It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Amazon.com Terminates Relationship With WikiLeaks, No Longer Hosts Whistle-Blower Website

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Amazon.com Terminates Relationship With WikiLeaks, No Longer Hosts Whistle-Blower Website


www.foxnews.com

Amazon.com Terminates Relationship With WikiLeaks, No Longer Hosts Whistle-Blower Website
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Just coming across the wires now not much info on it yet. Looks to me like wikileaks is being tossed out and are going to find themselves homeless on the net soon. Seems that they are definately under the guns now and the walls are coming down and closing in around them. Will update as news becomes more available.

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Amazon pulls plug on wikileaks
edit on 1-12-2010 by jaynkeel because: Add link


Aol News
edit on 1-12-2010 by jaynkeel because: add link



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
On our planet truth seekers are criminals..
Presenting the truth is illegal

sad sad world we live in...
lets take it back !



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


so, it would appear that everyone who jumped on the wikileaks is a gov't cover ......................

might just be wrong???????????

i guess this could be a false flag, in order to give host sites unprecented reason to deny anyone or any group that the gov't sees as opposition to TPTB...........

see, they didn't even have to officially declare wikileaks an enemy of the state, just the mere mention that they might be labeled as...........and people and groups start jumping ship....??



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Amazon is still a corporate lap dog of the government, they weren't about to jeopardize anything in the name of public disclosure. Not with every government out there gunning for them.

Wikileaks should start looking to the P2P model for all their releases, it seems to work for their insurance package. Just so long as include a good security hash to verify it as an official release.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ParkerCramer
 


While I am still on the fence about wikileaks true agenda and who is behind them, I admit this right here is wrong. Kinda sad when like you said premature pulling of the site due to fears that haven't been resolved yet.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I wouldnt worry too much.
If the website is shut down all they will do is release the password for the Insurance file.
Im pretty sure they aticipated the response and did infact put everything they have into the insurance file.


1.4 gigs of data is a lot of pages of text.
What if the insurance file has EVERYTHING assange has on it?? That would screw the governments up big time because hundreds of thousands of people have the insurance file.

Wikileaks could just twitter the password



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
personally after what theyre doing with the diplomatic cables i wouldnt host them either.

The iraq/afghan war stuff i could see a moral case for releasing some of that stuff. Things like civlian casualty numbers the USA claimed not to have etc

I havnt seen anything in the those cables thats in the public interest to be released. Its almost tabloid journalism stuff so far. Risks good work going on behind the scenes, compromising allies. I dont like it.
edit on 1-12-2010 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
As I understand it wikileaks only sought protection from amazon after they came under attack for cablegate. I could be wrong thought. Maybe amazon can't handle the 10gb/sec attacks.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ParkerCramer
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


so, it would appear that everyone who jumped on the wikileaks is a gov't cover ......................

might just be wrong???????????

i guess this could be a false flag, in order to give host sites unprecented reason to deny anyone or any group that the gov't sees as opposition to TPTB...........

see, they didn't even have to officially declare wikileaks an enemy of the state, just the mere mention that they might be labeled as...........and people and groups start jumping ship....??


Could it be that this will be used as an excuse for the Government to impose more control over the internet?



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabalis
 


Perhaps this is what is going on, maybe this is the government taking action and kindly letting Amazon know that it would be in their best interest to follow directions.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaynkeel
reply to post by Cabalis
 


Perhaps this is what is going on, maybe this is the government taking action and kindly letting Amazon know that it would be in their best interest to follow directions.


I was thinking more along the lines of the "internet kill switch" scenario that's been talked about on ATS but I could see them strong arming Amazon, too.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Honestly.. its not really a big deal.

They will just use another host, which they seem to have already done.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
This isn't shocking, and I'm fairly confident WikiLeaks will figure everything out so they can continue to pass some truth on to the people.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by TwiTcHomatic
Honestly.. its not really a big deal.

They will just use another host, which they seem to have already done.


I disagree, if Wikileaks was deemed a legitimate threat to National Security and blacklisted and linked to terror then I would expect this kind of action. But thus far nothing to that extent has been put in place formally to the best of my knowledge. But it does make one wonder if Amazon was coaxed along and told to drop them instead of doing it on their own free will. If thats the case then I would think it doesn't bode well for internet dealings. Like a previous poster stated they haven't been formally charged with anything yet and for Amazon to take action of terminating their hosting of Wikileaks without that seems odd. While I really don't agree with the current situation Wikileaks has caused, they shouldn't be silenced and restricted either.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Why not just release the password to the insurance file??? FRUSTRATED



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaynkeel


I disagree, if Wikileaks was deemed a legitimate threat to National Security and blacklisted and linked to terror then I would expect this kind of action. But thus far nothing to that extent has been put in place formally to the best of my knowledge. But it does make one wonder if Amazon was coaxed along and told to drop them instead of doing it on their own free will. If thats the case then I would think it doesn't bode well for internet dealings. Like a previous poster stated they haven't been formally charged with anything yet and for Amazon to take action of terminating their hosting of Wikileaks without that seems odd. While I really don't agree with the current situation Wikileaks has caused, they shouldn't be silenced and restricted either.


I understand what you are saying.. all I meant was the action by amazon does not stop Wikileaks in the slightest. They just find another host.. the information will still get out there.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TwiTcHomatic
 


Agreed.

Sorry thought you were going somewhere else on that.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Sites back up with more releases....



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Perhaps Amazon.com is afraid of having its assets seized.

Answer this: since, by all accounts, the Wikileaks information is legitimate U.S. government classified information, and since no one in the U.S. government has officially declassified said information, wouldn't the U.S. government be well within their rights to quarantine / confiscate / isolate / seize any computer hardware and associated infrastructure in an attempt to reclaim said classified information? Especially if said computer system / organization was not a well-known news source, such as the New York Times, but was rather a peddler of goods and wares?

Seems to me that for any U.S. owned company to have ANYTHING to do, formally, with Wikileaks is, at this point, asking for trouble.......

It may not be right, but business is business......and Justice Department search warrants and seized servers are probably pretty bad for Amazon.com's business model.

Just sayin'........



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join