Silencing Wikileaks is silencing the press


83 Responses to “Silencing Wikileaks is silencing the press”

  1. ericmartinex1 says:

    Great, Julian is being represented by 13-21 year old male internet tough guys now. The world is that much of a better and transparent place.

    • ultranaut says:

      such sexism. such ageism. As a former 13-21 year old male, on the internet, who has done some tough things, I think I speak for my peers when I say you are right. The world is that much of a better place when we stop jerking off to it so furiously and starting jerking it off in fury. Or furry suits as the case seems to often be. Whole world’s gone insane man, we’re just riding it as best we can hoping that giant nuclear explosion we see on the horizon is the fucking sunrise.

    • MrsBug says:

      I like to think of them as defending the first amendment; their age doesn’t matter to me.

  2. Anonymous says:

    In an completely ironic twist, the US announced it is holding World Press Freedom Day next year.

    Reading the announcement, it’s clear the irony isn’t lost on them.

    The theme for this commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. Obviously, we decided upon this before the latest round of news.

    The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. There certainly is an irony here.

  3. ultranaut says:

    I literally LOL’d

    Finally someone dreams up a title for a military operation that actually works really well.

    Who is the target? MASTERCARD! Wait what? Payback… Mastercard…

    Seriously, “Enduring Freedom”? This thing is writing itself.

    I must admit though, nothing compared to Operation Iraqi Liberation. I really really wish someone had the balls of ironic steel in whatever meeting finally scrapped that one. OIL!

    Payback: Sometimes it’s an anonymous bitch who smacks you upside the head until you say sorry!

  4. tellabrandi says:

    I agree that Wikileaks has a right to exist and that is is flawed.

    On a separate note, however, I also agree that revenge or in this case “payback” is not an effective tool for making things better for all. Especially when the payback isn’t being directed in a constructive manner, nor being directed toward the parties directly involved.

    Maybe I’m an idealist, but I tend to think brute force isn’t the best way to get one’s way in any situation.

    • ultranaut says:

      I agree. I hate it when I’m forced to use a different credit card. It’s such a horrible inconvenience to my luxury.

    • M says:

      I view it as a brilliant piece of asymmetrical warfare.

      They can’t possibly bring down the US government, so instead they go after the collaborators. The only people who mind are the government, the collaborators, and the friends of each. A few civilians get in the way of the fire, but certainly the US has no standing to complain about that these days.

      Future collaborators, assuming they’re not as flat-out stupid as the people in the government who started the whole thing, will learn that collaboration with the enemy doesn’t pay.

      That’s the way that wars are fought. I agree that it’s unpleasant, and I’m sorry it’s happening, but the US government should have put a little more thought into it before they tried to use extra-legal methods against Wikileaks (who, as near as I can tell have done absolutely nothing that’s against the law–read up on it some more if you don’t agree). If you want to blame someone for what’s going on, blame the people who are supposed to act like adults when they’re running things.

  5. insert says:

    All’s fair in love and war?

  6. Anonymous says:

    Positive social change has never come from the ballot box. The way to fix things is with direct action, not voting.

  7. Anonymous says:

    I’ll be impressed when the DDOS PayPal…

  8. prentiz says:

    People should be very careful about joining in this attack – particularly if they’re in the US or planning to visit soon. Sticking a few people in prison for cyber-terrorism would probably go some way to making some in the US administration feel better about their powerlessness to halt the leaks.

    Also, it is pretty unpalatable to suppress the free speech of others in order to promote free speech…

    • ultranaut says:

      What is cyber-terrorism beyond the horrific debasement of language? Man up or we’ll have to clone up Sir Eric Arthur Blair himself to come up in here like a born-again Rapper.

    • wormbaby says:

      “Also, it is pretty unpalatable to suppress the free speech of others in order to promote free speech…” How is it any different than locking a kidnapper in a jail cell. Plus I for one disagree with corperate personhood. Unless we can put a corp in jail then they have special personhood that grants them special rights not available to the rest of us. I refuse to feel sorry for mastercard. If you throw the first punch in a fight how can you expect to not get hit back? They thought they were punching Ghandi turns out they hit Mike Tyson. Boo Hoo!

