About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Savage on why he is fighting UK ban: "I made a commitment that nobody is ever going to put me into a gas chamber"

July 21, 2009 6:43 pm ET

From the July 20th edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

Savage falsely claimed CNN, Fox News did not cover his banning from the UK

Savage says Muslims, others should be banned from US, but he's "going to sue" UK for banning him

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by shaggles (July 21, 2009 6:46 pm ET)
      6 1
      What in hell is he talking about?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Conchobhar (July 21, 2009 6:59 pm ET)
        5 1
        No idea. Do you think by "boxy cars," he meant those black London taxis?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by dhpbear (July 21, 2009 7:51 pm ET)
        1  
        Oh, he had even more twisted logic yesterday.

        Now, he's complaining after a report that Smith may have just taken the whole list down. His complaint: "She didn't specifically remove ME from the list - I'm still with terrorists and murderers".

        Hey Weenie - there's an old expression: beggars can't be choosers!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 21, 2009 6:47 pm ET)
      7 1
      A gas chamber...? Nah...a straight jacket maybe.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (July 21, 2009 6:48 pm ET)
        5  
        There's enough noxious gas coming out of this guy's piehole.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (July 21, 2009 6:50 pm ET)
      5 2
      Don't worry about a gas chamber, you dipstick...

      A toilet, yes.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by blk-in-alabam (July 21, 2009 6:59 pm ET)
      3 1
      He is probably think about the safe he put's the donations in he's begging for.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by seroquel (July 21, 2009 7:02 pm ET)
      7 4
      Yeah, you were banned Mr. Weiner, for inciting hate speech and fearmongering.
      How about Mr. Weiner you walk in MY shoes one day? I've been homeless, destitute, and out of hope. I think if I walk in your shoes I might enjoy all the money that comes from walking in your shoes.
      Let's get something straight, Mr. Weiner(cause I know you read this site) you can't compare a gas chamber to being banned from Britain.
      Nobody is making you get on a train, you don't know what you're talking about, you're just another soulless reichwing nutter.
      As for your last name, I think you have an inferiority complex there.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Bronwyn (July 21, 2009 10:41 pm ET)
        1 1
        I've been homeless, destitute, and out of hope

        I hear ya. Many folks have been and to no fault of their own but in Savages mind, as he has stated, anyone in that situation is lazy, stupid and lacks moral fortitude. One would think these Christian, Conservatives would fear judgement-day, more than they do Liberals.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by The_Cat (July 21, 2009 7:04 pm ET)
      7 2
      Michael Savage is having a good time comparing Great Britain, who would rather not have him visit, to the Nazis, who killed Jews wholesale.

      Apparently, he is blissfully unaware that Great Britain has no 'right to free speech', however. He has so abused his right to free speech here, that the Brits have said, in essence, "Stay home, Michael Savage." I think they suspect if he ever once leaves the US, we will not let him back in, and they will be stuck with him.

      He can talk about fascism and liberals all he wants. It remains historical fact that all the fascist regimes in the history of the world have been conservative. He claims liberals are trying to rein in free speech, but, typically for a conservative, gives no offer of proof; we must blindly trust that whatever he says is gospel truth, I guess.

      If he were not so intently feeling sorry for himself, his ignorance alone might win him some small measure of pity.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by franky (July 21, 2009 10:16 pm ET)
        1 1

        "He can talk about fascism and liberals all he wants. It remains historical fact that all the fascist regimes in the history of the world have been conservative."

        Bad stuff CAN also come as a result of changes towards socialism and away from conservatism. Happened after the Russian Revolution for example. Mass genocide there.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (July 22, 2009 8:16 am ET)
            1
          If that regime had been, you know, socialist. They were in name only. They didn't actually endorse, or espouse socialist ways. They almost immediately turned into a dictatorship.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by franky (July 22, 2009 9:27 pm ET)
            1  
            "They didn't actually endorse, or espouse socialist ways."

            That's wrong. They spread the wealth to a large extent greatly altering the status-quo they replaced. Communism is a form of socialism.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by dmhack (July 21, 2009 7:06 pm ET)
      6 3
      It's getting harder and harder to follow what these idiots are saying. I think the Weinermobile believes that 100,000 armed Jews could have beat the Nazis back when larger armies with better arms couldn't. And this relates to his banning, how? Oh, right... liberals are just like the Nazis for banning him and doing all kinds of other horrible things. So, Weinermobile, are you advocating taking up arms against liberals? You claim they're fascists and that the Jews could have beat the fascists if they had been armed. I'm starting to see why the UK doesn't want to have anything to do with you.
      How would you pick out the liberals/fascists since they don't wear uniforms? I guess you could pin some identifying symbol on them.
      Oh, Michael. How sad to be you.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by John Paradox (July 21, 2009 7:37 pm ET)
        1  
        The first Nazi officer shot by 'Jews" would have led to the total demolition of the block where it happened, and justification of the act by the fact that a 'legal representative of the government' (Nazi) was "assassinated" by 'Jews'.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by franky (July 21, 2009 10:46 pm ET)
          1  
          To be fair to the clip, Savage's argument was that if the Jews had risen up early it would have shown a spotlight on the extremity of the anti-Jewish policy. Savage said the resulting Nazi crackdown would have upset the rest of the middle class in Germany who he says was not behind the extermination program. And that the Nazi's would have then backed off due to the bad PR this would have created.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Conchobhar (July 22, 2009 12:01 am ET)
              1
            And if you believe that, I can get you a great price on a beautiful bridge across the East River.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by franky (July 22, 2009 12:38 am ET)
              1 1
              In retrospect, I don't see how it would have made things any worse for them than how it turned out.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (July 22, 2009 10:16 am ET)
                1  
                Monday morning armchair quarterbacking the holocaust. Amazing.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Conchobhar (July 22, 2009 1:13 pm ET)
                    1
                  Stunning. And it requires a reading of history that a seventh grader would recognize as superficial.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by franky (July 22, 2009 9:52 pm ET)
                    1  
                    I didn't support Savage's argument, I simply outlined it.

                    My only assertion was: "In retrospect, I don't see how it would have made things any worse for them than how it turned out."

                    You didn't refute my statement. If a seventh grader could, then why can't you?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Conchobhar (July 23, 2009 4:15 pm ET)
                         
                      I wasn't referring to your statement. I don't know how things could have been much worse, unless Adolph had achieved his aim, and actually wiped out European Jewry. So replying to your point would be as pointless as arguing about the number of angels on the head of a pin.
                      I was agreeing with Fogleghorn, and specifically referring to the idiocy of believing that killing a few German soldiers would have helped avoid the Holocaust. Mikey mentioned "world opinion!" Right. World opinion did a lot in Rwanda, didn't it?
                      How many ships full of Jews were denied entry into other countries, including this one, and their passengers sent back to certain death, because G-D world opinion didn't give a Freeper's f*rt?
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by franky (July 22, 2009 9:59 pm ET)
                  1  
                  The subject matter of the post involved someone doing a counter factual on the Jewish holocaust. I didn't bring the subject up; Media Matters did via the Savage clip they posted.
                  Report Abuse
          • Author by worrierking (July 22, 2009 7:25 am ET)
              1
            So you're saying that the Nazi Death industry, which employed thousands of German middle class citizens, the chemical manufacturers who produced the gas used to exterminate millions, the railroad industry which provided the lines to carry the people to their deaths and the German military personnel who guarded the camps, was able to prevent tens of thousands of people involved in the murder of more than six million people from talking about the holocaust to their friends and families.

            I'm sorry, if more than one person is involved in a crime, the chances of the crime being kept secret diminish exponentially, as the number of people involved increases.

            The German middle class knew.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by franky (July 22, 2009 9:43 pm ET)
              1  
              If the average German knew about what was up, then Savage's argument doesn't work. I didn't address this though or the other assertions Savage used to make his case. I only gave my opinion on his conclusion that an early rising would have prevented the holocaust. But I didn't agree with that either. I simply said that with the benefit of hindsight it would have been worth a shot seeing as how badly it all ended up.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Conchobhar (July 23, 2009 4:38 pm ET)
                   
                People involved in great events don't have the benefit of hindsight. At the beginning the Jews couldn't possibly imagine that it would end as it did, and they could reasonably conclude that their best option was to ride it out, as they had done for centuries, without resorting to violence. Looking back, we can say "At least they'd have gone down fighting," but that is, as you say, using hindsight.
                Report Abuse
    • Author by worrierking (July 21, 2009 7:07 pm ET)
      7 2
      Right, because Hitler's attempt to exterminate the Jews of Europe is comparable to Great Britain banning someone known for flaming racial tensions whenever he speaks.


      Report Abuse
    • Author by The_Cat (July 21, 2009 7:08 pm ET)
      1 1
      Here is a link to the flap between Michael Savage and Jacqui Smith:

      http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6405170.ece

      It's hysterically funny if you are not a fan of Mr. Savage.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (July 21, 2009 7:08 pm ET)
      4 2
      Let's see, Michael Savage says vicious, rude, hateful things to people. He screams at callers and advocates violence, but when the U.K. says he is not welcome in their country, he gets offended and says rude and disrespectful things about the official who banned him and then he says he is not going to let them put him in a gas chamber? The U.K. didn't say he had to stop saying the horrid things he says, and free speech does not mean their are no consequences to having a free say. If you say hateful things, then you should not be shocked when people find you hateful, nor should you object when they don't want you around. If he had his druthers, he would ban Muslims, and Gays, and Liberals but that isn't fascistic, that is just being a good guy. I congratulate the U.K. for banning Mr. Savage, even though it means we are stuck with him.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by SteveRiverson162410 (July 21, 2009 9:48 pm ET)
        1 1
        Savage does not deserved to be banned simply for speaking his mind. Regardless of how you feel about his politics or views, he is not a murderer or a criminal that has hurt anyone; therefore he does not belong on a ban list simply because you don't agree with him or think his speech is hate.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by dmhack (July 21, 2009 10:24 pm ET)
          2 1
          The UK can pretty much ban anyone they want being a sovereign country and all.
          People are refused entry to countries all the time for a variety of reasons. I think Mike might have trouble getting into many countries with strong hate crime legislation.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by franky (July 21, 2009 10:27 pm ET)
             
          "Regardless of how you feel about his politics or views, he is not a murderer or a criminal that has hurt anyone;" - SteveRiverson162410

          He hurts society as a whole far more than the average hands-on criminal hate mongering to millions.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by epkklk851 (July 21, 2009 10:47 pm ET)
             
          So sorry Steve, but a country can ban someone from entry if they don't like what they have to say. We have no entry lists and no fly lists, other countries do, too. There are consequences for being a hateful piggy, and Mr.Savage, the aptly named is finding out what they are.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Bronwyn (July 21, 2009 10:33 pm ET)
        1  
        Where do we send our congratulations to the U.K. for being so wise? Wise enough to see through this horrible, lying, hate & war mongering mess. They have witnessed how disrespectful he is to the citizens and the President of his own country. Why would they expect him to be respectful to another country or it's citizens?

        Ever notice how so many of these tough talking idiots just love playing the victim? I guess if they are victims, then of course there is an enemy, the Liberals.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Tbone Slickens (July 23, 2009 9:41 am ET)
           
        You do know the lady that put Savage on the "list" has resigned right? She even state she was "in over her head".

        It is a slippery slope when people can make a "list" that bans others for what they say. The next time it might be a leftist that gets the ban. I get the feeling you'll show a little more empathy then.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by epkklk851 (July 23, 2009 11:19 am ET)
             
          I know there are watch lists for various reasons. I had a student who said his father was questioned because his very Irish name was on a watch list. There are consequences for your words and deeds, regardless of your political affiliations. If a Liberal was preaching as much hate as Mr. Savage, it would not bother me if he were banned. Cat Stevens has immigration issues because of his mild support for the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. I sitll like his music, but I don't agree with his politics.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by dmhack (July 21, 2009 7:09 pm ET)
      2  
      Oh yeah, one more thing.
      Canary in a Cave?
      It's canary in a coal mine, you twit.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by John Paradox (July 21, 2009 7:33 pm ET)
           
        He's talking about where he lives... you know, Troglodyte...
        Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (July 21, 2009 7:37 pm ET)
           
        I view the 'lil wiener as more of a stool pigeon -- or a dodo -- anyway . . .

        Report Abuse
      • Author by dhpbear (July 22, 2009 12:09 am ET)
           
        His sheer ignorance is astounding. Mispronouciations and malapropisms rivaling those of Archie Bunker.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by progressiveright (July 21, 2009 7:26 pm ET)
        1
      Unfortunatly this idot (sorry for the insult to those who are true idots) is a natural born citizen and we can not strip him of his citizenship and deport him. Maybe we can find an uninhabited island and exile him there.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jlmincey (July 21, 2009 9:38 pm ET)
           
        Wait we can't deport natural born citizens? Someone should inform Bush or maybe someone should tell the person who really ran the country the last 8 years (aka cheney).

        Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (July 21, 2009 7:33 pm ET)
         
      Savage on why he is fighting UK ban: "I made a commitment that nobody is ever going to put me into a gas chamber"


      Well, Mikey -- it sounds almost as if you're equating the UK to a gas chamber.

      If that's the case, why would you fight a ban by the UK -- unless, of course, you WANT to go into a gas chamber . . .
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jlmincey (July 21, 2009 9:40 pm ET)
           
        I interpreted it to be more like he thinks of America as the gas chamber and he wants to get out of it by going to Britan. Which shouldn't be surprising to anyone considering this is the same party that advocates secession.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Lane (July 22, 2009 4:46 am ET)
         
      ...canary in the in the uhh in the uhh in the in the uhh uhh cave


      Man, someone could make a killer techno song out of that.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by GeorgeG (July 22, 2009 5:15 am ET)
         
      a gas chamber would be going easy on this bigot.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jpskent (July 22, 2009 7:10 am ET)
      1  
      Does anyone else here think this is kind of insulting to the Jewish people who died in the holocaust? I mean it seems like he is saying if they had stood up for themselves like he does and would've then the holocaust wouldn't have happened.

      As a side note for just a brief bit of information on Jewish resistance to the Nazis, including taking up arms against them, which for all his studying he doesn't seem to realise happened see the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum website http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005213

      And Mikey if you read this (which I know he probably never will but what the hell I'll e-mail it to him too and hope for the best) the people who died and also those who lived through the holocaust were far braver than you'll ever be, please don't compare yourself to them, particually if you are saying they should've been more like you. I really don't think sueing the Nazis would've helped.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by dhpbear (July 22, 2009 12:21 pm ET)
           
        From the comments he makes about "curly-haired NYU professors with coke-bottle glasses", he seems to be a self-loathing Jew, also.
        Report Abuse