effective, and less impressive.  That’s highly dangerous when you are head of the most powerful state in the history of the world.  

He will start WW III, no doubt.

Fred M. wrote:I won't invite you to visit me if you feel the need to seek refuge in the UK...my house is a mile and a half as the crow flies from a known high priority target. Even worse, the local pub is half a mile away.

Not to worry.  I wouldn't live elsewhere than west Scotland, where the pubs are no further than ten steps in any direction. Plus, my castle is there.

Original Quill wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:For me, the most interesting interpretation of the phrase "...being economical with the truth..." (which, incidentally has been around for a couple of hundred years) arose when it was used by the UK Cabinet Secretary, Sir Robert Armstrong, during the Australian 'Spycatcher' trial in 1986.

   Lawyer: What is the difference between a misleading impression and a lie?
   Armstrong: A lie is a straight untruth.
   Lawyer: What is a misleading impression - a sort of bent untruth?
   Armstrong: As one person said, it is perhaps being "economical with the truth".

Most people now just seem generally to regard it as a euphemism for a "porkie."

As a lawyer (JD) and a philosopher (PhD), I’ve made it a game to study argument/answer forms in both legal and political dialogue.  It’s a short-cut in my profession, to understand the structure of the argument, so as to quickly ferret-out the direction.  For example, most people have heard me describe the ‘mirror-image’ analogy, of which conservatives are so fond.  Another example is the ‘pivot’, which has gained notoriety with the likes of Kellyanne Conway.  Most of these stratagems are described in my book, Why Elephants Lie.

So your dialogue example, while it works as a joke, wouldn’t really describe enough for a real student, who is looking into it in much greater detail.  Unfortunately, the dialogue is too loose, and goes astray:  “Economical” means parsimonious or sparing…less than full.  So “economical with the truth” means withholding something, not simply deceiving.  It’s a more subtle deception, because it obscures the fact that there is deception.

“Easy language” means something different.  It relies upon the stupidity of the listener.  It involves finding some term (metaphor, adjective, adverb or simile) with duplicate meaning, and knowingly using the wrong meaning for argument advantage.  It’s slippery…some might say, sleazy.  Because there is usually a source or orgin, one can check for oneself, and easily find the deception.  Only those who don’t check—or don’t want to check—are fooled.  It usually results in giving the speaker a bad reputation, no more.  I’ve seen judges get angry and dismiss whole cases for ‘easy language’ lawyering.

Trump is an ‘easy language’ artist.  Typical of spoilt children, he’s never been challenged to learn more sophisticated techniques.  His followers—the Trumpsters—are those too intellectually lazy to check the source, and this is consistent with conservative habits.  Typically, conservatives are too intellectually lazy to think—a thesis I have spoken of very often on this site.  It’s no surprise that Trump aligns with conservatives.

The example of the fate of the USS Carl Vinson is a case of ‘easy language’ announcement, because the source is so easily checked.  The US Navy announced it.  I found it in my own posts.  The Vinson was on maneuvers…no more.  Trump and the WH tried to misconstrue the destination as northbound, toward the Korean peninsula, to associate it with a position that we (US) are building up our military presence there.  In fact, the Vinson was southbound toward the west coast of Australia.  The Trump people thought no one would check.  Alas, there are deeper intellects out there, and conservatives always get caught by their lack of attentiveness (intellectually lazy…see, Why Elephants Lie).

So you see, the Trump people thought they would slide an ‘easy language’ (north, south…whose looking?) stratagem over on the world and no one would be the wiser.  The ‘easy language’ stratagem is the lowest in terms of sophistication, because it is readily checked (hence the term sleazy).  Consequently, the speaker—in this case Trump—is lowered in the eyes of the world.  He is, therefore, less effective, and less impressive.  That’s highly dangerous when you are head of the most powerful state in the history of the world.  

He will start WW III, no doubt.

Fred M. wrote:I won't invite you to visit me if you feel the need to seek refuge in the UK...my house is a mile and a half as the crow flies from a known high priority target. Even worse, the local pub is half a mile away.

Not to worry.  I wouldn't live elsewhere than west Scotland, where the pubs are no further than ten steps in any direction.  Plus, my castle is there.

Well, now that I no longer have to earn my living as a wordsmith, I shall enjoy the remainder of my years and enjoy whatever scribbling  I choose to do by adopting the famous Humpty Dumpty principle espoused by the ill-fated egg character in Lewis Carroll's "Alice through the looking glass"..."When I use a word it means exactly what I choose it to mean, neither more  nor less."

A castle in Scotland, eh? Not Dunans Castle in Ayrshire, perchance?

If so, I, too, am Laird of Dunans thanks to a rather quirky Christmas present given to me by a friend a few years ago that makes me proud owner of one square foot of the Dunans Rising Castle and estate, and this carries with it the ancient Scots title of Laird...something which, I am assured, is perfectly kosher (if one may be permitted to use a Jewish term in relation to Bonny Scotland)  no matter how utterly bizarre.

As milady so profoundly observed, when she learned of my newly exalted status, "well one square foot isn't going to give you enough space to exercise droit-de-seigneur over the local wenches, is it?"

