Are you beginning to see what is at stake, here? Comments were made questioning what Eric Pepin, a voluntarily public figure, and his Higher Balance Institute is all about on a public forum, comments that seem reasonable given the fact of Pepin videotaping orgies and having sex with all his employees and claiming that homosexual activities are spiritual practice. At least one of those comments was made by Laura Knight-Jadczyk. Now this deep pocket organization (HBI) is attempting use that comment to shut down everything Laura Knight-Jadczyk is attached to and THAT is the clue to follow.
What Knight-Jadczyk said, and whether that is constitutionally protected free speech, is clearly not the only - or even the main - issue here. It is about the existence of websites that allow people to voice their opinions, share their research, and come to conclusions based on their own work, their own thinking, their own choices.
To many, this suit is so absurd it can even be described as frivolous - read it for yourself - yet Pepin could succeed by waging a war of attrition. If he does succeed, we are all in big trouble. Obviously, the intent was to win by default. Go after a website that has few resources, the comment made by a person in a foreign country where response to the suit might not be mounted. If Knight-Jadczyk had ignored the suit, it wouldn't have made much difference to her personally. She would have lost by default, but her living in a foreign country without assets that could be attached would make any judgment essentially meaningless.
However, it seems that Knight-Jadczyk recognized this a matter of principle, a fight for the rights of others. Indeed, it is. That is the point we must recognize about this suit. It can really mean nothing to Pepin and his business. Filing the suit will bring him no financial remuneration and only serves to bring more attention to the statements made. Clearly, there is an ulterior motive, an agenda, if you will: "Openly repair the gallery roads, but sneak through the passage of Chencang."
In Pepin's world, successfully covering up the evidence of misdeeds means silencing any further inquiry or discussion for fear of prosecution. If Pepin succeeds in his suit, what happens to those who dare question the orthodox view of the events of 9/11, those who object to torture being done in their name, those who investigate the harm done by tasers, those who investigate and comment on the treasonous actions of Bush and Cheney in outing Valerie Plame? What happens to those of us who investigate current events and publish stories that are critical of the officially sanctioned view of events?
What could well happen, if Eric Pepin succeeds, is the silencing of the alternative voice. It would take nothing more than a court declaring that the evidence thus far discovered does not prove the case beyond a legally defined "reasonable doubt" to shut down any further investigation along with a whole host of websites dedicated to exploring the evidence beyond the official story of virtually anything at all. Truthout.org gone, 911Truth.org gone, OpEdNews gone, adereview.com gone, quantumfuture.net, cassiopaea.org, sott.net, all gone. In their place, every website will list the same official story, ad nauseam.
Pepin's world sounds a lot like Brave New World, the sort of world George Bush has been working toward.
What Knight-Jadczyk said, and whether that is constitutionally protected free speech, is clearly not the only - or even the main - issue here. It is about the existence of websites that allow people to voice their opinions, share their research, and come to conclusions based on their own work, their own thinking, their own choices.
To many, this suit is so absurd it can even be described as frivolous - read it for yourself - yet Pepin could succeed by waging a war of attrition. If he does succeed, we are all in big trouble. Obviously, the intent was to win by default. Go after a website that has few resources, the comment made by a person in a foreign country where response to the suit might not be mounted. If Knight-Jadczyk had ignored the suit, it wouldn't have made much difference to her personally. She would have lost by default, but her living in a foreign country without assets that could be attached would make any judgment essentially meaningless.
However, it seems that Knight-Jadczyk recognized this a matter of principle, a fight for the rights of others. Indeed, it is. That is the point we must recognize about this suit. It can really mean nothing to Pepin and his business. Filing the suit will bring him no financial remuneration and only serves to bring more attention to the statements made. Clearly, there is an ulterior motive, an agenda, if you will: "Openly repair the gallery roads, but sneak through the passage of Chencang."
What could well happen, if Eric Pepin succeeds, is the silencing of the alternative voice. It would take nothing more than a court declaring that the evidence thus far discovered does not prove the case beyond a legally defined "reasonable doubt" to shut down any further investigation along with a whole host of websites dedicated to exploring the evidence beyond the official story of virtually anything at all. Truthout.org gone, 911Truth.org gone, OpEdNews gone, adereview.com gone, quantumfuture.net, cassiopaea.org, sott.net, all gone. In their place, every website will list the same official story, ad nauseam.
Pepin's world sounds a lot like Brave New World, the sort of world George Bush has been working toward.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
