Spam downloads surge among WikiLeaks supporters

Attacking Visa, Mastercard, the Royals and others who are not directly responsible for your anger just shows the immaturity of the protest crowd. These people should be rounded up and held with their heros or as political prisoners or saboteurs.

Mike, they are directly responsible! They are acting as willing henchmen for the U.S. government. They had no problem with Wikileaks until the U.S. government pressured them. Now those supporting Wikileaks are pushing back. As ever, you ignore the acts of the ones who started it.

Now these companies get to choose which is more important: kissing U.S. government butt, or their profits. If they had chosen freedom of information as being more important from the get go, they would not be in this mess.

Gee hottomales my guess is that Visa and Mastercard just want business to go on and don't want any US government heat. So Visa and Mastercard started this did they? Sorry not many will see it your way. You are a hot headed fool to believe this.

mikehuntez: so, what you say is that Visa and MasterCard caved in on government pressures? Are you the same mikehuntez that goes after "socialists" in other topics?

hotto, so you're telling that no company has the right to say who they do business with? Besides, at least now Wikileaks doesn't have to give visa any fees. Just send them a check or cash

mikehuntez: so, what you say is that Visa and MasterCard caved in on government pressures? Are you the same mikehuntez that goes after "socialists" in other topics?

I'm saying that these companies don't want to aid and abet a crime so if they see fit to suspend their dealings for wikileaks they are free to make that business decision on their own. I don't particularly go after socialists. I don't go after anyone. But I sure do mock what I see as absurd.

But Be’ery stressed the boasts were unconfirmed, and the Anonymous statement said its members did not want to alienate the public by causing online havoc over the holidays.

HA! Thats not what the boards say. You can't control these people, you can plant an idea and thats about it. They thrive on anything that will get them attention, good or bad. And what could be better than messing up one of the most used sites on the web near the holidays?

If they had chosen freedom of information as being more important from the get go, they would not be in this mess.

"You are free to say anything you want...so long as you don't do anything we don't like or we'll hack your website." Says the group championing free speech.

I'm saying that these companies don't want to aid and abet a crime

What wikileaks does is not illegal, so this argument is not valid. I agree that a company does have the right to choose who or what they do business with, but it's customers also have the right to be angry with that choice if they disagree with it.

They are both sites that I like and use extensively, but I hope Paypl and Amazon suffer huge losses and decide to reverse their decisions.

mikehuntez：　When the warlogs were published, Visa, MasterCards, Amazon, etc didn't find anything to say and business went as usual. If it is purely a business decision, fine for me. This is this sudden "how! they are violating our service agreement!" that does sound like baloney.

Now, the hackers and lamers behind the attacks are not going to improve the situation. It will even worsen it. They just look like frustrated chumps...

mikehuntez: "Attacking Visa, Mastercard, the Royals and others who are not directly responsible for your anger..."

Ummm... but they ARE directly responsible for the anger of those using the Spam downloads, aren't they? Read the article, and the reasons. Now compare this with the reasons why the US in particular is embarrassed and you've got a point -- they are embarrassed because THEIR OWN mistakes got out and were made public... they're just punishing someone else for it.

Way to shoot yourself in the foot, Mike.

mikehuntez: "I'm saying that these companies don't want to aid and abet a crime..."

Wikileaks committed no crime by publishing information they received, my friend. The person who SENT them the info? that's another story... but we don't hear about any investigation into that person (people), now do we? Nah... just hear about how much of a bad guy Assange is (kind of reminds me of the invasion of Iraq to take pressure of the failure to find Bin Laden, in terms of shifting the focus of media attention and what not).

skipthesong: "hotto, so you're telling that no company has the right to say who they do business with?"

Of course they have every right to choose. What posters are just pointing out is that it's funny how they chose to do nothing at first and then caved to government pressure, ie. they're not doing it because it's bad for business, they're doing it because they were more or less told to by the party embarrassed by the facts that were released.

TumbleDry: "...so, what you say is that Visa and MasterCard caved in on government pressures? Are you the same mikehuntez that goes after "socialists" in other topics?"

Some people have trouble with their extremely paradoxical arguments. If you told such a person they are supporting the Obama administration on this they're minds would probably implode.

OK. Now let's all go to WikiLeaks and read 10MOSCOW228.

Visa and MasterCard get a little business help from the US government over the Russian NPCS. Oops...

No matter how much baloney you think something is it doesn't justify you committing a crime because you think a another crime has been committed.

Wikileaks published material they knew was stolen.

Some companies wanted to distance themselves from that and suspended dealing with them.

Those companies became the victims of criminals.

Liberals who usually quote "two wrongs don't make a right." are quick to suddenly believe that two wrongs do make a right. Oh the hypocrisy. Some of them are too dumb to have their minds contemplate this and are in danger of having their heads explode with their own ego.

The fact remains that the people who were supposed to protect the critical information FAILED miserably. I am sure and really hope that the people on top realise that Assange had very little to do with that. He is just a tiny small fish. And all those silly allegations are negligible in my view. Especially when you consider the background of the two women concerned.

Credit card companies and the way they abuse information... I am wondering if we should stop using them at all. Hard cash always better?

"smith, Of course they have every right to choose. What posters are just pointing out is that it's funny how they chose to do nothing at first and then caved to government pressure, ie. they're not doing it because it's bad for business, they're doing it because they were more or less told to by the party embarrassed by the facts that were released." Is there any evidence of that? I for one, wouldn't do business with someone who is clearly out to hurt me and that's what this guy is doing, potentially at least. is there a leak on any of these credit card companies?

The fact remains that the people who were supposed to protect the critical information FAILED miserably.

That is true but if I leave my car door open it doesn't give you the right to steal it and give it to another party. And that 3rd party knowing it's stolen is obligated to contact authorities.

Credit card companies and the way they abuse information... I am wondering if we should stop using them at all.

I don't think they are abusing information. I think they need to protect it better though. Still doesn't give anyone the right to "go after" these companies because they don't think they are doing things the way they are supposed to.

mikehuntez: Wikileaks published material they knew was stolen. Some companies wanted to distance themselves from that and suspended dealing with them. Those companies became the victims of criminals.

Cut the c*** already. How many years had they business with WikiLeaks? Don't tell me they never knew what WikiLeaks was about. Especially after war logs. Whistle blowing, by definition means stealing information from somewhere. Now that is closed we can debate "what whistle blowing is".

Wait just a minute everyone. It seems to me in my humble opinion that wikileaks targeted only the United States of America's information yet they "wikileaks" claim that they want the world to be transparent and if there are no secrets, the world will be a better and safer place. By releasing only the information for the United States of America and not information from Russia, China, Iran or North Korea they are taking sides that the USA is the only bad guy in the world. What a bunch of BS. Julian Assange is obviuosly biased and not a true defender of world freedom or am I wrong here???

By releasing only the information for the United States of America and not information from Russia, China, Iran or North Korea they are taking sides that the USA is the only bad guy" No, they're just chicken.

How many years had they business with WikiLeaks?" How many years, you seem to know. And how many online entities do they do business and are they supposed to know exactly who is who? Wiki just became famous, I'm sure management had to consult with lawyers on how to do it.

seems our bickering is moot: "Julian Assange, the jailed founder of WikiLeaks, is distancing himself from the cyber-attacks on MasterCard, Visa, and other organizations deemed hostile to him and WikiLeaks"

That is true but if I leave my car door open it doesn't give you the right to steal it and give it to another party. And that 3rd party knowing it's stolen is obligated to contact authorities.

I will definitely not steal your car. But first you need to admit that the fault was yours. The way things are in the world, anyone would do anything to make money. From what is known about Assange, he had a tough childhood. Cannot blame him if he thinks that all this was due to some bad people who were unfair. So he will do anything to hurt whom he seems fit. I could be wrong.

Credit card companies and the Internet- I do not trust so much.

skipthesong: "Is there any evidence of that?"

Come on, skip. Just above me TumbleDry does a good job of pointing out that these companies knew FULL well what Wikileaks was about in particular after releasing the war logs. Remember when you were up in arms about that a while ago? Why did the companies suddenly cut funds AFTER the US started taking action THIS time, and others seeking Assange's arrest?

"I for one, wouldn't do business with someone who is clearly out to hurt me and that's what this guy is doing, potentially at least."

How can you say that's what 'this guy's' doing, then follow it with, "potentially at least", then ask if he's actually targeted them? In other words, you haven't the slightest clue if he's hurt them at all, but base your reasoning on the idea that he has. Bizarre, if not contradictory.

Hawkeye: "By releasing only the information for the United States of America and not information from Russia, China, Iran or North Korea they are taking sides that the USA is the only bad guy in the world. What a bunch of BS. Julian Assange is obviuosly biased and not a true defender of world freedom or am I wrong here???"

Perhaps he is not a 'true defender of world freedom', but that doesn't change the fact that you may have overlooked a very simple fact in the matter: the question is not, "Why has he only leaked US secrets?", but, "Why was someone in the US dumb enough to leak them TO him, and why are the other countries obviously better at not letting such info leak out?" (well, save Japan, of course). You can only make such accusations if you know for a fact Assange has been given confidential information on other countries. Do we know that he has?

skipthesong: Wiki just became famous, I'm sure management had to consult with lawyers on how to do it.

If you didn't/don't/won't have any interest in this kind of sites and just heard of it, this is fine for me. I guess they can't check everyone's account and the content...

Hawkeye: By releasing only the information for the United States of America and not information from Russia, China, Iran or North Korea they are taking sides that the USA is the only bad guy in the world.

They claim that they actually have documents on Russia but nobody seen them yet. Or maybe, as skipthesong said, "just chicken"... You'll still need to get them translated and not with Babelfish...

skipthesong: "seems our bickering is moot: "Julian Assange, the jailed founder of WikiLeaks, is distancing himself from the cyber-attacks on MasterCard, Visa, and other organizations deemed hostile to him and WikiLeaks"

Where did you get that, skip? or did you simply change the quotation to suit your purposes? It says in the article, "WikiLeaks has been careful to distance itself from Anonymous, saying “we neither condemn nor applaud these attacks.”

You get that from another article? And so what if he IS distancing himself from them? given his position that's called 'playing it smart'. Given that he's committed no crime, suddenly saying he supports the acts of these hackers would give the governments seeking his prosecution on trumped up charges more fuel for their fire.

For the how many years:

PayPol from AFP: "In 2008 and 2009, PayPol reviewed and restricted the account associated with WikiLeaks for reasons unrelated to our Acceptable Use Policy," Muller said. "As soon as proper information was received from the account holder, the restrictions were lifted.

That means at least 2years.

In US cables, you won't find only embarrassing info about the US but also information on other countries and what they are doing behind closed doors. If you only want to retain embarrassing cables and fight against ridiculous US bashing arguments, please, waste your time.

I'm saying that these companies don't want to aid and abet a crime so if they see fit to suspend their dealings for wikileaks they are free to make that business decision on their own.

BS.

“Simply put, attacking a major online retailer when people are buying presents for their loved ones would be in bad taste,” the Anonymous release said.

I bet Anonymous also listen to Lady Gaga, much like another Wikileaks delinquent Pfc Brad MANNING.

“The deplorable WikiLeaks disclosures put innocent lives at risk, and damage U.S. national security interests,” U.S. Ambassador to London Louis Susman wrote in an editorial Friday in The Guardian newspaper. “There is nothing brave about sabotaging the peaceful relations between nations on which our common security depends.”

Senate Inquiry, perhaps?! LoL

The fact remains that the people who were supposed to protect the critical information FAILED miserably.

Exactly. The refusal of most Americans to face up to the real scandal is truly amazing.

It seems to me in my humble opinion that wikileaks targeted only the United States of America's information yet they "wikileaks" claim that they want the world to be transparent and if there are no secrets, the world will be a better and safer place

They received the information. Perhaps the reason the reason they didn't release info from other countries is that other countries are not so stupid that they leak like a sieve.

hottamales: They are acting as willing henchmen for the U.S. government.

Willing henchmen for the US government...heh. Wonder why any large company wouldn't want to get within a hundred miles of this story when they know people like you exist? Right now Wikileaks is a polarizing issue that any rational business would want to stay clear of with or without US pressure. It would be like hiring Sarah Palin to be your spokesperson. You might be able to pop off support on the internet but it's a bit different when you're responsible for what could be tens of thousands of jobs. There's absolutely no upside to throwing the future of your business into that emotional tornado. None.

They had no problem with Wikileaks until the U.S. government pressured them.

