New York Times Editorial: The financial industry is trying to shut down WikiLeaks.

[Better Believe It]

Editorial
Banks and WikiLeaks
December 25, 2010

The whistle-blowing Web site WikiLeaks has not been convicted of a crime. The Justice Department has not even pressed charges over its disclosure of confidential State Department communications. Nonetheless, the financial industry is trying to shut it down.

Visa, MasterCard and PayPal announced in the past few weeks that they would not process any transaction intended for WikiLeaks. Earlier this month, Bank of America decided to join the group, arguing that WikiLeaks may be doing things that are “inconsistent with our internal policies for processing payments.”

But a bank’s ability to block payments to a legal entity raises a troubling prospect. A handful of big banks could potentially bar any organization they disliked from the payments system, essentially cutting them off from the world economy.

The decisions to bar the organization came after its founder, Julian Assange, said that next year it will release data revealing corruption in the financial industry.

What would happen if a clutch of big banks decided that a particularly irksome blogger or other organization was “too risky”? What if they decided — one by one — to shut down financial access to a newspaper that was about to reveal irksome truths about their operations? This decision should not be left solely up to business-as-usual among the banks.

Read the full editorial at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26sun3.html?_r=1

[katnapped]

1. GEEEE--I WONDER WHY?!?!? n/t

[Better Believe It]

2. It's a mystery! Well, WikiLeaks isn't listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

You can't enrich yourself by supporting WikiLeaks!

[sabrina 1]

3. They are hoping to stop them from releasing the bank information.

But I think they will simply make more people come forward to help get the information out. Everyone wants to know, around the world, who is responsible for the collapse of their economies. There are plenty of small banks and Credit Unions he can deal with, all over the world.

[azul]

7. Wikileaks should have revealed that it was releasing stuff on PETA.

And then release the financial industry leaks, and say that they were just kidding about PETA.

Why would they give them all such warning? Make them expose themselves by attacking the messenger because they have something to hide?

[anamandujano]

9. "Why would they give them all such warning?"

Whether they planned it or not, we are getting schooled on how politically powerful and deeply corrupt the banks are. It forces all the cockroaches to make mistakes while running for cover willy-nilly*.



*I've never used this expression before. It is both funny and alarmingly apropos.

[sabrina 1]

11. Well, Wikileaks did release information on an Iceland Bank

You can read the demand by the bank in Iceland that Wikileaks take down the information they published on their site HERE

Notice how the Bank threatens Wikileaks and emphasizes that they have obtained legal advice from the U.S.

>
> Having regard to the abovementioned the bank hereby respectfully
> requests that the content on the abovementoined link is removed
> immediately !
>
> If the operators of Wikileaks fail to do so Kaupthing bank will
> take all applicable and appropriate measures according to law. We
> have already obtained US legal council to follow this matter.
>
> Your attention is furthermore drown to the fact that individual
> parties affected by the publication might take legal action and
> demand damages against you for infringement of their right to
> privacy.

Wikileaks responded:

No. We will not assist the remains of Kaupthing, or its clients,
to hide its dirty laundry from the global community. Attempts by
Kaupthing or its agents to discover the source of the document in
question may be a criminal violation of both Belgium source protection
laws and the Swedish constitution. Who is your US counsel?

Jay Lim.

The revelations by Wikileaks resulted in prosecutions and convictions:

Kaupthing Bank

By 9 October 2008, Kaupthing Bank HF was forced into government receivership - only days after a crisis at Landsbanki placed it into government control.<9> Due to the crisis throughout the Icelandic financial system, all trading in the country's equity markets was suspended on 13 October 2008. On 29 July 2009 Wikileaks exposed a confidential 210 page document listing Kaupthing's exposure to loans ranging from 45 million to 1.25 billion Euros.<10> The leaked presentation revealed the bank had loaned billions of euros to its major shareholders, including a total of €1.43 billion to Exista and subsidiaries which own 23% of the bank.<11>

On 9 December 2009, Daniel Thordarsson, former asset manager and Stefnir Ingi Agnarsson, former stock broker, both of Kaupthing Hf, were sentenced to an eight month prison term by the Reykjavik District Court.

The pair was charged with putting in offers to buy Exista shares six times in January and February last year shortly before the close of business, so that the offers would affect the end-of-day value of Exista shares. The charges were of submitting false purchase enquiries and of share price manipulation.

I'm not sure why Wikileaks lets people know when they are about to release information like this. But, even when threatened, they do not retract the information as in this case.

Assange was asked if they had information on the financial industry a few months ago and he confirmed that they did. But, I'm not sure if it was already known before that.

Whatever the reasons for the pre-warnings, someone is very worried about what will be revealed. Iceland is cleaning up its mess after the collapse of its economy. Unlike here, they are prosecuting those responsible. I think this will happen elsewhere also and there is a desperate attempt to try to fend off impending criminal charges against Banks all over Europe, and who knows, maybe even here if we ever restore the rule of law.

[azul]

16. Thanks for the enlightening reply.

There needs to be much more light shed on the financial collapse of 2008.

Deregulate and corrupt fools are turned loose to boom and bust the system.

[City Lights]

4. The truth hurts, eh banks?

:nuke:

[azul]

5. Maybe this is what all businesses in Iran feel like.

Being punished for some other countries' crimes and best-kept-hidden nastiness.

[wtmusic]

6. Interesting. Do we need legislation to ensure "financial neutrality"? nt

[DBoon]

8. I'm much more inclined to support socialism these days

stuff like this convinces me that capitalism and freedom are exact opposites.

Either we own them or they will own us. Right now they own us.

Banks should be publicly owned.

[Rex]

10. I fucking hate credit card companies, I hope assy finds a way to destroy

them completely...haha like that would ever happen. The big CCs have had a noose around the Peoples neck for decades now...no way are they ever going to lose.

I really really really hate big business and WISH there was a law that kept them out of the pants of our Senators and our SCOTUS.

[malaise]

12. Looks like everyone is waking up

to these fascists even folks who supported their agenda for way too long.
If they can do this to WikiLeaks, no one else is safe.

[wtmusic]

13. Like most problems with the US, the heart of the solution is enforcing anti-trust.

Q. Which situation would make it easier to stop payments to organizations with dissenting viewpoints?

a. 20 banks / 8 credit cards
b. 4 banks / 3 credit cards

[Q3JR4]

14. Mastercard, Visa, and Paypal have no problem with

processing donations for the http://wn.com/VISA,_Mastercard_PayPal_Deny_WikiLeaks%27_Donations_But_Allow_Donations_For_KKK">KKK, but they object to Wikileaks on moral grounds?

I'm not sure I know what to say about that...

Q3JR4.

[cognoscere]

18. And the BoA doesn't even clarify it that much.

They did it because, "WikiLeaks may be doing things that are “inconsistent with our internal policies for processing payments.” I'd bet a lot of money those internal policies are kept secret.

[femrap]

15. Maybe it will be about the

NY Fed....how sweet! But I'd take BofA as well.

[maryf]

17. K&Rnt

[gratuitous]

19. Financial institutions, in concert with the government

Can effectively stop people from participating in the economic system. Interesting concept. It's almost like I've heard something like that before. Imagine being shut out from buying or selling, paying or getting paid, simply by institutional fiat endorsed by a government that similarly has something to hide. No rules of procedure, no due process, just bam! you're an economic non-person.