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."

18 of 312 comments (clear)

  1. mastercard by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mortgage £750
    Gas £90
    Electric £45
    Sky £37
    Guns_r_us £917
    Telephone £67

    Getting your name on the no fly list, priceless.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  2. So remember... by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Funny

    Before you get your account suspended, make sure you're in serious severe debt.

  3. I'll take my chances. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:I'll take my chances. by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      True. But what do we do about it? Sure we can protest about it, which helps to an extent, but to a disturbingly large number of people, this sounds like a hysterical overreaction (which is ironic considering how much the support hysterical overreactions to terrorism).

    2. Re:I'll take my chances. by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why do the british/american people delude themselves under the false assumption that it could never happen with them?

      Why do you think that the majority of the US and UK population even realise that there are any parallels to be drawn between the two situations? I suspect that the vast majority see their government taking (to them) common-sense measures to protect their safety, and nothing else. Should anyone dare to challenge these measures, the replies will be along the lines of "If you're doing nothing wrong...", "No smoke without fire" and "But they're terrorists, why shouldn't they be watched?"

      I've heard people express the opinion that Charles de Menezes deserved to be shot, because he was acting suspiciously and ran from the police - "He must've been up to something!". I've also heard the opinion that the odd innocent death is worth it to protect the majority. Well, maybe it is to some people, but it isn't to me; friendly fire is still fire, and they're still just as dead.

      The leaders generally work towards that state, however well intentioned they might be.

      I think that in the vast majority of cases, it is not intentional, that the leaders sincerely believe that they are acting in the best interests of the country and the population as a whole. They tell themselves that desperate threats require strong measures, that *of course* the powers will never be used for bad, that the means justify the ends, etc. I don't think so much that power corrupts, as that it blinds you to certain considerations. Or perhaps I'm just being naive. It doesn't really matter either way; some of the powers being claimed in the name of the war on terror are just plain scary. There is too much scope for abuse - perhaps not by this government, but what of the next, or the one after that? Just what sort of world is my daughter going to grow up in?

    3. Re:I'll take my chances. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've made a rough appoximation of the chance:

      Let's assume that The Troubles is an accurate representation of most terrorism in the UK between 1969 and 2001. Let's also assume that the average life expectancy has been 70 years in that period (It has been 50 in the first half of the 20th century and is 80 at the moment in Europe).

      The period is 32 years and the total number of victims is 3,523, including both sides, civilian and military personnel aswell.

      The current population of the UK in 2001 has been 58,789,194. Let's assume that if the conflict would have lasted for roughly twice as long, for 70 years, which is roughly the average life expectancy, then the number of victims were doubled.

      This gives us (3523*2)/58789194 * 100 = 0.0119851957827488% chance of being killed in an average lifetime by terrorism.
      (For reference, the chance of winning the UK National Lottery is 0.0193366388688181%, if we assume that you play for 52 years in your life, every week.)

      And that is real terrorism. We didn't take it into account that the current terrorism threat is not seriously proven. There are other things we didn't take into account, like growing life expectancy, etc. in this guesstimate, but it was just a thought exercise of what kind of numbers can I come up with in five minutes.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
  4. Reputable? Don't make me laugh! by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    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.
  5. Hang on a minute... by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 4, Interesting
    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.


    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

    1. Re:Hang on a minute... by eunos94 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

  6. How to ruin lives by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  7. Sent money to Afghanistan by jabuzz · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Sent money to Afghanistan by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Quite why you would make a cross border payment of 20GBP is another matter.
      I don't see even the stupidest terrorist doing this. Not even a serious symphatiser. Come on, 20GBP? The guy most likely had good intentions. It's not as if he sent millions of pounds. Any serious terrorist would a.) try to stay off the radar completely, b.) RECIEVE money.
      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:Sent money to Afghanistan by locofungus · · Score: 5, Informative

      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 you read the article?

      Salama said the only cross-border payment he is aware of making is £20 a month to a British-based charity, which sponsors children in Afghanistan.

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
  8. Re:Cash withdrawal by jimicus · · Score: 4, Informative

    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?

  9. Own Goal by PHAEDRU5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
    1. Re:Own Goal by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia law than under British law.

      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?

      Twenty-eight percent of Brirish Muslims hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state.

      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?

  10. Re:Cash withdrawal by legoburner · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  11. Guilty Until Proven Innocent? by hotsauce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?)