Ah, c'est la vie........

Technically, she's owned by the clan chief as trustee of the family trust. But I clean and dust when I'm there.

I am also the Laird of Glencoe made possible by the purchase of a certain amount of land in that area ! I have a certificate to prove ownership and are willing to rent out,[for a small fee]this land, for anyone who wishes to holiday among beautiful scenery, sorry, no dogs.

They know me as the Earl of Craigneur.

Original Quill wrote:They know me as the Earl of Craigneur.

I bet you have more than one square foot of land on which to have your wicked way with the local lassies, though...

Dammit, I'm even prohibited from fracking on building anything on my patch, and in order to get to it I would have to trespass over the plots owned by about 100,000 other Lairds - a fair proportion of whom are American, I might add.

nicko wrote:I am also the Laird of Glencoe made possible by the purchase of a certain amount of land in that area !  I have a certificate to prove ownership and are willing to rent out,[for a small fee]this land, for anyone who wishes to holiday among beautiful scenery, sorry, no dogs.

The Laird of Dunans scheme is just a bit of nonsense, of course, but it's all perfectly legal I'm told. It's also in a good cause because it is funding the re-building of a lovely old Ayrshire castle gutted by fire some years ago.

What I find amusing is that people actually take it seriously, to the extent of having headed notepaper and business cards or even having their chequebooks printed with stuff such as "Fred, Laird of Dunans."

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Original Quill wrote:They know me as the Earl of Craigneur.

I bet you have more than one square foot of land on which to have your wicked way with the local lassies, though...

Dammit, I'm even prohibited from fracking on building anything on my patch, and in order to get to it I would have to trespass over the plots owned by about 100,000 other Lairds - a fair proportion of whom are American, I might add.

Fred, I've shown you a picture of my place.  Does that look like one square foot?

Here's my study:




I prefer a fire in the hearth, but the damn nurses insist on flowers.  

Bedroom:



Yellow isn't my color, but it's the lighting.  

"Ere's the Craignure Inn, where I was made an earl fer downin' the most shots o' cask-strength Tobermory island whiskey.



We marched to the green befor' the cas'le, where we took a wee nap.



Next mor'n we awoke--that's me, stretchin'--and we marched back dun to the Inn fer a few mor wee drams.

Sadly, the only noble achievement to which I can lay claim is a very brief reign as King of the Bog at an RAF station in East Anglia, having managed to piss higher up the urinal wall than my fellow competitors following a magnificent Abbot Ale-fuelled boozing session. These days I'm more likely to hit my boots...

Nurses? Good grief, is your castle a hospital or nursing home? MOST impressive though.

(...and yes, bags of space for the exercise of droit de seigneur!)

Fred M. wrote:Nurses? Good grief, is your castle a hospital or nursing home? MOST impressive though.

Yes...sadly, when I'm on the isle, they now lock down the Inn and hire nurses to follow me everywhere.  It's those damn, hated Campbells and their minions, the MacLaughlins...they're everywhere.

Fred M. wrote:...having managed to piss higher up the urinal wall than my fellow competitors following a magnificent Abbot Ale-fuelled boozing session.

Ah yes...never won one of those. Alas...I'm blessed with something of a sports car, not a lorry. Good on the curves, tho.

Original Quill wrote:

Fred M. wrote:Nurses? Good grief, is your castle a hospital or nursing home? MOST impressive though.

Yes...sadly, when I'm on the isle, they now lock down the Inn and hire nurses to follow me everywhere.  It's those damn, hated Campbells and their minions, the MacLaughlins...they're everywhere.

Better than having private detectives hired by a suspicious husband following you around, old boy.

Lock down the inn???? Bloody hell, that's sacrilege!

Ps. I thought your castle had stirred a few memories, confirmed by the pic of the inn. I last saw it more years ago than I care to remember from the flight deck of a Vickers Varsity on a training exercise. I remember it because apart from driving a boat on Loch Ness as part of a family holiday some years later, the training flight was the only time I had ever "visited" Scotland.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes...sadly, when I'm on the isle, they now lock down the Inn and hire nurses to follow me everywhere.  It's those damn, hated Campbells and their minions, the MacLaughlins...they're everywhere.

Better than having private detectives hired by a suspicious husband following you around, old boy.

Wha' the 'ell do ya think I retreat to the isle?

Fred M. wrote:Lock down the inn???? Bloody hell, that's sacrilege!

But they don' know about the back door.  Plus...there's always the Tobermory Inn, up on the hill.

Fred M. wrote:Ps. I thought your castle had stirred a few memories, confirmed by the pic of the inn. I last saw it more years ago than I care to remember from the flight deck of a Vickers Varsity on a training exercise. I remember it because apart from driving a boat on Loch Ness as part of a family holiday some years later, the training flight was the only time I had ever "visited" Scotland.

It was featured, too, in the film, Entrapment...starring Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones.  It was the castle retreat where the two went to plan their caper.  Connery is a distant clan cousin.

Although I'm an Island Scot, I would purchase a place in Charlotte Square, Edinburgh.  We'd motor to Oban and take the MacBrayne Ferry on the weekends.

Ad in Albuquerque Journal lost and found