Slashdot Mirror
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."
Mortgage £750
Gas £90
Electric £45
Sky £37
Guns_r_us £917
Telephone £67
Getting your name on the no fly list, priceless.
liqbase
Before you get your account suspended, make sure you're in serious severe debt.
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.
Oh, yes...the 'liquid explosive' plot.
The 'plot' where the alleged terrorists had no plane tickets and no bombs, and some of them didn't even have passports .
The 'plot' which alledeg the terrorists' intentions to synthesize TATP on board an airplane...a procedure that is ridiculously farfetched and manifestly impossible.
Ah, yes...that plot. I feel much safer now, now that some poor slob who has the misfortune of having an Arab name won't be able to pay his mortgage. That'll show those terrists the strength of our resolve!
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
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.
Both the account holder and the financial institution have the right to terminate the commercial relationship. The financial institution is limited by discrimination laws in the United States, and presumably there are limitations in the United Kingdom as well. Criminal investigation is an excellent reason to terminate the relationship.
He made a cross border payment to a "charity" in Afghanistan. There was a program on the T.V. in the U.K. less than a month ago that showed what some of these "charities" in occupied Palestine did with the money they where getting from the U.K. Lets just say it was *VERY* disturbing. Quite why you would make a cross border payment of 20GBP is another matter. It would have cost him more than that to make the payment, and there are plenty of reputable U.K. or international based charities working in Afghanistan that would have taken his money.
Did he do something suspicious, sure as hell he did. Is he innocent, quite possibly. However that does not change the fact that banks can and do routinely suspend accounts that have suspicious activity on them, and it does not just extend to terrorism. It happens all the time due to specious fraudulant activity, sometimes comited by random third party crimials.
Has tho good old cash withdrawal and paying for things with cash dryed out?
Yes. In the UK, 99% of employers will only pay wages into a bank account. It's also quite common to pay bills, mortgage etc. through direct debit - because our banks are quite tightly regulated, this isn't a huge concern to most. A direct debit taken in error can be revoked on a moment's notice - and it's not unknown for some organisations (including mortgage lenders) to stipluate that they're paid by direct debit.
So if you happen to be a normal person with a job, a car, a house and a mortgage - having your bank account frozen is a MAJOR pain in the backside.
Besides which, if you're account is frozen, how are you supposed to withdraw cash?
Being Free means living with the risks.
When you're terrified of Gatorade On A Plane, you're not Free.
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
LOL. Where do you think it is? Asia?
Duh. It's in Scandinavia!
Slashdotters are really bad at geometry.
If you're in the UK, then unless something's changed fairly recently, the fact that you were turned down shouldn't appear on the report. It should only indicate that a check was made. You don't want to have a whole string of checks listed in rapid succession, for obvious reasons, but a single extra check could be anything and shouldn't count against you.
That said, the last time I checked my credit report (also after someone else's screw-up affected my ability to do something) it was a joke, with probably more inaccurate records than accurate ones, and the attitude of the credit agency when I called to get it fixed was similarly unimpressive.
Also, if your credit report has been damaged because O2 made a mistake, you should ask O2 to remove the relevant details from the report. Failing that, you can (yourself) add an explanatory note to the report. That's not ideal, because automated systems won't understand it, but again, unless things have changed fairly recently, you're allowed by law to compel any business that makes automated decisions based on your credit report to undertake a manual review of those decisions by a real person who can see the notes.
Isn't it odd how the usual data protection principles don't seem to apply to the credit reference agencies? (I'm not aware of any legal reason why they shouldn't, but they certainly seem to be violated with remarkable frequency and little consequence.)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
25% of British Muslims believe the 7/7 bombings were justified.
When asked, "Is Britain my country?" only one in four British Muslims it is. Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia law than under British law. Half of those British Muslims who express a preference for living under Sharia law say that, given the choice, they would move to a country governed by those laws.
Twenty-eight percent of Brirish Muslims hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state.
