4th Law of Robotics.
A robot must not draw pictures of human being(s) except where such action would conflict with the First or Second Law of Robotics.
Topic: Apparently this London mural is anti-Semitic. - page 2. (Read 7374 times)
Quote
Clearly it's satirical in some symbolic way. Isn't satire protected by law any more?
Quote
Either way, its free speech on trial by fire at its best.
Actually in US, reffering to the Eye, might be against the law. Ok, this is in London, but still:Quote
Title 18 of the U.S. Code, as revised in January 1971, prohibits use of the likeness of the Great Seal or any facsimile in “any advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production” for the
purpose of conveying a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the U.S. Government under threat of a fine of not more than $250 or imprisonment of not more than 6 months, or both.
purpose of conveying a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the U.S. Government under threat of a fine of not more than $250 or imprisonment of not more than 6 months, or both.
It's because of the eye; EDIT: Freemasonry symbol, which "happens" to be on a lot of things
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Providence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Providence
Those guys around the table are clearly European.
Also the guys under the table look like they could be central african.
Also Milton Bradley is implied.
So what? Nice mural, thanks for sharing.
Also the guys under the table look like they could be central african.
Also Milton Bradley is implied.
So what? Nice mural, thanks for sharing.
... I'd say but the UK has all kinds of anti-hate speech and other thought crimes on the books now.
We certainly do - and they keep getting added to the statute book.However, I'm delighted to share with you folks that one of these is in the process of being struck following a campaign protesting about a clause from a 1984 statute that made it a crime to say anything that, in the opinion of the arresting officer, another could find insulting! I am the proud owner of a 'Feel free to insult me' campaign hoodie. Every now and again, against all the odds, law makers see sense! In this case it was the House of Lords, the undemocratic house in the UK. It's ironic how frequently the democratic house tries to bring in liberty-taking laws which are rejected by the Lords who appear to have a better understanding of the importance of liberty than elected MPs!
Another reason I love the way the whole 'Reform Section 5' campaing happened was that the Secularists and the Christians actually worked together and appeared publicly side by side arguing for this. Now that this is gone, next time they appear on opposite sides of an argument they can get back to insulting each other without risk of arrest
Hmm. Maybe I am part of the conspiracy. I wouldn't put it past me, I'm sure I'm hiding something...
Ah-ha! I knew it. Which one of the old guys in the mural is you?
I'm the one with the giant gherkin
It looks like a bunch of old men not far from the nursing home.
Giant Illuminati symbol
"OMG Jewish facial characteristics ANTI-SEMITISM"
Still a giant Illuminati symbol...
Yes, it's technically the "Eye of Providence" or some such, but everyone uses it for weird Illuminati conspiracy theories or just for "evil US politics" 'cause it's on some Dollar bill.
"OMG Jewish facial characteristics ANTI-SEMITISM"
Still a giant Illuminati symbol...
Yes, it's technically the "Eye of Providence" or some such, but everyone uses it for weird Illuminati conspiracy theories or just for "evil US politics" 'cause it's on some Dollar bill.
Hmm. Maybe I am part of the conspiracy. I wouldn't put it past me, I'm sure I'm hiding something...
Ah-ha! I knew it. Which one of the old guys in the mural is you?
I don't really care much either way but anyone claiming there isn't anti-semitism hasn't been keeping up with their crazy, right-wing, zionist conspiracy theories.
Ah, I didn't say there weren't crazy, left-wing, zionist conspiracy theories as well 
And you didn't say there weren't sane zionist conspiracy theories. But the glaring omission implies they exist "as well," by your logic.
Hmm. Maybe I am part of the conspiracy. I wouldn't put it past me, I'm sure I'm hiding something...
I don't really care much either way but anyone claiming there isn't anti-semitism hasn't been keeping up with their crazy, right-wing, zionist conspiracy theories.
Ah, I didn't say there weren't crazy, left-wing, zionist conspiracy theories as well And you didn't say there weren't sane zionist conspiracy theories. But the glaring omission implies they exist "as well," by your logic.
I don't really care much either way but anyone claiming there isn't anti-semitism hasn't been keeping up with their crazy, right-wing, zionist conspiracy theories.
Right wing? The right wing likes Zionism. Even more than they hate Muslims!
They've completely linked Jesus and Israel. I call their conflation of idolatry 'Jesusrael.'
They love the idea that the existence of a state called Israel proooves the Bible is true and that Jesus is coming back (real soon, any minute now).
You should to to Democrat Underground or Daily Kos and drop in to a George Soros thread if you want to see crazy anti-semitism run amok.
Ah, I didn't say there weren't crazy, left-wing, zionist conspiracy theories as well
I don't really care much either way but anyone claiming there isn't anti-semitism hasn't been keeping up with their crazy, right-wing, zionist conspiracy theories.
Right wing? The right wing likes Zionism. Even more than they hate Muslims!
