Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 19

Thread: Bai freedom of speech!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    193
    Thanked 324 Times in 155 Posts

    Bai freedom of speech!

    Where it was just some months ago I was convincing Kev that it would be perfectly fine to make a critical comic of the islam in this fine country of mine, today my point of view completly changed.

    Sadly international media havent picked up on this, so I will try to translate the story as best as I can.

    We have an cartoonist here by the name of Gregorius Nekschot(allias), he basicly makes critical comics that go a bit beyond the ones that the famed Danish cartoonist made. But all is fine, because the Netherlands is the bastion of free speech.

    Tuesday however, Nekschots house got raided by the police (9 men), all his paperwork and computer was confiscated and he was arrested. The reason, he makes discriminating and hatefull comics. After 1,5 day in in a cell he was released again. Ask yourself this, when you basicly have the guy who you need, and you have all the evidence, then why does he needs to stay in prison for 1,5 day unless its for intimidation.

    The court judged a certain amount of comics and decided that 8 of them are to extreme. When asked where the line is, they cant answer. If this would become a courtcase his identity will be gone, and there is a change he will end like Theo van Gogh (stabbed in the street for being a critic). The only difference, this time its the state, instead of a muslim extremist.

    The minister of the ministry of justice is claiming it took them 3 years to find him. While the cartoonists email adress is on his website, and they never bothered in those 3 years to mail him and tell him that he is crossing a line(where ever that line may be)

    So what it comes down to, a country that was once known for its extreme freedom slowly becomes a police state. Where in Denmark the goverment protects their cartoonists, here we throw them in jail. And it sickens me to the stomach.

    I hope I translated everything to some understandable form

    ps: For the guys in the Sorry World thread. See that the States is not the only country in the world where stupid shit happens

    edit: Link added by cosmochimp, thanks
    http://www.nisnews.nl/public/170508_1.htm
    Last edited by Duq; May 16th, 2008 at 06:27 PM.
    "Master storytellers never explain. They do the hard, painfully creative thing-- they dramatize"

    Sketchbook
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Duq For This Useful Post:


  4. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,035
    Thanks
    2,167
    Thanked 3,347 Times in 1,123 Posts
    I hope people realize that this is only going to make artists riled up, and want to make critical art even more.

    As a slave to fashion, I certainly do.

    There should be a day where artists create and upload critical art. Whatever grinds your gears, anything, from any side; islam, atheists, abortion, creationism, evolution, government etc etc etc... any of it could be tackled and hit so hard with a pencil it wouldn't want to fight back. If your position has any argument behind it, draw it, and be part of a huge art rumble espousing free speech.

    Rambling thoughts, but I've been thinking about it for a while.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,350
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 433 Times in 156 Posts
    http://www.nisnews.nl/public/170508_1.htm

    I didn't see one posted so there we go.
    ACTION SPEAKS LOUDER
    "Amateurs look for inspiration; the rest of us just get up and go to work. " -Chuck Close


    DRUNKEN WASTREL SKETCH GROUP:
    [ Costau D ][ Cuervo ][ Braintree ][ Fumble ][ Ookchk ][ RoboMonkey ]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Costau D For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Utrecht, The Netherlands, Europe
    Posts
    1,598
    Thanks
    151
    Thanked 163 Times in 87 Posts
    Though I think that people shouldn't discriminate one another I think this action is completely insane. I too believe it's pure intimidation and believe that this should have been handled very differently. As far as I know, this guy hasn't had any official warnings that he might be out of line. They didn't e-mail him to say which images he might need to take away from his blog, or which images he shouldn't print. Since these rules are so very misinterpretable I think this is one of the least things the OM should have done. Especially since this arrest is based on complaints made in 2005.

    This is a very strange thing to have an opinion about though, because I think his images are completely sick, though I also think the guy should have the right to post them.

    Oh well,
    Marleen.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #5
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    193
    Thanked 324 Times in 155 Posts
    Yeah exactly Noe, although I dont agree with some of his comics it does tick me off. Columnists and social critics should always have the right to find extremes in societies and put them to the test.

    Even if his work is distastefull at times, it isnt right to prosecute if there isnt a very clear line about what you cant and can do. The circumstances are just to vague to accept this.
    "Master storytellers never explain. They do the hard, painfully creative thing-- they dramatize"

    Sketchbook
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,169
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 587 Times in 314 Posts
    There is something to be said about freedom of speech. There is also something to be said about being tact. Attacking government policies and social injustices is one thing - attacking one's race or religion is another.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    2,987
    Thanks
    295
    Thanked 290 Times in 173 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Havoc-DM View Post
    There is something to be said about freedom of speech. There is also something to be said about being tact. Attacking government policies and social injustices is one thing - attacking one's race or religion is another.
    Don't want to shake the foundation of people's beliefs... they might have to think for themselves.
    My work: [link]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Blue For This Useful Post:


  12. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Posts
    1,730
    Thanks
    1,927
    Thanked 1,746 Times in 721 Posts
    Havoc-DM; Tact has nothing to do with this, its either legal or illegal. There sure seems to be a higher risk involved when it comes to religions though...

    Good of you to bring this up Duq.

    I find this quite disturbing. It's a shame to see whats becoming of a country that used to be known for its freedom.

    It seems to upset many people though, and I don't think Nekschot is intimidated this easily. I'm hoping it will change for the better.

    Take a look at my Website!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,169
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 587 Times in 314 Posts
    I'm all for freedom of speech, don't get me wrong. I also understand the legality of this issue at hand. However, one must note that by creating and spreading these cartoons, approximately 1.5 billion muslims can and would be offended. By doing so, one would also offend those of whom are the violent extremists who go under the banner of islam. By inflaming them, one would simply provide more of an excuse to kill western civilians around the world in their fight for "jihad".

