Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Financial Responsibility == Terrorism?

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Mon Mar 06, 2006 09:32 PM
from the utterly-speechless dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Capital Hill Blue is reporting that recently a retired Texas schoolteacher and his wife had a little run in with the Department of Homeland Security. The crime? Paying down some debt. From the article: 'The balance on their JCPenney Platinum MasterCard had gotten to an unhealthy level. So they sent in a large payment, a check for $6,522. And an alarm went off. A red flag went up. The Soehnges' behavior was found questionable. [...] They were told, as they moved up the managerial ladder at the call center, that the amount they had sent in was much larger than their normal monthly payment. And if the increase hits a certain percentage higher than that normal payment, Homeland Security has to be notified.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Why Terror Financing is So Tough to Track Down 578 comments
An anonymous reader writes "After a recent Slashdot story detailing the errant investigation into a credit card holder's dept payment, comes this article from the Christian Science Monitor discussing the commoditization of terrorism, its relationship to crime, and the difficulties encountered when trying to track "bad" money."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • My experience (Score:5, Informative)

    by MyLongNickName (822545) on Monday March 06 2006, @09:33PM (#14863417) Journal
    This isn't surprising. I work for a regional bank. Every employee is required to undergo training to know "what to look for". Doesn't matter if you are a teller, or a computer help desk operator. Anything over a certain dollar limit must be reported. As time goes on, the threshold has lowered. Pay off your house early? Gets reported. Large deposit? gets recorded. And anything overseas gets more scrutiny than J-Lo's panty lines.

    The training creeped me out. the uber-patriotic person assigned to train our group was so into it. 3/4 of our group thought it was great... bringing down meth dealers who weren't smart enough to structure their money better. In fact, however, structuring is a crime as well... Go just below the radar one too many times, and you can be charged, eevn if there is no illegal activity behind the generation of money.

    And, I would be wise to post AC (I won't, so this message might get more credibility) as advising someone how to avoid setting off the bells and whistles is a crime too.

    We don't live in 1984, but we might be at 1983...
    • Re:My experience (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06 2006, @09:39PM (#14863451)
      I am a consultant for a large national bank and just took this Money Laundering course. Wow, was it creepy. Yes, if you are a stupid crook you will get caught. If you are a normal human being you can get really nailed.

      The weird bit about this class was the continual referece to getting to know you customer. Which is of course imposible. So they set out all these questions and senerios to help you "GUESS" if there was a problem.

    • Re:My experience (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ejdmoo (193585) on Monday March 06 2006, @09:53PM (#14863564)
      Perhaps the threshold is a percentile for the company...

      In this case, I think a $6,000 payment to JC Penny (a department store) is quite unusual.

      Now, to figure out who's laundering money through JC Penny...
      • Re:My experience (Score:5, Informative)

        by MyLongNickName (822545) on Monday March 06 2006, @09:55PM (#14863580) Journal
        It is called "structuring [visualanalytics.com]"
        • Re:My experience (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06 2006, @10:26PM (#14863786)
          Talk about complete bullshit. It's garbage like this that makes people distrust their government.

          Let's see.. If I make a transaction over $10k, there's paperwork to be done and now the government has the Eye of Sauron on me. Hmm, I think I'll just avoid that headache and make two transactions on two different days instead. Alarm! Alarm! You are now being taken to Castle Wolfenstein!

          All this does is persuade criminals to NOT use banks at all and fucks over the legit folks. Typical end result of Big Brothering.
      • Re:My experience (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ceejayoz (567949) <cj@ceejayoz.com> on Monday March 06 2006, @09:56PM (#14863588) Homepage Journal
        "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about."

        Which is an idiotic argument, because what's currently okay won't always be okay.

        Ask someone who signed up for the trendy, fashionable Communist Party in the 1920s how that act later went over in the 1950s, for example.
      • If someone were involved in the shifting of huge amounts of funds around and planning the next WTC, Pentagon, Waco or Bali bombing, you mean you all wouldn't want to know about it?
        Yes, if "knowing about it" means that the government has the financial transactions of hundreds of millions of citizens under a microscope at all times, in order to (not) catch a few terrorists here and there, I definitely don't want it. It's a huge expense to taxpayers, and a huge intrusion into citizen's privacy, for no real benefit.

        Whenever people try to defend the latest ridiculous things that DHS is doing, they always trot out the line "but you want the government to catch terrorists, don't you?" That's a completely specious and indefensible argument; the government had more than enough information to catch the 9/11 terrorists before the act, and failed to do it because they had too much information and not enough ability (or willingness) to correlate it. Thus collecting MORE information is not the answer, especially since it encroaches that much more on the liberty of citizens.

