antisemitism

Hateful messages intensify

The Douglas Park area is being covered with hateful chalk and stickers. (photo by Joshua)

A residential pocket near Vancouver’s Oak Street corridor has become the site of an increasingly bitter battle over political messaging, public space and antisemitism. At the centre of it is one Jewish resident who says his neighbourhood – and his sense of safety – has been upended by a neighbour’s anti-Israel graffiti campaign.

Joshua, who asked that his surname be omitted, said one particular individual began tearing down hostage posters shortly after the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks. The same individual was filmed tearing posters down in front of a group of community members outside Schara Tzedeck before a commemorative event a year after 10/7.

The Vancouver Police Department’s diversity unit initially advised Joshua to stop putting up pro-Israel or hostage posters and allow the city to “neutralize” the space to de-escalate tensions. He complied for several months, he said, but anti-Israel messages only intensified. He has been in discussions with police since last June; he worries that the situation will escalate as the weather improves.

photo - Over the past six to seven months, chalked and adhesive messages have appeared across sidewalks, utility boxes, crosswalk placards and construction signage. — Over the past six to seven months, chalked and adhesive messages have appeared across sidewalks, utility boxes, crosswalk placards and construction signage. *(photo by Joshua)*

The same individual has become a near-constant presence in the area, waving a Palestinian flag at busy intersections such as Oak and 12th, usually at rush hour and sometimes for hours at a time. According to Joshua, who admits he has done his share of flag-waving as a regular participant at City Hall rallies for Israeli hostages, the anti-Israel activism has gone far beyond flag-waving.

Over the past six to seven months, chalked and adhesive messages have appeared across sidewalks, utility boxes, crosswalk placards and construction signage. While some read “Gaza” or “Free Gaza,” the messaging has grown more aggressive, including “Zionism is terrorism” and “Death to the IDF,” sometimes accompanied by an inverted triangle associated with Hamas imagery and implying terrorist targets.

The most recent messaging, Joshua said, is “Stop Israel Sadistic Cult” and equating the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with Israel – “ICErael.”

Joshua said he has documented the activity extensively, as well as the antisemitic rhetoric on the individual’s social media, and filed numerous 311 complaints with the City of Vancouver. If graffiti appears on city property, the city contracts a third-party removal company. But response times range from 48 hours to more than a week – sometimes longer, Joshua said. In one park, spray-painted slogans remained for more than three weeks before being removed.

Because chalk is temporary and easily reapplied, the individual can rewrite messages almost as soon as they are washed away.

Frustrated by what he sees as municipal inaction on targeted harassment and hate speech, Joshua has purchased an 11-litre backpack sprayer and walks the neighbourhood with water and scrub brushes to remove the chalk.

According to Joshua, the individual leaving the messages has “doxed” at least six area residents, sharing their personal information online, including their images and their licence plates. He posted Joshua’s first and last names and the cross street where he lives, with the comment, “Be sure to say hi and other things if you see him.”

Someone wrote Joshua’s full name on a public sign along with the words “IOF soldier” – IOF meaning “Israeli Occupying Forces” – and he has been accused online and in person of serving in the IDF, which he has not. In one incident, a woman confronted and filmed him at 7 a.m., shouting accusations and telling him, “We know where you live” and calling him an “IOF baby-killer.”

Joshua reported that encounter, as well as the doxing incidents, to police. Officers took a statement but indicated their options were limited, citing freedom of expression, Joshua told the Independent.

Meanwhile, the impact on the neighbourhood is tangible. A local rabbi told him that one Jewish family moved away because their children felt unsafe seeing hostile messages near their home and synagogue.

Joshua has removed his name from his building directory out of concern for his family’s safety. Confrontations and cleanup efforts are framed online as attempts by “Zionists” to silence dissent.

