Are Credit Card Companies Working to Censor Conservatives?

[OldLady]

The free market is getting into "economic sanctions," in a way. Investment firms getting rid of its investments in firearms manufacturers, for instance, or department store chains deciding not to sell AR's anymore. Like I said, discouraging hate groups is a good thing.

to many, those on the left are "hate groups". my issue isn't with discouraging hate, my issue is with who gets to define it. SPLC? they *hate* the right but that seems to be ok.

anti-fa is left based to be sure and they'r not classified as "hate" much less more or stopped from this "free market" of who gets to play in the new world. demonizing an emotion can have some seriously adverse affects.

Well, I would like to stay focused on the particular problem instead of getting into hypothetical arguments. MC is a profit making company and I somehow doubt if they will err on the side of too many banned groups as opposed to too few. They don't WANT to lose a bunch of customers.
They just might use the SPLC as a starting point and then do their own research, or they might only include heinous abusers of free speech that no one has to even look up. I think it is strange so many posters here are so upset about this. Why would they encourage hate groups to do business and flourish?

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

it seems like hate to me. i don't see the "evil people" trying to stop anyone from day to day activities. at least not in bulk. i see the left claiming this is a HATE GROUP and must be stopped but SPLC brands many known good religions orgs as hate.

how do they get this power to determine what is right and wrong? you don't see or have an issue with one mindset having this "power"?

Whoa! The article did not mention a single group and neither can you, because we have no idea what we're actually talking about here. The article in the OP is written from the perspective of the right wing, and is as hair on fire non specific as many of the people on this thread.

It's propaganda to stir up resentment and anger among the right wing for the left. Per usual garbage.

 

[iceberg]

to many, those on the left are "hate groups". my issue isn't with discouraging hate, my issue is with who gets to define it. SPLC? they *hate* the right but that seems to be ok.

anti-fa is left based to be sure and they'r not classified as "hate" much less more or stopped from this "free market" of who gets to play in the new world. demonizing an emotion can have some seriously adverse affects.

Well, I would like to stay focused on the particular problem instead of getting into hypothetical arguments. MC is a profit making company and I somehow doubt if they will err on the side of too many banned groups as opposed to too few. They don't WANT to lose a bunch of customers.
They just might use the SPLC as a starting point and then do their own research, or they might only include heinous abusers of free speech that no one has to even look up. I think it is strange so many posters here are so upset about this. Why would they encourage hate groups to do business and flourish?

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

it seems like hate to me. i don't see the "evil people" trying to stop anyone from day to day activities. at least not in bulk. i see the left claiming this is a HATE GROUP and must be stopped but SPLC brands many known good religions orgs as hate.

how do they get this power to determine what is right and wrong? you don't see or have an issue with one mindset having this "power"?

Whoa! The article did not mention a single group and neither can you, because we have no idea what we're actually talking about here. The article in the OP is written from the perspective of the right wing, and is as hair on fire non specific as many of the people on this thread.

It's propaganda to stir up resentment and anger among the right wing for the left. Per usual garbage.

but its' ok when the left does it to the right.

again we go in circles.

and i can name people who have already been banned from using certain credit cards. google it. it's out there.

 

[mdk]

That’s not snark, mate. That is the crux of the matter: it is for them to decide whom they wish to do business with.

then simply answer the question - can bobs mastercard approve purchases that master card does not?

Beats me. I don’t really care either. My problem is forcing people to business with another when they don’t is a violation of their right to associate.

well you are consistent in that which is fine. my bigger issue are those who cry foul on the baker but support the person who wouldn't make melaina a dress, or crap like this.

when said business becomes necessary in our day to day lives, however, it's not the same to me. if the electric company decides you're a hater, can they turn off your electricity?

Aforementioned are clearly hypocrites.

An electric company is classified as a utility and therefore are not provide the same rights as other businesses. One subject to much more government oversight than the other. Ma Bell and Ma’s Bakery are two totally different animals. With that said, until MasterCard or PayPal becomes classified as such they should have right to associate with whomever they wish.

so that's my point. try to buy something these days without our credit card. i don't have a lot of choices in credit cards much because again, MC, VISA, AMEX and Discovery. if one does this i have to think this rabid group will go to the next and demand the same thing, freezing out the other side due to their perception of right and wrong being the one they feel everyone should adopt.

so - go a week w/o using your credit cards. let me know if we've become dependant on them over time or if you can still use cash. then try to get cash out of the bank w/o a card. possible but not as convenient to be sure.

You’ll be hard pressed to convince me that having a credit, PayPal, Twitter, or Facebook account should be classified as a utility. I just don’t see it the same way as you. It’s cool, though. It would be a terribly dull place if we all agreed all the time.

 

[iceberg]

then simply answer the question - can bobs mastercard approve purchases that master card does not?

Beats me. I don’t really care either. My problem is forcing people to business with another when they don’t is a violation of their right to associate.

well you are consistent in that which is fine. my bigger issue are those who cry foul on the baker but support the person who wouldn't make melaina a dress, or crap like this.

when said business becomes necessary in our day to day lives, however, it's not the same to me. if the electric company decides you're a hater, can they turn off your electricity?

Aforementioned are clearly hypocrites.

An electric company is classified as a utility and therefore are not provide the same rights as other businesses. One subject to much more government oversight than the other. Ma Bell and Ma’s Bakery are two totally different animals. With that said, until MasterCard or PayPal becomes classified as such they should have right to associate with whomever they wish.

so that's my point. try to buy something these days without our credit card. i don't have a lot of choices in credit cards much because again, MC, VISA, AMEX and Discovery. if one does this i have to think this rabid group will go to the next and demand the same thing, freezing out the other side due to their perception of right and wrong being the one they feel everyone should adopt.

so - go a week w/o using your credit cards. let me know if we've become dependant on them over time or if you can still use cash. then try to get cash out of the bank w/o a card. possible but not as convenient to be sure.

You’ll be hard pressed to convince me that having a credit, PayPal, Twitter, or Facebook account should be classified as a utility.

great. then don't use any credit cards for a month. twitter/facebook isn't a part of this.

 

[OldLady]

Well, I would like to stay focused on the particular problem instead of getting into hypothetical arguments. MC is a profit making company and I somehow doubt if they will err on the side of too many banned groups as opposed to too few. They don't WANT to lose a bunch of customers.
They just might use the SPLC as a starting point and then do their own research, or they might only include heinous abusers of free speech that no one has to even look up. I think it is strange so many posters here are so upset about this. Why would they encourage hate groups to do business and flourish?

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

You people see "hate" where and when it is useful for your political agenda.

I read this before I looked at who wrote it, and I thought it was a lib writing against right wingers. Would have been appropriate.

I see hate where there is hate.

we all do, oldlady. that's my point. what you and i see is obviously different, ergo what we view as hate would be different.

why does 1 set of views get to override everyone else? it's not a matter of agreeing with them on THIS POSITION. thats pointless. but on the ability to give someone this power - that is my issue.

i have zero place telling you what to hate and how people should deal with you if i hate what you are doing. or should i have that power if i deem what you do as "hate"?

Let's be specific here. This is a country based on the principles of equality and freedom, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness being the natural rights of all people.
When a group of people moves to make another group of people inferior and without the freedom of opportunity to live where they like, get the education or the job they pursue, that is hate.
It's midafternoon when my mind kinda goes on semi-shutdown. I don't explain myself as well. But I don't have to, really, because no I don't believe you and I see hate in different things--you know exactly what I mean and I trust that you see hate in the same places.

 

[OldLady]

Well, I would like to stay focused on the particular problem instead of getting into hypothetical arguments. MC is a profit making company and I somehow doubt if they will err on the side of too many banned groups as opposed to too few. They don't WANT to lose a bunch of customers.
They just might use the SPLC as a starting point and then do their own research, or they might only include heinous abusers of free speech that no one has to even look up. I think it is strange so many posters here are so upset about this. Why would they encourage hate groups to do business and flourish?

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

it seems like hate to me. i don't see the "evil people" trying to stop anyone from day to day activities. at least not in bulk. i see the left claiming this is a HATE GROUP and must be stopped but SPLC brands many known good religions orgs as hate.

how do they get this power to determine what is right and wrong? you don't see or have an issue with one mindset having this "power"?

Whoa! The article did not mention a single group and neither can you, because we have no idea what we're actually talking about here. The article in the OP is written from the perspective of the right wing, and is as hair on fire non specific as many of the people on this thread.

It's propaganda to stir up resentment and anger among the right wing for the left. Per usual garbage.

but its' ok when the left does it to the right.

again we go in circles.

and i can name people who have already been banned from using certain credit cards. google it. it's out there.

No, link it. It's your claim.

Do you refute what I said about the article in the OP? I would rather we stick to the point instead of get into "I know you are what am I" argument.

 

[iceberg]

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

You people see "hate" where and when it is useful for your political agenda.

I read this before I looked at who wrote it, and I thought it was a lib writing against right wingers. Would have been appropriate.

I see hate where there is hate.

we all do, oldlady. that's my point. what you and i see is obviously different, ergo what we view as hate would be different.

why does 1 set of views get to override everyone else? it's not a matter of agreeing with them on THIS POSITION. thats pointless. but on the ability to give someone this power - that is my issue.

i have zero place telling you what to hate and how people should deal with you if i hate what you are doing. or should i have that power if i deem what you do as "hate"?

Let's be specific here. This is a country based on the principles of equality and freedom, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness being the natural rights of all people.
When a group of people moves to make another group of people inferior and without the freedom of opportunity to live where they like, get the education or the job they pursue, that is hate.
It's midafternoon when my mind kinda goes on semi-shutdown. I don't explain myself as well. But I don't have to, really, because no I don't believe you and I see hate in different things--you know exactly what I mean and I trust that you see hate in the same places.

great - but to me the left is moving to make the "alt - right" something THEY (the left) gets to define and THEY (the left) gets to punish and make feel inferior cause they don't agree with them. to me this SPLC type group has given themselves the power to determine who is right and wrong and based on THEIR determination, CAN limit what people say, do and their own freedoms.

i don't think we're far off but there's a few points here to expand upon but i think we're both getting into a repeat cycle and that won't help us try and make our point any more clearly.

i'm going to wait and see what the vote holds and go from there.

 

[iceberg]

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

it seems like hate to me. i don't see the "evil people" trying to stop anyone from day to day activities. at least not in bulk. i see the left claiming this is a HATE GROUP and must be stopped but SPLC brands many known good religions orgs as hate.

how do they get this power to determine what is right and wrong? you don't see or have an issue with one mindset having this "power"?

Whoa! The article did not mention a single group and neither can you, because we have no idea what we're actually talking about here. The article in the OP is written from the perspective of the right wing, and is as hair on fire non specific as many of the people on this thread.

It's propaganda to stir up resentment and anger among the right wing for the left. Per usual garbage.

but its' ok when the left does it to the right.

again we go in circles.

and i can name people who have already been banned from using certain credit cards. google it. it's out there.

No, link it. It's your claim.

Do you refute what I said about the article in the OP? I would rather we stick to the point instead of get into "I know you are what am I" argument.

well i'm not in that mode - apologies if it's coming across that way.

the point is - who gets to define hate and limit that groups capabilities based on their own definition they got to choose.

 

[OldLady]

The free market is getting into "economic sanctions," in a way. Investment firms getting rid of its investments in firearms manufacturers, for instance, or department store chains deciding not to sell AR's anymore. Like I said, discouraging hate groups is a good thing.

to many, those on the left are "hate groups". my issue isn't with discouraging hate, my issue is with who gets to define it. SPLC? they *hate* the right but that seems to be ok.

anti-fa is left based to be sure and they'r not classified as "hate" much less more or stopped from this "free market" of who gets to play in the new world. demonizing an emotion can have some seriously adverse affects.

Well, I would like to stay focused on the particular problem instead of getting into hypothetical arguments. MC is a profit making company and I somehow doubt if they will err on the side of too many banned groups as opposed to too few. They don't WANT to lose a bunch of customers.
They just might use the SPLC as a starting point and then do their own research, or they might only include heinous abusers of free speech that no one has to even look up. I think it is strange so many posters here are so upset about this. Why would they encourage hate groups to do business and flourish?

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

it seems like hate to me. i don't see the "evil people" trying to stop anyone from day to day activities. at least not in bulk. i see the left claiming this is a HATE GROUP and must be stopped but SPLC brands many known good religions orgs as hate.

how do they get this power to determine what is right and wrong? you don't see or have an issue with one mindset having this "power"?

Again, I say whoa! If MC votes to monitor hate groups' accounts and not allow contributions with a MC (this sounds pretty fuzzy and improbable to me), no one knows how they will determine who is a hate group. You are projecting all kinds of dire leftist boogie man fairytales, Ice. SPLC only has the power people give it, by the way. They identify the group and then they give the reasons for their determination. You do not have to agree with them, but you should at least listen to their reasons (from them, not from an outfit like the one that wrote the OP article) before deciding they don't know what they are doing.

Okay?

 

[mdk]

Beats me. I don’t really care either. My problem is forcing people to business with another when they don’t is a violation of their right to associate.

well you are consistent in that which is fine. my bigger issue are those who cry foul on the baker but support the person who wouldn't make melaina a dress, or crap like this.

when said business becomes necessary in our day to day lives, however, it's not the same to me. if the electric company decides you're a hater, can they turn off your electricity?

Aforementioned are clearly hypocrites.

An electric company is classified as a utility and therefore are not provide the same rights as other businesses. One subject to much more government oversight than the other. Ma Bell and Ma’s Bakery are two totally different animals. With that said, until MasterCard or PayPal becomes classified as such they should have right to associate with whomever they wish.

so that's my point. try to buy something these days without our credit card. i don't have a lot of choices in credit cards much because again, MC, VISA, AMEX and Discovery. if one does this i have to think this rabid group will go to the next and demand the same thing, freezing out the other side due to their perception of right and wrong being the one they feel everyone should adopt.

so - go a week w/o using your credit cards. let me know if we've become dependant on them over time or if you can still use cash. then try to get cash out of the bank w/o a card. possible but not as convenient to be sure.

You’ll be hard pressed to convince me that having a credit, PayPal, Twitter, or Facebook account should be classified as a utility.

great. then don't use any credit cards for a month. twitter/facebook isn't a part of this.

This would be an easy challenge on all three accounts, but I would have no way of proving it to you without making you privy to my personal and financial information. I am not willing to reveal such thing all for the sake of winning a forum argument.

 

[OldLady]

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

You people see "hate" where and when it is useful for your political agenda.

I read this before I looked at who wrote it, and I thought it was a lib writing against right wingers. Would have been appropriate.

I see hate where there is hate.

we all do, oldlady. that's my point. what you and i see is obviously different, ergo what we view as hate would be different.

why does 1 set of views get to override everyone else? it's not a matter of agreeing with them on THIS POSITION. thats pointless. but on the ability to give someone this power - that is my issue.

i have zero place telling you what to hate and how people should deal with you if i hate what you are doing. or should i have that power if i deem what you do as "hate"?

Let's be specific here. This is a country based on the principles of equality and freedom, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness being the natural rights of all people.
When a group of people moves to make another group of people inferior and without the freedom of opportunity to live where they like, get the education or the job they pursue, that is hate.
It's midafternoon when my mind kinda goes on semi-shutdown. I don't explain myself as well. But I don't have to, really, because no I don't believe you and I see hate in different things--you know exactly what I mean and I trust that you see hate in the same places.

great - but to me the left is moving to make the "alt - right" something THEY (the left) gets to define and THEY (the left) gets to punish and make feel inferior cause they don't agree with them. to me this SPLC type group has given themselves the power to determine who is right and wrong and based on THEIR determination, CAN limit what people say, do and their own freedoms.

i don't think we're far off but there's a few points here to expand upon but i think we're both getting into a repeat cycle and that won't help us try and make our point any more clearly.

i'm going to wait and see what the vote holds and go from there.

Cool beans.

 

[iceberg]

to many, those on the left are "hate groups". my issue isn't with discouraging hate, my issue is with who gets to define it. SPLC? they *hate* the right but that seems to be ok.

anti-fa is left based to be sure and they'r not classified as "hate" much less more or stopped from this "free market" of who gets to play in the new world. demonizing an emotion can have some seriously adverse affects.

Well, I would like to stay focused on the particular problem instead of getting into hypothetical arguments. MC is a profit making company and I somehow doubt if they will err on the side of too many banned groups as opposed to too few. They don't WANT to lose a bunch of customers.
They just might use the SPLC as a starting point and then do their own research, or they might only include heinous abusers of free speech that no one has to even look up. I think it is strange so many posters here are so upset about this. Why would they encourage hate groups to do business and flourish?

because it's not about the hate group.

when an organization take out a gun like this and shoots a "known enemy" and we ok it, it will *not* be limited to said known enemy. sooner or later you will fall on the bad side, then what? we've already given them the green light to do this to one group. since we have to change definitions of words to allow this to happen, well we just allowed that to be "ok" also.

again - lets see what MC does with this. but the fact a "far left group" is pushing mastercard to do this speaks volumes to me. how come their *hate* is ok?

we're criminalizing emotions and that simply won't end well.

"How come their hate is okay?" Because it isn't hate. It is concern for our society/our world. MC is an international company, so the groups they are looking at may not even have anything to do with us. It might be organizations on the terrorist list made by the UN or something.

No one is saying they can't sit in their corner hating everyone. It is simply saying that MC won't do business with them.

it seems like hate to me. i don't see the "evil people" trying to stop anyone from day to day activities. at least not in bulk. i see the left claiming this is a HATE GROUP and must be stopped but SPLC brands many known good religions orgs as hate.

how do they get this power to determine what is right and wrong? you don't see or have an issue with one mindset having this "power"?

Again, I say whoa! If MC votes to monitor hate groups' accounts and not allow contributions with a MC (this sounds pretty fuzzy and improbable to me), no one knows how they will determine who is a hate group. You are projecting all kinds of dire leftist boogie man fairytales, Ice. SPLC only has the power people give it, by the way. They identify the group and then they give the reasons for their determination. You do not have to agree with them, but you should at least listen to their reasons (from them, not from an outfit like the one that wrote the OP article) before deciding they don't know what they are doing.

Okay?

again - i said we are talking theory because MC has not voted yet. but to think any group would make this demand of MC to me is astounding.

 

[iceberg]

well you are consistent in that which is fine. my bigger issue are those who cry foul on the baker but support the person who wouldn't make melaina a dress, or crap like this.

when said business becomes necessary in our day to day lives, however, it's not the same to me. if the electric company decides you're a hater, can they turn off your electricity?

Aforementioned are clearly hypocrites.

An electric company is classified as a utility and therefore are not provide the same rights as other businesses. One subject to much more government oversight than the other. Ma Bell and Ma’s Bakery are two totally different animals. With that said, until MasterCard or PayPal becomes classified as such they should have right to associate with whomever they wish.

so that's my point. try to buy something these days without our credit card. i don't have a lot of choices in credit cards much because again, MC, VISA, AMEX and Discovery. if one does this i have to think this rabid group will go to the next and demand the same thing, freezing out the other side due to their perception of right and wrong being the one they feel everyone should adopt.

so - go a week w/o using your credit cards. let me know if we've become dependant on them over time or if you can still use cash. then try to get cash out of the bank w/o a card. possible but not as convenient to be sure.

You’ll be hard pressed to convince me that having a credit, PayPal, Twitter, or Facebook account should be classified as a utility.

great. then don't use any credit cards for a month. twitter/facebook isn't a part of this.

This would be an easy challenge on all three accounts, but I would have no way of proving it to you without making you privy to my personal and financial information. I am not willing to reveal such thing all for the sake of winning a forum argument.

you don't seem to be lying to me. if you say you did it, great. this isn't a life or death thing, just a "can you do it"? question.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

could be a few doing it and it dies quickly. but it's troublesome to a degree people think this is ok. i don't agree with you so you must suffer. sad mentality many have fallen into these days.

ANYWAY -

Mastercard Has Been Forced By Activists To Hold A Shareholder Vote That Could Cut Off Payments To The Far-Right

"Activists have successfully forced Mastercard to hold a vote by shareholders on a proposal which, if passed, could see the company monitoring payments to global far-right political leaders and white supremacist groups.

The proposal aims to see Mastercard establish an internal “human rights committee” that would stop designated white supremacist groups and anti-Islam activists, such as Tommy Robinson, from getting access to money sent from donors using the company’s card payment services.

It’s been conceived by US-based political activists SumOfUs, who want to escalate the battle against white supremacists and far-right groups from tech platforms like Facebook, Google, Twitter, Patreon, and PayPal to one of the biggest companies in world finance, in an attempt to choke off donations."

-----
we revert back to, why is it the lefts job to determine who gets classified where and then force companies to hold votes on whether or not they should go along with their "suggested" actions?

the headline i just realized isn't "dead on" - if it can be corrected to be the headline of the story i'd appreciate it.

its not only yer first amendment civil rights
yer second amendment to

one of my blogs i visit ...some guy was bitching Amex declined his charge at a place that sells ammo ....only he wasnt buying ammo ...he was buying a camo tarp.
my one amex card is due on the 13 th i dont keep large balances ..i just whip em out use em and pay em off when theyre due...i have like 30000 points to
on a YUGE limit .....this months 450 bucks lol

i have the orignal amex to ........i think i can buy a small island with that one ...the classic is always full payment due
before i pay im gonna call .......just to fuck with whatever tards they pass me around to ....and keep insisting that they answer why are you against Americans civil rights .

ive done this before ...I enjoy it

 

[OldLady]

This article includes more facts.

“Having a Mastercard logo on their website also gives these groups a veneer of legitimacy, and allows those who want to donate to do so quickly and quietly,” Dubsky told BuzzFeed News.

“Mastercard also benefits, pocketing a transaction fee for each purchase or donation.”

Mastercard declined requests for comment, pointing instead to the board’s position laid out in the information sent to shareholders ahead of the general meeting.

“Mastercard is committed to treating all people fairly and with dignity, and our interest in human rights extends to all areas in which our business is involved and where we have particular expertise,” it reads. “The Board does not believe that establishing a separate human rights committee is necessary to properly exercise its oversight of this important area.”

Mastercard Has Been Forced By Activists To Hold A Shareholder Vote That Could Cut Off Payments To The Far-Right

I also looked up that SumOfUs website. They are still inviting people to sign a petition that they are sending to a bunch of major credit card companies, it sounds like. So it was Master Card's decision to look at this, wasn't it? Maybe the other companies just ignored the SumOfUs.