BBC goes on the attack against Robinson tonight…

On Newsline tonight… This is an open thread, but please be careful in your comments not to go any further the facts…

UPdate: Here’s the written up article on the BBC site… More is expected tonight on Newsline at 6.30pm on BBC1 NI

  • andnowwhat

    Quincey, it was the Robinsons who set themselves up as being high and mighty with their boogy woogy church (with a member of the familiy as a minister off course) and Iris’ tyrades in the media.

    If all is ok, why won’t the Robinsons allow themselves to be interviewed in the usual manner that public figures are rather than handpicked journos, reading from scripts and dictating times before which they/he will not talk?

  • Quincey

    Well its much much easier to attack and pick holes and make allegations than it is to defend a position. That why the likes of Jim Allister rarely focus on what they actually want for example- far far easier to attack, you dont actually have to have ‘real’ evidence or proof.

    How much talking and interviewing and answering is required?? When will it be enough? The answer is for some it never would be- its would jsut be a continual nit picking.

    The questions have been answered. Sometimes you have to draw the line. A thirst for blood among some in the media and a small number in quasi political circles (i say quasi because most of this element dont actually seem to have anyone in elected)does not equate into an inalienable right to badger an individual.

  • andnowwhat

    There will be enough when Robinson puts himself up for open and frank interviews and stops hiding behind lawyers and sick notes.

    Loyalty, like respect is a beautiful gift to give someone.

    Like love, the receiver is duty bound not to abuse it. If they do, a trust is forever broken

  • daisy

    Branding Iris a “tart” smacks of the misogyny of the DUP itself. Disgusting term.

  • Neil

    The questions have been answered.

    So do you honestly believe that there was no need to declare an interest when someone gifts you property worth >400k? When carrying out a property deal in this fashion, unfortunately, tax has to be paid on the value of the land, not the amount it changed hands for.

    If my da, for example, decided to ‘sell’ me his house for a fiver as he’s getting on but he’s got more than 5 years left in him, (in an attempt to avoid paying inheritance tax if he laft it to me in his will), the inland revenue would be looking paid tax on the value of the house, not on the 5er I paid for it. Makes sense really, in order to prevent people bypassing the tax they’re due to pay. Is it your contention that these rules don’t apply to the Robbos?

    Is it also your contention that you can sit on an application, your own application and not declare that as an interest? If you were a councillor would it be acceptable for you to sit on a panel making a judgement on a planning application and not mention the fact that it is actually your application? In other words, do rules apply to everyone equally, or do the royalty in DUP circles bypass the rules? Westminster careers have ended for less, but the Robbos are above that as they own Northern Ireland.

    The tax thing is an issue, the failure to declare an interest on a planning application of your own is an issue, and the failure to report to Westminster the fact that you have a pecuniary interest, a piece of land worth in excess of 400k might, just might, affect your judgement when dealing with planning applications from the developer. Especially given it’s 10 – 15 years wages for the average NI worker, but hey the Robbos need all the help they can get, and God himself help anyone who questions their supreme right to fleece every bean out of every situation. Funny.

  • Neil

    Branding Iris a “tart” smacks of the misogyny of the DUP itself. Disgusting term.

    Fair enough, but calling people ‘an abomination’ due to what they get up to behind closed doors (especially when you’re getting a bit of extra marital sex yourself) is also disgusting to some of us. She put herself in the position that she’s in by sitting in judgement on others while all’s not exactly rosy in her garden (which is only worth a tenner, it’s the rest of the house that’s worth the money).

  • Frustrated Democrat

    The tax man cometh and he has more powers than Superman in 21st Century UK.

    Taxes got Capone…

  • ardmaj55

    The Castlereagh inquiry has yet to reveal it’s verdicts on the State within a made up state that was Castlreagh council during the junta of the Robbos for decades. no doubt the council will offload all the blame on iris since she’s already toast. This scandal has a long way to go, and judging from the petulant response of the DUP website whinging, they know it only too well.

  • Neil

    I’ve had a few dealings with them over the past few years, all done and dusted now. My advice would be this: lubricate. It will be interesting to see if the Robbos get the full treatment, and thereafter what Westminster has to say about the disregard for the rules.

  • daisy

    “but calling people ‘an abomination’ due to what they get up to behind closed doors (especially when you’re getting a bit of extra marital sex yourself) is also disgusting to some of us.”

    Agree absolutely but that doesn’t make Mr Hall’s misogyny any more palatable to me.

