Pajamas Media

118 Comments

1. steve:

I really can’t stand Savage, but agree wholeheartedly that banning him is an offence against free speech. I do feel, however, absolutely the same about Canada’s ban on the equally ludicrous George Galloway. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

May 8, 2009 - 2:50 am 2. David M. in Europe:

I wish we had a man like Michael Savage in Europe. Michael is not only intelligent, politically incorrect, courageous but also a scientist. He is for freedom and very much against totalitarian ideologies in every form (communism, fascism and islamism). I think the idea of banning Dr. Savage was not initiated in London but in Washington. We are in a very dangerous period of history with so many gutless, coward, corrupt politicians, journalists and academia (both in Europe and USA) who have become a tool playing for the enemies of civility, freedom and human dignity.

May 8, 2009 - 3:01 am 3. Ozzie:

You waste too much time repeating the “I’m not with him” phrases about his views. Once was enough, twice was embarassing, more than that looks like your hiding under your desk.

Many people appreciate and admire Savage. He is THE most intellectually stimulating talk show host on radio, and he tells the truth as he sees it. He’s not beholden to any political party. I can putter around the house all day, doing complicated things, with Hannity and Limbaugh on the radio. When Savage is on I have to close the book, stop the surfing and listen or turn him off. What he says is too darn interesting.

On the topic of the ban, I really don’t think anyone is surprised by it. I don’t think there any any more expectations the UK can disappoint on anymore. Americans expect the worst and are never disappointed. Savage seems to be enjoying the situation and using it to his advantage. More power to him.

May 8, 2009 - 3:13 am 4. Irish Alex:

Are you seriously trying to suggest that liberals be consistent?
Three words: “snowball”, “chance” and “hell”.

May 8, 2009 - 3:40 am 5. David M. in Europe:

#1.Steve

Comparing Michael Savage, a patriot, a man who fights for freedom of speech and a man who is not afraid of standing against those who want to take us to the 7th century of barbarity to a low-life George Galloway is the utmost sign of ignorance, stupidity and mental disorder. You are free to defend George but don´t compare this cretin to Michael Savage.

May 8, 2009 - 3:45 am 6. Ed Wallis:

I hope Savages lawsuit against Ms. Smith causes a wake-up avalanche in the UK.

May 8, 2009 - 3:55 am 7. MiamaMan:

You can disagree with Dr. Savage, but he is a great man. His style may be rash, but his message is spot on. That Jacqui Smith is a joke, but a dangerous one, as Great Britain is plagued with radical Islamic clerics, how can they try to cover the sun with one finger? While they ban Geert Wilders and Dr. Savage, I would not visit there either for anything in the world, I do not need or want that “privilege”.

May 8, 2009 - 4:12 am 8. Mark Epstein:

It’s true, liberals HATE freedom for others. Frankly, considering Jacqui Smith’s histrionics in this matter, it’s no wonder we fought a revolution to rid ourselves of such tyranny.

May 8, 2009 - 4:18 am 9. David Thomson:

Michael Savage is often an idiot. That is why I rarely listen to his program. But when has he ever advocated violence? The British government is behaving foolishly for even considering Savage to be too extreme to visit the country.

May 8, 2009 - 4:21 am 10. imyou:

Hmmm. The powers that be know best, and Michael Savage is a no no. In the spirit of being treated like a child, I want what I want and I want it now and as much as I want! Or, I’m going to throw a hissy fit, hold my breath, stamp my feet and call names. In other words act like Obama. Michael Savage is my new best friend.

May 8, 2009 - 4:52 am 11. Terry Gain:

You don’t have to agree with controversial radio personality Michael Savage to question the logic of banning him from the UK.

It’s perfectly logical. He’s singing from the wrong hymn book. The one that says all cultures are equal (even those that practice hideous Sharai Law) and Islam is a religion of peace (despite the daily world wide attacks by Islamists on infidels).

May 8, 2009 - 4:56 am 12. RE:

The UK makes itself look ridiculous with this stunt. It’s so obvious that they were looking for cover to avoid charges of racism.

What fools.

May 8, 2009 - 4:59 am 13. Terry Gain:

I really can’t stand Savage, but agree wholeheartedly that banning him is an offence against free speech. I do feel, however, absolutely the same about Canada’s ban on the equally ludicrous George Galloway

Galloway should have been banned on the basis of redundancy. There’s nothing he says that isn’t said by Democratic politicians and pundits. In tough economic times we North Americans should support out homegrown idiots.

May 8, 2009 - 5:01 am 14. BPT (Australia):

Ms Smith is known as a “pocketbook dictator” in her own country. In any case, I’d be happy if Savage visited Australia. He has done more for women’s rights than Wellesley. Come on down under!

May 8, 2009 - 5:21 am 15. Little Banana:

Actually, I think banning him was the best thing ever. Hear me out…..

Despite what the media would lead you to believe, I do believe the average inhabitant of the British Isles (let’s call them “Brits” even though I’m including Ireland – North and South in this) is right leaning – the silent majority if you will.

However, the average Brit is unlikely to have heard of Michael Savage (or in many cases Geert Wilders for that matter), and is unlikely to have heard of him/them except for this ban.

I’m firmly of the view that publicity, whether positive or negative, is always good.

May 8, 2009 - 5:30 am 16. TomJW:

I tried reading a Savage book and couldn’t stand it. But to think he would whip up some violence against the terrorists in UK’s midst (if only) is ludicris. That government is working for it’s own civilization’s extincntion and the people aren’t stopping it.

England is gone. They are in the transition period before sharia takeover.

May 8, 2009 - 5:38 am 17. HalifaxCB:

steve – it wasn’t Galloway’s open mouth that got him banned in Canada, it was was his open wallet to Hamas. It’s a terrorist organization, and Canada (justifiably, in my view) has laws that allow it to reject any visitor with such ties. I wish the government would use them more often.

Anyway, here’s a bit of a blurb on the ruling: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/610632 ; and a notable quote from a letter to Galloway from Canada’s High commisioner in London, and quoted by the judge:

“Specifically, we have information that indicates you organized a convoy worth over one million British pounds in aid and vehicles, and personally donated vehicles and financing to Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya. Your material support for this organization makes you inadmissible to Canada.”

There are steps Galloway can take if he feels that information is incorrect and still wants to enter the country; OTOH he had no problem actually getting his opinion heard here in Canada ( a live video feed was arranged instead). It’s just not a free speech issue, much as Galloway would like to make it one to avoid the consequences of his actions.

May 8, 2009 - 6:19 am 18. fred:

Let’s see, the Home Secretary – the one with the porndog husband (if you’ve seen her face I guess his degeneracy can be understood) – deems people like Geert Wilders and Michael Savage to be threats to the Realm. This is the same woman who decreed that the use of jihad in conjunction with Islamic beliefs is verboten. Nothing in Geert Wilders “Fitna” is untrue, for those who have yet to view it.

Jaqui Smith is a liar and a bully. Typical of the modern Cultural Marxist. Garden variety.

