Neo-Nazi Site The Daily Stormer Moves To Dark Web After Shutdown (vice.com)

After being shutdown by Google and GoDaddy, prominent neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer has moved their site to the dark web. "The new site is now only available through the Tor network, which allows users to set up their own domains," reports VICE News. "The original site, Dailystormer.com, is now fully offline." From the report: The homepage, as of Tuesday morning, contained articles that make light of the car ramming attack that claimed the life of 32-year-old Heather Heyer; admonish the "Jew media;" liberally employ various racial epithets; and, in a less offensive post, provided an update on which characters are available on Pokemon Go. In a statement, the site's founder promised to bring his site back online. "The Daily Stormer will be live in internet prison with drug dealers, terrorists and perverts, which is where we've been exiled to, for all time," Andrew Anglin said in a statement sent to VICE News. "We should have a real domain online within 24 hours. If it gets shut down again, people will know we are on the black web."

Comments

Good Job

[AdamStarks]

Now we can't mock the posts, debate the facts, or keep tabs on the threat. Nothing will get better; rather, these vile sentiments will fester, and we'll have a tougher time anticipating the next Charlotsville, since it won't be so widely publicized.

Good job, fuckwads.

Re:Good Job

[Anonymous Coward]

Debate? What debate?

Re:Good Job

[sobachatina]

I agree with your sentiment. I just hope whatever I think isn't someday deemed unworthy to say by American tech companies.

Still, if no one knew about the Charlottesville thing then no anti-protesters would have shown up. The vanishingly small number of nazis would have had their little hatefest and been properly ignored. No one would have gotten hit by a car.

Why can't we handle these things like we always have. Let them have their platform and ignore them. Let the FBI worry about whether they are planning actual violence.
This modern idea of given massive attention to a handful of radicals and then killing their free speech is frightening.

Re:Good Job

[American AC in Paris]

Now we can't mock the posts, debate the facts, or keep tabs on the threat.

Mocking racists and Nazis online is little more than entertainment, and it's the lowest of hanging fruits, at that. Debating facts is moot; when the premise of the debate is "our race is superior to all others and should lead the world," you're already playing chess with a pigeon. As for keeping tabs on the threat--a concern of consequence--I can only imagine that the people who do this for a living are already pretty well-versed in tracking people on the Dark Web.

Nothing will get better; rather, these vile sentiments will fester, and we'll have a tougher time anticipating the next Charlotsville, since it won't be so widely publicized.

These vile sentiments will fester regardless, but that very lack of publicity will also keep the numbers of people doing this low. You lose visibility, you lose the lightweights and hangers-on. You lose numbers. You lose clout. You lose efficacy. That is worth a great deal.

Re: Good Job

[Nidi62]

If the government can keep shutting down drug marketplaces on the dark web, I'm pretty sure they can monitor a neo Nazi website. And if they don't, the SPLC or something similar certainly will

Re:Good Job

[JohnFen]

Why can't we handle these things like we always have.

That's the wrong question. We are handling things like we always have. Look at how these issues have been handled over the past 200 years or so, and I think the question you'll want to ask is "why can't we handle these things any better than we used to?"

Re: Good Job

[godel_56]

in addition to being a drug dealer and pedophile?

In many individual cases, probably Yes.

Re:Good Job

[vadim_t]

Nope, anybody with the Tor browser can.

The only loss here is for the Nazis. The site is now harder to access, harder to find, and to boot now it's open season to go and try to hack the site. Tor protects the identity of the user, so now any random hacker wannabe can go and try their skills against the site without much of a risk of being found out.

The same anonymity means it's also far harder for the Daily Stormer from banning people from the site -- unless they want to make it really hard to access, like requiring referrals. So this development also makes it very possible to simply troll and spam the site into oblivion.

Re:Good Job

[TsuruchiBrian]

Either it's hard to use Tor or it isn't.

If it's hard then it will be harder to keep tabs on them, but it will also be harder for them to get their message out to their own idiot followers. Sounds like a wash to me.

Or, using Tor is easy, in which case nothing really changes except that they have been demoted to the dark web and lose some legitimacy.

I think I would also prefer to just have people be free to say whatever they want in a public forum, but I don't support forcing private web hosting companies/domain services to participate in spreading content they are opposed to.

As far as I can tell these neo nazis still have freedom of speech for the time being. So the government can't legally stop them from being on the internet. They just need to find services that are willing to do business with them, or develop some better IT skills and set up their own domain service/web host, and they can refuse service to all the dirty Jews trying to use it.

