Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

tayto lover · 11-02-2014 12:47PM

oholly121 wrote: »

Why would the media ( Whom I reckon don't have access to sophisticated state level surveillance equipment bug the GSOC ) it doesn't add up!!

look to who has something to gain from accessing sensitive information for their own gain, what would the media report on if they got this information and most media outlets in this country are bias towards the state institutions so even if information was acquired this would make no difference at all!

Stories sell newspapers.
Did you miss the whole News of the World thing in Britain. Even Millie Dowler's phone was tapped.
The security expert on Vincent Browne last night said that this equipment is easy enough to get.

tayto lover · 11-02-2014 12:48PM

oholly121 wrote: »

It would however make sense for the Gardai to have a head start in any potential investigation

Yes indeed BUT why would they also make it public?
There's something odd about this whole thing.

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 12:49PM

It's absolutely twisted and sick that everyone from the media to the political establishment has turned the focus on this story from "Who was bugging the Garda Ombudsman and why" to "Why didn't the Garda Ombudsman tell us they were being bugged".

Whatever the rights or wrongs of not telling them (personally after the Mick Wallace fiasco I regard Shatter as being far too pally with Callinan and wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him, but that's just me), the main and most serious issue here is that the organization with responsibility for policing the Gardai (let's not forget, the Ombudsman isn't just there to make sure the Gardai follow their guidelines, they're there to make sure the Gardai follow the law) has been the victim of a sophisticated attack on the privacy of its telecommunications system.

It doesn't, in my opinion, take someone with even a double digit IQ to decide which of those two issues is the more serious, which is more deserving of public attention, which is more deserving of media attention and above all, which is more deserving of attention from the government of this country.

Several months ago, there was a row over the Ombudsman being refused access by the Gardai to files and documents that they had not a legal right, but a legal obligation to read in their role as the police of the police. In that instance, the comment from Shatter was not, as it should have been, "The Gardai's refusal to hand over these documents in accordance with the Ombudsman's investigation is a serious and unacceptable breach of the law and must end immediately", his response was "It does not serve to encourage public confidence in GSOC for difficulties or arguments to persist privately or publicly about the timely provision of information to GSOC." You can read that statement yourself and decide whose side he seemed to be taking, it is at best ambiguous and at worse an attack on GSOC for making the argument public - it is most certainly not an unequivocal criticism of the Gardai for refusing to comply with the law in handing documents over.

Time and again I've noticed this pattern. I find it disturbingly comparable to what's happened with Snowden in the US - a lot of comment from both local media and politicians given over to "How did he do it", "How do we catch him" and "How do we prevent anyone else from leaking stuff" - NOT "How are these crimes allowed to happen, who was responsible for allowing them, and how do we stop them".

In both cases, the establishment media and the politicians attack something related to the story or the reporting thereof, and not related to the actual incident itself. In this case, why GSOC didn't inform the government may be considered a serious issue, but it's the size of a proverbial moth next to the tyrannosaurus rex that is the bugging of the Garda Ombudsman offices.

tl;dr - priorities, folks. Priorities.

Red Pepper · 11-02-2014 12:49PM

oholly121 wrote: »

It would however make sense for the Gardai to have a head start in any potential investigation

so they can tamper with the evidence?

jimgoose · 11-02-2014 12:51PM

Could anyone explain to me what the deuce is meant by "government-level" surveillance equipment? Are we talking about some sort of Narus deep-packet inspection rig or what? Because "government-level" around here would be somewhere in the region of a Sinclair ZX81.

jimgoose · 11-02-2014 12:52PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's absolutely twisted and sick that everyone from the media to the political establishment has turned the focus on this story from "Who was bugging the Garda Ombudsman and why" to "Why didn't the Garda Ombudsman tell us they were being bugged"...

^^^^^^
This.

tayto lover · 11-02-2014 12:52PM

Red Pepper wrote: »

so they can tamper with the evidence?

