Page 4-The Canadian Jewish News, Friday, April 9, 1976
\ -
Editorial
An independent Community Newspaper serving as a forum for diverse viewpoints.
Directors: Donald Carr, Q.C., George A. Cdhon, Murray B. Kbffier, Albert J. Latner, Ray D. Wojfe.
Editor, Ralph Hynrian
Associate Editor, Lewis Levendel
Production Manager, Gary Laforet Office Manager, Candace Carroll
VOL. XVII, NO.n (895)
Published by The Canadian Jewish News
(A Corporation without share capital) at 22 Balliol, Street, Suite IS, Toronto, Ontario. M4SiCl. 481-6434 Quebec Bureau - ■
4781 Van Home Ave., Suite 209;
Montreal, Quebec H3\V IJl
735-2606 "
SUBSCRIPTIONS Canada S7.SO per year .............$18 - 3 years
U.S.A, $ 10 pfer year............. $26.S0 - 3 years
All other countries $15 per year, $39 - 3 years
Nisan 9, 5736 - TairijL-T
Candlelighting: Toronto 6:34; IMontreat 6:13
Second Class Mail Postage Paid kt Toronto Registration Number 1683
Average net paid circulation, 27,033; average total-distribution, 28,391 . Publisher's sworn statement, January I, 197S.
: The Canadian Jewish Nows assumes n.. tisp>,nMhilit> for the kashru'th of the products advertised..
Piece of bigoted jourrialism
tan
te
Henderson article in CathoUcRe^ster
Larry Henderson, the one time CBC news announcer, and now the editor of The Catholic Register, has not enhaiiced his journalistic reputation with a signed article ^ the March 27 issue of the Register which BO doubt would gratify the hearts of Israel's enemies. It is a shoddy piece of work disguised as a defence pf Christianity.
A movie company in Israel is presently engaged in making a film based on the Hugh Schonfeld book. The Passover Plot. Editor Henderson yiews the making of this film as another evidence of the anti-Christian sentiment which he sees growing ipace in the world. He dismisses Hugh Sch<3nfeld as a "so-called biblical scholar," jnd goes on to warn the Israeli government to put a stop to this film ventiire because it could be interpreted as an 'anti-Christian act in contradiction to Israel's cpmmitinent to defend the three religious faiths.
Not content with inviting Israel to commit an act of bigoted censorship. Mr. Henderson issues a personal warning to Israel. ("1 would warn the government...") that refusal to stop the film making could have; undesirable consequences.
"If a film like this is shown in our theatres, and inevitably on our television screens, it will have a bad effect on travel to the Holy Land," wrote the editor. Then came the clincher:- "It may even provokie
France, not we
an unfortunate anti-Semitic reaction."
Poor Israel. Not only has she to contend with terrorists, threats of war, the menace of Third World nations, inflation, a shaky economy and a deepening sense of global isolation, but now Mr. Henderson comes along with remarks that do nothing to advance the ecumenical cause.
Mr. Henderson's anti-Israel bias shows iii his statement that it is not surprising Israel permitted such a film to be made at the actual sites of the Passion because Israel is far from being a religious state and, in fact "many of its founders were atheists."
Israel is a practising democracy in a part of the world where the word has little or no meaning, to, the nations that seek her destruction; The filrn. Jesus Christ Supeir-star, was. certainly not propaganda for Israel, but the Israeli authorities permitted it to be made, and the result was a barrage of criticism from angry Jews. Israel was right in permitting Snperstar to be made, just as she acted properly in not interfering with the right of a film company to make a rtiovie which takes an unorthodox view; of Jesus of Nazareth.
The Henderson article should be repudiated by Christian leaders. It is a. piece of , bigotrv- and unworthy of a responsible publication.
to
has escaped our slings and arrows
One of the more celebrated asf>ects of the Zionism-Racism resolution's aftermath was the way in which the frustrations and resentments of North American Jews were directed against Mexico.
Jewish fury against Mexico did, as whirlwinds, will, die down and the tourist boycott, which cost Mexican hotels alone some SIO million, was rather abashedly lifted amid mutual protestations of misunderstanding and gestures of reconciliation.
Mexico was a handy and vulnerable target for Jewish wrath, but there has been a warm relationship between Mexico and Israel which the Israelis were reluctant to disturb. Mexico had not. after all, given ' any indication of severing relations, merely of adhering to an expedient line at the UN. however distasteful that might be.
Amid all this brouhaha, it is piirious that a countr>' far less well-disposed to Israel, namely France, was escaping our slings and arrows. Or perhaps we did not expect any more from a nation which, in its volte-face from vast colonist power to friend of national liberation groups ("Vive le Quebec libre!"). has long since found Zionism to be ideologically unsound.
Given the consistent hostility to Israel emanating from the Palais de Justice the
last 20 years or so, it is a little surprising that North American Jewish leaders have failed to exploit whatever propaganda advantage they might have.
It was Charles De Gaulle, who can be seen in appropriately yellowed photographs posed with David Ben Gurion. who reversed French support for Israel, who more than once referred to Jews as "killers of Christ", who. alone of European leaders, in 1967. took a firmly anti-Israel stand. His public persona was that of the inheritor of Charlemagne, Le Grand Charies, the hero of the Frdnch liberation, the man who held the country together by sheer force of personality when the Algerian crisis threatened to tear it apart. :
De Gaulle's successors have conformed to the path laid out for them. It was under Georges Pompidou that France refused to deliver to Israel the Mirage fighter planes for which she had already paid, citing a boycott of arms to air Middle East combatants, presumably excluding Libya, sold 50 jets which, French assurances notwithstanding, found their way into the Egyptian air force during the halcyon days of Libyan-Egyptian fraternity. Excerpts from an editorial in the Jewish Post. Winnipeg. „
tcations
The insistence of American officials that there is nothirig new in Ambassador Scranton's blunt reminder of continuing U.S. opposition to Israel's settlement activities in East Jerusalein and the West Bank is factually correct./ It has long been obvious that the American foreign policy community, from the President down, cbnsidered these activities prejudicial to an eventual solution of the Arab-Israel dispute. This was clear beginning with the officially articulated American position at the Security Council debates in July. 1967. through the 1969 Rogers Plan, the more recent Saunders tesrimony before a Senate committee and the officially sanctioned' Brookings proposals.
' Israel has never agreed with this assess^
:ment and the Americans, for their part, did not press the issue with any great urgency after 1969. The Scranton statement would
• seem to indicate a new departure in American tactics. For what else are we to make of the State Department's insistence on choosing a debate in which Israel is being outrageously and spuriously accused of denying the religious rights of the Moslem population of the West Bank! and East
.Jerusalem, to air its differences with Israel
ion the settlement issue.
Whether tactical or substantive, this latest departure in thie articulation of American policy should serve notice on,the Israel government that the prolonged period of grace during which it could conveniently put off potentially divisive decisions and pride itself on having "decided not to decide," is fast coming to an end.
Israel's settlement policy in and around Jerusalem and in the other territories occupied in the wake of the Arab initiated war of June, |l967, was originally based on
widely accepted political and security concepts. This .has found its most concrete expression in the thickening ring of Israeli neighborhoods which today surround; Jerusalem. But execfution of this policy on the Golan Heights and in the Jordan Valley has been less determined. The tiatal number of Israeli settlers in the dozen or so settlements in each of these areas is barely 3.000. after nine years of effort.
It is a political fact of life that the settlement issue has become a, calise of deep division in internal Israeli politics. Mr. Scranton's words at the Security Council should, however, serve as a warning that the international and security implications of settlement policy must now be accorded the priority they deserve. We can no longer afford the luxury of granting primacy to considerations of internal politics.
It is time, however, for a fresh assessment of the political implications of Israel's settlement efforts in the other sectors. Are the assumptions which originally underlay, the decision to sprinkle settlements along the Jordan Valley and in the Rafiah-EI Arisha area still valid today? Conversely, are these settlements perhaps more essential than ever, if the recent American talk of the need to progress in the direction of an overall solution is merely a .smokescreen for pressuring Israel into wholesale withdrawal in return for something far short of peace? And if this is so, should not the. partisan settlement efforts at Kaddum,' Ofra and even Kiryat Arba be viewed as constituting a dangerous diversion of our limited human and'^financial resources from the main areas that/heed buttressing against linternationdl pressures? \ (JernsaJem Po^'l)
man IS
By TOBA KORENBLUM CJN Staff Reporter
TORONTO —
Mel Shipman is going back to school this fall. For thousands of public school and university students this is an annual ex-' pectation. But for this 52-year-old father of, four, the intention to enter law school is a somewhat unusual move — not uniquely because of his age and comfortable^si-tion as president of his own electronics ^ firm, but because education has been solely a pedagogical concern for him. Mel Shipman is chairman of North York's Board of Education. '
For three months now this man has sat behind the imposing desk in his airy modern office; lord over a S150 million budget and the future of 100,000 children in 165 schools. A large picture window overloioks an expansive muddy field where noisy, hulking machinery sets to work on the hew municipal building of Canada's largest borough — yet another symbol of this swelling community of a half-million citizens.
Shipman. now attired in a casual turtle-neck sweater and blazer, has served seven years as trustee for ward seven, an area thiit primarily takes in the Downsview district — scr\ing a large Jewish population arid a number of Hebrew day schools.
He kx)ks on that backbreaiking,. time-consuming job as replete "with excitement, challenge and frustration." Frustrations? He characterizes them in a clear-cut fashion: "The public school system is a
large multi-million dollar operation with habits long established, rituals and . processes engrained; change is a cumbersome and difficult undertaking."
One of his major tasks, particularly in the past year of his term as trustee, was to push for the pilot project integrating Associated Hebrew Day Schools into the public school system, a iiipve accepted, after much debate, by his Board last year, and still unapproved by the Ministry of Edy-cation. , .
The most contentious issue in the project, he sees, is the internal problem of accepting into a public system a school wherefeligious instruction is a component. When asked whether the ministry showed any resistance in principle to this idea, Shipman preferred not to comment. There have been delays, he says — a fall election, teachers' strike, winter holidays.— likely postponing the introduction of the land-niark project past the tentative September date. -
The integration question is only one sample of Shipman's strong conviction about the expansion of muiticulturalism and multi-alternajtives in the public school . system.
"The public taxpayer." he says in his careful, methodical, soft-spoken manner, "is entitled within the public institution for reasonable response to his social and cul-tiiral needs. The pubfic institutions that do not respond in an adequate way are noj meeting their responsibilities."
He agrees with thtf analysis that Canada's educational strategy, particularly
North York's Mel Shipman
during the wave of immigration in the first half of this century-, was to. absorb ethnic groups as rapidly as possible .into the' ":Canadian" milieu.
Articulating his philosophy of muiticulturalism, Shipman asserts "Canadian-isni is not synonymous with Anglo-Saxon-ism... I am convinced the melting pot is not the best solution: You can't imppse patriotism." But he concedes his philosophy "is not yet totally acceptable."
A child of immigrant parents, Shipman arrived in Montreal, from Poland, at the age of six. He calls himself "a product of the assimilationist process" — a process
/hich he admits measured one's Cana-dianism by the degree to which differences wiere subverted in favor of the national mould.
Raised in "Duddy Kravitz's neighborhood ", schooled at Baron Byng and McGill, he credits his Jewishness with sensitizing himself to the concerns of ethnic minorities and to the value of pluralism. —
"No single lifestyle," he^ays in a philosophical tone, ."canjmposejts attitude on society as a whole. The acceptance of emotional, psychological and prac;tical viariations that are a fact of our community life is necessary. If not we will explode internally."
But his multifaceted conception of tuition does not centre on cultural pr religious interests alone- His progressive school board has instituted several alternative programs to which he adheres wholeheartedly — French language immersion schools, free schools of all stripes — and he hopes it will in, future fund others. '
His personal credo is simply"to identify a need and act it out" which he tries to reflect in his work and lifestyle. And.which, along with hjs firm belief in educational institutions.explains why Mel Shipman is going back to school this fall, likely as a mature student at Osgoode Hall Law Sch(H>l.
