PayPal freezes WikiLeaks account

[Turborama]

Source: The Guardian

Jonathan Haynes
Saturday December 04 2010 10.19 GMT -

PayPal has frozen WikiLeaks' account in the latest action against the whistleblower website, which has been posting leaked US embassy cables online.

The decision by the online payment site – which WikiLeaks had used to raise funds for web hosting and other costs – has been announced with a posting on PayPal's blog.

PayPal, owned by the auction website eBay, said the account had been frozen because it was being used for "illegal" activity.

=snip=

PayPal said: "PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal acceptable use policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity. We've notified the account holder of this action."

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/04/paypal-shuts-down-wikileaks-account

---

PayPal statement regarding WikiLeaks
DECEMBER 3, 2010

PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity. We’ve notified the account holder of this action.

https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2010/12/paypal-statement-regarding-wikileaks/

[SpiralHawk]

1. Screw PayPal (R)

They gots trouble with the truth...they gots trouble all around.

[populistdriven]

164. click here to cancel your paypal account, you can leave a reason why when you close the account!

https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_close-account

[madrchsod]

2. pay pal sucked before this...now it sucks more

[pipoman]

3. This isn't PayPal's fight

and it was a wise move. Why would they risk involvement and possible sanctions for the crusade of another. Bet Assange couldn't open a bank account anywhere in the western hemisphere.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

9. Sanctions for what?

[pipoman]

187. Assange is wanted by the US..

seizure of assets can and do occur for people wanted. Paypal could easily be on the hook for legal and other expenses for Assange's fight.

[Kali]

199. warrant or charges filed?

I had not heard that.

I know the Swiss want to question him, but no charges there either.

[pipoman]

201. I believe he is wanted for questioning, no?

[Kali]

205. not by anybody official that I have heard other than the Swiss

[still_one]

13. Funny isn't it how both repukes and democrats, along with corporations are doing everything in their

power to try and silence Wikileaks. Which incidently, has exposed the TRUE colors of these people. They are not trying to protect classified documents, they are trying to hide how they have been screwing the world for decades.

It is no coincidence that they were able to lie us into a war, remove regulation that had protected us since the depression, and pass a patriot act, all in the name of freedom, and people didn't even blink their eyes

Now that the financial institutions are the next target, someone is going bonkers

What are they afraid of?

[TBF]

17. K&R this post. nt

[loudsue]

23. Best post of the year. +100,000,000,000 You NAILED IT.

:applause:

[populistdriven]

163. free t-shirts!

[Goldstein1984]

28. They are afraid of rival power

And afraid of losing their own power

And afraid of the precedent that successfully standing up to their power would set

And, ultimately, they are afraid of the very remote possiblity that enough Americans will put down the cheap beer, turn away from entertainment, and hold Power accountable for its hypocricy and crimes.

[laughingliberal]

79. +1 nt

[jimlup]

35. Indeed!

:headbang:

[DemReadingDU]

36. yep

[rtassi]

38. US! But the really don't need to be do they?

Because someone who has lost there moral compass will always be around to defend the decisions of a company like e-bay or pay-pal, while feigning outrage over the loss of our freedom!

[Raster]

40. They are afraid that the public will get an insider's view as to the wheelings and dealings...

...of the corporate banking and financial system, and be able to see the underhanded conduct that constitutes standard operating procedure. I suspect that the next Wikileak release (the "financial dump") will detail misconduct and culpability around TARP and the mortgage fiasco.

[axollot]

110. They went after him with full force AFTER he announced he had

another leak up his sleeve.

They didnt go after him with the Iraq file dump or really with the SD dump (although they did send Homeland Security in to close down torrent file sharing sites trying to stop the insurance). It's the banking dump that has them afraid, it's the banking dump that has mobilized the US fascists to go after him and label him a terrorist.

F*ing insane upside-down world we are in.

And I'll say again
The curtain is falling. Let it fall!!

Cheers
Sandy

[the.barberpole]

115. agreement

really believe in your "bottom" two line !

also......where is the freedom of speech shit we always brag
about !!

fuck paypal AND ebay !!

[Raster]

167. welcome to DU

[sirthomas66]

51. Your post is so excellent, I had to join this forum to respond.

[Hosnon]

56. +. I'm salivating over the financial documents release. nt.

[go west young man]

68. The truly true truth.

[naaman fletcher]

69. They are afraid of being exposed

This is a battle of the elites vs. non-elites.

The elites have a secret world in government and corporations that they are trying to hide from the rest of us.


Who will win?

They have won for the last fifty years, but with wikileaks we are now fighting back.

Expose them all. Expose everything!!!!!

[Desertrose]

84. Should be it's own thread!! +1000

Still trying to cover their own lying asses. Shame on them.

[truth2power]

93. You mentioned, "both repukes and democrats"...

And yet it's not PC to say that there's no difference between the two parties (when, BTW, there are hundreds of articles no the internet, by respected and competent individuals that say the same thing).

[ProfessionalLeftist]

100. "What are they afraid of?"

The TRUTH.

[leftstreet]

104. +1

[krabigirl]

119. Yep. They are authoritarians, corporate communists IMO.

[SOS]

149. Capitalist authoritarian state

Gingrich recently lauded China.
He said they are growing economically because they have no capital gains tax.

