I've got this CRAZY idea!

I think wikileaks have better things to do.

well, thanks for at least replying. If that's what you think, then I guess I wont see any support from you, but that's OK.

appreciate it.

Honestly, I'm glad he can't come here.

We don't need another nut case.

edit: he also invoked his first amendment right about it, which doesn't say that you cannot be banned from other countries for your insane views (and only applies to American soil)

edit 2: not to mention it sounds like the guy acts like a fucking child as much as possible.

I hope he loses his lawsuit. I hope it gets thrown out.

To clarify, the reason why it would be a danger for him to visit the united kingdom is entirely because of his views. There's already enough people in this country stirring up violent behavior towards other people, we don't need another person in the country doing the same thing.

edit 3: also

he was put onto the list to "provide balance" so that it didn't look like they where picking only Muslims.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of WHITE people on that list, it isn't just a list of muslims and then him.

[quote name='Law' post='3301792' date='Dec 1 2010, 05:25 PM']Honestly, I'm glad he can't come here.

We don't need another nut case.[/quote]

he's not a nut case, have you ever listened to anything that wasn't a taken out of context soundbite? here is last nights show, have a listen. is talking about stuffed peppers instead of politics really a crime?

edit: what's to stop someone from doing what they did to other individuals, take what he said and twist it to fit someone's political agenda? he was a test subject, to see if they could pull it off.

edit 2: yes, there are white people on that list, Nazi Skinheads, the guy from stormfront etc, but like I said, is it really fair to twist someones words like the people at Media Matters did for there own political gain? remember George Soros own's them! He speaks out against George Soros!

[quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3301800' date='Dec 1 2010, 10:28 PM'][quote name='Law' post='3301792' date='Dec 1 2010, 05:25 PM']Honestly, I'm glad he can't come here.

We don't need another nut case.[/quote]

he's not a nut case, have you ever listened to anything that wasn't a taken out of context soundbite? here is last nights show, have a listen. is talking about stuffed peppers instead of politics really a crime?

edit: what's to stop someone from doing what they did to other individuals, take what he said and twist it to fit someone's political agenda? he was a test subject, to see if they could pull it off.
[/quote]

No he wasn't. He isn't the first white person to be banned from the UK. Also in the list were the Phelps, who you could also argue were just acting under their first amendment rights.

Looking into it, Martha Stewart is banned from entering the UK.


edit: and honestly, if his argument is that he was put onto the list because they needed one white person to balance out the (very few) muslims, he really needs to look back and evaluate his life.

Things like these pretty much never work .
Also, you're*

[quote name='Law' post='3301822' date='Dec 1 2010, 05:40 PM']edit: and honestly, if his argument is that he was put onto the list because they needed one white person to balance out the (very few) muslims, he really needs to look back and evaluate his life.[/quote]


what, going throughout the fiji islands and collecting/preserving rare plants and storing them in the U.K. is realy the most dangerous threat to society. /sarcasm

That and selling vitamins later on in life, yea.. that's really dangerous! /sarcasm

edit: watch this guy, is he considered "sane" ? he's in the camp for OBL! he admits it. He Lives in England, why is he allowed to live there? why is his speech protected?

edit 2:

b, i want to point something out, the reason i said "provide balance" was not because he was white, the reason is because the Labor Party said it themselves! via the telegraphs Ed West

One message, sent by an unidentified Home Office official on November 27 last year, said that ‘with Weiner, I can understand that disclosure of the decision would help provide a balance of types of exclusion cases’.

The documents include a draft recommendation, marked ‘Restricted’, saying: ‘We will want to ensure that the names disclosed reflect the broad range of cases and are not all Islamic extremists.’

Click to expand...

source.

so, if you have a problem, don't take it up with me, take it up with the government.

--
If anyone is willing to help, please just let me know, please don't come in starting crap.

[quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3301846' date='Dec 1 2010, 10:53 PM'][quote name='Law' post='3301822' date='Dec 1 2010, 05:40 PM']edit: and honestly, if his argument is that he was put onto the list because they needed one white person to balance out the (very few) muslims, he really needs to look back and evaluate his life.[/quote]


what, going throughout the fiji islands and collecting/preserving rare plants and storing them in the U.K. is realy the most dangerous threat to society. /sarcasm

That and selling vitamins later on in life, yea.. that's really dangerous! /sarcasm

edit: watch this guy, is he considered "sane" ? he's in the camp for OBL! he admits it. He Lives in England, why is he allowed to live there? why is his speech protected?

