Opinion
Editorials are posted and archived on JNonline.us .
Dry Bones OR. HISTORY SAYS
V
Editorial
Israel Must Avoid Official Bias
0
ne of the permanent sources of
tension in Israel is the difficulty
in keeping the nation Jewish
within a Western-style republic that pro-
tects the civil rights of all. Any law or gov-
ernment action that protects Israel's Jewish
character is open to claims of racism and
even apartheid by Israel's many critics.
Most such charges are baseless, but
sometimes the Israeli government crosses
the line. The Knesset's mid-July vote on
land distribution is such a case.
The Knesset voted 64-16 to bar the
Israel Land Administration from selling
Jewish National Fund land to anyone other
than Jews. The goal of the bill is to reverse
a 2004 Supreme Court ruling that found
the policy of distributing JNF land only
to Jews to be discriminatory and, thus,
illegal.
That landmark ruling led Attorney
General Menachem Mazuz to decide that
the Land Administration had to market
and sell land, including JNF land, to Jews
and non-Jews alike.
That decision conflicted with the cov-
enant between the Israeli government and
JNF. In 1961, JNF handed land it controls
over to the government for sale, piece by
piece, to the public. The condition was that
only Jews could buy the land.
"We are gratified that the government
of Israel ... recognized that the land pur-
chased by the Jewish people for the Jewish
people should remain in the hands of its
rightful owners:' JNF President Ronald
Lauder said in a statement last month.
"This Knesset decision reaffirms the vision
and the dream of Theodor Herzl and the
millions of Jews over the past 106 years
who contributed and participated in the
rebirth of a Jewish nation after 2,000 years."
That's the proper attitude for JNF,
which owns 13 percent of the state land in
Israel. JNF bought that land with money
raised to help Jews settle in Israel. It has a
responsibility to donors to ensure the land
goes to Jews. "Jewish" is in the name of the
organization for a reason.
On the other hand, the Israeli govern-
ment has a higher obligation: to treat all
Israeli citizens equally.
Take the example of the Israeli
Consulate General to the southeastern
United States. Both the consul general,
Reda Mansour, and the deputy consul
general, Oren Rozenblat, served in the
Israel Defense Forces. Both have rep-
resented their country as diplomats in
foreign nations. Mansour even earned the
title of ambassador as Israel's top envoy
in Ecuador. But under the Knesset's deci-
AN AXIS OF
DICTATORS
THREATENS THE
WEST? . . .
WHILE A BRITISH
ENVOY SEEKS
"PEACE IN OUR
TIME". .
sion, Mansour may not
buy JNF land from the
government because he
is Druze; Rozenblat may
purchase the same land
because he is Jewish.
That is an appalling
situation. The Israeli
YES KIDDIES! OON'T
410 AN ISOLATED
government cannot
WASTE TIME STUDYING
DEMOCRACY IS BEING
ask for the loyalty of its
AWFUL 2 0TH CENTURY
PRESSURED TO CEDE
non-Jewish citizens if
DISASTERS!
TERRITORY IN THE
it does not treat them
NAME OF "PEACE".
equally. It must not
WE'RE HAVING A
institutionalize dis-
2 /ST CENTURY
crimination with laws
RE-RUN!
that order government
agencies to look at two
people and see them not
as Israelis, but as Jew
and non-Jew.
How can the govern-
www.drybonesblog.com
ment avoid discrimina-
tion without violating JNF's mandate?
control of its land.
The Knesset should pass a bill that calls
JNF, then, could fulfill its mission of
on JNF to make a choice: Either renounce
helping to build the Jewish state, and the
the religious restrictions on the sale of its
Israeli government could avoid the taint
land, or take back the responsibility for
of making discrimination an official
selling the land itself. JNF, if true to its
policy. II
Zionist charter, neither could nor should
drop its land-for-Jews policy — which
Send letters of no more than 150 words to:
means the private agency would take back letters@thejewishnews.com .
7-
Reality Check
Shaddup, Already
D
on't you wish they
would just hold
the election this
November and get the thing
over with? It's not that I'm over-
ly eager for regime change. It's
just that we're still 15 months
out and the blah-blah-blah is
mindless and relentless.
Who's ahead? Who's behind?
Who's hopeless? At this point,
who cares?
I don't know where I'm having lunch
tomorrow let alone whom I'll vote for 15
months from tomorrow. It's the perpetual
campaign, inventing news for the 24-hour
channels and spewing out information
that means mostly nothing.
It's like that with communication in
all areas of our lives now. Think about
how things have changed. For almost
the entire first day of the 1967 riots
in Detroit, there was a voluntary news
blackout. Radio and television carried no
coverage. Not until the first
editions of Monday's papers
were ready to come off the
presses did word get out.
The 40,000 people who
attended the Tigers' double
header with the Yankees that
afternoon had no idea what
was happening just a few miles
from the ballpark. The thick
smoke spiraling up from 12th
Street was visible for miles but
it could have been just another building
burning up.
That would be impossible today. Before
dawn of the first day, everyone in the
city would have known. Text messages,
cell phones, e-mails would have made
it impossible to keep a lid on the story,
and by noon it would have been all over
YouTube.
Good or bad? I don't really know. The
idea that the riot could be contained if
fewer people knew about it was surely
wishful thinking. Would anything have
been gained, though, would lives or prop-
erty have been saved, if everyone knew
immediately?
But it's a measure of how our lives have
been altered in the last 40 years. If you
could be transported back to that year, it
would probably be the most significant
change you'd notice. People could fall out
of touch much easier back then.
I find myself agreeing with William
Wordsworth: "The world is too much with
us." The opportunity to reflect lies buried
under an avalanche of dangling conversa-
tions and sensational images.
Celebrity pap. The misinformed argu-
ing with the ignorant on talk radio. Loud
and personal cell phone conversations in
public places. Spam on the computer and
static in the air. And everyone's an expert
when they blog.
I understand the reason for the inces-
sant politicking. The unending pressure to
raise more and more money now drives
the democratic process. If you don't grab
that jack, how can you afford to put men-
dacious smears of your opponent on TV
when it really matters?
From the media side, there is the need
to cut through the clutter by making
yourself loud, controversial and abrasive.
Rosie O'Donnell has nothing interesting
to say but she gets herself noticed. The
same is true of Ann Coulter on the other
end of the spectrum and a host of imita-
tors.
The measured commentary, the will-
ingness to accept the possibility that the
opposition may have a brain and a valid
point of view is out of fashion. Now it's all
a matter of whose dog can bark the loud-
est.
And we're going to have 15 more
months of this. I'd rather watch the Food
Channel. Vegetables are silent.
George Cantor's e-mail address is
gcantor614@aol.com.
August 9 • 2007
23