Just a matter of degree

[aegsm76]

Government tyranny is government tyranny
These stories are scarily similar
link
https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2018/05/04/give-me-that-bank/
link
https://reason.com/archives/2018/05/01/new-york-officials-weaponize-regulatory
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lockton-nra/new-york-regulators-fine-lockton-7-million-for-selling-nra-insurance-program-idUSKBN1I32GP

[Amanah]

The banks, payment and credit card companies support extremist organisations by authorising transfers and donations to them. You can use VISA and MasterCard to donate to the Ku Klux Klan and the English Defence League. You can donate to Aryan Nations, a white supremacist organisation, despite being designated a "terrorist threat" by the FBI.

VISA and MasterCard do not mind if you decide to use your cards to buy pornography on the internet or a rifle identical to the one used by the right-wing extremist Andreas Breivik to murder 69 people in Norway. To justify such associations the banks erect a facade of political neutrality. But there is one conspicuous exception where the finance companies show their true face.

The extrajudicial banking blockade imposed upon WikiLeaks by VISA, MasterCard, Bank of America, Western Union and PayPal is unique and has been in place for almost a year.

This is an attempt against the very survival of the organisation as WikiLeaks depends entirely upon donations for its operations. Already this blockade has stripped away 95 per cent of its revenues. This is an historic act of censorship. Never before has an organisation dedicated to the fght for justice and basic rights; transparency, freedom of information, freedom of the internet and freedom of expression been hit with such a vicious attack.

There is more at stake here than simply the survival of WikiLeaks. When financial institutions decide to make it very difficult or almost impossible for you to make a donation they are infringing upon your basic human rights. They are stopping you from expressing your support for a cause.

The banking blockade of WikiLeaks might be a first but it will not be the last if it goes unchallenged.

Will the banks decide to block donations to Amnesty International, Greenpeace or Reporters Without Borders? Will they decide to stop processing transaction to media organisations that sell content on the internet? Or even more serious; will the threat of such a blockade stop any organisation, relying on donations, from being critical of the financial powers?

With some notable exception, there has been an absence of mass critical reporting on this blockade in the mainstream media. VISA, MasterCard, Bank of America, Western Union and Paypal get away with declining to comment or by making vague references to illegality by WikiLeaks.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/20111189344715970.html

[Jito463]

The extrajudicial banking blockade imposed upon WikiLeaks by VISA, MasterCard, Bank of America, Western Union and PayPal is unique and has been in place for almost a year.

This is an attempt against the very survival of the organisation as WikiLeaks depends entirely upon donations for its operations. Already this blockade has stripped away 95 per cent of its revenues. This is an historic act of censorship. Never before has an organisation dedicated to the fght for justice and basic rights; transparency, freedom of information, freedom of the internet and freedom of expression been hit with such a vicious attack.

There is more at stake here than simply the survival of WikiLeaks. When financial institutions decide to make it very difficult or almost impossible for you to make a donation they are infringing upon your basic human rights. They are stopping you from expressing your support for a cause.

The banking blockade of WikiLeaks might be a first but it will not be the last if it goes unchallenged.
................snip................
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/20111189344715970.html

Frankly, I don't care one whit about Wikileaks. I don't see them as "fighting the good fight" or anything of the sort. I don't trust them to be any more honest than the lame-stream media, in fact. Having said that, if what you say is true, then I do agree that it sets a troubling precedent. There's already merchant account providers who are abandoning gun sellers, forcing them to scramble to find another provider so they can take payments online.

Regardless, though, I'd be extremely wary of getting your information from "Al Jazeera". They're more biased than PMSNBC, and that's saying a lot.

[Esaias]

Regardless, though, I'd be extremely wary of getting your information from "Al Jazeera". They're more biased than PMSNBC, and that's saying a lot.

There are no biased "mainstream news" sources. Al Jazeera is Qatari.

I'd believe ANY foreign news media over US domestic news, however. Even PRC state-run media. Not that I really believe any of them anyway, though...

[Aquila]

The banks, payment and credit card companies support extremist organisations by authorising transfers and donations to them. You can use VISA and MasterCard to donate to the Ku Klux Klan and the English Defence League. You can donate to Aryan Nations, a white supremacist organisation, despite being designated a "terrorist threat" by the FBI.

VISA and MasterCard do not mind if you decide to use your cards to buy pornography on the internet or a rifle identical to the one used by the right-wing extremist Andreas Breivik to murder 69 people in Norway. To justify such associations the banks erect a facade of political neutrality. But there is one conspicuous exception where the finance companies show their true face.

The extrajudicial banking blockade imposed upon WikiLeaks by VISA, MasterCard, Bank of America, Western Union and PayPal is unique and has been in place for almost a year.

This is an attempt against the very survival of the organisation as WikiLeaks depends entirely upon donations for its operations. Already this blockade has stripped away 95 per cent of its revenues. This is an historic act of censorship. Never before has an organisation dedicated to the fght for justice and basic rights; transparency, freedom of information, freedom of the internet and freedom of expression been hit with such a vicious attack.

There is more at stake here than simply the survival of WikiLeaks. When financial institutions decide to make it very difficult or almost impossible for you to make a donation they are infringing upon your basic human rights. They are stopping you from expressing your support for a cause.

The banking blockade of WikiLeaks might be a first but it will not be the last if it goes unchallenged.

Will the banks decide to block donations to Amnesty International, Greenpeace or Reporters Without Borders? Will they decide to stop processing transaction to media organisations that sell content on the internet? Or even more serious; will the threat of such a blockade stop any organisation, relying on donations, from being critical of the financial powers?

With some notable exception, there has been an absence of mass critical reporting on this blockade in the mainstream media. VISA, MasterCard, Bank of America, Western Union and Paypal get away with declining to comment or by making vague references to illegality by WikiLeaks.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/20111189344715970.html

What justification are the banks making in doing this?

[Amanah]

What justification are the banks making in doing this?

WikiLeaks had the blockade overturned in court because it violated free speech.

[Esaias]

There are no biased "mainstream news" sources. Al Jazeera is Qatari.

I'd believe ANY foreign news media over US domestic news, however. Even PRC state-run media. Not that I really believe any of them anyway, though...

I meant, "there are no UNbiased" etc.

[Amanah]

The U.S. gun lobby is taking aim at "gun-hating" banks after Citigroup and Bank of America said they would no longer provide certain banking services to gun makers, according to industry lobbyists.

The attack by Gun Owners of America and the National Rifle Association could imperil deregulatory gains the banks had hoped to win from Republican lawmakers and regulators, many of whom are staunch defenders of the Second-Amendment right to bear arms, according to industry sources.

In March, Citigroup put restrictions on new retail business clients which sell guns to require their customers to pass background checks, following February's Florida high school shooting that killed 17 people. Weeks later, Bank of America said it would no longer lend to companies that make military-style firearms for civilians.

Gun-control activists and Democrats praised the policy, urging other financial firms to follow suit. But gun owners and manufactures say it encroaches on Americans' constitutional rights and they are fighting back.

Gun Owners of America, a lobby group, has asked lawmakers to add a provision to a draft law rewriting bank rules that it says would prevent "gun-hating banks" from "discriminating" against firearms makers.

The bill reforming the 2010 Dodd Frank act is set to be voted on by the House of Representatives next week.

While financial-industry lobbyists say the bill is likely to pass without the provision on gun-lending, the firearms issue is threatening to turn the powerful gun lobby into an adversary for banks on other regulatory issues longer term.

"Citigroup and Bank of America are threatening our Second-Amendment rights. They do not realize how much more there is to lose than to gain," by their new policies, said GOA’s executive director, Erich Pratt.

The group this month wrote to its 1.5 million members urging them to petition House lawmakers to vote against the bill if the provision is not added.
"Our members will take direct action to such discriminatory lending practices by these banks," Pratt added.

Citigroup and Bank of America declined to comment.
Charles Adcox, a member of GOA, has stopped accepting Citi and Bank of America credit cards at his Missouri gun shop Black River Armory in response to their new policy.
"My more loyal customers don't mind paying in cash. Some even wish to drop their credit-card companies for gun-friendly alternatives," Adcox told Reuters.

The NRA is running an advertisement campaign criticizing Citi and Bank of America online, adding that Citi may be encouraging retailers to violate anti-discrimination laws.
"The NRA will continue to promote awareness of those companies who seek to infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of American citizens,” William Brewer, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and counsel for the NRA, said in a statement.

Mike Crapo, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, which writes banking rules and oversees Wall Street regulators, wrote to the chief executives of both lenders in April chastising them for trying to "manage social policy," according to reports.

J.W. Verret, professor of Banking Law at Scalia Law School, said the banks' gun policies appeared to be a "terrifically poor strategy" at a time when they had stood to gain from a political push to cut red tape across the financial industry - potentially reducing their access to lawmakers and regulators.

"There might be a timing challenge in getting that particular provision in this bill but it means that the number of offices that takes Citi's phone calls in the next year or two on the Hill has just been cut in half."

The gun issue is unlikely to go away as mass shootings grab the nation's attention. Multiple people were killed on Friday in a shooting at a high school in Texas, a law enforcement source said.

As lawmakers aim to relax banking regulations almost 10 years after the start of the 2007-2009 crisis, banking lobbyists have been increasingly active on Capitol Hill.
The Dodd Frank rewrite now being considered in the House would relax lending and capital and mid-size banks, give a capital break to some large banks’ custody businesses, and includes a provision that would directly benefit Citi’s bond trading business.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/banks-come-under-fire-for-denying-services-to-gun-makers/ar-AAxtkgu?ocid=spartandhp&ffid=gz