A Few Words on Ken Silva, Apprising.org, and the Truth

Dear DefCon readers and friends of Apprising Ministries and our brother in Christ Ken Silva,
 
Grace and peace to you.  As you may know Ken Silva has served on the front lines of the ongoing Truth War that’s presently raging within the broader professing church for an extended tour of duty and as you’re also no doubt aware Apprising.org has taken a direct hit by one Richard Abanes through the proxy of Ken’s web host, IPower.  As of the writing of this message Apprising.org is down.  Many Christian bloggers have been reporting on this startling event from their own unique viewpoints, and there’s very little that I feel I can add to the broad body of evidence that’s been brought before the Church regarding this matter.  The facts speak for themselves.
 
Brothers and sisters I stand amazed and I don’t believe it’s hyperbole to say that we, as Christian bloggers, and most importantly as bondservants of the Lord Jesus Christ collectively stand at a crossroads with respect to our peculiar form of ministry.  What shall we say when one single e-mail laced with the innuendo of legal action can bring down one of the richest resources of Christian discernment and apologetics on the internet in less than 48 hours?  What shall the rest of us do?  I say let’s continue to raise up the banner of truth, the selfsame standard the Ken Silva and Apprising hold high, and plant it firmly at each of our own blog outlets for the world to see.  At its base this issue has nothing to do with Richard Abanes, per se.  It has to do with the truth, and the love of the truth, which is I dare say why all of do what we do when it comes to our own “God-blogging”.  This issue isn’t about the personal, nor is it about personalities – it’s about faithfully proclaiming, defending, and contending for THE TRUTH.  Dear members of the Church Militant, although “Firebase Apprising” may be down, it certainly isn’t out and we can each do our own part, no matter how small, to support Ken through this ordeal.

Please keep Ken Silva in your prayers and ask the Lord to grant him strength as he overcomes this latest obstacle in the long, tedious, ongoing battle in the Truth War.  Sometimes something as simple as an e-mail containing a word of encouragement is a great blessing in a time of struggle so if you feel led of the Lord to write to Ken you can reach him at apprising@hughes.net.

For more on this subject I recommend the following articles:

Richard Abanes to Sue Apprising Ministries over Defamation-Libel?
Richard Abanes: Ken Silva – More Lies, More Sensationalism, More Sin
Pride Arrogance and Humility
Attack on Apprising Ministries
Throwing Cyber-Sand In The Face of A Purpose-Driven Resister
Saddleback “Apologist” Convinces IPower Hosting to Shut Down Critics Website
Indy Watchman on The Abanes Attack on Apprising

23 thoughts on “A Few Words on Ken Silva, Apprising.org, and the Truth

  1. I haven’t followed this with detail, but all Ken was asked to do was to remove one post. His ISP asked him to do this.

    Seems that his choices were: 1.) Remove the post; 2.) Move to a different ISP (or even host it himself); 3.) Or have the ISP shut him down. He chose # 3.

    It’s not really a 1st amendment issue, but rather a policy and procedures of the ISP. The ISP made the request with the “or else” the consequence of being shut down. Ken chose the “or else”.

  2. Down, but not out. Check back Monday Lord willing.
    I believe our biggest battles here in the western church will come from those professing to be Christians.

  3. No, I do not support Richard Abanes . I support Ken Silva in his struggle. I was merely showing that a man with a “religious” website “slandering” our troops is allowed to keep his site up and running, even though there has been a MASSIVE outcry against his site. It is protected by FREE speech laws. Why isn’t Kens?!!!

  4. Dave C,

    In this particular situation free speech isn’t at issue. Ken’s website content was and is “free speech”. At issue is the fact that IPower, his web host, is able under their Terms of Service to disable anything they host that they, in their sole discretion, deem to violate their terms.

    The lesson here is that one single e-mail laced with the innuendo of litigation is enough to send IPower’s legal team running to pull the plug.

  5. Ironically, I put the words ‘Henri Nouwen’ in the google search engine, and it lead me to the Apprising Ministries latest website.

    The archived articles are there.

    Just try that and see what you get.

  6. Brothers and Sisters,

    You have no doubt heard of the ongoing controversy regarding my interaction with Ken Silva. You might want more information regarding what has transpired, so I offer the following links that offer the truth, as I see it, about what has been happening:

    Lighthouse Trails: More Ken Silva Propaganda

    MORE ARGUMENTS: Ingrid Schlueter Speaks!

