Disaster Gab got blacklisted by Visa - Another free speech site has trouble with payment processors.

https://archive.is/ADwyE

http://archive.is/FCfJ3

Gab Has Been Blacklisted By Visa
Gab has been blacklisted by Visa for “promoting hate speech.”

Gab does no such thing. This is like saying Google “promotes hate speech” because you can search racial slurs on their search engine and get results. Gab is a neutral technology platform. We follow the law, have an excellent relationship with law enforcement, and have a clear set of community guidelines that detail what is allowed on our website and what is not.

The bottom line is that Gab is not controlled and cannot be controlled by the oligarchic elite who are working to overthrow our counties and infect them with communism. It’s no coincidence that Katie Hopkins was banned from Twitter today, Zerohedge and The Federalist had their comment sections censored by Google, and VDARE is getting banned by their domain registrar. All of this is coordinated. It’s targeted.

Where is the President? Where is Congress?

Tweeting and “monitoring the situation.” That’s where.

No one is coming to save us and no one is coming to save you.
It’s on all of us to save ourselves.

So we have lost credit card processing yet again after a year and a half of working to get it restored. We have been under attack at the payment processing level all month long. In early June we were abruptly banned by two separate underwriting banks without cause.


“Risk related reasons” is the excuse. These banks have no problem processing payments for pornography websites which are loaded with child exploitation, human trafficking, and more. They have no problem processing payments for cannabis, which is still illegal at the federal level. They have no problems processing payments for gambling websites.
Gab sells t-shirts, hats, and a software subscription service.
I guess that’s “high risk” to these people.

We still accept payments via echeck, check by mail, and bitcoin. If you’d like to support us through any of those options you can do so by upgrading to GabPRO here.

You can also send a check or money order donation/payment for GabPRO:
Gab AI Inc
PO Box 441
Clarks Summit, PA
18411
We will not go gently into the good night. We will rage, rage, against the dying of the light.
Ephesians 6:12
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

As many of you already know we learned last week that Visa blacklisted Gab and we are now unable to process credit and debit card transactions. We learned more information this week and I think it’s important that I share it as a warning for others.

It’s not just Gab that is blacklisted. It’s also my family.

In China there is something called the Social Credit System, which was developed by the Communist Chinese Party as a “national reputation system.” This system tracks the “trustworthiness” of individuals, businesses, and organizations. “Trustworthiness” here means total and complete submission to the Chinese Communist Party. If the Communist Party deems you to be untrustworthy, you are denied access to plane tickets, train tickets, opening and operating businesses, and more.

As of June 2019, according to the National Development and Reform Commission of China, 26.82 million air tickets as well as 5.96 million high-speed rail tickets have been denied to people who were deemed “untrustworthy (失信)” (on a blacklist), and 4.37 million “untrustworthy” people have chosen to fulfill their duties required by the law.

To most Americans this sounds horrifying, and it is. I now know from first-hand experience because this social credit system exists in the United States. While it may not be sanctioned by the United States government, it most certainly has been deployed by US corporations who today have in many ways more power, data, and control over our lives than our government does. Many of these corporations also happen to be endorsing and raising money for communist organizations, revolutionaries, and the domestic terrorists burning down our cities.

We were told this week that not only is Gab blacklisted by Visa as a business, but my personal name, phone number, address, and more are all also blacklisted by Visa. If I wanted to leave Gab tomorrow (something that isn’t going to happen) and start a lemonade stand I wouldn’t be able to obtain merchant processing for it.

Simply because my name is Andrew Torba.

If my wife wants to start a business she won’t be able to obtain merchant processing because she lives at the same address as me and would be flagged by Visa.

This is obviously very concerning. We have done nothing wrong. Gab is and always has been a legally operated business. We sell hats, shirts, and a software subscription service that unlocks new features on Gab. My personal credit score is in the 800’s. I pay my bills. I have a wife and daughter to provide for, yet we are all being punished and defamed because someone at Visa has it out for me.