  • Pigeon Toes

    “On this evening’s BBC Newsline, we’ll have more on the £5 land deal involving Peter and Iris Robinson which Julian O’Neill revealed exclusively on BBC Newline yesterday evening.”

  • jtwo


    ‘People simply understand that this sort of thing goes on, and its not near as underhand and morally lacking as individuals with an agenda want to paint it.’

    So it’s only a little bit underhand?

    And how would you define ‘this sort of thing’?

  • Watched this last evening – over 10 minutes on this story

    A strip of land bought for £5 and sold for £5.

    A garden sold at the height of the boom

    My license fee – wasted.

    Maybe Greg Campbell has a point on what goes on inside the British Broadcasting Corporation




    Im struggling to categorise News Line these days..

  • jtwo

    It’s ok wile they used your bit of the licence fee to buy a new bassoon for the BBC orchestra.

  • The abject apologists need to address the whole scene.

    It’s only weeks since the DUP press gang was castigating the BelTel over the quarter-of-a-million involved in transferring a Robinson property to the daughter. That was also the media’s fault.

    Besides which, the Robinsons have also acquired a London property and a Florida bolt-hole. That makes four houses: are there more to come?

    Since the Robinsons’ only means of obvious support were public subsidies and generous allowances shovelled into the family firm, we, who subscribed to this property-owning oligopoly, have an interest here — as much as in duckhouses and moat-clearances. And that’s why the BBC are entitled to be curious.

  • Pigeon Toes

    Of course if Mrs Robinson has been suffering from these mental health issues for some time, it could be that she was incapable of acting rationally with regard to the sale and disposal of this land.

    But where does that leave Mr Robinson,should the legality of the transactions be questioned?

    Own goal?

  • joeCanuck

    there was no belief of wrongdoing

    Ignorance of the law is not an allowable defence. It goes right up there with “I was only following orders”. And I would expect that legislators would have, at least, a smattering of knowledge of what’s lawful and what is not.Then there’s the morality of the pair of them. I rarely, if ever, comment on other people moral sense; in this case, however, they started the ball rolling with their “holier than thou” public pronouncements.
    As to some of your other comments on this blog, they have left me scratching my head in astonishment. Since you have only now turned up, I can only conclude that you are a sock puppeteering troll.

  • andnowwhat

    Malcolm, I really don’t mean to say this in a condescending way but I find all this miss fired loyalty from some on here quite sad.

    This is not an anti DUP issue unless the party makes it one (which in this unequivical support they are in great danger of doing).
    If one is a DUP supporter I feel one should actually be more fired up than the rest of us.

    My only criticism of the BEEB is that I think the 15 minutes or so they gave to the story was a bit OTT.

  • Neil

    Once again, the rules that apply to the rest of us don’t apply to the great and the good. Should anyone question whether the gift of a piece of land that earns in excess of 400k and the ensuing tax issues then they have an axe to grind. In fact as we know, anyone who asks the Robinsons anything difficult or uncomfortable is castigated for asking silly questions. The point I find most galling is that despite being comfortably wealthy these people feel the need to take more and more while giving as little as possible.

    What other explanation for maximum twin food bills, dodgy land deals etc. is there than greed; Jesus wept it’s not like they need the extra cash. The deadly sins keep accumulating. On the same theme of rules not applying to certain folks that apply to others: ‘I didn’t know I was breaking the law’ is a) not a defence and b)an admission of guilt. If you or I did it we’d be charged.

  • granni trixie

    It would be really interesting to know what ‘straight’ politicans in the DUP think about this turn of events. Do they say “poor Peter the media wont leave him alone” or are they strating to think that so much is emerging which show him in a bad light that there is no smoke without fire. I mean I couldn’t imagine this sort of stuff coming out about Arlene Foster.
    Time will tell.

    But the DUP will surely be tarnished unless they distance themselves. Blaming the messager has been a very weak response.

  • Mick Fealty

    Mick Hall. What kind of idiot are you exactly? If you want to break the law, do on your own blog! And if anyone else thinks by following him or riffing off his libellous themes you are off the hook, think again.

    We don’t pre-moderate. If we did, it would kill the conversation, and we would become immediately liable for anything that managed to get past our jerry built legal filters.

    But you are way way out of line here. And BTW can we drop the offensive stuff about Iris. There is a time, a place and tone. And this is none of those.

