Consulates and the Vatican in chaos as HSBC tells them to find another bank Read mor

I don't understand why HSBC has done this even after reading the damn story.

What does being fined by the USA have to do with whether the Vatican has a bank account there?

They think the Vatican may be laundering money?
​

 

Banks closing accounts to governments is a big deal. Why are they picking on the Vatican?

 

HSBC themselves launder money, billions for violent drug cartels. Since not a single employee got prosecuted, it's safe to assume they have never stopped. Why would they?

Every HSBC client should withdraw their account from these crooks.

 

The Vatican has a history, even in recent times, of having shady dealings with money. Try looking up "God's Banker" in a search.

 

When donations are made, they are accepted by churches for the betterment of that person's soul. Also Christians are not supposed to want recognition for what they give to God, so revealing the doners would go against Christian beliefs..or so I think. It's a predictment for the Vatican, but I'm sure deception was not the intent.

 

Well....as long as YOU'RE sure.

HSBC will likely suffer terribly due to this decision, and feel retribution from the Economic forces within the U.S. Government as this tit for tat escalates. Anyone holding stock in this corporation might seriously consider their portfolio options.

 

Hell's Satanic Barbarian Cult can't very well keep doing business with the Vatican now can they?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah they can't have the criminal competition.

 

The Vatican isn't as pure as Jeanette might think.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...ng-up-for-the-vaticans-moneymen-29419738.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...k-hit-by-financial-scandal-again-2164321.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Calvi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_the_Works_of_Religion

 

I thought it was relatively straight forwards. They'd previously had a problem with accounts they managed being used for money laundering, which led to them receiving a heavy fine for not having suitable protection measures in place. In response, they've introduced protection measures. One of them is a rather crude analysis of their business customers that a number of embassies failed to meet (probably because they're fundamentally different to conventional businesses).

Probably not. I'm sure it was a more procedural rule than an emotive decision. Of course, it could be argued that embassies do pose greater risk of their bank accounts being used for money laundering. I'm not convinced simply closing the accounts is the best response though.

 

This isn't really true.. HSBC weren't duped by account holders laundering money, and simply didn't catch it, although certain people may have tried to package that way (a manegerial oversight).. HSBC staff themselves intentionally laundered money. HSBC themselves admitted they were criminal involvement of their staff.

NOBODY was EVER criminal prosecuted for it. All were excused for their crimes, and their company merely paid a NOT hefty fine, which amounted to a miniscule tiny percentage of their profits for that year. Of course, the executives STILL got to receive a "performance" bonus to the tune of millions. As though letting their staff launder billions for violent cartels somehow qualifies as a positive "performance".

Immunity for prosecution and tiny "slap on the wrist" fines for their company simply reinforce criminal or reckless behavior, because they know they have little to lose, even if they are busted for a crime. In fact, possible fines are just another thing these crooks factor into their usual overhead.

 

I'm not really sure if tithes does have receipts,
the flow of money is quite hard to prove and to trace.