An article relating to this blog post on Finextra:
Visa and MasterCard cut off payments to WikiLeaks; Assange remanded in custody
The persecution of the WikiLeaks whistle-blowing Website continues, as founder Julian Assange is arrested by UK police and MasterCard and Visa join PayPal in cutting off donations to the operation.
A few thoughts have occurred to me.
Financial services firms cutting off a publisher for 'alleged' crimes where no evidence of any crime by the publisher has been presented, let alone were they convicted of any offence.
Mastercard and Visa need to question the aptitude their management have for the modern world. Do they think this will end well for them? Lawsuit perhaps? I'd suggest the boards examine their options.
As for the reasons they have given for terminating 'service' for wikileaks, I am sad to say there have and are many instances where US Senators and even Presidents would have far better qualified for service termination. Customers may not be as stupid as
you think they are.
Perhaps Mastercard or Visa could provide examples of where they have taken this action in the past?
I'm not a lawyer but if I was I sure would be lining up this one.
What happens when donations start to flow through say the hawalah system? Now that would be interesting.