Pondscum of the night
Posted on
January 20, 2013 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
We hope you’re just drunk, Ian. Honestly we do.
EDIT 9.52am: After I went to bed, Smart removed any doubt about his motivations.
From his own mouth, readers – Ian Smart capitalised on the deaths of four people at Glencoe in order to “wind up the cybernats”. Further comment seems superfluous.
…And the plot is totally lost……..
Four people died in Glencoe tonight, within hours Ian Smart saw it as an opportunity to get his name in the papers. Hope he’s proud.
Still, there’s always this:
link to guardian.co.uk
the wind, I feel, is finally at our backs 🙂
Ian Smart has just used the tragedy and death in Glencoe to have a go at Alex Salmond.
I’m not sure how how much of a grip he’s got on how the normal parameters of social behaviour.
I do hope so as well. It could be a simple “poke the Yes supporters and watch them get angry” shot. IMHO, let’s rise above it – we’ve got a referendum to win.
Sick.
So Salmond is to say nothing after four tragically die in the Glen? Should Cameron et al also stay schtoum on the dreadful events in Algeria?
Both are political leaders of these lands, both have a role in conveying the heartfelt condolences of the people to the next of kin.
Ian Smart is certainly not living up to his name this evening. Shame on you, Mr Smart, black-burning-shame on you.
@Stevie Cosmic.
Cheers for the link.I have noticed a change in tone of Kevin McKenna’s articles of late.Are we witnessing a transformation take place?A kind of Caterpillar to Butterfly thing?I think his eyes are opening.
“I have noticed a change in tone of Kevin McKenna’s articles of late.Are we witnessing a transformation take place?A kind of Caterpillar to Butterfly thing?I think his eyes are opening.”
Some of us spotted that back in September, M4rkyboy:
link to wingsland.podgamer.com
I think we are. Many had a notion of ‘something’s changed’ recently, that was hard to pin down… I think we are really beginning to get there.
No excuse for complacency mind, we’ve put out collective shoulders in and pushed, but it wont keep moving unless we continue to push; we need to get to the brow of the hill, then it’ll coast to the bottom and give us what we want.
I think Mr Smart has dined well, but perhaps not wisely.
The price of this, surely, will be his Labour Party membership card.
“The price of this, surely, will be his Labour Party membership card.”
I think it’s more likely that Labour will come out with an official press release echoing Smart’s comments.
He’s one of few people I’ve had to block on Twitter because he keeps coming out with similar insulting rubbish. Then there’s a furore about something he’s said so I unblock him to see what it is, and straight away remember why I’ve blocked him. But this is beyond his normal partisan trolling. I don’t know what Alex Salmond has done to make Ian hate him so much, but he needs to have a good, hard think about whether he should really be making comments like these in public.
And the BBC like to have this guy on as a pundit sometimes. I hope that stops, because this just shows you he’s no different from the “Scottish Nazi Party” screaming swivel-eyed unionist numpties that his like would have you believe don’t exist.
We need people to come with us through hope, not despair….
But perhaps after the Slough of Despond they will see the City on the Hill (Sorry, don’t know what Pilgrim’s Progress is doing here…)
In regards to McKenna’s stunning article, let’s just remember that the truth about the union cannot be unseen. Kevin’s article pretty much sums up why 2013 will be the year that substantial numbers of people will go from “no” to “maybe” on the one-way road to becoming a Yes voter.
Ian Smart used to death of those four climbers to wind up some cybernats.
Despicable.
Ian Smart is Sick. What else should the First Minister of Scotland do?
Union supporters seem to be dividing into two camps. On one side you have the bitter intransigents like Smart, Sarwar and Davidson. The negativity of the No campaign drives them to lose all reason and make outrageous statements against anyone that threatens their cosy comfort zone.
Others like Kevin McKenna link to guardian.co.uk
and Joyce McMillan link to joycemcmillan.wordpress.com
thought there would be, and wanted there to be, a positive case for the UK Union but despair of that ever happening. Being positive in their outlook, independence seems the only answer.
Those of us who have spent a lot of time asking Unionists for the positive case, and never getting one, suspect that there is no such beast.
