Connect with us

Features

Access to Canadian records of Nazi war criminals

David Matas

Introduction: Following upon the huge embarrassment caused not only to the Canadian Government, but to Canada as a whole, by the decision to invite a former member of a Ukrainian Waffen SS unit into the House of Commons where he was applauded as a “war hero,” we asked David Matas, renowned lawyer and expert on the issue of Nazi war criminals who were allowed into Canada following World War II, to write a piece providing an analysis how Canada has failed so badly, not only to prevent Nazis and individuals who cooperated with the Nazi regime, to enter Canada, but also to continually refuse to identify who those individuals were. Following is David Matas’s piece:

Getting access to Canadian Nazi war criminal records has to date been nearly impossible. Efforts to obtain access to relevant files and documents have been constantly frustrated and gone nowhere. The record is this.
On January 12, 2022, B’nai Brith Canada put in a request to Library and Archives Canada for Part II of the Report of the Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals. Part I was public in 1986 when the Commission reported. Part II was confidential.
Part II contained, according to Part I, 822 opinions on individual cases. The Commission recommended that the Government give “urgent attention” to investigating 20 files of alleged Nazi war criminals who might still be living in Canada. The report also recommended further investigation of 218 other possible Nazi war criminals living in Canada.
What happened to the 20 cases which were recommended for urgent attention and the further 218 which were recommended for further investigation? We have no idea. We know that there some cases which went to Court and we have the Court records of those cases. But which of these were part of the 20 or 218, if any, were not disclosed.
As of today, Library and Archives Canada, one year and ten months later, has not responded to the request for Part II, other than to acknowledge receipt and assign the request a file number. B’nai Brith Canada complained on December 5, 2022 to the Office of the Information Commissioner asking the Commissioner to issue an order setting a deadline for Library and Archives Canada to provide B’nai Brith with a copy of the Part II Report. That complaint, as of today, has not been decided.
Also on January 12, 2022, B’nai Brith Canada put in a request to Library and Archives Canada for records relating to investigations of alleged Nazi war criminals of the War Crimes Unit of the Department of Justice and the RCMP. Canada’s Program on Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Eighth Annual Report 2004-2005 stated that, since beginning this work, the Department of Justice had opened and examined over 1,800 files. Who are these people? What was the result of the investigations in these cases?
With that request too, Library and Archives Canada has not responded, other than to acknowledge receipt and assign the request a file number. B’nai Brith Canada complained as well on December 5, 2022 to the Office of the Information Commissioner asking the Commissioner to issue an order setting a deadline for Library and Archives Canada to provide B’nai Brith with copies of the war crimes records. That complaint, as of today, has, like the other complaint, not been decided.
B’nai Brith Canada on March 6, 2023 asked for an unredacted copy of Library and Archives Canada the September, 1986 report prepared by Alti Rodal titled “Nazi War Criminals in Canada: The Historical and Policy Setting from the 1940s to the Present” prepared for the
Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals. Justice Jules Deschênes who headed the Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals recommended release of the report in its entirety. He wrote: “This substantial study no doubt constitutes an outstanding contribution to the knowledge of this particular question and deserves wide distribution.”
Library and Archives Canada provided B’nai Brith Canada on July 5th 2023 a redacted copy of the report, albeit with fewer redactions than there were at the time of the original release of the report. B’nai Brith Canada complained to the Office of the Information Commissioner within 30 days of the refusal to release the unredacted report. That complaint remains undecided.
The 2000 International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Stockholm Declaration commits the signatories to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the opening of archives in order to ensure that all documents bearing on the Holocaust are available to researchers.” Canada joined the Alliance in 2009.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Monitoring Access to Archives Project recommended in 2017 that governmental archival institutions “release Holocaust related records, irrespective of any personal identifying information or national security classifications”.
The US Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act of 1998 created an interagency war criminals records working group to locate, identify, inventory for declassification and make public all classified Nazi war criminal records. The records subject to the Act include records of the assets of persecuted persons. The Act kept existing exemptions to disclosure in general laws, but required that they be strictly defined, with a presumption against the exemptions.
In addition to general requirements of strict definition and presumption against the exemptions, some of the exemptions were themselves redefined to limit their scope. The exemption from disclosure in favour of privacy is redrafted to become an exemption where there would be “a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”. The exemption in favour of national security interests is redrafted to become an exemption where disclosure “would clearly and demonstrably damage the national security interests of the United States”. The exemptions in favour foreign relations and diplomatic activities is redrafted to become an exemption where disclosure “would clearly and demonstrably damage” foreign relations or diplomatic activities. The exemption in favour of emergency preparedness plans is redrafted to become an exemption for information that “would seriously and demonstrably impair” those plans.
The records which were disclosed as a result of US Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act give us an insight into why the documents were withheld. One set of documents showed that the US Government had a lot more detailed knowledge of the Holocaust while it was happening. Keeping this information confidential and not acting on it at the time, whether or not it fits arguably within any of the exemptions, does make the US government of the time look bad. There is presumably similar information in currently withheld documentation of other governments.