May 8, 2009 - 6:20 am 19. Oldguy:

My God, The british have become worse than the French!

May 8, 2009 - 6:41 am 20. hoads:

I agree with #2 David M. in Europe–this emanated from Washington to make propaganda for what’s coming here. Savage has been picked and frozen and will be the first to be censored when Dems FCC start their “Fairness Doctrine” escapades.

May 8, 2009 - 6:44 am 21. seven:

Savage yesterday says he has law firms in the UK begging for the case.
On the other hand, if the director has a hubby with porn issues and fetishes, those are common paraphilias associated with molestors and violent crimes. for real.
A lot of killers on death row admit to porn addiction.

May 8, 2009 - 6:45 am 22. sheesh:

How do you feel about Cat Stevens being denied entry to the U.S.?

May 8, 2009 - 7:22 am 23. HalifaxCB:

It should be an interesting case. British libel laws (designed to protect the plaintiff from damage to his reputation without regard to the truth of the published material) are quite different from American (designed to protect free and factual speech). It’s been used quite a lot by the British left in the past (who didn’t want people knowing what they really did – think Roman Polanski, who won in a British court against Vanity fair, for pointing out that he was diddling a 13 year old, or George Galloway, who one against the Telegraph for publishing information collected in Iraq after Saddam’s fall that Galloway was being paid by Saddam to promote his case against the embargo). It’s been particularly useful to British funders of terrorism. Anyway, there’s more useful background here: http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/004002.html , and I hope certain politicians get hoisted on their own petards.

May 8, 2009 - 7:30 am 24. AThinkingPerson:

Cat Stevens aka Yusaf Islam? Apples and Oranges.

May 8, 2009 - 7:35 am 25. Yael:

Kol hakavod (all honor) to Carol. When any one of us is persecuted for holding a certain opinion, we all are in danger of the same. Wake up, people. There’s a difference between being pissed off and advocating murder. Remember, it will be impossible to hold the terrorists to a higher, more civlized standard once they have seen to our beheading(s). Gd forbid.

May 8, 2009 - 7:55 am 26. Tony R:

Its pretty obvious that the list of banned individuals included a few token whiteys so that the Government didn’t look racist – talk about cowardice in the extreme!! Savage was just a token name probably suggested to the UK Government by their “friends” in the US Government.

Oh and Little Banana (comment 15) – we Irishman don’t appreciate been called “Brits”. We may have kicked them out of our country long after you guys did but kick them out we did. Their laws, rules and social norms do not apply to our country so whatever nonsense their Governments get up to doesn’t remotely reflect what goes on in Ireland. By your generalisation I could just as accurately call Americans “Brits”.

May 8, 2009 - 8:05 am 27. Laura:

Savage can come as across as gritty and rude at times, but he is NOT a hate-monger nor does he incite violence of any kind. On the contrary, he abhors it. What comes out of his mouth is what a lot of people think, but due to P.C. bullcrap and white fear of being called racist, dare not say it. It is refreshing to listen to someone who has no restraints and fears no one.

May 8, 2009 - 8:10 am 28. Martin Adamson:

Comment 27:

More than just token whiteys, it was vital to find token Jews to ban. This is why the BBC, the government’s mouthpiece, was very eager to draw attention to the fact that Savage’s real name is Weiner – a thing that I never ever seen done in the case of any other DJ, actor, celebrity or whatever.

May 8, 2009 - 8:14 am 29. Don:

Actually, Michael Savage is Westerner attempting to visit a Western country. Cat Stevens is a former Westerner who thinks the sun rises and sets at Mecca, and doubtless prefers an Islamic democracy; one man, one vote, one time. Sorry ladies.

May 8, 2009 - 8:25 am 30. Herb:

Cry me a river or call the WAH-mbulance. It’s the UK’s prerogative to say who can and can’t come to their country.

Besides…If one wants to be granted the right to say what they want, then they better be prepared to accept the ramifications. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequence. Just ask Don Imus, Trent Lott, Michael Richards, or any number of folks who found that out the hard way.

May 8, 2009 - 8:32 am 31. AThinkingPerson:

Good point #29 Don BUT Cat Stevens is no more. I think we should refer to him by his real name Yusaf Islam. Pretty much sums up your post in a nutshell I’d say.

May 8, 2009 - 8:39 am 32. Paul:

I’m against restricting speech unless it really, truly fails the “fire in a crowded theater” test. But the most interesting question about this issue is this: how on earth does a guy named Michael Weiner get the sheer balls to rename himself Michael Savage?!

May 8, 2009 - 8:47 am 33. WhyamInotsurprised?:

Cat Stevens? Feel? Nope. Nothing there. Next.

May 8, 2009 - 8:55 am 34. Marge:

Countries do that all the time and I don’t agree with it Look at that big music star that the US banned from coming here. They put him on a plane and sent him back to the UK…I think all this banning without proof someone has done something is asinine.

May 8, 2009 - 9:10 am 35. Morry Rotenberg:

The actions of the British government are only a symptom of it’s progressive decline and ultimate fall along with the rest of Europe. Are we that far behind when conservatives cannot speak at our universities without being shouted down and at risk of bodily harm?

May 8, 2009 - 9:15 am 36. Boris:

I agree that Savage shouldn’t be “banned” form the UK.

After all, Savage is useful. Any time I meet someone who admires him, I know they are batshit crazy.

May 8, 2009 - 9:17 am 37. AThinkingPerson:

#36 Boris: Sort of like I feel when I meet an Obama supporter. I know they are a brain-dead, group-thinking, race-baiting, military hater no matter what the bumper sticker on their Chevette says.

May 8, 2009 - 9:32 am 38. HalifaxCB:

Re. Yusuf Islam – a big point folks like sheesh miss is that he did eventually get to enter the US, by following proper channels to clear up the confusion over his new name. He was denied entry because of the similarity between his name and that of a person on a terror watch list (Youssef Islam), and it is up to the border officers to make a quick call on that. Entrance to another country is a privilege – not a right – and US border security has bigger things to worry about than some flaky and somewhat forgettable 70’s pop icon, particularly when his current name is his third attempt to figure out his identity (Steven Demetre Georgiou/Cat Stevens/Yusaf Islam). One can toss into the mix his on-again-off-again support for the fatwa on Salman Rushdie, and the reports he gave money to Hamas (which he claims to have never done so knowingly, but it did result in his expulsion from Israel). Personally I think he’s just another “useful idiot”….

herb @29 – the issue over Savage isn’t denial of entry into GB (he’s said he has no interest in going there), but the the attempt by the Crown to “name and shame” on the flimsiest of pretexts for political gain. On the bright side, I had never heard of Michael Savage, and like a lot of people in a similar state, I’m curious to see what he’s all about.

May 8, 2009 - 9:33 am 39. gus3:

Michael Wiener… er, Savage, fighting for free speech? Give me a break.

This is the same man who, just a few days after 9/11, shouted down a veteran who called in to his show, to defend the free speech of war protesters. Yes, a veteran who fought for Michael Savage’s right to expose himself as the ass he is.

Don’t ever forget his “get AIDS and die” comment that got him fired from MSNBC.

Michael Savage doesn’t defend freedom of speech or assembly. Let him get a dose of his own medicine.

May 8, 2009 - 9:34 am 40. Войска ПВО:

22. sheesh writes:

How do you feel about Cat Stevens being denied entry to the U.S.?

I could frankly care lsss; typical liberal cockroach crapola. Make some drive-by, glib comment and fade back into the woodwork behind the toilet.

Here’s the 4-1-1 from Wikipedia (emphasis added):

Denial of entry into the United States
On 21 September 2004, Yusuf Islam was travelling on a
United Airlines flight from London to Washington, en
route to a meeting with singer Dolly Parton, who had
recorded “Peace Train” several years earlier and was
planning to include another Cat Stevens song on an
upcoming album.[39] While the plane was in flight, the
Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System flagged
his name as being on a no fly list. Customs agents
alerted the United States Transportation Security
Administration, which then diverted his flight to
Bangor, Maine, where he was detained by agents from
Department of Homeland Security.[50]

The following day, Yusuf Islam was deported back to the
United Kingdom. The Transportation Security
Administration claimed there were “concerns of ties he
may have to potential terrorist-related activities.”[51]
The Israeli government had deported Yusuf Islam in 2000
over allegations that he provided funding to the
Palestinian organization Hamas[52]; he denied doing so
knowingly.[53] “I have never knowingly supported or
given money to Hamas,” says Yusuf Islam, who repeatedly
has condemned terrorism and Islamic extremism. “At the
time I was reported to have done it, I didn’t know such
a group existed. Some people give a political
interpretation to charity. We were horrified at how
people were suffering in the Holy Land.” However,
the United States Department of Homeland Security added
him to their FBI- watch list. The U.S. deportation
provoked a small international controversy, and led
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw to complain
personally to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell at
the United Nations. Powell responded by stating that
the watch list was under review, and added, “I think we
have that obligation to review these matters to see if
we are right.”

Yusuf Islam believed his inclusion on the watch list may
have simply been an error, a mistaken identification of
him for a man with the same name, but different
spelling. On 1 October 2004 Yusuf Islam requested the
removal of his name, “I remain bewildered by the
decision of the US authorities to refuse me entry to the
United States.”[56] According to a statement by Yusuf
Islam, the man on the list was named “Youssef Islam”,
indicating that Yusuf Islam himself was not the
suspected terrorism supporter.

Two years later, in December 2006, Yusuf Islam was
admitted without incident into the United States for
several radio concert performances and interviews to
promote his new record.[57] Islam said of the incident
at the time, that, “No reason was ever given, but being
asked to repeat the spelling of my name again and again,
made me think it was a fairly simple mistake of
identity. Rumors which circulated after made me imagine
otherwise.”

Yusuf Islam has written a song about the 2004
deportation experience, titled “Boots and Sand”,
recorded in the summer of 2008, featuring Paul
McCartney, Alison Krauss, Dolly Parton, and Terry
Sylvester.

May 8, 2009 - 9:36 am 41. kourosh:

Well, what about BBC which constantly takes stands against American interests? How come tax payer’s money in used for BBC and we are subject to their programming via NPR? What is the standard here? I think as long as you bad mouth US you are progressive and belong to their backward club. These creatures reminded me of Edwards the colon, a recent darling of socialists, who while living in 20000 SQF /100 acres mansion, was promoting the poor. The entire socialism is manipulation of facts for Masses who are not educated. Don’t believe me ask the Kris Mattew the clown in MSNBC who just recently said if you are conservative you are against science. Beside some uneducated and inexperience masses, who he expect to believe these junks? I think;
Based on their values, the comments issued by Neo-liberals are not designed to come out their mouth but from the other orifices in their body.

May 8, 2009 - 9:41 am 42. Delia:

Anyone interested can listen to previous “The Savage Nation” shows online at this link:

http://radiotime.com/program/p_20626/The_Savage_Nation.aspx

May 8, 2009 - 9:45 am 43. Charvakan:

It is not very clear to me if this article is arguing for just Michael savage to be excluded from the list or it is arguing against banning anyone merely based on the views that they have expressed. If it is the latter I agree. Expressing a view about something that maybe illegal/criminal is not the same as doing something illegal/criminal. Exceptions could be made to the free speech right if someone is actively promoting violence against a particular group. But merely criticizing the group or expressing an option should not result is such bans. As for Micheal Savage, I consider him just an entertainer, just like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Keith Olbermann et al. There is a market out there for entertaining people with partisan rhetoric and they are just making use of that to earn their living.

May 8, 2009 - 10:01 am 44. Sonja:

An interesting point was brought up by a caller to Michael’s show yesterday, something regarding Al Gore and his global warming agenda. Michael interviewed Christopher Monckton (a global warming skeptic) very recently. I wonder if Al Gore’s people had any “influence” on Jacqui Smith regarding this ban.

May 8, 2009 - 10:16 am 45. Trisha2cents:

I love Savage. He’s passionate and witty. He’s an en-ter-tain-er.
You don’t like what he says, turn the channel. The law suit he’s bringing against Smith will be very interesting to follow. Also, this may be his pre-emptive strike against the Fairness (boohoo) doctine. I predict his ratings go through the roof.

May 8, 2009 - 10:27 am 46. mike:

Poor weak British. Once so proud and freedom-loving. Now the Muslims have them committing slow suicide. I don’t agree with Savage’s opinions on most things. But I just downloaded his podcasts. It’s important to resist tyranny.

May 8, 2009 - 10:32 am 47. Trisha2cents:

Gotta agree with ya, little banana. and in this case I believe this is effective publicity for the silent majority. We are eagarly watching.

May 8, 2009 - 10:35 am 48. HalifaxCB:

Thx, Delia @47

May 8, 2009 - 10:38 am 49. Sherab Zangpo:

The risk is this: the leftists will pick ONE individual at a time, attack him, attack again and again, make an “example” of him/her.

The goal is not to attack the single public figure, the goal is to silence dissent.
The goal is to create fear, self-censorship, overwhelming “prudence”.

Obavez attacked Hannity during the campaign, then Rush immediately after getting to the WH. Now his British allies help with Savage.

The question that they want to create in everyone’s mind is:
“Who is next ?”

And we know this, don’t we ? In fact we do write using pen-names…

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

May 8, 2009 - 11:25 am 50. Delia:

47. HalifaxCB,

You’re welcome! I’m currently listeing to:
Michael Savage 05/04/09 H2 Mon, May 4
“We’ve moved into the world of Big Brother. Nancy Pelosi and friends have taken a trillion dollars of our money, and now they want 94 billion dollars more.”

He definitely makes some excellent points.

May 8, 2009 - 11:26 am 51. Ian Thorpe:

Ironically the ultrapolitically correct Labour party that banned Savage under threat from the extreme right BNP in the forthcoming European elections. The BNP are unlikely to oust Labour but could take enough votes to let in Conservative or Liberal Democrat candidates.

