You couldn't be more wrong, according to US law. W

You couldn't be more wrong, according to US law. Websites cannot claim zero responsibility for what happens on their site.

Again, Napster, Facebook, YouTube and others all tried that defense and failed. When you report illegal content to YouTube, they look into it and remove it if they find it to be illegal.

Facebook removes content all the time. Napster lost their case using the defense you mentioned. Sites cannot hide behind their TOS to avoid US law.

The size and scope of a website does not give it permission to ignore US law either. This has been argued in court before. Especially when the website is notified of illegal content and they say they are not going to do anything about the illegal content.

Try posting kiddie pics on Facebook and see how long before they get deleted. You seem to think IHUB doesn't have to follow US law and can use their TOS to circumvent US law.

Again, you couldn't be more wrong. It's not a freedom of speech issue. It's not an opposing viewpoint issue. It's about a website supporting and participating in illegal stock manipulation and violating US laws by coordinating with hedge funds, market makers, admins, mods, and paid bashers that is the issue.