Newt let the agenda slip.

The Wall Street capitalists (and their lackeys in Washington) want to turn this country into Chinese-style capitalist authoritarian state.
And they are succeeding.

[EFerrari]

121. Precisely. Well said. n/t

[pipoman]

188. " What are they afraid of?"

"they" is ambiguous in this context. If you are talking about Paypal, they are affraid (and rightfully so) of being dragged into a huge pile of shit. If the they is in the larger sense, the (also ambiguous) "powers that be", well, I couldn't possibly know.

[Blue_Tires]

214. true bipartisanship in action...

:crazy:

[sabrina 1]

20. It was a cowardly move. No other country is acting this way.

The U.S. WILL put pressure on other countries, but hopefully not all of them will bow to the pressure.

Paypal probably got a call from the CIA.


This IS how Germany happened, I just hope the people won't fall for it as they did back then.

[still_one]

30. Actually there are other Western countries looking for way to do it. /nt

[krabigirl]

They are falling for it, and they will continue to do so.

Although i would compare it more to the former soviet union.

[pipoman]

189. Another

ambiguous post...if you are calling paypal cowardly for doing this, well, unless you are willing to risk your own assets for Assange's crusade you are a spectator. I would like to see your reaction to that call from the CIA. I am guessing if you thought you were going to get brought into Assange's pile of shit you would disassociate immediately too....that is unless you simply have nothing you have worked for to loose.

If you are, OTOH, calling this pursuit of Assange by our gov't. cowardly, certainly others agree with that.

[Cherchez la Femme]

27. (Most) people are not going to stop using PayPal if they handle Assange's account

however, I do believe many --me among them-- will boycott PayPal for this.

There are other alternatives, not the least of which is just paying directly sellers, or if you're a seller accepting other methods, especially simply using your credit card directly.

[Duval]

94. I am boycotting , too! Jerks!

[pipoman]

191. Paypal stands to get dragged into

an impossible legal dispute. I am sure you are the least of Paypal's worries.


BTW how much of your own money have you sent to Assange? What would you be willing to risk for his crusade? What kind of las vegas odds would you give on his future and back with your own savings and assets?

Oh, and you must be under the mistaken impression that your very own local bank would allow Assange to bank there...you going to keep your money in your pillow case and drive it to the people you are buying from?

[Cherchez la Femme]

213. About 6 months ago

I sent a whopping $50- to Wikileaks, all I could afford.

Now that my Health Insurance premium has just gone up almost double, over $1100 a month now, Assagne will not be seeing any money from me for quite a while.

That is why, in another post, I talked about seriously considering moving to Canada. That $1100+ a month will go FAR towards a mortgage!

I drive a car too, although I used to bike most everywhere but that was before my garage was broken into an emptied out by GUYS IN A TRUCK emptied everything portable out (including my kayak, grill, stored furniture, tools, lawn mower, my antique cast iron wood stove I used to heat my 'workshop' in winter etc. AND they despoiled my car in there since they couldn't figure out how to steal it, I guess)
all while my "don't snitch" neighbor just sat & watched them
-- so you wanna get on me for carbon emissions and using gasoline too? Go for it. Have fun.


But excuse me for having to LIVE. You are my new an hero in self-righteousness! :applause:




***sorry about capitalizing, too lazy to mess with all the html code.

[druidity33]

29. Cowards. nt.

[pipoman]

193. Another sideliner not risking anything for Assange's crusade..

but surely willing to risk other's assets for same..

[civilisation]

48. Yup exposing the bankers lead to this,. .

funny how this happend in tandam with the banking leaks,. . .

[pipoman]

194. Bite the hand that feeds you and all that...

[daleo]

168. No, but an arms merchant or drug dealer can

All kinds of true criminals with money are treated extremely well by bankers.

In fact one of the Wikileaks documents was about an Afghanistan government official who showed up un the middle east with $52 million in cash. Nobody, government or banker, stood in his way. I wouldn't doubt that he has a Paypal account.

[pipoman]

195. By FFB, er... Future Felon Bankers maybe

[JackRiddler]

186. Right, this isn't PayPal's fight, but they have taken a side.

[pipoman]

196. They have taken the side of their holdings

BTW how much of your money have you sent Assange? Would you be willing to, say, risk seizure of your house in the name of Assange's crusade? Nah, I didn't think so.

[JackRiddler]

200. You, sir, know nothing of me, so kindly keep your trap shut about it.

[pipoman]

202. I'll take that as an, 'I have not given, nor am I willing to risk anything for assange's fight'.

[JackRiddler]

210. You'll take it as you will. It's certainly none of your busy-body bidness.

[sudopod]

197. Their founder wants to start little artificial island kingdoms

where they can go Galt with hookers and drugs.

Who could have guessed they'd be assholes? :p

[pipoman]

204. Who's "their"? Ebay?

And frankly there are more than a few right here on DU who wouldn't fault "their" for wanting to decriminalize or even legalize those very two, currently illegal, activities.