Enough said. Keep monitoring those bank accounts.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Wake up, folks! We're not talking about a handful of misguided individuals, like a Unabomber, nor a tiny sect like the Branch Davidian or whatever. We're talking about a loosely flung organization of thousands, with millions of supporters or at least sympathizers behind them. Their goal isn't to blow up a few people; while many view 9/11 as a global disaster, I consider it little more than a minor skirmish in an ongoing cultural war with much bigger stakes. 9/11 was successful beyond the wildest expectations of its perpetrators, and directly affected maybe 10,000 or 20,000 people - the victims and their families. But Islamic fundamentalists plan nothing short of overthrowing our governments and replacing them with the rule of foaming-at-the mouth religious zealots even worse than the ones currently ruling the US. This would affect hundreds of millions of people, perhaps for generations. Or, to put it into terms even your mouth-breathing neighbor would understand: They want to take away your booze and your porn and make you pray and bang your head on the ground five times a day! You could keep your guns, though, because killing each other seems to be an important facet of Muslim life.
In view of this danger, I have no problem with the government
and generally taking a tough stance. I believe that the stakes are nothing less than the continued existence of Western civilization as we know it.
At the same time, I expect our governments to proceed fairly and appropriately. That sounds very wishy-washy, so I'll add some clarifying examples:
At the same time, I recommend dealing severely with attempts by anyone: politicians, law makers or law enforcers to commandeer for unrelated purposes those special powers implemented for dealing with national threats. I'm talking loss of office, heavy fines, even imprisonment for such abuses. The danger of our system being destroyed from within is just as grave as from without, and must be resisted. If we drop all the accomplishments of centuries of civilization and justice at the mention of the word "terrorist" then –to quote a
When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Rel
Hongkong and Shanghai were British colonies when the bank was founded.
"When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
Looks like you need to do some homework.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSBC
You do know that Hong Kong was a British colony from 1842-1997, right?
The parent is correct and I would go as far as saying the UK banking system is more mature than the banking system in the US (having banked in the UK and US and knowing many people from both). When it comes to moving money around, everybody needs a bank account in the UK. Many services will allow cash payments but only through a long-winded payment process which typically incurs charges, whereas direct debit (basically a rapid, regulated, consistent bank transfer) will normally get you discounts. Credit cards are accepted by a lot of places for paying bills, but if you want to pay rent or a mortgage, 90% of the time there is no choice other than a direct debit (or a very hefty processing charge for cheques/money orders). There are many convenient things about having such an integrated banking system (no charges for cash withdrawals from the vast majority of ATMs, regardless of your bank and the bank of the ATM for one), but losing the ability to use cash to much of a degree is one of the downsides.
Warhammer forums
yup... google for "fractional reserve banking", and then it'll be quickly apparent that diversifying your investments is vital.
It was set up by a Scot, is based in London and don't forget that Hong Kong was under British rule until 1997. I think that qualifies as British.
The Muslim world produces more history than it can consume locally, so it has to export.
OK, I'm being facetious.
If you're really interested in understanding how all this came to pass, I'd suggest reading some books by Bernard Lewis. He's been studying the Muslim world for 70+ years, and has a lot of insights. Start with "What went Wrong?".
Then, there's "Gos has 99 Names", by Judith Miller and "Inside the Arab World" by Michael Field.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Said by Thomas Jefferson.
The number is more like "over a billion".
"Significant and growing number"?
"Thousands" out of over a billion does NOT sound like a "significant and growing number".
And Bush also believes that God has given him a Mission.
What their "goal" is does not matter if they cannot achieve it.
And they cannot achieve it.
Again, what they "want" does not matter if they cannot achieve it.
Here, let me put it in terms that you can understand.
How many people would those evil Muslims have to kill in order to get YOU to convert or vote for Osama?
If you would not vote for Osama, then it really does Not MATTER WHAT THEIR GOALS ARE BECAUSE THEY WILL NEVER ACHIEVE THEM.
No. The danger of our system being destroyed from within IS FAR GREATER THAN FROM WITHOUT.
In the US, statistically, you are more likely to kill YOURSELF than to be killed by a terrorist.
