Local News
John Spencer: World’s “leading urban warfare expert” gives talk at Berney Theatre on September 11
By BERNIE BELLAN On Wednesday, September 11 an event was held at the Berney Theatre featuring John Spencer. The event was billed as “Hamas’ War: Truth and Consequences.”
Spencer, who retired from the US Army as a major, was described on the poster advertising the event as “the world’s leading urban warfare expert” and a “strategic adviser to world leaders.”
According to the website of the Modern Warfare Institute, which Spencer says he helped to create, “John W. Spencer currently serves as the chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute, codirector of the Urban Warfare Project, and host of the Urban Warfare Project Podcast. He is also a founding member of the International Working Group on Subterranean Warfare.
“He served over twenty-five years in the Army as an infantry soldier having held ranks from private to sergeant first class and second lieutenant to major. His assignments as an active duty Army officer included two combat deployments to Iraq as both an infantry platoon leader and company commander, Ranger instructor with the Army’s Ranger School, Joint Chiefs of Staff and Army Staff intern, fellow with the chief of staff of the Army’s Strategic Studies Group, and strategic planner and then deputy director of the Modern War Institute where he was instrumental in the design and formation of the institute.”
The email advertising the event that we received came from an organization known as “TAFSIK.” We have attempted to obtain more information about TAFSIK – and who’s behind it, but in response to two emails we sent to them asking them to describe who’s behind the organization, we simply got back a response that was a regurgitation of material already available on their website: “Tafsik organization emerged resolutely from the tragedy of October 7th, dedicated to combating Jew Hatred in Canada and beyond. By forging alliances with diverse communities—including Iranian, Indian, Christian, Yazidi, Venezuelan, and many other groups—Tafsik is uniting voices against Jew hatred on a global scale. The organization hosts significant events featuring prominent figures such as Douglas Murray, Gad Saad, Hillel Fuld, and Colonel John Spencer, to illuminate the challenges faced by Israel and the Jewish community worldwide. Additionally, Tafsik is leveraging cutting-edge AI technology to combat Jew Hate more effectively. As one of the fastest-growing grassroots organizations in Canada, Tafsik is committed to fostering understanding and solidarity in the fight against hatred.”
There were also names of three other organizations that were listed as sponsoring the Spencer event on the email received from TAFSIK: The Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; another organization called “Blue &”…something (the logo is unintelligible); and a third organization called Manitoba Israeli Coalition.
As well, during the event two other organizations were mentioned as having had some involvement: Winnipeg Friends of Israel and Bridges for Peace.
This event had an inordinate amount of security surrounding it. Registrants were told in advance that the actual venue would not be disclosed until shortly before the event. Here is what the email said: “Given recent threats and security events across Canada and elsewhere, we ask that you please keep this information confidential for security purposes…Filming and other recording will not be permitted.”
As it was, the venue turned out to be the Berney Theatre in the Asper Campus. When attendees arrived they might have seen one lonely protester, whose face was fully covered in a kaffiyah, holding a Palestinian flag. But there were also at least 20 Winnipeg Police Service members there – and at least five police cars. (There seemed to be even more police by the time attendees left the campus between 9:30-10:00 pm. The cost to hire all those police must have been exorbitant.)
Wow! We wondered what might be said that would be so sensitive as to prohibit recording – and how much money was spent in holding an event that was limited to only 200 individuals (the maximum capacity of the Berney Theatre), yet required a huge turnout of police.
To be honest, we didn’t hear anything from Spencer that one would think would have required a prohibition on recording the event – no discussion of military tactics or anything that he hasn’t already gone on the record as having written or said previously.
Spencer (who completed a 25-year period of service in the US Army infantry with the rank of “major,” but later was promoted to the rank of “colonel” in something called the “California State Guard”) focused largely on defending the IDF from accusations that its tactics merit criticism as, for instance, that they have been “disproportionate” to the level of threat posed by Hamas.
Interestingly, Spencer gave a full length interview to the Canadian Jewish News two days prior to the September 11 event in Winnipeg during which he went into a great more detail about Israeli military operations in Gaza than he did in the Berney Theatre on September 11. (You can read that entire interview at https://jewishpostandnews.ca/faqs/rokmicronews-fp-1/u-s-military-expert-john-spencer-to-speak-in-winnipeg-sept-11-argues-israel-isnt-committing-genocide-in-gaza/.)
