I hope – vainly, I’m sure – that this ridiculous, state-sanctioned gagging of a reliably pro

I hope – vainly, I’m sure – that this ridiculous, state-sanctioned gagging of a reliably pro-war media

outlet will cool the libel fever of neocons on this side of the Atlantic. Remember this from Michael

Ledeen?

On July 10, Ron Paul, a congressman from Texas, delivered a tirade against his version of

neoconservatism. He called it “Neo-Conned!” and he posted it on his website and had it distributed as

best he could. A considerable part of it is devoted to his version of my writings, and is so

inaccurate, so distorted, and so nasty, as to make me wish once again that this country had a decent

libel law so that I could at least get some money from him and give him a healthy dose of the public

humiliation he deserves. Unfortunately, members of Congress are protected from such suits.

Ledeen concluded his piece in classic middle school 5-paragraph essay fashion:

If we had a libel law worthy of the name, he’d either quickly correct his statements and apologize to

those he’s libeled, or find himself looking for the money to pay the damages he has certainly

incurred.

Ledeen is always welcome to emigrate. How does Canada sound? The libel laws up there are almost

certainly more to his liking, and the resident neocons take full advantage of them. In a favorable

profile of Canadian publisher Conrad Black in 2001, Slate writer David Plotz noted in passing, “He

files libel suits almost for sport.” Black settled one libel suit out of court last week and has

another pending.