Local News
Jews from Ukraine who have settled in Winnipeg offer conflicting opinions about the Russian invasion
By BERNIE BELLAN With the war in Ukraine still raging, its effects are being felt especially closely by individuals who have relatives or friends in that country.
Such is the case with several newer members of our own Jewish community in Winnipeg, who either came to Winnipeg directly from Ukraine, or who emigrated first to Israel, then to Winnipeg.
Wanting to learn more about the attitudes of former Ukrainians who are now members of our Jewish community here, I contacted Dalia Szpiro, who is the GrowWinnipeg Director at the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg, to inquire whether she could put me in touch with one or more of those individuals.
Subsequently, I spoke with two men of Jewish Ukrainian origin on Tuesday, March 22. The first, Alexey Guider, was quite willing for me to use his name, but the second individual asked me not to mention his name. The reason for that, as you’ll see if you read on, is that he was not totally unsympathetic to the view that Russian-speaking Ukrainians would not be opposed to seeing a part of Ukraine transferred to Russian control. He was worried that taking a position that might not be all that popular here was something that he didn’t want to lead to potential backlash against him or his family.
My primary purpose in speaking with both men was to try and find out what they are hearing from friends and relatives still in Ukraine. Further, I wondered what their attitudes were toward the war that is currently going on in Ukraine.
Alexey Guider explained that he and his wife (from whom he is now separated) came to Winnipeg 11 years ago, directly from Kiev, which is where he and his wife lived for 10 years before emigrating to Winnipeg. He noted that they were both planning on making aliyah to Israel, but they “decided to come to Canada instead.” Their two children were both born in Winnipeg, Alexey noted.
Alexey said that he’s a business analyst working at New Flyer Industries. He added that he has “a small business as well.”
I asked Alexey how many family members he still has in Ukraine?
His parents were living there until quite recently, he answered – in a town close to Kiev called Irpin . His “siblings live in Israel,” Alexey said.
I asked whether Irpin was under attack?
“I’m not sure at the moment,” Alexey answered. “It was captured, liberated, and captured again,” he said. “I’m not 100% sure what’s going on right now –but it’s not suitable for life at the moment.”
“Have you been in touch with your parents?” I asked.
Alexey explained that his parents were able to leave Ukraine shortly before Russia invaded, and go to Germany, where his grandfather had been living. “They went there in the middle of February – just before he died,” Alexey said. “They were able to say good bye – and then the war started…they were lucky.”
Alexey added that his mother-in-law is still in Ukraine – in the western part. “There’s no heavy fighting there,” he noted, “although at least twice a day there’s an air raid alert – so she has to run for safety.”
The rest of Alexey’s family, other than his siblings in Israel, live in other parts of Europe, he said.
“But what about your friends?” I asked. “You must still have many friends who remained in Ukraine?”
“Yes, I have lots of friends,” Alexey said. “Some of them escaped before the war. Some of them went to Poland. I have one friend who went to Spain with her kid. She was able to get her parents there too. I talk to her every day. She’s very anxious. Her husband is still in Ukraine. A man can’t leave Ukraine. “ (Men between the ages of 18-65 are not allowed to leave and must report for military duty.)
Alexey mentioned that he and his parents had been very involved with the Jewish community in Ukraine. His father, he said, was director of a Reform congregation in that country, while his mother was a program coordinator for the congregation.
Even though they’re in Germany now, “they have been helping members of the Jewish community to get out of Ukraine to Poland…not just Jewish people,” Alexey added.
I said to Alexey that I had read that most Ukrainian Jews who are able to leave that country prefer to go to Germany, rather than Israel.
“People are hesitant to go to Israel because it’s a similar situation there (as Ukraine),” he suggested. “There was shelling all over Israel.”
Something that Alexey told me though which took me somewhat by surprise was when he said that “most people who have left Ukraine (and who are still leaving) “are planning on returning when the war’s over.”
Yet, notwithstanding the desire of most Ukrainians who have left the country to be able to return home – and apparently the preference of most Jews who have left to move to Germany, I wondered whether Ukrainians would be eager to come to Canada if they were offered the opportunity?
The Canadian government has taken steps to expedite the immigration of Ukrainian refugees to this country, including dropping the normal visa requirement and allowing Ukrainians to obtain work permits immediately upon their arrival, although there will be a two-year maximum stay permitted for anyone coming here under the relaxation of the normal rules.
As a result, Alexey told me that he is in the process of bringing his parents here under the new provisions. They have family in Germany, he said, but this will be an opportunity for them to see their grandchildren again, so of course they’re eager to come, he explained.
In addition to his parents, Alexey will also be hosting two other friends who will be arriving within the next few weeks, he told me. “I’m going to have a full house,” he said.
He added that many Manitobans of Ukrainian heritage have been offering to take in refugees from Ukraine. (He said there’s been a Facebook group created for that specific purpose with a great many members already.)
Alexey added though that it would be great if the Jewish Federation here were to take the initiative and ask members of the Jewish community to volunteer to take in Jewish (and non-Jewish) refugees from Ukraine. I told him that I’d asked representatives of the Federation whether that is an initiative they will undertake and that I hoped the Federation would respond to my inquiry.
I did receive a response from Adam Levy, the Federation’s Public & Community Relations Director, to my query when I asked whether the Federation might want to ask members of the Jewish community whether they’d be prepared to take in refugees from Ukraine.
Here is what Adam wrote on March 25: “At this time, we are not making such an ask of the community, but continue to re-assess the situation on a daily basis as needs change and evolve. If community members wish to take Ukrainian newcomers into their homes, they can certainly do that.
“This is why we have settlement services in our community. Besides finding housing, there are many other vital parts to living in Canada that these services help to facilitate. We hope that they will utilize these resources so that their needs will be met and their transition to life in Canada will be as painless as possible.”
While Alexey Guider comes from Kiev, which is in the western part of Ukraine, and which is Western oriented in terms of its culture and politics, other Ukrainian Jews, especially those in the eastern part of the country, might have stronger connections to Russia.
Such was the case with Michael (not his real name), who told me he left Ukraine when he was 10, at which point his family moved to Israel for 20 years. He and his wife came to Winnipeg with their three-month-old baby eight years ago. (He wanted to thank the Jewish Federation for its help in bringing him and his family here. He specifically cited Dalia Szpiro’s assistance in that regard.)
Michael works in IT, having been involved in projects for companies both inside and outside Manitoba, he said.
When I asked Michael what part of Ukraine he came from, he said it was a town called Petrovsk, which is situated in the province of Luhansk Oblast. That area of Ukraine has been the scene of fighting between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian forces for the past eight years and, during Russia’s recent invasion it was taken over completely by Russian forces during the very first days of the invasion.
Two years ago, Michael noted, he was able to bring his parents and grandparents as well to Winnipeg, under a Federal sponsorship program. But, he added, “I still have a bunch of family in Ukraine.”
He said that another grandfather and an uncle of his are in Luhansk, while his wife’s mother and aunt are outside of Luhansk, in an area that has been subject to intermittent bombardment for the past eight years.
Perhaps somewhat ironically, Luhansk and the areas adjacent to it are now quiet, Michael said, as they are now totally under Russian control. “The people are working, shopping centres are open, so are restaurants,” he added.
As noted, an aunt of Michal’s left the Luhansk area with her two daughters (who are approximately the same age as Michael) eight years ago when the fighting first began there, and they moved to a town west of Luhansk.
“It’s quieter there,” Michael said. “You can’t compare to the other places, but still they have sirens in the middle of the night, they’re hiding, they’re getting some humanitarian aid – they’re volunteering in those centres. Basically, right now there is no active combat going on in that part, but there’s uncertainty where everything is going. The economy is stalled; they’re not working.”
What he’s been able to do though is send money to them through Western Union – which is “deposited directly into their bank account,” Michael said.
I asked Michael whether he’s in touch with his family in Ukraine. He said that he is, through a platform called “Viber” (which, interestingly, was developed in Israel).
But I was curious to know what life was like for his relatives who are now living in areas totally under Russian control. “From what you say, life is pretty normal,” I said to Michael.
In response, he told this story about his uncle, who is still living in Luhansk: “He was going someplace, going shopping or something. He was stopped by two Russian soldiers…they were checking his passport and his papers. He took his hat off. He’s like 75. He’s like a traditional Jewish person – he looks Jewish. And they said to him, ‘Sorry father’– (a Russian expression, Michael explained) and they apologized. They said ‘You look like someone else.’ They were looking for resistance. They checked his paperwork and wished him good day, and off he went.”
