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.
You mean the guy who joined the US military just to intentionally leak secret material? They explain very clearly what is going to happen to you if you intentionally leak Secret material when you get your clearance, 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 that's right, America is terrible.
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.
Pretty much sums up the treasonous Bradley Manning and those trying to support him. Good for PayPal! I hope they shut down accounts for all those who try to ruin this country like this weasle.
. . . 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.
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!!
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
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.
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
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.
Wrong. You have the right to legal defense - period. Not "the best legal defense available". Big difference. PayPal has no legal or even moral obligation to collect funds for this defendant's defense. And there are other means available. Someone could set up a bank account for the purpose. But since you are writing in support of a traitor I suppose I should not expect you to actually understand how the law really works.
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...
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.
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
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
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
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.
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"
PayPal has always been morally bankrupt; what took you so long to figure out that?
My karma is not a Chameleon.
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?
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.
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.
yeah but they don't have the right to abscond with other people's money...no matter WHAT their TOS says.
not this way.
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.
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
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".
"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
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.
"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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
> 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?!?
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
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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?
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.
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!