In preparing to file a lawsuit against Facebook, I’m putting together several instances in which the company paid third parties to “fact check” stories and then attempted to shut down content on their platform that exposed truth in a story. This has happened numerous times to SonsOfLibertyMedia.com and in doing so, Facebook has engaged in defamation by claiming that we are untrustworthy.
First, I’ll note that one of their “fact checkers” is called Lead Stories, which was started by a more than 2 decade veteran of CNN, Alan Duke. Remember, CNN has decades of being caught not simply making mistakes or errors, but actually fabricating the news.
Second, consider that Facebook has a playbook that was leaked to go after those they deem to be “hate agents.” Sons of Liberty Media has had that definition applied by Facebook. In fact, YouTube has done it as well by saying that we promote “hate,” as defined by them. Additionally, Mark Zuckerberg has stated that Facebook is “going to work with governments” to make “sure that hate speech isn’t on our products and services” and deem what is “unacceptable.”
Keep in mind that this is a platform that auto-generates pages for Islamic jihadis to promote their propaganda while attacking Christians. They have also allowed other propaganda such as pro-cop disinformation form Kosovo while taking down police accountability pages, as well as banned people from organizing First Amendment-protected protests against the COVID lockdowns on its platform.
Facebook also posts its own fake news in the form of advertising, in which the ad claimed all but one member of a family died of COVID. Then, the mom in the picture found out about it and said none of it was true.
WRDW, a CBS affiliate, reported:
LOS ANGELES (KCAL/KCBS/CNN) – A Facebook ad for a company selling face masks claimed all but one member of a Los Angeles family died from COVID-19, but the story, which used a real family’s photos, isn’t true.
Mother Sara Ancich says a professional photo her family took for their holiday card eight years ago showed up in a Facebook ad for FilterMax face masks.
The ad claimed she and her entire family had died, except for the youngest son, after contracting COVID-19 at a church service.
FilterMax also claimed in the ad that it’s the most efficient respirator on the market and is approved by the Food and Drug Administration, but the FDA says that’s not true. The ad features video of a teenager, falsely presented as the surviving member of the Ancich family.
“I am curious about the boy in the video, too. Where’s he in this? Does he know that he’s out there?” Ancich said.
Over several days, Ancich was inundated with Facebook messages from concerned family and friends, who wanted to make sure the story wasn’t true.
Ancich says she tried reporting the video to Facebook, but it kept popping up in her feed. She says she hasn’t posted the photo on social media in years, but a reverse image search on Google reveals the photo is on several Pinterest boards for examples of family photos.
Finally, consider that Facebook claims to be for online safety while at the same time allowing their platform to actually sell a child! Matt Agorist reported:
Last month, Facebook and Twitter — without warning or justification — deleted the pages of Free Thought Project and Police the Police which had over 5 million followers. During this purge, they also removed hundreds of other pages including massive police accountability groups, antiwar activists, alternative media, and libertarian news outlets. Facebook claimed to remove these pages in the name of fighting disinformation online and creating a safer user experience. Illustrating just how big of ostentatious sham this was, this month, a child was openly sold on this same platform that claims to promote online safety.
Last month, an auction was held on Facebook in which a child bride was put up for sale in a public post. People openly bid on Facebook for a 16-year-old girl’s hand in marriage.
Facebook claims they removed the post, but this wasn’t until the auction had ended and the girl had been sold.
These are the kinds of people saying they are taking the moral high ground to be the news police, but they sure are doing a poor job.
With that said, let’s take a few instances of how Facebook has labeled articles that SonsofLibertyMedia.com has put out and been labeled as “fake news,” and as a result, limited our reach to subscribers of our page.
Here are six instances of Facebook applying “false information” to stories we published and then limited our reach.
The first story comes from our friend Michael Snyder. Here’s how Facebook and LeadStories.com applied this to only further drive traffic and dollars to LeadStories.com.
LeadStories.com claims there was “no prediction” based on an after the fact statement from John Hopkins:
Recently, the Center for Health Security has received questions about whether that pandemic exercise predicted the current novel coronavirus outbreak in China. To be clear, the Center for Health Security and partners did not make a prediction during our tabletop exercise. For the scenario, we modeled a fictional coronavirus pandemic, but we explicitly stated that it was not a prediction.
Furthermore, the statement went on to state:
Instead, the exercise served to highlight preparedness and response challenges that would likely arise in a very severe pandemic. We are not now predicting that the nCoV-2019 outbreak will kill 65 million people. Although our tabletop exercise included a mock novel coronavirus, the inputs we used for modeling the potential impact of that fictional virus are not similar to nCoV-2019.
OK, did you get that? It’s not a “prediction,” but it was somehow to “highlight preparedness and response challenges.” Well, if you are creating a model of something, which they claimed to do, which obviously was to see the results (call it prediction or whatever), aren’t you, in essence, “predicting” a certain outcome? Yes, you are.
In fact, not one occurrence of the word “prediction” is mentioned in the article that Facebook used LeadStories.com to label as “False Information,” “false news” and “misleading content.” Rather, the context is clear, for anyone that actually reads the content, that the model was constructed for the clear purpose of discovering results. Otherwise, what is the purpose? Even John Hopkins’ own statement leads to that conclusion, despite claiming “it was not a prediction.”
The second story also comes from Michael Snyder at SonsofLibertyMedia.com.
This is not “partly false information” as Facebook and Science Feedback claim.
Notice our headline that mentions “an attenuated coronavirus.” While Facebook would have you believe we are putting out false news, the reality is that the source mentioned in our article mentioned coronavirus 159 times while mentioning SARS just eight times. It’s not “partly false.” It’s totally true, including the patent and the headline.
Here’s the specifics mentioned on the patent.
According to a summary of this patent, this attenuated coronavirus “may be used as a vaccine for treating and/or preventing a disease”…
The present invention provides a live, attenuated coronavirus comprising a variant replicase gene encoding polyproteins comprising a mutation in one or more of non-structural protein(s) (nsp)-10, nsp-14, nsp-15 or nsp-16. The coronavirus may be used as a vaccine for treating and/or preventing a disease, such as infectious bronchitis, in a subject.
This patent was filed by the Pilbright Institute, and as Stefan Stanford has pointed out, some of the major backers of the Pilbright Institute include the World Health Organization, the European Commission, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Thus, the article and headline are both true. Yes, were there questions regarding it possibly showing up in Wuhan? Absolutely. But asking a question is not tantamount to “fake news.” Yet, Facebook and their accomplices chose to limit our reach and libel us as providing “partly false news” without a shred of evidence. They assumed we were speaking about the same alleged virus, but that doesn’t make it a reality.
Then, there was the same nonsense and lies tied to an article that we don’t even know what they are referencing as the first one above.
This is clearly an attempt to silence those who point to predictive programming and actual predictions.
No prediction? Really? So, the movie Contagion wouldn’t be a prediction, which was the very scenario they tried to pin the coronavirus outbreak on. There was no prediction by the Bill Gates Event 201? There was no prediction in the Rockefeller Lockstep document? There was no conditioning in the early TV series The Dead Zone? There was no conditioning and predictive programming going on during the 2012 Olympic Opening ceremonies? Of course, there was. Once again, we are dealing with not just those kinds of predictions, but also the predictions of the John Hopkins model, which was established for the very purpose of predicting an outcome in order to deal with the results.
- Event 201: The COVID-19 “Conspiracy Theory”
- Bill Gates Virus Prediction, Madonna’s Dark Performance & Event 201 – Have Crimes Been Committed?
- Bill Gates’ Hand In COVID-19
- The Truth About Coronavirus Vaccines: Is This Why Bill Gates Wants Indemnity? Are You Willing To Take The Risk?
Then, there was the Virginia crisis actors nonsense put out by the corporate and CIA-controlled media.
This one I am very familiar with since not only did I attend the Lobby Day rally in Richmond, Virginia, but I also authored the article.
Facebook and LeadStories.com claim this is “false information,” “false news” and “misleading content,” which they also disseminate to users, which makes it libel and allows us to target them in civil court for damages, nothing in my headling or article is false.
Those in the know understand the problems with soy protein. Soy protein contains a xenoestrogen called genistein, which is implicated in breast and ovarian cancer in women, and affecting sexual development in males, among many other negative effects. It’s most notable use today is in popular supplements such as this:
The above product lists 56mg of soy isoflavones but does not provide a breakdown of the individual isoflavones on the box. Interestingly, the FDA allows the company to claim the product is estrogen and drug free, even though genistein is technically a drug that influences estrogen receptors.
The nutrition label of the impossible burger states that a burger portion is 113 grams. Based on the ingredient breakdown, we imagine that there is approximately 80 grams of soy protein in the product. What we wanted to know is how much soy isoflavones ( particularly the most harmful, Genistein ) was present in the burger, so we turned to the USDA’s table of soy isoflavones in soy protein products ( per 100 grams ).
How’s that compare to the isoflavones in post menopause supplements?
A quick browse of soy isoflavone-based supplements for menopause relief on amazon revealed that the standard dosage of soy isoflavones ranges from 30 to 125 milligrams. Taking the average isoflavone content, we have 77.5mg on average in these supplements, however, supplements with isoflavones as low as 50mg are reported by customers to be effective. In addition, there are plenty of clinical studies proving soy isoflavones increase estrogen levels, and are thus effective for symptoms of menopause.
Individual Genistein levels are rarely mentioned in the ingredients, but based on the tale above, Genistein makes up around 66% of the isoflavones in most soy based products. We would imagine that the average effective dose for menopause relief would be anywhere from 20mg to 75mg.
In our best guesstimate of the soy protein percentage in the impossible burger, We would imagine that each burger contains 42.2mg of the xenoestrogenic compound, if the soy protein concentrate comes from a water based extraction, or around 4.2mg for the alcohol extract.
We reached out to Impossible Foods by email for clarification and have not heard back. The phone number listed on their website went straight to voicemail.
In the best case scenario, consuming 5 impossible burger patties in one day would produce a low-end clinical dosage of the hormone disruptor. In the worst case, half of an Impossible Burger patty would have the same effect.
“If he is a Christian, Smith had his Old Testiment [sic] teaching backward. Rev. Michael Reeves, with Georgia’s Open Range Cowboy Church Ministries and a longtime Bible scholar told Lead Stories that “We are told in scriptures to weep for the wicked.” Rev. Reeves referenced Jeremiah 9:1, in which Jeremiah wept over the wicked in Jerusalem.”
Well, why even bring up the issue of Christian if Duke is claiming the religion is “unknown”?
I went further than Duke did though. I provided an update after speaking with the sheriff. Here’s what I discovered.
Phoenix Police Sergeant Tommy Thompson returned a call from Sons of Liberty media and indicated that police do not clearly know the religion. He did state that there was an indication that it seemed that he was some form of “jewish sect,” but they were not sure. When asked about FOX10’s report that family members said he was Muslim, Thompson replied that they would know better what the religion of the man is.
Facebook has also had a hard time dealing with the issue of 5G, which we have also had several articles on. Author Tony Elliot points out how they botched an article on the subject by missing the entire point of the article. You can read how he points out that Facebook was clearly driven by a political agenda.
These are just a handful of examples where Facebook has targeted The Sons of Liberty and libeled us in the public sphere, defaming our good name to the public. Additionally, their third party paid “fact checkers” should be held just as accountable for allowing their articles to be used to defame us, as well.
In closing, Facebook has clearly engaged in criminal practices that violate the public trust as evidenced in mountains of evidence in Jason Fyk’s lawsuit against the company.
In a previous letter issued by SOL attorneys, Facebook was notified that they appear to be violating the law, which they are doing.
“The Sons of Liberty appears to have been misled by you into building your services into its business model and believing that the boosts and ads it purchased would place the Sons of Liberty on the same playing field as other organizations vying for user interaction,” attorneys for SOL wrote. “Your conduct toward the Sons of Liberty as we understand it also appears to violate various state and federal laws, including, inter alia, provisions of federal and state anti-trust, consumer protection, and fraud in the inducement statutes.”
With that said, a lawsuit is being drawn up and about to be filed on behalf of The Sons of Liberty. We have given Facebook every opportunity to make things right, but since they will not repent, which we have given more than ample space to do so, it looks like they will have to pay through the courts.
Become an insider!
Sign up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media.