  • Procrasnow

    Mr Robinson is a shareholder in a property development company, as shown in his ‘members interests’ at Westminster see item 9 if this land issue was connected to that company, then in my opinion he has nothing more to declare and everything is above board

  • jtwo

    That company is nothing to do with the Fraser deal. Meanwhile interesting developments in another Julian O’Neill story

  • granni trixie

    Just heard Peter Weir answering qs with the line “its all the media’s fault”. Can the DUP themselves really believe that?
    Btw, in same interview never heard GA so rattled before. He is humsn!

    I was wondering too why the BBC were also reporting that the DUP were blaming them for a smear. And it struck me (or is this too much conspiracy theory?) – would the BBC be using accusations of DUP smear as a precautionary fig leaf lest BBC are accused of ‘having it in for SF/GA’ following Moloney’s book publicity?. Would explain the strange timing of PR story.

  • jtwo

    I think you’re wide of the mark on that theory – they will have simply reported the DUP line in the interests of fairness. The timing isn’t so strange – all the Iris stuff came out at the turn of the year, O’Neill then started looking at the Fraser stuff and it took as long as it took to properly stand up.

  • Mick F

    Iris Robinson started being truly ‘offensive’ when she said Gay people are in need of psychiatric help, and she made herself fair game, if you have a short memory and wish to be her knight in shining armour fair play to you, but have the dignity not to hide behind the law.

    Which of the points I mentioned were untrue, which were libellous, none, and you know it. Offensive for sure, as they were meant to be as you well know.

    If you truly believed what I wrote was untrue, you should ask me to withdraw my remarks, but you have not as you are well aware all the points I mentioned are on the pubic record.

    The main reason Stormont is such a dungheap is because whenever a major politician is exposed as a crook or worse, they brazen it out, knowing full well; people like you have sadly become of late, will only push the knife in so far, and then withdraw it and allow them to go about their business, if a little bruised.

    People like the Robinson’s and Gerry Adams understand this perfectly, they no longer fear when the truth is written about them, sure it irritates them, they would prefer it not to be, but they deal with it with more of the same and with a little help from their friends.

    The real problem is, whether it be Westminster or Stormont, the politicians and the MSM all sup from the same contaminated pool. It is how UK politics has increasingly worked over the last two decades, and it is a major threat to democracy. It’s the mentality of I will scratch your back and you mine; and we will all gentle prosper together.

  • Procrasnow @ 04:58 PM:

    That one came up in a previous thread, around the time the whole Conway affair blew up, and led into the expenses scandals and investigations.

    What nobody has yet explained is what “Union Arch” amounts to. It seems to fade in and out of Peter Robinson’s declarations as the spirit moves him. At one time it seemed to imply it was a holding company for his constituency offices (which would qualify as the fifth property in the Robinson empire).

    Then I made a vague effort to discover what “Union Arch” amounted to. Is it the concern of a similar name that operates out of the Kesh home of the former Sheriff of County Fermanagh?

    Since Mr Robinson will not explain himself, it behoves Procrasnow and his other apologists to help us out here.

  • ardmaj55

    JoeCanuck [17] This claim of ignorance of the law by some Unionist politicians is all of a piece with their complaints about the Saville inquiry. inquiry. One J. Donaldson in particular. He complains that there are no inquiries into republican killings, not because he’s ignorant about the fact that Govts see themselves above the law, but because he knows his likely voters probably don’t know the workings of govt, and he’s pandering to the bigots in this.

  • Quincey

    Im sticking to my line- this is searching too hard for something that isnt there. Its already close to dead. Peter Robinson is going nowhere.

  • jtwo

    Quincey can you just confirm your line is: ‘Peter did nothing and sure even if he did it was all pretty minor and (as yet unnamed) others have done worse and if you ask
    me guv that Iris stuff was all a bit of fluff’

  • joeCanuck


    Yes, and he’s ignoring the fact that there very many inquiries into republican killings, commonly know as murder trials. If the events of that terrible Sunday had been investigated properly (well, in any way) by the RUC and murder charges laid on those responsible, there would have been no need for the Saville Inquiry.

  • Quincey

    My line is that nothing has been done in Business terms that is not reasonably common practise. If its wrong fair enough- but challenge and change the practise, not the one high profile individual who has momentarily been identified as carrying it out (and who coincidently is undergoing unprecedented scrutiny). Where mistakes have been made they have been mistakes. On Iris- affairs happen every day.The monetary help sourced and given was on a different scale than jimmy to joanna down the road simply because the people where at a different level in the social chain. Whether they should be or not is a different debate.

