» Thursday, February 10, 2005

Northern Ireland

Asked about the Independent Monitoring Commission’s report and whether the un-named senior member of the IRA should be named, the PMOS said that this was a serious report. While it didn’t say anything which the Governments had not already said it should be taken with due seriousness by all involved. We could get into the Pantomime show of the UK, Dublin, the 2 Chief Constables and now the IMC all saying that the IRA did carry out the robbery and the IRA and Sinn Fein saying it didn’t, or we could approach this with the attitude of public opinion North and South of the border which was that the Northern Bank robbery had had serious implications for the Peace Process. It did mean that people had to think very seriously about those implications on both sides. People should approach this in that spirit. Above all this was a report coming from the Independent Monitoring Commission who’s raison deter was to give an objective analysis of what had happened, and that they had done.

Asked about naming of the senior member of Sinn Fein who knew about the robbery, the PMOS said that what the IMC did was a matter for them. It was our view, as we had said previously, that it was inconceivable, given the seriousness of the robbery, that senior members of Sinn Fein did not know about it.

Briefing took place at 15:45 | Search for related news


  1. "..It was our view, as we had said previously, that it was inconceivable, given the seriousness of the robbery, that senior members of Sinn Fein did not know about it…"

    It is my view that the time is long past for Tony to put up or shut up over this issue. arrest someone, charge them, convict them – and demonstrate that they are members of Sinn Fein.

    Alternatively one could also speculate that if the spooks are close enough to the IRA to ‘know’ that the robbery was going to be conducted by the IRA then the spooks should also have taken steps to stop the robbery. If they chose not to intervene to protect their ‘sources’ then they too are complicit, which makes the PM an accessory before the fact.

    Comment by Roger Huffadine — 11 Feb 2005 on 11:37 am | Link
  2. I seem to remember also that it was "palpably absurd" that there were no WMD in Iraq; then this palpable absurdity became reality and there WERE no WMD in Iraq.

    I also remember B.Liar swearing, hand on heart, that he knew nothing of what had gone on with David Kelly; another lie.

    Tony B.Liar is a proven liar, end of story. Why should we believe a single word he says, ever, on any subject? The man is a out and out charlatan who has broken promise after promise, and lied to the country with breathtaking regularity. Right Honourable?!?! Don’t make me puke!!! There isn’t a single Right Honourable among the whole sorry shower, and the least honourable of the lot is the man at the top.

    I could advance a handful of reasons why the security services should want to blame the IRA for this robbery, not least because any kind of conflict is big business and the UK arms industry is one of the worlds biggest. I’m not saying that IS the case, but the constant lies and dissembling by this government leaves one with no other option but to suspect some kind of self-serving shenanigans. As Roger says above, put up or shut up B.Liar (or more preferably, dissappear in a big puff of poisonous gas…)

    Comment by PapaLazzzaru — 11 Feb 2005 on 7:30 pm | Link
  3. The real situation was an attempt to bankrupt northern ireland and the society in the North and grab some monies for buying of weapons to arm or buy arms for groups who have no interest in seeing peace succeed. There may have been spooks who knew what was going to happen… who knows except the Government. But to say that the British Gov is responsible due to some pre-information is ridiculous as they didnt come up with the bank robbery plan in the first place. I remmber reading of an MI6 plan which involved sending robbers to rob banks in the republic and then blame the ira but his doesnt seem to have any benefit to the British Goverment! by my analysis anyhow. You have to ask yourself who needs this amount of money and what they want to use it for? Whether or not the PIRA had any connection… I think it was ex PIRA who defected to RIRA. But others may have better information than me… it just seems more logical.

    Comment by James Hernon — 18 Sep 2005 on 2:18 am | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)


This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Downing Street Says...

The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...


February 2005
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Jan   Mar »

Supported by


Disruptive Proactivity

Recent Briefings



Syndicate (RSS/XML)



Contact Sam Smith.

This site is powered by WordPress. Theme by Jag Singh