      • prentiz says:

        Presumably putting a kidnapper in a jail cell happens in accordance with the law of the land, after a fair trial and the possibility of appeal (at least in an ideal world). This seems rather like an e-lynch mob to me in comparison.

        • Anonymous says:

          But where oh where is the fair trial and possibility of appeal for wikileaks? :(

        • strougly says:

          Just to be clear, is the e-lynch mob Anonymous or the Government you’re talking about?

        • mdh says:

          which seems like an e-lynch mob? the thing, or the response to the thing?

        • wormbaby says:

          It is only a lynch mob if they are attacking a person. The definition under the law is ” “Any act of violence inflicted by a mob upon the body of another person” This is a website of a multinational corp. The court of “a website that shall not be named” has found guilty. Do you really think that would walk into a court to face due process? What if it was found guilty, could be thrown into a jail cell like our kidnapper example? Just say no to corp personhood.

          • Cowicide says:

            Just say no to corp personhood.

            That is when things went exceedingly downhill and we’ll probably never recover until that heinous personhood status for corporations is eradicated.

            Or… right… just go all the way then and be able to “execute” corporations just like people when they commit crimes, etc. – Jailtime and/or executions for CEOs and the board. Kill them. If we’re going to do it to American people then let’s do it to American corporations who want all the same rights (and then some).

            That said, I am against capitol punishment, think it’s devolved, cro-magnon bullshit and wish it was removed from this earth like the disease it is. BUT, once again, IF we are to have it… it needs to also be applied to corporations who claim personhood.

          • Anonymous says:

            Executing a fiction won’t help, because the people involved know it can be replaced by another fiction. Executing the people might make a difference, but I suspect would fall on scapegoats more often than not. The problem with corporations is, like terror cells, true responsibility is decentralized.

        • Anonymous says:

          Prentiz If the USG were working solely within the bounds of the law, for example, bringing charges against wikileaks rather than intimidating businesses into cutting them off, your point would be more valid. Unfortunately, the USG is attacking wikileaks thru extrajudicial means (no, they are not NECESSARILY illegal means), so the Internets are responding in kind.

          tl;dr: if the Gov. starts a fight in court, wikileaks will fight in court; if they start an extralegal campaign against them, you can’t blame the Internets for responding in kind.

          Still too long: turnabout’s fair play.

    • mdh says:

      Nobody is being silenced, corporate entities are behaving badly and are being inconvenienced. No different than filling the street in front of their loading docks with cars.

      Excellent attempt at a false equivalence though.

      • kc0bbq says:

        There is no requirement that any entity do business with Wikileaks. This is what it is, a temper tantrum by a few, a chance for lulz by a few more, and platitudes everywhere.

  9. Anonymous says:

    I fear this blockage of large commercial interests will make enemies out of apathetic bystanders. Best to fight on as few fronts as possible.

    I can hear congress critters using this as a convenient excuse to be against net-neutrality even now.

  10. Anonymous says:

    “Just as past court struggles for the legal protection of free speech in America have sometimes involved characters or groups one might find flawed at best, and abhorrent at worst, so too is this an imperfect entity deserving of the full protection of law and due process.

    Wikileaks may be flawed. But Americans cannot allow the US to criminalize Wikileaks. If we do, the rights of all citizens are jeopardized.”

    so why is wikileaks comparable to the press? it is a data dump. the press identifies misconduct and uses documents (that might be unlawfully obtained) as evidence to show that misconduct. the illegal behavior is to a greater good.

    the initial wikileaks did that too. but the current cables did not uncover anything we didn’t already know.
    so to me what they are doing is to publish information that was stolen and where they knew the proper owner of the information. similar to the iphone 4 issue earlier in the year.

    so right now this is stolen data and we have ton of this data. and obviously when you have tons of data you will find some skeletons in it … one of the reason most of us don’t like the government collecting all kinds of info about us, because even when we are law abiding citizens there will be skeletons in there, same in the cables.

    so i guess this leaves us with two questions:
    1. is stolen information protected by freedom of speech?
    2. does this only hold for government information on any type of information. because i don’t see a reason why it should only go for government info … and with that logic anyone who steals another person’s personal info or email data and publishes in a web database would be protected under freedom of speech.

    i honestly don’t think that that is the idea of the first.

  11. spocko says:

    One of the ways that the government acted against WikiLeaks was to go to the TOSs and Acceptable Use policies of the companies that were hosting or providing services to them.

    Most people never read those. I have. They contain a lot of things that can get a site shut down.

    If these Web hosts, DNS companies and payment firms are now going to start following their TOS and AUPs to the letter, I’m pretty sure that there are lots of groups and companies that should also lose Paypal, and hosting.

    So, for example the guy at who called for Assange to be killed was violating the hosting agreement Townhall made with Rackspace where they said that they would not publish information where someone threaten another with violence. That clause should be taken just as seriously as the clause about not hosting copyrighted materials.

    • ultranaut says:

      Indeed. If everyone would just follow the agreed upon rules of society everything will work itself out justly in the end.


      Personally, I am hesitant to commit all crime. Even thought crime, the only genre I actively participate in, has been a struggle for me.

      • Ito Kagehisa says:

        What rules would those be, exactly?

        I like the categorical imperative, myself, but I haven’t noticed very many other people playing by that rule.

        The rules they are teaching my children in school are all just variations on “he who holds the gun makes the rules” and “shut up and do what you are told if you want to stay out of jail”.

        • ultranaut says:

          This is why I believe I’m so MAD.

          You are right, you send your kids to school. They learn to hope they get a turn holding the almighty conch when it’s time to chase the piggy. They’ll make you wonderful grandchildren, you can be looked back as member in good standing of the greater generation. So moral. They stood up in some matters, they stood down in others. They never fucked with the conch though.

          • Ito Kagehisa says:

            Took me a few minutes to get the Lord of the Flies reference!

            My kids are learning to keep their heads down; we live in a “zero tolerance” school district.

          • ultranaut says:

            That is the most valuable lesson of education. Hide your flower away, someone will want to cut it down, pick it, sell it. God forbid they discover it’s got opium inside.

  12. Art says:

    After a couple weeks of reading the press, I now thoroughly distrust Assange as well as his motivations.

  13. Woolly Mittens says:

    The governments reacting like jackbooted thugs scare me more than the leaks.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Who cares if you shut down their front door web site. You’ll really get under their skin if you manage to shut down the networks that retailers use to register purchases. Tis the season!

  15. Sekino says:

    BTW, I do see that you state 15-20 years. But since the system is already broken, I don’t have much faith that the solution is yet more of the broken system, no matter how many years.

  16. Anonymous says:

    They are making a martir out of Asange, and they are increasing the profile of wikileaks. I hope the outcome of this is a stronger wikileaks and a renewed press that actually does it’s job.

  17. Stephen says:

    Shenanigans! There is no such thing as a “WTO Blacklist”. The US threatened trade sanctions. If Sweden felt they could win the case it would be up to Sweden to take make a case against the US in WTO court. The WTO court is not a venue that is in the pocket of the US and is not fundamentally broken like NAFTA litigation.

  18. Cowicide says:

    “Truth is treason in an empire of lies.”

  19. Blue says:

    Xeni, you had me at “Silencing Wikileaks is silencing the press”.

  20. Anonymous says:

    But turning their sights to Mastercard means is back up. Honestly if they want to make a difference in policies they need to make their attacks last longer than 1-2 days, not just skip and jump to the next site whenever the news changes. An extended attack against one site would make a bigger difference.

  21. tweaked says:

    wait – so what’s the problem exactly? is it ‘extra-legal pressure tactics’ or ‘criminalization?’ pressure tactics by governments, or pressure tactics by twittering teenager? overzealous application of espionage law or demands that webhosts voluntarily comply with gov’t demands?

    who’s in the right here? what’s the principle that accounts for ‘right’ in this context?

    my short answers: nobody and nothing. while i’m also pretty ambivalent about Wikileaks, pretty sure that they shouldn’t be shut down, and pretty sure that it’s OK for supporters to resort to the same ‘extra-legal’ tactics as those on the opposite side (so long as they remain nonviolent), I don’t think this is as straightforward a freedom-of-speech legal issue as this post makes it out to be. everyone involved in this story is vaguely reprehensible, and nobody is in the right by any set of rules. I guess in that respect this really is analogous to war.

  22. strougly says:

    The times we live in…

  23. petsounds says:

    [from the '300' script...]

    Arcadians, now!

    Go! Show the Spartans what we can do. Go!
    They shout and curse…
    … stabbing wildly, more brawlers than warriors.

    They make a wondrous mess of things.
    Brave amateurs, they do their part.

  24. M says:

    I was wondering when modern folks would come up with the equivalent of the sit-ins and civil disobedience of the 60s, and it seems they’ve finally found their wind. I congratulate them all.

    The government, however, apparently still hasn’t heard of the Streisand Effect.

  25. nomadicwarmachine says:

    Beware the language that the state force-feeds us!
    Operation Payback is CYBER-PROTEST, not CYBER-TERRORISM.
    Anonymous are the voiceless making themselves heard.
    This is a modern sit-in. Get with it.

    • Anonymous says:

      A sit-in will only work if you keep sitting until something changes, not if you keep getting distracted by the latest shiny. This is only an annoyance to Mastercard because they know you guys will have some other site to play with tomorrow.

  26. Anonymous says:

    seems to be coming back up. slowly.

  27. UncaScrooge says:

    Whenever protest stumbles within a hair’s-breadth of effecting a change, it is renamed violence.

  28. Anonymous says:

    I think it only fair that the lawmakers get leaks on Wikileaks. Then the playing field is even. One side cannot maintain more secrecy than the other, or power struggles appear. In this arrangement, only things that are “truly dangerous secrets” (like specific identities of operating CIA agents, or identities of operating Wikileaks agents, for example) remain secret, because each side is careful about revealing things; additionally, the sides must remain separated and not cooperate on larger scales (only a few whistleblowers in each organization working with people in the other organization; double agents might be called for in some situations, though); lastly, any leak of any kind must not be instantly prosecuted with the full force of the law, because many leaks really aren’t dangerous at all (and some leaks may appear initially dangerous to a few entrenched interests, but in the end improve life for everyone, along with that whole “innocent until proven guilty” thing we got), but if it’s blatantly clear dangerous leaks were made, then prosecution is certainly called for. The ultimate objective, of course, is to keep as little secret as possible, instead of as much as possible, as many government organizations do today. Essentially, I’m trying to present a way that “innocent until proven guilty” can better work both for government AND the public, instead of one over the other.

    And no, I’m not joking.

  29. Jeremiah Cornelius says:

    “Do as I Say, Not as I Do Dept.”
    After announcing sponsorship of World Press Freedom Day 2011 by the U.S. Department of State, virtually the entire Internet erupted into paroxysms of incredulous laughter. In the wake of State Dept. reaction to the Wikileaks “cablegate” revelations, this press release was compared to an article that might appear in “The Onion”.

    Investigative reporter, Okke Ornstein noticed that entire discussion threads were being deleted from the Facebook page for the organization, which touts “press freedom” and began to engage WPFD organisers in an attempted online dialogue.

    As Ornstein comments: “A press freedom club that deletes comments from its Facebook page, won’t answer a simple question and then cackles that they are “glad” to see social media being used for debate? Kafka couldn’t make this %$!? up. (WPFD is) a funding sponge run by impostors, influence peddlers and others who prefer being an “insider” over press freedom and honesty.”

  30. imag says:

    Great release from Daniel Ellsberg, signed by a pretty notable collection of folks:

    Ellsberg: “EVERY attack now made on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was made against me and the release of the Pentagon Papers at the time.”

  31. strandedlad says:

    I signed in to note that the ED Operation Payback page now redirects to the main page.

    But as long as I’m here, I would note that we, as regular people, have no recourse against corporations in America, which have all the legal status but none of the responsibility of citizens. You know, when Malcolm X spoke, his message was often simply that the current situation was untenable, and it would be resolved either through violence or through social change. He had no confidence that society would change on its own, so he encouraged people to be ready for violence. I am constantly amazed that rich people in America do not view Obama as the only thing standing between them and true class warfare.

    But you know whatever.

  32. Sekino says:

    On a separate note, however, I also agree that revenge or in this case “payback” is not an effective tool for making things better for all.

    I’m sure there is room for suggestions.

    What is an effective tool when the establishments who supposedly make the rules don’t actually play by them? That’s the whole point: People are sick and tired of having no power and no voice whenever big corps and governments decide that they don’t owe anything to anyone. If the system actually worked as advertised, there would be no need for vigilantism.

    Besides, a few websites getting knocked off the air isn’t an especially bloody revolution. Nobody’s getting guillotined in the street.

    • Ambiguity says:

      What is an effective tool when the establishments who supposedly make the rules don’t actually play by them? That’s the whole point: People are sick and tired of having no power and no voice whenever big corps and governments decide that they don’t owe anything to anyone. If the system actually worked as advertised, there would be no need for vigilantism.

      Honestly, I would say the first order of business should be: stop voting for assholes.

      It may not do anything today, but I think we need to start moving beyond the immediate gratification and taking a longer view. If people stopped voting for assholes, in 15 or 20 years the world would be a much better place.

      Instead, the try to be clever and vote for the one who is a little bit less of an asshole, but still an asshole anyway.

      • zeh says:

        Your mistake is believing that the assholes that you vote for are the ones that run the show. Those are just the minions on behalf of corporations, economic power in general, the capitalist class. They are the ones who want to continue doing business as usual, under the cover of secrecy and away from critical review and outrage. The way you vote changes very little. Change comes not from hope but from action. Resistance. Fightback.

      • Sekino says:

        Honestly, I would say the first order of business should be: stop voting for assholes.

        So people should just stop voting altogether then. I see what you’re saying, but how many generations we expect this ‘clean up’ to last? How many more years are we willing to spend putting up with corruption while we wait for the non-asshole to show up (considering that many people thought that was Obama and voted accordingly)?

        Note: I’m Canadian. This situation isn’t only an American issue, but the US are pulling the biggest strings, as usual.

        • Ambiguity says:

          I see what you’re saying, but how many generations we expect this ‘clean up’ to last? How many more years are we willing to spend putting up with corruption while we wait for the non-asshole to show up (considering that many people thought that was Obama and voted accordingly)?

          I think we’ll be waiting anyway. Until we get good people in office, we’ll have to put up with corruption (and stupidity) of all kinds. Through strength and persistence you may be able to force an action or decisions, but things will generally revert back, and lacking intelligent, creative, honest politicians politics is always a game of unintended consequences.

          In short, I think the problems are systemic, not situational. And the way to fix the system is to populate it with good people. Forcing bad people to behave well is just a temporary solution. That’s not to say that it can’t work in situations or it shouldn’t be done, but it doesn’t fix the root cause.

          I’m in the US, but I’m not affiliated with either major party. As far as I can tell the problem with the Democrats is that — despite being the “compassionate” party — they have no heart when the vote, out-thinking themselves by trying to vote for “the one who can win,” as opposed to the one they want. The Republicans have the opposite problem: despite their “theories,” they have no head when they vote. [Yes, I know this is painted with a broad brush, so it isn't hard to find exceptions.]

      • rourin_bushi says:

        Good idea, but first we need a sizable group of non-assholes to run for offices, and have a usefully accurate filter for determining which is which. Candidates, as a rule, lie. The only way I have currently to avoid voting for *known* assholes is pretty much to vote against every incumbent.

        • petsounds says:

          This is exactly what Assange was writing about in his ‘conspiracy’ papers though. When a group attains power, they begin to create a conspiracy of secrets to keep their power. Putting a couple of ‘non-assholes’ as you put it in power won’t necessarily negate the conspiracy of power. People thought they enacting real change when they put Obama in power; but that isn’t working out as well as they thought. I believe the US Presidency has in effect had a long-standing DDoS waged against it by this conspiracy of power. Even a man or woman with integrity can’t stand against it for long. This DDoS is a multiple warhead package, effecting both political gridlock and even moral and ethical relativism. But let’s be real here: the conspiracy of power begins long before a candidate reaches their appointed office. Most are already beholden to (and essentially a part of) this conspiracy before they ever reach office.

