Gutlless wimps at the Tate

LONDON (Reuters) - The Tate Britain on Monday defended its decision to remove a sculpture from an exhibition for fear of offending Muslims, citing the "sensitive climate" following suicide bombings in London in July.

The museum decided not to include "God is Great" in a display of works by British-based John Latham, infuriating the artist and renewing debate over where to draw the line when censoring the arts.

"God is Great" features copies of the Bible, Koran and Talmud -- sacred texts of Christians, Muslims, and Jews respectively -- embedded in thick glass.

"Having sought wide-ranging advice, Tate feels that to exhibit the work in London in the current sensitive climate, post-July 7, would not be appropriate," a museum spokesman said.

** Seems that the Guardian readers have won that round, and its shit like that that keeps the climate sensitive. (Below is another article on this from the BNP site)

The Tate Britain museum has never knowingly previously been too worried about causing offence by pushing back the boundaries of acceptability. It is after all the gallery which gave us such gems as the talentless Tracey Emins’ childish scribbles using the “f” word, other “artists” elephant dung daubings and “soft core” porno films.

However the sensitivities of Tunbridge Wells’ residents and genteel senior citizens seem to be not worthy of consideration by the Museum’s directors and trustees and it seems that only a Muslim of any age or either sex can be offended.

Exhibition work removed

The museum over the weekend removed a work made up of sacred texts from Christianity, Judaism and Islam torn and mounted on glass to avoid offending religious sensibilities following the July bombings on London Transport. The museum said it was particularly concerned that John Latham's piece “God Is Great” could upset Muslims. It pulled the work from an exhibition of Latham's art despite his objection.

“Having sought wide-ranging advice, Tate feels that to exhibit the work in London in the current sensitive climate, post July 7, would not be appropriate,” the museum said in a statement.

“God Is Great” consists of a large sheet of glass and copies of the Koran, the Bible and Judaism's Talmud that have been cut apart, with the pieces mounted on either side of the glass to make it appear that they are embedded in it.

“Cowardice” says artist

The museum put up a notice in the exhibition explaining the decision, including Latham's objection to it. Latham, 84, who made his name as a member of London's 1960s artistic avant garde, said the piece, which he made 10 years ago, was not anti-Muslim.

“Tate Britain have shown cowardice over this,” he told The Observer newspaper. “I think it's a daft thing to do because, if they want to help the militants, this is the way to do it.”

We have seen planning applications from Glasgow to Luton for licensed premises declined, delayed or modified following objections from Muslim residents.

We have seen barmy councils refuse to display the word “Christmas” and use seasonal decorations which might offend Muslims.

We have seen just last week Burger King remove a new brand of ice cream because of just ONE complaint by a supposed Muslim customer which is odd because BK have confirmed to us and many other correspondents that BK does not sell any halal products.

Endless list of offensive material

There seems to be no end to the list of activities, sights, sounds and words to which Muslims, such delicate souls that they are, get easily offended.

What about the offensive sight of a new Mosque being opened every 6 days in Britain, what about the offensive and frighteningly sight (to toddlers and the elderly) of women forced to completely cover their faces in bird-cage style garments, what about the offensive news of another honour killing on the streets of west Yorkshire or Lancashire, what about the offensive sight of halal products in Britain’s leading supermarket chains? Are indigenous Britons and other non-Muslims in Britain; Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and the secular not permitted to be offended and express that concern and have that concern listened to and acted upon?

Taking a peek at the Tate’s online visitors book suggest that they may have stirred up a hornet’s nest of popular anger and concern by those cultured, arty types who like the Tate’s own brand of sensationalist modern art. Perhaps the Tate will rethink its daft decision.

Every concession to supposed Islamic “offence” is a backward step for us in the west and another step forward for the advance of this middle eastern feudal religious cult.

.