garda corruption alive and well

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-08-2015 08:29AM

makeorbrake wrote: »

It certainly does have some bearing, yes. It most certainly IS evidence. Would it have been better to have some randomer on board with that also? Sure. However, you don't exactly have many passing randomers down a country lane that ends in a cul de sac.

I live in a cul de sac, there are several other houses in this cul de sac, Do they live at the end of a country lane where there are no other houses?

You can maintain your view - but you scrutinise their video testimony and either they are putting in Oscar performances or they are telling the truth.

I have watched the videos and they come across as convincing liars.

By the way, up until recently, people here were steadfastly opposing the presence of ANY dublin based Gardai - saying that this was delusional on the part of J.D. More recently, they are coming to accept same. That's the only changing storyline I'm seeing.

Evidence that there were Dublin gardai present?

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:33AM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I have watched the videos and they come across as convincing liars.

Now there's an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Do they live at the end of a country lane where there are no other houses?

Yes, that is my understanding.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Evidence that there were Dublin gardai present?

Gee, I dunno. Did they deny involvement when the Sunday Times asked them?

ArmaniJeanss · 13-08-2015 08:36AM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Lastly, you will recall that not so long ago, you said that Joe Doocey had to be off his trolley with his suggestion that Gardai drove down from Dublin to bust through his door (when you worked on the assumption that it was simply about a rumpus over an ex-girlfriend). Now, we've moved on to the point where you're accepting that they were present. Go figure...

Just to clarify I haven't changed my mind at all on this and don't believe I've given any indication of such - I still don't believe the claim about an armed response unit driving across from Dublin.

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:39AM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Just to clarify I haven't changed my mind at all on this and don't believe I've given any indication of such - I still don't believe the claim about an armed response unit driving across from Dublin.

Well, I guess a difference of opinion is emerging - see previous comments from others that are largely of your persuasion.

Any answer to this yet? => Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmaniJeanss
You have said you are not a member of II and I have no reason to doubt your integrity, however

What exactly is there to doubt in terms of my integrity as you seem to be questioning something - can you spell it out?

ArmaniJeanss · 13-08-2015 08:48AM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Well, I guess a difference of opinion is emerging - see previous comments from others that are largely of your persuasion.

You specifically referred to me as someone who had changed their opinion on the presence of Dublin based riot guards, I've just making clear that I haven't in the slightest.

makeorbrake wrote: »

Any answer to this yet? => Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmaniJeanss
You have said you are not a member of II and I have no reason to doubt your integrity, however

What exactly is there to doubt in terms of my integrity as you seem to be questioning something - can you spell it out?

It was a straightforward sentence with no hidden meaning intended, nothing to be spelled out that I can see.

lanos · 13-08-2015 08:50AM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I have watched the videos and they come across as convincing liars.

makeorbrake wrote: »

Now there's an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

haha, yes i was thinking the exact thing when i read the comment

it would seem that he is convinced by the story.
but some allegiances or prejudices are preventing him from accepting it as probable fact.
so only one conclusion...........he is a sheep

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:51AM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You specifically referred to me as someone who had changed their opinion on the presence of Dublin based riot guards, I've just making clear that I haven't in the slightest.

Duly noted....albeit that one of your co-travellers has.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

It was a straightforward sentence with no hidden meaning intended, nothing to be spelled out that I can see.

That's an untruth. Either say what you mean or are inferring or remove it.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-08-2015 09:06AM

lanos wrote: »

haha, yes i was thinking the exact thing when i read the comment

it would seem that he is convinced by the story.
but some allegiances or prejudices are preventing him from accepting it as probable fact.
so only one conclusion...........he is a sheep

Maybe look up the term and try to understand it.

They are convincing liars as in some people (yourself) are convinced they are telling the truth. Some people (myself) are not convinced.

ArmaniJeanss · 13-08-2015 09:07AM

makeorbrake wrote: »

That's an untruth. Either say what you mean or are inferring or remove it.

You what? I won't be removing any post.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-08-2015 09:07AM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Now there's an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

Yes, that is my understanding.

Gee, I dunno. Did they deny involvement when the Sunday Times asked them?

So you think there are no other houses on this road/cul de sac but you don't know for sure?

Little CuChulainn · 13-08-2015 10:19AM

makeorbrake wrote: »

By the way, up until recently, people here were steadfastly opposing the presence of ANY dublin based Gardai - saying that this was delusional on the part of J.D. More recently, they are coming to accept same.

Actually you are the one who made that claim then attributed it to me.

This is what you said

He is on record as saying that any attention from Dublin (i.e. the NBCI, the CCU, etc.) is as a consequence of his involvement in Integrity Ireland. Some of you are in denial that there is any such involvement from this lot

This is what I said

Nobody has suggested the NBCI were not involved in the investigation of threats against Judges. What's disputed is Dooceys account of events.

