cnet news

A hosting company has said it will take immediate legal action against Visa and MasterCard over the credit card companies’ refusal to process donations for whistle-blower site WikiLeaks.

DataCell, based in Iceland, facilitates donations to WikiLeaks. DataCell said it had been losing revenue since Visa and MasterCard decided to stop processing WikiLeaks’ donations.

“DataCell…has decided to take up immediate legal actions to make donations possible again,” DataCell CEO Andreas Fink said in a statement Wednesday. Fink told ZDNet UK that DataCell would pursue legal action as soon as possible: “Not being able to receive money from the public for a week can cost WikiLeaks seven-digit figures in losses, and DataCell as well, as it is unable to process any cards.”




  1. Animby says:

    #68 – “Assange isn’t under the jurisdiction of US law” I’ll bet you were one of the cheerleaders last week when Nigeria issued an arrest warrant for Dick Cheney. Cheney is not a citizen nor is he in Nigeria.

    Same thing for Assange. If the US decides to prosecute, they will issue a warrant and hope somebody can be induced to extradite him to the US. Once in our custody, they can prosecute any charge they wish. AND he gets many of the same civil rights as US citizens.

    “Gitmo detainees are held as enemy combatants specifically because they don’t have rights as citizens of the United States.” Your logic is a little twisted there. They are held as enemy combatants because they were captured fighting against the US. They do not have US citizen rights because they are not US citizens. In fact, a couple of years ago, one of them was deemed to be a US citizen (even though he only a tenuous claim) and removed from Gitmo to the US proper. So, enemy combatants, who are US citizens DO get US citizen rights.

    It’s hard to take “dumbassery” as less than a personal attack. By the way, I apologize to you for mistaking your name. hmeyers came through my sleep addled brain as if you were channeling the previous nominee to the Supreme Court. And that is why I assigned you the feminine gender – even though you write in a masculine tone. But, I have recently remembered she spelled her name differently (Miers). It was not an intentional insult and I do apologize.

  2. Dennis says:

    Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. . . . I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false.

    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson

  3. noname says:

    # 71 Dennis

    “I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors.”

    Dennis very true!! The smartest and wisest people I know don’t dare to have TV’s or bother with News Papers; they actually think for themselves!!

    Most of the brain dead idiots on this blog are like stepford wives to Fox News and just regurgitate what Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and Orielly tell them.

    Taco breath # 62 pedro is the classic idiot trying to play smart with his attempt at logic, circular logic that is.

  4. foobar says:

    Animby: extradite Assange and charge him with….what?

  5. Nugget Coombs says:

    Dennis said, on December 10th, 2010 at 7:13 pm

    Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper.

    You must be referring to Rupert Murdoch’s Toilet Papers, they’re really full of Bullshit.

  6. noname says:

    # 75 pedro

    Hey taco breath, in your decrepit and declining mind I certain you believe I am a Dumbass!

    And I am honored that you call me a Dumbass!.

    It’s like a double negative, logically meaningless!!

  7. Dennis says:

    For those wondering…that last was a quote from Thomas Jefferson. You know….a President, and an author of the little document called The Constitution. That thing that we are supposed to be governed by? The one that is supposed to limit the Governments ability to tread on the people of the country? The one that the government says the ‘terrorists’ hate us for?

  8. noname says:

    # 78 pedro,

    taco breath speaks more:

    “That’s why then the guys at openleaks are just envious morons.”

    You seem to be the envious moron, a mindless sycophant of your false conservative Gods: Fox News, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and Orielly.

    Your posts are allays entertaining; it’s like reading Dumb Dora comics, and still you are dumber.

    I congratulate you on your honest and certifiable dumbness!!!

    Carry on envious moron!!!

  9. foobar says:

    Rep. Ron “No Wonder Conservatives Hate Me” Paul
    From the floor of the Congress:

    Number 1: Do the America People deserve know the truth regarding the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?

    Number 2: Could a larger question be how can an army private access so much secret information?

    Number 3: Why is the hostility directed at Assange, the publisher, and not at our governments failure to protect classified information?

    Number 4: Are we getting our moneys worth of the 80 Billion dollars per year spent on intelligence gathering?

    Number 5: Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths: lying us into war or Wikileaks revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?

    Number 6: If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the first amendment and the independence of the internet?

    Number 7: Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on Wikileaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy of empire than it is about national security?

    Number 8: Is there not a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in a time of declared war, which is treason, and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death and corruption?

    Number 9: Was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it is wrong?

  10. noname says:

    # 81 foobar,

    “Number 5: Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths: lying us into war or Wikileaks revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?”

    The people who want Wikileaks closed or prosecuted, do not want a democracy of informed citizens, they want a dictatorship (Soviet style, I am sure).

    taco breath # 80 pedro is back to bowing at the alter of G.W. Bush

    From the lips of a fool (and his supporters # 30 Animby # 57 Animby, # 55 pedro)

    “You don’t get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier.” – Governing Magazine, July, 1998

    “If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier; just so long as I’m the dictator.” – Washington D.C. December 18, 2000

    “A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there’s no question about it.” – Business Week, July 30, 2001

  11. noname says:

    Hey Taco Breath # 83 pedro

    “What the hell does ‘leaks has to do with democracy?”

    You are really ignorant of what democracy is or for that what an American is!!!!!

    The depth of your ignorance is just outstanding.

    I get the sense you don’t care how many Americans are lead to an unnecessary death in a manufactured war!!!!

  12. foobar says:

    noname wins. Seriously, that was an ass kicking.

  13. hmeyers says:

    @Animby

    No you nailed, my name is funny misspelled allusion to Bush’s grotesque failed Supreme Court nominee. It was a disgrace to the nation.

    “They do not have US citizen rights because they are not US citizens. In fact, a couple of years ago, one of them was deemed to be a US citizen (even though he only a tenuous claim) and removed from Gitmo to the US proper. So, enemy combatants, who are US citizens DO get US citizen rights.”

    Ok, this is a good start. In understanding that non-citizens of the US do not have US rights, likewise they are not bound by US law.

  14. noname says:

    # 87 hmeyers

    I wouldn’t expect conservatives or republicans to apply a “fairness doctrine” like approach to law enforcement. For Conservatives and/or Republicans it’s about maximizing power (A very non-American ideal), not fairness, truth or justice.

    Conservative’s Constitution theory seems to be defined as narrowly as possible, ascertaining the ORIGINAL INTENT of the drafters. Conservatives believe if a right or freedom is not clearly conferred in the Constitution or by judicial precedent, it’s not the job of the Court. Conservatives place the burden on the individual to show a right or protection sought exists.

    Conversely, like-minded Liberals approach the Constitution by asking if anything in the Bill of Rights explicitly prevents the Court from finding a right or protection exists, and they look to the government to prove the right does not exist. (They error in conferring rights at the expense of others)

    Ironically, Conservatives/Liberals flip/flop when the question is use of government power, the opposing groups adopt each other’s philosophy: conservatives ask whether anything in the law prevents the exercise of the power, and liberals ask whether the power is explicitly allowed by the Constitution or some other statute.

    For conservatives, it’s about expanding power, not fairness, truth or justice.

    “In understanding that non-citizens of the US do not have US rights, likewise they are not bound by US law” would seem fair and just, (and I would strongly agree with affording non-citizens constitutional rights) however; for Conservatives: the burden is on the individual to show a right or protection sought exists.

    I would like to see our government return to it’s ideals first spoken of by John Winthrop and later by John F. Kennedy 9 January 1961

    …I have been guided by the standard John Winthrop set before his shipmates on the flagship Arbella three hundred and thirty-one years ago, as they, too, faced the task of building a new government on a perilous frontier. “We must always consider”, he said, “that we shall be as a city upon a hill the eyes of all people are upon us”. Today the eyes of all people are truly upon us and our governments, in every branch, at every level, national, state and local, must be as a city upon a hill constructed and inhabited by men aware of their great trust and their great responsibilities. For we are setting out upon a voyage in 1961 no less hazardous than that undertaken by the Arabella in 1630. We are committing ourselves to tasks of statecraft no less awesome than that of governing the Massachusetts Bay Colony, beset as it was then by terror without and disorder within. History will not judge our endeavors and a government cannot be selected merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these. For of those to whom much is given, much is required…

  15. noname says:

    Taco breath # 89 pedro,

    What got you so upset, didn’t get enough sleep?

    Always the grump at any place, sad.

    Dud you are just a sad sad grump!

  16. noname says:

    Taco breath, # 91 pedro, you are correct I am noname!

    But you can call me mustard, Colonel Mustard.

    I’ll just call you Taco breath!


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 8226 access attempts in the last 7 days.