Security Branch
- Cooke unwittingly brings another elephant into the room
Gentlemen and their carriages in the vicinity of GSOC offices
Verrimus staff reported what they recognised as clear signs of physical surveillance around the GSOC office. They might be expected to recognise such given their backgrounds. Their observations might be difficult to dispute.Cooke takes the option of Conclusion.23 (Page 50)
So far as concerns the suspicions of physical surveillance – the white van and the two men who turned away; the men observing the Verrimus operatives from the street; the man with the heavy sports bag in the coffee shop and the photographer at the airport – having regard to the demonstration visit made by Verrimus to Garda Síochána Security Branch in September, it seems highly likely that such surveillance (if that is what it was) was directed at the activities of Verrimus operatives rather than at GSOC personnel. This impression would appear to be supported by the contents of the phone calls subsequently received by Mr …. as described in Appendix III.It does not seem to strike Coke that Verrimus are inside teh GSOC office in order to provide the sort of legitmate security sweeps that he recommends that they do on a more frequent basis. They are there on GSOC business. Surveilling them while in the GSOC office is the same as surveilling GSOC.
In 10.24 – Page 46, Cooke has:
It is notable that when these incidents were being evaluated by the investigating officers they had been aware of Mr ’s visit to the Garda Security Division in September. At the time however the possible significance of that fact does not appear to have been appreciated. On the face of it, there would hardly be surprising if the Security Branch knowing that UK counter-surveillance experts were in Dublin with very sophisticated equipment, had an interest in the identities of their other potential clients. …..
Invoking the Security Spell is classic misdirection.
When the Security Spell in invoked, the people around in support of the speaker must go po-faced and nod wisely. This increases the power of the spell.
The effect of the spell is to make listeners suspend their intellectual faculties. It makes questions go away. State Security is very, very serious and important Mummy and Daddy stuff. It is not to be discussed in front of the children or the servants.
If Cooke suggests a theory that Security Branch would be interested enough in Verrimus to put them under surveillance, then we should all do the po-faced nodding thing and stop asking questions. Under no circumstances should we notice that he also mentions a statement by the Garda Commissioner that there was no such surveillance. Under no circumstrances should we think about a valid rationale for surveillance.
Let’s be very naughty and start questioning ……
Look them up http://verrimus.com/
Look at their Twitter timeline. Here's one:
Who might they be promoting their services to?
See 9.62 – Page 34
Mr … also mentioned in evidence that he had availed of his four days in Dublin between 23rd –27th September 2013 to visit some other prospective customers with a view to interesting them in training courses and in the equipment his company could provide. These included a visit to the Garda Síochána Security Division where he demonstrated a number of up-to-date counter-surveillance devices
Other potential clients?
OK. Garda Síochána Security Division. They don’t sound like terrorists or criminals - much.
Who else?
Financial institutions, legal offices, high-value intellectual property owners, keepers of sensitive information, etc. That’s what Verrimus does. It offers consultancy and services to do with COUNTER-surveillance.
Why would Cooke think it unsurprising that the Security Branch would be interested in a legitimate business offering legitimate counter-surveillance services to legitimate entities that included the Garda Síochána Security Division?
Is the Security Branch “more Austin Powers than James Bond”?
No matter. Security would be very discreetly tailing Verrimus around Dublin, checking on who they were meeting, just in case.You might think that using specialist manpower on at least a 16-hour per day basis over 4 days (for just one Verrimus trip alone) on such a 'long shot' would be more than a little excessive given budgetary cutbacks. Would they have nothing more useful to do?
But…
The physical surveillance was noted only in the vicinity of the GSOC office - inside which, Verrimus would be highly unlikely to be meeting "other potential clients" - and certainly not other clients of the criminal or terrorist persuasion.
One would think that if Verrimus were tucked up in the GSOC office, then the surveillance teams could relax. Keep an eye on the door alone in case they try to sneak out to meet some terrorists and criminals.
If the Security Branch interest is in other potential (necessarily criminal) clients, why are they making great effort to see what Verrimus are doing inside the office of the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission office?
If Irish Intelligence were surveilling Verrimus employees while working at the GSOC office, what would be the purpose?
