Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Dec 2010 12:16 UTC
Internet & Networking It looks like several companies are learning what happens when you mess with the internet - and they're learning it the hard way. Several major companies have been hit by the collective powers of Anonymous after 4chan launched several distributed denial-of-service attacks. What many have been predicting for a long time now has finally happened: an actual war between the powers that be on one side, and the internet on the other. Update: PayPal has admitted their WikiLeaks snub came after pressure from the US government, and Datacell, which takes care of payments to Wikileaks, is threatening to sue MasterCard over Wikileaks' account suspension. Update II: Visa.com is down due to the attack. Update III: PayPal has caved under the pressure, and will release the funds in the WikiLeaks account.
Thread beginning with comment 452717
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Completely disagree
by runjorel on Wed 8th Dec 2010 16:47 UTC in reply to "Completely disagree"
runjorel
Member since:
2009-02-09

I'll say it again

While I understand and appreciate Wikileaks trying to make the U.S. more transparent and therefore more accountable...
To be clear: I DO NOT AGREE WITH GOVERNMENT SECRETS. I agree with the opinion that many others shared that there should be political transparency. I just don't agree with how the information was obtained. It's illegal and whether you like it or not, private, material.

I wish the actions of the U.S. gov't were revealed in some other legal manor. I know it sounds stupid, silly, and idealistic but that's how I feel. For example, if the U.N. actually worked, I wish it would be the U.N. legally trying to uphold transparency, etc. I fear Wikileaks vigilantism. It always starts off innocently but then can grow into a bad thing. I hope not.

Thom, I understand that Gov't != Individual. I am not trying to argue that. What I am trying to say is, What did you expect the U.S. to do to Wikileaks when all this info was released? They're not going to just sit there, they are going to attack Wikileaks. Wikileaks 'attacked' first. Whether you think the U.S. is a victim or a bully, it doesn't matter. The U.S. is going to attack back...just as ANY ONE PERSON would act if their info was 'leaked' out. I believe other countries would react the same way. Main Point: I don't understand why people are so shocked at the U.S.'s approach to the release of all this information.

Secondly, I must apologize. Please excuse me, but with my short time on Wikileaks, I did not see any other information about any other country. I have not been able to access Wikileaks since the beginning of this media blitz. So I was basing my opinion of Wikileaks with what I saw there months ago. I cannot say that I browsed the entire site and consumed all of the information. I've only seen things there relating to the U.S. . If it's true that Wikileaks is after the entire international community, then please excuse my comment on this.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Completely disagree
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 8th Dec 2010 16:53 in reply to "RE: Completely disagree"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Wikileaks 'attacked' first.


This is nonsense. WikiLeaks didn't do anything illegal. The person sharing the information did. He's in custody.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Completely disagree
by runjorel on Wed 8th Dec 2010 17:07 in reply to "RE[2]: Completely disagree"
runjorel Member since:
2009-02-09

So, if someone stole some software for example, and then gave it to me. It's legal for me then to host that software for all the world to use/download, etc?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Completely disagree
by Bounty on Wed 8th Dec 2010 18:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Completely disagree"
Bounty Member since:
2006-09-18

" Wikileaks 'attacked' first.


This is nonsense. WikiLeaks didn't do anything illegal. The person sharing the information did. He's in custody.
"

Well I see Wikileaks as a pimp. Pimping is illegal in most countries.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Completely disagree
by boldingd on Thu 9th Dec 2010 00:13 in reply to "RE[2]: Completely disagree"
boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

" Wikileaks 'attacked' first.


This is nonsense. WikiLeaks didn't do anything illegal. The person sharing the information did. He's in custody.
"

This is in fact not true. Under U.S. law, knowingly receiving classified documents for which you are not cleared, possessing classified documents for which you are not cleared, and distributing classified documents for which you are not cleared to parties that are not cleared are all crimes. Any one of which can get you prosecuted for treason. Whether you believe it's moral or not - which is debatable, certainly - handling classified material for which you are not cleared is unambiguously a serious federal crime, with grave consequences.

Now, Assange isn't a U.S. citizen, and I really don't know how these laws would affect him (international legal relations are extremely complex). However, a strong legal case can be made that any U.S. entity that operates in support of Assange (i.e. provides hosting or funding) is acting in support of treason, and thus would potentially be liable.

Now, the ethics of this particular situation are up for discussion -- and highly subjective. But certain aspects of the legal situation are crystal clear.

Reply Parent Score: 2