Peter Hain and reality

The intervention by Secretary of State for Wales and Northern Ireland, Peter Hain, in the row over the contradictory assessments on paramilitary groups and organised crime from Shaun Woodward et al is, in reality, an acknowledgement that the NIO Security Minister has badly mishandled the situation. But in giving his intrepretation of a meeting he did not attend, Peter Hain is ignoring the reality of the statement by the Chairman of the Policing Board, Desmond Rea – who was there – and what the Daily Ireland, in its own inimitable way, referred to as Shaun Woodward “has slightly but significantly tweaked his words” when he attempted to clarify his remarks – although the quote in the editorial is not, in reality, where that tweak took place.For the benefit of those not paying attention I’ll repeat a point from my earlier post

Just to clarify further, the complex assessments of distinguishing between individuals being responsible for criminality and organisations being responsible relates to whether that organisation is attempting to apply a doctrine of plausible deniability.. with, as Mick pointed to, all of that doctrine’s inherent flaws.

,

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    An unfortunate example of conflicting views within the Britsh Security Establishment. A by product of when ex Branch men are allowed to set the agenda without recourse to any evidence and by selective leaking.

  • Pete Baker

    The only conflicting view appears to be the one that Shaun Woodward was attempting to promote in December, and again at the meeting with the Policing Board.. a view that he has now slightly, but significantly, tweaked.

  • “A by product of when ex Branch men are allowed to set the agenda without recourse to any evidence and by selective leaking.”

    According to Hugh Orde on UTV news on Thursday night, the senior officer in question was never in Special Branch – just more republican paranoia or an sly attempt to discredit the barer of bad news?

  • Cecil

    Pete

    “the complex assessments of distinguishing between individuals being responsible for criminality and organisations being responsible relates to whether that organisation is attempting to apply a doctrine of plausible deniability.. with, as Mick pointed to, all of that doctrine’s inherent flaws.”

    According to your logic then, both the RUC and British Army are terrorist and criminal organisations pursuing a terrorist and criminal agenda. Both organisations have had members convicted of criminal and terrorist activity.

    You can’t have it both ways.

    Though experience shows that Unionists and their friends in media will try…

  • Henry94

    The Police Board is supposed to hold the PNSI to account. It should stick to its role such as it is and stop trying to interfere in the political process.

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    I have already pointed out on another thread (not surprsingly unchallenged) that the intervention of Rea is highly selective and is never done to hold the PSNI (and before that the RUC) to any sort of account. A convemient relationship that showed he earned his knighthood.
    As of yet the only thing in the public domain is a selective leak that no one has been prepared to go on record and flesh out, aleak that even Hain was forced to admit bore’little resemblance to reality’.

  • alfred

    people like ‘pat mclarnon’ make me want to reach for the zinc bucket – in a few months time, as we all know, when the chucks are on the board and the big effort has given the psni his blessing, people like ‘pat’ will be using the same sort of outraged language to attack anyone criticising the board – they will then all be ‘enemies of the peace process’ or whatever while the policing board will be bathed in bright, cheery colours! yuck!

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    alfred’

    ‘in a few months time’ is that all, keep saying it every so often and you will eventually be right and will then be able to I told you so.

    Until then what is it about my post that you disagree with!

  • alfredo

    i note that you do not disagree with the substance of my remarks only whether the prediction will come true in this ‘few months time’ or the next ‘few months time’, in other words it will happen, the only question being when – what i dislike about your comments and people like you is the inherent lying that is your sole currency in the peace process – go back in time and you will find people like you saying ‘there will never be a ceasefire’, ‘there will never be an internal deal’, ‘there will never be decommissioning’ and each time you viciously attack those who say the opposite – then when the ceasefire, the internal deal or decommissioning happens you behave as if you had said nothing about them never happening and go on to the next line in the sand that will never, ever, ever be crossed, which is now joining the policing board – as i said, pass the zinc bucket, the chucks are at their work again! the only consolation in all of this is that your electoral bubble has burst in the south and will soon in the north!!

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    ‘what i dislike about your comments and people like you is the inherent lying that is your sole currency in the peace process’

    Could you give an example of that please?

    ‘go back in time and you will find people like you saying ‘there will never be a ceasefire’,’

    I never said any such thing.

    ‘there will never be a ceasefire’,

    I never said any such thing.

    ‘and each time you viciously attack those who say the opposite’

    Who have I viciously attacked?