[sudopod]

208. wat?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel

[pipoman]

209. If you're talking about Paypal's founder(s) I don't know what that has to do with anything

I don't know what that has to do with anything, as paypal is owned by ebay, or are you talking about ebay's founder(s)? So much ambiguity in this thread.

[sudopod]

211. I'm implying everyone involved in founding the company is a right wing douchebag

and the people running it now are too, so it's no huge surprise that they'd act this way. Hell, they're douchebags in normal times.

[Greyhound]

4. K&R #5.

[lamp_shade]

5. Good for them. K and NR (net rec) #8.

[newfie11]

6. Another reason not to use paypal! n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

8. Here's how to donate to Wikileaks...

I figure if there's such desperation to cut off ways for money to get to them, I'm good for a donation...

http://www.wikileaks.ch/support.html

[Smarmie Doofus]

12. 2-shay. n/t

[sabrina 1]

21. Thanks, I imagine they will get a lot more donations now.

The U.S. keeps shooting itself in the foot. The world, except for its corrupt leaders, views Assange as a hero.

We are sinking lower and lower and I have to wonder what it is they are so desperate to hide.

I wish Wikileaks would release the Bank information before they get cut off completely.

[DemReadingDU]

37. I think that is why Wikileaks is being cut off

to prevent exposing the Bank information

[glinda]

97. Wonder if the Bank info is international in nature? Just seems to be that the whole power

structure is not isolated to the USA. Nothing is in regards to the wealthiest.

[axollot]

112. Don't worry about the banking info. It wont be stopped by stopping

Assange or Paypal. The files have been spread far and wide. Average folks are hanging on to them - in pieces - waiting for an encrypt msg if needed. NOTHING will stop the leak - they are trying to discredit the messenger to low ball the message.

Cheers
sandy

[rtassi]

39. +1

[tavalon]

65. Yeah, and Paypal is still listed.

I'm guessing the best bet is paper money in an envelope.

[snot]

127. Another reply that should be its own O.P.

[No Elephants]

10. I've been meaning to close my paypal account anyway. If something goes wrong, like your vendor never

delivers, paypal is next to useless. Much as I hate banks on principle, I'd rather pay with a credit card. And now, I'm not too fond of paypal on principle anyway.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

11. I know what they are trying to achieve but they've gone about it in a really dumb way, it's causing

too much distrust amoungst nations and that's not really achieving peace as far as I can see. The truth is important but they could of gone about it in a less underhand way.

[still_one]

15. No they couldn't. If you have both parties in Congress trying to shut them down, that should tell

you that those members do not want to be exposed

[TBF]

18. What would be a "less underhand way"? How could they possibly get this information

out in an acceptable fashion (acceptable to TPTB that is)?

[snot]

129. How?

Bearing in mind that delaying the release of info can render it toothless.

[whoopingcrone]

14. Bye-bye PayPal

Last night I closed my Amazon.com account.
Tomorrow it'll be PayPal.
Can't do it today because I have to wait for the $ I spent
at Barnes and Noble to clear.

Yes, it's inconvenient.
But, thank to Wikileaks, it's become much harder/inconvenient
for the shadow dwellers who need to keep us in the dark about their doings.

[Foolacious]

41. How do you cancel PayPal account?

I can't find anywhere on the website that permits it. I did send a feedback about their page that castigated them for their stance, but now I can't see any way to close an account. Do I just have to send a separate email?

[MrsBrady]

80. don't know but here's a phone number I found

1-888-221-1161
(a U.S. telephone number)



4:00 AM PST to 10:00 PM Pacific Time Monday through Friday
6:00 AM PST to 8:00 PM Pacific Time Saturday and Sunday
Please note that hours of operation may vary on holidays

[harvey007]

16. Welcome to the New World Order

The global powers-that-be don't have to assassinate Wikileaks' leaders when they can just isolate and defund them.

They label Julian A. and his band of whistle-blowers "public enemy number one" while turning a blind eye to the world's most despicable dictators, torturers, banksters, war-makers, slave-traders, and earth-rapers.

Truth-tellers have no place to hide in a prison planet.

[sarcasmo]

109. Right on Harvay007.

[sabrina 1]

19. That's a lie. Wikileaks is doing nothing illegal.

They should publish a box office number or a few of them around the world where people can mail in donations.

I guess Paypal got instructions from the U.S. government. What a fascist state this has become. I used to think it was hyperbole to say that. Once upon a time.

Go Julian!

[NutmegYankee]

34. The documents have warnings on them that unauthorized release violates the law.

Wikileak's action are in direct violation of the US Code, and are therefore illegal. Paypal is just upholding their TOS.

[LESMAN]

45. The documents have warnings on them that unauthorized release violates the law

Just because something is legal or llegal,does not make it right

[NutmegYankee]

54. The TOS, agreed to beforehand, is very clear.

Your account will be suspended for supporting illegal acts. The acts are illegal under US law, and this is absolutely clear cut and fair. Many here seem to believe that this freeze was political, but the facts show otherwise.

[Dreamer Tatum]

108. Notice how whenever a mere fact about legality is pointed out

...people immediately start making normative arguments that supposedly have the same standing.

"But PayPal should do what's RIGHT."

Yeah, they'll get right on that.