Interesting times!
Doug, I think Kevin is the first of many journalists and columnists who will change over. Not having really thought about Independence in Scotland, they had preconceived ideas, probably in line with the mass media “propoganda” line.
But being journalists they have to make some effort to have their articles reflect some portion of reality, so they have to do at least some minor amount of research. As they do so they read it themselves, and kind of reassess their preconceptions and version of reality, and can’t help become more and more aware that what they are peddling is a version of pure fantasy, not reality.
It happens that Kevin had genuine faith in his Church, football team and political party (Labour) – and convictions about the SNP and the Union. Because it was genuine, he, more than anyone was able to see through his ideas, I think. And I also am pretty sure he reads many of the postings BTL, as I’ve seen exact wording appear in his articles.
It’s barely possible that by the fourth quarter of 2014, there won’t be one single Unionist journalist left in Scotland.
How often have we hear at the end of a tragic news story. “The Queen has sent a message of sympathy”? Does she do that because she wants the publicity, or is it her job?
What amazes me is that they don’t seem to realise that in “winding up a few cybernats” just how much they are damaging their cause.
If this is the strength of their argument, what on earth are they arguing for? It’s based on the personal hatred of one man, presumably because he is an outstanding politician and he is winning the argument.
“If you vote for independence, every time a local tragedy occurs you can expect the First minister to pop up on television, trying to make political capital out of it”.
The daft thing is that independence has nothing whatsoever to do with Alex Salmond. The first First Minister of Scotland might well be a Labour First Minister.
I’m glad to say (because otherwise I’d consider myself a sad and twisted mind), that when Cameron spoke about the hostages in Algeria, it never occurred to me that he was doing any more than their job demands.
Ian Smart needs to grow up.
@Oldnat
I’d agree with that conclusion Oldnat. There is definitely a split beginning to occur within the ranks. I think we’re beginning to see the results of ‘one question only’ hit home. The left thinkers, the soft no, the FFA adherents are starting to look really hard at both themselves and the situation in general. They’re maybe not all the way there yet, but there’s plenty of time.
As for Mr Smart? If ever a guy was poorly named………………..
I think Stu’s original summation explains it – he was pissed when he tweeted it.
I’m not making excuses for him as no person in their right mind would have come out with this.
If they did, they should be seeking psychiatric help and they should be seeking it post haste.
@Macart
It may be that Cameron will look back and realise that the day that he lost the referendum was the one when he decided to rule out the option that had the backing of the majority of Scots: DevoMax or Indylite.
Of course it would have been almost impossible to deliver, for a variety of reasons, but wiping it out forced the people who supported it to decide whether they wanted to stay or go. And the “stay” side was the one which had just knocked their true aspirations on the head…
Tris says:
20 January, 2013 at 8:49 am
@Macart
It may be that Cameron will look back and realise that the day that he lost the referendum was the one when he decided to rule out the option that had the backing of the majority of Scots: DevoMax or Indylite.
Yes Tris, and it still makes me laugh when I recall the field day the press, especially the English titles, had with this, much along the lines of how Cameron out-manouevred and out-smarted Alex Salmond. Must have been hard to keep a straight face, really…
@Tris and Stuart
I think its even worse than that. I think he well knew the gamble he was taking at the time. He knew fine well that FFA would win hands down as a third way and gambled that with all the cannons on his side (and by that I mean the media and Westminster Scots), he could bull it out and win hands down. Looking like a bit tighter race for him now. The W1 tacticians reckoned on devastating the independence core with the year of team GB. It didn’t! The core vote of around 30% didn’t waver and now we’re beginning to see genuine cracks appear in Cath’s ‘no but’ camp. The next few months ought to be interesting. YES is getting ready to go on the offensive, the SG will release its white paper and outsde of the campaign there is the Westminster EU split and tightening austerity measures.
By the end of this year I doubt anyone will remember who won the gold medal for synchronized troughing. 🙂
Yes Macart, I agree with that analysis, realising that Devo-max was a near certainty he threw caution to the wind. There is, as you know, a mindset down south that refuses to take the possibility of a Yes vote seriously, and in their hubris cannot believe that anyone could possibly want to leave the U.K. To my mind it is now inevitable. The positive case can only become stronger, the momentum will build up, and there seems (is!) nothing that the Better Together people can do to counteract this.
