Sunday, May 10, 2009

On The Sane Decision To Ban Michael Savage From Entering Britain


Radio talk show host Michael Savage, real name Michael Weiner, whose hate mongering right wing talk show has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred. His message of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence. It is the opinion in Britain that if this person was allowed into the country, his personal live hate speeches could incite and instigate hate crimes.

This decision to ban Michael Savage from entering Britain does have a history to draw upon coming to the sound conclusion of Savage’s banning.

The book, “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder” written by Michael Savage had already influenced Jim David Adkisson. Jim David Adkisson’s own admissions and quoting Savage, took it upon himself to kill innocent men, women, and children of the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church by shooting those who did not think as he and the neo-con media host he identified with. The constant drone of hate from this Neo-con’s rantings for anyone who does not think in lock step as he did was all Jim David Adkisson needed to confirm his decision to justify killing. Adkisson believed and I quote, “That all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and the Democrats were tying the country’s hands in the war on terror and had ruined every institution in America.

Of course the other Neo-Con right hosts such as the likes of Limbaugh, O’Reilly, and Hannity, are getting hours of subject matter for their shows. They are now spouting off about how Britain’s injustice and limiting free speech is unfair to the rights of Michael Savage. My retort to those who would pass on this message is for the people of Britain to simply ask the worshipers of the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church’s opinion of how Michael Savage’s constant drone of hate had what kind of effect on their lives.

12 comments:

LJP said...

Frankly I find Savage repulsive, but nothing warrants him being banned from Britain.

DromedaryHump said...

Micro said:
" Michael Savage had already influenced Jim David Adkisson. Jim David Adkisson’s own admissions and quoting Savage, took it upon himself to kill innocent men, women, and children of the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church by shooting those who did not think as he and the neo-con media host he identified with."


I have never actually heard Savage...but what I've learned of him he is scum. HOWEVER, your comment that listening to savage's perspectives caused/contribted to murder is both fallacious and dangerous.

I have heard Ben Stein say that he distains and rejects Darwinian theory, natural selection / "survival of the fittist", because it was the inspiration for Hitler's genocidal cleansing, eugenics, and the concept of the Aryan Superman. Stein is now a creationist as a result.

Its pretty fucking crazy to blame darwin for the acts of an insane racist tyrant who's psychosis allowed it to be perverted into something never endorsed or conceived of by Darwin. Thus Ben Stein is an asshat.

By blaming Savage, as moronic and fucked up as he is, for another persons acts, a person who through psychosis or predispostion to a particular mindset and violence exercised his free will and committed crime, is irrational and reactive. Britain banning him for his thoughts and words is equally unfair. IMO.

Hump

Anonymous said...

Engineer of Knowledge

Those who are fans of Savage would say that all he is doing is exercising their freedom of speech but freedom of speech does not allow you to shout out “FIRE” in a crowded movie theater as a joke.

In 1967 H. Rap Brown gave an impassioned speech on civil rights in the town of Cambridge, Maryland which resulted in a riot. As a result Brown found himself on the FBI’s top ten list of most wanted. He was finally apprehended, paid his debt to society for being found guilty of his words inciting a riot. My point is that there are laws that makes it illegal by using speech to incite riots and by Jim David Adkisson’s own admissions and quoting Savage’s own words is the evidence for his actions, this radio personality should be investigated for the same offences as many of those whom were brought up on charges during the civil rights movement. There are many of legal cases to reference to draw upon.

DromedaryHump said...

Uh...no. Sorry.


Anon,
the hackneyed reference to shouting fire in a crowded theater no withstanding, your example is off base.

Brown was never convicted of incitement to riot.

His specific words in MD were:
"If Cambridge doesn't come around, Cambridge got to be burned down."

The Kerner Commission report "... specifically addressed the situation in Cambridge and found that, contrary to popular belief, blame for the events of July 24, 1967, could not be pinned on H. Rap Brown. The report, leaked to The Washington Post, said the cause of the unrest lay in years of systematic discrimination against the black population of Cambridge."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12420016

I'm not familiar with Savage's specific rhetoric that you claim should e subject to censoring. Perhaps you have a transcript demonstrating where Savage specifically suggested that conservatives arm themselves and shoot liberals enmasse.