We were told that Visa has someone camping on our website watching our payment processing. As soon as we get a new processor up they find out who it is on their end and contact them. They tell the processor that Gab is flagged for “illegal activity” and if they do not stop processing payments for us they will be heavily fined.

When the processor inquires about this alleged “illegal activity,” Visa tells them that Gab has been flagged for “hate speech.” “Hate speech,” is of course not illegal in the United States of America and is protected by the First Amendment. As I have written, it’s not real and I refuse to acknowledge it as term. Visa doesn’t agree with me.

The reason I share all of this is that I hope it serves as a wakeup call and as a warning. If they can do this to me, they can do it to you and they likely will.

Christians need to be especially concerned and aware of this. The Communist revolutionaries taking over the United States are coming for us all. It’s only a matter of time before the Bible is labeled as “hate speech” and churches start to experience what I am going through right now.

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. Revelation 13:17

Andrew Torba
CEO, Gab.com
June 26th, 2020

@Null you're not the only one facing trouble with payment processors.

 

[Meat Target]

At this point, non-left sites are probably going to move to cash only or crypto. Probably the latter since if they did the former,

I say we abandon fiat currency altogether in favor of ammunition and booze.

 

[tehpope]

I say we abandon fiat currency altogether in favor of ammunition and booze.

TBTB will send the ATF after you on some bullshit.

 

[MuuMuu Bunnylips]

I say we abandon fiat currency altogether in favor of ammunition and booze.

And bottle caps.

 

[Made In China]

We're about to be on the receiving end of an Apartheid system.

As much as it makes me sound like a blackpilled bedwetter, I have no illusions that we're gonna "take back our country". We should be steeling ourselves to become outcasts and even outlaws. We're the Great Satan now.

Just sit back and enjoy watching the side of "muh private corporations" meeting reality like a brick wall.

 

[Cypher]

JUST MAKE

UR OWN

CREDIT CARD COMPANY

 

[Spiteful Crow]

Then throw a horde of billionaires at the tape.

I think we could do it. Let's start a hashtag!

 

[Joshuan Moon]

Thank you for your insight.

So say I'm a billionaire, and I make PylosCard and I start extending credit to people. I give all the KF and the Gab users lines of credit, I give merchant accounts to Null and Torba, everyone can buy t-shirts, everyone lives happily ever after (except probably me). What's the regulatory catch? That I have to extend credit to people I don't like? Will the existing bankers somehow lawfare me? Is there no way for a billionaire to cut this Gordian Knot?

I can't speak to any regulatory hurdles but making a bank wouldn't fully fix the issue of people and businesses being denied the ability to receive money from others because the credit networks will just deny the new bank access.

A bank might extend a line of credit to its customers but they don't run the processing network. So where are you gonna use that Gab Bank credit or debit card when nobody is set up to accept it and Mastercard won't put its logo on it?

Basically then the only way for the banks customers to send or receive money would be through an ACH transfer direct from a bank account or a check (which is functionally the same thing but written on paper). So really just exactly the situation they're in now (checks and ACH transfers and bitcoin). And who the hell knows, maybe after all the trouble of building a bank the bank gets denied access to the ACH.

 

[Ineedahero]

Just sit back and enjoy watching the side of "muh private corporations" meeting reality like a brick wall.

Which side is that? Both sides seem keen on corporations depending on the moment.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Then throw a horde of billionaires at the tape.

I forget which interview it was, but Peter Thiel was asked about this, since he co-founded PayPal. He said that PayPal was a point-in-time technology; it succeeded only because it was created before a lot of regulations were put into place, and a lot of consolidation happened in the industry. He explicitly said PayPal could not be created today, even if someone tried.

People forget that for a while, wholly virtual payment processors like PayPal existed outside a proper regulatory framework. PayPal insisted it wasn't a bank, until it got threatened with shutdown, at which point it worked out a deal so that it is treated like a proper financial institution. After the Great Recession and all the reactionary legislation there, it's basically impossible to set up a new payment system that will interact with the current oligopoly.

So no, this isn't a problem of money, it's a problem of access and law. The left has pushed so far into corporations and institutions that they triggered one of the few times small-government conservatives agree you need government intervention: to de-politicize money itself.

Spoiler: A sperg for the hopeless libertarians

Before the libertarians get on my ass, it's a legitimate government function because of the legal tender laws. As long as Federal Reserve Notes are mandatory for debts and taxes, their transfer should not be restricted for any reason short of illegality. If we were allowed to create our own parallel currencies, proper payment processors could be set up there, and then you only need an exchange.

And no, Bitcoin/crypto are not currencies. They're recognized by the IRS as assets, which is why you have to pay taxes on their appreciation. Don't agree? Tough shit, your minarchist wet dream is dead, you just don't want to acknowledge it. The whole thing will collapse whenever the Fed feels threatened enough to ban exchanges from payment processors. And if you think that can never happen, then you're more deluded than I can even describe.

You'll know you created an actual viable currency when you get the Bernard von NotHaus treatment. Until then, the Fed is simply letting you play with your encrypted toys. They think it's cute.

 

[Uranus Pink]

PayPal had the Fed all over their ass right after 9/11. Didn't help that the glowies thought PayPal was little too similar to Islamic banking in how they handle money outside of approved banking system.

 

[Made In China]

Which side is that? Both sides seem keen on corporations depending on the moment.

All the sides, apparently. Even the anarchists are on the side of corporations somehow.

 

[usernames can change now!]

Too much red tape. Not even a billionaire could do it.

That's easy. Escape jurisdiction. There are two billionaires working on it already, Musk and Bezos. There's no red tape on the red planet.

 

[Meat Target]

That's easy. Escape jurisdiction. There are two billionaires working on it already, Musk and Bezos. There's no red tape on the red planet.

Unlike Musk and Bezos, you're not above the law.

 

[Joshuan Moon]

Spoiler: A sperg for the hopeless libertarians

Before the libertarians get on my ass, it's a legitimate government function because of the legal tender laws. As long as Federal Reserve Notes are mandatory for debts and taxes, their transfer should not be restricted for any reason short of illegality. If we were allowed to create our own parallel currencies, proper payment processors could be set up there, and then you only need an exchange.

And no, Bitcoin/crypto are not currencies. They're recognized by the IRS as assets, which is why you have to pay taxes on their appreciation. Don't agree? Tough shit, your minarchist wet dream is dead, you just don't want to acknowledge it. The whole thing will collapse whenever the Fed feels threatened enough to ban exchanges from payment processors. And if you think that can never happen, then you're more deluded than I can even describe.

You'll know you created an actual viable currency when you get the Bernard von NotHaus treatment. Until then, the Fed is simply letting you play with your encrypted toys. They think it's cute.

I agree. Modern commerce requires electronic payments and people need to freely exchange money for our world to function. This is just another area where the "free market" can't provide a solution because this market isn't actually free.

Control over the currency is wholly within the scope of the federal government. I see no reason why there can't be a Federal payment processor that works like the Federal postal service. We could give it a monopoly on processing tax payments too like how the USPS have a monopoly on standard mail delivery. If the Constitution was written today's technology around I could almost see stuff like internet infrastructure and electronic payments being given a treatment similar to what they gave the postal service.

 

[Stoneheart]

I can't speak to any regulatory hurdles but making a bank wouldn't fully fix the issue of people and businesses being denied the ability to receive money from others because the credit networks will just deny the new bank access.

take over a small credit union in eastern europe, they all have access to the banking system and i doubt they could be kicked off payment processing because of natuional treaties and laws.

 

[2WokeB4BrainPills]

Spoiler: A sperg for the hopeless libertarians

Before the libertarians get on my ass, it's a legitimate government function because of the legal tender laws. As long as Federal Reserve Notes are mandatory for debts and taxes, their transfer should not be restricted for any reason short of illegality. If we were allowed to create our own parallel currencies, proper payment processors could be set up there, and then you only need an exchange.

And no, Bitcoin/crypto are not currencies. They're recognized by the IRS as assets, which is why you have to pay taxes on their appreciation. Don't agree? Tough shit, your minarchist wet dream is dead, you just don't want to acknowledge it. The whole thing will collapse whenever the Fed feels threatened enough to ban exchanges from payment processors. And if you think that can never happen, then you're more deluded than I can even describe.

You'll know you created an actual viable currency when you get the Bernard von NotHaus treatment. Until then, the Fed is simply letting you play with your encrypted toys. They think it's cute.

Interesting and sad story about NotHaus, thanks for sharing. I don't totally agree on crypto being currency, although the lines around what could be called currency are fuzzy. But, broadly I agree: crypto ain't gonna save you from the men with guns. It has easy centralized points to attack, and anyone having to get license from the government to operate can be easily bullied away from touching it. Any truly viable cc needs a sovereign sponsor willing to play host to crypto exchanges processors and business no matter how much it pisses off Uncle Sam, or perhaps because of that. The best hope for crypto would be if a group of 2nd or 3rd world countries decided to form a currency union embracing it, once the scalability of the tech advanced to the point to make it viable.

 

[pylosurf]

I forget which interview it was, but Peter Thiel was asked about this, since he co-founded PayPal. He said that PayPal was a point-in-time technology; it succeeded only because it was created before a lot of regulations were put into place, and a lot of consolidation happened in the industry. He explicitly said PayPal could not be created today, even if someone tried.

People forget that for a while, wholly virtual payment processors like PayPal existed outside a proper regulatory framework. PayPal insisted it wasn't a bank, until it got threatened with shutdown, at which point it worked out a deal so that it is treated like a proper financial institution. After the Great Recession and all the reactionary legislation there, it's basically impossible to set up a new payment system that will interact with the current oligopoly.

So no, this isn't a problem of money, it's a problem of access and law. The left has pushed so far into corporations and institutions that they triggered one of the few times small-government conservatives agree you need government intervention: to de-politicize money itself.

Spoiler: A sperg for the hopeless libertarians

Before the libertarians get on my ass, it's a legitimate government function because of the legal tender laws. As long as Federal Reserve Notes are mandatory for debts and taxes, their transfer should not be restricted for any reason short of illegality. If we were allowed to create our own parallel currencies, proper payment processors could be set up there, and then you only need an exchange.

And no, Bitcoin/crypto are not currencies. They're recognized by the IRS as assets, which is why you have to pay taxes on their appreciation. Don't agree? Tough shit, your minarchist wet dream is dead, you just don't want to acknowledge it. The whole thing will collapse whenever the Fed feels threatened enough to ban exchanges from payment processors. And if you think that can never happen, then you're more deluded than I can even describe.

You'll know you created an actual viable currency when you get the Bernard von NotHaus treatment. Until then, the Fed is simply letting you play with your encrypted toys. They think it's cute.

Maybe make political beliefs a protected class? Or even all beliefs? They used to talk about not discriminating based on "creed". That would seem applicable here. Political beliefs are a type of creed. Pushing to enforce non-discrimination against creeds in finance would be a solution within the existing structure, which the authorities would obviously prefer. It would still be a huge fight, but the fight might be winnable for enough people and maybe a billionaire or two. It would mean "defending Nazis", that's how it would be framed, but it would really be defending everyone.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Maybe make political beliefs a protected class? Or even all beliefs? They used to talk about not discriminating based on "creed". That would seem applicable here. Political beliefs are a type of creed. Pushing to enforce non-discrimination against creeds in finance would be a solution within the existing structure, which the authorities would obviously prefer. It would still be a huge fight, but the fight might be winnable for enough people and maybe a billionaire or two. It would mean "defending Nazis", that's how it would be framed, but it would really be defending everyone.

It doesn't need to be specific at all. You just need to frame it in the same way as a lot of other "equal access" institutions or rights: you can not refuse access/processing, except in the case of illegality under US law. That lets you keep blocking terrorists and child porn, but not for other reasons.

One caveat--the actual justification a lot of these places is using is "risk categories". They claim such fringe groups are a higher risk for charge-backs and fraud, and so refuse to deal with them. This is basically using a real requirement--risk management--but in an improper way. The law would need to take this into account and provide clearer guidelines when you are not allowed to use this excuse. So you could still monitor and suspend people like Twitch streamers who have large amounts of charge-backs to get "free" TTS shout outs, but not someone like Alex Jones who merely wants to sell you some water filters.

The best hope for crypto would be if a group of 2nd or 3rd world countries decided to form a currency union embracing it, once the scalability of the tech advanced to the point to make it viable.

Yes and no. You could in theory set up a completely independent currency backed by hard assets, such as gold, with a "gold window" like the Federal Reserve used to run. Trade crypto all you want, then cash it out for physical gold at the window. You don't need a fiat-to-crypto exchange, which would be regulated as a financial institution, since you are trading "receipts" like an old-fashioned bank. And most users wouldn't need to touch physical gold at all; as long as the exchange remained open and trusted, you can "spend" it like normal crypto and let someone else cash out at the end of the transaction chain.

The problem, of course, is that your gold redemption center still needs to be physically located somewhere. Whatever sovereign state it's located in would need to allow it, protect it, and protect any citizens transporting physical gold around.

You could probably pass some legislation in the USA to enable that; Ron Paul had some interest for a while. But right now, no one will try it since you're more likely to get a repeat of the von NotHaus situation, with federal seizure of the physical assets under some pretense. Even if you get it back after years in court, any disruption in the system is enough to kill the currency.

 

[usernames can change now!]

It doesn't need to be specific at all. You just need to frame it in the same way as a lot of other "equal access" institutions or rights: you can not refuse access/processing, except in the case of illegality under US law. That lets you keep blocking terrorists and child porn, but not for other reasons.

One caveat--the actual justification a lot of these places is using is "risk categories". They claim such fringe groups are a higher risk for charge-backs and fraud, and so refuse to deal with them. This is basically using a real requirement--risk management--but in an improper way. The law would need to take this into account and provide clearer guidelines when you are not allowed to use this excuse. So you could still monitor and suspend people like Twitch streamers who have large amounts of charge-backs to get "free" TTS shout outs, but not someone like Alex Jones who merely wants to sell you some water filters.



Yes and no. You could in theory set up a completely independent currency backed by hard assets, such as gold, with a "gold window" like the Federal Reserve used to run. Trade crypto all you want, then cash it out for physical gold at the window. You don't need a fiat-to-crypto exchange, which would be regulated as a financial institution, since you are trading "receipts" like an old-fashioned bank. And most users wouldn't need to touch physical gold at all; as long as the exchange remained open and trusted, you can "spend" it like normal crypto and let someone else cash out at the end of the transaction chain.

The problem, of course, is that your gold redemption center still needs to be physically located somewhere. Whatever sovereign state it's located in would need to allow it, protect it, and protect any citizens transporting physical gold around.

You could probably pass some legislation in the USA to enable that; Ron Paul had some interest for a while. But right now, no one will try it since you're more likely to get a repeat of the von NotHaus situation, with federal seizure of the physical assets under some pretense. Even if you get it back after years in court, any disruption in the system is enough to kill the currency.

There's no Feds on Mars

 

[Wilhelm Bittrich]

Ok, if I understand correccly Visa doesn't want to do business with Gab.
What exactly is the problem with that? How about the other credit card companies, mastercard, amex? Did they decline to do business with them too?

Tbh, I find it highly amusing that even the right wing German AFD can do business worldwide using creditcards, bank accounts and even PayPal but some harmless dude like the owner of Gab can't.
By the way if you're a German your donations to the AFD are tax deductible. Just sayin.