Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Almighty Buck Australia The Media The Military United Kingdom United States News Your Rights Online

Wikileaks Donations Account Shut Down 725

Posted by timothy
from the sucker-punch dept.
Scrameustache writes "The whistleblowing group WikiLeaks claims that it has had its funding blocked and that it is the victim of financial warfare by the US government. Moneybookers, a British-registered internet payment company that collects WikiLeaks donations, emailed the organisation to say it had closed down its account because it had been put on an official US watchlist and on an Australian government blacklist. The apparent blacklisting came a few days after the Pentagon publicly expressed its anger at WikiLeaks and its founder, Australian citizen Julian Assange, for obtaining thousands of classified military documents about the war in Afghanistan."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wikileaks Donations Account Shut Down

Comments Filter:
  • Uh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by copponex (13876) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @06:53PM (#33901900) Homepage

    At this point, is US government hatred of freedom and democracy even news?

    • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by vvaduva (859950) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:02PM (#33902020)

      Making enemies faster than they can kill them...

    • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by silanea (1241518) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:02PM (#33902022)
      It is, when it involves them meddling in foreigners' affairs. What the USA do within their borders is largely between the government and the electorate. But this stinks a mile high.
    • Re:Uh (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Sponge Bath (413667) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:03PM (#33902032)
      That's a little over the top. There are people in high places who are doing what they think necessary to accomplish their mission. They may be wrong. Their actions may not be lawful. But I don't see the entirety of the US government sitting around thinking of how much they hate freedom and democracy and conspiring ways to end it. If you want to correct a problem it helps to have a reasoned view of what motivates the participants.
      • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by GrumblyStuff (870046) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:22PM (#33902262)

        I'm guessing you haven't been to the airport since late 2001 or so.

      • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by copponex (13876) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:43PM (#33902476) Homepage

        But I don't see the entirety of the US government sitting around thinking of how much they hate freedom and democracy and conspiring ways to end it.

        "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." -Henry Kissinger

        CIA intervention for regime change:

        1953 Iran
        1954 Guatemala
        1959 Cuba
        1960 Democratic Republic of the Congo
        1963 Iraq
        1964 Brazil
        1966 Republic of Ghana
        1968 Iraq
        1973 Afghanistan
        1973 Iraq
        1976 Argentina
        1978 Afghanistan
        1980 Iran
        1980 El Salvador
        1980 Cambodia
        1980 Angola
        1981 Nicaragua
        1986 Phillippines
        1992 Iraq
        1993 Guatemala

        That list will grow larger as more documents are declassified.

        • by dbIII (701233) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @08:39PM (#33903092)
          Remember guys that the government that was installed in Chile with a lot of US help was the same one that later set off a car bomb in Washington D.C. to get rid of an exiled political opponent.
      • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:45PM (#33902502)

        Let's be clear about this. America in all it's forms is an empire. They can dress it up and use the word 'democracy' all they want but in the end their plutocratic and hegemonic tendencies always shine through. America's ultimate goal is to control the world for the benefit of it's rich elite. Any evidence that shows this to the American people frightens the elite and all efforts - legal or illegal - will be used to stop it.

        I realise this statement may be overused and has become abstract but; America is one step away from becoming a fascist state.

      • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by geoskd (321194) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:51PM (#33902584)

        That's a little over the top. There are people in high places who are doing what they think necessary to accomplish their mission. They may be wrong. Their actions may not be lawful. But I don't see the entirety of the US government sitting around thinking of how much they hate freedom and democracy and conspiring ways to end it. If you want to correct a problem it helps to have a reasoned view of what motivates the participants.

        The greatest danger to democracy and freedom is not the machinations of evil masterminds, but the meddling of well meaning idiots.

        -=Geoskd

        • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

          by icebraining (1313345) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @08:15PM (#33902870) Homepage

          "Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
          of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
          under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
          The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may
          at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good
          will torment us without end for they do so with the approval
          of their own conscience."

          - C.S. Lewis

      • Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by wierd_w (1375923) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @08:41PM (#33903108)

        Let's think about this..

        US government officals are angry that Wikileaks is revealing their secret abuses of power.

        So, they respond by publicly abusing thier power, where everyone can see, Because "Darn it, We just CANT let people know what we are REALLY doing here!"

        I am at a complete loss for words.

        The absurdity of the whole thing is staggering.

  • by h00manist (800926) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @06:56PM (#33901926) Journal
    Wikileaks is a great project, but its not too clear how people can help them.
    • by BadAnalogyGuy (945258) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Thursday October 14, 2010 @06:59PM (#33901974)

      The best way is to set up a nonpartisan, unbiased website that releases such documents without the ridiculous commentary and shifty editing.

      Assange has done a severe disservice to WL with his emphasis on injecting over the top editorial into the stories on the site.

      • by GrumblyStuff (870046) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:34PM (#33902388)

        It still would be shut down. That and they would flat out lie if such documents revealed trumped up evidence (WMDs?), coverups (Pat Tillman, Jessica Lynch), outright lawbreaking (Ilario Pantano shooting two detained Iraqis, Abu Ghraib torture), and suspicious circumstances (billions of dollars in cash sent to Iraq and can't be accounted for).

      • by Ihmhi (1206036) <i_have_mental_health_issues@yahoo.com> on Thursday October 14, 2010 @08:29PM (#33903002)

        To be fair to Wikileaks, they actually let you see all of the source documents if you don't like their shitty editing.

        There's nothing preventing people from going all "answers.com" and using Wikileaks' material as sources for their reports.

        If they didn't summarize things at all and were just a clearinghouse of information, would as many people read it? Would you read Slashdot if there was no summary, just a title and a link? (You may now proceed to make fun of Slashdot's editorial quality.)

    • by Presto Vivace (882157) <marshall@prestovivace.biz> on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:00PM (#33901986) Homepage Journal
      The US military whistle blowers would have been MUCH better off going to the Project on Government Oversight [pogo.org], an organization which has a history of helping whistle blowers get out their stories and keep them out of jail. Other than continuing to link to Wikileaks and give them publicity, I have no clue as to how to help them.
      • by Amouth (879122) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:37PM (#33902410)

        a problem with pogo.org is they are in inside the US.. so they are subject to National Security letters and gag orders.. if they had gone there - none of this stuff would have made the light of day except as a rumor before it was shut down.

        • by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @11:42PM (#33904384)

          right. for information to be safe and free, it has to be outside (jurisdictionally) of US borders.

          my god. who would have thought we would be saying or thinking this. 10, 20, 30 years ago I never would have imagined.

          from this generation onward, kids will grow up totally assuming they are being tapped, bugged and wire-sniffed. we really didn't have that feeling decades ago (I'm old enough to know). there was phone tapping and bugging, but not blatantly and not widespread. now its totally in-your-face. gag orders: how much more in-your-face can you be? the very concept of a 'you cant even talk to your lawyer' is so unamerican it just would not be believed 20 yrs ago. no one would take you seriously; they'd say that the 50's and mccarthyism is long behind us.

          sigh.

  • Messengers (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cosm (1072588) <thecosm3@nospaM.gmail.com> on Thursday October 14, 2010 @06:57PM (#33901942)
    They continue to shoot the messenger. It wouldn't surprise me if the intelligence community turned that phrase literal.
    • Re:Messengers (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Scrameustache (459504) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:48PM (#33902554) Homepage Journal

      They continue to shoot the messenger. It wouldn't surprise me if the intelligence community turned that phrase literal.

      I would be surprised: The US has long become more sophisticated than that. They understand that if you create a martyr, you could still be hearing about it two thousand years later. It's better to discredit them, make people think they're a narcissist, that they're reckless, that they're a rapist. Cut their funding, turn their friends against them, that's the kind of things I expect from the US; Straight up assassination I expect from Russians, their idea of subtlety is "exotic poisons".

      • by voss (52565) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @09:33PM (#33903540)

        The simplest explanation usually the correct one....

        The problem with your assumptions is that you assume the US government is WAY more capable and competent than it actually is.

        What is closer to the truth Assange is a reckless narcisstic jackass who got put on watchlists for leaking US intelligence, along the way
          he probably pissed off some women with his narcisstic jackass ways which caused them to accuse him of various misdeeds. Moneybookers cut him off because Moneybookers is a company based in Bahrain about to do an IPO and does not need the drama that his pitifully small accounts brings with them. Moneybookers wants to do things that are far less likely to bring them trouble like online gambling, international money transfers,etc,etc

        http://www.ecommerce-journal.com/node/30006 [ecommerce-journal.com]

  • by Haedrian (1676506) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @06:58PM (#33901956)
    Why doesn't this guy just yell "Banzai", leak out the rest of the documents, and survive for 5 minutes while hundreds of copies are made on the internet?

    At this point its just pointless bickering, if this guy releases the rest of what he's got, the US will have no real interest in him anymore I would think - because even if he 'mysteriously dies when his server mysteriously explodes', the copies of the document would have still been spread around like wildfire.
    • by yincrash (854885) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:02PM (#33902018)
      because it could put lives in danger? that would only serve to fuel the opponents who give that as the reasoning that they should be shut down (which may or may not be their real motive)
  • by schnikies79 (788746) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:02PM (#33902014)

    I can get behind Wikileaks, but not Assange. He is egotistical tool.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:05PM (#33902052)

    The US government is keeping so many facts and events classified, it simply can not function as a democratic government anymore.
    When people don't have access to important information, they can't vote correctly. And when they can't vote correctly, the government can't make the right decisions. I understand sometimes secrecy is necessary for safety, but too much simply kills a democracy. Wikileaks is the expression of that idea, as they fight the excessive secrecy of governments and try to provide citizens with information that citizens should have.

  • The sweet irony (Score:5, Interesting)

    by siddesu (698447) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:05PM (#33902056)

    It is funny (and, in a way sad) that the same country that sponsored all those radio stations I used to listen to as a young girl for (freedom-)free information during the Cold war years from behind the Iron curtain is now trying to stomp out a website that does exactly the same.

    Ah, dreams of my youth, when did you wither away?

    • Re:The sweet irony (Score:4, Informative)

      by lennier (44736) on Thursday October 14, 2010 @08:39PM (#33903100) Homepage

      Ah, dreams of my youth, when did you wither away?

      For me, about the same time I found out that Margaret Thatcher didn't want the Berlin Wall to come down [timesonline.co.uk].

      "Even 20 years later, her remarks are likely to cause uproar. They are all the more explosive as she admitted that what she said was quite different from the West’s public pronouncements and official Nato communiqués. She told Mr Gorbachev that he should pay no attention to these.

      “We do not want a united Germany,” she said. “This would lead to a change to postwar borders, and we cannot allow that because such a development would undermine the stability of the whole international situation and could endanger our security.” "

      Mrs Thatcher - TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 14, 2010 @07:12PM (#33902130)

    I have noticed that the US government is really taking the wrong approach to this, personally, whenever I hear about wikileaks in the news I always go and browse there for a while (and if I had the cash I'm donate), but otherwise I honestly don't even remember its there.

%DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears

Working...