An interesting couple of months ahead and, as Stevie Cosmic mentioned above, it does feel like the wind is at our backs now. McKenna deserves praise for his very honest piece today, I have noticed this building up in him from some months back, and even the Herald seems to be publishing some fairly impartial reports.
I enjoy your posts on the Guardian, keep up the good work.
I had a mountaineering friend pop by a few weeks ago who I hadn’t seen for a long time.
He mentioned at the time that he was looking to go to Glencoe in the New Year.
I haven’t been able to get in touch with him so have no idea if he was one of the unfortunates.
Ian Smart is beneath contempt but its not him I am concerned about at the moment.
Was there not an attempt made to blame SNP educational policy for the canoeing tragedy at Gairloch as well?
I can’t remember the details, but it’s possible that Ian Smart’s tweet is not the lowest that Labour have sunk in terms of using accidental deaths to have a gratuitous pop at the Scottish government.
I hope your friend was not caught up in this Seasick Dave, hope he is okay.
@ Stuart
Will do. 🙂
By the by poor Kevin is finding it hard going this morning. I’m noticing that many of his erstwhile supporters of many years are finding his recent articles hard to take. Apparently he was a good Scot when panning the nats and now……………..?
When ‘trolling’ becomes ‘flaming’…
Ian Smart would do well to twitter a real apology.
This man is beneath contempt.
Just clocked the second image.
Four lives have been lost in tragic circumstances and this idiot thinks it’s funny to bait nats?
There are no words….
I was firmly in the ‘maximum autonomy within the union’ camp – possibly open to persuasion by the Yes case – until the Westminster government ruled out that option. My switch to the Yes case was almost immediate, but more out of anger that a prime minister without credibility or real legitimacy in Scotland could impose limits on our debate.
If something like Secure Autonomy (pushed by Kenyon Wright, amongst others) had re-emerged, though, as the future for Scotland in the event of a No vote, then I would have been open to re-conversion. In reality, that hasn’t happened, and isn’t likely to happen given the calibre of people who hold sway in the No campaign. I don’t think the unionists have the political imagination to create a genuine Scottish home rule solution within the UK, and Westminster – which can’t even introduce limited democratic reform of its second chamber – certainly doesn’t have the ability to introduce it.
So, although I am almost certainly going to vote Yes come the autumn of 2014, and I will argue the case for independence online and with people I come into contact with, emotionally and intellectually I have still to make the switch completely (I still haven’t signed the Yes declaration, for instance). I would probably still answer ‘don’t know’ if asked by a polling organisation.
And what we are seeing with others, such as Kevin McKenna and Joyce McMillan, are similar journeys, journeys that progress at different speeds and, probably, for different reasons. What must help, though, is the mainly positive manner in which the Yes campaign conducts itself. The contrast with the No campaign – and people like Ian Smart illustrate the point – couldn’t be more stark.
Aye, Smart in name but not in “natter”, fit a neep.
I have done a little winter and summer scrambling on our Glencoe hills.
I would like to get my hands round the throat of that shit Smart and throttle the life out of the snivelling bastard.
could someone please point out to Mr Smart that northern Constabulary and the Mountain Rescue Service have posted (without prompting from press or anyone else) their own comments regarding this very sad event.
Mr Smart, I hope, will be writing to both to express his disgust that they should be getting their names in the press.
And if the FM hadn’t commented? No doubt “Salmond was too busy enjoying his Saturday night curry to spare a thought.” As the top of the article says, I really hope he was p1ssed when he wrote that as it’s hard to imagine any sane, rational person being so pathetically immature.
Do you thin this will get past The Herald moderators on their article on this tragedy today?
“What a tragedy – thoughts are with all those involved and we should all applaud the police and mountain rescue services for their complete professionalism in handling events such as this.
Lastly, I sadly noted last night that prominent lawyer and Scottish Labour political activist Ian Smart took time out on a Saturday night to use the tragedy as an opportunity to ‘wind up cybernats’ (his own words) on Twitter. I will not comment but leave it to others to judge his intervention.
