Author:

Lighthouse as beacon

Left to right, Lighthouse Labs’ Jeremy Shaki, Josh Borts and Khurram Virani. (photo from Lighthouse Labs)

The Jewish Independent first heard of Lighthouse Labs in January of this year, when it received a press release about Lighthouse’s second annual HTML500, “where 500 people can learn basic HTML and CSS skills from Canada’s top 50 tech companies for free.” In its first year, the waitlist numbered 1,300. In its second, more than 2,000.

But HTML500 (thehtml500.com) offers merely a peek into what Lighthouse Labs (lighthouselabs.ca) teaches in its eight-week computer coding bootcamp – a bootcamp that this year also became available in Toronto and Calgary. Lighthouse co-founder Jeremy Shaki credited fellow co-founders Josh Borts and Khurram Virani – who are also founders and partners of the Toronto-based development company Functional Imperative – with the concept.

“I wish I could take credit for the idea of Lighthouse Labs, but I can’t,” Vancouver-based Shaki told the Independent. Borts and Virani, the latter of whom now also lives here and is Lighthouse’s head of education, “came up with it as it pertained to their space … and asked me if I wanted to be involved.

“Personally, I have always felt very strongly about learning by doing and that schools should have more tangible outcomes associated with their education. So, to get a chance to put all that into action in an exceptionally exciting space like tech was very lucky. There were definitely other models for this that we looked at, but we developed our own philosophy around outcomes and, specifically, that we felt that everyone graduating should be able to get a job.”

While Lighthouse Labs doesn’t guarantee employment, of course, it boasts a 100% placement rate. As its website explains, “Since some students have other goals, this refers to those students whose goal is to work as a full-time developer as soon as possible upon graduation. To date, 100% of our grads have gotten jobs in that capacity within three months!”

Shaki and Borts have known each other since high school. Both were born and raised in Montreal.

“I was raised ‘Jew-ish,’ as in I was taught the history, had dinners on all the holidays, had Friday night meals with my family and went to synagogue on the important dates,” said Shaki, who attended JPPS-Bialik Jewish school until heading to St. George’s High School, where he met Borts, who attended St. George’s from pre-kindergarten through high school.

Borts described his family as “modern Jewish.”

“While my father was raised Orthodox,” he explained, “by the time I was born, we had migrated down the path to Conservative and mainly practised during the High Holidays, etc., like most of my Jewish friends. When I was planning for my bar mitzvah, I had a good interaction with the rabbi at the Reform synagogue in Montreal, Temple Emanuel, so our family moved there, completing our move to Reform.

“Once I left for university to Waterloo (honors, bachelor of computer engineering), I found myself outside of the Jewish social groups that are ever-present in English Montreal and I was, therefore, forced to create my own traditions. So, while I no longer attend synagogue on every High Holiday (I do when I can make it back to Montreal), I host a break-fast and seder for my friends (both Jews and non-Jews), as well as light the Chanukah candles (because who doesn’t like the dreidel?).”

Shaki stayed in Montreal for university, attending Concordia, where, he said, “I took the extremely practical political science course which led to my career in – marketing.”

Always encouraged to work, Shaki had myriad jobs, “ranging from selling spa packages on the street to hiring staff” – and including a job, at 15, with “the famous Montreal bagel shop St. Viateur Bagels” – “but ended up working for an experiential marketing agency called Sugar Media out of Toronto. I stayed there for seven years, loving every day of it before ultimately beginning to run Lighthouse Labs,” where his title is “chief talking officer.”

photo - HTML500 offers a glimpse into what Lighthouse Labs teaches in its eight-week coding bootcamp
HTML500 offers a glimpse into what Lighthouse Labs teaches in its eight-week coding bootcamp. (photo from Lighthouse Labs)

Borts’ path to Functional Imperative and Lighthouse Labs began in University of Waterloo’s co-op program, from which he obtained a wide range of experience, he said, “from working for a nonprofit in Sub-Saharan Mali … to algorithmic and high-frequency trading. Upon graduation, I took a job with a proprietary trading group in Hong Kong, where I spent three years working on trading strategies.

“When I finally came back to North America,” he said, “I was approached with an opportunity to launch my own technology startup. While not in the finance space, the idea of being an entrepreneur really appealed to me and my risk-taking approach, so I jumped in and moved to Toronto to launch SocialStreet. Unfortunately, my lack of experience showed and it quickly failed. However, I learned a great deal about what it takes to run a successful startup, experience that I now am able to give back to the community in my role at Functional Imperative and Lighthouse Labs.”

Integral to both places is Virani. “While I have a computer engineering background,” explained Borts, “I didn’t have the experience of building scalable software solutions. Khurram, with over 10 years of experience in web development, was the perfect co-founder to be able to execute on our clients’ visions.”

Based in Toronto, Borts’ involvement with Lighthouse Labs includes being its chief financial officer. “In general,” he said, “my ability to speak both business and technology means that I am responsible for bridging the gap between what is best for the business and what can be done. I often am the one pushing for higher margins and faster growth, to the chagrin of Jeremy and Khurram.”

It’s hard to imagine faster growth for Lighthouse Labs, which started in Vancouver in 2013 and now not only is established in two other cities, but has dozens of instructors, mentors (“For every seven students,” says the website, “we have one superhero of a mentor ready to combat the villains of logic errors and low batteries”) and alumni mentors (graduates who help “students figure out careers as developers”).

