Why you can sue Google.

Contrary to the widely held belief "Why you can't sue Google", it is my belief that you can. For example, take the case of Rachel North London. Some readers may not be aware that Rachel survived the 7/7 terrorist attack on the London Underground. That should have been enough for anybody to go through. However, Rachel has since been the subject of another terrorist attack. An ongoing terrorist attack. She has been subjected to psychological warfare, by a cyber-terrorist. I am not talking about cyber-stalking or cyber-bullying, as bad as these are in themselves, this has gone a step further. Rachel went to the police and the Crown Prosecution Service prosecuted under the harassment laws, and won her case in court, but the terrorist has continued to attack, not just Rachel, but others also. The terrorist has only been able to continue because AOL the terrorist's Internet Service Provider, and Google (who owns blogspot.com) where she has her blog, have facilitated this terrorist's activities.

The law is a living instrument. It moves on. The US challenges to Google do not bind this intended action. This is not about an attack upon freedom of speech. God forbid that that should happen. Nor is it intended to frighten AOL and other ISPs into over reacting, nor harm Google in any way. This is simply about not permitting Google and AOL to supply "arms and ammunition" to a cyber-terrorist and allowing a victim of a physical terrorist attack to continue to be psychologically attacked on the internet. Once Google and AOL have been put on notice, and it has been brought to their attention what is happening, and they facilitated further attacks, then it renders both AOL and Google legally liable. Nobody is above the law in England, not even Google and AOL, and if they are not aware of this principle then they will soon learn it.