Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[vallankumous]

Totally agree give her dixi. Sinn Fein died with Ruairí Ó Brádaigh. The party now is most unrecognisable and are surviving on reputation. I noticed where I come from they have lost large swaths of support.

Everyone knows they are not the same as the 80s. It's no secret and not unusal. The problem is while SF evolved into something different their detractors stayed the same/ demand the same/ or accuse them of being the same. All nonsense. Their should be a goodwin's Theory for all SF related topics.

[ashman]

I don't understand why the f**k Sinn Fein needed to get involved in it. It was obviously a DUP plant feeding the info to wee Jamie why couldn't they just let him get on with it?

Also what the f**k is the chair of the committee doing coaching a witness to the committee. For a party not known to make mistakes on this scale it's a huge f**king blunder and blows the whole NAMA story on to Sinn Fein instead of the DUP where it should be!

His "coaching" amounted to:

"What should tick the box of the committee for public session in terms of your response and I will be saying this to other witnesses ..."
and
"Send me a draft of the letter you are sending. Keen to get you into public session."

He presumably resigned because it was made clear that he shouldn't have had any contact with him. Daithi foolishly thought that as he would say the same to others it was okay to have some informal contact.

Ulick

Do you really expect us to believe this ??

[ashman]

Why did the MLA resign if they are disclosing stuff that is in the public interest

[Ulick]

I don't understand why the f**k Sinn Fein needed to get involved in it. It was obviously a DUP plant feeding the info to wee Jamie why couldn't they just let him get on with it?

Also what the f**k is the chair of the committee doing coaching a witness to the committee. For a party not known to make mistakes on this scale it's a huge f**king blunder and blows the whole NAMA story on to Sinn Fein instead of the DUP where it should be!

His "coaching" amounted to:

"What should tick the box of the committee for public session in terms of your response and I will be saying this to other witnesses ..."
and
"Send me a draft of the letter you are sending. Keen to get you into public session."

He presumably resigned because it was made clear that he shouldn't have had any contact with him. Daithi foolishly thought that as he would say the same to others it was okay to have some informal contact.

Ulick

Do you really expect us to believe this ??

Well that's what was on the front page of the Irish News this morning.

[StephenC]

Jamie spoke to someone from SF? 

[Ulick]

Why did the MLA resign if they are disclosing stuff that is in the public interest

He was Chair of the committee and all contact with witnesses is supposed to go through the civil servants. He foolishly thought he could use Twitter to do what the others do over lunch in the Culloden.

[ashman]

Why did the MLA resign if they are disclosing stuff that is in the public interest

He was Chair of the committee and all contact with witnesses is supposed to go through the civil servants. He foolishly thought he could use Twitter to do what the others do over lunch in the Culloden.

Right , tuigim anois .   What is the Culloden ?

[Rois]

After the initial advice, he told Bryson to get in touch with another SF guy, O'Hara, who took on the coaching role.

I personally don't care if he was coaching him to get the truth out about Peter Robinson.  Substance over form for me - was Bryson telling the truth about Peter and did he do so in a way that got the information out (that we might otherwise not have heard about if the committee stopped Bryson at the start of his evidence)?  If the answer is yes, then the ends justifies the means for me.

Bryson's done himself more damage in the loyalist community by befriending SF!

[screenexile]

After the initial advice, he told Bryson to get in touch with another SF guy, O'Hara, who took on the coaching role.

I personally don't care if he was coaching him to get the truth out about Peter Robinson.  Substance over form for me - was Bryson telling the truth about Peter and did he do so in a way that got the information out (that we might otherwise not have heard about if the committee stopped Bryson at the start of his evidence)?  If the answer is yes, then the ends justifies the means for me.

Bryson's done himself more damage in the loyalist community by befriending SF!

Don't get me wrong I agree with what you're saying but when you're the Chair of a Ministerial committee and act incorrectly you deserve all you get.

SF apologist/cheerleader Ulick is using words like foolish, innocuous, informal contact. . . Not exactly things you expect from the Chair or a committee. He deserves all he gets the only problem now is there is zero chance the higher ups didn't know about this so who will be thrown under the bus next!!

[ashman]

This shows again that in the main politicians having equities are in the main show trials where most of them are pitching with next election in mind .  What is needed in these issues are forensic accountants and lawyers .

[Ulick]

Why did the MLA resign if they are disclosing stuff that is in the public interest

He was Chair of the committee and all contact with witnesses is supposed to go through the civil servants. He foolishly thought he could use Twitter to do what the others do over lunch in the Culloden.

Right , tuigim anois .   What is the Culloden ?

Hotel in Holywood across the road from MI5 headquarters. Favoured watering hole for spooks, Unionist politicians, financial types & senior civil servants.

[Ulick]

Don't get me wrong I agree with what you're saying but when you're the Chair of a Ministerial committee and act incorrectly you deserve all you get.

SF apologist/cheerleader Ulick is using words like foolish, innocuous, informal contact. . . Not exactly things you expect from the Chair or a committee. He deserves all he gets the only problem now is there is zero chance the higher ups didn't know about this so who will be thrown under the bus next!!

So you obviously have evidence of a grand conspiracy the screenexile?

... and out of curiosity what exactly is so wrong with a committee witness being prepared before giving evidence?

[JohnDenver]

If he was in the DUP he'd be in line for promotion at this stage

[screenexile]

Don't get me wrong I agree with what you're saying but when you're the Chair of a Ministerial committee and act incorrectly you deserve all you get.

SF apologist/cheerleader Ulick is using words like foolish, innocuous, informal contact. . . Not exactly things you expect from the Chair or a committee. He deserves all he gets the only problem now is there is zero chance the higher ups didn't know about this so who will be thrown under the bus next!!

So you obviously have evidence of a grand conspiracy the screenexile?

... and out of curiosity what exactly is so wrong with a committee witness being prepared before giving evidence?

Nothing as long as the coach isn't the Chairperson of said f**king committee!!!

EDIT: Obviously Daithi knows something you don't as he's just apologised for it.

[Ulick]

Don't get me wrong I agree with what you're saying but when you're the Chair of a Ministerial committee and act incorrectly you deserve all you get.

SF apologist/cheerleader Ulick is using words like foolish, innocuous, informal contact. . . Not exactly things you expect from the Chair or a committee. He deserves all he gets the only problem now is there is zero chance the higher ups didn't know about this so who will be thrown under the bus next!!

So you obviously have evidence of a grand conspiracy the screenexile?

... and out of curiosity what exactly is so wrong with a committee witness being prepared before giving evidence?

Nothing as long as the coach isn't the Chairperson of said f**king committee!!!

EDIT: Obviously Daithi knows something you don't as he's just apologised for it.

Firstly I didn't say Daithi didn't do anything wrong or shouldn't resign etc... so you made all that bollocks up.

So anyway in your opinion, what exactly is so wrong with a committee witness being prepared before giving evidence (by the Chair or anyone else)?