[Xort]

martin14 martin14:

It's ok to show these scum as people because most Canadians are too dumb
to know who they are looking at, right.

Logically yes.

If I showed you a picture of a person in a group of people and you didn't know who they were, does what they have done matter?

[Delwin]

Even if you knew what they did what does it matter. There is a wax museum in Niagara Falls called the Criminal hall of fame dedicated to serial killers and all sorts of unsavory types, including Hitler. It's a part of history. Why should anyone be allowed to deny the artists the fundamental right to express themselves ? Its entrenched in the Charter.

[Delwin]

This artist went through the proper channels was vetted by a panel of artists and it was deemed that her art was good enough to be put on display. Any attempt to subdue this selection based on personal feelings would be nothing other than discriminatory. You don't like the art? You don't get it? Tough luck. The process was followed.

[QBall]

Maybe instead of fighting to take other people's works down maybe the Jews should be working on getting their works displayed?

[andyt]

What, we're going to have a fight now to have equal representation of people's political points of view? This is a politically provocative work that has no place being displayed in a government office. No more than giving the nod to one religion over the other in having a display. Put it in an art gallery, where it belongs, where controversy is part of the attraction. Not where it's implied that the government endorses that particular point of view.

[Delwin]

Who says it's political? Who says it isn't just some artists account of her own life's trials and tribulation? Do you make that determination ? Does the Jewish council? What if I submit a picture of a dying poppy? Is that some kind of anti-war propaganda ? Or maybe I'm promoting opiates ? Art is open to interpretation, that's why a panel of artists was selected to make the decision. Not every politico has a fine arts degree or even an appreciation for art. Maybe you could explain how your interpretation sees this as glorifying terrorism. I don't see it.

And Andy it is an art gallery. Period.

[andyt]

If it's an art gallery, then I've misunderstood. I thought this was city hall.

rereading the story, it seems it's a gallery at city hall. I guess if it's obvious that the gallery isn't part of city hall govt, guess I'd have to reluctantly agree to keep it up.

[GreenTiger]

andyt andyt:

I'm not for glorifying terrorists, if that is what's happening here. I don't like it when our local Sikhs have pics of their "martyrs" on their floats and our premier and other official are there waving and smiling and endorsing it all.

I don't know who would be offended by that Hitler rug - the local skinheads? Nazzal can have his perspective. But to display it in an official site shouldn't be on. Display it at an art gallery.

Yes, I could see right wing nuts getting upset over a Hitler rug, but the Israeli Ambassador? I would think they would want one for their office.


Come to think of it an Osama Bin Laden rug would be a big hit in The States.

[Delwin]

No, that is not the art in question, I was using it as an example of other controversial art.

The most controversial art being displayed from the Ottawa exhibit can be found here:

http://www.rehabnazzal.com/#!videos/c8gi

It is called "targets". I also posted an image of the collage the artist depicted which is on display.

In the "Target" exhibit, the faces of Palestinians who were killed are flashed with captions. Some of these people were responsible for the deaths of innocent Israelis, that is the controversy.

[commanderkai]

Delwin Delwin:

The most controversial art being displayed from the Ottawa exhibit can be found here:

http://www.rehabnazzal.com/#!videos/c8gi

It is called "targets". I also posted an image of the collage the artist depicted which is on display.

In the "Target" exhibit, the faces of Palestinians who were killed are flashed with captions. Some of these people were responsible for the deaths of innocent Israelis, that is the controversy.

And you don't think that would be political?

[Delwin]

Not necessarily, but obviously I could see how some would view it as such.

My argument is that in a democratic society, our right to express ourselves supersedes the fact that it could be controversial or offensive.

Freedom of expression is unalienable in my view until it constitutes a hate crime, and I don't view this as a hate crime.

This is the environment the artist grew up in and she is entitled to her perspective. She has a voice just like everyone else, I might not agree with it, and to be honest, I don't think much of her work but I also don't like foreign ambassadors coming to our country and trying to stomp on our democratic rights. Especially when I view their version of democracy as backwards compared to ours.

[commanderkai]

Delwin Delwin:

Not necessarily, but obviously I could see how some would view it as such.

My argument is that in a democratic society, our right to express ourselves supersedes the fact that it could be controversial or offensive.

Freedom of expression is unalienable in my view until it constitutes a hate crime, and I don't view this as a hate crime.

No, it just glorifies the murderers of innocent people while calling them victims. There are laws and regulations existing that restrict expression that reach far more than just hate speech too, in Canadian society. Game of Thrones isn't on at 5 PM every day for a reason on CTV or CBC.

$1:

This is the environment the artist grew up in and she is entitled to her perspective. She has a voice just like everyone else, I might not agree with it, and to be honest, I don't think much of her work but I also don't like foreign ambassadors coming to our country and trying to stomp on our democratic rights. Especially when I view their version of democracy as backwards compared to ours.

Except, in this case, the foreign ambassador is taking issue with an artwork being displayed in a building that shares occupancy with an actual government that victimizes the murderers of their civilian population. Pray tell, if you saw the Israeli art exhibit in one of their government offices calling the FLQ "victims" of Canada, how would you feel? None to pleased, I expect.

[Zipperfish]

Somebody should inform the Ambassador that we have freedom of expression in Canada.

[Delwin]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Except, in this case, the foreign ambassador is taking issue with an artwork being displayed in a building that shares occupancy with an actual government that victimizes the murderers of their civilian population. Pray tell, if you saw the Israeli art exhibit in one of their government offices calling the FLQ "victims" of Canada, how would you feel? None to pleased, I expect.

Ok, but that the art is victimizing or glorifying anything is completely opinionated and based on your personal feelings, feelings that not everyone is going to share. Where is anyone "calling" anyone a victim ?

Are the George Bush paintings of the world leaders a glorification of the leaders ? Does it mean that he agrees with their policies? Absolutely not.

You are assigning meaning where non exists. If I put on a slide show it is not ipso facto these guys are great.

Just like George Bush's paintings of various world leaders doesn't mean he agrees with their policies, they are just characters in his life's story.

There are of course limitations on freedom of expression other than hate crime to protect children from exposure to violence, pornography, libelous statements, etc

But what would be the justification in a court to have this removed ? Because of your interpretation of what it means ? It's simply not enough and shouldn't be, ever.

[Thanos]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Somebody should inform the Ambassador that we have freedom of expression in Canada.

Add in too that, unlike the United States Congress, we don't take our fucking marching orders from Likud either.