Saturday, January 13, 2007
No smoke yet - Redux
Still no official word from the Sinn Féin Ard Chomhairle meeting in Dublin today, but given that they have confirmed that Gerry Adams has recommended that the Ard Fheis on policing should go ahead, and they’ve also given a date, 28th January, it’s unlikely to be rejected at this point. What will be more interesting to see is whether any motion to be proposed, and/or the support for the rule of law, will be conditional.. and whether the un-met conditions of Motion 395 are mentioned at any point.. Update Ignore the post title - Smoke spotted.. looks greyish to me
Here’s the interesting part of the official word in relation to the points I was raising
The Ard Chomhairle is proposing that an Extraordinary Ard Fheis adopts this motion and gives the Ard Chomhairle the responsibility and authority to fully implement all elements of it. The necessary context for this is the re-establishment of the political institutions and confirmation that policing and justice powers will be transferred to these institutions or when acceptable new partnership arrangements to implement the Good Friday Agreement are in place. [added emphasis]
It would be entirely wrong to allow the most negative elements of unionism a veto over republican and nationalist efforts to achieve the new beginning to policing promised in the Good Friday Agreement. Sinn Fein will not be paralysed by rejectionist elements of the DUP.
There are also those within the PSNI who are opposed to change. In this context, I have been made aware of incidents in parts of South Derry, Castlederg and County Armagh where local PSNI units are involved in trying to destabilise nationalist communities. This is entirely predictable and needs to be stopped.
As previously mentioned, the imposition of those powers without the support of the Assembly would be “a constitutional nonsense”.. even though that target date may be “a Government objective”..
Adds I’ve extended the emphasis to include the line that seems to cede responsibility for implementing the motion to the Ard Chomhairle
The Ard Chomhairle is proposing that an Extraordinary Ard Fheis adopts this motion and gives the Ard Chomhairle the responsibility and authority to fully implement all elements of it.
Pete Baker @ 07:09 PM
The last two weeks have been like I said they would, veneer. This was always going to be the outcome.
Sorry, I thought you said Vermeer Martin !
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:22 PMGerry & the Peacemakers
The story I heard that was that 2/3’s voted in favour. If what you say is correct that suggests they just got the 2/3’s based on what I read. Maybe it was that they got more than their 2/3’s, but what i read was that they got 2/3s.
Someone can clarify.
On the plus side, It brings the Peacemakers closer to a gig alongside the Paisley Old Time Good News Gospel Band.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:23 PMChris does this mean you will resign
No
Adams has only lost one self inspired motion in 21 years
What a load of bollix!
The Ard Chomairle loose motions at every single Ard Fheis.
You don’t even understand the basic structure of Sinn FĂ©in so your utterings are irrelevent.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:24 PMYokel,
Briefly.This is just one more step along the pathway to a stable Northern Ireland. HMG has played a very long game to achieve this.But at what price?
Sinn Fein is corrupted from the top downwards. In the early to mid 80`s when the movement took hold, after the Adams / Bell split HMG spent great time and resources to infilitrate and then take a controlling influence.
That control remains today and they even fund the party Newspapers. Those papers were an important means of conveying the Sinn Fein message.
In summary Yokel, Do you see any evidence of either the membership or the average Sinn Fein voter for this track?
The Dynamic is not driven from within. It is external.
Gerry,
Not Rocket science mate. I am well aware of the cards.I know it is a stacked Deck!
Its called insider trading.LOL
Ding Ding
Martin
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:25 PMChris
My view is based on a belief that the leadership wouldnt go to the special confrence unless they expected a good win, otherwise whats the point, a seriously split movement and party?
I would guess they’d rather avoid it otherwise, unless, as I said elsewhere, external pressure is so intense they feel they cant avoid making this call.
I’m sure you see the logic in that view.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:26 PMTough I do see your logic as well Chris. I suppose it depends what side of the debate and political fence you fall on.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:29 PMThe outcome of today’s meeting was always a cert. but the meeting still served its purpose. It put the Shinners on top of the news agenda for another week; attempted to heap pressure on the DUP and allowed Adams to look pained and full of determiend leadership in front of the electorate.
mission accomplomished. Expect at least on more pained ‘in house’ meeting prior to the actual event. These guys are experts.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:29 PMChris,
Me and Henry 94 have already been through this mate.
