|
CLINGING TO
THEIR CONSTITUTION?
Justices'
free
speech decision claim praised,
faulted
By Bill
Vidonic
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, June 21,
2011
The solicitor for Pittsburgh Public
Schools says a
U.S. Supreme Court ruling
that a former eastern Pennsylvania
police chief couldn't claim free speech
in a private employment matter
was a
sound one.
"I think it represents a common-sense
distinction
between getting up at
a public meeting and saying, 'I'm an
employee, I live here, and taxes
are too
high,' which are matters of general
concern, and work-related speech,"
Ira
Weiss said of the decision Monday.
Click
here
to read more of this article or
click
here to
find books about this topic.
Britain
reaffirms
its ban on Michael Savage
Guilty
until
proven
innocent?
Posted:
May
24,
2011
© 2011 WND
An attorney for the British government
has
reaffirmed the United Kingdom's
decision to ban leading talk-radio host
Michael Savage from
entry.
WND reported
last July the new
Conservative-Party-led government of
Prime Minister David Cameron
informed the
popular nationally syndicated host it
would continue the ban initiated
by the
previous administration unless he
repudiated statements made on his
broadcasts
that were deemed a threat to public
security. The U.K., however, has
never specified
which statements it thought were so
dangerous.
As WND
reported in May 2009, then–British Home
Secretary Jacqui Smith
announced
that Savage was on a list of 16 people
banned from entry because the
government
believed their views might provoke
violence. Smith said it was
"important
that people understand the sorts of
values and sorts of standards that
we have
here, the fact that it's a privilege to
come and the sort of things
that mean
you won't be welcome in this country."
In the latest
communiqué
from
the
British
government, Michael Atkins, writing on
behalf
of the U.K.'s treasury solicitor, told
Savage's London-based attorney,
"Your client has not provided any
evidence to show that he did not
commit
the unacceptable behaviour" that
prompted the "decision to exclude
him, nor has your client provided any
acceptable evidence to show his
repudiation
of those unacceptable behaviours."
Atkins said Savage can do nothing at
the moment to
affect his status and
must wait until December, when the
decision is scheduled for review.
Responding
to
the
lastest
development,
Savage
pointed
to
Cameron
and
President
Obama,
during
his current trip to the
U.K.,
comparing themselves with President
Reagan and Prime Minister Thatcher,
"blathering about 'democracy' in the
Arab world."
"How
about democracy in the U.K.?"
asked Savage, referring to his case.
"The freedom to a trial? The
freedom
of appeal? The freedom to set the record
straight?
"Why does the Cameron government
protect Muslim
terrorists and Muslim
hate-preachers who espouse the overthrow
of the British government,
democracy
itself, while banning Michael Savage
from entering the land of their
better
forefathers?" he asked.
Savage has received support from Reps.
Allen West,
R-Fla., and John
Culberson, R-Texas, who sent letters to
Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton,
urging her to review Britain's
ban.
As WND reported, West's letter
pointed
out
Savage
was
put
on
the
U.K.'s
banned-entry list with "ruthless
criminals," including a Hamas terrorist
and Russian skinhead.
West argued there is no basis for the
action.
"For a nation who believes in freedom
of speech
and press," he
wrote, "I have a hard time understanding
why such a high level,
government
department would release this statement
when there has not been one
incident
recorded in the United States regarding
Dr. Savage instigating
violence, let alone serious criminal
acts."
Culberson, the assistant Republican
whip, urged
Clinton
to
use
her
position
to
press
the
U.K. to grant Savage a travel visa
immediately.
On his website, Savage
has
appealed to his listeners to sign a
petition urging Clinton to act.
Official U.K.
government correspondence shows Savage
was put on the list to provide
"balance," because it contained so many
Muslim extremists.
"Those who
would give
up essential Liberty, to purchase a
little temporary Safety, deserve
neither Liberty
nor Safety." (Benjamin
Franklin)
Oh, but it’s only the freedom of
speech. Shame on
our British cousins! And
woe to those in our government who
follow closely behind them. This
article can
be read in its entirety at
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=303069
or
click here to
read more
|
