Daily Stormer Hit From All Sides

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 07:27:26PM -0700, Razer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 08/16/2017 05:32 PM, Umair Chachar wrote:
> > Joshua, I think you might've missed what Mike was trying to say. With
> > mega corporate overlords taking over control of the internet, they can
> > deny any unpopular speech from being put on the internet just by
> > declaring that it's "hate speech."
> >
> > Literally what I just said could be counted as "hate speech" because
> > it's such a subjective term. It's a threat to freedom of speech.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Umair Chachar
> >
> 
> It's NOT specifically about speech. By definition anyone who would deny,
> or ESPOUSES the denial of someone's right to exist

And that's just one of the bullshit lies you keep espousing, L!

As you consistently mis-represent your "opponent"'s position, and try
to do nothing with your "opponent"'s views but "shut it down",
you are shutting down nothing other than your own strawman - but you
know this, since it keeps getting pointed out to you, and you keep
spewing this specific bullshit anyway.

Your persistence in this bullshit demonstrates that not only are you
politically active in your communication on something you consider
important, but that you continue to take only a belligerent extremist
position in your communication, leading the read to assume either:

a) you are "rationally" assuming that such belligerence is beneficial
   to your preferred social cause/outcome; or

b) you are unaware of the egregiousness of your "techniques" of
   communication and therefore the disingenuousness abundantly
   evident in your communication tactics, and fundamentally a fool.


In either case, your level of belligerence is offensive.


Any sane, rational person would absolutely support you in opposing
horrible human behaviour, be it murder, torture or even lesser crimes
such as intimidation.


But how do you expect any sane rational person support your
fundamentally Antifi-like "terrorist" tactics (to use a ridiculously
overused and misused term these days)?


Yes you have some great stories from your hey day of opposing The
Man, with which you regale us occasionally - and hey, thanks, I enjoy
reading these of course.  And you know enough words to demonstrate an
interest in "intellectual discourse". But damn, can you give up your
persecution complex already and man the firetruck up?!


By founding your entire discourse on a lie, and using this strawman
to justify horror untold, you demonstrate that you, Razer or Leigh
or whatever you want to be called today, ARE WELL ON THE WAY TO BEING
AN ABOLUTE MONSTER.

I tend to assume that overuse of THC leads to a sad and significant
reduction in self awareness, but such an issue can never justify the
horror you keep calling for - YOU either are, or are apparently
becoming, the evil you claim to oppose!


Good luck all,
Zenaan



> based on some
> unalterable feature of their existence like skin color of religion of
> birth forfeits not only forfeits their right to 'free speech', they
> forfeit the right to exist themselves, because to allow it implies you'd
> allow your own self-extermination. In other words you have to
> proactively act in  self-defense.
> 
> OFC then they claim to be the victims.
> 
> Meanwhile the Stormer article that got them bounced from GoDaddy said
> (paraphrase) the woman who got run down (a tactic learned from 'islamic
> terrorists' btw) was a fat 30-something year old woman who hadn't bred
> and therefore she was worthless. What I said above about "ESPOUSES the
> denial of someone's right to exist based on..." is operational here.
> 
> 
> Also note during the Bundy Bozos Oregon standoff there were adolescents
> and teen speaking to a city meeting about the refuge occupation
> literally in tears claiming they were in abject fear of the Bundy crew.
> 
> In other words. Terrorism. What do we do with terrorists? ESPECIALLY
> ones who terrorize CHILDREN?
> 
> Death is too good for them. I can't wait to 'victimize' a few affluent
> white men who can afford 'tactical bacon' and replica military weapons
> (but forgot their clean socks and tidy [snigger] whities) I knew guys
> like that at the disc drive company I worked for. They moved from
> affluent white suburbs to places in semi-rural areas outside cities and
> were frightened of everything, imaginary marauders who were going to
> home-invade their semi-rural paradise, and the Mexican restaurant
> workers next door ('gangbangers' natch) too, and bought guns, and were
> the most likely people to crack and show up at work to slaughter their
> co-workers.
> 
> Rr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >> -------- Original Message --------
> >> Subject: RE: Daily Stormer Hit From All Sides
> >> Local Time: August 16, 2017 5:09 PM
> >> UTC Time: August 16, 2017 9:09 PM
> >> From: joshua2014 at protonmail.ch
> >> To: cp <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>
> >>
> >> I'm so glad to hear it!
> >>
> >> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Mike Duvos<mpd at wolf359.net <mailto:mpd at wolf359.net%20class=>>
> >> Date: On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:57 PM
> >> Subject: Fwd: Daily Stormer Hit From All Sides
> >> To: <cypherpunks at cpunks.org <mailto:cypherpunks at cpunks.org%20>>
> >> CC:
> >>
> >>     Everyone's favorite Neo-Nazi parody and trolling site, The Daily
> >>     Stormer, written by Andrew Anglin, has had a bad several days.
> >>     They published an article calling the road rage victim at the
> >>     "Unite the Right " rally a "fat childless 32-year-old slut, " and
> >>     the forces of political correctness went wild. GoDaddy gave them
> >>     24 hours to find a new domain registrar, and they moved to
> >>     Google. Google cancelled their registration and froze the domain,
> >>     preventing them from moving it again, effectively stealing it.
> >>     They came back up as dailystormer.wang, in Chinese jurisdiction,
> >>     but that domain was seized after a few hours. They then tried
> >>     dailystormer.ru, but Cloudflare then dumped them after a Quartz
> >>     article accused Cloudflare of "Enabling Hate. " Twitter then
> >>     cancelled their status page. They've managed to get an onion
> >>     address up, at dstormer6em3i4km.onion which points to the few
> >>     places they haven't been kicked off of yet. With major chunks of
> >>     important Internet infrastructure in the hands of giant private
> >>     corporations, who can decline service to anyone at any time for
> >>     any reason, unpopular speech can get stomped on without it
> >>     technically being "censorship ", which is regulation of speech by
> >>     the government. Reading The Daily Stormer doesn't make anyone a
> >>     Nazi, anymore than reading The Landover Baptist Church makes
> >>     someone a Baptist. It will be interesting to see what happens
> >>     with the site, because right now, they are kind of the Spotted
> >>     Owl in the free speech forest. -- Mike Duvos mpd at wolf359.net
> >>
> >
>