A second set of documents initially withheld and then disclosed through the US legislation was documents showing that the Government was providing haven for those complicit in Nazi war crimes because of their potential to assist the US in the Cold War. Again this sort of information now withheld may well be found in other archives.
A third set of documents initially withheld and then disclosed because of the legislation were documents which showed the initial unwillingness to bring Nazi war criminals to justice, and the argumentation both for and against within the government. This argumentation we know has been replicated elsewhere.
A fourth set of documents not yet fully available relates to the effectiveness and operational difficulties of Nazi war crimes prosecution efforts once those efforts got going. In Canada, there was a split between the investigation and prosecution efforts, with investigations allocated to the national police, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and prosecution allocated to the Department of Justice. This fragmentation caused a sequence of operational difficulties about which we now have only partial knowledge.
There was also in Canada internal feuding within the Nazi war crimes Justice department unit, arguments whether the unit was too slow and cautious or overly energetic in the pursuit of their efforts. The documents we have now provide only a glimpse of this feuding.
A sixth set of documents not now completely disclosed is efforts of Nazi war crimes prosecution units that were established to obtain access to relevant documents in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. We know that there was a good deal of difficulty in getting that access and that eventually international agreements were negotiated that allowed foreign war crimes units direct access to those archives rather than working through local archivists. Again, this is a story which could be fully told only with release of all relevant documents.
A seventh difficulty is the inclination of archivists, government officials and Parliamentarians to address the difficulties in access to documentation all at once. Yet, attempting to do everything before one does anything is a recipe for doing nothing. Each request is particular, not least in the archival access issues it presents. An effort to resolve all these myriad issues in one fell swoop goes nowhere.
We can see in several countries self-exoneration and blame shifting as a form of Holocaust distortion. Everywhere the Nazis went they relied on local collaboration to identify, locate, detain and murder the Jewish population. What we see now in several countries is an effort to pretend that the locals were innocent, that the only perpetrators were the invading Nazis.
This whitewashing is not confined to the countries invaded. It is an attitude held within the populations which have emigrated from the invaded countries. This attitude had generated opposition to the effort to bring Nazi war criminals to justice and now generates opposition to disclosure of archives about those efforts.
Canadian privacy law allows for the lapse of the right to privacy twenty years after death. However, in the case of Nazi war criminal files, since the names of those, other than those whose cases have gone to court, are not known, neither is their dates of death. While the dates of death are not known to outsiders, they are either known or knowable to archivists.
The situation justifies these recommendations:
1) Obstacles to access to Nazi war criminal records stem from legislation which is general in nature. There needs to be legislation which is specific to Holocaust records and which provides an exception to these general requirements. The legislation needs to encompass Holocaust related archives concerning both perpetrators and victims.
2) National archives need to establish and maintain separate Holocaust records within their general collections.
3) Insofar as there is discretion in current legislation to allow for exceptions to prohibitions to access, that discretion should be exercised in favour of access to Holocaust related records, including Nazi war crimes records.
4) Parliament can obtain documents from Governments which the public can not obtain. Parliament should exercise that power to obtain Holocaust related records.
5) The public interest in access to Nazi war criminal files should prevail over the right to be forgotten.
6) There needs to be active review of Nazi war criminal files both to make publicly available the files where the dates of death are known and the fixed periods after dates of death in privacy legislation have passed, and to determine whether any of those to whom the files relate are still alive or, if dead, the dates of death, where the deaths or dates of death are not known.
Canada, as a member of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, is committed to Holocaust remembrance. To remember the Holocaust, we must remember the victims. We must also not forget their murderers. While the murderers are alive, that means bringing them to justice. Once they are gone, it means providing public access to the record of their atrocities.
During the Holocaust, the murderers were in Europe. After the Holocaust, the murderers scattered around the world to escape justice. Thousands came to Canada. Howard Margolian, a historian with the War Crimes Unit with the Department of Justice, in his book Unauthorized Entry, estimated that 2,000 Nazi war criminals and collaborators entered Canada after World War II.
It is understandable that files about individuals who are still alive are not made accessible to the public unless there is legal action. But once the individual has died, there is no reason why the file could not be made public, no matter what the state of the evidence about the individual. Not doing so amounts to covering up the haven Canada has given to those complicit in Nazi war crimes with a blanket of secrecy.
Philosopher George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Yet, we can not remember a past which remains hidden from us. To remember the past we must know the past. Only through public access to Holocaust archives can we learn lessons from those archives.
Learning lessons from the Holocaust is a legacy we can create for the victims, creating meaning from the senseless death of innocents. To learn those lessons, we need access to the archives which can convey them.
The effort at understanding, of learning the lessons from the Holocaust must never stop. For that history to be written, the files of those against whom there is compelling evidence of complicity in Nazi war crimes and who are now dead must be made public.
We have a duty to the victims, not just to remember that they died, but why they died, how they died. The picture of memory we paint must be real and complete. That picture must include the murderers.
Because we will soon be at a stage where the memory of the Holocaust conveyed by survivors will no longer be with us, access to Holocaust archives looms in importance for keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive. Access to Holocaust archives should be a matter of priority to Governments, Parliaments and archival collections.

David Matas is a Winnipeg lawyer and senior honorary counsel to B’nai Brith Canada

Continue Reading

Features

How to read fixed, daily, and progressive jackpot labels at Betscore Casino

Modern casino lobbies feature distinctive jackpot tags designed for easy recognition across various game tiles. Browsing through Bet Score, you will see that the platform uses a consistent system to present fixed, daily, and progressive jackpot displays. This brief guide explains how these labels are typically formatted, offering visual cues so you can confidently interpret each jackpot category. Betscore Casino presents these markers in a clear and recognizable way.

Across the lobby, jackpot labels act as immediate visual indicators that separate one game’s prize structure from another. These tags use bold text, simple icons, and standard placements, which makes scanning for your preferred jackpot type quick and intuitive. While game tiles may share basic design language, the wording on a label—along with visual styling such as meters or timers—lets you know at a glance whether a jackpot is static, day-specific, or incrementally building. Familiarizing yourself with these UI elements helps you compare options in Betscore Casino without clicking through each game panel. Understanding the visual symbolism of these badges saves time and keeps your focus on how casino interfaces communicate essential details about their jackpot mechanics.

Decoding fixed and daily jackpot displays in casino lobbies

When you spot a “Fixed” jackpot label in the lobby, it indicates a set prize amount displayed the same way every time you encounter it. This number stays constant, appearing directly on the game’s tile or badge and often repeating on the game’s detail page, to minimize ambiguity. The layout generally favors a clean, uncluttered presentation, with the static number supported by an icon or highlighted term that reinforces its status as unchanging. In Betscore Casino, these design choices create a straightforward reading experience where the fixed amount sits front-and-center beside the badge, making it easy to identify among multiple game tiles.

For “Daily” jackpot displays, the interface uses visual cues to highlight the time-based nature of the prize. You’ll often see the jackpot label paired with a reference to days or a timer-style icon, sometimes in the form of a calendar symbol or a clearly defined time window. These elements are usually grouped with the label and placed at the top or side of the tile so you can instantly tell that the jackpot is awarded on a daily basis. The combination of wording and visual accompaniments ensures that the daily structure stands out. This consistent tagging makes daily jackpots particularly easy to sort when scanning the available offerings.

