Expect trouble: MI5 take over 'security' in NI

[infamous-el-guapo]

[quote=PatMcL]

I just want to thank Sinn Fein personally for effectively giving MI5 a free reign in the North.

The SDLP wanted all security action to be accountable to the Police Ombudsman but oh no, their stupid Brits Out mentality has blinded them to the reality of a situation. Again.

Seriously, well done

If you believe for one second that the British Government would have surrendered accountability for Mi5 at the behest of SF , the SDLP or any other party other than themselves then you are seriously deluded.

Maybe it was unachievable but that doesn't make it ok to bow down before HRH and pass it off as a victory.

That post clearly contradicts your earlier post where you absurdly blame SF for the decision by the British. Gesture politics are clearly transparnet and i suspect the SDLP know that, quite clearly the electorate do.[/quote:1lxo2udt]

No if the provos are going to take this situation and pass it off as a victory, as something they wanted from the start of the negotiations then they deserve to be blamed for it. It's not gesture politics to strive for something you might not be able to achieve, it's about having principles, it's about doing what you believe is right regardless of the outcome.

[PatMcL]

[quote=infamous-el-guapo][quote=PatMcL]

I just want to thank Sinn Fein personally for effectively giving MI5 a free reign in the North.

The SDLP wanted all security action to be accountable to the Police Ombudsman but oh no, their stupid Brits Out mentality has blinded them to the reality of a situation. Again.

Seriously, well done

If you believe for one second that the British Government would have surrendered accountability for Mi5 at the behest of SF , the SDLP or any other party other than themselves then you are seriously deluded.

Maybe it was unachievable but that doesn't make it ok to bow down before HRH and pass it off as a victory.

That post clearly contradicts your earlier post where you absurdly blame SF for the decision by the British. Gesture politics are clearly transparnet and i suspect the SDLP know that, quite clearly the electorate do.[/quote:3uypf2g1]

No if the provos are going to take this situation and pass it off as a victory, as something they wanted from the start of the negotiations then they deserve to be blamed for it. It's not gesture politics to strive for something you might not be able to achieve, it's about having principles, it's about doing what you believe is right regardless of the outcome.[/quote:3uypf2g1]

The Stoops, as you have clearly admitted, made a song and dance about MI5 accountability which you have now admitted was unachievable. The Stoops wanted to attach MI5 accountability to that of the PSNI. Given the nature of Mi5 unaccountability it was clearly a cloak that the more secretive elements of the PSNI would have taken advantage of. So for the the Stoops the principle is giving the PSNI a get out clause, some principle.
I know people like Eddie Mc Grady congratulated the RUC when they killed republicans but giving the PSNI a blank cheque is reprehensible. It is absolutely clear why the electorate reject the Stoops in ever increasing numbers, they cannot be trusted on anything.

[infamous-el-guapo]

[quote=PatMcL][quote=infamous-el-guapo]

I just want to thank Sinn Fein personally for effectively giving MI5 a free reign in the North.

The SDLP wanted all security action to be accountable to the Police Ombudsman but oh no, their stupid Brits Out mentality has blinded them to the reality of a situation. Again.

Seriously, well done

If you believe for one second that the British Government would have surrendered accountability for Mi5 at the behest of SF , the SDLP or any other party other than themselves then you are seriously deluded.

Maybe it was unachievable but that doesn't make it ok to bow down before HRH and pass it off as a victory.

That post clearly contradicts your earlier post where you absurdly blame SF for the decision by the British. Gesture politics are clearly transparnet and i suspect the SDLP know that, quite clearly the electorate do.