    Ken Silva – More Lies, More Sensationalism, More Sin

    Richard Abanes

    PS. FOR THE RECORD, I did NOT:

    A. File a lawsuit against Mr. Silva.
    B. Threaten to file a lawsuit against Mr. Silva.
    C. Contact an attorney about beginning a lawsuit against Mr. Silva.

    The truth is that I sent a simple email to Mr. Silva’s ISP requesting that they review ONE of his news articles because I felt it that it not only violated their TOS agreement, but was libelous and offensive in tone. Based on the article’s content, after an IPOWER investigation, the ISP’s decision was to ask Mr. Silva to remove the article — or have his website deleted. He stubbornly refused to follow a simple request from the ISP with whom he had entered a TOS agreement. It was HIS willful defiance that caused his website to momentarily disappear. And now he and his and his so-called online “discerner” supporters are fueling an ever-growing controversy .

  7. Well, technically, Abanes never threatened Ken Silva directly. thouse he did threaten IPOWER. An actual qoute from his e-mali to IPOWER:

    Before turning this situation over to my attorneys, I respectfully request that IPOWERWEB.NET / IPOWERWEB.COM remove this particular article from it’s servers, and notify Ken Silva to cease and desist the posting similar articles. I have no wish to name IPOWERWEB.NET / IPOWERWEB.COM in a legal suit, and hope to resolve this issue as quickly and easily as possible.

    As far as his above comment that “after an IPOWER investigation, the ISP’s decision was to ask Mr. Silva to remove the article“–investigation? You mean to tell me IPOWER (or any ISP) is going to sift through every complaint and determine the validity of each and every claim that is made against a website? No, that doesn’t happen. They basically take the person at their word, and the only thing they “investigate” is whether the article is still there.

    And still, no mention of what got Ken Silva said that was so libelous.

  8. FOUR: house he did threaten IPOWER.

    RA:Incorrect.

    The actual language does NOT actually THREATEN a lawsuit. It reads as follows. And look at what it actually says. I’ll ask again, LOOK AT WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS.

    1. “Before turning this situation over to my attorneys,” I respectfully request….”
    2. “I have no wish to name IPOWERWEB.NET / IPOWERWEB.COM in a legal suit, and hope to resolve this issue as quickly and easily as possible.”

    The first statement ACTUALLY states “before” I contact attorneys. The obvious question is: Contact them for what purpose? Attorneys can give advice, too. Remember? They don’t just have to run out and file a lawsuit. Ever think of that?

    Perhaps in my mind I was thinking, if I get no where here, then I’ll make a phone call like this: “Good morning, Charlie, my attorney. Listen, what do you think I should do about this situation? I’ve already asked the ISP to look at the article and got nowhere. I can’t really call him personally because I already know what the outcome of that willl be based on his opinion of me. So what do you think I should do? Any other recourse?” That is NOT a lawsuit, my friend. But it is talking to your attorney.

    The second statement is a simple expression of exactly what I was feeling: “I HAVE NO WISH to name IPOWER in a legal suit.” That was and continues to be MY WISH. Who wants to do something like that? In fact, that very sentence goes on to say, I “hope to resolve this issue as quickly and easily as possible.” That is NOT threatening a lawsuit, it’s saying you actually have no WISH to threaten a lawsuit. That is what it was saying to my mind.

    This is how I interpreted these few passing words that were at the bottom of a template I downloaded years ago and that I have used before when dealing with all kinds of issues from copyright infringement, to illegally uploaded music, to on one occasion a complaint I made about a website that threw up porno material!!!! It has never caused a problem — that is, until Ken Silva decide to blow it up into an issue of astronomical proportions by illegally pasting that PRIVATE email to IPOWER online in violation of federal copyright/privacy laws. Why is no one complaining about him?
    _____________
    FOUR: As far as his above comment that “after an IPOWER investigation, the ISP’s decision was to ask Mr. Silva to remove the article“–investigation? You mean to tell me IPOWER (or any ISP) is going to sift through every complaint and determine the validity of each and every claim that is made against a website? No, that doesn’t happen.

    RA: Really? And now you suddenly know for sure how a company you don’t even work for runs it’s business — and you know it in direct contradiction to what that company itself stated to me in an email? Amazing.
    ____________
    FOUR: And still, no mention of what got Ken Silva said that was so libelous.