How progressive jackpot meters stand apart and quick display checks

Within the lobby, “Progressive” jackpot labels are closely linked with animated or meter-style visual treatments. The jackpot amount is shown as an ever-increasing figure, typically larger or highlighted in a contrasting color, to draw attention to its dynamic nature. Often, the progressive badge sits beside or above this meter, so the relationship between label and rolling number is obvious and direct. In Betscore Casino, this design philosophy visually distinguishes progressive jackpots from fixed or daily options at a glance, creating an immediate sense of anticipation around the changing prize amount each time you browse the lobby.

When identifying jackpot types quickly, three main cues make reading the tags straightforward. Fixed jackpots always feature a stable, non-animated number next to their badge, keeping things simple and clear. Daily jackpots consistently add a day-based timeframe indicator, which could be text or a countdown, usually positioned close to the label for easy association. Progressive jackpots, by contrast, are marked by a running total or animated meter, making them stand out as prize amounts increase. Paying attention to these conventions, you’ll find it much easier to compare options and navigate the jackpot categories provided with confidence and efficiency.

Continue Reading

Features

Some random thoughts on the AMIA bombing, Operation Solomon, Arab migration to Palestine, and Jeffrey Epstein

By BERNIE BELLAN When I received an email from an Ethiopian Jew who is now living in Winnipeg who reminded me of the incredible efforts made by so many different people to help rescue Ethiopia’s Jewish population and bring them to Israel during Operation Solomon in 1991 (Operation Solomon) I began to ask myself why that particular event doesn’t get paid more attention within our own Jewish community here?
Recently our community held another commemoration of the AMIA bombing in 1994 in Buenos Aires, which claimed the lives of 85 people (not all Jewish) and injured over 300. Each year B’nai Brith holds a solemn ceremony during which 85 candles are lit and the names of the deceased are read out.
Yes, that was a horrific tragedy, but I wonder how much it still resonates with people. There have been so many other horrible events since that AMIA bombing, including of course the massacre of October 7, but more recently there was also the Bondi Beach attack in Australia last December, during which 15 people were killed and 40 injured. Are we also going to have commemorative events held here in Winnipeg going forward to mark that particular event?

Compare the solemnity with which tragic events such as the AMIA bombing and the October 7 massacre are remembered with the total lack of celebration of something that should be as uplifting as was Operation Solomon. Could it be because Operation Solomon happened in far away Africa and the people who were rescued were black – and seemed so foreign to those of us who can even remember what happened in 1991? I don’t know whether there’s an element of racism involved in the lack of recognition anywhere of Operation Solomon, but I thought it most interesting when I was rereading articles in The Jewish Post & News written by the one individual in our Jewish community who did more to help in the rescue of Ethiopian Jews than anyone else – the late Elliot Levine, and Levine noted the total lack of support from the Winnipeg Jewish Community Council for what was known as “The Committee for Ethiopian Jews,” I couldn’t help but wonder how much race has played a part in sidelining Operation Solomon as a momentous event in the recent history of the Jewish people.
When one considers how much attention is paid to the AMIA bombing, which affected people who, simply put, look more like us, to the lack of attention paid to Operation Solomon – well, I think you get my point.
The Ethiopian Jewish community now living in Israel has had a difficult time being accepted by mainstream Israelis, but over the years many members of that community have made significant contributions to Israeli society and the more recent descendants of the original Jews who were brought to Israel are now proud Israelis. It would be nice for our own community to hold some sort of event to mark Operation Solomon, since it is now the 35th year since that momentous achievement occurred.

Speaking of past achievements, the furor over the Nakba exhibit at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights has continued to spark heated discussion. I’ve received a number of emails from various members of our community responding to articles I’ve written about the Nakba exhibit (and in some cases articles written by others that have appeared in the Jewish Post). I don’t mind admitting that I’m not at all sure where I stand on the whole issue of the Nakba exhibit. I can see the merits of arguments that have been made on both sides of the issue and I try to keep an open mind as I hear different perspectives. But, no matter what argument is being made, I encourage everyone to listen to what people have to say and think carefully about the pros and cons of the particular points being made.
As I noted in an earlier column, rather than descending into an argument over which group has a more valid reason to feel aggrieved – Palestinians who were forced to leave their homes in Palestine (and I’m not going to debate whether the majority left willingly or not; that’s an issue that will never be resolved to anyone’s satisfaction) or Jews who were forced to leave their homes in Arab lands, I’d rather concentrate on thinking about where can we go from here?
Unfortunately, the clear consensus in Israel now seems to be that there can never be a Palestinian state and even those politicians who might have been willing to enter into at least some sort of discussion about the possible creation of a Palestinian state have moved so far to the right – in response to the clear shift in public opinion in Israel that sees no room for even contemplating a Palestinian state, that the issue of a future Palestinian state has been completely taken off the table.
At the same time though, as much as I’m generally sympathetic to the Palestinian aspiration to have a state of their own, just as I prefer to refer to historical evidence when it comes to debating what actually happened during the “Nakba,” I also like to look at the evidence surrounding just how many true Palestinians there are.
By that, I mean how many people who call themselves Palestinians can trace their roots back to the actual land which can be referred to as “Palestine.” Remember that there was no such thing as “Palestine” per se until the British Mandate over Palestine began officially in 1923. Prior to that what we now regard as “Palestine” was simply part of the Ottoman Empire.
According to figures compiled by one of the pre-eminent experts on demographic in the Ottoman Empire, Professor Justin McCarthy, there were approximately 500,000 Arabs in what is referred to as Palestine at the turn of the 20th Century, while there were approximately 23,000 Jews.
By 1945 the Arab population of Palestine had grown by over 600,000 to approximately 1,100,000 while the Jewish population had grown to over 550,000. There is much debate over whether a good part of the increase in the Arab population was due to the surge in economic activity brought on by the influx of Jews, but let’s leave that argument aside for the moment. A point that I made in another column about the Arab population of Palestine at the time when Israel was declared a state is that approximately 750,000 Arabs left what had been Palestine – but whether they left voluntarily or not was irrelevant to me. What was relevant to me, I emphasized, was that there could not have been a “Jewish” state with a majority Arab population.
I have heard nothing from those who would criticize the Nakba exhibit at the CMHR about that point.
Again – as I noted previously, I’m not arguing the morality of what happened to the Palestinians; I’m simply making the observation that Israel could not have come about had those 750,000 Arabs who did leave had chosen to stay. I don’t suppose my making that point makes one whit of difference to anyone who is criticizing the CMHR exhibit. I just wanted to reiterate my support for looking at what happened in 1948 objectively. And I’m well aware that even suggesting that one can be “objective” about such a contentious issue is up for debate – but can’t we even try for a little objectivity?

Finally, what about Jeffrey Epstein – and what’s he got to do with everything I’ve just written?
Well, it was the persistently nagging questions surrounding Epstein’s relationship with Trump that led directly to Trump deciding to join in with Netanyahu and attack Iran. Trump was desperate to “change the channel,” especially when so many of his diehard MAGA supporters kept asking questions about why Trump was so keen to put the Epstein issue aside. So now Trump is caught up in a war that he thought would divert attention from Epstein, but the most likely scenario is that he’ll end up trying to bring the war to a conclusion by ceding control over the Hormuz Strait to Iran and abandoning the notion of forcing Iran to give up its quest for a nuclear weapon. And if the only way to reduce Trump’s march toward total authoritarianism is to elect enough Democrats to at least take over the House of Representatives then what we’re going to see is a bunch of “woke” Democrats in Congress who will be wanting to end American support for Israel – and, they’ll be pushing for a Palestinian state.
Thank you, Jeffrey Epstein, for being the cause of this whole mess.

