Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The funny thing about Stormfront is this.... I'd never heard of it until I started posting here. And i learned of its existence from this boards liberals... Lol. I wonder how many of that sites members were turned onto it by bumbling misguided SJWs...?I've never visited Stormfront website because it's not something I want to view. But I am totaly against its removal. What a dumbass thing to do in a country where we celebrate Free Speech. I guess we should shutdown websites that promote Black Lives Matter if we are going to be consistant about banning hate sites. I suspect the Left would be against that.
Aw, jeez, now where are you sick racists gonna foment your hatred?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.”
How are they gonna do that without a web host?The victory is likely to be short lived. Now these people will take their forum to the dark web where no one can restrain them... Probably not such a smart move. Dumbasses... You had them all, right there in front of you... With a small measure of control to boot. And just like everything else you leftists touch; you done gone, and fucked it up... Dumbasses...At last you have posted something we can all celebrate.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.”
Moron... free speech is a protection from the government trying to silence you. Whereas webhosting is a private business and racism is not a protected class.At last you have posted something we can all celebrate.
We??? Only free speech haters like you celebrate this.
Then again, most serial killers and mass murderers are white......so imbeciles and sick freaks come in ALL colors
The facts show Blacks and other non-Whites are 200 times more likely than Whites to assault, murder and or rape other people. Sorry! Brain capacity in humans influences their conduct! Not my fault. God did it through evolution.
What don't the facts show?
Well, if we look at facts, we can see that crime isn't higher among black people, it's higher among AMERICAN PEOPLE, as Africa has lower levels of violent crime than America does. The worst 40 cities in the world for murder, 39 of them are in the Americas.
The facts don't tell you that slavery, segregation and the treatment of black people during this time up until today plays a major part in how society functions and how different groups see themselves. The facts don't tell you that the US's politicians have managed to avoid being seen as racist by simply targeting the poor, many of whom are black or other minorities, and they don't give a damn about any whites who get caught up in this either.
Facts won't tell you everything.
By American, you mean Native American, and Native American mixed peoples have the highest murder rates, and I'd agree.
New World Blacks have higher murder rates than those of Africa.
Of course Africa is very strict generally on crime, unlike New World Blacks.
So you would be in favor of shutting down BLM websites?Moron... free speech is a protection from the government trying to silence you. Whereas webhosting is a private business and racism is not a protected class.At last you have posted something we can all celebrate.
We??? Only free speech haters like you celebrate this.
That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CocaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.Name Registrars are private entities and not governmental. This is not a First Amendment issue.
I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
If a webhost chose to do so because a BLM website was threatening to physically assault and kill others, absolutely. Again, it's a private business. Even worse, webhosts could be held liable for hosting sites that promote violence against others if such violence is then carried out.So you would be in favor of shutting down BLM websites?Moron... free speech is a protection from the government trying to silence you. Whereas webhosting is a private business and racism is not a protected class.At last you have posted something we can all celebrate.
We??? Only free speech haters like you celebrate this.
That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.Name Registrars are private entities and not governmental. This is not a First Amendment issue.
I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
^^^ another imbecile who doesn't understand free speech.I've never visited Stormfront website because it's not something I want to view. But I am totaly against its removal. What a dumbass thing to do in a country where we celebrate Free Speech. I guess we should shutdown websites that promote Black Lives Matter if we are going to be consistant about banning hate sites. I suspect the Left would be against that.
I used CocaCola as an example. It can be any business name, celebrity, etc...That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.Name Registrars are private entities and not governmental. This is not a First Amendment issue.
I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
Coca Cola is a unique and original name ... Stormfront, not so much.
But, if the folks over at Stormfront really want it back, they need to pool their donut and Red Bull money and hire a Jewish lawyer.
I used CocaCola as an example. It can be any business name, celebrity, etc...That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.Name Registrars are private entities and not governmental. This is not a First Amendment issue.
I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
Coca Cola is a unique and original name ... Stormfront, not so much.
But, if the folks over at Stormfront really want it back, they need to pool their donut and Red Bull money and hire a Jewish lawyer.
Won't help stormfront here since that is not their issue. Their issue is that their webhost seized their domain due to violating their terms of service.I used CocaCola as an example. It can be any business name, celebrity, etc...That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.Name Registrars are private entities and not governmental. This is not a First Amendment issue.
I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
Coca Cola is a unique and original name ... Stormfront, not so much.
But, if the folks over at Stormfront really want it back, they need to pool their donut and Red Bull money and hire a Jewish lawyer.
Not cut-and-dried answers to questions of Tort Law ... time for them to lawyer up and roll their collective dice.
I tried to explain earlier how the internet is mostly a private enterprize and there is control of content...Won't help stormfront here since that is not their issue. Their issue is that their webhost seized their domain due to violating their terms of service.I used CocaCola as an example. It can be any business name, celebrity, etc...That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
Coca Cola is a unique and original name ... Stormfront, not so much.
But, if the folks over at Stormfront really want it back, they need to pool their donut and Red Bull money and hire a Jewish lawyer.
Not cut-and-dried answers to questions of Tort Law ... time for them to lawyer up and roll their collective dice.
Won't help stormfront here since that is not their issue. Their issue is that their webhost seized their domain due to violating their terms of service.I used CocaCola as an example. It can be any business name, celebrity, etc...That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.I do believe however if Stormfront has some kind of copyright in the name they can go to court and prove they own it because it is using their name.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-company-force-me-to-give-them-a-domain-name-that-I-own
Coca Cola is a unique and original name ... Stormfront, not so much.
But, if the folks over at Stormfront really want it back, they need to pool their donut and Red Bull money and hire a Jewish lawyer.
Not cut-and-dried answers to questions of Tort Law ... time for them to lawyer up and roll their collective dice.
That is totally up to the owners of USMB....Not the Constitution or all the rightist that have a case of waded panties from Stormfront being closed.....Tissue?The libs need to be careful with their hate or USMB might be next to go
-Geaux
Great, so the score is:Won't help stormfront here since that is not their issue. Their issue is that their webhost seized their domain due to violating their terms of service.I used CocaCola as an example. It can be any business name, celebrity, etc...That's not the case here because no one is using the domain, stormfront.org. What you're looking at is where "squatters" purchase commonly used names and then try to resell them. Like buying coke.com when it was available and then trying to sell it to CokaCola for big bucks. Courts have consistently ruled in favor of corporations owning their own name.
Coca Cola is a unique and original name ... Stormfront, not so much.
But, if the folks over at Stormfront really want it back, they need to pool their donut and Red Bull money and hire a Jewish lawyer.
Not cut-and-dried answers to questions of Tort Law ... time for them to lawyer up and roll their collective dice.
After a bunch of lib lawyers went after the webhost
-Geaux