Clearly the party don’t understand their core voters who might have warmed to Michael Savage.

May 8, 2009 - 11:36 am 52. John Galt:

She and the operatives at her department are also under scrutiny for deporting maverick Dutch MP Geert Wilders, who produced the film Fitna about the sadistic excesses of extreme Islam,>>

=================
This is a total and complete misrepresentation.

1. Wilders is not “a maverick”. Since when does a person who stands up for free speech become a maverick? Also in the latest political poles taken in the Netherlands, Wilders’ party is polling #1. Wilders is not maverick. Use that of that derogratory term in respect to Mr. Wilders is wrong.

2. Fitna is not about the sadistic excesses of exteme Islam.

Maybe Carol Gould should actually see the film before they write such gross mischaracterizations about it.

Fitna is not sadistic excesses. In fact Fitna is not about exteme Islam. Fitna is not even about Islam per se.

Fitna is about the Koran period and shows real life situations based upon the writings of the Koran.

May 8, 2009 - 12:02 pm 53. Bilgeman:

#5 David M in Europe:
“You are free to defend George but don´t compare this cretin to Michael Savage.”

Galloway is a cretin now?

When was he ennobled?

Raised far, FAR above his natural station, what?

May 8, 2009 - 12:13 pm 54. Carol Gould:

I notice that Cat Stevens now calls himself ‘Yusuf’ on his albums and concert PR. He is no longer ‘Yusuf Islam.’
My two cents!

May 8, 2009 - 12:23 pm 55. Noga:

Galloway was not banned from Canada. Even Christopher Hitchens had to retract that accusation, once he became familiar with the details:

http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/2009/03/christopher-hitchens-is-wrong.html

Scroll to the very end of the article:

http://www.slate.com/id/2215445/

A classic example of the famous adage that a lie travels around half the the world while truth is still putting its shoes on.

May 8, 2009 - 12:33 pm 56. ReConUSMC:

39. gus3:
Michael Wiener… er, Savage, fighting for free speech? Give me a break. FREE SPEECH YOU MORON IT SPPECH EXCEPTANCE OF SPEECH YOU DON’T LIKE …. I HATE MARXIST LEAD CODE PINK AND THE ACLU BUT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY IT .
THE REASON YOUR KIND HATES SAVAGE SO MUCH IS HE TEACHES ””FACTS ” SOCILIST CAN TOLORATE !

This is the same man who, just a few days after 9/11, shouted down a veteran who called in to his show, to defend the free speech of war protesters. Yes, a veteran who fought for Michael Savage’s right to expose himself as the ass he is.
(((((((( NO REAL VET)))))))))) A FEW DAYS AFTER 9/11 WOULD CALL IN ABOUT WAR PROTESTORS RIGHTS .
IN FACT THOUSANDS SIGNED UP TO JOIN THE MILITARY AFTER 9/11 … YOU …… JERK
IT WAS PROBABLY A GUY LIKE YOU THAT HAS NEVER SERVED A DAY !!!!!

Don’t ever forget his “get AIDS and die” comment that got him fired from MSNBC.

(){{{{{{{ IF A MAN STICKS HIS EQUIPEMENT IN BACK FUDGE }}}}}}} ….. HE SHOULD DIE BECAUSE TAX PAYERS DON’T WANT TO PAY FOR HIS BACK SIDE PLAY !

Michael Savage doesn’t defend freedom of speech or assembly. Let him get a dose of his own medicine.
AND IF YOU DO ? B/S !!!!!!

May 8, 2009 - 12:35 pm 57. Ms. Attitude:

So he’s banned in the UK…aren’t they a little bit crazy over there with bad teeth? He should take it as a blessing in disguise. We can’t control the UK but we can control the US…someone pointed this out on another thread.

There is proposed legislation in the House of Representatives to amend HR1966 as:

SEC. 3. CYBERBULLYING.
(a) In General- Chapter 41 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`Sec. 881. Cyberbullying
`(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
`(b) As used in this section–
`(1) the term `communication’ means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user’s choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received; and
`(2) the term `electronic means’ means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.’.
This is very vague wording in part (a). How can one define “the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.”

Hopefully this will die and not get passed. But isn’t it amazing as to how our elected officials are thinking?

May 8, 2009 - 12:52 pm 58. Trisha2cents:

ReconUSMC: i get it, i get it. You don’t need to shout though I can tell this is getting your ire up, me too. Hey, TGIF!!!! Did I yell that too loud?

May 8, 2009 - 1:06 pm 59. Pastor of Muppets:

AThinkingPerson: “#36 Boris: Sort of like I feel when I meet an Obama supporter. I know they are a brain-dead, group-thinking, race-baiting, military hater no matter what the bumper sticker on their Chevette says.”

You’d have to leave your basement to actually meet an Obama supporter. But we make up 70% of the population, so in the rare case that you actually do go out into public, you’re bound to run into one. You can easily tell them apart because they’re not the ones screaming hysterically about how putting dijon mustard on your burger amounts to treason.

May 8, 2009 - 1:16 pm 60. AThinkingPerson:

Re #59: My basement? Oh boy, the expansiveness of a liberal’s humor can never be overemphasized can it? You’re right though, the TeleBama supporters ARE easy to spot. They’re the one’s with their hands out, a glazed over look in their eyes wearing a Code Pink t-shirt. Anything less than that and they’re closet moderation Republicans.

May 8, 2009 - 1:39 pm 61. Banned by Huffpo:

Hmm, is the “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright on that banned list too? How about Louie Farrakhan? No?

May 8, 2009 - 1:42 pm 62. JoshC:

We have enough nutters spouting ignorant small-minded garbage in the UK without importing them as well. Just be glad you don’t have to listen to Galloway all the time.

May 8, 2009 - 1:52 pm 63. Banned by PJM:

“61. Banned by Huffpo:

Hmm, is the “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright on that banned list too? How about Louie Farrakhan? No?”

oooooooooooh!!!! BURN!!!!

So you admit that Michael Savage is a racist then?

May 8, 2009 - 1:57 pm 64. Leatherneck:

Dr. Savage for POTUS!

May 8, 2009 - 2:21 pm 65. mags:

Banning someone from entering the country is different from censoring speech of those within
the country.
The U.K has every right to put him on the ’shit list’

Should we allow those charming Phelps family entry?
Also on this list was,klu klux klan supporters,Hamas leaders and nazi’s.

More muslim’s have been prosecuted under this law then any other group.

You are foreign to us. Your first ammendment right does not travel with you.
Don’t mix countries entry issues with freedom of speech.

May 8, 2009 - 2:36 pm 66. Bill Perron:

Allah Akbar, sharia law will soon be the law of England and all of Europe and eventually America and the rest of the world. Infidels it is already to late you have lost !!! Allah Akabar !!!!