Continue Reading

Features

35 years ago 14,000 Ethiopian Jews were rescued and brought to Israel in a short, but brilliant 36-hour operation

By BERNIE BELLAN My memory of an event that took place 35 years ago was jogged recently when I received an email from someone who himself was one of 14,000 Ethiopian Jews who were brought to safety in Israel during what was known as “Operation Solomon.”
That individual wrote that he wanted to thank me for articles I had written over the years, including about the rescue of Ethiopian Jews.
Here is part of what he wrote: “I am an Ethiopian Jew who live in Winnipeg. I recently came across Bernie Bellan’s articles and i was very fascinated by the depth of them and the fact they are informative and educational. I am not sure if he wrote anything about the thousands old dream of Ethiopian Jews who at the end reached their destination Israel. Thanks to operations Solomon and Moses that airlifted the Ethiopian Jews to become Israel’s citizens. I personally am grateful for the support i got from a couple of Jewish individuals in Winnipeg….My ancestors were hiding who they were in Ethiopia and i will never stop from telling who i am and my support for Israel. Please tell Bernie i said hello and i pray for his health so that he will continue sharing his knowledge. Little did he know that one day an Ethiopian Jew will read one of his articles.”
Reading that email led me to look back at articles that appeared in The Jewish Post & News around the time of Operation Solomon, also a later article that I wrote in 2013 about Israeli Brigadier General Eden Attias, who was deeply involved in Operation Solomon and who appeared at an event in Winnipeg that year.

The late Professor Elliot Levine

I would be remiss, however, to write anything about Operation Solomon without mentioning the absolutely pivotal role that the late Professor Elliot Levine played in orchestrating support among some Winnipeg Jews to help in the rescue of Ethiopian Jews. I found two articles Levine had written around the time of that incredible rescue effort in which he described the clandestine work in which he – and several other Winnipeggers were involved in reaching out to Ethiopian Jews at a time when anyone in Ethiopia who openly announced they were Jewish put their lives in peril.
To begin with, here’s some background about what led to Operation Solomon – taken from my 2013 article about Israeli Brigadier General Eden Attias. General Attias had played a key role in Operation Solomon, including having been on the ground in Ethiopia during the actual rescue operation. He was introduced at that 2013 event by the late Yude Heneleff.

“Henteleff gave a brief overview of Operation Solomon: ”In 1991 the Ethiopian government was threatened with being toppled,’ explained Henteleff.
“For several years previous Israeli operatives had been secretly working in Ethiopia to procure the escape of as many ‘Falasha’ Jews as possible (whom Henteleff noted should be rightfully referred to as ‘Beth Israel’.)
“Concerned that a new government would put a stop to this ongoing exodus of Ethiopian Jews, the Israeli government decided to implement a bold plan to ferry out as many Jews as possible in a condensed period before the window of opportunity was closed.
“Thus ‘Operation Solomon was born and carried out with precision. It involved the use of 34 aircraft, including several El Al passenger aircraft, as well as Israeli Air Force planes. In 36 hours the planes carried over 14,000 Ethiopian Jews to safety in Israel. In fact one Boeing 747 set the record for the most passengers ever transported on one aircraft when 1,122 passengers were crammed into the plane.
“During his talk Gen. Attias gave a detailed explanation of the events leading up to Operation Solomon, beginning as far back as 1862, when a group of Ethiopian Jews began the trek to Israel through the hostile territory of Sudan. Very few actually survived that journey, Attias noted.
“Through the years there had been various other attempts to bring Ethiopian Jews to Israel, with the most notable effort prior to Operation Solomon being ‘Operation Moses’, which was carried out in 1984. That operation was undertaken with the complicity of the Sudanese government and involved Mossad agents working to bring Ethiopian Jews to secret departure points in Sudan. Unfortunately members of the Israeli media learned of the operation and, even though they were asked to withhold revealing what they knew, went ahead and published details. That brought the operation to a sudden end, and with the rescue of only 7,000 Jews.”

