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.

 

WikiLeaks Supporters Aim Cyberattacks At PayPal

page: 4
40
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Now you know she can't advertise on ats without consent from the owners stop the maddness.




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch


Yes, that was ignorant and rude. So smooth, I must say Im sure he's a hit with the ladies


Coming from a single woman, you probably shouldnt be too quick to imply someone couldnt be attractive to the opposite gender.

My wife thinks I'm pretty neat

edit on 6-12-2010 by BigTimeCheater because: (no reason given)


I am single by choice, however you seem to insinuate otherwise. Im glad your wife thinks your "neat".

On topic, I still think it's wrong to attack PP. Maybe you should email Julian A and tell him all the things you've told me. THat HE can get another site to be paid through..or use a bank..or that he uses food stamps because he gets paid through paypal. But I am beginning to think you like belittling others.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


She is free to U2U me the link.

I need a logo pronto for an upcoming project.

Coding is my thing, graphics are not .



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch
 


How is it wrong to attack a company that blatantly steals money from people?

Snopes article on PP settling a class action lawsuit

PP horror stories


More PP horror stories

I can post countless examples.

If any company deserves to be brought down, PP is one of them.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   
This is a free market! If PP wants to sever its business relationship with Wikileaks that is their right to do so based on the nefarious activity of WL. So, poor little Wiki and its lemmings want revenge. Mind numbing!! Apparently, none of these lemmings have ever worked for or even run a business.

Relationships and contracts end all of the time for various reasons. In this case PP is motivated to cut off WL based on its criminal activity. Time to throw the book at all of them including those seeking to attack PP.

Just because they hide behind a computer in their parent's basements does change the legality of their actions. All crimes have victims. No way to rationalize out of that fact. I know several small business owners who earn a portion of their income via Pay Pal. No need for them to change their provider just because some punks want unwarranted revenge. For those who defend the attackers of PayPay... you are just supporting more criminal activity. Time to raise the criminality bar for cyber attackers and treat them as the crooks that they are.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Here is yet another great example of how PP screws their "customers" over.


Click here



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


And i can post horror stories of any financial institution. Banks are even worse. I have had no problems, and had no clue that other's did.
I did have a problem with a clients payment, called paypal's customer service, was treated exceptionally well and problem was solved instantly.
Im not condoning what they did to Julian A, all Im saying is, this cyber bomb hurts innocent people. I feel the shrapnel from the bomb. Maybe that doesnt matter to you unless you see blood.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
This is a free market! If PP wants to sever its business relationship with Wikileaks that is their right to do so based on the nefarious activity of WL. So, poor little Wiki and its lemmings want revenge. Mind numbing!! Apparently, none of these lemmings have ever worked for or even run a business.

Relationships and contracts end all of the time for various reasons. In this case PP is motivated to cut off WL based on its criminal activity. Time to throw the book at all of them including those seeking to attack PP.

Just because they hide behind a computer in their parent's basements does change the legality of their actions. All crimes have victims. No way to rationalize out of that fact. I know several small business owners who earn a portion of their income via Pay Pal. No need for them to change their provider just because some punks want unwarranted revenge. For those who defend the attackers of PayPay... you are just supporting more criminal activity. Time to raise the criminality bar for cyber attackers and treat them as the crooks that they are.


What criminal activity?

Who has been convicted?

On what charges?



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Amen, and thank you for standing up for all the small businesses out there that are feeling the effects of this bomb.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


how about possession of stolen property for starters.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


how about possession of stolen property for starters.


Remember that little innocent until proven guilty thing?

Happen to have a link to a court case where they were convicted of something?



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


how about possession of stolen property for starters.


Remember that little innocent until proven guilty thing?

Happen to have a link to a court case where they were convicted of something?


Yes, let the courts decide. But I highly doubt that Manning had permission to give WL anything that is the sole property of the US govt. That is why Manning is in Jail!!!!!! So, I call that theft of intellectual property. Apparently, our AG is afraid of WL and its spooky doomsday/insurance file.

It will all come out in the wash! I can assure you that!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Remember Manning is only being detained, he isn't sitting in jail because he was convicted of anything.

Pretty important detail there.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


A crime is a crime and he is cooking for a reason. I'll wait for his day in court. I can't wait to hear is defense. I bet his handlers will push for mental instability of some sort (Manning the victim of harassment will be presented to the nation rather than Manning the traitor). The files Manning absconded with were illegally distributed or sold to a third party. They were not his to distribute.

If I pulled those tricks with sensitive files that belong to my employer, I'd be in jail too.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


What part of "He hasnt been convicted of any crime" do you not understand?

You could be arrested tomorrow and charged with killing eleventy jillion people, would that automatically make you guilty? Of course not.

Only after you are convicted is one guilty.

Allegations of a crime does not make one a criminal.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


I'd highly recommend you establish and report the facts correctly.

manning is detained, not arrested, there is a huge difference between the two...
detained: de·tain (d-tn)
tr.v. de·tained, de·tain·ing, de·tains
1. To keep from proceeding; delay or retard.
2. To keep in custody or temporary confinement: The police detained several suspects for questioning. The disruptive students were detained after school until their parents had been notified.
3. Obsolete To retain or withhold (payment or property, for example).

arrested: An arrest is the act of depriving a person of his or her liberty usually in relation to the investigation and prevention of crime. The term is Anglo-Norman in origin and is related to the French word arrêt, meaning "stop".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrested
Having been stopped or prevented from developing
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arrested
arrest - collar: take into custody; "the police nabbed the suspected criminals"
arrest - check: hold back, as of a danger or an enemy; check the expansion or influence of; "Arrest the downward trend"; "Check the growth of communism in South East Asia"; "Contain the rebel movement"; "Turn back the tide of communism"
arrest - catch: attract and fix; "His look caught her"; "She caught his eye"; "Catch the attention of the waiter"
arrest - apprehension: the act of apprehending (especially apprehending a criminal); "the policeman on the beat got credit for the collar"
arrest - halt: cause to stop; "Halt the engines"; "Arrest the progress"; "halt the presses"
arrest - the state of inactivity following an interruption; "the negotiations were in arrest"; "held them in check"; "during the halt he got some lunch"; "the momentary stay enabled him to escape the blow"; "he spent the entire stop in his seat"

source: www.google.com...:Arrested&sa=X&ei=wS39TKP_HZC0sAPjs8n3DQ&ved=0CBoQkAE

heres the true story....

source;abcnews.go.com...

nice try with the one sided attempt: but a major one view FAIL!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


Fyi WL has committed no crime and has never been charged and never will be for a crime in this matter. Information is not property as such and copyright issues don't apply either.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch
Im not offended. Im just irked that someone has tried to close down a site that I get my money from.


If you read the OP you would see that it was the paypal blog that was affected, not paypal itself.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by jibeho
 


I'd highly recommend you establish and report the facts correctly.

manning is detained, not arrested, there is a huge difference between the two...
detained: de·tain (d-tn)
tr.v. de·tained, de·tain·ing, de·tains
1. To keep from proceeding; delay or retard.
2. To keep in custody or temporary confinement: The police detained several suspects for questioning. The disruptive students were detained after school until their parents had been notified.
3. Obsolete To retain or withhold (payment or property, for example).

arrested: An arrest is the act of depriving a person of his or her liberty usually in relation to the investigation and prevention of crime. The term is Anglo-Norman in origin and is related to the French word arrêt, meaning "stop".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrested
Having been stopped or prevented from developing
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arrested
arrest - collar: take into custody; "the police nabbed the suspected criminals"
arrest - check: hold back, as of a danger or an enemy; check the expansion or influence of; "Arrest the downward trend"; "Check the growth of communism in South East Asia"; "Contain the rebel movement"; "Turn back the tide of communism"
arrest - catch: attract and fix; "His look caught her"; "She caught his eye"; "Catch the attention of the waiter"
arrest - apprehension: the act of apprehending (especially apprehending a criminal); "the policeman on the beat got credit for the collar"
arrest - halt: cause to stop; "Halt the engines"; "Arrest the progress"; "halt the presses"
arrest - the state of inactivity following an interruption; "the negotiations were in arrest"; "held them in check"; "during the halt he got some lunch"; "the momentary stay enabled him to escape the blow"; "he spent the entire stop in his seat"

source: www.google.com...:Arrested&sa=X&ei=wS39TKP_HZC0sAPjs8n3DQ&ved=0CBoQkAE

heres the true story....

source;abcnews.go.com...

nice try with the one sided attempt: but a major one view FAIL!


Bravo, Bravo, You know how to look up the meanings of words. Now I think Manning although detained at the current moment in time will be arrested and convicted. But thats not what the discussion is about, The discussion is about Wikileaks supporters cyber-attacking paypal. Answer me this if you can. Why does this question get bumped to the side in every thread. Why don't the people that strongly support Wikileaks and Assange take out their aggression with the people "causing" the problems? Example the United States government? I have yet to see people march down to their offices and establishments and demand change, as anyone can hide behind a computer and spout out words of hate and cyber attack. If people feel that strongly about the situation they wouldn't be silenced through net censoring and such? Or is it just easier for people to sit in their homes and complain? There is a reason why when unions protest they do it in person not behind a computer. And no this method does not have to include any kind of violence.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaynkeel
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Little do these idiots realize is that they are just feeding the beast. They are going to be the cause of the internet being shut down through their actions. And no I don't agree when big brother does it either, two wrongs don't make a right. But considering the mentality that we are dealing with it doesn't surprise me.


OMG this constant fear that if someone stands up to them they will take the internet down. Best be very, very obedient and not do anything they disapprove, lest they shut the internet... Taking the internet down will be a HUGE deal and they know it.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join