Sunday, March 30, 2008

Legal experts:although it may be seen as offensive by some it was not illegal

nazis_skokie.jpgIn the Chicago suburb of Skokie, one out of every six Jewish citizens in the late 1970s was a survivor--or was directly related to a survivor--of the Holocaust. These victims of terror had resettled in America expecting to lead peaceful lives free from persecution. But their safe haven was shattered when a neo-Nazi group announced its intention to parade there in 1977.

The debate was clear-cut: American Nazis claimed the right of free speech while their Jewish "targets" claimed the right to live without intimidation. The town, arguing that the march would assault the sensibilities of its citizens and spark violence, managed to win a court injunction against the marchers. In response, the American Civil Liberties Union took the case and successfully defended the Nazis' right to free speech.

Skokie had all the elements of a difficult case: a clash of absolutes, prior restraint of speech, and heated public sentiment.

piss-christ.jpgThe PISS CHRIST caused a scandal when it was exhibited in 1989, with detractors, including United States Senators Al D'Amato and Jesse Helms, outraged that Serrano received $15,000 from the taxpayer-funded National Endowment for the Arts for the work. Supporters argue the Piss Christ is an issue of artistic freedom and freedom of speech. The journal Arts & Opinion describes the controversy as "a clash between the interests of artists in freedom of expression on the one hand, and the hurt such works may cause to a section of the community on the other."[2]

Sister Wendy Beckett, an art critic and Catholic nun, voiced her approval of Piss Christ. She explained in a television interview with Bill Moyers that she regarded the work as a statement on "what we have done to Christ" - that is, the way contemporary society has come to regard Christ and the values he represents.[3]

Serrano produced other similar works to much less controversy; Madonna and Child II (1989), for example, in which the subject is similarly submerged in urine, is not nearly as well known.

Some have claimed that Piss Christ violated separation of church and state.[4][5][6].

Piss Christ was included in "Down by Law," a "show within a show" on identity politics and disobedience that formed part of the 2006 Whitney Biennial. The BBC documentary "Damned in the USA" explored the controversy surrounding "Piss Christ".

Virgin dung:


Art as religious bigotry -- SOME 135 YEARS AGO Abraham Lincoln said "The world has never had a good definition of the word liberty, and the American people, just now, are in much need of one." When it comes to religious bigotry, the First Amendment, and the arts community, Lincoln couldn't have been more prescient. Does an artist have the liberty to depict religious symbols and characters in a denigrating light? Yes.

Thumbnail image for jumper10.jpgBut Fitna....????

1) AMSTERDAM -- The controversial anti-Muslim film by Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders has been removed from the Web by its British Internet provider, which said its employees have been seriously threatened. "Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature and some ill-informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, has been left with no other choice but to remove 'Fitna' from our servers," the company said.

2) UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday condemned as "offensively anti-Islamic" a Dutch lawmaker's film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence.

Moon acknowledged efforts by the government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of the film, which was launched by Islam critic Geert Wilders over the Internet, and appealed for calm to those "understandably offended by it."

3) Muslim countries warned Friday of strong reactions to an anti-Islam film posted on the Internet by far-right Dutch deputy Geert Wilders, though initial reactions in the Netherlands were calm.

A handful of Muslim countries had responded early Friday, with Iran saying the short movie showed some Westerners were waging a "vendetta" against Islam, and warning of unspecified repercussions.

Bangladesh also said the film could have "grave consequences", while a coalition of Jordanian media said it would sue Wilders and launch a campaign to boycott Dutch products.

The European Union's Slovenian presidency also attacked the film, saying it served "no other purpose than inflaming hatred."


Who is left to speak for freedom of speech?
What poltician stands?
What leader speaks out?
Who is against the mob?
Is this all there is to be?


Anonymous said...

We are the resistance, E.

Walid Phares' new book "Confrontation" is out but I'm waiting til Tuesday to buy it with our new 33% discount. I've been looking through it at lunch, though. One section that made me both angry and proud is where he discusses how the MSM completely dropped the ball and defaulted on their responsibility to investigate, analyze and report on the nature of the enemy prior to and especially after 9/11, choosing instead to obsess over Bush, Iraq, etc. Phares credits the bloggers and other "rebel" information sources with taking up the enormous and crucial task of informing the public of the facts that were in danger of being completely suppressed by the Left and the influence of Wahabi oil money on the media and academia. Our "cultural warning system" had been taken out years before 9/11 through the influence of Islamist-slanted Middle East Studies on graduates as they took up positions of responsibility in the media, academia, the military, etc. Without the internet we would still be asking "Who are they?" and "Why do they hate us?" because we'd never get the answers from the network or the newspapers.

The Fitna story is being buried here. Hardly anyone is aware of it. What coverage there is labels Wilders as "far-right-wing" and tries to dismiss the film. If he were to suffer van Gogh's fate what would that mean to 99% of Americans? "Geert who"? I fear that it is only when someone whom Americans recognize and admire is murdered, or some beloved landmark is destroyed, or the body count from a suicide bombing is so grotesque they can't ignore it, that people in this country will wake up and react. We still have the capacity for that, the Obama-Wright expose drew outrage at the grass-roots level. Common sense does kick in, but only after we're hit between the eyes with the 2x4.

Pastorius said...

And, of course, no Christians will riot or behead anyone.

Anonymous said...

Pastorius, I completely agree with a point you made in some other post, where you said that this entire inaction on the part of the European authorities will end up with people taking the law into their own hands and then the unbelievable might happen again...I think from day to day it becomes more and more obvious.

Pastorius said...

Sadly, yes, I think it is true.

I am certainly no historia, but it seems obvious to me that the Spanish Inquistion and the Expulsion of the Moors were linked. They both happened/culminated in the year 1492.

The Crusades were also a Christian reaction to pressure from Islam, and they ended with Christians killing everyone they could get their hands on.

Color me worried.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you - Fitna is being buried - all the UK papers are apparently refusing to cover it beyond the "right-winger launches hate-film" nonsense buried o page 5.
Its almost eerie. This is such a big story - to not be able to read about it is weird. As you say, thank god for the internet. This episode is teaching me a lot I did not want to know about how MSM works. sigh. Then fight on.

Anonymous said...

Get it out through bittorrent, limewire, etc.

The islamonazis and our dhimmified political, administrative and media class would have to shut the entire internet down to stop distribution.