The Department of Homeland Security Goes on a Panty Raid

|

Birdies Panties via Kansas City Star / Wichita Eagle

In 2002, the Bush administration issued a formal proposal outlining the reasoning for the creation a new, cabinet-level bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

"The changing nature of the threats facing America requires a new government structure to protect against invisible enemies that can strike with a wide variety of weapons," the proposal explained. "America needs a single, unified homeland security structure that will improve protection against today's threats and be flexible enough to help meet the unknown threats of the future." Without DHS, America would never be safe.

Flash forward to 2014. The Department of Homeland Security has a $39 billion annual budget. It is fighting the fight against our invisible enemies, and taking on the unknown threats of the future.

By confiscating baseball-themed women's underwear from enthusiastic local retailers.

The Kansas City Star reports on Peregrine Honig, who created the design for "Lucky Royals" women's boyshorts, featuring the words "take the crown" and a "KC" logo emblazoned on the rear, in honor of the Kansas City Royals baseball team making it to the World Series.

Honig was going to sell the boyshorts in her store, Honig's Birdies Panties. Then a pair of DHS agents stopped by:

Homeland Security agents visited the Crossroads store and confiscated the few dozen pairs of underwear, printed in Kansas City by Lindquist Press.

"They came in and there were two guys" Honig said. "I asked one of them what size he needed and he showed me a badge and took me outside. They told me they were from Homeland Security and we were violating copyright laws."

She thought that since the underwear featured her hand-drawn design that she was safe. But the officers explained that by connecting the "K" and the "C," she infringed on major league baseball copyright. (The officials involved could not be immediately reached for comment.)

They placed the underwear in an official Homeland Security bag and had Honig sign a statement saying she wouldn't use the logo.

Don't you feel safer now?

The Royals won their first World Series game in decades last night. We all lose when overfunded, unnecessary bureaucracies expand their poorly defined missions into doing dumb stuff like this.

(Link via Radley Balko's Twitter feed.)

Here's ReasonTV with three reasons to scrap DHS now:

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

153 responses to “The Department of Homeland Security Goes on a Panty Raid

  1. DHS confiscated them so they could put them in a twist.

    1. a DHS agent is sitting in his car vigorously fapping to his new stash of panties, and he is on the clock getting paid for it…

    2. Be careful, because satire that’s not funny enough will also soon be criminalized. For now, you’re safe as long as you don’t send out any email “confessions” in the “names” of DHS officials. But be careful not to cross the line, because “neither good faith nor truth is a defense.” See:

      http://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

  2. “America needs a single, unified homeland security structure that will improve protection against today’s threats and be flexible enough to help meet the unknown threats of the future.”

    *outright, prolonged laughter*

    1. That right there pretty much put to rest any remaining delusions I might have still had about GWB being any kind of small government pol. He outed himself as a pro-life proggie from that point forward.

    2. The scariest quote ever, and just in time for Halloween.

  3. the officers explained that by connecting the “K” and the “C,” she infringed on major league baseball copyright

    You’re not fooling me! This didn’t happen.

    Right?

    1. Need to check to make sure this isn’t from The Onion.

      1. Reason needs a not-The-Onion tag for stories?

    2. For one thing, it would be trademark, not copyright.

      1. Actually, it could be both. But the idea of connecting the K and the C as being either is ludicrous.

        And how the hell does this fall under the scope of DHS? Were these panties a threat to the country? Is this a vicious terrorist plot that will destroy the economy or undermine the fabric of the nation? I suggest there is someone at the Royals who didn’t like this and has a buddy working for DHS who agreed to go break some legs to send a message.

        1. It is also to be noted that while the matter could be a potential criminal matter, it primarily falls under the scope of and is always a civil matter.

          To become a criminal matter, the amount would necessarily have to exceed $2500, and the investigation of such would be done by the FBI, not DHS, and it would necessarily precede any seizure unless the materials were by their nature, illegal. Panties are rarely that [/sarc]

          The fact that there was a legit and arguable disagreement about the nature of the violation (her artwork with the only connection being that the letters connected) is something that no unbiased criminal judge is going to sign off on when it comes to seizure of property.

        2. Our newly minted National Cops have WAY too much time on their hands. Didn’t we create that department over terrorism? What in the world are they doing trademark infringement for? Great Scott!

        3. so when i connect a C and a K as in “those DHS fuCKs can suCK my coCK” am i in violation?

  4. Someone has to stop the China-men and their knockoff jerseys. Who’s that going to be? You, reason?

    1. You need me in Honig’s Birdies Panties!

      1. YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH…ABOUT WHAT’S IN THE PANTIES!

        1. This seems appropriate here, for many reasons.

          1. So not clicking that link.

            1. It is relevant.

  5. And this is why they couldn’t stop the Tsarnaev brothers, even after the Russians specifically warned them.

    1. Unfortunately, men wearing copyright-violating panties are a protected class.

    2. That wasn’t DHS. That was the FBI. The Tsarnaev Brothers had valid green cards. It takes more than a note from the Russians that these guys are dangerous to revoke their green cards. The FBI handles counter terrorism. All DHS could have done was try and deport them.

      1. Isn’t DHS supposed to coordinate anti-terrorist activities among the various agencies? To solve the problem of the ‘wall’ between agencies causing information like this to get ‘lost’ or ignored? So the Tsarnaev fiasco was a fail for both the FBI and also the DHS.

        1. Nope. FBI is the “lead agency” for counter terror and guard that role jealously. You would think DHS would do that. And the agency was sold to the public as doing that but that is not how it works. The FBI has too many allies in congress to ever give up their lead role in whatever gets them a press conference.

          1. the proposal explained. “America needs a single, unified homeland security structure

            That actually is supposed to be the core mission of DHS. And I think the fact that they are not doing it, and are instead enforcing copyright law, is the point here.

          2. So they do share blame. The DHS for being a gutless waste of money, and the FBI for being incompetent glory-hounds.

            1. Sure they do Bryan, if you are shreek level retarded maybe. By your logic they share the blame for the IRS scandal too.

              The responsibilities are what they are.

              1. DHS responsibilities:

                “the Department of Homeland Security works in the civilian sphere to protect the United States within, at, and outside its borders. Its stated goal is to prepare for, prevent, and respond to domestic emergencies, particularly terrorism.”

                Those are their stated responsibilities, their entire reason for being. The fact that they are doing other stupid bullshit instead is the point here. I don’t see how pointing that out is retarded.

                1. Because that has nothing to do with the actual facts of the case which were the guys had green cards and thus couldn’t be denied entry or deported based on the information and that it was the FBI’s job to investigate and prosecute terror cases and thus act on the information given by the Russians.

                  You guys don’t help yourselves by making bad arguments even if it is for a good case.

                  1. Of course they could be denied entry or deported, all they had to do was revoke their visas, which they can do if:
                    “…the alien is ineligible to receive a visa or enter the United States for health, criminal, security, or other serious reasons;
                    They had actual security reasons to revoke their visas and ship them out. But they fucked up and didn’t bother to do anything.

                    1. Of course they could be denied entry or deported, all they had to do was revoke their visas, which they can do if:

                      No judge in the country would revoke their visas over a note from the Russians. They didn’t have tourist VISAS. They had green cards. Those are very difficult to revoke.

                      And it is more than a bit rich to hear open borders Reasonites bitch that DHS fucked up by not deporting someone.

                    2. Fair enough, maybe they didn’t have enough to pull their green cards, but the fact remains that the DHS was created specifically to coordinate anti-terrorism activities in the “homeland” and they have failed miserably at that task. But still do stupid shit like customs enforcement, as if that had anything to do with keeping Americans safe from terrorists.

                    3. but the fact remains that the DHS was created specifically to coordinate anti-terrorism activities in the “homeland”

                      they have no authority to do that. That authority lies with the FBI. The FBI is the designated lead agency for counter terrorism.

              2. I see two federal agencies who have two equally bad excuses for not doing the jobs they ostensibly exist to do. What am I missing?

                1. What is DHS’s excuse Bryan? That they didn’t break the law and just deport them illegally? Because that is what they would have had to have done. They only own immigration law. They own counter terrorism or domestic criminal law. The FBI owns that.

                  1. So the bureaucratic regime is to blame? Ok, who cares? The government fucked up. I don’t care which agency Obama eventually wants to assign responsibility to. The government fucked up. Period.

                  2. John, I don’t get your argument. The DHS obviously has some responsibility for domestic terrorism, by its very mission statement. That being said, no one is saying DHS should deport the Tsarvnevs on the basis of a Russian letter. DHS is supposed to be the hub that connects the dots to identify the high-risk threats. The Russian notice is merely one piece of the puzzle. DHS, FBI, etc. should have determined whether the threat was credible and investigated/acted accordingly. Hindsight says they obviously dropped the ball.

                    Now, these dipshits are wasting our money enforcing copyright? I think there’s a major bitch to be had here.

                  3. I’ll agree that the DHS got a raw deal. They were given a job yet denied the authority to actually do their job. They’re a misbegotten agency with a massive budget that’s shamelessly wasted on politics, security theater, and make-work nonsense like this. They’re defined by TSA gropers while taking the blame for other agencies mistakes. That’s humiliating, and it should be.

                    DHS is broken and unaccountable by design, and everyone is worse off for its existence. It would be best for all concerned to dissolve DHS back into its constituent parts and cut our losses.

    3. If only the Tsarnaev’s had violated copyright law…

  6. Reason really could fuck up a cup of coffee sometimes. The problem here is not DHS. It is the federal government acting as the armed enforcement wing of MLB and every other copyright holder. Somehow copyrights have become a criminal issue rather than a civil one.

    Would reason feel better if the old Department of Commerce had done this raid? I wouldn’t. There are lots of opportunities to write DHS sucks stories. Please don’t fuck up a good “my God the feds have turned the powers of law enforcement to the support of their big business cronies” story into a DHS story.

    1. I think its kind of both. It shouldn’t be a criminal issue, but even if it was, it has nothing at all to do with DHS.

      1. It was everything to do with DHS. Customs enforcement is a core DHS mission. And part of customs enforcement is stopping counterfeit goods that violate various copyrights. So DHS does have a role in enforcing copyright law.

        1. I thought DHS was created to stop teh terroristez?

          Oh, that’s right. Copyright infringement is how the terrorists are funding their operations. It all fits now.

          1. thought DHS was created to stop teh terroristez?

            No, it was created as one agency to defend the borders of the country mostly by consolidating customs and immigration enforcement into one agency. Customs enforcement includes a lot more than just terrorism and in fact is 99% not related to terrorism.

            Most of what DHS does has nothing to do with terrorism. In fact, it is FBI that is still the lead agency for counter terrorism.

            1. Why would customs and immigration be involved? Is there some evidence that these items were imported?

              1. See my post below. There isn’t a reason for them to be and no one who actually is an LEO at DHS would identify themselves so generically. This whole story doesn’t add up.

            2. FBI should also be enforcing copyright…at least that is what it says on every DVD/CD you purchase these days.

            3. John,

              Maybe you missed it, but these items were printed in the USA. No customs issues here.

        2. Customs enforcement is a core DHS mission.

          What part of “homeland security” is furthered by a panty raid?

          1. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The problem here is the customs laws. You could kill DHS today and these raids would still be occurring just done by another agency.

            1. You could kill DHS today and these raids would still be occurring just done by another agency.

              Well, of course.

            2. You could kill DHS today and these raids would still be occurring just done by another agency.

              And when that agency rears its head, we kill it.

          2. What part of “homeland security” is furthered by a panty raid?

            The fact that wives, girlfriends, mistresses, etc., of the agents involved get free panties?

            1. And maybe a few of the agents themselves ?

              Male and female ?

        3. Customs should not be involved in copyright or trademark disputes. That should be resolved in court between the copyright holders and the alleged violators.

          And in this case the panties in question were apparently made and sold within the US. Perhaps entirely in the state of Kansas. Why on earth should that invoke customs enforcement?

          1. It doesn’t. I don’t think these guys, whoever they were, were what they claimed to be.

            1. I’m with John on this one.

              The story is too outlandish even for idiotic government workers.

              1. Is that even possible?

            2. Who could they have been ?

              Who would impersonated DHS officers to conduct this raid ?

          2. Kansas City is in Missouri.

            1. There’s a Kansas City, Kansas, just across the river from Kansas City, Missouri.

              1. I am aware. I live here. KCMO is by far the larger of the two and the Royals and Chiefs play in Mo. The incident in hand took place in Missouri. Sorry man, it annoys the shit out me when people think KC is a Kansas town.

                1. And Kansans like to remind everyone there is a KCK.

                  Just like New Mexicans like to remind everyone there is a Las Vegas, NM, which used to be bigger than Las Vegas, NV.

                  1. Fair enough. I know it’s a trivial thing to the rest of the country, but given the history of violence between the two states, we tend to get butt hurt when people wrongly think you’re a resident of one or the other. Despite sharing the same metropolitan area, there’s a very deep divide on state allegiance.

                  2. And Paris, Texas is the foodie capitol of the US !

                2. Sorry man, it annoys the shit out me when people think KC is a Kansas town.

                  You might consider getting up a petition to rename it Missouri City.

                  Just a thought. 😉

                  1. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki…..,_Missouri

                    Already taken.

                  2. P.S. Sorry about Claire McCaskill. You can’t blame me for that one.

        4. From the DHS Website:

          The Core Missions

          There are five homeland security missions:

          Prevent terrorism and enhancing security;
          Secure and manage our borders;
          Enforce and administer our immigration laws;
          Safeguard and secure cyberspace;
          Ensure resilience to disasters;

          I’m sure that the fuckweasels running DHS would claim, somewhere, somehow that ‘copyright infringement’ is under one of those missions.

          But those five core missions say fuck all about domestic copyright infringement.

          I’m on the fence that either the DHS had no authority to be there and any agent and/or manager that ordered or took place in this raid should be fired, and hounded out of the employable world until they’re homeless, or there’s something fishy about this story and the people who claimed to be DHS officials weren’t– that the whole story is a scam.

    2. Well, it is a fine example of mission creep and bureaucratic bloat where energies get directed toward unimportant bullshit instead of on the actual core mission of the agency. Much like the CDC doing lesbian obesity studies instead of focusing on infectious disease control.

      1. Not really. It is an example of the punitive expansion of the customs laws. They were doing a core mission of DHS and indeed the federal government; enforcing the customs laws. The problem is with how broad and punitive those laws have become.

        1. Except even if customs enforcement actually had fuck-all to do with national security, this case had nothing to do with customs anyway.

    3. DHS is Dubya’s baby so you rush in to defend it. Typical for you. And sad.

      1. Since you are illiterate and retarded, it doesn’t surprise me that you didn’t understand the words “there are a million opportunities to write DHS suck stories”.

        At some point, I would think you would look to put yourself out of your own misery.

      2. I bet you’re the kind of guy who would fuck a person in the ass and not even have the goddamn common courtesy to give him a reach-around. I’ll be watching you.

        1. Really? That is the best you’ve got? No real rebuttal, just abuse?

          Guess John has to be partially right at least, maybe not illiterate and retarded, perhaps just retarded.

    4. You must work for DHS, yes?

    5. Are we sure this story is not satire?

  7. The only solution is to create a super federal agency that oversees DHS so that these abuses won’t ever happen again.

    /Progressive

    1. Just like creating an agency regulating the regulators will end regulatory capture!

    2. Exceptional idea.

      I’m sure it is being worked on though already.

      1. It’ll be called the “Department of Administrative Affairs”.

    3. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  8. 1. The title if this article sounds like the beginning to a sugarfree story.

    2. Homeland security, isn’t that why we have a military.

  9. They told me they were from Homeland Security and we were violating copyright laws.”

    To which the logical question would be “What the fuck does copyright violations have to do with Homeland Security?! Is there some kind of nefarious Al-Quaeda plot to violat MLB’s copyrights thereby making their officially licensed merchandise worthless or something?”

    But of course, that would probably have gotten her black-bagged and sent to Guitmo as an obvious AQ sleeper.

    1. To which the logical question would be “What the fuck does copyright violations have to do with Homeland Security?!

      DHS owns customs enforcement. Part of customs enforcement is preventing the importation of counterfeit goods. These were counterfeit goods imported in violation of the customs laws.

      The issue here is how pervasive and punitive the customs laws have become. The real question is “why is it a crime to import counterfeit goods rather than a civil tort”.

      1. These were counterfeit goods imported in violation of the customs laws.

        They were neither counterfeit nor imported, according to the quote above.

        1. That is what the owners say. Clearly the feds thought they were both. Maybe they are wrong about that. Regardless, they still begs the question of why even if they are counterfeit and imported this isn’t a civil issue rather than a criminal one. If MLB thinks these guys are stealing their copyright, sue them.

          1. No:

            Homeland Security agents visited the Crossroads store and confiscated the few dozen pairs of underwear, printed in Kansas City by Lindquist Press.

            Unless, of course, you have some other source?

            1. There is no such thing as a “Homeland Security Agent”. There are ICE Agents and Secret Service Agents and Border Patrol Agents but not “DHS agents”. No one is referred to as that or in my experience would refer to themselves as such.

              I don’t think these guys were from DHS.

          2. “Clearly the feds thought they were both.”

            Who gives a fuck what they think?

            1. Because that means the problem is the law not the agency.

              1. Laws are enforced by agents. When made to enforce stupid laws, the agents are made to act stupid. If the agents don’t want to be stupid, then it’s up to the agents to push back against those bad laws or quit.

                They’re in a much better position to do that than any of us are likely to be. If they actually care, that is.

                1. Sure Bryan. Lets let the cops decide what laws they want to enforce. That should work out well.

                  1. Sure John. Let’s hold federal agents blameless for whatever idiocy they do, so long as they’re following orders. That should work out well.

              2. Keep sucking that cop cock.

          3. If you’re going to assume the pose of a fucking smart ass know-it-all, could you at least understand and use the term “beg the question” properly?

        1. They had to have been for DHS to be involved. I wonder if the owner just didn’t get robbed. He says the guys told him they were from “Homeland Security”. I can assure you that ICE fucking hates their headquarters and no ICE agent would ever say he was from “Homeland Security”. He would call himself a “customs agent”. They take a lot of pride in that. No way would they ever say the were from DHS.

          And DHS has no jurisdiction over copyright cases that don’t involve importation. So just who the hell were these guys, that the paper can’t find and identified themselves in a way no actual LEO who works at DHS would do so? I call shenanigans on this. I think they were either guys who were just robbing him or thugs hired by MLB to shake down businesses.

          1. Or maybe DHS agents, and the DHS doesn’t want to admit to this bullshit once it had a light shined on it.

            1. First, there is no such thing as a “DHS Agent”. Second, who exactly in DHS? It is possible that it is some rogue operation but I would need more proof of that than this. It seems more likely it is someone robbing the guy or acting on behalf of MLB. Only someone who doesn’t know anything about the Department would say “DHS Agent” as opposed to Customs Agent or Secret Service Agent or such.

              1. Could be. However this seems so much like something the government would typically do it’s hard for me to just dismiss it out of hand.

                1. I am not dismissing it. I am just saying the facts as reported don’t make any sense.

                  1. Fair enough. You could be right, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

              2. Lol, John, you dumb bastard, it’s all over their website.

                http://www.dhs.gov/search-job-postings#

              3. what is your experience that allows you to speak with such authority on practices within DHS agencies?

                I am not suggesting you are incorrect, just asking for the basis of your statements.

            2. There ARE people who not only refer to themselves as DHS Agents but that is their actual title. John is incorrect. The OIG is entirely staffed by such folks and their badges and jackets all refer to them as DHS Agents.

          2. “He would call himself a “customs agent”. They take a lot of pride in that. No way would they ever say the were from DHS.”

            I hate to break it to them, but, thanks to mickey mouse idiocy like this, ICE’s real-world reputation is just a tiny bit better than the TSA.

            1. You are assuming they were from ICE. I don’t think they were. Again, I would like to know who calls themselves a “Homeland Security Agent” because I have never met them.

              1. see my above comment

  10. Homeland…Fatherland…

    You know who else liked their security agencies?

    1. The train companies that hired the pinkertons?

    2. The Securities and Exchange Commission?

    3. Your mother?

      1. Where in Blue Blazes is OUR Praetorian Guard when we need ’em, pray tell? WE NEED them to do their knocking-off-the-Emperor trick, NOW more than EVER!!!

  11. Politically incorrect panties, whoop-de-dooo!!! Y’all show me ANYWERE in the USA Cuntstitution, where we are EVER given the right to wear whatever kinds of panties we want! Besides, it’s not so much the panties? It is when you commit the primordial Sin according to Government Almighty, which is the SIN of moving a single dollar from here to there, for the purposes of the peons, rather than for the purposes of Guv Almighty.

    1. Well anyway, don’t be such PUSSIES about such a trivial thing a PANTIES, fer Chrissakes? The other day I got busted for BLOWING ON A CHEAP PLASTIC FLUTE, w/o permission from Guv-Almighty-Blessed Expertologists of Expertology! See http://www.churchofSQRLS.com and search for “lung flute” if you cannot believe me ? A “lung flute” is a cheap-cheap piece of mass-produced plastic? If ya BLOW on it, it is supposed to set up magic “sound waves” to knock un-wanted excess mucus? Kinda like un-wanted, excess Obozo, I might add? Outta that them thar LUNGS and bronchial tubes and what-not, of yers or mine. It is the same basic thing as this deep-dark “medical procedure” called “coughing”, if you will, in those regards, except it is assisted by a cheap plastic flute. The All-Wise and Uber-Benevolent FDA has LOVINGLY decreed that we as ignernt morons can NOT be trusted to buy said dangerous “medical device”, sans prescription! And so I got busted? Cheap-plastic-flute blowing, of the UN-authorized kind!? Now THERE is something to whine about! My whines are stronger than panty-whines?.

