Attack on piece of art at the Museum of History in Stockholm

[Ty]

I don't think you are qualified enough for that lecture. Free speech is about protection for the things you don't want to hear not for what you want to be subject too.

The ambassador is NOT "subject" to the artwork. He merely not need visit the museum. Geez, what a concept. But the fact that he went out of his way and supposedly premeditated it?

Who is giving a lecture? You? What are your qualifications?

How would you feel if the artist wore a t-shirt that condemned the Israeli government? Would you be 'ok' if the ambassador took a swing at the artist because it offended his sensibilities? Where do you draw the line?

In which case it seems it is the ambassadors message that needs protected or is it only free speech for the artists of the world?

The ambassador's "message" should be protected if it were limited to a non-destructive manner. How you can even justify vandalism of another persons/government's property is beyond me. You basically like to give the Israeli government carte blanche. So what now? The ambassador could claim that the idea McDonalds insults him so he should be free to raze those?

At any rate may be Sweden would favor subsidizing art that in some way glorifies the murdering of Palestinians?

That is a totally different issue and for Sweden and it's populace to wrest with.

Dear God man, I said you might consider it that way.

Yes you used, "might", but that does not matter for my response. I just do NOT see how vandalism in this case can be considered a legitimate form of protest at all. It's not as if he did not have other alternative forms.

Who cares if them Jews dislike the idea of being blown up by suicide bombers?

I do and no one is arguing otherwise. It's an absolute atrocious act. But what does that have to do with vandalism? Your propensity for arguing from extreme points of view (are you implying that I condone or support suicide bombers?) makes it difficult to have a coherent discussion with you.

Then have some asshole artist depict it as some great deed.

Again, your interpretation is but ONE. Look no further than this very same topic to see others that view the art differently than you.

May be you would like it if someone who makes designs to blow themselves up in your home was portrayed as something that would be beautiful with your blood all over them.

More nonsensical extremism. Of course not. But there are laws against vigilantism.

Does displaying this work qualify as some variety of hate crime? I think it might.

There's that word, "might" again. Honestly I'm fuzzy on the definition and application of a "hate crime" law. How is your argument constructed that it is?

Does Sweden have hate crime laws? That's how. You seem to be disgruntled with the idea that someone has an extreme disapproval of the work in question.

Disgruntled? You seem to the one who is getting hot under the collar. I actually don't care that much since it wasn't my art or my tax dollar that paid for it.

I can see how you would stifle the message they have with regards to the work in question. Free speech is not only for artists you know.

So now vandalism is free speech? Nice world you live in.

 

[oi]

There was an interview with him in 'Aftonbladet', Swedens biggest newspaper yesterday (or the day before that, time is a kinda fuzzy concept for me at the moment). It wasn't really that interesting though, it was basically two pages of him saying that he was shocked by being called antisemetic. He also was very disturbed by the fact that he thought people didn't understand the art piece, since when he had been in Tel Aviv before and showed another 'similar' piece - a wall of blood which had ladders or stairs which led you to telephones in which you could hear crying voices. The journalist asked "palestinan or israelis?", "You didn't know, and that's the point! The people of Tel Aviv understood".

Anyway, it was pretty clear though that he wasn't pro-Sharon at least. He basically said that when Sharon and his ambassador call people anti-semetic for criticizing Israel they assume that they [Sharon] are representing all the jews in the world, which isn't the case. So when Sharon calls someone antisemetic, they [EU] are in fact just against the Israeli government, not jews as a people.

 

[Legion]

Here is a review of some of the news coverage.

http://honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Swedish_Art_Outrage.asp

 

[oi]

This exhibit was the culmination of dozens of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish events in Sweden.

Lol, ok, glad he gave some examples at least

For the June 12 deaths of her brother, and her cousin... seemingly innocent with universal non-violent character... Weeping bitterly, she added: 'If our nation cannot realize its dream and the goals of the victims, and live in freedom and dignity, then let the whole world be erased'... Run away, then, you poor child... and the red looked beautiful upon the white.

Uhm, I don't really see the anti-semetic in this. I think it's pretty obvious that it tries to portray what might have gone through her mind when she decided to do what she did. But you see what you want to see, I guess.

 

[London Geezer]

So now vandalism is free speech? Nice world you live in.

So... you mean, if i write "I HOPE U DIE, U BASTARD" on my boss's car with my house keys, i could get sacked? Isnt that freedom of speech?

 

[Humus]

Here is a review of some of the news coverage.

http://honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Swedish_Art_Outrage.asp

Nice for a site called "honest reporting" to put out such a one sided view of the event ...

 

[L233]

Here is a review of some of the news coverage.

http://honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Swedish_Art_Outrage.asp

Nice for a site called "honest reporting" to put out such a one sided view of the event ...

It's a right wing propaganga site that sees any reporting not catering to the right-wing point of view as "dishonest".

 

[oi]

That's what I thought, but I rather waited for someone else to say it

 

[kyleb]

honestreporting seems like a rather fair and balanced* site to me.




*phrase used in the same sense as that of foxnews.

 

[Legion]

of course we all know Reuters has Foxnews beat in terms of honest reporting.

 

[kyleb]

who the hell was trying to pass of reuters as a reputable news sorce?

 

[Legion]

who the hell was trying to pass of reuters as a reputable news sorce?

shall we simply superimpose indymedia apon reuters or any news group or webblog you visit?

If the webpage is right leaning its contents are some how false or possibly more inaccurate then if they were more centrist or left leaning?

 

[Humus]

The only thing to be said here is that reading the article you linked to it seems that honestreporting does not live up to their name.

 

[kyleb]

no kidding. besides, i visit a wide range of news sorce and do my best to seperate the propganda from fact no matter which side it leans towards. best i can't tell Legion is just trying to justfy his own bias with speculation and moral relivitism. :?