Within the Jewish community, there is debate about how to respond. Some have suggested stopping cleanup efforts in hopes that broader community frustration will grow. Joshua believes a coordinated, multi-block volunteer cleanup effort – involving Jews and non-Jews – is the only way to demonstrate that the issue is about shared civic space, not a private feud. He has set up an online group at facebook.com/groups/cleaningupdouglaspark.

photo - Because chalk is temporary and easily reapplied, the individual can rewrite messages almost as soon as they are washed away — Because chalk is temporary and easily reapplied, the individual can rewrite messages almost as soon as they are washed away. *(photo by Joshua)*

Residents should not have to navigate obscenities and hostile rhetoric on sidewalks and parks, said Joshua, and he questions whether the city would respond differently if racist or homophobic messages appeared in neighbourhoods with significant populations of the targeted communities.

This sort of conflict, in different permutations, is taking place in cities across Canada and worldwide. In Toronto, anti-Israel protesters have routinely set up demonstrations in areas with concentrations of Jewish residents and even marched through residential areas. Many Jews and their allies have repeatedly asked why there do not seem to be consequences for perpetrators of such deliberate harassment and intimidation.

That question was the subject of a Feb. 10 webinar with legal and policing experts, organized by the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, titled Why Can’t There Be More Consequences?, which was moderated by Richard Marceau, CIJA’s senior vice-president and general counsel.

Mark Sandler, the chair of the Alliance of Canadians Combatting Antisemitism, and Rochelle Direnfeld, that organization’s senior criminal counsel, have been delivering educational modules to police, making them aware of tools they have to enforce existing laws. Training for prosecutors is also necessary, Sandler noted.

Law enforcement and justice officials need to be able to recognize antisemitism and how it manifests, said Sandler.

Direnfeld provided examples, noting that average police officers cannot, for example, be expected to understand a sign that appeared at one rally: it read “Israel’s only friend is the Gharqad tree.” This is a reference to a Muslim religious verse about the only tree that would protect Jews from Muslims at the end-times.

Even the nuances of more seemingly straightforward messages – “From the river to the sea,” “Globalize the intifada” and “By any means necessary” – may not be immediately evident to those who are not engaged with the narrative, panelists said.

Sandler said police have been asking for sharper tools and the federal government is responding with Bill C-9. (See jewishindependent.ca/new-bill-targets-hate-crimes.) Panelists noted that existing laws against mischief, intimidation and unlawful assembly should suffice in cases where protesters are blocking roads or crowding into shopping malls.

Hank Idsinga, a retired inspector with the Toronto Police Service, said insufficient staffing can be used as an excuse for inaction, but this is not an appropriate response. “Police need to be prepared for various scenarios,” he said.

On the other hand, said Joseph Neuberger, chair of the Canadian Jewish Law Association, Jewish community members need to know what is and is not acceptable within the bounds of the law. Chanting allegations of genocide is protected speech, he said, whether or not the allegations are false.

Neuberger is enthusiastic about components of C-9 that would criminalize intimidation around and obstruction of cultural and religious spaces. The bill is in committee stage.

The full webinar is available at youtube.com/watch?v=kAj_D0gREIM.

Wrong choice to host Piker

As a political science student at the University of British Columbia, I believe fiercely in free expression, open debate and intellectual diversity. I have defended the idea that universities should be places where ideas are rigorously challenged, interrogated and tested against competing visions of the world. But debating controversial ideas is not the same as giving a platform to only one side. It’s not the same as presenting individuals whose speech crosses the line into hate and dehumanization.

Universities are not neutral stages without consequence. They are institutions that make choices, and those choices carry weight. The people a university decides to platform is never incidental. It is a statement of values. It shapes the tone of campus discourse. It sends a message about whose voices are elevated and whose concerns are dismissed. And, in moments of deep political tension, it can determine whether students feel genuinely safe, respected and included, or alienated in their own community.

It is because of these reasons that I am deeply concerned that UBC decided to include Hasan Piker in its America First, America Alone? lecture series.

The Phil Lind Initiative claims to explore global politics in an age of uncertainty. That is an important and timely goal. But the credibility of such a series depends on the seriousness and integrity of its speakers. When a university invites someone whose public commentary has repeatedly included inflammatory, dehumanizing or violent remarks, it undermines the very academic rigour it claims to promote.

US Democratic Congressman Ritchie Torres warned about the amplification of antisemitism on Twitch and specifically in reference to Piker: “Since October 7th, there has been an explosion of Jew-hatred on social media platforms,” Torres wrote. “Hasan Piker has emerged as the poster child for the post-October 7th outbreak of antisemitism in America.”

This is not about disagreement. Universities should host controversial thinkers. They should invite people whose views make us uncomfortable. But there is a difference between complex ideological debate and rhetoric that outright promotes violence, questions the suffering of victims and/or uses language that dehumanizes and endangers entire communities, including marginalized groups.

Piker is not merely a “polarizing” internet personality. He has built a brand around extremist commentary, from justifying 9/11 to repeated attacks on Israel and Zionism that go beyond policy criticism to attacking Jewish identity and calling for the destruction of Israel.

He has compared Zionism to Nazism, a comparison that is as morally distorted as it is historically indefensible. This kind of talk isn’t political critique, it’s erasure. Piker takes Zionism, a movement rooted in Jewish survival and self-determination, and distorts it into the Nazis’ attempt to annihilate us. These are not accidental slips of the tongue. They reflect a consistent pattern of language that crosses from criticism into dehumanization.

Piker has been temporarily suspended from Twitch multiple times for violating community guidelines related to hateful or abusive speech. That matters. Even if someone wants to defend his right to speak, we can’t pretend his public record reflects thoughtful, careful debate.

His style is built on provocation – on pushing buttons and escalating outrage – because that’s the business model of social media. The louder and more inflammatory the take, the more clicks, the more engagement, the more money. Academic spaces are supposed to prioritize nuance, depth and serious inquiry, not viral moments designed to generate cash and controversy.

For Jewish students on UBC’s campus, this isn’t some abstract political theory debate. Since Oct. 7, 2023, campus has felt different. Heavier. As antisemitism and openly hostile rhetoric have increased, many of us feel more exposed than we did before. I know I do. It has changed how openly we express our identity, how we participate in class discussions and how comfortable we feel in spaces that once felt safe. Friendships have been strained. Conversations are more tense.

So, when the university invites a speaker who has compared Zionism to Nazism, brushes aside concerns about antisemitism and treats Jewish self-determination as inherently illegitimate, it is difficult to believe this is simply about “intellectual curiosity.” It does not feel neutral. It feels dismissive. It feels like our fears and lived experiences are being minimized. More than anything, it feels like no one is listening.

UBC often speaks about inclusion, safety and belonging. Those commitments are not tested when we invite speakers everyone agrees with. They are tested when we decide whether “academic freedom” should be used as a shield for rhetoric that alienates vulnerable students.

To be clear: academic freedom protects speech from censorship, but it does not obligate a university to amplify any individual voice. Universities curate speakers all the time. They reject invitations. They choose who represents them.

Some will argue that silencing controversial figures sets a dangerous precedent. I agree that censorship is not the answer. But accountability is not censorship. Standards are not censorship. Students have every right to question whether this invitation reflects the kind of discourse a serious institution should highlight.

At the least, UBC has a responsibility to ensure ideological balance in the series. But where are the scholars who defend liberal democracy from the populist left and right? Where are the voices that articulate the Jewish experience of antisemitism in progressive spaces? Where is the intellectual diversity that the series claims to value?

Universities should be raising the nuance of conversation, not bringing the loudest parts of internet culture into serious academic spaces. Piker already has millions of followers. He did not need UBC to amplify him. The real question is whether our university’s stage should have been used to legitimize Piker’s approach – I don’t think it should have been.

As students, we deserve better.

We deserve debate that is rigorous, not reactionary. We deserve speakers who challenge our ideas without dehumanizing entire communities in the process. We deserve administrators who understand that inclusion cannot be selective.

Inclusion cannot mean protecting some students while asking others to tolerate hostility in the name of “dialogue.” If UBC is serious about equity, then protecting Jewish students from being dehumanized should not be controversial. It should be common practice.

If views like Piker’s were directed at almost any other marginalized group, there would have been immediate outrage, with statements, listening sessions and other institutional responses. There would have been no confusion about whether they crossed a line. So why was it different when it came to Jewish students?

UBC’s brand is built on excellence, inclusion and global leadership. Excellence requires discernment. Inclusion requires sensitivity. Leadership requires moral clarity.

The decision to host Hasan Piker fell short on all three values.

Avigail Feldman is a fourth-year student at the University of British Columbia, with a bachelor’s in political science and going into a master’s of management. She is also a StandWithUs Canada Emerson Fellow.

Attack on Jewish kids

Fresh red lines have been crossed by anti-Israel agitators in Canada. These developments should alarm everyone who cares about civil society, diversity and safe spaces for children.

A coalition of antizionist groups is pressuring provincial camping associations to strip accreditation from Jewish summer camps on the basis that the camps integrate Zionism into their programming.

These opponents accuse the camps of politicizing Jewish summer camps, but the irony here is that it is the activists who are doing the politicizing. The land and the state of Israel are integral to Jewish identity. They deserve to be part of a holistic Jewish experience – camping, or any other cultural undertaking – for Jews of any age.

A primary complaint, it seems, is that Jewish camps often employ young Israelis, including (as almost all Israelis are) veterans of the Israel Defence Forces. They take it a step further, though – and this is a lesson about the insidious strategy behind the “genocide” libel.

The term genocide, we should not need to note, carries a strict definition under international law and no competent international court has made such a finding against Israel. While the term is thrown about with abandon, including by erstwhile legitimate nongovernmental organizations, this is, at best, a contested area of discourse.

It might have seemed that the widespread use of the term “genocide” was a means to undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. It is much more than that.

Having planted the flag of “genocide,” antizionist groups are now moving from this presumed “fact” to employing it as a weapon on new fronts to attack Jewish identity, culture and security worldwide – the first, apparently, being Jewish kids’ summer camp experiences.

The activists targeting Jewish camps are accusing them of endorsing “genocide.” The campaign is part of a broader effort to cast Jewish institutions as unacceptable in public life if they are connected, even tangentially, to anything associated with Israel.

Jewish summer camps have nothing to do with military strategy in Gaza or legislative decisions in Jerusalem. They have everything to do with building community, preserving language and tradition, fostering positive identity and belongingness, and providing childhood experiences that many Canadian Jews cherish and remember fondly for decades. They are also sources of relationships – dating and marriages included – for many in the Jewish world.

And that, of course, may be the point.

The anti-Israel activists know the centrality of Israel to Jewish identity. To undermine Israel, they seem to have concluded, it is necessary to attack the foundations of Jewish identity in Canada and around the world. Starting with kids.

The attempt to weaponize accreditation – a marker of safety, quality and regulatory compliance – threatens to blur the boundary between political disputes and Canada’s multicultural harmony. Provincial camping associations are rightly focused on ensuring that camps meet health, safety and staffing standards. They are not forums for arbitrating geopolitical grievances.

What is most disturbing about this campaign is not merely its target, but its implications. If any cultural institution can be penalized because it maintains a connection to a nation or narrative that some (rightly or wrongly) find objectionable, then no group is safe from the imposition of political litmus tests in civic life. Imagine if every cultural organization that used Russian, Hausa, Arabic, Urdu or Mandarin were accused of endorsing every foreign government’s actions. The corrosive effect on Canadian pluralism would be profound.

To their credit, camping associations in Ontario and Manitoba have responded appropriately. We await similar expressions from the BC Camps Association.

Jewish camp leaders, Jewish federations and others have rightly pushed back, calling the campaign discriminatory and cautioning that it risks undermining the welfare and safety of Jewish children. Their voices deserve amplification. Protecting our children’s right to participate in enriching experiences free from political and antisemitic harassment is not a partisan concern. It is a foundational element of a just, inclusive society.

In defending Jewish summer camps, we are defending more than campfires and games. We are defending a principle: that identity – religious, cultural or ethnic – must not be a basis for discrimination in Canada.

To suggest that Jewish camps should lose their accreditation because they use Hebrew words around a campfire, celebrate Jewish holidays or employ staff who have served in the Israeli military is to redefine discrimination as activism.

Targeting Jewish summer camps for their cultural identity is an assault on the very foundations of multicultural community life.

Tackling antizionism head on

Adam Louis-Klein was deep in the Amazon on Oct. 7, 2023 – three months into fieldwork with an Indigenous community, living without any internet or phone contact. Two days later, in a local town, he reconnected with the outside world and saw the news. Then he saw something else: how people in his professional orbit were responding to the atrocities perpetrated against Israelis.

“I spoke up and said I stood in solidarity with Israelis, and spoke up against the bigotry I was already seeing, and I was quickly, basically purged,” he told the Independent.

photo - Adam Louis-Klein — Adam Louis-Klein *(photo by Adam Louis-Klein)*

Louis-Klein, a McGill University PhD candidate who now lives in Westchester, NY, describes a swift loss of “all my social and professional contacts.” But that didn’t stop him from expressing his views. He felt an obligation, he said, to offer a Jewish voice that speaks the same language as the academy and the left, especially in response to antizionism.

“As I wrote more about it, I think my understanding of antizionism got sharper and sharper,” he said. “I got more focused on antizionism itself as an ideology, not just antisemitism.”

That shift – treating antizionism as something that should be named and confronted directly, rather than in the context of its relationship with antisemitism – has become central to his work. In his view, focusing on antisemitism as the lens can become a rhetorical trap, positioning antizionism as a respectable political position.

His ideas went viral.

“I was posting on Facebook and people kind of liked the little mini-essays I wrote,” he said. He launched a blog at the Times of Israel, then began writing for other outlets. “One thing led to another.”

The visibility has accelerated in recent months, he said. Movement Against Antizionism (MAAZ), the organization he founded and leads, has also caught on rapidly.

People found his Times of Israel blog and were on the lookout for voices explicitly naming and confronting antizionism, he said. The people he works with have helped refine his language. Looking back at his writing over a short span, he said, “I already see a kind of progression whereby I get sharper at naming antizionism and making that the focus.”

The backlash was instantaneous.

“People tried to shut me down,” he said. “There were fake complaints against me … they would call my advisor, they would call the anthropology department to try and get me expelled.” He said he was removed from WhatsApp groups, a book club he organized collapsed, a presentation he organized on the Soviet roots of antizionist rhetoric was canceled without explanation.

He described a hardened ideological environment.

“I was told that no one would discuss with me whether it’s a genocide,” he said. “The genocide libel was not something that could be discussed.”

While the university environment may be a hotbed of antizionism generally, anthropology is particularly hostile, he said.

Early anthropology was connected to colonial infrastructures and later efforts to reckon with that legacy have put “settler-colonialism” at the centre of the discipline, Louis-Klein said. In his telling, the field has “swallowed wholesale” a narrative in which “Israelis are these evil white settlers.” He no longer sees a future in the discipline. “It’s not a field that Jews who do not profess loyalty to the antizionist movement … can exist in at this point,” he said.

Louis-Klein, who grew up mostly in Seattle and who spent time in Whistler growing up, holds a bachelor’s degree in philosophy from Yale University, a master’s in philosophy from the New School, a master’s in anthropology from the University of Chicago, and is nearing completion of his PhD at McGill.

With academic doors closing in front of him, he sees a new possibility: the creation of a serious intellectual space for the study of antizionism itself.

“There is now a movement to try and create an academic space for critical studies of antizionism,” he said, adding that he wants to “provide an intellectual framework for treating antizionism as an objective study, as something that we can critically understand, break down, trace its genealogy, understand how it functions in the present as its own phenomenon.”

In his view, the public conversation must change for practical reasons, not just academic ones.

“We cannot fight anti-Jewish violence today without naming and opposing antizionism,” he said. “The vast majority of anti-Jewish violence is directly motivated by antizionism.”

Even attacks rooted in “more classical” right-wing antisemitism now unfold within “the overall hysteria that has been created by antizionism since Oct. 7 and the genocide libel,” he said. Besides, he argued, as a strategy, equating antizionism and antisemitism is failing.

“Calling antizionism antisemitism is also not working,” he said. “We’re assuming that if we just say it’s antisemitic, a number of institutional levers will set into place Holocaust memory, and it’ll shut it down.”

But that’s not happening, he said, “because antizionism doesn’t look like classical antisemitism.”

