Russia Today: NatWest To Close Russian Channel's UK Bank Accounts (bbc.com) 131
According to the editor-in-chief of state-run broadcaster Russia Today (RT), NatWest bank froze its account. Margarita Simonyan said, "They've closed our accounts in Britain. All our accounts. 'The decision is not subject to review.' Praise be to freedom of speech!" The Guardian adds: Russia has angrily accused Britain of trampling on freedom of speech after NatWest said it was closing down the bank accounts of the Kremlin TV channel Russia Today (RT). Russian MPs, the foreign ministry and human rights officials all condemned the move, and said the UK government was guilty of violating press freedom and of double standards. Simonyan said she had received a letter out of the blue from NatWest saying that it was pulling the plug on the broadcaster's accounts from mid-December. "We have recently undertaken a review of your banking arrangements with us and reached the conclusion that we will no longer provide these facilities," it said.
For those wondering... (Score:4, Interesting)
... while the focus in the US has been more about the hacking of the DNC and similar stories, if I had to wager, I'd guess that this is part of the new sanctions threatened against Russia by John Kerry and Boris Johnson over the bombing of Aleppo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... while the focus in the US has been more about the hacking of the DNC and similar stories, if I had to wager, I'd guess that this is part of the new sanctions threatened against Russia by John Kerry and Boris Johnson over the bombing of Aleppo.
The focus in the US has hardly touched the DNC hacking, if the American versions of RT - CNN, MSNBC, NBC et al are anything to go by. It's all been about women coming out of the woodwork to accuse Trump of doing something a decade or more ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? When did they get to set up shop in Russia? Oh, that didn't happen? Guess it's not quite the same then.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the timing is suspiciously coincidental. But if it *is* a US covert sanction, it makes you wonder exactly how it was worked.
Re:For those wondering... (Score:4, Interesting)
No, this is part of a change to UK banking law. It occured a couple of years ago and it's effected all sorts of people and organisations including MPs themselves - the law of unintended consequences and all that.
Basically, the law now allows for banks to be held culpable if they facilitate money laundering, and as such banks have started pursuing a zero risk approach to the topic. Therefore everything from charities merely accused of corruption, funding terrorism and so forth, through to MPs that engage with corrupt foreign leaders even if simply engaging on political fact finding missions have had their and even their families bank accounts shutdown.
This is merely a continuance of that, Russia is basically the global capital of corruption. Given the rise of the many billionaire oligarchs post-soviet era I'm amazed it's actually taken the banks this long to decide that supplying banking for the a Russian government run organisation is too risky.
So no conspiracy theories are really necessary, nor would they make any sense. When the same law is resulting in MPs and their wives, kids, and grandmothers having their bank accounts closed down as it is RT it's a complete nonsense to suggest anything nefarious is going on. It really is just about a private company choosing to play it overly safe in the face of a change in the law.
Given the impact on MPs themselves, I'd be surprised if this particular law change lasts long at all. I believe this also enshrined into law US overreach too, as my father who has never had any link to, nor ever been to the US was asked to prove he was not a US citizen (I don't know how you prove you're not a US citizen, I can imagine how you prove you are one) and avoiding paying taxes whilst living overseas under the FATCA regulations. It rather sickens me that my father had to provide information on his personal finances as a British citzen to the US authorities to allow them to decide if he's evading American taxes or not when he's got nothing to do with America or face having his bank account shutdown in a similar manner.
Yeah, so long story short, basically they've gone over the top in trying to crackdown on fraud and tax evasion and everyone and their dog (probaby literally) in the UK is being hit right now. On the scale of organisations deserving to be hit by this law though because of probable real actual corruption I'd say RT is pretty high up the list relative to all the people who really are unquestionably innocent and are also suffering the same fate.
Really, despite all the rhetoric from Russia about censorship, sanctions and such there genuinely is no such story here. It's entirely about our banking regulations currently having been made a complete ass.
Re: (Score:1)
oh good another clever comment about the election, how original.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Surely you don't think US media is allowed to operate unfettered in Russia or China? If you do, you are very ignorant about the state of affairs.
RT takes direct orders from the Russia government. It is not at all comparable to corporate media (except in the fantasies of Russian propagandists with their endless whataboutism).
But the US really does have an equivalent to RT that's targeted at Russia, it's called Radio Free Europe: http://www.rferl.org/
There's also Radio Free Asia: http://www.rfa.org/
Take a loo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not sure why? Did you see how hard it was to convince France to stop outright selling them their most advanced warship? So many people are willing to let business interests dominate the discussion; Europe (where I'm at) is particularly gutless on this front ("LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU, nothing going on, just business as usual!" (BOOM!!!! BOOM!!!) "I said NOTHING GOING ON, nope, pay no attention to those explosions next door to us!!!!")
