Originally Posted by
osarusan
Why do you not think that as the journalist in question has not come out nearly 24 hours after it was published to prove it is true, it heightens your suspicions of it being false? That seems to me to just as likely an interpretation as yours.
Your argument seems to be that we must believe it as it hasn't been denied yet, and even if it is denied, that will just make you believe it even more. You don't think that is unreasonable at all?
I have no idea if O'Neill made the comments he is alleged to have made. It would surprise me if he did, given he doesn't really have a history of the kind of witless sh!t-stirring those quotes would be. Equally it would surprise me for a journalist to simply fabricate an interview/set of quotes. I don't know what to believe.