In America you have freedom of speech. You don't have the right to anyone's help in spreading your speech.

Re: Good Job

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually people were persuaded because he predicted that the Jews (who he claimed controlled the banks) were loaning Germany money in order to wreck their economy as further revenge for WWI.

Then the US (and other) stock markets crashed, and the banks tried to "call in" Germany's debt. Which tanked their economy and caused insane inflation.

So then people started thinking, "hey this Hitler guy actually was right."

Re:Good Job

[fahrbot-bot]

Debating facts is moot; when the premise of the debate is "our race is superior to all others and should lead the world," you're already playing chess with a pigeon.

And to those pigeons, I'd like to rephrase a popular Trump and Trump supporter remark: Both the Nazis and the South lost; get over it.

Re: Good Job

[Anonymous Coward]

Interresting how foreign politics that does not equal facism somehow equals communism.

Re: Good Job

[RazorSharp]

But unlike Nazi Germany, our economy is actually doing quite well. Just because Trump ran a campaign that declared that the U.S. economy was spiraling down the drain doesn't make it so. When Germans in the 1930s were disappointed with the economy, it was because many of them were literally starving to death. Modern Americans who think our economy is doing poorly are detached from reality (most likely because they're stupid and don't know how to judge the veracity of whatever they read on the internet or hear on talk radio).

Re: Good Job

[MightyMartian]

The modern Neo-Nazi pretty much mirrors the view of their spiritual forebears. If you're not espousing Aryan superiority, then you're either a emasculated collaborator with the Jewish conspiracy or a Communist (in some Neo-Nazi's eyes one and the same). I realize the parent may not be a Nazi, but the rhetoric of the White Supremacy movement has been adopted with extraordinary fidelity by the Alt-right, though I suspect most members of the Alt-right are too naive or stupid to realize it.

This Is Both Good and Bad News

[IonOtter]

The Good: It drives the "weekend Nazis" away, and they'll simply get bored and go back to being irrelevant.

The Bad: The real Nazis will embrace this, and will gladly slither into the depths.

The Ugly: Government agencies now have a valid excuse to obtain funding for exponentially increasing the number of exit nodes under their control.

Re:This Is Both Good and Bad News

[alvinrod]

The Ugly: Government agencies now have a valid excuse to obtain funding for exponentially increasing the number of exit nodes under their control.

I don't quite get this argument. Neo-Nazis are suddenly a valid excuse when child porn, illegal drugs, or arms dealing weren't? I mean half of the country likes their guns, even more like their drugs (even in they won't publicly admit it), but I don't think anyone is going to stick up for the kiddie diddlers. Even the Neo-Nazis have a better reputation than they do.

Libertarians should love this outcome.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's hilarious that all the self-styled "libertarians" here are freaking out about private businesses choosing not to host material they see as potentially harmful to their bottom line.

This is a textbook example of the free market regulating itself. No one wants the bad publicity of hosting these chuckleheads, and they certainly can't provide the dollars needed to make hosts consider carrying heir content a worthwhile business decision.

And before you say "but muh First Amendment!" that only applies to the government you so loathe. In fact, the government is the ONLY instiution that actually has the power to protect free speech.

So let these Nazi shits scuttle off to the dark web. No one is stopping them from posting their drivel there, and unless they create a clear and present danger to public welfare, no one is going to interrupt their supremacist fantasy circle jerk.

Re:Libertarians should love this outcome.

[meglon]

I think you need to stop mixing up bullshit in your head before writing said regurgitated bullshit onto a page.

Or, say, a "private business" refusing to rent an apartment to a black family?

That is specifically illegal: http://civilrights.findlaw.com...

Would you be so cheerful if ISPs refused to say, host LGBTQ sites?

Federal courts have ruled that LGBTQ are a protected class under the Civil Rights Act https://www.lifesitenews.com/n... so, yes, that would be illegal on the part of the ISP. That's federal law. Now, the current administration would prefer that states be allowed to be petty tyrants and strip any citizen they want of their rights, so they've appealed the ruling.... we'll see how that turns our.

I'm pretty sure that it was settled that NO, private businesses do not get to pick and choose who they serve when the court determined the bakery DID have to make a wedding cake for the gay marriage http://aclu-co.org/court-rules...

IF you had read that article, you'd have noticed this little tidbit in there:

Longstanding Colorado state law prohibits public accommodations, including businesses such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

So yes, a state court in Colorado said the bakery was violating the state law.

