Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Monday August 14 2017, @10:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the thugs-and-their-thug-accomplices dept.

We've had multiple submissions on the confrontation in Charlottesville, Virginia between white supremacists and counter-protesters. We lead off with a submission about the altercation which culminated with a car driven into a crowd which left 1 person dead and 19 injured. Then we continue with GoDaddy informing dailystormer.com — a white supremacist web site which called for the rally — that they had 24 hours to find another registrar for their site. They signed up with Google's domain registration service. Now there are reports that Google, too, has dropped the registration.

This story could very well cause a lot of heat, but it is my hope we can look beyond the details of this particular situation and focus discussion on the overriding questions of freedom of speech/publication raised by one of the submitters and the implications it may lead to. This saying comes to mind: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

Terrorism in Charlottesville: 1 Dead, 19 Injured

ProPublica reports:

Police Stood By As Mayhem Mounted in Charlottesville, Virginia

At about 10 a.m. [August 12], at one of countless such confrontations, an angry mob of white supremacists formed a battle line across from a group of counter-protesters, many of them older and gray-haired, who had gathered near a church parking lot. On command from their leader, the young men charged and pummeled their ideological foes with abandon. One woman was hurled to the pavement, and the blood from her bruised head was instantly visible.

Standing nearby, an assortment of Virginia State Police troopers and Charlottesville police wearing protective gear watched silently from behind an array of metal barricades--and did nothing.

[...] the white supremacists who flooded into the city's Emancipation Park--a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee sits in the center of the park--had spent months openly planning for war. The Daily Stormer, a popular neo-Nazi website, encouraged rally attendees to bring shields, pepper spray, and fascist flags and flagpoles. A prominent racist podcast told its listeners to come carrying guns.

[...] the white supremacists who showed up in Charlottesville did indeed come prepared for violence. Many wore helmets and carried clubs, medieval-looking round wooden shields, and rectangular plexiglass shields, similar to those used by riot police.

[...] The police did little to stop the bloodshed. Several times, a group of assault-rifle-toting militia members from New York State, wearing body armor and desert camo, played a more active role in breaking up fights.

[...] The skirmishes culminated in what appears to have been an act of domestic terrorism, with a driver ramming his car into a crowd of anti-racist activists on a busy downtown street, killing one and injuring 19 according to the latest information from city officials. Charlottesville authorities tonight reported that a 20-year-old Ohio man had been arrested and had been charged with murder.

[...] A good strategy, [said Miriam Krinsky, a former federal prosecutor who has worked on police reform efforts in Los Angeles], is to make clashes less likely by separating the two sides physically, with officers forming a barrier between them. "Create a human barrier so the flash points are reduced as quickly as possible."

GoDaddy Stomps 'Daily Stormer' -- Site Moves to Google

The Washington Post reports GoDaddy bans neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer for disparaging woman killed at Charlottesville rally:

After months of criticism that GoDaddy was providing a platform for hate speech, the Web hosting company announced late Sunday that it will no longer house the Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website that promotes white supremacist and white nationalist ideas.

[...] We informed The Daily Stormer that they have 24 hours to move the domain to another provider, as they have violated our terms of service.

— GoDaddy (@GoDaddy) August 14, 2017

[...] In the Daily Stormer post[1], [Andrew] Angelin characterized [victim Heather] Heyer as dying in a "road rage incident." He said she was a "drain on society" and disparaged her appearance. "Most people are glad she is dead," he wrote.

"@GoDaddy you host The Daily Stormer — they posted this on their site," Twitter user Amy Siskind said in an appeal to the Web hosting company. "Please retweet if you think this hate should be taken down & banned."

[...] GoDaddy has previously said that the content, however "tasteless" and "ignorant," is protected by the First Amendment. The company told the Daily Beast in July that a Daily Stormer article threatening to "track down" the family members of CNN staffers did not violate Domains by Proxy's terms of service.

[1] https://www.dailystormer.com/heather-heyer-woman-killed-in-road-rage-incident-was-a-fat-childless-32-year-old-slut/

After the incidents in Charlottesville it seems GoDaddy have decided, one can gather from and after a massive amount of pressure, to no longer provide Domain name access to the Daily Stormer. While a private company is free to do whatever they like, I wonder if there will or might be further implications. I think the interesting question here isn't what happened in Charlottesville or what kind of stories they provide over at the Daily Stormer -- they might be or are a complete shitfest filled with neo-nazi-news for all I know. The interesting aspect is if companies should now monitor their customers, which it seems the Daily Stormer has been one for years, and ban or block customers that no longer align with company beliefs or that other customers find offensive. It seems the Daily Stormer has previously posted "tasteless" and "ignorant" stories that one can only assume have not aligned with GoDaddy policy or Terms of Service, but this one was somehow over the line and the straw that broke the camel's back?

I'm fairly sure the Daily Stormer won't be knocked offline or anything, there will always be someone willing to host them somewhere. So today they try to knock a neo-nazi site offline, I doubt many people will lose any sleep over that, but who is going to be next? Is this part of the ramping up of the current online-twitter-socialweb-culture? Is there a slippery slope here?

Google Domains, GoDaddy blacklist white supremacist site Daily Stormer

Ars Technica is reporting that Google Domains and GoDaddy have blacklisted white supremacist site Daily Stormer:

The article prompted a response from the site's domain registrar, GoDaddy. "We informed The Daily Stormer that they have 24 hours to move the domain to another provider, as they have violated our terms of service," GoDaddy wrote in a tweet late Sunday night.

On Monday, the Daily Stormer switched its registration to Google's domain service. Within hours, Google announced a cancellation of its own. "We are cancelling Daily Stormer's registration with Google Domains for violating our terms of service," the company wrote in an statement emailed to Ars.

[...] A lot of outlets covering this controversy described GoDaddy, somewhat misleadingly, as the Daily Stormer's hosting provider. But GoDaddy wasn't storing or distributing the content on the Daily Stormer website. It was the Daily Stormer's registrar, which is the company that handles registration of "dailystormer.com" in the domain name system, the global database that connects domain names like "arstechnica.com" to numeric IP addresses.

GoDaddy has faced pressure for months from anti-racist groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League to drop the Daily Stormer as a customer. But until this weekend, GoDaddy resisted that pressure.

"GoDaddy doesn't host The Daily Stormer's content on its servers," the investigative site Reveal reported in May. "Because it provides only the domain name, the company says it has a higher standard for terminating service."

"We need to evaluate what level of effect we can actually have on the abuse that's actually going on," said Ben Butler, director of GoDaddy's digital crimes unit, in a May interview with Reveal. "As a domain name registrar, if we take the domain name down, that domain name stops working. But the content is still out there, live on a server connected to the Internet that can be reached via an IP address or forwarded from another domain name. The actual content is not something we can touch by turning on or off the domain name service."

But GoDaddy abruptly changed its stance on Sunday evening. What changed GoDaddy's mind? In a statement to Techcrunch, GoDaddy said: "given this latest article comes on the immediate heels of a violent act, we believe this type of article could incite additional violence, which violates our terms of service."

Reading GoDaddy's terms of service, this seems to support their stance that they could suspend the domain registration:

9. RESTRICTION OF SERVICES; RIGHT OF REFUSAL

[...] You agree that GoDaddy, in its sole discretion and without liability to you, may refuse to accept the registration of any domain name. GoDaddy also may in its sole discretion and without liability to you delete the registration of any domain name during the first thirty (30) days after registration has taken place. GoDaddy may also cancel the registration of a domain name, after thirty (30) days, if that name is being used, as determined by GoDaddy in its sole discretion, in association with spam or morally objectionable activities. Morally objectionable activities will include, but not be limited to:

  • Activities prohibited by the laws of the United States and/or foreign territories in which you conduct business;
  • Activities designed to encourage unlawful behavior by others, such as hate crimes, terrorism and child pornography; and
  • Activities designed to harm or use unethically minors in any way.

