Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Pole

Paypal Cuts Wikileaks Access For Donations

Recommended Posts

from the BBC:

The online payments processor, PayPal, says it has cut access for donations to the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.

PayPal said its payment service cannot be used for activities "that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity".

Wikileaks' latest releases - of US diplomatic cables - have caused considerable embarrassment to the US and its allies, correspondents say.

It has been forced to change its web address after sustained cyber attacks.

In a statement, US-based PayPal said donations could no longer be made to Wikileaks because of "a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy"

Earlier, the company providing Wikileaks with its domain name, EveryDNS.net, cut off service because the domain wikileaks.org had become the target of "multiple distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks".

The company said: "These attacks have, and future attacks would, threaten the stability of the EveryDNS.net infrastructure, which enables access to almost 500,000 other websites."

Wikileaks later reappeared using a Swiss web address.

It had earlier turned to the online store Amazon to host its site but the company ended the agreement on Wednesday - a move welcomed by US officials.

Amazon said Wikileaks had failed to adhere to its terms of service.

"It's clear that Wikileaks doesn't own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content. Further it is not credible that the extraordinary volume of 250,000 classified documents that Wikileaks is publishing could have been carefully redacted in such a way as to ensure that they weren't putting innocent people in jeopardy," Amazon said on its website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the BBC:

The online payments processor, PayPal, says it has cut access for donations to the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.

PayPal said its payment service cannot be used for activities "that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity".

Wikileaks' latest releases - of US diplomatic cables - have caused considerable embarrassment to the US and its allies, correspondents say.

It has been forced to change its web address after sustained cyber attacks.

In a statement, US-based PayPal said donations could no longer be made to Wikileaks because of "a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy"

Earlier, the company providing Wikileaks with its domain name, EveryDNS.net, cut off service because the domain wikileaks.org had become the target of "multiple distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks".

The company said: "These attacks have, and future attacks would, threaten the stability of the EveryDNS.net infrastructure, which enables access to almost 500,000 other websites."

Wikileaks later reappeared using a Swiss web address.

It had earlier turned to the online store Amazon to host its site but the company ended the agreement on Wednesday - a move welcomed by US officials.

Amazon said Wikileaks had failed to adhere to its terms of service.

"It's clear that Wikileaks doesn't own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content. Further it is not credible that the extraordinary volume of 250,000 classified documents that Wikileaks is publishing could have been carefully redacted in such a way as to ensure that they weren't putting innocent people in jeopardy," Amazon said on its website.

Pathetic PayPal.

Pathetic Amazon.

Boycott them over Xmas.

Wikileaks has released information that the public had every right to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've downloaded the insurance.aes256 file from The Pirate Bay but I expect it's a load of cr8p!

What program do you use to open a .aes256 file anyway? (I know that you're supposed to have a key to decrypt it - that's not what I'm asking).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've downloaded the insurance.aes256 file from The Pirate Bay but I expect it's a load of cr8p!

Apparently, its got the photos NASA dont want you to see. The un-doctored versions. The same photos that Gary Mckinnon saw, when he hacked the DOD computers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pathetic PayPal.

Pathetic Amazon.

Boycott them over Xmas.

Wikileaks has released information that the public had every right to see.

Its not what theyve released that bothers me, its what they havent released.

They have motives and ideologies too, and, given he's admitted he will release more if anything happens to him, its fair to assume there is much that hasnt been released for various reasons he see's as 'reasonable'

Im all for transparency, but Assange is part of the problem, not the solution. Its just taking secrecy away from one beareaucrats hands and putting it in a renegades hand. I dont see the benefit myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, its got the photos NASA dont want you to see. The un-doctored versions. The same photos that Gary Mckinnon saw, when he hacked the DOD computers.

I just made that up BTW......:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not what theyve released that bothers me, its what they havent released.

They have motives and ideologies too, and, given he's admitted he will release more if anything happens to him, its fair to assume there is much that hasnt been released for various reasons he see's as 'reasonable'

Im all for transparency, but Assange is part of the problem, not the solution. Its just taking secrecy away from one beareaucrats hands and putting it in a renegades hand. I dont see the benefit myself.

Me thinks you would quickly change your mind, if an innocent member of your family had been murdered by U.S Soldiers, who filmed the incident, then claimed ignorance of elements of the event, and refused to share the tape with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not what theyve released that bothers me, its what they havent released.

They have motives and ideologies too, and, given he's admitted he will release more if anything happens to him, its fair to assume there is much that hasnt been released for various reasons he see's as 'reasonable'

Im all for transparency, but Assange is part of the problem, not the solution. Its just taking secrecy away from one beareaucrats hands and putting it in a renegades hand. I dont see the benefit myself.

It would make more sense to me if they just had done with it and published the lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me thinks you would quickly change your mind, if a member of your family had been murdered by U.S Soldiers, who filmed the incident, then claimed ignorance of elements of the event, and refused to share the tape with you.

And if he, as self appointed administrator of this information decides it not in anyones interest to release it, but use it instead as an insurance policy against his life, that is fine?

He may have already have done this in thousands of cases for all we know. Like i say, its what he decides not to release that bothers me.

Call me skeptical, but he's just another man, i dont trust him any more than the US, or any other govt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would make more sense to me if they just had done with it and published the lot.

I remember watching an Alan Bennet Play adapted for TV.

An Englishman Abroad.

Based upon the true life occurence of a meeting between an actress, and Guy Burgess, after Burgess had flown to Soviet Russia.

The play seemed to suggest that we were all safest, when everyone knew everything about everyone else.

