» Tuesday, February 1, 2005Northern Ireland
Asked about the outcome between the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach had just held a joint doorstep. To summarise the points, they had a briefing from the Chief Constable and his opposite number in Dublin, the Garda Commissioner. As a result of that briefing they were in no doubt as at all that the IRA had been responsible for the bank robbery last year. The Prime Minister stated that, in his view, IRA activity was now the sole obstacle to progress. Therefore what was needed was a clear move on the part of the IRA to cease all paramilitary and criminal activity. The Prime Minister and Taoiseach’s precise words could be found on the newswires. Asked about Peter Robinson’s proposal to revive the Northern Ireland Assembly but not the Executive, the PMOS said that was a DUP proposal and no doubt all the parties would put forward their views. Unfortunately it may come as a shock to some people to discover that there was a tendency for individual party’s proposals to contradict each other. Therefore it was difficult to find a way forward. As the Prime Minister had said, the best way to move forward would be to find an exclusive way forward, which included Republicans, because anything other than that would have difficulties. But had also made it clear in the House of Commons last week that if the IRA would not cease criminal activity then we would have to look at the implications of that and that meant all parties examining those implications. But let us see where we got to. Briefing took place at 15:45 | Search for related news Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says. |
The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...
Search
Supported byRecent Briefings
Archives
LinksSyndicate (RSS/XML)CreditsEnquiriesContact Sam Smith. |
I seem to remember the PM being briefed by the head of SIS on the absolute certainty of WMD existing in Iraq; the information was so hot off the press and so dynamite that he had to drop what he was doing and do a runner over to Downing Street. It turned out to be wrong – even though to this day I don’t recall hearing that kind of acknowledgement from the horses head, sorry, mouth. I mean, in front of 4 separate enquiries and committees, no-one in the cabinet all the way up to Bliar thought to volunteer that they KNEW that information was discredited at source. He also lied about Iraq trying to obtain nuclear material from Niger; when THAT information was discredited he lied about its source, and said he had ANOTHER source – which was also eventually discredited.
Why then, should we believe him when he says he is in no doubt about something? Regardless of who has told him what? Because of his past record as regards honesty with the country in general, every time he says he has no doubt, I instantly find myself looking for other angles, other possible scenarios. There are plenty as regards this particular issue; it’s not beyond the bounds of credibility that the raid was carried out by others in order to blame the IRA. I’m not saying that was the case; merely just the fact that it’s Tony Bliar saying "I have no doubt" which instantly raises my antennae.
Comment by PapaLazzzaru — 3 Feb 2005 on 1:59 am | LinkHorse’s Head? – Wrong end of the spinal column, I think. But it is true, unfortunately, that Blair never has any doubts about anything.
It’s the absolute conviction that is so worrying. They all seem to have a crazed evangelism about their ‘mission’, whatever it may be. None ever admits to failure or uncertainty.
Lemmings come to mind.
Comment by Chuck Unsworth — 3 Feb 2005 on 5:16 pm | Linkarrest someone
charge them
convict them
THEN
if they are IRA there may be a link
otherwise demand that both parties get on with the negotiations.
Come on Tony it isn’t rocket science
If you are in doubt ask your wife – she still understands the law.
Comment by Roger Huffadine — 3 Feb 2005 on 9:52 pm | Link