Once again johnlilburne raises an issue which is actually worth talking about. Unfortunately we dont seem have to have much information about Debanking and I am too sleepy to understand what is being suggested here.

UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese was debanked following sanctions imposed by Uncle Sam.The global reach of the U.S. financial system forced European banks to comply with an American blacklist. It was political.
We can all see what happened there. But if some billionaire is putting money into the account of a a leftwing journal in order to influence its messages, or further a takeover by a political crony, why should that be of concern of the banks? Why should it want the donation refused, unless the moneys are in some way illegal?. The concern of the banks would be with the law and with its own moneys. But if there is some sort of illegality involved in the funding, why should the bank be shy at least to hint at its reasons for the debanking. Of course if its reasons re political, it will be reluctant to state them. I dont know the law but I would have thought a purely arbitrary act of debanking would give grounds to sue. But it that were the case the admirably litigious George Galloway would have already hve don so.


gb