Friday, December 17, 2010

HOT: Wikileaks Advises to Move Funds from Bank America

Wikileaks just sent out this tweet:

WikiLeaks

Does your business do business with Bank of America? Our advise is to place your funds somewhere safer.
Looks like Wikileaks has B of A in it sights. It also appears that WikiLeaks has gone beyond journalism and is doing what, I am not exactly sure.

Assange, if you have a story, as it appears you do, run it.  Hype-advice without backing is not where you want to be. Bad move. Very bad.

UPDATE: Earlier WikiLeaks tweet:
WikiLeaks

We ask that all people who love freedom close out their accounts at Bank of America.
UPDATE 2: Here's the reason, from Wikileaks:
WikiLeaks

Bank of America bans ALL transactions to WikiLeaks http://is.gd/iW0Jl receive better interest: http://wikileaks.ch/support.html
The frustration is understandable, but you have already threatened/hinted to bury them with leaked emails. Their frustration is also understandable!

Bottom line: Don't mess with customers or service providers. And if you do, they may cut you off from their service or quit as customers, realize that in advance.

That's life.

2 comments:

  1. Robert wrote:

    "The frustration is understandable, but you have already threatened/hinted to bury them with leaked emails. Their frustration is also understandable!"

    Wikileaks, as far as I know, said they would release documents that might take down "a big U.S. bank." BOA wasn't specifically identified. So if BOA is frustrated by Wikileaks' statements, then:

    1. BOA must know that its employees were involved in fraudulent/criminal activity.

    2. BOA is pretty confident that these alleged Wikileaks documents will shine the light on their fraudulent/criminal activity.

    3. BOA doesn't want to be exposed as a criminal enterprise and therefore attacks the source that they believe will provide incriminating evidence against them. Nobody wants to be Enron.

    So BOA is either the bank Wikileaks was referring to, and is concerned about being exposed as such, or it is merely bowing to the thug like tactics of the government and refusing to continue doing business with a thus far informally alleged spy agency, as other companies like Visa and Mastercard have done.

    Robert wrote:

    "Bottom line: Don't mess with customers or service providers. And if you do, they may cut you off from their service or quit as customers, realize that in advance."

    Point taken. BOA may provide banking services for many Americans. But they would not even exist today if Americans had not provided them with billions of dollars forcefully taken by their partners in the federal government. Are they now afraid that Wikileaks will reveal that the American taxpayer was forced to turn over billions so that a criminal organization could continue operating? Oh, Boo-Hoo.

    You know, if I owned a reputable Ford dealership in, say, Indiana, and someone said they had documents they were going to release that could bring down an Indiana Ford dealership, I would be looking forward to and encouraging their release. Why? Obviously because I want my competitors to operate honestly just like I do. If they are trying to get the upper hand by dealing fraudulently, then I want them to be exposed. Heck, I would probably even benefit from it due to the decrease in competition when the fraudulent dealer is hauled off to jail.

    You don't see anything like that from any of these big U.S. banks. That's because they are not real businesses competing against one another. They are fascist organizations of the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department, supported wholly by taxpayer bailouts and monetary injections by the Fed via its easy 0% Fed funds rate and quantitative easing policies.

    So is BOA showing its hand here? Is BOA sweating bullets? It shouldn't be. Whatever those documents reveal, Timmy, Ben and Obama will be right there to back them up with any and all assistance they may need. And the media will provide the American people just enough trash TV and limited news coverage to induce them back into their slumber if they attempt to awake from their coma.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Excellent comment

    ReplyDelete