Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

mickdw · 10-02-2014 08:04PM

Surely the ombudsman had every right to carry or security checks on their own accord.
I would have thought that only when something unusual was found that it should be reported to minister.
According to statement, when all investigations were concluded, there was no evidence of wrong doing by Gardai. Was there evidence of wrong doing at all?

Hootanany · 10-02-2014 08:04PM

Uriel. wrote: »

Why does he need to resign?

Because he could not provide a breath sample due to breathing difficulties but has no problem blathering on in the Dail.

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:05PM

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

Could be anyone. Journalists/British M15/Garda/Army/disgruntled gsoc employee.

But let's not let the facts get in the way of a good witch hunt, and blame it on the gardai

So blame it on GSOC instead?

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:05PM

Hootanany wrote: »

Because he could not provide a breath sample due to breathing difficulties but has no problem blathering on in the Dail.

You need to try harder

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 10-02-2014 08:07PM

Uriel. wrote: »

It won't collapse and who are you proposing to put in its place?

His moral heros, FF and SF, our saviours waiting in the wings, those paragons of virtue:rolleyes:

mikom · 10-02-2014 08:07PM

Hootanany wrote: »

Because he could not provide a breath sample due to breathing difficulties but has no problem blathering on in the Dail.

Uriel. wrote: »

You need to try harder

That's what the cop at the roadside said......

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:08PM

Phoebas wrote: »

The very strange thing about this story is that this apparently happened last year, the GSOC investigation has been inconclusive and it seems that they haven't seen fit either to pursue it further or to report it to the Minister.

Its like they were just going to let it slide - perhaps this is what promoted the leaker.

One wonders if it was included in a first draft of their annual review and seen by someone who has
Blown the surrounding issues out of proportion

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:09PM

mikom wrote: »

That's what the cop at the roadside said......

Perhaps. Maybe he/she said you have to blow harder. Or blow longer or blow harder and longer

Hootanany · 10-02-2014 08:11PM

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

His moral heros, FF and SF, our saviours waiting in the wings, those paragons of virtue:rolleyes:

FF are you serous

charlie14 · 10-02-2014 08:13PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So who do the apply too for the licence, the DoJ, the minister, the Garda ??? LMAO.

Are the members of this government the only people in the country not to have heard the advice "When you are in a hole, stop digging!

My name is URL · 10-02-2014 08:13PM

Phoebas wrote: »

The very strange thing about this story is that this apparently happened last year, the GSOC investigation has been inconclusive and it seems that they haven't seen fit either to pursue it further or to report it to the Minister.

Its like they were just going to let it slide - perhaps this is what promoted the leaker.

Sure, there's questions to be asked of how the GSOC handled this but it shouldn't take precedence over the more pressing matter of who the hell is responsible for the bugging.

The media and government seem more interested in why the matter wasn't raised with Shatter more than the fact it happened in the first place.

Hootanany · 10-02-2014 08:15PM

Smoke and daggers

ygolometsipe · 10-02-2014 08:15PM

just spreading the rumor that there are talks of a movie.

An Depárted

charlie14 · 10-02-2014 08:18PM

Uriel. wrote: »

You need to try harder

Is that what the Garda said to Shatter before he drove off without giving a breath sample?

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:20PM

charlie14 wrote: »

Is that what the Garda said to Shatter before he drove off without giving a breath sample?

Shatter might need to try harder but you surely need to try quicker, you were beaten to that "joke" awhile ago

Phoebas · 10-02-2014 08:20PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Sure, there's questions to be asked of how the GSOC handled this but it shouldn't take precedence over the more pressing matter of who the hell is responsible for the bugging.

The media and government seem more interested in why the matter wasn't raised with Shatter more than the fact it happened in the first place.

That's true - the bugging is by far the most serious part of this, but that assumes that the core of the story is true.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

mikom · 10-02-2014 08:25PM

Phoebas wrote: »

I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.

