Wikileaks (13 Viewers)
- Thread starter Bjerknes
- Start date
www.mastercard.com is now down thanks to hackers who are against opposing Assange. They are getting ready to sue in return.
Operation: Payback
Retaliation is a bitch.
http://twitter.com/Anon_Operation/status/12441051566448640
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback
Operation: Payback
Retaliation is a bitch.
http://twitter.com/Anon_Operation/status/12441051566448640
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback
Justi n. And here's the reason why Mastercard and Visa shut him down.
WikiLeaks cables: US 'lobbied Russia on behalf of Visa and MasterCard'
The US lobbied Russia this year on behalf of Visa and MasterCard in an attempt to ensure the payment companies were not "adversely affected" by new legislation, according to American diplomats in Moscow.
A state department cable released this afternoon by WikiLeaks reveals that US diplomats intervened to try to amend a draft law going through Russia's Duma. Their explicit aim was to ensure the new law did not "disadvantage" the two US firms, the cable states.
The revelation comes a day after Visa – apparently acting under intense pressure from Washington – announced it was suspending all payments to WikiLeaks, the whistle-blowing website. Visa was following MasterCard, PayPal and Amazon, all of which have severed ties with the site and its founder Julian Assange in the last few days.
The companies have justified their decision to stop donations on the grounds that WikiLeaks is acting "illegally". Each has quickly become the target of sustained online revenge attacks by disgruntled hackers, with mastercard.com paralysed today.
The cable, dated 1 February 2010, states that the Obama administration took up the companies' plight with senior Russian government officials. Earlier this year Moscow unveiled plans to create a new National Payment Card System (NPCS) that would collect all credit card fees on domestic transactions – depriving Visa and MasterCard of a major chunk of revenue.
A consortium of state-owned Russian banks would administer the system and collect processing fees "estimated at $4 billion a year", the cable claims. Additionally, sending payment data abroad would be forbidden under the law going through Russia's rubberstamp lower house of parliament – another potential blow to the US credit card companies.
In the cable Matthias Mitman, a US diplomat specialising in economic affairs, and based at the Moscow embassy, urged Obama's presidential commission on Russia to take up the issue. Obama agreed to found a new bilateral commission with the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, as part of the reset in US-Russian relations.
Mitman comments: "This draft law continues to disadvantage US payment card market leaders Visa and MasterCard, whether they join the National Payment Card System (NPCS) or not. If they join, the NPCS operator will collect the fees, leaving them to collect processing fees only when card-holders travel abroad – a tiny section of the market.
"If they do not join but choose to compete with NPCS cards, they will have to set up payment processing centers in Russia, a very large investment in itself, and compete against a system likely backed by the largest Russian state banks."
The answer, Mitman suggests, is for the Obama administration to actively bat for Visa and MasterCard. "While the draft legislation has yet to be submitted to the Duma and can still be amended, post will continue to raise our concerns with senior GOR officials.
"We recommend that senior USG officials also take advantage of meetings with their Russian counterparts, including through the Bilateral Presidential Commission, to press the GOR to change the draft text to ensure US payment companies are not adversely affected."
WikiLeaks cables: US 'lobbied Russia on behalf of Visa and MasterCard'
The US lobbied Russia this year on behalf of Visa and MasterCard in an attempt to ensure the payment companies were not "adversely affected" by new legislation, according to American diplomats in Moscow.
A state department cable released this afternoon by WikiLeaks reveals that US diplomats intervened to try to amend a draft law going through Russia's Duma. Their explicit aim was to ensure the new law did not "disadvantage" the two US firms, the cable states.
The revelation comes a day after Visa – apparently acting under intense pressure from Washington – announced it was suspending all payments to WikiLeaks, the whistle-blowing website. Visa was following MasterCard, PayPal and Amazon, all of which have severed ties with the site and its founder Julian Assange in the last few days.
The companies have justified their decision to stop donations on the grounds that WikiLeaks is acting "illegally". Each has quickly become the target of sustained online revenge attacks by disgruntled hackers, with mastercard.com paralysed today.
The cable, dated 1 February 2010, states that the Obama administration took up the companies' plight with senior Russian government officials. Earlier this year Moscow unveiled plans to create a new National Payment Card System (NPCS) that would collect all credit card fees on domestic transactions – depriving Visa and MasterCard of a major chunk of revenue.
A consortium of state-owned Russian banks would administer the system and collect processing fees "estimated at $4 billion a year", the cable claims. Additionally, sending payment data abroad would be forbidden under the law going through Russia's rubberstamp lower house of parliament – another potential blow to the US credit card companies.
In the cable Matthias Mitman, a US diplomat specialising in economic affairs, and based at the Moscow embassy, urged Obama's presidential commission on Russia to take up the issue. Obama agreed to found a new bilateral commission with the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, as part of the reset in US-Russian relations.
Mitman comments: "This draft law continues to disadvantage US payment card market leaders Visa and MasterCard, whether they join the National Payment Card System (NPCS) or not. If they join, the NPCS operator will collect the fees, leaving them to collect processing fees only when card-holders travel abroad – a tiny section of the market.
"If they do not join but choose to compete with NPCS cards, they will have to set up payment processing centers in Russia, a very large investment in itself, and compete against a system likely backed by the largest Russian state banks."
The answer, Mitman suggests, is for the Obama administration to actively bat for Visa and MasterCard. "While the draft legislation has yet to be submitted to the Duma and can still be amended, post will continue to raise our concerns with senior GOR officials.
"We recommend that senior USG officials also take advantage of meetings with their Russian counterparts, including through the Bilateral Presidential Commission, to press the GOR to change the draft text to ensure US payment companies are not adversely affected."
Sex without consensus of the other participant is obviously rape, regardless of the involvement of condoms of which there is no note in the law. Consensus is always essential in Sweden, even if it's sex within say, a marriage. The claims from certain foreign journalists and lawyers that women always win rape cases here is false, though. If I remember correctly, 10% of all rape cases end in a sentence. No need to worry if you're having sex in Sweden; you'll know when you're doing something wrong.
So a condom breaks midway through the act, and if one participant clearly wishes to stop but the other one ignores this and goes on, the mutual will is no longer there and you have some grounds for a rape charge. He is also charged with the less serious "sexuellt ofredande", which essentially requires him to have purposefully damaged the victim's sexual integrity. If he was being a real ass and somehow wanted to teach one of the women who's the man, then the latter could perhaps be applied if he crossed the line.
Of course, these are all based on claims from two women who have willingly had intercourse with him. The state will have a very hard time proving their case. And yes, the state are obliged to investigate all possible rape cases. The women never filed anything, but merely went to the police for "counsel" on the situation.
So a condom breaks midway through the act, and if one participant clearly wishes to stop but the other one ignores this and goes on, the mutual will is no longer there and you have some grounds for a rape charge. He is also charged with the less serious "sexuellt ofredande", which essentially requires him to have purposefully damaged the victim's sexual integrity. If he was being a real ass and somehow wanted to teach one of the women who's the man, then the latter could perhaps be applied if he crossed the line.
Of course, these are all based on claims from two women who have willingly had intercourse with him. The state will have a very hard time proving their case. And yes, the state are obliged to investigate all possible rape cases. The women never filed anything, but merely went to the police for "counsel" on the situation.