De-banked for expressing alternative social views
Expressing an alternative social view can lead to de-banking:
https://youtu.be/FHHBYXW79wk
Is this the kind of society you want to live in?
Reminds me of what happened in the Middle Ages to those who fidn't accept the main religion:
Revelation 13:16-17 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: [17] And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
https://youtu.be/FHHBYXW79wk
Is this the kind of society you want to live in?
Reminds me of what happened in the Middle Ages to those who fidn't accept the main religion:
Revelation 13:16-17 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: [17] And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Scroll to see replies
The known self-serving grifter Nigel Farage tells you his bank account was terminated for politically motivated reasons and you automatically believe him? Didn't anyone ever tell you to not believe everything you read on the internet?
This reeks of narcisism and victim complex. Do you really think that a bank would close his account because they disagreed with his political opinions? Not least at this point in time, where Farage's only relevance is being some *****y talkshow host? UKIP, Brexit and Farage himself were at peak public exposure in 2015 and 2016. Why the hell would a bank do this 7-8 years after that fact?
Furthermore, what bank was this meant to be in relation to? No bank is named directly and all this information comes from Farage only, so there is no way for anyone to independently verify the claims. For all we know his account could have been closes but because of dodgy reasons he clearly wouldn't bring up.
No doubt the conspiracy crowd will have a field day with this one because it fits their narrative.
This reeks of narcisism and victim complex. Do you really think that a bank would close his account because they disagreed with his political opinions? Not least at this point in time, where Farage's only relevance is being some *****y talkshow host? UKIP, Brexit and Farage himself were at peak public exposure in 2015 and 2016. Why the hell would a bank do this 7-8 years after that fact?
Furthermore, what bank was this meant to be in relation to? No bank is named directly and all this information comes from Farage only, so there is no way for anyone to independently verify the claims. For all we know his account could have been closes but because of dodgy reasons he clearly wouldn't bring up.
No doubt the conspiracy crowd will have a field day with this one because it fits their narrative.
Original post by SHallowvale
The known self-serving grifter Nigel Farage tells you his bank account was terminated for politically motivated reasons and you automatically believe him? Didn't anyone ever tell you to not believe everything you read on the internet?
This reeks of narcisism and victim complex. Do you really think that a bank would close his account because they disagreed with his political opinions? Not least at this point in time, where Farage's only relevance is being some *****y talkshow host? UKIP, Brexit and Farage himself were at peak public exposure in 2015 and 2016. Why the hell would a bank do this 7-8 years after that fact?
Furthermore, what bank was this meant to be in relation to? No bank is named directly and all this information comes from Farage only, so there is no way for anyone to independently verify the claims. For all we know his account could have been closes but because of dodgy reasons he clearly wouldn't bring up.
No doubt the conspiracy crowd will have a field day with this one because it fits their narrative.
This reeks of narcisism and victim complex. Do you really think that a bank would close his account because they disagreed with his political opinions? Not least at this point in time, where Farage's only relevance is being some *****y talkshow host? UKIP, Brexit and Farage himself were at peak public exposure in 2015 and 2016. Why the hell would a bank do this 7-8 years after that fact?
Furthermore, what bank was this meant to be in relation to? No bank is named directly and all this information comes from Farage only, so there is no way for anyone to independently verify the claims. For all we know his account could have been closes but because of dodgy reasons he clearly wouldn't bring up.
No doubt the conspiracy crowd will have a field day with this one because it fits their narrative.
A number of other people make the same claim in the video, if it turns out to be false I will agree with you.
If it turns out to be true, what will your response be?
Given Farage's links to Arron Banks and sketchy Russian money I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest there's more to this than a simple 'fwee speech and loss of liberty, wah!" story.
The FCA and (actual) press would have a field day if Farage does a SAR and finds any trace of impropriety on the banks part. In reality there's going to be some trail of dodgy activity with lots of internal notes from the bank. They are not going to get rid of such a high profile customer, (especially a media donkey like Farage) without crossing the t's and dotting the i's.
