Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation

[Faun]

And yet, there is. I already posted what Facebook considers hate speech.

you said it,,,WHAT THEY CONSIDER,,,

and by their actions its all politically based and not about hate,,,

LOLOL

It's their website, so yeah, they get to create their own terms of service.

as long as they are equally applied,, which they arent,,,its all purely one sided,,,

Oh? I wasn't aware Louis Farrakhan is on your side. Thanks for clarifying that.

how would you know what side is mine???

Based on your defense of the one side you wrongly portrayed as being the only target in this.

 

[Faun]

And yet, there is. I already posted what Facebook considers hate speech.

you said it,,,WHAT THEY CONSIDER,,,

and by their actions its all politically based and not about hate,,,

LOLOL

It's their website, so yeah, they get to create their own terms of service.

as long as they are equally applied,, which they arent,,,its all purely one sided,,,

Oh? I wasn't aware Louis Farrakhan is on your side. Thanks for clarifying that.

He's a Democrat.

Who is? Farrakhan or proghunter?

 

[bripat9643]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

The truth hurts.

I love it.

The Trump supporting flame throwers spew trheir shit all over the internet & then run crying when the favor is returned.
You asssfucks need to grow the fuck up & try the truth instead of believing the Loomers & Limbaughs.

No wonder you are all dumber than shit.

If I own a newspaper, I don't have to print your shit.

I hope there is a counter suit & the dumb bitch loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, fucking moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

 

[Faun]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

The truth hurts.

I love it.

The Trump supporting flame throwers spew trheir shit all over the internet & then run crying when the favor is returned.
You asssfucks need to grow the fuck up & try the truth instead of believing the Loomers & Limbaughs.

No wonder you are all dumber than shit.

If I own a newspaper, I don't have to print your shit.

I hope there is a counter suit & the dumb bitch loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, fucking moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

 

[bripat9643]

you said it,,,WHAT THEY CONSIDER,,,

and by their actions its all politically based and not about hate,,,

LOLOL

It's their website, so yeah, they get to create their own terms of service.

as long as they are equally applied,, which they arent,,,its all purely one sided,,,

Oh? I wasn't aware Louis Farrakhan is on your side. Thanks for clarifying that.

He's a Democrat.

Who is? Farrakhan or proghunter?

Farrakhan.

 

[bripat9643]

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing.

you mean like the hatred for white people we hear everyday???

thats just speech you hate,,,and also truth if they do hate them,,,

facts dont care about your feelings,,,

this hate speech thing is just to silence opinion,,,

Nope, it's to prevent exposure to legal liability in cases where the hate speech leads to criminal behavior.

Wrong. If they didn't take sides, they wouldn't be liable. Since they have taken sides, now they are liable.

Instead of banning why not just label these posters as “dangerous” or something to that effect?

That's what Facebook is being sued for.

 

[Dragonlady]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Loomer also has a right to sue them for defamation when Facebook uses it's arbitrary definition of "hate."

No she doesn't. Legally, Loomer doesn't have a leg to stand on here. Facebook can make any sort of artbitrary decision they like to ban a person, and they don't have to justify their reasons. It's a private company. They can't ban her on race, religion or nation of origin, but that's about it. The usual "public accommodations" stuff.

Look at it this way. You invite someone to your home for a dinner party. The guests are a diverse group, but one of your guests comes in, and starts calling people racists names, acting like a total asshole, insulting and offending your other guests, and arguments are breaking out.

Are you going to stand there and say "She is just expressing her opinions as is her right under the Constitution", or are you going to say "You can't talk like that to my other guests. Stop it right now or you'll have to leave".

The right to "free speech" in America is not a carte blanche to promote hate and bigotry. The right to "free speech" is extremely limited: You cannot be arrested or prosecuted for criticizing the government. That's it. You cannot enter a private business and start shouting that you hate brown people. They'll throw you out and rightfully so.

 

[bripat9643]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

The truth hurts.

I love it.

The Trump supporting flame throwers spew trheir shit all over the internet & then run crying when the favor is returned.
You asssfucks need to grow the fuck up & try the truth instead of believing the Loomers & Limbaughs.

No wonder you are all dumber than shit.

If I own a newspaper, I don't have to print your shit.

I hope there is a counter suit & the dumb bitch loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, fucking moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

It's their website, so yeah, they get to create their own terms of service.

as long as they are equally applied,, which they arent,,,its all purely one sided,,,

Oh? I wasn't aware Louis Farrakhan is on your side. Thanks for clarifying that.

He's a Democrat.

Who is? Farrakhan or proghunter?

Farrakhan.

Then obviously, Facebook's bannings are not one sided. Thanks for showing I was right.

 

[Faun]

The truth hurts.

I love it.

The Trump supporting flame throwers spew trheir shit all over the internet & then run crying when the favor is returned.
You asssfucks need to grow the fuck up & try the truth instead of believing the Loomers & Limbaughs.

No wonder you are all dumber than shit.

If I own a newspaper, I don't have to print your shit.

I hope there is a counter suit & the dumb bitch loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, fucking moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

LOL

Of course I do. That's just one of the funnier ones.

 

[justinacolmena]

Facebook defamed me with its anti-transgender hate policies. As a consequence, I will never be able to work for pay or go in business for myself in a competitive market.

I don't have any illusions of a $3,000,000,000 jackpot jury verdict, or even so much as a restoration of civil rights.

 

[bripat9643]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Loomer also has a right to sue them for defamation when Facebook uses it's arbitrary definition of "hate."

No she doesn't. Legally, Loomer doesn't have a leg to stand on here. Facebook can make any sort of artbitrary decision they like to ban a person, and they don't have to justify their reasons. It's a private company. They can't ban her on race, religion or nation of origin, but that's about it. The usual "public accommodations" stuff.

Look at it this way. You invite someone to your home for a dinner party. The guests are a diverse group, but one of your guests comes in, and starts calling people racists names, acting like a total asshole, insulting and offending your other guests, and arguments are breaking out.

Are you going to stand there and say "She is just expressing her opinions as is her right under the Constitution", or are you going to say "You can't talk like that to my other guests. Stop it right now or you'll have to leave".

The right to "free speech" in America is not a carte blanche to promote hate and bigotry. The right to "free speech" is extremely limited: You cannot be arrested or prosecuted for criticizing the government. That's it. You cannot enter a private business and start shouting that you hate brown people. They'll throw you out and rightfully so.

Facebook called Loomer a "dangerous person." That's why they're being sued. Not because they banned her.

Actually, free speech is carte blanche to promote what you call "hate." You should shut the fuck up when it comes to American law, because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

[Faun]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Loomer also has a right to sue them for defamation when Facebook uses it's arbitrary definition of "hate."

No she doesn't. Legally, Loomer doesn't have a leg to stand on here. Facebook can make any sort of artbitrary decision they like to ban a person, and they don't have to justify their reasons. It's a private company. They can't ban her on race, religion or nation of origin, but that's about it. The usual "public accommodations" stuff.

Look at it this way. You invite someone to your home for a dinner party. The guests are a diverse group, but one of your guests comes in, and starts calling people racists names, acting like a total asshole, insulting and offending your other guests, and arguments are breaking out.

Are you going to stand there and say "She is just expressing her opinions as is her right under the Constitution", or are you going to say "You can't talk like that to my other guests. Stop it right now or you'll have to leave".

The right to "free speech" in America is not a carte blanche to promote hate and bigotry. The right to "free speech" is extremely limited: You cannot be arrested or prosecuted for criticizing the government. That's it. You cannot enter a private business and start shouting that you hate brown people. They'll throw you out and rightfully so.

She's not suing because they banned her. She's suing because they labeled her "dangerous."

 

[bripat9643]

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

Sure, fucking moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

LOL

Of course I do. That's just one of the funnier ones.

You've humiliated yourself multiple times in here. I would think you would quit while you're ahead.

 

[Faun]

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Loomer also has a right to sue them for defamation when Facebook uses it's arbitrary definition of "hate."

No she doesn't. Legally, Loomer doesn't have a leg to stand on here. Facebook can make any sort of artbitrary decision they like to ban a person, and they don't have to justify their reasons. It's a private company. They can't ban her on race, religion or nation of origin, but that's about it. The usual "public accommodations" stuff.

Look at it this way. You invite someone to your home for a dinner party. The guests are a diverse group, but one of your guests comes in, and starts calling people racists names, acting like a total asshole, insulting and offending your other guests, and arguments are breaking out.

Are you going to stand there and say "She is just expressing her opinions as is her right under the Constitution", or are you going to say "You can't talk like that to my other guests. Stop it right now or you'll have to leave".

The right to "free speech" in America is not a carte blanche to promote hate and bigotry. The right to "free speech" is extremely limited: You cannot be arrested or prosecuted for criticizing the government. That's it. You cannot enter a private business and start shouting that you hate brown people. They'll throw you out and rightfully so.

Facebook called Loomer a "dangerous person." That's why they're being sued. Not because they banned her.

Actually, free speech is carte blanche to promote what you call "hate." You should shut the fuck up when it comes to American law, because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Fucking moron, free speech does not extend to private businesses.

 

[Faun]

Sure, fucking moron. And Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin according to you.

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

LOL

Of course I do. That's just one of the funnier ones.

You've humiliated yourself multiple times in here. I would think you would quit while you're ahead.

LOL

Too bad for you your hollow claims can't be confirmed.

 

[bripat9643]

they are if they claim they are which Facebook and many other tech giants have under oath to congress

So all Loomer has to do is prove their decision was done with bias that they weren't impartial and not very hard to do with its record

A company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service they cant claim they are unbias that they are impartial and not be just like a manufacturer cant put a made in US tag on products made in China
Its called consumer protection
you against consumer protection? you against consumers not getting what a company claims they are getting?

Facebook doesn't produce a product. They provide a platform. You must abide by certain rukes to use their platform. Is you don't, they can remove you.

It's really just that simple. I already provided Facebook's partial list of TOS violations. She has no case.

they provide a service same difference
doesn't matter what their TOS says if that TOS isnt applied and enforced with out bias or impartiality which they claim it is they are in violation of misrepresenting their service

She was banned along with others who express hate speech, including Alex Jones and Louis Farrakhan.

"Hate speech" is undefinable, and Facebook defines it to mean "any opinion Mark Zuckerberg doesn't like."

So what? It's their site. If you don't like it, don't post your hate speech on it.

They can't call Loomer a "dangerous person." That's defamation. That's what all you fucking lefteing turds refuse to understand.

 

[bripat9643]

Same old trick.

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

LOL

Of course I do. That's just one of the funnier ones.

You've humiliated yourself multiple times in here. I would think you would quit while you're ahead.

LOL

Too bad for you your hollow claims can't be confirmed.

Everyone in this forum with a brain knows what a douchebag you are. Personal attacks are about the only thing you do.

 

[Faun]

Facebook doesn't produce a product. They provide a platform. You must abide by certain rukes to use their platform. Is you don't, they can remove you.

It's really just that simple. I already provided Facebook's partial list of TOS violations. She has no case.

they provide a service same difference
doesn't matter what their TOS says if that TOS isnt applied and enforced with out bias or impartiality which they claim it is they are in violation of misrepresenting their service

She was banned along with others who express hate speech, including Alex Jones and Louis Farrakhan.

"Hate speech" is undefinable, and Facebook defines it to mean "any opinion Mark Zuckerberg doesn't like."

So what? It's their site. If you don't like it, don't post your hate speech on it.

They can't call Loomer a "dangerous person." That's defamation. That's what all you fucking lefteing turds refuse to understand.

They can call her that if she made any threatening comments on their site.

 

[Faun]

It never gets old.

Yeah, because you have nothing else in your quiver.

LOL

Of course I do. That's just one of the funnier ones.

You've humiliated yourself multiple times in here. I would think you would quit while you're ahead.

LOL

Too bad for you your hollow claims can't be confirmed.

Everyone in this forum with a brain knows what a douchebag you are. Personal attacks are about the only thing you do.

More empty banter from the fucking moron who actually claimed Madison Square Garden is in Wisconsin.



Are you going to discuss this thread or me?