But by tampering with evidence they would also be giving themselves away by making it public.
That's the bit that intrigues me.
Anyway how would a Garda being investigated (even 4 or 5 of them) get this type of equipment and learn how to use it? Many of them seem to have difficulty with a pen.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 12:54PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Stories sell newspapers.
Did you miss the whole News of the World thing in Britain. Even Millie Dowler's phone was tapped.
The security expert on Vincent Browne last night said that this equipment is easy enough to get.

Yeah but this was hacking into voice mail's relatively simple if you know how! what we have here is state like covert surveillance not easily available to any media outlet.
You probably can get the equipment easily enough its using it and how you get information is the key point here not everyone would be proficient in the use of such equipment, I am sure a level of training is required to use this

i.e I have a driving licence and I can drive a car but I can buy a truck and struggle to drive it a big difference if I was not trained in how to operate it!
I have the equipment but I dont know how to use it without training and guidance!!

MilanPan!c · 11-02-2014 12:55PM

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't pretend that its false - I don't know if its true or false yet. This isn't based on bias, but based on a lack of clear evidence so far.

You have repeatedly gone out of your way to claim it has no basis in fact, but that's not how this works...

A lot of claims were made.

None of them have been shown to be false.

Some of them have been shown to be true.

None has been denied.

A reasonable person doesn't then assume that the person making the claims has decided to lie about some and not others.

We all live on the back of assumptions. You assume that unnamed sources are not to be immediately trusted... that's YOUR assumption. I assume that, they are telling this truth, in this case, based on the above, that - until proven otherwise.

You'd be better off spending your time asking why:

Brits were called in
Why GSOC didn't think it shoud tell the MOJ
Why the report by the Brtis hasn't been made public
Why EK decided to lie about the Garda Act of 2005
Why others in his party have also lied about it
Ask why the media has been so critical of the GSOC in this matter

or you can argue about who's assumptions are more valid.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 12:56PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Yes indeed BUT why would they also make it public?
There's something odd about this whole thing.

But they didn't make this public the GSOC! and most of the evidence would have either been destroyed or gone according to security consultants!

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 12:57PM

jimgoose wrote: »

Could anyone explain to me what the deuce is meant by "government-level" surveillance equipment? Are we talking about some sort of Narus deep-packet inspection rig or what? Because "government-level" around here would be somewhere in the region of a Sinclair ZX81.

Presumably they mean equipment which isn't available to buy unless you have some kind of permit or license. I'll admit that when this story first broke, the NARUS rig exposed in the US being used against Telecoms companies was the first thing that came to mind, but until we get more details we just don't know.
If it was something like that, then there's no reason anyone would have had to have access to the building to use it - you could just as easily attach it to the phone line outside before it enters the building. We'll just have to wait until we get more information.

Dyr · 11-02-2014 01:02PM

Who has the motive to do this?

Who has the capacity do to this?

Who has the previous form to do this?

It may be that its some as yet uknown dark horse that was behind it but there's an odds on favourite here.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 01:03PM

MilanPan!c wrote: »

You have repeatedly gone out of your way to claim it has no basis in fact, but that's not how this works...

A lot of claims were made.

None of them have been shown to be false.

Some of them have been shown to be true.

None has been denied.

A reasonable person doesn't then assume that the person making the claims has decided to lie about some and not others.

We all live on the back of assumptions. You assume that unnamed sources are not to be immediately trusted... that's YOUR assumption. I assume that, they are telling this truth, in this case, based on the above, that - until proven otherwise.

You'd be better off spending your time asking why:

Brits were called in
Why GSOC didn't think it shoud tell the MOJ
Why the report by the Brtis hasn't been made public
Why EK decided to lie about the Garda Act of 2005
Why others in his party have also lied about it
Ask why the media has been so critical of the GSOC in this matter

or you can argue about who's assumptions are more valid.

