July 11, 2009
Exclusive: Michael Savage Banned From Great Britain: The Crime? Speaking His Mind
Last week I wrote a column titled “Uncompassionate Savage Treatment,” discussing talk radio host Dr. Michael Savage being denied entrance to the UK and the fact Savage, the man who coined the phrase “Compassionate Conservatism” in 1994, is being treated like a criminal by British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and abandoned by Republican politicians constantly using his slogan for their own personal achievements.
Smith, who is embroiled in MP scandals concerning spending public money for personal use (her husband’s adult pay-per-view movies were billed to the public), created more humiliation for British Parliament by alleging Michael Savage’s views on homosexuality, Islam and illegal immigration are extreme: Smith claims Savage is “someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country.”
Savage has filed a £100,000 (about $162,000) libel lawsuit against Smith.
I am one of Savage’s many listeners, and I know that although he does not support homosexual life-styles he never calls for hate or violence toward gays. Savage staunchly disagrees with mistreatment of women, openly stating that Islamic women forced to wear burkas is reminiscent of Nazism. His stance on immigration is that people should enter America legally.
Liberals consider traditional beliefs extreme. Desecrating San Francisco churches is exercising free speech.
Smith told the press: “It’s important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here, the fact that it’s a privilege to come, and the sort of things that mean you won’t be welcome in this country…If you can’t live by the rules that we live by, the standards and the values that we live by, we should exclude you.”
Americans once lived by British rules: we decided to dump those rules in the harbor and exclude them.
Talk Radio Network host Rusty Humphries said: “As a host who witnessed firsthand the hate speech not only tolerated but encouraged by the UK, I am appalled and amused at the suggestion that Michael Savage is banned from the UK for his speech.”
Shadow Home Secretary Christopher Grayling had a different argument: “What we need from the Government is not the gimmick of a name-and-shame list but a consistent strategy on who can and can’t come into the country.”
The Home Office, however, is standing its ground against criticism: “…he [Savage] was excluded for engaging in unacceptable behavior by making comments that might provoke others to serious criminal acts and foster hatred that might lead to inter-community violence.”
What would that be? Demanding Italian delis make larger meatballs or Swedish-style will take over the bun?
Earlier this year, when troops returned to the UK, Muslims demonstrated against them, calling them the “butchers of Basra.” Arrests did not ensue until a counter-protest sprung up.
Although Great Britain does not have a written, ratified or codified constitution and no working bill of rights, the nation’s laws of “devolution-by-way-of- evolution” give modern-day citizens and visitors freedom of speech. However, the UK is denying those rights to Michael Savage while allowing violent criminals and terrorists entrance.
Jacqui Smith seems to ignore the real culprits of antagonism. London’s conservative mayor Boris Johnson declared shock that few in Parliament defend the “elementary principle of free speech.”
Dr. Savage’s name is on a list containing white supremacists, Hamas, and Nazis: “It’s interesting to me that here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence, who advocates patriotic traditional values, borders, language, culture, who is now on a list banned in England. What does that say about the government of England? It says more about them than it says about me.”
Savage told the press: “For her [Smith] to link me up with skinheads who are killing people in Russia, to put me in league with mass murderers who kill Jews on buses, is defamation.”
Savage has not applied for a UK passport; thus the question of barring entrance. No other American talk radio host or columnist is banned from the UK.
Media Matters went so far as to splice and edited Savage radio sound bites, creating extreme-sounding rhetoric. Americans must ask why Media Matters took Savage’s words out of context; why make him sound radical? Why target one conservative and not all?
Savage asked of Smith: “Why me? I’m not a terrorist… maybe Jacqui Smith plucked my name out of the hat because I’m controversial…to…counter-balance all the Arabs on her list.
Is Smith using Savage as an offset to salvage her career? Smith’s attacks on Savage and his lawsuit bring more scandal to Parliament: Speaker of the House Michael Martin resigned in May. No speaker has stepped down in 300 years. MPs were caught spending $40,000 for personal expenses. Gordon Brown’s Labour Party is losing ground to the opposition seeking an early election season.
Mayor Johnson told London’s Guardian that Smith’s naming-and-shaming Michael Savage is “an utterly demented decision…to cover up the hoo-ha over the home secretary’s taxpaying-funded bath plug.”
UK Criminals remain protected under the civil rights law of “Right to Family Life:” Rock star Gary Glitter: imprisoned in Vietnam for sex crimes against young girls. He was arrested in the UK for possession of child porn and served only two months.
Learco Chindano: murdered Headmaster Stephen Lawrence in 1995 but cannot be deported on grounds of “breach [ing] his Right to a Family Life.”
Ashan Sabri, illegal Pakistani drove his car into a UK citizen, killing the person: he’s free on guarantee of “Right to family Life.”
The Home Office refuses to release six names on the list “not considered to be in the public interest.” Michael Savage however may be ferocious and deadly: he reads the Bible on air; he’s pro-life and supports traditional values and America.
Michael Savage is being used as an example against conservatism. “Compassionate” conservatives should be defending him.
Attacking Michael Savage is an assault against free speech and civil rights, putting him in the same league as Geert Wilders, who was also banned from the UK for his speaking out against radical Islam. Placing Savage’s name on a list with murderers, making false allegations against him, violates his rights.
Democrats and liberals are pushing to enact the Fairness Doctrine and ban conservative and Christian talk radio. Conservatives need to take a stand together against those absconding with America’s First Amendment.
Lee ADDS: Folks, we fought for our independence from Britian for a reason. We WON! so, why are the Liberals so desperatly seeking a return to that system of speech supression? Could it be that they fear truth?
