The New York Post reports, "LinkedIn banned ‘proud Jew’ Manhattan CPA for pro-Israel posts, lawsuit claims" and adds that the platform failed to remove posts and comments such as "Death to Israel,” and one that depicted Jews as "cruel and emotionless animals that need to be extinct." These are but two of equally bad or even worse examples, including a wish that Hitler had "finished the job."

The entire complaint, which may be viewed here, alleges among other things that LinkedIn committed breach of contract, namely, the rules posted on its own Web site. "42. Pursuant to LINKEDIN’s own terms and conditions of its user agreement, in the event of any violations by the user, LINKEDIN is to notify the user of the specific violation." "58. LINKEDIN breached its contract with STROHL by failing to specify and/or inform him of the alleged 'violation' of its 'terms and conditions…'"

If the above allegation is true, then LinkedIn looks guilty of breach of its own one-sided "take it or leave it" (adhesion) contract that it posted on its website. This, as I recall from my MBA business law class long ago, looks very ominous for LinkedIn. "Courts often resolve ambiguities or inconsistencies in favor of the weaker party, as the stronger party is presumed to have........

© American Thinker