SF claims it had secret channel to DUP…

Looks like Sinn Fein is prepared to throw the kitchen sink at the DUP to get them to concede the devolution of policing and justice powers before power sharing… This time they have ‘revealed’ (without revealing who, when, or for how long) that there was an ‘independent verifier’, outside the British government, who acted as a secret channel and took messages from one party to the other. A DUP spokesman denied the report. More here. One to keep an eye on.

  • Yokel

    Isn’t it kind of obvious that someone was playing messenger?

    Christ they can’t be on two totally separate tracks here, even Tony couldnt manage that.

    Rumour has it one of his senior adviser types at NO.10 has been lifted, and charged, regarding cash for peerages by the way but there’s nothing firm on it.

  • ingram


    Sinn Fein are just playing games.

    WHO , WHERE and When simple or is Adams telling more of his lies?


  • Yokel


    I dont see anything shocking in this and nto should anyone in the DUP. What Gerry appears to be saying is that they had a back cahnnel to confirm that what they sent to the DUP was not played with the the NIO on the in bteween.

    Thing is, did the DUP know that back channel was there?

  • joeCanuck

    With regards to denials by politicos, Mandy Rice Davies summed it up rather succicntly. Didn’t she!

  • ingram


    I am not easily shocked.

    The DUP say there was no such contact as BOLDLY claimed by Adams. Arlene Foster on national TV reiterated that point last night.

    Connor Murphy(LOL) was confused on Hearts and minds, he first said there was contact but when challenged he said he did not know the circumstances of the contact and then said he was not at liberty to disclose. LOL Thats Murphy for you.

    Sinn Fein have a golden chance here to show the DUP to be liars?

    Would you like to lay my bet they wont able to do that?

    Simple, Adams has a clear history of lying. The onus is on him to prove the provenance of his claim: WHERE , WHEN and WHO?

    It`s a bit like the so called threats to Adams and other leading Shinners from dissident republican groupings just before Christmas! Yesterday he said he now wants to meet them in secret.

    Now thats what you call a real threat Eh! LOL

    Over to you Gerry.


    PS. I will give it a few minutes and either comical Pat or nice old henry will be on to guide us through to the Sinn Fein light!

  • Yokel


    I neither back nor lay where I can’t form a definite opoinion. I expect the truth is somewhere in between. I would not be surprised by back channels but im also not surprised if Gerry is down at Premier meats looking for pork for his pies….

    The DUP to me have been very quiet over the last few days, a kind of don;t help but don’t hinder SF move.

  • J_K

    Nothing like a troll to make you lose interest.

  • starbuck

    Arlene stated that she was unaware if a back channel was opened – slight difference in BOLDLY denying it ?

  • ingram


    Adams is a serial Liar. He should simply put the information into the public domaine.

    WHERE , WHEN , WHO. Simple.

    and as regards the dissident threat. LOL


    quoteI neither back nor lay where I can’t form a definite opoinion.unquote

    Very wise my friend. That is why we read and study form! form is what we base our tissue price upon.

    The form of Mr Adams is not good! in comparison the DUP have been consistent and todate have not been proven to be liars.

    The form would suggest Adams has bought Premier meats out! lock, stock and smoking barrel.



  • ingram

    Star buck,

    She then went on mention that Dr Paisley had dealt with this issue in some depth. He clearly denied it.

    A very Bold denial to me. Connor Murphy in contrast when pushed on the three points stuttered and rambled on, Sinn Fein should be kind to this guy and remove him from frontline debate its just not fair on him.

    The onus is on Mr Adams to substantiate his very BOLD claims, afterall he does have a track record of telling lies.



  • Henry94

    The last time I remember a claim like this was in relation to John Major. He denied it but it turned out Sinn Fein were telling the truth.

    The trouble with the DUP is that they are split and reaching one side won’t help you with the other.

  • fair_deal

    This was claimed before by Sinn Fein, three years ago, and it was not substantiated then or since.


  • Henry94

    It would be a sorry state of affairs if there was no contact.

  • Another example of DUP hypocrisy and lies. Love them or loathe them, at least the UUP were transparent about their dealings with Republicans.

  • Gerry Adams talked about this on last Sunday’s This Week program.


    there are several more instances of the British govt. denying secret talks with SF and SF proving them to be liars.

    It is unsurprising that there is a back channel between the DUP and SF because as the past few years have demonstrated the British govt will tell the unionists and nationalists different things in the belief it will get them over the “final” hurdle.

  • WindsorRocker

    This allegation smacks of Sinn Fein desperation. They want to make the DUP nervous.
    Who, Where and When…. will we get an answer from Sinn Fein… doubt it.

    For the first time in years, Sinn Fein are squirming….

  • Jeremy

    Mr. Ingram – “PS. I will give it a few minutes and either comical Pat or nice old henry will be on to guide us through to the Sinn Fein light!”

    I though you had reformed from trolling but there seems to be a relapse. Hope you get better soon.

    Interesting revelation as far as affecting the mood music but this is not going to become an issue. Its hardly a ground breaking revelation. Thought it was interesting that Gerry said the big thing was not the transfer but actually getting the DUP to actually sit in govt.

  • just curious

    Noel Thompson:
    On Hearts and Minds said the motion will only be implemented on certain conditions i.e. Only when the power-sharing institutions are established And when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred.

    Conor Murphy replies:
    Or in the event of that not happening the AC are mandated in other circumstances to implement this motion.

    So looking at the motion being put before the Ard Fheis the Ard Chomhairle recommends:
    That the Ard Chomhairle is mandated to implement this motion only when the power-sharing institutions are established and when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred. (i.e conditions) Or if this does not happen within the St Andrews timeframe, only when acceptable new partnership arrangements to implement the Good Friday Agreement are in place.(Conor Murphys other option)

    So does that mean that irrespective of whether the conditions are established, SF will still accept the police service.

  • brendan,belfast

    In response to Just Curious, the other interpreatation is that SF don’t actually believe that the time is right to support the policing structures (and thereby assist in the delivery of effective policing) and are merely using this AF motion as a tactic to get back into Stormont. Otherwise why would there be a delay mechanism built into the motion?

    SF either agree with policing or not. it should not be dependent on the DUP agreeing to share power. them’s called vetoes.

  • joeCanuck

    The only other cases (luckily few) where I’ve heard someone repeat the same silly and childish mantra over and over ad nauseum, is when the person involved has been very tired and emotional.

  • Nationalist


    Your statement “The form of Mr Adams is not good! in comparison the DUP have been consistent and todate have not been proven to be liars.”

    On one of the political programmes, Hearts & Minds I think, a question was put to the DUP representative on whether the DUP had attended a meeting with the UVF and asked them NOT to go on ceasefire in 1994 prior to the ULMC declaration of that year.

    The DUP representative sat and told barefaced lies when he denied the meeting took place and said they would never do that, only for David Ervine to contradict him and David asked the gentleman if he would like him to remind him of the colour of the wallpaper on the walls of the Shankill Road house where the meeting took place.

    I would say that the DUPs barefaced denials on TV to the question of approaching terrorists is a very clear history of the DUP being liars.

  • Gerry & the peacemakers

    I think the back channel is likely to be a Protestant clergy man.

    If its not true then why did Paisley not issue his new year message on time. He was supposed to issue at 2pm but it didn’t come out until 7pm. Obviously a lot of ‘debate’ inside the dupes during those 5 hours.

    Its been the same down through history – the British Govt denied talking to the IRA but were. The DUP deny talking to SF – get real. The word is the DUP are so split they make SF look united.

  • Comrade Stalin

    I think the back channel is likely to be a Protestant clergy man.

    Inappropriate use of terminology is runs a risk of legal action from Paul Berry.

    Newton Emerson’s recent article about SF may apply just as much to the DUP. Have they been trying to hoodwink their own members ?