You again

Okay, so this was a blatant untruth

Then you quote me

That same guy who believes the entire state is out to get him because he dated a Gardas ex girlfriend.

So to put explain that. I said I didn't think the entire state wa sout to get him. You took that, mixed it around in your head and made it into a claim that I didn't think the NBCI where investigating him, which is actually the opposite of what I think. That's basically what you've been doing all thread. Someone makes a point, you take a few words from it and put them in a new sentence that you can argue against.

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 03:45PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You what? I won't be removing any post.

I see. So you are leaving some inference hanging there and don't have the balls to go the whole hog?...or maybe because you know what you're inferring is just downright wrong. Then don't remove it - leave it there for any even minded individual to see how reprehensible you've acted.
As an aside, you'll find it's against forum rules to attack the poster rather than deal with the subject matter....I suppose you're having difficulty with the latter.

@LittleCuChulainn: Either you are of the opinion that Dublin based Gardai are involved or you're not. You can't claim both.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

So you think there are no other houses on this road/cul de sac but you don't know for sure?

I'm not 100% sure. What I do know is that in one of his youtube videos, J.D. stated that his house was in a rural area and at the end of a cul de sac. I *thought* he said there was no-one else on that road - and that's why I said that this was my 'understanding' ergo...there's nothing inaccurate in what I said.
In any event, we are dealing in semantics. Evidently, you (and your co-travellers) are not going to change your opinion on the basis of that - nor am I.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-08-2015 03:56PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

I see. So you are leaving some inference hanging there and don't have the balls to go the whole hog?...or maybe because you know what you're inferring is just downright wrong. Then don't remove it - leave it there for any even minded individual to see how reprehensible you've acted.
As an aside, you'll find it's against forum rules to attack the poster rather than deal with the subject matter....I suppose you're having difficulty with the latter.

@LittleCuChulainn: Either you are of the opinion that Dublin based Gardai are involved or you're not. You can't claim both.

I'm not 100% sure. What I do know is that in one of his youtube videos, J.D. stated that his house was in a rural area and at the end of a cul de sac. I *thought* he said there was no-one else on that road - and that's why I said that this was my 'understanding' ergo...there's nothing inaccurate in what I said.
In any event, we are dealing in semantics. Evidently, you (and your co-travellers) are not going to change their opinion on the basis of that - nor am I.

I am a very open minded individual, show me solid evidence of wrongdoing (3 members of the family with a vested interest is not considered solid evidence ) and I will happily change my mind.

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 04:04PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I am a very open minded individual, show me solid evidence of wrongdoing (3 members of the family with a vested interest is not considered solid evidence ) and I will happily change my mind.

I see. So in your 'justice system', were those three individuals to testify to that under oath, you would size that up as having zero net worth? Charming.

If you are the open minded individual that you say you are, then scrutinise that video I linked to and tell me that Dermot Doocey and Anne Edwards are lying about their account of events.

Secondly, don't you think it strange that an operation was underway within minutes of Mr. Doocey participating in a court action that implicated gardai locally and at a higher level? When I say 'implicated', I mean that he claimed wrongdoing. You think it would be wise to initiate a stop under those circumstances unless Mr. Doocey was engaging in something so blatantly unlawful that there was no doubt whatsoever?

If any other police force found itself in question like that, the first thing that would have been clarified would have been the reason for the stop. Can you cast any light on that?....because to my knowledge, the Gardai haven't. Don't you think it's odd that the first opportunity that the man is on his own - within minutes of that process, he was stopped in the middle of the town?

Little CuChulainn wrote:

That's basically what you've been doing all thread. Someone makes a point, you take a few words from it and put them in a new sentence that you can argue against.

Not true. What I have been doing all thread is dissecting the diatribe and rebutting it - point by point.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-08-2015 06:23PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

I see. So in your 'justice system', were those three individuals to testify to that under oath, you would size that up as having zero net worth? Charming.

This may shock you, people lie under oath all of the time.

If you are the open minded individual that you say you are, then scrutinise that video I linked to and tell me that Dermot Doocey and Anne Edwards are lying about their account of events.

I believe that they are not telling the whole truth, I don't doubt the house was raided, I do doubt it was done in the manner they claim.

Secondly, don't you think it strange that an operation was underway within minutes of Mr. Doocey participating in a court action that implicated gardai locally and at a higher level? When I say 'implicated', I mean that he claimed wrongdoing. You think it would be wise to initiate a stop under those circumstances unless Mr. Doocey was engaging in something so blatantly unlawful that there was no doubt whatsoever?

If any other police force found itself in question like that, the first thing that would have been clarified would have been the reason for the stop. Can you cast any light on that?....because to my knowledge, the Gardai haven't. Don't you think it's odd that the first opportunity that the man is on his own - within minutes of that process, he was stopped in the middle of the town?

