Happyman42 wrote: » The PSNI haven't dismissed it or can, until complaint has been processed. Alastair, as usual, is assuming on behalf of 'everyone else'.
Under the Patten architecture, to which all political parties have signed up, there are numerous ways in which policing concerns can be addressed, notably through the independent Police Ombudsman, Policing Board or Human Rights Commissioner. As such, questioning the motivation or impartiality of police officers tasked with investigating serious crime in this very public, generalised and vague manner, is both unfair and inappropriate. It would have been wrong to treat Mr Adams any differently to other citizens. The arrest and questioning of Mr Adams was legitimate and lawful and an independent judge subsequently decided that there were grounds for further detention. Prosecutorial decisions will also be made independently by the PPS.
maccored wrote: » Its quite obvious the questioning was at the very very least, suspiciously timed. I would say its political policing as the timing wasnt accidental. Purely 'imo' mind you.
alastair wrote: » Matt Baggott, Chief Constable PSNI
alastair wrote: » When was he on the run? None of the above removes from the reality of his membership of the IRA.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » I've even heard it from SF supporters, how everyone including SF members know it, but it has to be denied for political reasons. If it is ever proven in court, the SF script will shift immediately to "everyone always knew that!".
alastair wrote: » It's certainly not factually incorrect - see below: Adams was implicated in the killing by two IRA veterans who gave taped interviews to researchers for a Boston College history archive http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/world/story/1.2627546 Republicans interviewed as part of the oral history project had implicated Gerry Adams in the murder of Ms McConville, who was dragged “squealing” from her home in front of her children in December 1972 and was never seen alive again. http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/shadow-of-jean-mcconville-murder-still-hangs-over-gerry-adams-and-sinn-fein-30244125.html Participants in the BC project have implicated Adams in the killing: Brendan Hughes, a legendary IRA volunteer who fell out with Adams over the latter’s peace strategy that included compromising on long-standing republican ideals; and Dolours Price, one of the highest-profile female members of the Provisional IRA, who said that Adams ordered her to drive McConville to her IRA executioners. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/04/30/sinn-fein-leader-gerry-adams-arrested-connection-with-ira-murder/xUrADTJZCIhQMZSExLiAlM/story.html
Adams was implicated in the killing by two IRA veterans who gave taped interviews to researchers for a Boston College history archive
Republicans interviewed as part of the oral history project had implicated Gerry Adams in the murder of Ms McConville, who was dragged “squealing” from her home in front of her children in December 1972 and was never seen alive again.
Participants in the BC project have implicated Adams in the killing: Brendan Hughes, a legendary IRA volunteer who fell out with Adams over the latter’s peace strategy that included compromising on long-standing republican ideals; and Dolours Price, one of the highest-profile female members of the Provisional IRA, who said that Adams ordered her to drive McConville to her IRA executioners.
crusher000 wrote: » I was being sarcastic when I said on the run. Lowest form of wit. Still elected to three different parliments. How does that happen in a democracy ?. Oh yes people voted for him so dispite all the claims rightly or wrongly about his past he still has support. And we're not talking in the 100's bot the 1000's.
Happyman42 wrote: » Again Alastair lies and distorts the truth. Matt Baggot said that in response to Martin McGuinness's statement NOT in response to an official complaint by Adams himself. Official complaints that still have to be adjudicated on.http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-27296208
alastair wrote: » That's PSNI dismissing the whole 'political policing' straw man. Adam's complaint is nothing to do with supposed 'political policing' - he's taken exception to some of the questions he was asked, but hasn't specified why exactly. I'm sure the police ombudsman will give it all the consideration it deserves. :rolleyes:
Happyman42 wrote: » And nobody in the PSNI has commented on the complaints, despite you trying infer that they did. Just keeping you honest.
alastair wrote: » The complaint has nothing to do with the claim of 'political policing'. Everyone has indeed dismissed that claim for the bluster it was. Which is what was uner discussion. Just keeping you on topic.
Dan_Solo wrote: » You're using he royal we again others alastair. Can we ask yet again who exactly are these "everyone"?
Dan_Solo wrote: » @Alastair Yes, you have used the royal we when you really mean just you.
Dan_Solo wrote: » His isn't surprising after your confused usage of "strawman" earlier.
Dan_Solo wrote: » Now, could you list this "everyone" who has completely dismissed Adams' claims of political policing with the traditional evidence (try to avoid twitter feed nonsense please) to back it up?
Dan_Solo wrote: » Alright alright we get it. Not the slightest whiff of evidence to back up your "everyone" nonsense. You could have just said so instead of going off on one.
Dan_Solo wrote: » @Alastair You've posted one or two links to the usual suspects. It's quite predictable that this counts as "everyone" to you.
alastair wrote: » Again - you're not too hot on reading what I've actually written. I provided no links to anyone - 'usual suspects' or otherwise - I gave you a list of those that have dismissed the claim. As a special bonus I even gave you one name to kick your list off. And yet I'm not actually seeing a list from you? What's that all about?
Dan_Solo wrote: » What's that about? It's about your trifling list not being worth the pixels they're printed on from the auto-condemn brigade. Did you really link to a dismissal from EVERY political party and EVERY commentator? Wow. Must have been a long list. Funny I can't find it anywhere.
alastair wrote: » So, your list of those supporting the SF claim?
Dan_Solo wrote: » I never claimed to have a list. YOU claimed "everybody" had dismissed the claim. You are now oh so predictably looking for some other list as a sad bit of whataboutery when you were called out on your bluster and have zero to back it up.
alastair wrote: » Everyone has indeed dismissed that claim
Dan_Solo wrote: » Just in case you forgot what you said alastair. Hey, why don't you ask me to hop on one foot or say a tonguetwister as some sort of counterclaim so everybody might forget you said this and have failed miserably to back it up?
alastair wrote: » I've backed up my comment by listing those that dismissed the accusation. It's essentially everyone but the Shinners and their coat-trailers. Now if you want to be pedantic, I'm happy to admit that there's quite a few people oblivious to the whole issue, to Adams, and to Ireland, but within those involved in NI, the consensus outside SF is that their accusation just doesn't hold water.
alastair wrote: » The complaint has nothing to do with the claim of 'political policing'. Everyone has indeed dismissed that claim for the bluster it was. Which is what was under discussion. Just keeping you on topic.
Dan_Solo wrote: » It'd be amazing if you found anybody who didn't have something to gain from dismissing SF's claims of police bias, wouldn't it? So by "everyone" you really do just mean "you and the usual suspects". Sorry about that.
Happyman42 wrote: » Could you post a link to his two complaints please? I didn't realise they were in the public domain, but you seem to be familiar with them...or are you bluffing again?
