Homeland Security raids mall kiosks, claims they "fund terrorists"

[myrkul]

Which ones? The ones involving terrorists?

Or trademark violations?

The former...

Thanks, that's all I needed. Now, since the DHS is involved, clearly the case involved terrorists, yes? So the title is neither sensationalist, nor a lie.

[Kluge]

I don't remember hearing anything about a new, invasive police force with jurisdiction everywhere called DHS. It didn't seem to garner as much discussion as it probably should have, considering it now handles everything from MSB compliance to cheap knock-off products in malls.

You know, though, AE -- cell phone accessories have notoriously high markup over cost to manufacture. It's in roughly the same margin class as "designer" costume jewelry. Why on Earth would any organization be worried about increasing an 80% margin? Are the "dangerous underground entities" just that greedy? Or maybe the plastic foundry (are they called foundries?) is part of the much bigger money-laundering, kill-Americans-with-unsafe-plastics scheme?

[RavinTavin]

Frankly, I am surprised that MFC hasn't caught more heat about sending money around the world, some of the girls look to be in cave!

[AzureEngineer]

Thanks, that's all I needed. Now, since the DHS is involved, clearly the case involved terrorists, yes? So the title is neither sensationalist, nor a lie.

The Sun is made of cotton candy! The Sun is made of cotton candy! Maybe if I say it over and over again, it becomes true? I mean, that must be what happens. There is no other reason you would so blatantly lie over and over again. Continue this type of garbage discussion and I will ignore you for trolling. Now try again, and think before you post this time.

The problem is that Homeland Security people are sitting about waiting since 2002 waiting for something they can fight back against.  Nothing has happened that they can stop. So they are using counter-terrorist institutions and legislation against hucksters selling fake perfumes and jeans.

I agree the hucksters needed to be taken down.  I agree that the Homeland Security people are more use doing that than sitting about playing pocket billiards.  But what does bother me is that its called "Homeland Security" and its being used for routine police work. 

If they had done the same raid and never once mentioned terrorism or Homeland Security, no-one would object.

Severian's point in making the post is that petty crime is being attacked by elite anti-terrorist forces backed by the Patriot Act.  I'm sure you can see why that is a bad thing.

The other guys piling in saying this proves that all police action is evil and illegitimate? Ignore them.

The flip side is that if the DHS got involved, they probably have more evidence than a bunch of counterfeit merchandise. There could be an absolute bucket of reasons that the DHS did this and I highly doubt it is solely because they thought that terrorists were using the products as income. That is personal speculation on my part though. Other than that, I agree that the DHS handling this was extreme, but as far as I'm concerned, it was far from the wrong thing to do.

[sal002]

There is nothing wrong with seizing counterfeit products. Your sensationalist title skews the issue.

Exactly.

[myrkul]

Thanks, that's all I needed. Now, since the DHS is involved, clearly the case involved terrorists, yes? So the title is neither sensationalist, nor a lie.

The Sun is made of cotton candy! The Sun is made of cotton candy! Maybe if I say it over and over again, it becomes true? I mean, that must be what happens. There is no other reason you would so blatantly lie over and over again. Continue this type of garbage discussion and I will ignore you for trolling. Now try again, and think before you post this time.

DHS are the police when it involves crimes such as these [which involve terrorists].

Or maybe a better title would be: DHS desperate for purpose, claims flimsy excuse to raid mall kisoks?

[Hawker]

..snip...
The flip side is that if the DHS got involved, they probably have more evidence than a bunch of counterfeit merchandise. There could be an absolute bucket of reasons that the DHS did this and I highly doubt it is solely because they thought that terrorists were using the products as income. That is personal speculation on my part though. Other than that, I agree that the DHS handling this was extreme, but as far as I'm concerned, it was far from the wrong thing to do.

What if, and this is only speculation, in these days of sequestrated budgets, the Department of Homeland Security wants to show its not a total waste of money and operations like this are all they have to work on?

Seriously there is no invasion for them to defend against; the Boston bombs make them look stupid; money is tight; perhaps this is all they have to avoid being fired for uselessness?

[AzureEngineer]

What if, and this is only speculation, in these days of sequestrated budgets, the Department of Homeland Security wants to show its not a total waste of money and operations like this are all they have to work on?

Seriously there is no invasion for them to defend against; the Boston bombs make them look stupid; money is tight; perhaps this is all they have to avoid being fired for uselessness?

This could be a possibility. Government always tends to go for a reward-by-result numbers game. I wouldn't be able to say such a thing is true, because I'm not in a position to say just how much impact the DHS really has on the activity of terrorists. I think in the end though a strategy such as this would be moot, as you would be chasing phantom cases. "We thought this was the action of terrorists but wasn't, oops" might be a lot worse than "we have thus far found no sign of terrorist threat." Having one rather small article to go on makes assessment of exactly what the DHS is doing in this case is all but impossible.

[Hawker]

What if, and this is only speculation, in these days of sequestrated budgets, the Department of Homeland Security wants to show its not a total waste of money and operations like this are all they have to work on?

Seriously there is no invasion for them to defend against; the Boston bombs make them look stupid; money is tight; perhaps this is all they have to avoid being fired for uselessness?

This could be a possibility. Government always tends to go for a reward-by-result numbers game. I wouldn't be able to say such a thing is true, because I'm not in a position to say just how much impact the DHS really has on the activity of terrorists. I think in the end though a strategy such as this would be moot, as you would be chasing phantom cases. "We thought this was the action of terrorists but wasn't, oops" might be a lot worse than "we have thus far found no sign of terrorist threat." Having one rather small article to go on makes assessment of exactly what the DHS is doing in this case is all but impossible.

