#ShinnersList: “we are in position where it would’ve been better to have left the issue alone”

1 views

So, how many crises do you know that last just 24 hours? Peter Robinson getting his inquiry from David Cameron is merely the close of phase one, not necessarily the end of the crisis per se.

The Sunday Politics for instance carried this warning from Alex Maskey:

I believe that Peter Robinson and others have created a storm they don’t know where it will actually all end up. And they may regret creating that storm because they have created a bit of a crisis which they themselves have now had to wind back from.

Let’s be very clear a crisis was created which had no need to be built and I think we are in position where it would’ve been better to have left the issue alone.

The news flows may have gone quiet, but the issue hasn’t gone away, you know…

, ,

  • Morpheus

    Is this still going?

    The news flows have gone quiet because they realize how much of a non-issue this was from day one – a molehill made into a mountain of half-truths and complete non-truths with no regard to the consequences. It still makes me smile when I think that a regular commentator on here was willing to ignore all the evidence until such times as a letter recipient – people who were not even wanted for questioning – was prosecuted.

    I find it absolutely cringe-worthy that the SOS stood up and made her Ministerial Statement at the beginning of all this and the DUP made their song and dance but now the SoS moves around the words a bit saying the same thing and things are hunky dorey. Does Peter Robinson think we’re stupid and can’t see what is right in front of us?

    I hope the Judge goes to town on this and exposes this for the sham attempt to win votes that it is. We knew it was coming but the Unionist people are almost at the top of the hill and don’t even know it yet.

    Mick, how do I go about submitting a piece for others to dissect? Any guidelines? Will it be published?

  • cynic2

    “a crisis was created which had no need to be built and I think we are in position where it would’ve been better to have left the issue alone.”

    I agree with Alex. It would have been far better if SF had left OTRs alone and not done a secret dirty under the counter deal with Peter Hain

    Now its exposed we can see where we were lied to and misled …….. The politics of NI of course polarizes this but it should be a sectarian issue. The rule of law was subverted. People who murdered Protestants and Catholics went free with secret deals ..,that should hurt and alarm both communities

  • Morpheus

    Here we go again…

    A secret deal that the police knew about, the Governments knew about, the politicians knew about, the media knew about, the Loyalists knew about, the Policing Board knew about, the NI Prison Service knew about. Worst kept ‘secret’ in history, right up there with the Area 51 and ‘Who killed Kennedy?’

    It’s a deal with Peter Hain this week is it? What happened to Tony Blair? The Attorney General?

    Who specifically went free with a ‘secret deal’ cynic2? it wasn’t any of the letter recipients and it wasn’t Downey so who was it?

  • Mick Fealty

    Morph,

    I thought Alex’s remarks were very important in the wider scheme of things, and well worth noting.

  • Morpheus

    The Judge will see this for the farce it is and will conclude that this process was not secret and it was most assuredly not amnesty. When Jonathan Powell is called will be very, very telling but I think the wealth of other information sources will show that the governments knew about it, the politicians knew about it, the NI Prison Service, knew about it, the Loyalists knew about it, the media knew about it etc showing that this was all very much in the public domain.

    The problem I have with this ‘crisis’ is that it was manufactured to have maximum impact on the local and European elections and since the Judge reports back AFTER those then let’s face it, it doesn’t really matter what she concludes.

  • Morpheus

    I am serious about the blog by the way.

  • Mick Fealty
  • Morpheus

    In a simple MS Word document or complete with html attributes?

  • Mick Fealty

    just email, five lines? dont work it too hard at this stage…

  • Dec

    Possibly covered before, but interesting link regarding the Gerry McGeough trial: note use of ‘formal assurances’ and the PUP’s (then) support of the defence case.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11252601

  • socaire

    I know a letter recipient and he was telling me that he hasn’t had a night’s sleep for nearly a week. He wakes up sweating in the middle of the night imagining Squeaky Bum Paisley has come after him and is in the room. Where the f**k do they get them?

  • Morpheus

    Shinnerlist has been done to death Mick – I don’t think many are buying this anymore – so I forwarded a very short piece on the jaw-dropping hypocrisy of the UUP’s ‘proposals’ this week

  • cynic2

    “Who specifically went free with a ‘secret deal’ cynic2?”

    We don’t know because it was all done in a secret grubby little deal

    What we do know is that, after a sprinkling of Tony’s special fairy dust, suddenly many wanted OTRs became unwanted. And the alleged victims of these unwanted-wanted people weren’t told

    Isnt that all collusion on the Corry definition?

  • cynic2

    When Jonathan Powell is called ……..

    How can we look forward to anything. It will be in secret with Powell deciding what he wants to say / not say. All those awkward questions may go unanswered like, if it was so innocuous, why did you cover it up?

  • Morpheus

    You don’t know. Says it all really don’t you think?

    For the record we also know that Tony made it very clear to GA that he had no role whatsoever in deciding who gets prosecuted by explaining that that responsibility likes squarely with the Attorney General and DPP. Are they in on this fairy dust conspiracy too?

    You don’t give a crap about the victims. If you did you would be on here asking why our public officials tried to make out that those who committed crimes against the victim’s families were given immunity, amnesty and GOOJ cards when it wasn’t even close to being the truth. Not a single feck was given about the victims in that decision making process as they were dragged through the ringer yet again.

  • Morpheus

    Why did I cover what up?

  • sherdy

    Cynic, – Tony and the fairy dust?

    You seem to forget that all applicants for letters had their cases investigated by the RUC, latterly PSNI. Do you really think that ‘your’ police force were colluding with Sinn Fein, and Gerry Kelly in particular?

    Paranoia or what!

  • Mick Fealty

    So a simple question? What crisis is Alex talking about?

  • cynic2

    “Do you really think that ‘your’ police force were colluding ”

    We don’t know. It was done in secret. Why?

    And from what we can see the real review went on in the PPS and Law Officers Departments where ‘public interest’ was the driver – or a major driver at least. So lets see an analysis of what ‘public interest’ was submitted to turn for example a suspected murderer into one who was no longer suspected

    And why are you so keen to defend what happened?

    And why do you regard this as a mere sectarian game? See comments earlier

    And why is it ‘your’ police force? Its no more mine than yours or Gerry Kellys

  • http://gravatar.com/joeharron Mister_Joe

    Mick,

    Politicians in N.I. are very fond of hyperbole. And not just the politicians; the BelTel frequently uses the word “fury” in its headlines but when you read the article, it’s simply that someone has disagreed with someone else.

  • Neil

    What crisis is Alex talking about?

    The one foolishly manufactured by the punt, obv.

  • Comrade Stalin

    The article noted by Dec above is very significant (and a lot of people seem to have missed this). Apparently Mo Mowlam gave people an assurance that nobody would be prosecuted.

    If this is true, then it is significant due to R vs Downey which established that the public interest required that promises made by senior government officials be upheld. It could therefore be the case that an amnesty is basically already in place.

  • Morpheus

    Is there anything you do actually know cynic? So far all we have heard is a poor effort at a conspiracy theory and something about fairy dust.

    Ask yourself, was is amnesty? Obviously not. Was it secret? Obviously not. If it was a deal then who was it between because you went from Tony Blair to the PPS and Law Officers Departments in the space of 2 posts.

  • Charles_Gould

    SDLP have been very clear on this.

    We did not end the dirty war to have it replaced by dirty deals.

  • Charles_Gould

    Dr Alasdair McDonnell is on Westminsters NI Select Committee which is organizing a very thorough public inquiry. This will be the most powerful and important inquiry into OTRs: has the power to call witnesses and has parliamentary privilege.

  • http://nalil.blogspot.com Nevin

    “The article noted by Dec above is very significant (and a lot of people seem to have missed this).”

    CS, you must have missed the link on Pete Baker’s thread dated 1 March 2014.

  • Morpheus

    How is he going to reconcile that his party plead ignorance until the policing board minutes popped up confirming that the SDLP were indeed briefed?

  • sherdy

    Charles, – You claim the NI select committee inquiry will have the power to call witnesses.

    If Sinn Fein, as seems likely, refuse to take part in this inquiry, will Gerry Kelly be arrested and forced to co-operate?

    Should be an interesting prospect!

  • Charles_Gould

    Sherdy – people can be formally summoned if they decline the informal invitation. Rupert an James Murdoch declined the informal invitation to attend and they were then formally summoned by order, and compelled to attend. Anyone living in the UK (other than MPs or Lords) can be so compelled. Those compelled can be asked to speak under oath, and proceedings are televised.

  • Charles_Gould

    Sherdy – non-attendance is classed as a “contempt” and parliament has the legal penalty for contempt that includes imprisonment until the end of the current parliamentary session.

  • Mick Fealty

    Erm, Alex Maskey was at pains to point out in the selection above that SF would not rule out appearing in front of the Select Committee’s inquiry… Why would they refuse?

  • sherdy

    By co-operating with this inquiry Sinn Fein members would be subjecting themselves to British Westminster regulations, which, by refusing to take the oath to the Crown, they have refused to do so far.

    Charles mentions the possibility of them being ‘summoned’ and classed as ‘in contempt’ if they don’t wish to play ball with this kangaroo court.

    I think that is a fight they would relish, as it would strengthen their support in their own heartlands, and would dampen any criticism from the Dissidents.

  • Neil

    Erm, Alex Maskey was at pains to point out in the selection above that SF would not rule out appearing in front of the Select Committee’s inquiry… Why would they refuse?

    C’mon now Mick. He was ‘at pains’ to point this out? Or was he simply asked a question which he replied to?

    ‘Will you attend?’
    ‘I wouldn’t rule it out.’

    He didn’t have to stretch too far to get that out there.

  • cynic2

    Morpheus

    None of know exactly how this operated . The Downey judgement laid out the bones but not the detail. For example what were the public interest consideration sued to turn wanted men into ones without a care in the world? Thats where the key lies.

    This was a politically driven process and Hain even admitted that getting them all the letters was critically important to Tony s legacy – so wasnt it just convenient that all those public interest issues overwhelmed the former evidence in so many cases. Its strange that in relatively recent war crimes cases we can sustain cases stretching back 50 years but for PIRA all the evidence suddenly evaporates over a drink in downing street

    And as for ‘it was in the open’ – its was known that OTRs were writing in and asking but not that the case reviews were running in parallel. That was all secret

  • cynic2

    “I think that is a fight they would relish,”

    ….but don’t they already have and use passes to the HoC and dining rights in the cheap bars and restaurants ?

    Remember all those strange and expensive expenses

  • Neil

    Yep. Just the swearing of the oath to the Queen and all her heirs etc., and the associated taking of seats. I don’t think the shinners ever said they would make any real efforts to reduce the outgoings of the chancellor of the exchequer, so I always wonder why they didn’t claim the maximum allowable amount of money for food for example, every single day, even when they were not in London.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8051277.stm

  • Morpheus

    Cynic2:

    The Downey judgement laid out the bones??? You think that Justice Sweeney, with his 38 years of professional legal experience, made a decision like that with just the bare bones? C’mon man.

    The fact that the letter recipients were not even wanted for questioning just washes over you don’t it? For clarity,what caused the stay of prosecution was NOT that he received a letter it was that he received a letter with errors in it which the Judge and the prosecution conceded meant that Downey was misled and an abuse of process was called.

    To be clear I think that Downey should face trial. If The Met Police think they have enough for him to face trial then he should face trial but 2 questions immediately spring to mind:
    1. Why were there no extradition proceedings already in place? This would have left Downy in no doubt that he was wanted in the UK.
    2. Why was a final decision made in November 1989 NOT to extradite Downey?.
    If he was wanted then the process should have been by the book so he didn’t walk on a technicality if found guilty. But it wasn’t. Far from it.

    Who said that all the evidence has ‘suddenly evaporated’? I think that’s your conspiracy theory running away with you. There was insufficient evidence to even warrant questioning the letter recipients but no one has said that there was evidence but now it has gone.

    I will say this again – for your conspiracy theory to ring true the word would need to have come from the Prime Minister, through the Attorney General, to multiple police officers at multiple levels of command in multiple police forces to ‘evaporate’ evidence to protect a group of people – a number of whom the police didn’t know and crimes the police didn’t even know were committed. (ACC Drew Harris)

    Does that sound even remotely plausible? Even a little bit plausible? C’mon man.

