Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Michael Savage Was Banned Only Because ‘Enemy List’ Was Too Muslim Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    I don't think anything more needs be said.
    From a personal viewpoint, I'm not so interested in defending Savage as I am questioning the motives of the government.

    Assuming you feel strongly about Savage not being allowed into the country, would you not be disappointed to hear he was not being allowed entry to the UK to appease Muslims and balance statistics, rather than because of the nature of his views?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    So you're at least conceding that on his radio show he has advocated the murder of millions of Muslims?
    I don't think this is a concession, since I never tried to deny that.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    From a personal viewpoint, I'm not so interested in defending Savage as I am questioning the motives of the government.

    Assuming you feel strongly about Savage not being allowed into the country, would you not be disappointed to hear he was not being allowed entry to the UK to appease Muslims and balance statistics, rather than because of the nature of his views?
    Nah, it seems to me that you're just trying to spin out an argument to attack Muslims and want to ignore Savage's hypocrisy. The fact is, Savage has made statements on his radio station to the effect of advocating the murder of millions of Muslims (Muslims are human beings too). I'm happy that the government don't want him in the country and regardless of what Smith's motives might be I support the action. Indeed I'd support the exclusion of any other person who has publicly promoted mass-murder.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by favh)
    I don't think this is a concession, since I never tried to deny that.
    Ok, good, we're agreed that this Savage has advocated mass murder of Muslims on his radio station. That's actually the point I wanted to make so as to reveal that he's a hypocrite when he suggests elsewhere that he doesn't advocate violence.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    Nah, it seems to me that you're just trying to spin out an argument to attack Muslims and want to ignore Savage's hypocrisy. The fact is, Savage has made statements on his radio station to the effect of advocating the murder of millions of Muslims (Muslims are human beings too). I'm happy that the government don't want him in the country and regardless of what Smith's motives might be I support the action. Indeed I'd support the exclusion of any other person who has publicly promoted mass-murder.
    So you wouldn't be disappointed? As long as he was excluded, the motive would not matter? It doesn't bother you at all that the government may be drawing up ban lists based not on the views of the people in question, but to accommodate certain minority groups and balance out statistics?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The government does this with everything. Stop and searchs they search white people to 'balance' the figures. I wouldn't be surprised if this happens in many other areas.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    The fact is, Savage has made statements on his radio station to the effect of advocating the murder of millions of Muslims (Muslims are human beings too). I'm happy that the government don't want him in the country and regardless of what Smith's motives might be I support the action. Indeed I'd support the exclusion of any other person who has publicly promoted mass-murder.
    In that case, I assume you support the exclusion of Muslims from the United Kingdom; after all, they belong to a religion which advocates the mass-murder of gay people.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Voluntas Mos Victum)
    So you wouldn't be disappointed? As long as he was excluded, the motive would not matter? It doesn't bother you at all that the government may be drawing up ban lists based not on the views of the people in question, but to accommodate certain minority groups and balance out statistics?
    In this case the motive doesn't matter to me, no. Savage clearly broadcasted the advocacy of mass murder of Muslims on his radio show and I'm happy he will not be permitted to come to Britain. In any event I'm not prepared to accept that the motives of Smith as the BNP website has them (or the Daily Fail for that matter) but that's besides the point. My view is that anyone who advocates mass-murder should not get entry to Britain to spread their violent sentiments and Savage fits that scenario regardless.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seven_Three)
    The government does this with everything. Stop and searchs they search white people to 'balance' the figures. I wouldn't be surprised if this happens in many other areas.
    Indeed, that revelation was particularly alarming.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/ju...terror-law-met

    A link (Not even the daily mail this time ) for those interested.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Cappuccino)
    In that case, I assume you support the exclusion of Muslims from the United Kingdom; after all, they belong to a religion which advocates the mass-murder of gay people.
    If someone explicitly advocates mass-murder they should be banned from entry (if they're not UK citizens of course). Being a Muslims doesn't mean advocacy of mass-murder anymore than being a Christian does, religion is a matter of interpretation and involves the individual believer taking some aspects of their faith literally and others not; you only have to look at the variety of interpretation in Christianity to realise this - and some Christians do believe that the Bible's correct interpretation supports the killing of abortionists.
    Offline

    10
    His actual second name is Weiner :nothing:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lefty Leo)
    His actual second name is Weiner :nothing:
    You got a small weiner?
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by 4G_dollars)
    You got a small weiner?
    :facepalm2:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    Ok, good, we're agreed that this Savage has advocated mass murder of Muslims on his radio station. That's actually the point I wanted to make so as to reveal that he's a hypocrite when he suggests elsewhere that he doesn't advocate violence.
    I didn't dispute that. What I said (and you ignored) was that it wasn't his argument that he didn't advocate violence, rather than he doesn't intend to do violence. That is a very big difference. He isn't a hypocrit for saying that he doesn't intend to commit any acts of violence because, as far as we know, he isn't. It is neither here nor there whether he has 'advocated' violence.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by favh)
    I didn't dispute that. What I said (and you ignored) was that it wasn't his argument that he didn't advocate violence, rather than he doesn't intend to do violence. That is a very big difference.
    I'd agree that there's a difference, but I don't think publicly advocating mass murder (in this case on a radio station) is thus somehow trivial because it's not the actual killing. I've also shown him to be a hypocrite when he suggest that he doesn't advocate violence.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by favh)
    ... He isn't a hypocrit for saying that he doesn't intend to commit any acts of violence because, as far as we know, he isn't. It is neither here nor there whether he has 'advocated' violence.
    Nah, he said this: "here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence..."

    but had already made the statement advocating mass-muder which I think fits the meaning of 'violence' pretty well. His claim was that he does not advocate violence and yet he clearly did advocate it.

    You lose.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    I'd agree that there's a difference, but I don't think publicly advocating mass murder (in this case on a radio station) is thus somehow trivial because it's not the actual killing. I've also shown him to be a hypocrite when he suggest that he doesn't advocate violence.

    Nah, he said this: "here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence..."

    but had already made the statement advocating mass-muder which I think fits the meaning of 'violence' pretty well. His claim was that he does not advocate violence and yet he clearly did advocate it.

    You lose.
    Your zealous debating style aside, the fact that this man has said things that are untrue does not necessarily have a bearing on his complaint about being placed on this list. People who have merely 'advocated' violence on some or other occassion includes pretty much everyone in Parliament and I would imagine most of the country. This banned persons list is supposed to include people who are a threat to the public safety, which Savage clearly is not, never having been tied to any plot to actually commit any act of violence.

    Your argument seems to be "Savage is a nasty man". I don't necessarily disagree, but it isn't wholly relevant. Being 'nasty' is not a crime and nor is it grounds for exclusion from a country.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswy)
    If someone explicitly advocates mass-murder they should be banned from entry (if they're not UK citizens of course).
    Is that where you draw the line? What about people who propose other anti-liberal policies? Should we bar Muslim preachers who openly attack women's rights and who express a desire to impose - albeit without reference to violence - Islamic Law upon British society?

    (Original post by Oswy)
    Being a Muslims doesn't mean advocacy of mass-murder anymore than being a Christian does
    That's simply not true, certainly on issues such as homosexuality. You would be hard-pressed to find a Christian group that incites hatred and advocates violence against gay people; whereas it would be child's play to find a Muslim group (or scholar) that advocates the slaughter of gay people.

    (Original post by Oswhy)
    Religion is a matter of interpretation and involves the individual believer taking some aspects of their faith literally and others not; you only have to look at the variety of interpretation in Christianity to realise this - and some Christians do believe that the Bible's correct interpretation supports the killing of abortionists.
    Once again, Christianity is at a different stage with its texts.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by favh)
    Your blah, blah, blah....
    I've clearly shown that Savage a) publicly advocated mass-murder and b) is a hypocrite when he made a more recent statement to the effect that he didn't advocate violence. As far as I'm concerned my case is pretty watertight seeing as I used his own words. Anything else you say is just typing practise.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No **** Sherlock, Savage was just a face thrown in to whiten out the banned list. Savage should never have been banned - he made some controversial statements and is horribly rude to his callers...big deal. Only thing this ban did was make Savage famous in the UK, I had never even heard of him before this ********* happened. Labour clearly shot themselves in the foot with this fascist, PC tripe hence the fact Mr Savage is now allowed to visit the UK.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.