    On the question of policing (as well as most other things) I believe you should never say never. I remain optimistic that eventually there will be sufficient changes in place to allow me to give my support to a policing service. Until then I will follow my own counsel. I am on record on this site stating that both SF and especially the SDLP settled for too little on policing and the fundamental changes needed.

  • Shore Road Resident

    As I’ve pointed out on another thread, the current Shinner line of “if we’re responsible for all our individuals, then so is the PSNI” leads to several surprising conclusions, ie:

    (1) The IRA is no better than the PSNI
    (2) The PSNI isn’t responsible for its individuals
    (3) Two wrongs make a right

    …and so on. Actually, maybe this sort of double-talk isn’t so surprings. However, it is absolutely nauseating. Incidentally Pat, where do people with a complaint about the action of IRA individuals go? Who is the republican ombudsman? What powers of scrutiny has the Provisional Board?

    I also await with eager anticipation the fast-approaching day when you’ll be back on here explaining why you’ve done a 180 on policing. In the meantime you might be better off not digging holes the road you’re about to head back down.

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    ‘where do people with a complaint about the action of IRA individuals go?’

    How would i know that?

    ‘Who is the republican ombudsman?’

    Do they have one?

    ‘What powers of scrutiny has the Provisional Board?’

    Do they have a board?

    As for your last paragraph read my earlier post.

  • Alfred, you may not agree with Pat’s views or tactics, but so far as I know, he is who he says he is. Sticking to the point is usually way more damaging to an opponent that playing the ad hominem card.

  • THE GREAT PRETENDER’S BIGGEST FAN EVER

    ‘where do people with a complaint about the action of IRA individuals go?’

    How would i know that?

    ‘Who is the republican ombudsman?’

    Do they have one?

    ‘What powers of scrutiny has the Provisional Board?’

    Do they have a board?

    As for your last paragraph read my earlier post.

    PATDO, last night you broke my heart but tonight you are back on form!!!!!!!!!!!! You are on fire, Pat, FIRE!!!!!!!!! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK, MATE, YOU ARE THE ONE THE ONLY (WELL MAYBE NOT THE ONLY) THE GREAT PRETENDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    FROM YR NO1 FAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • TAFKABO

    Pat.

    What do you call it when someone complains about others making allegations without evidence, and in the same post falsley claim that someone was a member of special branch?

    Sam Kincaid was never in special branch.
    Will you withdraw the claim that he was, and tell us how this new reality fits in with your paranoid fantasies?

  • alfredo

    actually mick fealty, i heard it was you who was putting it around that ‘pat mclarnon’ was a pen-name, one of many, for sinn fein’s blog monitoring committee!

  • heck

    Maybe I can answer Shore Road Resident’s questions of Pat McLarnon. (I am not a member of any political organization or part of any “blogging team”)

    Richard Nixon made the comment once about a south American dictator “ he might be an evil SOB but he is our evil SOB.” That is the way I feel about the republican movement.

    Yes the IRA have murdered and tortured Irish people but the PSNI (RUC/UDR/LVF/UDA/UVF/British Army) have also murdered and tortured Irish people and I have known more loyalist victims that IRA victims. However when I comes to the murder of innocent people Honest Tony and the British government have any Irish organization beaten hands down with the launch of their illegal war in Iraq and the deaths of over 100000 innocent Iraqis. Any unionist who basis his opposition to SF in government on the fact that they have supported the IRA armed campaign and then says that he wants to be ruled by Torturing Tony’s government is suffering from the psychological condition called “cognitive dissidence “

    Do the leadership of the republican movement lie? Of course they do. Do they lie less that the British government led by Blair and Straw?—without a doubt.

    Is the leadership of the republican movement committed to the principle of non-violence? I don’t think so—I think the political strategy is a tactic to pursue their political goals- probably the only tactic available given the depth of infiltration by Ingram’s friends. Do I think they are more committed to non-violence and agonize more about violence than Blair et al? (or Trimble/paisley etc) Again without a doubt.

    Is the leadership of the republican movement covering up for killers? Again with out a doubt? but what about Pat Finucance etc.? (my only whataboutry)

    Are there many more touts waiting to be exposed? IS THE POPE CATHOLIC!!. Do I believe this exposure is being done at the moment to further some agenda? Of course, and few are asking whose and what.

    Are there people in the republican movement making money of the troubles? I don’t know of any—but there may be some. Are the Blairs using their position to go on the North American speaking circuit and get luxury vacations from their hangers on? Are the PSNI overpaid? Are senior security officials leveraging their activities in Northern Ireland to get well paid consulting gigs? Well who has just come back from consulting in Iraq.

    What my view comes down to is that simple fact that if I where still living in North Belfast and sectarian violence where to flair up again then I do not have the confidence in the PSNI (RUC lite ) or the British Government to come to my defense. The IRA may be murdering criminals, but if I where to need them I have more confidence that they would be there to defend me than anyone else. (no mater how amateurishly!!) I have more confidence in the honesty of the average volunteer than in people like Martin Ingram.

    The RM may be sons of bitches but they are the sons of bitches I would look to when I needed some one. And they are sons of bitchs who are fighting in the political area to further my goals.

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    ‘actually mick fealty, i heard it was you who was putting it around that ‘pat mclarnon’ was a pen-name, one of many, for sinn fein’s blog monitoring committee! ‘

    Once again not true, why do I attract so many trolls, is it because I digress from the ‘accepted view’.

  • TAFKABO

    Don’t take this the wrong way heck, but that was as big a load of pish as I have heard for many a while.

    No doubt your fellow travellers will agree with you, but so what?
    What exactly is the point you were trying to make?, or were you just hoping to keep talking long enough so that we would forget what the discussion was about in the first place?
    You’re telling me that I have no right to oppose Sinn Fein in government because of what exactly?
    Because Tony Blair has removed Saddam Hussein from power and Iraq is moving towards democracy?

    Sorry mo chara, try again.

  • Shore Road Resident

    Heck’s post has answered none of my questions, nor has it addressed any of my points.

    Pat’s response was similiarly unenlightening.

    This is all most disappointing.

  • Irish Aussie

    The second in command of the bloging squad is a British agent, you heard it here first

  • Irish Aussie

    I didn’t get this from martin ingram
    I made it up myself

  • heck

    TAFKABO

    “You’re telling me that I have no right to oppose Sinn Fein in government because of what exactly? Because Tony Blair has removed Saddam Hussein from power and Iraq is moving towards democracy”:”

    Exactly –you’re telling me that you oppose Sinn Fein in government because of what exactly? !!!!!

    Because they brought down a one party sectarian government and then fought for years to get the British army out of Ireland? (As opposed to bringing down a one party dictatorship and fighting to keep the British army IN Iraq?)

    Now we have agreed that those who claim it is because of violence are full of BS, why is SF not in government? I have said on this site for months that IRA arms were an excuse not a reason and was proved right. The reason SF are not in government is because the unionist population (well the majority who vote DUP anyway) do no accept nationalists as equal to unionists.

    The only reason is unionist bigotry –pure and simple

  • micktvd

    Here’s 180,000 reasons why Heck is on the right track. British government support for Indonesia in the biggest massacare per head of population since ww2.

    http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB174/

    Among other things, the East Timor Truth Commission report “strongly criticizes the role of the international community in supporting Indonesia’s invasion and occupation of East Timor and calls for reparations from the governments of the U.S. and United Kingdom and from Western arms manufacturers”.

    Before someone accuses me of being OT or indulging in whataboutery, I would propose the following argument:

    1. Opposition to reinstituting the Assembly is often based on a position that Sinn Fein is morally unfit to govern because it has/had a military wing that engaged/engages in violence and killing.

    2. Evidence that the British Government has engaged in/is engaging in violence and killing on a grand scale is never seen as a reason to exclude it or those who support(ed) its actions.

    This is called a double standard.

  • TAFKABO

    Exactly –you’re telling me that you oppose Sinn Fein in government because of what exactly? !!!!!

    Heck.
    I don’t oppose Sinn Fein in Government, I oppose the IRA in government.As long as the IRA are anything other than an old boys association I shall be happy with their fellow travellers in government, and I expect my elected representatives to withdraw from any arrangements that would allow them access to government.
    Like all people, I make my democratic choices largely based upon the likely effects or benefits that will accrue for me and mine.
    Now we can go round the houses all day and you can teach me history till the cows come home, but patronising irrelevance is not going to change my mind on the issue.
    Now, if you’ll kindly permit me to patronise back a little, you’re clever enough to know that this is the case.So why persist with these pointless lines of argument concerning other places?