The last vote lost by Adams was abstensionism? Henry 94 agreed.
Unless you can think of one more recent?
Ding Ding
Ingram
PS, I was shafting Sinn Fein before you left primary school mate.LOL
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:31 PMMr Ingram
I can’t necessarily disagree that what you say is very possible.
From anyone I know on the nationalist side of the fence who’d be favorable to SF they see it all with a cynical eye but that doesnt mean they won’t mark their vote beside SF come May and thats really what matters. Same for the DUP types.
The only SF member that i could call an acquaintance (and that definition is pretty loose) is actually reasonably well up in the party and I doubt very much they’d tell me anything! Anyway never spoken politics with said individual.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:35 PMYokel,
quote"From anyone I know on the nationalist side of the fence who’d be favorable to SF they see it all with a cynical eye but that doesnt mean they won’t mark their vote beside SF come May and thats really what matters.
What you have just outlined is very true. We call them sheep. They have very little thought process.
Sad but very true.
Ding Ding.
Ingram
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:40 PMIngram
You are talking bollix and no disrespect to Henry but he has never been a member of Sinn FĂ©in and as such has never attended an Ard Fheis.
Unless you can think of one more recent?
Last year the Ard Chomhairle lost a motion on the political levy in relation to SIPTU, they also lost a motion on coalition government in the south.
They are just two, there were more last year.
As I have said already you don’t even understand the basic structure of Sinn FĂ©in however do keep howling at the moon.
It’s funny
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:42 PMIngram “We call them sheep. They have very little thought process.”
I would have thought that most voters were like that - very sad.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:48 PMIngram
Me and Henry 94 have already been through this mate.
The last vote lost by Adams was abstensionism? Henry 94 agreed.
That’s a lie and a childish one. You claimed he had never lost a motion and I gave you an example to show you were wrong. End of story.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:49 PMChris,
I am talking of an ADAMS motion.This is an Adams backed motionand you know it.
You may be a memeber of Sinn Fein but you do not understand how it REALLY works. like you said not that long ago to me on this board.
You believe Gerry Adams has NEVER been in the IRA?
That says everything about you mate.
You BOASTED that you would resign from Sinn Fein if the policing motion included a role for MI5.
Now you say you wont.
Ding Ding
Martin
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:49 PMHenry 94,
LOL.
I shall dredge out the archives Henry and I will come back to you with the exchange.
Martin
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:52 PMI am a bit confused with some of the postings, for quite a while now people have been on this site stating that there is massive internal pressure etc etc within SF. Adams has a rebellion on his hands etc etc. Eureka, now it is simply a case of the PSNI motion getting rubber stamped at the AF. Where is all the dissension now then?
Each cumann selects its own delegates to an AF. If this widespread dissension exists it will be reflected in the delegates to the AF, thus Chris is quite correct that the AF will be interesting. That is of course if the dissension that posters on this site say exists is actually out there.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:58 PM“Sinn FĂ©in president Gerry Adams hailed the decision as courageous and historic and said it would have been wrong of his party to be blocked by the most negative elements of unionism.
However, he did warn that it was not a foregone conclusion that party negative would vote to support the PSNI and the criminal justice system.”
Yokel, very interesting comment from Gerry.
Ingram
You are a proven liar and bull shitter, you have been caught out telling porkies. Gerry does not put motions to a Sinn FĂ©in Ard Fheis and the Ard Chomairle has been defeated on several occassions every year.
game.set.match
like you said not that long ago to me on this board.
Yet more lies from Slugger’s resident spook
You believe Gerry Adams has NEVER been in the IRA?
Don’t be silly, please show me where I have ever said that?
Please stop telling lies, I realise that you are doing this to cover up your own lack of knowledge but it’s getting boring.
You BOASTED that you would resign from Sinn Fein if the policing motion included a role for MI5
Are you capable of telling the truth????
What I said was
I?m wondering will Chris carry out his threat to resign if SF do a deal on policing (patten policing) rather than a new force?”
Brenda
If Sinn FĂ©in sign up to a police service which I could not support then I would not lend that force any semblence of legitimacy by asking others to support or join in my stead. If such a situtation arises my position would be untenable.
Posted by Chris Gaskin on Sep 23, 2006 @ 06:07 PM
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 08:58 PMIngram
Here is the discussion.
http://sluggerotoole.com/index.php/weblog/comments/sinn-feins-drafted-motion-to-be-robust/
Here is your claim and my response
Do you honestly think Adams would call the Ard Fheish if he was not certain he would win the vote?
In relation to The Devils point. Pat could you tell us when was the last time Adams was beaten at a vote at the Ard Fheish?
In clear terms the last time an Adams sponsored motion was defeated at this renowned democratic insitution?
Thanks Mate.
Ding Ding
Martin
Posted by ingram on Dec 30, 2006 @ 04:20 PMAs far as I remember Gerry Adams was on the losing side in the abstention debate in 1985. He didn’t walk out in a huff either. He stayed and argued and won the next year.
Posted by Henry94 on Dec 30, 2006 @ 05:06 PMThat was the extent of my involvement. I certainly did not say or agree it was the last or only time Adams was on the losing side. I simply gave an example I remembered.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:03 PMChris,
There have been many debates on this board about this subject.The snap shot you provided was not in an exchange with me . Dont be embarrassed mate, you too can now join a British police force.
In relation to Gerry Adams. So you now agree Adams was/is in the IRA?
Ding Ding
Martin
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:06 PMOn this day when Gordon Brown’s been on the air-waves rabbiting about Britishness, and strengthening the Union; we know what way he’s going to go, as and when he takes office, so it was perfect timing to call the AF today.
Looks like the timetable will be kept to.
Good.Martin Ingram, I don’t think you’ll survive 3 on 1 tonite, and I’ll have a tenner on that
LOLPosted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:07 PMChris
Would you consider yourself a sceptic on this issue at the moment? I use the word sceptic advisedly
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:09 PMSomeone made the point that all this being in the public eye is good for Sinn FĂ©in. That may be, but to be honest I think most people are pretty fatigued by this whole business so I am not sure that it in itself has a very large impact. I rely on Pete Baker to keep his eye on the detail. I lost patience for the details of the process around 2005, when the IRA decommissioned fully.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:12 PMchris/pat
I hope you guys go and vote against this motion. I looks like a sell out to me.
As Ingram pointed out a day or two ago the head of the PSNI/UVF will still be appointed by the faceless men in London. The justice minister in any NI powersharing government will have no power. (the talk about who holds the position is pure farce.)
There has been no exposure of the collusion activities of the PNSI/UVF or no proof that those responsible are gone.
There is no commitment to hold the agents of the state to the same standards as “members of the public”.
The prosecution service has not been made open and transparent.
There has been no reform of the judicary and the process by which judges are selected.
It’s not that I am opposed to policing as a concept just that the PSNI/UVF are not the group to do it. If SF hold out and the SDLP would stop selling out we could address these issues.
nor is there any urgency to get the PSNI/UVF accepted in nationalist areas. I am not aware of a problem with muggings, child molestion or house robberies in S Armagh. In fact I would feel safer walking through Crossmaglen at 2am that through London or Dublin where they do support the police.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:15 PMslug
I agree. I don’t think people are in any doubt that the GFA is the only way forward however long it takes and that there will be no return to violence.
The detail is strictly a minority sport.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:16 PMYou suggesting he’s not going to be so friendly to SF as young Tony?
I had been told that the DUP’ers have met Brown’s people and it wasnt to talk solely about yet another bloody peace dividend that the place doesn’t deserve.
Slug, I did ask people to interpret thae words that Pete higlighted. That includes Pete himself. I’d be happy to hear from anyone what they read into that particular passage.
Posted by on Jan 13, 2007 @ 09:17 PM