He likes alternativcs."It keeps you alive." he says, and like his philosophy bf education adds, "how can you fix forever what you are going to do."
Pro-Nazi Quislitig regime
800 Norwegian Jews were sbt^
camp
fers of refuge from the Swedish govern-inent. as well as the long Norwegian-Swedish border along which many slipped over into freedom, the Nazis were able to ship approximately 800_ Norwegian Jews to Auschwitz. Some of them were saved when, near the end of the war, Sweden's Count Folke Bernadotte arranged to have
Norwegian and Danish prisoners in Germany sent to neutral Sweden.
Notwithstanding this act, the maniacal mind of the Nazi machine was excellently illustrated by the struggle over 64 Norwegian Jews of mixed marriages interned at a camp near Oslo. Reports flew from office to office, including that of Adojph Eichmann,
Letters to the Editor
concerning what should be done with them.
In March, 1945. the little group of Jews were allowed to leave for Sweden, but not before the Nazi machine expended considerable manpower, time and energy — even as the Third Reich was gasping its last breath — on what to do with M Jews.
By ROCHELLE CARR
h was between I arid 2 a.m. April 9; 1940. Air raid sirens were screeching all over the beautiful Scandinavian city of Oslo. Germany had launched an all-out attack on Norway.
Unlike World War I. Norway and her neighbor. Denmark, which was simultaneously attacked, would not be allowed to remain neutral. Germany needed Norwegian ports, she needed to previent Danish foodstuffs from reaching Britain and she needed to safeguard herself from an attack from the rear in the blitzkreig about to be launched against the West.
Thus it canie about, that, despite valiant efforts on the .part of the Norwegians, Norway felland King Haakon VH and his government were compelled to flee to London by the beginning of June; (Almost five years to the day, the Norwegian's beloved king would return to his liberated' country.)
Before leaving, however, they managed to put into Allied hands, most of their up-to-date riiercharit marine which was soon manned by Norwegians who escaped to England. Also, shortly, there were enough self-exiled Norwegian young men to start the Royal Norwegian Air Force, whose pilots trained at a camp near Toronto.
As for the rest of the.Norwegians, they were forced to live under the black shadow . of the swastika until May 8, 1945. Included in this captive population were approximately 2.000 Jews.
Concerted Nazi actions against the Jews did not start until the beginning of 1942. In October, a mass round-up of aHJewish men over 16 was begun. Rumors of what round-ups in other countries had meant, prompted many of the Jewish men to go into hiding.
Undaunted, the German hierarchy. and the pro-Nazi Norwegian government, now in power — complete with hirdmenn to emulate Hitler's Brownshjrts — under Vidkun Quisling, continued the round-ups which soon included Jewish women and children.
Despite aid from Christian friends, prof-.
Reader claims 'outright Jewish COM are all emotionally disturbed people'
Dear Editor:
As a fascinated (adult) student pf human behavior, as well as being a concerned Jew. troubled by the problems of intermarriage and assimilation. I read the interview in a CJN February issue, with psychiatrist Saul Levine, with great interest. ("Orthodox Unresponsive to the Needs of Jewish Youth")
As J have been doing some private"re-search" on this subject (of assimilation in general) for'some time, I would like to share my experien9es and. findings with \ouT readers.
As far as the outright Jewish converts (some of whom I have met) go — they are all emotionally disturbed people. The most interesting example in this category is a prominent Montreal psychiatrist, Dr. Karl Stem (recently deceased) who, in his auto-bibgraphy. Pillar of Fire, describes his search for a meaningful faith: Born into an assihiilated Austrian Jewish faniily. Dr. Stern, as a young adult, for a time embraced ultra-Orthodox Judaism; however, this didn't satisfy him for very Ipng and he then became converted to Catholicism, remaining a Catholic untilthe end of his days. After reading his book, I reached the conclusion that he was more disturbed than his patients!
