Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the construction can resume at a disputed site for The Museum of Tolerance in Jerusalem.
Frank O. Gehry designed the museum with 200 million USD coming from California. Backed by Gov. Schwarzenegger, the museum is a sister project for the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center. PNN * Previous coverage: 1, 2, 3, 4
23 Comments
Return it to a sacred parking lot and move the building somewhere else.
People and their stupid religions dragging humanity down. What a mess. This has nothing to do with history. This is all about pushing fairy tales with a political agenda.
Why did this get reposted? Was there any new news?
yes it is new.
it is a current news in palestinian publication, pnn.
since we have been reporting this, design is developed, construction started, stopped, opposition and supporters organized better, and couple of days ago, israeli supreme court gave the green light lifting a major roadblock. it is certainly very news worthy project that i will keep following. the building someday be completed and talked about. and some people will know how it all started and what was the story behind it.
this particular article comes from a credible palestinian source and clearly names some of the players, extend of the project and lets me know bit more about the facts.
it has architecture, urban planning, politics, human rights issues, discussions of architectural theory, ethics, culture tourism and much more.
trust me it is worthy news post.
it is not a repost either. you can call it a developing story if you will, and, if archinect's coverage of it interests you, look up more because i didn't link all the previous news on the subject.
people need to look a lot of things if they want to know about transformation of jerusalem.
these kind of information has a lot of lessons in them that might be useful to architects and architecture for the better world.
i would have better respect for the israeli supreme court, if it decided museum and the hotel development be built elsewhere, the site never return to be a parking lot (when and if ever was) and restored, and, not developed as if it is on the corner of pico blvd. and roxbury dr. in los angeles.
maybe i see that as a better situation and perhaps i see it might help build trust and better co-operation between two peoples and help bring lasting peace to the region.
with me, all these thoughts come to forefront specially via a building.
of course project being a frank gehry building, main support coming from my local community in socal, undoubtly adding an increased interest on my part.
i hope this help you to reconsider the newsworthyness of the post.
I do think it's an irrelevant story and appreciate your long response. I never questioned the source or legitimacy of the article or the PNN. I believe the article is credible got across exactly what it wanted to. With quotes like "they have raped our lands in the name of tolerance" I think you should have stuck to the LA Times article with the same exact information. I would also like to know how this is a violation of ALL Holy Sites considering a similar cemetery was found in Egypt and relocated. I disagree that this particular act of building is a human rights issue. Nobody can deny that there is a massive human rights issue in Palestine (created by many factors including oppression: exterior and religiously imposed) but the only way this building comes in that discussion is if it is used as a tool to further the religious education towards division. The article you linked very much feeds into this systematic the use of fear and religion to divide and regress away from modern world th. That could be a much larger discussion involving all countries. This is fundamentally a way for a particular group to propagandize a historic site, that has been a parking lot for 25 years, to gain religious and political leverage in a volatile area. To negate this and say you think this process could lead to peace while posting an article like you did leads to would should be an interesting conversation. I would be willing to bet wherever this project was built there would have been some opposition on the mere fact that it is a Jewish Tolerance Center. I understand that architecture at that scale is essentially a political act, especially a project a loaded as this one, but it is hard for me to see how this process can be a unifier no matter if it is moved. What makes this story interesting to you in terms of architectural theory, tourism, and urban design makes me see a huge scary divide created by politics and a religious propaganda machine. I have to believe that most people want the same peaceful endings so hopefully the "raping in the name of anything" is held to a minimum.
Yikes - I meant 'relevant' Very relevant -
so, you see opposition to 'museum of tolerance' as propoganda of religion and find nothing of violation putting a big showy museum and hotel suites with overseas money on top of a site which has been, until 1948, "the main" muslim cemetery in jerusalem.
it is okay, whoever you are.
i just wanted to simplify what you have said.
i can see the palestinian pens are much more effective than anything else exposing belligerency. this is something usually missing in la times!
I am responding to the article that you posted which was definitely propaganda. It was not intended to be a belligerent response but if you bring up topics on contention and then do not expect a reaction then I do not know what to say. It raised many questions and thoughts for me on the role in modern religious politics. To say this is not a factor is hard for me to believe. A few quick things - I believe that a Museum of Tolerance founded by a Holocaust survivor should be mentioned in an article instead of a "big ass museum with hotels." I am still curious what you mean by overseas money. It will not offend me if you say what you mean. I am also curious what you mean by the main cemetery since 1948. I thought it was found while excavating for the museum. All belligerence aside this is something you can help me understand.
hmm. you were not called belligerent.
read the jerusalem post article linked, regarding the main cemetery until 1948.
regarding overseas money, again, read the article please. the project mainly financed by money being transferred to israel from united states.
not everybody in israel and in jewish diaspora approve this museum and pending hotel and commercial building complex.
it already is a symbol of conflict, which is very sad and useless for much needed dialog.
