Barbie doll prompts FBI child porn warning

shoreline said on August 9, 2011 at 12:43 PM

bring back lawn darts!

tarzandaz said on December 8, 2010 at 8:59 AM

we live in the "child proof" United States.. everything has to be setup to protect the small percentage of idiots that use or abuse things incorrectly. im sick of the government baby sitting everything... free country my rear end! ie. i easily talk on a cell while driving... but some idiots cant manage...so.... now its banned ...hmmmm

tarzandaz said on December 8, 2010 at 8:56 AM

"It frightens me," said William Poores, a Tacoma grandfather who said he will not be buying the Video Girl Barbie for his 6-year-old granddaughter. "She would love it," said Poores, "But she's more important to me than a giggle on Christmas morning." wtf is this guy saying??? my impression is he is affraid he may film the child if it is in his house.

danbolivar said on December 4, 2010 at 3:03 PM

People that would approve of gimmicks such as these, that open doors for Big Brother are Barbies themselves. It's of no use to show people that don't wish to see and remain oblivious to the inner workings of the spy network that's being set... up by the Illuminati. People that buy these 'toys' will probably end up employed at Fema camps, cleaning their toilets and shining their boots all the while thinking they're doing their patriotic duty and kissing the asses of those that would enslave them in a heat beat should they ever actually start thinking and investigating the reasons behind the madness.

4real said on December 4, 2010 at 11:32 AM

Really, I'm sure no one thought of using this toy for the purpose that the FBI claims, until now. I would be questioning the FBI agent that suggested the use this toy as a medium.. Next on the list baby monitors, security cameras, pin cameras.. Slow day at the office..

rigidprinciples said on December 4, 2010 at 9:53 AM

It's as if the government doesn't even care to use baby steps anymore in its tyrannical acts. That will be their end. They are way too greedy with the groin gropes and the nanny acts, and it's happening at fast enough of a rate for enough People to become aware, to have enough People put the government back in their place (especially the FBI), using whatever force necessary. Hopefully deadly force :)

alicynx said on December 4, 2010 at 9:02 AM

this is seriously stupid. The FBI are officially overpaid - time to make budget cuts.

paulharvey said on December 4, 2010 at 12:24 AM

Oh my f'ing God. Everything is a potential danger, isn't it? Can we do anything at all without having it be a crisis? The government is now trying to step between kids and their Barbie dolls. They have to have their dirty little fingers all over our lives because the little minions out here just aren't capable of protecting ourselves. We need big brother to watch our every move. Get off our F'ing backs!

cjcampbell said on December 3, 2010 at 6:54 PM

I still fail to see how this doll could be of any possible use to a pedophile. I said that before and my comment was removed. But I just do not see it. I am reminded of the recall of Rollerblade Barbie because some people were concerned that sparks from the rollerblades might cause a fire if Barbie ran through a pool of gasoline. As if parents let their kids play with the gasoline. Oh, well. Common sense is dead.

dede1978 said on December 3, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Amen dakotanative, you said it all.

mrsskurvy said on December 3, 2010 at 1:09 PM

I could understand being worried if you bought the Barbie used and did not have the original media equipment it came with. i.e the CD, cords to hook up to the computer. I could see how other's could hack into the camera. But, if you buy it new and have all the parts and taught your daughter not to post on the internet, I see no problem with this! There are other products out there of concern!

bobbbb said on December 3, 2010 at 12:10 PM

This doll is a disaster in the making. Children and parents in every state of undress are subject to being secretly and/or accidentally filmed by this thing. It puts a clandestine "nanny cam" in the hands of children who don't have the maturity to use it properly. This undermines the whole concept of children being protected by a parent or adult guardian. Nosy kids can leave it on in the parent's bedroom and film them having sex and then retrieve the doll later and watch the whole thing on the home computer. The FBI is totally right on this warning. The damage this device can do is irreparable. The basic right of privacy where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy is gone with this in the hands of children. Mattel has visited a nigthmare on people everywhere. Shame on them.

lovenotwar said on December 3, 2010 at 12:09 PM

When I was a kid, I loved playing with Barbies. Now, If I owned this particular Barbie when I was 6 years old, who knows what I would film with it. Even though I was young, I still had my imagination to run off of. I think it's a cool idea for a Barbie. But I do agree that we should be careful with our techonolgy these days. Yes, it's a little over dramatic to get the FBI involved, but if that's what it takes to make parents aware of the unknown possiblity of what could come from the video Barbie, so be it. Again, I think it looks fun, but no young child needs a camera in their Baribe. Seriously. They don't.

skippypotpiebaby said on December 3, 2010 at 11:46 AM

I want one

jonad said on December 3, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Nevermind the camera, it looks to me like little girls could get together in a group, cut off all their Video Barbie's hair, weave all the synthetic strands into a large net, string it up in a doorway, and trap little boys in it, causing panic and havoc, that years of psycho-analysis will hardly be able to touch! Yes indeed, Barbie, video or not, can lead to neo-narco-GLOBAL-feminism, and a decreased compassion for others who are not Barbie-like. Perhaps even, later life 'Letdown Syndrome' driven terrorism. Isn't THAT obvious!?? Thank you FBI, for cluing us into, yet ANOTHER REASON, not to trust ANYONE, ...ANYMORE! Yeah, welcome to 2011. This message is world wide copyrighted, if you read it, you must crumple it up afterwards and swallow it.

