Following Right-Wing Attacks, Museum Seeks To Cancel 'Right Of Return Conference'

[Purveyor]

An international conference by Zochrot, an Israeli NGO which focuses on the Nakba and the “right of return,” is under threat, following pressure from right-wing organizations.

The Eretz Israel Museum, where Zochrot decided to host the event, has recently informed organizers that due to the risk of demonstrations and public disorder, they will need to pay for increased, onsite security. The museum management has also demanded that the name “Al-Shaykh Muwannis” mentioned next to the museum’s name in the event invitations be removed.

“Al-Shaykh Muwannis” is a Palestinian village that was located in what is today’s north Tel Aviv, and which stood where the museum and the Tel Aviv University are currently located.

The conference, titled “From Truth to Redress” is due to take place on September 29-30. The museum has informed Zochrot that the event will be canceled, should the organization not meet the new requirements. In response, Attorney Michael Sfard sent a letter on behalf of Zochrot to the museum, stating that backing away from the agreement would be “an illegal act” and “would constitute intellectual and ideological discrimination.”

MORE...

http://972mag.com/following-right-wing-attacks-museum-seeks-to-cancel-right-of-return-conference/77969/

[azurnoir]

1. so the Israeli Rightwing is using threats of violence to thwart the conference?

interesting and the museum apparently finds this somehow acceptable?

Imagine if Palestinians with Israeli citizenship used such threats, would they be found equally acceptable?

[oberliner]

2. Only in your imagination

No "threat of violence to thwart the conference" cited in this article.

[azurnoir]

3. The need for extra security is prominately noted in the article

as the reason for canceling, this is due to threats of demonstrations by Rightwingers

1

[oberliner]

4. Who threatened violence?

Do you know? What did they threaten to do? Were they arrested for doing so? None of this is in the article. It's only in your imagination.

[azurnoir]

5. lol read the article it plainly says who

but if there was no threat of violence why the need for extra security?