          Assange’s solution in his papers is to create enough communication breaks in the conspiracy’s ‘network’ that it can’t successfully route around it. The conspiracy is more like a split of factional terrorist groups placed intranationally and internationally, rather than a wide-reaching, single organization. With the rise of Wikileaks, the exposure of secrets creates rifts between these factions, and thus breaks down links in the conspiracy nodes. But the exposure of secrets also has the potential to nullify the conspiracy itself. If there are no secrets, there can be no conspiracy, and therefore no power. From the visibly panicked response of people involved in this conspiracy of power, we can see that it is having some effect.

        • Ambiguity says:

          Good idea, but first we need a sizable group of non-assholes to run for offices…

          We may be screwed for a while. As far as I can tell, politics doesn’t usually attract creative, intelligent, far-thinking people.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Part of me wonders if Roman Polanski ran a Wikileaks-like site instead of making films, would the US government have gotten him back by now.

  34. sarahmayscott says:

    “The US hasn’t pressed charges against Assange or Wikileaks, but all the noose-tightening is concurrent with increasingly blunt statements characterizing Wikileaks as a criminal or terrorist organization.

    And that should concern every American.

    Whatever you think of Wikileaks, the crescendo of extra-legal pressure tactics threaten all our freedom.”

    that says it all Xeni, thank you. whatever shakes out in all of this, it’s important to remember they haven’t been charged with anything. it’s the de facto attempts at censorship that is truly alarming, a lot more than the knowledge that a certain dictator is addicted to botox. a lot of empty threats being bandied about that seem to be going a long way towards criminalizing an organization that has not been yet tested by the courts for their actions.

  35. Anonymous says:

    I suppose it is just another manifestation of the times we live in that a person like assange would be seen by so many as a hero. Chaos and confusion reign and people like assange just add to it with a self righteous glee that will only be understood for the disaster that it really is by helpless hindsight. The hero worship will disappear rapidly but then it will be too late. This immature person greasing the palms of the immature and being lionized for it by the immature would be comical if not so fraught with the bad consequences that are on the way……………..

  36. Blue says:

    Actually, I’d like to add to my previous post by adding this:

    Wikileaks IS the free press.

    The US government, Paypal, Matercard, Visa, PostFinance, the Swedish government, Amazon and EveryDNS are all currently engaged in a campaign of ATTACKING the freedom of the press.

    That is all.

  37. CastanhasDoPara says:

    Well, it seems now that Mastercard is back up, the twiter link of previous is now suspended, and the links that were in that link were also borked. Also the operationpayback tumblr somebody above mentioned is also borked. Net-protest indeed. Any other bright ideas?

  38. quietrevolution says:

    It is too bad the U.S. media is only too willing to censor themselves:

  39. Jack Squat says:

    this is the new war and the tactics being used are being used for our collective freedom. I have no problem with the hacking as matter of fact I admire it, I am proud that some brave people are intervening. If you have little to lose or nothing stop paying your credit cards. If we are to compete with the likes of lieberman and his butt licking pals these are the tactics that hit them where it counts. Please consider killing your paypal account. Please consider killing your amazon account. The more we can disrupt anything that is them the better off we will be.
    Make no mistake our enemy is capable horrendous acts of torture and I am quite sure that would like to use these torture tactics on us.
    So if you are having a soft heart about operation payback you might want to remember that our enemy would very much like to torture and kill any who would stand in their way. They have done it in the past and I am sure they would like to keep the status quo,
    wake up people we are in the new war.

  40. travtastic says:

    Let’s all calm down now.

    Be polite.

    Speak quietly.

    If you’re nice enough, the bad people might listen to you.

  41. Anonymous says:

    At the moment most of the wikileak mirrors are a day or two behind, and many of them don’t respond.

  42. nixiebunny says:

    Damn! This is some serious stuff going on.

    I wonder if the US government has thought about the implications of their actions. No, that’s crazy talk.

  43. Birdseed says:

    “Operation payback” has also taken down the sites of the Swedish prosecution service and the lawyers representing the alleged victims of Assange’s raping.

    Real classy, “defenders of civil rights”, obviously not including the right to having your case tried in the court of law.

    • Ito Kagehisa says:

      Real classy, “defenders of civil rights”, obviously not including the right to having your case tried in the court of law.

      Are you saying that in Sweden you can’t be tried in court unless the websites of the Swedish prosecution service and the lawyers representing the alleged victims are functional?

      It seems unlikely.

    • mdh says:

      I have no part in these actions, but I support them on this basis: Justice for all or justice for none.

      A system that protects only the accusers and not the accused… is barbaric.

  44. Anonymous says:

    So the US is playing dirty pool with perceived enemies of the state. What’s new? Should we be ashamed? Yes. Should we be surprised? Sadly, no.

  45. Anonymous says: and aren’t responding to ping requests. Visa still does, though.
    I wonder why?

  46. WizarDru says:

    So is BoingBoing advocating reckless Internet Vigilanteism? ‘Cuz I think you could probably choose a better screenshot to make your point.

    • Xeni Jardin says:

      So is BoingBoing advocating reckless Internet Vigilanteism? ‘Cuz I think you could probably choose a better screenshot to make your point

      1) No.
      2) Duhh.

      Maybe I’ll grab a different pic, but that certainly wasn’t my intent. I posted it for informational purposes.

      • musicman says:

        Lame that you changed the pic, Xeni. On the basis of one comment? I’m surprised at the comments here, tbh. It offends me that it’s put down to 12 year old males, displaying both the self-perceived maturity of the commenter’s (biased) position and their lack of respect for ppl that will defend their rights.

        It offends me that ppl have so little analysis about the situation at large. I am all for the retaliatory actions against the various companies involved.

        I agree that these attacks wont do much to advance liberty. In reality, these attacks wont last – all of those companies will be back up and running online within days. I don’t believe the credit card companies would have much to worry about apart from their web presence anyway – their daily credit functionality would be using a different system not available on via http (one would hope).

        But in the long term, on an iterated prisoner’s dilemma, the best strategy is tit for tat. These corporations have just learnt that they aren’t untouchable, just as the governments and diplomats have learned. It was just last week that there was talk of another wikileaks expose, this time on a major bank coming sometime soon.

        I would like to hear your reasons for the sentence: “I believe Wikileaks as an organization to be flawed and Assange to be a problematic figure, to put it charitably. ”

        While I don’t disagree, I also think that these accusations could be levelled at almost anyone and any organisation at some level. While it’s fun to poke at Mastercard/Visa/Paypal for denying wikileaks, yet accepting KKK monies, _who_ is going to be the person to stand up and say that those organisations should also deny the NYT, The Guardian, etc?

    • user23 says:

      the internet ain’t the garden of eden, and this ain’t the summer of love.

      this is an extremely important issue which is now in the happening.

      there are millions of people around the globe who are following this every day and participating in it one way or another. However, it concerns all peoples everywhere.

      there are over 9000 people actively fighting against what is symptomatic of an ages old battle of oppression – master vs. slave. Real people suffer & die daily because the Owners of Everything really could care less about the little people they so gladly trample upon.

      if these people (digitally protesting) were in the streets, the Owners & Powers Which Be would be sh**ing blood. They aren’t marching, instead hey have taken to the nets, to one place where a person can still protest and not be shot, clubbed, pepper sprayed or exposed to ultra-sonic weapons & tasers.

      I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it now. It’s WW2.5. The quiet digital war of the Citizens vs. Capitalists.

      So, in short WizarDru, we all desperately need to be exposed to non-corporate mediated media wherever we can get it. I, for one, love BB for that very reason. …and…reporting is -not- the same as advocation…unless it’s Fox News or Rupert Murdoch.

  47. Anonymous says:

    If Mastercard can continue to process payments, I see little use of this attack. How many people go to on a daily basis?

    If you’re going to DDoS, hit them where it will hurt – credit card processing. Cost them financially – if Mastercard went a day (or better yet, a week) without being able to process payments, I think that would open some eyes.

Leave a Reply