"He said it was not possible to think of "an explanation which is more credible" than the "intelligence-based explanation" he had given"
- according to a report in the IT today, McD referring to Connelly/Farc/IRA.... etc., in a Newstalk 106 interview.
He said that the IRA were to be paid $20m for training the Farc (money got from drug dealing, acccording to McD)
When confronted with the question of the credibility of his 'evidence' he said the above.
Would another explanation be -
1. There is lots of mileage to be got out of this in Dublin 4
2. I don't have to produce any evidence
3. I can get rid of a pest (Connelly)
4. I can improve my anti-IRA credentials amongst the chattering classes
Therefore I will fly this kite, using Dail privilege and then follow it up with quotes from 'intelligence' in my possession. [Question - is the use of the word intelligence in the context of McD and Dept of Justice an oxymoron?].
The result? miles and miles of coverage in the meja.....which I will feed from time to time with new 'intelligence'
Is that not as valid an explanation?
Bye, Barry



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote