J'accuse England! J'accuse America!
Posted: July 08, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

J'accuse! (I accuse!)

– Émile Zola

On Jan. 13, 1898, the celebrated French writer and intellectual Émile Zola risked his career and endangered his life when his letter "J'accuse!" was published on the front page of the Paris daily L'Aurore. This famous letter was a scathing indictment against the French government for unjustly condemning a war hero, Capt. Alfred Dreyfus, to Devil's Island and covering up evidence of his innocence. This passionate letter "J'accuse!" has stood through the ages as a singular expression of indignation and accusation against powerful persons, organizations and nations.

Now, 100 years later, the Dreyfus Affair has now crossed the English Channel in the case of Michael Savage.

After several weeks of relative quiet regarding the May 5 blacklisting of radio host Michael Savage, Jim Meyers of Newsmax dropped a bombshell article on July 1 that chronicles the recent admission by the British government that it did not consult with the U.S. and the Obama administration regarding the exclusion of Michael Savage from England. As remarkable as that statement is, it made an even more incredible admission that England is now presently speaking with ranking members of the Obama administration about the blacklisting of Michael Savage.

The May 5 blacklisting of Savage is suspiciously close to – and I believe connected with – a lawsuit Savage filed in mid-April against Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano over a DHS report suggesting U.S. military veterans could be targeted by right-wing extremists. Furthermore, Savage has been the most vociferous critic of the socialist policies of the Obama administration, and we know how defensive and petulant President Obama can get when he is criticized.

Britain's defensive and convoluted reply on the case of Michael Savage amounts to a non-denial denial. It smacks of conspiracy, cover-up, lies and collusion at the highest levels of the world's two most powerful governments.

Here is my theory on how the Obama administration colluded with Britain to blacklist Michael Savage:

Let us float a "Fairness Doctrine" trial balloon with our ally across the pond before we bring it home to America.

Let us pick a sacrificial lamb: a conservative of some notoriety, yet controversial with few friends in the state-run media or among his conservative peers.

Let us associate him with the most evil, irredeemable criminals on the planet.

And let us wait and watch with glee as his fellow conservatives lurch back into the shadows, shut their normally big yaps on this case and not come to Michael Savage's defense.

Why? Because big shot conservatives like Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, Scarborough, Fox News and conservative think tanks are deathly afraid that they will be next to be blacklisted.

The Machiavellian plot of the British and U.S. government against Michael Savage, an American patriot and self-confessed Anglophile is really appalling. Their scheme would have worked, but they only made one mistake: They picked the wrong man to blacklist. They underestimated this man. Michael Savage is a Promethean figure who has the courage and fortitude to take his case all the way before the British Parliament if necessary.

If Prime Minister Gordon Brown's administration put Michael Savage's name on this list of infamy, then surely it had to be approved by or at least made aware of to the prime minister himself. There is no plausible deniability here. Also, since Savage's radio program isn't broadcast in England, how did it learn of him? Who ratted him out? Perhaps some useful idiot in the bowels of the Obama administration?

How can England so conspicuously try to postdate its collusion with America to ban Savage two months after the fact, or until conservative MP Nigel Evans sent his letter of inquiry regarding the Michael Savage case to the secretary of state for the Home Department, asking "what discussions his department has had with the U.S. administration on the creation of the list of foreign nationals barred from entry to the U.K., with particular reference to the inclusion of Michael Savage on that list."

A reply came from Phil Woolas, minister of state in the Home Office and a member of the Labour Party: "The Home Office did not consult the U.S. administration about the creation of the list of foreign nationals who are excluded from the United Kingdom on unacceptable behavior grounds, which included U.S. citizen, Michael Savage.

"However, following publication of the list, Home Office and FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) officials have discussed the Government's policy on exclusion with American officials."

Who are these unnamed American officials? This British-American axis amounts to collusion to exclude Savage. Furthermore, it is a modern-day metaphor of the "Dreyfus Affair" regarding the unjust conviction, imprisonment and cover-up of Capt. Alfred Dreyfus, a decorated war hero, a French citizen of Jewish extraction who was falsely accused of treason by France in 1894. At least Capt. Dreyfus had the celebrated writer and intellectual, Émile Zola, to defend his cause, but who does Michael Savage have on his side?

England and America can no longer ignore the public outcry against Savage's freedom of speech and freedom of expression being egregiously violated. This was evident when Home Secretary Jacqui Smith resigned on June 5, one month to the day after she published England's blacklist which defamed Michael Savage.

Justice Louis Brandeis was right: Sunlight is the best disinfectant. England, America: Tell us what you knew and when you knew it. Michael Savage only wants his name taken off that list of infamy and given an apology by the British government.

If Capt. Alfred Dreyfus had to wait 12 years – from his arrest in 1894, to his conviction the following year, to his pardon in 1899 and official exoneration and annulment of all charges by the military in 1906 – then how long must Dr. Michael Savage wait to get justice?

J'accuse England! … J'accuse America!

Ellis Washington