    RA: And still, people who have NOTHING to do with this issue at all think that they, wherever they happen to being the world, deserve to receive from me the details that are, in reality, none of their business. The only reason everyone knows about this issue is because Silva, instead of responding appropriately, chose to illegally post on the Internet a private email from me to his ISP. Yet no one seems to have a problem with that. Interesting.

    Moreover, what is alarming to me is how no one seems to be raising a word of criticisms about even worse attempts to silence me that have been made by others, including Lighthouse Trails (see this article) and Warren critic Chris Rosebrough (see this article) .

    This shows that the issue is NOT what everyone claims is the issue. It’s about taking sides, and being against a person they perceive as an enemy. The rest is all a smokescreen. That is the truth. If that weren’t the truth, then please, I do want to know — Where is the hue and cry against Chris Rosebrough (see above link)? Where are the articles crucifying Lighthouse Trails (see above link)?

    RAbanes

  9. The issue here is very clear, it’s about the Biblical resolution of disputes/problems between professing Christians – it is not about the personalities involved or “taking sides”.

    I’ve read more than I care to discuss about the Abanes/Silva dust up, yet at the bottom of practically every defense I’ve seen from RA he is, in effect, found to be shouting “FOUL ON THE PLAY, COACH!” This cry evidently issues forth because Ken Silva exposed this matter to the light of day in a manner that RA has regularly characterized as “violation of federal copyright/privacy laws”. From what I’ve seen here and in other venues this particular charge is typically followed by copious amounts of finger pointing and complaining that no one is taking Ken Silva (or “others”) to task for being lawbreakers and/or for not being sufficiently impartial in their criticisms of the event. Amazing!

    As I’ve pondered this situation I’ve ended up with more questions than answers. But the answer to the question I, and several other bloggers such as Steve Camp and FP in this very thread have wondered about simply isn’t forthcoming: What did Ken Silva say in the offending article “A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RICHARD ABANES” that was deemed so libelous?

    RA’s response? “It’s none of your business!” Now don’t get me wrong, that’s a perfectly valid response, but it certainly doesn’t help anyone understand WHAT PROMPTED THE E-MAIL TO IPOWER IN THE FIRST PLACE which e-mail, of course, lies at the very heart of this situation.

    I’m no expert of copyright/privacy laws and presumably RA knows what he’s talking about so I’ll take him at his word on this subject. Perhaps it could be reasonably argued that Ken Silva might have chosen to expose the matter in a different way, but the PROBLEM would still remain, regardless of HOW the problem was exposed.

    For example, is it really RA’s defense that there would be no problem if Ken Silva hadn’t “made a big deal” of RA’s e-mail to IPower and their subsequent demands for Ken Silva to modify Apprising? If so, then in my view this represents a breathtakingly myopic view of reality. Regardless of how Ken Silva had gone public with the matter there would have still been a problem and, as most of our readers well know, the problem has been heavily documented and analyzed by many, many independent Christian sources.

    RA says people are taking sides and it’s hard for me to imagine that there’s not been some of that – but is he willing to claim that EVERYONE who has questioned his heart motivation as a Christian for initiating the complaint to IPower has “taken sides” against him? I should certainly hope not. And if not, has ANYONE’S criticism or sincere inquiries given RA pause to reconsider ANY PORTION of his prior or present course of action throughout this ordeal, or is he completely satisfied that in retrospect he would have done nothing differently? Did RA seek godly counsel from a Pastor / Elder / Deacon or anyone in spiritual authority to whom he is accountable before, during, or after this episode? If so, did he heed their advice? If not, does he plan to seek godly counsel on this matter?

    Now, the Christian blogosphere would most likely not be abuzz with this issue and RA might not find himself feeling quite so alone and on the defensive in the blogosphere right about now if Ken Silva had not gone public, but the problem would still exist, even if it were completely unknown to the entire world apart from RA, Ken Silva, and the enigmatic IPower folks who are responsible for settling such matters and because RA and Ken Silva are both professing Christians the problem and the Biblical method for the resolution of such intramural problems among Christians (who represent and in fact are the church) is spiritual and thus sacred – not carnal and worldly. Of course the Bible doesn’t delineate the minutiae of every conceivable eventuality wherein Christians might have a dispute so we shouldn’t expect to find the chapter and verse on Internet etiquette for example, but the Bible is abundantly clear on the Law of the Liberty of Christ and the duty Christians have as bondservants to Christ to resolve our conflicts in the manner prescribed in scripture.

