Sorry, but you are wrong.
Again, the decision to suspend or not is irrelevant and not the discussion at hand.
SD posted inaccurate information.
I called her on it, rather politely even.
She was wrong, but rather than admit it, or just ignore it, she accepts a conditional apology from me even though the conditions of the apology were not met. (I consider this very rude and of very poor form).
I point out her errors and now I am accused of injuring her good name.
Why won't you defend my name? I never called her a liar as you claim. Show me where or when I claimed she was lying. Instead, I assumed she was in error and provided her a means to correct the error. For this I am attacked.
Woe that I should suffer the arrows of injustice for so valiant a cause.
My point is: this was a simple matter that SD decided to escalate.
She was wrong when she posted the information and wrong when she attempted to accept my conditional apology.
You said this: "Although I love Freerepublic, I hate when people distort a story to try and make a point."
and
"He or she intentionally implied that a small child brought a small key chain to school and was suspended for it in an attempt to bolster his or her claims that public school officials are incompetent.
"
There you go. I'm tired of wasting my time with you too. You are unreasonable and wrong. And you are making a fool of yourself in front of whoever might be reading this thread. I'm outta here.