    This is where tact comes into play. One has to be able to fully comprehend the reprocussions of one's actions and understand that one could indirectly play a role in the killing of civilians.

    If it is not tact for Michael Richards to offend African Americans with racial slurs, then how is it tact to offend all muslims with hate promoting comics. Richards was simply expressing his freedom of speech. Was he wrong by doing so?

    The analogy only goes so far though. Richards was not arrested for being offensive, nor is it legal to arrest anyone on those grounds. Was it legal to arrest Nekschot for expressing his freedom of speech? No. Was it legal to raid his home, seize his property, imprison him, and prosecute him on charges where the boundary of what is and is not legal doesn't exist? No. Was the action of the police completely unjustifiable? This is where things get difficult. If the police had taken action in the interest of public safety (by possibly preventing future terrorist attacks), then are they completely in the wrong?

    It is important to understand the entire issue rather than focusing on the arrest and the grounds for the arrest, while ignoring other relevant information. I am NOT saying that the police were right, nor will I attest to Nekschot being harmless. Given that his cartoons are "discriminatory against Muslims and people of darker skin," does he truly deserve nothing but our sympathy?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  14. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,035
    Thanks
    2,167
    Thanked 3,347 Times in 1,123 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Havoc-DM View Post
    I'm all for freedom of speech, don't get me wrong. I also understand the legality of this issue at hand. However, one must note that by creating and spreading these cartoons, approximately 1.5 billion muslims can and would be offended. By doing so, one would also offend those of whom are the violent extremists who go under the banner of islam. By inflaming them, one would simply provide more of an excuse to kill western civilians around the world in their fight for "jihad".

    This is where tact comes into play. One has to be able to fully comprehend the reprocussions of one's actions and understand that one could indirectly play a role in the killing of civilians.

    If it is not tact for Michael Richards to offend African Americans with racial slurs, then how is it tact to offend all muslims with hate promoting comics. Richards was simply expressing his freedom of speech. Was he wrong by doing so?

    The analogy only goes so far though. Richards was not arrested for being offensive, nor is it legal to arrest anyone on those grounds. Was it legal to arrest Nekschot for expressing his freedom of speech? No. Was it legal to raid his home, seize his property, imprison him, and prosecute him on charges where the boundary of what is and is not legal doesn't exist? No. Was the action of the police completely unjustifiable? This is where things get difficult. If the police had taken action in the interest of public safety (by possibly preventing future terrorist attacks), then are they completely in the wrong?

    It is important to understand the entire issue rather than focusing on the arrest and the grounds for the arrest, while ignoring other relevant information. I am NOT saying that the police were right, nor will I attest to Nekschot being harmless. Given that his cartoons are "discriminatory against Muslims and people of darker skin," does he truly deserve nothing but our sympathy?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  15. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,169
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 587 Times in 314 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Rainville View Post
    Though Patcondell does bring up many valid points in his argument, most of them contain the same logical fallacy: He presents most of his points against all muslims and speaks as if these actions are the norm. Rather, most of these practices that are critical of Islam are practiced by those who are simply misinformed on what Islam really is (the Quran and the Sunna of the Prophet). I can be much more specific if you like and can address most of the issues that Patcondell brings up (I do not want to take over this thread though, it is already starting to deviate from its intentions). Let me know if you would like any specifics
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  16. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,010
    Thanks
    193
    Thanked 324 Times in 155 Posts
    The analogy only goes so far though. Richards was not arrested for being offensive, nor is it legal to arrest anyone on those grounds. Was it legal to arrest Nekschot for expressing his freedom of speech? No. Was it legal to raid his home, seize his property, imprison him, and prosecute him on charges where the boundary of what is and is not legal doesn't exist? No. Was the action of the police completely unjustifiable? This is where things get difficult. If the police had taken action in the interest of public safety (by possibly preventing future terrorist attacks), then are they completely in the wrong?
    Well even Geert Wilders, whose movie about the Islam actually caused world wide anger and endangered the public safety, didnt got arrested or had his house raided to protect the public safety.

    It is important to understand the entire issue rather than focusing on the arrest and the grounds for the arrest, while ignoring other relevant information. I am NOT saying that the police were right, nor will I attest to Nekschot being harmless. Given that his cartoons are "discriminatory against Muslims and people of darker skin," does he truly deserve nothing but our sympathy?
    The 8 comics in question are social commentary and do not have any hate speech. They are however controversional, and although its not my taste he does deserve our symphaty. Because of people like Nekschot we the ordinary people have examples to test our own opinions against, thats why social comment is so important in a society.

    However this thread is not about wether he should be arrested or shouldnt be. Its about the Ministry of Justice that apparently can arrest anyone with an opinion, without an approval of a judge. In the end this case needs to be seen as what it is. An unlawful supression of social criticism.
    Last edited by Duq; May 18th, 2008 at 05:47 AM.
    "Master storytellers never explain. They do the hard, painfully creative thing-- they dramatize"

    Sketchbook
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Duq For This Useful Post:


  18. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    219
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts
    Thank god for my first amendment

    Who really passes all these ridiculous hate speech, thought laws? It is absolutely ridiculous, people should be able to say what ever they want. It's like boo hoo if it offends you, get over it and move on.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: March 2nd, 2007, 12:00 AM
  2. What'll be your Oscar acceptance speech?
    By JERI in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2006, 06:34 PM
  3. Art: Speech Impediment.
    By cannibalcandy in forum FINISHED ART & ARTWORK
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: December 7th, 2005, 10:16 PM
  4. Concession Speech
    By the_blur in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 4th, 2004, 01:46 PM

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook