Slashdot Mirror
US Government To Study Bitcoin As Possible Terrorist Threat
randomErr (172078) writes "The US Department of Defense is investigating whether Bitcoin and other virtual currencies are a potential terrorist threat. The Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office (CTTSO), a division within DOD that identifies and develops counter terrorism abilities and investigates irregular warfare and evolving threats, has listed Bitcoin among its topics for research and mission critical analysis related to terrorism."
Bacon is clearly not a terrorist threat. So, eat up, America!
the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
FYI, all other electronic money transfers in the US are required to go through money laundering and terrorist funding checks. By law the bank isn't even allowed to tell you why you can't get your money, if the scan hits a positive.
It's a bit immature for people to be blindly making fun of this. At the risk of RTFA:
This sounds like a perfectly valid thing for someone to think about, and consider the implications of. Honestly, whatever your business (or governmental responsibility), if you aren't thinking about the impact of crypto-currency, you might be being negligent.
And I can't even imagine how harsh would be the punishment for those who get caught laundering money for terrorists. Let's say if a big bank (i.e. HSBC, or Santander) got caught, certainly hundreds of people would go to jail, right?
I feel so safe with all these laws protecting us.
`echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
They are not investigating Bitcoin as a threat.They are investigating how crypto-currencies can be used to finance terrorism. The editors need to be fired.
Back in January, Bitcoin Magazine unearthed an unclassified memo detailing some of the CTTSO projects. "The introduction of virtual currency will likely shape threat finance by increasing the opaqueness, transactional velocity, and overall efficiencies of terrorist attacks”, the memo said.
quite unreasonable.
don't you know the drill, by now?
if this competes with the existing power-brokers (and yes, it does) then it can't be allowed.
to stop things we don't like, we label them as child pron or terrorism.
nothing new about this; we've seen this old play redone hundreds of times during the last 10+ yrs.
this is just about controlling currency and stopping anonymity. has absolutely nothing to do with 'terror'. only an moran would buy that story.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Yeah, and in the last few decades law enforcement agencies on both the state and federal level have grown increasingly dependent on civil forfeiture in their insane drug war. Basically it's a guilty until proven innocent system, and good luck getting it back if the government took all your money to begin with.
This was a country with $500 and $1000 (and more) dollar bills already back in the 1920s.... and now you're suspicious if you carry more than a few hundred dollar bills. Modern hundred dollar bills that I may add have less value than a 1920s Hamilton ($10 bill).
Before anyone says it only happens to drug dealers, I had 2 friends go to CA with their life savings of $15k and a business plan get stopped in OK and the money seized and never seen again. Not an gram of drugs in the car, just some beer in the back. America looks more and more like a communist country every coming decade.
FYI, all other electronic money transfers in the US are required to go through money laundering and terrorist funding checks. By law the bank isn't even allowed to tell you why you can't get your money, if the scan hits a positive.
Obama administration offers $27 million in additional help for Syrian rebels
Wonder how they'll transfer it...
America looks more and more like a communist country every coming decade.
I think the words you were looking for are "totalitarian police state", or the like.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
It seems like they should have put it in bitcoin and retrieved it when they got to CA.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Great business minds!
Was step one of the business plan: "Withdraw every penny of their life savings in cash in order to transport it cross country by car?"
[As you know, EFTs can't get over the Rocky Mountains until the pass opens back up in the spring...]
foolishness is not illegal.
carrying cash is not illegal.
carrying cash should not used as a proxy to assign guilt for some other crime.
the police should not be able to press charges against *items* and deny standing to it's owner.
civil forfeiture is an abrogation of our civil rights and we should be throwing the ones responsible for it in jail. :(
Be careful what you wish for. It looks like Holder is going to actually try and jail some bankers.
However, these banks will not be accused of laundering money for terrorists, except under an extremely flexible definition of "terrorist". Most likely they will be accused of evading sanctions and/or helping naughty Americans avoid tax (let's ignore that some of these Americans had left America). Unfortunately last time the USA went on the war path over sanction-evading banks it turned out that the countries the financial activity was happening in didn't have those sanctions. Another minor detail for the US Govt. Jurisdiction doesn't seem to matter to them.
I do feel like we're entering dangerous new territory with this constant beating up of banks, often under deeply questionable covers. The DoJ and Treasury dept have realised that bankers are so politically weak they can be made to do anything because people automatically assume they're guilty, and just the threat of prosecution under bogus laws can cow them into subservience - which is a problem because by seizing control of the banks they seize control of the people, who cannot do without bank accounts. Hence Operation Choke Point.
Frankly, I do not believe bankers are a part of some cigar smoking Al-Qaeda terrorist conspiracy and I'd rather they were left alone than we go down this path .... it can only lead to even more gross abuses of power than what we've already seen.
quite unreasonable.
don't you know the drill, by now?
if this competes with the existing power-brokers (and yes, it does) then it can't be allowed.
to stop things we don't like, we label them as child pron or terrorism.
nothing new about this; we've seen this old play redone hundreds of times during the last 10+ yrs.
this is just about controlling currency and stopping anonymity. has absolutely nothing to do with 'terror'. only an moran would buy that story.
It's about control and destroying a free and open society..
Terrorism, rebellion against the government, and being able to move wealth without government knowledge is only preventable in an authoritarian police-state type of society.
A free and open society only exists when it is possible to keep one's finances a secret from government and organize without the governments' knowledge to commit acts of terrorism and rebellion.
More government "Safety" = Less Freedom, Less Actual Safety, and Less Money for You.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Frankly, I do not believe bankers are a part of some cigar smoking Al-Qaeda terrorist conspiracy and I'd rather they were left alone than we go down this path .... it can only lead to even more gross abuses of power than what we've already seen.
You're right. But they are members of the oligarch class who will happily watch us all end up in the streets as long as they can maintain their profits. Actually, they'd like us all in the streets, since poor people have fewer opportunities to challenge their supremacy.
You can call that paranoia if you want, but given the lobbying and politician buying activities of that group, it's clear that they are willing to sacrifice our economic and social well-being in the pursuit of more money for them.
It's ultimately self-defeating, since their profits are based on our consumer society, but they'll happily sacrifice the future for quarterly gains (and bonuses).
That's not terrorism, but it is antithetical to the ideals of freedom and opportunity for all. That we don't regulate these guys or incentivize economic opportunity and equality says a lot about how deeply these guys have their filthy paws into our government.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
And I can't even imagine how harsh would be the punishment for those who get caught laundering money for terrorists. Let's say if a big bank (i.e. HSBC, or Santander) got caught, certainly hundreds of people would go to jail, right?
I feel so safe with all these laws protecting us.
I'm so sick of seeing the HSBC case referenced by people who have no clue about the actual case. Nobody at the bank had any involvement in "laundering money for terrorists". Other people laundered money using HSBC's accounts. The HSBC employees did not follow regulatory reporting rules that might have revealed the laundering. So like any regulatory violation, they were slapped with a massive fine. It would have been ridiculous to charge anyone with a crime.
If the night security guard at a bank falls asleep, and someone robs the bank without him noticing- you wouldn't charge the security guard with bank robbery.