Post #336,871
12/7/10 1:50:47 PM
|
visa and mastercard refuse to allow wikileak donations
http://www.rawstory....ing-site-illegal/
Thanks to the credit card carriers' decisions, traditional postal mail now stands as WikiLeaks' only remaining financial lifeline.
A request for comment lodged with MasterCard's corporate public relations office, seeking elaboration on what it considers "illegal" about WikiLeaks' actions, went unanswered.
Both credit card providers will still allow electronic donations to controversial and hate-based groups like the Ku Klux Klan, according to The Guardian. because the site did nothing illegal, thats why there is no comment
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
|
Post #336,899
12/7/10 11:03:01 PM
|
What would John Galt do? ~~ #1 US Corporatocracy decider?
I could almost see voting for Palin in 2012 on the grounds that this sorry ratfucking excuse for a republic, this savage, smirking, predatory empire deserves her. Bring on the Rapture, motherfuckers!
-- via RC
|
Post #336,963
12/8/10 9:09:05 PM
|
cause his next leak was targeting banks
and THAT might have focused some eyes on what Visa and Mastercard do behind the curtain. Not that I'm alleging anything, but this sure seems like a preemptive strike.
"Chicago to my mind was the only place to be. ... I above all liked the city because it was filled with people all a-bustle, and the clatter of hooves and carriages, and with delivery wagons and drays and peddlers and the boom and clank of freight trains. And when those black clouds came sailing in from the west, pouring thunderstorms upon us so that you couldn't hear the cries or curses of humankind, I liked that best of all. Chicago could stand up to the worst God had to offer. I understood why it was built--a place for trade, of course, with railroads and ships and so on, but mostly to give all of us a magnitude of defiance that is not provided by one house on the plains. And the plains is where those storms come from."
-- E.L. Doctorow
|
Post #336,968
12/8/10 9:53:03 PM
|
As I said elsewhere.
WikiLeaks announced the subject of the next release way too far in advance of the actual release. It should have been mere days, not weeks.
Of course, perhaps it was deliberate to see who would get the jitters.
Note that Visa was invented by Bank of America. I wonder if that has anything to do with it...
Wade.
Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers?
A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
|
Post #336,986
12/9/10 7:40:31 AM
|
I'm sure it does have everything to do with it.
As soon as the announcement was a Major Bank... all heck broke loose on WikiLeaks.
And the focus was shifted to the US Cables.
|
Post #336,987
12/9/10 7:51:08 AM
|
Dunno. Assange said he had bank stuff last year.
It was alluded to earlier, but here's the link (from October 9, 2009). I guess nobody reads Computerworld. ;-)
http://www.computerw...b_a_leakier_place
[...]
"It's counterintuitive," he said. "You'd think the bigger and more important the document is, the more likely it will be reported on but that's absolutely not true. It's about supply and demand. Zero supply equals high demand, it has value. As soon as we release the material, the supply goes to infinity, so the perceived value goes to zero."
The final act will be for Wikileaks to publish the material on its Web site after the story has been written and the embargo period lapsed.
"We want to get as much substantive information as possible into the historical record, keep it accessible and provide incentives for people to turn it into something that will achieve political reform," said Assange.
Wikileaks is also working on ways to make browsing throu[g]h the material it receives easier for users.
Wikileaks often runs into problems concerning how to present material and how to make it easier to sift through for vital information, said Assange.
"At the moment, for example, we are sitting on 5GB from Bank of America, one of the executive's hard drives," he said. "Now how do we present that? It's a difficult problem. We could just dump it all into one giant Zip file, but we know for a fact that has limited impact. To have impact, it needs to be easy for people to dive in and search it and get something out of it."
In three years on the Web, Wikileaks published over 1.2 million sensitive documents.
The way things have turned out with the State cables, it sort-of proves the first paragraph, doesn't it? I think the story turned with the sex allegations, not the bank stuff.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #336,988
12/9/10 8:50:22 AM
|
In 2009 did bank any execs even know what a "Wikileak" was?
Last year Wikileaks stories were in Computerworld. This year they're in the Wall Street Journal. Not surprising they noticed it this time.
--
Drew
|
Post #336,989
12/9/10 9:31:33 AM
|
Yeah, Assange and wikileaks are actually being really smart
The simple truth is that it's become very apparent to any and everyone who's paying attention just who the people within our governments really work for... and that this is the case all across the western nations. 100%.
|