The tone of the OP's article says "Look at me - I am not a waste of money."  It's not a huge issue that DHS got used instead of the local cops to arrest hucksters selling fake copyrights.  But it is interesting that they have so little work that is what they are told to do.

[AzureEngineer]

The tone of the OP's article says "Look at me - I am not a waste of money."  It's not a huge issue that DHS got used instead of the local cops to arrest hucksters selling fake copyrights.  But it is interesting that they have so little work that is what they are told to do.

It is a very queer use of resources, that I can agree with. That they needed "undercover" agents to buy the items in the first place sounds like a badly scripted 007 film. I think it can boil down to two basic options. Either the DHS left out some very major details in order to preserve the operation as a whole... or they are completely wasting their time with mundane investigations.

[Hawker]

The tone of the OP's article says "Look at me - I am not a waste of money."  It's not a huge issue that DHS got used instead of the local cops to arrest hucksters selling fake copyrights.  But it is interesting that they have so little work that is what they are told to do.

It is a very queer use of resources, that I can agree with. That they needed "undercover" agents to buy the items in the first place sounds like a badly scripted 007 film. I think it can boil down to two basic options. Either the DHS left out some very major details in order to preserve the operation as a whole... or they are completely wasting their time with mundane investigations.

In Northern Ireland, after the IRA declared a ceasefire, there was a similiar rash of investigations into petty drug dealing and the like.  There really is nothing like the scent of redundancy letters to inspire this kind of zeal.

[Spendulus]

..snip...
The flip side is that if the DHS got involved, they probably have more evidence than a bunch of counterfeit merchandise. There could be an absolute bucket of reasons that the DHS did this and I highly doubt it is solely because they thought that terrorists were using the products as income. That is personal speculation on my part though. Other than that, I agree that the DHS handling this was extreme, but as far as I'm concerned, it was far from the wrong thing to do.

What if, and this is only speculation, in these days of sequestrated budgets, the Department of Homeland Security wants to show its not a total waste of money and operations like this are all they have to work on?

Seriously there is no invasion for them to defend against; the Boston bombs make them look stupid; money is tight; perhaps this is all they have to avoid being fired for uselessness?

All proceeds according to plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

[Severian]

The DHS handled the situation because the operation behind the counterfeit items may have also been a terrorist organization. What exactly is your problem with any of that?

I'm not the one raising objections to anything but DHS's mission creep.

[Severian]

All proceeds according to plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

Yepper. A strong, well-funded "civilian security force" has never gone wrong in any other place or era. /s

[Severian]

So the title is neither sensationalist, nor a lie.

The only way that I could see it being sensationalist or a lie is if one's perception is influenced by a predilection to be favorable to public agencies. I was a little surprised by the vehemence of the complaint.

[niko]

When it comes to major brands, I actually always try to buy counterfeit goods when safety is not at risk. Clothes, for example. Feels good at many levels, and feels even better after reading this thread.

[gramma]

In Northern Ireland, after the IRA declared a ceasefire, there was a similiar rash of investigations into petty drug dealing and the like.  There really is nothing like the scent of redundancy letters to inspire this kind of zeal.

^^^ This.  Some of us are old enough to remember.

[Biomech]

"Homeland Security does wellness check for corporate trademarks, naughty people found"

Is this better?

This is sensationalist as well. Depending on the counterfeiter, counterfeit items can be quite dangerous, as most cut costs by not abiding by health and safety standards. Saying counterfeit items are bad because it hurts corporations is silly.

To repeat, since you seem made of dense stuff: DHS claimed it could be funding terrorist networks. They used the excuse, not me.

Would you prefer the government allow what could be a terrorist fund to continue unabated? You're not making a whole lot of sense.

News flash. The difference between a "terrorist" and a "soldier" is who's telling the story.

[Biomech]

Why is this being made about me? This is about DHS busting trademark infringers and claiming that they could fund terrorism as the excuse.

Counterfeit items are a danger in and of themselves. They are often made without industry regulations (because the manufactureres are illegal in the first place). The DHS handled the situation because the operation behind the counterfeit items may have also been a terrorist organization. What exactly is your problem with any of that?

I could dispute this a great deal. But following on your logic, what about Federal Reserve Notes? If you follow their history from their first issuance in 1913 through today, they cannot be called anything BUT counterfeit. Originally, they were a warehouse receipt. Then through quasi-legal subterfuge and outright theft in 1937, they were made to be promissory notes. Then the original intent was sacrificed on the altar of the great god Keynes. Now they are LITERALLY worth less than the special paper they are printed on.

They are made without industry regulations (because the manufacturers are illegal in the first place{No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.}).

What I NEVER see pointed out in these threads, even by people on my side of the argument, is something that should be trumpeted from the rooftops. DHS and KGB have the same meaning, and the same function. There was never any purpose behind DHS EXCEPT to spy on and control the subjects of the Empire. If they are involved, it's dirty. Period. These are people who view honesty and integrity as swear words.

I have lived in the Empire for 44 years. In my youth it was a relatively pleasant and relatively free place. Now, in just a couple of decades, it has turned into something beyond the Checka's wildest dreams. Hitler would be jealous and Mussolini proud.

[hashman]

News flash. The difference between a "terrorist" and a "soldier" is who's telling the story.

So another version then:

"Uniformed terrorist gang robs small-time entrepeneurs in plain daylight"

If anybody didn't expect this kind of thing to occur, they obviously missed the most basic tenets of primate psychology. 

If you give a bunch of kids uniforms and guns and tell them its ok to rob people and commit violence for political gain, it's likely to happen. 

So, do you think this kind of thing is going to get more blatant and costly for us all until we fight back or will these guys grow up and find real jobs on their own?