I always thought he had a point about the transparency element.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if he, as self appointed administrator of this information decides it not in anyones interest to release it, but use it instead as an insurance policy against his life, that is fine?

He may have already have done this in thousands of cases for all we know. Like i say, its what he decides not to release that bothers me.

Call me skeptical, but he's just another man, i dont trust him any more than the US, or any other govt.

Fair Point. Having said that, Assange may be withholding information that could be genuinely disastrous. And simply be showing good judgement. So Far I am erring on the side of Wikileaks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When this whole saga started I was broadly in favour. If there's another Abu Ghraib out there then it's important we are told about it and hats off to the sort of jounalist brave enough to go after this sort of story.

But looking at the content, it's dross, just typical diplomatic tittle tattle .. none of it so far amounts to any kind of justification for publishing, when you consider the negative consequences for the conduct of diplomacy and possible danger to individuals providing info at some considerable personal risk (eg Iranians seeking to overthrow their religious dictatorship).

It's a good test for the Constitution-fetishists among the Right in the US though, suddenly faced with free speech in a way they don't like ... their hypocrisy is as big as it gets.

There are some things states have every right to keep secret and this guy Assange has way overstepped the mark - personally I hope they catch him and throw the book at him, and the stooge who fed him the material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not all Dross.

Wikileaks have released some video footage, that the US army was suppressing. Sickening Stuff. Not something I would want to watch again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no jurisdiction on earth that can prevent the proposed drip feed to the net, the Chinese have attempted, the Yanks failed abysmally.

In fact, the only way we wont get to see more embarrassing leaks, about 1/4 million of them, is a shutdown of the wordwide web.

It would all makes sense if the owner of Wikileaks was employed by an evil dictator, hell bent on world domination

But apart from freedom, I cant see the motives of this guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no jurisdiction on earth that can prevent the proposed drip feed to the net, the Chinese have attempted, the Yanks failed abysmally.

In fact, the only way we wont get to see more embarrassing leaks, about 1/4 million of them, is a shutdown of the wordwide web.

It would all makes sense if the owner of Wikileaks was employed by an evil dictator, hell bent on world domination

But apart from freedom, I cant see the motives of this guy.

'Freedom' surely is one heck of a motive?

The history books are full of people ready to die in the name of 'freedom'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There does appear to be a concerted effort to make life hard for Julian and Wikileaks, contrary to the spirit of the internet. A corporate closing ranks, which stinks...

We all know or suspect that those with power bend or even break the rules - sometimes, e.g., in war it may be justified. However, for one human being to be superior to another and so dominate another is not right. There is nothing special about about many of the people in power, worse that they are there to represent the people they go on to effectively abuse.

'Nothing to fear, nothing to hide' always seems a one-way street.

Long live the whistleblower. It's not an easy choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are drip feeding the cables for maximum media exposure, releasing them all at once would be a waste.

On their website it says if they released one cable per hour it would take 28 yrs

This is going to be a long journey, and I find the consistent DDOS attack on Wikileaks very disturbing, this is a turning point for the internet and will be marked in history as the first true war on information, as far as the internet is concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if he, as self appointed administrator of this information decides it not in anyones interest to release it, but use it instead as an insurance policy against his life, that is fine?

He may have already have done this in thousands of cases for all we know. Like i say, its what he decides not to release that bothers me.

Call me skeptical, but he's just another man, i dont trust him any more than the US, or any other govt.

Whilst not perfect, I'd rather a world with Wikileaks than one without. Moreover, there is such a thing as responsible release of information. Someone has to make a decision somewhere. It is quite clear that the governments and large corporations hide the sorts of things that should be public knowledge with the excuse of responsible release, and if by revealing some (if clearly not all) of this Wikileaks wake a few people up, then that is a good thing, especially in a world where large corpoations are having undue influence on public policy.

He is just a man, and imperfect like any other, but at least Wikileaks are doing something. In the past, Wikileaks role was performed by print journalists. They now, in the main, seem to be under government and corporate thumbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if he, as self appointed administrator of this information decides it not in anyones interest to release it, but use it instead as an insurance policy against his life, that is fine?

Seems like a perfectly sensible precaution in a world where governments have no problem assassinating people. If you were in his position, wouldn't you take such precautions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me thinks you would quickly change your mind, if an innocent member of your family had been murdered by U.S Soldiers, who filmed the incident, then claimed ignorance of elements of the event, and refused to share the tape with you.

Or you where that German national arrested taken to Albania for 'interrogation' and then once found innocent dumped on the street there, you then go home and nobody believes you......the leaks then confirm you where right and the US sent a request to Germany to bury your story.

To that guy Wikileaks are heroes at least he can go to court now and try and get some comp..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to understand the nature and intent of our enemy.They aren't exactly shy about telling anyone within earshot what they are trying to do. Their oft-stated aim is to get the West to spend itself into irrelevance and demonstrate our hypocrisy by causing us to over-react. This they do by attempting high-profile terrorist acts. Note I say attempt, there are enough cowards and ****-covering politicians out there to make sure they win regardless. The classic example is aviation security, where fortunes are being wasted feeling up passengers while freight and airside workers remain largely unchecked.

So they're not going to try and wipe out some multi-acre factory site off the map so the USN has to wait a couple of years to spin up production of some obscure widget; they're not going all out to cause mass casualties. They will do something novel and easily countered to force yet another wave of over-reaction. And it is that over-reaction they seek, not the acts themselves. We have to refuse to be terrorised.

The fact is that modern civilisation is vulnerable to serious attacks and that we should do a lot more to put resilient infrastructure in place - but that is in case a real threat comes along, not to counter the current bunch of clowns.

1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 309 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.