7 ms·

Banca Etica Suspends A/I's Account While Condemning the Sanctions Behind It

97 points by rendx 15d ago

alqph 15d ago
The ground works for debanking were laid when all of the mainstream press cheered on the debanking of Canadian truckers. Now their opponents use it and it gets very little press coverage. It needs to stop. I would not do well in this autistici.org group and they'd probably kick me out on some CoC grounds with their draconian rules and social pressure, but I still cannot get over the fact that you can just destroy a service provider with very little evidence. All parties need to stop this.
- Maken 15d ago
  Why do you think the "mainstream press" and "A/I" are in the same side? Because I don't see two parties here, but rather governments using the financial system to suppress opposition.
- mdp2021 15d ago
  > very little press coverage It may be apparent to some that some of us browse lots of news: we can say that the more powerful ones are not the most visible. You have to check carefully, to find the "historic milestones" ones. > they'd probably kick me out Many of us know they would not accepted given some possible inerpretation of their rules, but we really do not know - who tried? > you can just destroy a service provider with very little evidence The whole banking system of a State, and a State itself, some say.
- PavleMiha 15d ago
  I often read things like this, and then I go look and don't quite see the cheering: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-banks-ottawa-protests-1.6353968 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-banks-ottaw... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 https://www.businessinsider.com/trudeau-canada-freeze-bank-accounts-freedom-convoy-truckers-2022-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/trudeau-canada-freeze-bank-a... https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-linked-trucker-protest-1680649 https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-... https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-protest-finances.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-pro... Maybe we have different ideas of what the mainstream press is? These all seem pretty normal articles, most note what critics are saying of the measures.
- megagpt2 14d ago
  The difference is that the Canadian truckers were doing bad things and A/I were doing good things, obviously, just in case anyone is confused here.
  - xdennis 14d ago
    > Canadian truckers were doing bad things and A/I were doing good things That is such a platitude that I'm not sure if you're serious or you're just attempting Reddit humor. But if you're serious, at least try to justify what A/I is doing by saying things like terrorism is in the eye of the beholder like Piker does.
    - deaux 14d ago
      > by saying things like terrorism is in the eye of the beholder This is so trivially true that it's not worth bringing up in discussoon with anyone who can be taken seriously. It's true for any politically charged word, and terrorism is one of the most political words in the English language.
    - megagpt2 14d ago
      I haven't seen A/I commit any terrorism. Which train station did they blow up?
  - 129983715 14d ago
    First if all, doing bad things should not be a reason for debanking. Secondly, the truckers opposed forced vaccination despite the fact that they were solitary in their cabins while keeping the economy afloat so that bureaucrats like Trudeau could eat. Thirdly, I find it worrisome that the GP is downvoted and an indication that autistici.org is a radical org that does not tolerate the slightest dissent. So I guess I have to live with the fact that we either have left wing or right wing nonsense and that autistici.org would also ban anyone if they had power. Thanks for the reality check.
    - likelybot 14d ago
      [dead]
buran77 15d ago
> The Italian bank says A/I’s account showed no previous anti-money-laundering concerns—but fears U.S. secondary sanctions could endanger services for 130,000 customers and members. > Banca Etica strongly condemns the use of counterterrorism tools to target political opponents. Evaluations are underway to prevent the closure of the bank account following A/I's inclusion on the US list of terrorist organizations. This isn't the usual debanking as a political statement, but rather the bank trying not to be sanctioned by the US, a country already bleeding all its soft power and veering heavily into hard power and coercion. The sanctioning of the ICC prosecutor already showed beyond any doubt the level of moral bankruptcy. The beatings will continue until morale improves.
- impossiblefork 15d ago
  The ICC has tools for countering this kind of thing though. They can order anyone who impedes them seized and handed over for judgement to the ICC, including bank CEOs and the like participating in retaliatory measures against them. They haven't done this, presumably for political reasons, but they can.