Do you have “government-level technology” in your garden?

a sophisticated surveillance operation which used “government-level technology”

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/article1373695.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_02_08

Kaizersoze81 · 10-02-2014 08:25PM

Uriel. wrote: »

Why does he need to resign? What makes them a law onto themselves?

Because they're obliged by law to disclose to the Minister for Justice matters such as this. They've broken the law by not disclosing it.

sopretty · 10-02-2014 08:25PM

Phoebas wrote: »

That's true - the bugging is by far the most serious part of this, but that assumes that the core of the story is true.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

The 'government level' surveillance will debunk that fairly lively. I don't care what statements come out, there is deep corruption involved here in my opinion.

MadYaker · 10-02-2014 08:26PM

So far we have 99% speculation and 1% facts.

All we really know is that in December 2013 a specialist security firm from the UK confirmed "3 technical and electronic anomalies", I couldn't find anymore detail than that. GSOC says it doesn't suspect the Gardai were involved (officially) and its databases weren't compromised (as far as they can tell).

Why they decided not to tell anyone is anyone's guess, but I don't think it would be a stretch to say they don't exactly trust senior members of the Gardai even if they are saying they don't think the Gardai were involved. While I seriously doubt the Gardai were involved in any official capacity, maybe some of the less than honest members were making an attempt to keep on top of what sort of things the ombudsman was investigating, or maybe they were trying to get info on people trying to expose corruption within the ranks of the Gardai.

I'm not sure why they didn't tell Shatter though, I don't believe the conspiracy stuff being spouted in this thread. I don't really think Shatter is corrupt or had anything to do with this. Maybe GSOC were just being extra cautious, but if so, why?

Kaizersoze81 · 10-02-2014 08:27PM

sopretty wrote: »

The 'government level' surveillance will debunk that fairly lively.

That's a nothing phrase. Surveillance such as this is accessible to anyone who has the money to pay for it.

Phoebas · 10-02-2014 08:27PM

mikom wrote: »

Do you have “government-level technology” in your garden?

Yes. In my underground bunker.
(see how anonymous sources can't be relied upon?)

downonthefarm · 10-02-2014 08:27PM

Don't think it was the guards in fairness.that lot couldn't find their hole with their two hands

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:28PM

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

Because they're obliged by law to disclose to the Minister for Justice matters such as this. They've broken the law by not disclosing it.

Really? What makes you say that?

mikom · 10-02-2014 08:29PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Yes. In my underground bunker.
(see how anonymous sources can't be relied upon?)

Hope you registered that septic tank.

My name is URL · 10-02-2014 08:29PM

Phoebas wrote: »

That's true - the bugging is by far the most serious part of this, but that assumes that the core of the story is true.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

I honestly don't believe that the consultancy firm would come out and confirm their involvement in such a way if the original article was full of untruths.

Kaizersoze81 · 10-02-2014 08:29PM

downonthefarm wrote: »

Don't think it was the guards in fairness.that lot couldn't their hole with their two hands

And you couldn't type a proper sentence with your two hands.

Uriel. · 10-02-2014 08:30PM

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

That's a nothing phrase. Surveillance such as this is accessible to anyone who has the money to pay for it.

Surveillance such as what? What kind of surveillance was undertaken?

Kaizersoze81 · 10-02-2014 08:30PM

Uriel. wrote: »

Really? What makes you say that?

The taoiseach quoted a section from the garda siochana act which stated this.

twowheelsgood · 10-02-2014 08:30PM

MadYaker wrote: »

So far we have 99% speculation and 1% facts.

All we really know is that in December 2013 a specialist security firm from the UK confirmed "3 technical and electronic anomalies", I couldn't find anymore detail than that. GSOC says it doesn't suspect the Gardai were involved (officially) and its databases weren't compromised (as far as they can tell).

Why they decided not to tell anyone is anyone's guess

No need to guess.

GSOC chairman Simon O'Brien wrote: »

He said the Commission took the very difficult decision not to report the matter because it did not want to point the finger at anyone or undermine public confidence in the Ombudsman.

I have to say the "3 technical and electronic anomalies" is a touch short of the smoking gun I was expecting.

Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

Comments