US woman accused of laundering Bitcoin for Islamic State | Hacker News Reader

US woman accused of laundering Bitcoin for Islamic State

bbc.co.uk

> Ms Shahnaz was born in Pakistan and worked as a lab technician in the US.

I'm not american, though I spend some time in US, mostly in Maine. Every-time I hear this kind of stories, I can't help but thinking: you go through all that trouble to immigrate to US to build yourself a lot of opportunities for your life and all you end up doing is shit like these? while millions of people are waiting in line wishing for a better life? Same for anybody living an Europe who rushed to go live in the Caliphate... while people are fleeing these very places because of the insane violence... I can't understand this.

Religion. It's extremely powerful, especially if indoctrinated from young age. And it gets compartmentalized, when faced with opposing facts. That's why we have PhDs who believe the Earth is 6000 years old.

Its not just that. Its also family ties, sense of belonging and identity.

Specifically in regards to ISIS its also about "changing the world" and being a force for "good" in the world. This sort of idea is appealing to those that are young as well as those who feel the need to be "redeemed" or are stuck in some sort of rut. To just attribute it to religion is missing a lot of the background detail of why people do these things.

> Religion

There is differences between some follows of religion and others. As a Theology Student who has read the Koran several times, I can tell you it is not based on the Koran, but more about ideology and worldview and not what their religion teaches them. This is why when most Muslims confront terrorist they tell them they aren't Muslims.

For example Westboro Church's stances and action are not built off of what Christianity traditions, scriptures or historical figures taught them but it based on their own twisted worldview and ideology that causes them to protest veteran's funeral and attempted to protest Sandyhook victim's funerals (Happy to say that my home state wouldn't let them get there)

So slamming all of "Religion" is being disagreeable. I think the biggest thing all of us, especially in US right now, needs to judge ourselves on how we treat people we disagree with.

Nobody cares about the true word of the Koran. Nobody wants a thesis on accuracy of interpretation.

What matters is the most accessible, loudest voice in the space. Just like fake news, accessibility and network effects are the only things that matter. The demand is for one particular religion to acknowledge and tame the spread of this loud, violent "fake" religion/interpretation, if you will

> Nobody cares about the true word of the Koran. Nobody wants a thesis on the accuracy of interpretation.

There are millions that do and thousands of great academic scholars who strive for that. I went to seminary and studied for over 5 years Greek and Hebrew so I could know better, but the issue is MOST don't care. They care more about what so and so says.

How do you know that your interpretation of the Koran is correct, and ISIS's is wrong? All mainstream religions have this problem, and there's no resolution. Christianity, for instance, has 30,000 subsects that can't agree on the most basic things mentioned in the Bible.

To an outsider who may not have studied the religion, that is a valid issue to raise. However, ISIS more or less did not bring anything new, they share ideologies with the Khawarij group for instance. Add to that that we have strong narrations that foretold of groups of people who pray and fast in a manner that makes observers think their own prayers are inferior; they recite the Quran very well, but without comprehending its meanings, and take actions leading to bloodshed and other terrible things. In those narrations these people were described as the dogs of hellfire. From what I came across, scholars generally applied that description to the Khawarij group, but it does not mean that other groups with similar ideologies won't appear later on (we already see what's happening today).

Another clear narration can be found here: https://sunnah.com/urn/245570

I guarantee you that none of the leaders of outlaw groups like ISIS would be able to hold a proper debate to defend their points of view in front of a well-learned scholar, they would get instantly demolished. The issue is that you have a lot of uneducated and/or emotional people who fall for their propaganda and end up joining them unfortunately.

One mental gymnast of your choice is more convincing than another. To you. Big surprise.

If there was truly one well-learned scholar who demolished everyone else, religions wouldn't have these problems.

But all religious texts remain big books of multiple choice where any section can be declared literal or metaphoric or mean something totally different because "context", all on a whim of the "scholar".

Where do you see the mental gymnasium in what I wrote? I think the source I cited was very clear.

I just gave an example about a well-learned scholar refuting ISIS's leadership in a way to show how well established Islam's position is about this topic, that any single person who is well versed in the matter can tear down their ideology. And yes, there is historic precedence with something similar happening with the Kharijites.

This might be of interest: http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/

The Quran does acknowledge the fact that different parts of it may be allegorical: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhkam_and_Mutashabih_(tafsir)

At the same time, there are many parts which are clear, and which all well-learned scholars have agreed upon since the very beginning, which are not up for interpretation (e.g. what ISIS is doing today). Any well-learned scholar can tell you about the Kharijites and how they went astray, citing the Quran and the Hadith, as well as narrations from Companions about how they dealt with them. It is established Islamically that the behavior of the Companions as a whole is something we are ordered to follow, and those same companions dealt with an ISIS-like group that emerged during their time. This is not up for debate.

Other things which are not as grave as bloodshed and which have not been firmly established throughout the history of the Muslims can be up for debate, no problem. It happens all the time. And such topics do not touch the "core" of the religion, only "branches" if that makes any sense.

This point remains: A rulebook that - if taken literally - leads to suffering is not a good rulebook.

There was nothing in what I wrote about taking things literally in the Quran leading to bloodshed or suffering.

I was in the US an H1B worker highly skilled in a top company. I wanted to be a US citizen. US is a great country. But I have to wait 10 years minimum (India queue) to get a greencard and my wife cannot work because is an H4 visa holder. So I left US and immigrated to Canada and is a citizen now.

US should stop taking in people thru diversity visas and family categories, but skilled people like me who wants to contribute and make it big in life are made to wait forever. Your loss US, your loss.

US' immigration system is broken. Diversity visa system & the entire family tree of that person moving to the US in the course of time. What a burden to the US taxpayers !. While skilled workers like me bringing high value to the US economy are being pushed away. US immigration system is a joke. Take a cue from Canada's express entry system and learn.

The article obviously doesn't talk about her visa status, but it certainly sounds like she holds a work visa just like you did. It doesn't sound like she is a naturalized citizen.

I agree the immigration quotas should be higher, though.

No, that's the wrong takeaway. The immigration queues should be full of high quality people who are also likely to make loyal US citizens.

The precisely not how it works now. It’s full of people who will make good employees. Selecting for good citizens is very different, but in the case of bitter-toned OP perhaps it worked in this regard.

>It’s full of people who will make good employees.

Yeah I would agree with that. You can see the conflict of interest here though - with the existing system US Federal Government employees are making decisions about who might become a citizen one day. Presumably, those citizens will then hold the government employees accountable for their actions.

This biases US Government decision-making towards populations that tend to be pliable and dependent on the state, rather than populations who have the capability of building alternative bases of power.

Honestly what this means is that decisions about who to let in the country are too important for the US Government to be making - exactly because citizens should hold it accountable for its behavior.

As an American, I find this opinion offensive. When you say the US needs to import skilled workers you are insinuating that Anericans aren’t intelligent enough or capable enough to fill positions. It doesn’t do my country any good to import someone to do a job while there are skilled Americans looking for work.

I dunno, I think a country benefits when it imports talented people, full stop. Americans can be intelligent and capable, and companies can still benefit from hiring more people just like them (or, in some cases, more intelligent and more capable than them).

Perhaps it'd make sense to be protectionist if there was a fixed pool of employment/business opportunities, but I don't think that's the case for technology workers at the moment--lots of room at the margin for talented people.

I am possibly biased, though. I was in the US on an H1B for a few years from 2008-2011, but left due to the immigration bullshit.

Do you mean the diversity visa program is offensive? Or the h1b visa program? Or just immigration in general?

Wondering, why a throwaway post though. I don't think being happy about Canada is that controversial here. A lot of people want to immigrate there and it's a great country. Do you think it's because it wasn't the first choice and you might get criticized for it?

If they ask my social accounts when I visit US, I don't want them to see my comments on this topic. I was once questioned half jokingly by a TSA agent on my choice of tshirt. The tshirt was of an IC engine schematic. Just playing it safe. US has become a scary 'stereotypy' place for non US citizens.

Good point on social accounts. That's a chilling and scary thing.

there is a lot that isn't about "the earnest citizen" in the US. Yes, we taxpayers aren't pleased about it. Canada is lovely-- you will get good healthcare there even if you lose your job. A lot of us Americans wish the US could learn from Canada. Menwhile, be thrilled you are there!

I am in love with this country now. I am now relaxed, not worried about my visa status. My wife is happily working too. We lead a happy stress free life.

That's Canada for ya!

I've moved to the US from Canada, and my life is more stressful and less relaxed then it used to be. The US is a great place, but its got a kind of crazy, competitive, wild west, make it or break it, work hard, never stop, push your limits past the breaking point kind of attitude. Which can be fun in a way, if you're managing to keep up with it, but definitly exhausting in the long run.

Now, I just keep thinking how nice it'll be when I move back to Canada, after my US "adventures", and get to relax again, enjoy good people's company, and just appreciate a comfortable life without worries and minimal stress.

Canadians kind of do fall into their stereotypes. They're just nice reasonable people, who just want to be friendly to you and not have to work too hard, but know how to organise themselves and work together so everyone can enjoy a nice life.

And since you is a citizen of canada now, do you also take the popcorn for stories like this?

"Suspect in Canada Terror Attack Had Been Ordered to Leave U.S." https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/world/canada/canada-terro...

Glad that someone funneling money to terrorists is a cause for your celebration though. At least it makes someone besides the terrorists happy.

Clearly we lost a charmer. I'll be sure to write my congressperson.

"taking the popcorn" is not a celebration. I am sorry you felt that way.

You should take it out. As a native english speaker, I've never heard an idiomatic expression involving popcorn that didn't imply "happily awaiting entertainment."

Done.

It's important to read indictments skeptically. The point of an indictment is to indict.

In this case, her actions look pretty bad. And if she was funding terrorist organizations, then yes, agreed. But consider that she may have actually been trying to help people.

The central issue here seems to be that she was taking out loans to buy BTC. That's not ok under any circumstance, unless of course someone is loaning you the money because you told them of your plans.

Related: "After fleeing North Korea, some defectors want to go back to life under Kim Jong-un" http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-15/north-korean-defect...

Maybe your perception is that you're ultimately helping your fellow muslim brothers and sisters and sacrificing yourself for the greater good. Of course it doesn't make any sense to me but given enough propaganda and indoctrination, anything can happen.

Is it possible that she was framed? Or pressured into it?

You're absolutely right! Both are very, very possible.

Fortunately for her, she and her legal defense team will have ample opportunity to present facts on such precisely this subject! Specifically, during trial.

mostly in Maine

Side point: excellent choice, if I may say.

I feel the same way, in fact, I think the truth of what is really happening with stories like this is probably stranger.

From the article:

"Prosecutors said that Ms Shahnaz obtained a Pakistani passport in July and booked a flight to Pakistan with a layover in Istanbul, intending to travel to Syria.

She was arrested at John F Kennedy airport carrying $9,500 in cash, just under the limit of $10,000 that a person can legally take out of the country without declaring the funds.

Searches of her electronic devices showed numerous searches for Islamic State-related material. "

Also the following:

"Prosecutors say she took out fraudulent loans of $85,000 (£63,000) in order to buy the bitcoin online."

How you take out a fraudulent loan? How can they know her intent from just a couple of searches? Lots of information missing from this article, and makes me think that this woman commited thoughtcrime rather than an actual crime...

This is a summary. You might want to read the actual press release with the actual indictment rather than make up accusations of "thoughtcrime". https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/long-island-woman-indic...

Also, it's an indictment. The actual evidence will be presented at the trial.

That may be true. However, have you been blind to the constant discussion that the police are more than willing to confiscate money and leave you be?

And it is an indictment, that can be rescinded. The funds themselves can be charged.

She lied to obtain loans and sent money to ISIS. Seems like real crimes to me. The fact that police and prosecutorial abuses exist doesn't mean that they're happening here.

That's what the police allege.

She claims that it was direct humanitarian aid to the peoples in Syria.

Sure. It sounds like the police have enough evidence to move forward with a trial, and then the court will decide innocence or guilt. That's how it's supposed to work. There's nothing in any of this, as far as I can see, to support your suggestions of police misconduct, or the other fellow's suggestions of thoughtcrime.

That is why we have due process to get at the truth (or at least the most plausible explanation).

Joining the Knights of Rojava, or Peshmerga, or the Women's Protection Unit YPG looks just like this.

They all involve a layover in Istanbul

They all involve wiring money, sometimes to you for the free tickets

They all involve making multiple internet searches of factions in Syria

and none of them involve getting arrested, simply because they aren't ISIS

Not buying it. The indictment doesn't give details, and the summary the DOJ has lacks specifics on how it determined the bitcoin was going to ISIS, or that she wasn't just speculating on bitcoin. The point is that these are prerequisites for the governments case.