[axollot]

143. In democracy bad laws are squashed. *smh* @ people being rational about

an irrational move by our government. I think it makes us look weak to CARE about Wikileaks. Let the curtain fall, change course and go from there - that is what democracy does....
Cheers
Sandy

[sabrina 1]

137. When the press gets information that is of interest to the

public, they are protected by the 1st Amendment. Assange is a publisher and he is not American.

If it is illegal to publish these documents, then the NYT and every other news organization will be prosecuted, right?

As for Paypal, you have a point as they are not the press. Otoh, if the press publishing the documents is not illegal, an argument could be made by Paypal that they are doing nothing wrong by continuing to service them.

[EFerrari]

125. Wrong. It may have been illegal for Manning to download this material

but it's not illegal for THE PRESS to publish it. Why do you think there is no American warrant for Assange? Because he hasn't broken any law.

[NutmegYankee]

131. WRONG.

It is still illegal to publish classified material. Times v. United States did not overturn them.

[EFerrari]

133. Nope. And you notice no one is lyching the New York Times

for publishing this material. No one has been able to show where Assange has broken any law.

Go read what the ACLU has to say about this.

[NutmegYankee]

145. You failed to defend your argument.

[Wednesdays]

155. Is there a U.S. warrant for his arrest? And if so, what is the charge?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

156. There is no warrant for Assange.

There are no legal experts who agree with you. Those who agree with you are the likes of Lieberman and Ensign.

ACLU
Prosecuting WikiLeaks For Publishing Documents Would Raise Serious Constitutional Concerns, Says ACLU
http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-national-security/prosecuting-wikileaks-publishing-documents-would-raise-serious-constit

Scott Horton
The Madrid Cables
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9674102

Jonathan Turley
Is the United States Engaging In Unlawful Cyber Attacks Against Carriers of Wikileaks?
http://jonathanturley.org/2010/12/03/is-the-united-states-engaging-in-unlawful-cyber-attacks-against-carriers-of-wikileaks/

[cpwm17]

159. US: World Empire?

So you are saying that the people of the world must obey US law? I think not.

Julian Assange isn't American.

[NutmegYankee]

160. Paypal considers breaking a US law to be "illegal"

This really is so simple.

[sudopod]

198. Simple answers

for simple minds.

[snot]

132. Since when is Wikileaks subject to U.S. law?

[boppers]

174. It isn't. Paypal, however, is.

Thus, if it's a problem for Paypal, it doesn't matter if Wikileaks is not US based.

[daleo]

169. Someone else "released" the documents

Wikileaks just facilitated the whistle-blowers actions, same as the media has done since. Democratic Underground has done its share too. Should it be shut down? Are people who have donated to DU criminals?

[Wednesdays]

154. A box office number? I think you mean they should publish a P.O. box number

Although, a box office would be good for watching the show. :popcorn:

[sabrina 1]

212. Lol, yes, that is what I meant.

[Marthe48]

22. PayPal didn't freeze the acct when WL posted military info

but now, when diplomats are exposed, WL is so dangerous they must be demolished. Illustrates again who counts. What a load of crap.

[still_one]

31. I think it is more that Wiki leaks said they were going after the financial system that did it /nt

[Broderick]

32. Good point

Certainly different now that politicians are being exposed.

[GSLevel9]

87. DING! DING! DING!

and YOU kind Sir/Madam win the Grand Prize!

[Toucano]

88. +1

This should not be ignored.

[greiner3]

24. Paypal;

Never again.

Admins; you need to get another way to get money to you.

[lunatica]

25. Maybe the State Department called them

[Shining Jack]

26. I never did business with them.

Now I know I never will.

[NutmegYankee]

33. Smart move.

This is a clear cut case of violation of the TOS.

[laughingliberal]

81. Wonder if they'd cancel any accounts of newspapers who have published the leaks. nt

[NutmegYankee]

162. Have the newspapers published the actual documents?

Or have they just reported on them?

[daleo]

170. I have seen "actual documents"

In fact, the CBC website has a searchable databse.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/12/02/f-database-wikileaks-canada-cables-full-text-search.html

[bluescribbler]

42. Coincidence?

Paypal is owned by EBay, EBay is owned by Meg Whitman, who spent, what?, $140 million?, "of her own money" on her failed campaign. So, any of us who have used EBay in the past, myself included, have helped to fund her egoism. Now she strikes back at transparency and the truth. I think she's more worried about what we will learn about the banksters than about torturers and two faced diplomats.

[glinda]

101. List of connected buy outs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_eBay

[Renew Deal]

43. The noose tightens

[truth2power]

44. Well, then...WikiLeaks should freeze the accounts of Pres. Obama and

SOS Clinton and most members of Congress, since they engaged in Obstruction of Justice by leaning on Spain not to prosecute the Bush/Cheney criminals.

...our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity.

Fair's fair, doncha know. :evilfrown:




Note: I hate PayPal anyway. Never could figure out how to use it. Can't hardly buy anything on eBay anymore unless you use PayPal, thus I've just about quite going there. I hope they go bankrupt.

[newtothegame]

46. What accounts would Wikileaks be freezing?

:shrug:

[truth2power]

89. I was trying to make a point more than anything else...

I don't really suppose that Obama has a PayPal acct. I was trying to point out the hypocrisy and self-righteousness of organizations (like PayPal) who are very selective in imposing rules. If it's countries engaging in state terrorism, i.e., the US, they'll look the other way.

