Talk:Museum of Tolerance Jerusalem

Haaretz special report on the MOT

Haaretz has been running a story on the soon to be built Museum of Tolerance in Jerusalem. Specifically the backlash against it within certain areas of Israel (the political left and most of the non-Jewish residents). The issue is that the museum is being built on top of a Muslim cemetery that dates back to at least the 14th century.

Recently a report came out showing that the bodies have been damaged by the company hired to excavate the area. http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2010/may/19/excavators-accused-of-desecration/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/7737047/Israeli-contractors-dig-up-Muslim-graves-at-museum-of-tolerance.html

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/travel/Israel+Contractors+accused+damaging+cemetery/3044884/story.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/world/middleeast/19webbriefs-CEMETERY.html?ref=middleeast

http://www.haaretz.com/magazine/friday-supplement/museum-of-tolerance-special-report-part-ii-secrets-from-the-grave-1.290941

I am not a wikipedia member or someone who can be completely neutral on the subject so I leave it to those of you who can both edit and be fair —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.123.4.230 (talk) 13:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

You forgot the essence: what's its purpose?

Purpose: which is...? We don't have a single word about why it's being built, neither the officially declared purpose, nor what critics see as its less visible implications. You can't post an article about a topic lacking a definition! Arminden (talk) 08:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Made a start. Now it's up to us to figure out what's hiding behind the weasel words of the SWC. Tolerance for what & whom? Harmony between whom? What's the justification for this mammoth project, just across the street from another weird museum, the FOZ (here)? Forget the cemetery for a minute (and after that read what Hajj Amin al-Husseini said when his project, quite expectedly, stumbled over old bones – just for the sake of perspective, not for anything else). Arminden (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Undue weight

Could you explain why this article was tagged for undue weight (in this edit), @Qualiesin? - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:37, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

The controversy section takes up about 50% of the article. It would make more sense to have most of the article be about the subject itself. Qualiesin (talk) 01:12, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

The controversy is a part of the subject. It's probably due for the lede and it should definitely be mentioned in the history section. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 06:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)