TRAVEL ALERT: Duck Scam Artists Fleecing Tourists

funny-pictures-beware-of-the-cute-duckling-scamI just saw this picture and thought you should be warned about mother ducks using their ducklings as decoys.

This brings a new meaning to being fleeced. Yet, all those animal rights people still defend these little drifters (the proper term of grifter ducklings). Notably, tourist guides identify the same technique of pickpockets in Europe using children, here is how one guide advises you to do with cute children (or presumable ducklings): “If a group of scruffy children approaches, jabbering, yell “No!” forcefully, glare, and keep walking. If they persist, yell “Politz!” (which is close enough in any language).” However, for ducklings, “Hawk!” might be better than “Politz!”

20 thoughts on “TRAVEL ALERT: Duck Scam Artists Fleecing Tourists”

  1. Keep your eye on John Conyers in the House, too. He seems much more angry than Leahy, and he’s been relentless in the last few years despite being stonewalled repeatedly by the Bush administration

  2. lottakatz speaks truth –

    On my (admittedly slower) further understanding of Leahy’s plan, I’d like to revise my previous statement and say that Leahy is ‘almost my kind of Senator’. After hearing more statements from him this afternoon and evening, I’m even more confused about his intentions. He wants to immunize people to tell the truth? What does that even mean?

    I get to commit crimes, and so long as I’m honest about their commission I get to walk free?


    My bad.

    As they say on 30 Rock, “Shut it down …”

  3. I respectfully disagree about the Leahy proposal. I don’t want the traitors immunized for the sake of finding out ‘what happened’. We know what happened, traitors broke the law. I want them in Leavenworth.
    This is reminiscent of a more contemporary example of a fact-finding hearing than Leahy uses. This would be another Iran/Contra hearing with the Courts (if subsequent charges were brought) obligated to throw out all charges and evidence contaminated by immunized testimony. Ollie North, a traitor, walked.
    I’d like to see justice done.

  4. rcampbell –

    I agree that last night’s press conference was a winner, and the president may be playing things a bit vague for political purposes to further his economic agenda (by not stepping on too many toes too soon). But he also said that his focus is to ‘get it right moving forward’ and that is much easier to do when one has thoroughly examined how the last administration got it so wrong.

    In any case I’m grateful for Senators like Leahy …

  5. Fido,

    You have kinder baristas than in my neck of the woods. The signs here offer the kiddies straight espresso.

  6. Mojo

    The President’s whole answer at last night news conference certainly included his oft spoken line about looking forward, but he then reinforced that “…no one is above the law”. I heard that, with great hope, as a tacit approval of Leahy’s proposal.

    BTW, I thought his performance last night was simply excellent. He was asked difficult, multi-layered questions by a finally reawakened press corp and he gave well considered, thorough and complex answers to complex questions.

  7. JT you might be messing with intellectual property rights here cause it looks like an Aflack commercial.

    This Congress couldn’t pour pee out of a boot with the directions on the heel. Lindsey Graham would deny that there is any pee in the boot. And John Boehner would pass out checks on the house floor from the boot industry. Reid and Pelosi make about as much sense as an episode of Lost.

  8. Cuteness can be a survival trait.

    That explains the persistence of OUR species.

    What about yours?

    Remember the sign in the coffee shop:

    “Unattended children will be given a free cappuchino …

    and a free puppy.”

  9. Jill –

    Right. Patrick Leahy is my kind of Senator. We could use many more like him. The professor, in my opinion, couldn’t cover this topic enough on Countdown.

  10. Mojo,

    I believe Leahy is talking about a Congressional investigation into “the past”.

    I was struck by the statements you mentioned and Obama’s assertion once again. that if he has any evidence of war crimes (how about Cheney on TV!?) it should be investigated. Shades of Nancy Pelosi. I think it’s time to inundate the WH with “the evidence”. Pelosi got a lot of evidence when that was done in her case.

  11. Well, if it walks like a duck…

    This is no different than our “Quacks” in congress who ‘legally’ pick our pockets…

  12. Prof…
    I think you would enjoy this blog: despite the crude name. It’s ground zero for the war on cute animals.

  13. “A duck’s bill …”

    Completely OT but thought I’d put this out there:

    When the press asks President Obama about his thoughts on prosecuting war crimes, and he continues to answer that he’d rather focus on the future and not the past, is that the end of it? Can’t anyone else open an investigation, or does the decision to do so rest exclusively with the president?

Comments are closed.