S.F. Art Gallery Owner Beaten Up for Showing Anti-Torture Painting
Tom_Servo
S.F. Art Gallery Owner Beaten Up for Showing Anti-Torture Painting
Lori Haigh runs an art gallery in San Francisco. Well, she used to.
On May 16, according to AP, she installed a piece of artwork by Guy Colwell
entitled "Abuse." The painting (which you can see at
www.nobeliefs.com/abuse.htm) is an elaboration of the torture that went on
at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. In the foreground of Colwell's painting are
two grinning U.S. soldiers, one man and one woman, with American flags on
their sleeves. The man is holding a cattle prod, and the woman, a cigarette
dangling from her mouth, is holding electrical wires. Those wires are
attached to the fingers of three naked male Iraqi detainees, who are
standing on cylinder blocks. The prisoners are hooded. In the background,
two other American soldiers in sunglasses are leading a shackled and
blindfolded woman into the room.
Haigh placed the painting in the front window of her gallery. Two days
later, "someone threw eggs and dumped trash on the doorstep," AP reported,
and "people started leaving nasty messages and threats on her business
answering machine." She told AP that she received "about 200 angry
voicemails, e-mails, and death threats."
So she decided to remove the painting, but still things got worse.
One day, someone walked into the gallery and spit in her face.
And then on May 27, someone "knocked on the door of the gallery, then
punched Haigh in the face, knocking her out, breaking her nose, and causing
a concussion," AP said. Two days later, she still had a bad black right eye,
with purple on the cheek next to the eye, one bandage over the nose, and
another over her right eyebrow.
*
So, who would like to see a painting like that? For cheap political shot?
Clearly some of her neighbors strongly disagreed with her statement.
"Tom_Servo" <tomser...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gG1wc.462$fQ5...@chiapp18.algx.net...
Carol Lee Smith
> It is not an "Anti-Torture" Painting, it is a "Torture Painting"
> So, who would like to see a painting like that?
Hey. Have you ever seen anyone wearing a dead man on a stick around their
neck?
Who would want to see a piece of jewelry depicting a torture.
Likewise, ever been inside a Catholic Church?
Torture sculpture all over the place!!
> For cheap political shot?
See above.
Dale
> It is not an "Anti-Torture" Painting, it is a "Torture Painting"
> So, who would like to see a painting like that? For cheap political
shot?
> Clearly some of her neighbors strongly disagreed with her statement.
How is it a political cheap shot if it only tells the truth and contains on
reference to politics?
You're obviously not an American. If you were, you'd be first in line to
defend this artist's right to freedom of expression against people who use
physical violence in response to images and ideas. What country are you
from, anyway?
Spike
says...
Spike
--
3016 Men, Women and Children were murdered September 11th,
2001 by 19 men armed with boxcutters. One gun on each plane
could have changed things.
Tom_Servo
Gutless Nazi "*" <*@*.com> wrote in message
news:2ibqtfF...@uni-berlin.de...
> It is not an "Anti-Torture" Painting, it is a "Torture Painting"
It shows exactly what occured, actually a very sanitized version, because it
didnt show the raping of young boys and women, as well as the dead prisoner
that was kept on ice after he 'passed away' from lack of medical attention
following the injuries at the hands of the CIA contractors and U.S. Mil.
personnel. Or the other atrocities. Read the small version of the Report!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001
> So, who would like to see a painting like that?
Well, Me, and You, if you had the Balls to look at the truth, and not let
right-wing ideology blind your path to intellectual growth.
in the U.S.A. we should have the right the SEE EVERYTHING an artist can
produce.
>For cheap political shot?
Idiot, only a evil person or a facist would say that telling the Truth about
human rights atrocities, is a 'political shot'. I guess you prefer LIES.
> Clearly some of her neighbors strongly disagreed with her statement.
So it's OK that they should vandalize, use terrorist tactics like Death
threats, and physical Assault, to 'Disagree' with the Art??? What kind of
fuc*ed up monster are you?
This was Classic Nazi Brownshirt style tactics circa 1938, now revitalized,
thanks to the dark shadow that is cast across our now-dying experiment in
Liberty.
TS
Mike Smith
<tomser...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Gutless Nazi "*" <*@*.com> wrote in message
>news:2ibqtfF...@uni-berlin.de...
>
>> It is not an "Anti-Torture" Painting, it is a "Torture Painting"
>
>It shows exactly what occured, actually a very sanitized version, because it
>didnt show the raping of young boys and women, as well as the dead prisoner
>that was kept on ice after he 'passed away' from lack of medical attention
>following the injuries at the hands of the CIA contractors and U.S. Mil.
>personnel. Or the other atrocities. Read the small version of the Report!
>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001
Uh-oh... another delusional Bush-hater....
>
>> So, who would like to see a painting like that?
>
>Well, Me, and You, if you had the Balls to look at the truth, and not let
>right-wing ideology blind your path to intellectual growth.
>in the U.S.A. we should have the right the SEE EVERYTHING an artist can
>produce.
No we don't have a right to see everything an artist produces. Nowhere
in our Constitution is any such right granted.
>
>>For cheap political shot?
>
>Idiot, only a evil person or a facist would say that telling the Truth about
>human rights atrocities, is a 'political shot'. I guess you prefer LIES.
Atrocities? Are you fuckin delusional... Or are you just too stupid to
undestand words such as "atrocities"?
>
>> Clearly some of her neighbors strongly disagreed with her statement.
>
>So it's OK that they should vandalize, use terrorist tactics like Death
>threats, and physical Assault, to 'Disagree' with the Art??? What kind of
>fuc*ed up monster are you?
Ummmm.. a rational human that cannot tolerate anti-American imbeciles?
Yep.. that's about right.
>
>This was Classic Nazi Brownshirt style tactics circa 1938, now revitalized,
>thanks to the dark shadow that is cast across our now-dying experiment in
>Liberty.
>
>TS
>
Idiot.
Nazis dismembered people. Nazis killed people. Nazis put people in gas
chambers and ended their lives. Nazis "experimented" on people to see
how much pain they could take.
You, in your infinite ignorance, don't even begin to understand the
word "atrocity". You're just another whiny-baby liberal moron.
Mike Smith
Dale
news:sgq1c014fgu3vj5b2...@4ax.com...
[...]
> Nazis dismembered people. Nazis killed people. Nazis put people in gas
> chambers and ended their lives. Nazis "experimented" on people to see
> how much pain they could take.
The Nazis didn't start by dismembering people or putting them in gas
chambers. A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. The Nazis
began with hatred and intolerance. From there, and with encouragment from
people like you, it was just a small step to escalate to vandalism, from
vandalism to ghettoization, and so on and so forth, to making lampshades out
of human skin.
This is the ultimate end of the course you advocate when you begin by
condoning the countering words and images with physical violence.
GIMME
However, the American thing to do would be to acknowledge the
right of free speech and then to object to the mean intent of the
spirt of the art.
Naturally, if you hate America, your inclination will be to take
advantage of America's positive aspects, such as it's free speech,
and then use those aspects to destroy the country from within. That is
what the gallery owner and the artist are trying to do in the
name of getting publicity and making a buck.
If the art was truely worth something, someone would have purchased
it. But it's unlikely that anyone, except an American hater, like
Aaron Peskin, wants to look at it.
You claim to love America (I think) and sarcastically write
"What country are you from?". Well ... most people would be puzzled
that you lack any compassion toward US soldiers. California, as
you know, has lost more soldiers than any other state. Not to
mention that these guys have a *lot* to put up with.
Also, you might object to the US policy toward Isreal .. but did you
know that three homosexual protestors in where killed by Palestinians
last week? That's something you won't hear about in the SF Newspapers.
cory
> No we don't have a right to see everything an artist produces. Nowhere
> in our Constitution is any such right granted.
The Constitution doesn't grany any rights. It recognizes and enumerates
certain rights which past governments have had a habit of abusing. You
notice that the Constitution doesn't mention anything about sneezing, or
having kids, or laughing? You don't think we have the right to do those
things?
We do, as a matter of fact, have the right to display or view whatever
the fuck we want, as long as nobody is endangered in the process.
gorf
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.104060...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> Hey. Have you ever seen anyone wearing a dead man on a stick around their
> neck?
>
> Who would want to see a piece of jewelry depicting a torture.
>
> Likewise, ever been inside a Catholic Church?
>
> Torture sculpture all over the place!!
To be fair it's not a valid comparison unless the cross were surrounded by
grinning figures with the Star of David on their sleeves. I'm not
advocating anti-semetism here, but if the idea of publicizing an image of
Christ being tortured by grinning people representing a specific segment of
the population is offensive, then so should be the idea of an Iraqi being
tortured by a bunch of grinning American soldiers. It's not anti-torture,
it's anti-American. Is it her right to display such a thing without fear of
physical harm? Yes... but you can't blame people for being upset (although
the person that hit her broke the law so yes, you can blame him/her).
--
gorf
Mike Smith
wrote:
>"Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote in message
>news:sgq1c014fgu3vj5b2...@4ax.com...
>[...]
>> Nazis dismembered people. Nazis killed people. Nazis put people in gas
>> chambers and ended their lives. Nazis "experimented" on people to see
>> how much pain they could take.
>
>The Nazis didn't start by dismembering people or putting them in gas
>chambers. A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. The Nazis
>began with hatred and intolerance. From there, and with encouragment from
>people like you, it was just a small step to escalate to vandalism, from
>vandalism to ghettoization, and so on and so forth, to making lampshades out
>of human skin.
BWAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH... You hateful liberals are a hoot! Totally
delusional.....
Tell us... do you see spacemen under your bed, at night?
>
>This is the ultimate end of the course you advocate when you begin by
>condoning the countering words and images with physical violence.
>
Yea, you slept since yesterday, so this is a whole new world for you,
despite the fact that physical violence has been a part of mankind
since it began.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
wrote:
>Mike Smith wrote:
>
>> No we don't have a right to see everything an artist produces. Nowhere
>> in our Constitution is any such right granted.
>
>The Constitution doesn't grany any rights.
True. I should have stated that it doesn't protect any such right.
>It recognizes and enumerates
>certain rights which past governments have had a habit of abusing. You
>notice that the Constitution doesn't mention anything about sneezing, or
>having kids, or laughing? You don't think we have the right to do those
>things?
No constitutionally guarranteed right.
>
>We do, as a matter of fact, have the right to display or view whatever
>the fuck we want, as long as nobody is endangered in the process.
And we do not have the right to exhibit anything we want to;
especially when it is extremely offensive to a vast majority of
people. Especially when it deters our war against terrorism.
The artist took a gamble and got slightly injured... So what.
Mike Smith
oops
"Tom_Servo" > Lori Haigh runs an art gallery in San Francisco. on May 27,
someone punched Haigh in the face, knocking her out, breaking her nose, and
causing a concussion," >>
GOOD JOB! That person should be given some kind of award. Too bad they did
not trash the gallery too.
Unclaimed Mysteries
> On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:48:00 -0500, "Dale" <dmg...@nspm.airmail.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote in message
>>news:sgq1c014fgu3vj5b2...@4ax.com...
>>[...]
>>
>>>Nazis dismembered people. Nazis killed people. Nazis put people in gas
>>>chambers and ended their lives. Nazis "experimented" on people to see
>>>how much pain they could take.
>>
>>The Nazis didn't start by dismembering people or putting them in gas
>>chambers. A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. The Nazis
>>began with hatred and intolerance. From there, and with encouragment from
>>people like you, it was just a small step to escalate to vandalism, from
>>vandalism to ghettoization, and so on and so forth, to making lampshades out
>>of human skin.
>
>
> BWAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH... You hateful liberals are a hoot! Totally
> delusional.....
>
> Tell us... do you see spacemen under your bed, at night?
>
Mike, are you really a hip, now au-go-go Up-2-Speed Bush advocate? You
said NOTHING about his needing to:
1) get his [INSERT PSYCHOTROPIC DRUG NAME HERE] adjusted, or
2) start taking his [INSERT PSYCHOTROPIC DRUG NAME HERE].
I'll have Mister Rove send you another copy of the memo.
--
It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net
"Religion isn't the opiate of the masses. When
properly used, religion is the methamphetamine
of the masses." - nu-monet v6.0 in alt.slack
Unclaimed Mysteries
I'm sure this sounded better in the original Klingon.
Carol Lee Smith
> "Carol Lee Smith" <hu...@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.104060...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> > Hey. Have you ever seen anyone wearing a dead man on a stick around their
> > neck?
> > Who would want to see a piece of jewelry depicting a torture.
> > Likewise, ever been inside a Catholic Church?
> > Torture sculpture all over the place!!
> To be fair it's not a valid comparison unless the cross were surrounded by
> grinning figures with the Star of David on their sleeves.
I don't need grinning figures, star of David or no, to be repulsed by a
bloody image of a tortured human form.
I would never want to infringe on someone's right to display such
grotesque imagery any more than I would infringe on someone's right to
display pictures of nudes or other stuff which might repulse others.
We have no guarantee which protects us from being repulsed.
> Is it her right to display such a thing without fear of
> physical harm? Yes... but you can't blame people for being upset (although
> the person that hit her broke the law so yes, you can blame him/her).
People being upset is their problem. But assault and battery is
definitely not an option.
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
-- Robert Anton Wilson
Tom Servo
EVIL NAZI "Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote in message
news:d9a2c0hn81djif7q2...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 18:48:26 -0500, cory <postm...@hotmail.com>
> And we do not have the right to exhibit anything we want to;
> especially when it is extremely offensive to a vast majority of
> people. Especially when it deters our war against terrorism.
You can't be that fucking mindless, clone-like, unquestioning, and gullable
can you?? I'll bet you keep a copy of Ann Coulter's book under the seat of
your truck, and dream about lynching liberal professors, and marching off
the fight in the ficticious 'war on terror'.
> The artist took a gamble and got slightly injured... So what.
Such compassionate conservatism!!!
So, since I disagree with your speech here, and believe that you are an
enemy of Liberty and offensive to the majority of upright-walking humans out
here, can I come to your house and bash your face in, knock you the ground
and trash your house??? Is that what you
TS
Seethis Pass
Len
In my cynical old age, knowing that city, the chick was probably
punched out by her old lady/man, then lied to the press about it.