You put an amazing amount of faith in your government.
Who will/can verify that the "terrorists" found are actually terrorists?
Instead, why not just realize that there is a certain danger in living every day and that no amount of Big Brother will ever protect you from that?
Wrong.
The "optimal strategy" for "dealing with the threat of Islamic fundamentalism" does NOT include elevating it to an issue of "national security".
You deal with it by supporting the liberal and moderate elements and treating the extremists as the criminals that they are. Arrest them. Try them. Jail them.
But do NOT plaster it all over every paper in the world and make travellers dump their shampoo before they can fly.
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
25% believe that the 7/7 bombings were justified. Ok, this one looks bad. It can be explained by the U.K's collaboration with the U.S regarding the war in Iraq. Many muslims don't stomach all those tens of thousands of deaths due to collateral damage and will hold countries responsible. And maybe lash out in a poll. Doesn't mean they'll actually support terrorism. Only an idiot would think that. 45%+ of quebec residents favored secession, yet they never demolished bridges and blocked streets with burning tires. Opinion does not equal action. And 75% of muslims were against the attacks. That's a bigger percentage than the number of europeans who are against racism according to the last french and austrian elections among others. And racism is a much, much , MUCH bigger problem than terrorism. We don't freeze THOSE people's bank accounts though, do we?
Only one in four think Britain is their country? So what? You think those people are going to simply renounce their country of origin? People are proud, even those that come from third world countries. Who CARES if they view GB as their country. Their children will. And that'll be the end of that. That's the way it ALWAYS works with immigrants.
30% of muslims would prefer to live under sharia law? Meaning islamic law? ONLY 30%? Wow, that's great. Isn't it? 70% of muslims PREFER A SECULAR GOVERNMENT! What's the problem?
15% of muslims say that given the choice, they'd move to a country governed by shari'a laws. Well then, they are lying. There is nothing stopping them. Here's Morocco, here's Algeria, Yemen, Tunisia, Egypt, ad infinitum, why don't they move there? I know for a fact they don't need visas to go there. What does that say about the 30% that'd prefer a sharia government? Might they ALSO be lying? *GASP*. Hard to believe, but people lie in polls. Google that and find out for yourself.
28% hope for the U.K to become an islamic state. And these are muslims we're talking about. How many christians do you think would be in favor of living in a christian state? EH? Should we monitor THEIR bank accounts? What a stupid question to ask. This is trolling if i've ever seen it
That poll was designed to make muslims look bad. Stop spreading FUD.
That stinks. In the USA, 100% is covered up to 100,000.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
There are several problems with your analysis.
So I think that the number of "civilians" killed (excluding the above groups) is more relevant. This number is given in Wikipedia as 1857. Giving a chance of about 0.006% of being killed by terrorism in a lifetime.
For comparison with chances of dying from a range of other causes, see here. For example, an American has about a 1.3% chance of dying by suicide.
If it's a choice between giving up civil liberties to the government, and putting up with a risk of dying because of some terrorist attack, I'll take the risk of being killed by terrorists, thanks.
What happens to the 70% or so when the 30% or so start beheading those who disagree with them?
I dunno, what happens when the 70% say, "fuck that" and don't let a 2:1 minority start beheading them?
Or maybe you could pay attention to the point the OP was making about how 30% expressing a preference in a poll is one helluva different thing than going around beheading people?
The younger generation is more alienated and radicalized than the older generation. The 7/7 bombers were born and raised in the UK.
Young men across the world are always more alienated and radicalized than their parents. It's part of being "young, dumb and full of cum." When they get to the age of their parents, they will have mellowed, just like their parents did, and their parents before them all the way back throught history of mankind.
While most Muslims may not be terrorists, most terrorists are Muslim.
Really?
A) You are wrong - more terrorists are catholic - irish and basque to start with.
B) So what? Do you really think it is reasonable to draw conclusions about a group of people based on less than one in a 100,000? There are more klansmen than their are muslim terrorists, does that say anything meaningful about white christians?
Critical Thinking, it could be your best friend, so get some.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
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