Christian News Site ‘LifeSite’ Blacklisted by Web Host

Breitbart ^ | Oct 29, 2018 | by Charlie Nash

[palmer]

I don't know who hosted them when they wrote the article a few days ago. But right now lifesitenews.com is hosted by Cloudflare, one of the biggest in the business. In their terms of service:

We may at our sole discretion suspend or terminate your access to the Website at any time, with or without notice for any reason or no reason at all. We also reserve the right to modify or discontinue the Website at any time (including, without limitation, by limiting or discontinuing certain features of the Website) without notice to you. We will have no liability whatsoever on account of any change to the Website or any suspension or termination of your access to or use of the Website.

From https://www.cloudflare.com/website-terms/

[AAABEST]

These days I just rent some space on a server for some of our business sites. I had a religious site on there for some time that started out as an offshoot of FR and got pretty huge for a while.

Not really my line of work... just kinda worked out that way.

[daniel1212]

Pro-family group gets SWATted: Website shut down after LGBT activist threatens company

The person behind this, an impenitent (if he was repentant i would not post this) criminal (not simply a sexual offender, but an assailant, witness tampering, lying, continued intimidation activist ) has not succeeded in shutting down Google or the state of Maine. May God yet grant him "repentance to the acknowledging of the truth." (2 Timothy 2:25)

Name: Adam Edward harland Flanders Database last updated on: 10/30/2018: http://sor.informe.org/cgi-bin/sor/step3.pl?id=6036

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE ADAM E ... www.med.uscourts.gov/.../2013/MJK_03262013_2-12cv278_Flanders_v_Maine.pdf Mar 26, 2013 - . [Excerpts] Petitioner Adam Flanders pleaded guilty in January 2008 to several crimes

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE ADAM E. FLANDERS , ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) 2:12 - cv - 00277 - JAW ) 2:12 - cv - 00278 - JAW STATE OF MAINE, ) ) Respondent ) RECOMMENDED DECISION ON 28 U.S.C. § 2254 PETITION S Petitioner Adam Flanders pleaded guilty in January 2008 to several crim es in Knox County Superior Court, including aggravated assault , tampering with a victim , and violation s of conditions of release. In August 2008, he pleaded guilty in Ma ine District Court in Belfast to sexual abuse of a minor and violation of conditions of release and admitted a probation violation in Knox County Superior Court based on the same conduct .

2 to represent him on his federal habeas petitions. The doc ket entries reflect that the same retained counsel also entered an appearance in state court prior to the state evidentiary hearing on the state post - conviction petitions . 1. T he Assault Incident ( Knox County ) The underlying Knox County crimes arose out of an assault that involved Flanders and two victims, one of whom was a boy age 1 6 at the time of the crimes. (State Court Record §§ A.1 at 1; D.3, Vol. II at 64.) The other victim in that incident was the boy’s father. The assault took place in February 2007 at the home of the boy, his father, and his stepmother ; the stepmother was at home but was not assaulted . (State Court Record §§ A.1 at 1; D.4 at 6.) Flanders testified that he had been in a relationship with the boy since 2005 when Fla nders was eighteen or nineteen years old and the boy was fifteen. (State Court Record § D.3, Vol. II at 64 - 66.) Prior to the events at issue in this post - conviction, Flanders had pleaded guilty to assaulting the boy in 2006; sentencing apparently was def erred but Flanders was under a court order of no contact with the boy. (State Court Record § D.3, Vol. I I at 64 - 66.) In addition, the boy’s stepmother had obtained an order of protection from harassment prohibiting Flanders from having contact with the b oy. (State Court Record § § D.3, Vol. II at 66; D.4 at 6.) The conviction for tampering with a victim concerned the same boy as was involved in the February 2007 assault. (Stat e Court Record § D.4 at 11 - 12.)...

Flanders’s self - defense theory is that the boy and his father lured Flanders to their house as a setup to get Flanders arrested, and Flanders responded in self - defense to the father’s aggressive behavior. (State Court Record § D.4 at 5, 7.)

T he post - conviction court did not find meaningfu l factual support in any of the recorded statements for a claim of self - defense by Flanders . (State Court Record § D.... 4 at 6.)

Flanders testified that he discussed a theory of self - defense with counsel but that he decided to plead guilty because he was concerned about a prison sentence on the charge of tampering and because he thought he might be prosecuted―unfairly b ecause he felt he was innocent― for having child pornography on his computer . (State Court Record § D.3, Vol. II at 29, 39.)

In the recorded interview of Flanders concerning the assault incident, Flanders told the investigator that the boy asked him to sneak into the boy’s residence so the two could have sex. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) Flanders told the investigator that he parked his car where it could not be seen, and he took a knife to use in se lf - defense. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) The boy let Flanders into the house, and he went to the boy’s room. The boy then thought that his stepmother may have seen Flanders, and he told Flanders to go out through a window and hide on a roof. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) The boy went downstairs, returned, and told Flanders to come back into his room. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) Flanders did so and 4 started taking off his clothes. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) The father then called th e boy downstairs. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) Flanders hid in a closet in the boy’s room. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) The father entered the boy’s room and was not carrying a weapon. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) Flanders swung his knife toward the father and cut him. (State Court Record § § D.3, Vol. II at 68; D.4 at 6.) Flanders told the investigator that he did this because he was afraid of the father and was acting in self - defense. (State Court Record § D.4 at 6.) The boy was also cut during the incident, and although Flanders told the investigator that he did not cause that injury, at the hearing on the post - conviction, Flanders admitted that he did cut the boy with the knife. (State Court Record § § D.3, Vol. II at 67; D.4 at 6.) Flanders testified that he injured the father “much more seriously” than the boy, although the boy sustained several cuts. (State Court Record § D.3, Vol. II at 67 - 68.) ...

the boy stated that when the violence began, Flanders took him from behind and held the knife near the boy’s throat; (2) the father was watching the situation and threatened to intervene if Flanders escalated the threat to the boy; and (3) the boy said that Flanders stabbed him at least once before the father approached Flanders. (State Court Record § D.4 at 8 n.3.) ...

In March 2007, Flanders sent a letter to the boy after Flanders had been charged with crimes based on the assault incident at the boy’s home. (State Court Record § § B.1 at 1; D.4 at 11.) Flanders wrote the letter while he was being held on pretrial bail set in the assault case . (State Court Record § D.4 at 11.) In the letter, Flanders asked the boy to exculpate him from criminal liability by falsely stating that the bo y’s injuries were self - inflicted rather than caused by Flanders. (State Court Record § D.4 at 11.) Flanders asked the boy to use a “last opportunity,” stating that it “essentially involves you changing your statement.” (State Court Record § D.4 at 11.)

The Waldo County charge of sexual abuse of a minor arose out of an incident in June 2008 with a different victim than the boy involved in the assault incident . (State Court Record §§ C.1 at 1; D.3, Vol. I at 115.)

Yet there is still room at the cross for all who will come to God in repentance and faith, and trust in the Divine Son of God sent by the Father, the risen Lord Jesus, to save them on His account, by His sinless shed blood, and thus be baptized and live for Him. Acts 10:36-47

[daniel1212]

In May 2017 ProPublica reported that Cloudflare as a matter of policy relays the names and email addresses of persons complaining about hate sites to the sites in question, which has led to the complainants being harassed. Cloudflare's general counsel defended the company's policies by saying it is "base constitutional law that people can face their accusers."[58] In response Cloudflare updated their abuse reporting process to provide greater control of who to notify for the complaining party.[59]

Cloudflare was ranked in the 7th rank among the top 50 Bad Hosts by HostExploit.[61] The service has been used by Rescator, a website that sells payment card data.[62][63][64]

Two of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant's top three online chat forums are guarded by Cloudflare but U.S. law enforcement has not asked them to discontinue the service, and they have not chosen to do so themselves.[65] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare

Related: The Terrifying Power of Internet Censors (NYT)

[daniel1212]

Didn’t Gab have a porn section? If Christian, I wouldn’t want to share services with a hosting company that had no problem with porn.

That is the problem: If a host can deny porn based on its content being objectionable, it can deny conservative content on the same basis. Unless perhaps the one denied wanted to promote the homosexual agenda, would be discrimination to deny them, just like refusing to rent space for celebrating homosexual unions.

[major-pelham]

Hi Jim. Web hosting strikes me as a non discretionary basic service like installing telephone service or receiving mail. There’s nothing discretionary at all about a decision to provide the service if you’re offering the service. I’m a supporter for any emergency litigation funds being created.

[daniel1212]

(1) No information about any connected allegation or circumstance

See post 83 And,

Vimeo kowtows to gay sex offender, deletes conservative news outlet’s videos

LifeSiteNews threatened by Maine homosexual over July 12 story

Convicted gay sex offender uses scare tactics to shut down website on truth about homosexuality

Aren’t there any Christian run hosting services?

This overview via excerpts may help, concerning Cloudflare, whose policy is, as stated vby CEO Matthew Prince, "One of the greatest strengths of the United States is a belief that speech, particularly political speech, is sacred. A website, of course, is nothing but speech ... A website is speech. It is not a bomb. There is no imminent danger it creates and no provider has an affirmative obligation to monitor and make determinations about the theoretically harmful nature of speech a site may contain."

