Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

US radio presenter threatens to sue over UK entry ban

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. try sue all ya like ya fricking homophobe yes should be on list infact should be imprisoned for your hate

  2. This guy’s ego is almost as offensively inflated as his extreme outbursts.

  3. This guy really lives in his own filthy dimension. He’s nothing but a fly that thinks that can make a shadow and darken a country. What a lunatic.

  4. This man is quite something! You can go to the US, be denied access and put on the next flight out — and probably not even be given a reason why. He, on the other hand, believes he has a God-given right to go wherever he wants and we can’t keep him out. Actions have consequences and his actions got him on the UK government’s undesirables list. Deal with it…

    I hope he does sue – that would be an interesting one to watch. Sue the UK for thinking they can make their own laws without asking some talk-show host in the US.

  5. ‘Savage also called for his listeners to “cancel trips to England”, adding: “I suggest you stop buying English made goods, I don’t know what they make any more but whatever they make I suggest you don’t buy any more’

    That’s unbelievable. I can’t believe how spoilt and childish and up himself he’s being. Its never occured to him to even think about why he’s been banned.

  6. We should not condone the excesses of an illiberal government because it is excluding someone who is offensive to us(and he is very offensive). Offence is not a valid reason to deny freedom of speech or movement. Everyone is offended by something and the risk of offending can be a blanket rationale for repressive tyranny. If he openly incites violence or breaking the law, keep him out. Otherwise, we should let him come and give him hell in open debate if he can face it.

  7. Brian Burton 7 May 2009, 4:06pm

    American GOONS like Savage should be banned from a civilised Country like UK. This is good news for us you Radiohead idiot.

  8. Ian Laughlin 7 May 2009, 4:19pm

    There’s a good article in the Guardian newspaper today on Savage and how people like him dominate talk stations in the States. Until 1986, the US broadcasting regulations required talk stations to have at least lip service to presenting a fair debate. After that time, extremist right-wingers began to buy up AM radio stations, and the supremacy of the ultra-conservative screecher was assured on radio sets across the country. There are some liberal stations on FM and on the internet but they find competing difficult. Such is the racism, anti-Latina propaganda and homophobia on talk radio in the states that pirate stations such as San Francisco Liberation Radio have taken to breaking the law to get alternative points of view across.

    The Guardian columnist concludes that the main danger in banning Savage from the UK is that he will use it to incite anti-British hysteria and yet more conspiracy theories amongst his ill-educated listenership. This appears to be happening. Instead, they suggest the authorities needed to just quietly refuse him a visa and thus thwart any future attempts to enter the country.

    As it is, it is important that the Home Office now stick to its position, fight him and wait for Savage to find new targets. In the meantime, LGBT communities here have their own airwave battles to fight – against BBC Radio 1’s resident gay basher Moyles and the anti-gay psuedo-Christian broadcaster Premier Radio.

  9. Jen Marcus 7 May 2009, 4:28pm

    Savage is an arrogant, egotistical blow hard, idiot like Rush Limbaugh who pander to the base elements of non thinking people in the States. He has a lot of nerve telling people in the UK who they can or cannot admit into their own country.

  10. I agree with Riondo – once we stop open debate, such nasty right wing views just go underground and thrive unchallenged. We then think we have equality, all is pink and rosy, when the reality is quite the opposite.

    And without a common enemy, the intellectual elite (including the likes of Ms Smith) will end up attacking other liberals who aren’t her shade of grey. I can hear echoes of Animal Farm

  11. I’m in two minds about banning him. On the one hand, you’re giving a political platform to a guy who wouldn’t even merit a couple of column inches in a UK newspaper in any other circumstances. If he visited, it’s not like he’d be signed up for a weekly radio spot this side of the pond, who would want him barring the BNP? Any opinions he had would fall on deaf ears.
    Now everyone knows who he is and what he stands for, and he gets to act the martyr on front pages on both sides of the Atlantic.
    On the other hand, folks have been banned from the USA for much less than that.
    On balance they should have let him be, then when he comes over spewing hate and vitriol he would simply be ignored. Some cages shouldn’t be rattled.

  12. Jonathon. For the record, hate speech is not open debate. This miserable excuse for a human being is not interested in open debate. Stop deludeing yourself.

  13. John M.J. 8 May 2009, 7:17am

    ‘Hate speech’? ‘Scuse me, what exactly is ‘hate speech’? You live in an open and democratic society – in theory. Some people are not going to like you. Live with it and don’t, please, invent psuedo-crimes such as ‘hate speech’. People are entitled not to like other people on all sorts of grounds, including the ground of being gay; that’s not ‘hate speech’, that’s just what people are and have a right to be. You may not like it, indeed, I hope that you don’t, but banning an expression of opinion because it offends you is just plain stupid. You don’t have a right not to be offended, nor do you have a right to prohibit the free speech of others no matter how much the exercise of free speech offends you.