Perhaps those directly affected by the tragedy would care to make their feelings known to Mr Smart and perhaps a paper like The Herald would seek to pursue him to question his views on the matter? “
Page 37 of the Economist’s “The World in 2013” reports that “Just possibly… Opinion polls start to suggest that Scotland will vote for independence in its referendum in 2014”
Day 20 of 2013 and there has been some positive coverage recently from Prof Scheffer to Joyce MacMillan and others. In the meantime Better Together, and Westminster in the Section 30 Order Debates have plumbed new depths.
We will see!
Strangely enough, even The Herald seems to be having a wee dig at Labour over the last week or so…
I think this is symptomatic of a more general problem with Scottish Labour. The sense of entitlement that still makes them believe they and only they have the right to lead Scotland and speak for Scotland. Smart and his mates simply cannot stomach the sight of Salmond carrying out normal First Ministerial duties, whether that’s leading a trade delegation or being interviewed on TV or sending a formal message of condolence.
If McConnell or Gray had been FM, they’d have done exactly the same, and quite right too. It’s the duty of the FM to send messages like that. None of us would have criticised McConnell for doing that, in fact no doubt he did, more than once. But Smart has not come to terms with the fact that Labour is no longer in power and the person who is carrying out these duties is not the Labour leader, and it’s choking him.
I honestly feel sorry for him. He’s not behaving like someone with a grasp of reality. Even Yasser Arafat condemned 911.
Wait a minute, wait a minute. I’m beginning to detect a wobble in support of independence here, and I am now beginning to realise a lot of commentators would apparently be happy with a wee pretendy nation, that was in some way still be linked to the British state. I have a problem with that on so many levels, but its Sunday and I think a lot of you will already have a rough idea of where I am coming from. I will ask two questions though.
Have any of you been separated from an spouse, and forced to seek reconciliation services before you were entitled to seek a divorce?
Hasn’t the Edinburgh Agreement not already defined what can, should and will happen in 2014? If so, any discussion of an alternative approach or voteing system is not only a waste of time and energy, but a distraction for the primary task. That of delivering a mandate from the people, to secure the legal authority to protect their futures and their childrens future, and their childrens’ children. IMHO, the only way that can be done is through full independence.
“I’m beginning to detect a wobble in support of independence here”
You are?
Well, all the sadness that is being expressed here, that devo-max and FFA are not on the table. There not, those options have already been discarded. Perhaps I am not detecting a wobble, but rather coming to understand that there is a proportion of the Yes camp that have been forced there by the lack of viable alternative. This is perhaps an unfair question, but are these people thinking of Scotland’s future, or what will benefit themselves the most in the short-term?
“Perhaps I am not detecting a wobble, but rather coming to understand that there is a proportion of the Yes camp that have been forced there by the lack of viable alternative.”
Yes, that’s certainly the case, and I suspect will be increasingly so in the coming months.
Three comments. Firstly, Smart has gone beyond the sewer-whatever that is. Imagine the relatives/friends of those who lost their lives reading that deranged crap.
Secondly, heads of governments have to make statements when events occur such as nutural disasters or others as Alex Salmond has ref: Glencoe/Algeria and David Cameron regarding the latter.
On a brighter note, McKenna’s article (not for the first time) was brilliant. Completely accurate and astute. It will send shivers down Labours back.
Perhaps I need to up my meds, but that doesn’t appear a particularly solid support base to me. I think there is still a lot of work for the Yes campaign to do, in firming up the commitment of this group.
@ Cameron
I see whereyou are coming from, but I don’t see that as a wobble I see it as a strengthening of the argument for independence. When Cameron negotiated it down to one question – for or against he polarised the debate further hoping to scare the devomax vote firmly into the no side. I think this will spectacularly backfire for Better Together. It has narrowed down their position and made it impossiblle for any wriggle room in their argument. Over the next couple of months I think we will see the UK goverment offer us carrots to vote no in order to widen their argument as they realise the mistake that has already been made. Incidently, maybe this was a materstroke of negotiation by Salmond and Sturgeon. If we do get a yes vote (and a sincerely hope we do) i think that Salmond and co will acheive the best settlement possible for Scotland as they will completely out negotiate Cameron & co. And if labour win the next UK election in 2015 they will also out negotiate Ed Milliband & Co. My own estimation of Alex Salmond is growin as is my confidence that he is one of the best politicians in the UK regardless of party or political position.