I have been stopped at least 50 times over my lifetime, **** happens.

Not true. What I have been doing all thread is dissecting the diatribe and rebutting it - point by point.

No, you have been following your agenda and vehemently denying that you could be wrong on even the smallest point.

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:18PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

This may shock you, people lie under oath all of the time.

Yes, they do don't they ...under oath and in affidavit.

However, we are not talking about 1 witness. We are talking about THREE witnesses.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I believe that they are not telling the whole truth, I don't doubt the house was raided, I do doubt it was done in the manner they claim.

Really? How was it done then - by whom and for what purpose?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

I have been stopped at least 50 times over my lifetime, **** happens.

PLEASE - don't insult peoples intelligence! We are not talking about regular tax/insurance/breathalyser/speeding stops - and well you know it.
Secondly, you were stopped immediately (as in minutes - and at the first time thereafter when you were alone) following a court action which you pursued - that implicates wrongdoing by local and Dublin based Gardai? You were singled out on the road (i.e. NOBODY else was stopped) in the full knowledge of who you were by those stopping you - with them being in full knowledge of proceedings only a short while previously?
Don't insult peoples intelligence.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

No, you have been following your agenda

My 'agenda' - which is?
By the way, I'm the only one that has declared the nature of my interest in this - not one of you has clarified your own (self) interest.

i.e. Any participants who are (or have a close family member who is ) associated with the following;

An Garda Siochána
Courts Service
Judiciary
Solicitors/Barristers
Law Society
GSOC
...among others.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

vehemently denying that you could be wrong on even the smallest point.

ergo....I've visited this thread and witnessed the sullying of the good name of
an individual by those that clearly are acting out of self interest. It's long since that I flagged the entrenched positions of others - and all that has done for me is confirm my thinking on the subject. We'll let the actual neutrals that happen upon this thread decide for themselves.

SpaceSasqwatch · 13-08-2015 08:25PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

i.e. Any participants who are (or have a close family member who is ) associated with the following;

An Garda Siochána
Courts Service
Judiciary
Solicitors/Barristers
Law Society
GSOC
...among others.

lol you're some baby.Paranoid much?

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:27PM

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

lol you're some baby.Paranoid much?

Is that it? Is that your 'contribution' to the discussion or you have an actual point you want to make?

SpaceSasqwatch · 13-08-2015 08:30PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Is that it? Is that your 'contribution' to the discussion or you have an actual point you want to make?

Is it a discussion? I thought it was just you answering questions that nobody asked......

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:32PM

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

Is it a discussion? I thought it was just you answering questions that nobody asked......

Not worthy of a response...

SpaceSasqwatch · 13-08-2015 08:35PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Not worthy of a response...

yet you replied :rolleyes:

This thread should of been moved to conspiracy theories or the freeman megathread.Your brick is way to big to swallow.

conorh91 · 13-08-2015 08:48PM

I watched the whole 30 minutes of the video. I don't believe most of it, or rather, I believe he's omitting a lot of information. Parts of it seem credible.

I do believe there's a variation in the quality of policing nationwide.

There is something very odd about the North-West, Mayo and Donegal in particular. People in those counties make twice the number of complaints against members of AGS as 'comparable' rural areas like Kerry per head of population.

They even complain more than Dubliners, despite this being the national focus for thugs and protests and the scope for greater Garda interaction.

That's a general point by the way, in no way should we take seriously a series of wild accusations via Youtube, from a man who quite clearly is giving an incomplete picture of events.

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:51PM

conorh91 wrote: »

I watched the whole 30 minutes of the video. I don't believe most of it, or rather, I believe he's omitting a lot of information. Parts of it seem credible.

Which parts are credible and which parts don't you believe specifically?
Furthermore, you don't believe 'him' - as in the singular - or you don't believe them (as in all three witnesses)?

SpaceSasqwatch · 13-08-2015 08:53PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

and which parts don't you believe specifically?

He/she said most of it.

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 08:56PM

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

He/she said most of it.

Firstly that wasn't addressed at you (as you already know). Secondly, I used the word specifically.

SpaceSasqwatch · 13-08-2015 09:03PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Firstly that wasn't addressed at you (as you already know). Secondly, I used the word specifically.

its a public forum and as for you requesting information specifically you want the poster to post 20+ points why you're full of sh1te and maybe 2 points to illustrate where you are telling the truth.

The only truths you are telling is that your buddy is a wanted criminal who has previous convictions and his house got raided.Thats it.

You got laughed at in Legal Discussions, the mods told you to shut up in your helpdesk thread and the only bit of oxygen you and II have is here.

Enjoy

knird evol · 13-08-2015 09:41PM

I can think of the names of fifteen different types of birds.

the canary
the macaw
the budgie
the parrot
the parakeet
the Finch
the Toucan
the Magpie
the Jackdaw
the Falcon
the Barn Owl
the Kingfisher
the Goose
the Albatross
the Gannet

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 09:45PM

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

its a public forum

Yes, it's a public forum. Notwithstanding that, clearly I was addressing a question to someone else - and not you - or do you answer for others now?