    Your last line is bizarre. You are now saying that it wasn’t secret because “it was known that OTRs were writing in and asking but not that the case reviews were running in parallel.” I’ll ignore the fact that this is yet another change in your position. What you are saying is that it was known that the OTRs were requesting confirmation on their status but not that the PSNI were actually looking into the cases and giving the confirmation. C’mon man.

    Are SF capable of shady backroom deals? Absolutely. But in this case I suggest you open your mind a smidgen to let in the fact that you have fallen victim to DUP BS yet again. A mountain was made out of a molehill in the name of seats/salaries/pensions/expenses for another term at least.

  • cynic2

    Morpheus

    Your apparently ever more willful refusal to understand the process seems odd in someone os determined to be objective

    The test use by the CPS / PPS includes a major element of ‘is in in the public interest’ to prosecute> What we do not know is how that was applied given the pressure from Downing Street No conspiracy ….just amoral Blairite behind closed doors sofa politics

    “yet another change in your position.” – the only change is your level of desperation

  • Morpheus

    Not even an attempt to address anything I have said? Interesting.

    My position has been consistent since day 1 – in the space of a single thread you have changed from the deal being between SF/TB and then that changed. You started off with the rhetoric that it was secret and then that changed. Your position changes with the wind.

    You need to get up to speed on the fact that the recipients of the letters were not even wanted for questioning so your conspiracy theory about ‘in the public interest to prosecute’ doesn’t apply. Not even close.

    I ask again – for your conspiracy theory to ring true the word would need to have come from the Prime Minister, through the Attorney General, to multiple police officers at multiple levels of command in multiple police forces to ‘evaporate’ evidence to protect a group of people – a number of whom the police didn’t know and crimes the police didn’t even know were committed. (ACC Drew Harris) Does that sound even remotely plausible? Yes or No.

  • socaire

    Listening to Tom Eliot on Nolan this morning, it seems that he now agrees that it was not an amnesty but a partial amnesty – a little bit pregnant – and what sticks in his craw is that we wuzn’t told. Even with all their Privy Councillors and ex-’military’ members, they still knew nothing. But it will be interesting to see how Sinn Féin react to a term in the Tower.

  • Neil

    They weren’t told, but they were. It was a secret that everyone knew about. It was hidden but it was spoken of in public (and featured in a book).

    Unionists: it you’re pissed off, maybe you should ask your reps why they didn’t bother asking any pertinent questions when they had the chance. And no one read Powell’s book, especially those that featured in it. They’re either incompetent or lying. Direct your ire thataway.

  • cynic2

    Morpheus

    My we are obsessive on this aren’t we. Have you got a letter?

    You accuse me with sweeping allegations and then end with the classic News of the World demand – “answer yes or no”.

    Why are you so obsessed with these games?

    My position has not changed at all. The OTRs were concerned that they were wanted. Such concern can only have come from a guilty conscience but park that for the moment.

    The reality was that some were wanted and some some weren’t.

    The fact that they were writing in and asking for Police for answers was known

    What wasn’t known was that secretly the blessed Tony waved his magic wand. A solicitor to police communication line transformed into a SF to Tony line. At some point the PSNI started to write to the NIO who fed the answers back through Sinn Fein. IT all became politicised with SF even prioritising the order cases were dealt with.

    In the middle of this obviously the answers that some were still wanted were terribly difficult for SF and some of the greasy pole climbers in the Government. Tony waved the wand again and set up a process to review the cases of those listed as wanted. And low and behold ‘poof’ many of them became unwanted. All this was secret.

    We don’t know how many or for what crimes because that’s all secret too

    In the middle of the ‘poof’ were law officers taking decisions on the standard prosecutors rules which include a measure of discretion not to prosecute ‘in the public interest’

    We know that SF were secretly lobbying an increasingly desperate Blair for a liberal interpretation of this to save the only part of his political legacy that wasn’t going to rats as a point where he was being knifed politically within the party and keen to secure his place in history and lucrative future business as a ‘peacemaker’ (or do i mean ‘moneymaker’?).