Brits were called in- Because most security consultancies that are capable of carrying out this sweep in Ireland are run by ex Gardai or ex military thus a whitewash
Why GSOC didn't think it shoud tell the MOJ- They wanted to have the facts before they went to the MOJ and the MOJ and the commissioner enjoy a cosy relationship!
Why the report by the Brtis hasn't been made public - Sensitive information
Why EK decided to lie about the Garda Act of 2005_ he dosent know what he is talking about and as an ex teacher is not capable of quoting acts of with a legal background
Why others in his party have also lied about it- To sweep this under the rug before a full and comprehensive investigation/ Politicians lie all the time!!!!
Ask why the media has been so critical of the GSOC in this matter- Because the media thinks the Gardai is just brilliant and are far from suspicion!!!!

Phoebas · 11-02-2014 01:03PM

MilanPan!c wrote: »

You have repeatedly gone out of your way to claim it has no basis in fact, but that's not how this works...

I didn't say that - not even once.
Stop making shít up.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 01:05PM

Bambi wrote: »

Who has the motive to do this?

Who has the capacity do to this? the Gardai

Who has the previous form to do this? The Gardai

It may be that its some as yet uknown dark horse that was behind it but there's an odds on favourite here. The gardai!!!!!

MilanPan!c · 11-02-2014 01:16PM

Phoebas wrote: »

I didn't say that - not even once.
Stop making shít up.

It is certainly the implication... and clearly so...

There's no other reason to REPEATEDLY state that something may not be true because it's from an unnamed source...

Here's some of the things you've said, which I'm sure you think (wink wink) don't imply the info isn't true:

The statement was from the journalist who didn't explain how he came to the conclusion.

You can't just be taking the word of somebody as gospel without some kind of reasonable explanation from them about why they are saying it (and that doesn't mean that they have to reveal their source - just reveal what the extent of the evidence is, and if and how he corroborated it).

What's the 'everything else'? We have no specific information at all except that 3 'anomalies' were found. Everything else is based on the unidentified source.

That was from an unidentified source - we have no inkling of the quality of the source

The information in that graphic comes from the Sunday Times reporting, not from GSOC. GSOC haven't provided any of this detail

Yeah, but we don't know who his source was or if he's verified the story in any way whatsoever.

The only explanation that we have is that there were anomalies - they are very readily available. The rest is in the realms of unidentified sources and speculation

The 'Government level technology' phrase was from an unidentified source and the 'anomaly' bit from the GSOC seems to downplay the seriousness of the whole thing.

The report cites an unidentified 'source'. We can hardly take it as gospel

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

It is very much about the source if you're going to categorise the information coming from the source as 'highly credible'

I didn't say that at all!!! I just wouldn't categorise an unidentified source as 'highly credible'.

But sure, sure, you're just being reasonable... no bias on your end huh?

Strange your obsession with repeatedly stating to all comers that they should give little credence to unidentified sources, that they shouldn't be considered credible or relied upon.

suicide_circus · 11-02-2014 01:18PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's absolutely twisted and sick that everyone from the media to the political establishment has turned the focus on this story from "Who was bugging the Garda Ombudsman and why" to "Why didn't the Garda Ombudsman tell us they were being bugged".

Whatever the rights or wrongs of not telling them (personally after the Mick Wallace fiasco I regard Shatter as being far too pally with Callinan and wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him, but that's just me), the main and most serious issue here is that the organization with responsibility for policing the Gardai (let's not forget, the Ombudsman isn't just there to make sure the Gardai follow their guidelines, they're there to make sure the Gardai follow the law) has been the victim of a sophisticated attack on the privacy of its telecommunications system.

It doesn't, in my opinion, take someone with even a double digit IQ to decide which of those two issues is the more serious, which is more deserving of public attention, which is more deserving of media attention and above all, which is more deserving of attention from the government of this country.