“So this is fair and normal in the city of Luhansk,” Michael said.
I said I was surprised to hear what Michael just told me. I said, “So this means the Russian soldiers are behaving fairly nicely,” I suggested.
Michael agreed, adding, “The Western media. They are reporting just one side of the story. And, to be honest, I don’t know who is wrong, who is right. You know, you see all those terrible things on the TV, on Facebook, on Instagram, but on Viber – and I haven’t heard from my uncle for a week or so, he says that everything is stable, everyone is okay.”
“Isn’t that interesting?” I responded. I continued, asking Michael, “What would you say then if the Russians took over all of Ukraine, how do you think they would behave?”
Michael answered: “This is what the Western world really doesn’t understand. Ukraine is actually divided into two. The eastern part is truly Russian-speaking population. They share the same traditions, the same language – everything. Even myself, when I was in school, Ukrainian was like a foreign language. It’s like you learn French here. It’s as if Ontario and Quebec were combined together – and you called it Ukraine.
“For those areas where it’s mostly Russian-speaking people, the quality of life is not that great. They don’t really care who is in power, honestly. They just want to get to work, get paid, and feed their families. The people there are mostly farmers, miners (of coal). They don’t really have an agenda for politics. They don’t want war. They just want to lead a normal life.
“In the western part of Ukraine, it’s a different story because they’re more Polish in nature. They have stronger connections to Poland. There was always tension between Ukrainians and Russians. It’s not spoken of, but during the Holocaust the Ukrainians cooperated with the Nazis. (To which I said, “Yes, I know.”) More (Jewish) people were killed by Ukrainians than by Nazis. These days we don’t talk about that. But I don’t know who is better and who is worse (comparing Ukrainians and Russians). They both do the same.
“It’s not black and white, it’s sort of gray,” Michael suggested.
“But how do you react when you see what they (the Russians) are doing to Mariupol and to Kharkiv?” I asked Michael. “Mariupol has been destroyed.”
“Yes, absolutely,” Michael said. “How do I feel? I feel bad. How can you feel when the city is being destroyed, but the point is: Russia has its own agenda and Ukraine has its agenda. Someone is making a lot of money out of this.” (I didn’t ask him what he meant by that.)
I wanted to return to asking about Michael’s relatives who were still in Ukraine. I wondered whether any of them are trying to get out?
He explained that it’s all but impossible where his relatives are. “So,” I asked, “what can we as Winnipeg Jews do to help people like your relatives? We can help with money, I suppose,” I said.
“I guess so,” Michael said. “But he noted that the Russian army is not progressing to the centre of the country where his aunt and his cousins are living. His aunt is working part-time in a grocery store, Michael explained.
I remarked to Michael that I found his perspective totally different from Alexey’s and was rather unsure what to make of what he had told me.
Based on what he told me, I wondered whether the war could be brought to an end if Ukraine were to hand over the two eastern provinces (Luhansk and Donetsk) that are primarily Russian speaking, along with Crimea (which used to belong to Russia)?
“But,” Michael suggested, “they (the Russians) won’t stop. Sanctions mean nothing to them. What do you care about sanctions when you have nothing to begin with?”
He said that there should be “some kind of reasonable negotiations,” but when I suggested that Zelensky has been willing to engage in honest negotiations from the very beginning, yet the Russians are engaged in some kind of charade when it comes to negotiations, he said “I don’t know. I’m not a politician.”
But after listening to Michael, I felt that I had a better understanding how Jewish Ukrainians are not all on the same page when it comes to this terrible conflict. Yet, I don’t want what I’ve written in any way to come across as a defence of what Vladimir Putin has done – and I’m afraid that someone reading this could easily extract from some of Michael’s comments exactly that. Still, I wonder if perhaps, by understanding somewhat better the divisions that exist within Ukraine between Russian speaking and Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians, we might come to the realization that a compromise solution will have to take into account those divisions.
Is a compromise possible? It would seem so, but Vladimir Putin and his generals seem determined to punish Ukrainians terribly first, and for expatriate Ukrainians like Alexey and Michael, they can only watch and wait – and hope that their relatives and friends still living in Ukraine don’t become casualties.
Postscript: Several days after I interviewed Alexey and Michael, I was troubled by the message that I discerned from what Michael had said to me. He was quite sanguine about Russia’s occupation of Ukraine, I thought.
So I decided to look further into his claims that Russian-speaking Ukrainians feel quite differently about the Russian invasion than do Ukrainian-speaking Ukrainians.
According to an article in the Washington Post, “most Russian-speaking Ukrainians feel Ukrainian.” The article went on to say that “In Ukraine, the language people speak cannot be equated with ethnic identity. A larger representative study from 2013 examining the identity of Ukrainians living in various regions of the country found that the vast majority consider their ethnic identity as Ukrainian – the lone exception was in Crimea….strong Ukrainian identification can be found in predominantly Russian-speaking parts such as southern, eastern Ukraine, and even Donbas – where 70 percent or more identify as Ukrainian.”
I thought about Michael’s relative acquiescence to the Russian occupation of that part of Ukraine where he lived – until he was 10. But that was 28 years ago. Even though he says he is in touch with relatives in that area, including his grandfather and uncle, I wonder just how much Michael’s views were shaped by his experience growing up in a country that was under Soviet occupation until1991. According to what he told me, Michael would have left Ukraine for Israel in 1994. One can well imagine how much the country has changed in the past 28 years.
But to say that “But I don’t know who is better and who is worse (comparing Ukrainians and Russians),” as Michael said; “they both do the same”, would seem to be a distortion of the reality that now exists in Ukraine.
Local News
Epic court battle shaping up between Etz Chayim Congregation and two former members who are now barred from setting foot in Etz Chayim
By BERNIE BELLAN Introduction: This story had originally been posted Friday morning, August 14, with a photo of Etz Chayim Synagogue. Then we received an email from Morissa Granove, COO of Etz Chayim Congregation:
“Hi Bernie.
“This request is not about the article itself but the safety of our shul. We have been advised not to post the address or photos of our Jewish organizations publicly for some time for security reasons. Can I please ask that you change the image posted online (and planned for print if needed) and that in this be kept in mind for the future?
“Thank you so much for your understanding,
“Morissa”
We replied:
“Gee Morissa – I’ll do that but maybe you better ask Google to remove any mention of any Winnipeg synagogue because all anyone has to do is do a Google search and they’ll come up with a complete list of Winnipeg synagogues and their addresses – also photos! Do you want me to contact Google for you? Can’t be too careful, can we?
Now, here’s the story as it was originally posted:
The date October 7 carries a huge amount of significance for Jews around the world: It was the date that members of Hamas and other terrorist groups launched a murderous attack on innocent Israelis (and members of other nationalities) that resulted in the deaths of more than 1200 people and the abduction of 251 others.
But it is also a date that may have a significance of a different sort come this October 7 when a Winnipeg courtroom will be the scene of a court case in what is shaping up to be a momentous legal battle between Congregation Etz Chayim and two former members of the congregation who have been barred from attending services – or even setting foot inside the building that houses Congregation Etz Chayim.
Before publishing this article I had sent copies to both sides in the dispute – and offered both sides the opportunity to correct any mistakes they might have found in what I had written. I did receive responses from both sides and have incorporated their suggested corrections into what follows.
The two individuals involved at the heart of this dispute are both former longstanding members of Etz Chayim – and before that, Rosh Pina Congregation: Dr. Emet Eviatar (previously known as Hadass), who had been the Torah reader at Etz Chayim for many years, and who had also led Sunday services; and her husband, well known scientist Dr. David Hoult (who played a leading role in the development of MRI technology and was also very active in the congregation). Drs. Eviatar and Hoult have filed suit against CEC over what they claim was the illegal termination of their membership.
In response, however, Congregation Etz Chayim asserts that it was not a question of membership when CEC exercised its right to refuse entry on the advise of the WPS and security experts who were consulted after a deeply concerning letter was received from one of the plaintiffs by the synagogue.
The filings in this particular case are in the hundreds of pages. I spent two recent afternoons at the Law Courts poring over the filings, and photographed pages of what I thought were some of the most relevant issues at hand so that I could quote accurately from those filings.
