IRONY OF IRONIES: 'museum of tolerance' on Muslim graves...

[Sirotnikov]

Land that was stolen from the Palestinians was used to build a 'museum of tolerance' - that is hypocrisy right there, unless you're too dumb to figure that out...

classic - your main arguement in this thread failed so you fall back on default premesis.

Ignoring the fact that it is incorrect to attribute any kind of 'national' land ownership to the palestinians, as a concept of their nationality has never arose prior to the 1950s.

I suggest the following comparison, which can be relevant everywhere (america, europe, australia):
"land that was stolen from natives now used to build museum of tolerance"

Look, what a horrible step of utter intolerance! Building a tolrance museum on a place that had once seen intolreance! How hypocritical!

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
classic - your main arguement in this thread failed so you fall back on default premesis.

Actually you'll find the basic premise intact, the 'museum of tolerance' is trying to build on a muslim cemetery...

Ignoring the fact that it is incorrect to attribute any kind of 'national' land ownership to the palestinians, as a concept of their nationality has never arose prior to the 1950s.

**** national land ownership - who said anything about that? What about individual ownership!? Those people or organisations forced to flee for their lives who've had their land confiscated for not returning to it - nowithstanding the fact that the Israeli govt refuses to let them return.

I suggest the following comparison, which can be relevant everywhere (america, europe, australia):
"land that was stolen from natives now used to build museum of tolerance"

Yet in most of those countries there has been significant attempts at restitution - but not Israel...

No, your state relies on its apartheid, discriminatory, ethnic-cleansing, lebensraum-esque policies in a vain attempt to stem the advancing tide of the arab population within its borders - lest it ceases to exist as the 'democratic' nation it purports to be...

Look, what a horrible step of utter intolerance! Building a tolrance museum on a place that had once seen intolreance! How hypocritical!

Hah, you expose yourself so easily! Apparently Siro thinks because a wrong has been committed before it is OK to commit another one...

Don't worry mate, soon enough you'll be overrun by Israeli Arabs within your borders, in what 20 years I heard? Cos no matter what your govt does, the reality is that the arabs are growing at a far faster rate than the jews - then we'll see how good you are at playing happy families with 'the enemy within'...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Patroklos
As long as the remains are buried somewhere else I don't see the problem. I would suggest a landfill.

Do we know if the dead bodies were of persons who were all terrorists, or are these bodies of innocent people?


Because if these are bodies of decased, innocent people, I find your remark to really obtuse and cold-hearted.

[Sirotnikov]

Actually you'll find the basic premise intact, the 'museum of tolerance' is trying to build on a muslim cemetery...

Actually the basic premise is that Israel is trying to build a museum of tolerance on a piece of land that turned out to happen to contain human remains, which interested factors (the waqf) claim to be muslim. Their religion, in either case is irrelevant. It is, a simple case of moving a cemetery, which is often done.

Simply because the remains may belong to muslims, doesn't make it any more or less sacred.

**** national land ownership - who said anything about that? What about individual ownership!? Those people or organisations forced to flee for their lives who've had their land confiscated for not returning to it - nowithstanding the fact that the Israeli govt refuses to let them return.

Israel still has parts of land which are owned by private people, most of them indeed arabs or druze. However, as a policy, Israel has been nationalizing land - whether arab or jewish. Most of the lands that were settled in the early 20th century were privately owned, and yet Israel as a state steadily nationalized it, and did as it saw fit. That is but a natural process when building a country from scratch, in a place that has little spare space. Calling it stealing is silly, because a state can't steal if it appropriates by law. And yes - in some cases a state has a right to do so - just like it has a right to force draft to the army.

Yet in most of those countries there has been significant attempts at restitution - but not Israel...

In no other country was the original population as hostile from the outset, and in no other country was restituion a meaningful threat to the existance of the state itself.

Obviously USA can now set up Indian resorvatories, after it wiped out most of them, and there is no chance in hell they are going to threaten the existance of the new state.

If you want, I can promise to give some restitution rights, some 200 years from now, as well.

No, your state relies on its apartheid, discriminatory, ethnic-cleansing, lebensraum-esque policies in a vain attempt to stem the advancing tide of the arab population within its borders - lest it ceases to exist as the 'democratic' nation it purports to be...

You better look up all those words in the dictionary.

To have apartheid or ethnic cleansing you would need figures of Israeli arabs to shrink, or to have their place in society worsen. That is the opposite of what is happenning.

If you are referring to the inhabitants of the palestinian authorised territories, then I would say that a jump from military regime, to self governance is a step forward, also, inconsistent with claims of ethnic cleansing.

Apparently Siro thinks because a wrong has been committed before it is OK to commit another one.

You miscredit me. I don't think that building the museum on said ground is a wrong. At least not because it is 'muslim'.

Don't worry mate, soon enough you'll be overrun by Israeli Arabs within your borders, in what 20 years I heard? Cos no matter what your govt does, the reality is that the arabs are growing at a far faster rate than the jews - then we'll see how good you are at playing happy families with 'the enemy within'...

I'm terribly glad at your demonstration of your capacity to clear thought, free of prejudice or biggotry. I haven't seen my arab neighbours (a flat above me) as 'enemies within' yet.

No doubt, the muslim population in your home town will soon be growing as well, just like in the rest of Europe. I suggest you better start learning your Hadith, or else

You know, soon you'll be able to say very little of the prophet... or of anything else

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by MOBIUS


Actually you'll find the basic premise intact, the 'museum of tolerance' is trying to build on a muslim cemetery...

If the basic premise is that you're an ass? Yes. However, your basic facts are incorrect. Why am I not surprised?

They found bones. The city is 3000 years old. You probably can't dig up any significant area of land and not find bones.

It's a really important cemetary when the people who claim the bones didn't even know they were there, isn't it?

[Lonestar]

Wasn't the Museum of Tolerance in South Park?

[Sandman]

It's not really a museum of tolerance. From the video, it looks like some sort of national Jewish museum.

[muxec]

Hoax.

[Arrian]

I too am for fairness why is why almost everything the Israeli state stands for is contrary to that sentiment - my argument in its purest form (something any 12 year old could easily figure out) is: Is it right/fair for development that purports to be about tolerance, be built on stolen land from a people persecuted and marginalised by the powers that the development itself represents?

Your argument is one a 12 year old would come up with and think brilliant. It's full of holes, though.

Item 1: as noted many times, Jerusalem is an ancient city. You can't really dig anywhere w/o finding remains. It does not appear that anyone thought this was a cemetary and decided to build something on top of it.

Item 2: the Imam or whoever is objecting to the construction now appears to have been unaware of the existance of remains until the construction began... but all of a sudden it's a sacred cemetary. Doesn't that seem a tad fishy to you?

Item 3: Your basic premise when it comes to anything about Israel is that you don't think Israel should exist, or at the very least that it shouldn't be was it was established to be: a haven for the Jewish people. As noted in the bit I quoted.

It does, though. Whether or not one believes that its creation (including where it is) was fair, it's been done and it's irreversible. The demographic problem (how can Israel manage to act like a democratic, enlightened state and also stay Jewish) is something Israel grapples with constantly. Personally, I think that so far their policies to deal with that issue have been misguided. I don't think they're evil, though, given the circumstances. Again: think about the purpose Israel is supposed to serve. What would you do in their position? Have you even considered it from that angle?

Israel and Palestine (the Palestinian people) have been at war. There have been several wars involving nation-states, and also the intifadas. Both sides have done horrible ****. Neither side has much claim to moral highground. So don't give me this whiny crap about the poor downtrodden Palestinians vs. teh evil Zionist empire. It's not nearly that simple. Fairness would suggest looking at it from both sides.

I do not know the details of how Israel got this bit of land that became a parking lot. There was confiscation involved, apparently. What neither you nor I know is exactly what was involved in that. I think it's possible that it could have been confiscated in a way that does not constitute theft.

Your reaction to the Independent article was as I described: you are against "just about everything Israel stands for" and saw a reason to get in a good bash. It's clear as day to most of us reading this thread. I don't even have to make any assumptions! You've laid it out yourself. At most, all that is required is a little deduction.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sandman
It's not really a museum of tolerance. From the video, it looks like some sort of national Jewish museum.

Its hard to convey the history of the Jews for the last 2000 years without bringing up discrimination and tolerance, unless you want a museum full of old kiddush cups and menorahs. Which I trust this is not.

[Sandman]

Bringing up something doesn't entail naming the whole museum after it...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Sandman
Bringing up something doesn't entail naming the whole museum after it...

I dont run videos on this PC, but I know the SWC has a museum of tolerance in LA. From what I understand its a multimedia exhibit about the Holocaust and WW2. The SWC evident considers teaching about the Holocaust to be teaching about tolerance. While it certainly doesnt exhaust the subject of tolerance I cant fault them for the name. And I dont see that its "Zionist"

[Arrian]

Something else that jumped out at me:

Yet in most of those countries there has been significant attempts at restitution - but not Israel...

Long after the damage was done, once the losing side constitutes zero threat. Not whilst the other side was fighting back. Only once any threat is gone and the power disparity is such that "restitution" costs almost nothing do people go for such things. That's reality.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on (in earnest anyway) for less than 100 years. And it's still going. Apples and Oranges, to say the least.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

actually restitution for land claims is one of the issues in the negotiations for an end to the conflict. It would be silly for the Israelis to make a unilateral concession on that (BTW, similarly ive maintained that Abu Mazen cant be faulted for not giving up the right of return - he cant unilaterally give up a negotiating card)

[lord of the mark]

BTW, can somebody tell me about the attempts at restitution to NAtive AMericans happening in my country? I wasnt aware of any, unless you count the casinos.