For all customers Cloudflare offers an "I'm Under Attack Mode" setting. Cloudflare claims this can mitigate advanced Layer 7 attacks by presenting a JavaScript computational challenge which must be completed by a user's browser before the user can access a website - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare

But who dropped the American neo-Nazi website "The Daily Stormer" as a customer. Which I would do also, but as said, if a host can deny such based on its content being objectionable, it can deny conservative content on the same basis (unless perhaps the one denied wanted to promote the homosexual agenda or reverse racism.). This issue led to this opinion piece in the NYT no less, The Terrifying Power of Internet Censors :

Generally speaking, there are two kinds of corporate players on the internet: companies that build infrastructure through which content flows, and companies that seek to curate content and create a community.

Internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast, domain name servers, web hosts and security services providers like Cloudflare are all the former — or the “pipe.” They typically don’t look at the content their clients and customers are putting up, they just give them the means to do it and let it flow.

Social media platforms like Facebook are the latter. They encourage their users to create, share and engage with content — so they look at content all the time and decide whether they want to allow hateful material like that of neo-Nazis to stay up.

One of the additional difficulties with Cloudflare is that it is not so much a piece of pipe as it is a service. Specifically, it is a paid-for-protection service. Having to hire Cloudflare to protect your website is like having to hire security to protect you from attackers when you speak in the public square.

Matthew Prince, Cloudflare’s chief executive, acknowledged how much power his company has, and what’s at stake. “The internet is a really important resource for everyone,” he said in an interview with TechCrunch, “but there’s a very limited set of companies that control it and there’s such little accountability to us that it really is quite a dangerous thing.” - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/opinion/cloudflare-daily-stormer-charlottesville.html

[Biggirl]

Give President Trump CREDIT. He is working hard to drain and clean the swamp.

[discostu]

Private property. Get a better host.

[daniel1212]

Web hosting strikes me as a non discretionary basic service like installing telephone service or receiving mail.

No, installing/enabling telephone service is not the same thing as providing the continual service. Selling a car is one thing, providing the road to drive it on is another. And to use the phone of Internet service we are subject to Terms of Service agreements, which are purposely so ambiguous they they could easily justify terminating our use based on advocating Christian morality, and political views as expressed here. To wit, Verizon's ToS for residential customers states, in part,

General Policy: Verizon reserves the sole discretion to deny or restrict your Service, or immediately to suspend or terminate your Service, if the use of your Service by you or anyone using it, in our sole discretion, violates the Agreement or other Verizon policies, is objectionable or unlawful...

use the service in any fashion for the transmission or dissemination .. in a manner that.. espouses, promotes or incites bigotry, hatred or racism;

The Comcast Cloud Solutions Terms of Service (for businesses) states, in part,

BY USING THE CLOUD SOLUTIONS MARKETPLACE YOU AGREE NOT TO post, upload, or distribute any User Submission (as defined in Section 8 below) or other content that is defamatory....inaccurate... or that a reasonable person could deem to be objectionable, offensive,...threatening, embarrassing, distressing, vulgar, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive, or otherwise inappropriate.

And the tendency is that of the Left applying what you see deemed in universities as objectionable, threatening, inappropriate, etc. to society as a whole

[DiogenesLamp]

Public communications cannot be allowed to be private property. That is a fundamental concept that I don't think you comprehend. You would toss away our only means of survival for some abstract principle which you have heard but do not correctly understand.

[discostu]

Now you’ve gone full blown socialist. Might as well support Obama Care and change your name to Bernie Sanders. You’ve lost the narrative. Goodbye.

[Borges]

Do you support bringing back the Fairness Doctrine?

[DiogenesLamp]

Yes, please, goodbye. I don't need to hear from you, I just need to knock down your ideas. Your replies to me are not necessary, and are in fact counter productive because they waste my time.

[discostu]

You keep pinging me dipstick. Stop whining. And you haven’t shot down a damned thing. To do that one must bring FACTS which you are apparently allergic too. Meanwhile my point stands, if you think communication is too important to be private property you’re a freaking socialist.

[DiogenesLamp]

Do you support bringing back the Fairness Doctrine?

I could answer that if I could find a good explanation as to what *is* the "fairness doctrine." Too often stuff gets labeled as something it isn't. I believe the "fairness doctrine" is a good example of such a thing.

I'll tell you what I do support that might save you some trouble. I support the government *FORCING* all broadcast television media systems to give half of their existing air time to people who represent the other half of the American public.

It is insane and ridiculous that 1/2 the public cannot be represented on the national airwaves. Every person in charge of television broadcasting is a Liberal Democrat, and the entire system espouses only one political view.

Time to end this. It is an unnatural and dangerous monopoly.

[DiogenesLamp]

I am not “pinging” you, I am replying to your commentary. About the only good thing I can say about it is that it is somewhat amusing.

[Original Lurker]

Comments in the article suggest it’s hosted by Godaddy.

[discostu]

I wasn’t on this thread. YOU pinged me to it. That’s what it’s called when you put somebody in the To field that wasn’t there already.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I’d want to go frankly Christian rather than playing the world game. Playing the world game is what got most Jews in America banding with the looie leftists.