As of the time of this being written, it appears that the Daily Stormer domain (dailystormer.com) is still being hosted by Google:

Domain Name: dailystormer.com
Registry Domain ID: 1787753602_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.google.com
Registrar URL: https://domains.google.com
Updated Date: 2017-08-14T14:51:45Z
Creation Date: 2013-03-20T22:43:18Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2020-03-20T22:43:18Z
Registrar: Google Inc.
Registrar IANA ID: 895
Registrar Abuse Contact Email:
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8772376466
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited


Original Submission #1   Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:23AM (20 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:23AM (#553927) Journal

    to an illegal gathering

    Umm... what?
    I'm looking over Unlawfull assembly [wikipedia.org] and I don't see any mention of USA having specific laws.
    Would you like to provide details?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:29AM (1 child)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:29AM (#553935) Homepage Journal

    They're largely local laws that get around the 1A by saying they're not restricting freedom of assembly but regulating traffic and such. Me, I think if you have to ask permission it's not a Right anymore.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:39AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:39AM (#553951)

      Have an Internet Point!

  • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:42AM (11 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:42AM (#553957)

    Umm... what?
    I'm looking over Unlawfull assembly [wikipedia.org] and I don't see any mention of USA having specific laws.
    Would you like to provide details?

    I already did. The "unlawful assembly" that was used to invoke the state of emergency was the counter protesting far-left turds and not the far-right turds who had both a constitutionally protected right to freedom of assembly and a federal permit for their rally. Antifa are all about "bashing the fash", they started the violence and the police had a duty to keep them away.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:11AM (10 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:11AM (#553986) Journal

      The "unlawful assembly" that was used to invoke the state of emergency was the counter protesting far-left turds and not the far-right turds who had both a constitutionally protected right to freedom of assembly and a federal permit for their rally.

      Really now?
      How was the demonstration on Friday night [theguardian.com], then?
      'Cause the alt-right demonstration was approved for Saturday, not Friday, and I doubt the one on Friday got approval for the violence you see around min 34 [www.pscp.tv]

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:16AM (9 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:16AM (#553993)

        and I doubt the one on Friday got approval for the violence you see when antifa showed up

        Antifa are not your friend. [soylentnews.org] I don't like defending the far-right but like the ACLU, I take a principled stand towards legal rights for all.

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:55AM (8 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:55AM (#554023)

          I like the Antifa, because they saved my family when the Nazis were trying to round us up and send us to the death camps. You might say that they got a little carried away with things like the bombing of Dresden, and maybe even killed some Germans who were not really Nazis, but you know, that doesn't bother me at all, because they allowed racism to happen. So the Antifa are my friends.

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @05:26AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @05:26AM (#554094)

            I like the Antifa, because they [...] maybe even killed some Germans who were not really Nazis, but you know, that doesn't bother me at all, because they allowed racism to happen. So the Antifa are my friends.

            So, you want to kill people over the mere perception of having supported racism. Eat hot lead, murderous scum.

            • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @08:59AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @08:59AM (#554175)

              Yes, I did, and I still do. Eat 2000lb blockbusters, you Nazi sympathizing scum! I really regret it has come to this, that we have kill you, your family, and your cute little pets, but if only you had stopped the Nuremberg Rallies, or this Unite Fascists march in Charlottesville, we would not have to kill all. Too bad you did not think to build enough bombers before starting the whole thing. Or, IF YOU ARE A RACIST, remember, NEVER ATTACK AMERICA. We will kill you. Bombs or Jew Bears, we will kill you.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @09:31AM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @09:31AM (#554182)

            I like the Antifa, because they saved my family when the Nazis were trying to round us up and send us to the death camps.

