Connect with us

Local News

Situation re possible sale of Town Island gets even murkier

By BERNIE BELLAN
The situation regarding the possible sale of Town Island took a somewhat confusing twist these past two weeks when an online publication known as Kenora Online reported on Monday, January 13, that Kenora-Rainy River MPP Greg Rickford (who is also Ontario’s Northern Development Minister) said “he’s working with the City of Kenora on a possible Town Island land swap.”

 

 

 

 

 

However, a careful reading of what Rickford is actually quoted as having said might be interpreted as the exact opposite of what the Kenora Online wrote when it said Rickford is working on a “land swap” with Kenora. Here is what the article actually said:
“Kenora Rainy-River MPP and Northern Development Minister Greg Rickford says he’s working alongside staff with the City of Kenora to create an opportunity for more housing and land developments, and the plans include Kenora’s Town Island.”
“ ‘There’s discussions with the city and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry on the opportunity. Now that we more clearly understand the city’s intentions are with it, I’ve assured the Mayor and Councillors (sic.) that we’re going to move forward and try to create an opportunity for them,’ said the minister.” 
When I emailed Adam Smith, the City of Kenora’s Manager of Land Services, to ask him whether he could confirm that there have been negotiations with the Province of Ontario over Town Island, Smith categorically denied that there have been any negotiations with the Province of Ontario over anything to do with a land swap for Town Island.
Here’s what Smith wrote to me on January 17:
“Hi Bernie,
“The City has not had any discussions around a land swap with the Province (emphasis ours). I understand there is an article suggesting otherwise and I would suggest following up with the editor on the content.” 

As a result of the possible misinterpretation of what Minister Rickford said to the reporter for Kenora Online, we have attempted to contact Minister Rickford himself to seek a clarification of what it is exactly that the Province of Ontario would like to do re Town Island.
In an email I sent to Minister Richford on January 17, I asked the minister the following:
“A careful reading of what you had to say could lead one to think that the province is interested in helping to ‘develop’ Town Island – which is the opposite of what those hoping for a land swap would want (which would be to see Town Island conserved in its natural state).
“Can you help me to understand just what it is that the province is interested in doing? Also, have there been negotiations with Kenora, but they don’t have anything to do with a land swap?”

In a previous article we noted that the City of Kenora had set January 31, 2020 as the deadline for receiving expressions of interest re Town Island. The clock is ticking. As we noted in our Short takes column of January 8, the Province of Ontario holds the key cards in this situation if it were to propose a land swap with Kenora for Town Island.
But, it is entirely possible that Kenora will want to move ahead with the sale of that part of Town Island which it still owns regardless of the position that the Province of Ontario might take. Thus, it is crucial to understand what Minister Rickford meant when he said that “There’s discussions with the city and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry on the opportunity”.
What opportunity is he referring to? Is it the opportunity to “develop” Town Island, which is what he seems to be saying – and which would be devastating news for the Friends of Town Island and other groups that have rallied in support of halting the sale of Town Island or is it the opportunity to conserve Town Island as a “nature conservancy”, which is what the Friends of Town Island are proposing?

Certainly, ambiguity is what most politicians are very good at delivering when they offer any comments at all – if you can even get a politician to make a public comment. But, in the case of Minister Rickford, it doesn’t seem that he was being deliberately ambiguous. He certainly had something in mind when he said “he’s working alongside staff with the City of Kenora to create an opportunity for more housing and land developments, and the plans include Kenora’s Town Island.”
The problem here is that the reporter for Kenora Online didn’t follow up that remark with this sort of question: “Are you talking about developing Town Island?”
Instead, the reporter – and it would seem whoever was responsible for posting the story online, took Rickford to mean that he was interested in the idea of swapping Town Island, which explains why the headline for the story read: “Province, City working on Town Island land swap”.

Naturally, when I read that headline, my first reaction was: “Whew! Finally, the Province of Ontario is stepping in to help save Town Island from development”, which is something I suggested in our January 8 issue was the desired outcome for this vexing situation.
Thus, when I sent an email to Adam Smith of the City of Kenora, asking him whether he could confirm that there had been discussions with the Ontario provincial government about a land swap for Town Island, I was shocked to read that, not only was there nothing to announce regarding a deal to swap provincially owned land either in or adjacent to Kenora for Town Island – Smith denied there had even been any negotiations on the matter.
But, it took three days for Smith to respond to my query about a land swap. Once I received his response late Friday afternoon, I immediately contacted the reporter for Kenora Online to ask him whether he had recorded anything else Minister Rickford might have said that would have justified going forward with a headline that Ontario and Kenora were working on a land swap for Town Island?
Here’s what the reporter wrote back to me in an email: “That is the direct quote I received from Minister Rickford after speaking with him in person in regards to the Town Island land swap (emphasis ours). I’d encourage you to contact his office for more.”

So, it would seem clear that the reporter for Kenora Online was asking about a land swap when he spoke with Minister Rickford. And, I can well understand the reporter’s interpreting the minister’s response to mean that the Province of Ontario was indeed interested in a land swap, but this wouldn’t be the first time that a reporter might have rushed to judgement without asking a more specific question that would have removed any doubt as to what the minister meant.
Why all this concern about Town Island, you might be wondering? Well, if over 10,000 individuals have taken the time to sign a petition asking the City of Kenora not to sell Town Island, it’s pretty clear that this is an issue that resonates with a great many people.

And, with the clock ticking as we move ever closer to the possibility that Kenora may indeed sell off the rest of Town Island to a private developer (although there is nothing to forestall an organization or individual from coming forward with an offer that would see Town Island safeguarded from private development), it’s awfully important to remove any ambiguity as to what the Province of Ontario is prepared to do to protect Town Island – if anything at all.
I’m just afraid that the Kenora Online might have got it all wrong though – and, rather than wanting to preserve Town Island, the Minister of Northern Development for Ontario actually wants to develop Town Island. After all, his title contains the word “development”, not preservation.
And, given the response that I received from Adam Smith of Kenora in which he said there have not been any negotiations at all with the Province of Ontario over a land swap for Town Island, it doesn’t appear that the Province of Ontario will do anything to stop the sale of Town Island to private developers. Just the opposite seems the most logical interpretation of what Minister Rickford had to say: He wants to “develop” Town Island.

Post script: We have to attempted to reach Minister Rickford several times since this article first appeared in our print edition, including through his government office in Toronto and his constituency office in Rainy River –  to clarify just what is the Government of Ontario’s intent with respect to Town Island, but have not heard back from anyone associated with the Ontario government.

This is one case though, where I hope I’m proved absolutely wrong though – and the Ontario government is sincerely interested in doing a deal with Kenora.

Continue Reading

Local News

Nakba exhbit at CMHR – you can see it right here and make your own assessment

By BERNIE BELLAN (Posted June 26, updated July 19) The Nakba exhibit at the Canadian Exhibit for Human Rights opened to the public June 27. The morning before the exhibit was set to open to the public, (it had a private opening for invited guests the evening of June 26) we received a press release from the CMHR. That press release gave a very detailed description of what was in the exhibit, along with photos (supplied by Annie Kierans of the CMHR).

There is also a link right at the beginning of the press release that will allow you to watch the same videos that anyone attending the exhibit can watch. We reprinted what was sent to us without making one edit. We leave it to you to form your own opinion as to whether the exhibit is fair in its presentation, and whether it is lacking “context” – which is an accusation that has been levelled at the exhibit’s organizers by some representatives of Jewish organizations.

We have received many emails in reaction to the exhibit. If you have an opinion and would like to see it published on this website, you can send it to jewishp@mymts.net, but please indicate whether you would be willing to have it published on this website.

Here is what we received the morning of June 26:

Winnipeg, MB — June 26, 2026 — The Canadian Museum for Human Rights (CMHR) will open a new exhibit tomorrow that explores human rights violations related to the ongoing forced displacement of Palestinian Canadians.
 
Palestine Uprooted: Nakba Past and Present will be on display in the Rights Today gallery on Level 5 until 2028. Featuring personal stories told through artifacts and video testimonies, the exhibit presents Palestinian Canadians reflecting on their ongoing struggle for human rights. The small exhibit reveals enduring patterns of loss and resilience, helping visitors understand more about this contemporary human rights story.
 
Palestinian Canadian stories are now included alongside many other stories of forced displacement and human rights violations featured in the Museum’s galleries. Each of these stories contribute to our visitors understanding of human rights and help the Museum fulfill its mandate to foster reflection and dialogue.  

Exhibition highlights
Personal stories and artifacts: Experience firsthand accounts from Palestinian Canadians sharing their journeys of displacement and memory through a series of five artifacts. Cases display artifacts like property deeds, house keys, and a traditional Palestinian embroidered dress, accompanied by short videos that deepen understanding of the impacts of displacement.