    What we don’t know is what representations were made to the law officers on public interest issues (secret) or in how many cases (secret) or for what crimes (Secret).

    What we do know is that on 5 May 2000 the Blessed Tony wrote (in a letter kept Secret at the time) to the Saintly Gerry A

    ” You have also questioned whether it would
    be in the public interest to mount any prosecutions after 28 July for offences
    alleged to have been committed before the Good Friday Agreement, since by
    then all remaining eligible prisoners will have been released, and have raised
    other related issues around the 28 July date. I would be willing to have these
    matters considered rapidly, with the aim of deciding the way forward before
    28 July. Prosecution decisions are, of course, a matter for the Director of
    Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General…..”.

    Indeed if you think this was all just a normal legal process don’t look beyond the following month when the AG wrote to the SOS NI

    “…..I am seriously concerned that the exercise that is being undertaken has the capacity of severely undermining confidence in the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland at this most sensitive of times. Individual prosecution decisions have
    to be justifiable within the framework in which all prosecution decisions are reached and I am not persuaded that some unquantifiable benefit to the
    peace process can be a proper basis for a decision based on the public interest……”

    Yet again, all this was Secret at the time. Indeed in 2001 Gerry A was telling Tony

    “in terms of Republican confidence, it would be better if there was an invisible process for dealing with OTRs,”

    So there you have it i am afraid – secret secret secret all the way – and we haven’t even got near the lies and misrepresentations told to the victims

  • Morpheus

    Obsessed? Me? Goodness no, I just can’t abide educated people passing off myths, half-truths and complete non-truths as fact.

    In between all that was there an answer to the question as to whether or not the scenario I gave you sounds even an eency-weency bit plausible? I am guessing that you didn’t answer again because the answer wouldn’t fit in with your conspiracy theory.

    I see we are back to blaming Tony Blair and his fabled fairy dust again. Apologies, I just read the bit where it is a magic wand now. Regardless, GA wrote to TB back in 2000 asking if prosecutions were in the public interest and Tony Blair set him straight that all decisions regarding prosecutions were a matter for the Attorney General and the DPP. Now you would have us believe that instruction came down from the Prime Minister, through the Attorney General, to multiple police officers at multiple levels of command in multiple police forces to ‘evaporate’ evidence to protect a very small group of people – a number of whom the police didn’t know and crimes the police didn’t even know were committed. (ACC Drew Harris)

    If it was ‘secret secret secret all the way’ then how did the Prison Service know about it? How come our politicians knew about it? How come the BBC were able to write about it as far back as 2002? How come it was in Eames Bradley? How come it’s there in the PB minutes? It simple has to be the world’s worst secret. Granted you and I didn’t know about but let’s be honest here, how many police operations do you have intimate knowledge of?

    In short your conspiracy theory has gaping, cavernous holes in it. But as always, if you have any tangible evidence that any of the above scenario that you would have us believe actually happened then I am all ears. Minutes, briefings, statements, interviews, reports, anything. Anything at all.

    You are right though, the victims have been lied to and dragged through the ringer again. It was deliberately put into the public arena that terrorists were given an amnesty when that it is clearly not the case. It was put into the public arena that Get Out of Jail cards were issued to terrorist when that is clearly not the case. it was put in the public arena that the Downey case collapsed because of these amnesty letters when that is clearly not the case. What was nothing more than an administration scheme has been blown out of proportion in the name of seats/salaries/pensions/expenses right in time for the local and European elections.

  • IanR

    Cynic2, how does your conspiracy theory explain the prosecution, conviction and imprisonment of Seamus Kearney last year for pre-1998 IRA offences?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26517717

  • Morpheus

    And McKeogh.

    And Downey.

    3 people who were wanted and went into UK jurisdiction were all put on trial. Imagine that.

    What a deal…

  • IanR

    Maybe Charlie Windsor’s been putting in a good word on behalf of the boys on the run…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26544124

  • http://nalil.blogspot.com Nevin

    Was the person convicted the same Seamus Kearney who appears on this 320-member #antiShinnersList alongside a Gerry McGeough?

  • IanR

    I don’t know. It’s possible that he did previously receive a comfort letter stating that he wasn’t wanted on the basis of the evidence available at the time. His conviction arose from new evidence acquired by the HET, using modern DNA analysis techniques applied to a cigarette butt that was found at the crime scene and kept in storage over the years.

    If Kearney had received an earlier comfort letter and was then subsequently convicted on the basis of new evidence arising, then that would be a further nail in the coffin of the ‘amnesty’ conspiracy theory.

  • Morpheus

    Excellent point IanR

  • cynic2

    If it was ‘secret secret secret all the way’ then how did the Prison Service know about it?

    Well if it wasn’t secret how come the Irish Government DIDNT know about it?

  • cynic2

    Did Kearney get a letter?

  • Morpheus
  • cynic2

    “Dr Haass told the subcommittee that all he knew about the On the Runs letters had come from the public revelations regarding their existence.”

    Even better …….Haass didnt know.

    So much for it being public

  • Morpheus

    OK, we’ll skate over the most recent flaw in your conspiracy theory.

    If you are going to quote Haass then at least include the full quote. Here it is for you for ease of reference:
    https://audioboo.fm/boos/1985527-he-s-right-that-violence-could-erupt-again-tom-elliot-reacts-to-richard-haass-s-stark-warning-from-america#t=1m30s

    Notice how he confirms everything that has been said for the past week?

    Out of curiosity how would SF go about briefing Haass?
    SF: “Excuse me Dr Haass we want it to go on record that a bunch of guys the police didn’t know got letters saying they weren’t wanted for questioning for crimes the police didn’t know were committed.
    Haass: “OK,thanks for that, moving on…”

  • Morpheus

    Sorry that last bit should read:

    SF: “Excuse me Dr Haass we want it to go on record that years ago a bunch of guys the police didn’t know got letters saying they weren’t wanted for questioning for crimes the police didn’t know were committed.
    Haass: “OK, thanks for that, moving on…”

  • Charles_Gould

    Morpheus if you are not going to be constructive and make sensible posts I respectfully suggest you take a break from Slugger.

  • cynic2

    oh come on Charles. Trolls need love too

  • Morpheus

    Troll eh? Well this ‘troll’ blew all of your ever-changing conspiracy theories out of the water without breaking a sweat so now your plan is to attack the messenger eh? I’m shocked, I didn’t see that coming from a country mile at all.

  • Morpheus

    Basil on Nolan.

    That guy needs to be First Minister asap – honesty and integrity personified

  • MonkDeWallyDeHonk

    Charles Gould

    “make sensible posts”

    Well I must admit that as you have contributed intellectual gems such as:

    “The SDLP is the party of Labour values” and

    “Alex Attwood is an excellent candidate”

    I’m sure you’re in a position to lecture us all about constructive and sensible posts.

  • Neil

    Oh come on Monk, be fair. They do have ‘Labour’ right there in the name. Now, how about some nice sensible sloganeering? I’ll start.

    Success to the greatest party and glory to the leader!

  • Mick Fealty

    Look, can we back off the slegging for a minute? Personally, I don’t see a lot of change in the EP elections (if this is even on topic)…

    I do think Dodds is being underestimated now she’s had five years in the job and the party have put a lot graft into connecting with agricultural communities in particular.

    The irony over Attwood is that he’s probably by far the best MEP material, but I suspect the SDLP just don’t have the machine or the popularity to overhaul Martina who is, judging from the little I’ve looked into it over the last couple of years, not at her best with policy and detail.

    Will any of this OTR stuff make a difference? It depends what’s found and how well the SDLP play for solid future ground. But with Naomi in the game this time round I won’t be venturing any of my ill gotten Betfair gains over the years on backing any actual candidates, but rather betting against a few. ;-)

  • Morpheus

    The damage has already been done regarding the OTR ‘crisis’ Mick and it doesn’t really matter what is found because the Judge reports back AFTER the elections. We have educated people on here swallowing all the DUP guff about amnesties, GOOJ cards, collapsed cases and secret deals hook, line and sinker so God knows what the average ‘flegger’ thinks about it all. PR must be thinking ‘job done’ right about now – he manufactured a ‘crisis’ and bled it dry. If the tactics were not so despicable then you could argue that it was a good weeks underhand work for the DUPers.

