Boycott PayPal for Dumping Wikileaks

Boycott Amazon for Dumping Wikileaks

Some background on Anonymous from an academic POV.
Six videos, +/- 10 mins each, total length: 1 hour, 4 minutes.
Embed code at link below.
edit: Hmmm. guess this forum or YT has changed something, as playlist apparently no longer embeddable here... Watch it here or at YT





Hackers vs. Scientology

Gabriella Coleman's lecture "Old and New Net Wars over Free Speech & Secrecy or How to Understand the Lulz battle against the Church of Scientology", at NYU's ITP on March 5, 2010.

A video presentation about the question why geeks have been compelled to protest the Church of Scientology vehemently for nearly two decades.

Videographer: Stephen Bruckett Editor: Patrick Davison.

This work is published by Gabriella Coleman under a free Creative Commons Attribution Sharealike license. Full text of permission can be found here: http://nocensor****.co.cc/index.php?id=137

-- Edited by budnonymous on Tuesday 7th of December 2010 05:21:02 PM

Looks like our buddy, Paypal Osama, (not to be confused with that other paypal Osama) got caught telling a little white lie...

In a TechCrunch post, he stated that State Dept told us these were illegal activities. It was straightforward." when questioned about exactly why, or what were the illegal activities. However, later in the post, he clarifies (backstage, after the interview was over no less), that the State Department did not directly talk to PayPal and that the letter in question here was actually sent by the State Department to WikiLeaks.

In other events overnight, Anonymous took down mastercard.com, and Senator Lieberman's site, also glanced upon Sarah Palin's site. One other DdoSed site, ADVBYRA.SE - the the site of the 'rape' accusers' lawyer, was taken down by the ISP due to being on a shared server

A good spot to get the play by play with excellent visual exibits is this post at Panda Labs blog.

Now here are a couple surprises. (not)

Bank of America cuts ties with WikiLeaks

This bank's stuff is due to be released very soon.
I think that's what a lot of folks are waiting for.



The LOIC  (Low Orbit Ion Cannon or LOL-cannon) is starting to be defined as malware/spyware

From Virustotal.com

loic-1.0.4-binary.zip
2010-12-17 06:50:31 (UTC)
finished
18 /43 (41.9%)



-- Edited by budnonymous on Saturday 18th of December 2010 06:33:21 AM

Thursday, December 16,2010

Feds react to WikiLeaks

By David Accomazzo

The controversy surrounding the latest disclosure of secret and classified diplomatic cables, dubbed "cablegate" by some uninventive types in the media, has spawned a wide variety of responses.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, herself an author of some of the most controversial (and embarrassing) cables, stands on one side, bellowing that the document disclosure "tears at the fabric" of international relations. Then there are others, like Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who downplay the effect the leaks will have on national security.

"I've heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described as a 'meltdown,' as a 'game-changer,' or so on, and I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought. ... Is it embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest," Gates said at a press conference shortly after the cables were first released.

Despite the fact that many in the media, like Gates, also downplay the negative impact of the WikiLeaks cables, many government officials have stepped up rhetoric in the past few days, calling for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to be charged with espionage, treason or worse.

In a release on his website, Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., characterized the leaks as an attack on U.S. national security that endangers the lives of Americans. He also implored the president to use all legal means necessary to shut down WikiLeaks and, waxing philosophical, called the release an assault on the "principle of transparency." Later, Lieberman attacked The New York Times for publishing the documents.

"To me The New York Times has committed at least an act of, at best, bad citizenship, but whether they have committed a crime is a matter of discussion for the justice department," Lieberman told FOX News.

Lieberman wasn't the only politician to take U.S. media outlets to task. Rep.-elect Allen West, a Florida Republican, said on a right-wing radio program that the news organizations publishing the leaked documents should be censored.

"There are different means by which you can be attacked," West said, according to a transcript published on ThinkProgress.org. "I mean, it doesn't have to be a bomb or an airplane flying into a building. It could be through leaking of very sensitive, classified information. And I think that we also should be censoring the American news agencies which enabled him to do this and also supported him and applauded him for the efforts. So thats kind of aiding and abetting a serious crime."

Mama Bear Sarah Palin took to Twitter and called WikiLeaks' release "treasonous." Her running mate and political surrogate father from 2008 was a bit more polite.

"I wish The New York Times had chosen not to [publish the leaked cables]," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told The Daily Beast.

Official response that goes beyond the opinions of Washington politicians has been a bit more muted, but that doesnt mean nothing is happening. As others have pointed out, if the justice department were moving to indict WikiLeaks pale-faced Australian founder, there would be no way for the American public to find out beforehand, since grand jury deliberations are secret. While Assange addresses allegations of sexual assault made against him by two Swedish women, he will have to wait for word from the American government as to whether or not theyve constructed a legal argument that could be used to request his extradition from Sweden.

WikiLeaks claims it gave the cables to the State Department prior to publishing them so that the U.S. government could provide feedback as to which documents WikiLeaks should "look at with extra care," and that the State Department refused to provide that information, instead insisting that none of the cables be released.

The State Department sent a letter, dated Nov.

27, to WikiLeaks, firmly stating the governments desire to keep the WikiLeaks documents out of the public eye. The letter, published by Reuters, says that the documents were given to WikiLeaks in a violation of American law.

"As long as WikiLeaks holds such material," the letter says, "the violation of the law is ongoing."

The letter concludes: "If you are genuinely interested in seeking to stop the damage from your actions, you should: 1) ensure WikiLeaks ceases publishing any and all such materials; 2) ensure WikiLeaks returns any and all classified U.S. Government material in its possession; and 3) remove and destroy all records of this material from WikiLeaks databases."

Much has been made about the use of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks to take down websites of organizations that are anti-WikiLeaks. The DDoS attacks (which, on the scale of passionate activism techniques ranks just above changing your Facebook profile picture and many, many steps below hunger strikes) have been directed at WikiLeaks, too. Some suspect the government was behind the attacks, and there has been no word on this from the government so far, although a security expert interviewed by the Associated Press said the attackers were most likely "a bunch of geeks," not the U.S. government.

The Twitter account of State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley acted as the voice for the state department for a few days, issuing statements to counteract accusations appearing on blogs and websites. One major tweet concerned the governments role in PayPals decision to sever ties with WikiLeaks after PayPal. There had been some speculation of U.S. government involvement after a company vice president publicly referred to a letter from the government as reason for stopping WikiLeaks service.

"The U.S. government did not write to PayPal requesting any action regarding #WikiLeaks. Not true," tweeted Crowley.

PayPal later clarified that the VP was referring to the letter written by the State Department to WikiLeaks, not a letter addressed specifically to PayPal.

.............................................................



So amidst all the other ugliness, as the money-crooks and political crooks twitch & freak while the dirt beneath their rollers surfaces, there is peer  PayPal.

Not only did Paypal try to use this as a smokescreen for a quick, illegal,  and sneaky money grab, but they, themselves, used 'leaked' info to make that decision.

Looking over at PandaLabs Blog I see that they have discovered the very same SEO trending topic oriented, Fake Youtube page/player malware distribution scam which I found back when [non-politically influenced - LOL!] PayPal decided that Ms Pamela Gellar's (of AtlasShrugs Blog) right to free speech was 'hate speech' and cut her account off.

(Followed by a wave of harassment from Paypal's clan of paid psychopaths, goons, stalkers, and 'special advisors', all while Payapal allowed the anti-American, Anti-Christian, Anti-Isreal, Anti-Jewish, pro Islamic Jihad oriented sites to continue exercising their free speech while using the paypal donation button to fund their efforts.)

But I digress. !

With the exception of the trending topic du jour, the malware scam is the same: the same fake player image, with the time remaining showing as 6:66, same youtube account username "thenameisskittles" (which last I checked was an active, valid youtube account, not sure if that is a 'victim' or the 'perp')



-- Edited by budnonymous on Tuesday 21st of December 2010 08:02:09 AM