clear2copy said on December 3, 2010 at 11:07 AM

wow.. we get freaked out at the simplest of things..

maxxcor said on December 3, 2010 at 10:23 AM

I'm surprised that NWCN wasted the electrons to even publish this garbage. Whoever thought this was "news" and that the FBI had to issue a warning needs to get some help to deal with their paranoia. And by the way - the FBI? Do they not have anything more important to do than find bizarre uses for toys? I think I'll have to go buy one of these for teasing the kids. Grow up people!

mmmgood said on December 3, 2010 at 9:51 AM

I agree with most of you. I would have never thought of it without this article. Guess the Pedofiles are the reporters.

scott_bellevue said on December 3, 2010 at 9:25 AM

That is too funny. Now I want one just for the novelty of having a doll with a spy camera. New office toy. I'll set it on top of my computer.

otter814u said on December 3, 2010 at 8:19 AM

We already have smaller cameras than this, I think this FBI agent is a pervert and now other perverts may share his idea.

lisarasmussen4u said on December 3, 2010 at 8:10 AM

The doll even has a creepy look to it. Why would someone by a camera in the shape of a doll? Who came up with this one folks?

cyrixlord said on December 3, 2010 at 2:50 AM

are we out of our mind? each day we strip away more and more of our freedoms away and give it to the terrorists and criminals.they win just by making us paranoid. We need to just stand up and let the criminals know that we are not going to live in fear and paranoia. more people die from car accidents in the us than anyone would from just a single terrorist attack, even on a plane, yet we seal up our airports and strip our freedoms and our privacy for things that would or might become. this is rediculous. United Paranoid nanny state of america indeed.

ytzhaak said on December 3, 2010 at 2:01 AM

@tomma206 I also have girls but I don't believe the new gadget-mounted doll is within the business of law-enforcement. I don't buy the doll for my girls and I am happy with my decision. But I am OK with different decisions by another family's authority. Such a decision is of family's domain but not of the state's. The manufacturer should have freedom to design and sell whatever dolls they think the best. Family should evaluate and judge the private businesses, but the state should not try to control such an area. It just makes the law-enforcement looking weird, as some people mentioned. I want to respect justice. They should stop being such a nanny-state type fidgeting justice.

wmdkitty said on December 3, 2010 at 12:28 AM

An this, folks, is why we can't have nice things.

tomma206 said on December 3, 2010 at 12:23 AM

As a father of 2 girls I beleive there is no reason a child should have a doll with a camera.Is it never enough just to have a doll?Put a freakin mp3 player and a cell phone in the barbie and charge 300 bucks while your at it.The agent is right and thats why he has that job.Just like the airport scanners, why risk it?

calli said on December 2, 2010 at 10:57 PM

We better make alcohol illegal because people drink and drive and kill people. We better make tobacco products illegal because it's causes cancer. We better make guns illegal because people kill people with them. While we are at it, we can outlaw Playboy and Penthouse. Then we need to outlaw children swimsuit ads from stores because some FBI agent might get turned on.

bobinboise said on December 2, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Sounds like the FBI has a potential pervert as an agent, that and he has way too much time on his hands. Like all law enforcement they need to spend more looking for and catching criminals and less time dreaming up stuff to worry about.

jdhibberd5209890 said on December 2, 2010 at 9:58 PM

Regardless of the possibilities for misuse, just considering the stupid things that even many adults do in front of the camera, and post online, giving something like this to a kid seems like a bad idea.

blankingout said on December 2, 2010 at 9:12 PM

FBI may need to keep a close eye on the agent who thought of this since the article says there have been no cases...

yogibear said on December 2, 2010 at 9:07 PM

What about Ken?

dakotanative said on December 2, 2010 at 9:04 PM

This is what the country has come to. We ban FourLoco that almost killed people who abused it, but we endorse cigarettes that kill when used as directed because it brings in tax money. Now they want to restrict dolls with cameras, but we sell everything from clocks to computers with cameras that can be used for illegal activity just as easily. It is time to stop banning stuff and start punishing the people that misuse it.

slappywag said on December 2, 2010 at 7:57 PM

Wait... what did I miss here? If you don't want a product, don't buy the product. Why does the product have to frighten you? This is real simple stuff, folks.

colesweetpea said on December 2, 2010 at 7:35 PM

Does this mean we should get rid of our cell phones?

happiness4all said on December 2, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Maybe I am a bit obtuse... but I would think it would be a great tool to catch a perv.... Tell your kid, if anyone ever tries to touch you go get Barbie and get your video evidence! Dawn and Tammy and a bunch of Bratz probably got together to whammy poor Barbie, because they don't have a camera on their chest!

skippythedog said on December 2, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Huh? Wha? Who comes up with these ideas? And, why target this toy? Chester the Molester can just as easily stick a $29 pinhole camera in any Teddy bear. This story really does scrape the bottom of the barrel.