I too have slogged through these last 35 pages, and have yet to read a poster pointing out to you the mistake you have made in characterizing what the nature of the complaint against Levant is, and how you have erroneously used Levant's situation as an example of restricting free speech.

The complaint was not brought against what he may have said or posted politically. This has nothing to do with political opinion, ideology, or freedom of speech. What he said can be characterized thusly (and I quote from a local news site):

"Last month, Soharwardy complained about postings on the Western Standard website that referred to all Muslims as scum and said they should all be killed."

(http://calgary.ctv.ca and search Levant)

Really? Can you point out where the politics in a statement like that would be hiding? Perhaps in the word "scum"? Or maybe in the word "kill". If you'd looked past the "subtlety" of Levant's rantings you might see that he took what was a personal attack against an individual and framed it as an example of free speech being muzzled.

If you'd looked . . .

So you're claiming that Levant has no responsibility for what is posted and LEFT POSTED on his blog. And that he is without the ability to remove these posts because he is a bastion of free speech. And Steyn quoted somebody in his book, but of course ranted and raved further in his book how wrong this statement was? No, he did not. He supported that quote, which is precisely why he included it in his book. And Levant left the post up because he supported it.

You're a Canadian, Johnny. You know what the Ugly Canadian looks like. Being once removed from hate, as are Steyn and Levant, does not confer innocence on them in these instances. They exercise a pattern of targeted hate and call it Journalism.

Call me a partisan idiot all you want. Better that than the useful one you are.

Could you have said it any better?

What international laws are being violated (and have been violated) since 2002? Well, other than the illegal invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation...

Don't they need permission from the nation at the other end of that call before they can tap it? And if other nations are colluding, are they not then in "rendition" territory, and consequently violating their own constitutions, and breaking their own laws?

The lack of protest from other nations against this invasion of the privacy of its citizens is actually quite alarming. Or am I really that naive?

"Contrary to the diatribes you often read on lefty blogs, neither the Government of Israel nor any recognizable segment of its population advocates or engages in 'wholesale and indiscriminate slaughter of innocent civilians.'"

Give me a count, if you will, of the number of children, just the children, Israel has killed via indiscriminate bombing over the last sixty years. You could even quote those numbers per year, if that will make them more palatable for you. Are they children of a lesser god?

And what of the thousands of children being held in Israeli prisons? Is that not a hoped-for death for these children?

How about those millions of bomblets Israel let loose in Southern Lebanon in 2006, in the last three days of the war? How many children have died as a result? That would surely qualify as indiscrimate, it's most definitely wholesale, and is intended to slaughter the innocent.

Israel does and is engaging in deliberate, wholesale, INDISCRIMINATE slaughter of a people they need to deem animals in order to do so. This is patently obvious to anyone who's been paying attention for the last 60 years. It's just being done via the slow-creep version. No less abominable, wouldn't you say?

Calling you on your bullshit. But, hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Thanks for the propoganda, but you failed to mention that Israel incubated and bankrolled Hamas.

Gives whole new meaning to the term "self-hating Jew", doesn't it?

". . .has praised the U.S. military for the lengths it goes to avoid civilian casualties"

Am I the only one who sees the glaring hypocrisy inherent in that statement?

The US violated international law and invaded a sovereign nation, and proceeded to maim and kill civilians who were simply defending their very lives.

"Leave it to Salon to find a "story" where none exists." And leave it to "idiots" such as yourself to go to war to find . . .WMDs where none exist.

doesn't Mukasey become an even bigger liar because the warrentless wiretapping was being done long before 9-11? At least February of 2001 is when they started, if I recall correctly. Ask the CEO of Qwest. . .

9-11 was a "look! over there!" moment, while over here, the dismantling of a nation began in earnest. It wasn't four planes that got hijacked that day.

. . .the slippery slope of hatred and bigotry. Don't hate the playa, hate the game. Or, for Amis, hate the playa AND the game. What a hack.

Isn't this how it always starts? The so-called declared (by what authority?) intellectuals (puh-leeze) begin to legitimize hatred and bigotry, by compartmentalizing it -- Islam vs. Islamists. Then they get some defensive tripe essentially advertising the hatred without really writing or saying anything (yes, I mean you, Ms. Miller). So what was the point of this article? Other than hatehatehatehatehatehate.

Never again . . .unless you're a Muslim. Right?

What is wrong with the AP? One of their own journalists, Bilal Hussein, is being held without trial, without due process. And yet they allow Jordan's piece of crap about Mukasey? Wonder what Mukasey thinks about Bilal's rights. Wonder if the AP even remembers him.