While the case may seem hugely complicated, given the number of pages of documents that have already been filed, it seems that it boils down to two essential issues: Did CEC violate its own bylaws (or its own constitution, as the case may be, because at the time of the events in question a bylaw which would have governed who might be excluded from belonging to the congregation had not yet been passed) by terminating the memberships of Dr. Emet Eviatar and Dr. David Hoult? The argument advanced by the plaintiffs is not that a congregation cannot decide who can belong to that congregation. Rather, it is an argument that CEC did not properly adhere to its own bylaws in the manner in which it has excluded the plaintiffs from attending – or even setting foot inside Etz Chayim.
But, a second issue in play – and one which is argued forcefully by CEC in one of its briefs is that the argument Emet Eviatar and David Hoult are advancing has no place in the courts in the first place. As is noted in one of the briefs filed on behalf of CEC: “The dispute is, at its core, about the internal governance of a religious congregation. It concerns who may participate in communal worship, who may participate in communal religious life, and how a synagogue governs itself in response to legitimate security concerns. If it is accepted that the dispute was about ideological differences, as alleged by the Applicants, then these are fundamentally religious questions. The court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate such matters, and ought not to intervene.”
How the parties arrived at this situation is a complicated – but very interesting story.
I, myself was first made aware that something unusual was going on between CEC and David Hoult when I received this email from Dr. Hoult on Friday afternoon May 30, 2025, at 12:42 pm:
“Hi Bernie,
“I have just had a pair of police officers at the door telling me that we are now banned from Etz Chayim and if we show up the police will be called, no reasons given. I suspect it was an accumulation of things, including a letter I sent.
“Shabbat shalom,
“David.”
Later that afternoon I received another email, this time from a member of CEC, who forwarded me an email that had been sent to congregation members by Morissa Granove, Chief Operating Officer of CEC. That email had a letter attached, which said, in part:
“On Tuesday, May 27th, we received deeply troubling correspondence from a member of our community. The nature of this communication raised serious concerns about the safety of our congregants and staff. After careful and deliberate consultation with our Board of Directors, Clergy, the Winnipeg Police Service, the Jewish Security Network, and the Secure Community Network (in partnership with the USCJ), and on their recommendations we have made the difficult but necessary decision to terminate the membership of this individual and all members of their household, effective immediately.
“These individuals are no longer permitted on the premises of Congregation Etz Chayim, nor may they participate in any of our synagogue’s programs or activities.”
The letter was signed by Morissa Granove, Chief Operating Officer of CEC, and Allan Cogan, President of CEC.
What the heck was going on? I wondered. So, I emailed Morissa Granove that same afternoon:
“Hi,
“I received an email from David Hoult telling me that he is now banned from the Etz Chayim. I assume Emet Eviatar is also banned too, judging by the way your email is worded.
“I don’t know David at all – other than having received a piece he wrote about Israel and Gaza that I published to my website. I can’t begin to imagine what he might have written, but in the interest of fair reporting and fuller disclosure, can you say anything more about what he wrote in his letter?
“-Bernie Bellan
“Publisher,
“jewishpostandnews.ca
“also Associate Editor,
“The Jewish Post Winnipeg”
But, Morissa Granove did not offer any more information as to what might have been contained in that “troubling correspondence” which was received by CEC.
It was only when I went down to the Law Courts on August 10 that I was actually able to see what was in that “troubling correspondence.”
But, before I get into what was in that particular communication, even more background to this strange case is necessary.
In an email I received from CEC COO Morissa Granove following my having sent her a draft of this article, she wrote: “Congregation Etz Chayim …has never taken action based on political views. Further, CEC argues that other members, congregants, and guests share Dr. Eviatar’s views and yet there has never been an issue with their behaviour and as such, Congregation Etz Chayim has never taken action against anyone, revoked a membership, or refused entry to anyone based on their political stance.” Dr. Eviatar, in her own words, notes that she had already provoked the displeasure of some members of CEC, including staff members, by certain of her behaviours while, according to Morissa Granove, “volunteering in a leadership role and officially representing Congregation Etz Chayim. CEC …is ‘a Zionist organization’.”
Yet, according to CEC, Dr. Eviatar’s family’s attendance at Etz Chayim was never in question – until a letter was received from Dr. Eviatar’s husband.
As is noted in a brief for the plaintiffs, the following is taken from an affidavit given by Emet Eviatar, which might suggest that her membership in CEC had been called into question long before May 2025:
“In July 2024, I co-founded Manitoba Friends of Standing Together, a chapter of the international support network created by Standing Together. Standing Together is a grassroots joint Jewish and Palestinian organization in Israel which was originally created in 2015 to fight for equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel. Since the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas they have pivoted to protesting the war in Gaza.
“On October 6, 2024, I appeared as a guest on the local CBC Radio Weekend Morning Show, together with Mr. Ramsey Zeid, president of the Canadian Palestinian Association of Manitoba to discuss the importance of having local conversations between Jews and Palestinians…
“Later that week, I received a phone call from CEC Rabbi Kliel Rose and Cantor Tracy Kasner. They informed me that I would no longer be allowed to lead Sunday services. The rabbi also suggested that ‘for my own peace of mind’ I might want to consider finding another congregation (that aligns with my views.”)
“On November 4, 2024, I received an unsigned letter from CEC which was provided to me by the then executive director, Jonathan Buchwald…
“While the letter contains various false statements, and is clearly a reference to my having contact with Mr. Zeid and others in the local Palestinian community, the assertion that I was aligned with an ‘ideology which is mutually exclusive and contrary to the existence of the Jewish people and the state of Israel’ was extremely offensive and hurtful to my being an Israeli citizen, having family who live in Israel, and having served in the Israel Defence Forces.”
Later, on March 3, 2025, Emet Eviatar appeared a second time on the CBC morning weekend radio show, again with Mr. Zeid.
In an affidavit taken from Morissa Granove, Ms. Granove explained the CEC’s objection to Emet Eviatar’s publicly associating with certain individuals while officially representing Congregation Etz Chayim (noting that CEC’s objection bore no consequence to Dr.Eviatar’s or her the family’s membership.)
“This public alignment with parties opposed to Israel raised concern within CEC about potential risks surrounding the Synagogue, especially in times of heightened safety risks and awareness of antisemitic vitriol. These concerns were brought to the attention of Dr. Eviatar. She took no action to mitigate these concerns. As a result, she was removed from a volunteer leadership position she held with CEC. CEC took no action regarding either of the Applicants’ ability to attend the Synagogue as congregants.” In the email I received from Morissa Granove in response to a draft of this article, Ms. Granove added: “Still, her family’s membership was never in question.”
But, in May 2025 something happened that led the CEC to take drastic action against Emet Eviatar, David Hoult and the other members of their household. It should be explained that, according to an affidavit taken from Morissa Granove, who had stepped into the role of Chief Operations Officer of CEC in January 2025, in May 2025 CEC announced it would be adding new security measures, based on a “site security assessment from the Winnipeg Police Service. Officer Constable Justin Remillard (who) attended the Synagogue and provided guidance on improving security.
“Among other things, he advised:
“a) access to the Synagogue should be controlled;
“b) registration and entry lists should be used for programs and services at the Synagogue;”
On May 5, 2025 CEC held its Annual General Meeting. According to an affidavit taken from Ms. Granove, “During discussion relating to security protocols…David Hoult expressed opposition to security procedures such as locked doors at the Synagogue, registration requirements, and screening of visitors.”
The following is taken from an affidavit taken from Ms. Granove: “On May 22, 2025, CEC received a letter from Dr. Hoult. The most significant concern with the letter was that it stated:
‘If, G-d forbid, I wanted to attack the shul on Shabbat morning it would be trivial. A stolen motorbike, onto the lawn, Kalashnikov to shatter the windows, gun down the congregation, drive away, ditch the bike, gun, mask and clothes…” (Emphasis added)
The same affidavit states that, “In that correspondence, he again expressed opposition to security measures and described them as ‘hysteria,’ ‘paranoia,’ and ‘psychologically stupid.’ “
According to an affidavit taken from David Hoult, “My wife and I received no direct communication from CEC advising of the termination of our membership until a cheque with no accompanying letter was received in the mail on June 9, 2025.”
In an email received from Morissa Granove after I sent her a draft of this story she asked that this sentence be inserted: “Congregation Etz Chayim was interviewed extensively by the WPS before going to the home of Dr. Hoult for the service call and had all of the details which were required in order to qualify their actions.”
On September 16, 2025, Hadass (Emet) Eviatar and David Hoult filed an application in Court of King’s Bench to have the termination of their membership declared “null and void,” also seeking an “order to comply with bye-laws” (of the CEC).
In response, CEC asserts that it “has never terminated the Applicants’ membership. Rather the applicants were advised they were no longer permitted to attend the synagogue.” Morissa Granove asked that this be added: CEC “exercised its right to refuse entry on the advice of the WPS and security experts.’
Did it boil down to semantics? I wondered. CEC was saying that it hadn’t “terminated the Applicants’ membership,” yet it returned the cheque they had sent in to pay for renewal of their membership.
However, if it is the CEC’s position that, based on the plaintiffs’ claims as written, this matter is not one that should even be considered by the courts – as is noted at the beginning of this article, then arguments over whether CEC abided by its own bylaws would be moot.
Yet, if the courts might be willing to consider the issue whether CEC did not properly follow its own rules – as set out in its bylaws, then the Eviatar-Hoult case becomes more compelling.
For instance, the issue whether CEC “terminated” the memberships of Dr. Eviatar and Dr. Hoult might take on added importance.
As is noted in a brief for the plaintiffs, the letter sent out by Morissa Granove to members of CEC on May 30, 2025 states quite clearly that “We have made the difficult but necessary decision to terminate the memberships of this individual (Dr. Hoult) and all members of their household effective immediately.”
In this case the plaintiffs (Drs. Eviatar and Hoult) are arguing the nowhere within CEC’s governing constitution (which was adopted in 2014) were there “provisions for the termination of membership.” Therefore, their argument goes, “CEC had no authority to terminate their membership.”
Morissa Granove asked that this be added: “The defendant (CEC), however, argues that the CEC’s governing constitution says that “directors ‘may pass by-laws’ regulating, among other things, ‘the suspension and termination of membership by the corporation and by a member.’ The word ‘may’ is permissive.”
“Thus, CEC is arguing, therefore, that it had no obligation to actually pass a by-law governing the termination of a membership.”
As it was, the by-law was never voted upon, as, according to an affidavit given by Dr. Eviatar, CEC leadership “had not complied with the correct procedure, including giving proper notice.,
However, in her email to me Morissa Granove wrote that “the very same bylaw was passed at a Special General Meeting of the members when Congregation Etz Chayim and its lawyers provided clarity on the proposed changes, which was requested by the members at the conclusion of the AGM to clear up any issue or confusion.”
Further, the letter to CEC members that was sent on May 30, 2025, which said that “These individuals (i.e., Dr. Hoult and any members of his family) are no longer permitted on the premises of Congregation Etz Chayim, nor may they participate in any of our synagogue’s programs or activities” was signed only by the COO and President of CEC.
Whether or not CEC followed proper procedure in whatever happened to Dr. Hoult, Dr. Eviatar, and their other family members will be up to the courts to decide.
But, there is a larger issue at hand. Are there are any rules that might govern how a private organization such as a synagogue should govern itself? And, perhaps even more important, can the courts intervene at all in such a situation?
This case is shaping up to have some fascinating implications.
Local News
Ami Hassan returning as owner of Falafel Place
By BERNIE BELLAN In a surprise move – and after more than a six-year absence as owner of Falafel Place (Corydon at Wilton) the legendary Ami Hassan has decided to return as owner of one of Winnipeg’s most famous eateries.
Long known for his sometimes irreverent attitude to his customers, e.g., “If you’re finished, get out!”, Ami decided to return to running Falafel Place after having retired years ago (or so he thought) from running the Corydon Avenue restaurant.
We asked Ami whether he’ll be sending a special invitation to Julia Roberts to come visit him at Falafel Place. He asked again: “Who’s Julia Roberts?” (Just kidding – he really does know how Julia Roberts is.) Read the story how Ami told her to leave the restaurant and come back later at Julia Roberts turned away from Falafel Place
Ami did note that when customers saw him inside the restaurant one recent day as he was getting it ready for the reopening Monday, August 10, over 20 of them came in asking him if he was open already.
We asked Ami whether the menu will be the same as it was when he last ran the place and he said everything will be the same.
Falafel Place will be open 7 days a week from 7 am – 2 pm. Remember, if you’re finished – get out!
Local News
Bark Mitzvah at the Simkin Centre August 13, 2026
By BERNIE BELLAN On a beautiful summer day at the Simkin Centre residents and family members – along with staff, were treated to a delightful “dog day afternoon” when scores of dogs were brought to the front courtyard outside the centre to celebrate what was titled a “Bark Mitzvah.”
Now, no dogs were called up to the podium to read from the Torah – or even to bark out a blessing, although as I canvassed many owners of dogs that were there – inquiring as to whether their dogs had received any special training for the day, I was pleased to hear that many dogs came from good “Jewish homes” and were good “Jewish” dogs. (I would suppose, in the case of our own dog that would mean that she’s been spoiled rotten.)
Some owners though maintained that their dogs had been brought up quite disciplined – although to be honest none of the dogs that I saw seemed to be be rigorously paying attention to any commands. Most were of the Goldedoodle, Yorkie variety. There was one rescue dog in the midst. It seemed quite confused, surrounded as it was by all those lap dogs.
The entire event was presided over – with great humour, but also a certain amount of seriousness, by Rabbi Matthew Leibl, who explained to the very large audience why having a special day celebrating dogs was entirely consistent with Jewish tradition.
Following is part of the transcription of an interview I conducted with Rabbi Lebil following his remarks explaining why he thought holding a “Bark Mitzvah” would be a good event to have. (You can watch the entire video at the end of this story. But where there was a great deal of laughter coming from people who were listening to my interview YouTube inserted the word “laughter” – which should give you an idea how fun an interview it was.)
As Rabbi Leibl explained to me, “I’ll tell you a serious story. When I was training – and I trained with Rabbi Annabal Mass… our teacher, Rabbi Steven Glade, encouraged everyone to consider a blessing of the animals ceremony because he said it’s a monster event. Just look around. It brought out so many people. It’s one of those events you can tie in loosely to a Jewish event – which it is. I mean we did it on Rosh Chodesh Elul- the new year of the animals and this whole idea it’s very similar to Tu B’Shvat- reimagining something old from Mishna to do it like this – but look at the attendance. I mean everyone wants to bring their dog and at a personal care home they say that music, babies, and dogs are the three biggest things that get through to everyone.”
I had to ask about kashrut, however (as I’ve been told repeatedly that kashrut is an essential element of the Simkin Centre – no matter how few residents may care about kashrut. Look – if I’m sent to cover something as frivolous as a “Bark Mitzvah” you can hardly expect me to refrain from going after my pet bugaboo at the Simkin Centre – and how ridiculous it is to require that the centre remain kosher when most of the residents could care less about kashrut), so I said to Rabbi Leibl: “No milk bones here, I hope. I expect that this is a strictly kosher event.”
His response: “I’m not sure. I wasn’t put in charge of that, so I can’t say. But no one’s going to be serving them any of the food that we eat. I can tell [laughter] you that.”
I said: “I’m not sure how to read that. [laughter].”
I asked whether there were Jewish dogs mixed in with non-Jewish dogs? (Dog assimilation is a serious issue.)
Rabbi Leibl replied: It’s inter denominational. [laughter] . I guess I don’t think we check to see if the dogs were uh circumcised. “
I asked: “Are we… [laughter] Are we mixing Jewish and non-Jewish dogs?”
Rabbi Leibl: “I don’t know that dogs have a faith. I’m not sure. I think they do. I think they’re of all faiths. ”
I asked: “Okay. And you know where bark mitzvahs originated?”
Rabbi Leibl: I’m sure it’s probably something silly.
Me: “It was gay guys in New York.”
Rabbi Leibl: ” Really?”
Me: ” Yes. Because they didn’t have kids. They started having bark mitzvahs.”
Rabbi Leibl: “That was probably more of an individual dog thing. This is a communal thing. It’s just a catchy title for publicity, Bernie. It’s the blessing of the animals. That’s the real thing.”
Me: “I was told that some of these dogs are on medication – as are many of the residents.”
Rabbi Leibl: “That’s low hanging fruit, Bellan. Low hanging fruit.”
Here’s the complete video of my interview:
