“may have caused disaffection among republican supporters..”

Here’s an alternative version of the lines in the IMC report, noted by Mark Devenport, edited [Adds by me] to better reflect reality – and that’s a “matter of fact.”

Today the IMC asserted that the one possible reason for the increase in Continuity IRA and Real IRA activity “may be a perception that the absence of progress on the devolution of justice and policing [blocking of NI Executive meetings by Sinn Féin] has created a political vacuum, or [the Sinn Féin leadership’s failure to deliver on their claims of negotiated commitments to devolving police and justice powers by May 2008] may have caused disaffection among republican supporters, which the dissidents think they may be able to exploit”.

, , , ,

  • Padraig

    the fenians will be the death of us yet……….

  • latcheeco

    A cynic might say the whole thing looks very choreographed.

  • Mark McGregor

    mmm….so Slugger bloggers just delete the words they don’t like in statements/press releases etc. and replace them with what they want? Must try that some time, I’m sure it’d go down a treat.

  • Pete Baker

    Mark

    “so Slugger bloggers just delete the words they don’t like in statements/press releases etc. and replace them with what they want?”

    Is there some confusion about what I’ve done here?

    I thought I had explained it in the introduction?

    If you need further clarification just ask.

  • skullion

    Pete

    I’m going to have to agree with Mark here.You seem to have used,shall we kindly say,poetic licence.Or to put it another way that’s not what it says on the tin.

  • Mark McGregor

    No problem Pete, you openly and honestly altered the words of others to apply your personal opinion. It was clear from the get go.

    I’m going to try it too, seems a easy peasy way to blog.

  • Pete Baker

    skullion

    You must have missed the “edited to better reflect reality” sign-post in the original post.

    That editing doesn’t actually contradict what the IMC report says. But it does clarify the reality of the situation.

    Of course, it’s there to be falsified.

  • Pete Baker

    Mark

    “to apply your personal opinion.”

    You really should know by now to click through on the links.

    It is, again, there to be falsified.

  • Driftwood

    What are republicans? Are these people who oppose Crown servants like Adams and McGuinness? Why don’t they stand for election?

  • Pete Baker

    I’ve added an ‘edit credit’ if that helps some to understand.

  • skullion

    Pete

    Those little bits you scored out and those little bits you added in makes it a tad removed from reality.

  • Mark McGregor

    Pete,

    Indeed. The reason for your opinion is well documented but I’m not a fan of the strikethrough and edit in a blockquote, it removes the documented opinion of others and replaces it with your own. As I said, I’ll give it a go at some point myself just to see how it goes down.

  • Pete Baker

    Mark

    “I’m not a fan of the strikethrough and edit in a blockquote”

    Your stylistic preferences are duly noted.

    “it removes the documented opinion of others and replaces it with your own.”

    As I had said I had done.

    Oh, but you forgot to mention that I backed that opinion up – the clickable links.

    Don’t forget to add those when you try it yourself.

  • skullion

    Today the IMC asserted that one possible reason for the increase in Continuity IRA and Real IRA activity may be a perception that “the Dup don’t really want to share power etc etc.”There you go straight from the horse’s mouth whomever the horse might be.

  • kensei

    As I had said I had done.

    Oh, but you forgot to mention that I backed that opinion up – the clickable links.

    With your own fucking posts! Seriously, you’ve just revealed all the stuff about the “Baconian method” and the rest as a full on pile of steaming horseshit
    . You’re either on an ideological crusade, a wuid up, or both.

    How about you just report what’s there, and stick to your stated aim? I’m quite sure you would not react too well to people sticking words in your mouth.

  • USA

    Peter Faker,
    Your arrogance knows no bounds. Get over yourself.

  • Pete Baker

    Ken

    “With your own fucking posts!”

    The links don’t end at those posts. They go out further.

    “I’m quite sure you would not react too well to people sticking words in your mouth.”

    Didn’t you see the ‘edit credit’?

    USA

    “Your arrogance knows no bounds.”

    One more time then, it’s there to be falsified, guys.

  • It was Sammy Mc Nally what done it

    Pete,

    this a piece of outrageous fiction which would be dangerous if not so completly silly.

    Having repeatedly ignored the fact that the DUP are under political pressure because of their non-implementation of the STA you have now taken to making stuff up and ignoring the actual evidence which undermines your view. lol.

    Why dont you save your yourself further embarassment and just say to the world ‘I Pete Baker called it wrong and all my pin head dancing has been in vain’. I dont know if the Sunday Sport is still in print but if they are surely they will be looking over their shoulder at Slugger and getting worried.

  • USA

    Faker,
    It’s been covered ad nausium, what makes you think I would want to waste my time discussing P+J with you? We are where we are, make a deal on it or don’t, and the dice will fall where they may. You are not going to convince folks that you are right, probably because they have a different frame of reference, and your patronizing attitude towards everyone does you no favors at all.

  • Sorry, Pete, your alteration of the actual text of the IMC report is completely dishonest and out of order. You simply cannot take and alter their language, even if you do so clearly and openly which I admit you have done.

    You may certainly cite language from their report and point out where you believe it is in error and why BUT you are not allowed to change their text, no matter how openly you do it.

    Them’s the rules, Pete, and you broke them.

  • Big Maggie

    Driftwood

    Crown servants like Adams and McGuinness

    I knew Adams was a barman at one time but didn’t know he worked in the Crown. Not sure he’d like to be called a servant though….

  • Pancho’s Horse

    The non-British segment of ‘Northern Ireland’ contribute more to HM Revenue than the British (not born in Britain) do and consequently should call the shots.

  • edward

    lol pete sad….. true to form but ….. sad

    lies, damn lies and pete fakers links

  • Sadder Hussain

    Peter,

    You just get sadder and sadder – just give it up for your own sake.

    A Friend

  • Dave

    Shooting the messenger…

  • ciaran

    Oh dear Pete, me-thinks the peasants are revolting.

  • Jer

    “edited [Adds by me] to better reflect reality”

    …. should you not add “as I see it”

    By changing the text the way you did you made your own opinions and interpretations the subject of debate and sidelined the IMC report.

  • kensei

    Pete

    The links don’t end at those posts. They go out further.

    Yes. but but they stage, you’ve already narrowed the field and set your own spin. It is fundamentally dishonest.

    Didn’t you see the ‘edit credit’?

    Why don’t you see its irrelevance?

  • It was Sammy Mc Nally what done it

    Shooting the messenger?

    No. Shooting the message distorter.

  • [aside]Here’s a comment I posted on that Devenport Diaries “Exploiting the Vacuum” thread:

    “defraud industrial or agricultural subsidies”

    I don’t know about fraud, Mark, but the mainstream media seems to be turning a blind eye to ‘difficulties’ within the procurement process, not least the Rathlin ferry subsidy.

    Other examples include court cases involving government departments and Henry Brothers and McLaughlin and Harvey.

    There seems to be confusion as to where final responsibility lies: the DFP’s Central Procurement Directorate or its client departments.

    Is it a problem with ‘unjoined-up government’ or is the process vulnerable to cronyism?

  • Mick Fealty

    Pete’s a big boy, so he doesn’t (no more than any of our bloggers) needs a cultured defence from me.

    But if you are all out to get him can you at least to try to make it civil? Your points will carry much more weight that way!

  • ulsterfan

    Pete
    Keep up the good work.
    Perhaps you can start a new and original blog along the lines that SF sold a pup to their supporters when they said the DUP had agreed a time table for P&J;.
    I think this will produce some revealing comments and don’t think the subject has been discussed before.

  • Wilde Rover

    Pete,

    I think the crossing out thing works if you are giving your own take on a situation as a blogger but I don’t think it works if you do it with something like a report.

    Just sayin

  • It was Sammy Mc Nally what done it

    Mick,

    It’s not Pete’s size that is under discussion – but I’ll take you word for it.

    Having refused to ackowledge the political difficulties for the DUP in exercising their veto on the implmentation of the STA it is surely editorially unsound for him to simply re-write statements which are not in keeping with his views rather than debate what has been actually said.

  • George

    Pete,
    What purpose is served by crossing out what is clearly flagged as a “perception” in a report with your own (and indeed other people’s) perceived reality?

    It doesn’t change the reality that the perception the IMC flags exists. Surely the reactions to your posts on this issue should be evidence of that.

  • percy

    Peteb
    There’s no getting way from the fact that Lord Alderdice yesterday argued that increased dissident activity occurs when there is political stagnation, and that’s the lesson of the last 35yrs.

    Falsified?
    Well, you’ve got some wriggle room , as my point concerns the wider issue of stagnation, and not specifically the devolution of P&J;.

    Take it? Up to you?
    I would 😉

  • percy

    Holiday Gifts, Education and Entertainment: Get It All at NASA Glenn Visitor Center

    Need ideas for what to do during the holiday season? Don’t stay at home; instead bring the family to the Visitor Center at NASA’s Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, for an exciting day filled with mind-expanding activities. Its interactive exhibits, video presentations and gift shop are just a few of the attractions for people of all ages to explore the world of air and space flight.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Sammy etc:

    this a piece of outrageous fiction which would be dangerous if not so completly silly.

    You do love a bit of the old hyperbole, don’t you. What on earth is “dangerous” about Pete giving his own interpretation of a sentence in the IMC report, leaving their original wording clearly visible ? What danger has Pete put us in using his keyboard ?

    Having repeatedly ignored the fact that the DUP are under political pressure

    Except that they’re not, so it’s not a fact. The DUP have shown no indication that they are going to budge, and they under no strict obligation to do so. None of the three governments can lift a finger to do anything about this.

    because of their non-implementation of the STA you have now taken to making stuff up and ignoring the actual evidence which undermines your view. lol.

    What is incorrect about the idea that SF’s withdrawal from the government is creating a political vacuum ? Seems like an accurate reading of the situation to me. If SF did not withdraw, then we would have a working government, of sorts.

    Why dont you save your yourself further embarassment and just say to the world ‘I Pete Baker called it wrong and all my pin head dancing has been in vain’.

    I haven’t seen any factual errors in anything that Pete has posted. This coming the guy who keeps making “predictions” which turn out to be wrong. Your latest one is that the American administration will make some kind of call for the DUP to move and proceed with the implementation of the StAA before the end of this year, isn’t that right ?

    I dont know if the Sunday Sport is still in print but if they are surely they will be looking over their shoulder at Slugger and getting worried.

    Do you think they would have printed a story about Obama “calling for” an investigation into the Finucane enquiry, when he clearly did not ?

    Having refused to ackowledge the political difficulties for the DUP in exercising their veto on the implmentation of the STA

    What political difficulties ?

    it is surely editorially unsound for him to simply re-write statements which are not in keeping with his views rather than debate what has been actually said.

    It’s editorially unsound for Pete to present an opinion and clearly denote it as such ? Slugger isn’t a newspaper and it doesn’t require it’s bloggers to present no bias.

    You’re all fart and no shite.

  • [i]”What on earth is “dangerous” about Pete giving his own interpretation of a sentence in the IMC report, leaving their original wording clearly visible?”[/i]

    For clearly obvious reasons, the rule is that you cite the actual text EXACTLY as written and THEN indicate your disagreement with the text. Sorry, Comrade, but them’s the rules and with good reason. Pete violated them.

    [i]”Except that they’re not, so it’s not a fact. The DUP have shown no indication that they are going to budge, and they under no strict obligation to do so. None of the three governments can lift a finger to do anything about this.”[/i]

    The fact is that the DUP are so obliged. They are not doing so..

    [i]”What is incorrect about the idea that SF’s withdrawal from the government is creating a political vacuum ?”[/i]

    The political vacuum is created not by Sinn Fein, but by the DUP’s refusal to honor its commitments.

    [i]”I haven’t seen any factual errors in anything that Pete has posted.”[/i]

    Then, why do you x out what Pete posted and substitute alternate — and contradictory –text?

    [i]”Slugger isn’t a newspaper and it doesn’t require it’s bloggers to present no bias.”[/i]

    True enough, but Slugger DOES require that others’ views be presented clearly and without editing or obfuscation.

  • Pete Baker

    Bob

    “the rule is that you cite the actual text EXACTLY as written and THEN indicate your disagreement with the text.”

    I had no idea you had been issued with an official Slugger rule-book on blogging.

    “but Slugger DOES require that others’ views be presented clearly and without editing or obfuscation.”

    I’ll ask again – Was there any confusion over what I have actually done in the post?

    You have to understand the rules, Bob, to be able to break them.

  • Alas. Pete, it is obvious that you are unaware of the rules or convention used in ANY written commentary on publications or written comments of another person.

    Now, the rule was promulgated long before there was anything like the Internet, much less Slugger’s blogosphere. but the rule is a good one and there is no reason to insist on changing it when you are posting comments on the net instead of composing them for publication in the print media. Sorry, Peter, but, as I said, the rule is a good one, i.e. when you post a quotation from another’s writing, you do not change the author’s text in ANY way with or without x’s or crossouts or omissions. THEN and ONLY then are you free to suggest that the text is erroneous in some fashion and how you do that’s pretty much up to you — as long as you previously cited the author’s text EXACTLY as he wrote it.

    Occasionally, the author’s text may be highlighted in some way, e.g. bolding or italicizing or underlining a portion of the text but even this must be noted with the quotation. And NONE OF YOUR TEXT can be inserted into the author’s text.

    Sorry, Peter, you broke the rules. And the rules for print publications apply on the net when you are printing on a TV screen instead of a sheet of paper.

  • Sneakers O’Toole

    Dear God would ye’s ever settle down. This is getting into playground stuff.

    I thought it was pretty clear what he meant, there was no intention to mislead now, c’mon. IMC says something, Pete disagrees. What’s not to get?