Making millions defrauding governments

First off, sorry there is no link posted for this story.

I was watching BBC-NEWS on PBS tonight and they ran a story about a "gentleman" (British, I believe) who was FINALLY arrested for selling fake bomb detectors. It seems the person in question, "found" a company that was selling a golf ball finder/detector and took the design and modified it very slightly to create a bomb detector. The golf ball finder/detector was sold in the U.S. for about $20, the nearly identical bomb detector was sold to foreign governments (including Iraq) for $5000. Yes, FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS for a bogus bomb detector. Although in fairness, it came in a really nice briefcase-type case. The BBC started to investigate the "inventor" a few years ago, and it took until now to get the accused into the docket, but not before he was able to amass a fortune from the sales of his "invention"....something in the area of several MILLION DOLLARS.

The end of the story showed an Iraq army soldier on duty still using his bomb detector.

When reporters outside the courthouse tried to question the "inventor", he still had the balls to be un-apologetic/professed the bomb detector to be legit.

BTW, the so-called "bomb detector" looks like the handle of a do-it-yourself car wash "wand" except that the long pipe at the end of the handle is replaced by a short "antenna".

I can't remember if the story says any U.S. or U.K. forces are using this contraption.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22267468
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22266051
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22204076

It's saddening but not at all surprising to see there are plenty of people willing to put others' lives at risk for a profit.

It's OK. Governments make trillions defrauding citizens.

Maybe it works. Who are we to blame the scumwad for lining his pockets on the stupidity of military buyers the world over?

Its not like that is news, after all.

SVreX wrote: It's OK. Governments make trillions defrauding citizens.

Yeah. Toilet seats come to mind.

I met a machinist back in high school that made a knockoff for an OEM tank part that was essentially a folded piece of EDM'ed sheet metal. A few bucks of material, and a little time resulted in a $450 part.

poopshovel wrote:

SVreX wrote: It's OK. Governments make trillions defrauding citizens.

Yeah. Toilet seats come to mind.

Seriously? This one again? You do know realize the famed "$600 toilet seat" was a scratch designed and built assembly to replace out of production/out of stock parts on a freaking AIRPLANE, right? But I suppose you could have just swung by Home Depot on your lunchbreak and found something that would have worked just as well...

The P-3C Orion antisubmarine aircraft went into service in 1962. Twenty-five years later it was determined that the toilet shroud, the cover that fits over the toilet, needed replacement. Since the airplane was out of production this would require new tooling to produce. These on-board toilets required a uniquely shaped, molded fiberglass shroud that had to satisfy specifications for vibration resistance, weight, and durability. The molds had to be specially made, as it had been decades since their original production. The price reflected the design work and the cost of the equipment to manufacture them. Lockheed Corp. charged $34,560 for 54 toilet covers, or $640 each.[2] President Reagan held a televised news conference in 1987, where he held up one of these shrouds and stated: "We didn't buy any $600 toilet seat. We bought a $600 molded plastic cover for the entire toilet system." A Pentagon spokesman, Glenn Flood stated, "The original price we were charged was $640, not just for a toilet seat, but for the large molded plastic assembly covering the entire seat, tank and full toilet assembly. The seat itself cost $9 and some cents.…

In reply to Josh:

Way to miss the forest through the trees.

So, you're opinion is that our government is efficient in their spending habits, and provides the US taxpayer with a good value for their invested tax dollar, right?

SVreX wrote: In reply to Josh: Way to miss the forest through the trees. So, you're opinion is that our government is efficient in their spending habits, and provides the US taxpayer with a good value for their invested tax dollar, right?

i think it might be possible to show one instance where they didn't really overspend on something and still think that governments, in general, are very inefficient things..

Oh wow! Government waste must not exist then! Don't I feel like a horse's ass. I just watched the street in front of my shop get re-paved for the 3rd time in 5 years.

1st time: With money from a state grant, city tears up street, replaces sewer lines. Does a E36 M3 job re-paving. Takes about a month, berkeleying up my business in an already E36 M3ty economy.

2nd time: More state money. City didn't bother replacing water lines while they had the street torn up. So they tear the street up again. This time it's six weeks. They pocket the money from the state, have the state prisoners do the prep, then hire the (wink-wink) "lowest bidder" to lay the asphalt...which sinks in a week, because the city took the cash and let berkeleying prisoners do the prep.

3rd time: They hired the same private contractor (wink-wink) to do all the work. Still state money. It was done in a week and the did a berkeleying killer job. Literally finished today.

Or, I can just say "toilet seats," and everybody knows what the berkeley I'm talking about.

It's not really Josh's problem that a bad/inaccurate example was used. Unless the example was used in jest towards you.

Also: flounder. (Impressively quickly, too!)

I think his objection was to a cheap shot soundbite that is old, tired, and widely recognized as rubbish. If I want to illustrate a point, I try not to use an illustration that everyone knows is wrong.

I think his objection was a flounder, to which I have objection.

Unless pan seared with copius quantities of butter!

This has been a real eye opener for me, guys. $16,000,000,000,000.00 really isn't that much after all. If we pay back a million dollars a day, it'll only be 32,000 years before we hit a zero balance. And it's not like I pay some of your annual gross salaries in income tax every year.

SVreX wrote: In reply to Josh: Way to miss the forest through the trees. So, you're opinion is that our government is efficient in their spending habits, and provides the US taxpayer with a good value for their invested tax dollar, right?

No, I'm of the opinion that the operations of any complex organization are not characterized well by taking isolated examples of situations that on the surface appear to demonstrate a particular viewpoint, while leaving out important information, stripping the example of any context, and pretending that the example as crudely presented sums up the entirety of the organization. It's just a dumb way to see the world, but people keep doing it, because it's certainly easy, and let's face it, most people don't like to think too hard about things.

You do realize that there can be some space between black and white, don't you? That there's somewhere in between thinking that government is a stinking fetid leech that's destroying humanity, and thinking that it's perpetually infallible? I certainly don't think ours is perfect (certainly other countries get a better ROI with regard to things like education and health care, though I suspect that admitting that access to education and health care are actually desirable things has an impact there).

I take no issue with the notion that there is waste, but that toilet seat thing is a really common, but really dumb argument. It's willfully misleading, and I wish people would stop going on about dumb stuff like that because it obscures real issues.

The point was not toilet seats. The point was government waste.

It is not willfully misleading to discuss government waste, regardless of the metaphor.

geez...

I read years ago that the toilet seats, allen wrenches etc were marked up to pay for 'other expenses' not in budget. Who knows... black bag, informants, keeping a mistress, whatever. Kinda like being billed $45 for an aspirin in the hospital.

SVreX wrote: I think his objection was a flounder, to which I have objection. Unless pan seared with copius quantities of butter!

To be clear, I say this with a chuckle, because I figure you're probably the sort of guy with whom I would have a fine time racing or wrenching, once I figured out to just nod and think about something nice like boobs whenever you got into another politics/religion/economy rant.

BUUUUUUUT, the idea of you in particular calling flounder on anyone else here is so ridiculous I can't even think of something to compare its ridiculousness to. Maybe you think that's what you're supposed say when you think someone's disagreeing with you, and you don't like it and you want someone to make them stop? Come on, you start political threads and politicize nonpolitical threads all the time, from a predictable viewpoint, and you're predictably aghast whenever someone replies with something other than "yup, you sure are right about that 'Rex". I can't be the only one who thinks it's kinda getting old.

SVreX wrote: The point was not toilet seats. The point was government waste. It is not willfully misleading to discuss government waste, regardless of the metaphor. geez...

The point is that "DUH HUH $600 TOILET SEATS" isn't discussing it.

To the point of the original post - I think anyone responsible for buying these things should go to jail if he does. They're the ones most culpable for failing to ensure their money was spent properly. Governments hire dowsers to dig wells all the time, which is a similar flavor of bullE36 M3, and nobody really makes a big deal about that, or tries to put the dowser in jail for fraud. Of course, a well doesn't blow anyone's legs off if it turns out there isn't any water in it.

Heck, aren't like three of the five most popular TV shows right now about psychic police detectives or some kinda nonsense? I'd imagine there are some of these in the real world too, right? Can we put them in jail now? (No, seriously, I think I'd be ok with that. We might as well throw in the people who make those tv shows while we're at it.)

Pretty old scam. Look to history and you will find centuries worth of people defrauding the government. My favorite was the poor quality shoes sold to the union army at one point. They lasted about 2.5 feet of marching before they returned to the earth.

Josh wrote: You do realize that there can be some space between black and white, don't you? That there's somewhere in between thinking that government is a stinking fetid leech that's destroying humanity, and thinking that it's perpetually infallible?

I'd like to subscribe to Josh's newsletter

Josh wrote: you start political threads and politicize nonpolitical threads all the time, from a predictable viewpoint, and you're predictably aghast whenever someone replies with something other than "yup, you sure are right about that 'Rex". I can't be the only one who thinks it's kinda getting old.

I'm definitely sick of every thread - regardless of topic - being turned into "government sucks." To be fair, though, svrex is not the only one doing this.....I wish that everybody would just tone it down a notch about politics

And lets not forget that its PRIVATE organizations who are ripping off the government, whether ours or others, in this case.

When I saw the thread title I said out loud "Is this about the 'defense' industry?"

I remember this guy, he was selling dummy devices with blinkenlights as bomb detectors for YEARS, being used by US and UK forces as well as local forces in Iraq. I wonder how many people were unfairly searched or died because of these things.