    I honestly believe that the ordainary man on the street is as close to indifferent about this all. Robinson got a favour from a mate to push through a deal that affected many other people and things. If he hadnt of done it he would have eventually got the same price for the land anyway, it would just have taken a bit longer.

  • Quincey

    Joe, calling murder trials inquirys is a very loose interpretation, but even in that respect we have well over a thousand murders that never were examined at any trial.

    On Saville- the one thing that the Saville inquiry has uncovered is that there were armed republican terrorists on the streets of Derry that day. Im thankful for that confirmation, but would gladly have lived without it if the millions had went into the Stormont coffers instead.

  • joeCanuck

    Quincey, I can hardly believe that I’m actually reading the words you have written all through this blog. I could probably be convinced right now that you’re one of those monkeys given a typewriter and that you’re about to re-invent the whole corpus of Shakespeare’s plays.
    I, along with most of Slugger visitors, could quickly demolish your vacuous and morally repugnant arguments, but I would rather go and look out the widow.
    I nominate you for troll of the month.

  • granni trixie

    Troll of the Month/week/day – great idea!

  • Quincey

    Thats your perogative Joe. Ive given my opinion and tried to explain why i have it.

  • granni trixie

    Mickhall:you seem to be using a cultural relativism defence being used here to minimise (possible) wrongdoing: political culture and ordinary peoples culture which tolerates (alleged)corruption. But surely it is the job of leaders to set higher standards than this?

    Also, re your approach to Irisgate – 2 wrongs dont make a right – she was 100% in the wrong in her remarks/attitude to gay people but that does not mean it is right to refer to her in the terms you do. And I’m no fan of hers.

  • jtwo

    Quincey even in the annals of political hackery that is risible stuff

  • ” But surely it is the job of leaders to set higher standards than “this?

    Not these political leaders I’m afraid 😉

    Of course I was deliberately being provocative, I concluded long ago this bunch have no shame, thus the best we can do, beyond hoping a younger generation will come along and show them the door, is to ridicule them in the only language they, their party members and their constituents seem to understand.

    All the best

  • alan56

    Wonder what Lady Sylvia thinks about this. Will she be asking questions about it?

  • ardmaj55

    Quincey [8] So, in common with Campbell donaldson and the rest, you have seen and read the Saville Report before it’s been published, for you to be able to judge it conclusions? and there were armed loyalist terrorists in the area at Drumcree, so would that satisfy you if there had been an Orange Bloody Sunday as trimble feared? since the paras were around during that also. You would not have demanded an enquiry into that?

  • Pigeon Toes

    Quincey where are Paul, and Harry J tonight?

    The three of you share a somewhat unique writing style..

  • andnowwhat

    Surely tou would not inferr that DUP HQ would stick a few on their monkeys on the much talked about Slugger O’ Toole blog Pigeon?

    Actually, sounds about right. A smarter, less smug party would have cut Robinson lose.

    As Empy said, if this was the Brirish PM the press would have went crazy.

    I really wish an American journo (outside of these mythical legal restraints) would get in to this.

  • Pigeon Toes

    “a few ”


  • Procrasnow

    Malcolm @ 5.35PM

    As I am a friend of Dorothy’s, please do not be insult me as calling me a apologist of the Robinsons.

    I am merely being detached, open minded and trying to be fair.

    Even if the Robinsons erroneously would refer the likes of me as an abomination, I do not have to have a chip-on-the shoulder and be anti-Robinson in my views

  • Quincey

    I can assure you that ‘Quincey’ is Quincey and no-one else. As an adminstrator of several sites, the Slugger ‘Staff’ should easily be able to catch on to any individual posting under different names by monitoring isp addresses.

    On Saville: Nope im not fortune telling.It has already been apparant in the evidence presented by Nationalists on the ground on the day that several Armed nationalists were in Derry on 30 Jan 1972. Its been acknowledged and will appear in Saville.

    As for the suggestion about Drumcree- ifs and buts. Pointless and irrelevant comparison and totally stupid to try and pass an imaginary judgement on an imaginary situation.

    To acccuse me of political hackery is a bit rich given some of the other comments (including drawing an event in 1972 and an imaginary Drumcree scenario into the equation!).

    Ill repeat. Im doing what everyone else is doing- giving an opinion. In fact im going a bit futher than many by giving my reasoning and logic behind my view.

