“not in the business of saying one thing in private and another in public”

It’s worth highlighting the BBC’s note of DUP leader Ian Paisley’s response to Sinn Féin’s claim that he had agreed to use a form of words which confirmed a target date for devolving policing and justice – a target date which Peter Hain described earlier this week as “a Government objective, to which all parties should work.”.. in case you missed it, that is..From the BBC report

However, Mr Paisley said he had made no commitment which went beyond his recent public statements.

The DUP leader has previously denied he ever agreed that policing and justice powers would be transferred by 2008.

“I am not in the business of saying one thing in private and another in public,” Mr Paisley said on Friday.

“It is time for Sinn Fein to get down to business and deliver support for the police, the courts and the rule of law.

“Delivery from them, instead of delay and diversion, can help to start building confidence.”

, , ,

  • ingram

    Well,

    We now we must wait for Mr Adams to clearly tell us the provenance of the document.

    Failure to do so will indicate another entry into his long list of “Porky Pies”.

    Miss Fitz, made a very good point about working out the Modos Operandai of our political leaders.

    Over to you Gerry.

    Ding Ding

    Martin.

    PS. I have a feeling it will be a long wait.

  • Frustrated Democrat

    Another ‘sleight of hand’ by Blair and Hain.

    Maybe they used the wrong translation software from Irish to English.

  • Yokel

    All it would take is the governments, or more particularly the UK government, as Bertie seemed to be at St Andrews making tea, to start publically laying down what was or wasnt said.

    It is perhaps getting to the stage where someone is definitely is playing aroud, even given the complexites of interpretation of words etc.

    What I do find remarkable is how quiet the British government are through upfront statements or conveniently timed leaks.

  • overhere

    Oh so you were all waiting for auld Ian to say “well dang blast, it I did say that now didn’t I, you know since turning 80 my mind’s turning to porridge”

    This is starting to look like Ian in the driving seat but different hands on the wheel

  • Yokel

    Overhere

    Like the carney hanging of the back of the dodgem car?

  • DaithiO

    Does anybody else find “ingrams” habit of saying “ding ding” particularly irritating?

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    ‘All it would take is the governments, or more particularly the UK government, as Bertie seemed to be at St Andrews making tea, to start publically laying down what was or wasnt said.’

    Agreed.

  • Way Icit

    DathiO “Does anybody else find “ingrams” habit of saying “ding ding” particularly irritating?”

    Yes I do and probably everyone else here.

    At the end of each posting he reverts to his childhood or perhaps he is just away with the birds!

    Think we should all start using it for a while – that would really spoil his trade mark.

    Ding Ding

  • ingram

    Hi,

    I thought you may like to consider the following post by a slugger Blogger made a few moments ago on a connected matter.

    Good Luck Lads.ingram

    It may be Stockholm syndrome, but I am going to defend Ingram again.

    I believe and have believed for some time that this is the end game in many ways for a lot of conflicting ideas and ideologies. Although there was a lot of disagreement on whether SF’s indication of support for the police was a ‘rubicon’, I still maintain that it was, as there is no going back from such a position. Once you agree to support the police you cannot retract that support, and as such this represents a very significant historical landmark for republicanism.

    Martin’s ding ding is a surrealistic background noise that is ticking away as time flows like sand through an hourglass. Like the sand, if the opportunities are not seized, the future of a reasonably self-determining democratic structure in Northern Ireland will also slip like sand between our fingers and will be lost for generations if not permanently.

    Ding Ding

    Posted by miss fitz on Jan 12, 2007 @ 02:33 PM

    Posted by Ingram

  • Dessertspoon

    Yeah but sand doesn’t go “Ding Ding”

  • Pete Baker

    To all

    Could we try to keep to the topic?

    As for comments, as long as they adhere to the Commenting Policy…

  • ingram

    Dessertspoon,

    That was good.

    In return. I will suspend the Ding Ding until such time as the AF is called.

    That is reasonable and an incentive to call the AF.

    Regards.

    Martin

  • Ian

    “That was good.

    In return. I will suspend the Ding Ding until such time as the AF is called.

    That is reasonable and an incentive to call the AF.”

