We have been following the ban imposed on conservative radio host Michael Savage by England — barring him from entry into the country. England now appears to have reaffirmed the decision and accuses Savage of promising to retract some of his statements and failing to do so. While I strongly disagree with many of Savage’s statements, I view the ban as part of a disturbing trend limiting free speech in the West and particularly in England.
In the communication below, Treasury Solicitor Michael Atkins tells counsel for Savage that he previously assured the government that Savage would repudiate some of his comments on his website. It also says that Savage promised to appeal the earlier decision and failed to do so.
Savage was informed last July that the Cameron administration would continue the prior ban on his entry into the country unless he repudiated statements made on his broadcasts that were considered a threat to public security. The very notion of ideas being a threat to public safety is the hallmark of censorship and governmental abuse. While then–British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith insisted that it is “important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here,” he omitted free speech.
The most recent letter is equally disturbing. It puts the burden on Savage to show that his ideas are not a threat to public security — a ridiculous burden when the only way to do so appears to be the repudiation of his beliefs and ideas. England has moved rapidly against free speech guarantees with comparably little protest. There does not even to be much of a national debate despite the fundamental shift on individual rights. We need to support those civil libertarians in England who are fighting this lonely battle — often on behalf of unpopular individuals like Savage.
Here is the letter: Savage letter
Jonathan Turley
the height of irony would be if it were found out that high concentrations of synthetic vitamins, herbal remedies and nutritional ethnomedicine were the primary causes of autism.
While we’re on the subject of Savage and the right of free speech–some of you might want to take a look at the following story:
Michael Savage Has to Apologize to Brave New Films
By Tana Ganeva
Fri Sep. 11, 2009
http://motherjones.com/riff/2009/09/michael-savage-has-apologize-brave-new-films
Shock jock Michael Savage, who is not prone to public shows of remorse, has been forced to apologize to progressive video production company Brave New Films after a take-down notice his syndicator sent to YouTube in 2008 resulted in the removal of all BNF’s films from the site.
The company’s YouTube complaint specifically targeted a Brave New Films video called “Michael Savage Hates Muslims.” In the video a nice photo of Savage posing by the Golden Gate Bridge is overlaid with soundbites of the shock jock railing against Islam, Muslims and the Koran. “I can see what it says in their book of hate … make no mistake about it, the Koran is not a document of freedom. The Koran is a document of slavery and chattel!” screams Savage. Kind of hard to misrepresent his meaning.
On his site, Savage hosts a link to a legal defense fund, meant in part to combat alleged violations of his free speech. Yet Savage’s Oregon-based syndicator, The Original Talk Radio Network, Inc. (OTRN), sent a notice to YouTube claiming copyright infringement, even though as most people who know things about the law will tell you, brief soundbites compiled into a document of critique fall squarely within fair use laws.
BNF’s case was taken on by Bingham McCutchen LLP and Stanford Center for Internet and Society’s “Fair Use Project,” a group specializing in fair use law. According to the BNF press release, they sued Savage and the radio company “for damages caused by the removal of BNF’s content and to vindicate BNF’s free speech rights.”
The settlement reached included the following written apology by Michael Savage and the company:
OTRN acknowledges that it made a mistake by asking YouTube to remove Brave New Films’ video “Michael Savage Hates Muslims” from the YouTube site. Upon further examination, it is clear that video should not have been included in OTRN’s September 29, 2009 takedown notice. OTRN apologizes for this error.
“We were not going to allow extreme members of the right to intimidate progressive organizations into inaction.” says BNF producer and liberal activist Robert Greenwald. “Mr. Savage systematically targeted the Council on American Islamic Relations for simply printing his hateful words onto one of their fundraising materials. These despicable acts, as well as Mr. Savage’s hateful rants against Muslims on his radio show, spurred us into action.”
(Tana Ganeva is an assistant editor at AlterNet.)
Savage Nation of Wieners.
Or is that Whiners?
It’s all sounded pretty much the same since your Holy Oracle started getting criticized.
