Slugger O'Toole Notes on Northern Ireland politics and culture Slugger O'Toole Notes on Northern Ireland politics and culture

You are here
Home | Government | violence does not pay..


Next or Previous
« Slow blogging... | Main | "aggressive and arrogant" »




SOS - Save Our Slugger!

Help fund Slugger's new software:

Or mail it direct to Slugger!



violence does not pay..
According to Peter Hain, that is.. After months, and months, and months, of dithering, Secretary of State Peter Hain has formally [eventually? - Ed] accepted that the UVF ceasefire is non-existent, a move he described last week as a quick procedural fix.. of course, it would be more than procedural if it was followed up by arrests and charges against members of said specified organisations.. but that would require Peter Hain et al to be on the side of law and order.. ANYway.. he has a dinner to attend.. In the meantime his "door is open to loyalist representatives to find out what their agenda is".. sheesh. Update Sort of.. Here's Peter Hain's statement

Comments (11)

"ANYway.. he has a dinner to attend."

Bon appetit, Peter. You're aware at any rate that the inner man is always more important than the dead one.

Posted by: Denny Boy at September 14, 2005 11:20 AM


Gosh Peter - the iron fist of British rule has been revealed!

Hain makes Roy Mason look like John Inman. Not.

Posted by: Deaglan at September 14, 2005 11:26 AM


Er, what's the significance of the UVF having their ceasefire declared over?

Posted by: smcgiff at September 14, 2005 11:55 AM


For the UVF, I mean.

Posted by: smcgiff at September 14, 2005 12:00 PM


What was the delay? How exactly did the violence of the UVF over the past number of weeks constitute being on ceasefire? Anyway, does he think they'll actually care if they've been specified anyway? It's not as if they generally care anyway about maintaining 'the Queen's law'.

Posted by: El Matador @ El Blogador at September 14, 2005 12:00 PM


Interesting to see Pete talking about the United Volunteer Force on GMTV on Monday morning. It's good to see that he's earning his money, I mean, if I had his job, I wouldn't learn what UVF stood for either. He's another w*n*er that doesn't care at all.

Posted by: nmc at September 14, 2005 12:45 PM


I think you mean Peter and not Pete! :-O

Although if you've more information when love to hear it!!!

Posted by: smcgiff at September 14, 2005 01:14 PM


surely the implication of the ceasefire being declared over is that those uvf prisoners that were released under the terms of the agreement are locked up again under the terms of the agreement. is this not the case?

Posted by: wha? at September 14, 2005 09:27 PM


"surely the implication of the ceasefire being declared over is that those uvf prisoners that were released under the terms of the agreement are locked up again under the terms of the agreement. is this not the case?"

Actually wha?, believe it or not it doesn't. I had a look on lawtel today to find out what other orders in council had been made specifying groups and the most recent one of 2004 (can't remember the SI number) in its explanatory memoranda stated that former prisoners "may be liable" to having their licences revoked. I didn't have enough time to check the primary legislation but I think it relates to becoming involved with that proscribed organisation again

Posted by: curious at September 14, 2005 10:20 PM


Not that I have much sympathy for westminster ministers in whatever colonial office, they are generally fooked here. The nationalist/republican side what rid of them, meanwhile the loyal Queen's subjects seem to detest Her Majesties Government more and more day-by-day. Makes me wonder what idea of British statehood they are hanging on to...?

Posted by: looking in at September 14, 2005 11:22 PM


wha

"surely the implication of the ceasefire being declared over is that those uvf prisoners that were released under the terms of the agreement are locked up again under the terms of the agreement. is this not the case?"

Could you vote in NI in 1998? If you could did you vote for the Belfast Agreement? Did you read what you voted for? Did you understand the prisoner release provisions? There were enough people warning of the one way street of concessions to criminals back then. Perhaps you should have listened.

Posted by: pakman at September 15, 2005 09:49 AM



NOTE: When adding hyperlinks, please follow this format:
<a href="(URL)">hyperlink</a>
It is important that you include http:// when adding the URL.

Slugger O'Toole records news, commentary and diverse opinion on Northern Ireland.

Produced by Mick Fealty
Designed by River Path

News, tips or crits here: mick.fealty -at- gmail.com
(change "-at-" to "@")

Commenting Policy


Topics
a long peace?
books
Britain
Conflict
Culture
Economy
Education
election 2003
Election 2005
Enviroment
environment
Europe
Gaeilge
Glossary
Government
Highlights
Human Rights
Humour
International
Manifesto
Media
Nationalism
Negotiations
Parties
Policing
Soapbox
Society
Sport
the south
unionism

Highlights
Out with the crystal ball...
Just a Mo...
Commenting Policy
A backgrounder on the McCartney affair
Northern Bank raid and political fallout, so far

Readers comments
More corrupt than last year? - (4)
Living on an island or in a state? - (31)
a combination of historical ignorance and monumental self-pity - (42)
Payout time... - (4)
New Lansdowne revealed - (24)
Far right 'imagination'... - (13)
Nazi comments were a sectarian slur - (3)
The price of peacemaking... - (17)
belfast metropolitan area plan unveiled - (23)
Why (or rather how) Alec Reid was right... - (37)


Archives
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
July 2004
March 2004
October 2003
September 2003
May 2003



Design: River Path Associates Comments: Big Blog Co Powered: Movable Type 3.15 Copyright © 2003 Sluggerotoole.com All rights reserved.