    Look RA, is clearly a smart guy. He can turn a nice phrase and the fact that he’s a published author attests to his capability as a wordsmith. This may sound like a strident statement, but in my mind the problem herein – whether or not RA consciously realizes it – is that RA is presently engaging in the EXACT SAME blame shifting and self justifying behavior that Adam engaged in before the Lord in the garden. This is Depravity 101 stuff, folks. Based on what I continue to see posted in comment thread here (and around the blogosphere) instead of accepting ANY responsibility for ANY portion of the fallout surrounding this matter RA simply blame shifts. Sadly this tactic is literally the oldest trick in The Book.

    And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. (Genesis 3:12)

    Man’s depravity expresses itself in many ways, and the vitriol which oozes from wounded pride surely ranks among the most frequent outlets of this most pervasive and ugly form of trespass since such is a sin against both God and man. Have others reacted to this situation in anger and out of sinful personal pride? Probably. Does pointing to the sins of others make our own sins any less sinful? As evidenced by the results of the Fall absolutely not.

    Despite all that I’ve read I certainly don’t claim to have perfect knowledge of this matter and in reality none of us – not even the principals involved – actually possesses a perfect understanding of all the “in’s and out’s” and “behind the scenes” details surrounding this sorry situation. It’s the height of presumption to pretend that I or anyone else apart from the LORD Himself understands RA or Ken Silva’s hearts or their true heart motivations. Yet this being said it’s abundantly clear that since both parties are professing Christians repentance and reconciliation are due, and the most important question now remaining is who will take up his cross first and become a peacemaker?

    ‘Til He returns or calls me home,
    CD

    But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. (Eph 5:13)

    UPDATE: RA has posted this article in response to the commentary by Steve Camp linked in my comment above.

    A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city, And contentions are like the bars of a citadel. (Proverbs 18:19, NASB)

  10. This Open Letter to Steve Camp outlines my initial thoughts/intentions/motivation for writing to Ken Silva’s ISP. It also covers various issues relating to the “Ken Silva vs. Richard Abanes” controversy, including:

    1. Bible Study notes on key passages being discussed,
    2. the actual contents of my email to Silva’s ISP,
    3. observations about the current state of the church,
    4. an indictment of today’s so-called Online Discernment Ministries, and
    5. documentation of Ken Silva’s violation of federal copyright/privacy laws, and other issues.

    The open letter should answer most questions and addressed the widely-read article by Steve Camp titled “Battles in the Blogsphere.”

    This is my final word on the issue. Those who have ears to hear, and eyes to see, will both hear and see the truth.

    Richard Abanes
    Pop Culture Mix

  11. It’s unfortunate that in his final word on the issue RA has willfully chosen to ignore and evade the fundamental question “What did Ken Silva say in the offending article “A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RICHARD ABANES” that was deemed so libelous?

    And perhaps even more importantly why does RA continue to stand defiantly and unrepentantly in violation of 1 Cor. 6:1-8?

    The fruit of the Purpose Driven Paradigm is evident for all to see through RA’s actions throughout this whole sorry episode. Interestingly enough RA’s well established pattern of un-Christian comportment is the whole point behind Ken Silva’s missive “A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RICHARD ABANES” from which the following quote is taken:

    From where I stand, it has now become clear to me that Mr. Abanes feels anyone who disagrees with him is simply wrong, no matter what evidence may be presented to him. It is my sincere prayer that the following might cause him to come to a position where he will at least show some semblance of respect for others in the family of Christ with whom he does not agree. Perhaps he might wish to consider Philippians 3:15 – Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you (NKJV).

    And in another quote taken from “A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RICHARD ABANES” Ken Silva points towards RA’s less than charitable and very personal attack on Dr. John MacArthur who is himself on record exposing the bitter fruit of the Purpose Driven Paradigm:

    From Tim Challies’ rather revealing interview with Mr. Abanes, we will see an arrogance emerge as he “attacks” (personally?) Dr. John MacArthur. Whatever one may think of every area of Dr. MacArthur’s theological positions, the fact remains that he is widely acknowledged as one of the finest Bible teachers we have in the Christian Church today. Further, MacArthur is also a man who is a senior pastor–and an elder–if you will, within the Evangelical church at large.

