Micheal Savage banned from visiting the UK

[philip]

An American best selling author and conservative radio talk show host who lives in San Fransisco has been put on a list to be barred from entering the UK.

To my knowledge Micheal has never been arrested for anything. He is Jewish and before becoming a radio talk show host and author, he was a professor of Biology with a Phd.

I suspect many American's who like his show may begin a boycott of all things British, but probably not this website.

For those of you who have never heard Micheal Savage on the radio. He is very conservative, and tends to rant and rave alot on the air. For example he refers to San Fransisco as "San Fran Sicko"

His inital comment to find that he is on the same list as Russian murderers and Hamas kingpins was that " I won't be able to go to England for that dental work I had planned" and that he would have to put off his "tour of world famous English restaurants".

One commenter said " I'm glad we changed our name to the UK as Great Britian doesnt seem to fit anymore" and another said "apparently it was a "mini carta" that was signed in way back then." Maybe Rush Linbaugh and Sean Hannidy will be next.

[Mattk]

He was barred as there was considered to be engaging in acts that would incite criminal acts and would foster inter community hatred. These are clear exceptions to freedom of expression expressed in the European Convention on Human Rights (Art 10.2). As an administrative decision, it is judicially reviewable, an option he has not taken. I am not sure of merits review provisions in the UK, but he has also not taken that option. Instead, Michael Savage, or Michael Weiner (his real name) is acting like a dickhead, and has threatened to sue the Secretary for defamation. Judging from the comments he has made in the past, I'm sure his reputation is beyond salvation.

[RC45]

He was barred as there was considered to be engaging in acts that would incite criminal acts and would foster inter community hatred. These are clear exceptions to freedom of expression expressed in the European Convention on Human Rights (Art 10.2). As an administrative decision, it is judicially reviewable, an option he has not taken. I am not sure of merits review provisions in the UK, but he has also not taken that option. Instead, Michael Savage, or Michael Weiner (his real name) is acting like a dickhead, and has threatened to sue the Secretary for defamation. Judging from the comments he has made in the past, I'm sure his reputation is beyond salvation.

Cite ONE example where Savage has EVER incited or encouraged or caused criminal acts fostered by inter community hatred.

He is a radio personality.

BTW, I am really going to enjoy wathcing the PC psuedo-euro world trying to manage the Taliban- Pakistan conflict as it breaks out.

I bet issuing serious written warnings and barring the Taliban from Trafalgar Square will solve everything.

WHile they are about it, why not ban the enitre population of Montana and Texas from the UK... this new legislation is sure to set the PC whining liberals overseas on their heads . We get to have easier access to more guns :)


Montana Gun law HB 0246
**************************************** **************************************** **********
Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law
Executive Summary - The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal - confiscation of privately owned firearms.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama's face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.
Important Points - If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billpdf/HB0246.pdf (http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billpdf/HB0246.pdf)

http://leg.mt.gov/css/default.asp (http://leg.mt.gov/css/default.asp)

Gotta love those 1st, 2nd and 10th amendments... oh wait, that's right harldy anyone else even has a Bill of Rights ;)

[Mattk]

Cite ONE example where Savage has EVER incited or encouraged or caused criminal acts fostered by inter community hatred.
Past actions are persuasive but not determinative. On a personal level, I really don't care. Savage may have a silly name and sprout rubbish, but I don't think he's dangerous. However, the UK clearly cares greatly about maintaining social order. In an environment where there has been, and still is, a good deal of ghettoisation and distrust of non-Anglo residents, particularly in London, I really can't blame them for being cautious.

In any case, any country has the right to deny any other person entry for whatever reason. It is a sovereign right. It happens all the time, even in the US, where even long-forgotten summary convictions are dredged up to deny now-respectable people entry. Possession of cannibis leaf conviction in 1970? Sorry buddy, should have declared it. Fair enough, but just as dumb on a practical level.

oh wait, that's right harldy anyone else even has a Bill of Rights
You may find that almost every country in the world has a Bill of Rights, including the UK. Zimbabwe also has a bill of rights.

[zeus_2011]

^I think the UK was the first country to actually have a Bill of Rights, passed by p'ment in 1689, backed up by the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679!

Correctly stated Mattk, savage does have a right to have the administrative decision judicially reviewed, something im sure he wont do as there is less publicity in rather suing for defamation (a law suit he will lose due to the fact that there is the legal avenue of Judicial Review!).

My opinion is that it is a ridiculous decision, akin to the UK banning Jamaican reggae stars from entering the UK a few years back due to the "homophobic" lyrics in their songs!

PS. RC, I think the taliban have already been banned from Trafalgar Square back in 2002!

[Mattk]

^Indeed, the Bill of Rights 1689 was a precursor to many other subsequent rights documents, including the US Bill of Rights and the ECHR, which the Human Rights Act 1998 applies.

[pitfield]

An American best selling author and conservative radio talk show host who lives in San Fransisco has been put on a list to be barred from entering the UK.

To my knowledge Micheal has never been arrested for anything. He is Jewish and before becoming a radio talk show host and author, he was a professor of Biology with a Phd.

I suspect many American's who like his show may begin a boycott of all things British, but probably not this website.

For those of you who have never heard Micheal Savage on the radio. He is very conservative, and tends to rant and rave alot on the air. For example he refers to San Fransisco as "San Fran Sicko"

His inital comment to find that he is on the same list as Russian murderers and Hamas kingpins was that " I won't be able to go to England for that dental work I had planned" and that he would have to put off his "tour of world famous English restaurants".

One commenter said " I'm glad we changed our name to the UK as Great Britian doesnt seem to fit anymore" and another said "apparently it was a "mini carta" that was signed in way back then." Maybe Rush Linbaugh and Sean Hannidy will be next.

I'd rather have brown teeth than a tummy so large that it has it's own weather system.

[RC45]

You may find that almost every country in the world has a Bill of Rights, including the UK. Zimbabwe also has a bill of rights.

The point whizzed over your head - you sit there spouting legal comment with regard to Bills of Rights, I dont believe Australia has a Bill of Rights... correct?

Now you and zeus go back and review how many countries with token Bill's of Rights actually enforce them in a manner that upholds and promotes individual freedom and liberty.

And ironicly the so-called British Bill of Rights actually did little to protect the individual liberty and freedom of anyone in practice, because if it did, the Founding Fathers would have not had a reason to Declare Independance from the British, fight the War of Independance and form their own country.

It isone thing to establish some token rule of law, it is another thing entirely to practice and enforce it.

As witnessed by your little example of Zimbabwe - a poorly drafted Bill of Rights does not a nation make.

Why don't you guys actually take the time to read and understand the Declaration of Independance and the US Constitution as well as the various amendments there to that make up said Bill of Rights - yo umay learn something.

[philip]

I also occasionally listen to Amy Goodman her show is called "Democracy Now" on the Pacifica FM radio network.

I suspect she is not banned from entering the UK.

Amy feels that elections are not a good way to pick a leader, as there has never been a "fair" election.

Hmm. No Micheal Weiner Savage, but Amy Goodman is ok.

[RC45]

And didnt the UK accept back a recently released terrorist master mind from GITMO?

Talk about someone inciting hatred and violence.

[pagani]

The want to ban free speech

[black_diamond]

Michael Savage is actually a very intelligent man and very well traveled (More then Obama). He is #3 in the radio market and his numbers are close to 30 million listeners (Rush is 40 mil)

This is an example of the PC 'Tolerance' crowd that has no respect for anyone's opinion but their own.

On top of that they are the most prejudice, self-righteous and greediest group of people known to man, they are also closely tied to Communist, mainly because they are communists. They promote homosexuality (along with other things) because it is contrary to Judeo-Christian values, the one thing they hate the most. These are the same people who ‘worship’ the golden-calf.

Savage will end up on top and are messing with the wrong man (its almost him going mainstream or worldwide).

This came from the fascists Obama Admin BTW, not because of the UK.

You know they did the same thing in NAZI (National Socialist) Germany.


A common song Michael plays...


Michael Savage - There's No England Anymore - YouTube

[zeus_2011]

^^^He's hit it the nail right on the head.....exactly the reason why I got up and left london behind me 4yrs ago, living in Greece now. Too many changes, all for the worse, occurred in a very short period of time, not that Greece isn't heading down the same road today, sign of the times I think, Western democracy is suffering greatly today....far too many laws trying to govern aspects of our lives that have to be left up to us to decide, and society is responding.

RC, believe me I agree with you, my original comment on this thread was to correct you saying that the UK has no bill of rights. I am a UK Lawyer, britain may not have a written constitution but it does have one nonetheless, and in theory, it does protect human rights with the best of them, something Im sure is true for the states as well, it's just that the people in power, those that govern are not doing very well. I have no experience of the US, but im sure its not all rosy over there too, with the law used in hypocritical ways too, protecting some members of society while leaving others in the gutter.

[5vz-fe]

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23412867-details/Tens+of+thousands+of+CCTV+cameras,+yet+80%25+of+cr ime+unsolved/article.do

10 thousand CCTV....(I don't think that number include the regular security cameras owned by stores / bank)

I know there are alot of attention whores out there, but for me, I really don't like having the feeling that I am being watched all the time.

[Mattk]

The point whizzed over your head - you sit there spouting legal comment with regard to Bills of Rights, I dont believe Australia has a Bill of Rights... correct?
No, we don't; we are the only democratic nation to not have one, although one state and one territory have statutory instruments in the mode of the Human Rights Act 1998. However, it's not like we have zero respect for rights, or that we have none. The main criticism is that it is not codified in a way useful to society. Respect for rights is not derived from a bill of rights. Stalin's 1936 Constitution had one of the most comprehensive rights guarantees ever created, but he had no respect for rights himself. A country which has operated without a bill of rights since its inception does not need one, even if having one may improve respect for rights.

The American Bill of Rights is a document that has inspired absolutely no-one to create anything like it. It was based on the kind of things Americans thought were really important in 1789. The broader Constitutional rights system has worked well, except for perhaps the Thirteeth and Fourteenth Amendments for around 100 years until the Civil Rights Act of 1968. However, I don't think it's suitable for any other country.

[RC45]

The American Bill of Rights is a document that has inspired absolutely no-one to create anything like it. It was based on the kind of things Americans thought were really important in 1789. The broader Constitutional rights system has worked well, except for perhaps the Thirteeth and Fourteenth Amendments for around 100 years until the Civil Rights Act of 1968. However, I don't think it's suitable for any other country.

Then you really have not ever read these documents with understanding and comprehension.

If you actually did read the Declaration of Independance with comprehension (not an anti-american bias and contempt) you could only come to the conclusion that is the fairest most balanced promotion of individual protections ever conceived.

If you then went on and actually did read the Constitution with comprehension (not an anti-american bias and contempt) you could again only come to the conclusion that it is the fairest most balanced promotion of individual protections ever conceived.

The only way anyone can conclude otherwise is if they are a Hobbsian statist at heart and conclude that the state/collective/community is superior to the individuals that make up said state/collective/community.

The very concept and then drafting of and finally execution of the Declaration of Independance and Constitution cannot be philosophically or socially flawed - unless, again, you are a Hobbsian (or worse).

I find it quite ironical that in the face of the radical violent oppressive expansion of islam and other tyrannical social dictates that have left the lives of more people in the world oppressed than ever before in human history, almost to a T leftists/statist/Hobbsians still blindly stumble forward ignoring any vestiges of endowed and enforced individual freedoms thinking expanded government controls and constraints are the "free future" and that man-made legislated "freedoms" are anything but disguised oppression.

[RC45]

Maybe the UK can breed their way out of todays problems ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU

[79TA]

Savage strikes me as a little crazy from the couple of times I've heard his show, but I don't see how that can get you barred from a country, at least a free western one.

[SHIZL]

this is the best publicity this media moron will ever get.

[nthfinity]

Savage strikes me as a little crazy from the couple of times I've heard his show, but I don't see how that can get you barred from a country, at least a free western one.
Savage doesn't come in in my local, at least not audiable. I know a couple people who love his show; but I really don't know much about his convictions to say I agree with him; other than it's likely that I agree far more with him than anything on MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN etc.

Lately, I've dug the evening host who's basis is constitutional law... who just came out with a new book.

[RC45]

this is the best publicity this media moron will ever get.

Think again - these "fringe" Talk Radio host slike Rush, Savage, Levin etal are soem of the largest advertising markets in broadcasting - period.

You want a shovel to help bury your head deeper in the sand?

[pitfield]

And didnt the UK accept back a recently released terrorist master mind from GITMO?

Talk about someone inciting hatred and violence.

I didn't mean you if that's what you meant. I have seen Americans who are capable of fitting into an airline seat and leaving their county. It was just the stereo type quoted by Savage that I was mentioning. He's right, I do have brown teeth, but only because of all the shit that comes out of my mouth.

[Mattk]

Then you really have not ever read these documents with understanding and comprehension.
I wasn't talking about the American constitution, which I have no quarrel with, because it is good. In fact, I would agree that it is the best, seeing as it's the same federal system used in Australia. There are some differences in interpretation (specifically the doctrine of reserved state powers), but that's about it. The Bill of Rights is another matter. I believe that Bills of Rights can really only be crafted with specific regard to the enacting nation's circumstances. An acontextual application can create problems.

I am of the opinion that the Human Rights Act in the UK has not succeeded in many respects. The issuance of control orders is almost universally criticised, mainly because they are simply ridiculous in terms of the effects they have one people's lives. Banning people from coming in is technically not a human rights issue, but is based on the same pre-emptive principle, something I do not entirely agree with.

Was the banning of Savage a valid decision? Given the deferential approach of the House of Lords towards HRA ss 3 and 4 post-Belmarsh Detainees, probably. Was it a good idea? Probably not, because I don't think he would have made a great impact in British society.