“The success we had in the early going really helped us prepare for the future from the start,” said Shaki. “We were lucky to have made some fantastic partnerships with many different groups in the tech sector, and those groups helped open up opportunities to bring our business to other Canadian cities faster than we had originally expected.

“As for where we go from here, the main focus is to make sure we are able to deliver the same quality program consistently in the markets we have expanded to. That being said, we have some very ambitious projects that will be coming to fruition soon, but I’ll keep those ones to myself for the moment!”

Earlier this year, Shaki spoke at a conference at Simon Fraser University on a panel dealing with the topic Not Just Our Problem: Motivating People to Care About Women in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). His comments shed light on another aspect of Lighthouse Labs’ success.

“There is a major movement going on in tech to get more women involved and we are as active as anyone,” he said. “On the panel, I spoke mostly about the language that we use to describe the tech industry in general and how, with some small changes, it makes for a big difference.

“We threw an event called HTML500 last February in four cities across the country and, with those language changes, we were able to attract over 50% female participation in a learn-to-code event. It was about making it open and inclusive instead of trying to depict coding as difficult and niche.

“We also made sure to have a lot of women mentors around, as it provided both the men and women showing up to learn the initial opportunity to learn from and respect a woman developer. I don’t know if you can change all the people who are already in the tech industry, but we definitely feel as though we can affect the people entering it for the first time.”

The language and approach Borts uses at Functional Imperative are also illuminating.

“One of the common misconceptions is that software developers are not creatives,” he said. “I may not be good with a paintbrush but, like other creatives, my team and I are abstract thinkers who thrive on innovation. My job is to harness my team’s insane creativity in a way that still ensures a quality product at the end of the ride. A couple of strategies we use at Functional Imperative include:

“Demo your work early and often. The sooner you can get feedback on your work, the more likely it is to match the project requirements. This is at the core of agile development methodology.

“Have someone else give you feedback on your code. This ‘peer review’ is essential for ensuring code quality.

“Eighty/20 rule: 80% of our projects should use technology my team already knows, while 20% can be riskier, allowing them to push the bounds of their knowledge.

“Tell them what you want, not how to get there.”

And it can only help that both Borts and Shaki love what they’re doing.

“I get to wake up every morning and create new things,” said Borts. “It is the dream of every engineer. This is both at Functional Imperative, where we help shape and deliver on the vision of our clients, and at Lighthouse, where I am helping build a world-class education institute that is at the forefront of changing how education is delivered. Every day brings a new problem to solve.”

As for Shaki, he looks forward to going to work because he has “an amazing team that are all passionate, goofy, hard-working and hilarious.

“I also love it because, when I made the switch from marketing to running a developer bootcamp, I made the conscious decision to do something that made a positive impact. We keep very small classes, so I get to meet all our students and watch as their lives change in the matter of eight weeks. That is extremely fulfilling, and a far cry from hawking other peoples’ products, no matter how much fun event marketing is.

“At this point, I get to have extremely intelligent discussions with intelligent people every day and talk about better ways of improving education. To be doing that as my job makes me happier than anything else I could be doing.”

Celebrating 50 years

Ambassador Rolf Pauls of Germany presents his credentials to Israeli president Zalman Shazar on Aug. 19, 1965. (photo from picture-alliance/dpa via CIJA)

On Aug. 19, 1965, Ambassador Rolf Pauls of Germany presented his credentials to Israel’s president Zalman Shazar. The tension and solemnity of the occasion were evident in everyone’s faces. Formal intergovernmental relations were being launched between Israel and Germany in the dreadful shadow of the Shoah.

Three milestones paved the way for this historic rapprochement.

  • The Luxembourg Agreement of 1952, which constituted the Federal Republic of Germany’s assumption of responsibility for the consequences of the Holocaust.
  • The meeting in March 1960 between David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, and Konrad Adenauer, West Germany’s first chancellor.
  • The 1961 trial of Adolf Eichmann.

The Luxembourg Agreement formed the foundation for opening dialogue, which after long years of deliberate, mutual and courageous effort culminated in the meeting between Ben-Gurion and Adenauer. The Eichmann trial helped change the two countries’ perception of each other, making it possible to look forward to a different future.

This spring, we marked the 50th anniversary of the establishment of formal diplomatic ties between Germany and Israel on May 12, 1965, a landmark day in the history of both countries. These 50 years have been marked by the rapid development of relationships and contacts in all fields and the burgeoning of a friendship that has become part of the bedrock of international affairs.

Initiated by the pioneering efforts of the scientific community in both countries, German-Israeli ties now cover every possible field of human endeavor and achievement, from scientific research and technological innovation, to youth exchange programs, civic partnerships, municipal exchanges, cultural collaborations, sport, tourism, and so much more.

Today, a quarter of all Israelis have visited Germany, while more than 700,000 young people have participated in bilateral exchange projects. Meanwhile, a trade relationship worth a mere $100 million in 1960 has grown to $7.4 billion in 2013, making Germany Israel’s third most important trading partner, after the United States and China. Israel, in turn, is Germany’s second most important trading partner in the Near and Middle East.