    Third time ill say this- the ‘fiver’ story is already dead and is going nowhere. Outside of the minority who engage in political debate/attack on the net, a BBC investigative team and a small number of isolated prospective politicians (technically they arent yet), nobody see’s it as being a significant relevance to either Robinsons character, his position in Stormont or his position in the DUP. The Province wide reaction has made that plain- there hasnt been one!

  • kelvin

    Correct me if I am wrong (as I am totally ignorant of the law in this case…) but is this land deal actually illegal? Did Robinson actually break the law or was he just a canny player in securing a bloody good deal with a friend, who after all set the price? I do not think that there is any illegality here, other than the BBC suggesting that Robinson did not inform Westminster but in that case, he did not financially benefit directly from the sale of the strip of land?

  • Procrasnow @ 09:25 PM:

    Hmm … “friend of Dorothy”?

    Synapse creaks into action: “Over the Rainbow”.

    Hmm … my long-gone classical education reminds me that Iris was the goddess of the rainbow, and the Greek “eiris” was the rainbow.

    But, “somewhere over the Iris” leaves me totally speechless.

  • Quincey

    You dont need corrected Kelvin, and thats the point. No law has been broken.

    Perhaps this is identifying loopholes that need fixed- but it has neither been illegal nor immoral.

  • Procrasnow

    Malcolm @9.45 PM

    I have frequently remarked on the Irony of Iris the Goddess of the rainbow on the one hand and Iris against what rainbow stands for, on the the other.

  • cynic47

    Maybe I’m missing the point about all this being a good bit of business. Could someone help me get my head around it all by suggesting to me why a hard nosed developer like Mr Frazer would sell a piece of land to the Robinsons for a fiver and then donate £25K to Iris to pass on to her young beau. Are there other favours to be unearthed?

  • cynic47

    Maybe I’m missing the point about all this being a good bit of business. Could someone help me get my head around it all by suggesting to me why a hard nosed developer like Mr Frazer would sell a piece of land to the Robinsons for a fiver and then donate £25K to Iris to pass on to her young beau. Are there other favours to be unearthed?

  • jtwo

    Kelvin, I think you’re the first person to suggest criminal conduct. BTW I was tremendously moved by your empathy with Iris’ mental health and certainly don’t think your testimony sounds utterly hooky *wipes tear*

  • kelvin

    If the deal is not illegal, then why such fuss?

  • andnowwhat

    Is the Magic Forest agreen belt?

    Never mind. Some people know how to get around shch matters.

    Maybe the yellow brick road will get relaid and lighting in turn for turning a black eye to development policies.

  • jtwo

    Why such a fuss? If I must:

    1) Not declaring the land on the Commons register, as required by the code of conduct

    2) Not declaring an interest when a planning app was passed, as required by the code of conduct.

    3) The tax liability raised by the real value of the random strip

    4) The big unanswered question – why did the grandaddy of the hard nosed developer class give away a valuable piece of land for next to nothing? The same developer who gave Iris 25k with no expectation of seeing it again – was Fraser the Secret Millionaire of Castlereagh dispensing charity wherever he went?

  • granni trixie

    I simply cannot understand the logic in asking why is the Robinson land deal of public interest. The answer for dummies is: because it puts the onus on the First Minister to show that he does not have inappropirate relationship with property developer(s) given the postion of influence he and his wife were/are in.

    Even on the voluntary boards on which I sit at the beginning of meetings the Chair asks if anyone has a conflict of interest on any matters on the agenda and annually one fills in a form declaring potential relationships from which conflicts of interest may arise during the year.

    Why should such standards not prevail in the realm of politics? Ofcourse PR/DUP seems to be arguing that there is no case to answer but if I were in his/Iris position I would definately think it appropriate to register relationship with the developer as a potential conflict of interest.

  • ding dong

    The reason most ordinary people are interested in this story can simply be explained because for some daft reason we have been brought up to believe that politicians should be beyond reproach.

    In reality many of them are crooked, twisted, money grabbing self publicists who care little or nothing for the people they represent but view politics as a means to promote themselves.

    During a political career they amass huge fortunes, with even bigger houses and property portfolios and expect the right to be listened to when they pontificate about the private lives of others. Much of this fortune is genreated in ways that a magician would be proud off but rarely does anyone prove the unexplained nature of the polticians financial success.

    In NI we still fawn over these self proclaimed leaders of society and at our tribal best we overlook their dodgy dealing and disgusting pasts disconnecting our brains and morals when we enter the polling booths.

