Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks Crime The Almighty Buck Idle

Girls Catfish ISIS On Social Media For Travel Money 238

MarkWhittington writes: Yahoo Travel reported that three women in Chechnya took ISIS for $3,300 before getting caught. They are now under investigation for Internet fraud, which seems to be illegal even when committed against the most fearsome terrorist army in modern times. The scam seems to be a combination of the Nigerian Prince con, in which a mark is fooled into giving the con artist large sums of money and catfishing, in which the mark strikes up an online romance with someone he thinks is an attractive woman (or man depending on the gender and preference of the mark.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Girls Catfish ISIS On Social Media For Travel Money

Comments Filter:
  • Nice. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02, 2015 @10:07PM (#50237873)

    This is hilarious. I wonder why more people haven't tried it.

    • If we had an intelligence agency that was actually trying to win this war, they would be doing operations like this times 100. Unfortunately we don't. The CIA doesn't even bother to call and ask for information from people who were kidnapped by and escaped from ISIS. At a minimum the CIA should at least act like some of the people going over there are agents and spies, then there would be division within ISIS since they wouldn't be able to trust each other. Psychological operations like that cost no money

  • Catfish (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @10:23PM (#50237925)

    Can we stop using catfish as a verb? Its fucking dumb.

    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by Culture20 ( 968837 )
      Catfishing is a specific type of fishing where you stick your hand in a hole that probably has a giant alligator snapping turtle, but you hope has a catfish, and you hope that the catfish tries to eat your hand, then you pull your hand out and you have a ctafish for dinner. But if you find that snapping turtle, then you won't be using the word "catfishing".
    • Re:Catfish (Score:4, Informative)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @11:18PM (#50238153)

      Too late. It's in the Oxford dictionary now and part of the correct use of the English language. It's actually not the only definition of catfish in verb form.

      • Dictionary people used to just categorize definitions for eternity. They recognized the slow change, but now it seems they've gone overboard in the other direction, being too quick to recognize new words that may be faddish and need the lens of time to know if they're gonna stick around.

        • This happens when business models without steady revenue streams aren't good enough. You somehow have to increase the frequency how often people are forced to buy updates.

          • I suspect it's also an arms race to have the most definitions. Oh noes, the OED has 20,000 more than us - better add all the wrong ones too!

      • Which does offer a reasonable excuse for including it in the dictionary
    • Re:Catfish (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sqr(twg) ( 2126054 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @01:10AM (#50238419)

      Yes, verbing wierds language, as Watterson wrote, but on the other hand; What word do you propose we use to mean "to swindle by assuming a false identity online"?

      Language evolves as new words are needed, and just because a word is already a noun, there's no rule saying it can't become a verb. (To "fish" is a verb.)

    • no

      language evolves. deal with it. no one cares about your strange mentally brittle sensitivities. adapt or die

      http://www.oxforddictionaries.... [oxforddictionaries.com]

      verb

      (often as noun catfishing) Back to top
      1 [NO OBJECT] Fish for catfish:
      with the Mississippi River far below its normal level, the catfishing kept getting better and better
      MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
      Some friends and I were catfishing the Minnesota River until well past midnight on a cloudy, moonless night.
      I hooked a carp that was yellow as a goldfish while I was catfish

  • Why is that illegal? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @10:27PM (#50237945)

    If the intelligence agencies were smart, they would offer to match anything you were able to con out of known terrorist groups. The scam artists of the world would de-fund ISIS in about a year, all without firing a shot.

    • The scam artists of the world would de-fund ISIS in about a year

      Don't forget ISIS now control some oil production. That makes their pockets quite big.

      • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @11:03PM (#50238087)

        You severely under-estimate the combined ability of the worlds scammers targeting a specific group... especially so with a group who have already shown they are prone to being manipulated.

        No amount of stolen museum works or oil wells or side income from slave brothels/human trafficking would save them from total plunder.

        Big pockets are all the better as lure the lure for more attacks.

        • Also, the ISIS would probably kill the jihadists who give too much money to a scammer, that way, not only their funds would be depleted, but their manpower as well.

