Login | Create A Free Account | FAQ
WindyCitizen.com HomeBlogsAdvertise Find People
Popular Latest Links Comments
biverson shared a link...
25

Alderman says he had this mural destroyed

apps.wbez.org - 27 weeks ago - 2784 views

If this was my Alderman, I would run against him. What a racist, facist jerk. An art mural on PRIVATE PROPERTY was removed by city graffiti workers because police didn't like it. The police told the alderman and Ald. Balcer decided that there might be hidden gang signs in the mural and that he just wanted it removed. This is why Alderman shouldn't be judging art.

Read full story »

Post a comment E-mail it Tweet it Facebook it

11 Comments Have your say. Vote up the best responses. ↓

Comments

1 points
by Cshess87 27 weeks 1 day ago

If you read through to the WBEZ article, Streets and Sanitation isn't even sure anymore that what they did was legal, because Buildings says that no permit was needed for the mural.

The alderman is an authoritarian thug, and shameless about it.

As a matter of private property rights the city was in the wrong.

As a matter of bureaucratic procedure removal of the mural was wrong.

And as a matter of the majority dictating culture and taste to the minority, removal of the mural was wrong.


The alderman is an authoritarian thug, and shameless about it.

What is this ad hominem attack based on?

As a matter of private property rights the city was in the wrong.

Interesting, but where are you getting this argument from?

As a matter of bureaucratic procedure removal of the mural was wrong.

Is there a correct procedure for stuff like this?

And as a matter of the majority dictating culture and taste to the minority, removal of the mural was wrong.

Aren't the majority behind keeping the mural and it was just a few powerful folks who got rid of it?

Also, why the heck is this old story creeping up the front page. Weird.

I thought the majority were for this mural too. But I'm even more perplexed about how this story resurfaced. Any of the new voters want to say how they found this story?

Someone with a lot of StumbleUpon mojo stumbled the story, helping to push it back up the charts.

Thanks for clarifying. Wondered what happened. Just a matter of time till we'll see the WGN reporter playing basketball again.

The mural was on private property.

I assume you wouldn't be OK with an alderman calling the graffiti blasters to sandblast your house because he didn't like the color of the paint?

Touche! I would not. I see your point now.

The reason for why the mural was painted over from the WBEZ article:

11th ward alderman James Balcer says he called in the graffiti blasters because the owner of the building never got a permit for the mural. He says he got 3 or 4 complaints from residents. He says he got some from police too and he says he agreed that the piece was distasteful.

1 points
by Madcap 22 weeks 3 days ago

Insane...destroying art..

Didn't the Taliban destroy the reclining Buddha statues because they offended some cops, er, Muslims?

Post new comment

To join the conversation create a profile, login, or
Reactions on the web
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/wcoO)

Latest News from our Sponsors [?]

Paid for and Authorized by Friends of Dan Hynes

30 Chicagoans voted up this post

  • danielhonigman
  • Madcap
  • andrewgill
  • OurManInChicago
  • Tim Winkler

Explore this story


This site Copyright 2009, Windy Citizen.com - All rights reserved. Content posted by users is dedicated to the public domain.
Designed in Chicago's Old Town neighborhood.