    That being the case, I’m sure you have achieved a remarkable feat in uniting almost every blogger on here, no matter their political outlook, in hoping that Adams never calls the AF.

  • Nationalist

    I beleive the term the man would use would be to declare that a “Falsehood”. I recall the man stating in public that the DUP would not talk to un-reconstructed terrorists, yet had no problem sitting around a table planning their next move along with the un-reconstructed terrorists of the UDA/UVF etc. during the summer of 2005.

    After those meetings Paisley delivered a “Warning” of what would happen should the parade on the Springfield be stopped.

    And guess who was right – but then again sitting down and discussing the situation with un-reconstructed Unionist terrorists wouwld have given the DUP the edge and inside information – and of course doesn’t really count – Does it?

  • Plum Duff

    “I will suspend the Ding Ding until such time as the AF is called”.

    Ingram

    Who the fucking hell do you think you are to dictate terms to this website? I, like you, am a contributor. I, and others, try as far as possible to give reasoned arguments to the the various topics that are raised. You, on the other hand, do not. Out of a constant steam of drivel and wind ups, there’s occasionally a small bit of sense. Stick to the latter *MATE*.

    As I said on a different thread a few days ago, in answer to yet another person who found your particular tic annoying, to which you markedly didn’t respond (a historic first?),

    “”‘What’s the craic with the ding ding shit?’””

    To which I replied –

    “You might have noticed, from your own experience, that certain people, when they speak, use mannerisms such as, ‘You know’, ‘Actually’, ‘Basically’, etc, before or at the end of every sentence. It generally shows or points to a very poor level of communication. Or, if they’ve nothing of substance to say, they use these mannerisms to flannel.

    That’s the crack ‘with this “ding ding” shit’.””

    When your tic becomes *the* subject for discussion, when it obfuscates the topic, when it annoys the majority of other contributors, do you not think it’s time to grow up – or is your war still on?

    Get a fucking life.

  • Comrade Stalin

    “I am not in the business of saying one thing in private and another in public,” Mr Paisley said on Friday.

    I guess that depends on whether your name is Andy Tyrie or not.

    I’m tired of this old crap about what an honest and principled player Paisley is. The guy is a double dealer, especially when it comes to the role of loyalist paramilitaries.

  • Smithsonian

    plumduff
    Actually, I do rather like the ding,ding from Ingram. What I don’t like is your use of four letter explitives. (This indicates a rather poor command of the English language, but the this is the Internet and whom am I to pass judgement on your style).

    Build a bridge, get over it.

    I even like Ingram’s analysis. It does seem to add a certain something to our musings.

    Ding Ding

  • ding away

    Shouldn’t it be that the people who are astoundingly easily upset over two words – ding, ding, of all words! – appearing on their screen, to the point where they are screeching for the words ding ding to be censored, shouldn’t *they* be the ones to ‘get a life’, I mean, really, get over yourselves. Keeping dinging, it is not the ding ding that is annoying them, it is everything else you are saying and the only thing they can focus on is ding ding because they have no answers to your analysis.

  • Plum Duff

    Smithsonian

    ‘four letter explitives’
    ‘whom am I to pass judgement on your style’
    ‘This indicates a rather poor command of the English language’.

    Would you care to reflect on what you’ve just written?

    Actually, in fairness, given your last quotation, I couldn’t have put it better myself.
    **************

    ding away

    Please address the point of my argument first, ie, read what I actually said, before you even mention ingram’s analysis. When his ‘ding ding’ becomes *THE* subject for discussion, as it has done on quite a few threads – to the exclusion of the actual topic – I and many others, as is evident from their comments, find it an arrogant abuse of the hospitality of the Slugger website – especially when he wrote “I will suspend the Ding Ding until such time as the AF is called”.

    I’m not exactly sure, however, to whom you are addressing your comments. You start off with ‘the people’ and ‘they’. Then you change to ‘yourselves’, by which I presume you are reflecting back to “‘the people’ and ‘they'”. Next you seem to be speaking to old ‘ding ding’ himself as in ‘everything else you are saying’ and ‘your analysis’.

    Hence I am three times confused. Are you winding me up, are you talking to yourself or are you merely engaging in onanism?