Slashdot Mirror


Financial Responsibility == Terrorism?

An anonymous reader writes "Capital Hill Blue is reporting that recently a retired Texas schoolteacher and his wife had a little run in with the Department of Homeland Security. The crime? Paying down some debt. From the article: 'The balance on their JCPenney Platinum MasterCard had gotten to an unhealthy level. So they sent in a large payment, a check for $6,522. And an alarm went off. A red flag went up. The Soehnges' behavior was found questionable. [...] They were told, as they moved up the managerial ladder at the call center, that the amount they had sent in was much larger than their normal monthly payment. And if the increase hits a certain percentage higher than that normal payment, Homeland Security has to be notified.'"

6 of 1,086 comments (clear)

  1. What about incoming payments to political parties? by vandan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It's great that major terrorist plots such as this are being foiled, but I wish more scrutiny was given to payments coming *in* to bank accounts.

    For example, the Bin Laden Group is Dubya's biggest financial backer, and has repeatedly rescued him from bankruptcy.

    I would also like to see far more scrutiny of payments from weapons manufacturers, oil companies, tabacco companies, mining companies, etc, to political parties. It's clearly *these* payments that are at the *root* of terrorism. Emperor Dubya and his gang of war criminals are far too keen to treat the symptoms of these issues ( the rise of Islamic fundamentalism ) instead of addressing the cause - themselves and their financial backers.

  2. Re:way to go! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Maybe ... but it's pretty much a given that had the Democrats been able to field anyone more credible than John Kerry we'd have seen the last of G. W. Bush. They had to know that going in, which makes me wonder what sort of deals got made to assure Bush's re-election.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  3. Re:My experience by Canadian_Daemon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Troll? he presented the other side of the arguement...wish i had some mod pts

    --
    This sig is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
  4. Re:Time to reread your history textbooks by WorldRimWalker · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah, but none of those fellows went before a firing squad.
    Which is exactly what they would have done to their
    political opponents, had their glorious revolution succeeded.

    "I have seen the future, and it works", indeed.

  5. Shoot someone if your VP and its ok. by cheekyboy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Dick Chaney shot someone, no charge. wow i love laws.

    Randy Duke steals millions, hes ok... Bill ORielly the moron, lies to death and its ok because if you say, "i believe..." it sok.

    One rule for poor schmucks, another for rich prix with $100million influences.\

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  6. Re:Stay with the important subject. by imdylbert · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    You're a moron. This is a practice that has been in place for a long time. And is very logical. If it tightens a bit after the worst terrorist attack in the nations history, it's not surprising NOR is it cause for upset. On the contrary, if things WEREN'T tightened up after an attack like that, it WOULD be cause for alarm. Stop rooting for the terrorists.