They've completely linked Jesus and Israel. I call their conflation of idolatry 'Jesusrael.'
They love the idea that the existence of a state called Israel proooves the Bible is true and that Jesus is coming back (real soon, any minute now).
You should to to Democrat Underground or Daily Kos and drop in to a George Soros thread if you want to see crazy anti-semitism run amok.
I don't really care much either way but anyone claiming there isn't anti-semitism hasn't been keeping up with their crazy, right-wing, zionist conspiracy theories.
ye'd say anti jewish aswell. Judging by the big noses it's focusing on that that's a generalization. He still might be right of jewish bankers being behind fiscal atrocities like american government behind war crimes but at least pin point the characters.
What a nice, lovely mural.
None of the old banksters are wearing hats.
I'm no rabbi, but don't Jews have to wear head coverings?
Bernie Madoff always did.
Of course, merely arguing against the charge is airtight proof that you are guilty, according to The Rules:
None of the old banksters are wearing hats.
I'm no rabbi, but don't Jews have to wear head coverings?
Bernie Madoff always did.
Of course, merely arguing against the charge is airtight proof that you are guilty, according to The Rules:
Quote
It’s pointless to ask what “anti-Semitic” means. It means trouble. It’s an attack signal. The practical function of the word is not to define or distinguish things, but to conflate them indiscriminately — to equate the soberest criticism of Israel or Jewish power with the murderous hatred of Jews. And it works. Oh, how it works.
When Joe McCarthy accused people of being Communists, the charge was relatively precise. You knew what he meant. The accusation could be falsified. In fact the burden of proof was on the accuser: when McCarthy couldn’t make his loose charges stick, he was ruined. (Of course, McCarthy was hated less for his “loose” charges than for his accurate ones. His real offense was stigmatizing the Left.)
The opposite applies to charges of “anti-Semitism.” The word has no precise definition. An “anti-Semite” may or may not hate Jews. But he is certainly hated by Jews. There is no penalty for making the charge loosely; the accused has no way of falsifying the charge, since it isn’t defined.
A famous example. When Abe Rosenthal accused Pat Buchanan of “anti-Semitism,” everyone on both sides understood the ground rules. There was a chance that Buchanan would be ruined, even if the charge was baseless. And there was no chance that Rosenthal would be ruined — even if the charge was baseless.
Such are the rules. I violate them, in a way, even by spelling them out.
“Anti- Semitism” is therefore less a charge than a curse, an imprecation that must be uttered formulaically. Being a “bogus predicate,” to use Gilbert Ryle’s phrase, it has no real content, no functional equivalent in plain nouns and verbs. Its power comes from the knowledge of its potential targets, the gentiles, that powerful people are willing to back it up with material penalties.
http://www.sobran.com/establishment.shtml
When Joe McCarthy accused people of being Communists, the charge was relatively precise. You knew what he meant. The accusation could be falsified. In fact the burden of proof was on the accuser: when McCarthy couldn’t make his loose charges stick, he was ruined. (Of course, McCarthy was hated less for his “loose” charges than for his accurate ones. His real offense was stigmatizing the Left.)
The opposite applies to charges of “anti-Semitism.” The word has no precise definition. An “anti-Semite” may or may not hate Jews. But he is certainly hated by Jews. There is no penalty for making the charge loosely; the accused has no way of falsifying the charge, since it isn’t defined.
A famous example. When Abe Rosenthal accused Pat Buchanan of “anti-Semitism,” everyone on both sides understood the ground rules. There was a chance that Buchanan would be ruined, even if the charge was baseless. And there was no chance that Rosenthal would be ruined — even if the charge was baseless.
Such are the rules. I violate them, in a way, even by spelling them out.
“Anti- Semitism” is therefore less a charge than a curse, an imprecation that must be uttered formulaically. Being a “bogus predicate,” to use Gilbert Ryle’s phrase, it has no real content, no functional equivalent in plain nouns and verbs. Its power comes from the knowledge of its potential targets, the gentiles, that powerful people are willing to back it up with material penalties.
http://www.sobran.com/establishment.shtml
Quote
The features of most of them seem quite clearly to be caricaturized stereotypical Jewish.
Like what? We must have different stereotypes of jews here in the U.S., all I see is a bunch of old fucks playing monopoly.
Not saying that it wasn't anti-semitic, or that it was, just saying I don't see the stereotype there.
Either way, its free speech on trial by fire at its best.
This is just another case of overly sensitive people overreacting.
On balance, I'd say it probably is (anti-semitic). The features of most of them seem quite clearly to be caricaturized stereotypical Jewish.
As to the reaction of covering it up? Down to the property owner, I'd say but the UK has all kinds of anti-hate speech and other thought crimes on the books now.
As to the reaction of covering it up? Down to the property owner, I'd say but the UK has all kinds of anti-hate speech and other thought crimes on the books now.
Jump to: