Skip to main content

Article in Foreign Policy Magazine

Help, I'm a British Philosophy Professor With the Same Name as a Burmese Heroin Kingpin!

...and banks keep getting us confused.

BY Jamila Trindle
FEBRUARY 10, 2014
Jamila.Trindle
@jtrindle
Source here.

The U.S. sanctions blacklist is meant to stop terrorists, drug lords, and weapons traders from getting access to their money. Unfortunately, it also ensnares a lot of people who just happen to have the same name as one of those alleged criminals. Professor Stephen Law, who shares the name of a prominent Burmese heroin dealer, has discovered that firsthand.

The British Stephen Law is a soft-spoken professor at the University of London where he has taught philosophy for 17 years and plays the drums in a band called The Heavy Dexters. He's also the author of books like Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked Into an Intellectual Black Hole. The Burmese one is a wealthy drug kingpin who was sanctioned by the Treasury Department in 2008 and again in 2010 because of his ties to the country's ruling junta. Treasury officials said Law's company, Asia World, received lucrative government construction contracts because of his close ties to the regime. The second Law uses several aliases and is believed to split his time between Burma and Singapore.

The two Laws have little in common except their name, and the fact that it appears on the Treasury Department sanctions list has hit each of them hard. The British Law said that bank transfers from Europe take weeks to get to him and that packages from abroad often fail to arrive. When an American friend sent him a drum, it was held up at customs and then sent back to the United States. When he asked his bank why a travel reimbursement from Austria was held up, they wouldn't tell him.

"I've been having these problems for years but I never understood what it was or why it was happening to me," Law said.

Law, who describes himself as a "fairly well-known atheist in the UK," first thought his religious views might have somehow landed him in hot water. But then someone on Twitter alerted him to the Treasury Department list, which includes the name Stephen Law.

Law recently wrote a letter to the Treasury Department complaining about his problems accessing his own money or receiving gifts from abroad, but the department has yet to respond or take steps to ensure he isn't confused with the Burmese Law.

The British Law's troubles are the inadvertent byproducts of the U.S. government's ongoing push to cut off alleged drug kingpins, war criminals, and nuclear weapons proliferators from the international financial system. Washington uses targeted sanctions to single out individuals and companies and make it illegal for U.S. banks and companies to interact with them. While broad trade embargoes against countries like Cuba haven't worked, freezing the assets of individuals has proven a successful tool for pressuring them into doing what the U.S. government wants, whether that's ending support for terrorists or giving up ties to narcotics trafficking.

When the Treasury Department adds a new name to the list, it issues a press release that includes their reason for the new designation. Banks and companies are responsible for making sure they don't do business with the sanctioned person. Because the fines can be so high -- the Treasury Department raked in $137 million for sanctions violations in 2013 -- companies are often extremely cautious about handling transactions for people whose names are at all similar to those on the list. Most major banks check transactions against rosters maintained by outside companies like Thomson Reuters. If a name is too similar to those on the sanctions list, the transactions will be held up while banks methodically check the person's address and birthdate to make sure they're not aiding an alleged wrongdoer.

Treasury officials declined to comment on Law's case, but a spokeswoman said they "always endeavor to make public all available bio-identifier information -- including addresses, dates of birth, places of birth, and passport numbers, among other information." Law, for his part, has taken to the Internet to express his exasperation.

"This has proved frustrating, time-consuming and also costly to me personally," Law wrote in a blog post. Its incredibly subtle title: "How the US Treasury imposes sanctions on me and every other 'Stephen Law' on the planet."

Courtesy of Stephen Law, Treasury Department

PPS  just phoned me and suggested I have my DOB and passport number put on all parcels posted from US and all money transfers.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...