By itself you might construe that this was indeed a mistake, a terrible miswording, etc.. It can happen, some people make mistakes and there should always be room for forgiveness for such.
However, when you frame this against the background of Paypal attempting to deplatform the Free Spoeech Union and UsForThem recently, amongst many organisations historically, because they didn't tow the main stream line (and I'm not talking about people supporting terrorism), then it becomes something different.
The main issue, which always gets over-shadowed by the debate as to the merits of the organisation being deplatformed, is the fact that a main stream banking/financial organisation is 1) banning people from something we all need to exist: fincances & banking, particularly as we're soon to go cashless, 2) freezing funds for up to 180 days: Imagine that if you're a business? It would potentially kill it and you probably won't have the funds to hire a solicitor.
Looking at this with a wider lense; This is something that has been happening for many, many years, but was, until recently, reserved for violent extremist organisations and usually at the behest of a government. It's now being used more often against private citizens and organisations who don't hold "acceptable" opinions and politics, particularly in the U.S. and Canada. Banking is becoming weaponised.
As for those who think "So what? They are a private company and have the right to decide who they do business with", consider this: Deplatforming for wrong-think is becoming normalised and has spread to banking. If it spreads further into that area and into, say, your ISP, your electricty supplier, etc then saying the wrong thing online which your ideological opponents report you for will make life unliveable. Also keep in mind that the overton window (what is "acceptable" for public discourse) can move rapidly and can and has narrowed significantly and your opinions might be on the chopping block next.