Without a punch in a court of law, beginning of this week, Wikileaks is knocked out of action – exactly what the US Government sought to do through an effective blockade of access to PayPal, Western Union, MasterCard, Visa, and Bank of America. WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange announced in a press conference (October 24, 2011) that the organization had halted its online publishing. “We are forced to temporarily suspend publishing whilst we secure our economic survival.” WikiLeaks stated on its Web site that the blockade is illegal citing the US Treasury’s own statement, which concluded it did not have the needed evidence to place WikiLeaks on a sanctions list. Assange said that it is exploring options for litigation in several countries, including the U.S., against the blockade. However, by labeling WikiLeaks and/or its leaders as potentially criminally prosecutable and applying terms as treason and terror, US officials at the very top may have also intimidated/convinced (depending on your point of view) Americans as well as non-Americans to avoid any financial support. Intentionally or otherwise, WikiLeaks contributor’s may have been encouraged to fear prosecution under such laws as applied to terrorist and organized criminal organizations. The imprisonment and treatment of alleged WikiLeaks source, Special Private Benjamin Manning, beyond both US Constitutional and United Nations review (US Government has denied unmonitored access to UN human rights investigator), undoubtedly has had some chilling effect on supporters including those just providing financial support. (READ - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/films/blog_post/un-investigator-denied-unmonitored-visit-to-wkilleaks-prisoner-in-united-states-by-ambassador-mo/27229 ). Regardless of your view on WikiLeaks, its methodology and the material disclosed, it would be troubling to me that US and global citizens could be effectively denied opportunity to support the organization’s work by US executive action and without Court review. It provides a dangerous template as to how employ purportedly terror and other regulations with objective of chilling effect on any disclosure of information it wants to label as dangerous to US national security. (READ – “Is Solitary Confinement Torture & Human Rights Violation?” diplomaticallyincorrect.org/films/blog_post/un-is-solitary-confinement-torture-human-rights-violation-by-ambassador-mo/36596 ). Undoubtedly many governments as well as the UN Human Rights Office are not pleased that the US has acted unilaterally to effect its will in this situation. Many such capitals probably are not unhappy though that WikiLeaks is being silenced by being choked of funding. Many such governments might also not hesitate to apply similar or even more extreme methods facing similar perceived "threat" from WikiLeaks or other potentially embarrassing disclosures - "they would if they could act like US Government or worse1" That is though the real danger: Washington may also be providing both quasi legal/political precedent as well as template to global despots and human rights violating regimes in this WikiLeaks situation. On the other hand, from the White House to most of democracy’s centers we are hailing the recent change including the “Arab Spring” through freedoms exercised on the internet. (READ – Warning of Increasing Government Efforts to Control Internet” - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/films/blog_post/increasing-controls-on-internet-un-expert-on-freedom-warns-by-ambassador-mo/28657 ). By Ambassador Muhamed Sacirbey Facebook Become Fan at “Bosnia TV” and “Diplomatically Incorrect” Twitter – Follow us at DiplomaticallyX War Crimes Justice” Channel - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/c/war-crimes-justice