“Like the effect of being ridiculed is often caused by saying something ridiculous.”
Pardon me. I was laughing too hard at your basic idiocy to type properly. Plus holding out that the finger made it awkward.
ABC News is left-wing?
They are owned by Disney.
I’m thinking you are not thinking or you are one of those mentally challenged people who think all media is left wing when in fact is a dominated by corporate interests. Interests which are predominately right wing. Hell, ol’ Walt was about half-Nazi himself.
And I have listened to him. Ad nauseum. Just like I’ve listened to Rush and Gordon Liddy. I’ve even met Gordon. See, I get to know the enemies of society before I speak ill of them. It’s called research. That thing Savage Wiener should have done before he opened his pie hole to opine on the causes of autism. Not the treatments. The causes. Cause and effect. Like the effect of being ridiculed is often an effect of saying something ridiculous.
What is the very height of irony is that you are telling me – someone who defends Savage’s 1st Amendment Right to Free Speech – to shut up. Because you don’t like my fact based criticism and your best proof is “You just don’t understand him!” whereas I provided “Dr.” Savage Wiener’s own words to illustrate his thoughts on the matter. You sound like a 15 year old girl trying to rationalize dating a crack dealer.
You have a nice day there, sport, but I’m going to exercise my 1st Amendment rights all I want – which includes both defending Savage’s rights and ridiculing him for being an ignorant ass all at the same time. If you’ve got a problem with that? Tell it to the Wiener Nation, because you have exactly zero chance of stopping me from doing anything. Not only am I laughing, guess which finger I’m holding up?
It’s also telling that – now that I’ve called you leftists on your overtly juvenile use of Dr. Savage’s real name – you all act as if you were only referring to his real name to be “accurate” and not (as was patently obvious) to make third grade “weiner” jokes.
And Crying Buddha, it’s nice that you can quote left-wing websites when it comes to knowing what Dr. Savage thinks. You should try actually listening to him in context some time. He often uses hyperbole for effect, but it is plain as day to those of us who listen to him on a regular basis that his position on autism and ADD is completely based on his belief that it is unethical for doctors to over-medicate kids (and all people for that matter) and that that practice is directly related to the amount of money to be made by big pharma and NOT out of concern for the overall health of the kids.
Maybe you should shut-up and listen for awhile before spouting off.
“The level of discourse on the left is typified by the constant referring to Dr. Savage’s real name. If you can’t raise your arguments above the grade school, playground, name-calling level, why would you expect anyone to take you seriously?”
So now I’m confused, who was caught with his pants down Paul Reuben or PeeWee Herman? If I refer to Walt Disney am I dissing Mickey Mouse?
By the way I agree that this vile person shouldn’t be banned, but he made his bed.
Double Head Shot,
Sorry old boy … “on this site … and they too want him censored” is untrue and thus a poor defense.
Try again
Triple Shot in the Foot,
“Buddha, you don’t sound like your laughing anymore.”
Then you don’t know me very well, genius.
As to the rest of your blather, thanks for showing that in addition to being a Pavlovian follower instead of an actual critical thinker that you are a sore loser as well. Those pesky facts! They’ll bite you in the ass every time. Especially when you run off at the mouth without using your brain first.
And what Elaine said.
Also, to re-iterate what I told your Wiener Nation buddy james: I’m sorry you’re so ignorant that you think an entertainer is an oracle. If you don’t like that I have the same 1st Amendment rights as “Dr.” Savage – including the right to be critical of him and his stupidity – then I suggest you take it up with the Founding Fathers.
Elaine, you summed it up very nicely. Well done.
Double Head Shot,
Who suggested that Savage should be censored? Some of us disagree with your opinion of the man and that means that we believe he should be censored?
I think Savage is a hatemonger, a racist, and a homophobe. Lots of people say things that I find offensive. I don’t ask that they be censored. I just don’t listen to their hateful rhetoric.
I think it was Judge Bazelon who remarked of an expert, that spending time occupying a seat in a classroom did not guarantee the inculcation of knowledge.
Possessing a doctorate does not guarantee either humanity or common sense. Look at Thomas Sowell, James Dobson and Rand Paul, just to name three. We can add Michael Alan Weiner and make it four.
Buddha, you don’t sound like your laughing anymore.
You call me an idiot, closeted, sugarpants? and that you “save your loven for the ladies.” Yeah, right. I have read your bloviations on this post and others. All I can say is that your a pathetic dork. I didn’t believe there were really morons like you, typing away on blogs all day (likely your mom’s basement in underwear). The left sure has some embarrassing spawns.
As for this thread, it has degenerated into blather. The point of this article is that Michael SAVAGE is being censored for his VIEWS. The same ideas that deadbeats on this site can’t stand hearing and they too want him censored. Savage may not be correct on every single issue (he is on most) but thank goodness somebody has the guts to say what needs to be said.
Elaine,
I agree.
“The level of discourse on the left is typified by the constant referring to Dr. Savage’s real name. If you can’t raise your arguments above the grade school, playground, name-calling level, why would you expect anyone to take you seriously?”
Using a person’s given name when talking about him lowers one’s argument to no more than grade school, playground, name-calling? Really?
**********
Buddha,
Anyone who has ever worked with autistic children knows Savage is dead wrong about them. Savage is just a hateful, mean-spirited little man. I don’t care if he did earn a Ph.D.
“…constant referring to Dr. Savage’s real name….”
*******************************
What’s the matter. Is there something wrong with Michal Alan Weiner’s real name? His Jewish family history perhaps being embarrassing to him and his sheeple followers?
As far as “Dr. Savage” goes, there is no such person on two fronts. Savage is a fake name for stage purposes and thus is not a real person. While Weiner did get a Ph.D.; in an academic setting, those holding a Ph.D. are called “Mr.” In fact, in England, surgeons are called “Mr.”
No doctorate was ever awarded to the Savage persona, so any reference to Savage as “Dr.” is both grammatically and formally wrong. “Michael Savage” does not have a diploma on a wall anywhere showing a person by that name has a doctorate.
As the holder of an earned doctorate myself, this is one of those issues that annoys the hell out of me when a grown man who should know better engages in this kind of childish chest-thumping.
Ignorant of his real positions?
“Michael Savage — one of the most popular talk show hosts in the nation — is used to controversy. It’s been one week since Savage made controversial remarks about autism, referring to those diagnosed with the condition as ‘brats, idiots, and morons.’
Several big advertisers have pulled their commercials from the syndicated ‘Savage Nation’ radio show, and now, thousands of parents and protesters are urging Savage to step down, calling his words ‘hate speech.’
‘I’ll tell you what autism is,’ Savage told his audience on July 16. ‘In 99 percent of the cases, it’s a brat who hasn’t been told to cut the act out. That’s what autism is.’ The talk show host also said, ‘Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don’t sit there crying and screaming, idiot.‘”
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Parenting/story?id=5457991&page=1
Yeah.
Those are clearly the words of somebody who is primarily concerned with Big Pharma and not simply a hateful, ignorant and ill-informed bigot. He’s not only all of that, but he’s also a brat, an idiot, and a moron. And apparently his advertisers and parents of autistic children agreed on that point. So I guess it’s just a good thing for you that you added the qualifier “most” to your statement. It makes you look only marginally less ignorant in defending him than Savage was in making his putrid pronouncements in the first place.
The level of discourse on the left is typified by the constant referring to Dr. Savage’s real name. If you can’t raise your arguments above the grade school, playground, name-calling level, why would you expect anyone to take you seriously?
As for his autism/ADD comments – Savage is against the over-medicating of our children being pushed by big pharma. He has also written several books on natural medicines, based on his research as a botanist. He’s not just some ignorant screamer. (Something most of his detractors here are – completely ignorant of his real positions yet pronouncing him “bigoted” and “hateful”.)
Blouise,
Well you know what Uncle George used to say about euphemistic language . . .
Buddha,
Did you read Fiat Lux phrase “Sure, his language is robust”?
I like that description “robust language”.