Unless you have such information then I'm going to proffer that you are making unsupported statements, but worse, are prepared to premptively truncate the individual's right to free speech because they "may" cause a psycho to do something.

I dispise Savage's politics and methods... but to suggest that he be gagged or prevented from airing his dispicable percetive is a violation of the 1st amendment and damn unAmerican. I'll have no part of it, nor should anyone who loves freedom.

Hump

Anonymous said...

From Engineer of Knowledge

Hello Hump,
Glade to see your interest. Thank you.

Yes I lived through H. Rap Brown being blamed for the riot in Cambridge. I remember very well being able to see the western sky glow from the fires set in Cambridge that night. He was arrested and spent time for inciting that riot.

On the July 6, 2006 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage declared that "liberalism is, in essence, the HIV virus and there is no extreme too violent to have it removed" because it "weakens the defense cells of a nation." Savage described the "defense cells of a nation" as including the police, which have been undermined by the "ACLU viruses," and the military, which has been weakened by "Sen. Barbara Boxer viruses." Savage also claimed the liberalism "virus" has weakened "the church ... particularly the Catholic Church."

Now for those who would argue that Jim David Adkisson was a sick man and like any other angry, deranged type person who would kill Amish children, college students in their dorms and classes, killing Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheists, etc, and I cannot possibly blame a Neo-con radio host for the deaths of these people attending church on that Sunday morning; I will reply that these sick people do not need any encouragement from the likes of those empty headed, clueless, blowhards.

Everyone is the sum of one's own life’s experiences which developed my viewpoints over the years. My family moved back to the Eastern Shore of Maryland in the summer of 1967 from the suburbs of Baltimore and I had just turned 14 that spring. That summer H. Rap Brown gave an impassioned speech on civil rights in the town of Cambridge, Maryland which resulted in a riot.

You are correct with your quoted statement, "If Cambridge doesn't come around, Cambridge got to be burned down."

Brown's speech atop the car outside the federation's headquarters 41 years ago repeated the themes of racial pride and assertiveness that were characteristic of Carmichael's speeches, but Brown went further in urging listeners to take up arms against white society.

The complete quote is:
"Don't be trying to love that honky to death," he proclaimed. "Shoot him to death. Shoot him to death, brother, because that's what he is out to do to you. Do to him like he would do to you, but do it to him first." Later, he talked about how slowly Cambridge had changed. "If this town don't come around, this town should be burned down.”

In Washington, the government's actions against Brown established a pattern for the suppression of highly publicized radical leaders. In August, a month after the Cambridge riot, the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Mississippi Democrat and plantation owner James Eastland, focused on the riots - with witness after witness, including the chief of the Cambridge police department, blaming Brown. Brown was arrested and charged with inciting to riot.

Imprisoned several times between 1967 and 1970 for the same offence of attempt to incite to riot, Brown was eventually shot and captured by New York City police during an armed robbery. Sentenced to a term of from five to fifteen years in Attica Prison, Brown was paroled in 1976. Converting to Islam, he changed his name to Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin.

Getting back to Savage….One could ask is it not better for someone to be thought a fool or to allow them to speak and remove all doubt? One of the best defenses against Nazi Germany in the early 1940’s in the United States was to let their message be broadcasted on new reels in movie theaters before the featured film started. The majority of people can come to the correct conclusion as they did at the time. It is the same basic message of hate similar to Joseph Goebbels of his time, but in Michael Savage case, is there any real value in the quote at the top of the page?

DromedaryHump said...

Jeff,
The "value" of ones speech, or lack thereof, is not a qualifier for the 1st Amendment's protection.
If value were a criteria virtually every fundamentalist christian would be denied the right to free speech.

I personally think people on the extreme Right are a virus, who have beeen trying to do things to this country that the founding father's never wanted to see. They are the disease.

OK..so now what? Shall I too be censored or censured? Is it possible that my speech is going to inflame some left wing sociopathic nut case, maybe... who knows.

But that is the price we pay for a free society.

Nothing in what savage said compares to what Brown said. He was expressing an opinion in terms that never encouraged any sane person to take up arms and commit random murders. Adkisson saying he followed Savage is neither here nor there.
Brown was found not responsible for the carnage in MD, as I showed above. Thus, if Brown wasnt guilty of incitement to riot, there is no way any impartial person and defender of free speach could lay that accusation on Savage.


We need to be careful we don't let hyperbole get in the way of common sense and allow it to overwhelm our freedoms.
"Those who would give up a little freedom to secure a little safety gain neither freedom nor safety."

Hump

DromedaryHump said...

Anon..
sorry... I have NO idea where I got "Jeff" from. I guess I decided to give you a name :)

although it would be nice if you had your own name.

hump

Anonymous said...

From Engineer of Knowledge

I was wondering who Jeff was??? :-
) Engineer is fine.

The "value" of one’s speech, or lack thereof, is not a qualifier for the 1st Amendment's protection. If value were criteria virtually every fundamentalist Christian would be denied the right to free speech. (This put a smile on my face)

When Michael Savage declared that "liberalism is, in essence, the HIV virus and there is no extreme too violent to have it removed" is definitely the “Orwellian New Speak from this talk radio host” and has the same meaning as Brown’s Shoot him to death. Shoot him to death, brother” comment. On this point I have to disagree with your counter point.

"Those who would give up a little freedom to secure a little safety gain neither freedom nor safety." (One of my favorite quotes by Ben Franklin and has never been truer than with the current event of the last eight years with the Patriot Act becoming law.)

In Washington, the government's actions against Brown established a pattern for the suppression of highly publicized radical leaders. Brown was being arrested several times between 1967 -1970 on the same charge of the intent of inciting to riot. Each time he would spend several weeks in jail waiting for his trial. Another example is the Chicago Eight who spent time in jail for inciting a riot. Many at this time were being arrested, even if it was just for harassment purposes, and sat for many weeks in jail. After all is said and done, none were found guilty of inciting the riots. On the other hand, no one died during these riots.

We need to be careful we don't let hyperbole get in the way of common sense and allow it to overwhelm our freedoms.

Key words here are, “our freedoms.” Now in summation, you are applying the Bill of Rights / First 10 amendments that Thomas Jefferson made sure was added to the U.S. Constitution securing U. S. citizens their Civil Rights. These points you bring up were the big improvement of Britain’s Magna Carta but cannot be applied to Britain’s decision to keep Savage from entering the country. Britain does not have these laws to be able to have them applied in Savage’s case.

I have really enjoyed our conversations.

DromedaryHump said...

Engineer said: "I have really enjoyed our conversations."

Right back at ya!
Hump

Valérie said...

Microdot,

You bad boy! I just notice this in your introduction:

"microdot Location: Aquitane, France
Well, okay...I'm a Detroit boy
"

It's Aquitaine, not Aquitane, LOL.

I hope you have a good time in the vineyards. I miss you, and everyone else too. You will have much fun when you come back, I am sure, there are more than 200 comments on each article and Mr Politness is just so funny, and Stiletto is giving Barb such a hard time, I can't stop laughing.

Anonymous said...

From Engineer of Knowledge
Hello Valerie
I too will be glad when Microdot gets back. I have been enjoying and sometimes submit postings for his site for a while. I have been a fan of his satire humor. On this he is the best of the best.

Valérie said...

Engineer of Knowlege,

Bonjour, you have a strange name, but I like it.

"I have been a fan of his satire humor. On this he is the best of the best."

Yes I agree, he makes me laugh on PP every day, and this is why I can't wait until he comes back there. Mr Politeness is as good too, I call him Mr Pee, LOL. And this new woman Nunya is so funny also. Others are very good too, Whynot and Shitstirrer especially. I love satire and fun.

Maybe while you wait for Microdot to come back here, you could have fun on PP?

Sorry for my bad English,
Greetings from Paris