Bitcoin Forum

Do you think governments will use terrorism as a reason to make anti bitcoin laws?

No. But I think they will use terrorism and other criminal activities as a reason to enforce already existing KYC and AML laws on bitcoin based businesses just like they do with businesses that use other currencies (such as USD).

Osama isn't dead?

Ofcause he isn't dead. Why kill the ultimate source of info on terrorism sponsors? If you claim he is dead you can keep him in a basement for however long you need.

I don't think that Bitcoin is usefull for terorists. The way Al Caida works today with low tech insurgents and attacks, they would'nt know how to make use of Bitcoin for anything.

That'd be a stupid reason to outlaw BTC. They're used for so many different things, but I do agree that most of it in black market stuff. Don't try to argue this, just look up the deep-web and hidden wiki, that's only scratching the surface though.

For the 1st time they should start trade plutonium for BTC.

If bitcoins were outlawed because of their use by terrorists, then you would have to outlaw the USD too because I'm sure Al Queda uses those too.  ;)

Why would "outlawing" bitcoin prevent terrorists from using it? Or would breaking finance law be a bridge too far for Al Qaeda?

To combat terrorism, one should look at the root causes and learn what causes it. To be honest, I think many governments are happy with a certain degree of terrorism. And do not dismiss that there may be some false flag operations too. That way, the population can be controlled, there is an outside enemy, and the govt. can have an excuse to add certain countermeasures to prevent terrorism, that's not really about anything else but to keep the citizens under control.

We have always been at war with Oceana.

Agreed, Eurasia is our perennial friend and ally.

If the US uses any means to outlaw bitcoin, it appears that the US will use the illicit market SilkRoad as the excuse. That is the excuse that a few members of Congress have already attempted to use.

Well I don't think it would. But a government sure would be willing to use it as an excuse... and it would make a newsworthy catchphrase to garner support. At least that's my fear. Some powerful bankers fund terrorists with bitcoins... the terrorists are somehow caught or they commit some act and are linked to bitcoins after. The news goes crazy... and then legislation begin.  Call me a conspiracy theorist I guess. The irony of that conspiracy though would be that bankers (who would be the enemies of bitcoin) would actually buy the bitcoins to use to fund terrorists.

Look at 1000USD and 500€ notes... they are even less traceable than bitcoins

And while they are at it, they will have to outlaw the cell phone, too. It's the number one tool of drugs dealers.

I dont think there would be any advantage with outlawing bitcoins because even if the us outlaw them they will still be there and still be able to buy with them as all the bitcoin exchange services will just operate from a country that bitcoin is not yet legal in .Also if usa did manage to somehow make bitcoins illegal all over the world there would be another bitcoin invented straight away that is the same but just with a diffrent name .


I dont think it will be as easy as making a law and everyone stops trading in bitcoins if anything the ban would probley bring more publicity to the currency and would make more people interested in using it

If still alive, he's probably living somewhere as someone else. If we are to embrace a conspiracy theory, I think it's more likely that he was an accomplice to the charade. Otherwise, why not accept the official story?


But, they did orchestrate and manage to succeed in taking out the most sophisticated covert attack in the known human history. Strange...

I mostly agree though, that the idea that they somehow are threatened by anti-money-laundering measures and need something like Bitcoin is not very realistic. Assuming there really are actual powerful autonomous terrorist groups (i.e. non-State-created, though could be sponsored), they must already have trust networks to operate. They don't need a distributed notary system. For the transfer of wealth outside the banking system, I'm sure bags of cash will do just fine and perform better than Bitcoin wrt traceability.


Agreed. Though keep in mind that using it as an excuse to attack Bitcoin also counts as an attempt at keeping the citizens under control.

We may possibly overestimate the fact that they were concerned about Silk Road, there are probably an enormous amoung of other cases they're looking into. I'm frankly not sure if bitcoin is on their agenda much.

While we all are consumed by bitcoin, we would probably be shocked to learn how far off the radar it is to the government. 

I think that's why people are afraid that they might try.  It's the stupidest thing to do, so it's the most likely thing the government would try.

A perfect example, ban guns and there will be no more killing.

It seems like laws could only make acquiring and cashing out bitcoins more difficult, but since they are already established currency how could a government effectively outlaw them?