    And yet, instead of showing Dr. MacArthur the respect his venerable position within Christ’s church would entitle him to, Mr. Abanes says with insolence:

    As for John MacArthur, he simply does not know what he is talking about and has shown himself to be a loose cannon when it comes to Warren, The Purpose Driven Life, and Saddleback Church. I am not sure who is feeding him information, but it is false. But perhaps MacArthur just doesn’t care enough about truth to be careful in his own research. Therefore, I fault MacArthur for either: a) not doing his own research; or b) not doing his own research carefully enough before falsely accusing Warren of things that Warren has never taught. (http://www.challies.com/archives/001175.php)

    Strong words.

    Personal words.

    Incendiary words.

    In fact prior to Ken Silva’s writing of “A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RICHARD ABANES” RA had also expressed his disdain for Silva’s “research skills”.

    Interestingly enough there appears to be somewhat of a controversy surrounding RA’s own “research skills” as can be seen in the articles below:

    Update on the Richard Abanes and Winston Frost Plagiarism Allegations

    Richard Abanes’s “Catch-Me-If-You-Can”(1) Copycat Research, Copyright Infringement, and Plagiarism

    It’s not uncommon to find that the guilty, accusing conscience will “project” its sin guilt upon others in an attempt to blame shift. Blame shifting is as natural to man as breathing and doing it takes just about as much thought. The natural compulsion of sinful man is to spread the blame around and in so doing attempt to make as many as possible share one’s sin guilt. Anyone with children has seen this rebellious manifestation of sin as one child accusingly points toward the other, sniffling “He started it!”, or “He did it first!”, or else ““He did it too!”

    Is RA guilty of blame shifting and unrepentantly avoiding his own personal responsibility in the matter before us? Does RA stand defiantly in rebellion of 1 Cor. 6:1-8? I think the facts speak for themselves.

    In Christ,
    CD

  12. CD: PLAGIARISM……….

    If these charges are true, how very odd it is that my two most recent book contracts are for the very SAME publisher who published the book from which I allegedly stole material! Anyone see that as an indication of something? There is SO much more to this story. And trust me, you do NOT want to know the specifics surround that truly grievous tale.

    Richard Abanes
    Pop Culture Mix

  13. RA,

    I’m not privy to whether or not the plagiarism charges are true or not, RA, they were simply relevant to the content of my comment.

    While prayerfully reviewing the scriptural wrangling that’s taken place throughout this ordeal I’ve slowly come to realize that at the very heart of this matter the real issue is the bitter fruit produced by the Purpose Driven Paradigm. As I’ve previously mentioned it’s not about the personalities involved, per se, it’s about nothing less than a clash of worldviews. On one side is the historic, orthodox, fundamental Christian faith and on the other side is the modern, heterodox, innovative faith of Warrenism.

    To me, sir, you are the quintessential example of a product of Saddleback and your copious blog posts, comment thread rebuttals, your open letter response to SJC’s posting and your subsequent engagement in his meta affirm to me that the Purpose Driven Paradigm has indeed born much bitter fruit.

    RA you have frequently demanded for your critics to show you where your theology or doctrine were challenged by the offending Silva article, yet the article wasn’t concerned with your theology or doctrine; it was concerned with the bitter fruit produced by the Purpose Driven Paradigm of which one Richard Abanes was (and is) “Exhibit A”.

    In fact Ken’s article makes much more sense to me now than it did when I originally read it. Do you know why RA? It’s because you have verified the veracity of Ken’s claims by continuing to demonstrate your well established pattern of un-Christ like behavior throughout this ordeal.

    At least you’re consistent, and there’s something to be said for consistency.

    In Him,
    CD

  14. CD:

    Amen.

    Richard:

    I join Coram Deo in applauding you for being a consistent Purpose Driven person. We are so pleased that you have shown us how a Purpose Driven ‘apologist’ behaves towards other Christians. If I had any reservations about the PD paradigm before this (not that I have had any), your conduct especially in this case would have totally turned me off. In point of fact, your conduct is even worse than the SDAs I have been facing off previously and currently, who although being a cult behave much better and more polite than you in handling dispute.

  15. Well I have to say that the nature of Mr. Abanes’ writing as I have seen all over the web is more like a teenager spoiling for a fight than a real apologist concerned with the truth of God’s Word.

