By Peter Ripley, Publisher
 |
| Peter Ripley, Publisher |
"Give me liberty, or give me death!" is a quotation attributed to Patrick Henry from a speech he made to the Virginia Convention in 1775, at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia.
As we commemorate those who have fallen to protect or freedoms and way of life. Our very freedoms which so many had paid the ultimate sacrifice in times of war is now being threaten from forces who oppose our very being.
Quoting our First Amendment: “The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
Yet, there are those who live within our mist who wants state, local, and national governments to adopt a law based on religious beliefs. I am talking about Sharia Law. Yet, those who scream the separation of church and state, seems to have no problem in allowing Islamic law like Sharia, to be implemented! Like some parts of Texas, which is an affront to our Bill of Rights!
Two women in Texas however sees the threat that Sharia Law poses, meaning the end of our God given free will, and ending of our Constitutional rights
One of these women which I now refer to as daughters of liberty, is Pam Gellar, who is now marked for death by those who claim to be members of a peaceful religion, Islam!
Related story: Pamela Geller Confronted Evil, so the Left Hates Her
The second daughter of liberty: Mayor Beth Van Duyne of Irving Texas
According to The Political Insider: Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops “Sharia Court”… Here Is Her EPIC Response!
The Imam in charge of this Tribune kangaroo court, wants the mayor to be defeated! So we have death threats on one woman defending free speech, we have another woman a mayor, being intimidated! So, much for a “peaceful religion”
Now another abridgment of free speech is happening locally actually. NO, it's not as controversial as two Texas women standing up against a foreign law based on religion, being imposed on an unsuspecting populace which takes away our rights. It's about threatening legal action by a law firm against a local newspaper, called Port O Call for running a story of a court case involving the Wilbur decision.
The details of the story isn't relevant to my point I am trying to put forth . Now since that story as appeared in the Port O Call the publisher is being threatened legal action for publishing the story called: Justice has left the building. They gotten a letter from an law firm representing one of the people mention in the article demanding an apology, and retraction of the story, if they don't a law suit will be forth coming!
Sounds to me this is a case of a Slapp!
Which is defined as: A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.[1]
The typical SLAPP plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff's goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. In some cases, repeated frivolous litigation against a defendant may raise the cost of directors and officers liability insurance for that party, interfering with an organization's ability to operate.[2] A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAPP is often preceded by a legal threat. The difficulty is that plaintiffs do not present themselves to the Court admitting that their intent is to censor, intimidate or silence their critics. Hence, the difficulty in drafting SLAPP legislation, and in applying it, is to craft an approach which affords an early termination to invalid abusive suits, without denying a legitimate day in court to valid good faith claims.---read more
Why you may ask why I share with you these three stories? Because of this similarity, whether it's from some religious sect pushing their own law on others and using any means to get their way through intimidation and threats to silence anyone who opposes them, or an law agency using threats of legal action against a publication to silence them it still slaps the face of every service man and woman who defended our liberties and freedoms we at times take for granted. The media should stand up to any infringement of our basic rights, not bury their head in the sand and hope it will go away. I just like bully tactics in any form! Mostly any breach of our free speech whether it's acceptable or not should not be censored.
To prove my point readers I am tempted to post two bikini clad women up on this site, see how much flax I would get doing that!
