A hosting company has said it will take immediate legal action against Visa and MasterCard over the credit card companies’ refusal to process donations for whistle-blower site WikiLeaks.
DataCell, based in Iceland, facilitates donations to WikiLeaks. DataCell said it had been losing revenue since Visa and MasterCard decided to stop processing WikiLeaks’ donations.
“DataCell…has decided to take up immediate legal actions to make donations possible again,” DataCell CEO Andreas Fink said in a statement Wednesday. Fink told ZDNet UK that DataCell would pursue legal action as soon as possible: “Not being able to receive money from the public for a week can cost WikiLeaks seven-digit figures in losses, and DataCell as well, as it is unable to process any cards.”
# 31 President Amabo
1.) You’re supposed to announce a military atack in advance?
2.) You invent some new weapon system making you’re enemy’s systems inneffecive and obsolete and you’re supposed to tell them how it works?
# 31 President DUMBO, you believes Julian Assange did #1 or #2.
Not only are you dumb, your just ignorant!!!
# 30 Animby
“You draw no line in the sand? Our government should be completely open? No secrets?”
I believe in boundaries that favor building a stronger Democracy; that is, “I believe in the values in our Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine “Common Sense”, Poor Richard’s almanac, …..”
I do not believe not believe in a “Line in the Sand” that favor Theocracies, Despotic governments, Tyrants, or George W. Bush both stating and acting as a dictator!!!
G.W. Bush in his own words and what # 30 Animby supports!!!:
“You don’t get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier.” – Governing Magazine, July, 1998
“If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier; just so long as I’m the dictator.” – Washington D.C. December 18, 2000
“A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there’s no question about it.” – Business Week, July 30, 2001
“See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.” – Rochester NY, May 24, 2005
“The really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway.” – Annandale VA, August 9, 2004
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” – Washington D.C. August 5, 2004
“It’s been a fabulous year for Laura and me.” – December 20, 2001 (Three months after the 9/11 attacks)
“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.” – Sept. 13, 2001
“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” – March 13, 2002
“I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we’re really talking about peace.” – June 18, 2002 (ever read George Orwell’s 1984? Remember “Doublethink”?)
“”I’m the commander – see, I don’t need to explain – I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being President.” – quoted in Bob Woodward’s “Bush at War”
“I’m also not very analytical. You know I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things.” – June 4, 2003
“See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don’t attack each other. Free nations don’t develop weapons of mass destruction.” – October 3, 2003
#30 Animby – Not a big fan of history I take it?
” Maybe we should advertise our plans for the next combat mission in Afghanistan? Give the Taliban soldiers time to leave or plant IEDs. ”
When we are the ones that have been providing weapons to them, and that we USED to provide them with All Types of information…but that was when they were fighting RUSSIANS.
And, might I ask…what EXACTLY did the Taliban do that made us determined to wipe them out? Did the Taliban bomb anyone? Knock down any buildings?
Do not interpret this as any type of support for the religious zealots (anywhere or of any religion) they are, but we USED to support them. We USED to make deals with them. Then, we (the government) decided we needed something from that area, and started the LONGEST US WAR IN HISTORY. At a cost of 2.x Billion a week.
But that doesn’t bother you, because you were told they were the enemy.
Only, with the Wikileaks stuff, you find that information tells you it was all a Big Con Game, with the US paying the cost.
Information is free, in a free society.
Do I believe that ALL information should be available? No. However I do believe that when the lies are told, when the politicians are making money off the blood of our soldiers, all of it based on lies, that those lies, if possible, should be exposed.
The fact that it is being suppressed, and that people of religious belief are calling for the DEATH of Assange, just leads me to question “Why is this CEO so important that he needs to be KILLED?”
#32 – so you admit there is *some* information that should be kept secret? I’ve never said a word about the specifics of this leak, only the intent. The Assman’s intent is to harm America. Read some of his writings. Harming
America is evil in the extreme since through unbiased observation it’s obvious that without America to show the way the human race is lost.