With regard to our young people who drift away to the "Jesus freaks". Hare Krishna and other Eastern sects, after attending several meetings of such groups myself, where I interviewed some of these youngsters, I have reached the conclusion that what they want is not religion at all, but just fun and fellowship with their peers, away from parental criticism and constant supervision.
. Sylvia Hartstone, Toronto.
Dear Editor:
This is in reference to the article which appeared in the March 19, 1976, issue of
The Canadian Jewish News, under the heading of "Mashgiach Not Responsible for Hygiene."
It most certainly leaves a lot to be desired, when z group of rabbis, advises the Jewish population that it is quite alright to do business with two food establishments because they are still considered kosher; in spite of the fact that they have deliberately flouted the laws on cleahliriess and a disregard for the health of the public.
I take exception especially to the comments of Rabbi Meir Gottesman of Beth Sholom; quote ^ "If a piece of kosher' meat falls on the floor, it doesn't necessarily make it traife." How ridiculous can a rabbi get? The. public can walk into these establishments after. wading through or walking over disease prone filth on the outside and bring it with, them into these establishments, to say nothing of mice or rat dung which could be present in almost any food establishrrient.
i think, rabbis, that you should take a second look at all kosher establishments, especially the ones that have been charged under the health department laws.
.Albert Langer, Toronto.
Dear Editor:
Toronto Pioneer Women has Just concluded an important two-day seminar dealing wjth "Our Answer To The Arab Propaganda". Our speakers — Max Goody on Thursday, March 25, speaking on "An Effective Program for Israel Public Relations in Canada", Gavriel Strasman and AbeTooch on Sunday, March 28, spealdng on "Methods By Which We Can Combat Arab Propaganda'' followed by workshops —: were most effective. This seminar was open to the public and non-Jews were also preisent.
According to the evaluation comments left by the participants, the majority felt that: seminars such as this one should be
held and open to the public once a month (perhaps sponsored by different organizations in co-operation with the CIC); there is a need for a "united Jewry" (this, from a non-JewO: young people should be informed on how to speak out in' schools; letters to the editor of the daily newspapers are ven.- useful; know your facts and to whorii yoii speak to be effective.
As usual — the program and speakers were excellent. But the turnout disappointing. One hundred on Thursday evening and only 60 Sunday afJemoon.
What does it take to wake up our Toronto brethren? An Arab-sponsored disaster? G—d forbid!
MolUe Rothman, . seminar chalmuui, Toronto Pioneer Women, ThomhlU.
wearing tejtUtn on chol hamoed
1. ■ What is the ruling regarding putting on tefilliri during the intermediate days of Passo\/er and on a day when a brit mila is performed following the service? '
Rabbi Akiba is reported as ruling that it is wrong to wear tefillin on the Sabbath and on festivals since these days are called a "sign" and tefillin, too, are a "sign" (Menachot 36b). To vyear tefilliri on these days is a slight to their sanctity, implying as it does that the "sigri" they provide is inadequate, ,
The question arises whether Rabbi Akiba's use of the terrini "festivals" includes the intermediate days (chol hamoed). The medieval authorities (see Tosafists to the passage) were divided on the question..
-"The Shqlchan.Aruch (Orach Chayyim 31:2) rules that it is forbi,dden to wear thetefillin.on intermediate days but Rabbi Moses Isserles' note adds that it is the custom in Poland to wear the tefiliio,-with the difference that the benedictions over the tefillin are recited quietly in the synagogues on these days.
There is, however, a passage in the Zo-har which comes down heavily against the wearing of tefillin on interniediate days which is why the Chassidim, who generally follow the Zohar in these matters, do not wear them.
It is customary to wear the tefillin when the brit is carried out in the synagogue since both tefillin and the brit are called a "sign" (Shakh to Shulchan A-
This is a souvenir photograph of a seder held in 1915 in Franzebad for wounded Austriari-JewisH soldiers. (A Feast of HistorvV / ca"fd a sign IShakh^tc
/ j > . ■ fuch, Yoreh Deah 265;24),