@ Scot MacVicar
I was quite impressed with AS when I had a chance to chat with him at a business lunch, and that doesn’t normally happen. I mean my being impressed in such a setting, not that AS was stuffing his face. He was a little rotund, but a lot taller than I was expecting. This might be difficult for some to accept, but I’m generally a bit more reticent, and do not normally warm to a stranger so quickly. I reckon I have a good nose for BS, but he came across as a pretty straight shooter.
Anyway, wobble probably wasn’t the best way of putting it, so how about “dilution” of purpose? I’m just afraid the unionists have figured out that the only way to defeat the Yes vote, is through a homeopathic stealth attack.
@Cameron
Good job link to guardian.co.uk then!
@ AndrewFraeGovan
Just because homeopathy is a load of cod’s, doesn’t mean there aren’t powerful people who believe in it, and spend millions of pounds on supporting it each year. Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t some of the NHSs’ scarce resources get siphoned off to pay for it, just because one of the more space cadet royals believes in it?
It was originally meant as a bit of a joke, but now you’ve got me thinking. This could actually be a threat to the Yes vote. The British empire has always sought to divide and conquer.
I have friends in the “Black Country” where I worked for several years. That part of England has also suffered de-industrialisation. The observation was made that their taxes supported the SE and London and it shall be even worse after the Scottish taxes were removed from the equation post independence.
Please advise exactly who and what Ian Smart is. I am new to these internet conversations.
Finally I watched our First Minister at FMQ and was impressed with his statements regarding the Algerian hostage situation. More a Statesman than a Politician.
He also correctly described the gas plant as a joint BP/Statoil facility. It is only referred to as BP here. Lets not let on the Norwegian state has a significant role in the world oil industry. We could have had. Let’s not mention Britoil headquartered in Glasgow.
Just saw the update in regards to Ian being on a Nat wind-up. That’s shocking, at least if he’d been drunk he could have put it down to not having his wits about him. If it was because of pathological hatred of Eck, then you could at least say the red mist is blinding him.
Doing it as a wind up shows he knew exactly what he was doing. He’s actually a lower form of scum than even the idiot troglodytes that call us nationalists fascists and go on about Salmond being a fat Hitler – at least they have the excuse of being thick.
This is far worse than any of the things that have seen folk driven out of the SNP by media witch-hunts because of something they’ve said on Twitter or Facebook.
@ Robert Kerr
Unfortunately for our friends and relatives south of the border it will be for them to either change the political landscape of their own country or else relocate to Scotland and help us build a brighter fairer and more democratic future here.
@ Scott MacVicar
Perhaps its just lazy Sunday thinking on my part. Of course any additions to the Yes camp is a strengthening of our support. I’m just a little worried that the full-on independence voters might eventually represent a latter-day Menshevik block. I know they were the more moderate of the Russian revolutionaries, but hasn’t the world turned upside down in recent decades.
I had been joking slightly when I highlighted a “dilution of purpose”, but is forcing a YES/No question the tactical blunder that has been suggested? There is still a lot of time before the vote, and the unionist still have a lot of time to influence the “soft” Yes vote. Not through reason, but through the most powerful human motivation, fear.
Sorry for the waffle, I’ve just thought thing through and arrived at Monday. Full-on independence supporters would only become a minority in the movement, if the Yes vote were to exceed 60% or so?
Y’know, I think what this is is a fundamental misunderstanding between tactics and strategy. Tactics is the art of winning the news cycle or holding a successful launch event. It’s the art of getting a decent knock in against your opponents. That’s what Smart thinks he’s doing. New Labour was all about tactics. The problem was, there was no room left for a strategy at the end of it, so they were in power, but basically kept to the strategic script of their predecessors.
With the referendum, we have one side that has a strategy – they want an independent Scotland, and are starting to flesh out how they want that Scotland to begin. It’s to be hoped that they have good tactics to get to that point. The other side has no strategy, because they have no real goal. How can they? They have nothing to fight for, and when you have nothing to fight for, you can only attack.
And that’s how you end up with articles like this one. Smart can only think in terms of tactics, and as such assumes that Salmond is similarly afflicted. If the no side lose the referendum, this is a major reason why.
@ Naim Clark
Definitely not pedantic word play, well spotted.
I stand corrected.
Cameron, as YES is supposedly in the minority just now OF COURSE we rely on converts to the cause to swell our ranks. Those converts will usually be more unsure and probably less fervent than long-term independentistas. They are no less welcome for that.
Frankly you’re talking a load of bollocks and seem almost intent on turning converts away from our cause. You’re coming across like some sort of fundamentalist religionist and I think you’d to well to reconsider how you present yourself.
All YES votes count, and have equal merit.
@ Cameron.
sorry, I was just commenting on the original post. But if I did inadvertently spot something good, I reserve the right to claim it as my original intent, so long as it makes me look clever. That’s usually my main tactic.;)
@Cameron
All we’re seeing are genuinely concerned people who have arrived at this decision to change their political view after a great deal of thought. Some may have arrived here through worry for their families economic future, some via political disenchantment with former party loyalty, others through principle. They may not have started out as full on believers in independence, but theirs is by far the harder choice and road. It must have taken quite a lot for some to go against a lifetime of belief or years of Westminster party allegiance. They are coming to the independence side of the fence looking for answers.
I’m for greeting them with big wide open arms regardless of reasons. 🙂
@ holebender
I may be coming across as if I’m talking bollocks, because I had started out making a tongue-in-cheek comment, that I was then called on to justify. I wasn’t being serious and that should have been evident if you had read all of my comments to this thread.
Whatever, lets not fall out. 🙂
All new converts to the Yes campaign are of course to be welcomed with open arms.
I think the problem with Ian Smart’s ‘contributions’, from either his blog or his twitter account, is that he his either trying to get as much attention as possible, thus diverting opponents from other things, or he really is the extreme British Nationalist that his ‘writings’ would suggest. Of course Smart could be both of these things as well. The evidence probably indicates that he is both of these things, there can be no doubt that he is being deliberately provactive and offensive. Smart also appears to be increasingly irrational and extreme, which suggests that he is a Scottish Labour unionist of the die-hard variety.
Perhaps the only downside to having a referendum is this appearance of rancid, poisonous hatred by British Nationalists, particularly those in Scottish Labour, who genuinely believe that Scotland is, and should always be, their personal political fiefdom. More and more their support for the union is appearing to me as a form of fundamentalism. Their non-attempts at securing the support of SNP voters (calling Salmond a dictator-who would elect somebody like that?) , and knee-jerk dismissal of support for independence among their own members, suggests this is maybe the case.
Whatever, the explanation for his trolling, his credibility has been hugely damaged by his previous nonsense about Salmond not wanting a referendum on independence at all. Therefore, I think it might be best just to ignore Smart as he is clearly trying to get a reaction and attention.
Ian Smart is Labour Party member who s a solicitor and former President of the Law Society of Scotland.
Solicitors have an obligation to the democratic process and not bring the profession into disrepute.
His conduct will be referred to the Law Society Council.
“His conduct will be referred to the Law Society Council”
I did look at their website and complaints procedure this morning. Seemed to relate to poor service from the profession, but I’m likely wrong.
I dare say they will be interested in anyone bringing the profession into disrepute so please let us know if you get a response.
This is the only info on a ‘Mr Ian Smart’ at the bent judges blog.
link to bentjudges.com
Don’t know if it’s the same guy ?
I have no idea about the truth of the allegations on that page, but that is indeed the same Ian Smart.
link to twitter.com
Smart’s blogged about it tonight and he’s sticking to his line, so I guess we can rule out drunkenness.
Aye, so he wasn’t drunk after all? If you rule out the possibility that he’d done what we all sometimes do (i.e. post something we wake-up regretting) what’s left to excuse such disgusting behaviour?
He finishes his blog entry with ‘Bring it on’.
