Israel’s first attempt at ice hockey
Your article on Oren Eizenman (“Israel’s ice man: Oren Eizenman feels at home playing minor league hockey in Stockton,” Jan. 1) reminded me of Israel’s first hockey team. About 1950, Israel was in a period of rationing and all-around deprivation, so the Canadian Zionist Federation invited an Israeli hockey team to tour Canada and play games at every stop. This offer was accepted by the Jewish Agency.
The problem? Finding hockey players!
There were no ice rinks in Israel, yet hundreds wanted that free trip, with the chance to bring home suitcases full of goods. A newspaper ad told applicants when and where to appear, and to bring their own “hock.” Finally a team was chosen on the basis of essays.
The Israelis arrived in Toronto and were scheduled to play several NHL teams — until the Canadians saw them skate. Oy! Some of the players had never seen a hockey game, let alone played in one.
Games were quickly rescheduled against colleges, and Israel lost every one, often by scores like 20-0. The Israelis lost to junior varsity teams, they lost to high schools. Finally, an Israeli scored a goal, to great cheers from the CZF.
The Israeli hockey team never won a game, but all went home fatter, happier and with full suitcases.
Bennett Woll | San Francisco
A big loss: the Oral History Project
I write as a Holocaust scholar and former board member of the Holocaust Center of Northern California and the Bay Area Oral History Project about the layoffs and budget cuts at HCNC (“Holocaust Center carries on despite budget cuts,” Jan. 1).
The article and its sources do not acknowledge that survivor testimonies will no longer be gathered. To imply that this activity is “not critical” is to dismiss the reason that the center has earned national and international recognition. Adding to this dismissiveness is no mention whether a permanent home will be sought for the center’s invaluable oral history collection.
Harvey Peskin | Berkeley
Holocaust Center, a precious resource
It was with great sadness that I read recently of the cuts made at the Holocaust Center of Northern California (“Holocaust Center carries on despite budget cuts,” Jan. 1).
Especially devastating is the loss of the Oral History department, which records the stories of the surviving few. As a teacher of Holocaust studies, I have found the center invaluable in procuring speakers, who have told their stories to middle schoolers. My students have sat enthralled and moved as they listened.
It has always occurred to me that this will be the last generation that has the privilege to hear these unique recollections of a time when the world went mad. And now I worry that the center may not even have the ability and financial wherewithal to have this happen. How devastating that would be to students who have benefited so greatly from these stories and from the center’s work.
I can only offer an insubstantial plea to people to please support the center so that my generation of students will one day become the teachers to the next, who will never hear a survivor speak to them face to face.
Ilona Shechter | Sunnyvale
Fight sexism in Israel
I was outraged to read of the tyrannical grip that ultra-Orthodox rabbis continue to impose on the citizens of Israel (“Orthodox influence in Israel under fire — again,” Jan. 1).
The example of forcing women to step to the back of the bus reminds me of the struggles of blacks in the South that occurred in our country in the ’60s.
This sort of religious sexism and bigotry should be fought against by all Jews, indeed by all fair-minded people, whether in Israel or in any other country that has institutions that oppress certain “inferior” segments of society.
I hope that among the women of Israel there is a courageous Rosa Parks who will come forward and “Just say no!”
Jonathan Feinberg | San Mateo
Canada anti-Semitism gambit is hollow
Canadian Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and his party claim they act on principle by demonstrating “zero tolerance” toward anti-Semitism (“Canada deems church group anti-Semitic,” Jan. 1).
But these same Conservatives have averted their eyes to prisoner torture in Afghanistan, have given minimal support to U.N. peace operations that tackle genocide, have weakened Canada’s stance on capital punishment and have routinely smeared opposition members, whistle-blowers and social justice organizations that refuse to toe the Conservative line.
Anti-Semites may indeed criticize Israel, but not all critics are anti-Semitic. Conservative tactics that intimidate and punish groups just because they question Israeli government policies must be repudiated.
Neither Israel nor Canada benefits when democracy and freedom of speech are diminished for crass political advantage.
Larry Kazdan | Vancouver, B.C.
U.S. relations with Israel are in trouble
The foolish spat of J Street’s leaders with Ambassador Michael Oren (“Israeli envoy, Obama aide dig in their heels over J Street,” Jan. 1) should give all U.S. Jewry a warning of difficult times ahead for our relations with Israel.
The push by J Street and its liberal/progressive base to assert itself as a new voice in the U.S. political arena may further fragment U.S. Jewry political influence, which unfortunately is already declining due to dwindling U.S. Jewish population.
On the other hand, in the past 15 years a demographic shift took place in Israeli society; the right-leaning Sephardim and Russian immigrants are becoming the majority of the population, and are providing a solid voting base for the right-wing parties, Likud, Kadima and Yisrael-Beiteinu for the near future and beyond.
This should give U.S. Jewry and its multitude of agencies pause in the way they are structured, their thinking and role vis-à-vis Israel: If U.S. Jewry wants to continue supporting Israel and influence U.S. political policy in a credible manner, they must realize that it is not about their views, but it is about the best way they can work together to support Israel and the policy of its elected government.
Sam Liron | Foster City
SFJFF power grab
The San Francisco Jewish Film Festival is an organization that has done a wonderful job bringing a wide variety of Jewish films to our community. Now it has come under attack by self-appointed political commissars who would like to impose a litmus test of uncritical support for their narrow vision of what is good for Israel.
As a loyal audience member, I find their proposals for “resolution and healing” nothing more than a naked power grab and an insult to the intelligence of the festival patrons. The “Rachel” event was indeed a stumble, but so what? What was the harm? The festival took a chance on something controversial — isn’t that what a film festival should be doing?
Adding these activists to the board would simply be giving in to demands for censorship. And perhaps more demands from those of different political opinions who would like to censor other films that might be considered controversial.
The Jewish community not only crosses the political spectrum, but we have widely divergent views on religion, sexual identity, etc. If the festival caves to the present demands, what will happen the next time another constituency claims to be outraged and demands seats on the board?
Michael Lipsey | San Rafael
No call to prayer
In response to the letter “Swiss justified for banning minarets?” (Letters, Dec. 18) from Kathi Twomey Wahed, I think it is important to note that minarets in Switzerland did not issue calls to prayer.
According to the Dec. 3 issue of the Economist, “the Muslim call to prayer has not been heard in Switzerland, except [during the referendum campaign] from anti-Islamic activists trying to alarm the public.”
Jason Bernstein | San Francisco
44 million Muslim ‘fundamentalists’
Recently a publication was released called “The 500 Most Influential Muslims in the World 2009” (http://thebook.org/books_pdf/
500Muslims_2009.pdf).
The principle sponsor is the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre and the [Saudi] Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Georgetown University.
In other words, this is about as “official” as it gets.
There is quite a bit of information included within the publication, but what is very interesting is the Muslim population demographics.
On the bottom of page 180, it indicates the world’s Muslim population is 1,479,200,275. On page 13, it indicates 3 percent of the world’s Muslim population is “fundamentalist.”
Simple math translates 3 percent into more than 44 million people, who, by their own admission, are “fundamentalists.”
If all of them were in one country it would rank 29th out of the world’s 220 countries, more than the entire population of such countries as Argentina, Poland, Canada, Australia and Romania, to name just a few. This is astounding.
There are those who have said fundamentalists are a mere “tiny fraction” of Muslims. And there are those who say they represent a much larger percentage of Muslims. Whatever your views have been, we now have an “official” publication from Muslims themselves which has the troubling facts.
Dan Calic | San Ramon