And Russia of course funds attacks on the other flank (Golden
Re: (Score:2)
You do not outsource the construction of your most advanced or secret technology. The Mistrals were helicopter carriers. A helicopter carrier is not a new concept, nor is there anything particularly advanced about it. France had to pay reparations for breach of contract, by the way. This doesn't say so much about Russia as about how much France is an American puppet.
And Russia of course funds attacks on the other flank (Golden Dawn, Front National, Northern League, etc) - populists supporting policies favorable to Russia. And funds anti-fracking groups and other organizations that pose a threat to their energy dominance in Europe.
You have actual evidence of this or are just making shit up?
but it just hasn't gone well. Their infrastructure isn't there, their people aren't there, and even the places in China where they need the energy supplies aren't, for the most part, close to the border.
Yes they're doing something that's totally ALIEN to Americans because they haven't
Re: (Score:2)
he Mistrals were helicopter carriers. A helicopter carrier is not a new concept, nor is there anything particularly advanced about it.
That doesn't stop it being France's most advanced warship.
You're also rather naive if you think a warship is just a chunk of metal and maybe a couple of wocka wockas.
The French have historically actually been very good at designing and building warships. Just utter shite at fighting in them.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't stop it being France's most advanced warship.
Then France is in a pretty sorry state. Not to mention the fact that someone should be concerned that they're selling one to that staunch ally and NATO member - Egypt............ oh wait
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing advanced about Mistral - it is basically a modified ferry.
Re: (Score:2)
"You have actual evidence of this or are just making shit up?"
Actually there's a shit load of evidence of this, if rather than simply trying to declare the other person's post false you could've simply Googled it. Given that an AC appears to have done that for you it appears I wont have to. Long story short though, some of it is covert, and some of it is overt. There's evidence of both, but the funding for France's national front for example wasn't even a secret:
https://themoscowtimes.com/new... [themoscowtimes.com]
Russia also
Re: (Score:2)
stop backing the Syrian regime so Europe and the Middle East can deal with the influx of refugees.
You are laughably uninformed. Carry on.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously get real. The US government opinion as given by Hillary Clinton, let them kill each other until they get tired of it, this after the US pumped them up and supplied arms and munitions (this includes Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Iran and to be brutally honest pretty much the entire African continent, shh, it also includes NATO member Turkey). They do not give one crap about how many die, well, that's not quite accurate, more accurately they do care that as many die as possible. As for the Ukraine, did
Why do they even have a UK bank account? (Score:2)
To pay the people in their London bureau?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you do blame RT then. Because if you've ever watched it for any length of time, you'd know that broadcasts nothing but anti-western stories. There is literally nothing of general interest, and every story has a pro-Russian taint to it. And while some of those stories are true, many are not. And while CNN and others have their own "taints", they're nowhere near as slanted. You'll frequently hear stories not in a positive light about western politics and culture. Complete apples and oranges, so don't
Hypocrisy at its best (Score:2, Insightful)
As if Putin, and thereby extension Russia, knows what freedom of speech is.
If Russia is so worried about freedom of speech then perhaps they should start at home by allowing all those opposition and independent news organizations they keep investigating and shutting down to reopen. Lead by example.
The same would go for the Tartar news and radio organizations they've shut down since they've taken over Crimea from Ukraine rat
NOT posting anonymously. (Score:2)
(Says one prairie dog to the other): "I think the lawnmower's gone. I'm gonna stick my head up and check."
***WHACK!***
UK denies involvement (Score:4, Interesting)
https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No.. the UK Government are not denying involvement, only the UK Treasury are. Not the same thing at all.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-... [bbc.com]
"The UK Treasury said it does not comment on individual cases, but added that no new sanctions or obligations relating to Russia had been imposed on British banks by the government since February 2015."
Very careful wording.
The UK wording gets even more interesting in
"NatWest decision over Russia's RT is matter for bank -UK PM spokeswoman" (Oct 17, 2016)
http://www.reuters.com/article.. [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
OK I guess it is possible that the Nat West Bank was gently reminded by the British government as to what the rules are.
Is there more to this (Score:3)
I can't help wondering if there is more to this. For some reason, I get a bunch of Russia Today articles in my news feed. It's interesting to read their side of things from time to time. Heavily biased and full of pro-Russian propaganda, but I'm smart enough to wade through most of that.
That said, it's hard to see how any of it is illegal and deserving of being closed down. Is there more to this story that isn't public? Or is this as simple as Britain shutting off RT just to quiet it. I hope there is more to this and not some overly sensitive clod high-up abusing his power.
Re: (Score:2)
Since it's government owned it's fair game for sanctions related to things like blowing up airliners in Ukraine and civilians in Syria.
This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the content, although that probably doesn't help.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"That said, it's hard to see how any of it is illegal and deserving of being closed down. Is there more to this story that isn't public? Or is this as simple as Britain shutting off RT just to quiet it. I hope there is more to this and not some overly sensitive clod high-up abusing his power."
On the contrary, it's none of these things. It's a private sector organisation refusing to provide banking services to another private sector organisation.
