Talk:Ezra Levant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 2010[edit]

I've just edited the article in several places. I probably made some mistakes, so please feel free to improve my work. Here's a few points for discussion:

  • I improved some of the refs to use {{cite news}} etc. There are a lot more left to fix. CWC 15:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re the Coulter-at-UOttawa kerfuffle:
  • Now that we cite Kady O'Malley's blog post, we probably should drop the Associated Press news item. CWC 15:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I said the speech "was canceled at the last minute, apparently by its organizers, ...". AFAICT, it was Levant and other organizers who canceled it, based on what the police and Coulter's bodyguards told them; I think Kady O'Malley makes that fairly clear. So maybe we should drop the word "apparently". Comments? CWC 15:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wish the article did not use so many sources to newspaper items with no URLs. CWC 15:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Culture Warrior?[edit]

Until recently, the "Recent activities" section of the article said that:

Levant is currently one of the main figures of the Canadian culture war, and writes frequently on the subject, while also appearing on CBC to discuss the topic.

User 99.232.22.101 (talk · contribs) deleted it with no explanation (which is perfectly OK, since it was that account's first edit). I mention it here in case anyone thinks we should say something about Mr Levant and the Canadian culture war. Any comments? Cheers, CWC 17:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow this guy got screwed left and right by everyone. Glad he's still fighting.24.42.89.106 (talk) 19:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lol = culture warrior. There is a reason this guys is getting screwed, and that's because he lies, and doesn't do proper research, pretends to be a journalist, and is a joke. The culture war likely fits into the hate crime section. perhaps "culture war" is how levant justifies his racism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnieHall (talk • contribs) 01:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist[edit]

why nothing about his support of Israel and zionist views? I guess the Israel lovers scrubbed any info of that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.56.96.179 (talk) 23:53, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship to Stephen Harper[edit]

Regarding claims of "original research" and "POV" w.r.t. the links between Harper and Levant, see this [1]

It clearly refers to Levant's projects as "Tory-linked" and provides the analysis that is referred to as "original". Modify the language if required, but bald reverts with false claims that this research is "original" or "POV" are clearly biased. There are sufficient research links in this article to justify all of the claims made.

"Ethical landmines"[edit]

The Brian Topp mockery of Levant's position is clearly documented by the Globe and Mail as originating with a Sun media source. Topp is a major NDP figure and may be the Leader of the Opposition in Canada soon, so his position is notable. [2]

what does this have to do with ethical landmines? also, your link was fruitless. and who doesn't mock levant. by spouting of racist banter, misinformation, and telling any company to f. his mother is like begging for mockery.AnieHall (talk) 01:57, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Ethical oil" abroad[edit]

The fact that the "ethical oil" terminology/propaganda has been ignored or refuted outside Canada is also extremely significant and notable. Removing the link to The Globe article referencing the Guardian is unwarranted. [3]

I've read this article. It states that several British media sources do not agree with the term "ethical oil." Using this to reach the conclusion that ""the "ethical oil" terminology/propaganda has been ignored or refuted outside Canada" (in particular, your use of the term propaganda) is ridiculous.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 03:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Relationship to Harper (removed statements)[edit]

Removed the following statements for now, pending some neutral sources that explore the link between Harper and Levant.

"This reflects the close personal link between Harper and Levant, probably dating back to Levant's standing down in Calgary."

"Harper uses Levant's front groups for astroturfing support for extremely controversial private sector projects such as Keystone XL and Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines, while publicly denying that he or the "Harper government" takes any position on these projects, which is clearly false."

One link on this relationship is already included [4] but evidently pro-Harper pro-Levant commentators are determined to keep that link out. Suggests a clear pro-Harper bias.

The Vancouver observer is hardly a neutral source. Please keep in mind that this is a BLP article, meaning that allegations such as this have a high standard of proof required.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 04:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Are you disputing the fact that Kathryn Marshall speaks for ethicaloil.org, and has clear ties to the PMO? I don't know what you think "neutral" means, but it certainly does not mean that you must agree with the editorial stance of an article before you accept its FACTUAL basis. If only the facts are relied upon in the Wikipedia text, then the source can be biased as hell. The question is whether the source is reliable not whether it is neutral. It's Wikipedia's language that must be neutral, and it's the source's facts that must be reliable. Don't confuse the two.
I haven't removed the statement that Kathryn Marshall speaks for ethicaloil.org. However, the allegation that because her husband, pollster Hamish Marshall was previously manager of strategic planning for the Prime Minister’s office is somehow conclusive evidence that she has secret ties to the PMO is a conspiracy theory, not a fact.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 04:48, 7 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Recent POV editing[edit]

Very simple : Wikipedia is not a soapbox to push an agenda. It's fairly clear that 142.177.46.232 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is not here to build an encyclopedia but to push their specific viewpoint, possibly with an undeclared conflict of interest, therefore they are urged to stay away from this article which they obviously feel strongly about. While additions may certainly be factual, they may also be undue. For example, "Kathryn Marshall has ties to the PMO" has nothing to do on the encyclopedic biography of Ezra Levant, nor does her husband's alleged activities. If you want to prove a point and/or "shame" a living person, please do so elsewhere than on Wikipedia. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 05:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for investigative journalism, commentary or the promotion of conspiracy theories.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Conservative or conservative activist?[edit]

While Levant definitely has a history as a Reform and Canadian Alliance activist I don't see any sourcing for his being active on behalf of the Conservative Party of Canada. I don't doubt he's a member and a supporter but I think at this point he's more of a small "c" conservative ideologue than a big C Conservative Party activist ie he doesn't work for the Conservative Party or any MPs, he isn't a Conservative Party volunteer (at least not visibly) and doesn't represent the Conservative Party formally or informally in the media and occasionally he takes issue with the Conservatives for allegedly not being conservative enough. I think the lede might be more accurate to refer to him as a "conservative" activist. Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 22:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Macleans profile[edit]

Macleans published Ezra Levant: Love him or hate him, he keeps winning, a "profile of the right-wing gadfly who loves to offend" by Jonathon Gatehouse on 12 January 2013. It probably would be a good source for the article, as long as we note the author's obvious and predictable hostility to the subject. CWC 06:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Roma Section[edit]

In the interest of open dialogue, here are the rationale behind my recently reverted changes: 1) The huffington post source does not contain the direct quotation it is being used to support, unlike the journalism project source 2) The title of the section is POV, and not at all neutral 3) The section is already over-long, and needs to be reduced in length per WP:UNDUE. The fact that there was a protest against him which said insulting things about him isn't all that relevant to the main facts of the case which are already detailed at length. If you insist on including it, we should then cut the length of the rest. Peregrine981 (talk) 08:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--Added a a better quote from the National post, where they mentioned: it is a full quote. now for the point of neutral point of view (Idle no more) natives. I though I was doing that (PLEASE read the lines where I wrote, that the natives were all in his face, SURPRESSING him before he had a chance to ask them for what racist statements they were accusing him of), I wrote that he was actually supporting them. But then they began chanting that he was racist, (it's all in the video you know the part there they go "hey hey ezra you can't hide. We can see your racist side", and at the end the native was saying to the negro protestor something Jewish media conspiracy. They kept on chanting illrelevantly about Palastine-Isreal... And that again Ezra hadn't the chance to explain himself.

And I though I was just extending the Roma section, to now include Levant's controversial statements as the ongoing saga of his "journalism", so I was just upgrading the section with the extension of these rent a cop protestors. The That's my rationale, that I was moving up the "roma" section to include crazy shit that people think he said. And that in this case defending him.