Prior to Operation Solomon Ethiopia had been engulfed in a civil war that had contributed to mass starvation and brutal violence. In 1991 the Marxist regime that had been in power was threatened with being toppled and there was heightened concern within Israel – also in many communities in the diaspora, for the safety of Ethiopia’s Jewish population. As has already been noted, there had been other efforts to rescue Ethiopian Jews, but with mixed results. Thus, the bold plan to rescue as many Ethiopian Jews in one fell swoop was hatched. But in order to bring that rescue about contacts had to be made within the Ethiopian Jewish community.
How those many thousands of Ethiopian Jews were contacted is in itself a totally fascinating story. That’s where Elliot Levine’s description of the cloak and dagger nature of the work that was involved in making contact with those Jews was so vividly described in the two articles he wrote for us in 1991.
Levine noted that the vast majority of Ethiopian Jews – also known as “Falashas” (which is a derogatory term meaning stranger that was commonly applied to Ethiopian Jews by other Israelis) lived in Gondar province, which is in the north of Ethiopia.
As he wrote in the first of his articles describing the part that some Winnipeg Jews played in that rescue effort (published in the June 5, 1991 issue of The Jewish Post & News), “In April 1990 an agent if the American Association of Ethiopian Jews went into Ethiopia from North America….
“By May 1990 thousands of Ethiopian Jews had arrived in Addis Ababa with the help of a field worker placed by the American agent. A ‘truck stop’ outside of Gondar city was the rendezvous point. A few dollars a head paid for the road transport to the capital.
“By early June, however, an arrest had been made and a message had been sent out not to replace the field agent. Thereafter, those who made their way out of the hills had to make their own arrangements…
“With over 10,000 now in the capital (Addis Ababa), overburdened workers reported the weekly death tolls… By month’s end, emergency meetings and commitments had been made in Israel…
“In Winnipeg meanwhile, our Council of Rabbis was briefed on the situation and their response, among other things, funded an Ethiopian Jewish ‘agent’ we sent from Israel to assist families with particular problems.”

Levine went on to describe the invaluable assistance that agent played in helping Ethiopian Jews through “nighttime meetings, escorted tours that evaded security patrols and interviews with Ethiopian Jewish refugees.”
Levine noted, however, that the effort to help rescue Ethiopian Jews was organized entirely by a group of private individuals – with no assistance whatsoever from what was then the Winnipeg Jewish Community Council (later to become the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg). Further, the Committee for Ethiopian Jews – as the group was known, was an initiative led by members of Temple Shalom, Winnipeg’s Reform congregation.

At this point I want to return to that initial email I received from the Ethiopian Jewish individual who had reached out to me. In very dramatic fashion he described what happened when one father was approached by one of the agents who had been dispatched by the Israeli government to make contact with Ethiopian Jews and try to persuade them to flee their homes in Gondar:

“ ‘The silent call’ Operation Solomon
“ ‘good morning my name is …..i am here to tell you that we are on a mission to send a lot of people from Bet Israel( Ethiopian Jews) to Israel. And we know you are one of them. Are you interested’
“ ‘no I am not a Jew I went through horrible times I do not want to talk about myself and how would I know you are not a spy’
” ‘No I am not a spy please I know your family that is why I came to tell you about this mission’
“ ‘yes I am and please don’t tell anyone I am a Jew’
“This was a conversation that took place with the father of Anna and Jerusalem, 13 and 15 year olds who were sexually assaulted in front of their mother who took her own life the following day.
“That month in March 1991 preparation to evacuate 14000 Ethiopia Jews was planned secretly.
“In that same year 1991 bitter civil was raging in the Western part of Ethiopia, Just a month later the military junta was about to be overthrown.”

To return to Elliot Levine’s account of the role Winnipeg Jews played in the rescue of some Ethiopian Jews, in the follow-up article he wrote about that effort, he noted that Winnipeg Jews often responded quickly when told of specific urgent cases of individuals in need of direct help: “In the months preceding the airlift we had the luxury of responding to emergency appeals quickly….We in Winnipeg had arranged an especially prompt conduit – on most favourable terms. We also functioned as supporters of last resort for some of the inevitable cases that fell between the cracks. Recipients often confirmed receipt of our aid within a few days of our being notified of their plight.”

Ultimately, Operation Solomon helped rescue over 14,000 Ethiopian Jews in just 36 hours – from May 24-25, 1991. Non- stop flights of 35 Israeli aircraft were involved, including military and civilian planes. Almost all of Ethiopia’s Jewish population was rescued as a result.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News