Slashdot Mirror
Banks Accept Dubai Assassins' Stolen IDs
schliz writes "Public scrutiny did more harm than good last week, after Australian police and the media released details of three stolen passports allegedly used in the assasination of a senior Hamas member in Dubai. As if having their identities stolen for an assassination wasn't enough, it turns out the victims' passports had not been cancelled by the government, so the details that were published by the media in fact could be used to open fraudulent bank accounts."
I thought that the details had been obscured by the government when it made the release. It appears that the ABC and Seven blurred the important numbers. Others broadcast the details without editing. I thought we had enough of these on Media Watch last year to teach them a lesson.
schliz, kdawson: are you absolutely sure that this is public scrutiny's fault?
On the hamas leader see: http://www.michaeltotten.com/2010/02/more-like-this-please.php
Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
OK, let's see: the Dubai police has, so far, incriminated 26 suspects which have fled the country, two of them to Iran. The only individuals actually captured by the Dubai police are 3 Palestinians. (That would make the number of operatives equal to 29). Additionally, the police actually found succinylcholine (a muscle relaxant) in Mabhouh's blood (so he wouldn't fight back when, allegedly, smothered with a pillow). Some of the passports used by the alleged operatives belong to Israeli citizens (7 of them, IIRC).
You don't see any problem with these?
First of all, 29 operatives - that's a recipe for disaster; the more people involved, the higher the likelihood for an error. Mossad has used two to four people in the past, even for much higher profile targets (we know this from the few botched missions). As for how much does adding people to the operation increase the likelihood for error, it's given by the formula 1 - (1 - q)^n, where q is the likelihood that one agent will screw up, and n is the number of participating agents.
Secondly, no Israeli agent would flee to Iran - because it's a paranoidly tightly controlled police state.
Thirdly, Mossad would never use identities stolen from Israeli citizens, as that would endanger the lives of said citizens (and protecting lives of Israeli citizens is one of Mossad's raison d'etre), AND it would point a giant flashing sign at Israel. Mossad doesn't need to use Israeli citizen's identities.
Fourthly, Mossad does not leave traces behind them. Their targets have historically been either shot or their death defied forensics.
Fifthly, the only captured people are Palestinians. This would point at the involvement of Fatah rather than Israel.
The whole operation, while successful, seems mired in sloppiness (having such a large group of people involved, all of them identified - WTF? And leaving evidence at the scene etc. etc.), which should be enough to discredit the claim that Mossad was in involved.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Truth be told Israel is a state sponsor of terror and it was founded on terrorism.
-Might- want to check how Israel was founded and by whom.
My understanding of the foundation of Israel was that is was begun by the Zionist movement who wanted to return to the homeland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
the State of Israel was proclaimed by
Ben-Gurion on the 14th May 1948 the day the British mandate expired.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_(Israel)
The British left due to a Jewish terror campaign also known as the Jewish Revolt.
The Arabs/Palestinians had there own terror campaign as well it's just the Jewish were better at it.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/defense.html
I don't recall telling banks in the UK any government-issued ID numbers, but I haven't opened a bank account there recently.
Money laundering requirements in the UK generally take the form of 2 or more pieces of documentation that prove both who you are, and where you live. (Drivers licence or passport for who you are, tax notices, benefits letters, utility bills for address.) Used in conjunction with data held by Experian/Equifax (which includes electoral information as backup for where you live.)
The closest you'll get to explicitly handing over a government issued ID number to a bank is if you open an ISA (Individual Savings Account - limited tax free savings,) and they ask you for your National Insurance number.
http://harridanic.com