    Michael Savage may appear to you to be deeply anti-gay, perhaps he is. I happen to be deeply anti-Muslim. If you ban him then you end up banning me – eventually you end up banning just about everyone.

    Free speech is free speech. You can’t pick and choose. Either we all have the right to speak our minds or none of us has. The moment that you limit what any one of us can say then you limit what all of us can say. We’ll win the argument for gay rights because we we will win the argument. We cannot win the argument if we sinmply ban the other side from speaking – that’s fascism and dictatorial politics and that’s not the way we British do things. Michael Savage is wrong about gays but we have to prove that he is wrong – simply banning him from advancing his silly and simplistic arguments doesn’t answer those arguments, it simply encourages a conspiratorial mindset.

    In my opinion Michael Savage has an absolute right to say anything he wants, short of advocating violence (which he has never done), and we gays have an absolute right of reply. Do you think that we can’t win this debate? Do you think that Michael Savage’s views on homosexuality, on abortion, on teen sexuality, on contrataception are so threatening to good order and our society that you have to deny him a platform?

    I don’t, even though I disagree with him on almost all of his platforms I will defend to the death his right to hold his opinions. That’s freedom. I’m ashamed of all of you who would deny open and free speech to this man. We need not be afraid of free speech if it speaks only irrational prejudice. If it speaks truth then we should humble ourselves in the face of truth. I do not believe that Michael Savage speaks truth, I believe that his speech does not speak the truth about gay people – but I cannot accept that we should silence him. Silencing him is not democracy, it is not freedom and it it is not fair. Silencing Michael Savage and denying him the freedom to travel is tantamount to dictatorship – it is the thought police in action.

    We could be next!

  14. Well done John M. J. At least one voice of wisdom and sanity still prevails on here among the knee-jerk hysterical ranting. So, the discriminated become the discriminators. How rich!! I don’t agree with Michael Savage either, but I hope he sues the Ann Summers panties and stilletoes off Jackboot Jacqui!

  15. @ John, I don’t understand why you think Mr Savage has not ever advocated violence. Do you mean he has never explicitly advocated violence? Because he has implicitly implied it on many occasions. He’s also lost a radio DJing job because of this very reason.

    As I can’t add links here directly, evidence of his implied incitement to violence is given on YouTube, just type “Michael Savage Violent Fantasy” into the search bar on that site and you’ll hear it, quite clearly.

  16. BrazilGayScene 11 May 2009, 3:08am

    Absolutely. We are forgetting one very important thing here. Immigration law… There is no right to ‘freedom of movement’. Any country can ban someone from entry, without giving a reason if they wish. This man has no automatic right to go to the UK. The Home Secretary is absolutely within her rights to say we do not want him there.

    So yes guys, lets defend his ‘rights’ to free speech, lets defend his right to incite people to hatred and acts of violence against us… But let’s defend his right to carry on doing it from his little radio station…IN THE US.

    Not in the UK thanks.

  17. John M J: Yes, he has the freedom to say what he wants. But Britain also has freedom to say sod off and say it somewhere else, because he’s not a British citizen.

    Would you allow objectionable people to come to stay at your house? It’s just the same, isn’t it. It doesn’t affect his freedom of speech one jot… Britain isn’t banning his words from being broadcast in the country; blocking his webcasts, YouTube videos or publications. I don’t see any “freedom of speech” argument as being relevant in this case. He’s a nasty piece of work, he makes his money out of being nasty, and he can stay at home to do it, if nobody else wants him. :-)

  18. Michael Savage (Weiner). Wonder why he changed his name.

    You guys can be so civilized, it’s difficult to criticize you, but…

    The best part of this Savage ran down his mother’s legs.

    Put a target on his back? Not only on his back, but also on his forehead, his arse, his nuts and his chest.

    Sue? He just said he doesn’t know anything about British law.

    7 lawyers? 7,000 lawyers couldn’t help him in a British court.

    Ask his listeners to boycott England? Who wants the KKK in England anyway?

    Just look at his face. Is this the face of “Reality Check”?

    In my opinion, he should be banned from the USA as well, and given a complimentary one way ticket to Antartica.

    When I come to my senses though, I agee most with Riondo (6), Ian Laughlin(8) and Flapjack (11).

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all