1. Lots of unsurprising findings in the Kenova report. I will leave it others better qualified to judge how recommendations meet victims/families demands. But a few interesting segments on relations between MI5, the RUC / PSNI and military intelligence that, so far, stand out..🧵 2. The claim that "those in the most senior positions of the security forces did not have ... any knowledge of the alleged agent Stakeknife" is not strongly challenged. The recording with General Sir John Wilsey, the most senior officer in NI 1990-1993, suggests otherwise 🤔

1. A thread on the President of Ireland, Michael D Higgins, the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy. First the words used by the President… 2. The pejorative language – the government is trying “to crawl away” from a policy position. Not healthy for a president to say that to the government/legislature.

1. I don't think Ireland should apply to join NATO right now. But reading @BarryWhyte85's Sunday Business Post article/interviews about the neutrality debate in Ireland has increased my concern that falsehoods about NATO are being repeated without challenge. Two examples. 2. If Ireland was a member of NATO it would have had to take part in the invasion of Iraq. This is self-evidently false. The need for NATO consensus meant NATO did not invade Iraq in 2003. Even if one member state strongly objected it would not have been possible. But several did

1. Watched the RTÉ documentary Gunplot on the 1970 Arms Trial. A shame that some of the subsequent debate is being reduced to binaries - Lynch treachery / Captain James Kelly a betrayed patriot. The history of the arms trial /Irish state in the Troubles is far more interesting. 2. Lynch likely knew that money sent to defence committees in the North, partly controlled by republicans, would be used to buy arms. The Irish state would be directly financing or supplying these, albeit in limited amounts. To argue otherwise does not seem reasonable.

The idea that all alleged crimes by the British Army were properly investigated, particularly during 1970-1972, is laughable. Don’t take my word for it. Just read the MOD’s own files in @UkNatArchives Be honest @JohnnyMercerUK. If you just want an amnesty regardless, say so.

https://twitter.com/johnnymerceruk/status/1384572401179144193

You cannot argue that ‘such events happened nearly 50 years ago’ to stop prosecutions in the tiny amount of cases ever taken against former soldiers but cheer on the ongoing prosecution of republican John Downey for the horrific murder of two soldiers in 1972. Justice =no cakeism

1. @Judy_Dempsey @Carnegie_Europe asked an important question: “Is the Northern Ireland Peace Process At Risk?” Here is my answer: 2. Yes. There is an escalating threat to the peace process in Northern Ireland. What was true for Irish nationalists—that a hard border after Brexit would threaten peace—is also true for unionists.

Thread - I have tried to stay out of the debate on an amnesty for soldiers who served in NI. But Lord Dannatt’s comments on #r4today that allegations against soldiers were fully investigated ‘at the time’ is not accurate in many cases, esp in the 1970s, and should be discussed. The Royal Military Police made clear in a subsequent 1973 memorandum that until the end of 1972 neither they nor the RUC collected evidence for criminal investigation purposes - except in the most egregious, unavoidably self-evident cases.