Harper deserving of JNF honour
I was very upset to read the letter (“Harper honours not deserved,” The CJN, Nov. 28) written by Stephen Lewis and others.
First of all, it was a low blow against a major Jewish organization, the Jewish National Fund, which was holding this fundraiser. Secondly, it was a malicious letter directed against Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a leader who has been the greatest friend of Israel ever. Thirdly, there are many experts who say that Lewis and his group, the Jewish Refugee Action Network, are totally wrong in their assessment of the government’s refugee policy.
Personally, I am very glad and proud to say that I was one of 4,000 people who turned out at the Negev Dinner to support Harper, a true great friend of the Jewish people.
Howard Price
Toronto
* * *
The letter criticizing Prime Minister Stephen Harper has nothing to do with the Jewish National Fund honouring our prime minister.
It is an honour greatly deserved.
For years both the NDP and the Liberal parties of Canada either sat on the fence or had a negative attitude towards Israel.
Harper and the present Canadian government are Israel’s best friend in the world. They constantly support the State of Israel.
A letter like this has one intention and one intention alone. It is strictly political.
Letter writers Stephen Lewis and Michelle Landsberg can see the Jewish support in Canada has swung in favour of the Conservatives and will say anything to try and undermine this support.
Selwyn Cainer
Toronto
* * *
Tuition help falls short
I understand the desire of Jewish day schools to limit tuition to make it more affordable for parents (“Plan limits day school tuition to 15% of income,”The CJN, Nov. 28). With fees of approximately $15,000 to $20,000 per child, middle-income families must make significant sacrifices to send their children to Jewish day school.
Although I commend Robbins Hebrew Academy (RHA) for trying to do something about this by limiting the total tuition to 15 per cent of income, their definition of middle income is totally off the mark. A family with income between $200,000 and $300,000 should not need financial assistance. They are the ones who should be able to afford the full amount. A family with two or three children with an income of under $100,000 cannot afford to pay half their gross income for education, and they are the ones who truly need help.
RHA’s new policy may be a step in the right direction, but it is far too little to help the vast majority of Jewish parents.
Michael Kinrys
Toronto
* * *
Advocacy efforts ineffective
Regarding the article “New group’s advocacy methods ruffle feathers” (The CJN, Nov. 14), imagine it is 1939 and you can choose one group to oppose the rampant anti–Semitism you witness in your neighbourhood. You could choose the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), which advocates and justifies “muted responses” and “remaining quiet as acknowledgment draws more publicity.” Or you could choose the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center (FSWC), which advocates and justifies non-action and “avoiding knee-jerk reactions.” Or you could choose StandWithUs, a newer group which runs counter to the attitudes of CIJA and FSWC.
Despite the fact that StandWithUs has demonstrated success in countering anti-Semitic campaigns, CIJA and FSWC still vigorously defend and justify their lack of reaction.
We are witnessing more anti-Semitism than ever, yet both CIJA and FSWC continue to advocate antiquated reactions that we recognize as misguided and dangerous from our pre-Holocaust experience. Next time you want to donate money, consider where your dollar will best counter anti-Semitism and provide the most effective pro-Israel campaign.
Elisabeth Gelb
Victoria, B.C.
* * *
Remarks were ‘undiplomatic’
The so-called clarification by Israeli Consul General Joel Lion (The CJN, Nov. 21) of comments he made at the Kristallnacht commemoration (“Rabbi derides values charter at Kristallnacht event,” The CJN, Nov. 14) rings hollow.
To many, including myself, who attended the event, it was fairly obvious that when Lion mentioned that there was “a very small fire burning here,” he was alluding to Quebec’s proposed Bill 60 (better known as the charter of values), and not, as the clarification claims, to “a general statement about anti-Semitism in Canada” (which has actually been in decline in recent years).
Although Lion’s remarks may have seemed benign compared to Rabbi Reuben Poupko’s diatribe, they nevertheless constituted an undiplomatic interference by a foreign diplomat in domestic political affairs, especially when addressing a public forum that included journalists as well as invited political dignitaries, and regardless of whether or not the sentiments expressed have popular support.
Don Miller
Montreal
* * *
Advocacy efforts ineffective
Regarding the article “New group’s advocacy methods ruffle feathers” (The CJN, Nov. 14), imagine it is 1939 and you can choose one group to oppose the rampant anti–Semitism you witness in your neighbourhood. You could choose the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), which advocates and justifies “muted responses” and “remaining quiet as acknowledgment draws more publicity.” Or you could choose the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center (FSWC), which advocates and justifies non-action and “avoiding knee-jerk reactions.” Or you could choose StandWithUs, a newer group which runs counter to the attitudes of CIJA and FSWC.
Despite the fact that StandWithUs has demonstrated success in countering anti-Semitic campaigns, CIJA and FSWC still vigorously defend and justify their lack of reaction.
We are witnessing more anti-Semitism than ever, yet both CIJA and FSWC continue to advocate antiquated reactions that we recognize as misguided and dangerous from our pre-Holocaust experience. Next time you want to donate money, consider where your dollar will best counter anti-Semitism and provide the most effective pro-Israel campaign.
Elisabeth Gelb
Victoria, B.C.