As noted, the major point of Spencer’s talk, rather than being an analysis of military tactics employed by the Israel Defence Forces – which, I was rather hoping to hear, was a rebuttal of the accusation that has been levelled against Israel that what it is has been doing in Gaza amounts to “genocide.”
Here is some of what Spencer had to say during what was almost an hour-long talk:
“Just about everything that has been said about Israel and Gaza is a lie.”
There is a “global deficiency in understanding urban combat…There has been a long history of urban combat” but, until quite recently, urban combat has been about “fighting for cities, not in cities.”
Later, Spencer expounded upon this theme when he examined in some detail battles that took place in Manila (1945), and in Mosul (2016-17), in which cities were ravaged as a result of opposing forces trying to defend positions on the one hand, while other forces were trying to take those positions on the other – but in both cases, while there was a certain amount of underground fighting, the forces attempting to defend their positions were largely above ground and their ostensible purpose was to prevent the enemy from overtaking their positions. He contrasted those situations with what Hamas’s only goal throughout this war has been, which is “to survive the conflict.”
As for how to assess the current war in Gaza, Spencer suggested that “historians take about 20 years to write about combat,” so he was reluctant to weigh in on how successful Israel has been in achieving its goals.
He did say that he has been to Israel three times since October 7 and has been inside different Hamas tunnels on two different occasions. He did agree that the extent of Hamas’s preparations for this war – which were over “15 years” in the making, were quite impressive, but when it comes down to taking a position on whether Israel is actually winning the war, it was in his interview with the CJN that he was far more decisive in his opinion than he was during his talk in the Berney Theatre, when he didn’t take a clear position on that question. Here’s what he said during that September 10 interview:
“I wrote a Foreign Affairs article countering actually four major articles that have been published on ‘Israel isn’t winning. Israel is actually creating more terrorists than it’s killing’. All of these wrong frameworks.
“Israel absolutely is winning its war against Hamas in Gaza, because I taught strategy at West Point. Wars have a start, they have an end. They have political goals, which can change, although Israel hasn’t changed its three primary goals for the war against Hamas. Those are: number one, return the hostages. Number two, destroy Hamas, its political and military power in the Gaza Strip. And number three, secure the borders.
“There’s different wording for them, but those are the three goals. And Israel is absolutely [winning] all three of those. Especially with the hostages. They brought home over half the hostages to include over a hundred living hostages. But there is the myth that Israel could have brought them home a different way. It could have been negotiated in the beginning.”
In fact, during his talk Spencer paid scant attention to the situation regarding the hostages. It would have been interesting to hear from an urban warfare expert what he makes of the challenge presented by Hamas likely holding the remaining hostages in its network of tunnels. There have been several articles written – especially in the New York Times, detailing the enormous difficulties the IDF has had in going into Hamas tunnels. Like many other commentators though, Spencer noted that the number of tunnels Hamas had built came as a major surprise to the IDF.
A major part of Spencer’s talk, however, was given over to a rejection of various arguments that have been used against Israel, including that its response to the Hamas attack on October 7 has been “disproportionate,” and the suggestion that Israel has been engaged in “genocide.” Again – it would have been nice to be able to record Spencer’s talk so as to give you a more precise account of what he said, but during that September 10 interview with the CJN he made the exact same points in response to criticisms of Israel’s conduct of the war:
“Well, at the macro level, it seems for Israel, Gaza is where the truth dies. The accusation that Israel has been disproportionate, indiscriminate, excessive, or starving the population. While none of those are true, there’s actually a counterfactual huge body of evidence, actually real and physical. Like the “starvation”. I went to the Netzarim corridor, saw where the (U.S. humanitarian) pier used to be, and there were just mountains, a whole field of humanitarian aid that just hadn’t been picked up. But from the actual execution of war, like you said, for the IDF, there’s no comparison. So the IDF was being compared to other operations where just this tunnel challenge of being able to find and operate with an entire world underneath the urban areas.
“Hamas built this world underneath their civilians for the sole purpose of using everything on the surface to cause [criticism from] the international community. the destruction, the civilian casualties, everything, but all these lies about being disproportionate, proportionality–nobody’s faced this challenge in modern history. No military has.
“And then the other thing, which is what the prime minister and other Israeli officials or government use, which is backed up by data, is that in this execution of this war against Hamas, a defender who’s had 15 years to prepare for the attack of the IDF, Israel has done more and has implemented more civilian harm-mitigation measures than any military in the history of war, to include the U. S., Canada, the coalitions, to prevent civilian casualties and destruction. Like evacuating cities, like dropping [leaflets], the use of daily pauses, the use of certain munitions. There’s a long list that I go through. There’s actually over 10 civilian harm-mitigation measures that Israel has implemented, some that have never been created before in the history of war, like tracking civilian populations with their cell phones on or off and then restricting them. This is what I saw in Khan Younis, restricting the IDF operations because of that overriding aspect of preventing civilian harm, trying to get the civilians out of harm’s way, even though Egypt, which owns a lot of the destruction, the civilian casualties, and [took in] not a single refugee. So even that aspect of fighting a war against a military who’s trying to get their civilians killed without a complete area to move civilians to, into the Sinai, which would be really realistic. So the idea of how to find a way to create a safer zone within Gaza while still moving against Hamas.”
Spencer cited the claim that over 40,000 civilians have been killed during this war. He countered with the claim that, even if that figure is close to being correct – which he didn’t concede, over 13,000 of the deaths have been of Hamas fighters. (What Spencer didn’t do though, is offer an assessment of how strong Hamas remains. Recent reports that Hamas has been resurfacing in the north – which the IDF had previously claimed to have been rid of Hamas fighters, would tend to indicate just how difficult it will be to subdue Hamas militarily.)
Still, even if one were to accept the notion that there have been a large number of civilians killed during this war, Spencer suggested that one must take into account various criteria in evaluating to what extent a military force engaged in warfare with an enemy that is not only willing to use innocent civilians as human shields, it actually wants to see large number of casualties among its own population.
He offered these criteria for determining the level of responsibility one might attach to a military force when it is engaged in urban warfare where civilians are present:
• military necessity
• proportionality
• distinction (between civilians and combatants)
• humanity
• honor
Spencer noted that in the annals of warfare, even when tens of thousands of civilians have been killed as the result of urban warfare (or, as was the case in Manila in 1945 when the US Army fought to liberate that city from the Japanese and over 100,000 civilians died), the defending force did not deliberately want to see civilians die in order to turn world opinion against the enemy force – which is what he said, Hamas has been doing. Even ISIS, Spencer claimed, as brutal and savage as it was, was willing to surrender control of cities in situations where it was clear it was about to be defeated, rather than see entire civilian populations killed in order to enflame world opinion against the attacking forces. Hamas, he said, has as its clear goal, to survive – and if it can pressure Israel into accepting a ceasefire that will allow them to do that – even at the cost of seeing thousands of its fellow Palestinians killed as a result, then it will have achieved its aim, Spencer said.
And, as he said during the CJN interview, Hamas will want to pursue its goal of survival by having the international community exert pressure on Israel to accept a ceasefire that will allow Hamas to regroup only to attack Israel yet again – and again.
Local News
Jewish Federation holds first ever “town hall”
By BERNIE BELLAN It was a relatively small turnout – maybe 70 people were at the Shaarey Zedek Sunday morning, June 14 – but it may have been the start of a new foray by the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg into community outreach when a “town hall” was held to which members of the Jewish community had been invited to attend.
I had broached the idea of the Federation’s holding a community town hall with Federation CEO Jeff Lieberman back in the fall on an evening when he and newly installed Federation President Carrie Shenkarow had invited members of the community to come meet them for some one on one conversations.
I was disappointed that evening how few individuals showed up, so I shouldn’t have been surprised that the turnout for the town hall itself was relatively low.
But, give full marks to Lieberman and the others who were on the panel with him on June 14 for coming out to an event where they were prepared to answer any and all questions from audience members, as well as respond to questions that had been sent in by members of the community prior to the actual town hall.
Now, I should make clear that I have a particular position when it comes to attending any type of forum of the sort the Jewish Federation held, which is that any and all questions should be allowed – even if those questions might anger both the respondents to the question and audience members as well.
Toward almost the very end of the town hall I did ask a question that did elicit a somewhat negative reaction from within the audience – about the uproar over the upcoming Nakba exhibit at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights, but I’ll save what I asked and the response I got for later. Suffice to say for the time being, it seems apparent the suggestion that some Palestinians were forcibly expelled from their homes and have a right to have their story told is anathema to many in the Jewish community.
The town hall was moderated by Neil Duboff. Accompanying Duboff on the podium at the Shaarey Zedek were four other individuals, each of whom was representing a particular Jewish organization: the aforesaid Jeff Lieberman, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Dr. Ruth Ashrafi, Regional Director, B’nai Brith Canada; Gustavo Zentner, CIJA Vice-President, Manitoba and Saskatchewan; and Bellle Jarniewski, Executive Director, The Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada. Later in the program, they were joined on the podium by Rabbi Anibal Mass of Shaarey Zedek Congregation.
Each of the panellists gave what turned out to be fairly lengthy descriptions of what it is they do in their opening remarks, lasting a total of 20 minutes.
From time to time William Sagel, who is community security director for the Jewish Federation, but was not present in person, also joined in the discussion via a remote link.
Rather than report on how each of the panellists described what they do in their respective positions, I’ll jump right into the question and answer session that ensued. However, the initial question and answer segment of the program turned out to consist of questions that had been submitted beforehand and were read out by Neil Duboff, who took turns asking different panellists to respond to different questions.
Considering that a town hall is supposed to be a forum where, after opening remarks by whoever is going to respond to questions from audience members, the floor is supposed to be opened up to members of the audience to ask questions, having Neil Duboff read questions that had been submitted beforehand contradicted what is supposed to happen at a town hall, but hey: This was a first for our community, so I’ll give them a pass this town – but guys, next time – if there is a next time, how about having a real town hall?
What follows are snippets of what turned out to be a very long event that ran well past the allotted two hours that had originally been set aside. (If answers to questions posed, either by Duboff – reading from questions that had been submitted or by actual audience members themselves, seem exceptionally short, it’s for reasons of space, not because respondents gave abbreviated answers.)
The first question Duboff asked, and which was directed at Gustavo Zentner, was: “What is CIJA’s strategy for holding public officials accountable when current laws are not being enforced?”
Zentner responded that he prefers to meet one on one with officials – on a confidential basis, but he tries “to set a paper trail of accountability.”
One particular event that had a significant impact on the relationship CIJA (as well as other community organizations, other panellists noted) has had with politicians at various levels of government was the Bondi Beach attack in Australia last December during Chanukah, when 15 people were killed and 40 wounded by two gunmen who opened fire as members of the Sydney Jewish community were gathered to celebrate Chanukah on the beach.
Zentner noted that, following that attack, he met with the premier of Manitoba as well as the leader of the opposition, to discuss how the Manitoba government could bolster security for the Jewish community here.
Zentner said that, coming out of that discussion, the Manitoba government has now created a position of prosecutor specifically to deal with hate crimes and that the government “gave specific funds for security infrastructure for the community.”
He added that “two weeks ago” the Winnipeg Chief of Police released hate crime stats for the City of Winnipeg. “We were interviewed four times in 24 hours” about what the chief had said, Zentner added.
The next question Duboff asked was addressed to Jeff Lieberman: “What does the Federation do to prevent people from attending events who aren’t invited?”
Lieberman answered: “We pre-register” attendees.
He also said he wanted to add something to Zentner’s response to the question asked about holding public officials accountable.
He referred to Premier Wab Kinew’s controversial comment at the Federal NDP convention, held this past March, when Kinew said “Let the Epstein class fight the Epstein war” – a remark that was widely regarded as a dog whistle to antisemites.
Lieberman said that “Kinew said some things that were not favourable. We met with him and around one month later we got $1 million in new funding for security.”
Duboff asked Ruth Ashrafi to comment about the upcoming Nakba exhibit at the CMHR – which is scheduled to open June 27.
