White-hating racists get Stormfront booted off the internet ! FIRST AMENMENT IS DEAD

Why are the nut jobs at those white supremacy or nationalist groups so paranoid and insecure? They all seem to be obsessed with fear about when their daughters, sisters, moms and girl friends will stick a black dick into one or both of their orifices.
Obviously some Black guy has victimized them by boning their mom, wife, sister, cousin etc.
 
Why are the nut jobs at those white supremacy or nationalist groups so paranoid and insecure? They all seem to be obsessed with fear about when their daughters, sisters, moms and girl friends will stick a black dick into one or both of their orifices.
Obviously some Black guy has victimized them by boning their mom, wife, sister, cousin etc.
"victomized"?
 
Why are the nut jobs at those white supremacy or nationalist groups so paranoid and insecure? They all seem to be obsessed with fear about when their daughters, sisters, moms and girl friends will stick a black dick into one or both of their orifices.
Obviously some Black guy has victimized them by boning their mom, wife, sister, cousin etc.
"victomized"?
I had a white friend once that was extremely booty tickled when a blonde I used to bone ran up and gave me one of those sexy I miss you hugs. its weird what a Black man boning a white woman does to the insecurity level of white men. Needless to say the white guy became my ex-friend after he explained to me that it just wasnt right.
 
So why do we allow websites that openly advocate for affirmative action, the govt mandated persecution of white men and the biggest hate crime in america.

Stormfront, internet’s longest-running white supremacist site, goes offline

aug 26 2017 Stormfront, one of the internet’s oldest and most popular white supremacist sites, has been booted off its web address of more than two decades amid a crackdown against hate sites.

The address Stormfront.org went dark on Friday, and publicly available information current lists its domain status as “under hold,” a category reserved for websites under legal dispute or slated for deletion, the USA Today network first reported.

The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a D.C.-based nonprofit group, said it was behind the effort and had successfully booted the website from its domain of 22 years by raising its concerns with Stormfront’s registrar, Network Solutions LLC, and its parent company, Web.com.

“Their website is a vehicle used to promote racially-motivated violence and hate,” Kristen Clarke, the committee’s executive director, said in a statement. “Following our efforts, Network Solutions has pulled the site. We are working across the country to combat the spread of hate crimes.”

A move that the enemies of free speech will likely end up regretting...

Consider the exceptions to Free Speech in US Supreme Court Decisions summarized here:

United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia
 
As if your delusions are real. :lmao:

What's delusional is even questioning whether or not google and facebook are biased against conservative opinion. Almost everything is left leaning these days, it's the default. Stray too far and you'll be labeled a nazi, and that's bad for business. I feel like I have to explain basic facts about the internet because you're old and out of touch.
Citing yourself doesn't prove anything other than your delusions persist.
 
I don't know. I am not sure you can discriminate via a contract.

Then what in the Hell do you call what the web host did to Stormfront? They clearly discriminated against them.
They didn't discriminate against Stormfront. Stormfront violated Network Solutions' term of service.

Your atrocious reading skills negate any and all arguments you've made. It's already been stipulated to everything you've said.

The bottom line is, you've not responded to the points I made in my rebuttal. You can pretend, until Hell freezes over that no rebuttal was made... but it has been made. You can't respond to it because you got the shit kicked out of your weak and prejudicial argument.

The only weak ass argument on this thread is to admit you don't know if it's legal to discriminate against anyone via a contract. NOTHING has been addressed regarding violating a person's Rights via an adhesion contract. Go ahead an ignore the point. You don't understand the law and are too lazy to research it.

It's all good. You threw in the towel and you're the only one (other than one other troll) too dumb to realize it.
My reading skills are just fine. Network Solutions did not discriminate. Your tenacious whining doesn't change that. Pointing out their terms of service amounts to an adhesion contract is meaningless since such contracts are commonplace. You then extend your position of an adhesion contract to cross the crazy bridge to it being an "unconscionable contract" without offering a stitch of evidence other than to point out "adhesion contracts can become an unconscionable contract."

Hysterically, you then spike the ball as though you just scored when there was actually no gain on the play.

To score, you have to first prove the contract was unconscionable.

Denying people their Right to believe something as a prerequisite to doing business with them is unconscionable
No one is denying them their right to believe what they want. They don't have a right to inflict risk upon a company in violation of their terms of service.

Denying people some right they have under law as a prerequisite to doing business with them is unconscionable
That's nothing but your opinion. Proves nothing. Even worse, you're trying to deny Network Solutions their right to protect their own company from the liabilities they face from a customer using their service to promote violence.

Forcing someone to give up any Right under the Constitution as a prerequisite to doing business with them is unconscionable.

No matter how you spin your argument, you lose.
Keep telling yourself that, Spunky. Meanwhile, you have failed miserably to prove that Network Solutions' terms of service amounts to an unconscionable contract and Stormfront remains down.
 
And you think this ... because ... ?

it's called reality you smug fuck.
LOL

As if your delusions are real. :lmao:

You should give it up. The posters here are kicking your ass back into the stone age.

What are you really getting out of this? The only rational explanation is that you are on the right and need to make talking points, so you push posters here as far as you can with easily dismissed drivel. We end up providing you with talking points you can use elsewhere.

It's the most bizarre thing I've ever seen.
That you think I'm a) rightwing; b) getting my ass kicked; or c) should give up, reveals just how deluded you are.
 
And you think this ... because ... ?

it's called reality you smug fuck.
LOL

As if your delusions are real. :lmao:

You should give it up. The posters here are kicking your ass back into the stone age.

What are you really getting out of this? The only rational explanation is that you are on the right and need to make talking points, so you push posters here as far as you can with easily dismissed drivel. We end up providing you with talking points you can use elsewhere.

It's the most bizarre thing I've ever seen.

I love that you went from arguing an actual point to accusations of trolling or questioning what they get out of posting (especially since you are doing the same thing).

I'm merely responding to a continuation of troll posts. Nothing more and certainly nothing less.

The points have been made - asked and answered. Ignoring what I've posted doesn't bolster any claims by those on your side. If your argument fails, it fails. And it failed. Those pushing your side's talking points have NO case. There is nothing more to be said.
Repeating your baseless opinion that Network Solutions' terms of service is an unconscionable contract is what fails. Your opinion is worthless and you've yet to offer anything whatsoever substantiate to demonstrate your point; which lies prostrate on the floor.

Try citing some case law instead of yourself.
 
You should give it up. The posters here are kicking your ass back into the stone age.

What are you really getting out of this? The only rational explanation is that you are on the right and need to make talking points, so you push posters here as far as you can with easily dismissed drivel. We end up providing you with talking points you can use elsewhere.

It's the most bizarre thing I've ever seen.

I love that you went from arguing an actual point to accusations of trolling or questioning what they get out of posting (especially since you are doing the same thing).

I'm merely responding to a continuation of troll posts. Nothing more and certainly nothing less.

The points have been made - asked and answered. Ignoring what I've posted doesn't bolster any claims by those on your side. If your argument fails, it fails. And it failed. Those pushing your side's talking points have NO case. There is nothing more to be said.

Pointing out that the situations and laws are different when talking StormCunt and the bakery is not trolling. It is factual.


WTF??? All of this has been covered umpteen times. You've cited your mickey mouse laws. I moved beyond that. I don't have to obey unconstitutional acts. And I won't. Don't like it? Sin Loi Victor Charlie.

YOu are welcome to claim that they are unconstitutional. There has been no ruling to that effect.
And in fact, the baker has lost at every turn in our judicial system. They're down to their final chance as the U.S. Supreme Court has chosen to review their case.
 
You idiots who think blacks are mentally equal to whites need to explain why

1. Blacks come in last in all standardized tests. Asians do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests..

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

You're one sick motherfucker. I'm white and I want to kick your inbred fucking ass. Die bitch.
 