  - rendx 15d ago
    Sources? When I look at the law and their mandate, it sure looks like they can't. That's not part of their soft powers. They can excusively go after a very narrow band of criminal acts.
    - impossiblefork 15d ago
      "Article 70 - Offences against the administration of justice Offences against the administration of justice [...] (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official;" So I'd say 70 (e) covers the sanctions imposed on those court officials. They are clearly officials of the court, and the sanctions are clearly part of retaliation against them. Consequently it stands to reason that anyone who participates in their enforcement or drafting or really in any way can in principle be prosecuted.
mdp2021 15d ago
> an Italian bank maintaining relationships with an OFAC-listed entity could be subject to "secondary sanctions" that would involve the cessation of all services provided by US intermediaries. This would mean that all Banca Etica customers would be unable to use credit and debit cards (which currently rely on a substantial monopoly by US operators) «A substantial monopoly by US operators»: very strong words, very important words: those "US operators" are the part that is responsible for having destroyed monetics in the eu - the part that forced NFC on bank cards. Of course the problem should have been solved immediately. now we have banks with crippled services here.
impossiblefork 15d ago
I think what's needed here is for A/I to go the ECHR. A state failing to prevent foreign sanctions from restricting the freedom of association of its citizens is certainly a breach of article 11. It doesn't matter whether it's caused by a foreign state, the duty of Italy is clearly to ensure freedom of association in practice.
- graemep 15d ago
  How is Italy going to do that? You could argue that all the nations that have signed up to the ICC have a duty to protect its officers from American sanctions and that is clearly not happening.
  - impossiblefork 14d ago
    The ICC already has the authority to punish people who interfere with its operations. It's on them to prosecute people who cooperate with sanctions and the like to retaliate against the judges or lawyers or others working for the court, and they can do that any time they like. Literally, they can write a warrant for the president of their bank, or the highest Microsoft rep in Europe, or anybody involved in any way, and the ICC-signatory country they're in must hand them over. They have the authority.
    - graemep 14d ago
      In theory, but I do not convinced countries are actually going to start handing over bank CEOs for doing something they were forced to do.
      - toyg 14d ago
        At some point, someone must be held to account for "just following order". We know what happens otherwise.
      - impossiblefork 14d ago
        I don't see how they could legally intervene. Most EU countries have very independent court systems. Once the warrant is sent to the states, it will be enforced.
mlok 15d ago
"A/I" = "Austistici/Inventati" Collective "Autistici/Inventati is a Tuscan collective that develops independent IT services and provides email addresses, websites, blogs, and newsletters to other activists and collectives."
josefritzishere 15d ago
The supposed "land of the free" is suppressing political speech at home and abroad.
tomjen3 15d ago
This ironically is a place where the EU needs to make draconian rules.
- bone_frequency 14d ago
  They are too busy making piles of bureacracy that keeps us from having any money to put in the bank in the first place.
tevon 15d ago
Ok I agree that de-banking is not a good thing overall from a political perspective. But in this case, it seems fairly clear that A/I was providing services to organizations listed as Terrorist Organizations by the US, UK, and Canada. Seems like the best way around this is... don't do business with terrorists? I'd understand more if these were ONLY deemed by the US, but this is an international group.
- strken 14d ago
  Is Italy in that list?
- dmix 14d ago
  Reminds me of when Cloudflare used to provide DDOS protection for ISIS and Al-Qaeda linked websites, Matthew Prince used to defend it by saying providing services is not an endorsement https://www.theregister.com/off-prem/2015/11/18/cloudflare-ceo-blasts-anonymous-claims-of-isis-terrorist-support/922766 https://www.theregister.com/off-prem/2015/11/18/cloudflare-c...
- foul 14d ago
  > it seems fairly clear that A/I was providing services to organizations listed as Terrorist Organizations by the US, UK, and Canada. It isn't fairly clear, there's no due process, there are no proofs or clues, only Trump's and Shideler's word on that.
- Cynddl 14d ago
  > it seems fairly clear that A/I was providing services to organizations listed as Terrorist Organizations by the US, UK, and Canada Let's take the UK as example. The organisation mentioned, Palestine Action, was indeed banned under terrorism laws. But on 13 February 2026, the UK High Court has ruled that the ban of Palestine Action under terrorism legislation is unlawful [1]. Why is that ‘fairly clear’ then? [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8x90q9nyzyt https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8x90q9nyzyt
  - ellefire 14d ago
    This is outdated: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/15/ban-on-palestine-action-was-lawful-court-of-appeal-rules https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/15/ban-on-pales...
sph 15d ago
Ethical Bank? Isn't that an oxymoron?
- adg001 15d ago
  Established in 1998, Banca Etica has a long history of ethical stewardship in their finance. It is a differentiator and selling point for their account holders. For more (in Italian) https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banca_Popolare_Etica https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banca_Popolare_Etica
- Almondsetat 15d ago
  Since you made no effort to point out the supposed oxymoron: no.
- bonzini 14d ago
  That's the point.
diegoeche 15d ago
It _looks_ like A/I was providing services to the PKK. A/I intentionally selects politically aligned groups, provides them with encrypted communications, hosting, anonymity and other infrastructure, and among the groups receiving those services was the PKK.
- Cynddl 14d ago
  > among the groups receiving those services was the PKK Do you have any evidence for that apart from a US executive order, the same that Banca Etica condemns for political motives?
- freeone3000 14d ago
  So?
- foul 14d ago
  It's thoughtcrime and it wasn't even the PKK. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/4a3850cc-9186-4271-fe98-9caebcd5b632/2025-10-28-PM_Testimony_Shideler.pdf https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/4a3850cc-9186...
stefantalpalaru 15d ago
[dead]
etdznots 14d ago
If only there was some technology they could have used for uncensorable transacting
- grigio 14d ago
  if only Monero didn't exist..
- toyg 14d ago
  Ironically, this is what could actually push them to adopt more opaque financial tools, making it harder to track for actual law enforcement.
axus 14d ago
Can you use your bank account to buy crypto currency? Liability shifting is one feature of crypto.
- megagpt2 14d ago
  A/I chose to avoid cryptocurrency on ideological grounds and did not accept cryptocurrency donations.
csense 14d ago
So...what happens to the money in the account? AFAIK normally when your account is closed, your bank gives you a cashier's check which you can use to open an account at another bank. But given that they're in OFAC, what if no other bank will have them? Does someone who works for A/I have to drive to Italy and pick up a briefcase full of cash? Or does the money stay in the bank, inaccessible to A/I, until A/I proves they aren't terrorists? Which could be...forever, since it's basically impossible to improve you're not a terrorist once you're formally included on The Big List Of Terrorists? How do you hire a lawyer to argue your case if the money you would use to pay them has already been taken away?
- salawat 14d ago
  Great question! Here's the answer: an entity on the SDN (Specially Designated Nationals) List, basically has all financial operations withdrawing or moving funds out of an account denied. There is no "closing" allowed. Those assets are, for all intents and purposes, frozen. Except... Deposits still go through! It is intentional to the design that all operations around taking in money be left enabled. Also, it is strictly forbidden to inform someone that the reason for the declining of outgoing transactions is because one is on the SDN. In short, the goal of imposing sanctions is to lock down the maximum assets possible of a sanctioned entity within the influence of the U.S. financial system. Your observations about the problematic nature of OFAC are quite astute. You are added at the whims of the Executive Branch of the U.S. government. They won't go out of their way to tell you you are on it, and they don't let anyone else tell you either. There is in theory a process to petition to get off it, but gooooood luck with that. https://sanctionslawyers.net/ofac-lawyers/how-to-get-off-ofac-list/ https://sanctionslawyers.net/ofac-lawyers/how-to-get-off-ofa...
MadrasThorn 14d ago
Italy can protest but their actions in Africa and Iran seem very close with russias. Italian oil and gas firms still operate in Iran as well as Italian soldiers in Niger post Russian takeover.
- toyg 14d ago
  I don't think I've seen a worse whataboutist post in the last 5 years.