May 8, 2009 - 3:58 pm 67. Leatherneck:

Has Dr. Savage called for murder of Infidels? Perhaps, he has made a film on moon god worship. No, all he has done is tell the truth about PC idiots, and countries selling out to Islam.

Better place me on that list too. I would be proud to stand next to Dr. Savage.

Dr. Savage for POTUS!

May 8, 2009 - 4:06 pm 68. archer:

this has me conflicted. the banning of course is absurd, but these two–smith and savage–are a perfect match. complimentary nutcases.

the reason i am conflicted is that i agree with savage on just about everything. this is cringe producing; my views and positions being promoted my a self-obsessed emotional basket case. he’s an embarrassment and plays into one of the top priorities of the left, which is to mischaracterize all conservatives as emotionally erratic basket cases.

he whines about the lack of support for him in this matter from rush limbaugh, sean hannity, and others, and presents their silence as pettiness and jealousy on their part. wow, talk about your classic projection! you aren’t likely to jump to the defense of someone who insults and attacks you on an almost daily basis, desperate for you to respond and give you the attention that you’re obsessed with getting. fortunately rush and sean have adopted the classic “won’t dignify by responding” attitude

May 8, 2009 - 4:17 pm 69. sheesh:

How about you all move to Texas. that way you don’t have to let anybody in or out.

May 8, 2009 - 4:28 pm 70. Morton Doodslag:

Войска ПВО

Also read this from the same Wiki entry — very relevant to this discussion:

RE:

“Salman Rushdie controversy”
Main article: Cat Stevens’ comments about Salman Rushdie
The singer attracted controversy in 1989, during an address to students at London’s Kingston University, where he was asked about the fatwa calling for the death of author Salman Rushdie. Newspapers quickly interpreted his response as support for the fatwa, but he released a statement the following day which said that he had not been supporting vigilantism, and was merely explaining the legal Islamic punishment for blasphemy. In a BBC interview, he displayed a newspaper clipping from that time period, which quotes from his statement. Subsequent comments made by him in 1989 on a British television program were also seen as being in support of the fatwa, but in an extensive statement in the FAQ section of his web site, [46] he states that he was joking and that the show was improperly edited. In the years since these comments, he has strongly denied ever calling for the death of Rushdie or supporting the fatwa. [3][40]

Unmentioned in the Wiki article is the fact that during the vast majority of Islam’s membership within Dar ul Islam, the singer abjured any music which did not directly celebrate Allah — including his own compositions. It is a commonly held belief among Muslims that any music which does not extoll the virtues of Allah and solely extoll Allah and Islam is “forbidden” or haram or sinful. This is why they murder music store owners in Afghanistan, or slaughter teenagers in Iran who listen to the radio.

So by Yusuf Islam’s own admission he has subscribed to at least two of the vicious creeds of Islam which Usama Bin Laden also certainly agrees with — and in this regard is no different from that evil filth. Just because he’d like to revise history, or appear more moderate does not matter to me. Whether he has moderated his fascist attitudes, or simply wishes to reach a wider audience to proselytize for Islam (which I think is highly likely) it was correct for the U.S. to reject his entry until further clarification was forthcoming. But rather than an outright mea culpa by Islam for his disgusting anti-liberal attitudes, or better yet, a fulsome rejection of the supremacist retrograde tenets of Islam which led him to believe such filth, we got a disingenuous denial and a highly false revisionist historical account of his actions and motivations. In my book he is a dangerous Jihadi bent on spreading Islam however and whenever he might. Political correctness and misguided liberal indignation defeated a sound policy, and he has now been back to the U.S. more than once, I believe.

May 8, 2009 - 4:57 pm 71. Winston:

I don’t like Savage and I think he is nuts but I can’t stand British politics and the fact that their country is now overrun by Muslim fanatics from Pakistan.

May 8, 2009 - 4:59 pm 72. steveg:

I have not listened to Savage in years, but as I recall, he was always more interesting than Rush or Sean. Sometimes I would turn him off if he got more extreme than my liking, but there is nothing about Savage that is violent.

The Democrats are going to find some backdoor way to silence talk radio. It may take 2 years, or maybe 5 years, but it is one of many goals on their agenda plate.

I just learned today, that Congressman Conyers has agreed not to investigate ACORN after pressure was put on him from left-wing groups to not do so. So, we have learned that the election fraud unit of the Democrat party will not be investigated, and will continue to receive government funds, whereas anyone not speaking fondly of Democrats on the radio, will find themselves out of work in the foreseeable future.

Beem me up Scotty, I want to get off Bizzaro World.

May 8, 2009 - 4:59 pm 73. paul_unalaska:

U.K.’s Muslim population in 1970: 82,000
U.K.’s Muslim population in 2008: 2.5 million

I don’t understand why Savage is banned in ‘Britian-istan’.

May 8, 2009 - 5:20 pm 74. sheesh:

It’s interesting to see the willing defense of Savage, but an equally vociferous rejection of say, Tim Robbins or Sean Penn or Michael Moore. It’s simple proof that opinion trumps principle every time.

May 8, 2009 - 6:07 pm 75. sheesh:

72 steveG . . . Welcome to Flight 666 to Planet Karma . . . I’ll be your pilot, Katherine Harris.

May 8, 2009 - 6:24 pm 76. jetrayk:

Talk about serving up a juicy fast-ball right over the plate. Savage hit this one into orbit. Jaqui obviously didn’t grasp the magnitude of humble superiority.

May 8, 2009 - 6:30 pm 77. Meryl:

Right wing extremist that I am, I actually can’t deal with listening to Michael Savage.

However, this silly action is very important and is an occasion, not with regard to Michael Savage, but with regard to what it says about the rapidly deteriorating situation in Great Britain.

I hope he sues the pants off the dimwit who’s behind his banning.

Just like the AF1 flyover of NYC, it’s really hard to realize that when these yahoos are coming up with ideas like banning someone who has shown no interest in visiting them anytime soon–that no one in the room looks at them and says, “Are you crazy?” and further, in Michael Savage’s case, someone should have said, “Are you really sure you want to open that particular can of worms?”

Did they seriously think that he would just sit back and take it?

Oh, well. I’m grateful for their thickheadedness. It accelerates the revelations of their brainlessness, which is helpful in the battle for our survival.

May 8, 2009 - 6:33 pm 78. gus3:

@ReConUSMC:

Nice try, but your own shouting is no better than that of Mr. Wiener.

My rights, the same as the rights of Mr. Wiener and the protesters he so much hates, are not subject to your approval. They are granted by God and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.

If you are not defending the Constitutional rights of *all* law-abiding citizens to disagree with their government, then you have broken your Oath of Enlistment and have no place in the armed forces of the United States.

May 8, 2009 - 6:41 pm 79. fred:

Given how British society has fallen so low, and is in the forefront of civilizational suicidalism, for the British elites to reject people like Geert Wilders and Michael Savage I would treat as a compliment rather than an insult.

Evil cannot tolerate those who condemn it. It must silence things like goodness and grace and truth.