They probably also felt reasonably assured that what they were doing wasn't illegal. Now, I don't think that's the case. Looks like there are legal opinions on both sides, and not only that, it looks like the US government is actually going to invest in trying to get Assange in court.

Now those supporting Wikileaks are pushing back

You have a group of computer hackers acting as judge and jury. You don't get it yet, but someday you will understand that it's a chaotic situation that can only get worse as time goes on. In the end I think you will regret supporting them. You don't understand how you can't control things like this and the last thing you want to do is make these people think that what they are doing is right. Maybe you agree with this one group, but you can't predict who the next group will be.

TumbleDry: Whistle blowing, by definition means stealing information from somewhere.

Whistleblowing, by definition, has to include some kind of wrongdoing. That's where Wikileaks stepped over the line. They're including documents that do not involve crimes at which point they go from whistleblowing to simply releasing stolen information for the sake of releasing stolen information. And I think that's where people start to get a bit nervous. People actually like to hear about large companies getting screwed when they deserve it. What they don't like is the thought that things like personal opinions in emails can be stolen then released. Wikileaks is creating so much collateral damage by releasing things that have absolutely nothing to do with their mission statement that it makes ones call into question their motivation.

GJ some people are so full of paranoia that they perceive that these leaks are all bad and have somehow caught the USA in a lie. The only thing they have exposed is how much more they have to secure their documents from criminals that would steal them.

So far I have seen no crimes that the USA is taking heat for. But I do see confidential cables being plastered over the net of behind the scenes communications. Nothing too damaging except for face saving for the USA. So you can relax. You did not catch them in any lie. It's only your own liberal paranoia about anything related to "government" and particularly the one with "US" in front of it that makes you perceive that somehow you have won some kind of battle with them. This is foolish.

You are so euphoric that you applaud the guy, and the criminals that act in his name, no matter how much he may have been involved in a crime. If the crime suits you, you seem quite willing to accept it. That exposes only the hypocrisy of the liberal thinkers who usually throw around the cliches to justify anything and everything when it suits them.

"The farmer is their friend, he told them so." is one of the most paranoid things I have seen on this forum. Go ahead keep living in your paranoid dreamland. Lets wait to see what legal action comes against Julian. If he gets off with it then so be it. But if he's convicted maybe you can come back here and justify more crimes against those "dastardly Americans" you so much hate. And if you are American well you could always renounce your citizenship and take refuge in one of your utopias that I'm sure you think exist elsewhere. Cuba is always fine this time of year.

Is this going to escalate into a type of 'fire sale'??

skipthesong - seems our bickering is moot: "Julian Assange, the jailed founder of WikiLeaks, is distancing himself from the cyber-attacks on MasterCard, Visa, and other organizations deemed hostile to him and WikiLeaks"

The "alledged" rapist Assange theatened the British and every other government who attempted to arrest him. He said they would be attacked by internet attacks and that is exactly what has happened.

The U.S. has not filed any charges against Assange and neither have the British. Assange is sitting in jail because he violated Swedish law and fled the country to avoid arrest. The WikiLeaks supports believe that Assange is above the law and should be allowed to molest anyone, anywhere and at anytime.

The geeks seem to be ramming a Prius amount of information at the enemy motherships. -And it seems the imperialist governors have little in reply.

Assange is being illegally held right now with no claims being made against him. I would expect the attacks to continue and gain in strength using the power of the Internet(s).

Badsey - Assange is being illegally held right now with no claims being made against him. I would expect the attacks to continue and gain in strength using the power of the Internet(s).

Not according to the Swedish police and legal system. Britian is cooperating with international laws. Assange will eventually be delivered to Sweden to answer for his crimes.

Someone calling themselves "Jester" has been disrupting the Wilileaks sites using the same tactics as the Wilileaks supporters. Various companies have refused to allow themselves to be used to transfer money to Wilileaks. Informational websites are under cyber attack but not their operational systems. These attacks are merely annoying. The longer the "friends of Assange" stay online, the greater the chance that they will be tracked down and arrested.

enough of this wikileaks nonsense. Who cares about the doc... what did they say? "US doesn't like Iran". big deal, we know. "Many countries don't trust Iran". big deal, we know.

This whole thing is a farce. Now just wait until your online freedom gets taken hostage by the government in response.