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

you want the poster to post 20+ points why you're full of sh1te

I don't think the poster was making any commentary about me. Not sure what thread you're reading.

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

The only truths you are telling is that your buddy ....

My 'buddy'?

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

.....is a wanted criminal

A criminal is it? Under these circumstances => "Secondly, don't you think it strange that an operation was underway within minutes of Mr. Doocey participating in a court action that implicated gardai locally and at a higher level? When I say 'implicated', I mean that he claimed wrongdoing. You think it would be wise to initiate a stop under those circumstances unless Mr. Doocey was engaging in something so blatantly unlawful that there was no doubt whatsoever?
If any other police force found itself in question like that, the first thing that would have been clarified would have been the reason for the stop. Can you cast any light on that?....because to my knowledge, the Gardai haven't. Don't you think it's odd that the first opportunity that the man is on his own - within minutes of that process, he was stopped in the middle of the town?"
Sounds to me like he fled the scene of blatant intimidation for his own personal safety.

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

...who has previous convictions

Joe Doocey has long complained of Garda malpractice locally. Whilst he was convicted of an offence, he vehemently maintains his innocence. For the record, there have been wrongful convictions in this state - just in case you are unaware of it.

SpaceSasqwatch wrote:

You got laughed at in Legal Discussions

This would be the "Legal Discussions" forum whereby forum members have tried to tar and feather Integrity Ireland with the 'Freeman' brush - in full knowledge that they have nothing to do with Freeman ideology?
The Legal Discussion forum where practically all forum members are members of the Self regulated (ergo - not regulated) Legal Profession - or ancilliary professions? Yes, they would have a neutral point of view on Integrity Ireland wouldn't they? ...what with I.I.'s sustained advocacy for reform of the 'profession'.
You needn't worry about being 'laughed at' by that lot - I wouldn't expect anything else. It's no secret that their profession is rotten to the core.

SpaceSasqwatch wrote:

the mods told you to shut up in your helpdesk thread

I respectfully disagreed that partisan forum moderators should have a hand in denigrating the good name of an organisation off their own bat by way of the thread title. I remain of that view.

SpaceSasqwatch wrote:

and the only bit of oxygen you and II have is here.

Your use of the word 'oxygen' is telling. It's pretty obvious some folks want to suppress the truth alright.

SpaceSasqwatch · 13-08-2015 09:56PM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Yes, it's a public forum. Notwithstanding that, clearly I was addressing a question to someone else - and not you - or do you answer for others now?

I don't think the poster was making any commentary about me. Not sure what thread you're reading.

My 'buddy'?

A criminal is it? Under these circumstances => "Secondly, don't you think it strange that an operation was underway within minutes of Mr. Doocey participating in a court action that implicated gardai locally and at a higher level? When I say 'implicated', I mean that he claimed wrongdoing. You think it would be wise to initiate a stop under those circumstances unless Mr. Doocey was engaging in something so blatantly unlawful that there was no doubt whatsoever?
If any other police force found itself in question like that, the first thing that would have been clarified would have been the reason for the stop. Can you cast any light on that?....because to my knowledge, the Gardai haven't. Don't you think it's odd that the first opportunity that the man is on his own - within minutes of that process, he was stopped in the middle of the town?"
Sounds to me like he fled the scene of blatant intimidation for his own personal safety.

Joe Doocey has long complained of Garda malpractice locally. Whilst he was convicted of an offence, he vehemently maintains his innocence. For the record, there have been wrongful convictions in this state - just in case you are unaware of it.

This would be the "Legal Discussions" forum whereby forum members have tried to tar and feather Integrity Ireland with the 'Freeman' brush - in full knowledge that they have nothing to do with Freeman ideology?
The Legal Discussion forum where practically all forum members are members of the Self regulated (ergo - not regulated) Legal Profession - or ancilliary professions? Yes, they would have a neutral point of view on Integrity Ireland wouldn't they? ...what with I.I.'s sustained advocacy for reform of the 'profession'.
You needn't worry about being 'laughed at' by that lot - I wouldn't expect anything else. It's no secret that their profession is rotten to the core.

I respectfully disagreed that partisan forum moderators should have a hand in branding an organisation off their own bat by way of the thread title. I remain of that view.

Your use of the word 'oxygen' is telling. It's pretty obvious some folks want to suppress the truth alright.

you're at it again..answering questions nobody asked

makeorbrake · 13-08-2015 10:01PM

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

you're at it again..answering questions nobody asked

I'm sorry if you find the truth uncomfortable. What is it they say? The truth hurts but it cures?....

garda corruption alive and well

Comments