Several months ago, there was a row over the Ombudsman being refused access by the Gardai to files and documents that they had not a legal right, but a legal obligation to read in their role as the police of the police. In that instance, the comment from Shatter was not, as it should have been, "The Gardai's refusal to hand over these documents in accordance with the Ombudsman's investigation is a serious and unacceptable breach of the law and must end immediately", his response was "It does not serve to encourage public confidence in GSOC for difficulties or arguments to persist privately or publicly about the timely provision of information to GSOC." You can read that statement yourself and decide whose side he seemed to be taking, it is at best ambiguous and at worse an attack on GSOC for making the argument public - it is most certainly not an unequivocal criticism of the Gardai for refusing to comply with the law in handing documents over.

Time and again I've noticed this pattern. I find it disturbingly comparable to what's happened with Snowden in the US - a lot of comment from both local media and politicians given over to "How did he do it", "How do we catch him" and "How do we prevent anyone else from leaking stuff" - NOT "How are these crimes allowed to happen, who was responsible for allowing them, and how do we stop them".

In both cases, the establishment media and the politicians attack something related to the story or the reporting thereof, and not related to the actual incident itself. In this case, why GSOC didn't inform the government may be considered a serious issue, but it's the size of a proverbial moth next to the tyrannosaurus rex that is the bugging of the Garda Ombudsman offices.

tl;dr - priorities, folks. Priorities.

actually find this pretty worrying. the central issue ie: that the ombudsman offices were bugged, has been completely sidetracked and if you go on rte.ie right now, the headline story is that gardai are calling for the chairman of the ombudsman commission to resign....eh....hello? the police watchdog of this state was put under covert electronic surveillance by persons unknown, pretty serious, no?

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 01:21PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

actually find this pretty worrying. the central issue ie: that the ombudsman offices were bugged, has been completely sidetracked and if you go on rte.ie right now, the headline story is that gardai are calling for the chairman of the ombudsman commission to resign....eh....hello? the police watchdog of this state was put under covert electronic surveillance by persons unknown, pretty serious, no?

But this is what always happens there will be no accountability for this no one will take the blame the whole idea is to twist the story so your confused and then tomorrow something else!

Yes the GSOC offices bugged is a huge issue but so is why they didnt tell the minister are you serous thats the joke!!!!!!

Phoebas · 11-02-2014 01:24PM

MilanPan!c wrote:

You have repeatedly gone out of your way to claim it has no basis in fact

MilanPan!c wrote: »

It is certainly the implication...

Well perhaps instead of relying on what you think I'm implying you could ask me directly my my actual opinion is.

That would be a lot better than you falsely making up claims I never made.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 01:25PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Well perhaps instead of relying on what you think I'm implying you could ask me directly my my actual opinion is.

That would be a lot better than you falsely making up claims I never made.

What is your opinion Pheobas!!?

mikom · 11-02-2014 01:27PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Well perhaps instead of relying on what you think I'm implying you could ask me directly my my actual opinion is.

Is the double my "my my" a tell?
Could "my my" actually mean head office, as in head offices opinion.............. an unverified source says yes.

MilanPan!c · 11-02-2014 01:34PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Well perhaps instead of relying on what you think I'm implying you could ask me directly my my actual opinion is.

That would be a lot better than you falsely making up claims I never made.

You never said:

I wouldn't categorise an unidentified source as 'highly credible'

anonymous sources can't be relied upon

No?

You haven't on multiple, multiple occasions gone out of your way to make sure that people take anything from an anonymous source - which, "can't be relied upon", and which you wouldn't categorise as "highly credible" - with a grain of salt?

Repeatedly?

Of course you have.

You can try and say that you've meant something else, but it's obvious, via your words, that you think that unidentified sources are not "highly credible" and that in your opinion they, "can't be relied upon".

And I doubt you therefore believe that what this not credible and unreliable source is say ing is true.

And that clearly explains your persistent focus on focusing everyone to endlessly acknowledge that a unreliable source is the person behind the leak.

Youzername · 11-02-2014 01:36PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

actually find this pretty worrying. the central issue ie: that the ombudsman offices were bugged, has been completely sidetracked and if you go on rte.ie right now, the headline story is that gardai are calling for the chairman of the ombudsman commission to resign....eh....hello? the police watchdog of this state was put under covert electronic surveillance by persons unknown, pretty serious, no?

