Savage says Muslims, others should be banned from US, but he's "going to sue" UK for banning him
SUMMARY: Michael Savage is outraged and says he is "going to sue" U.K. Home Office Secretary Jacqui Smith over the decision to ban him from entering the U.K. -- but Savage himself has repeatedly called for people to be banned or deported from the U.S.
During the May 5 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, responding to the British Home Office's decision to ban him from entering the United Kingdom for "stirring-up hatred" -- specifically, "engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence" -- Michael Savage claimed that "I am going to sue" Home Office Secretary Jacqui Smith. Later, Savage stated: "This lunatic Jacqui Smith, in my opinion, has defamed me, and if possible, I will sue her personally." Savage himself has a history of calling for the deportation or banning of individuals and groups from the United States. For example:
- On the August 14, 2008, edition of his radio show, Savage stated that "minorities in America are becoming the majority" and "[t]he only way to stop this is to throw out all the politicians, immediately, and then throw out the anchor babies." He added: "You know, this thing about the anchor babies is why minorities in America will become the majority. Most people will be afraid to discuss this for fear that the radical scum on the left will call them a racist."
- During the March 31, 2008, edition of his radio show, Savage stated: "If I had the power by executive order, I would round up every member of the ACLU and of the National Lawyers Guild, and I'd put them in a prison in Guantánamo and I'd throw the key away. Or I would reopen Devil's Island and I'd put everyone in the ACLU into -- onto Devil's Island." He added, "But, you see, I fantasize. That's one of my flaws is I live in a fantasy land that can never be." Devil's Island is a former French penal colony off the coast of French Guiana.
- In March 2007, The Minnesota Independent's Robin Marty wrote that after she reported that six Muslim imams who were removed from a US Airways flight had filed a discrimination lawsuit against the airline, she received an email from Savage which stated, "You and they should be deported for taking advantage of this great nation."
- During his October 29, 2007, program, Savage reportedly said of Islam and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR): "What kind of religion is this? What kind of world are you living in when you let them in here with that throwback document in their hand, which is a book of hate. Don't tell me I need re-education. They need deportation. I don't need re-education. Deportation, not re-education. You can take C-A-I-R and throw 'em out of my country. I'd raise the American flag and I'd get out my trumpet if you did it. Without due process. You can take your due process and shove it." After CAIR posted audio of Savage's statements on their website, Savage sued the group for copyright infringement. The suit was dismissed in federal district court.
- On the November, 27, 2006, edition of his show, Savage stated that in order to "save the United States," lawmakers should institute an "outright ban on Muslim immigration" into the United States.
From the May 5 broadcast of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: Well, I don't know who this pork-eater is, but I have a question for her. I hear she's the home secretary of the former England. When has this witch heard my show, since it is not syndicated in England? When has this witch listened my program in England, and which show or shows is this witch referring to?
Now, I will say this, that when I awoke this morning in the 7 o'clock range and went down to my computer; I turned on various websites. I go to The Drudge Report because it is the newspaper of today amongst anyone with a brain; you know that and I know that. And it has some great, you know, linkages.
I was shocked and I thought I was seeing things when it said Michael Savage banned in England. Am I seeing -- so the first thing I thought was darn, there goes the summer trip to receive their -- their dental care. And I'm going to have to give up a summer trip where I was going to do a tour of British restaurants for their famous cuisine. But then it dawned on me who they had linked me with; I thought this is a joke or a mistake. They linked me up with Russian skinheads who had murdered 10 people, Islamists who had smashed in the heads of Jewish children with rifle butts, preachers in the UK who call for the destruction and overthrow of the government.
How could they put Michael Savage in the same league with mass murderers when I have never avowed violence? Had I avowed violence, I wouldn't be on the radio. I wouldn't have lasted 15 minutes, let alone 15 years. In fact, my opinions are more in keeping with the mainstream of America than you would like to believe. I am closer to the heartland of America than is, let us say, this woman. I want to remind you, though, that the whole point of the First Amendment, which we enjoy in America and apparently these Brits do not enjoy, is to protect offensive speech, not polite speech.
Let me repeat that. The whole point of the First Amendment was to protect offensive speech, not polite speech.
And I want to remind you liberals: Whatever happened to your famous sayings from the '60's, "I may disagree with you but I will fight to the death your right to say it"? Now I suggest that my 8 to 10 million listeners cancel your trips to England immediately and tell your travel agents why. I suggest you stop buying English-made goods. I don't know what they make anymore, but whatever they make, I suggest you don't buy anymore. If they want to play hardball, we'll play hardball. Will they ban my listeners from attending -- going to their wonderful, great nation as well? I mean, I've been banned from Britain. I mean, I hadn't planned on going there; I haven't been there in over 25 years. And when I woke up this morning, I thought this can't be true. But the point is today it's me, tomorrow it's someone else.
And my second reaction was the land of the Magna Carta has now become the land of the Mini-Carta. They published 16 of the 22 names of those banned from England since October, but they didn't include six additional names, right? Now, I'd like to know who it is who put together this list. I'd like to know which six names are not being published. I'd like to know why they have not banned, for example, Kim Jong Il the third -- the second, who allegedly has starved over a million of his fellow countrymen to death.
Is Kim Jong Il banned from England? What about Chavez, Hugo Chavez? Is he banned from England? He has driven half the Jews out of his nation with his hate talk. Is he banned by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith? No, she picked an easy target. She doesn't know my show, obviously, but someone in America sent her my name, and as a result of this, I'm going to sue her. I don't know if I can win; I don't know the laws of England. I have seven lawyers working on this right now.
Britain defamed Michael Savage, putting me in a league with mass murderers because of my opinions. For this lunatic Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary of England, to link me up with skinheads who are killing people in Russia; to put me in a league with Hamas murderers who killed Jews on buses, is defamation. Moreover, I've been endangered by this lunatic. She has painted a target on my back, linking me with people who are imprisoned for killing people.
Does she not think that this will bring harm to me, and if she does, will she pay for it? We'll find out soon enough what the laws of England protect and don't protect. But even liberals listening to this show should be disturbed at the move by the British Government because they wonder -- they should wonder who's next. Today it's me, tomorrow it's you. And I have to say to you that this is -- some ways, people are saying, "Savage, it's a badge of honor. Savage, it's a good thing to be on this list. Savage, this is a last gasp of a troubled Labor Party that is out of touch with the voters of England." According to the most recent surveys, Labor and highly unpopular Prime Minister Gordon Brown are expected to be swept from power by conservatives at their next general election. That's all well and good, but will the conservatives undo the damage that this lunatic has done? We'll have to wait and see.
The Home Office of England said that I was banned because I am engaging in unacceptable behavior. Behavior? How is it behavior for me to publish books? Now, I thought about this, and it could be that my latest book, Psychological Nudity, on the cover of which you see Michael Savage and my 10-pound dog, Teddy, it could be that One-Armed Frank, or Fat Al's tuna, or Dead Man's pants, or Woodchuck Bill, or Love By the Sewer Plant -- it could be that one of those stories is offensive to those in England. I really don't know.
I do know this: that I've written many best-sellers. But prior to my political life, I had written about 18 books in the field of health that were well received as well. Perhaps they're out of touch with the English today. Perhaps my books on vitamins and nutrition are considered a threat to the social order in England. Some would say, "Savage, don't be so upset. It's gonna help the sales of Psychological Nudity."
Well, OK, great. Go on to MichaelSavage.com and buy a copy and tell them to send it to a friend in England, and tell them to walk around with it proudly. Do me a favor. It's not gonna change my lifestyle.
[...]
SAVAGE: This lunatic Jacqui Smith, in my opinion, has defamed me, and if possible, I will sue her personally.















Defamation? I'd say it's DEFINITION of character!
The complete lack of self-awareness exhibited by wingnuts knows NO bounds.
As it is, he carried the issue way too far, and those comments - rather than being humorous jabs back at the Brits - seem to be actually meant to "hurt" them, and give the impression (probably accurate) that the savageweiner is really just a thavagewhiner.
Really? Going after the Brits for those two things are two of the most tired cliches in the book, and any humor that they may once have had is long gone through overuse. Savage's wit is as rapier sharp as a marshmallow.
Few greater truths have ever been spoken.
Public figures in the U.S. can sue for defamation, the standard is just higher. Under NY Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, the statement must have been published knowing it was false or with reckless disregard to its truth.
Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
Sometimes the truth is just the truth, and just needs to be accepted, otherwise you just look like an idiot.
I tried posting this as a reply to the post where you made the above statement, but my quotes from Weiner wouldn't make it past the MMFA profanity filter and now it won't let me reply directly to that post. I'll try again here.
Speaking of an MSNBC reporter he said "Turn on MSNBC and you'll find the mind-sl-- with a big pair of glasses that they sent to Afghanistan. She looks like she went from porno into reporting. See, when they get over forty they go into news."
He said the "U.S. Senate is "more vicious and more histrionic than ever, specifically because women have been injected into" it.
He referred to the Million Mom March as the Million Dy-- March.
When talking about student volunteers who were distributing food to the homeless, he said that "the girls from Branson [school] can go in and maybe get raped... because they seem to like the excitement of it. There's always the thrill and possibility they'll be raped in a dumpster while giving out a turkey sandwich"
He claimed that "any heterosexual woman today over the age of 25 who grew up in America is basically a dominatrix."
Speaking of Hillary Clinton, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O'Connor, he said they have "feminized and homosexualized much of America, to the point where the nation has become passive, receptive and masochistic."
There's more, but I think this makes the point. None of those statements have a factual basis. They aren't based on the actions of those of whom he is speaking. They are all entirely gender-based. And they reek of hatred.
He is going to sue for having been defamed under British law.
Home Secretary Smith put in writing that Savage has "inspired others to commit crimes". Unless she can cite a specific criminal act that Savage inspired the offender to commit (and she can't), she clearly defamed him.
Savage has a slam-dunk case against her.
You're almost correct, for once. If he tries to go to England, Weiner will be slam-dunked back to the US.
Does not matter who tells them, Savage, Rush, Hannity, Levin or any right wing talk radio host.
I am confident that even I can cater to their addiction to let them hear what they they want to hear, logic, reality, facts, truth be damned. I don't want to because I do not live in AM talk radio Fox News world for making a living.
Whether Rush or Savage would ever agree to this or not... but I get the feeling that the 8-10 million listeners of Mike's are part of the 15-18 million of Rush's...?
but i guess its easier to tag him to another rush or hannity .
Prove it. Please cite your examples.
And Mikey and the Leader of the Repubs do have the same listeners.
Isn't it funny - hate mongers and revisionist always cry about their perceived loss of 1st amendment rights - that they can't say what they want to say. But they conveniently leave out the Point of the actual law. Yes, in Germany and a dozen other countries, it Is illegal to deny the Holocaust -- IF in so denying, the denier incites hate and/or efforts to rebuild the Nazi party.
Actually, people can say whatever they want here in the UK - and no one wins libel law suits. Just look at what goes down in Parliament every day? But that doesn't mean you have a right to inflame hate or people to commit hate-filled crimes.
I think Mr Savage has finally found his niche, is in with the appropriate company.
Read the above. Why would / should 'this woman' give a rats a$s about his self perceived closeness to the heartland of USA, when she is British?
(I was going to write a sentence that Bin Laden could have said with equal righteousness but decided to refrain myself)
there's also the possibility - however remote it might seem to you - that so-called "liberals" commented on this thread because they read {drumroll} . . . {cymbal crash} . . . the Media Matters article on the subject . . .
Are you the Inquisition Director here? Do you think your question is fair because.... 1. You are uninformed or 2. You are informed and want to play gotcha games.
P.S. If MMFA is partisan, TOO BAD. And what definition of objective are you speaking about?
You do not have to incite violence directly to actually be "de facto" promoting it through others, and this is exactly what Savage does while he hides behind a microphone and his lawyers.
however , Britain has become a very soft , week degenerate country
there is not a week without reading about 12 yer. old kids with babies , kids drugged to death , kids getting married , woman flushed her baby in the toilet and list goes on and on .
Yes, Savage is Harsh, brash, and filled with sarcaism. But its clear that a GOVERNMENT has choosen to exclude a specific person based on thoughts and beliefs. Not actions he has been tried and convicted for against a rule of law. He didnt get to plead his case, defend himself, or make a argument.
Yes, he is opposed to gays. Yes, he is against illegal immigration, yes he differs from majority opinion on medicine. But its his thoughts and beliefs. If people dont like it or dont agree, DONT LISTEN.
However, a GOVERNMENT has said we are banning you. Why take the stand with him? Is Kim Jong Il permitted to come? What are these "standards" for getting a ban? Why him? They have made him more powerful for putting just his name on the list.
The point is not Michael Savage, but the process of how they did this. All these posts are about not liking Savage and his points of view. Great, have your beliefs and be thankful you can express them without being labeled yourself. As that all Savage has done. We may disagree, but they are just thoughts.
i as a democrat always hear for cons about big government , power grabbers etc. to e honest that would be a living example for this argument.
and please think about it before you instinctively comment about you're beloved Britain
but 1. it doesn't make it right 2. the us did not banned any radio talk show hosts or any person who is a radical...
as far as i know bill Ayers is still spreading his propaganda
while enjoying his status as professor - what a shame
Cant Britian learn from mistakes of the past???
Can he really be this stupid to fall into this trap? He is carrying on like a child. Does he really believe that America will stand behind him and his silly lawsuit. Once again, Mikey the Victim, be a man and never return to that country. Go visit Iran or something like that and try the same thing. I'll be that don't ban you from returning. Show those Brits a thing or two.
And Mikey, you are as bad as Hannity, Rush and the rest of the shepards by trying to use your TeaBaggers to fight for you.
Maybe the Brits are just trying to get your sheep to send them 1 million tea bags. Damn VERMIN.
I respect your opinion that you agree with with the decision. But Im asking if you agree because you dislike Savage.
Its the process that is flawed. I respect your opinion.
If memory serves me right, he was actually in London for a movie premier when Hoover negotiated with INS to deny him re-entry or something along those lines. He heard of the actions by Hoover and chose not to come back and stayed in Europe. The only time he ever returned to the U.S. was to recieve an honorary Academy award in 1972.
CAT STEVENS.
I'm not in favor of censorship in any form, but a boycott of his sponsors might be in order. There are certain people who only understand being chastised via their wallets.
Randy
Randy
The main definition of Incite is "to urge (someone) to do something. He incited the people to rebel against the king.
He is not in any way telling people to go out and commit violence. In fact he does the exact opposite. To compare him to terrorists and mass murderers is ridiculous.
The ACLU and other civil libertarians have come out in defense of Savage's right to speak his mind against the ban. Are you going to bash the very organizations and individuals that back you guys up 100% when the time is needed? You give them glowing reviews. Now what? Are they Commies and hate monger supporters?
The ACLU is 100% of the time all about defending the Bill of Rights. Are you going to bash them and the Bill of Rights. You guys walk a slippery path of being the thought police. 1984? It makes me sick.
Britain's ban of Savage decried by detractors
San Fran Chronicle
May 5, 2009
US radio shock jock Michael Savage brands Jacqui Smith a 'witch' over UK banned list
It's become so accepted that it's blatant on TV and radio.
What ever happened to the days when people like Weiner were relegated to late night talk shows with a "lets laugh at the freaks" theme?
Michael Savage tells Americans that their way of life is threatened, that their nation is being ruled by an evil order of perverts, that democracy and family values are being destroyed by imposters who've stolen power and oppress the people. He projects no hope for nonviolent action, no hope for western civilization. The only way we can succeed and defend our holy superior culture is through DRASTIC, DRACONIAN action, and the government won't do it for you....
All of that together, night after night, mixed with charismatic stories and fatherly chiding, is the exact recipe for violent extremism. If you were a true believer in Michael Savage's world, you'd be a paranoid, angry, and armed.