Whose Pal Are You Anyway? Company Cuts Off Financial Support for Wikileaks Through PayPal

The pressure continues to find ways to cut off support and access to WikiLeaks material. PalPal was the latest company to move against Wikileaks by cutting off the ability of people to make donations to support the whistleblower disclosures. The company waited until Friday (when coverage would be reduced) to make the move.

PayPal insists that WikiLeaks violated its acceptable use policy, “which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity.” What I fail to understand is how PayPal can be used to support other journalistic and whistleblower organizations under this standard. The New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today and other media groups routinely publish classified material. Various whistleblower organizations use such material to disclose great government abuses. Under this standard, PayPal will assist the government in shutting off support for anyone using classified or leaked material to disclose wrongdoing.

How about books containing such information? Would that also go to pay for stolen or illegally obtained information? How about the collection of Pentagon Papers?

This comes after the acknowledgment of people like Joe Lieberman that they have been pressuring companies to block access of the public to the material.


43 thoughts on “Whose Pal Are You Anyway? Company Cuts Off Financial Support for Wikileaks Through PayPal”

  1. Hi my family member! I want to say that this post is awesome, great written and include approximately all vital infos. I’d like to see extra posts like this .

  2. Wiki Hornet’s Nest

    Posted on Dec 14, 2010
    By Eugene Robinson


    “… the wildly popular social networking sites Facebook and Twitter took down the pages that Anonymous members had been using to coordinate their electronic warfare. This brings me, finally, to those unsettling questions about censorship and free speech.

    When Iranian protesters were challenging the thuggish regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the mullahs last year, censors managed to shut down television coverage. But the world learned what was happening via Facebook and Twitter. Likewise, those Internet sites—Facebook has more than 500 million users worldwide, and Twitter an estimated 200 million—are important conduits for pro-democracy advocates in places such as China and Cuba.

    So who gives executives of private companies the right to decide that some unapproved speech will be encouraged and some will be suppressed? Do we want the people who run Amazon, PayPal, Facebook, Twitter or perhaps even—shudder—Microsoft, Apple or Google making political decisions on our behalf?

    For my part, I don’t think I do. It seems to me that especially as Internet firms reach near-monopoly status, we should be increasingly uncomfortable with them making political decisions of any kind—even those with which we might agree.

    I don’t particularly enjoy defending Assange, WikiLeaks or a bunch of irresponsible hackers. But I don’t want the companies that regulate interaction and commerce on the Internet deciding whose views are acceptable and whose are not.

    he “terms of service” agreement that should take precedence is the First Amendment.” end excerpt

    Leave a Reply Cancel reply
    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Name *

    Email *



    You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

     Notify me of follow-up comments via email.
     Notify me of new posts via email.
    « Nullification – Better Than SecessionWas VT Slow To Respond To Campus Threat That Left 32 Dead? »
    Vote HERE for our blog as the top opinion (IMHO) blog among the ABA 100!
    Turley Tweets
    Click here to follow the blog on Twitter.
    Categories Select Category Academics  (584) Animals  (74) Bizarre  (4335) Columns  (91) Congress  (757) Constitutional Law  (1370) Courts  (656) Criminal law  (3002) Environment  (474) International  (1083) Justice  (827) Lawyering  (909) Media  (580) Military  (278) Politics  (2664) Religion  (991) Science  (95) Society  (4864) Supreme Court  (263) Testimony  (31) Things That Tick Me Off  (16) Torts  (1013) Uncategorized  (326) USA Today  (68) 
    Top Posts
    Mandatory Health Care Provision Struck Down As Unconstitutional
    Columbia Professor and Huff Post Blogger Accused of Incest
    When You're a Jet, You're A Jet All The Way . . .: Can Jets Assistant Coach Alosi Be Sued For Battery?
    UC Berkeley Police Officers Allegedly Arrest Journalist for Taking Their Picture
    Video: Collapse of the Vikings Stadium -- Followed Shortly Thereafter By The Chicago Bears
    2010 To Be Hottest Year On Record
    Shelton: Clinton Cabinet Member Wanted To Sacrifice American Pilot To Start War With Iraq
    Ron Paul Speaks about Wikileaks on the Floor of the House
    Pachyderms and Packy Don'ts: Man Caught At Dulles International Airport With Elephant Tails and a Case of Horrors
    Police Officer Allowed to Remain on Force after Arresting Man and Stealing Images of His Girlfriend From His Cellphone 
    Recent Posts
    With This I Do Sue: Attorney Sues Man Who Jilted Her Days Before Wedding 
    Who Killed Frosty? 
    2010 To Be Hottest Year On Record 
    Eye for An Eye: Iranian Supreme Court Upholds Sentence To Pour Acid In Eyes of Defendant 
    Shelton: Clinton Cabinet Member Wanted To Sacrifice American Pilot To Start War With Iraq 
    Recent Comments anon nurse on Ron Paul Speaks about Wikileak… 
     puzzling on Ron Paul Speaks about Wikileak… 
     Tony C. on Ron Paul Speaks about Wikileak… 
     Former Federal LEO on Who Killed Frosty? 
     Bud on Who Killed Frosty? 
     HenMan on Shelton: Clinton Cabinet Membe… 
     rafflaw on Who Killed Frosty? 
     eniobob on With This I Do Sue: Attorney S… 
     kay sieverding on With This I Do Sue: Attorney S… 
     anon nurse on Who Killed Frosty? 
     anon nurse on Shelton: Clinton Cabinet Membe… 
     Buddha Is Laughing on Who Killed Frosty? 
     Bud on Who Killed Frosty? 
     anon nurse on Who Killed Frosty? 
     Bud on Who Killed Frosty? 
    December 2010 (83) 
    November 2010 (168) 
    October 2010 (122) 
    September 2010 (116) 
    August 2010 (149) 
    July 2010 (146) 
    June 2010 (165) 
    May 2010 (175) 
    April 2010 (187) 
    March 2010 (189) 
    February 2010 (178) 
    January 2010 (186) 
    December 2009 (197) 
    November 2009 (197) 
    October 2009 (205) 
    September 2009 (186) 
    August 2009 (176) 
    July 2009 (181) 
    June 2009 (169) 
    May 2009 (190) 
    April 2009 (187) 
    March 2009 (184) 
    February 2009 (192) 
    January 2009 (193) 
    December 2008 (165) 
    November 2008 (177) 
    October 2008 (149) 
    September 2008 (121) 
    August 2008 (157) 
    July 2008 (182) 
    June 2008 (139) 
    May 2008 (154) 
    April 2008 (146) 
    March 2008 (166) 
    February 2008 (124) 
    January 2008 (108) 
    December 2007 (168) 
    November 2007 (162) 
    October 2007 (130) 
    September 2007 (109) 
    August 2007 (194)

Comments are closed.