May 8, 2009 - 7:06 pm 80. Oakley:

Read about the cult of tolerance here:

The Myth of Relativism and the Cult of Tolerance

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/the_myth_of_relativism_and_the.html

and here:

When Tolerance Trumps Truth

http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/8047

May 8, 2009 - 7:08 pm 81. donttreadonme:

Pardon, i just came through a worm-hole in the time/space fabric of the universe…since when is defending our borders from illegal aliens; defending English as our language; and defending the US Constitution “controversial?” Oh, and Gus3, when did the “war veteran” have his freedom of speech violated? After his phone call was taken by Savage and AFTER the veteran given a chance to begin speaking? Hmmm. Oh, and nice job with your shark-jumping “Oath of Enlistment” screed. You should switch to decaf.

May 8, 2009 - 8:34 pm 82. Brian Richard Allen:

The writer claims that Doctor Savage “wished AIDS on caller” who, it is claimed was criticizing Doctor Savage’s “homophobic” views. It is further claimed that Doctor savage was then “fired for this by (P)MSNBC — but later was restored to the airwaves.” Doctor Savage, it is stated, has “pooh-poohed autism as the result of a spoiled child’s exposure to parental permissiveness” and has “displayed virulent antagonism towards Muslims.”

Pity Ms Gould was apparently too busy to research her subject.

While there is a whiff of truth to all of those claims none of them is true. Doctor Savage, talk radio’s greatest intellect and most interesting character, is, for starters, not “controversial.” He is but Truthful. Doctor Savage has NEVER been what the Homo-nazis call “homophobic,” which, in his case, apparently covers his being realistic and honest about the perversion involved? (Which perverion, for example, precludes any in this forum from writing a single paragraph about what poofters do to one another)

Doctor Savage was never off “the airwaves” and thus never needed to “be restored” to them by TRN or by anyone else. Doctor Savage never poo-pooed autism and most definitely has NEVER displayed any of what you claimed about Muslims. Although, in fairness, G-d alone knows why!

And finally: Before you get too carried away with Mr Churchill’s ‘Englishness,’ you aught never forget nor stop thanking God that Mr Jerome-Churchill was half American.

And while the American half of him was helping the New Zealander, Keith Park and the Americans, Patton and Eisenhower and MacArthur et al and millions of Americans and ANZACs and Kenyans and Rhodesians and Canucks and South Africans and other foreigners win both the win the Battle of Britain AND the larger War — and save the execrable Jacqui Schmitts ancestors and all of Europe — again — from its serial bloody barbarity, the English half of Mr Churchill (probably as the consequence of reminiscing about the (once?) great British triumphs at Galipoli and Singapore and Dunkirk) was as often as not pissed out of its brain!

Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles CalifOBAMBIcated 90028
And the Far Abroad

May 8, 2009 - 8:44 pm 83. donttreadonme:

Kermit,
The next time you take your Monthly Obama “Straw Poll,” try getting out of the Student Union first. You may wish to randomly poll any number of business owners, physicians, accountants, attorneys – you know, the people who actually create jobs AND pay every last red cent that allows Obama’s ass to exist, warts and all. That 70% number would be accurate but probably not in the order you expect. Grow up, man.

May 8, 2009 - 8:44 pm 84. donttreadonme:

Sheesh,
“It’s interesting to see the willing defense of Savage, but an equally vociferous rejection of say, Tim Robbins or Sean Penn or Michael Moore. It’s simple proof that opinion trumps principle every time”

Pssst…This is a predominantly conservative forum, so we will, you know, bash the Michael Moores and Tim Roths of the world. Crazy, huh? You know how you get up every day, take off your Spiderman Underoos, grab your backpack, head on down to the Sociology College, meet your buddies ,and ponder the evils of money, white people, and oil? Well, us conservatives get up, kiss our kids and spouses goodbye, work 8-12 hours or more, come home, relax, and ponder the empirical folly of Obamonomics. Here’s the dark secret, Sheesh…many of us conservatives have walked in your shoes as young, dumb liberals with altruism in our eyes and equality in our hearts. Upon growing up and taking a bite out of a Reality Hoagie Deluxe, we then got on with our lives. It may be time you try walking in OUR shoes, big guy.

May 8, 2009 - 9:03 pm 85. Horace Wells:

So dave
got any proof of your conspiracy? Or are you just spouting the usual paranoid conspiracy nonsense that Savage and others have been kicking around and excell in?

My bet as far as conspiracies go, is that Savage planned it himself to sell himself in the UK and boost his publicity. After all, in show biz there is no such thing as bad publicity.

May 8, 2009 - 9:08 pm 86. Tarantula:

Mark Epstein…You’re correct. Liberals hate freedom. They hate what they can’t control. I especially feel sorry for England. There are many many people there who are just as dismayed by the religion of political correctness taking over, but have no voice. However, Jaqui Smith’s party is on the rocks and the conservatives are gaining ground. We’ll have to see how it goes in the next couple of years…

May 8, 2009 - 9:48 pm 87. DaveinPhoenix:

Ban me ! Ban me ! I’d be honored to be banned from this “nation”.

May 8, 2009 - 10:41 pm 88. tehag:

“Banning him is a cowardly move that is a shameful act by a country that once cherished free expression.”

Banning Savage is an expression of the intellectual purity of the new class that governs the EU, a revealing act in a once-independent nation now wholly given over to EU totalitarianism.

There is not now-and there never has been-any freedom of thought, speech, or publication in the EU and Nazi and Soviet precursors. That Great Britain has joined them is no more than the recognition among its governing class of the strength and appeal of EU ideology among the well-indoctrinated.

tehhag

“Ban me ! Ban me ! I’d be honored to be banned from this ‘nation’”

Ditto.

May 9, 2009 - 2:53 am 89. Mary Grabar:

What’s really scarey is that Savage, as far as I know, has not inspired any actual violence. This order comes on the heels of the Homeland Security Directive, shortly after the Obamas’ trip to Europe. What’s going on? Good article.

May 9, 2009 - 5:32 am 90. Ms. Attitude:

Sheesh, a friend of mine was dating this guy who was a little out there. We would be having an adult conversation and out of the blue he’d say something that was just way out there. We’d get a good laugh, not with him but at him. Needless, to say they broke up and our conversations have been all adult. Sometimes, I miss him.

Glad to see you are doing good.

May 9, 2009 - 7:27 am 91. D-wah:

Late to the party–but..
#83donttreadonme–amen. As the saying goes, Not a lib under 30? No heart. Still a lib after? No brain. I just feel sorry for today’s kids, they’re helping to usher in the real thing and have no flipping idea what disasters await.
By God’s grace, we’re all allowed to dream and explore, but societies generally teach their offspring to honor and learn from the wisdom of those who’ve gone before them. Not so today. Today’s world has no consistent standards, just temporary rules of convenience, so it’s become the devil’s playground, no longer ruled by principles, but opinion and emotion and eventually force by those who gain control, which we’ll soon see.
Our young today barely have a chance. The “schools” teach contempt for our foundational principles, while they flood their brains with this liberal statist revisionism. Let’s hope and pray that it’s not too late for many of them to snap out of it.
Now the so-called ADULTS who fall for all this….they will taste the Hoagie sooner or later. How they missed a reality bite all these years attests to their sheltered entitlement mentality. They never really moved from Mom’s house or the dorm, just perpetual adolescents demanding the world pay for them to stay there (isn’t that called tenure?) and they can stay high and keep playing their board game “Weatherman Rules the World”.