Powerful artworks: In her painting Bound Together in Gaza, Malak Mattar, a Gazan artist, captures the struggles and resilience of her generation shaped by conflict. Her work pays homage to Guernica, Picasso’s powerful masterpiece depicting civilian suffering during war.

Curfews and Closures, by Rajie Cook, bears witness to life under military occupation during the 2000–2005 Palestinian uprising, when curfews and closures were expanded and further limited basic rights and freedoms.

Cultural heritage: Discover traditional Palestinian embroidery called tatreez. Tatreez motifs and colours are tied to place, family history and regional identity. Patterns are associated with particular towns, villages or areas of Palestine. In this way, tatreez is a form of storytelling: a way of preserving memory, sustaining identity and expressing resilience across displacement and exile.

Poetry and reflection: Engage with Mahmoud Darwish’s evocative verses, inspiring personal reflection on exile, voice, and responsibility. Visitors can take a card containing Darwish’s poem and add a personal note, fostering ongoing dialogue beyond the exhibit.  

Contemporary context: Witness striking images of current events in Gaza and the West Bank, connecting past displacement to ongoing struggles.
 
Quotes:
“No force can silence the truth we carry. Growing up in Canada, my children lived the Nakba through our stories. And now we watch it happen again, live, on our phones. When I see the images coming out of Gaza, I am not watching the news. I am watching my history repeat itself.” -Fouad Sahyoun, a Palestinian Canadian featured in the exhibit


“We developed this exhibit with a clear awareness that Palestinian Canadian voices have too often been marginalized, silenced or spoken over — and that anti-Palestinian racism affects whose stories are heard and whose suffering is recognized. That is why we intentionally centred Palestinian Canadian voices throughout the exhibit.” -Isabelle Masson, Curator of Palestine Uprooted


“Human rights matter precisely when they are inconvenient, when the question of who deserves the dignity of having their rights recognized is genuinely contested. These are the moments where having a national museum for human rights is most important.
 
There are people who believe this exhibit should not exist in its current form. There are people who believe it should have existed sooner. There are people who will visit this exhibit and feel that it does not say enough, and others who will feel it says too much.
 
We have listened to every one of these voices. We have reflected. And we have renewed our resolve to continue the difficult, sometimes contested, and often controversial work of building understanding about human rights. We are a museum grounded in Canada’s human rights framework, whose mandate requires us to bear witness to the full complexity of the human story. We are proud to open this exhibit because the story it tells will help achieve that mandate, and because this story belongs in the collective memory of Canadians.”

  • – Isha Khan, CEO
Continue Reading

Local News

Jewish Federation releases amounts to be allocated to each of its 12 beneficiary agencies

By BERNIE BELLAN I had been reporting on allocations given to the 12 beneficiary agencies of the Jewish Federation for over 11 years – until last year, when I took a break from covering our major Jewish organizations.
These past couple of months, however, I’ve gone back to looking at financial information for some of our major Jewish organizations, including the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba and Jewish Child and Family Services. (If you want to read my reports on the two Annual General Meetings held by those organizations you can find them elsewhere on this website.)


Over the years as well, I had also been adding to a table that I began to compile 12 years ago that showed comparison figures year over year for how much had been allocated by the Jewish Federation to each of its 12 beneficiary agencies. Even though I didn’t do any reporting on allocations by the Jewish Federation last year, I was able to obtain information about the 2025 allocations that I’ve reproduced in the table that you can see here. (That table only shows information for the past five years, although I do have tables showing information about allocations going back as far as 2014 that can be found on my website if anyone is interested.)
Looking at the figures for this coming year though, a couple of things stand out: For one, there will be no allocation for Aleph Bet Child Life Enrichment, just as there wasn’t one last year either. This comes after having received allocations for as long as I’ve been covering the allocations committee, so that might require some further investigation to find out why Aleph Bet Enrichment is no longer receiving an allocation. Secondly, there will be a small allocation for the Irma Penn School of Jewish Learning – as there was last year also, after a multi-year absence of the school applying for allocations. The Irma Penn School used to advertise in The Jewish Post & News when it was active, but I don’t recall seeing anything about it the past two years. At one time it was very popular among adults. It would be worth looking into how it functions these days. (Over to you, Myron. You used to write about the Irma Penn School.)

Also, the report of the Allocation Committee says: “The Jewish Learning Institute resumed their participation in the Allocations process after a hiatus of a few years to enhance their revitalized programming.” But the Jewish Learning Institute did receive funding in 2025 and 2024, so it’s not clear why the report says there was a “hiatus of a few years.” No big deal, really.

It’s always been interesting for me – and I’m sure for you, too, to look at trends: Which beneficiary agencies have been receiving the largest increases in allocations year over year or, as the case may be, the smallest increases in funding – relative to what other agencies received?
According to the report of the allocations committee, “The 2025-26 Combined Jewish Appeal Campaign raised $7,224,856 this year.”
That amount is $660,577 more than what was raised in the 2024-25 campaign, which was $6,864,279. While a portion of what was raised goes toward beneficiary agencies, another portion goes to Israel, another portion is to cover operating expenses of the Federation, and another portion goes to replenishing the Federation’s emergency fund, which was badly depleted during Covid.

Insofar as how much each of the beneficiary agencies receives,, each year the allocations committee of the Jewish Federation meets during the course of the year to decide how to allocates funds to the 12 beneficiary agencies of the Federation.
The allocations are to be given to the respective agencies on September 1.
The total amount allocated to the Federation’s beneficiary agencies is $95,700 more than what was allocated last year, and $193,600 more than what was allocated in 2024. There will be a total of $3,050,000 allocated in 2026, compared to $2,954,300 in 2025, and $2,856,400 in 2024. Interestingly, the total amounts allocated in 2023 and 2022 were higher than what were allocated in 2024 and 2025, but the allocation to Gray Academy in 2022 was exceptionally high – $974,000, compared with $900,000 this year. In 2022 Gray Academy was still dealing with the fallout from Covid and the huge increases in costs that arose from having to resort to online teaching.
As well, until this year, the most ever allocated by the Jewish Federation to its beneficiary agencies was also in 2022 – when the community was still in the grip of the Covid crisis and total allocations were $3,003,000. At that time the Federation tapped into an emergency fund that it had on hand – and totally depleted that fund.
In its report the allocations committee went into some detail explaining its methodology and how certain criteria were given special attention when it came to determining allocations.
Each of the agencies had representatives appear before the committee. Those representatives were given 15-20 minutes to make presentations to the members of the committee and answer a series of questions pertaining to eight different criteria.
Here, in summary, are the main criteria the report cites as “priorities” when it came to deciding how much to allocate to agencies:

  1. Social isolation and lack of belonging: “Longing for belonging,” a desire for a
    stronger sense of connection to the Jewish community and Jewish identification.
  2. Seniors Isolation: Does this program address the problem of seniors’ isolation?
  3. Teen Program Continuity Gaps: Gaps in programming continuity limit teen
    leadership opportunities. Peer connection programs across this demographic
    must be prioritized.
  4. Building Jewish Identity and Connection: Strengthening Jewish identification
    ensures every program builds Jewish community through authentic Jewish content
    and context.
  5. Poverty and Financial Barriers to Participation: Financial challenges can prevent
    community members’ full participation in Jewish life.
  6. Accessibility and Inclusion for People with Disabilities: People with cognitive or
    physical challenges face barriers to full participation in Jewish life.
  7. Exclusionary or Unwelcoming Environments: Language and practices may
    unintentionally exclude interfaith families, LGBTQ+ individuals, Jews of color, and
    others.
  8. Data on Participation and Community Needs: Do you have data available on who
    participates in programs, who is underserved, and what impact programs have?

Even after having subjected each of the agencies to that sort of rigorous scrutiny, however, the fact remains that the sizes of the increases given to each agency were quite consistent with what had been given in previous years.
Here, for instance, are the increases that have been given to some of the agencies for the past three years:
Gray Academy – 2026 increase over 2025: $30,000; 2025 increase over 2024: $30,000
Gwen Secter – 2026 increase over 2025: $19,000; 2025 increase over 2024: $11,500
JCFS – 2026 increase over 2025: $30,000; 2025 increase over 2024: $25,000
Rady JCC – 2026 increase over 2025: $18,000; 2025 increase over 2024: $10,000
What it all boils down to, I would suggest, is that the allocations each of those agencies received are consistent with what they had received in previous years, notwithstanding the supposedly rigorous criteria that the allocations committee says it adopted in reviewing the presentations given by each agency.

Continue Reading

Local News

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