We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
UNIONISTS WANTED SINN Féin to be excluded from talks being carried out during a review of the Good Friday Agreement in 2004 after the attempted abduction of Bobby Tohill.
Tohill was a member of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and later the Irish National Liberation Army (INLA).
He was abducted from a bar in Belfast city centre on 20 February 2004 and driven away in a van which was then intercepted by police. He was badly beaten in the incident.
At the time, it was widely suspected that the men who abducted him were IRA members.
Four men were charged but, after being granted bail, went on the run. They were all caught years later and sent to jail, receiving sentences of up to eight years.
Tohill never testified against the men and asked a judge for leniency, saying they were his friends. Earlier this year, Tohill confirmed he likely only had a few months to live due to his deteriorating health.
In the days and weeks after his attempted abduction – long before the suspects were jailed – the incident was a major talking point in political meetings.
Previously confidential records, which were released this month as part of the State Papers, show that unionists were deeply unhappy with the situation.
On 24 February 2004, Irish and British officials met with several senior members of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) including Ian Paisley Sr, Ian Paisley Jr, Peter Robinson, Nigel Dodds and Jeffrey Donaldson.
At this 40-minute meeting, Paisley Sr said the DUP were greatly concerned by the events four days prior and wanted to know what both governments planned to do about it.
Then-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Paul Murphy confirmed that the PSNI’s Chief Constable Hugh Orde believed the incident was an IRA operation.
In May 2003, the Irish and British governments published the Joint Declaration which outlined steps needed to ensure the Good Friday Agreement would lead to lasting peace in the region.
Paragraph 13 states: “We need to see an immediate, full and permanent cessation of all paramilitary activity, including military attacks, training, targeting, intelligence gathering, acquisition or development of arms or weapons, other preparations for terrorist campaigns, punishment beatings and attacks and involvement in riots.”
Unionists viewed the attempted abduction of Tohill as a serious breach of this paragraph.
The DUP wanted Sinn Féin excluded from ongoing talks related to a review of the Good Friday Agreement. However, the record of the meeting notes that the review “was not a formal talks process” so “there was no means of exclusion”.
Both governments had referred the matter to the Independent Monitoring Commission (IMC), which was tasked with reporting on the activities of paramilitary groups in the North and operated from 2004 until 2011.
The internal document notes that the DUP delegation “was very dissatisfied with the Governments’ proposed course of action and the rest of the meeting was taken up with various DUP participants criticising the Governments”.
Murphy and Brian Cowen, then-Foreign Affairs Minister, defended their positions. The document continues:
Donaldson, Robinson, Dodds and Paisley Jr. were prominent in these sometimes animated exchanges.
“They argued that there was no role for the Independent Monitoring Commission in the current context. The Chief Constable had already clearly indicated what organisation was responsible.”
On the same day, 24 February, government officials also met with senior Sinn Féin members including Martin McGuinness.
A record of this meeting notes that McGuinness “began by saying he wished to object in the strongest possible terms at the way in which the PSNI handled the arrests on 20 February in Belfast and the subsequent comments of the Chief Constable over the weekend”.
The document adds that McGuinness “made no comment about IRA involvement” in the Tohill abduction.
He claimed the PSNI’s handling of the incident was “clearly part of a political agenda… to attack Sinn Féin”, adding that such “knee-jerk reactions” were very damaging to the party and its role in the peace process.
McGuinness is quoted as saying: “Announcing that the entire process is in a mess is not a good news story.”
He added that Sinn Féin had stated “its total and absolute commitment to exclusively democratic and peaceful means and its opposition to any use or threat of force on 21 October last, and had unequivocally restated its position many times since then”.
At a later meeting on 27 April 2004, Paisley Jr said the British and Irish governments had allowed “inclusivity to run amok” and “a window of opportunity would be lost if the Governments continued to play around by not confronting SF/IRA”.
“Paisley (Jr) added that inclusivity had failed; that was why the DUP was now in pole position within unionism. Inclusivity was preventing the process moving ahead without SF,” a document notes.
Murphy added that, in order to end paramilitarism, the governments needed to talk to all relevant parties.
Minister John O’Donoghue said the IMC report on the matter “was of immense importance”, adding that its “condemnatory tone had placed [Sinn Féin] under huge pressure in the South”.
According to the record of this meeting, Paisley Jr then “interjected to say that a great deal of the response to the IMC response was nauseating hypocrisy”. He is quoted as saying that people in the Republic were “not as sick of the paramilitaries as we are”.