The "Idle no More' Protest seems to be quite unconnected to the comments about the Roma, so I'm going to go ahead and split it off. However, there are major sourcing problems now. ie. it says "Levant stated he supports abolishing the Indian act as outdated and apartheid." but htis does not appear in the article. It says "Levant was suppressed with chanting and rapid accusations invoking the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, holocaust," but this is not mentioned. We are also using the "Sun" newspapers as a source about a protest against the Sun. That seems like a somewhat dubious choice. Also, you have changed the source for the earlier quote for no apparent reason, without bothering to format it properly. Why? And lastly, why do you want to call it "Alleged Controversial remarks"? That is a super-ambiguous and banal title, which simultaneously manages to bias the reader against Levant right off the bat, while not actually imparting any useful information. See WP:CRITS. Peregrine981 (talk) 19:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


>>> Odd I though he did. But thanks for spliting it off like that. I'll scrutinize other sources. But in the video, the protestors were saying that though.

Connections to the Conservative Party[edit]

Some strong allegations in this article on CBC and Greenpeace press release. ...Greenpeace Canada is asking Elections Canada to investigate whether the Ethical Oil Institute is colluding with the Conservative Party in order to get around rules that limit donations to political parties. Keith Stewart, the climate and energy campaigner for Greenpeace, has written a letter to the commissioner of Canada Elections complaining that Ethical Oil is using money raised from individuals and companies to attack government critics. As well, the letter alleges, "mirrored messaging" is going on between Ethical Oil spokespeople and Conservative cabinet ministers. The complaint also alleges "multiple crossovers" between Ethical Oil spokespeople and Ottawa ministerial staff. Stewart repeated the complaints at a press conference in Ottawa... http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/greenpeace-calls-for-elections-canada-probe-of-ethical-oil-1.2602284 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurt Dundy (talk • contribs) 17:05, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remembrance Day 2014[edit]

Since this has hit the fan, I think that it should be included in the main article. However, I can't find a place in the existing sections to slip it in.

Summary: on the eve of Remembrance Day, Levant wrote a column and did a monologue claiming that the Greater Essex County District School Board had notified its schools to grant exemptions to Muslims from Remembrance Day ceremonies. He then launches into a rant that Muslims are traitors, bigots, terrorists, etc. Sources: http://www.torontosun.com/2014/11/10/lest-only-some-of-us-forget & http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/prime-time/867432237001/objecting-to-remembrance-day/3884869891001

He further started a petition site: http://www.loveitorleave.ca

Of course, Ezra totally made this up: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/books-and-media/ezra-levant-wrongly-accuses-ontario-school-board-of-allowing-exemptions-for-muslim-students-on-remembrance-day/article21537390/ , http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/ontario-students-exempt-from-remembrance-day-ceremonies-1.2831167 & http://windsor.ctvnews.ca/windsor-essex-school-board-responds-to-toronto-sun-s-remembrance-day-commentary-1.2097307

Given that this hasn't made it to the CRTC or CBSC, it can't be added to those sections (yet) — Preceding comment added by BordenRhodes whose signature was swallowed by HTML gremlins (talk • contribs) 18:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should not include this, per WP:DENY, unless a lot more sources make a big deal about it. We don't need to be a signal booster for Levant's nonsense. Ivanvector (talk) 23:49, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. FYI, there's a CBSC investigation being conducted into this, so see if anything comes of it. BordenRhodes (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ezra Levant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eurabia[edit]

People keep reverting my changes to this article. Here's what I did.

It said that Ezra believed in the "Eurabia conspiracy theory". I removed that because there are were NO sources to suggest/confirm that he believes in a "conspiracy theory" of an organised group of people trying to Islamise the West. The source that was given only showed that Ezra had used the WORD "Eurabia" - and as the Wikipedia page for "Eurabia" describes, the word is merely a neologism which refers to the area of Europe and Arabia. Using the word does not necessarily imply, or confirm, belief in an organised conspiracy of people trying to Islamise the West.

He clearly used the term to draw attention to the fact of increasing immigration from the Arabic world to Europe. Does this imply/confirm that he believes a CONSPIRACY is at work to achieve this? No it doesn't. If you want to claim that he believes in such a conspiracy then you must provide SOURCES to substantiate your claim.

Please, therefore, do not put anymore unsubstantiated, un-cited claims that he believes in a conspiracy theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThebeOkonma (talk • contribs) 14:56, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Ezra Levant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:05, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Law Society of Alberta[edit]

I removed a paragraph about the Law Society of Alberta in section "Libel cases". It depended on a cite to National Post February 7, 2010, which I couldn't find at nationalpost.com, or on mementoweb, or on the internet archive ("This URL has been excluded from the Wayback Machine.") and I couldn't find it in a search of ProQuest, a database that includes National Post articles. The nearest two mentions in the National Post, both reports by Joseph Brean, were: on February 6, 2010, where Levant said there was a finding of a "minor violation"; on March 11, 2010, where Levant complained that a blogger had improperly referenced a letter from the law society with "scandalizing" result, and filed another Law Society letter saying the discipline matter was "dismissed". So: it seems something trivial happened, but it's poorly sourced. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:33, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Forced to resgin for the Bar association[edit]

Please add this portion : Force to resign in disgrace

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ezra-levant-applies-to-resign-from-alberta-law-society/article28861945/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.222.147.184 (talk) 16:08, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Levant has applied to resign. Saying he was "forced to resign in disgrace" is a gross mischaracterization of the situation, and we will not include it here. Please see WP:BLP. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A lawyer in Canada belongs to a law society, not a bar association. As well, the article said he was "accepted into the law society in 2000". In fact, admission into the law society happens when one is a student-at-law. A person must be called to the Bar to be a lawyer in Canada. I have changed the text to reflect that, but I know it is risky, as he may have actually been accepted into the Law Society of Alberta in 2001 as an articling student and called to the Bar in 2001. ArtRoebuck (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:52, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Rebel russian ties and funding , aka Macrongate / macronleak[edit]

Report of russioan funding and ties and support in MacronGate / macronleak , lead to Ezara Levant and The Rebel behing at the center of the failed russian attempt to disrupt the French election as they reportly did and participated in the USofA

http://plus.lapresse.ca/screens/4ee753a2-f99b-473a-bcd9-95e85b7359ff%7C_0.html

http://www.canadalandshow.com/rebel-media-macronleaks/

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-far-right-american-nationalist-who-tweeted-macronleaks

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/05/09/opinion/french-election-scandal-traced-canadas-rebel-media

https://qz.com/977718/macron-email-leaks-alt-right-americans-and-internet-bots-are-spreading-macronleaks-on-twitter-to-skew-the-french-presidential-election/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/06/macronleaks-french-election-campaign-hackers

http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCAKBN1820QO-OCATC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.222.147.184 (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Ezra Levant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:23, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ezra Levant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:06, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ezra Levant is Jewish[edit]

Someone is trying to deny that the man is Jewish. I have no idea why. Please explain why you feel he is not Jewish, and cite a reliable source. 192.171.39.199 (talk) 04:24, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you have not read WP:LEDE, but nothing should be included in the lead section that is not also in the body of the article; nothing like "Ezra is Jewish" is currently presented as fact, much less sourced. Newimpartial (talk) 04:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I added a source stating that Levant is Jewish.192.171.39.199 (talk) 05:04, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by 2600:1700:1111:5940:d9f6:63d1:857a:104[edit]

You can't state an opinion as if it were fact, especially not in lede. Rebel Media is already mentioned in a neutral fashion.--יניב הורון (Yaniv) (talk) 14:05, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who started this thread has been blocked, and 75.119.247.233 has re-inserted the material. I reverted once but won't revert twice. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[WP:NPOVT] seems to cover this. Both sources are reputable news organizations- two of the most prominent in Canada, actually. It could use attribution, but X accuses Y of being Z isn't an opinion stated as fact. If it were Y is Z it would be.Safrolic (talk) 02:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually there's only one source, the other cited article doesn't mention counter-jihad. WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV is relevant if "has been accused" is regardable as weasel wording. WP:PUBLICFIGURE is relevant if Warnica's statements are regardable as allegations against Levant not just The Rebel. But two editors think the material is okay, so my comment was to merely an attempt to be informative. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 13:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edits of the Bio intro for accuracy and historical relevance plus suggestion of addition of terrorism influencing[edit]