97 points by rendx 15d ago

alqph 15d ago

The ground works for debanking were laid when all of the mainstream press cheered on the debanking of Canadian truckers. Now their opponents use it and it gets very little press coverage. It needs to stop. I would not do well in this autistici.org group and they'd probably kick me out on some CoC grounds with their draconian rules and social pressure, but I still cannot get over the fact that you can just destroy a service provider with very little evidence. All parties need to stop this.

Maken 15d ago
Why do you think the "mainstream press" and "A/I" are in the same side? Because I don't see two parties here, but rather governments using the financial system to suppress opposition.
mdp2021 15d ago
> very little press coverage It may be apparent to some that some of us browse lots of news: we can say that the more powerful ones are not the most visible. You have to check carefully, to find the "historic milestones" ones. > they'd probably kick me out Many of us know they would not accepted given some possible inerpretation of their rules, but we really do not know - who tried? > you can just destroy a service provider with very little evidence The whole banking system of a State, and a State itself, some say.
PavleMiha 15d ago
I often read things like this, and then I go look and don't quite see the cheering: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-banks-ottawa-protests-1.6353968 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-banks-ottaw... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 https://www.businessinsider.com/trudeau-canada-freeze-bank-accounts-freedom-convoy-truckers-2022-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/trudeau-canada-freeze-bank-a... https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-linked-trucker-protest-1680649 https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-... https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-protest-finances.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-pro... Maybe we have different ideas of what the mainstream press is? These all seem pretty normal articles, most note what critics are saying of the measures.
megagpt2 14d ago
The difference is that the Canadian truckers were doing bad things and A/I were doing good things, obviously, just in case anyone is confused here.
- xdennis 14d ago
  > Canadian truckers were doing bad things and A/I were doing good things That is such a platitude that I'm not sure if you're serious or you're just attempting Reddit humor. But if you're serious, at least try to justify what A/I is doing by saying things like terrorism is in the eye of the beholder like Piker does.
  - deaux 14d ago
    > by saying things like terrorism is in the eye of the beholder This is so trivially true that it's not worth bringing up in discussoon with anyone who can be taken seriously. It's true for any politically charged word, and terrorism is one of the most political words in the English language.
  - megagpt2 14d ago
    I haven't seen A/I commit any terrorism. Which train station did they blow up?
- 129983715 14d ago
  First if all, doing bad things should not be a reason for debanking. Secondly, the truckers opposed forced vaccination despite the fact that they were solitary in their cabins while keeping the economy afloat so that bureaucrats like Trudeau could eat. Thirdly, I find it worrisome that the GP is downvoted and an indication that autistici.org is a radical org that does not tolerate the slightest dissent. So I guess I have to live with the fact that we either have left wing or right wing nonsense and that autistici.org would also ban anyone if they had power. Thanks for the reality check.
  - likelybot 14d ago
    [dead]

buran77 15d ago

> The Italian bank says A/I’s account showed no previous anti-money-laundering concerns—but fears U.S. secondary sanctions could endanger services for 130,000 customers and members. > Banca Etica strongly condemns the use of counterterrorism tools to target political opponents. Evaluations are underway to prevent the closure of the bank account following A/I's inclusion on the US list of terrorist organizations. This isn't the usual debanking as a political statement, but rather the bank trying not to be sanctioned by the US, a country already bleeding all its soft power and veering heavily into hard power and coercion. The sanctioning of the ICC prosecutor already showed beyond any doubt the level of moral bankruptcy. The beatings will continue until morale improves.

impossiblefork 15d ago
The ICC has tools for countering this kind of thing though. They can order anyone who impedes them seized and handed over for judgement to the ICC, including bank CEOs and the like participating in retaliatory measures against them. They haven't done this, presumably for political reasons, but they can.
- rendx 15d ago
  Sources? When I look at the law and their mandate, it sure looks like they can't. That's not part of their soft powers. They can excusively go after a very narrow band of criminal acts.
  - impossiblefork 15d ago
    "Article 70 - Offences against the administration of justice Offences against the administration of justice [...] (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official;" So I'd say 70 (e) covers the sanctions imposed on those court officials. They are clearly officials of the court, and the sanctions are clearly part of retaliation against them. Consequently it stands to reason that anyone who participates in their enforcement or drafting or really in any way can in principle be prosecuted.

mdp2021 15d ago

> an Italian bank maintaining relationships with an OFAC-listed entity could be subject to "secondary sanctions" that would involve the cessation of all services provided by US intermediaries. This would mean that all Banca Etica customers would be unable to use credit and debit cards (which currently rely on a substantial monopoly by US operators) «A substantial monopoly by US operators»: very strong words, very important words: those "US operators" are the part that is responsible for having destroyed monetics in the eu - the part that forced NFC on bank cards. Of course the problem should have been solved immediately. now we have banks with crippled services here.

impossiblefork 15d ago

I think what's needed here is for A/I to go the ECHR. A state failing to prevent foreign sanctions from restricting the freedom of association of its citizens is certainly a breach of article 11. It doesn't matter whether it's caused by a foreign state, the duty of Italy is clearly to ensure freedom of association in practice.

graemep 15d ago
How is Italy going to do that? You could argue that all the nations that have signed up to the ICC have a duty to protect its officers from American sanctions and that is clearly not happening.
- impossiblefork 14d ago
  The ICC already has the authority to punish people who interfere with its operations. It's on them to prosecute people who cooperate with sanctions and the like to retaliate against the judges or lawyers or others working for the court, and they can do that any time they like. Literally, they can write a warrant for the president of their bank, or the highest Microsoft rep in Europe, or anybody involved in any way, and the ICC-signatory country they're in must hand them over. They have the authority.
  - graemep 14d ago
    In theory, but I do not convinced countries are actually going to start handing over bank CEOs for doing something they were forced to do.
    - toyg 14d ago
      At some point, someone must be held to account for "just following order". We know what happens otherwise.
    - impossiblefork 14d ago
      I don't see how they could legally intervene. Most EU countries have very independent court systems. Once the warrant is sent to the states, it will be enforced.

mlok 15d ago

"A/I" = "Austistici/Inventati" Collective "Autistici/Inventati is a Tuscan collective that develops independent IT services and provides email addresses, websites, blogs, and newsletters to other activists and collectives."

josefritzishere 15d ago

The supposed "land of the free" is suppressing political speech at home and abroad.

tomjen3 15d ago

This ironically is a place where the EU needs to make draconian rules.

bone_frequency 14d ago
They are too busy making piles of bureacracy that keeps us from having any money to put in the bank in the first place.

tevon 15d ago

Ok I agree that de-banking is not a good thing overall from a political perspective. But in this case, it seems fairly clear that A/I was providing services to organizations listed as Terrorist Organizations by the US, UK, and Canada. Seems like the best way around this is... don't do business with terrorists? I'd understand more if these were ONLY deemed by the US, but this is an international group.

strken 14d ago
Is Italy in that list?
dmix 14d ago
Reminds me of when Cloudflare used to provide DDOS protection for ISIS and Al-Qaeda linked websites, Matthew Prince used to defend it by saying providing services is not an endorsement https://www.theregister.com/off-prem/2015/11/18/cloudflare-ceo-blasts-anonymous-claims-of-isis-terrorist-support/922766 https://www.theregister.com/off-prem/2015/11/18/cloudflare-c...
foul 14d ago
> it seems fairly clear that A/I was providing services to organizations listed as Terrorist Organizations by the US, UK, and Canada. It isn't fairly clear, there's no due process, there are no proofs or clues, only Trump's and Shideler's word on that.
Cynddl 14d ago
> it seems fairly clear that A/I was providing services to organizations listed as Terrorist Organizations by the US, UK, and Canada Let's take the UK as example. The organisation mentioned, Palestine Action, was indeed banned under terrorism laws. But on 13 February 2026, the UK High Court has ruled that the ban of Palestine Action under terrorism legislation is unlawful [1]. Why is that ‘fairly clear’ then? [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8x90q9nyzyt https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8x90q9nyzyt
- ellefire 14d ago
  This is outdated: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/15/ban-on-palestine-action-was-lawful-court-of-appeal-rules https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/15/ban-on-pales...

