Picasso's Guernica covered up at UN

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

John Ashcroft-sized idiocy strikes again, only this time at the UN..

I'm still too dumbfounded by such a display of irony impairment to be offended. Yet.

― Chris Barrus (xibalba), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 01:44 (twenty-two years ago)

There's yer hyperreality for you.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 01:49 (twenty-two years ago)

"Take that, Guernica!"

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 02:27 (twenty-two years ago)

God, I just hear David Cross screaming "HIDE THAT DIRTY FILTHY TIT!"

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 02:37 (twenty-two years ago)

maybe they're big Matisse fans

― James Blount (James Blount), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 03:47 (twenty-two years ago)

aaargh. Surely this is the time when everyone walking into the security council needs to be reminded of such things.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 08:02 (twenty-two years ago)

The explanations are weird - surely the UN Security Council has held televised press conferences between 1985 and now?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 08:22 (twenty-two years ago)

maybe they're big Matisse fans

hah! that was the first thing i thought, too.

― geeta (geeta), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 08:55 (twenty-two years ago)

looks like Pablo Picasso just got called an asshole

― dave q, Tuesday, 4 February 2003 11:38 (twenty-two years ago)

*ker-ching* Mr. Q.

― suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 12:02 (twenty-two years ago)

The article claims it's an impressionist painting!

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 18:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Maybe that's why it's being covered up - they realised they'd bought the wrong thing.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 18:39 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't figure out the tone of that article. The Wash Times is a notoriously conservative paper, so how does this line work: "Picasso: Social critic, Cubist and a little too opinionated for many in this organization." I mean, I can only assume the paper is pro-war, and covering Guernica would seem to be an anti-anti-war kind of gesture. Or is this just another "stupid UN (and Arab, too, by his name) diplomat" thing? Or should I even bother thinking about hackwork?

― g.cannon (gcannon), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 18:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I really wish they'd photographed people at the UN speaking in front of a horse's ass.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 18:50 (twenty-two years ago)

your wish is my command

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/05/images/20010511-1.jpg

― it had to be done (tracerhand), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 19:08 (twenty-two years ago)

oops, that's the white house

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 19:08 (twenty-two years ago)

"Hey Coffee can you tell this guy to move it?"

― g.cannon (gcannon), Tuesday, 4 February 2003 19:14 (twenty-two years ago)

A Suggestion: For Peace and Against Censorship in the ARTS.

Please read, distribute and protest by sending folks at UN a copy of Guernica with a message like:
Peace through Peaceful Means: let the inspections work. Insist that US give evidence to inspectors so inspections can work. Containment and Continuous Investigation.

The UN has covered a tapestry reproduction of Picasso's Guernica for Colin Powell's visit and speech because it gives "too much a mixed message."
See Maureen Dowd's column, today, NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/05/opinion/05DOWD.html
To call in protest: UN phone number:(212) 963-4475
To email: UNITED NATIONS ADMINISTRATION:
inquiries@un.org
areca@unhcr.ch
unsco@palnet.com
ecu@un.org
coi@un.org
webadmin.hchr@unog.ch
Security council members:
france@un.int
Chinamission_un@fmprc.gov.cn
mexico@un.int
chile@un.int
contact@germany-un.org
Pakistan@un.int
spain@spainemb.org
rusun@un.int
usa@un.int
IPRD@mfa.government.bg
syria@un.int
Guinea@un.int
Cameroon@un.int
uk@un.int
Thanks, Sue
www.louisvillepeace.org

― Suan Bentley, Friday, 7 February 2003 14:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Your average American conservative has little or no love for the UN, so I guess the message is intended to be "Those UN weenies can't even bring themselves to face an artistic representation of war."

Also, American conservatism has an isolationist wing -- I believe Pat Buchanan and some of his cronies are opposed to this war.

― j.lu (j.lu), Friday, 7 February 2003 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.