[/quote]

He probably became a citizen before going nuts and now they can't get rid of him without causing outrage in the muslim community which could ignite a mini-war between browns and whites.

and again to the above post, The Telegraph? Really? Wow. Not to mention the statement can be interpreted in many ways. One way is "We had to fill a quota of white people", the other way is "Instead of just banning brown people who cause trouble, we have to show we ban white people who could cause trouble too".

which just shows that they realised he was a threat to peace and put him on the list.


edit: so is this Michael Savage guy your dad or something and you really want to go on holiday to the UK with him?

[quote name='Law' post='3302014' date='Dec 1 2010, 07:08 PM'][quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3301846' date='Dec 1 2010, 10:53 PM'][quote name='Law' post='3301822' date='Dec 1 2010, 05:40 PM']edit: and honestly, if his argument is that he was put onto the list because they needed one white person to balance out the (very few) muslims, he really needs to look back and evaluate his life.[/quote]


what, going throughout the fiji islands and collecting/preserving rare plants and storing them in the U.K. is realy the most dangerous threat to society. /sarcasm

That and selling vitamins later on in life, yea.. that's really dangerous! /sarcasm

edit: watch this guy, is he considered "sane" ? he's in the camp for OBL! he admits it. He Lives in England, why is he allowed to live there? why is his speech protected?

[/quote]

He probably became a citizen before going nuts and now they can't get rid of him without causing outrage in the muslim community which could ignite a mini-war between browns and whites.

and again to the above post, The Telegraph? Really? Wow. Not to mention the statement can be interpreted in many ways. One way is "We had to fill a quota of white people", the other way is "Instead of just banning brown people who cause trouble, we have to show we ban white people who could cause trouble too".

which just shows that they realised he was a threat to peace and put him on the list.


edit: so is this Michael Savage guy your dad or something and you really want to go on holiday to the UK with him?
[/quote]

wrong! he was born in London! and they have had well over 10 years to get rid of him, since 1999. but they refuse to act!

so what, telegraphs out, daily mails out, the suns out, what news organization do people in England accept, Jihad daily? the extremist chronicle? what about the radical times? I would honestly like to know so I can source from them next time!

no, he isn't my dad, and I do not even know the guy personally.. But NO ONE should be put through what he was put through. just beca use they do not agree with him on certain issues in politics.

and what about freedom of speech according to the EU.

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected

Click to expand...

shouldn't he have a right to practice it as well, after all. He has lived in the UK when he was younger, alongside spain. Did WW3 happen when he lived there? did all hell break loose? I don't think so.

[quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3302064' date='Dec 2 2010, 12:35 AM'][quote name='Law' post='3302014' date='Dec 1 2010, 07:08 PM'][quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3301846' date='Dec 1 2010, 10:53 PM'][quote name='Law' post='3301822' date='Dec 1 2010, 05:40 PM']edit: and honestly, if his argument is that he was put onto the list because they needed one white person to balance out the (very few) muslims, he really needs to look back and evaluate his life.[/quote]


what, going throughout the fiji islands and collecting/preserving rare plants and storing them in the U.K. is realy the most dangerous threat to society. /sarcasm

That and selling vitamins later on in life, yea.. that's really dangerous! /sarcasm

edit: watch this guy, is he considered "sane" ? he's in the camp for OBL! he admits it. He Lives in England, why is he allowed to live there? why is his speech protected?

[/quote]

He probably became a citizen before going nuts and now they can't get rid of him without causing outrage in the muslim community which could ignite a mini-war between browns and whites.

and again to the above post, The Telegraph? Really? Wow. Not to mention the statement can be interpreted in many ways. One way is "We had to fill a quota of white people", the other way is "Instead of just banning brown people who cause trouble, we have to show we ban white people who could cause trouble too".

which just shows that they realised he was a threat to peace and put him on the list.


edit: so is this Michael Savage guy your dad or something and you really want to go on holiday to the UK with him?
[/quote]

wrong! he was born in London! and they have had well over 10 years to get rid of him, since 1999. but they refuse to act!

so what, telegraphs out, daily mails out, the suns out, what news organization do people in England accept, Jihad daily? the extremist chronicle? what about the radical times? I would honestly like to know so I can source from them next time!

no, he isn't my dad, and I do not even know the guy personally.. But NO ONE should be put through what he was put through. just beca use they do not agree with him on certain issues in politics.

and what about freedom of speech according to the EU.

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected

Click to expand...

[/quote]

What's happening does not infringe either of those rights. He can still hold opinions and receive information, he just isn't allowed to live in a country where a certain amount of the population isn't white due to his views.

And yes, Jihad Daily and The Radical Times are both excellent news papers that you can source from. The Saudi on Sunday is fine too.

[quote name='Law' post='3302082' date='Dec 1 2010, 07:45 PM']What's happening does not infringe either of those rights. He can still hold opinions and receive information, he just isn't allowed to live in a country where a certain amount of the population isn't white due to his views.

