Features
New book tells riveting tale of World War II experience for Jewish family living in British Mandate Palestine – but oh my gosh, I’ve never read more mistakes in a book
“The Long Way Home from Crete”
By Isaac Kal
Self-published, 2021
Available on Amazon
Reviewed by BERNIE BELLAN
I don’t think I’ve ever had quite the experience reading a book that I had reading one that was recently sent to me by the author of “The Long Way Home from Crete”.
The story, in itself, is terrific – but the mistakes – oh god, I’ve never read anything that has mistakes in just about every paragraph, from grammatical mistakes, to omitted words, to usage of the wrong word entirely – and, to top it off, an absolutely egregious error when it comes to writing about what was known as British Mandate Palestine, but which the author insists on referring to as “Israel”. It wasn’t Israel yet – not until 1948!
Despite all that, I told the author that I was going to give his book a good review in our paper (also on our website). Why? Because the story he tells is so engrossing that I actually found myself riveted to the book. However, that being said, I’m not so sure that the typical reader would be able to forego wanting to grab the author by the neck and say to him: Why didn’t you have someone edit the book before you published it?
To illustrate, here’s just the third paragraph in the opening chapter: “As the ship pulled up its anchor, the tossing waves beneath me, made me feel though the world I once knew, was losing its stability.”
Okay, how many mistakes can you find in that one sentence? For one, why does he separate the sentence with three commas? For another, that phrase “made me feel though the world I once knew” has a word that is totally misplaced. Take out the “though” Isaac, and lose two of those commas! And – talk about awkward syntax!
Finally, as I’ve already noted, the ship wasn’t headed to Israel, it was headed to Palestine.
Now, if you’ve made it this far in my review, you might be wondering how someone who’s as interested in proper grammar, vocabulary and attention to historical accuracy as I like to think I am, could have persevered in reading a book that was almost comically poorly written.
The reason is that the story of the protagonist, an individual by the name of Abraham, which is told in the first person, along with the parallel story of Abraham’s wife, Genia, which is told in the third person, offers an intriguing glimpse into what life might have been like for Jews who had come to Palestine in the late 1930s, after fleeing Nazi persecution in Germany.
Abraham’s story in itself is especially absorbing. Born into a poor Jewish family in Poland, he makes his way to Konisberg in Germany, where he is taken in by the family of a well-to-do uncle. In time, Abraham discovers that he has a talent for business and, along with a cousin of his, opens up a successful sauerkraut business.
At the same time, Abraham, who is somewhat of a playboy, it seems, ends up meeting the love of his life, a beautiful but very observant young Jewish woman by the name of Genia. After promising her that he will modify his lifestyle to the point where it will be acceptable for her to marry someone who is clearly not the type of person to whom she would have previously been willing to marry, they eventually settle into a very happy life in Konisberg, and have one child, a boy named Aaron.
The story does go back and forth in time at the start, moving from 1938 “Israel” to 1930s Poland and Germany. I suppose the author was attempting to emulate other writers who decided they didn’t want to tell their stories in chronological form, and although it can be a bit confusing, using that particular device can help to hook the reader who might want to find out how a character ended up where they are.
But, given the era in which the book is set, it comes as no surprise that Abraham and Genia decide they must leave Germany. I have my qualms though with how easy it is for them to get into “Israel” in 1938: no British blockade – and no difficulty in entering the country. That simply doesn’t jive with the reality of the time, in which the British had imposed severe quotas on the number of Jews allowed into Palestine. Still, for the sake of the author being allowed some latitude in telling his story, I’ll allow him some discretion in handling the historical accuracy of that particular aspect of his story.
It’s when Abraham and Genia do settle into their new home in Herzlia though that the story really picks up. Abraham cannot find suitable employment and, even though he had been quite wealthy in Germany, when he tries to import funds from that country, they’re frozen, and the couple finds themselves quite desperate just to feed themselves.
One day, however, Abraham happens to chance upon an advertisement in a paper seeking men to enlist as support workers for the British army. It’s at that point that the story starts to move at a much faster pace. The author provides a detailed description of what life was like for Jewish men in Palestine who volunteered, not to serve in the British army itself, but rather as support workers. This was an aspect of history about which I had never read anything, so I contacted Isaac Kal while I was reading the book to ask him whether the story which, to that point, I had thought might have been a work of fiction, was actually true?
Isaac responded that the story was indeed true – it was his grandfather’s story. He also suggested that I take a look at his website for further information. That didn’t prove at all helpful, but what did help was going to the Amazon website and entering the name Isaac Kal. It was then that I discovered a fair bit more information about what led Kal to write this book – along with some further information about the unit in which his grandfather served.
Here’s what the website says: “In the midst of the Covid-19 closure, the author had plenty of time to go through the photos and documents of his family. He found his grandfather’s soldier certificate and the date of his enlistment. While browsing online, he came across a group of relatives of the Israeli POW from WW2. he discovered the name of the unit in which his grandfather served (Port Operation Unit 1039). Interestingly enough, his captain kept a war diary until his capture.
“Through the stories and the dates in the diary, he was able to trace the route that his grandfather took until his capture.”
As Abraham completes his training, which is to enable him to work in ports helping to unload cargo ships – eventually leading to his becoming a skilled crane operator, he is fairly quickly thrust into an ongoing series of dangerous situations, in which he and the other members of his unit are required to work under enemy fire.
The scenes move from battleground to battleground as German forces advance, first in Africa – in Tobruk (Libya), then in Greece, leading to British forces, along with the support units, such as Abraham’s, constantly retreating.
Again, if the author’s descriptions of events are true, then the vivid accounts of all the near misses that Abraham experiences, often when others nearby get killed, provide descriptions of battlegrounds, especially in the eastern Mediterranean, that are perhaps not as well known to many of us as battlegrounds in western Europe.
At the same time though that Abraham is experiencing the arduous life that anyone who is attached to a combat unit during a war would no doubt experience, his loving wife, Genia, it turns out, is not quite as virtuous as one might have thought. Left alone with her young son she turns to a younger man by the name of Jacob who works in a store and who offers to assist Genia, first by attending to some repairs needed at her home, then by offering her a job helping him in the store.
It doesn’t take long though for the reader to realize that Jacob has an ulterior motive, which is to bed Genia. I was somewhat surprised to read that she wasn’t all that reluctant to give into Jacob’s advances. The whole time I was thinking: “Isaac (Kal), is this your grandmother you’re writing about?”
Thus, while the book evolves into quite the exciting war story – as Abraham escapes from one near-death situation to another, eventually finding himself on Crete – surrounded by Germans, until he is finally captured and taken to a prisoner of war camp in Silesia (in Poland), Jacob has moved in with Genia, while Aaron has been sent to an orphanage in Jerusalem.
Abraham does survive – of course, otherwise the title of the book would not have been what it was, and is reunited with Genia.
But, the story suddenly ends with the couple back together and no clue as to whether Genia ever confesses her marital infidelity to Abraham. (To be fair, he was gone five years and had been reported as “Missing in Action”, but even when Genia learns that Abraham is indeed alive, she finds herself still drawn to Jacob and unable to resist his sexual advances.)
I note that, of the reviews on Amazon, a number ask whether there will be a sequel to “The Long Way Home from Crete”? I suppose that if what happens to Abraham and Genia following Abraham’s return to “Israel” was nearly as interesting as what preceded his return, then it might make for a very good sequel. But, for gosh shakes, Isaac Kal, get someone to proofread your writing!
Features
Are Niche and Unconventional Relationships Monopolizing the Dating World?
The question assumes a battle being waged and lost. It assumes that something fringe has crept into the center and pushed everything else aside. But the dating world has never operated as a single system with uniform rules. People have always sorted themselves according to preference, circumstance, and opportunity. What has changed is the visibility of that sorting and the tools available to execute it.
Online dating generated $10.28 billion globally in 2024. By 2033, projections put that figure at $19.33 billion. A market of that size does not serve one type of person or one type of relationship. It serves demand, and demand has always been fragmented. The apps and platforms we see now simply make that fragmentation visible in ways that provoke commentary.
Relationship Preferences
Niche dating platforms now account for nearly 30 percent of the online dating market, and projections suggest they could hold 42 percent of market share by 2028. This growth reflects how people are sorting themselves into categories that fit their actual lives.
Some want a sugar relationship, others seek partners within specific religious or cultural groups, and still others look for connections based on hobbies or lifestyle choices. The old model of casting a wide net has given way to something more targeted.
A YouGov poll found 55 percent of Americans prefer complete monogamy, while 34 percent describe their ideal relationship as something other than monogamous. About 21 percent of unmarried Americans have tried consensual non-monogamy at some point. These numbers do not suggest a takeover. They suggest a population with varied preferences now has platforms that accommodate those preferences openly rather than forcing everyone into the same structure.
The Numbers Tell a Different Story
Polyamory and consensual non-monogamy receive substantial attention in media coverage and on social platforms. The actual practice rate sits between 4% and 5% of the American population. That figure has remained relatively stable even as public awareness has increased. Being aware of something and participating in it are separate behaviors.
A 2020 YouGov poll reported that 43% of millennials describe their ideal relationship as non-monogamous. Ideals and actions do not always align. People answer surveys about what sounds appealing in theory. They then make decisions based on their specific circumstances, available partners, and emotional capacity. The gap between stated preference and lived reality is substantial.
Where Young People Are Looking
Gen Z accounts for more than 50% of Hinge users. According to a 2025 survey by The Knot, over 50% of engaged couples met through dating apps. These platforms have become primary infrastructure for forming relationships. They are not replacing traditional dating; they are the context in which traditional dating now occurs.
Younger users encounter more relationship styles on these platforms because the platforms allow for it. Someone seeking a conventional monogamous partnership will still find that option readily available. The presence of other options does not eliminate this possibility. It adds to the menu.
Monopoly Implies Exclusion
The framing of the original question suggests that niche relationships might be crowding out mainstream ones. Monopoly means one entity controls a market to the exclusion of competitors. Nothing in the current data supports that characterization.
Mainstream dating apps serve millions of users seeking conventional relationships. These apps have added features to accommodate other preferences, but their core user base remains people looking for monogamous partnerships. The addition of new categories does not subtract from existing ones. Someone filtering for a specific religion or hobby does not prevent another person from using the same platform without those filters.
What Actually Changed
Two things happened. First, apps built segmentation into their business models because segmentation increases user satisfaction. People find what they want faster when they can specify their preferences. Second, social acceptance expanded for certain relationship types that previously operated in private or faced stigma.
Neither of these developments amounts to a monopoly. They amount to market differentiation and cultural acknowledgment. A person seeking a sugar arrangement and a person seeking marriage can both use apps built for their respective purposes. They are not competing for the same resources.
The Perception Problem
Media coverage tends toward novelty. A story about millions of people using apps to find conventional relationships does not generate engagement. A story about unconventional relationship types generates clicks, comments, and shares. This creates a perception gap between how often something is discussed and how often it actually occurs.
The 4% to 5% practicing polyamory receive disproportionate coverage relative to the 55% who prefer complete monogamy. The coverage is not wrong, but it creates an impression of prevalence that exceeds reality.
Where This Leaves Us
Niche relationships are not monopolizing dating. They are becoming more visible and more accommodated by platforms that benefit from serving specific needs. The majority of people seeking relationships still want conventional arrangements, and they still find them through the same channels.
The dating world is larger than it was before. It contains more explicit options. It allows people to state preferences that once required inference or luck. None of this constitutes a takeover. It constitutes an expansion. The space for one type of relationship did not shrink to make room for another. The total space grew.
Features
Matthew Lazar doing his part to help keep Israelis safe in a time of war
By MYRON LOVE It is well known – or at least it should be – that while Israel puts a high value of protecting the lives of its citizens, the Jewish state’s Islamic enemies celebrate death. The single most glaring difference between the opposing sides can be seen in the differing approach to building bomb shelters to protect their populations.
Whereas Hamas and Hezbollah have invested untold billions of dollars over the past 20 years in building underground tunnels to protect their fighters while leaving their “civilian” populations exposed to Israeli bombs, not only has Israel built a highly sophisticated anti-missile system but also the leadership has invested heavily in making sure that most Israelis have access to bomb shelters – wherever they are – in war time.
While Israel’s bomb shelter program is comprehensive, there are still gaps – gaps which Dr. Matthew Lazar is doing his bit to help reduce.
The Winnipeg born-and raised pediatrician -who is most likely best known to readers as a former mohel – is the president of Project Life Initiatives – the Canadian branch of Israel-based Operation Lifeshield whose mission is to provide bomb shelters for threatened Israeli communities.
Lazar actually got in on the ground floor – so to speak. It was a cousin of his, Rabbi Shmuel Bowman, Operation Lifeshield’s executive director, who – in 2006 – founded the organization.
“Shmuel was one of a small group of American olim and Israelis who were visiting the Galilee during the second Lebanon war in 2006 and found themselves under rocket attack – along with thousands of others – with no place to go,” recounts Lazar, who has two daughters living in Israel. “They decided to take action. I was one of the people Shmuel approached to become an Operation Lifeshield volunteer.
Since the founding of Lifeshield, Lazar reports, over 1,000 shelters have been deployed in Israel. The number of new shelter orders since October 7, 2023 is 149.
He further notes that while the largest share of Operation Lifeshield’s funding comes from American donors, there has been good support for the organization across Canada as well.
One of the major donors in Winnipeg is the Christian Zionist organization, Christian Friends of Israel (FOI) Canada which, in September, as part of its second annual “Stand With Israel Support” evening – presented Lazar and Operation Lifeshield with a cheque for $30,000 toward construction of a bomb shelter for the Yasmin kindergarten in the Binyamina Regional Council in Northern Israel.
Lazar reports that to date the total number of shelters donated by Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry (globally) is over 100.
Lazar notes that the head office for Project Life Initiatives is – not surprisingly – in Toronto. “We communicate by telephone, text and Zoom,” he says.
He observes that – as he is still a full time pediatrician – he isn’t able to visit Israel nearly as often as he would like to. He manages to go every couple of years and always makes a point of visiting some of Operation Lifeshield’s projects.
(He adds that his wife, Nola, gets to Israel two or three times a year – not only to visit family, but also in her role as president of Mercaz Canada – the Canadian Conservative movement’s Zionist arm.)
“This is something I have been able to do to help safeguard Israelis,” Lazar says of his work for Operation Lifeshield. “This is a wonderful thing we are doing. I am glad to be of help. ”
Features
Patterns of Erasure: Genocide in Nazi Europe and Canada
By LIRON FYNE When we think of the word genocide, our minds often jump to the Holocaust, the mass-scale, systemic government-led murder of six million Jews by Nazi Germany during the Second World War, whose unprecedented scale and methods led to the very term ‘genocide’ being coined. On January 27th, 2026, we will bow our heads for International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the 80th year of remembrance.
Less frequently do we connect genocidal intent to the campaign against Indigenous peoples in Canada; the forced displacement, cultural destruction, and systematic killing that sought to erase Indigenous peoples. The genocide conducted by the Nazis and the genocidal intent of the Canadian government, though each unique in scale, motive, and implementation, share many conceptual similarities. Both were driven by ideologies of racial superiority, executed through governmental precision, and justified by the perpetrators as a moral mission.
At their core rests the concept of dehumanization. In Nazi Germany, Jews were viewed as subhuman, contaminated, and a threat to the ‘Aryan’ race. In Canada, Indigenous peoples were represented as obstacles to ‘progress’ and seen as hurdles to a Christian, Eurocentric nation. These ideas, this dehumanization, turned human beings into problems to be solved. Adolf Hitler called it the ‘Jewish question,’ leading to an official policy in 1942 called the ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Question,’ whereas Canadian officials called it the ‘Indian problem.’ The language is similar, a belief that one group’s existence endangers the destiny of another. The methods of extermination differed in practice and outcome, but the language of intent resembles one another.
The Holocaust’s concentration camps and carefully engineered gas chambers were designed for efficient, industrial-scale killing, resulting in mass murder. The well-organized plan of systematic degradation, deadly riots, brutal camp conditions, and designated killing centres were only a few of the ways the Nazis worked to eliminate the Jews. The Canadian government’s weapons were policy, assimilation and abandonment. Such as the Indian Act, reserves, and residential schools, which were all meant to ‘kill the Indian in the child,’ cutting generations off from their languages, families, and cultures. Thousands of Indigenous children died in residential schools, buried in unmarked graves near schools that called themselves places of learning. Both systems were backed by either religion or ideology; Nazi ideology brought together racist eugenic policies and virulent antisemitism, while Canada’s genocidal intent was supported by Christian Protestantism claiming to save Indigenous souls by erasing their heritage.
The Holocaust was a six-year campaign of complete industrialized extermination, mass murder with a mechanized intent, on a scale that remains historically unique. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission describes Canada’s indigenous genocide as a cultural one that unfolded over centuries through assimilation and the destruction of indigenous languages and identities. The Holocaust ended with the liberation of the camps and a global recognition of the atrocities committed. However, the generational trauma and dehumanization of antisemitism carry on. For Indigenous peoples in Canada, the effects of the genocidal intent continue to this day, visible in displacement, poverty, and intergenerational trauma. While these histories differ in form and timeline, both are rooted in dehumanization and the belief that some lives are worth less than others.
A disturbing similarity lies in the aftermath: silence and denial. The Holocaust forced the world to confront the atrocity with the vow of ‘Never Again,’ which has now been unearthed and reformed as ‘Never Again is Now,’ after the October 7th, 2023, massacre by Hamas. The largest massacre of Jewish people since the Holocaust, and the denial of the atrocities committed on October 7th, highlight the same Holocaust denial we see rising around the world. In Canada, for decades, the genocidal intent was hidden behind narratives of kindness and social progress. Only in recent years, through survivor testimony for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the discovery of unmarked graves, has the truth gained recognition. But acknowledgment without justice risks repeating the same patterns of erasure.
Comparing these atrocities committed is not about comparing pain or scale; it is about understanding the shared systems that enabled them. Both demonstrate how racism, superiority, and dehumanization can be used to justify the destruction of human beings. Remembering is not enough in Canada. True remembrance demands accountability, land restitution, reparations, and education that confronts Canada’s ongoing colonial legacy. When we say ‘Never Again is Now’, we hold collective action to combat antisemitism in all forms. The same applies to Truth & Reconciliation; it must be more than a slogan; we must apply action to Truth & ReconciliACTION.
Liron Fyne is a 12th-grade student at Gray Academy of Jewish Education in Winnipeg. They are currently a Kenneth Leventhal High School Intern at StandWithUs Canada, a non-profit education organization that combats antisemitism.