I was in Cuba on business, dealing with Cuban dance companies. That was within the legal guidelines published by our UK government at the time, we have no political beef with Cuba. We have UK legislation which makes it an offence in UK law, for any UK business to uphold foreign embargos against countries which we have no beef with. I discussed this with the bank before going. They advised they could not transfer money to Cuban businesses, but not that they would actively freeze the acoount, effectively embargoing me, even when I was back in UK thereafter.
That looks like them upholding foreign embargo to me.
Also I saw the grinding poverty in Cuba.
I know this is down to the US embargo. They can't even get internet connectivity officially because pretty much all internet accessl goes through AWS, a US company obliged to honor US embargo.
Castro is dead. But the embargo is still there, because the Cubans won't give in to US rule.
They would literally die first.
They've seen the mess of US disaster handling in Puerto Rico, in response to Hurricane Maria for example, and they don't want that.
The US tries to force itself throughout the world, but we are starting to wake up to it's negative effects.
Do you know that beautiful women in Cuba will offer to marry someone who bought them a fridge freezer, assuming that person to be seeking marriage, because a fridge freezer is way outside what they can ever hope to achieve in life without a rich foreign partner?
That is what your embargo has reduced people to in Cuba.
If you support embargos, and other weaponisation of money then that is what you are supporting, besides all the other misery.
Further, I show evidence why this is part of the global energy problem, the very need for everyone to be operating for profit is what is directly driving up the global temperature, so the reason the planet is starting to burn.
I don't do that by religion, I do it with Systems Engineering, which is my long term profession in the old system.
You can read all that evidence in the other stories of my profile.
It is a business decision by the bank, when they decide to freeze an account, it is an attempt simply to limit potential losses.
They would rather risk being sued by someone in UK, than someone in US, since both legal systems are effectively "In their pocket", they just go with whichever one will potentially take most money from them, damaging their profits. That is how it looks to me, following all motivations through.
Is that good enough, "Evidence" for you?