What Peter might learn from Martin and Gerry…

There are still things I am puzzling over that have happened in the last three months. One, is why on earth the second President Bush would disturb his rather sleepy retirement to pursuade Reg Empey to vote with the DUP on a Policing and Justice Bill that they were provided no access to before its provisions were agreed on by the parties inside the semi detached polit-bureau in Stormont Castle? And the other is why the BBC turned on the First Minister last week with evidence of wrong doing that was less than complete. Nevertheless, it caught the FM off his guard, and may have caused him unwelcome damage, however lateral. Lawrence White in the Belfast Telegraph says Peter should learn from Gerry:

While Peter might feel under pressure over investigations into his property dealings, the allegations are nothing of the scale that continue to be directed at Martin and Gerry.

Gerry has been accused of ordering the death and disappearance of Jean McConville and masterminding the Bloody Friday slaughter of nine people as well as the laying waste of Belfast in the 1970s. Now he is also apparently facing a death threat from dissidents.

But apart from one snappy answer to a UTV reporter, Gerry has managed to keep his cool. He has also managed to keep up the pretence of never being in the IRA. All has been done in a remarkably calm manner.

But, of course, he goes on to note:

Of course Gerry and Martin have plenty of experience of handling hostile questioning from the times they were scooped by the security forces and interrogated by police. A few days in Castlereagh would make handling questions from journalists seem like small beer.

But ominously for Peter:

Now that Peter’s weak point has been identified he can only expect more hostile questioning over property deals. As First Minister he must keep meeting the media and leave himself exposed to further interrogation.

If there is actually more to come…

  • articles

    As to why Bush rang Sir Reg..

    US presidents have a Not to do under any circumstances list. This list is drawn up by US embassies and consulates around the world and comprises items considered undiplomatic, ill mannered, culturally insensitive, don’t do it if you want to stay alive, terminally boring, etc etc. It is updated very year. The idea was taken from the Brit Foreign office who have had such a list for donkey’s.

    Bush was taken by the list and used it inventively; quite simply each time he lost a game of golf he picked an item from the Not to do list as a forfeit. Thus over time Bush has winked at the Queen, groped Angela Merkel, danced with the natives etc. after losing a golf match. On leaving the White House he asked if he could continue to receive the list.

    Allegedly Dan Rooney’s 2009 entry read “Do not under any circumstances enter into conversation with Sir Reg Empey, he makes Joe Lieberman sound like David Letterman.”

  • Mick,

    Anyone’s tale is only as strong as the weakest link, and one only needs to ask questions to find out that which is either false, or so sensitive as to be declined an answer which can be checked for its corroborating veracity.

    And there’s always more to come whenever you are in a position which you are not fit for, or you have done a dodgy deal for.

  • Neil

    While Peter might feel under pressure over investigations into his property dealings, the allegations are nothing of the scale that continue to be directed at Martin and Gerry.

    But it’s the relevance of the allegations with respect to the appropriate section of the electorate. Do the vast majority of SF voters suspect that Gerry was in the IRA? Do they know the same of Martin? The answer is yes to both questions, so does the SF voting electorate suspect that both men were involved in shootings and bombings? Again yes. Therefore the impact of the revelations/allegations regarding Adams is practically nil. The only people who matter politically are SF voters and they knew all this already.

    The problem is applying normal logic to an abnormal situation. If, for example, a peace process was battered out in Palestine and after a while the Hamas party leader was exposed as having potentially killed an innocent Israeli in the past what impact would it have? The average Palestinian knows that this Hamas leader killed people, they knew it before they voted for him so why would it matter afterwards? It might be news to the Israelis but then they’re not voting for the Palestinian so, politically speaking, who cares?

    This is the primary difference between Peter and Gerry’s positions. Gerry’s position, more or less was known a long time ago to his voters. Peter’s voters are only beginning to learn about these potentially damaging property deals, and worse the high and mighty judgemental Christian guff they were spewing just last year makes it all the more damaging due to the addition of hypocrisy to the mix.

  • PJM

    To expand on Neil’s post. All of us who opposed SF and supported the GFA did so accepting that it meant that IRA leaders would be in government. I am annoyed that Adams treats us like fools but had I wanted him to be tried for war crimes I would have had to oppose the agreement. OTOH, I also (as a non-Unionist) had to accept that Robinson could be in government regardless of his past attitude to my country.

    The GFA does not affect the proper conduct of politicians or their fitness to govern. Having seen down south what government by people who are too close to developers I don’t want the same up here and oppose Robinson for that reason. One is a question of the old dispensation but the Robinson scandal affects the new one instead.

  • Neil,

    Whilst I might wholeheartedly agree with you on the relative positions of Gerry and Peter, the fact that Gerry’s past be so well known and accepted “locally” makes his continued denial all the more puzzling and damaging, for it does suggest that there are indeed skeletons in the cupboard which his loyal followers will not be able to accept and that points to him being … well I think that is quite enough of that for now for anything else would be pure speculation and educated guessing?

    But what the people need now is postmodern civil leadership and Gerry is no leader, and that he has in common with Peter, who also lacks it in spades.

  • Henry94

    amanfromMars

    But what the people need now is postmodern civil leadership

    I’m sure people would vote for it if they felt the need for it. I think that what people want is leaders who are tough enough to see this process through. Would you fancy a postmodern civil leadership to take on the dissidents at street level.

    Someday you might be right but we are far from out of the woods yet.

  • [quote][i]Someday you might be right but we are far from out of the woods yet.[/i] …. Posted by Henry94 on Apr 06, 2010 @ 06:14 PM

    Henry94,

    There is the IT Hardware and Software and Virtual Architecture already in Place, and Indispensable to the System and its Feeder Systems, and the Programmers to Use and/or Abuse it to Crash the Global Economy or Hold the World to Ransom, and you think that IT couldn’t deliver a Better Beta Society [for something Novel and Different is Definitely Postmodern] to the Troubled Folk on a little sliver of land floating in the Atlantic Ocean?

    Get Real……. and stop hiding in the woods.

    [quote][i] Would you fancy a postmodern civil leadership to take on the dissidents at street level. [/i][/quote]

    Yes, I would, but much more to the point is that they would too whenever they realise that everything will be completely different and better.

  • Michaelhenry

    like all people who are in the right martin and gerry keep calm and talk the talk,but when you are in the wrong like peter you will lose your rag because he can no longer bluff the bluff.

  • Mick,

    “One, is why on earth the second President Bush would disturb his rather sleepy retirement to pursuade Reg Empey to vote with the DUP on a Policing and Justice Bill that they were provided no access to before its provisions were agreed on by the parties inside the semi detached polit-bureau in Stormont Castle?”

    If only you had listened to the once handsome, and dashing but now unfortunately deceased MrWhatDoneIt who painstakingly took yourself and Pete B. through what was going on with the politics of the transfer of Police and Justice many, many times.

    so once more… the realpolitik of the issue was not about ‘false’ deadlines or crises but the 3 governments ensuring that transfer of police as the last piece in the peace process jigsaw fell into place and if that meant that some cowboy had to climb out of his retirement bunk to make a few phone calls to some anti-agreement Unionist who was trying to preted he didnt know what was going on – then it was always going to be done.

    The only puzzle here is how you and Pete B. didnt twig what was going on many moons ago.

    Protocol warning: Please adjust your mindset
    For those of a particulalry tribal and/or sensitive disposition and those unable to judge an arguement on it’s merits please be aware that the term Unionist in my name is not an entrirely accurate reflection of my political views though it should also be noted that my paternal grandfather was a keen supporter of the Union and I am invoking the FIFA grandparent rule and am opting to call myself so. (I’m sure he would have approved.)

  • andnowwhat

    What’s more damaging for NI? A minister (believe me, I am far from defending this ignorant, arrogant, deluded meglamaniac) who is too close to developers or a press (as we have seen) that is too close to ministers?

  • andnowwhat

    Oh, I forgot to mention public cuchold re, Peter.

    Could be worse, he could by definition be an international terrorist who invaded a foreign (by his own fedinition) country

  • Comrade Stalin

    MU,

    Are you aware that when Bush made his intervention, that he wasn’t the President anymore and hence it was not a government intervention ?

    Are you also aware that the intervention was restricted to the Ulster Unionists – who ignored it ?

    Devolution of policing and justice powers was always going to happen. It got a bit of a kick up the backside in the earlier part of this year, because the Iris Robinson matter changed the whole boardgame and gave Sinn Fein a tactical advantage that they did not have up until that point.

  • Framer

    Bush rang Empey because Washington advised by Woodward asked him to.

    They did not know or probably care that Mandelson had dreamt it all up to undermine Cameron.

    Bush oddly was excused from the usual bitter criticism because the political victim was a unionist. Ergo…

  • Mick Fealty

    Now that accords with some of the stuff I’ve been hearing Framer…