Disgraceful!

[newtothegame]

90. Oh you wanted PAYPAL to freeze an account, NOT Wikileaks.

Your post was confusing.

[truth2power]

142. Oh cripes! I'm sorry. I failed to catch that (TWICE)...

I think my brain is deteriorating...Or else I'm so worried that someone will assassinate Assange that I can't think straight.

Sorry. :blush:

[newtothegame]

173. Cheers! nt

[cbdo2007]

47. I'm surprised any company does business with Wikileaks. If they're threatening to expose private

companies documents next year - then why would anyone open themselves up to Wikileaks and possibly be a future target of their document releases?

[newtothegame]

91. A good point. nt

[sabrina 1]

138. If they have done nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear.

[axollot]

144. Ugh - I know your sentiment but this statement was over used for so long

by the right to defend their crap, I hate seeing it attached to pro-wiki.

Cheers
:hug:

Sandy

[newtothegame]

175. Amen. nt

[sirthomas66]

49. As soon as I wake up enough to think, I am closing my paypal

account. I can't close my amazon account because I have insurance premiums taken out there. Assange is a hero. He must persevere even if people have to hide him the rest of their lives. We have already slipped into fascism; it can be reversed right now, but we must know who to attack and not let up for even a moment. The government spies are everywhere.

[kgnu_fan]

50. I am SHOCKED that so many DUers do not advocate for the First Amendment!

Shocked. This place is full of people who advocate oppressive police state agenda. No wonder right wing policies are in place one by one in our congress. Our foreign policy is in huge mess because citizens in the USA are blind and do not knows anything about what is going on in other part of the world. People are advocating against their own best interest. So many blindness in this country. Sad.

[kgnu_fan]

52. No "Land of Brave". It is now "Land of Blind Obedience"

[cbdo2007]

53. I'm not sure you understand the First Amendment.

Keep reading though, I'm sure you'll get it soon.

[kgnu_fan]

57. Have you read the Justice Black's opinion? Do you agree or not?

Justice Black's opinion on the Pentagon Papers case:


In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell. In my view, far from deserving condemnation for their courageous reporting, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other newspapers should be commended for serving the purpose that the Founding Fathers saw so clearly. In revealing the workings of government that led to the Vietnam war, the newspapers nobly did precisely that which the Founders hoped and trusted they would do.<...>

To find that the President has "inherent power" to halt the publication of news by resort to the courts would wipe out the First Amendment and destroy the fundamental liberty and security of the very people the Government hopes to make "secure." No one can read the history of the adoption of the First Amendment without being convinced beyond any doubt that it was injunctions like those sought here that Madison and his collaborators intended to outlaw in this Nation for all time.

The word "security" is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment. The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security for our Republic. The Framers of the First Amendment, fully aware of both the need to defend a new nation and the abuses of the English and Colonial governments, sought to give this new society strength and security by providing that freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly should not be abridged. This thought was eloquently expressed in 1937 by Mr. Chief Justice Hughes - great man and great Chief Justice that he was - when the Court held a man could not be punished for attending a meeting run by Communists.

"The greater the importance of safeguarding the community from incitements to the overthrow of our institutions by force and violence, the more imperative is the need to preserve inviolate the constitutional rights of free speech, free press and free <403 U.S. 713, 720> assembly in order to maintain the opportunity for free political discussion, to the end that government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes, if desired, may be obtained by peaceful means. Therein lies the security of the Republic, the very foundation of constitutional government."

[NutmegYankee]

58. How is that applicable to this case?

That case was the government ordering a paper to not publish a story.

This case is a private company enforcing it's contract (TOS) with a customer.

[kgnu_fan]

62. If you are so dense, hopeless. This country has become helpless.

[NutmegYankee]

66. Ad hominem aside -

You are not approaching this from the side of logic. Many here are acting purely on emotion and hatred of the wars to defend every act of Wikileaks, illegal or not.

[kgnu_fan]

71. Your logic is the logic of Bush/Obama government and military.

[NutmegYankee]

73. Single Payer healthcare.

I can edit after the fact too!

[kgnu_fan]

74. delete

[eilen]

99. Apparently you feel the laws of commerce supercede basic freedoms.

Captialism over Freedom. whatever. The Merchant prevails.

[NutmegYankee]

116. It's a contract. Our legal system is designed to enforce them.

Capitalist or communist, or whatever, contracts are still enforced when not fraudulent.

[Wednesdays]

158. Heh heh, contract.

[sabrina 1]

141. True, but the private company is claiming that Wikileaks has

violated the law to justify not doing business with them. If Wikeleaks is not violating the law, then that is a specious argument. It has not been established that a law has been broken. They could have announced that they were waiting to hear from legal experts regarding the issue and would act when they had verification. Will they cut off any news publication that publishes the material? If not, they they are singling out one organization in an attempt to censor them.

No legal expert to my knowledge has yet determined that Assange and Wikileaks are breaking the law. The original leaker, Manning, broke the law. How about the NYT?