# 33 Dennis said, “Not a big fan of history I take it?”
Please do not lecture me on the history of Afghanistan/Taliban. I lived and worked there for over seven years before, during and after the NATO action. I am still in regular communication with Afghan friends. I speak enough Pashtu and Dari to get around. I have worked with the Taliban when necessary and sustained a (very minor) injury from one of their roadside bombs. So, hold the lectures until you’ve had to bribe Russian border guards, ridden across the desert on a camel with a local warlord’s troops or sneaked in from Pakistan across the Khyber Pass.
Go read your history books. Probably the closest you’ll ever get to any real action.
# 32 noname said, “I believe in the values in our Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine “Common Sense”, Poor Richard’s almanac, …..”
The ‘values’ of Poor Richard’s Almanac? I’d be willing to bet you’ve never read the other documents you mention, either.
I suppose it would surprise you to find out the founding fathers used a substantial number of secret agents in their dealings with the British. I don’t know how Ben … errr … Poor Richard felt about it but I, for one, am damned glad they had some secrets and even happier that some long forgotten forefather of Assange did not publish those secrets.
Animby: I fought for my country. In the first GWar. You sound like a paid contractor.
You want lectures? I don’t do that. You however want to change the subject to personal accounts. I have 8 years worth. I would put mine against yours any day. But thats not the subject is it?
You are right, I never bribed anyone. I just had to shoot them and proclaim that as a victory for the US of A.
And do you know why YOU were there? I was part of the lie, and recognized it for what it was.
But you don’t care about the Facts.
#37 Dennis: You’re not the only war veteran in this dialogue. My war was VietNam. Yes, I get paid for my labors. I suppose you’ve always worked for free. As for your eight years, Ive been doing this for near 30 – Mozambique, Angola, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc. And you know what? I know EXACTLY why I was in each war: to save/improve the lives of civilians. I was part of no lie. As for the facts? I’d quote Jack Nicholson at you but you’re too full of yourself to get the irony.
1) WikiLeaks (and Assange) have not broken any laws wrt releasing information. I’ll say it again – THEY HAVE NOT BROKEN ANY LAWS.
2) The person/people who originally stole the information did. They have been prosecuted under the law.
3) WikiLeaks gave the government the opportunity to vet material to ensure that impact will be minimal. They refused.
4) Most media outlets (and many people here) complain the information is not interesting, or that we already ‘knew’ the contents. If so whats the problem?
WikiLeaks is at base a mechanism to release information. That is the essence of free speech. It is not without risk or problems. But overall it is to the good – certainly whilst the media are unwilling/unable to do any investigative journalism.
If there are secrets that the government doesn’t (hopefully legitimately) want the public to access. They better try and keep it more safely. The idea that this information is anything other than run of the mill to the intelligence community is ridiculous.
History show the pursuit of and confronting of the truth leads to the best results, even if it is a bumpy ride.
# 38 Animby
“I know EXACTLY why I was in each war: to save/improve the lives of civilians. I was part of no lie.”
“My war was VietNam”
I don’t know how you can square that.
I mean which civilians? How many Vietnamese were killed? 1-3 million Vietnamese, 300 thousand Cambodians, 50 thousand Americans. And for what outcome? You do know the original French conflict, leading to American involvement was funded by America? Perhaps you also may know that Ho Chi Min – was a supporter of the USA through WW2, and wanted to work with the US, but was basically spurned forcing him to work with USSR. And that’s not touching on Nixon, illegal wars in cambodia, the burning of Vietnamese villages to ‘save them’. And on and on.
If information wasn’t leaked it could have gone on much much longer. And many more people pointlessly killed.
Whilst I respect that you put yourselves in harms way for American interests. And at the time it may have seemed a noble cause. Retrospectively it’s hard to square that based on information subsequently revealed – much leaked – that a lot of it was lies.
Without outlets like Wikileaks it might be hard to find stuff like this out (the Pentagon papers for example) it would be hard to know this.
Sounds like you just don’t want to know.
Like Eric Schmidt said, If you don’t want everyone to see it, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it. Har!
I can only hope Wikileaks finds some dirt on Google.
#3 : If you consider that 1 USD is worth 119 Icelandic króna you were not far with your cents hypothesis.
# 40 freddybobs68k said,
“1) …THEY HAVE NOT BROKEN ANY LAWS.” === So, by your definition, if a jewel thief gives me some gems he’s stolen – and I KNOW they’re stolen – and I sell them, I have committed no crime? That’s basically what Assange did. He knowingly accepted stolen classified documents and published them for profit. A seven figure a week profit if the OP is accurate.
“2) The person/people who originally stole the information … have been prosecuted under the law.” === I’m prepared to be corrected but I don’t believe PFC Manning HAS been prosecuted. He has been detained but I don’t think they have even agreed on the charges, yet. He certainly has not yet been prosecuted.
#41 freddybobs68k = Please excuse my misstatement. VietNam was prior to my becoming a physician and embarking on my current career.
#44 Animby
“So, by your definition,…”
Lets try this another way. Tell me concretely what laws they broke? And if so why haven’t they been shutdown/arrested under said laws?
And why the rest of the media who are completely complicit in publishing the material, _by your argument_, they must have broken those laws too – right?
You’re analogy is broken. Information isn’t a diamond. And through free speech if I receive information _even if illegally obtained by someone else_, I can publish it. And that is a good thing.
On Manning – I overstepped. He’s been charged…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
and may be in jail for the rest of his life.
But the point is he ‘broke the law’ and is now facing the repercussions, through the legal process. Personally I find the idea of him being in jail for the rest of his life absurd, but that’s the risk he took.
The idea that “gitmo” is the answer to anything you disagree with is the most disturbing thing.
Why do you hate America?
That mindset is more damaging that anything wikileaks could do.
China jails activists without trials for releasing embarrassing information.
I don’t think we have a leg to stand on to criticize China any longer.
animby, can you name the law or laws that the Wikileaks organization has broken? Seriously, I’m not baiting.
The joint investigation by the Dept. of the Army and FBI has come up with diddly-squat so far other than “they certainly have behaved in a reckless manner”. When pressed to name a law or act (e.g. Pentagon spokesman, US legal council, etc) they make vague references to the 1917 Espionage Act.
@Dvorak
Hey, did you see this; the Swedish woman Anna Ardin who admits to having sex with Assange of her own volition but accuses him of then breaking the condom on purpose, may have ties to the CIA: She was in an anti Castro group, with a link to a CIA funded group:
http://qwstnevrythg.com/2010/12/anna-ardin-cia-2/
# 24 President Amabo said, on December 8th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Even OPEN governments still have SECRETS. Only a retard would think otherwise.
You are only proving that people like you are Septic Tanks. ie. Full of Shit.
HEY EVERYONE # 52 pedro says President Amabo is right.
I guess that settles it.
We all know how honest, truthful and completely intelligent pedro is.
# 51 Nugget Coombs
I think # 24 President Amabo is more of a Septic Yank and very much seeping shit from all frontal orifices.
# 55 pedro,
That’s Colonel Mustard to you taco breath!!!!
#45 freddybobs68k
#48 foobar
Good morning.
Sorry for the delay. I was not avoiding the question, I went to bed. It is GMT+7 where I’m living.
What law has Assange broken?
Let’s start with espionage. I think a case could be made. (I doubt they will pursue this one because they would then have to prosecute the NY Times!)
Then, more mundane, receiving stolen materials. 250,000 counts. (How about we give him 30 days in prison for each count?)
Reckless endangerment? Several people have gone underground for their own safety.
Conspiracy?
I’m sure our friend SeaLawyer could be more specific and bring up numerous more suggestions.
Freddyetc: I hadn’t heard they’d actually charged Manning. The article you referenced said he was charged with unauthorized use and disclosure. That sounds like a holding charge to me. Meaning they may very well add further charges. I think he would have a decent defense if he had pursued documents about a specific subject of extreme national importance (i.e. Ellsberg and The Pentagon Papers) – instead, he indiscriminately downloaded and disclosed classified documents in an apparent attempt to embarrass or discredit the US Gov. Now, I know many of the people on this blog will say that was a noble idea.
I don’t.