edited the intro to read the accurate and historically orderly timed : "is an Albertan oil propagandist first of Canada, former lawyer turned", He his an Alberta Independatist promoter of the wexit illegal sedition of Canada , that unlike Quebec as no basis on legality nor any real popular support , Alberta 9 failed indepndantist party ( see wikipedia page about alberta Independantist paty for reference) who are all banckrupt due to fraud msotly, failed to elect 1 single deputy at provincial or federal level in wich they participated. ezra levant ethical oil book who whe was paid to do as an illegal and unregistered OIL lobyist is also all that is needed to refer to him accuratly as an oil above life and all propagandist since he to my knowlegde never legally registered as an oil lobyist even do he did the job in the media , in books and in conferences multiple time , if I am wrong that he his a registered lobyist please add it to his biography introduction. Anyone who remove the fact and record that he has studied and practiced laws to defend his criminal and ultimatly what got him kicked ourt and soft disbarred ( he was going to be disbarred but he offered to resign and never rejoin as part of a plea deal ) https://www.amazon.ca/Ethical-Oil-Case-Canadas-Sands/dp/077104643X , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_Oil , https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/200762/ethical-oil-by-ezra-levant/ , https://ipolitics.ca/2019/11/21/the-rebel-to-rabble-review-wexit-draws-the-attention-of-activist-media/ , https://www.facebook.com/therebeltv/photos/a.389008927859007/2597330590360152/?type=3
Terrorism influencer was not added but I know sugest it must be added properly : Accused mass shooter suggested his most trusted source for news was Ezra Levant’s far-right Rebel Media website , https://pressprogress.ca/video-shows-accused-new-brunswick-mass-shooter-praising-rebel-medias-anti-muslim-coverage/ it is a known and quantified and recorded observance fact that conservative of the right create and encourage white inferioracism mass shooting and hatred of the islamophobic kind , Ezra Levant is often quoted by attacker and mass shooters and his wikipedia page should reflect that fact — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.159.46.12 (talk) 07:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

== Edits of the Bio "of Canada" instead of Canadian explained.

Due to Ezra Levant repeated illegal sedition, with terrorism if necessary ( his words at many conference ) demands and ties to Wexit, I suggest that he cannot be stated as a Canadian as his wish is to Steal rental Alberta lands and ressource that belong to Quebec who purchased (the land and ressource to include in it's property and creation the Canadian Democracy we know today from the ashed of the Canadian Collony /British Dominion ) it and first Nation who the court recognised as shared owner's as well on part of that same territory. Due to their lack of legality and lack of choice on the future name of their attempt at steal Quebec and First nation land that they won't keep calling Wexit if they eventually succeed he enter a path of is own choosing of being appatride who reside inside Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.159.46.12 (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When will Wikipedia label Ezra Levant as anti-Muslim?[edit]

Just curious when does a person get the label of an anti-Muslim?

He owns RebelNews and RebelNews has been accused of Islamophobia https://www.dawn.com/news/1493641

He sent RebelNews staff (Faith Goldy and Gavin McInnes) to Bethlehem, Israel where they called for a new crusade against Muslims. https://www.therebel.media/it_s_crusade_o_clock_in_bethlehem

Or can we say that RebelNews may be accused of Islamophobia but it does not automatically imply the owner is an Islamophobe?

Levant has a history of hate speech and slander against Muslim individuals. Here https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ezra-levant-loses-hate-speech-case-must-pay-80000-to-man-he-defamed-as-illiberal-islamic-fascist and here https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/09/13/nenshi-calls-ezra-levant-creepy-obsessed_n_3921261.html and here http://beaconnews.ca/calgary/2012/01/sun-columnists-anti-muslim-trash-talking-has-no-place-in-canada/

He clearly crossed the line on anti-Muslim hatred by publishing a series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad. https://sul-swap-prod.stanford.edu/20090418064234/http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=232073

Calgary alternative newspaper and conservative activist Merle Terlesky said, "Ezra looks for any opportunity to poke a Muslim in the eye." [See: Brean, Joseph (October 17, 2013). "In 2007, Ezra Levant sued a Calgary newspaper and letter writer for libel". National Post. Retrieved October 20, 2013.]

Some Muslims have already labelled his hate speech and fear mongering as Islamophobic https://muslimdebate.org/2014/06/16/ezra-levants-hypocrisy-revealed/

But this is my opinon that he is an outspoken anti-Muslim and an Islamophobe. Wikipedia should be based on facts not my opinions. What factually is considered anti-Muslim? And has Levant crossed the line here long time ago?

See other secondary sources on Levant and his anti-Muslim actions: https://www.vice.com/en/article/wjz73q/inside-rebel-medias-big-money-anti-islam-crusade https://nowtoronto.com/news/canada-christchurch-islamophobia-far-right https://www.cjnews.com/perspectives/ezra-levant-good-jews https://www.canadaland.com/david-walmsley-ezra-levant-globe-oped/ https://globalnews.ca/news/5919069/trudeau-brownface-blackface-canada-election/

2001:1970:5F5D:8B00:21F3:F62B:1E95:5C8 (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of an article isn't to label a person as something-or-other but to be a comprehensive and well-sourced biography. This article isn't protected so you could edit it yourself by, for example, adding a subsection on Levant's views on Islam to the "Political views" section. Additions would have to have reliable sourcing and follow policies on biographies of living people and neutrality. Articles on other far-right individuals like Geert Wilders or Gavin McInnes might serve as useful templates for you.Citing (talk) 15:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Posting a cartoon, drawing or similar graphics of any religious leader, does not necessarily make you anti-whatever religion it is. You are entitled to not like Ezra posting the cartoon, however Wikipedia is supposed to be a neutral unbiased source, not personal opinions. MiroslavGlavic (talk) 06:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Far-Right vs Right-wing[edit]

Out of curisoity, the article refers to Ezra as Far-Right. For me Far-Right is more Right than Right-Wing.

So question...the 2013 Macleans section above uses Right-Wing, yet the article uses Far-Right. I have seen articles from different sources over the years using Right-Wing and Not Far-Right. Yes I seen some sources refer to him as Far-Right and other terms too but mostly I have seen Right-Wing.

Can anyone justify Far-Right over Right-Wing? credible sources please. MiroslavGlavic (talk) 14:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we've got two academic sources referring to him and his work as "Far Right" right there in the opening sentence (plus it's easy to find more [5]), and "right wing" necessarily contains "far right" so nobody is exactly contradicting those claims. What's the issue? Citing (talk) 16:23, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an Ezra fan but came to the talk page because it struck me as a biased article in that he is called "far right" so many times in the first few paragraphs when he is a conservative libertarian in his own words.
Just because "academic sources" with an obvious political motivation call him far right?
Lumping Levant in with someone like Nick Fuentes (who is actually far right) doesn't make sense as they have little in common.
It just seems like an attempt to move the overton window so that even common right-wing views are labelled as"far". 23.186.80.194 (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bueller 007 on 22 May 2022 changed to "conservative" and I think (without examining every edit) that the lead sentence called Mr Levant "conservative" until 50.92.202.153 changed to "far-right" on 9 January 2024, then 2001:56a:7380:e500:8c74:c83e:9f06:aff8 went back to conservative, then Newimpartial went to "far-right" again. I don't see that the cites right after the term support far-right, and the ones that come later are about Rebel News. I'll wait to see whether anyone else cares. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The pre-Bueller 007 version (which is the one I still think of as "stable") had a decent academic source for far-right. I don't really understand why it changed at that point, and the edit summary of that edit offers no explanation. Newimpartial (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not up to digging through the history right now, but somewhere the citations got moved around unhelpfully. "Far-right", referring specifically to Levant himself, is supported by an article in Journal of Hate Studies (currently citation 11), the book Right-Wing Extremism in Canada (part of the bundle in citation 6), and an article in Global News (part of the same bundle). There may be more. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I detailed some of these in the section below in this edit. There's other sources that varying label him specifically as far-right ([6]) or alt-right ([7], [8]) . Rebel Media is quite often described as far-right with Levant mentioned in the same breath, e.g.:
  • "After the event, they received support from the Rebel, a far-right website led by Ezra Levant, a self-styled “rebel commander”"[9]
  • "It’s been a tough few years for Ezra Levant. Rebel Media, his far-right website..." [10]
Rebel Media, which Levant founded and runs, is consistently described as far-right basically everywhere. The writing could be cleaned up but I'm not sure there's much to debate here, unless we're looking for him to come out and say "yes, I am actually far-right and not conservative libertarian", in which case we may be waiting a while. Citing (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article spends so much time smearing the man that it does not even include basic factual information - such as when he was born.[edit]

