I was musing in the linked post previously about the story surrounding Michael McDowell v Frank Connolly. Last night the tale took another turn with McDowells address to the Dáil and Ahern's defence of McDowells position and his assertion that McDowell has been acting with the full consent of the cabinet in relation to this matter.
McDowell is still asserting that Connolly is/was involved in subversive activity including travelling to Columbia on a false passport, the application for which he was able to produce, and being associated on that trip with a known IRA man.
The other side of the coin is that Connolly's Centre for Public Inquiry have recently being investigating the purchase of land in North County Dublin for the location of a new prison site. The coverage on that story indicates that the land may have been bought over value, but McDowell denies this.
So it appears that McDowell is concerned that a public body with funding like the Centre for Public Inquiry and the subsequent powers of investigation that it has access to should not fall into the control of subversives who could use it to undermine the authority of the state. That sounds like a fair argument to me. What is really strange about this story, however, is Frank Connolly's unavailability for comment.
He has denied the accusations previously but since the story hit the headlines again he has consistently refused to provide evidence of whereabouts in April 2001 or offer any defence apart from denial. Surely at this stage it's time for him, if he has been the subject of a witch hunt, to stand up and address the issue. The longer he fails to do this the worse it looks for him.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Not surprisingly, Eamonn Dunphy, no fan of MacDowell's by any means, was all over this on his show this morning. Two things came out of it which interested me :First, Dunphy compared the whole thing to the Pat Finnucane case [although he is always willing to drag that name in whatever the topic] and suggested that Connolly may now be a target of Loyalist paramilitaries thanks to our Minister for Justice. Though that may be true, doesn't it also make MMcD a target for the IRA, or, sorry, let me get it right, we now call them "dissident republicans"???
Second, McD's close friend Sam Smyth made a good point. Although many are now calling for the minister's resignation, there is only one man who can actually ensure it ever happening, and that's Frank Connolly, by proving where he was on the dates in question.
Why should Frank Connolly do that? He hasn't been charged with a crime and owes none of us any explanation.
The man's reputation is being blackened by a government minister and people actually call for Frank Connolly to tell us all where he was at that time... it's almost funny but is much too serious to be.
JL,
If you think the IRA and "dissident republicans" are the same people you really are living on a different planet! ;)
Post a Comment