The only difference when joining the other factions is that the US won't scoop you up at JFK or in Istanbul if they think you are joining the other factions, and aren't muslim.

I don't understand how you can simultaneously say that we don't have details and that joining these other organizations looks just like this.

We don't know what the evidence is against this person. While it's true that the evidence could be crap, it could also be solid. This looks like a standard indictment for activities that are and should be illegal. I see no reason to think any "thoughtcrime" was involved.

I'm not using the word thoughtcrime, someone else had though.

> I don't understand how you can simultaneously say that we don't have details and that joining these other organizations looks just like this.

What is confusing about that? The government doesn't arrest people for trying to join the other ones. OOooh you think those would count as terrorist organizations too! Nope. Thats the point, it is completely subjective BS. You can join other non-state enemy combatant groups and the US will not care at all. I'm surprised I don't hear more about YPG here on HN more often, you might like what they stand for.

> We don't know what the evidence is against this person. While it's true that the evidence could be crap, it could also be solid.

We agree on this, I simply spelled it out and point out that I can't reserve judgement on the government's side until the evidence is shown, and this doesn't show enough of it to even sound damning to me, the opposite conclusion than what you came to, perhaps its because I am aware of the following:

Syria has been a "choose your faction" videogame for 5 years now, with only ISIS being the hidden character you aren't supposed to access. The allegation, to be convincing before trial, needs to at least show how she was affiliated with ISIS aside from some mere google searches.

Otherwise, AS WE BOTH AGREE, the evidence will just have to wait till then.

She may have falsified documents or misrepresented her intentions when getting the loans. That would make them fraudulent.

If you had a US citizen as a coconspirator it's not a bad way to get a ton of money really-have them blow up their good name to take a series of crappy loans, use them to buy Bitcoin, flee to Pakistan. Sure you'd be burning your bridges in the US but if you were planning on living in a terrorist camp somewhere, you're not really concerned with that I imagine.

> How you take out a fraudulent loan?

Presumably you commit fraud on your loan application.

I am pretty sure that taking a loan with the intention to leave the country and skipping out of repaying is fraudulent.

Naturally its up to the prosecutor to prove the intent.

How were they able to search electronic devices? It's that easy / routine now at airports?

I’ll never bring my phone on an international flight again: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13645825

I Had My Electronics Seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13453189

A US-born NASA scientist was detained at the border until he unlocked his phone: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629593

US Customs block Canadian man after reading his Scruff profile: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13702981

The last one didn't even happen on US soil but at Vancouver airport; there are now more than 600 US customs agents stationed in multiple airports around the world:

    Dublin and Shannon in Ireland; Aruba; Freeport and Nassau in The Bahamas; Bermuda;
    Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates; and Calgary, Toronto, Edmonton, Halifax, Montreal,
    Ottawa, Vancouver, and Winnipeg in Canada.

Customs can detain you until you unlock the device.

You take out a fraudulent loan by making misrepresentations of some variety on the loan documents.

You don’t just show up to the bank asking for a loan “because I want it”, you have to state what you want it for and how you intend to repay it. The bank will then assess if your request makes sense, and whether you can afford it, before granting it.

I guess a bank wouldn’t loan money “to help refugees” or “to buy bitcoins”, so anything she’s stated was likely false, hence fraud.

Balance transfer loans are "because I want it" and I get offers for those all the time, up to the limit of my credit for an individual account (I have many) which exceeds $30,000.

> Her lawyer, Steve Zissou, said she was sending money overseas to help Syrian refugees.

> "What she saw made her devoted to lessening the suffering of a lot of the Syrian refugees and everything she does is for that purpose," Mr Zissou said outside the courthouse.

That’s a hell of a defense

The Life Aquatic Steve?

It's plausible on all accounts. I doubt a terrorist group would have issues lying about their goals, and legitimate charities allegedly being terrorist fronts isn't that rare.

Go big or go to jail I suppose...

This defense might actually work in Germany/Sweden.

If you actually believe that, I have two pieces of advice for you:

1) Stop reading Breitbart / Dailymail.

2) Go travel a bit.

The arrest on the verge of her alleged flight to Syria makes this sound very similar to the FBI undercover "terrorist" stings. She was doing nothing obviously wrong at the airport, so the arrest signals they were expecting her.

I get the sense that bitcoin, all these coins, are going the way of Tor: ostensibly an innocent channel. In fact, the dominant activity is foul in the extreme.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com