>http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc060104.html
>
>
>S.F. Art Gallery Owner Beaten Up for Showing Anti-Torture Painting
==
Talk to the finger, 'cause it don't deserve a whole hand.
Len
artwork in SF.
>On May 16, according to AP, she installed a piece of artwork by Guy Colwell
>entitled "Abuse." The painting (which you can see at
>www.nobeliefs.com/abuse.htm) is an elaboration of the torture that went on
>at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. In the foreground of Colwell's painting are
>two grinning U.S. soldiers, one man and one woman, with American flags on
>their sleeves. The man is holding a cattle prod, and the woman, a cigarette
>dangling from her mouth, is holding electrical wires. Those wires are
>attached to the fingers of three naked male Iraqi detainees, who are
>standing on cylinder blocks. The prisoners are hooded. In the background,
>two other American soldiers in sunglasses are leading a shackled and
>blindfolded woman into the room.
@@@@
Homophobia is not an actual phobia,
according to three University of Arkansas psychologists.
In a recent study, these researchers showed that homophobia originates
not out of fear or anxiety -- as true phobias do --
but from feelings of disgust.
Seethis Pass
>Top Post Only
>In my cynical old age, knowing that city, the chick was probably
>punched out by her old lady/man, then lied to the press about it.
>
There you go,
It's a picture of compassionate conservativism.
You know,
the compassionate conservatism that always blames the victim.
Len
>>In my cynical old age, knowing that city, the chick was probably
>>punched out by her old lady/man, then lied to the press about it.
>>
>
>There you go,
>It's a picture of compassionate conservativism.
>You know,
> the compassionate conservatism that always blames the victim.
You nailed me there buddy, real well.
Or is it based on experience, antecedents, and priors of a like and
similar nature. For with many in that city, the means may always
justify the ends.
==
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.
It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain
Mike Smith
wrote:
Thanks for the warning.
If we should ever meet, based on your post, I will be in fear of my
life, and will act accordingly.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
Of course I get Rove's daily directives..... I've been a member of the
VRWC since its inception.
I just thought I'd have a good laugh at Dale's expense...
Mike Smith
Tom Servo
Can't figure out whether you like lynching liberals? Or perhaps you would
actually get off on and condone the use violence and knuckle-dragging
behavior against anyone like liberals, jews, 'negros', etc... for their
political views....what if that violent attack was physically aimed at you?
Would that stir that black heart of yours to a sense of Justice.....probably
not. ......You just can't polish a Turd.
No answer to the question of your gutless hypocrisy??
Can't comprehend why violence is immoral, no matter the results or the goal?
Can't wrap your mind around basic morality??
TS
Mike Smith
wrote:
>What's wrong Mike,
>
>Can't figure out whether you like lynching liberals?{lie}
Typical ignorant liberal.
Start with a false premise and build on it...
MIke Smith
Progressive with an Attitude
The Rightards know what the Abu Ghraib imagery can do in the next
election. They are scared the the truth comes out about their ways. They
will do anything they can to suppress this imagery. Bush has already
suggested that this prison be blown up. They don't want the prison
around during the election.
GIMME
I don't know what your situation is, but someone with your temperment
is unemployable and is a likely danger to his immediate family. You
sound like you just got out of prison.
If you toss around the words "liberals, jews, 'negroes'" freely,
when those words haven't been used ... it conveys a paranoid frame of mind.
Some of the issues you raise, the false war on terrorism are valid.
But in your current state of mind, no one is going to be persuaded
by your arguments. The best you can hope for is to make someone angry.
But you'r retoric is so extreme, it fails to even do that.
"Tom Servo" <toms...@wakemeup.com> wrote in message news:<MxKwc.48052$mQ4....@fe2.texas.rr.com>...
Carol Lee Smith
quits.
Tom Servo
probably trying to bait him into exposing his misanthropic nature, but
failed when the subject of the experiment ran away into the trees, dragging
his 'knuckles' and all.
Twain
"GIMME" <gimme_this...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3f12b4fb.04060...@posting.google.com...
Mike Smith
wrote:
>His rhetoric was aimed at conservadolt, Mike Smith, not anyone else. He was
>probably trying to bait him into exposing his misanthropic nature, but
>failed when the subject of the experiment ran away into the trees, dragging
>his 'knuckles' and all.
>
>Twain
>
>
BWAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA...
What a moron, Twain, errr... Tom.... errrr whoever.
Mike Smith
Giovanni...@aol.com
she has called it quits.>
now she will milk the story into some kind of TV Movie, Book, and speaking
tour of the most-lesbian college clubs and NOW political rallies. More than
likely her gallery was circling the drain and she had her husband BRENDA
slap her face a few times and then called the cops and made up the story.