I believe that was widely hailed as a precedent setting verdict that would stop those 'closed minded' businesses from constraining people's freedom ...like this.

The former was a federal court ruling LGBTQ is a protected class, and falls under the Civil Rights Act, the latter is a state affirming you have to follow the law. The federal ruling was precedent setting, the state one... not so much. Regardless.... neither of those apply to worthless fucking NAZI's, because not only are NAZI's NOT a protected class... they are enemies of the United States.

Re:Libertarians should love this outcome.

[MightyMartian]

Perhaps because there are Libertarians, and then there are alt-right types or worse masquerading as Libertarians to white wash their vile views. I think Libertarians, at least on economics, are hopelessly naive, but when it comes to issues of free speech, I tend in that direction. People have a right to speak their mind, but no one is under any obligation to hand them a microphone.

Re:Libertarians should love this outcome.

[Voyager529]

The GP was a bit off on his examples, but the question is a bit more complicated. Refusing to sell a cake out of the display case because an individual is black/gay/Muslim/whatever, obvious discrimination, no question, both immoral and illegal. Events and work-for-hire, on the other hand, are where the ambiguity lies. If the cake bakers were asked to custom create a cake with swastikas for the neonazi rally, should they be allowed to refuse to take that job? I would agree that the bakery should be required to sell the neonazis a cake from the display case and a tube of red icing, but requiring them to enter a work-for-hire contract is, in my opinion, more ambiguous.

Bringing it back to the gay wedding scenario, the summary on the ACLU website is a bit vague on the difference between the two. The plaintiff in the case was indeed gay, making it a layup for a discrimination ruling to be made. The case would have been far more interesting if the plaintiff was straight, e.g. a caterer subcontracting a cake for a gay wedding. If the policy was "we don't make same sex wedding cakes, regardless of who asks", and both a straight person and an LGBTQ++ person received the same lack of service, then I would argue it's not 'discrimination' so much as 'a service that isn't offered', again, so long as the policy was posted and they're willing to sell an undecorated cake and a tube of frosting to that same person. Of course, it would have been really funny to watch the squirming that would take place if the cake was for "Alex and Taylor".

Just to ensure I don't get accused of comparing homosexuals to nazis, I'm explicitly not equating the two groups - and that's my entire point. Refusing service to a human is discrimination, and no, I'm not even a little bit in favor of doing so, to anyone. However, refusing to provide service to an *event*
  or *ideological group* irrespective of the individual representative signatory is...apparently the same thing though, according to the state of Colorado? The "protected class" argument is tough - "neonazis are not a protected class" makes some sense because one can choose to cease being a nazi (and really, they should), but does that mean that a cake baker can refuse to make a swastika cake for a straight neonazi, but not a gay one (yes, I know...)? Moreover, the "protected class" argument is tenuous due to its seemingly inconsistent definition. It's not as simple as 'Things that cannot be changed about one's self', because the quoted list includes 'marital status', which is optional. Though presumably not an exhaustive list, it also doesn't list religion, meaning that they would be free to refuse to make a 'Happy Ramadan' cake as long as the person asking was a white Muslim?

This brings us full circle to GoDaddy - If the individual paying for the hosting account for the website fell within a protected class in tangential relation to the content of the website, does 'protected class' overrule 'objectionable content'? Does 'private company choosing who they do business with' overrule both? Neither? If "protected class" wins, then all the neonazis need to do is have a gay person sign up for the hosting account, and then Godaddy *has* to provide them service. If "private company" wins, then there is no such thing as a "protected class" as long as the content is sufficiently objectionable.

Brilliant!

[beheaderaswp]

This is rich- they'll survive about 24 hours (if that).

The hacktivists who use Tor are now gleeful that their attacks against the site cannot be traced. Even people who don't hack sites are going to be looking for scripts. IT guys who never hack are going to attack.

These people are not smart. If you dive into Tor or I2P you are in the deep end of the pool.

Re:Have the BLM and Antifa follow.

[Cyberax]

"Antifa" is a virtue signal for right-wingers, a way to show that you're a part of them and not of the "lying media". Another signal is "Soros" who is apparently hiding behind every corner.

Re: I vociferously disagree

[MattKeith]

The real problem here is that they think they've gone mainstream with Trump. They weren't wearing masks. Maybe they have, but leaving them alone to think, and maybe convince others, that this line of thinking and reasoning is acceptable, is clearly dangerous. It's not like there aren't a lot of DNS providers, but maybe, just maybe, if no one is willing to do business with them, others will think twice before joining them.