O.K. the writer of the article thinks Mr Levant is "far right" - and that thinks that verbal opposition to jihad is "dangerous" to "marginalised groups" (the Frankfurt School of Marxism doctrine, from Herbert Marcuse, that Freedom of Speech is "Repressive Tolerance"). But how about giving us basic factual information on Mr Levant such as when he was born? Surely the writer could take a few seconds off from smearing propaganda to actually give readers such basic information?2A02:C7E:1CC3:8A00:9D52:7D91:BE50:A764 (talk) 17:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know of a reliable source that states his date of birth? Firefangledfeathers 17:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Doug Weller removed the birth date in September 2020, along with explanation. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 18:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good removal. I see a bunch of sources, all unreliable, that mention his DOB. We should keep it out, pending more research. Firefangledfeathers 18:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He is called "Far right" citing Source 4, which cites 2 and 3 as it's sources, which both link to pdf documents that do not mention the subject whatsoever. How is that considered acceptable? Him being "Far right" is nothing more than an opinion, and not based in fact.

How about a source proving he advocates for Ultra nationalism? Authoritarianism? against free speech? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4pp4r1t (talk • contribs) 03:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He is frequently described as far-right and is listed alongside far-right figures in reliable sources. A quick search of academic sources brings up:

Reportedly, Donald Trump’s Ambassador for International Religious Freedom even raised Lennon’s case with the British ambassador in Washington. Lennon also received vocal support from fringe North American figures like Gavin McInnes of the “Western chauvinist” fraternity the Proud Boys, and Ezra Levant of the Canadian Rebel Media, for whom Lennon worked after leaving the EDL

  • Tanner, Samuel, Valentine Crosset, and Aurélie Campana. "Far-Right Digital Vigilantism as Technical Mediation: Anti-Immigration Activism on YouTube." Introducing Vigilant Audiences (2020): 129. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0200

To analyse the actants involved in the mediation process, let’s start by providing a precise description of each one. First, Lauren Southern. Born in 1995 in Canada, she is a central fgure in Canadian farright populist activism as well as an Internet personality and infuencer. At the age of 20, she ran as candidate for the federal Libertarian Party in a district in British Columbia, getting 0.9% of the vote. Until 2017 she worked as a journalist for Rebel Media — a copycat version of Breitbart6 — founded in 2015 by Ezra Levant, another important fgure in Canadian far-right populism.

Canadian pundits Ezra Levant and Brian Lilley, both of whom worked for the now defunct Sun News Network (Little 2017; Warnica 2017; Markusoff 2017), originally founded Rebel News which presents "a seamless mix of farright activism and commentary" (Warnica 2017). [Note: the article cited is here: "After Ezra Levant launched Rebel Media — a platform with deep ties to Canada's Conservative mainstream — he became a major player in the international far-right movement"]

That was just a cursory search. I'm sure you could find dozens of others within minutes. Citing (talk) 19:21, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a good example of everything that's wrong with Wikipedia these days.[edit]

The article is just a list of negative claims against Levant. It barely mentions any of his work. Where's all the detail on 'The China Files' for example. The article is an utter disgrace to Wikipedia. Hontogaichiban (talk) 13:07, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're an editor, edit it. Doug Weller talk 16:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CEO?[edit]

How can you be CEO of a political stance? Wikipedia is no place for jokes. 89.100.127.214 (talk) 00:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? Rebel News is a website, not a political stance in and unto itself. —C.Fred (talk) 01:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ezra_Levant&oldid=1207886727"