  12. WHY DOES REASON PICK ON THOSE POOR GOVERNMENT AGENTS ALL THE TIME??????

    THEY”RE JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS!!11

  13. Let’s all try to keep our eye on the ball, and focus our hate teh Mooooliumz!

  14. Her problem was that she spelled KoCh incorrectly.

  15. I am not an attorney, and intellectual property law is pretty complex and confusing, but wouldn’t this be a violation of a Trademark, not a Copyright?

    1. Yes, that’s a trademark violation. And it’s a Royals trademark, not an MLB trademark.

    2. Images are copyrightable, and logos are images.

      Hard to see how there could be a trademark violation when the Royals don’t make underwear.

      1. Beg to differ: http://www.fanatics.com/MLB_Womens_Underwear
        MLB teams sell every type of attire you can imagine, and many which you can’t.

  16. The job of “securing the border” was distributed among a bunch of different agencies prior to 9/11. The stated purpose of the DHS was to remedy that problem. The outcome of the DHS was to bury all of these agencies under a massive new bureaucracy. The DHS was ill-conceived, poorly-implemented, and instantly hobbled by partisan politics.

    Yea team!

  17. I can’t judge this story properly without more pics.

  18. I don’t remember the Royals logo being 3 dimensional. this looks completely different to me.

  19. Fuck you, Suderman, I posted this in Morning Links.

  20. Even if it did violate copyrights isn’t there some kind of due process involved in stealing these people’s property.

  21. I love how this idiot businesswoman “thought” that if she slightly modified the Royals logo, it wouldn’t be a problem.

    Then she went and put a crown on top of it anyway. Let me guess, the crown has a different number of peaks than the Royals crown?

    1. Who gives a shit? You want your tax money going to support the Kansas City Royals in any way? Let them go fuck themselves.

    2. I love how copyright enforcement has become yet another excuse to engage in lawlessness.

      Not only did she not get a cease-and-desist request, she didn’t even get a trial.

      Your property will be confiscated to sake jmomls’s need to be smug and superior!

      1. C&D requests are a courtesy, not a right.

  22. I wonder if DHS or Department of Homeland Security is as of yet copyrighted ? Entrepreneurs? Anyone ?

  23. I am so glad these pervs dedicated federal agents have my back!

  24. I, for one, would like to thank KMW for posing for the picture.

  25. I make up to USD90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around USD40h to USD86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link?
    Try it, you won’t regret it!?

    best deals is..=========== w?w?w.M?o?n?e?y?k?i?n.c?o?m?

  26. I don’t know about safer, but I feel dumber . . . this is what they are using Dept. of Homeland Security $39Billion budget for now? because we have Ebola, ISIS, and the Mexican border all handled?

  27. Reminds me of the six FBI agents who listened 24/7 for months to the bugged phone conversations in a New Orleans bordello — while 9/11 played out.

    One thing I’m sure of — not a single agent or supervisor involved in the New Orleans Keystone Cops caper received even the slightest reprimand for this idiotic misuse of federal funds and manpower. They ALL got their pensions!

  28. The only real threat this country has is the U.S. military! The rapist of the world!

    http://www.theusmarinesrape.com/FaceBook.html

    1. Not true, the entire government is a threat to this country.

  29. Before they’re hired by the government, Homeland Security people grow up sniffing girls bicycle seats. And lots of them sniff boy’s bicycle seats. Once hired, they’re into women’s panties. Or men’s jock straps… depending on their leanings.

  30. Those panties must not have passed the sniff test.

  31. I definitely feel safer now. If there was a sarcasm font this sentence would make sense.

  32. They were Oriels fans.

  33. my co-worker’s mother makes $71 /hr on the laptop . She has been unemployed for 9 months but last month her payment was $17334 just working on the laptop for a few hours. published here

    —————-http://shorx.com/onlineatm

  34. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail

    ———————- http://www.jobs700.com

  35. Can you have some spare time to sit back in your chair having your laptop with you and making some money online for some interesting online work said Jenny Francis in the party last nightsee more what is for you there to increase your pocket money??.

    http://shorx.com/clickforsurvey

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.