    If this is what following the Purpose Driven Drivel produces, at 17 and still in a formative stage of my life, I want no part of it. I actually want to be around people who are serious followers of the text of Scripture and committed to following the Lord Jesus. Rick Warren doesn’t do that (yes I know he wrote a book on Bible Study Methods – I have it [to my shame…]), and the fruits of his soft, weak theology can clearly be seen in the behaviour of and treatment of Scripture by Mr. Abanes.

    P.S. I have read both the Purpose Driven Life and the Purpose Driven Church, and it is pure marketing techniques packaged as Gospel…and I can prove it if necessary…

  16. Suppose someone was standing on my lawn with a gun. I yell out the window, “You better leave or I’ll call the police!” What would the person on my lawn think? Would they think

    (a) I would call the authorities so we can have a discussion about our feelings?

    or

    (b) I was threatening to have them arrested, even though I would not want to?

    Anybody with a brain would conclude (b). So, when Richard Abanes says

    The actual language does NOT actually THREATEN a lawsuit. It reads as follows. And look at what it actually says. I’ll ask again, LOOK AT WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS.

    1. “Before turning this situation over to my attorneys,” I respectfully request….”
    2. “I have no wish to name IPOWERWEB.NET / IPOWERWEB.COM in a legal suit, and hope to resolve this issue as quickly and easily as possible.”

    We can see that he is doing nothing more than dancing a jig around the Maypole. After all, what do lawyers do? They file lawsuits. They seek injunctions. By simply saying he was going to turn the matter over to his attorneys–without letting it be known that he was not seeking a lawsuit–he is, in effect, threatening a lawsuit.

    Besides, I still don’t see what has gotten him in such a tizzy. I have read “A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RICHARD ABANES” and I have found nothing in the article that would slander, libel, or defame Mr. Abanes. But, when you publicly disagree with the Flesh-Driven Marketing Scheme, I mean Purpose-Driven Paradigm, you can expect to be called every name in the book.

    What I find so amusing is that while Mr. Abanes doesn’t take kindly to someone criticizing him, he has no problem criticizing–in rather harsh tones–anyone who disagrees with him. Take this quote from Abanes, talking about John MacArthur:

    As for John MacArthur, he simply does not know what he is talking about and has shown himself to be a loose cannon when it comes to Warren, The Purpose Driven Life, and Saddleback Church. I am not sure who is feeding him information, but it is false. But perhaps MacArthur just doesn’t care enough about truth to be careful in his own research. Therefore, I fault MacArthur for either: a) not doing his own research; or b) not doing his own research carefully enough before falsely accusing Warrren of things that Warren has never taught. (http://www.challies.com/archives/001175.php)

    He said this about an article by Paul Proctor:

    Is this kind of ugly imagery really necessary? What does Proctor think he is accomplishing by speaking so hatefully/hurtfully about Christians (or maybe he does not even consider them Christians). It seems that he is deliberately using references that are commonly abhorrent to Christians: alcoholism, strong drink, drunks, carousing in bars, etc. etc. etc. This is not apologetics. It is mean-spirited attacking that reflects not the Bible or Christ, but rather, tabloid journalism.

    Seems Mr. Abanes can smear and slander anybody he wants to, but oh my, if somebody criticizes him, gee, he can’t take that.

    Here’s the question I have: This article (“A PASTOR’S ASSESSMENT…”) has been out there for THREE YEARS. THREE YEARS!!!!! You mean to tell me that if this article was so damaging to Abane’s reputation, career, etc, no one ever told him??? Or could it be that this article has done nothing to damage Richard Abanes’ position as Chief Cardinal to the Purpose-Driven Pope a writer? How much money has Abanes lost because of this article?

    I would love to see this case wind up on Judge Judy. I have a feeling she would tell Richard to grow up, get a backbone, and move on. Oh, and he would actually have to tell her what was so libelous about it.

  17. Not threaten a lawsuit? I normally shy away from sarcasm, but this demands a question. Are you kidding me?
    Look at this for a minute: Under most states self-defense laws, if one perceives a threat to be a life-threatening one and acts with deadly force as a result, (such as when a police officer sees someone with a plastic gun that is indistinguishable at 20 paces from a real one and fires on that person) will usually be exonerated.

    So, if one makes a statement that includes the word “attorney”, how would any reasonable person conclude anything other than that a law suit has just been threatened?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s