Businesses get to choose what other businesses they do business
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I largely agree with you, but I'm not convinced it's a solveable problem, and you've kind of subconciously noted the problem with enforcing that strictly in your own post - what if someone has strong political views that most people find abhorrent, but the bank has to serve them anyway, but that person is also likely to get them in hot bother because they engage in money laundering, or because they simply cause the bank to take a loss? Can they close the account down?
If no, then what happens when everyone w
Brexit? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have heard this is to shut down Assange (Score:2)
Not sure how that works.
What reason was stated? (Score:3)
Before we get into the whole "was the UK gov involved" quagmire, for what reason did the bank state that they froze the accounts? Without evidence, everything is pure speculation.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Closing accounts is very different to freezing them.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.rt.com/news/363013... [rt.com]
Enjoy the freedom to read the text in full
Re: (Score:2)
Vlad?
More seriously, if you were running a bank, and had reason to suspect that one of your clients might be funneling funds through that weren't quite on the up and up, would you want to run the risk of it coming out in the press that you were supporting them? Even if you didn't have proof, just a reasonable suspicion, isn't that good enough for you to ask them to take their business elsewhere?
With RT being nothing but a propaganda machine, I wouldn't want my bank to be supporting them, and I certainly wo
How about using Wells Fargo? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They are not "frozen" or "closed" (Score:4, Interesting)
Not the uk government doing this... (Score:1)
This isn't sanctioned by the uk government. It's a bank who, for some reason, has decided they don't to take a risk with Russia Today. There's nothing stopping Russia Today opening another bank account with another bank in the UK.
To say it's under the control of the uk government is wrong. They bailed this shoddy excuse for a financial institution in the last recession, and would likely sell it up if it ever got worth anything.
However, RT IS a voice of the Kremlin. They both share those chips on their shoul
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Riiiiiiiight. [businessinsider.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No one said Russia is a bastion of free speech, but the hyperbole of the "RT is the KGB" is absurd,
The KGB did A LOT More horrible shit than produce media with a pro-russian spin, i'm sick of stupid people constantly trying to make a point by finding the most extreme parallel they can imagine and then declaring confidently as if its fact..
Re:Nice to see the West pulling tricks from the (Score:5, Funny)
i'm sick of stupid people constantly trying to make a point by finding the most extreme parallel they can imagine and then declaring confidently as if its fact..
Damn right! Those people are literally Hitler!
Re: (Score:1)
RT is and has always been part of the propaganda arm of the FSB. Yes, the vast majority of stories it runs are true, and responsible journalism (with the exception of now, while they are ramping up to try to destroy the US electoral system), however, their standard play-book is to leak the random false propaganda story in with the real occasionally. This gives the propaganda more credibility. This is what they have done to steal elections from Ukraine, and attempt the same in France and Germany where they h
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Another reporter, but less of attention is Abby Martin [wikipedia.org], because she did not resign and RT did not fire her.
Re: (Score:2)
its about as close to the KGB as CNN is close to the CIA
That doesn't like much of a stretch. We all have our lapdog press.
Re: (Score:1)
That doesn't [sound] like much of a stretch...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean it belongs to the Belarus government?
Re: (Score:2)
You mean it belongs to the Belarus government?
Belarus has KDB rather than KGB, state in Belarussian is "dzyerzhava" as opposed to [red] Russian "gosudarstvo". But then, Lukashenko hardly even knows Belarussian...
Re: (Score:2)
Since Russian is the second official language in Belarus, it still works.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean it belongs to the Belarus government?
Belarus has KDB rather than KGB, state in Belarussian is "dzyerzhava" as opposed to [red] Russian "gosudarstvo". But then, Lukashenko hardly even knows Belarussian...
It's a better idea to use the term 'Soviet' instead of Russian when the union of 15 Soviet communist republics existed, and when Russian only referred to the RSFSR
Re: (Score:2)
It's a better idea to use the term 'Soviet' instead of Russian when the union of 15 Soviet communist republics existed, and when Russian only referred to the RSFSR
There's no "Soviet" language even though one of those republics forced its language on others to a level that only the French (as a minority or majority) beat, including forcing people to switch their native languages to Cyrillic.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the kind of thing Russia and China do to US/EU media groups.
Which ones?
Re: (Score:1)
of europe
FAST
Re: (Score:3)
A regional power with ~8k nuclear weapons. At least with the current administration, fear of conflict with this "regional power" has bound their hands pretty well.
There's no signs that Russia is going to "collapse any day now". It's not exactly on a positive trend, and remains fraught with demographic problems including large numbers of people who don't consider themselves Russian (or consider themselves Russian only second to some other category). And indeed they're playing with fire by, for example, us
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When the west bargained from a position of strength, we ended the Cold War. And when Obama thought we could just all sing Kumbaya, Russia took that as a sign of weekness...as did N. Korea, Iran, and others, and they took advantage of it. So if, by "fuck with Russia" you mean let them do what they want, you're an idiot.