Slashdot Mirror
PayPal Freezes Support Account For Bradley Manning
An anonymous reader writes "The online payment provider PayPal has frozen the account of Courage to Resist, which in collaboration with the Bradley Manning Support Network is currently raising funds in support of US Army Pfc. Bradley Manning. 'We've been in discussions with PayPal for weeks, and by their own admission there's no legal obligation for them to close down our account,' noted Loraine Reitman of the Bradley Manning Support Network (Support Network). 'This was an internal policy decision by PayPal. ... They said they would not unrestrict our account unless we authorized PayPal to withdraw funds from our organization's checking account by default. While there may be no legal obligation to provide services, there is an ethical obligation. By shutting out legitimate nonprofit activity, PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt.'"
Can't those idiots be sued?
http://cryptome.org/0003/paypal-evil.htm
"They said they would not unrestrict our account unless we authorized PayPal to withdraw funds from our organization's checking account by default. Our accounting does not allow for this type of direct access by a third party, nor do I trust PayPal as a business entity with this responsibility given their punitive actions against WikiLeaks-an entity not charged with any crime by any government on Earth."
The Support Network repeatedly requested and was refused formal documentation from PayPal describing their policies in this matter.
PayPal is a private company and thus under no legal obligation to provide Courage to Resist, the Bradley Manning Support Network, or anyone else with services. This was something made very clear to the Support Network by PayPal representatives.
"They opted to apply an exceptional hurdle for us to clear in order to continue as a customer, whereas we have clearly provided the legally required information and verification. I think our dealings with PayPal should be a cautionary tale for any possibly controversial not-for-profit entity with a PayPal account," Paterson said, "While there may be no legal obligation to provide services, there is an ethical obligation. By shutting out legitimate nonprofit activity, PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt."
There really is no excuse for this at all. We're all entitled to a fair trial and the best legal defense available to us. This signifies that Paypal doesn't support the constitution or the rule of law. Shameful.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem using PayPal as a buyer if that's how a merchant has their account set up (though I'll only use credit cards through them and won't ever, ever, link a bank account with them). But who in their right mind would ever use this fucktards as their clearing house for financial transactions? Just get a merchant account and use your bank's credit card processing services, or go with someone like Google Checkout or Authorize.net. Using PayPal seems like you're just begging to have your accounts seized and funds raided because someone there doesn't like you.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Just saw this scumbag mashup a few minutes ago on Reddit and I had to chuckle.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
They tried to screw Burning Man via the same tactic.
. . . there is an ethical obligation.
Wrong. There is no ethical obligation to do business with people supporting treason. I'm not saying there's an ethical obligation not to support them, but these people are worse than terrorists.
I think you forgot the part about "innocent until proven guilty"? How about a fair trial first (which is what he needs the money for), THEN you can condemn him.
Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
you are free to do anything in a capitalist economy. see, the catch is, everything costs money, and those with bigger money, can determine how much free can one be.
such is the lesson of this incident, apart from the paypal's staggering lack of spine. roadside pimp may be having more spine and honor than paypal in regard to principles.
Read radical news here
So, what's Paypal's standard policy on this? Have they done this with any other orgs? They often do stupid things like this for no reason other than they have stupid policies. For example, it took years-- YEARS I tell you-- to get them to verify and change the address on my wife's account.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
But not financially bankrupt!! Cha-ching!!
so why the fuck am I supposed to feel bad that this guy is getting exactly the punishment that he knew he would get?
oh i don't know, does "due process" feel like something you could feel good about?
look sig is kool
why are you anonymous ? before accusing someone of treason, someone should develop the balls needed for expressing their views with at least a dubious registered website account. notice - i didnt even say 'with your own identity'. such is the level you are at, currently.
Read radical news here
The point is that account is raising funds to help defend someone in a court of law. Feel free to not send him any money if you think he's an asshole. But he is innocent until proven guilty (except in PayPal's eyes, it seems... oh, and yours).
treasonous Bradley Manning
[citation needed]
Criteria for citation requires:
1. Law(s), with sections and code.
2. Previous convictions with said law(s) and with similar case(s).
Loraine, I rename thee hereby to Captain Obvious.
It should read "US Army PFC Bradley Manning", not "Pfc."
Loading...
I understand where PayPal is coming from too. They open themselves up to more trouble than a bunch of people complaining on message boards; usually at sites where the people loudly claim that PayPal is evil anyway and cite numerous stories of cousins brothers best friends little dogs being ripped off; compared to some country's politicians deciding to play up the populace with some timely investigations or worse getting other departments to look at areas of business not related.
Corporations can't win, they aren't protected by the law in areas like this. An individual would garner more sympathy than they would should previously mentioned government entities try to make a run at them. So yeah, it sucks for people who like what this group is doing. The truly sad part is that more people will express angst here and on other boards than would have made a contribution.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
This is a Milgram Experiment, and you are the test subject. You pretty much failed.
I cannot imagine why any sane person or organization would use PayPal as a bank-like entity after their many, many, MANY abuses of their "not a bank" status.
Seriously... It surprises more to hear about people successfully getting their money out, than stories like the FP.
Really simple, folks - Just stop using them. Period. They have the right not to serve us, and we have the right not to use them. Exercise that right, and put these bastards permanently in the red ASAP.
Anyone have a backup link? I want to read the article before I jump on or over any guns.
>>> PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt.
PayPal can not be morally bankrupt as it is a corporation, not a person. Morals do not apply to corporations. The fact is a corporation's only objective is to make as much money as possible and it does this through the decisions made by the persons running the corporation. Whether or not they are morally bankrupt is another matter, however since their job is only to make lots of money, not use the corporation as some sort of moral flagpole, if it is not in the corporation's best interest to do something, it will not be done.
Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
^This. The entire situation is completely and utter absurd, and a slap in the face of everything our country is supposed to represent. He's been in custody for how many months now without any word of a trial?
And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
even traitors deserve a fair trial, see also John Adams legal defense of Captain Preston after the Boston Massacre.
Distributed proteome folding @ WorldCommunityGrid.org
Team Slashdot - Members:#1 Run Time:#1 Points:#1 Results:#1
missing the point. this isn't manning's account, it's an account set up to defend him.
paypal are basically saying that they reserve the right to screw anyone for no reason if they so choose. politics be damned.
i think the internet backlash might just hurt their business a little more than threats from a bankrupt government... it's a dumb decision on paypal's part.
Paypal may be morally bankrupt, they might be acting like an merciless merchant, bank without the obligations to follow rules concerning this kind of businesses. But every idiot that use paypal after all these years of news about how paypal is morally bankrupt, outside the banking rules and does whatever they please i.e. you are and your money are at their mercy, then what do you want us to do?
Stop using paypal, or suit yourselves!
So far, the only nominally credible journalistic outlet reporting on this story (and indexed so far by teh Google) is Huffington Post, which appears to be reporting solely based upon the press release.
This would be a great opportunity for some actual journalism - to find out why Paypal actually suspended access, what the reason behind the checking account access requirement is, whether or not there's government pressure at work here, and whether or not there's something that Courage to Resist knows about but isn't saying in their press release.
Or, we could just blindly accept everything Courage to Resist says as the unvarnished truth.
Does anyone still use this service? There must be some alternative.
I think another company should use this as a promoting tool..."The only way to support freedom of speech online" would be a nice slogan, add a "donate" button and you got a good startup...
Manning is a hero to democracy. He risked everything to ensure that the people found out the truth about all the dirty secrets. I personally believe that in order for our world to get past all the bickering and warring, we will need open government as a constraint. We will not be able to properly explore deep space and survive our eventual destruction without complete openness in all aspects of our lives as well. Until then, we will be playing shadow games with one another and we will remain stuck on this rock, doomed.
Also, PayPal is not a good organization. They are self-interested, and corrupt.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Of course. But as a general rule, they can only be sued successfully if they have bad lawyers. Also, if you have good ones. Unfortunately, it takes money to pay good lawyers (with rare exceptions), and people who get cut off don't have money.
From the summary:
They said they would not unrestrict our account unless we authorized PayPal to withdraw funds from our organization's checking account by default.
I can't get TFA to launch, so I don't know further details on this, but... A) Why does PayPal need to withdraw funds from their checking account? B) If that's PayPal's legitimate policy, where's the problem? Set up a checking account and hand them the account number, put only what you owe them for whatever in it. What's the big deal?
The founders of Pirate Bay have shown themselves to have courage in the past and to stand up for themselves when they believe they are right.
Wikileaks nor Bradley Manning have been convicted of any crimes and yet Paypal et al. withdraw their service under inexplicable circumstances.
Looks like a great time to stop using paypal, Amazon and the others that fail basic morality tests.
Slashdot Beta should die a painful death.
Does LamePal already have a financial/military sector corporate pimp?
Or is this just another displaying of the wares to attract one?
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
Well, if he has been convicted already, then I guess this is all moot.
manning's actions were based partly on his ethics and partly on his other issues.
just because you don't agree with his ethics does not render them void.
also, you forget that while the USA slides into ever more intractable debt, the rest of the world is reaching for the popcorn.
feels good man.
it will be a shame when the USA falls, because in many ways it really has been a good thing for a lot of the world (IMHO).
also you spelled "weasel" wrong :)
so why the fuck am I supposed to feel bad that this guy is getting exactly the punishment that he knew he would get?
3/10, but I'll bite anyway - Because whether or not his case amounts to a prosecutorial slam-dunk, he still has the right to a fair trial.
More importantly, this has less to do with whether or not you should "feel bad" for him, than with whether or not a private business has the right to arbitrarily seize your assets temporarily in their possession. The specifics here (depriving someone of the funds required to afford one of our basic constitutional rights) just makes the core offense all the more insulting.
This war on geeks has gotta stop. Don't they have any idea how stupid it is to PISS OFF ALL THE SMART FOLKS! ld
The spelling and grammar police can kiss my ass
I don't owe Bradley Manning a fair trial because I'm not a government entity. He is entitled to a fair trial before government punishment is meted out, period. I'm entitled to form an opinion of him based on available knowledge and I'm also free to decide to not associate with him in any way whether or not that opinion is based on fact or conjecture. PayPal is afforded the exact same rights that I am. They don't owe him anything and they certainly aren't forced to wait for government trials to conclude before they form an opinion of someone and act upon it, so long as they aren't violating traditional discriminatory statutes and the like.
Haven't we collectively learned our lesson yet? Paypal sucks! You know it, I know it.
They really need to adopt the bitcoin standard. No censorship is possible. No chargebacks. No bullcrap. Just a free, open way for people to anonymously transfer fiat notes to one another. They can be exchanged for dollars, euros, or increasingly traded down the chain for goods and services.
Have you ever seen the qualifier on a business sign, "reserves the right to refuse service to anyone"? Unless the refusal is based on Race, Color, Religion, National origin, Age (40 and over), Sex, Familial status (Housing, cannot discriminate for having children, exception for senior housing), Sexual orientation (in some jurisdictions and not in others), Gender identity (in some jurisdictions and not in others), Disability status, Veteran status, or Genetic information PayPal is free to refuse service to anyone they want for any other reason. No one said life was fair and no one promised anyone they could be a total twit without repercussions.
I need to disable my account. Slashdot has officially ventured into Fox News territory for me. I see that I can't disable my account so how can I at least have all my email info and personally identifiable info removed?
Paypal morally bankrupt, scummy company not to be trusted, old news, we all know.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Last I checked, there was this little thing about right to a speedy trial and right to counsel. The speedy trial is clearly being denied in Manning's case, and this is a clear attempt to interfere with his right to counsel by cutting off the funds to pay for said counsel.
Alternately, I guess we could just go with the rule that whatever the executive branch is totally cool - after all, that was perfectly ok in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain, right?
I am officially gone from
you are writing in support of a traitor
So, he's been convicted then? I didn't know that.
I can't understand the privatization of payments online. Governments used to be the primary supplier of moneys which everybody had the right to use and everyone had to accept. But online only the private sector (credit cards, paypal, etc) is providing the means of payment. Anyway, all these folks should use Bitcoin: http://www.bitcoin.org/ It is peer-to-peer and anonymous. The tricky part involves converting it to traditional currencies but it currently has parity with the dollar, as reported earlier on Slashdot.
1) Open a secondary account.
2) Wash the checking account down to the minimum balance daily, and the rest to the secondary account. Depending on the daily balance, the bank will do this automatically either for free or a small fee, or you can take 2 minutes a day and do it yourself.
3) Grant them the stupid permission on the checking account.
The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
Paypal is part of the banking system. And you expect them to tolerate a librul cause? ROFL.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Paypal certainly does have the right to not collect the money.
This is very different then freezing money they already collected.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
I work for a non-profit that does nothing remotely controversial and we have had to deal with the exact same issue. PayPal forces EVERYONE to withdraw from a bank account by default. They make no distinction about who they are dealing with and they care less about non-profit status. Because they are a quazi-monopoly on ebay payment they pretty much force people to do what they want if you want to buy or sell on ebay.
If you want to be outraged, be outraged that the they use their monopoly status to force their fingers into bank accounts, not that the made some political move they actually didn't make.
Amen, the Espionage Act is pretty specific. Plus, he's subject to the UCMJ - I imagine the penalties available there are worse than a civilian might 'enjoy'.
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl106a.htm
Wrong. You have the right to legal defense - period. Not "the best legal defense available". Big difference.
Correct. Big difference. Your position that you're only entitled to a Lionel Hutz-esque defence irregardless of what's wheeled out to prosecute you results in something that I like to call 'not a fair trial'.
But since you are writing in support of a traitor
But then, I suppose, you were never really interested in a fair trial, were you?
And there are other means available. Someone could set up a bank account for the purpose.
And the difference between an actual bank just cutting off services to a legal defence fund, and a pseudobank doing that same thing is..? Please, enlighten us as to how this is a better solution.
FGD 135
I closed my PayPal account after they stopped taking WikiLeaks donations.
They're free to choose whatever business practices they wish. Just not with me supporting them.
Does this have anything to do with Manning?
Or is this just because Courage to Resist doesn't want to give PayPal the ability to withdraw funds from a checking account?
After reading the article at http://cryptome.org/0003/paypal-evil.htm it seems that Courage to Resist is equating PayPal saying "Follow the rules about checking account access" to "We're freezing your account because you help someone the Gov't doesn't like"
"Reaching for the popcorn"?
I think you misspelled "Reaching for the lifeboats because if the US falls so will the entire fucking world."
I was with you until
..without complete openness in all aspects of our lives as well.
so how do you propose to keep everyones' life completely open? a tyrannical police state? oh wait, world governments are already busy building that as we speak.
PayPal has always been morally bankrupt; what took you so long to figure out that?
My karma is not a Chameleon.
We need more traitors like that. People should not be allowed to kill indiscriminately regardless of who they are or what their position is. Have you actually read any of the documents he leaked? Soldiers were gunning down whole families because there may possibly have been some terrorists nearby. If our country is going to be doing that then "We the People" need to put an end to it and we can't do that if we don't know what is going on. Afterall, "We the People" are the source of the government in the US, right? If not then worse traitors than Bradly Manning have already done their damage and the wrong traitor is on trial. How can we "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" when the crooks and murderers in charge may hide from us everything important that is going on?
So now Bradley Manning's ability to mount a strong defense is directly affected by corporate behavior having nothing to do with the judicial system. Gee, who knew that "business" could affect "justice" so directly? Does anybody really still think that simple campaign finance reforms are reformation enough?
Corporate behavior can be as dangerous to democracy and ethics as any military campaign.
Any alternatives? Preferably with the rates as low as paypal for non-profits?
How about a fair trial first (which is what he needs the money for), THEN you can condemn him.
He joined the military. Despite the fact that he decided to betray his own oaths by lying, stealing sensitive material, etc., he still gets complete legal representation as part wearing the uniform. He doesn't need to raise money to pay for lawyers. The legal team at his disposal is exactly as good as the legal team that's prosecuting him for his acts. If they are seen dragging their feet or being useless, his JAG defense team are themselves in big trouble.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
So, why does PayPal insist on the ability to withdraw from the account of an organization which is being used for donations.
I've never trusted PayPal, and continue not to. I don't give anybody the ability to withdraw money from my accounts. You can have a credit card on a per-transaction basis, but you sure as hell don't get blanket access to my accounts.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Who is this "John Adams," some sort of commie?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
He has no need for funds, since the military (of which he is still a part, despite his decision to commit the crimes in question) will provide him with a team of lawyers at no cost to him whatsoever.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Sometimes a court isn't necessary to prove guilt. The Constitution doesn't guarantee a court proceeding, it simply requires due process. Due processes has then been interpreted in many different ways.
There are many occasions where guilt can be proven without a court, and the courts only responsibility should be to determine the legal and appropriate punishment. For example, the shooting of Rep. Giffords. Is he "innocent" because a court hasn't found him guilty yet? No. Dozens of eye witnesses and video recordings prove he did the act. There is no question about it.
I haven't followed this case very much, so I can't say off the top of my head what the evidence is against him. From what little I've heard it is a pretty clear cut case.
People who do not use PayPal do not get ripped-off, betrayed, or stolen from, by PayPal. Surely there must, must, MUST be something we can conclude from this?
From all I have read on him, I would definitely call him a traitor.
It is one thing to blow the whistle on heinous activity that you know is going on, and to publish proof of that activity. It is quite another to irresponsibly start sending out as much confidential/secret information you can get a hold of to third parties. The former, I would praise him for -- as many people seem to be doing. For the latter though, I condemn him. At best he acted recklessly or wantonly and deserves time in jail for violating his oath, his duty, and the law. At worst, he is guilty of espionage and high treason.
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, it's clear you have already judged him without benefit of a trial, so as far as you're concerned, he's guilty. Yet you condemn others that question your judgment. Where I come from we call that hypocrisy.
And while PayPal, a division of eBay, certainly is under no obligation to provide him an account, their biased actions could come back to bite them in the ass someday. I already know plenty of people who no longer use eBay or PayPal due to their shady and uneven practices. Stuff like this only sends more and more people looking for alternatives. And I'm a-ok with that. That is, after all, their opinion, right?
Lets suppose a general contractor hire you to paint a house. He then gets paid by the client and then would pay you. But after he gets the money he says "You're a rapist, and we think you will use the money for rape, so we aren't giving you what we agreed upon"
Is that OK?
Of course not, and neither is freezinf someone assets.
It would be ok for that contractor to not use you in the future, but not OK for him to hold your assets.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
So do you think OJ was guilty?
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
yeah but they don't have the right to abscond with other people's money...no matter WHAT their TOS says.
not this way.
The Milgram Experiment is seriously flawed. It doesn't deserve to be mentioned.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Maybe I am confused, but Paypal normally lets you create an account but must eventually have withdrawal access to a real bank account. This is how they verify you are not a terrorist, have a recourse for their dispute policy, and claim to not be a bank. Every Paypal account I have setup requires this.
I had a paypal account, but I found out by clicking on "My Account", "Profile" and "Cancel Account" I could shut it down. It is that easy. There is an extended guide on http://www.ehow.com/how_4519103_cancel-close-pay-pal-account.html on how to stop the account.
Yeah, I'd like to know this too. Hell, if I had any experience I'd start something myself. This seems like a real opportunity for some competition that promises to be less corrupt than Paypal.
Our country is supposed to represent bad reporting?
http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/24/paypal-on-cutting-off-courage-to-resist-this-has-nothing-to-do-with-wikileaks/
lol, u mad?
I think you forgot the part about "innocent until proven guilty"? How about a fair trial first (which is what he needs the money for), THEN you can condemn him.
The LAW is required to consider him 'Innocent' until proven guilty. Even if he strolled onto the field during the Superbowl and killed a ref in front of 100 million witnesses. It requires due process, however perfunctory it may be.
However, I'm not required to believe him innocent at all.
one's traitor is another's patriot
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
I think you overestimate how powerful nerd rage is. Paypal is fine.
Absolutely. "Not guilty" doesn't mean "innocent". But at least he got his day in court and all the evidence was presented. Until this guy is afforded the same right, I'm making no judgement, cause I don't have all the facts.
Tell it to the judge.
I've deleted my paypal and ebay accounts. I feel dirty for having even had them.
We need to stop pointing our fingers at PayPal and start pointing them at the US Government. I am sure political powers put a tremendous amount of force on PayPal to shut down the account.
First funny thing I've read here in a while.
RELEASE THE KRAKEN!
Technoli
I'm also free to decide to not associate with him in any way whether or not that opinion is based on fact or conjecture. PayPal is afforded the exact same rights that I am.
In my opinion, this is yet another example of why corporations deserve LESS rights than real citizens, not the same or more.
Furthermore, you didn't say you would associate with him. Paypal on the other hand has agreed to transfer funds for all legal transactions. Singling out this one because they think/hope he's guilty or disagree with him, or wish to curry favor with those government powers that have already decided his fate, no, that's not legitimate. Legal of course.
Manning is a dipshit.
In the materials he was supposed to read when signing for his clearance, he was told how to handle information he believed was improperly classified. He refused to follow procedure or the law that would have gotten the improperly classified information declassified, and chose "glory" or some shit like that, ostensibly at the urging of Julian Assange.
Manning deserves to spend many years in jail, possibly the rest of his life, and if evidence is evolved that his actions caused someone to be identified and killed by the enemy, he deserves the death penalty.
As for PayPal,
http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/24/paypal-on-cutting-off-courage-to-resist-this-has-nothing-to-do-with-wikileaks/
whatever it is, it's not acting politically in this case.
He gets his pre-trial evaluation this month and should see justice relatively soon. Is it a travesty of justice to allow the government to make their case, finish their investigation, and ensure that Manning is fit to be tried?
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
Yeah, I'd like to know this too. Hell, if I had any experience I'd start something myself. This seems like a real opportunity for some competition that promises to be less corrupt than Paypal.
You'd find less demand for such a service than you might think, for the simple reason that businesses can deduct payment processing fees on their taxes.
Obviously that doesn't help non-profits, but for legitimate businesses, it makes processing fees all but a non-issue. Key word there, "legitimate" - No business planning to declare their PayPal receipts as taxable income would risk having their assets frozen on a whim. PayPal amounts to the online euphemism for "cash business".
If you're expecting the entity that's prosecuting you to also defend you fairly, then you need a lawyer of your own checking their math even worse than you think.
"They said they would not unrestrict our account unless we authorized PayPal to withdraw funds from our organization's checking account by default"
Set up an account that only has PayPal deposits in it. Transfer that money daily to another account they do not have access to. At the wost, paypal can only take back the money they have deposited for that day. Problem solved and everyone's happy.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
The issue at hand is not whether or not I think he's guilty (which, by the way, you apparently inferred from my words because I intentionally did not address it). The issue at hand is whether someone deserves a fair trial before they are condemned by a private entity's personal opinion, and the answer is "no". And I never condemned anyone that questioned my judgment. I merely stated the fact that PayPal is not required to wait for a trial before forming an opinion and acting upon it. If they're acting illegally, then that's another story.
And yes, it's fine for people to refuse to do business with PayPal because of things like this. I don't understand the sarcastic-sounding question at the end. Would you expect me to have disagreed with that?
Meanwhile, the prick in Arizona that shot the Congresswoman and killed 6 other people, he gets due process, and no lock out on his accounts for a fair trial.
Tell me, where else in the world does this kind of crap happen? Oh, third-world banana-republics? Welcome to America.
Yes, in America we have a legal system, but don't ever confuse that for a JUSTICE system.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
This isn't a direct response to you, but more to the general mentality I've observed on Slashdot over time. You just happen to be the lucky one that finally prompted me to write it.
It's interesting to me the hypocrisy around here. The entire nerd culture is obviously very progressive and liberal oriented, but from time to time something like this happens and it makes me wonder.
Progressive and liberal ideology always requires more and bigger government. Just look at what Obama has done (coincidently, Obama has a lot of support around here). Yet at the same time it's common place to see rages against the evil corruption already in place in politics, while advocating giving them more power. They are evil conspirators, except when they want to take over your healthcare, and except when they want to take over your job, and except when they want to tell you what to eat, and except when they want to "spread the wealth." Then they are just working for the greater good.
Yes, America has a lot of dirty secrets. Read up on the rise of communism and you will see how in many ways the US is very responsible for supporting and developing both the Soviet Union and China. All the blood on their hands is also on ours. I do not pretend that America is the perfect country, but I do declare it to be unique. It's done a lot of bad, but its also done more good for the world than any other country in history. It's full of imperfect people who elect imperfect, and often evil, leaders.
It's done that because of the basic principles upon which it was founded. When followed, they will keep a steady course for good. It is when they are violated, ignored, overruled, or otherwise set aside that things go bad.
"By shutting out legitimate nonprofit activity, PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt.'"
They aren't morally bankrupt - they are a dictatorship. If you choose to use them, you get all the good and bad that comes with it.
Someone doesn't have to be convicted to be guilty. A guilty person is guilty when they commit the crime, not when found guilty in court.
Just like sometimes guilty people sometimes don't get convicted, i.e. O.J. Simpson.
Stories about PayPal's behavior are legendary. Search the 'net and you'll find numerous cases where PayPal has been accused of blocking access to accounts with little or no means of finding out why and therefore with little recourse for the account owners.
Many years ago I stopped using PayPal after reading some of the stories. They are not necessary - even eBay sellers are quite willing to take money orders and cashier checks if you just prearrange it. Do not get locked into a situation where somebody can arbitrarily block access to your money. Avoid PayPal.
Amen. How many people thought OJ was guilty before his trial? I know I did. Hell I still think he did it. We make judgements based on information we have, but we're not deciding his fate so who cares?
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
right to a speedy trial
Be careful what you wish for. The speediest trials are often not found in favor of the defendant.
The "speedy trial" thing is about unnecessary delay, not necessary delay, which includes developing the case, vetting the evidence, locating witnesses, etc.
The defense needs time to develop its case as well, especially when it's skating on ice as thin as Manning's is.
Actually, many of this nation's defining moments are a direct result of bad reporting. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
Well, leaving aside the issue of whether Manning is a traitor -- which is the very question to be put to trial -- you're right about PayPal having no *Constitutional* obligations here. Its an action that i profoundly against American civil values, but those values are not law.
I disagree that giving defendants any sort of defense whatsoever is sufficient. The trial system is an adversarial one, and the teams on each side should be about evenly matched. That means in most cases the defendant should be assured a competent defense, but in high profile cases where the state is putting substantial resources into prosecution the defendant should be entitled to the very best representation. Otherwise it makes a mockery of the word "trial". If you put a top drawer prosecutor with decades of experience up against an inexperienced or incompetent defense attorney, you're determining the results of the trial before it happens.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Or to put it another way: digital cash would be a good thing for common people, so you can bet that the government and leaders of larger corporations have a problem with it.
Palm trees and 8
Fair enough. I kind of thought OJ was guilty before he got tried myself. But I wasn't in charge of his trial so nothing bad came of my rush to judgement. We make decisions based on information we have, but we can amend those later if we need to right? Is anyone really harmed when some idiot like myself rushes to judgement?
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
You can still be proven guilty, but when the jury decides that you're not, you're still "not guilty" even with all the evidence to the contrary.
This is standard procedure for Paypal, in the UK if not the US:
"Direct debit" is the authority to withdraw money from your bank account. Lots of people do this with their utility bills.
treasonous Bradley Manning
[citation needed] Criteria for citation requires: 1. Law(s), with sections and code. 2. Previous convictions with said law(s) and with similar case(s).
Good luck with getting all that crap on Slashdot.
Thanks anyway, I needed the laugh.
Doesn't happen any more. Even information that was scheduled to be declassified is being held back - obviously 50 year old supply records for the Vietnam & Korean wars are still highly sensitive.
More types of information are being classified all the time. I fully expect to find out that the names of presidential candidates are going to be classified in the next election - the debates will be held with the voices scrambled & the candidates hiding behind screens. When you get to the booth, you only get to vote A or B.
Sorry, I thought you were the OP. My bad.
But to address your post directly (this time), yes, anyone is free to form any opinion they want, but they do themselves and others ill favor when they form those opinions without having all the facts. People are much less likely to give your opinions any weight, or take them seriously, when they know they are snap judgments and/or ill-informed.
And although PayPal is under no legal obligation one way or the other they really shouldn't, as a matter of principal, do things like this. I'm sure they have their reasons, which I'm also sure we'll never really know, but it only further underscores the concerns that guys like Manning aren't going to get a fair shake.
You have any links to the war journal to prove that?
That doesn't follow at all. If my business pays, say, a 25% income tax rate, all that writing them off on my taxes means is that I get 25% of the processing fees back. If I'm looking at $100 in fees a month for an Authorize.net account versus $50 for PayPal fees, tax implications take that to $75 versus $37.50, which is less of a difference but still not a "non-issue".
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Even if he strolled onto the field during the Superbowl and killed a ref in front of 100 million witnesses.
And what crime would killing a referee be?
When Manning goes to trial, he will be convicted of treason and executed. There's really no ambiguity in what he did. Giving away state secrets to foreign nationals is treason, plain and simple. The only way he can avoid execution is to put off having a trial for as long as he can.
Source: http://www.bitcoin.org/
Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer digital currency. Peer-to-peer (P2P) means that there is no central authority to issue new money or keep track of transactions. Instead, these tasks are managed collectively by the nodes of the network. Advantages:
* Bitcoins can be sent easily through the Internet, without having to trust middlemen.
* Transactions are designed to be computationally prohibitive to reverse.
* Be safe from instability caused by fractional reserve banking and central banks. The limited inflation of the Bitcoin system’s money supply is distributed evenly (by CPU power) throughout the network, not monopolized by banks.
Bitcoin is an open source project currently in beta development stage. Development is hosted at Github.
Paypal's business model doesn't function when its cut is subject to individual negotiation with every tom, dick and harry that whats to participate; thus the automatic debit requirement. The Paypal model you wish to leverage depends on this.
Reasonable people have no difficulty understanding this so Paypal thrives with lots of participants. The folks involved with this case are, however, not reasonable people. They are malcontents and they demand special treatment. Any failure to accommodate their demands is 'unethical' and evidence of 'moral bankruptcy.'
Oh, and Paypal doesn't need a 'legal obligation' to justify shutting you down. Paypal isn't a right.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
I thought this was a news site? The fact that Paypal is a bunch of unethical business is not news.
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
IMO it depends upon the context. It's fine if you're just discussing the issue as a form of social discourse. But I think it crosses the line if someone takes an action based upon an ill-formed opinion.
The OP is saying it's ok for PayPal to cut off his legal funds cause the guy is clearly guilty and should get all he deserves. I just think he should get a fair and honorable trial BEFORE we start trying to cut him off at the knees. I mean seriously, isn't that the whole foundation of American society?
Yea, that would be a refreshing change. But journalism is dead. Even if a news outlet still had the resources to invest in actual fact gathering vs reprinting press releases or just letting a press flack have a few minutes of airime or a few inches of column space, they are philosophically opposed to truthseeking. Truth is a social construct now.
Your mindset is right and you are a seeker of truth, as evidenced here.
But in the rest of your post, you are attacking a person holding a candle in the darkness, revealing what was hidden (no matter what the reason he did it). Your judgment is clouded by your belief that law is infallible, that the government keeping secrets from us is in our best interests.
If you really seek the truth, support those who reveal it, and not those who hide it.
We will not be able to properly explore deep space and survive our eventual destruction without complete openness in all aspects of our lives as well.
I think you're greatly underestimating the importance of privacy. Suppose you were put into juvenile detention for a few weeks for some relatively small offense, but did not commit even a traffic violation during the following 20 years. Now suppose this is true of 20% of the population. If each individual keeps this secret of his or her youth, would you argue that those harmless secrets prevent our survival as a race?
Or suppose you have a shoe fetish that you only indulge in your bedroom. "Complete openness in all aspects of our lives" certainly encompasses that, seeing as how it is an aspect of one's life; is it your argument that we cannot explore deep space or survive our supposed eventual destruction if we don't know about your shoe fetish?
I see absolutely no reason why "properly exploring deep space" or "surviving our eventual destruction" should depend on "complete openness in all aspects of our lives". It's a rather large leap of logic and an absurdly broad requirement, but you've provided no basis for the argument.
The American adversarial criminal-law system could use some serious adjustments, but the way it stands now, the government will do everything it can to put Manning in prison for a suitably long period of time so the gov can claim a political win. Federal judges are not likely to stand up for justice, either.
The only chance Manning has of even a small amount of justice is to be represented by a good legal team. That requires lots of money, in the U.S. Justice is not only about whether the jury reaches the correct verdict. It is also about whether there is an effective advocate for both sides, and a fair arbitrator. In the U.S., the fairness of a particular judge can vary quite a lot, so the only way to ensure a little bit of justice is to have the most effective legal defense team you can put together.
This has nothing to do with whether Manning is guilty or innocent. It's about the U.S.'s failboat legal system, and Paypal deciding unilaterally (or more likely with some pressure from .gov stooges) to make it harder for any voice other than the government's voice to be heard adequately at trial.
There is also much more than just whether Manning is guilty or innocent. Even if we all stipulate to illegal actions Manning allegedly took to release classified information, there's the matter of appropriate punishment, which cannot be decided without a fair and equitable legal process.
The government will spend millions if not tens of millions prosecuting Manning. To deny Manning the ability to raise funds for his defense is a miscarriage of justice. If Paypal had an ounce of civic awareness, they would realize this, but sadly they appear to care only about publicity and government pressure.
Furthermore, Manning is a veteran (not sure conditions of discharge are relevant), and there are laws against discriminating against veterans.
"Unrestricted access" to banking is not very clear -- PP does have a reasonable right (and even duty) to know their customer, so [repeated] confirmation of bank account is reasonable. However, viewing deposits/withdrawals, let alone being able to effect same is egregious.
I'm sorry, but this is stupid. The court is supposed to make the judgment if someone is innocent or guilty and then give out the appropriate punishment. Guilt, in theory is determined by the truth of weather or not you committed the crime. Here in the US, we have these things called courts and laws. Some people, like Jared Loughner are pretty obviously guilty, yet they still have a right to a speedy trial. Manning's guilt may be a forgone conclusion in your eyes because I'm sure the government would never tell you things that were untrue. But the fact that he hasn't gone to trial raises a lot of flags. Flags about his guilt or at the very least it raises a lot of flags on how they are planning on using him against Wikileaks. In either case, he is a US citizen and he has the right to a speedy trial, political games be damned.
In the US, people have the right to a swift and open justice system. Manning may not have the specific right to the "open" part because he's part of the US military and because he's being accused of leaking state secrets, but he still has the right to a trial, military or otherwise before being punished. Right now you have an un-convicted US citizen being locked up in this country for nearly a year without a trial or trial date set. That's not right and that's not ok. Just because you say he's guilty doesn't really matter. Just because the media says he's guilty doesn't really matter. Just because the US government says he's guilty also shouldn't matter until he's proven guilty in a court of law. Here in the US people are supposed to have rights and I happen to believe people's rights are still important.
d
all language nazi's will burne in heil!
That's because all you hear is the squeaky wheel. By some weird thought process that has lead you to believe that there are no wheels that aren't squeaking.
I think it is called a bank-account.
It is one thing to have to trace transfers to orders, but if you are non-profit organization I assume you are just taking donations. Since you don't have to provide goods or services in return for the transfer, you only need a standard bank-account, which is FREE, and cost NOTHING to transfer money to.
Why do they have a problem with allowing PayPal access to their checking account? I'm pretty sure it's probably that they're just doing such volume that PayPal wants some sort of security in case of disputes and what not. I do a lot of volume with PayPal and my account was on hold for awhile until I got my account verified, and later my address. If they're moving that much money, they should probably go to a merchant account solution. They'd get a better rate anyways.
So how are you supposed to accept credit cards then?
No one else lets you accept credit cards from random strangers without having to follow some really weird and arcane rules to satisfy the merchant account rules. Google Checkout doesn't (it requires you be a store), not sure about Amazon Payments, but I think it's similar as well.
Face it - the only real reason people use Paypal is because it's pretty much the only way Joe Average can transfer some money to John Smith via credit card. Sure you can go to the post office and get a money order, mail it off, hope it arrives a week later, ... rigamarole, but that seems idiotic in this day and age of fast and easy e-commerce.
And the other options aren't much better - western union? egold?
Until someone manages to find a way to allow two random people on the internet send random amounts of money via credit card, Paypal's it. You want to put them out of business? Set it up in Paypal's niche.
It's also why eBay bought Paypal - because they're very synergistic.
And here's another question - why did they use Paypal? Why couldn't they set up their own merchant account? Or use Google Checkout? Or Amazon Payments? Most likely, either the fees are higher (Paypal may charge a lot, but credit card processors aren't cheap, either), or they didn't qualify. If they didn't qualify, Paypal ends up being the only way to accept credit cards.
So why are people falling into the same trap again and again? Google Checkout and Amazon Payments should also work, as does a merchant account...
I still wonder why Google hasn't moved their Checkout product to be more like PayPal, enable P2P payments and so forth. They're really missing out on a lot of revenue from people who are fed up with PayPal.
The true motivations of this guy are very clear, "we can circumvent the constitution by making everything private". Privatise everything and EVERY thing can be regulated without it coming down on the state. Right to have shelter? Sure you do, not out problem the renting industry doesn't want to rent to you. Right to counsel? Sure you do, not our problem you can't afford to pay for a private lawyer. Right to speech? Sure you do, not our fault you can't afford a spot on private television.
It is very effective and the Mafia knows this. Control the basics and you control the town. You don't have to pay protection money, your garbage just won't be collected by the private company they just happen to have a say in.
But they say, it says nowhere that your freedoms have to be available. Yes indeed, that is because they made bloody sure of that. It is how the system work. You are free from the state you elect and own yourself to the company store instead, that you don't elect.
Private enterprise is the chain that binds free men. Next time you see a repubilican claim that something should be run by private industry or go un-regulated, look further.
Remember, that republicans love freedom, their freedom to chain YOU. Because it is abundantly clear that Paypal indeed is not required to provide service to all, no US bank is. Doesn't that say it all? It means an essential service can be denied NOT after due process but simply because a board of directors decided to. In many ways I prefer outright dictatorship, at least the controls are clear then. Who made Paypal do this? Paypal has no morals on way or another, so which hidden master pulled its strings?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Are you going to assume that by default those right don't exists ? Get real. In the modern wall where most of the money is electronic (UNTHINKABLE for the time the constitution was written, where you could theoretically never ever visit a bank if you wished) forcing the bank to serve you should be a default freedom. In some country this is recognized, and if no bank want to serve you, the central governement force a bank to give you access to basic accounting facility (deposit, sending money , withdrawing), although they are in no obligation to give you a credit , that is you can withdraw only up to what you have.
You're wrong. Associated Press style for private first class is Pfc.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
Roman empire didn't fall in a day. Neither will the US empire. And because of that, it won't collapse the world.
Just try opening a PayPal account yourself with one way transferral of funds. PayPal will only allow you if you give them unfettered access to your account. It has been their policy for years. You can't use pre-paid debit cards either.
Pull my finger for my public key.
Congratulations sir, for your undying deference to the truth as stated by the man, you have been promoted to the rank of "Government Flunky". Please attach this sticker to your forehead and wear it proudly!
all language nazi's will burne in heil!
not really. the problem is most of the general population are apathetic to many causes, and generally don't care as long as they are able to order the shit they want.
"This is my Sig. there are many like it but this one is mine."
and you overestimate the influence a bankrupt economy can have on a business that deals with money. i would rate the two as of similar importance to Paypal's bottom line.
i have not met anybody that hasn't heard that "oh, aren't paypal a bit dodgy though?". that's all that's needed to turn people off it. when it comes to trusting someone with your own money, people are more astute than they would be when trusting a person they're not effectively giving their hard-earneds to.
Why do you hate America?
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Great idea, genius! Maybe I should just put a plate at the door and wait for people to drop some cash in there.
Tell me: how do you integrate your bank account with your web site? Have you checked the rates the banks charge for accepting credit card donations?
Although IANAL, I believe the following is all true...
There is no obligation for an establishment to serve the entire public. The only requirement is to not descriminate based on race, color, religion, natural origin or other protected categories of the public (e.g, various handicaps).
For example, if you have a diner or restaurant and you say "pants-required", and someone doesn't have pants, you can refuse service. As a more nuanced restriction, you can say no children (no law protecting against age descrimination in public), or refuse service to potential patrons that are too rowdy, too smelly, or just about anyone that detracts from the safety or welfare of other patrons.
As another example, a bank can refuse to do business with someone as long as the reason isn't protected by public policy. For example, they can refuse to open a checking account if you don't have a street address, or aren't a resident of the state, or if your credit score is too low, etc... They can also choose to close your account at any time for any reason (e.g., low-usage, high-usage, inactivity). Ironically, they can even refuse to take cash deposits (currency is legal tender for debts, not for deposits) and often do when the amounts are high and the source is suspicious (e.g, 100 bills on pallets wrapped with cellaphane, or with purple dye splashed all over it). Also, when they freeze your account, they can just send the money to the state as unclaimed assets.
People with lawyers may disagree with the possibilities listed, so there is always potential forlegal recourse, I doubt it would be successful based on my understanding of what constitutes a public accommodation and what is protected by law.
paypal is the government. the government is paypal.
You can REVOKE access to the chequing account after they've verified it, douchebags. That's where YOUR REAL BANK is accountable to you. If they allow Paypal to withdraw funds after you've revoked their authorization then the bank is at fault, and they WILL be held accountable.
This sounds like someone at CtR decided to take a moral stand against the tyranny of Paypal based on unwillingness to wade through bureaucratic bullshit, instead of an actual legal ground.
I didn't really have a "hero" when I was a kid, nor did I as I was growing up, primarily because all of the "heroes" I was told I should look up to were either fictitious (and thus inherently biased) or simply bullshit. Even as a kid that was pretty obvious. I did have people I looked up to, people I emulated as being role models, such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., but they focused on the symptoms of what was really a cancer that needed to be excised--they never addressed the root of the problems they made so much noise about.
I do have a "hero" now, and have since the day I heard about him. Bradley Manning. He found himself in possession of something that could actually be used to address the root of those problems and did what he though would best serve that goal, as well as do what he took an oath to do--protect his country, not the government, but his country...at all costs, up to and including his life.
Say what you will, but any way I look at it Bradley Manning knowingly risked his life to provide the citizens of this country, as well as the rest of the world, with KNOWLEDGE, knowledge that I think is crucial to our understanding of those we employ to run our country, and by extension, a large portion of the rest of the world (another issue entirely). It is one thing to speak out, it is another thing entirely to risk one's life in order to speak out. He knew the risks and weighed them carefully, I am sure.
Many do not understand his actions simply because they wouldn't do such a thing themselves--put themselves in harms way for the betterment of others. That in itself, in my mind, is a symptom of exactly what he is trying to fix--the selfish ambivalence pervasive in our society that allows our elected leaders, as well as corporations, to do pretty much anything they want. That selfish ambivalence is a product of the misinformation and lies we've all been handed, as well as the omission of data from the public domain. The release of those cables is a huge step in dealing with such issues.
That being said, fuck you Paypal. I've never been a customer and I never will because of shit like this (that also rules out doing business with anyone that requires PayPal transactions).
Anyone have any idea if Courage to Resist has set up a SECURE (and by that I mean "unfreezable") means of donating? I'd like to donate.
When you say "fit to be tried", do you actually mean "psychologically broken down by inhumane and unnecessary holding conditions so that he'll be willing to cop a guilty plea"?
My recollection is that to have a full account w/ paypal that you need to link it to your checking account. I don't blame people for finding this to be scary -- but I guess the idea is that paypal reserves the right to try and "take back" funds from your accounts if there is a dispute. While I find this distasteful, I don't think that this has anything to do with Bradley Manning..
Evolution: love it or leave it
That weaselly little pole smoker doesn't deserve any legal assistance. Motherfarking traitor is what he is!
Why would they need to be a bank to be sued?
Im not here now... Im out KILLING pepperoni
A very serious crime. It comes with a sentence of 15 years paid leave on a Caribbean island, compulsory parades in New York, Los Angeles and the referee's home town and a requirement that you accept being carried around like a king for the rest of your life.
As long as during that time the accused isn't punished beyond what is necessary.
What I mean by necessary punishment is custody, and that pretty much it.
Hes been locked up in solitary confinement, made to sleep without clothing, not allowed to exercise, hes not allowed a sheet for his bed, or a pillow, prohibited from possessing any personal items, like letters or pictures.
This is psychological torutre. Im surprised they are letting him sleep. Hell even the country that started off the whole shebang in the middle east, Tunisia, promised to not use solitary confinement for more then ten days. That was in 2005. If a country corrupt enough to be overthrown by their own citizens, treats their prisoners better then we treat ours, then something is seriously messed up..
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2005/04/19/tunisia-pledges-end-long-solitary-confinement
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
> If Amazon suddenly said 'we are going to stop selling books by negro and jew authors because
> they are written by negros and jews', there very well could be an issue.
Yes they would have legal problems. They shouldn't though. Am I mad? Perhaps, but Freedom that doesn't include the Right to be Wrong isn't Freedom, it is some anointed assholes telling you that they are Right and you are Wrong and if you don't agree with them bad things (government is violence) will happen to you.
Lets run the thought experiment. Amazon does exactly what you suggest in the free world I propose. What happens next? The government wouldn't be able to do a darned thing so what happens? Well the way I see it one of two basic results are possible.
1. To say the reaction from the general public is negative is the understatement of the century. Business dries up, profits tumble and the shareholders install competent management and spend the next couple of years trying to recover.
2. While losing some business they survive as a major force in retailing. We should thank them for their service in exposing the bigger problem in society because obviously there are a lot more bigots out there than anyone would have thought possible.
It is debatable whether the Civil Rights Act was constitutional but even with the benefit of hindsight it was probably the only tool available to solve the real problem that existed at the time. The Democratic Party had an iron hold over a large area of the country and was just as hellbent on their wicked ways as they were in the aftermath of the War of Southern Independence. I'm not some suicide pact libertarian, sometimes it really is required to violate the letter of the law to save it's spirit. But we need to understand that was what was happening so we can realize that if we still need it the problem probably can't be solved by government force. The best way to end discrimination by race/gender/etc really is to stop discriminating/classifying/etc people on the basis of race/gender/etc.
However just because I think it is a bad idea for the government to be imposing it's notions doesn't mean We the People shouldn't use social sanction on idiots who still refuse to get with the program. My way they still have the right to be wrong, they just suffer severe shunning for it. In many ways more severe than in the progressive world because in prog world you can't refuse to to business with someone in most areas of life (banking, housing, etc.) and in mine you could.
Democrat delenda est
Sheesh guys, just use bitcoin already!
Anyone else have second thoughts when finding a seemingly "great deal" on eBay or other online store where paypal is the only method of payment available?!?
Something about paypal has never seemed quite right to me. In part due to eBay disallowing any other method of online payment allowed, not infrequent stories of frozen accounts with no reason or recourse, no phone number (or other customer service options) available until forced to do so, not to mention questionably high fees for accepting money via their 'service'...
I think the word I'm looking for is insidious. Or perhaps monopolistic?!?
Perhaps when he made those oaths he believed that those nominally in-charge were morally superior, that they were leading the defence of his countrymen and so in a sense, rightfully 'in-charge' and that he was 'one of the good guys' ?
Perhaps, once he realised his misunderstanding, he decided to do something about it ?
Requiem for the American Dream
Can't the Manning fund simply set up and announce a bank account? Today, you can wire money all over the world. There are dozens of US banks that will take money shipped from overseas, for example. And I imagine the US banking system allows eletronic transfer between banks from and to private citizens's acounts, no?
Strictly speaking, this is PayPal's double loss (financial and PR - because it does look ugly that they should mingle in politics).
Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
SAN FRANCISCO, 25 February 2011 (5pm PST) -- Reacting to an enormous backlash from supporters and criticism from the media, PayPal has reinstated the account of Courage to Resist, an organization which has partnered with the Bradley Manning Support Network to raise funds for the defense of accused WikLeaks whistleblower Bradley Manning. The change in account status comes with no explanation from the online payment provider, and only hours after the nonprofit organization published a press release drawing attention to the matter.
http://www.couragetoresist.org/x/content/blogcategory/64/122/
The only ones here who are morally bankrupt are Bradley Manning and CTR. Screw 'em
As a military vet who dealt with sensitive data every day I highly disagree. What should happen to him is a firing squad for treason committed during a war. Now had the leak been accidental or leaked some other way that is a different story. This however is the case of a military member sworn by oath, knowing full well the seriousness of his actions.
Got Code?
Murder. The victim being a ref doesn't make the crime any different.
I'd only tolerate complete openness if the watchers could themselves be watched.
Thing is it's a prisoner's dilemma where the government has every reason, motive, and opportunity to defect and pass some bullshit law or simply classify something in the grand name of national security.
So unless the government plays ball, I'm not cooperating.
Ebay and other important companies: Thou shalt not use any payment processor other than paypal or you will not do business with us.
I wonder if paypal has a united way-esque exclusivity clause in their agreement.
nothing new to see here. We've all known they are morally bankrupt - a long time ago.
Needed a part, available almost exclusively on Ebay. All the sellers accept only paypal. Must all be masochists or something. Wish I had stuck it out now, but today before I heard about this I used paypal for the first time in *years*. And the last time, ever.
fuck paypal i will never ever use them again..
I work at PayPal, otherwise I would probably, like a lot of folks here, be un-aware of the KYC compliance that PayPal has to adhere to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_your_customer
Every year we have to go through compliance training and they make it clear, this is a VERY big deal. If we mess this up, the entire business could be shut down.
I can say with some certainty, PayPal has spent many millions to be compliant.
I don't understand your post. If what you say is true, are you suggesting that this should be the basis of his legal defense? I'm not sure "I lost faith in my commanders" will get him off for passing on classified material.
So are you lionizing him because he's clearly innocent and an obvious scapegoat, or because he did do it and he is a champion of Freedom?
It is fascinating when people turn something into their moral issue, they become such sanctimonious pricks. Listen to the delicious condescension in your post; how you conceded to climb down off your high horse to patiently explain to someone clearly not as obviously morally correct as you. You don't find many Bible-thumping self-righteous anti-abortionist types on this site, but it really looks like the almost steady stream of Manning and Assange stories bring out a whole different kind of self-righteous assholes.
Yes, I know, I am clearly an unwashed cretin because I dare say anything that you don't agree with, but seriously, look at all these histrionic posts:
Mr. A: "Well, if he did steal and give away classified information, then, by definition, he is guilty of stealing and giving away classified information."
Mr. B: "Oh yeah? Do you think its right that innocent people are getting slaughtered? Do you know what was in those cables? Mother Rapists. And Father Rapists. Puppy kickers too. Do you think children should be killed? You probably do. You believe everything The Man tells you because you are a dumbass tool."
Mr. A: "Actually I never expressed an opinion of whether I think what he may or may not have done is correct. I'm just saying that if he stole and gave away classified information, then he is guilty of stealing and giving away classified information."
Mr. B: "That's what I'd expect an ignorant asshole like you to say. I can't believe you think he's guilty. Anyone who says he's guilty is a plant by the CIA anyway. You make me sick."
You know what's next, don't you? Someone who feels very morally superior is going to bomb PayPal, or MasterCard, or Amazon, or whatever. No matter the color of your stripe, be it religious, political, etc., a morally superior prick will always be a morally superior prick. And just as tiring.
PayPal has been screwing consumers for years. I, too, refuse to use it. Any site that pushes the use of those thieves, does not get my business.
Correct me if I am wrong, but he does not have to pay for his defense, nor is there a manner in which he could if he wanted.
"PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt."
You mean, like knowingly stealing a bunch of classified documents and handing them over to a sociopathic, ego-centric narcissist?
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
If anyone complains about an account then PayPal freezes it, without explanation to the account holder. They've always done this, and not just for high profile accounts. The only solution is to not use PayPal if it would inconvenience you to lose all the funds on your account.
You just gave the market to everyone else. And about time.
Paypal certainly doesn't deserve it.
I meant that paypal wasn't in danger from the "internet backlash". How many people do you met that you actually discuss paypal with?
I've dealt through paypal for years, along with my entire family, and never had a single problem despite the horror stories you claim are so prevalent.
Some people, like Jared Loughner are pretty obviously guilty
.
Well said, especially for an AC. You just forgot to mention the part where it doesn't matter that he is guilty because he did it for "the greater good"
Pardon the flowery eloquence, but PayPal sucks. And so does Ebay.
It seems that "in a wake of protest"PayPal has unfrozen the Courage to Resist account.
I'm not saying that that should be part of his legal defense. It's clear that he has no defence - he's completely controlled within the framework of rules defined by his opponents - those who place themselves into a position of unquestioned virtue, despite committing/sanctioning unimaginable acts of horror, nominally on 'our' (I'm in the UK) behalf.
I'm often reminded of Jack Nicholson's character's rant in "A few good men" (below) and wonder whether in fact, the way forward is for those of us who are 'ignorant of harsh reality', those of us who are beneath the blanket, to push those who provide it into offering it to those who are currently left uncovered. Something needs to be done. No longer can a country have a 'hard coating and a soft chewy interior' - internal ethics and morality need to be extended to all levels of society and then out into the world community such that we can all live together in peace (man).
This man, Bradley Manning, apparently took a stand for what he believed was right. Surely it's clear that morality is larger than the rule of law and only partly contains it as a set? Yet, we act as if law is morality. Indeed, take a look at the comments on this thread, "PayPal didn't break any law so everything's ok. waaaa" - again and again. It's quite clear that PayPal must be aware that this man's future in large part depends on his ability to mount a legal defence in his David vs Goliath - style battle yet because 'the rules were not broken', we are to consider that they acted appropriately. Please!
It's one step in a generations-long battle to eradicate hypocrisy and abuse by those in power. Roll-on the next step and the next. Let's get this thing moving!
</incoherent_rant>
-
“Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have more responsibility here than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. I know deep down in places you dont talk about at parties, you don’t want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then question the manner in which I provide it. I prefer you said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand to post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to!” [Jack Nicholson, as Colonel Jessup]
Jack Nicholson (Col. Jessup): “You want answers?”
Tom Cruise (Kaffee): “I think I’m entitled.”
Jack Nicholson (Col. Jessup): “You want answers?”
Tom Cruise (Kaffee): “I want the truth!”
Jack Nicholson (Col. Jessup): “You can’t handle the truth!”
-
PS. wth slashdot? line-height: 40px ? !!
Requiem for the American Dream
PayPal fail.
Recipes for USA bankrupt - http://tinypaste.com/0d66f dd = dollar deluge (printed in the infinity)
Why on earth do you have to limit yourself to credit cards? Just use SWIFT (or whatever is your equivalent to IBAN). Atleast within eurozone transfers between two individuals are practically free. Though I've heard rumors that in USA wire transfers cost crap-loads of money, which might limit their utility.
That is outrageous.
Come on now. You heard the warnings, everyone heard the warnings. Paypal pulls stuff like this often, and it's been going on for decades.
There is one simple rule to not getting ripped off by paypal, never have anything to do with paypal. They are the virtual street thugs of the money transfer business.
since you are writing in support of a traitor
Normally I try to explain my reasoning for taking issue with something and lay out my position
Well, whatever small amount of karma I have here be damned. You're an absolute arsehole, a genuine fucking cunt. Please, writhe in agony for hundreds of hours before expiring in puddle of your own goo, you fucking, fucking cunt.
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Once again you cut through to the heart of the issue and see it for what it is. I'm one of your fans for this very reason and I really enjoy your posts.
I find with stuff like this I tend to get caught up in the heat of the matter and lose perspective. Your comments are frequently modded to +5 and with good reason; thank you for sharing your thoughts.
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
^This. The entire situation is completely and utter absurd, and a slap in the face of everything our country is supposed to represent. He's been in custody for how many months now without any word of a trial?
Exactly. However, I'd point out it's not merely custody he's been enjoying at the pleasure of the 'American people'; kind Uncle Sam laid on a full spread of psychological torture for the man who pointed out the Emperor's saggy bottom cheeks behind the 'cloth of finest gold'. He's suffering even now, as we post on the innertubes.
Ahh, America, land of the free.
Note: I don't think my little shit-splat country is any better - of course, New Zealand doesn't trumpet and parade itself as a bastion of freedom like the US of A does..
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
The Milgram Experiment is seriously flawed. It doesn't deserve to be mentioned.
Oh fuck off, you fat prick. You've never got anything useful to say anyway, you immature, reactive foolish imbecile.
As soon as CTR fixes their issues, the account will be unfrozen. The criminal activity here is CTR misrepresenting their mistake as Paypal's, just to get a little free press and sympathy.
"Reaching for the popcorn"? I think you misspelled "Reaching for the lifeboats because if the US falls so will the entire fucking world."
In other news, Galileo has been exhumed and re-animated (with wires and stuff) to publically recant his belief that the Earth orbits around Sol.. in truth, it's America that the rest of the world revolves around; specifically, the state of Utah.
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
I've got a google checkout account, it works fine for incoming money transfers, and I am not a store, nor do I play one on TV. Fill out the online paperwork, point it at your bank account where you want to receive funds. Did you try setting up a merchant account or did you take somebody else's word that it can't be done?
Confiscating your money and holding it ransom until you permit them to take it is not illegal or unconstitutional?
Some people call it robbery.
So it's OK to steal then? Because that's what PayPal is doing.
It's also breech of contract.
What, do you think, would happen if disgruntled paypal customers popped round the CEO's house, kicked him out and squatted? Sure, those people aren't the government, so it's not a constitutional issue, and since they are going about a lien on this man's house, they have a right to remove the debtor.
right?
Sounds like there's a market for an alternative to PayPal.
Hey stupids...why don't you get the facts before jumping in with ridiculous claims? This business has requirements to fulfill before it allows use of its system.
Set your account up CORRECTLY and there's no problem; if you want to use an alternative financial-transfer system, then just do it and quit bitching, pointing fingers, and tightening your foil hat.
People need to move to use bitcoin for donations. Unhackable, untraceable. The US Gov is actually using akamai technologies to run denial of service attacks on companies that resist it. It, as of this very minute is running them against paypal and ebay to get them to do what they want. There are very powerful people doing very bad things. Protect yourself cause it's soon to get a lot worse.
"That money was just resting in my account!"
"By shutting out legitimate nonprofit activity, PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt.'" Interesting turn. PayPal takes unilateral action for whatever reason - just the same as Manning took unilateral action for his own reasons. PayPal decided for itself that they wanted to restrict funds for Manning's defense. They did not confer with Manning, his supporters, or his family. Bradley Manning decided for himself that he should release thousands of classified documents. He didn't confer with any other American. He just decided for himself. interesting... Apparently there is no monopoly here on "moral bankruptcy."
Lesigh. I don't want to see this guy screwed over anymore than the rest of his supporters but it's been pointed out several times in this thread and trumpeted from the rooftops by Paypal that the reason the account has been frozen is because they require a chequing account. Seems Courage to Resist could have figured that out themselves but decided to start screaming and waving their arms instead. It's also funny that they claim Paypal wouldn't supply the information when they've has responded to other requests for information pretty openly it seems.
I guess George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, etc. were all traitors too then? Technically they were from a purely British standpoint, but they stood up, broke the rules, and they did it because they believed the rules to be injust. Same thing here. It's a risk on their part and on Manning's part (dumb fool should have kept his mouth shut) but he wasn't betraying his country for money or to destroy the United States, he was trying to hold the US accountable for its actions so we start acting with some morals instead of just paying it lip service.
Undoubtably I'll be labeled a traitor now too since I spoke out against my government and they are illegally scouring just about everything under the sun any more for those who dare to ignore official party line!
Sounds like you mad, bro. Though I use that in the sense of insane. The US losing its position of prominence is going to shake things up quite a bit and anyone who believes it will happen quietly seems to be forgetting how our previous superpowers have met their ends.
And no, I'm not American and wouldn't even consider relocating.
Your understanding of commerce is shameful. PayPal recieved funds and entered into an agreement to do so freely. They cannot refuse to allow those funds to be given to the recipient when PayPal sees fit because it IS NOT THEIR MONEY.
You would suggest that the people paying PayPal have no say as to what PayPal do with the donation, even to the extent of keeping it for themselves. You would suggest theft is fine, as long as the shop selling the goods takes your money for the goods and refuses to give you the goods.
Do you run a shop?
Well if you have problems with that then where is the outrage for ALL prisoners in the US? I've been in maximum security before and I never had any defense fund or anyone crying over it. Ever been in a 23 hour lock down situation for months? I have and although I do understand the conditions aren't great, they serve their purpose. They need to isolate him from others and make sure he doesn't get hurt by others or hurt himself. This is not unusual in anyway and the fact that people think it is shows how little everyone knows about the conditions in almost any US prison.
Don't do the crime if you can't handle the time. Seriously. Who commits a crime and then cries because the conditions aren't ideal? It's a joke.
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
What you described happens in prisons every single day. Where is the outrage for that?
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
Or perhaps he did it because he was busted down to PFC for some other infractions and wanted to expose the unjustness of his punishment.
I am outraged by it I think its ridiculous.
The fact that you and so many other citizens think its A-OK makes me sick though.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
They don't owe him anything
Like hell they don't. They owe him the money that they collected on his behalf.
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Oh I'm not okay with it at all. My point is everyone else is. I've spent months in 23 hour lock down with1 hour out by myself for "recreation" which amounted to sitting in a sealed yard and seeing the sky above. See this is how we treat everyday criminals, I didn't commit a heinous crime.
It's screwed up big time and people are completely cool with it. It's only when people want to make a political statement with an inmate that they care.
Another point I was trying to make is - be prepared for this if you do a crime. Jail is really messed up and you should avoid it at all costs. This guy obviously didn't understand the consequences but this is what awaits anyone who goes against the US government or it's states. They'll let you know real quick who is really in charge and right or wrong, you'll be fucked.
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
The recent actions have shown that Paypal is basically acting on behalf of the government, and will do whatever it says, regardless of whether or not there is any legal requirement or need to do so.
This just means that you should treat Paypal as a US Government-owned bank in terms of your decisions to use it for various things and understand that your funds do not belong to you until they escape paypal.
The problem I have with these types of arguments that are based on morality, particularly when it has to do with legal issues, is that the the foundation for morality is pretty cloudy and is basically defined by the person making the argument. For this reason I don't necessarily agree that morality is larger than the rule of law because the law is (more or less) clearly spelled out, whereas, in general, morality isn't. Even within religions it isn't clearly spelled out, and certainly not across religions. If your moral standing on an issue is not the same as my moral standing, than I would want you punished for breaking laws you might feel you are permitted to break. People who kill doctors who perform abortions make that kind of argument, and I can't say that I sympathize with them when they are arrested. I recall from years ago a newspaper article (I think this was even pre-9/11) about radical Islamic clerics who openly advocated and encouraged killing Israelis. Apparently, in the Koran it is spelled out pretty clearly who you can and can't kill (my foggy memory recollects it being something like it is forgivable to kill enemy soldiers in war, but you must never kill innocent civilians). The argument these particular clerics were making was that military service in Israel is mandatory for everybody, so indiscriminate killing of men, women and children was OK because if they aren't currently in the military, they would be eventually. Like those who kill abortion doctors, these clerics have defined the moral ground and their standing in it, and clearly feel justified in what they advocate. You can even find posts in this topic (35306854, which isn't the one I'm thinking of in particular, but they're not hard to find), and basically for any story that gets posted about Wikileaks, where people counter the argument about releasing this info will put people in harm's way by saying that those people who might be killed because of that were just going to kill other people, so it is OK.
It seems to me that the strongest supporters of Assange and Manning, at least around here, draw a very sharp line defined by the notion of transparency, which they take to be absolute. To me, that line isn't nearly as sharply defined as they make it to be. However, some at least, stake a high moral claim by stepping to one side of that line and seem to express forgiveness for any alleged wrongdoing. It is the sort of passion and one-sided arguments that you usually don't see expressed outside of "hot button" issues that crop up with religion or perhaps post-9/11 US patriotism (remember, you are not a true American if you don't wear a flag on your coat lapel at all times). I would wager that a good deal of those around this site who argue so passionately for Manning and Assange would look with disdain upon those who argue passionately, for example, the Pro-Life movement, even though (in my mind, at least), they are making the same argument that only differs on which tower on the moral landscape they decided to climb.
where is the outrage for ALL prisoners in the US?
This is a straw man. We're talking about Bradley Manning. My voicing of concern for his conditions does not affect in either direction my concern for those of other prisoners.
I don't know the reasons that you spent time in prison. I am sure that the conditions were extremely unpleasant, quite possibly inhumane. However, the fact that you or any other prisoner was mistreated has no bearing on the rightness of the mistreatment of prisoners. Mistreatment is mistreatment. It was wrong when it was done to you, and it's wrong when it's done to Manning.
Don't do the crime if you can't handle the time.
Bradley Manning has not even been accused of a crime. He's being held in solitary confinement, under suicide watch, in pre-indictment custody. A military psychologist has examined him and found him to not be a self-harm risk, but he is still under suicide watch. His access to the world outside his jail is incredibly limited. Tell me how the way he's being held is contributing to him being less likely to want to hurt himself, or being, as you said, "fit to stand trial".
Oh okay. No need to continue this bullshit conversation then. Write your fucking congressman.
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
here ya go http://file.wikileaks.info/leak/CollateralMurder_full.mp4
And a jury would have the right of nullification, then.
Paypal is overextending themselves here. Charities could give them one account that is usually empty, and move funds from it to another account so that even if Paypal could remove funds they wouldn't be able to do so. Therefore Paypal has no recourse here and this is further evidence that they are attempting to be corrupt. They have no right to stipulate how some company does business.
Further evidence of them being shady is that after I have spoken against them, one of their developers ceased his Slashdot relationship with me.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
The Communist yin is the American yang and that's the whole point. We'll get to a single world government soon enough. It's required for deep space travel to become possible on a regular basis for most human beings... and it will be required for us to survive as a species.
Let's not split hairs on government. When we are capable of easily traveling space individually we will not require big government... but until then we do.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Mmmmm chicken (drool) by Stenchwarrior the RETARDED DOUCHEBAG (1335051) on Thursday February 24, @05:06PM (#35306192)
Oh, that's what a retarded douchebag says!
Speak for yourself retard. You can't write properly either:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2010616&cid=35299528
The word is not "weight", it's "weighs". Then again, a retarded moron like yourself? We don't expect much from the likes of you.
I cld lv ll th vwls ut f ths scntnc nd stll b ndrstd bt tht dsnt mk t rght. by Stenchwarrior THE RETARDED ILLITERATE MORON(1335051) on Monday February 28, @10:25AM (#35338050)
Oh, so that's what a retarded illiterate moron says!