People who have been thought the Holocaust should do this and that. Most Jews are offended by that argument - Very annoying and condescending. Why does the funding of the museum matter when Jews are spread all over the World? I am curious why that is such an issue with you. Is there something wrong with that? Everything is contentious in Jerusalem. Everything is built over something historical. There are arguments all the time over whose land is whose. What do people think should happen to the site if the building is moved? The last main question is was the site desanctified? And if so - When?
yes, there is something fishy about a museum of tolerance built in jerusalem, on muslim cemetery, against the protests of local community, and built with beverly hills money. i also find arnold schwarzenegger angle a bit strange too, possibly campaigning for his local supporters.
you don't seem to understand the palestinian humiliation and resentment to shiny tolerance museum, when, in fact, they are not 'tolerated' as citizens in their own traditional homeland and even allowed to move freely.
a museum of tolerance should not be shoved down to people's throats.
i hope someday this building changes all this hardships and becomes a true symbol of hope and all palestinian suspicions about it proved to be wrong and misplaced. i doubt that but i wish it nevertheless for lasting peace.
this is enough from me. a lot of your questions can be answered by reading few articles on the case.
The museum of (in)tolerence, if I'd name it, how could a museum dedicated to the notions of peacful co-exitence, be built on an ethno-cidic foundation, fed by humiliating the other, and razing his cemeteries..
also,
i think the building itself sucks.
it is the worst gehry project ever. obtusely placed on a site looking like a jerk from the hills, where the palestinian homes are being bulldozed.
doing festive topsy turvies, as if it is a new addition to westside pavilion, rendering the word 'tolerance' on actual architecture itself.
finally,
it is like hanging a disco ball over an eminent domain situation...
I agree about the design but I question when we should stop bowing to religious history that was built on conflict and mass killings (all religions in that area). Enough is enough. I do not respect any religion nor the history of using it to justify killing.
There were conflicting stories on if the site was desanctified. I believe this makes a huge diference in how this story should play out.
Guys - take your jew / muslim rock throwing somewhere else. You already ruined your corner of the world so dont ruin ours too
I think it is a very unique situation that sparks a variety of opposing views. What's wrong with that?
clam,
you should have run for presidency!
i have already committed to vote for someone else but, you could've been a contender with your insight and worldview.
very funny...
architectonicita, we definitely agree that it is a unique situation and similar for our views on religion.
if the museum of tolerance was to be more inclusive of its surrounding communities and built within less divisive conditions, it would have been a very positive development for the area and be a part of peace. but instead, unfortunately, it is a missed opportunity and unnecessary provocateur of further division, an oxymoron.
I will say this - There is nothing wrong with conflicting dialogue. If nothing else your posts usually get people to react - which is a good thing
well thank you architectonicita. that is how we learn from each other and accept to co-exist. i think that's good for everybody. i am impressed with your ability to stay on it and allow room to maneuver to different aspects of the dialog.
- 12% of the site
- Deconsecrated
- In a part of the world where there is something under every piece of ground
- Measures in place to prevent the disturbance or honorable reburial of any bodies
Build it.
I was just passing by.
I would like to say this issue is being exploited by the Arabs and bash-Israel groups for political purposes. Not a peep was uttered by these same people when the car park was built 30 years ago. At least the authorities have offered to exhume the bodies and rebury them. This is in stark contrast with the Tunisians, who turned a Jewish cemetery into a park without exhuming the bodies, the Libyans who built a highway over the Jewish cemetery in Benghazi and the Iraqis who are, I have heard, making a fortune developing the Basra Jewish cemetery into luxury flats, to say nothing of the Islamic authorities in Jerusalem itself who have excavated priceless Jewish relics from the Temple Mount and unceremoniously dumped them. Hypocrisy, anyone?
Having said that, I think to build a museum of tolerance is a ridiculous and frivolous idea and Gehry's design is monstrous. But if Weisenthal backs down now it will be considered a victory for the Palestinian protestors.
www.jewishrefugees.blogspot.com
01/15/2010
i mean for real..built buildings or freaking parking lots on top of another people's mother or father or uncle or grandma grave???? how is that even considered as "tolerance" ??? this is not even issue of history or religion! this is fundamental error!! y not move the museum in the middle of the wall that either Palestinians or Jews can move & interact freely inside for a start. Im not big on Gehry but way to go ol'man!
News just in....
A November 22, 1945 article from The Palestine Post (the pre-state name of The Jerusalem Post), which was forwarded to the Wiesenthal Center on Monday after being posted on a blog, reports Muslim plans to build directly over the cemetery.
The report states, “An area of over 450 dunams in the heart of Jerusalem, now forming the Mamilla Cemetery, is to be converted into a business centre.
“The town-plan is being completed under the supervision of the Supreme Moslem Council in conjunction with the Government Town Planning Adviser,” the article continues.
“A six-storeyed building to house the Supreme Moslem Council and other offices, a four-storeyed hotel, a bank and other buildings suitable for it, a college, a club and a factory are to be the main structures. There will also be a park to be called the Salah ed Din Park, after the Moslem warrior of Crusader times.”
The 1945 article also describes plans by the council to transfer remains buried in the cemetery to a separate, “walled reserve” and cites rulings from prominent Muslim clerics at the time allowing for the building plans to progress.
“In an interview with Al-Wih-da, the Jerusalem weekly,” the Palestine Post article continues, “a member of the Supreme Moslem Council stated that the use of Moslem cemeteries in the public interest had many precedents both in Palestine and elsewhere.
“The member added that the Supreme Moslem Council intended to publish a statement containing dispensations by Egyptian, Hijazi and Demascene clerics sanctioning the building programme. He pointed out that the work would be carried out in stages and by public tender. Several companies had already been formed in anticipation, and funds were plentiful.”
Hypocrisy, anyone?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.