    Personally I would love to see NI21 do well because it would be a positive sign that we’ve had enough of the Loyal Order’s unrepresentative stranglehold on NI politics. NI21 are a moderate, pro-UK party who obviously can’t do well in the local elections due to a lack of candidates so the Euros would be a perfect way to plant a flag.

    Anna Lo would also be a positive step forward if only to stick a finger in the eye of the racists who have been attacking her recently, A vocal, articulate Chinese woman in a sea of white men would be welcome.

  • cynic2

    “I would love to see NI21 do well ” ….now I can agree on that but they wont as they are invisible

    “Anna Lo would also be a positive step forward if only to stick a finger in the eye of the racists who have been attacking her recently,” I agree but for her ability not her sex or race – though its a rare enough quality in Alliance

  • cynic2

    “all of your ever-changing conspiracy theories”

    Just cause you keep saying it don’t make it true. I have been consistent all along – just read the posts slowly and carefully without you preconception glasses on

  • cynic2

    “We have educated people on here swallowing all the DUP guff about amnesties, GOOJ cards, collapsed cases and secret deals hook, line and sinker”

    Well The Irish Government say they didn’t know and Haass didnt know and the SOS says she just left it to Gerry Kelly to tell wee Davy Ford about is – but if David Ford and everyone already knew all about it why did he need telling? And why didn’t the blessed Gerry tell him?

  • Morpheus

    First it was a secret then it wasn’t. First it was Tony Blair then it was the PPS and Law Officers Departments and then it was Tony Blair again. Yeah, the epitome of consistency.

    As demonstrated in my post at 3.50pm yesterday the Irish Government not only knew about the scheme but used the scheme. Along with the #NIPrisonServiceList.

    I have said from day 1 that David Ford is the only politician who can say with any degree of credibility that he didn’t know (his party was not represented in the April 2010 policing board meeting) and he should have been the one who did know from day one when he took over Justice when it was devolved in 2010. But he needs to have a serious word with his underlings in the NI Prison Service who used the scheme.

    Read my post from 10.16pm when it comes to Haass.

  • cynic2

    Now you are just making it up. Why the desperation to defend the indefensible?

    For credibility your posts are starting to rival “I was never in the IRA”

  • Neil

    Powell on The View, standing over the facts:

    DUP knew about the scheme.
    No amnesties involved.
    Common problem in conflicts around the world.
    Innocent people being informed they were not sought.

  • Neil

    Tony Blair’s chief negotiator during the peace process has said he stands by his claim the DUP knew of concessions made to Sinn Fein over IRA On the Runs.

    In his book, he said the DUP could accept the scheme if Tony Blair wrote to Ian Paisley making clear it had been agreed under David Trimble’s watch.

    First Minister Peter Robinson described that as “nonsense”.

    Mr Powell said on Friday: “The book was based on my diaries and the Number 10 papers when we were in government.”

    Speaking on BBC’s The View, he said: “I stand by everything in the book. The book was written in 2008. I’m not going now into suggestions about who knew what when.”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26571738

    Blame the shinners all you like. You knew what they wanted, they were quite open about it. The DUP on the other hand… You been played like the recipients of an Alliance yellow leaflet.

  • http://gravatar.com/joeharron Mister_Joe

    And, of course, stick your fingers in your ears and chant “la la la….” when wallpaper is mentioned.

  • Morpheus

    Wallpaper?

  • cynic2

    “I stand by everything in the book. The book was written in 2008. I’m not going now into suggestions about who knew what when.”

    Its more an issue of what is NOT in the book and WHY IT ISNT THERE

  • http://gravatar.com/joeharron Mister_Joe

    Morpheus,

    David Ervine said that he could describe the wallpaper in Paisley’s house from when the UDA/UVF had meetings there with the man.

  • Morpheus

    Seriously Joe? I don’t know if that is funny, scary or totally non-surprising.

  • http://gravatar.com/joeharron Mister_Joe

    Yes, serious and disturbing. Shows who is hypocritical. Ervine didn’t name names, unfortunately.