        Terrorism should not be dealt with differently than any other crime. As in, "innocent until proven guilty", and "better to let ten guilty men go free than to wrongly convict one innocent man". The Constitution requires search warrants for investigations of other crimes (though King George the W claims otherwise); they should be required for terrorism investigations as well, including searching financial transactions.

        These "know your customer" banking regulations, the transaction reporting threshold, the instructions to report suspicious transactions even below that threshold, and the prohibition of "structuring" transactions all actually came about before 9/11, but have been stepped up significantly since then. The original rationale was the so-called "war on drugs". But that's not any better reason than the so-called "war on terrorists".

        "They that can give up essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither."
        --Benjamin Franklin
      • Re:My experience (Score:5, Insightful)

        by nadamsieee (708934) on Monday March 06 2006, @10:05PM (#14863657)
        What you need to do, Rebeka, is read John Stuart Mills' "On Liberty" (specifically Chapter IV [bartleby.com]). Then perhaps you will realise just how short sighted your thinking is. An inept bureacracy is just as bad if not worse than an actual conspiracy.
      • Re:My experience (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Hiro Antagonist (310179) on Monday March 06 2006, @10:09PM (#14863684) Journal
        So, you'd have no complaints being audited by the IRS for your 'suspicious' behavior of having a home business that earns more than the average, even though it'll cost you a nice chunk of time and money? I mean, after all, you came out of things without any harm, survived the audit, right?

        You wouldn't mind being detained in a holding cell for a day because some overzealous cop thought you 'looked suspicious'? I mean, you got released the next day, so no harm, no foul?

        How about having the police raid your home because you've bought a little too much cold medicine over the past month, and you also happened to place an order for some beakers for a halloween party? Because, you might be running a meth lab, and so the cops were able to get a nearly unrestricted warrant on that alone? I mean, it's no big deal, other than the day of work you missed, the neighbors watching the police crawl all over your property, and all those entries in the public records.

        Seems a little more scary, doesn't it?

        It has nothing to do with being a conspiracy, and everything to do with a big-ass violation of the Bill of Rights. You, as a citizen, have a right to be secure in your papers and effects, which is why we have this whole warrant system. It's supposed to be that, if the cops want to poke into your business, they have to show probable cause to a judge, and everything is public record (so you can see what they're saying about you, basically).

        Basically, it's a huge pain in the ass, so why go through it unless you really think the person is a criminal?

        Now, your entire life is practically open; law enforcement has access to all of your financial records, including taxes and bank account information, and all without needing a warrant, as long as you violate some arbitrary criteria as to what 'normal' is. Does this help them catch criminals? I doubt it; I mean, the crooks dumb enough to be cooking meth in their kitchens don't usually give a damn about pyrex or lab safety equipment, and the guys smart enough to build nuclear weapons in their basement aren't going to try and buy their supplies at Home Depot.

        Personally, I'd rather our law enforcement dollars were spent on, oh, education, especially in high-crime areas, and in prison reform, so that inmates came out of prison, well, reformed, rather than better-trained in being criminals.

        So, yeah, all of this does scare and bother me, not because I think that there is any big conspiracy, but because the government is violating my rights in exchange for some illusion of safety.
      • Re:My experience (Score:5, Insightful)

        by IgnoramusMaximus (692000) on Monday March 06 2006, @10:15PM (#14863713)
        Absolutely, I have been telling this to my Comrades for ages!

        Vhat you hav to realise is none of tis means anything. So KGB be notified. So they have a look at your bumagi. So they notice nothing be wrong, they go away.

        Vhat the problem? It be age old statement that defeats conspiracy theorists, they who convinced the government is going to imprison all good Soviets vhile the real reactionaries run free.

        "If you not doing anything vrong, you hav nothing to vorry about."

        Tink about it. If someone vere involved in the shifting of huge amount of funds around and planning the next Trotskyte terror campaign, subversive sabotage or bombing, you mean all would not want to know about it? Phew! You be joker.

        ============

        Absolutely, I haf been telling zis to my Komraden for all zis time!

        What you haf to realize is none of zis means anyzing. So ze Gestapo is notified. So zey haf a look at your recorden. So zey eventually notice nozing is vrong, and zey go away.

        What iz ze problem? Again it comez down to ze age old statement zat defeats ze conspiracy zeorists who are convinced ze government is going to imprizon all good Germans while ze real Communisten und Juden run free.

        "Iv you are not doing anyzing vrong, you haf nozing to worry about."

        Zink about it. If someone vere involved in ze shifting of huge amounts of funds around und planning ze next Burning of the Reichstag or bombing of ze train tracks carrying our heroic troops in Polen, you mean you all vouldn't vant to know about it? Jaaa. Right.

  • Catcher in The Rye (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Krach42 (227798) on Monday March 06 2006, @09:35PM (#14863430) Homepage Journal
    Seriously, it's getting pretty bad. Everything you have to notify the government for.

    When I was flying back from Europe, I had to fill out a form with who I was, and my home address, and an emergency contact (if I so wished).

    They set it up like it's some sort of idea that all flights into the US require all US citizens to be recognized and accounted for, so that if it goes down? or something like that? that they can know for sure who was on board, and can start contacting people ahead of time?

    The requirements for entering the US are so ridiculously more complex than any other country I've visited.
  • by webweave (94683) on Monday March 06 2006, @09:36PM (#14863437)
    And Bin Laden is still free.

    Isin't that funny you can be freer in Afghanistan than in the US.
  • by slashname3 (739398) on Monday March 06 2006, @09:38PM (#14863447)
    Everyone on /. send me a dollar. I will apply it to one of my credit cards and then we will see how quickly the FBI shows up. I don't mind taking the hit. So as soon as I collect a dollar from everyone I will make the payment. Not a problem. Glad to do it. It's all for the experiment.
  • This isn't even about terrorism, this is part of the War On Some Drugs. This is "Know Your Customer" from years ago, been going on over a decade in one form or another.

    Any unexpected transaction these days gets the once over, any cash purchase over X gets reported to the FBI. (Last I heard, X was $10K) Buy a car with cash, get investigated. Walk into an airport with a sack of cash and it will simply be taken, no appeals, no trial, no recourse. Simply being in an airport with cash is a crime subject to asset forfeiture. Bitch too loud and they will simply arrest you along with the money. Been that way since the '80s.
  • Lousy Article (Score:5, Informative)

    by jjohnson (62583) on Monday March 06 2006, @10:05PM (#14863655) Homepage
    The real story here is that the Department of Homeland Security is also responsible for credit fraud. One of the scams people pull is to steal a number, write a bogus check to the credit card company for that card (which guarantees the credit will be there), and then spend the amount that was written on the check before the check is cashed (and detected as bogus).

    The auto-trip flag for this is that when a large payment comes in that's many multiples of the payee's normal history, the credit card company will hold the payment until the check clears, which is within 10 days at the outside.

    In other words, this has nothing to do with terrorism, the fascist Bush regime, the gestapo at DHS, or any other Orwellian fantasy you can cook up. It's an arguably poor fraud prevention measure, nothing more.
    • they don't live under a cloud of suspicion.
      ...more than anyone else, you mean. This kind of behaviour means we're all living under an implicit cloud of suspicion -- if we weren't suspect, what valid cause would there be for interference? My personal financial matters are my own personal financial matters, and why a transaction between myself and an entity I happen to contract with to keep my money has any business being audited by a government entity charged with "homeland security" -- well, it wants something by way of explanation.
      • I twice have purchased a new car at the dealer by writing a five-figure check for the full amount before driving away. I had no problems either time.

        You wired the money... Two cars ago I paid for a nice car with cash. I had the money at hand, depositing checks from multiple accounts, only to have some clown try to charge me for a cashiers check and hassle me about when funds were ready (moving from accounts within the same bank) because they had to certify things. I was certified or at least fit to be tied - so I said fine - I'm not paying for a check, give it to me in cash. (for the record, my bride said it was a bad idea) I expected hassles from the bank, who delayed, had me fill out forms, and do a thumbprint.

        The car dealership were the once that surprised me. Seems spending a healthy amount of cash for a car set off flags there as well. They asked if I could deposit the money and write a check! Several forms later, and a 'I told you so...' I had the car. Pre-war on Eurasia, so I suspect things are worse today.
        • Re:No problem here (Score:5, Interesting)

          by thc69 (98798) on Monday March 06 2006, @10:21PM (#14863750) Homepage Journal
          The construction company where I work has never been asked to report five figure checks, and we get them all the time.

          Bob Kerr's column is full of stories like this. Some are more believable than others. This one lacks substantiating evidence, and is pretty tough to believe without it. Since 9/11, I've made transactions like that, and I'm not even old and retired; I'm young and can barely make the payments on my raised ranch...I've never had this sort of problem.

          Why would the company not post the transaction while they investigate? Wouldn't it make more sense to NOT alert "terrorists" that they're suspects?

          I'd like to see some proof, so I'll know to be properly scared when I pay off credit cards.
    • No. That is wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Monday March 06 2006, @09:52PM (#14863555)
      Do I find it annoying? Yes. However, I also find it a necessary nuissance to help keep smugglers and criminals from easily moving money around through our banking system.
      The REAL problem is when people accept this kind of monitoring as "necessary".

      Enron dumped hundreds of millions of dollars off-shore and the government never suspected a thing.

      These people pay off $6K of debt and they're investigated and you support that.
      If you've got a better solution, I'd love to hear it.
      Yeah, it's called "Freedom".

      Sometimes it means that the criminals get away, but that's part of the price of Freedom.