CrimePoliticsTerrorism

Breaking: TX Supreme Court Finally Smashes Facebook … 5 YEARS AFTER SEMINAL BOOK DEBUTS, URGING ACTION!

AS is said, better late than never! Yes, let the rest of the (legal and legislative) dominoes fall into place. Faster … faster …

INCONTESTABLY, Facebook has been lending its platform to the worst of the worst, yes, the absolute dregs of humanity. No ifs, ands, or buts. This has been the case for years — mind you, even as they censor the righteous voices of patriots, conservatives, and all those who refuse to go along with the most anti-American/western wrecking balls, bar none. For heavens sake, the Zuckster aka “Master of the Universe” had the stones to censor President Trump — and, he got away with it! More than beyond the pale….

BACK to the (almost) 5-year marking point of a seminal book….

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today? (1)

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Conservative Firing Line updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

IN May 2020, this author wrote the following:

…… Full Disclosure: Back in September 2016 (how time flies!), this writer’s book (co-authored with Joe NewbyBANNED: How Facebook Enables Militant Islamic Jihad debuted. It was not for nothing.

In fact, this undertaking was not only laborious, a Herculean effort, if you will, but a mandatory clarion call from its freedom-loving authors. Effectively, BANNED explains how social media in general and Facebook in particular operates with a double standard that ultimately enables Islamists, a.k.a. greens, and socialists/Marxists/communists, a.k.a. reds.

It is to this end that 47 U.S. Code § 230 comes into sharp relief; both at BANNED and as the target of Trump’s blessed executive order, albeit long overdue! Mind you, it took close to 4 years — since the aforementioned book zeroed in on the acute dangers from Silicon Valley’s tech titans, censors — for President Trump to jump on board. But, to be fair, he has had his hands full with the likes of a shadow government serving as deep state operatives to overturn his presidency.

More specifically, Chapter Nine of BANNED, “Possible Political Solutions And Obstacles“, attests to the thesis at hand by targeting legislative action, primarily, through monopoly busting via updated antitrust laws, as well as by amending the (no longer viable) Communications Decency Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. Section 230.  To wit….

IN this regard, even though it is a Johnny-Come-Lately moment, it appears as if (inexorably, it’s not a done deal, until it is) the Texas Supreme Court has had enough of Facebook’s jive- talk and smoke and mirrors show — as they continuously trot out and hide behind the dangerous shield, that is, U.S.C. Section 230! Naturally, it is utilized by all the big tech behemoths — while they aid and abet all manner of heinous crimes, in this instance, FB + child sex trafficking!

AND another thing: atop the crime of sex trafficking, what about all of the non-stop sexual brainwashing….

AS per the great Lone Star State, Texas….

♦  ♦  ♦  ♦  ♦

THE BELTWAY REPORT | June 27, 2021

Facebook has suffered a major defeat thanks to the Texas Supreme Court. They are being sued over facilitating a child sex ring and tried to get out of it by declaring they are protected by Section 230. But, they have no problem censoring conservatives but does that keep them so busy they can’t do anything about a site that runs a teen sex ring. This just goes to show you that you don’t mess with Texas.

They can appeal to the Supreme Court but I doubt they would even take the case, meaning that the Texas Supreme Court’s ruling stands. This could cost Facebook dearly. If they make a settlement or have a big judgement against them, it could embolden others to sue over various actions instituted by Facebook. I would like to see a successful lawsuit against Facebook for censoring conservatives.

Business Insider reported:

The Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday that Facebook can be held liable for sex traffickers that use its platform to recruit and prey on child victims.

As the Houston Chronicle reported, the ruling followed three local lawsuits involving teenage victims who had met their traffickers through Facebook’s messaging tools. The plaintiffs said Facebook was negligent and did not attempt to key sex trafficking off its technology.

Facebook has argued that it is shielded by the protections of Section 230 — part of an internet law that states online platforms are not liable for what people post on their services — and should therefore not be held responsible for what is posted on its platform.

But the Texas Supreme Court said Section 230 doesn’t mean Facebook can operate as a “lawless no-man’s-land,” as the Chronicle reported.

Facebook has argued that it is shielded by the protections of Section 230 — part of an internet law that states online platforms are not liable for what people post on their services — and should therefore not be held responsible for what is posted on its platform.

But the Texas Supreme Court said Section 230 doesn’t mean Facebook can operate as a “lawless no-man’s-land,” as the Chronicle reported.

According to the Human Trafficking Institute’s 2020 Federal Human Trafficking Report, 65% of online sex trafficking took place on Facebook.

CBS News reported:

Data from the last two decades included in the human trafficking report showed that 30% of all victims identified in federal sex trafficking cases since 2000 were recruited online.

In 2020 in the U.S., 59% of online recruitment of identified victims in active cases took place on Facebook alone. The report also states that 65% of identified child sex trafficking victims recruited on social media were recruited through Facebook.

Twitter is also being sued for the same thing. A boy had his picture placed on Twitter and when he complained, Twitter told him the picture did not violate their standards. Another victim then joined the lawsuit. Hope it costs them a fortune.

[Cross referenced at AmericasCivilWarRising.org]

[Cross referenced at Adina Kutnicki: A Zionist & Conservative Blog]

Related Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×