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