Huh?
Bring what on?? He wants more attention, more opprobrium?
Sometimes you come across stark evidence of how detached some folk are from common decency – this character has not only provided it, but confirmed it.
Families are grieving, but they, it seems, don’t matter – he’d rather grab the chance to beat his chest at imagined foes.
The behaviour of this sad, bitter man should make us all reflect on what ‘politics’ in this country has become.
I see this is Ian Smarts CV on his Herald blogspot page “I’m a long-standing member of the Labour Party with a particular interest in and commitment to Scottish Home Rule. I was a founder member of Scottish Labour Action and have sought repeatedly to secure election to the Scottish Parliament. I’ve now given up in the huff. I’m a lawyer to trade and in 2009-10 was President of the Law Society of Scotland.”
Is it possible that the source of Mr Smarts bitterness is down to this repeated non-selection ? Most recently failing to get the Paisley North 2011 nomination. Consider some of the absolute monkeys in red-rosettes who have been elected (James Kelly, Paul Martin, Michael McMahon etc) and one could almost have a twinge of sympathy for Smart. Is it any wonder he has such a downer on Johann Lamont ? Another Labour heartland incompetent, elevated to Labour Leader ?
There can’t be a day goes by when all that isn’t grinding his gears and feeding his bitterness. Of more interest though, is WHY Smart is so often passed over for nomination, and by so many constituencies ? Is there – as was said about Michael Howard – something metaphorically of the night about him ? If we are to take his twitter feed as a guide to his psyche, then it would seem that there is something in there that even potentially dazzled constituency associations just plain old don’t like about him.
With regards the comments on devo-max. I see that over on the ‘better to-get-her’ website that they have attacked Nicola Sturgeon for dismissing the latest report from the IPPR titled “Devo-more’.
I wished to point out that the whole report was too late and that it was, in effect, advocating that there was a ‘possibility’ that Scotland could receive more powers. It was essentially another ‘jam tomorrow’ scheme, hastily cobbled together in an attempt to minimise the huge stuff up Cameron had made when he demand that only one question be asked in the referendum.
I also wished to highlight that it was Cameron who stifled the democratic wishes (of what looked like a hugely popular choice) without giving it a second thought and to remind the site that the SNP had time and again said they were open to a second question, but that it was up to the other parties to frame said question.
However, after writing this post up I found the only option to login was by using face book. This is not a site I subscribe to. So I hope that someone on here who uses face book will (time permitting) see fit to put them straight.
He wrote a blog post in praise of Karl Rove’s political maneuvering not so long ago, and this latest tweet seems to be a bit of “trolling” that could’ve come straight from the Rove playbook – first he invites attack by making an outrageous statement, then he immediately plays the victim when lambasted for it. “Look, Cybernats are attacking me! They’re saying nasty things! I told you they were all MENTAL!”
The fact that he has used the tragic deaths of four people to engineer this minor internet spat doesn’t seem to bother him.
I’m sure he’s aware that only “CyberNats” read his blog anyway, it’s not as if the average Scottish Labour supporter would find anything on it worth reading.
Even the horrific events in Algeria this week are not beyond being used by some unionists in their obsession with Alex Salmond
link to i47.tinypic.com
@Donald
So Mr Smart isn’t the only pond scum to surface this weekend. Dear God people have lost their lives, families are devastated, our representatives are performing their duties as we expect and morons like these crawl out to try to score points.
Beneath contempt.
Maybe he tried to brush it off as “mere” trolling after he realised how much he had put his foot in it with his foul idiocy? I could look at his comments and think: How many unfortunate poor dead people does Ian Smart need to enjoy himself at night before he rolls off to sleep? We know four (and their grieving families) at least will give him some joy at their expense, it seems from these twitter updates presented. Perhaps next he can get some real kicks one night from a bus load of dead children. That should keep him going for a week.
He is a poor excuse for a human being.
Trolling about such events is far too poor taste and a nasty thing even for a teenager to do, never mind an adult who should know better. I hope Mr Smart does not do this again. Using them for cheap shots. I doubt I’d be overjoyed if it was my own family or friends being used as ammo.