May 9, 2009 - 7:36 am 92. steveg:

#81 donttreadonme….Unfortunately, the items you listed are considered controversial, in accordance with the almighty MSM. Do you remember Geraldo Riviera at the illegal immigration protest yelling “Welcome honored guest”? He had my blood boiling!

Anyone in the media that defends the items you listed will be labeled controversial by the MSM, and in most cases a nativist, or racist. That is where we are at, in our religion of PC society.

Anyway you look at it, the MSM is our enemy. If we can find a way to knock them down a few pegs, it will be a great victory. As far as I’m concerned, mainstream is just another word for liberal. When you have Ted Kennedy suggesting that a judicial nominee is not mainstream in his thinking, it is code word for liberal.

The real question should be, how did we allow liberals, who only represent 20% of the American population, decide what is considered mainstream for the rest of the country? As you stated in another post, we have been to busy working, and raising a family to pay attention.

May 9, 2009 - 7:41 am 93. D-wah:

By the way, Savage is a truly great man. Brave, fiercely independent, compassionate, uncompromising, sincere and honest. We’re just not used to seeing these qualities since the world doesn’t have any real statesmen or great men any longer, so he sticks out like a sore thumb. He’s actually one of the very few healthy appendages left in the world!

Like the story of the kid running into the house and tells his dad, “Dad–Mom’s out in the field and there’s a BEAR coming after her!” Dad calmly says, “That bear got himself into it, he’s gonna have to get himself out of it.”

The UK doesn’t know what they got themselves into picking on Dr. Savage. Right on Michael! We should stand shoulder to shoulder with him, like his politics or not.

May 9, 2009 - 7:47 am 94. Michael:

Why on earth shouldn’t the British Home Secretary ban a loud-mouthed American?

May 9, 2009 - 9:13 am 95. Mike Blackadder:

#78 gus3 & #74 sheesh: You folks obviously didn’t decipher the screaming rant at #56.

This is a typical leftist logic. You think conservatives are hypocrites for defending free speech, while simultaneously voicing passionately that they disagree with what you say (and by convincing others not to listen to you).

Do you understand the logic behind the following statements?

1. Rush Limbaugh refusing to invite Sean Penn on his program is not a free speech issue.
2. Fairness Doctrine legislation that takes Rush Limbaugh’s show off the air is a free speech issue.

May 9, 2009 - 10:42 am 96. Mike Blackadder:

BTW: Question to the rest: Does the banning of Mike Savage from UK more closely resemble statement 1. or statement 2.?

May 9, 2009 - 10:44 am 97. Themistocles:

Geert Wilders visited the UK in December 2008 without any problem. What has changed since then, that Wilders is now banned?

The always-lying Left paints Wilders as a radical, when his speech is no more inflammatory than what John F. Kennedy said. Don’t believe it? Listen to what Wilders said in a recent speech:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_8uyn4gomU

Tell me anything Wilders said, which rises to the level of banning him from the UK.

May 9, 2009 - 11:45 am 98. archer:

fred, if you came up with “civilizational suicidalism“, major prop! i now intend to steal it.

meryl, congrats for this: “Oh, well. I’m grateful for their thickheadedness. It accelerates the revelations of their brainlessness, which is helpful in the battle for our survival.” very well stated.

oakley, thanks for the excellent links.

May 9, 2009 - 12:13 pm 99. mags:

I am sorry yo be the one to tell you all.
In the U.K we do not have to abide by your first ammendment right.

This does not curtail freedom of speech within the country.

So does this mean because you have freedom of speech you cannot be prevented from entering a country.

Would anybody want the Phelp’s family to represent you all?
We are saying he’s a bigot ,stay away. Which ironically is an expression of our rights.

May 9, 2009 - 1:28 pm 100. gus3:

#95 Blackadder:

Mr. Wiener was calling for the anti-war protesters to be arrested and thrown in jail. The veteran called in to remind him of their First Amendment right to disagree with their government.

The only response Mr. Wiener had was to bury him in decibels. He had no counter-argument, and didn’t even have the class to just hang up on the guy and say, “I disagree with him.” That was when I turned him off forever.

Although I fail to see how any of this is addressed rationally by ReConUSMC. He’s more interested in purging society of anyone he deems “unworthy,” homosexuals first.

As for your question in #96, it resembles neither. If a foreign nation wants to ban me from entry simply because of my hair style, that is their right. If England refuses my visa request because I sound like a hillbilly, there isn’t much I can do about it, is there?

Post script to ReConUSMC:

Just because some people have never served in the military, doesn’t mean they know nothing of it. If you want me to serve, please convince the medic at the MEPS to sign a waiver for the various fracture scars I’m carting around. They were caused by bullies like you, who didn’t like me wrecking the curve. The least I can do is offer you a chance to redeem yourself.

May 9, 2009 - 1:52 pm 101. archer:

= when savage called for protesters to be jailed it wasn’t for protesting it was for extreme vandalism, assault, and other crimes.

= to associate comment with bone-breaking violence exceeds the absurdity of smith’s slander. bullies are the people that cowards scapegoat for purpose of concealing their own weakness.

= of course any nation has the right to ban anyone they like. the outrage and suit are about defamation, not exclusion.

May 9, 2009 - 5:11 pm 102. fred:

mags,

It’s clear you do not know the facts about Geert Wilders or Michael Savage. If you were so informed, I think you would understand our reactions to Jacqui Smith’s cowardly preening. BTW, we think the Obonga administration probably had a say in this too, so I’m not laying it all on the British government.

Mr. Wilders and Mr. Savage are not at all like the other thugs on that list. In fact, to equivalize those two men with the other savages defies reason.

May 9, 2009 - 8:28 pm 103. gus3:

archer, nice try, but bullies are just cowards who engage in physical violence to conceal their own inferiority complexes.

And I remember Mr. Wiener’s tirade against the war protesters. It wasn’t for breaking the law. It *was* for the simple act of asserting their First Amendment right to disagree with their elected government.

May 9, 2009 - 8:56 pm 104. The_Basseteer:

I’m wondering if I should write the Home Secretary and ask that I be banned from the U.K, too, being as I listen to Micheal Savage 2-3 times a week?

May 9, 2009 - 10:45 pm 105. RobertG:

The_Basseteer:-Ban the Brits-damn fools burned the White House, sent the Beatles over here to screw up Rock and Roll and now this! Out damn Brits-out!

I would invite Mr. Wilders and Mr. Savage over for lunch any day.

