>Re-read my accusation. I never stated that you support committing crimes
No, you said essentially exactly that, that a person opposing AML and KYC is automatically supporting "scary" crime:
"So your position is that we should allow criminals to launder the proceeds of violent and organised crime"
The evidence of many, many people being penalized by AML and KYC is abundant. Either you're deliberately being obtuse or just haven't paid attention. On this site alone, posts and attending comments very, very regularly appear describing the numerous ways in which ordinary people and small businesses face financial difficulties and account freezes explicitly because of AML rules, sometimes in their worst, entirely algorithmic forms. This has applied with bank accounts, payment processing firms and perhaps most infamous of all, Paypal, which is almost universally famous for its bullshittery on freeing "suspicious" funds and transactions.
You saying that because you've had no problems, then there probably is no problem is like someone who's never personally been harassed by the police while driving saying that reports of police brutality against marginalized individuals are probably absurd. Good for you for turning anecdote into evidence.
Patio11's post, which I've seen, also does no favors to your argument. Using a mountain of verbiage, it elaborates how and why the crap I describe happens. The post also seems to justify the banks that do it as poor victims of something that they're obviously complicit in for the sake of their profitable bottom lines (since it's easier to just freeze someone out with no explanation than actually devote resources to better, more transparent support for customers who find themselves shafted by some mandated financial suspicion process)
If you really think that well connected elites are especially hamstrung by AML, KYC and PEP regulations, you should really take a closer look at several major financial leaks such as the Panama Papers and others.