ZGram - 5/12/2002 - "A Museum of Tolerance in a City of Fanatics?"

[irimland@zundelsite.org]

ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny

December 5, 2002

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Have I got a ZGram for my folks today!

As you read this, just remember:  A "schnorrer" is a bottom feeder. 
An apt description for the elements we know - who are disliked, 
abhorred and seen as harmful even in their own communities.

Wiesenthalers, put THAT into your pipes and smoke it!

[START]

-Meron Benvenisti, former Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem, Ha'aretz, Dec. 5, 2002

Ha'aretz (Israel) | December 5, 2002

A museum of tolerance in a city of fanatics

By Meron Benvenisti

Only in the holy city of Jerusalem are white elephants tempted to believe they
have found their heaven. No matter where they come from, when someone
decides to bring them to Jerusalem, the elephants first prosper, stuffed
with all the hollow slogans of provincial kitsch, ignorance, and greed that
blossom in the holy ground. But sadly, the life span of the white 
elephants is very
short, because the struggle for survival is cruel and ruthless and their
importers are interested in the profits resulting from bringing them to the
city, not in the fate of the beasts after they've arrived.

The skeletons of such white elephants are scattered throughout the city,
and others that up until recently were considered "vital for the very
existence of the city" are struggling to survive. Nevertheless, new white
elephants line up for the convoy, and as the nattering rhetoric accompanies
the pathetic procession, only the names of the entrepreneurs and the vague
details of the project change. Occasionally, when there comes an elephant
newer and bigger than the previous, people rub their eyes and are certain
nothing more monstrous can come along, but sure enough, an even more
grotesque creation shows up, as if it was an iron law of nature: Welcome
the Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Tolerance as designed by Frank Gehry.

It is difficult to imagine a project so hallucinatory, so irrelevant, so
foreign, so megalomaniac, as the Museum of Tolerance. The mere 
attempt to stick the
term tolerance to a building so intolerant to its surroundings is
ridiculous. Others have already referred to the extravagant arrogance
expressed in the geometric forms that can't be any more dissonant to the
environment in which it is planned to put this alien object. There's no
need to waste words on the absurdity of a Museum of Tolerance planted on
part of an ancient Muslim cemetery, some of which has long since been
turned into a parking lot, and will now be topped by spaces in which people
are meant to learn about tolerance, mutual respect and religious
coexistence.

The most intolerant city in the world, battleground for all who claim eternal
truths - "the sons of light" against the "sons of darkness" in the name of the
"absolute right" - will get a "temple of tolerance," that will never 
be involved
in any serious contention. Fanatic, brutal Jerusalem, saturated with the
ambition to gain exclusive possession over it, will take pride in a site that
preaches equality between communities and the brotherhood of nations, and
from its rooftops will be seen the homes of Palestinians, whose struggle
for freedom is always defined as "terror."

Neither the project's initiators nor its financial backers deserve the
criticism, which should be reserved for the local authorities that 
allowed this white
elephant into the city. As in previous cases, there was a combination of the
unbridled urge to do something, a sloppy planning process, political
motives, and a very large dose of provincialism: See, they're going to let
Jerusalem be like Los Angeles and if we don't recognize Gehry's
architectural genius they'll say - heaven forbid - that we don't understand
aesthetic sophistication, so we could lose the chance to get on the world
tourism map, to be the next Bilbao.

Nobody should complain to the initiators. They're just behaving like good
Jews, who live in the Diaspora and want to be involved in nurturing "good"
causes, free of conflict and complex messages, to allow them to keep living
the good life and still feel the satisfaction of having contributed to
lofty causes. The marginal readiness of Diaspora Jews to be superficially
involved, from a safe distance, is exploited by an entire industry of
schnorrers and "funds," run by various government agencies and
institutional interests for the sake of being in motion, without any 
serious look at the goals or the aesthetic and environmental 
implications.

After the white elephant rises to its feet, there's no need to worry about how
to keep it alive and maintained, and whether there's a budget - since it's
impossible to ask for money to keep it clean and maintained - they'll look
for a new white elephant, and there's no doubt Jerusalem's name will enable
another entrepreneur to initiate yet another megalomaniacal project. The
Who's Who of Jerusalem, after all, was at the presentation of the Museum
of Tolerance.

Usually, the project initiators and the authorities who "promote" them, trust
the fact that the public is apathetic or worried about its own 
affairs, or fears
the criticism might harm professional or economic interests. The absurdity
of the Museum of Tolerance and the danger that this white elephant might
actually rise, are so tangible that this time apathy cannot be allowed to
take over. There have been successful campaigns waged against destructive
projects in Jerusalem and there's no reason why a well-planned campaign
won't succeed in this case. The Museum of Tolerance project must be
eradicated without any tolerance.

[END]

(Source: 
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=237902&contra
ssID=2&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y&itemNo=237902)