You idiots who think blacks are mentally equal to whites need to explain why

1. Blacks come in last in all standardized tests. Asians do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests..

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

This site is totally fucked up - you mods can kiss my ass. Fuck you all. American my ass.
 
You idiots who think blacks are mentally equal to whites need to explain why

1. Blacks come in last in all standardized tests. Asians do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests..

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

You're one sick motherfucker. I'm white and I want to kick your inbred fucking ass. Die bitch.
Can't dispute his points so you revert to name calling and threats.
 
I love that you went from arguing an actual point to accusations of trolling or questioning what they get out of posting (especially since you are doing the same thing).

I'm merely responding to a continuation of troll posts. Nothing more and certainly nothing less.

The points have been made - asked and answered. Ignoring what I've posted doesn't bolster any claims by those on your side. If your argument fails, it fails. And it failed. Those pushing your side's talking points have NO case. There is nothing more to be said.

Pointing out that the situations and laws are different when talking StormCunt and the bakery is not trolling. It is factual.


WTF??? All of this has been covered umpteen times. You've cited your mickey mouse laws. I moved beyond that. I don't have to obey unconstitutional acts. And I won't. Don't like it? Sin Loi Victor Charlie.

YOu are welcome to claim that they are unconstitutional. There has been no ruling to that effect.
And in fact, the baker has lost at every turn in our judicial system. They're down to their final chance as the U.S. Supreme Court has chosen to review their case.


And, if a person fails there \, they can employ passive resistance, civil disobedience; they can lobby to get the law changed. He might leave that state and go somewhere more suitable to his way of thinking. There are at least a dozen options.
 
it's called reality you smug fuck.
LOL

As if your delusions are real. :lmao:

You should give it up. The posters here are kicking your ass back into the stone age.

What are you really getting out of this? The only rational explanation is that you are on the right and need to make talking points, so you push posters here as far as you can with easily dismissed drivel. We end up providing you with talking points you can use elsewhere.

It's the most bizarre thing I've ever seen.

I love that you went from arguing an actual point to accusations of trolling or questioning what they get out of posting (especially since you are doing the same thing).

I'm merely responding to a continuation of troll posts. Nothing more and certainly nothing less.

The points have been made - asked and answered. Ignoring what I've posted doesn't bolster any claims by those on your side. If your argument fails, it fails. And it failed. Those pushing your side's talking points have NO case. There is nothing more to be said.
Repeating your baseless opinion that Network Solutions' terms of service is an unconscionable contract is what fails. Your opinion is worthless and you've yet to offer anything whatsoever substantiate to demonstrate your point; which lies prostrate on the floor.

Try citing some case law instead of yourself.

You repeating the same shit over and over won't make it acceptable if a free society within our de jure / lawful constitutional Republic.
 
And you think this ... because ... ?

it's called reality you smug fuck.
LOL

As if your delusions are real. :lmao:

You should give it up. The posters here are kicking your ass back into the stone age.

What are you really getting out of this? The only rational explanation is that you are on the right and need to make talking points, so you push posters here as far as you can with easily dismissed drivel. We end up providing you with talking points you can use elsewhere.

It's the most bizarre thing I've ever seen.
That you think I'm a) rightwing; b) getting my ass kicked; or c) should give up, reveals just how deluded you are.

That statement is an indictment exposing your ignorance. I'm not deluded into believing anything. If you're prodding me for an opinion about, I'd say you're a glutton for punishment. You continue to prattle on with the same point over and over and it has been responded to.

It seems to make you mad as Hell that the rest of the world don't walk, lockstep with your beliefs. Reality check: You're not God and you don't understand the difference between power and authority.
 
Then what in the Hell do you call what the web host did to Stormfront? They clearly discriminated against them.
They didn't discriminate against Stormfront. Stormfront violated Network Solutions' term of service.

Your atrocious reading skills negate any and all arguments you've made. It's already been stipulated to everything you've said.

The bottom line is, you've not responded to the points I made in my rebuttal. You can pretend, until Hell freezes over that no rebuttal was made... but it has been made. You can't respond to it because you got the shit kicked out of your weak and prejudicial argument.

The only weak ass argument on this thread is to admit you don't know if it's legal to discriminate against anyone via a contract. NOTHING has been addressed regarding violating a person's Rights via an adhesion contract. Go ahead an ignore the point. You don't understand the law and are too lazy to research it.

It's all good. You threw in the towel and you're the only one (other than one other troll) too dumb to realize it.
My reading skills are just fine. Network Solutions did not discriminate. Your tenacious whining doesn't change that. Pointing out their terms of service amounts to an adhesion contract is meaningless since such contracts are commonplace. You then extend your position of an adhesion contract to cross the crazy bridge to it being an "unconscionable contract" without offering a stitch of evidence other than to point out "adhesion contracts can become an unconscionable contract."

Hysterically, you then spike the ball as though you just scored when there was actually no gain on the play.

To score, you have to first prove the contract was unconscionable.

Denying people their Right to believe something as a prerequisite to doing business with them is unconscionable
No one is denying them their right to believe what they want. They don't have a right to inflict risk upon a company in violation of their terms of service.

Denying people some right they have under law as a prerequisite to doing business with them is unconscionable
That's nothing but your opinion. Proves nothing. Even worse, you're trying to deny Network Solutions their right to protect their own company from the liabilities they face from a customer using their service to promote violence.

Forcing someone to give up any Right under the Constitution as a prerequisite to doing business with them is unconscionable.

No matter how you spin your argument, you lose.
Keep telling yourself that, Spunky. Meanwhile, you have failed miserably to prove that Network Solutions' terms of service amounts to an unconscionable contract and Stormfront remains down.

YOU are the one who has spent this entire thread with the philosophical argument that private businesses cannot discriminate. OMG. Here we go again.

Who's on first?
 
A privately owned website provider has decided they don't want to be associated with the trash that populated stormfront. The members of that group still have freedom of speech. But the 1st amendment does not guarantee access to someone else's property.

There is something I love about that argument. It cannot stand scrutiny.

If the First Amendment does not guarantee access to someone else's property, tell me how a gay couple has the right to force a private business to make a cake for a gay wedding.

Where, may I ask are the baker's rights?

When it's convenient, some people argue that whites have no rights. But, when the other side of the coin is presented, whites are somehow locked out on the SAME grounds the whites used when they tried to protect themselves. Funny how that works.

If the First Amendment does not guarantee access to someone else's property, tell me how a gay couple has the right to force a private business to make a cake for a gay wedding.

Tell me WITF cake has anything to do with the 1st amd. You just conflated and convoluted a simple point into nonsense.

The First Amendment protects against there being a state religion. Forcing someone in the private sector to violate their religious conscience violates the so - called "separation of church and state" the left babbles on about.
The business isnt owned by the church you retard. When you open a business its in the public domain.

It is a PRIVATE business. Let me give you an example:

A private business can tell you not to enter the premises with a firearm. It doesn't matter that the Second Amendment guarantees you the Right to keep and bear Arms; it don't matter if you have a carry permit. The business is PRIVATE PROPERTY.

The laws your side keeps referencing are predicated upon public policy, designed to force people to think a certain way, even if it means denying them their Rights.
 
Why are the nut jobs at those white supremacy or nationalist groups so paranoid and insecure? They all seem to be obsessed with fear about when their daughters, sisters, moms and girl friends will stick a black dick into one or both of their orifices.

Nut jobs??? You talk trash like that in public? If you did in this neighborhood, the nice men in white suits would help you into the van.
 
Why are the nut jobs at those white supremacy or nationalist groups so paranoid and insecure? They all seem to be obsessed with fear about when their daughters, sisters, moms and girl friends will stick a black dick into one or both of their orifices.

Nut jobs??? You talk trash like that in public? If you did in this neighborhood, the nice men in white suits would help you into the van.
No, they wouldn't.
 

Forum List

Back
Top