# 31 President Amabo said, on December 9th, 2010 at 4:23 am
God what fools. You’re supposed to announce a military atack in advance? You invent some new weapon system making you’re enemy’s systems inneffecive and obsolete and you’re supposed to tell them how it works? You’re working behind the scenes to collpase some sack-of-shit regime that doens’t believe America should be in charge of the world and you’re supposed to tell them?
There are hippie subhumans that can live without secrets, but not real humans.
Is that you George W???
# 57 Animby, # 55 pedro (both the same person)
“What law has Assange broken?
Let’s start with espionage. I think a case could be made. (I doubt they will pursue this one because they would then have to prosecute the NY Times!)”
What an idiot!!!!!
What you saying, from your dull point of view:
1.) A law was broken
2.) It’s ok for NY Times to break the law
3.) It’s not ok for an individual non-citizen to break the same law.
Your both idiots # 57 Animby, # 55 pedro!!!!
Why don’t you both go back to bowing at the alter of G.W. Bush
From the lips of fools, in his own words and what # 30 Animby # 57 Animby, # 55 pedro supports!!!:
“You don’t get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier.” – Governing Magazine, July, 1998
“If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier; just so long as I’m the dictator.” – Washington D.C. December 18, 2000
“A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there’s no question about it.” – Business Week, July 30, 2001
Animby, you sir you have mastered dumbassery. I salute you.
This is something called jurisdiction.
The laws of the United States don’t physically extend outside of the United States to non-citizens.
This is why the Gitmo detainees don’t get due process and constitutional rights. Except for like the 2 Gitmo guys who were actual American citizens.
So if it’s espionage, I don’t get the clandestine part. Wikileaks is anything but clandestine.
Animby==you really are “wrong.” Wrong about what the law IS, as opposed to what you might think it should be? Actually, I’m happy to see this as with the right factual basis, your education, intelligence, experience, and humanity otherwise so continuously displayed can flower again?
1. Assange is not a US citizen. He cannot be charged with treason.
2. Assange is not a US citizen. He can be charged with espionage under our LAWS, if the US can get jurisdiction over him which he does not have to voluntarily submit to.
3. When charged with espionage, all the other LAWS of the USA also apply==like freedom of the press to publish “secrets” that they otherwise innocently/legally come into prossession of.
4. There is no First Amendment Provision regarding possession/distribution of diamonds. There is for speech ESPECIALLY for political speech.
As posted above, VIETNAM is one of the VERY BEST EXAMPLES OF THE NEED FOR TREASON/REVOLUTION from time to time. I asked you before: how high the body count to keep the lies secret?
Truth. Why do people hate it/fail to balance the competing harms?
Bobbo – I knew I should have dropped this when I had a chance. There is a lot of venom in a couple of the posts above. You, at least, try to make a discussion out of it – no matter how dogmatic you are.
I made no mention of a treason charge. Please don’t put words in my mouth.
As for the other charges I suggested, espionage is the most likely to stand up to international scrutiny. If the US decides to issue a warrant for his arrest, they will then have to get whatever country he is in to agree to extradition. Difficult but nowhere near impossible. Once in the US espionage and any other charges they wish to prosecute can certainly be filed.
Now, since Ms Myeres has accused me of dumbassery and then gone on to say, “This is why the Gitmo detainees don’t get due process and constitutional rights.” I’ll just repay the favor by letting her know the real reason is because we claim they are enemy combatants and being held under military law.
Pedro, I seldom respect what you say but I do apologize that Mr Noname believes we are the same person. Of course, the rest of his post shows a lot of disconnect with reality, too.
Now, if you all will excuse me, it’s late here and I’m going to bed. You may now safely say anything you wish about me. Oh, by the way, I had chicken vindaloo not tacos for dinner.
I’m amazed how many people are comfortable that corporations, banks, and DNS providers were easily coerced without any due process. China caved Google and now the US has caved a number of large companies.
Animby, enjoy your tacos.
I was criticizing your comments on the application of law, not you personally.
But the Gitmo detainees are held as enemy combatants specifically because they don’t have rights as citizens of the United States.
Likewise, Assange isn’t under the jurisdiction of US law — he isn’t a citizen and he isn’t in the United States.