Bank Accounts of 5,000 UK Terror Suspects Tracked
Juha-Matti Laurio writes to mention an article over at the Guardian, reporting on the surveillance of over 5,000 bank accounts in the interests of terrorist tracking. Accounts at such reputable British banks as HSBC, Barclay, and Lloyds TSB are having their activity tracked for 'suspicious activity'. Financial details from these banks, it turns out, was part of the trail of evidence used to apprehend terrorism suspects in a plot to bomb airplanes last month. From the article: "However, the extent of the banks' involvement in neutering the terrorist threat has sparked a fierce backlash from some British Muslims amid claims of mistaken identities and the persecution of innocent account-holders. Ahmed Salama was stunned when his HSBC account was frozen nine days ago. He received a letter informing him that HSBC wished to end their relationship after 11 years. The decision left Salama unable to pay 12 bills and his mortgage. Despite repeatedly asking for an explanation, HSBC has only told him it detected 'suspicious' payments in his account."
I'd rather have a 0.00000001% chance of being blown up by terrorist events organized by the government, than to live under the draconian restrictions on freedom the same government pushes allegedly in response to those said terrorist events.
Some people assume that fascism is something that happened in Italy pre WW2 or something. They never entertain the thought that germans, italians and spanish people didn't see it coming until it was too late to do anything about it. Why do the british/american people delude themselves under the false assumption that it could never happen with them?
There is nothing inherent in a democratic system apart from the constant watch of the people that stops the system from becoming undemocratic and fascist. The leaders generally work towards that state, however well intentioned they might be.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
And here we see the consequences of a shoot-first, ask-questions-later policy to fighting crime/terrorism/whatever we're calling it today. The law should protect people from this kind of mistake, not encourage it.
The really insidious thing, of course, isn't that the mistake happened -- no-one's perfect, certainly not banks and government departments -- but that there is little the victim of such a mistake can do, since the system is designed to stonewall them on the basis that they're in the wrong. In other words, the system assumes it is perfect. This sort of situation, where the little guy is being screwed by the big guy with the government's blessing, is exactly why things like constitutional safeguards, civil liberties and due process are important.
And yes, I am bitter. I have had problems of a similar type, in my case by a random civil service staffer making a simple mistake in entering an ID number on their system, fluking my number instead of someone else's, and leaving me with several months of being out of pocket and wasting hours trying to get the problem fixed. That was not long after I started my first job, when I had precious little in the way of savings and a very tight budget, and it nearly left me unable to pay my rent.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Can't pay your bills, can't pay your mortgage, have your credit rating plummet, forget about renewing your mortgage, forget about getting that loan.
Who needs terror from abroad when there's enough domestic terror?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
The last terrorist attack in London cost around £3,000 to finance. Think about that for a second. Ten people could each have paid £300. You can withdraw that much from a cash machine over a couple of weeks without raising any alarms.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Err, as is their perfect right?
You do remember that 'democracy' thing? That 'freedom' thing we're apparently fighting for? Who the fuck are you to say that they don't have a perfect right to desire Sharia Law in Britain? And if they get a majority in power, can't implement it?
Or is it only /your/ brand of democracy and freedom that's acceptable?
I'd be surprised if you replaced Muslim with "Baptist" in the US, and Islamic with "Christian", you wouldn't come up with the same result.
Again, their perfect right. If they are able to win a majority support in parliament, so /should/ Britain become a fundamentalist Islamic state.
You are aware that people are allowed to live lifes with different beliefs to you, aren't you?
Err, as is their perfect right?
WRONG! The reason we put in "rights" and other limitations on laws is so that mob rule does not ensue. No one has the right to beat Jews just because they are in the minority - and Sharia has far more severe rules included in it as well.
while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
Not that I agree with the parent...but after being told there are weapons of mass destruction, that we do not use methods of torture, that there are not secret prisons around the world where we ferry detainees at our whim to keep them out of the reach of the Red Cross and international observers, that in just a few weeks or months the Iraqi security force will be strong enough to successfully take over, and that prisoners in the war on terror will be treated according to international law...and then finding out that all of that was lies, one can begin to see why some sectors of America and the UK doubt the veracity of the claims made by their governing officials.
I really hate comments like this. Do you have any real evidence proving that there was no plot?
No. And I don't have any real evidence proving you are not a terrorist.
GUARDS!
(Doesn't the government have a case to prove first? Or do you just believe everything they say?)
Lies about crimes