End Internment Now March


  1. Sadly we have returned to the old days of 9th Aug 1971, you may ask the question , "WHY".

    This is the answer.

    Why has the weston park accord (20) not been implimented?.
    This is the initial paragraph 20 weston park accord.

    20. Both Governments also recognise that there is an issue to be
    addressed, with the completion of the early release scheme, about
    supporters of organisations now on cease-fire against whom there are
    outstanding prosecutions, and in some cases extradition proceedings, for
    offences committed before 10 April 1998. Such people would, if convicted,
    stand to benefit from the early release scheme. The Governments accept
    that it would be a natural development of the scheme for such prosecutions
    not to be pursued and will as soon as possible, and in any event before the
    end of the year, take such steps as are necessary in their jurisdictions to
    resolve this difficulty so that those concerned are no longer pursued.

    This is why.

    GFA Weston Park Accord (20)

    Le gach deá ghuí,
    Question No. 127
    Parliamentary Question - Dept Details

    To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the reason he is not pressing that an agreement made between the Irish Government and the British Government be implemented in full, and that as agreed at Weston Park that no further prosecutions and consequently prison sentences will be imposed on those who committed offences before 10 April 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

    Éamon Ó Cuív.

    For WRITTEN answer on Tuesday, 28th February, 2012.
    Ref No: 10899/12


    Proposed draft legislation by the British Government to deal with this specific issue as referred to in paragraph 20 of the Weston Park accord was formally withdrawn by the then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Peter Hain MP, on 11 January 2006. The draft legislation, the Northern Ireland (Offences) Bill, had been opposed by the majority of the Northern Ireland Assembly parties and the Secretary of State was compelled to withdraw the legislation when the only supporting party, Sinn Féin, could not accept certain aspects of the proposed legislation. As the Government was committed to introduce proposals only in tandem with the British government and in accordance with the consensus of the democratically elected Assembly parties, the withdrawal of the Bill meant that the proposals for dealing with the matter in this jurisdiction were also withdrawn.

    SF should have read this sentence before signing up to the GFA.

    "only in tandem with the British government and in accordance with the consensus of the democratically elected Assembly parties".

    Loyalist outvoted it, just like everything within that so called house on the hill, The puppets will never change, they are "Staters"

  2. itsjustmacker

    SF don't have policy or strategy they have jobs. They hope 'their' people wont be pursued and are indifferent if attention falls on others. They only spit the dummy out if a shiner gets pulled in.

    Not much use as representatives. More self-servers.

  3. itsjustmacker-

    Good to see the dissos going to the PSNI with their 28 day notice for this march-and good luck to them-the irony would drown a person-

  4. Larry.

    I know, they think off nobody but themselves.



    Do you really think they are that stupid to march without notifying anyone, they would all be lifted and you and the rest of your cronies would be gleefully laughing.
    I forget how many times I have ask you this question, so here it is again, What was it that SF disagreed with re Para 20 of the weston park accord?.

    Lets see if you have any balls and reply with a logical answer, or , is that possible to get one from SF and its pro treaty supporters? , or, make a comment when replying to a poster which relates to the subject of the post.

  5. itsjustmcker

    go easy on MH them SF boys ride every horse in the race, he may need to take time to check where he is at exactly.

  6. itsjustmacker-

    " Do you really think they are that stupid to march without notifying anyone "

    The PSNI is anyone now-

    I do think they are that stupid because that's the way they have held marches for years-the 1916 Societies still don't give the PSNI
    any notification for their marches-are you calling them stupid-Duh-

  7. Larry:

    lol, I like that one, MH is first and last and riding the same horse.


    No Comment Officer!!!!!!!!!!.

  8. michaelhenry:

    "the 1916 Societies still don't give the PSNI
    any notification for their marches-are you calling them stupid-Duh-"

    Oh, your on about the we 6c BRITISH 1916 societies then, those societies set up by SF to oust a top SF leader who stuck to his principals and the declaration of independence , seems your lot have all the same double lined pockets in case the Queens Shilling would make a hole in them and you would end up skint!.

  9. Just a thought after reviewing the loyalist response to the 'LEGAL' internment march held yesterday.

    Will those loyalists who blocked Royal Avenue and stopped the 'LEGAL' march from proceeding now face arrest and prosecution?

    When protestors blocked the road at Ardoyne in 2010 and halted an Orange parade eight of them were fined £400 for blocking a main road. When they appealed their sentence the presiding Judge, Judge Rodgers upheld the convictions, he stated: "They could have applied to the Parades Commission for permission to protest and done so legitimately and subject to any restrictions placed on them.

    "Alternatively, they could have carried out an unregulated parade which did not involve blocking the highway and preventing its legitimate use."

    On UTV a few nights ago Nelson MCCausland stated 'Is it sensible, is it wise is, it right, that such people should be taking to the streets of Belfast with the endorsement of the parades commision, I think this is an affront to decency, and will apall decent people right across this province'.http://www.u.tv/news/Calls-for-calm-before-internment-rally/3af89757-d301-4da8-9c50-51dbc2cede31
    So what Mr McCausland is saying that 'such people' i.e. citizens, taking part in a 'Legal' parade shoudl be denied their democratic right. Considering not too long ago Good Ol Nelson said ' The right of protest, peaceful protest,the sort of protest the orange order has advocated, and has called for, the right of peaceful protest is fundamental in any democratic society...' Nelson also went on to say 'But we should never stop decent law abiding people having the right of freedom of assembly and freedom to dissent'.

    So the questions must be asked of Nelson, is he stating those who participated in the anti internment march are not decent law abiding people? If he is can he provide proof? Or is Nelson rally saying this is is not a democratic society and the rule of law does not apply unless you're weilding a cermonial sword?