May 10, 2009 - 4:41 am 106. The Infidel Alliance:

This, the banning of Geert Wilders, and the attack on Mark Steyn in Canada is precisely why we must get our megaphones out NOW and start sounding the alarm about the threat of Islam….before it becomes banned as a thought crime.

I don’t have the opportunity to listen to Mr. Savage, but when people like Geert Wilders and Mark Steyn are attacked for simply pointing out the truth about Islam, from Islamic sources, freedom of speech is clearly threatened.

So, before I get banned from Britain, let me say loud and clear:

- Jerry Fallwell was right when he said Islam is a terrorist religion.

- Islam is NOT a religion of peace, but an intolerant, oppressive martial doctrine dedicated to the forcible conversion, subjugation or death of all non-Muslims.

- Islam’s brutality, established by the words and deeds of Muhammed, and carried on for 1,400 years by his minions must be exposed.

- Islam is engaged in an ISLAMIC WORLD WAR which must be recognized, exposed and resisted.

- Islam’s founder, Muhammed, was a sadistic sociopath, a murderer, a rapist, a decapitator, a mutilator, a slaver, a looter & thief, a terrorist, a genocidist, a mysogynist, a paedophile, a gluttinous hedonist driven by lust, power and greed. He was by any rational measure, one of the most vile men who ever lived.

- In the greatest mass brainwashing campaign in history, Muhammed is slathered with praise and superlatives, and is upheld as “al-insan al-kamil,” or the “Perfect Man”, and is feted as “an excellent example of conduct”. Massive lies in obvious contradiction of the recorded truth.

- The truth about the brutal history of Islam and its “prophet” is suppressed by a well oiled Islamic propaganda machine, assisted by useful idiots in the media and politics.

Master NAZI propagandist Joeseph Goebbels said “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

We must not let the state, whether it is the United Kingdom, the United Nations, or an Islamic “republic” suppress the truth. We must not allow free speech submit to Islam.

~ The Infidel Alliance
(From Dar al-Harb)

May 10, 2009 - 5:48 am 107. Mike Blackadder:

gus3 @ 100: If this is the case, then I can accept your point that Savage can hardly be called a champion of free speech (albeit, depending on the specific content of anti-war protests, staunch defenders of speech are admittedly stretched to the extreme). And I imagine you would also accept me characterizing you in a similar way when you propose we “Let him get a dose of his own medicine.”

I think the main point is that, whether or not Savage is owed any voice in the UK, this position of censorship on the part of the UK government is worthy of scorn when they fancy themselves a free democracy. Just as a Rush Limbaugh who would refuse to debate the other side would lose credibility as a communicator of ideas.

May 10, 2009 - 9:22 am 108. M:

there’s no england anymore…

May 10, 2009 - 10:40 am 109. gus3:

#107 Blackadder:

As a rule, I do not call for restrictions on civil rights. In this case, my statement should be viewed in the same context as Abraham Lincoln’s response to the defenders of slavery: “Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally.”

May 10, 2009 - 9:32 pm 110. archer:

gus3, yes bullies are also cowards. it’s a collaboration.

you are just flat out lying regarding the protester issue; i happened to have been listening. an officer’s horse was hit in the head with a brick, feces was thrown, urine was thrown, windows were broken, businesses trashed, cars overturned and burned, roads made impassable, and more.

May 10, 2009 - 11:28 pm 111. Marsha:

Ban em all! Anyone who disagrees, even in the least with the PC line of the day must be eradicated from society before the infection spreads. President Obama is the greatest human to ever walk the face of the Earth. He will be everything to all, manna bringer, life giver. He is the Master of Political Correctness. If you disagree, you are obviously Political Incorrect, unstable and a menace to all PC. You must be silenced. Re-education? Perhaps. Extermination, only if done with a nice PC bias. Long live President Obama. The greatest president of all time!!! (Since the rules of the Constitution are no longer in play, when the Bill of Rights is finally canceled, President Obama WILL be president for life!!! Viva la Presidente!!!)

May 11, 2009 - 6:25 am 112. Bill:

D-Wah:

“Now the so-called ADULTS who fall for all this….they will taste the Hoagie sooner or later. How they missed a reality bite all these years attests to their sheltered entitlement mentality.”

Unfortunately it a testament to a generation which has grown up spoiled in the prosperity of the Reagan boom: never undergone a terrible economy, blissfully unaware of the horrors of the Carter years- so they have no immunity to the leftist virus.

I’m afraid it will take another disaster on a Carter/Callaghan scale to produce a new Reagan or Thatcher. But what will be left of our economy (or democracy) by the time the Obamanite collectivists are through?

May 11, 2009 - 8:11 am 113. freewill:

Savage has put up w/liberal % right-wing phonies on air for 15 years w/courage, truth and honesty, you try that, bunch of self-important weenies on this site plus a crappy/overly PC article. i don’t like this/that find some courage before liberal fascists destroy OUR country completely, read about woodrow wilson, cloward-piven, alinsky, authoritarian socialism, get a clue mousey morons the brown shirts are coming to a reopened “school” near you, right before the green shirts install smart grids.check for guns/sign you up for intern’l union membership (to save the planet from CO2 of course). It could happen/it has happened throughout human history, Savage knows history/human nature/analytical analysis what do you sheeple know, how to stand in a bread line?

May 11, 2009 - 9:45 pm 114. gus3:

#110 archer:

No, it is you who are lying. The veteran who called in referred to himself, during his enlistment, as having once bristled at war protesters, until his commanding officer reminded him that Freedom of Speech and Assembly applies to everyone, and defending that right was the sworn duty of every soldier.

And it was in response to this that Mr. Wiener has nothing but a temper tantrum.

May 11, 2009 - 9:58 pm 115. CJPR:

Congratulations to Jacqui Smith for banning hate-mongering Right-Wing bloviator, Michael Savage, from entering Great Britain. Well done, Madame Smith. Now, how can we prevent Michael Savage from entering the USA?

Please Visit My Blog: Conservatives Are America’s Real Terrorists

May 12, 2009 - 4:49 am 116. IAMSAVAGE:

After hearing that Michael Savage was banned from the UK I was outrage and I had to do something. I have put together a web site were I am selling I AM SAVAGE shirts. The shirts are only $10 and I am going to donate 50% of the profits to The Michael Savage legal fund. We Must Declare “I AM SAVAGE!”

http://www.IAMSAVAGE.org

May 12, 2009 - 11:57 pm 117. archer:

gus you are absurdly,obviously, and blatantly conflating the right to protest and freedom of speech with criminal behavior. ridiculous.

think i’ll rob a bank carrying a sign protesting the cruelty of sheep shearing, that way when i’m arrested i’ll have hordes of mis-educated drones
such as yourself shrieking in outrage at the violation of my rights. unbelievable.

May 14, 2009 - 1:24 pm 118. AtlasShrugged:

“We elect a Democrat for president every few years to remind ourselves why we don’t elect democrat presidents. Then we elect a Republican for president every few years to remind ourselves why we don’t elect republican presidents.”
Will Rogers

May 15, 2009 - 2:48 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: