Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation

[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.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

Facebook defines hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what they call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability.

Show me where Omar, Tlaib or Cortez expressed such hate speech on Facebook.....

youre kidding right???

If you're aware where they promoted such hate speech on Facebook, then post it.....

 

[DOTR]

Lol
Facebook is owned and run by progressives,

I do not give a **** who owns and runs a company, I will still favor them over the government...you on the other hand run to the government for everything.

You defend Facebook every chance you get. Sometimes you whine about your government obsession. Then you come across private action and you whine about that.
You are paralyzed without the government b

 

[progressive hunter]

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.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

Facebook defines hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what they call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability.

Show me where Omar, Tlaib or Cortez expressed such hate speech on Facebook.....

youre kidding right???

If you're aware where they promoted such hate speech on Facebook, then post it.....

not on facebook

 

[Faun]

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.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

That makes sense. What did Laura Loomer post to get her banned?

If I recall, all she did was state a fact,,,

Oh? What did she post...?

 

[bripat9643]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

Preaching "hate" (aka an opposing view) and being dangerous are completely different things. They told users she was dangerous, which implies that she is violent or has incited violence.

We all know good and Goddamn well that this person was not violent. Facebook commies just didn't like her message.

They were trying to be cute with their banning bullshit, but they fucked up.

But, I think Facebook should go with the "hate speech" defense. They will be required to prove it, and what they offer will be NOTHING but political speech.

Just one "conservative" on that jury will be enough.

People are fed up with this bullshit, and now they have a chance to do something about it.

.

One does not have to be violent or has incited violence to be dangerous. Ideas can be dangerous without being violent. I heard Obama called dangerous to our country a thousand times.

you are letting your hate cloud your reason.

Obama is a politician. It's almost impossible for them to sue for defamation. That's the law. Your kind whined like little babies when Trump proposed changing that.

 

[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.

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.

American's don't want to live like you Russians, Tree. That's why you're not allowed to threaten people's lives, or make calls for the murder of all liberals, which we so often see on this forum. That's hate speech.

Don't speak out of question - that's Donald Trump. Everything is wonderful, he's the greatest, just ask him. All of your memes are the direction that Trump is heading. He wants no criticism from the media, no one calling him out on his lies.

"Truth is not truth" is one of his lines. "Don't believe what you see or hear" is another.

You posted that to me, not tree.

 

[Dragonlady]

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.

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.

you mean like all the hate aimed at trump that results in attacks on anyone that even wears a hat with his slogan on it???

Some say that wearing a MAGA Hat is the very definition of hate speech, and many people wear them in the HOPES that they will get beat up and they can claim victimhood.

 

[Faun]

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.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

God will judge people on The Left on Judgement Day.

No need for any one to act as God's executioner.

Hell is a real place, and Evil, Liars, Slanderers, The Treasonous, And the Vile Idol Worshipers will all find themselves there.

Laughing about Hell does not stop you from being sent there.

Yuck it up, fuzz ball.

I'm not laughing about hell... I'm laughing at you for thinking you know who goes where after death.

 

[progressive hunter]

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.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

That makes sense. What did Laura Loomer post to get her banned?

If I recall, all she did was state a fact,,,

Oh? What did she post...?

best I can find is she didnt say anything that violated the TOS,,,its just FB didnt like her POV so they banned her like so many others

 

[progressive hunter]

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.

you mean like all the hate aimed at trump that results in attacks on anyone that even wears a hat with his slogan on it???

Some say that wearing a MAGA Hat is the very definition of hate speech, and many people wear them in the HOPES that they will get beat up and they can claim victimhood.

got a link??

 

[Faun]

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.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

Facebook defines hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what they call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability.

Show me where Omar, Tlaib or Cortez expressed such hate speech on Facebook.....

youre kidding right???

If you're aware where they promoted such hate speech on Facebook, then post it.....

not on facebook

Then they haven't violated Facebook's terms of service

 

[bripat9643]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

doesn't matter if its a private company a company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service if Face book says decision made are done with out bias that they are impartial all you have to do is prove that decisions made are done with bias that they are not impartial

these Tech giants like Facebook cant tell its consumers one thing and then act differently just like manufactories cant put a made in the US tag on products made in China

It's a private company, they are under no constraints to be impartial. They could have banned her for no reason if they wanted to. Instead the banned her for hate speech, a clear violation of their TOS. She has no case.

The reason you're wrong has already been explained a couple dozen times in this thread. Pretending to be stupid isn't a good debate strategy.

 

[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 **** 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 ***** loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

 

[Faun]

She can't be all that abused, I've never even heard of her.

That doesn't matter for a defamation case.

She had100,000 followers who Facebook informed that she was banned for being dangerous. It's pretty clear cut. Only question is how much Facebook will pay.

.

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

doesn't matter if its a private company a company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service if Face book says decision made are done with out bias that they are impartial all you have to do is prove that decisions made are done with bias that they are not impartial

these Tech giants like Facebook cant tell its consumers one thing and then act differently just like manufactories cant put a made in the US tag on products made in China

It's a private company, they are under no constraints to be impartial. They could have banned her for no reason if they wanted to. Instead the banned her for hate speech, a clear violation of their TOS. She has no case.

The reason you're wrong has already been explained a couple dozen times in this thread. Pretending to be stupid isn't a good debate strategy.

LOLOL

******* moron, until you can quote her post, you are in no position to determine if anyone is right or wrong for supporting Facebook's actions on this matter.

 

[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 **** 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 ***** loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

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

 

[HappyJoy]

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 **** 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 ***** loses everything.

Facebook is going to get $3 billion of truth.

When the lawsuit is thrown out will you leave the board?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

That makes sense. What did Laura Loomer post to get her banned?

I don't know as Facebook has not said.

You’re more familiar with their policies than me. Do they have to state why?

 

[Dragonlady]

Lol
Facebook is owned and run by progressives,

I do not give a **** who owns and runs a company, I will still favor them over the government...you on the other hand run to the government for everything.

You defend Facebook every chance you get. Sometimes you whine about your government obsession. Then you come across private action and you whine about that.
You are paralyzed without the government b

We're not defending FaceBook, we're telling you people that you cannot consistently promote hate and harm to others on any platform and expect to get away with it. And that those who do should be banned. I would also say that those who deliberate lie and post "fake news" should also be banned, but that's just me.

It used to be that newspapers, magazines and other media had standards regarding truth in journalism. Now anyone can publish anything, true or not, and there's a lot of "not" getting published and tweeted and then reposted without fact checking. And we have lots of publishers like Breitbartm, who are privately owned by billionaires who are pushing an agenda that is not in the public's interest.

People simply don't know what to believe any more.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Look at the goose-stepping douchebag defending the largest corporations on planet Earth.

Facebook is not even in the top 50 largest corporations on planet earth.

...and you worship it. Lol

Not at all, but I will always support private enterprise over the government...another way you and I differ.

Normally I would agree. In this case these social media companies have become a full on subsidiary of one political wing of our government. Something has to change.

Seems the American way would be to start one that did not do that and give them some competition.

It would also seem to be the American way for these platforms to allow free speech without promoting one ideology while banning any ideas counter to it. So if we’re all for the American way let’s not pick and choose which parts we’re going to use or throw out.

 

[Faun]

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.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

That makes sense. What did Laura Loomer post to get her banned?

I don't know as Facebook has not said.

You’re more familiar with their policies than me.

Not really, I just looked up their definition of hate speech which they find actionable. I don't post on there myself.

I did, however, find Loomers context on Facebook. Thanks to Crepitus. But it's on HuffingtonPost which I don't find credible.