No if the provos are going to take this situation and pass it off as a victory, as something they wanted from the start of the negotiations then they deserve to be blamed for it. It's not gesture politics to strive for something you might not be able to achieve, it's about having principles, it's about doing what you believe is right regardless of the outcome.[/quote:1xs2hg9c]

The Stoops, as you have clearly admitted, made a song and dance about MI5 accountability which you have now admitted was unachievable. The Stoops wanted to attach MI5 accountability to that of the PSNI. Given the nature of Mi5 unaccountability it was clearly a cloak that the more secretive elements of the PSNI would have taken advantage of. So for the the Stoops the principle is giving the PSNI a get out clause, some principle.
I know people like Eddie Mc Grady congratulated the RUC when they killed republicans but giving the PSNI a blank cheque is reprehensible. It is absolutely clear why the electorate reject the Stoops in ever increasing numbers, they cannot be trusted on anything.[/quote:1xs2hg9c]

First of all i didn't say it was definitly unachievable i said maybe it was. I guess we'll never know because the provos either gave up on it or didn't understand what they were doing.

The SDLP can't be trusted? Are you being serious? We aren't the party that has taken all it's policies off another. Let's see what issues did the provos change their policies on because they saw that the SDLP was right:
Power Sharing
Decomissioning
Policing
Not Killing People

[raff]

We see bickering here between the supporters of the largest groups to (allegedly) represent Republicans and Nationalists. Surely it would fit you better if you were arguing some more 'unified' approach to this problem?

In the immediate aftermath of the Provo cessation the stoops were arguing for support for the RUC while PSF maintained at the very least the Patton recommendations be implemented, (even though they argued these were not stringent enough!). Now we see PSF support for the RUC even though 'Patton' has not been implemented and indeed greater control has gone, and been replaced by the talking shop DPP's.

Of course the usual Provo spin is in place 'we will make them accountable', we are forcing through change', etc, but the reality of the situation is that PSF constrained themselves through the accepting of GFA/StAA and had/have no option but to support the RUC. They will as infamous-el-guapo hinted claim this as a victory and continue their slow sell out of all their former Republican principles, and as such, have indeed done more to bring acceptability to the RUC than the stoops ever could and should be left to take the blame for this sorry mess.

[PatMcL]

We see bickering here between the supporters of the largest groups to (allegedly) represent Republicans and Nationalists. Surely it would fit you better if you were arguing some more 'unified' approach to this problem?

In the immediate aftermath of the Provo cessation the stoops were arguing for support for the RUC while PSF maintained at the very least the Patton recommendations be implemented, (even though they argued these were not stringent enough!). Now we see PSF support for the RUC even though 'Patton' has not been implemented and indeed greater control has gone, and been replaced by the talking shop DPP's.

Of course the usual Provo spin is in place 'we will make them accountable', we are forcing through change', etc, but the reality of the situation is that PSF constrained themselves through the accepting of GFA/StAA and had/have no option but to support the RUC. They will as infamous-el-guapo hinted claim this as a victory and continue their slow sell out of all their former Republican principles, and as such, have indeed done more to bring acceptability to the RUC than the stoops ever could and should be left to take the blame for this sorry mess.

First of all the RUC does not exist. Secondly if you like the Stoop on here believes that any Irish person will influence the British on how they operate their intelligence services then you are as big a fool as him.l

[raff]

First of all the RUC does not exist. Secondly if you like the Stoop on here believes that any Irish person will influence the British on how they operate their intelligence services then you are as big a fool as him.l

First of all Pat it's the Provos that are running around claiming that they will hold the RUC to account not me, nor any Irish man or woman that understands anything about the British rule in the 6 counties. I have heard a number of local PSF members tell me recently about holding the RUC to account I have read about members in Magherafelt and Omagh councils talk the same sh1te.

Now that thats sorted can you tell me the difference between a bar of Marathon and a bar of Snickers? They are the same but with different names. Considering that 'Patton' has not been implemented and that most of the 'PSNI' members are former RUC members one can only believe they are the same organisation.

As Provisional Sinn Féin used to be against British rule in Ireland now they support it and still claim to be the same organisation it should only stand to reason that the RUC who have changed less should be considered the same.