[boppers]

171. That's not the bar paypal set, nor is it their claim.

"...cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity."

[NutmegYankee]

55. Please explain how this violates the first amendment.

This is a private company enforcing Terms of Service that were contractually agreed to by wikileaks beforehand.

[kgnu_fan]

59. I am shocked to see so many people are defending corporation, not the most fundamental issue at hand

being fought by Wikileaks. Wikileaks is fighting for truth, letting people know about crimes committed by our government, corporations and military.

[NutmegYankee]

63. I'm defending the rule of law.

And I do value the rule of law. I'm a hardcore economic/social liberal, but I'm not an anarchist. I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU, but I still recognize that the law is the law. And this act wasn't even taken by the Government. It's a company enforcing a CONTRACT. If you do not intend to comply with the terms you AGREED to, don't sign it.

[kgnu_fan]

67. USA government is violating the law of land and International law

Wikileaks is exercising the duty of the Fourth Estate.

[NutmegYankee]

70. That however, doesn't make Paypal's action wrong.

[kgnu_fan]

72. Your are bought. Your freedom to be a slave. Fine with me.

[NutmegYankee]

78. ah.

Well, let me know how the effort to tear down western civilization works out. Have fun!


I'm going to continue fighting for single payer healthcare and an end to Ayn Rand style tax policy.

[Odin2005]

120. There IS NO rule of law, anymore. the Corporatists have killed it.

When the elites can get away with anything then the law is a sham designed to oppress rather than ensure justice. They will get away with stealing peoples homes, with torture, with financial fraud, and YOU are lecturing us about sanctity of contracts?

[Name removed]

150. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NutmegYankee]

152. .

I'm sick of the personal attacks.

[Name removed]

157. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Arctic Dave]

82. I believe the poster is trying to say is, under this court ruling,

what WL is doing in not illegal. So Paypal closing the account is not justified. They are doing, as the judge wrote, their duty as the fourth estate.

[kgnu_fan]

85. Yes, thank you for your elaboration.

[kgnu_fan]

151. So many American nowadays are engulfed in the depth of ignorance

Helpless and hopeless. I am waiting for the big ship and Wikileaks is our ship.

Leonard Cohen - Democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OETwbVBPI1U&feature=channel

[NutmegYankee]

122. The Pentagon papers case was a narrow ruling though.

From wikipedia,

Times v. United States is generally considered a victory for an extensive reading of the First Amendment, but as the Supreme Court ruled on whether the government had made a successful case for prior restraint, its decision did not void the Espionage Act or give the press unlimited freedom to publish classified documents. A majority of the justices ruled that the government could still prosecute the Times and the Post for violating the Espionage Act by publishing the documents. Ellsberg and Russo were not acquitted of violating the Espionage Act; they were freed due to a mistrial from irregularities in the government's case.<3>

<3> http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2007/February%202007/0207pentagon.aspx


THE RELEASE OF CLASSIFIED MATERIAL REMAINS ILLEGAL.

[Arctic Dave]

139. I don't think the espionage act would apply considering they aren't releasing military info.

Nor does it undermine military operations. Unless you are saying the State Department is part of the Pentagon?


Typo

[boppers]

172. "aren't releasing military info"? You haven't been reading the cables, then.

They've been releasing info on military operations, personnel, capabilities, methods, and weapons systems. The state department "personality" cables aren't the only things they've been dumping.

[Arctic Dave]

176. We could say that about Janes. They have been publishing all those for decades.

[boppers]

179. True, to a certain extent...

Janes tends to shy away from Classified/Secret/Noforn information, though.

[mikehiggins]

83. Illegal is the question

Wiki released the documents received from a third party. They did not steal them nor did they violate any oath of secrecy in spreading them out on the table for everyone to read for themselves.

Paypal is working on behalf of TPTB and that is all there is to it. Arguments about TOS are real reaches, IMHO. Does being a print newspaper publishing the Pentagon Papers make one release legitimate and being an Internet service releasing other "secret" documents not?

Sure, the "secret" classification was meant to keep the information from unauthorised eyes, but the American public? We PAID for this crap, folks. All of this was done on OUR dime. Do you consider it legitimate to hide it from us?

But back to the point. The Wike releases were passed through to print and electronic media, just like the TIMES passed on the Pentagon Papers. This should be as legitimate as anything else.

And Paypal is a whore, first, last and always. Just my opinion of course.

[kgnu_fan]

86. Yes, thank you!

[eilen]

96. I wish I could rec your and kgnu fan's posts.

Screw Paypal.

Stop being a battery for the GBCM (Government/Banking/Corporate/Military) system.

You don't need any of that garbage on ebay anyway. Spend your money at home with honest working people, cut out the middleman.

Freedom of the Press. Freedom of Speech. Freedom of Assembly. Freedom of Association, Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Movement, Freedom of unreasonable searches and seizures.

Are people really ready to give that up for a pre-emptory TOS? Really?

[NutmegYankee]

126. The pentagon papers case did not overturn the laws.

It was a narrow ruling that left the laws intact. It is still illegal to publish classified documents.

[kgnu_fan]

130. USA is currently committing war crimes. You are supporting it by suppressing Wikileaks revelations.

[NutmegYankee]

153. BULLSHIT

It's funny that all you can do is attack me. Can't use facts can you?