    • by zedaroca ( 3630525 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @11:03PM (#50238083)

      The scam artists of the world would de-fund ISIS in about a year

      You forgot who is financing ISIS.
      According to the vice-president (and a lot of other more credible places), it's the US allies, that their funds from the US.
      The clip with Joe Biden [youtube.com]
      News about him apologizing for telling them out [cnn.com]
      Old Wikileaks leak [wikileaks.org] about them financing anyone available to fight against Assad, and being interested in a big humanitarian disaster. Quotes from the e-mail:

      One Air Force intel guy (US) said very carefully that there isn't much of a Free Syrian Army to train right now anyway

      the idea 'hypothetically' is to commit guerrilla attacks, assassination campaigns, try to break the back of the Alawite forces, elicit collapse from within

      They dont believe air intervention would happen unless there was enough media attention on a massacre, like the Ghadafi move against Benghazi. They think the US would have a high tolerance for killings as long as it doesn't reach that very public stage.

      • *that get their funds from the US
      • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @06:26AM (#50239197)

        Yeah if Turkey's latest actions where it's killed 260 kurds are anything to go by it's pretty obvious which side Turkey is on.

        Turkey is the new Pakistan, pretending to be pro-West on one hand to get nice military funding, whilst supporting the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda and ISIS on the other.

        All thanks to Erdogan.

        • by mvdwege ( 243851 )

          Utter fucking bullshit. Turkey has always had a problem with the Kurds, it's a nationalism issue. Erdogan is as much a Turkish nationalist as the army that used to make noises about him better not getting out of line. But hey, why would you interest yourself in what actually motivates those brown people over there, as long as you can play on the Islamophobia to give your bigotry the semblance of respect?

          • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @08:46AM (#50239817)

            Erdogan has turned a blind eye to ISIS fighters and weapons using his country as a transit point into Syria whilst blocking Kurdish fighters from doing the same and has put far more effort into bombing Kurds.

            It's got nothing to do with skin colour or religion, Turkey and the Kurds are both secular, ISIS is an Islamist group, and Erdogan is an Islamist leader, that's about it. Calling out a bad leader for doing more to oppress a group that has been in peace talks for 2 years and has been attacked by Erdogan's troops more than they've attacked Erdogans troops doesn't make me an Islamaphobe by any measure, particularly as there are more than enough muslim Kurds. Stop being so ignorant.

            Your post really couldn't be more useless, "it's a nationalism issue", what's a nationalism issue exactly? bombing the Kurds? great, but how does that justify implicitly supporting ISIS by letting them transit fighters and weapons through Turkey? how does that make it okay to attack the Kurds more so than ISIS? It doesn't matter what the motivation issue is, it's wrong all the same. Erdogan has long held the belief that ISIS are more of a benefit than a problem, and that's really not good for the West. Only now that they've attacked Turkey proper in a slightly more brutal way has his calculus changed somewhat and even then his instinct is not to obliterate ISIS, but instead to use it as an excuse to hammer the shit out of the PKK, and hit the YPG too.

            It's kind of sad how you had to see the problem as an issue of race and religion, I'm astounded that you'd then cry bigot - you obviously are wrestling with your own inability to keep religion and race out of a discussion it's wholly irrelevant to. Crying "Islamaphobe", talking about skin colour and shouting bigot wont detract from your own apparent bigotry where you jump to conclusions that bear no relevance to anything that was said.

            • by mvdwege ( 243851 )

              Erdogan has turned a blind eye to ISIS fighters and weapons using his country as a transit point into Syria

              Yes, what people actually live on that border? Oh golly, the Kurds.

              The rest of your post is a case of 'the lady doth protest too much'. It's the usual PVV/Front National/Vlaams Belang/BNP apologia, so fuck off and die in a fire please, you racist shit.

      • by gmack ( 197796 ) <gmackNO@SPAMinnerfire.net> on Monday August 03, 2015 @07:51AM (#50239555) Homepage Journal

        The reality is much more complicated than that. The funds they used weren't American and the US pretty much asked them not to go off fund and and arm Jihadist groups but they went ahead and did it anyways because they wanted to hurt Iran's allies. (The current Iraqi government and Syria). The result was predictable: ISIS turned on their former benefactors now that they are self financing using local tax revenue and captured oil wells.

    • And if the cannibals ate known terrorists? AIDS spreaders purposefully had unprotected sex with known terrorists? Terrorists cut the heads off of known terrorists?
      Illegal things are illegal.
      • Terrorists cut the heads off of known terrorists?

        That strategy worked great in Doom. If you can figure out how to make it happen, I'm sure all will be forgiven.

        Or are you saying former Doom players will be hunted down an jailed?

    • by radarskiy ( 2874255 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @11:33PM (#50238203)

      "If the intelligence agencies were smart"

      Your suggestion would be smart only to someone actually incentivized to end ISIS.

      If ISIS went out of business, intelligence agencies would no longer be able to justify their expenditures in combating ISIS and would have to put in some actual work to find a replacement target.

      • by dbIII ( 701233 )
        The old situation of managing a problem (eg. hiring more telephone switchboard operators) to providing a solution to a problem (eg. automatic phone exchange). With a vast majority of management from the ranks of accountants, economists etc instead of a technical background it's really obvious that the former is what is usually going to happen.
      • Not only that, but who would provide the FUD politicians need to distract the people?

    • by goodmanj ( 234846 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @05:18AM (#50239013)

      ... Okay, so I get a friend in Saudi Arabia to send me a money order, marked: "for travel to the Islamic State, Allahu akbar". I show it to the US government, they pay me a reward, I split it with my friend.

      That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure a real con artist could do better. The problem with doing business with con artists is that they're con artists.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. And spam their communications into the ground.

    • by jrumney ( 197329 )
      The intelligence agencies used to be that smart. They armed the Taliban against the Soviets, and they armed Iraq against Iran. For some reason they stopped the strategy of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". Go figure.
  • by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @10:45PM (#50238023)

    If it was legal to scam them they would be flooded with offers from so many girls it would either bankrupt them or they would stop recruiting because of all the scams. It would seriously disrupt their recruiting.

    It's just like banning people from joining them. We should be lining those people up and flying them over there right after they sign papers saying they aren't citizens anymore. Let them go, fight and die as long as they never return. They won't be in our country anymore. And on the flip side it should be perfectly legal to scam them. They are a criminal organization and I personally like the old world idea that someone that's breaking the law and fighting prosecution is then outside the law including it's protections. There aren't innocents in groups like ISIS, everyone should be free to target them with any action that would normally be deemed criminal.

    • by mysidia ( 191772 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @11:05PM (#50238097)

      If it was legal to scam them they would be flooded with offers from so many girls it would either bankrupt them or they would stop recruiting because of all the scams.

      I would suggest the prosecutors exercise their prosecutorial discretion to not prosecute against people for non-violent crimes committed against overseas violent enemies/lawless violent groups.

      At some point the noise of all the scammers/fakers could drown out those whom terrorist orgs could "legitimately" recruit, therefore interfering with those groups' ability to recruit.

    • Perhaps one or more governments have already been doing this in various forms. While quasi-legal for a government to do it [some have done far worse], this might be a case of the private sector cutting into the margin ... Last time I looked, wasn't the Chechnyan government hard up for cash [as are a lot of former Soviet Bloc countries, notably Russia]? Just sayin' ...

      In all seriousness, this ISIS catfishing could easily be subverted along the lines of the Nigerian oil minister scam: "Hi, you don't know

      • Last time I looked, wasn't the Chechnyan government hard up for cash [as are a lot of former Soviet Bloc countries, notably Russia]? Just sayin' ..

        Must be very long ago last time you looked. Chechenia has belonged to Russia for what, 150 years?

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @04:09AM (#50238851)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Okay see, but killing people is illegal as well. Yet when we declare war on someone we declare that it is okay to kill them to further some grander strategic goal. The government could certainly do something similar here - declare war economically on ISIS and say it's okay to scam them out of whatever money you can, just report your scammed income here on this form and it's all well and good.
    • It's just like banning people from joining them. We should be lining those people up and flying them over there right after they sign papers saying they aren't citizens anymore. Let them go, fight and die as long as they never return.

      Banning them from joining does effectively the same thing. It's not like someone is standing there physically preventing people from joining. If people go and join, they get put on a list. If they try to reenter their home country they are arrested and rot in jail.

      Remember, making something illegal doesn't prevent it from occurring. It just provides a means to prosecute those that commit that act.

  • by Rick in China ( 2934527 ) on Sunday August 02, 2015 @11:03PM (#50238085)

    LET THEM GO! Come on, really going to charge some women with cheating ISIS out of a few grand?

  • by Shadow of Eternity ( 795165 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @12:06AM (#50238285)

    People pissing off ISIL/ISIS or interfering with non-public operations are a problem for states that are doing their own things officially. When you've got private citizens scamming them like this you wind up with lots of little bullseyes antagonizing ISIL which might provoke a reprisal of some kind.

    What we really need to do with all these non-state and semi-state actors like ISIL and Al Qaeda is start issuing letters of marque again. "You want to pick a fight with these guys? Go have it at. Follow these rules and understand you're on your own or we'll come after you ourselves."

  • Thank goodness Islam is "The Religion of Peace" and ISIS isn't following Sharia. I'm sure ISIS will "turn the other cheek" because Islam follows the "Golden Rule" and preaches "forgiveness", and the equality of men with women, and believers and unbelievers, and separation of mosque and State, right? right? /sarc

    Too bad for these girls that Islam actually means "Submission" (supposedly to Dushara/Allah, but actually to the Arab Emperor the Caliph), and Sharia preaches no mercy, women are worth less than

  • I'm curious how this would play out here in the states.

    While Internet fraud is a crime, if the nation has an enemy we have declared war with or even a formal aggression stance such as a police action, etc, I wonder if scamming them wouldn't actually be a nationalist act and praised.

    The whole thing as it stands is a farcical scenario of laws versus justice/morality. Something worthy of debate.

  • Collateral Damage. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by westlake ( 615356 ) on Monday August 03, 2015 @12:36AM (#50238347)

    This looks like it is all in fun.

    Until ISIS decides to set off a truck bomb on the street where these women live.

    The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. The Islamic State is committed to purifying the world by killing vast numbers of people.

    What ISIS Really Wants [theatlantic.com]

    • Yes and I want a pony. They are in no position to threaten anyone outside of Iraq and Syria at this point - even people in Jordan and Turkey are not currently in danger let alone Russia, Chechnya, USA, etc.
  • While these brave women are in Russia, we have a good constitutional tool to encourage citizens to fight our enemies. Drying up ISIS recruitment money and eliminating their online presence would deal a measurable blow to organization that prides itself in media savvy. And it would be done for free by young people who would never consider joining Army or NSA.

  • give anyone who repeats this feat 10x the amount of money they steal from ISIS

    the CIA and FSB can trip over themselves encouraging this

  • ...and that out of the way, when are the US Government going to publish their ISIS/ISIL/al Qaeda/Daesh funding accounts?

  • If they could identify the source of the money, could they work it back a little further to figure out where that source got its money from? That could be useful information. I rather doubt that ISIS is getting most of its funding through a kickstarter page or other such structure involving lots of small contributions.
  • Surely slashdot should known that is is Catphishing not catfishing

  • Unless you're the government.
  • How were these girls caught???
    Did ISIS call up the FBI or Interpol and say they were scammed?
    Did they present the emails and their location to help the investigation? Why were they not bombed once their location was defined (ISIS I mean not the girls).

    I mean WTF?!?

    • I'm sure that it's not all that unusual for intelligence agencies to look for communication to/from ISIS.

  • Not Mercenaries--we have those; just call them "private contractors" e.g. Blackwater.
    Just draw up a list of "enemies" and authorize anyone who asks to attack them.

    Only difference now is you don't have to be on a ship to attack a foreign power--you don't even have to leave your house!
    You keep the booty as compensation for your risk & expense.

    There's certainly precedent for it.

Avoid strange women and temporary variables.

Working...