Never thought bitcoins would be use for terrorism since most terrorist groups don't even have the technology to do that. Maybe cyber terrorism like cyber-hacking, data-jacking, and trojan horses. That would make groups like Anonymous feared throughout the world. As for government control, sounds like using some obscure law or something to make bitcoins unreliable. It's not their top priority now.

This is a misconception. OBL had a degree in civil engineering, for example. Anyway, the only technology you need to use bitcoin is a computer or phone with access to the internet. That's a pretty low bar.

He died in 2003, don't ask me how i know. He was on dialysis in a hospital in Ciaro when the CIA went to see him before 911, but the wars wage on and we pay for them.

Bitcoin just might change that!!

Note that if the Us Govt. or any other Govt. tries to make bitcoin illegal for reasons that it aids criminal activity, drug trade, extortion, terrorism, pedophilia, and so forth, then they should also make the euro, the dollar or their national currency illegal.

Now, if it comes to this, we must be aware that it's not about protecting us against anything at all. It is to keep control. Imagine if you were the boss in town, and you was sitting on a stack of dollar bills, then something new came to town, and nobody would accept your dollars more, then you would not be the big boss any more. However, if you saw early on that this was a threat to your position, you could leverage everything you had against it. Make laws, pay thugs to intimidate bitcoin users and so on.

Actually they are sort of traceable. First, Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/business/money/strip.asp) debunks that they are RFID-enabled. But every bill has a serial number, and for large amounts of currency it is quite rare to use cash. That means the bills have a very short trip from one bank to another, where they are always carefully inventoried. Put it all together and it means it's simple to figure out who got the bill out of a bank and who put it back.

The fact that outlawing guns doesn't stop criminals from using them doesn't stop government from outlawing guns.

Yes, every bill has a serial number. Do the ATM's actually record this ? What if you scratch the bill, so the serial number is difficult or impossible to read, have you twarted the tracking then ?

So, if I take a 100 USD bill out of a bank in NY, then this leaves my hand, and then finally 2 weeks later, a coffee shop owner deposits it in his bank account, how do we know where the bill was between the time it was withdrawn and the time it wa deposited ? Was there 1 intermediary, 10, 20 ? We can't and won't know at all. We do not know where this bill travelled.

And do the bank register the serial number when bills are deposited ? I'm not sure about that. Seems like loads of work, for little benefit. And as we know, the banks are all for profit making, and if a task doesn't contribute to that, they don't do it.

I think that serial numbers of bills are only used in certain cases, for instance when ransom money is paid, and law enforcement want to attempt to track it.

Now, how could you possibly create money out of thin air? If you're the govt. you could of course just print it, or go to a pc and select add 10 million usd to the economy. The processes are more complicated than that but you get the point.


Now if you and your friend wanted to risk becoming criminal to make a lot of money, what you could do is to somehow make the bank accept a loan application. They will create the money out of thin air, on the promise that you will later pay it back (ie. backed by depth). So if this money is transferred to another bank, and withdrawn there, the original bank loses nothing. Because they never had the money in the first place. It's quite the intriciate system. See money as debt documentary to learn more.

But yes, bitcoins are more traceable by default than cash. You can see every hop bitcoins do through the public ledger, the block chain. Once the USD bills leave a bank, there's no way of tracing them.

You're talking about a 100 USD bill. I'm talking about a 1000 USD bill.

I agree that small amounts are impossible to fully track. That's why money laundering is only reasonable in small bills. 100 USD is the bill of choice right now I think.Banks must inventory their bills to be allowed to perform "magic" like fraction reserve lending, which means the bank can deposit your money and then lend out up to 8 times as much money based on your deposit. (You talk a little about this down below.) This is all regulated by the Federal Reserve, and the Federal Reserve mandates serial number tracking on all large denomination bills.

It's not done by hand! The same machine that counts the money records the serial number.Only for small denominations. I think the important point here is to avoid 1000 USD bills.

Found something on a banks website:

The "Danske Andelskassers Bank" uses TietoEnators software "ProScan" to scan new coustomers, costumer register and past transactions. The scan is run against the following databases:

-EUs surveilance list.
-The European Union Common Foreign & Security Policy. Consolidated list of persons, groups and entities subject to EU financial sanctions.

-OFACs surveilance list.
-The United States Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Controls list over Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons.

-FATFs surveilance list. The Financial Action Taskforces list over Non Cooperating Countries and Territories.

So if you are denied service from a bank, you might simply have, at some point, transfeered money to a blacklisted area where you sister works as a voluntary nurse.

You get no explanation as to why you are denied service as the contents of these databases are classified.

I'm not sure what to make of that list, but it doesn't surprise me that new customers at the bank must undergo a background check.

Sure but it's like insurrance companies now, you get blacklisted at a number of banks, if one of them get a positive on you in a scan!!

You become un-bankable without a trial, which is a serious sanction for something completely legal!

A bit offtopic, but: How often do you see 1000 bills in circulation, and where is it used ? I mean, 1000 USD is quite a lot of money, I don't think anyone would pay an ordinary restaurant meal with such an amount ? Perhaps if buying something expensive, like a high end pc ? Do you see 1000 USD bills used a lot ?

That is a completely sick system. We can see how well it works with the no-fly list. Even senators must spend weeks and do multuple phone calls to get off the list. Imagine what kind of troubbles an ordinary person has with it.

In general, the "rejection -  no tell"-policy is completely ridiculous. If you're a bank manager, then your brother works with a construction company, then a competitor of your brothers company wants to bank with you, you just issue some internal statements declining to work with them, or just to drag out disputes, and nobody can do anything about it. Totally ridiculous.

The way it should work if it were to be fair is full disclosure. And if somebody comes on a list for the wrong reason, then they should be explained to why they're on the list, and what's the process to get off.

Who are we fooling really ? Terrorists or advanced con men have access to resources, and can twart any counter measure there is. Fake identities, bank account in others names and so on. Impossible to stop. I think people in power position often will put people they don't like on such lists.

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/denominations.aspx

Created from nothingness, destroyed to nothingness. Sweet!

 
I've read the bitcoin forum for over a year before recently deciding to become a full member able to post messages.  Ignorant discussions such as these are both what kept me away and eventually made me decide to post messages.  I am really hoping that bitcoin is accepted by the majority of people in the near future but tinfoil hat wackos are only going to be used by the opponents of bitcoin as ammunition in attempt to discredit it. 

On another note, $1000 US banknotes?  Please tell me when the last time someone saw or heard of one of those being used in circulation.  They're not.  The numismatic value of one far outweighs the face value and if any idiot actually did use it, it would be noticed and snappped up to be sold to a collector of banknotes. 

The alleged killing of Osama bin Laden in 2001 is nothing more than a conspiracy theory and has no facts or evidence of actually occurring. Here is an AP article noting (http://m.startribune.com/?id=142811145) that the Government can't locate a single file on the death of OBL.

How many times did the story change and it even came out that all of those situation room photos of them allegedly watching the raid were completely staged. Hillary came out and said she put her hand over her mouth because she had "allergies." She seems to always have "convenient" ailments.

The real truth of the matter is that OBL died in December of 2001 due to Marfan syndrome, which is a kidney disease. Here is an article (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1DM4ukjnDooJ:12160.info/profiles/blogs/usama-bin-laden-died-in-december-2001-of-marfan-syndrome) which has links to dozens of mainstream articles and foreign newspapers supporting the fact that OBL is long dead.

Before you make up your mind I hope you can read through all of the articles in there before you come to a conclusion. Even if you don't agree with my conclusion I hope you will at least understand why some of us question the government narrative. We're not tinfoil hat wearers, we are just skeptical of those who are known liars and have the most to gain from lying.

I suggest you read and study 1984 if you want to know more about the world you are living in.

Surely it would be pretty difficult for anyone to outlaw BTC ?

I like

It's a truth that the internet is a breeding ground for a lot of conspiracy theories.

However, it's also a fact that governments lies. They twist the truth at occasions, fabricate events, or deny something happened. Main Stream media is a very poor source of what's actually going on.

While there may be some whacked conspiracy theorists among us, I think healthy skepticism and questioning authorities is a good thing! :)

Here's more about false flag operations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

 I wouldn't doubt it if bit coins become illegal. They will most likely sentence anyone with bit coins to lengthy prison terms. With mandatory scheduled sodomy. So in that respect any of you who want to stay out of trouble should give me your bit coins my wallet is 1N5648b8pAntjfcdByAdKhpL14YZRCq7d
It might seem a little extreme giving away your bit coins to a stranger. I assure you though that departing with your bit coins, will be far less painful than the sodomy and cockmeat sandwhiches the government has in store for you.

And 2pac is in Cuba with Heath Ledger, and Michael Jackson.