This is effing ridiculous!

Tbh this just indicates to me more that there has be a blatant cover up here.

The Gardai are as much a bunch of gansters as the guys they are meant to be locking up!

Is there anything the public can actually do to force the right issue here?:mad::mad:

twowheelsgood · 11-02-2014 01:36PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

tl;dr - priorities, folks. Priorities.

It isn’t either / or. Both questions can be asked and hopefully answered.

And whodunit (if anybody!) may not be the most important question. It certainly would be the bigger question if it turns out that a member of the gardai or someone in government was behind it.

But if it turns out to be a journalist I would say the matter of greater public concern would be a lack of trust between public officials.

Youzername · 11-02-2014 01:39PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

It isn’t either / or. Both questions can be asked and hopefully answered.

And whodunit (if anybody!) may not be the most important question. It certainly would be the bigger question if it turns out that a member of the gardai or someone in government was behind it.

But if it turns out to be a journalist I would say the matter of greater public concern would be a lack of trust between public officials.

But the GOSC should not trust the Gardai / Garda Comissioner, and considering the recent actions of the Garda Commissioner and the MoJ, they probably shouldn't trust the MoJ either.

Thats the whole point of the GOSC tbh!!

suicide_circus · 11-02-2014 01:45PM

Youzername wrote: »

This is effing ridiculous!

Tbh this just indicates to me more that there has be a blatant cover up here.

The Gardai are as much a bunch of gansters as the guys they are meant to be locking up!

Is there anything the public can actually do to force the right issue here?:mad::mad:

wouldnt go so far as to say that the gardai are gangsters but this whole thing absolutely screams "cover-up" involving senior gardai, the minister and by extension, Pravda (rte).

the bugging of the ombudsman office is one of the most intriguing news stories in ireland for a long time and yet the state broadcaster is not focusing on it at all, rather it is focusing on the association of garda sergeants and inspectors trying to make a scapegoat out this simon O'brien chap (chairman of the ombudsman commission) because he didnt inform shatter or gardai. I cant blame o'brien for this, given that the most likely agency to bug the ombudsman is AGS and shatter is in the pocket of their overbearing commissioner.

twowheelsgood · 11-02-2014 01:47PM

Youzername wrote: »

But the GOSC should not trust the Gardai / Garda Comissioner, and considering the recent actions of the Garda Commissioner and the MoJ, they probably shouldn't trust the MoJ either.

Thats the whole point of the GOSC tbh!!

True a certain distance apart on the “cozyness” scale is healthy, even necessary, between any watchdog and whoever is being watched. But it can’t be good if any public body, by their actions or lack of them, distrust the police so much that they decline to report a crime.

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 01:49PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

It isn’t either / or. Both questions can be asked and hopefully answered.

And whodunit (if anybody!) may not be the most important question. It certainly would be the bigger question if it turns out that a member of the gardai or someone in government was behind it.

But if it turns out to be a journalist I would say the matter of greater public concern would be a lack of trust between public officials.

I agree both questions should be asked, but (in my view) as far as the public interest goes, finding out who bugged the office and why is the more important question, and yet it's becoming a side-headline to the "main" story of the day, "Gardai call on GSOC chairman to resign". That isn't right.

suicide_circus · 11-02-2014 01:51PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

True a certain distance apart on the “cozyness” scale is healthy, even necessary, between any watchdog and whoever is being watched. But it can’t be good if any public body, by their actions or lack of them, distrust the police so much that they decline to report a crime.

true but the problem being that the ombudsman may very have thought that the police themselves committed the crime. damned if you do, damned if you dont.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 01:52PM

Why don't we all agree that the gardai the MOJ, The Garda Commissioner, THe force, the government and Fianna Fail are juts brilliant and above suspicion because judging by some of the responses here that what we are saying

Its like a bomb went off and people are searching for debris instead of asking who planted the bomb and why!!!?

Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

Comments