At the governmental level, building upon the deep desire of both peoples, our countries have worked consistently to expand and deepen mutual trust and understanding, as well as the platforms for exchange and interaction that make it possible for these to flourish. Visits at the highest political levels – laden with meaning and symbolism – have developed into regular exchanges, including annual government-to-government consultations and close coordination between trusted partners.

At the core of Adenauer’s and Ben-Gurion’s efforts was the recognition on the German side of the need to demonstrate in the most concrete terms – to itself, to Israel and the Jewish world, and to the broader international community – that the country had detached from its Nazi past and was committed to the responsibility for that past. For Israel, close relations with Germany were a geopolitical imperative for the young state, a matter of securing its future in the family of nations, without forgetting the past.

The unique relationship built by our two nations in the five decades of our ties has helped both countries normalize our international standing, entrench our security and economic well-being and make meaningful contributions to global society. This success is founded upon three key principles: Germany’s ironclad commitment to the security of Israel, for which every Israeli is grateful; our mutual commitment to remembrance and education of the next generation; and our mutual understanding that the well-being of our people requires that we work together to build a safe and prosperous future for all.

German-Israeli relations are built on this dual commitment to the past and the future. A unique trust and a real friendship have been courageously fashioned out of the abyss created by the horrors of the Nazi era. We are proud of what our two countries have achieved together and full of optimism for what lies ahead.

D.J. Schneeweiss is consul general of Israel to Toronto and Western Canada, and Josef Beck is consul general of the Federal Republic of Germany to Vancouver and Western Canada. This article was first published in the Canadian Jewish News and Das Journal. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Pacific Region, and the German Consulate General in Vancouver are hosting a concert on Oct. 29 in celebration of the 50th anniversary year.

Will Israel policy change?

Days before the federal election, the Liberal party ran an ad in the Canadian Jewish News promising, “On Oct. 19, our government will change. What won’t change is Canada’s support for Israel.”

This message effectively echoes what Prime Minister-elect Justin Trudeau told the Jewish Independent in an exclusive interview in July. However, what candidates say and what elected officials do can sometimes differ. When the Liberal party was last in office, their approach to international affairs, particularly during votes at the United Nations, took a “go along to get along” approach that too often saw Canada siding with despotic regimes against Israel.

Jewish and Zionist voters may have thought that Conservative rhetoric on Israel was just that, rhetoric. But very shortly after Stephen Harper became prime minister, the Gaza war erupted and Canada became Israel’s most vocal ally on the international stage. Our country would remain such for nearly a decade.

Critics – inside the Jewish community and beyond – often saw cynical motivations in the Conservative government’s position vis-a-vis Israel. Either it was motivated by political expediency, Jewish votes and financial support or millenarian Christian theology. Harper repeatedly insisted that the government’s policy was motivated simply by the principle of standing by a democratic ally and the Jewish people, nothing more or less.

Whether the decade of Harper’s unapologetic support for Israel is the reason, or whether Canadians have come to the judicious conclusion that Israel is not the malevolent entity that some extremists proclaim, Harper’s view is now mainstream in Canada. So much so that the Liberal party felt obligated to promise that there would be no change in approach. Even the New Democrats, who have a history of harboring some of Canada’s most strident Israel-haters, officially takes a pro-Israel position.

The NDP’s collapse in Monday’s election may change that. It was during the NDP’s weakest period, in the 1990s, that anti-Israel extremists were able to seize the Middle East policy reins of the party. Leader Tom Mulcair steadfastly dragged his party back to a more reasonable position on the topic, but he will certainly be gone soon from the leadership and everything he did and stood for seems likely to be analyzed for a place to lay blame, whether deserved or not.

Of course, outside of a small cluster of voters, Israel and Palestine were not core issues. They were certainly not issues that turned the election. In the end, it was a desire for change and, perhaps, a backfiring of Conservative attack ads and rhetoric that led to the outcome.

The Conservatives blanketed Canada with ads promising us that Trudeau was “just not ready,” which lowered expectations so dramatically that when he was able to hold his own in successive party leaders debates, he could hardly help but exceed the low threshold the Conservatives had created for him among Canadian voters. This, combined with a comparatively positive Liberal campaign and the fact that, in the final days, it was clear that the Liberals, not the NDP, were to be the choice for change, seems to have created the perfect storm that led to the majority government.

We now have the opportunity to see if the Liberal party will indeed stand by its word. Liberals have repeatedly insisted that they are every bit as committed to Israel’s security as the Conservative government. Now they have a chance to prove it. If they do, it will be evidence that support for a Jewish, democratic state, our greatest ally in the region, is not a Conservative value, but a Canadian one.

Longing for past headlines

How I miss those mundane headlines of my youth back in the ’Peg. Nothing more serious than potholes and (the more serious) urban decay of the city centre.

I even miss those mundane headlines of the local papers here in Israel from mere weeks ago. Nothing more serious than the stuck peace process, disputes with Obama, the Iran nuke deal, stray mortar shells from Syria and the like.

I used to love the quiet of those mornings. Sipping my Turkish coffee with the paper spread out in front of me. Catching up on those mundane Middle East headlines before waking the kids up for school, walking the dog and getting ready for work. A typical start to most days probably anywhere in the world.

Well, my world is not typical anymore.

As of late, the headlines blare the new insanity of terrorism in our midst. Random, lone wolf attacks – how random, how lone wolf? – shaking up our beloved routine. No longer so pleasurable reading the morning papers when the headlines shout about multiple terror attacks around the country. Alright, we might expect it in Jerusalem (don’t tell anyone I said that). But for stabbings and car attacks to take place in the cities of Ra’anana or Holon? Even in Tel Aviv. What the heck is going on?!

What is a car attack? It’s when a crazed terrorist rams his car into a crowd of waiting commuters at a local bus stop and then jumps out and starts stabbing the wounded and shocked. Have I disrupted your morning coffee?

This craziness has done more than ruin my beloved morning time. Not sure if it’s just me – I am kind of embarrassed to ask my friends – but I find myself looking over my shoulder much more frequently. Even when exiting the elevator of my condo, I kind of prepare myself for the worst; if I am with my dog, I will let him go out first, just in case (don’t tell my daughter that).

Of course, I worry more about my kids now. They, too, are also frightened. Especially my 14-year-old daughter. Even my son – with all the bravado of a pre-army teen – is, well, let’s just say, concerned.

I picked my daughter up from an after-school event the other day. Much of the activity took place outside. I had terrible visions. Fortunately, the area was more heavily guarded than usual. Not enough for a paranoid parent, but there were a number of police stationed at strategic points. Probably better not to think about it.

Do I want my son walking home from his friend’s this weekend at 3 a.m.? Or meeting his pals at the local ice cream parlor or mall after school? For sure not! Will he? Probably. Life goes on, he says. He just wants to have fun, as do most teens everywhere.

And take my wife. She called me from a business meeting in Tel Aviv today. The city was on high alert. Those dang terrorists again. Major throughways were blocked. Helicopters hovering overhead. The army moving about in full force. The White City in lockdown mode. Stores and malls shut their doors. People stayed inside. Luckily, my wife’s meeting took place at an excellent restaurant; at least she could enjoy a good lunch. Or could she?

Hmm. Looking forward to a quiet morning tomorrow with my Turkish coffee and newspaper; catching up on the insanity taking the country by force, and hoping it doesn’t become mundane.

Bruce Brown, from Winnipeg, lives in Israel with his Sabra wife and children. He actually doesn’t like Turkish coffee – his wife drinks it every morning with her paper – but took the poetic licence to describe himself as drinking the black goo while reading the headlines of his morning paper.

Refugee system doesn’t work

According to David Matas, former president of Canadian Council of Refugees (CCR), changes that have been made to this country’s refugee system within the last few years have made it more difficult to sponsor refugees.

photo - David Matas is a vocal proponent of changing Canada’s immigration system
David Matas is a vocal proponent of changing Canada’s immigration system. (photo from David Matas)

“We set up a sponsorship system in ’78 and it was used in ’79 and ’80 and years around there to bring in the Vietnamese refugees,” said Matas. With the different sponsorship programs developed over the years, mixed with the growing willingness of people to sponsor, visa offices no longer have the capacity to process the amount of sponsorship applications, he said.

“The response of the government, in my view, should have been to increase the resources to match the sponsorship need, but that’s not what happened,” he said. “Instead, what they did is put visa caps on the offices with the biggest numbers, as well as an overall local cap for private sponsorship through sponsorship agreement holders. Then, they divided the global cap amongst the sponsorship agreement holders.”

According to Citizenship and Immigration Canada, “A group of five (G5) is five or more Canadian citizens or permanent residents who have arranged to sponsor a refugee living abroad to come to Canada. All of the group members must be at least 18 years of age and live or have representatives in the area where the refugee will settle.

“The group must agree to give emotional and financial support to the refugee(s) for the full sponsorship period – usually one year.”

They couldn’t cap the G5 applications in the same way as the other, so what they did instead, said Matas, “was insist that anybody who sponsored through group of five had to get prior approval … through the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which is much more overwhelmed and under-funded than the Canadian government.”

The CIC website explains that, effective Oct. 19, 2012, “a G5 may only sponsor applicants who are recognized as refugees by either the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) or a foreign state, unless you are applying to sponsor a Syrian or Iraqi refugee.”

According to Matas, the caps made the lines longer, forcing people to reapply year after year, making it so that anybody who applied had to wait years before sponsorship came through.

“But, obviously when you’re dealing with refugee people marching across Europe, they can’t wait years,” he said. “And, what’s more, there is a direct connection between people leaving and the failure of the sponsorship. Because, if people know they’re putting in an application and, if they hang around, it will succeed, they’ll stay. But, if it’s going to take five or 10 years, there is no point in waiting.

“So, there’s a direct connection between this exodus that we’re seeing now, the failure of the Canadian sponsorship scheme and the absence of any European sponsorship schemes.”

Matas believes that if we had kept our Canadian sponsorship scheme as it was, then we could have advised Europe to do the same and, if Europe had agreed, all this mass migration could have been avoided.

Recent turmoil has simply shined a spotlight on the issue. “It’s just like water pressing against a dam,” said Matas. “In the beginning, it doesn’t have any impact. It’s only when it breaks, or the water overflows the dam, that you notice the dam isn’t working or that the dam is a problem.”

The current situation does not come as a big surprise to him, with visa offices being “under water” for years. But, instead of giving them more “air” (staff), they were further strained by the capping system, which artificially controlled the number of refugees going through the system, regardless of need.

“With the failure of the Canadian system, there wasn’t a picture to show the Europeans how it is done and ask them to do the same,” said Matas. Instead, “We have a system that collapsed. Well, not completely, but it ceased to be functional.”

According to Matas, the caps need to be removed and the system resources increased “to match the private sponsorship, so we don’t have the generosity of Canadians being frustrated.”

In early September, Matas spoke at a public rally about refugees organized by the Kurdish community of Winnipeg.

“The refugee sponsorship and resettlement community has been against these changes from the first minute they were discussed,” he said. “I am not presenting a new idea here. I’m reiterating a stand that has been taken many times in the past by the refugee support, resettlement, integration [and] advocacy community.”

The topic became an election issue, with candidates talking in terms of numbers – but not in terms of fixing the mechanics of the system. However, said Matas, “Presumably, with the numbers will go the capacity to process them.”

While many of the refugees arriving in Europe are Syrian, many are not, said Matas. “While the situation in Syria is terrible, it’s not the only place in the world that’s terrible,” he said.

About the Canadian government’s decision to not have Canadian visa officers apply the UN refugee definition to 10,000 Syrians, thereby allowing these 10,000 to enter Canada on a first-come, first-served basis, Matas said, “The government, with the recent announcement, did nothing to fix the system,” said Matas. “Rather, it acknowledged, indirectly, its failure, by deciding not to apply it to 10,000 random Syrians who may or may not be refugees. As far as I am concerned, that is not much of a response to the global refugee crisis or even, for that matter, the Syrian one.”

Rebeca Kuropatwa is a Winnipeg freelance writer.

Sometimes innocent jailed

Ken Klonsky speaks on “Freeing David McCallum: A Story of Exoneration” at the Outlook fundraiser and social event Sept.27. (photo by Winnifred Tovey)

“Number one, never talk to the police.” The first tip Ken Klonsky gave when asked by the Jewish Independent for the best advice to avoid getting wrongfully convicted by the police. Klonsky – Vancouver author and director of Innocence International, which focuses on righting wrongful convictions produced by false confessions – spoke at Outlook magazine’s annual fundraiser and social event on Sept. 27, which was held at the Peretz Centre for Secular Jewish Culture.

The event began with refreshments. During the initial schmoozing, Faith Jones, a member of the Vancouver Outlook collective, explained that people attending were “from various Jewish activist communities, such as Independent Jewish Voices,” as there is an “overlap with IJV and the Peretz community and the new UBC club, the PJA” (Progressive Jewish Alliance at the University of British Columbia), with topics ranging from food security to Yiddish-language activism.

Jones included that “many other people read Outlook because it offers a voice they don’t hear often” and, within the community, there is a “strong sense that words can change the world.”

Amid stories of the joys of being Jewish and various community and activist involvements, the crowd of about 25 people entered the downstairs room at the Peretz Centre scattered with foldout tables and a slide projecting: “Freeing David McCallum: A Story of Exoneration.”

Klonsky explained “the fraudulent case” of David McCallum, with which he became involved after receiving a letter from McCallum, who had read an interview Klonsky had done for The Sun Magazine with Dr. Rubin Carter, the founder of Innocence International, who passed away April 20, 2014.

“David McCallum was in prison for 19 years when he saw this. What he saw was a friend was reading it somewhere in the library of the prison. He was able to read it, and saw my name connected to it. He wrote to The Sun, asking for my address and he wrote me a letter asking if I would help him with his case. I had nothing to do with the law at that point in my life. I was just basically an observer…. But the letter was so poignant that I decided I was going to get involved.”

When referring to the McCallum confession, Klonsky noted: “We never see the interrogation. If you have a videotape confession, the purpose of it was to get a conviction because the jury sees a videotape confession.”

Klonsky explained, “The police say, when they are in private, they say, and I’m using their language, the reason people talk to us is because they are stupid and they love to tell their stories and that’s how we get them. Now, I know young people, the reason they talk to the police is they think, ‘Well, I haven’t done anything wrong and I’m going to tell them the truth, the truth is going to protect me’… but your truth might not be the truth of the next person they talk to. McCallum and [the late Willie] Stuckey… they were both told, your friend has told us you shot Nathan Blenner, but we know you didn’t do it, we know it was him.”

Elaborating on the mindset of the interrogated individuals, Klonsky said, “Well, I’m going to go home because all I’m saying is what my friend did … neither David nor Willie confessed to the crime. They said they were witnesses to somebody else doing it. They didn’t realize, being children, that if you’re along for the ride, you are an accomplice and it doesn’t matter. You are going to get charged.”

McCallum was exonerated last year, after nearly 29 years in prison.

Klonsky is currently working towards proving the innocence of Atif Rafay and Sebastian Burns. He called the situation “the greatest tragedy I’ve ever ran in to” because “there is no evidence linking them to the actual crime” and, he alleged, their “false confession … was engineered by the RCMP. Sebastian and Atif were the youngest people that have ever been victimized by this routine.” Klonsky continued, “It is a very dangerous thing to do … they know how to set up a young person.”

In responding to a question of the number of wrongful convictions in the United States, Klonksy said, “A minimum of 35,000, that is 1.5% of the 2.3 million people who are in prison in the United States.… This is the mechanism of an oppressive state. I don’t want to paint an unnecessarily dark picture, but it really is pretty dark.” Klonsky added that he considered this a low estimate, as “The New Yorker says five percent, that is, over 110,000 wrongly convicted people. There are only 70 innocence projects in the United States.”