NB. GBN is not a credible news source in any sense of the word. Offcom licenced them as an 'editorial' effort.
The FCA and (actual) press would have a field day if Farage does a SAR and finds any trace of impropriety on the banks part. In reality there's going to be some trail of dodgy activity with lots of internal notes from the bank. They are not going to get rid of such a high profile customer, (especially a media donkey like Farage) without crossing the t's and dotting the i's.
NB. GBN is not a credible news source in any sense of the word. Offcom licenced them as an 'editorial' effort.
Original post by NJA
A number of other people make the same claim in the video, if it turns out to be false I will agree with you.
If it turns out to be true, what will your response be?
If it turns out to be true, what will your response be?
Who are those other people? Can we verify their claims independently? If their accounts have indeed been cancelled then how can we check what the reason(s) for that were?
GB News, given it hosts Farage, is an inherently biased source of information about this and it should not be relied upon.
If it turns out to be true what would my response be? There is no need to entertain that question until we know if this is even true or not. Grifters like Farage shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt. That's exactly how they grow their grift; they never hold themselves up to proper scrutiny and instead have legions of follows who would instead be asking 'but what if he is telling the truth?'.
The point shouldnt be "If it turns out to be false...", it should be "If it turns out to be true...". Farage is a wanna-be politician. Like any real politician he shouldnt be automatically trusted on anything.
(edited 1 year ago)
Original post by NJA
Expressing an alternative social view can lead to de-banking:
https://youtu.be/FHHBYXW79wk
Is this the kind of society you want to live in?
Reminds me of what happened in the Middle Ages to those who fidn't accept the main religion:
Revelation 13:16-17 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: [17] And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
https://youtu.be/FHHBYXW79wk
Is this the kind of society you want to live in?
Reminds me of what happened in the Middle Ages to those who fidn't accept the main religion:
Revelation 13:16-17 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: [17] And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
I love how he claims "The corporate world will never forgive me for Brexit".
So he has just admitted that it was an economic disaster that is not supported by businesses.
Ouch!
Original post by NJA
A number of other people make the same claim in the video, if it turns out to be false I will agree with you.
If it turns out to be true, what will your response be?
If it turns out to be true, what will your response be?
Also note that he says it is only "a possible reason".
Another possible reason he mentions is that he received large sums from the Russian government.
Original post by WADR
Also note that he says it is only "a possible reason".
Another possible reason he mentions is that he received large sums from the Russian government.
Another possible reason he mentions is that he received large sums from the Russian government.
Does he actually say that in the video? Haha!
"It's because I speak truth to power! And to a lesser extent received a large amount of funds from a country under strict sanctions."
Original post by Admit-One
Does he actually say that in the video? Haha!
"It's because I speak truth to power! And to a lesser extent received a large amount of funds from a country under strict sanctions."
"It's because I speak truth to power! And to a lesser extent received a large amount of funds from a country under strict sanctions."
I haven't watched the video (seeing his face move and hearing his voice makes me nauseous).
It was quoted in the article in the Independent.
*shrug* Yea I'd just assume that he either did something wrong or is telling a v misleading tale for attention.
Original post by StriderHort
telling a v misleading tale for attention.
What? Farage?
Doesn't seem likely.
Original post by WADR
I haven't watched the video (seeing his face move and hearing his voice makes me nauseous).
It was quoted in the article in the Independent.
It was quoted in the article in the Independent.
A credible news source (current ownership aside) being referenced in the News & Current Affairs forum? I'm sorry, but I am going to have to lie down for a bit...
Okay I couldn't resist having a look first.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-brexit-eu-remain-b2366505.html
Mr Farage suggested other reasons for his accounts being closed could include him being categorised as a “politically exposed person”, which drives up costs for banks.
He added: “A third reason, a few months ago in the House of Commons, Sir Chris Bryant… said, using Parliamentary privilege, that I had received large sums of money directly from the Russian government.
“The truth is, I did not receive a penny from any source with even a link to Russia.
“I wonder whether that is what’s given me part of the problem.”
He added: “A third reason, a few months ago in the House of Commons, Sir Chris Bryant… said, using Parliamentary privilege, that I had received large sums of money directly from the Russian government.
“The truth is, I did not receive a penny from any source with even a link to Russia.
“I wonder whether that is what’s given me part of the problem.”
I must say Nigel, that's a very specifically worded denial.
Original post by WADR
What? Farage?
Doesn't seem likely.
Doesn't seem likely.
I know, it's a bit of a claim that a UK politician would commit financial crimes and lie about it
The most likely explanation seems to be 'dodgy money' and as a public & political figure the bank will scrutanise him more for bribery etc, I somewhat doubt it's 'because we didn't like Brexit'
In the very very unlikely case that his account was closed purely for his political leanings then yes, that would be disgusting and unacceptable in a country such as the UK, whether you like him or not. However, as others have mentioned, it seems he may have committed financial crimes or at the very least done something really dodgy with his accounts which would justify the closure.
(edited 1 year ago)
Hard to comment on the validity of Farages claim, whilst it seems unlikely it would happen he is the type of person you could imagine would be at the end of a sort of modern financial vigilante target by someone within the city of London.
I suspect there is more to the story, and frankly I do think UK registered banks should be required to serve consumers unless there is evidence related to significant financial irregularities/crime etc. and access to consumer financial services is something that needs to be protected.
I suspect there is more to the story, and frankly I do think UK registered banks should be required to serve consumers unless there is evidence related to significant financial irregularities/crime etc. and access to consumer financial services is something that needs to be protected.
Original post by Sorcerer of Old
In the very very unlikely case that his account was closed purely for his political leanings then yes, that would be disgusting and unacceptable in a country such as the UK,
What if he was fundraising for nazis? I'd be ok with a bank or other company deciding they wanted no part of those sort of political leanings.
Original post by StriderHort
What if he was fundraising for nazis? I'd be ok with a bank or other company deciding they wanted no part of those sort of political leanings.
Or what if he was the toad-faced figurehead for a dishonest and corrupt political movement that has caused untold damage to the country?
Any business would be justified in declining his custom.
(edited 1 year ago)
Original post by StriderHort
What if he was fundraising for nazis? I'd be ok with a bank or other company deciding they wanted no part of those sort of political leanings.
Fundraising is an action, not a political leaning. Anyway, aren't Nazi groups proscribed as terrorist organisations? Illegal.
(edited 1 year ago)
Original post by Sorcerer of Old
Fundraising is an action, not a political leaning. Anyway, aren't Nazi groups proscribed as terrorist organisations? Illegal.
So if he was re-nonbanked for being a major cog in the Brexit machine, then as an action rather than a "political leaning", it's justified?
Original post by WADR
So if he was re-nonbanked for being a major cog in the Brexit machine, then as an action rather than a "political leaning", it's justified?
If someone isn't doing anything dodgy or illegal with their accounts, which includes sending and receiving funds then they shouldn't be de-banked.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Buses from Hatfield Train Station to UH Campuses.
- English Literature 30 marker on Pride and Prejudice
- Living cost
- Should I write a cover letter?
- Does this have Ai in it for my personal statement
- FREE Grade 8 An Inspector calls essay here if anyone wants it :
- Radio Transmitters
- UCL vs Oxford for Politics
- university doubts
- Notts or Leeds to break into FO IB
- Unis for Fashion communication?
- Could someone please give me some feedback on this Entre les murs essay
- An Inspector Calls: The Theme of Capitalism
- Student finance
- audiology
- Budgeting at University:
- Is Oxford toxic?
- can someone mark my english lit essay
- An Inspector Calls: Eric Essay
- psychology alevel year 13
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 month ago
It has been two years since I graduated and I don't know what to do