            Antifa didn't stop Hitler, their violence propelled him to power.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:07PM (1 child)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:07PM (#554212) Journal
              The antifa of the 20s was Communism. And German society's fear of them was a significant boost to the Nazis. Personally, I think the US won't replay the Wiemar Republic of the 20s and 30s. But it might replay the failure of the Third French Republic who also built a wall [wikipedia.org].
              • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday August 15 2017, @02:45PM

                by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday August 15 2017, @02:45PM (#554269)

                Don't be too sure. We have made most of their mistakes, let the money printing we have already done finally (most economists still can't explain why it hasn't already happened) launch hyperinflation and with the simmering hatreds already being displayed things could get mighty ugly mighty fast. And if anybody can tell you how such a chaotic system will react under unprecedented stresses they are fools you may safely ignore.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @09:30PM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @09:30PM (#554449)

              The "Anti-fascists" were also referred to as "The Allies". Perhaps you have heard of some of them? The nations of Britain, the United States of America, and the Soviet of Socialist Republics. These are the "antifa". Violence? You have no idea! Unconditional surrender of fascists, that is the goal.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @01:07AM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @01:07AM (#554511)

                'Cause Soviet Russia turned out to be such a great ally to both USA/Britain/etc. and the Russian people...

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @09:19AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @09:19AM (#554626)

                  You dare say this about a nation that sacrifices 20 million of its citizens to save the world from Nazism? I am thinking that these alt-right people are really, really stupid and ignorant of history. And disrespectful. No wonder they are so upset that when they march in real life, people don't like them. 20 million souls will be following you on your next march, along with a half million Americans who died fighting you and your type. Traitors.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:51AM (5 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 15 2017, @12:51AM (#553967) Journal

    Unlawful assembly is a bullshit term trotted out from time to time by officials who want to break up an assembly. Like yourself, I've never been satisfied with any definition offered. The constitution doesn't protect the freedom of association or assembly "when permits are issued". There is no mention in the constitution of permits. Meaning, I'm permitted to attend an assembly whenever I damned well feel like it. If/when that assembly turns into a riot, THEN the police have authority to break it up. Not one second sooner though.

    • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:02AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:02AM (#553975)

      Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.

      Antifa's stated goal is "bash the fash", they forfeit all right to assembly. They have no legal right turning up anywhere. Turning up with violent intention towards political opponents is terrorism, Fields is being charged with second degree as police clearly have a problem proving premeditation.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:58PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:58PM (#554262)

        White nationalism has no peaceful intent, and there is no "civil discourse" to be had if your skin is different (or you oppose them). Don't lie.

        People who support American nazis gathering safely, who think nazism is just an opinion, are complicit in the murders.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:49PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:49PM (#554319)

        Awww, are the poor white fascists on the other end of the gun barrel this time? I feel so baaaaad for them.

        Start by condemning the long running group of hateful nazi fucks, THEN maybe we'll listen to your antifa whining. Otherwise you just come off as a nazi sympathizer, which I'm suuuure you don't want right?

    • (Score: 2) by etherscythe on Wednesday August 16 2017, @02:28PM (1 child)

      by etherscythe (937) on Wednesday August 16 2017, @02:28PM (#554724) Journal

      This is pretty radical thinking. The Constitution spelled out the ideals of the nation, but it is up to Congress and the states to implement the fine details so that these ideas can be made to fit with reality. If the states decide that a permit system is the way to do this - then that's the legitimate law of the land until the Supreme Court says otherwise.

      I'm suddenly reminded of the way Christians tend to view evolution as antithetical to their beliefs because, for some reason, their God could not use evolution as a process to produce the world per their dogma.

      --
      "Fake News: anything reported outside of my own personally chosen echo chamber"
      • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:59PM

        by urza9814 (3954) on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:59PM (#555305) Journal

        The Constitution spelled out the ideals of the nation, but it is up to Congress and the states to implement the fine details so that these ideas can be made to fit with reality.

        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

        So yeah, Congress "implementing the fine details" is still unconstitutional. What part of "Congress shall make no law" is unclear? As the parent said, they can pass laws to break it up when it turns into a riot, or is no longer "peaceable"; but otherwise they are not permitted to enact any regulations. This now applies to state governments as well through the Fourteenth Amendment as interpreted in De Jonge v. Oregon.

        Worth looking into that De Jonge v. Oregon as well, because it fits this situation too. De Jonge was arrested at a Communist Party meeting, specifically for associating with the Communists who were considered by the government to be a criminal organization. The courts overturned the conviction because De Jonge himself was not engaged in any illegal activity other than attending the meeting. The local government passed a law declaring the whole meeting to be illegal, but the courts said that such regulation violates the right to free assembly.