sph 15d ago

Ethical Bank? Isn't that an oxymoron?

adg001 15d ago
Established in 1998, Banca Etica has a long history of ethical stewardship in their finance. It is a differentiator and selling point for their account holders. For more (in Italian) https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banca_Popolare_Etica https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banca_Popolare_Etica
Almondsetat 15d ago
Since you made no effort to point out the supposed oxymoron: no.
bonzini 14d ago
That's the point.

diegoeche 15d ago

It _looks_ like A/I was providing services to the PKK. A/I intentionally selects politically aligned groups, provides them with encrypted communications, hosting, anonymity and other infrastructure, and among the groups receiving those services was the PKK.

Cynddl 14d ago
> among the groups receiving those services was the PKK Do you have any evidence for that apart from a US executive order, the same that Banca Etica condemns for political motives?
freeone3000 14d ago
So?
foul 14d ago
It's thoughtcrime and it wasn't even the PKK. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/4a3850cc-9186-4271-fe98-9caebcd5b632/2025-10-28-PM_Testimony_Shideler.pdf https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/4a3850cc-9186...

stefantalpalaru 15d ago

[dead]

etdznots 14d ago

If only there was some technology they could have used for uncensorable transacting

grigio 14d ago
if only Monero didn't exist..
toyg 14d ago
Ironically, this is what could actually push them to adopt more opaque financial tools, making it harder to track for actual law enforcement.

axus 14d ago

Can you use your bank account to buy crypto currency? Liability shifting is one feature of crypto.

megagpt2 14d ago
A/I chose to avoid cryptocurrency on ideological grounds and did not accept cryptocurrency donations.

csense 14d ago

So...what happens to the money in the account? AFAIK normally when your account is closed, your bank gives you a cashier's check which you can use to open an account at another bank. But given that they're in OFAC, what if no other bank will have them? Does someone who works for A/I have to drive to Italy and pick up a briefcase full of cash? Or does the money stay in the bank, inaccessible to A/I, until A/I proves they aren't terrorists? Which could be...forever, since it's basically impossible to improve you're not a terrorist once you're formally included on The Big List Of Terrorists? How do you hire a lawyer to argue your case if the money you would use to pay them has already been taken away?

salawat 14d ago
Great question! Here's the answer: an entity on the SDN (Specially Designated Nationals) List, basically has all financial operations withdrawing or moving funds out of an account denied. There is no "closing" allowed. Those assets are, for all intents and purposes, frozen. Except... Deposits still go through! It is intentional to the design that all operations around taking in money be left enabled. Also, it is strictly forbidden to inform someone that the reason for the declining of outgoing transactions is because one is on the SDN. In short, the goal of imposing sanctions is to lock down the maximum assets possible of a sanctioned entity within the influence of the U.S. financial system. Your observations about the problematic nature of OFAC are quite astute. You are added at the whims of the Executive Branch of the U.S. government. They won't go out of their way to tell you you are on it, and they don't let anyone else tell you either. There is in theory a process to petition to get off it, but gooooood luck with that. https://sanctionslawyers.net/ofac-lawyers/how-to-get-off-ofac-list/ https://sanctionslawyers.net/ofac-lawyers/how-to-get-off-ofa...

MadrasThorn 14d ago

Italy can protest but their actions in Africa and Iran seem very close with russias. Italian oil and gas firms still operate in Iran as well as Italian soldiers in Niger post Russian takeover.

toyg 14d ago
I don't think I've seen a worse whataboutist post in the last 5 years.