Bitcoin assets cannot be blocked - is that helping terrorists?

[Gozie51]

I think the situation further exposes the use of blockchain and how it secures our funds from third parties. This is just a matter of third party security which is financial sovereignty. Although what we see is the reality of third party intrusion with fiat. This is just the way we get our bank account frozen by the banks for a little verification that the bank is requiring but will block off a customer. It is clear that is a sanction coming down to troubled countries that America didn't succeed on and thinking ahead this action can turn out as disguise for more countries to begin adopting cryptocreency to avoid centralised intrusion.

[1714612447]

1714612447

[1714612447]

1714612447

[1714612447]

1714612447

[1714612447]

1714612447

[Silberman]

What can we do, we wanted a decentralized platform and the people that have malicious intent find a way to use it tho their malicious purposes. But for some terrorists, I don't think that they'll be using it though, bitcoin is easily traced if you have the manpower and equipment and dedication.

At the end of the day bitcoin is just a tool and it is up to the person to decide what they will do with that tool, they can do something constructive or they can do something destructive, it is a mistake to blame the tool for the bad uses that people give to it but that is precisely what we are going to see as bitcoin becomes more popular and banks become more aware of the risk that bitcoin represents to them and will use this as a way to scare people away from this market.

[mu_enrico]

While it's true that if the transaction is valid, it will be confirmed. But it's at the protocol level.
In the real world, I'm afraid the dynamic is a lot more complicated than that. BTC tx can be traced, and to cash out a lot of money, it's difficult to move a pile load of cash with no one notice (yes, they still need to cash out). Thus, for small scale terrorists, maybe they still can use BTC, but for the whales, it is as painful as other methods (or perhaps more painful). It helps small scale criminals/terrorist the same as they use cash. So no, BTC isn't helping terrorists.

[shield132]

While most of the illegal activities in the world take place in USD and I am far from saying that bitcoin is actually worse than any other asset on that regard, I have read many news about the American withdrawal from Afghanistan and how the US government froze some billions of USD belonging to the previous government or perhaps (debatable) to the country itself. Obviously, this could not have happened if those assets were held in bitcoin or other crypto. It seems that not everything is good in self-sovereignty?

BTW, this is not a statement saying that Taliban are terrorist, just wondering about some other cases in which states were clearly linked to terror.

Modern problems require modern solutions. There is one problem that people can't understand: If we talk about illegal activities, bitcoin isn't problem alone but a whole crypto world. Will you ban bitcoin? Then we have Monero. Will you ban Monero? Then there are other cryptocurrencies and guess what? They are unique and their structure, work of mechanism is different from each-other and they aren't the clones.

Sharp knife is used to cut bread and also is used to cut someone's stomach. Knife can't be blocked, is that helping terrorists? <-- How would you answer to this question? The progress of cryptocurrencies and modern information technologies is just unstoppable and in this case both, bad and good guys benefit via the same thing because the medal has always two sides, positive and negative. So, as I said already, modern problems require modern solutions

[paxmao]

While it's true that if the transaction is valid, it will be confirmed. But it's at the protocol level.
In the real world, I'm afraid the dynamic is a lot more complicated than that. BTC tx can be traced, and to cash out a lot of money, it's difficult to move a pile load of cash with no one notice (yes, they still need to cash out). Thus, for small scale terrorists, maybe they still can use BTC, but for the whales, it is as painful as other methods (or perhaps more painful). It helps small scale criminals/terrorist the same as they use cash. So no, BTC isn't helping terrorists.

For you and me (well, I do not know you, just guessing that), it may be difficult to cash out. We probably would be thinking of local bitcoins or an exchange. However, when you are talking big money, you can certainly look for an over the counter partner for the case and believe me it is not going to take long to find one. If you think of it, some countries did not retire their embassies from Kabul so it may even be organised via a partner state. Even if transactions can be traced, that type of funds cannot be blocked an will always find a friendly hand.

[carlfebz2]

BTW, this is not a statement saying that Taliban are terrorist, just wondering about some other cases in which states were clearly linked to terror.

Im aint surprised with these kind of discussions in talking about money laundering or terrorist funding and come to think off that if its possible with fiat then how much more on using up Bitcoin?

Anonymity does really have its specific role when it comes on making transactions anonymous which is the best recipe on funding something neither could be a terrorist or simply passing up money or funds
to your loved ones and so on.

Does it really matter? Even if you do but still theres nothing you can do.

[Wawa2013]

This is how smart Bitcoin haters are, they provide inaccurate information and mislead a lot of people. Bitcoin will always get accused of helping terrorists, maybe because Bitcoin is decentralized and the government can't control it, then raise the accusation that Bitcoin is widely used for illegal activities. Though if we do the research properly, and get information from reliable sources, will find the fact that the number of terrorists who use fiat far more. Because terrorists existed before 2009, when there was no Bitcoin, that many terrorists use to carry out illegal activities is fiat.
So it's actually not true with the information that says Bitcoin helps terrorists. There are indeed some terrorists who use Bitcoin, but very few of them. Many terrorists until now use fiat more for their illegal activities.

It is so much more in fiat then bitcoin, that's true. Bad people use tons more in fiat then they use in bitcoin, bitcoin is probably just the low level drug dealer that sells weed on darknet and that's about it, the transaction is done in bitcoin or some other coin like monero, and then they send the product after the buyer sends the coins, then dealer sends the drugs and it's done.

This is a very very small time amount compared to all the bad people out there dealing in millions of dollars every day, there are billionaire bad people in the world, none of them uses crypto. Long story short they should fix the fiat world helping the criminals before they start to bark about how crypto helps the criminals or gives them a way out, because even though it is anonymous it is not untraceable and that means if there is a bad guy eventually you will catch them.

Actually this problem is due to lack of education to the entire population in the world about Bitcoin, so they only get information from the government.
Most of the information the government provides is wrong, so in my environment very few people know about Bitcoin. Those who know Bitcoin also
think Bitcoin is bad, so it's our job who know the truth about Bitcoin at least try to educate those closest to us first. That can help a little bit to
reduce misconceptions about Bitcoin.

[Chato1977]

While most of the illegal activities in the world take place in USD and I am far from saying that bitcoin is actually worse than any other asset on that regard, I have read many news about the American withdrawal from Afghanistan and how the US government froze some billions of USD belonging to the previous government or perhaps (debatable) to the country itself. Obviously, this could not have happened if those assets were held in bitcoin or other crypto. It seems that not everything is good in self-sovereignty?

BTW, this is not a statement saying that Taliban are terrorist, just wondering about some other cases in which states were clearly linked to terror.

On the other hands this also a great idea that Government is not always over everything .

because indeed that this is hard for them to freeze assets from bad elements but also we knew how crooks run in government and this also sometimes leads to abusing .

so best that there is crypto in which cannot be harmed for those occasions .

[mu_enrico]

For you and me (well, I do not know you, just guessing that), it may be difficult to cash out. We probably would be thinking of local bitcoins or an exchange. However, when you are talking big money, you can certainly look for an over the counter partner for the case and believe me it is not going to take long to find one. If you think of it, some countries did not retire their embassies from Kabul so it may even be organised via a partner state. Even if transactions can be traced, that type of funds cannot be blocked an will always find a friendly hand.

You mean bigger money will be easier to cash out? I don't think that's correct (but I don't know for sure lol). For a small amount of money, as you said, cashing out won't be a problem with local bitcoin or exchanges. If terrorist want to cash out big money, since bank wire transfer isn't an option, I imagine it would be like face-to-face transaction in the movie where one party betrays the other (and the shooting begins). I didn't argue about the government capability of blocking such tx at the protocol level (valid tx with sufficient fees will be mined, that's the rule), but more about the practicality of using BTC for funding terrorists.

[Silberman]

While it's true that if the transaction is valid, it will be confirmed. But it's at the protocol level.
In the real world, I'm afraid the dynamic is a lot more complicated than that. BTC tx can be traced, and to cash out a lot of money, it's difficult to move a pile load of cash with no one notice (yes, they still need to cash out). Thus, for small scale terrorists, maybe they still can use BTC, but for the whales, it is as painful as other methods (or perhaps more painful). It helps small scale criminals/terrorist the same as they use cash. So no, BTC isn't helping terrorists.

This is a good observation, if anything they could be using bitcoin for small transactions as any big transaction even if it is being done on-chain it is going to bring attention about what is happening there, and if the coins are at some point converted to cash then there is going to be a record of that somewhere in an exchange, so this theory that bitcoin is helping criminals is actually being overblown, something that does not surprise me taking into account how afraid of bitcoin banks and governments really are.

[LUCKMCFLY]

This is a very important point, if we take into account that the biggest scams worldwide have been with FIAT money, BTC does not figure or have any sustainable comparison knowing that many governments and banks are enemies of BTC, the point here is, yes BTC it is not taken into account and is not valid in all countries, you cannot be blamed for it. In case the money had not been blocked, access it from the source, unless the private key is handled by more than 1 person and needs the authorization of those who handle it, it is obvious, this is a way to move a lot of money But due to the global policies of governments and banks, that money remains as if it were in the air. The flaw is, that money is not deflationary, they can continue printing and that problem is solved.

[uneps]

Bitcoin is very safe because it is not associated with financial institutions or institutions and transactions are carried out in a decentralized manner.  It protects its users because this digital money system eliminates personal data.
Simply.I think terrorists only use dollars from, not Bitcoin.  The reason is simple Bitcoin is not a liquid currency, like the dollar.
Bitcoin is difficult to use for transactions, especially in countries that have minimal technological infrastructure.
Bitcoin is difficult to use quickly.  In addition, acceptance of digital money is very limited in regions such as the Middle East and North Africa, where terrorist groups are most active.

[BITCOIN4X]

I think terrorists only use dollars from, not Bitcoin.  The reason is simple Bitcoin is not a liquid currency, like the dollar.
Bitcoin is difficult to use for transactions, especially in countries that have minimal technological infrastructure.
Bitcoin is difficult to use quickly.  In addition, acceptance of digital money is very limited in regions such as the Middle East and North Africa, where terrorist groups are most active.

No, I have a feeling you really don't know that the people behind the terrorist name are intelligent people as well as very tech savvy. Since bitcoin is a currency, it is possible to use it for illegal acts such as terrorist financing, money laundering, and many other things. Regardless of whether the country supports cryptocurrencies or not, bitcoin transaction can never be prevented by the government. Regulation can't really prevent bitcoin transaction from being broadcast even if you're in a country with minimal technology infrastructure.

[oHnK]

I think terrorists only use dollars from, not Bitcoin.  The reason is simple Bitcoin is not a liquid currency, like the dollar.
Bitcoin is difficult to use for transactions, especially in countries that have minimal technological infrastructure.
Bitcoin is difficult to use quickly.  In addition, acceptance of digital money is very limited in regions such as the Middle East and North Africa, where terrorist groups are most active.

No, I have a feeling you really don't know that the people behind the terrorist name are intelligent people as well as very tech savvy. Since bitcoin is a currency, it is possible to use it for illegal acts such as terrorist financing, money laundering, and many other things. Regardless of whether the country supports cryptocurrencies or not, bitcoin transaction can never be prevented by the government. Regulation can't really prevent bitcoin transaction from being broadcast even if you're in a country with minimal technology infrastructure.

If we talk about the uniqueness of BTC that cannot be regulated by the government and cannot be frozen then this is a very clear privilege that BTC is a decentralized currency, but if this is related to illegal actions and benefits them.  I strongly disagree, whatever innovation is given, illegal acts will always exist.  But society always blames the media and its tools.  It should not be the function of decentralized BTC that is being discussed but how to remove illegal acts..

[BITCOIN4X]

If we talk about the uniqueness of BTC that cannot be regulated by the government and cannot be frozen then this is a very clear privilege that BTC is a decentralized currency, but if this is related to illegal actions and benefits them.  I strongly disagree, whatever innovation is given, illegal acts will always exist.  But society always blames the media and its tools.  It should not be the function of decentralized BTC that is being discussed but how to remove illegal acts..

Basically the government of a country can only regulate without being able to prevent bitcoin transaction. They cannot block transaction thus allowing bitcoin to be used for various payment purposes. I also don't think that government can freeze bitcoin on the network if they don't have the private key because bitcoin isn't a currency they can control like a centralized fiat currency. Bitcoin decentralization could give terrorists more opportunities to function as untraceable means of payment. I think the mixer can also help them hide where the transaction is going.

[swiftxi]

I think its funny to think that all the restrictions should be in place just becouse of terrorists.
Nato,Russia,China who all claim to be anti terror organised, could easily eliminate any threat.
Yet.
Isis drives Toyotas imported from US, Assault rifles made in Russia.
Taliban now has US Vehicles, aircraft ,weapons. Etc.

[Sithara007]

I think its funny to think that all the restrictions should be in place just becouse of terrorists.
Nato,Russia,China who all claim to be anti terror organised, could easily eliminate any threat.
Yet.
Isis drives Toyotas imported from US, Assault rifles made in Russia.
Taliban now has US Vehicles, aircraft ,weapons. Etc. 

On top of that, Taliban and ISIS have regularly raided central banks and other financial institutions, taking vast reserves of fiat cash. Almost all of their dealings (ransom payments, purchase of weapons, sales of drugs.etc) are conducted using fiat currency. And yet, it is cryptocurrency which receives the blame. There are reasons why these terror groups prefer physical cash to cryptocurrency. First of all, cryptocurrency is not 100% anonymous since the transactions are recorded in Blockchain. And secondly, the liquidity will be an issue with larger amounts, especially in countries like Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.

[Betwrong]

I think its funny to think that all the restrictions should be in place just becouse of terrorists.
Nato,Russia,China who all claim to be anti terror organised, could easily eliminate any threat.
Yet.
Isis drives Toyotas imported from US, Assault rifles made in Russia.
Taliban now has US Vehicles, aircraft ,weapons. Etc. 

On top of that, Taliban and ISIS have regularly raided central banks and other financial institutions, taking vast reserves of fiat cash. Almost all of their dealings (ransom payments, purchase of weapons, sales of drugs.etc) are conducted using fiat currency. And yet, it is cryptocurrency which receives the blame. There are reasons why these terror groups prefer physical cash to cryptocurrency. First of all, cryptocurrency is not 100% anonymous since the transactions are recorded in Blockchain. And secondly, the liquidity will be an issue with larger amounts, especially in countries like Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.

That's right, using fiat currency is much more convenient for terrorists because, unlike Bitcoin, it's 100% anonymous. Blaming BTC is ridiculous, but if we think of it, since recently no serious person blames BTC in helping terrorists. It's ignorant journalists who don't know the difference between Monero, Zcash and the likes and Bitcoin write those foolish articles, and fortunately fewer and fewer people read them.

[Laughingfool]

Bitcoin itself is not wrong. Bitcoin has the same attitude towards everyone. There is an error in this proposition. From another perspective, if the previous government uses digital currency, his funds will not be frozen, but I will consider, does the United States still protect the previous government? Everything is for profit, and there is no free lunch. For many countries that want to get rid of the dollar control. Will the US government not impose an economic blockade on them?

[bryant.coleman]

That's right, using fiat currency is much more convenient for terrorists because, unlike Bitcoin, it's 100% anonymous. Blaming BTC is ridiculous, but if we think of it, since recently no serious person blames BTC in helping terrorists. It's ignorant journalists who don't know the difference between Monero, Zcash and the likes and Bitcoin write those foolish articles, and fortunately fewer and fewer people read them.

Even with Monero and Zcash, there is no concrete evidence that they are being used for terrorism. XMR and ZEC have even serious liquidity issues, since their trade volumes are much lower when compared to established cryptocurrencies. Journalists just want sensationalism and use these sort of stories as clickbait. That said, I don't want to call them as ignorant. It's all intentional. Also, for the governments cryptocurrency is just a convenient excuse to hide their own failures in combating global terrorism.