Ashrafi noted that in December 2023, in response to Israel’s incursion into Gaza following the October 7 massacre, there had been a “die-in” at the CMHR and word began to circulate that the CMHR was preparing to open an exhibit about the Nakba.
In April 2024, Ashrafi said, lawyer David Matas, acting on behalf of B’nai Brith Canada, sent a letter to the CMHR, in which he voiced reasons that such an exhibit should not be mounted.
In November 2025, Ashrafi added, Jewish organizations were supposed to be informed about the Nakba exhibit, “but B’nai Brith wasn’t informed.”
She also referred to “all that other nonsense you can be a very good Jew and a non-Zionist.”
Belle Jarniewski also spoke about the Nakba exhibit, saying “consultation has not taken place on the exhibit…The problematic title suggests that the very creation and ongoing existence of the State of Israel is an ongoing catastrophe…This exhibit is putting a target on the backs of Jews across Canada…They (the CMHR) consulted with six percent of Jews across Canada – who are not Zionists…Carla Compton (the newly elected MLA for Tuxedo) said that ‘a museum is supposed to be about facts, not feelings’…The museum refused to say who is on the advisory council for the exhibit.”
Gustavo Zentner added: “The moment we were advised of the exhibit in November we asked them (the CMHR) not to make any more announcements…It is the federal government’s responsibility to take action on this problem. It doesn’t matter whether the government appointed the board.”
Duboff asked Lieberman: “What security planning is underway for community events?”
Lieberman asked Williams Sagel to respond. Sagel said there are security enhancements being implemented across a wide swath of community institutions, but he didn’t want to get into details.
Duboff asked a follow-up question: “What do you say to the suggestion that community responses to security threats are inadequate?”
Lieberman responded that “We have to be very careful what we do.”
Questions from the audience then followed. As one might expect, given the opportunity to speak, once handed the microphone, most audience members would go on and on without asking a question.
Here, in capsule form, are some of the questions asked:
“Why is there no Israeli person on the panel?”
“Why not put on a counter exhibit to the CMHR exhibit at the Convention Centre?”
“Why do we have three different organizations dealing with antisemitism?” (Actually, the questioner could have asked “Why do we have four different organizations” doing that, because the Jewish Federation, B’nai Brith, CIJA, and the recently formed Manitoba Institute to Combat Antisemitism, which is part of the Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada, all deal with antisemitism in one way or another.)
“How is what Belle is doing different from what Ruth and Gustavo are doing?”
Jarniewski responded: “We all collaborate all the time.”
A questioner asked what can be done about the Winnipeg Free Press which, he suggested, rarely prints an op-ed defending Israel.
Lieberman said: “It is not our mandate to take a stand against that particular business.”
A questioner asked “Why isn’t ‘Shomrim’ incorporated into the community?”
For readers unfamiliar with who “Shomrim” are, here is something generated by AI about Shomrim: “Shomrim Toronto is a dedicated volunteer organization committed to ensuring the safety and security of the Jewish communities across the Greater Toronto Area. As guardians of peace (Shalom), we bridge the gap between the community and local law enforcement through vigilant community patrols, educational programs, and direct incident response.”
In Montreal, “This is the community safety and emergency response patrol operating primarily within the Hasidic and broader Jewish communities (particularly in the Tosh and Outremont areas).”
Lieberman responded: “The organizations in Toronto an Montreal have been operated for numerous years.”
William Sagel added: “We’re training volunteers for the future.”
Then, I asked my question, followed by angry muttering from the audience. I began by suggesting that the Jewish community is far more diffuse than the panelists would have us believe and the idea that there is unanimity about the Nakba is not right. I also said that speaking at this particular “town hall” was really nothing more than speaking in an ‘echo chamber’ since none of the questions asked dared to challenge accepted wisdoms about Israel and the Nakba. I asked: “Is it not possible to acknowledge the existence of what Palestinians refer to as the Nakba?” (And, for anyone who might think what I said was absolutely outrageous, I simply suggest you do some reading about what Israeli leaders, including David Ben Gurion, Chaim Weizman, and many others, said about the necessity of expelling large portions of the Palestinian population in order to create a viable State of Israel. I deal in reality, not mythology. And yes, I know that 800,000 Jews were also forced to leave their homes in Arab lands.)
Gustavo Zentner said: “The museum has not been transparent in its dealings….The (federal) government has a responsibility to step in and handle its responsibilities for corporate governance.”
A series of questions were asked by audience members about financial aid for members of the community, either to attend Gray Academy or Jewish camps. One audience member said that more parents are now sending their kids to Gray Academy or to Jewish camps as a result of antisemitism, but there was a need for more bursaries for those kids.
Jeff Lieberman agreed that “more and more kids” have left public schools and enrolled in Gray Academy after facing antisemitism in public school. He added that Gray Academy is giving out “$1 million in bursaries” each year. Lieberman pointed out that Gray Academy Head of School Lori Binder was in the audience and he asked her to come to the front to address the question of financial aid for parents wanting to send their kids to Gray Academy.
Binder said: “No one who comes to our door will ever be denied a Jewish education,” but in response to the suggestion from one audience member that non-Jewish families are receiving financial aid to send their kids to Gray Academy, Binder was unequivocal in saying that’s not true, saying that “non-Jewish families are not receiving financial assistance at all.”
Although this has been a long article to read (if you made it this far) I’ve really only attempted to give a flavour of what happened at the town hall. By the time it was nearing an end, Neil Duboff suggested that it would be a good idea to hold another such town hall. Yes, tempers may fray at a town hall (and I’m used to being criticized for daring to say things that don’t go over well with many others), but it was a very civil discussion, albeit with not enough time for questions from actual audience members. Full credit to Jeff Lieberman for following through on my suggestion to hold a town hall. And now that there’s been one – and the organizers may have learned where they can improve things, it would be a good idea to hold another one – but please, try to include members of the community who are either disaffected – which I would suggest is the majority of the Jewish community, or even those who are stridently opposed to the positions taken by our established Jewish organizations.
Local News
Temple Shalom suffers significant flood damage – rendered unusable for rest of the summer
The following notification was recently received from Temple Shalom:
Dear members and friends of Temple Shalom,
As you all know by now, Temple Shalom suffered significant damage when part of the building flooded during the intense storm last week. I wanted to take this opportunity to provide you with a quick update on the situation at this time.
The flood primarily affected the entryway, the stairs, the lobby outside the sanctuary and the lobby downstairs. There is also a smaller amount of damage to other areas of the building, including the kitchen, the music room and the sanctuary. The damage is extensive and we have now learned that asbestos is present in the flooded area of the building and that we will need to undertake a major abatement project before the actual repairs can begin.
Steve has been managing this project and is working with our insurance company, restoration company, roofers, electricians and other trades. Flynn Roofing was able to assess and make temporary repairs to the roof, and so far, there have been no further leaks. Steve and Bernie have been working tirelessly to remove water, clean up debris and move furnishings and other material out of areas that will need repair. Cynthia has been answering phone calls and emails and making arrangements for the next steps in this process.
It is now clear that we will not be able to use the building this summer. By next week, no unauthorized individuals will be permitted in the building, and our staff will be working from home. We are still working on a location for our services this summer and will let you know the arrangements as soon as they are finalized; we are grateful to the congregations and community organizations that have already reached out to us and offered space. Currently, our Torahs are safe at Shaarey Zedek. Until the location for in-person services is confirmed, we will hold our services on Zoom (details to follow).
We are planning ways to keep our community together during this time.
Judith
President, Temple Shalom
Local News
Chesed Shel Emes is hiring
Chesed Shel Emes is looking for a daytime “Shomer Plus” – an individual who understands and appreciates the depth and significance of Shmira, who is able to assume some of the day to day tasks managing our facility, and who can take on some of the administrative work – be it graphic design, social media management, Board support, or providing back up for our 24/7 on call staff.
This is a unique position which calls for a blend of the spiritual and the practical. We are offering a part time, salaried, daytime position, with employee benefits. The successful candidate will need to be flexible, patient and have a sense of humor.
For more information contact Rena Boroditsky, executive director of Chesed Shel Emes at chesedwinnipeg@gmail.com or phone 204-582-5088