    Where polticians have principles or honesty they soon fall foul of the need for tribal solidarity because inevitably at times they must condemn members of their own tribe – ultimately fatal

    Coupled with a relatively lazy and servantile press who due to the nature of politics here have become beholden to our politicians so they never truly investigate the glaring anomolies thus our bloved politicos continue

    Ultimately nothing will change and anyone daft enough to believe GA or PR will be damaged by recent revelations live on a very different planet to me

  • Gréagoir O Frainclín

    It’s seems taht this little island is riddled with corrupt politicians!

  • Gréagoir O Frainclín

    It’s seems taht this little island is riddled with corrupt (and opportunistic) politicians!

  • Gréagoir O Frainclín

    It’s seems that this little island is riddled with corrupt and opportunistic politicians!

  • Fretjumper

    A wiser man than me said ‘its all hip pockets and brown envelopes’ meaning secret deals, wink wink nudge nudge, I didn’t believe him…I do now.

  • granni trixie

    Ding dong: if I thought what you thought I would not be an active member of a political party. Your statement is too sweeping. I do agree that in some “pockets” the culture in political classes seems to tolerate corruption.

  • [quote][i]A wiser man than me said ‘its all hip pockets and brown envelopes’ meaning secret deals, wink wink nudge nudge, I didn’t believe him…I do now.[/i] …. Posted by Fretjumper on Apr 01, 2010 @ 10:24 AM [/quote]

    And unless you are able to make your own cash/stash, Fretjumper, you are in the pocket of someone else who would then control you, and play with you at their leisure for their pleasure. And the Really Smart One always ensure that it always remains a Mutually Satisfying Delight ….. otherwise it can so easily become a Catastrophic Liability Partnership just like a rotten marriage.

  • Fretjumper

    Ziggy Stardust – otherwise it can so easily become a Catastrophic Liability Partnership just like a rotten marriage

    Would that be like Robinsons’ marriage you mean?

  • ding dong

    Granni, maybe having been involved in a local poltical party previously has given me a not so unique insight, the problem remains look at our political leaders/MPs/MLAs tell me where the real altruists are and then tell me where the real talent is?

    THe fact is our clutch of politicians are not in it for the people some not even for the praise but the money – which of our 108 would you employ to do an ordinary job?

  • OscarTheGrouch

    The apparent confusion our politicians have with their responsibilities, makes me think that perhaps we should require a NVCQ qualification in Ethics for all MLA’s… or at least a cycling proficiency test (tufty club membership?)

    We better make it a NVCQ level 1 though, or we may end up with a mass cull.

  • ding dong

    Its the only job in NI you can have that pays £50K that you don’t need to have gcse maths for – and you can run the country!!

  • granni trixie

    I am in a party with leaders I respect (and I’m no fool). What more can I say?

  • kelvin

    Just curious, but I noticed that the Guardian had an article today about the leadership challenges to Peter Robinson and Gerry Adams. The article mentioned new additions to the Fall of the House of Paisley book due out this week which is expected to raise uncomfortable questions for the Robinson’s – anyone know any details?

  • Pigeon Toes

    Kelvin, er buy the book?

  • cynic47

    Ding Dong.

    You are correct! People can be fooled by the Sunday best suits they wear but I know of a few who can just about read and write. I’m not being funny!!

  • Quincey

    Sorry guys, i win. Its gone.

  • Drumlins Rock

    must read “the house of Paisley” first, then get the rest, a house robinson and adams would be interesting too lol

  • ardmaj55

    martin r. [13] Tax avoidance by substituting the £5 deal for declaring in place of the half million deal? The Robinson’s? On past form, like a shot. We still haven’t heard from iris due to her convenient ‘mental breakdown’ yet.

  • jtwo
  • pinni

    The BBC is still flogging away at a dead horse in continuing their attack against Peter Robinson.

    After a couple of days of giving front page prominence and top story status to the Yet-To-Win-an-Election TUV’s attack on Robinson, the BBC, today, gives front page coverage to the MP-less UUP’s attack on Robinson.

    What a miserable bunch of losers! Doing everything in their power to try to keep a half-baked non-story alive.

  • Mrazik


    If you don’t think that PR has at least some questions to answer you are seriously deluded (or still on duty).

    Has the DUP taken action against the BBC yet?

    A ‘smear campaign’ is a serious allegation which, if made against an individual, wouldn’t go uncontested in the courts.

  • Drumlins Rock

    can someone give me the link to the proposed housing development, am just wondering how “key” to the development the site was.