O’Donoghue insisted there was now “an unprecedented widespread acknowledgement of the evil of the IRA and that the republican movement had come under enormous pressure”. He added that the criminal process would deal with those who allegedly were involved in the Tohill abduction.
Paisley Jr accused both governments of being “scared of the Provos”. He claimed that if loyalist paramilitaries had been involved in a similar incident, the governments “would have moved on without the DUP”.
His party “wanted to be part of the deal but the Governments could make that impossible if they insisted that SF must stay in, irrespective of what the republican movement did”, the file notes.
State Papers reference number: 2024/112/1
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Doesn’t matter the figures……had to be spent, a no brainer
Poor souls. Sounds like an awful death. They’re such smart and peaceful creatures too.
I was probably in the anti-zoo camp in my teens. But like so many things you understand the complexity and nuance of these things as you get older. The ethical zoos with good intentions (not the vulgar Pokémon collections of rare species) do amazing work. It’s all so relative. Ideally they live peacefully in the wild. But humans have an appalling record when it comes to mistreating animals. So captivity in safety, out of the way of trophy hunters and other rancid members of our species isn’t the worst scenario. We’re all hemmed in in some fashion no matter how much we rattle our cages.
Our own knuckle draggers are in the news this week. I do my best to keep the rage in check but I truly hate these people and wish nothing but the worst on them. Low lives you’d love to see stripped of their citizenship so that’s one less thing we are forced to have in common with them. Lowest of the low.
@SerotoninWars: very deep & thought provoking
@Kevvy kerrr: Thanks Kevvy :)
And in Ireland, we now accept halal, I do not hear any Irish animal welfare charities condemning such an atrocious and sickening practice. Of course not, in modern, diverse and tolerant Ireland, we must not offend, must be all equal, must conform, must stay quiet, must be criticised if you ask questions.
@Fintan Pox: says the FF fan boy
@Mick O’K: So you disagree?
@Fintan Pox: I agree Halal especially with the no-stun aspect is absolutely barbaric. You can throw Kosher in the mix too. I’ve read about and watched some harrowing scenes from the slaughter floors of both. When I was younger to be precise. I can’t stomach it anymore. That doesn’t give ‘our’ methods a pass at all with some of the most upsetting cruelty imaginable happening in these slaughterhouses.
I’m not saying for a second that this covers all Muslim’s (it’s the Guardian!) but it’s a bit of context to the wider debate. I’ve given up on us making many advances in my lifetime. You get worn down and reduced to the most marginal of gains. But for crying out loud, at least stun them! If your god requires this level of suffering, maybe it’s time to ask some questions. That goes for all of them.
The main thing for me is why on earth we are still at a stage where we feel the need to slit ANY creature’s throat and watch it bleed out, never mind with this additional level of cruelty in the mix.
The meat industry does its best to give its products cute fun names, especially in the fast food industry. It’s deliberate, of course. Just like so many things where severing the end product from the reality of how it got there, is paramount. There are a lot of people who would choose to eat something else if their colourful box of meat meant doing the slitting, chopping, beheading and bleeding out themselves. Only the most brutal horror flicks get anywhere near the shocking reality of the meat industry.
@SerotoninWars: don’t eat meat.
@offside again: I don’t! :)
@SerotoninWars: I’d never have guessed.
Animals like sheep would prefer halal to wolves I’m sure. I’m not defending it. I’m sure it’s painful but it’s relatively quick in the scheme of things.
You’re right about the ‘meat industry’. That doesn’t mean eating meat is wrong though. But it should actually be a luxury rather than an everyday thing.
@offside again: There’s actually some middle ground here for once! :)
I get that it’s a hugely complex area (like nearly everything!) but there is a world of difference between the type of old-school farm-to-table setup and the industrialised conveyor belt we’ve ended up with. Capitalism demands faster and more without thinking about anything outside of accumulating more paper and coins.
Even if people don’t particularly care about animals, some of the conditions human beings have to work in are harrowing. The USA is of course amongst the worst offenders. The level of accidents, lifelong injuries and appalling treatment of the workers is off the chart. All to keep a conveyor belt of animals heading into the mouths of people who expect meat at every single meal.
They often use cheap immigrant labour and when things go wrong there is practically nothing in the way of compensation. In comes the next poor and desperate person to replace them. All to keep the main conveyor belt of profit going. If they don’t care about humans, you can imagine how much they care about the animals.
@SerotoninWars: my brother in law kept sheep and I bought one. First of all we had to catch one. Then his system was to tie it up in his workshop, sit down and drink a couple of beers until the animal relaxed. And without warning then hit it with a lump hammer, before proceeding to kill it.
Butchering an animal yourself is not easy.
Anybody who has a bit of land can keep a pig.
@offside again: I can imagine. None of it is pretty in the end. I’m not overly romanticising that aspect even if I’d like to think there are nicer ways of doing it! But if it has to happen, and enough humans make sure it will, then something that equates to fewer animals, better lives and living conditions up to the point of death, and less recklessness when it comes to the environment, seems more desirable.
The money in the industry is enormous. Huge amounts are spent on lobbying and what is hard to describe as anything other than propaganda. I go back to my point that even if people don’t care about animals they need to wake up to the fact that so much of the denier stuff being pumped into media and social media, is by people with a vested interest in making people apathetic and cynical about any moves to curtail consumption. That might mean less profit shock horror.
The industrial meat industry is a disaster for humans as much as animals.
@offside again: hey bff, so the story goes { allegedly} something like this……. Choose the victim, catch the victim, relax with a few duffs…you know… Just chilling, chewing the fat….& Then when everyone’s got a decent buzz going….. Whip out a lump hammer & whack the poor guy…… Gotta ask…… You been watching reruns of the sopranos??
@SerotoninWars: full belly cheap = big profit. I believe a certain Austrian said : ‘it’s good for leaders that men do not think’.
@Kevvy kerrr: your talent is wasted here !
@Kevvy kerrr: Hey Joey Sheeps! Don’t wurry it’s not a nursing home! It’s a retirement community!
Money well spent Good on zoo
For once money we’ll spent.
Elephant in the room no doubt
@Phillip Smyth: ah Phillip c’mon, that was 2/10 at best….. Larry Betts standard
@Kevvy kerrr: I know couldn’t resist.
They should not be on view, zoos are a thing of the past animals should allowed to run free, that’s the elephant in the room, poor creatures bobbing back and forth in tiny spaces, they are brought to a strange land to here, away form their natural habitat, basically to just die in a tiny area totally alien to them.
@Phillip Smyth: now Kevvy K the elephant in the tiny room.
@Phillip Smyth: 100% right. Zoos are totally inappropriate for these huge majestic creatures. At the very least, they need the space of a national park, for roaming and for privacy away from their most deadly enemy, us.
Give a lump sum from the TV licence
the budget …..vanished from your articles .
Good job you understood we had enough
There is a beautiful tribute in an article on here to the late, great and stunningly beautiful Mary O’Rourke, by Mary Hanafin, whose dad Des was a great man too, opposed, divorce, opposed gay marriage, opposed abortion., all values in Fianna Fail we hold dearly.
There should never be elephants in captivity In such small spaces. These majestic animals can travel hundreds of kilometers per day in the wild. At the very least, they need the size of a national park to roam. No matter what you do in Dublin Zoo, it’s a 28 hectare site. Calling it the African Plains doesn’t make it so. Some animals do ok in captivity, but these huge beautiful beasts need space and privacy. Gorillas, Tigers, Lions, bears and Rhino should only ever be kept in captivity to prevent extinction, and then only in huge national park-size enclosures. If you want to see Elephants, there is about a million hours of footage on YouTube thanks to David Attenborough et al.
Just isolate the elephants who are sick you absolute clowns.
@Buster Lawless: Out of curiosity, how long did you study to be a vet?
@Jack Jack: this is basic science, isolate the spread. These cockatiels are murdering the elephants.
@Jack Jack: study? Buster Lawless? Funniest comment of the day!
@Buster Lawless: the ilness doesnt show until v sick by which time all may have caught it. I got that by reading about it at the tome . You’re the clown
@damien leen: your trolling knows no bounds. Show some respect here punk, elephants are dying.
@uXGdMXx5: tome? Did you learn that in the circus while abusing the donkey? Sicko.
@Buster Lawless: Please join Fianna Fail.
@Fintan Pox: they must remove usc it is essential
@Buster Lawless: No party going to do that, shur jaysus, we had to bring it in when we bankrupted the country, and you gonna vote for us if we got rid of it! Bleedin sap lol
@Buster Lawless: there isn’t the space.
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say