And yes, Jihad Daily and The Radical Times are both excellent news papers that you can source from. The Saudi on Sunday is fine too.[/quote]


but that's just it, he isn't syndicated outside the united states, so how is is that they have heard his show at all, it was sound bites taken out of context, and there using that as a base to ban him!

it was his opinion on his media 'radio program' show, that he has had for 15 years. where did they get it from, do they have secret spies listening into radio programs thorough the world just itching to ban someone for something they do not like being said?

look, I do not ask you to listen to his program for more than a few minutes, you do not have to listen to the whole program. but if you listen, he talks about wiki leaks for a few min, then he goes on to talk about stuffed peppers, and that's pretty much the whole show, mind you, it's not all politics and food, sometimes it's religion, sometimes it's about pets, sometimes he let's the callers choose.. actually, that's what he ask's them to do, to suggest things to talk about.

I have the Saudi on Sunday bookmarked!

Alright, I guess I can kind of guess where you're coming from, it looks like this guy has a pretty bad rep for just speaking his mind.

I highly doubt the decision will be appealed though, and I guess next time I should look into it more than just reading the "Controversy" section on Wikipedia.


edit: oh and for what it's worth, Jacqui Smith is a huge bitch.

[quote name='Law' post='3302172' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:23 PM']Alright, I guess I can kind of guess where you're coming from, it looks like this guy has a pretty bad rep for just speaking his mind.

I highly doubt the decision will be appealed though, and I guess next time I should look into it more than just reading the "Controversy" section on Wikipedia.


edit: oh and for what it's worth, Jacqui Smith is a huge bitch.[/quote]

Thank you!! I appreciate it that you have an open mind, I agree about Jacqui *gets taken out, "we have him, were bringing him back."* I just wanted to try to help, and this is a way that I was thinking might work.

Michael Weiner is a homophobic dirtbag

[quote name='yuyuyup' post='3302188' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:28 PM']Michael Weiner is a gay hating dirtbag[/quote]

he doesn't hate gay people, he has said on multiple occasions he doesn't care what they do, as long as they do not harm children, he could care less. -snip-

[quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3302198' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:35 PM'][quote name='yuyuyup' post='3302188' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:28 PM']Michael Weiner is a gay hating dirtbag[/quote]

he doesn't hate gay people, he's has said on multiple occasions he doesn't care what they do, as long as they do not harm children, he could care less. -snip-
[/quote]
I've never heard of a isolated case in which being gay caused someone to harm a child, unless that child was gay and someone was harming them because of it.

[quote name='_Chaz_' post='3302202' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:38 PM'][quote name='The Living Shadow' post='3302198' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:35 PM'][quote name='yuyuyup' post='3302188' date='Dec 1 2010, 08:28 PM']Michael Weiner is a gay hating dirtbag[/quote]

he doesn't hate gay people, he's has said on multiple occasions he doesn't care what they do, as long as they do not harm children, he could care less.

[/quote]
I've never heard of a isolated case in which being gay caused someone to harm a child, unless that child was gay and someone was harming them because of it.


If the link is graphic, you should refrain from posting it here.
[/quote]

In a sexual way. I have a story about that, but i will not post it unless someone requests it.
--
I removed it, I was just trying to make a point and I posted a warning ahead of time.

edit: _chaz_, please edit your post

How many times does Michael Savage have to mention the "Gay Mafia" for him to be considered homophobic ? Oh, you want an example of him saying "Gay Mafia ?"
[yt]jMedePk_PGg[/yt]
Savage vs. autistic kids [yt]LwnD_o-FFbU[/yt]
Good golly what a piece of shit.

[quote name='yuyuyup' post='3302413' date='Dec 1 2010, 10:46 PM']How many times does Michael Savage have to mention the "Gay Mafia" for him to be considered homophobic ? Oh, you want an example of him saying "Gay Mafia ?"
Good golly what a piece of shit.[/quote]

well, let's see.. BDSM parades in downtown San Fransisco, Homosexual Rallies in S. F. where they dress in leather and parade around town. NAMBLA "North American Man Boy Lovers Association" that's based in S. F., what about the homosexual bath houses, your telling me people don't lobby for such things... should i go on, what kind of backwards city is that!? there is allot more, but I am going to stop.

@ the autism, I have seen this a million times over, people take a 15 minuet discussion on medicine and cut it down to 1:30 seconds, tell me that's right, tell me that there wasn't a back story there. this is the same thing that happened with him being banned in the U.K.

why don't you link to where he responds to the criticism.

[yt]KuDTI_GHu_A[/yt]

yuyuyup, stop causing trouble.. if your really have this much time on your hands go for a walk, or play a game. don't try to hijack this thread anymore than you have already.

edit: thank you _chaz_