Tuesday, October 01, 2013

Ian Bell: The Complete Tweets.

Neil asked, so this is what there is (or was). The truncated ones were meant as jokes (until, amusingly, that ceased). According to their timing, I Iasted from 4.44pm, when the clock struck 13, on September 28 until 1.38pm on September 30. I got time off in between for subversive behaviour.
            Banned twice? I haven’t been banned twice since the Scotsman was a power in the land and all referees had Tynecastle season tickets.
            For a couple, it helps if you like Curtis Mayfield. If you don’t, I might not be the person you’re looking for.
            As a serious point, since Twitter claims not to monitor and I make a point of staying legal, what happened and why? Open to quibbles, as ever, from maquisards.

This might be fun. The British state has forgotten how to be the British state. That used to be called an opportunity.

Scotland's nationalists have meanwhile forgotten how to be nationalists. Elsewhere, paint is drying.

My, but it's dark in here. Perhaps we could go back to the elementary and set light to something?

"Scotland unfree will never be at peace". Any chimes? "The cause of labour is the cause of Scotland"? This isn't even original.

No nation was ever made politely. Someone should have told us.

And as I continue to ask optimistic friends, what happens if the day is lost? Take to the maquis? Where is that, in your head or your life?

Those better days in that better, imagined nation are fine tales for our children. I'd shield them. But bastards are back. Tool up.

The nation that fails to identify itself is asking to have its passport questioned. It volunteers for the body search. Ever had one?

Eight tweets and suspended. What they always said: "Must Try Harder".

Still, corporate ghouls, want to take a crack at that apology thing? Some of us can still spell defamation.

As our favourite Kircudbright pirate almost said, "I have not begun to jack you around".

Ah, well. Better get back to labouring the obvious. Anyone seen the tools?

With hindsight, I'm annoyed that it took eight tweets. That's like occupying the GPO on a Tuesday.

"Move On Up": all the politics you will ever need.

But then, was there a politics shortage? I'm just trying to work out my tweet ratio before another proud Unionist says that it's an outr...

Never - never ever - listen to edits of Curtis Mayfield. It's offensive, wrong and arguably an assault on human rights.

Before another proud Unionist says it's an outrageous ass...

Those of you who have a grasp on what matters in life can have a go at this. What would Curtis Mayfield have said of Scotland now?

But before another "Scottish and British" Unionist says it must be stopped right


  1. Many thanks Ian.
    I've read and reread these tweets. I've read them backwards, I've read them forwards, I've read them while listening to Curtis Mayfield (Pusherman was always a favourite of mine). Still I can find nothing that would lead to suspension. If professed support of nationalism is the issue, someone should tell the likes of Newsnet Scotland and National Collective, who perform a massive public service by broadcasting the type of opinions that (Herald excepted) the print media steadfastly ignores. In terms of offence, there are thousands of tweeters whose entire purpose is to disgust, denigrate and provoke, yet the Tweetpolice appear to turn a blind eye. Perhaps there's an automatic censor that kicks into life when the machine detects an unusually high level of nuance?
    The playful part of my mind would like to copy these tweets word for word, and tweet them using my own account, over the space of a day or two. It'd be interesting to see what occurs...I'm guessing *nothing*.

  2. Ian - There's a lot of this about. The Disqus forum on the Herald was interesting for a while, until the moderators made their views on the independence debate known. Suddenly, some commenters had their bon mots delayed for several hours, rendering discussion impossible, while a Union troll was and still is allowed to stomp about calling people names and shouting abuse without a coherent argument in sight.

  3. In fairness Martin, the published response to Mark Smith's article "Why the Saltire makes me cringe" - 99 comments and counting, plus 2 more on today's letters page - doesn't exactly smack of Unionist bias - and a good thing too!
    Completely take your point about the delayed / rejected comments though, more than a little frustrating...

  4. Neil - It's the uneven moderating that forced me to cancel my subscription. I was put on a delay because I teased a Unionist boor who crashes into every discussion yelling abuse and some deranged chant about Salmond, contributing nothing to the debate. One day I got tried of it - and his deeply offensive, expletive-laden avatar - so answered every comment of his that day with "Boo, hiss" : I get effectively barred from conversation and he is allowed to rant away. And with an ex-Daily Record man at the helm, don't kid yourself about any lurking impartiality on the Herald's part. They are playing the widest game of all. Be warned.