[kgnu_fan]

177. Study a little. Do your homework. Don't be lazy. OK?

[Bodhi BloodWave]

192. maybe you should take your own advice, OK? n/t

[kgnu_fan]

206. LOL!!!

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[derby378]

60. Aren't the COURTS to decide what is illegal and what is not?

Not happy with PayPal right now. Then again, they were bought up by a Republican, yes?

[kgnu_fan]

64. Yes. All great idea now has been bought up by Republicans. Money is God of USA.

[Odin2005]

123. PayPal is owned by Meg Whitman.

[EFerrari]

134. Really? No wonder.

Remember they shut down Andy's account on the day of his surgery because the stalkers called and said the money was from a scam. They didn't even bother to check it out, they just shut it down. Their product is crap.

[Odin2005]

136. i was only a lurker then, but I remember.

Shameful!

[kgnu_fan]

148. I remember that... Andy...I miss him...

[tavalon]

61. Okay, so yesterday I ditched Amazon

Today, it will be Paypal.

[kgnu_fan]

75. .!

[tavalon]

76. Amazon was actually painful.

Ditching PayPal feels like lancing a boil that has been bugging me for a long time!

[kgnu_fan]

77. I know. Amazon was painful to me too.

[MrMickeysMom]

92. MY DEAR PayPal...

GO FUCK YOURSELF.

(apologies to California Peggy) .. :-)

[felix_numinous]

95. Total information awareness is for everyone

why should we be out of the loop? If the American people were told the truth all along, instead of all the lies and fear mongering, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. If our educational system, news agencies and intelligence organizations were being run ethically from the beginning, the American people could make intelligent decisions about their lives.

But at some point, consolidation and compartmentalization of information has created a collective psychosis, which is essentially a disassociation. This can happen internally or externally (and both are related, IMHO). Internal disassociation is seen when people's different personas do not know each other, and are often conflicted-their different parts become compartmentalized.

I think our country has manifested a collective disassociation, as we are being run literally by a shadowy secret compartmentalized part of our government, and are witnessing the collective social breakdown that results from this.

The way toward health is awareness and the assurance that that we know enough about where our tax dollars go that we are truly represented.

[Whoa_Nelly]

98. Biggest question: Why didn't PayPal do this before now?

Answer: Vested corporate/US-to-Global government control interests.

fuckers :grr:

[Posteritatis]

103. Paypal likes to let accounts build up a decent purse before taking the money

I've seen them do it a few times. If someone's got a donate/purchas/etc link on paypal and get a little too popular, they freeze the account and generally try to take the money for themselves. If they'd frozen the account before the cables were released, they wouldn't get as much money afterwards.

[booley]

113. if I could recommend your post I would

Yep a lot of this has to do with pay pal's crappy business practices and poor customer services that generally screw over the customer in favor of themselves.

They've done this plenty of times for non-political reasons.

It's just this time it was a high profile customer like wiki leaks.

[Posteritatis]

124. Their practices aren't crappy/poor as much as actively malicious

I really, sincerely do believe they have a deliberate policy of watching an account build up for one reason or another and then shutting it down on a pretense, pocketing the money if the target doesn't jump through all the correct hoops (at which point more hoops can always be provided).

It was sort of funny watching them (very briefly) try that stunt on the Child's Play charity last month, though.

[pitohui]

147. they don't pocket the money

i am a little offended when people just decide to make shit up

they are not allowed to pocket the money, we have laws and paypal is in part incorporated under the same rules as any other money market

if an account is frozen for gov't actions, the money is forfeit to the gov't agency in question

time will tell who gets the money, it won't be paypal, all this is for paypal is a big effing hassle

[Whoa_Nelly]

140. I still think it's greater than that

Seems more of a way to have been, and to continue to follow Assange's trail. PayPal is just being a paid/controlled corporate tool for the larger cog.

[go west young man]

102. Great post I read in the Guardian comments section.

The Americans are sitting in the room? "Salaam friends! Yes, we want to work with you, Al-Qaeda is a threat, you're better than the British soldiers, etc, etc." The Americans leave the room and the British ambassadors walk in in. "The Americans are cowboys. They don't know how to run a counter insurgency like the Brits. Yes, now the Brits, they know what to do." Brits leave, Al-Qaeda reps walk in .. "Salaam brothers, sit!"

[eilen]

105. I'm reminded of a science fiction novel I once read

and cannot for the life of me remember the title. It's about a journalist who has the talent to interview politicians and religious leaders and totally unmask them to the public. He is celebrated for this talent. Anyway, he interviews a religious/political leader who has been emerging as very popular in the US. In fact, there is a party that is raising in influence in which it's elite are almost like soldiers for this guy. The journalist interviews and then researches and discovers this leader is a total fake. As he is getting it together to put out the interview, his financial resources are disappeared and he and his family (his wife and a few people that make up his inner circle) are pursued. His goal is to get across the country to a fabled place that is unspoiled and where a group of children are protected and growing up free. He is transported and aided by an underground network of this revolutionary/secret group. I can't think of the name of it.

Anyway, through the book his identity is trashed, his character besmirched and his technology is taken away-- even his "anti aging" technology.

[Posteritatis]

128. That sounds interesting

A lot of it actually sounds like the graphic novel Transmetropolitan. It isn't, because the its story diverges from your description after awhile, but it's still got a devastatingly effective journalist who winds up in plenty of crosshairs for doing his job a little too well.

[eilen]

165. If I could only remember the title..

This drives me nuts. I have to start keeping a book journal.

[sarcasmo]

106. The Government controls Paypal too, time to cancel my account, just sad.

[defendandprotect]

185. It is sad ... we'd be cheering if they were acting in any sense for freedom of the press...!!!

[jwirr]

107. Just another economic entity I am through with.

[craigmatic]

111. Surprise suprise another financial institution caves in to the powers that be.

[Odin2005]

114. Anyone notice that this started right when he happened to threaten the Banksters?

[boppers]

178. He's already taken down several banks, and Iceland (the state), over banking.

It might be about a *specific* bank, but the "Banksters" have been regular targets for a while now.

[krabigirl]

118. Pay pal sucks, always has. And they do support illegal activity. So this is bs.

So many counterfeit goods are sold on eBay and they of course only allow pay pal payments.

[cutlassmama]

180. Yep. Just got ripped off with counterfeit goods and PP didn't do anything.

[snot]

135. [self-delete]

[pitohui]

146. seems to me paypal is caught in the middle here

everyone wants to pile onto paypal instead of the real villains of the piece

paypal has pretty much always been harassed by the big banking interests and has had to be especially careful to follow the rules, hence, why you can't fund yr online gambling acct thru paypal, can't buy porn (perfectly legal porn) thru paypal, and so on

i expect paypal to serve me as a money market fund and as a way for the "little guy" to be able to buy and sell when i can't possibly afford to accept credit cards on my own

if you destroy paypal, you destroy A LOT of women working out of their homes, because they simply have no other way to make their small sales -- they CAN'T qualify for accepting credit cards w.out paying an expensive fee

of course so many people these days are "useful idiots" and are happy to parrot the corporate line, paypal is evil, paypal steals money blah de blah...actually paypal does none of those things but it is hit over and over again by the astroturfers because its fees are a fraction of bank of america's.

paypal has to struggle to keep from being squashed and i'm just sick of the paypal hate

no use for meg whitman but the fact remains that these days, you can't accept checks, because if a check bounces, you the victim are charged a fee (this wasn't the case until the bush years), same for money orders, you HAVE to accept paypal or another way to be paid by debit/credit card because it gets too expensive otherwise...you may laugh at the extra $100 or $200 a month that some women are making online but the fact remains, that money means GROCERIES...for some people that money means CHRISTMAS

i'm so sick of the circular firing squad i can't tell you, people seem to always find a way to hate on those who are doing us some good ... whether it's the paypal hate or the obama hate...cool it, people

if you were paypal caught in the middle of this, you would do the same thing, what choice would you have?

and paypal does not "keep" the money, sheesh...usa forfeiture laws doesn't give frozen assets to the bank, etc. in question, think about how idiotic this would be...ultimately forfeited assets will go to some gov't entity, depending on the law used to seize the funds...paypal did not write the patriot act or the money laundering act and i'm sure they would be delighted if these stupid ass hassles didn't exist, money markets/financial institutions don't actually enjoy being asked to be front line cops when they know nothing about law enforcement

paypal's policy has always been PLAY IT SAFE

[Wednesdays]

161. "if you destroy paypal, you destroy A LOT of women working out of their homes..."

Translation: "Too big to fail."

[defendandprotect]

184. Whatever happened to writing checks ... ? I still use them --

[RogueBandit]

166. I had no idea ... Craigs List?

I had no idea that Craigs List was bought by eBay, let alone that it happened in 2004.

Craigs List seems like such a nice homey site, but obviously eBay can monitor and track the users into a larger database.


Paypal in 2002
CraigsList in 2004
Skype in 2005

eBay .. no wonder that woman could afford a private run at Governor of California.

I believed days ago that the pressure against Asagne went up when it was disclosed a big bank's documents would be the next leak. Now I really believe it because PayPal has such a significant attachment to banking, they have to protect their own.

I can quit PayPal easily, I can stop shopping at Amazon with some difficulty, but stopping the use of CraigsList will be much more difficult.

[kgnu_fan]

181. Wow, I did not know... I thought CragsList is community based network developped by friendly geeks!

Money can buy love in the USA

[Turborama]

190. Skype?

eBay owns Skype and has done since 2005? How the hell did I miss that? :wow:

[krabigirl]

182. Lol, like eBay/paypal doesn't have users engaging in illegal activities.

Sellers sell bootleg crap all the time on there.
Anyway, I hate PayPal, regardless of this. They suck. They do have the right to deny Wikileaks service, just as people have the right to boycott them for this and other decisions.

[defendandprotect]

183. Well, now we know who's working with our terrorist US ......

to try to destroy the message and the man --

Screw Pay Pal!

[DeadEyeDyck]

203. Isn't Pay-Pal owned by Ebay?

Didn't the CEO of Ebay run for governor in Ca. and loose?

[kgnu_fan]

207. Kick for the night!