It seems reasonable to assume that if the physical surveillance around GSOC was directed at Verrimus, then it was not directed at Verrimus per se or on "other potential clients". It would bedirected on what Verrimus might be teaching and/or discovering about technical surveillance at GSOC. Surely this would be benign legitimate necessary activity on the part of Verrimus and GSOC?
Ah! We’ve missed something.
Warning. This video includes scenes of po-faced nodding.
This is why State Security is only for Mummies and Daddies. We children had assumed that Verrimus was a legitimate firm used and recommended by GSOC’s UK counterpart. What we missed is that Verrimus is a “FOREIGN spying firm - essentially”. …..FOREIGN….. …… SPYING……
That website, tweet and legitimate customer base is just a front ... for spying ... presumably for the British Government.
So ….
Verrimus are inside the GSOC offices (by invitation) and they are spying on the vital state secrets that are stored in there.
In order to counter this, the Security Branch are wandering about outside with bad tradecraft and peering in the windows. To aid their surveillance they might have equipment in vans or in heavy bags.
Oh my sainted Mummies and Daddies!!
I don't suppose that Security Branch might have had a discreet word with GSOC in order to advise them that they were holding vipers to their bosom?
This is good fun and games, but here comes a very serious point
Cooke invoked the State Security spell. In order to give extra power to the spell, he points to the mysterious telephone calls made to Verrius (aka foreign-spies) by someone with connections to people in Irish State Security.
This impression would appear to be supported by the contents of the phone calls subsequently received by Mr …. as described in Appendix IIIWhat Cooke does not seem to understand is that he is introducing a huge elephant into the room.
This “supported by” only works if the audience is po-faced and nodding.
What Cooke has totally missed is the meaning of the timing of those calls – 19th and 24th February 2014.
He includes extracts from the calls - Appendix III – Pages 61,62
25th February 2014 – first call:
CALLER “Well, you know, one of the things that may come out of this, when you speak with the Judge … Is to impress upon him that that particular aspect of things that actually that you would like the Gardaí would actually get a copy of everything, right. … And, you know, try to impress upon him that, you know, that it’s in everyone’s interest that all of this should be out in the open and that everyone could talk about it, because what it actually means to them, right, is that if he would be monitored doing what you were doing, by somebody, right then that is a criminal matter and that is something that needs to be investigated.”
CALLER “Right. And they should be investigated by the powers that be and in this case that means the Gardaí need to know exactly what it is that you actually discovered. So that would be one of the primary things I believe that should come out of all of this.”
Cooke describes the calls as “lengthy and quite oblique for the most part” and “one theme appears to have been a desire on the part of the individual to convey concerns that had been expressed to him by contacts in both the Garda Síochána and Irish Army Security Services”
>> "the Gardaí need to know exactly what it is that you actually discovered" <<
When those calls were made, Shatter already had the Verrimus reports. They were in the Department of Justice. He had even passed copies to Rits for review. Cooke had them. His inquiry was in progress.There is no sign in the "Expert Opinion of Rits" (Pages 15,16) of Rits looking for more detailed information. Presumably the Verrimus reports were detailed enough.
If the Security Branch / Gardai wanted to know what was in the Verrimus reports, then all they had to do was pick them up and read them in DoJ.
I suspect that within what Cooke describes as “lengthy and quite oblique” content, the caller will have been suggesting that Verrimus supply a copy of their material direct to him and whomever he is fronting for. Forewarned is forearmed.
It is interesting that the calls take place after Shatter, Callinan and an army of establishment entities have dismissed the supposed bugging of GSOC as a 'bottle of smoke'.
Shatter had Rits review the Verrimus reports and had declared that there was “no evidence whatsoever” of any bugging by anybody.
And yet despite that… the people behind the caller appear to be still working on the expectation that Verrimus might have evidence. They seem most keen on knowing the extent of what Verrimus had discovered. They might be interested in any detailed information that was summarised in the reports.
Could it be that they know/believe that bugging actually took place, but are unsure as to how successful the clean-up of traces had been?
Are they behind that bugging?
Are they keeping an eye on colleagues/peers that they believe are behind the bugging?
Whoever they are, they don’t appear to have access to Verrimus reports that are in DoJ. Does this not mean that that they are running an unofficial operation? These people are then either the buggers or they are vigilantes.
