Remember Ezra Levant, the Canadian Journalist squaring off with the Canadian so called Human Rights Commission because he published a picture of mohammed in his magazine and it threw a few weak minded radicals into a demonic tail spin? Well, they sued him about two years ago, caused him to spend about 100K defending himself for using his GOD given right to speak–not allah given right.

Well, the news is that now these lame ass radicals are withdrawing their complaint against him. The fact that the Canadian government allowed themselves to be used in a dry run to see how far they can be used to take away people’s right to free expression just shows you how bad it is in Canada for free thinking people!

Here is the report I got today in my email for your education. It’s very interesting and we have to stay on our toes here in America if we cherish our right to free expression.  Will Ezra take this sitting down?

~~~

By Ezra Levant on February 12, 2008 7:39 PM

Today Syed Soharwardy told the Calgary Herald editorial board that he is withdrawing his human rights complaint against me that he filed two years ago when I published the Danish cartoons of Mohammed. (Seriously, if you haven’t done so, you’ve really got to look at his hand-scrawled complaint here. I know dyslexic ten-year-olds with ADD who are more coherent.)

If he’s really withdrawing the complaint, this is the first I’ve heard about it; and when I spoke with my lawyer this afternoon, the complaint was still proceeding against me.

It might be a lie — it wouldn’t be Soharwardy’s first, but then again, lying to an infidel newspaper isn’t immoral to someone like Soharwardy. It’s called taqqiyah.

But even if Soharwardy withdraws his complaint against me, an identical complaint filed by the Edmonton Muslim Council still proceeds.

So why would Soharwardy do this — and why now?

 The answer lies in another Arabic word: hudna. A hudna isn’t a peace treaty. It’s a temporary truce called by a Muslim warrior who’s losing in battle. It’s pretty easy to understand how hudnas work by watching Israel fight Hamas and Hezbollah. Those two terrorist groups lob rockets and send suicide bombers into Israel for months; then, every once in a while, Israel deploys its military and flattens Hamas and Hezbollah, who then call for a hudna. The UN intervenes, saving Hamas and Hezbollah to fight another day. That’s a hudna: a tactical truce for a strategic advantage.

Soharwardy wants a hudna because he’s losing badly. Not financially: he hasn’t spent a penny to further the complaint against me — that has been done courtesy of Ed Stelmach’s government and the taxpayers of Alberta, to the tune of $500,000, I’d guess. Nor has Soharwardy had to spend hundreds of hours battling against me at the commission — Alberta government employees do that for him. It’s because over the past two years — and the past month in particular — Soharwardy has become known for what he is: an Islamofascist imam, who’s trying to bring Saudi values to Canada. Though I’m being pummelled in a kangaroo court, he’s being pummelled in the court of public opinion. He didn’t expect it, and he hates it.

He hates that hundreds of bloggers ridicule him. He hates that my video clips, in which I describe his illiberal nature, have been viewed almost 500,000 times. He hates that his own enemies within his mosque have taken advantage of this media coverage to shine a light of scrutiny on the way he runs his mosque – from his financial irregularities, to his abusive treatment of women. These documents here, here, here and here, first published on my blog, have been viewed thousands of times and led to a series of newspaper items in the Calgary Herald and even the Washington Times. Soharwardy is embarrassed — as well he should be. He is no longer polite company. Now he’s known as a censor, a fascist, a sexist. He’s un-Canadian. And if the complaint against me goes to a tribunal, he’ll go through this again on a larger scale.

But can someone abuse a government process like he has, for two years, and then simply walk away with impunity? I’ve spent the better part of $100,000 defending against this thug — but because he’s losing face, he thinks he can pretend he never did what he did.

Soharwardy claims that he’s seen the light and realized that he was misguided — that he should never have tried to censor me. Really? Last month he was cheering on commission’s interrogation of me; two weeks ago, he was sending me more legal threats. The only epiphany he’s had was that in the circus he started, he’s coming across as the clown — an angry, anti-Semitic clown who shouts down women at his own mosque.

I understand that Soharwardy has an Op-Ed in tomorrow’s Herald in which he effectively admits his complaint was motivated by Saudi-style censorship, not any Canadian belief in human rights. In other words, he admits what I’ve alleged all along: he was hijacking a secular “human rights” commission for his radical Islamo-fascist agenda. But now he wants us all to pretend he didn’t.

Well, back in the land of real laws and real rules of court, there’s a tort called “abuse of process“, and Soharwardy has just admitted to it.

For two years, this corrupt, radical imam has hunted me using the resources of the taxpayers of Alberta for the “thought crime” of publishing a cartoon he didn’t like. I had a preliminary discussion with my lawyer today. My aim is to file an abuse of process claim in the Court of Queen’s Bench within the month. Whether or not I sue the commission itself, and its inquisitor Shirlene McGovern, is something I haven’t discussed yet with my lawyers.

When the chief complainant in a two-year censorship exercise admits the whole thing was improper, an abuse of process suit is not just about recouping my losses. It’s about holding a little fascist, and the government agency he hijacked, to account, and having grown-ups — that is, real judges in real courts — tell them that what they’ve been doing is morally and legally wrong.