Throughout the talk, comments and questions were shared by the crowd, ranging from experiences in the 1970s of interrogation regarding the activist work of individuals on the way to an anti-apartheid conference, to questions regarding the motivations of police officers pushing these charges and using such tactics.

Gyda Chud, emcee of the event, spoke after Klonsky and highlighted one of his quotes of the evening: “The opposite of evil is not good, it is truth.” She continued to say that, “for truth to prevail, people like yourselves [Klonsky] and those involved in the innocence project work … we must thank you for righting these wrongs.”

Klonsky told the Independent about “a case in Louisiana, a football player, African-American kid. He was accused of writing false banknotes, forged banknotes, and the handwriting didn’t match and we were able to get him off.” The “kid” is now married with four children, said Klonsky. “Sometimes, you do things that you don’t have any idea of the effect you are going to have.”

A fundraising speech by Marion Pollack concluded the event. “Outlook has a strong and proud history of voicing dissenting opinions…. It shows that there is an amazing and wondrous reality of Jewish voices,” she said.

Outlook editor Carl Rosenberg said, “The presentation was good, people seemed to enjoy it…. I think it went well.”

Outlook publishes six times a year and offers both a socialist and humanist lens of social justice, Yiddishkeit, ethical humanism and other issues. For more information, visit outlookmagazine.ca.

Zach Sagorin is a Vancouver freelance writer.

Ensuring fair, legal elections

Kara Mintzberg (B.C. regional director of CJPAC), Ron Laufer, centre, and Michael Schwartz. (photo from Jewish Museum and Archives of British Columbia)

With Canada’s 2015 federal election so closely contested, Jewish community organizations continued to the dying days of the long campaign to try to encourage volunteerism and interest in the electoral process. One such point of community engagement was the talk Observing Democracy by Ron Laufer on Oct. 8 at the Jewish Museum and Archives of British Columbia. Presented in conjunction with the Canadian Jewish Political Affairs Committee (CJPAC), the evening was a chance for people to hear about the challenging conditions under which elections run in a variety of countries around the world.

Laufer works as an election observer and administrator. He has administered private elections locally, in the case of court-ordered elections of nonprofit organizations such as the Guru Nanak Sikh Temple, for example. His international experience includes primarily work for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). He has acted as an election analyst, polling station advisor and deputy head of mission for many international elections. Some of these elections were not particularly democratic while others, although complex in their execution, were perhaps surprisingly democratic in their process.

The Afghan election in 2005 was an example of a logistically complicated election. Not only was the concept of democratic elections new, but also a large proportion of the population is both illiterate and isolated in places unreachable by motorized vehicle.

“We used hundreds of donkeys, camels and horses to transport election materials,” said Laufer. The ballots were sometimes seven broadsheet pages on which voters needed to cast seven votes, no more, no less, in order for the ballot to be valid.

Laufer worked on this election on the ground in Afghanistan for six months in order to help educate the population, organize the ballots and the voting, and assess the results afterward. From the slides he showed, another challenge was keeping the election observers safe. “One trip included two international observers, with about 18 others between the interpreters and the security staff.”

Just a sampling of the countries Laufer has visited to help in some fashion with their elections includes Turkmenistan, India, Nigeria, Iceland, Hungary, Kosovo, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Austria, Tunisia, Malta and Albania. With the exception of Nigeria, these countries are all member states of OSCE. Much of his work as an observer has been for the OSCE, since all member states are required to have observers of their elections. There are 57 states who have signed on to the OSCE, so this keeps Laufer quite busy, considering the length of his missions can range from one week to observe an election day to a long-term mission of up to six months.

Membership in OSCE is, in some cases, a screen for undemocratic states, such as Turkmenistan, and countries like Hungary and Bulgaria, which are becoming increasingly less democratic, said Laufer.

While he offered many examples of countries in which elections are no more than a show put on by the ruling dynasty, he also gave examples of countries whose systems seem to be improving. His fairly recent trip to Sierra Leone was a bright spot. He said, “They went through hell and back and now it feels like they are moving forward. Their election was fairly smooth.” He acknowledged that elections are only a small part of democracy but said that, without properly run elections, democracy cannot be achieved.

After Laufer answered questions from the floor, Michael Schwartz, JMABC coordinator of programs and development, gave a short presentation that was followed by Kara Mintzberg, B.C. regional director of CJPAC, who spoke briefly on the ways in which Jewish Canadians can “punch above our weight” in an election.

As a community, she said, we represent only 1.1% of the Canadian population and are spread out all over the country; only five percent of all ridings in the federal election were potentially influenced by a concentration of Jewish population in those areas. In general,

CJPAC encourages members of the community to volunteer, and facilitates the introduction of a volunteer who signs up with CJPAC to the volunteer’s choice of campaign, thus alerting the candidate to the participation and interest of a Jewish volunteer. This knowledge, it is hoped, will make the candidates more aware of the Jewish and/or pro-Israel presence and support in his or her riding.

Among CJPAC’s activities leading up to the Oct. 19 federal election was an all-candidates meeting on Oct. 1 at Beth Israel Synagogue with more than 500 in attendance. CJPAC’s mission of fostering Jewish and pro-Israel political leadership is not limited to election time.

For more information on the JMABC, visit jewishmuseum.ca. To become involved in political advocacy through CJPAC, visit cpjac.ca.

Michelle Dodek is a freelance writer living in Vancouver.

Expanding the financial field

Michael Susser, left, and Murray Palay of Quadrant Asset Management. (photo from QAM)

The first-ever Quadrant Asset Management Investment Conference was held on Oct. 2 at the University of Manitoba’s James W. Burns Executive Education Centre in downtown Winnipeg. It will be a recurring event, happening at least once every two years, according to Murray Palay of Quadrant Asset Management, which has committed to five conferences in the next 10 years.

Even though the conference was their idea, Palay and business partner Michael Susser were taken aback by how quickly the idea was accepted and how speedily it has taken form – a year ahead of schedule.

Both graduates of the U of M, Palay and Susser wanted to support the Asper School of Business in its desire to hold a conference on behavioral finances.

“We felt it was appropriate to give back, particularly in the area of finance,” said Palay about the decision to support the conference. “But really what we wanted was more academic…. We wanted a program that we could kick-start and that would build over the years.”

Quadrant covers 60% of the cost, with the remaining amount covered by partners in the industry, Tetrem Capital Management and CI Investments. Michael Benarroch, dean of the Asper School, and Dr. Gady Jacoby, the Bryce Douglas Professor in Finance, were involved, and U of M assistant professor of finance Chi Liao organized the conference.

Behavioral economics, or finance, incorporates other factors, such as psychology and emotion, into conventional economic theory – which assumes that people always behave rationally, in a way that maximizes their wealth – in an effort to explain why people often make decisions, or behave in ways, that seem unpredictable or irrational. It does so not just to understand individual behaviors, but their effect on the market at large.

About that general definition, Liao said, “I’m not sure if I agree with the term ‘irrational.’ It may be more measured to say that behavioral finance uses psychology to understand how human behavior influences financial decisions.”

A major question the conference examined is whether or not people make decisions based on emotions as well as financial considerations.

“I had the liberty of choosing the speakers, so I chose people who I thought had very cutting-edge, very talk-able research topics – researchers like Dr. Hersh Shefrin of Santa Clara University, the conference’s keynote speaker,” said Liao. “He was an obvious choice, as he really pioneers the field of behavioral finance.”

Shefrin’s 1999 book Beyond Greed and Fear: Understanding Behavioral Finance and the Psychology of Investing has become a standard text used around the world in behavioral finance courses, as well as being part of the CFA Institute curriculum source material, among others. As it happens, Shefrin is a former Winnipegger and a U of M graduate.

Other conference presenters included Amos Nedler of the University of Western Ontario, who spoke about The Bull of Wall Street: Experimental Analysis of Testosterone and Asset Trading; Rawley Haimer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland on YOLO: Mortality Beliefs and Household Finance Puzzles; Jawad Addoun of the University of Miami, who discussed Local Bankruptcy and Geographic Contagion in Loan Characteristics; and Vicki Bogan of Cornell University on the Importance of Mental Health and Retirement Savings: Confounding Issues with Compounding Interest. Capping off the conference were speakers Scott Hsu of the University of Arkansas, who spoke about Beauty is Wealth: CEO Appearance and Shareholder Value; and Lisa Kramer of the University of Toronto, who discussed Examining the Effect of Social Distance on Financial Decision Making.

“Martin Wayngarten, who heads our investment management group, could have listened to Dr. Shefrin all day,” said Palay. “His explanation of the behavioral aspects, how sentiment and emotions factor in, and how they correlate or don’t to rational investors, this is all stuff that we live and breathe.

“Being on the front lines, we recognize that behavioral issues, such as sentiment and emotion, are very much a part of what we have to deal with. It’s just not all numbers.”

Palay felt some of the other speakers’ topics were a bit more esoteric, such as those discussing testosterone in traders, but still very interesting.

One major takeaway for Palay from the conference was a newfound understanding of the nature and depth academics go through to prove their theories through clinical studies.

“We would have never really seen this kind of a presentation if not for Jacoby and Liao,” said Palay. “The presentations you would get industry-wide would be a lot more practically oriented and more numbers-oriented.”

In addition to what he learned at the conference, Palay was also glad to have had the opportunity to spend time with his son, who is a student in Liao’s class, as the whole class came to the conference.

“I should mention, by the way, the bias I have in terms of how good Dr. Shefrin was,” said Palay, noting that Shefrin is his wife’s second cousin. Palay learned of this connection shortly before the conference, when sharing some information with his wife, Ivy Kopstein (of Winnipeg’s Jewish Child and Family Service), about the then-upcoming conference and the keynote speaker. Kopstein said Palay must invite Shefrin home over for dinner.

Rebeca Kuropatwa is a Winnipeg freelance writer.

First-ever official visit

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, left, welcomes President Pranab Mukherjee to the Knesset. (photo from Israeli Prime Minister’s Office via jns.org)

In the first-ever official visit by an Indian head of state to Israel, President Pranab Mukherjee arrived in Jerusalem last week to discuss a wide range of issues including the negotiation of an extensive free-trade agreement, bilateral cooperation in agricultural and other technologies, and expanded counter-terrorism coordination.

“India attaches high importance to its relationship with Israel, a relationship which has taken great strides in the last few years,” said Mukherjee.

Israeli President Reuven Rivlin described the visit as deepening “the friendship between our states in the fields of economy, science, medicine and agriculture.”

Relations between India and Israel have recently undergone a major shift. In 1947, India voted against Israel joining the United Nations and did not establish official relations with Israel until 1991. This was mainly out of concern over how this would affect India’s diplomatic relations with Muslim countries, as well as India itself hosting “the world’s second-largest Muslim population in raw numbers,” according to a 2013 report by the Pew Research Centre.

Nevertheless, this recent development demonstrates how ties between the two countries have expanded considerably since then. The most recent example of a warming of relations between the countries came when India decided to abstain from the UN Human Rights Council vote condemning Israel during the 2014 Gaza conflict. This was a significant policy change, since India for decades was a leading force for nations that automatically voted against Israel in all international forums.

At the same time, the Press Trust of India recently quoted Mukherjee as saying, “India’s traditional support to the Palestinian cause remains steadfast and unwavering while we pursue strong relations with Israel. Our bilateral relations [with Israel] are independent of our relations with Palestine.”

During Mukherjee’s visit, India and Israel signed a double taxation avoidance pact as well as a number of accords promoting cultural and technological exchange between the two nations. Mukherjee and his delegation reserved 70 rooms in Jerusalem’s King David Hotel and another 30 rooms in the nearby Dan Panorama. Celebrity chef Reena Pushkarna was hired by the King David Hotel to prepare Indian dishes for the delegation and some 300 members of Israel’s Indian community.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu shares a very warm relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and referred to him as his friend multiple times when hosting Mukherjee at the Knesset. The prime ministers earlier this year congratulated each other on their respective electoral victories, with Modi making a point of doing so in Hebrew and Netanyahu expressing his good wishes in Hindi. Mukherjee extended an invitation to Netanyahu to become the second Israeli prime minister to visit India, the first being former prime minister Ariel Sharon, who visited India in 2003.

Further illustrating the growing ties between the two countries, Israel is India’s second-largest arms supplier after Russia. But relations are not limited to military ties and a mutual commitment to fight terrorism. Vijeta Uniyal, founder of Indian Friends of Israel, described how Israel’s commitment to developing the desert “extends to the Thar Desert, Gangetic Plain and Wetlands of Bengal.”

Bilateral trade between Israel and India grew from $200 million in 1992 to $4.39 billion in 2013, with both countries importing and exporting precious stones, metals, machinery, minerals, plastics, chemical products, textiles, agricultural products, and transport equipment.

Ties between the two countries are expected to strengthen considerably as a result of Mukherjee’s visit, signifying the solidification of a strong alliance between India and Israel.

Bradley Martin is a fellow for the Salomon Centre for American Jewish Thought and research assistant for the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.

Eatery’s unique offer

Recent visitors to the Hummus Bar at the M Mall in Kfar Vitkin, near Netanya. The eatery is offering a 50% deal on its hummus for Jews and Arabs who share a table and eat together. (photo from facebook.com/Mhumusbar)

An Israeli eatery is making headlines across the globe for its latest menu deal: 50% off any hummus dishes served to tables seating Jews and Arabs together.

Breaking bread together throughout history has always been an act of sharing and reconciliation. So, in response to the latest wave of terror attacks and incitement in Israel, Hummus Bar at the M Mall in Kfar Vitkin, near the coastal city of Netanya, posted a Facebook call for customers to share pita and hummus together – and pay less if they do.

The Oct. 13 post reads: “Scared of Arabs? Scared of Jews? At our place, we don’t have Arabs! But we also don’t have Jews … we’ve got human beings! And genuine, excellent Arab hummus! And great Jewish falafel! And a free refill for every serving of hummus, whether you’re Arab, Jewish, Christian, Indian, etc.”

Speaking to local media, manager Kobi Tzafrir said there were a number of people taking up the offer from his restaurant, which is famous for its chickpea spread. But, he added, the short post also fueled interest from around Israel and the world.

Hummus eateries are countless in Israel, yet Tzafrir reported that visitors have come from around the country to show support for the Hummus Bar’s message of tolerance and camaraderie.

“If there’s anything that can bring together these peoples, it’s hummus,” Tzafrir told the Times of Israel.

Hummus Bar’s Facebook page continues to garner positive posts from abroad, as well.

“Love the idea of bringing people together with food! Love and food conquers all!!” writes Urbian Fitz-James from the Netherlands.

“I think it is amazing what you guys are doing to unite people!” posts Josh Friesen from Canada.

“Thank you. This is marvelous,” writes Samir Kanoun from Turkey.

There are other messages of support – including from the United Kingdom, the United States and Japan – on the eatery’s Facebook page.

Hummus, of course, is a national dish in Israel, from the point of view of both Muslim and Jewish communities in the country. The International Day of Hummus even began here.

And it’s not just hummus that brings tolerance and coexistence. There are also Arab-Jewish owned eateries serving up coexistence, including Maxim restaurant in Haifa and Bouza ice cream in Tarshiha.

Viva Sarah Press reports on the creativity, innovation and ingenuity taking place in Israel. Her work has been published by international media outlets including Israel Television, CNN, Reuters, Time Out and the Jerusalem Post. Israel21C is a nonprofit educational foundation with a mission to focus media and public attention on the 21st-century Israel that exists beyond the conflict. For more, or to donate, visit israel21c.org.