In the second call, the mission seems to be to get their own man ( ex Defence Forces) inside the Cooke Inquiry so as to be able to “assist” it in a certain way. That might involve having access to all available information and/or the use their status to create a lens through which Cooke would view it.
CALLER: Well, you know, there is work going on behind the scenes there to put in a man in there who may understand the whole significance of it. Right. And I know that the boys in green are trying to get a man who is, let me say…..
If Irish intelligence were surveilling Verrimus while they worked in the GSOC offices, was this officially sanctioned?
Again from Cooke in 9.62 – Page 34
In the interview of 19th May 2014 the Commissioners gave me to understand that they had been informed by the Garda Commissioner that no operation in the vicinity of the GSOC offices had been in place on 20th October 2013.
Cooke suggests that Irish intelligence services might have been engaged in surveillance of Verrimus while they worked inside the GSOC office but at the same time indicates that the Garda Commissioner was unaware of any authorised operation, and could get not confirmation of one taking place.
- He has suggestion coming out of nowhere but a need to explain suspicious events away.
- He has a concrete denial from the Garda Commissioner that his suggestion is valid.
Cooke goes for the unsupported suggestion that is intended to stop the questions. It's the Lord Denning "Appalling Vista" approach.
We are supposed to go po-faced, nod and not think about things because it's "Security".We are also not supposed to notice conflicts in retarded logic involved in explaining what the official/non-official physical surviellance as observed was trying to achieve.
The mystery caller says that he is fronting for people in state security. These people seem to be at the very least still open to the idea of actual bugging of GSOC despite the assertions of “no evidence whatsoever”. They might even have knowledge of such. They are apparently not in a position to view documents that are in possession of the Department of Justice.
Alternatively, they have had a view but want more detail.
The problem remains - if these people are legitimate and operating with the knowledge of their superiors ( in the superiors' capacity as acting for the state), then why should they adopt such an indirect approach? If they are legitimate, they could go straight to GSOC and ask them to facilitate complete disclosure of everything that Verrimus discovered.
Apparently the Department of Defence have responded to the reports of these telephone calls by assuring us that no military personnel were involved or connected with these approaches in an way.
Either the caller was fabricating the story about who he was fronting or the Army is unaware that some of their Intelligence personnel play away.
So who was doing that surveillance?
Was there something Boylan-ish off-the-books going on?
Is there some sort of turf war going on that is wider than just Boylan?
Looking at
- the murky goins-on around Boylan,
- the very clear indications that GSOC was bugged,
- the implications from the mysterious calls to Verrimus, and
- the hysteria on the part of our betters (supported some compliant journalists) in response to suggestions that all might not be well
- it seem inescapable that there are elements within AGS / Security that are out of control and even engaged in an internal struggle.
Remember the Morris Tribunal:
6.05Government and management can not but be aware of this, but are totally unable to deal with the situation. They prefer to try to sweep it under the carpet.
…..Without a management structure being restored to the Gardaí that is based on strict compliance with orders, and immediate accountability, the danger is extreme that what the Tribunal has reported on in Donegal will be repeated; and that such conduct will multiply if allowed to go unchecked.
6.09
The Tribunal has been staggered by the amount of indiscipline and insubordination it has found in the Garda force. There is a small, but disproportionately influential, core of mischief-making members who will not obey orders, who will not follow procedures, who will not tell the truth and who have no respect for their officers. An Garda Síochána is an organisation necessarily vested with wide-ranging powers that impose on the constitutional rights of the citizens of Ireland. It must have, as in a military organisation, accountability and unwavering discipline…..
But ......
To borrow a phrase from someone:
"They haven't gone away you know."
Here's a Sunday Independent piece by Gene Kerrigan from March 2014 - that begins to scratch the surface
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/gene-kerrigan/were-paying-price-of-blind-eye-politics-30138573.html
Next:
The decisions to call in Verrimus and initiate a PI
Other pages:
- Bottle of Genie
- Your 5-minute guide to the reliability of the Cooke Report findings - Bugging of GSOC mobile phones – an elephant in the room
- The Boylan affair as a trigger for surveillance of GSOCand context arising from the Morris Tribunal findings
- Extent of bugging and Observations on the “three anomalies” - some invalid assumptions made in the report
No comments:
Post a Comment