Instead, he thinks people need to be taught what antizionism is.

“You can’t just say it’s antisemitic,” he said. “You have to explain to people what antizionism is as an ideology, and you have to stop treating it as political critique.”

He draws a distinction between debating Zionism and describing antizionism as a social phenomenon.

“Talking about antizionism also doesn’t mean … explaining how Zionism is actually good. It goes far beyond that. It means explaining how antizionism is a hate movement,” he said.

“It’s a mob movement,” he added. “There are lynch mobs … people who hunt down Zionists and try and shame and humiliate them.… They vandalize buildings, they smash windows.”

MAAZ delivers training in different sectors, including education, business, arts and journalism, designed to help people understand antizionism and “to fight back and to give people a language.”

“We really think naming and labeling is the way to defeat it,” he said.

Louis-Klein described teaching people to “maintain boundaries,” and to label recurring accusations – “colonizer libel, apartheid libel, genocide libel” – as antizionist so that Jews and allies stop feeling obligated to defend their legitimacy and instead “hold antizionism to account.”

The organization also includes legal thinking, with scholar Rona Kaufman developing a legal concept of antizionist discrimination.

Beyond training, MAAZ emphasizes public education. Louis-Klein encourages people to explore the organization’s website (movementagainstantizionism.org), which he describes as “kind of like a museum … a curation where you enter inside of the whole history of antizionism and its different forms and the different libels.”

He emphasized a point he sees as essential for long-term success: expanding beyond the Jewish community.

“Having non-Jewish people who can get behind that … will just be the key,” he said. “That will be the thing that catapults it to the next stage.”

New bill targets hate crimes

At rallies held across Canada after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and during the Israel-Hamas war, there were protesters holding antisemitic signs and hollering antisemitic slogans. Bill C-9 would amend the Criminal Code to strengthen existing hate-related offences. (photo from Canadian Handbook on the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism)

Parliament resumed last month after its winter break and one of the bills on the agenda for the new session could have significant repercussions for Jewish Canadians.

While Jewish organizations welcome most components of the proposed legislation, the most important message that its passage would send is that political leaders take hate crimes seriously, according to Jewish organizational spokespeople who were interviewed by the Independent.

Bill C-9 would amend the Criminal Code to strengthen existing hate-related offences. But legal experts and advocacy agencies admit there is no quick fix for the explosion of antisemitic rhetoric and violence in Canada and around the world.

The proposed legislation, which is now in committee stage, would create new offences for intimidation and for intentional obstruction of access to religious or cultural institutions, schools, daycares, seniors residences and cemeteries. It would also create a new hate-crime offence tied to crimes motivated by “hatred,” add a definition of “hatred” and create an offence related to publicly displaying certain hate or terrorist symbols in ways that promote hatred. If passed, the law would remove the requirement of provincial attorneys general to approve police-laid charges and instead place that decision on Crown prosecutors.

In a rare joint statement in December, five national organizations – the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre, B’nai Brith Canada, the Alliance of Canadians Combatting Antisemitism, and Canadian Women Against Antisemitism – welcomed the bill. They also called for additional steps, including increased funding for community security and closing gaps in the country’s anti-terror laws. The statement further called for existing laws to be more vigorously and consistently enforced.

Despite the advocacy of community voices, and existing and proposed legislation, many Canadian Jews feel that antisemitic rhetoric and acts are getting worse, not better, and that few of the actions taken to stanch them are having the desired outcomes.

In British Columbia, for example, Vancouver police recommended charges against Charlotte Kates, a Vancouver resident who publicly called the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks “brave and heroic” and who led a rally in chants of “Long live October 7.” The recommendation has been on the desk of BC’s attorney general for more than 18 months. In an interview with the Independent late last year, Premier David Eby committed to providing an update on the case. Despite repeated follow-ups, the premier’s office has not yet responded with an explanation as to why no action has been forthcoming.

The Independent interviewed leaders in Jewish advocacy organizations, and a clear consensus emerged that expressions of political will may be as important as any particular piece of existing or new legislation.

While many people may feel things are on a downward trajectory, Dylan Hanley, senior vice-president, public affairs, for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, noted some areas of progress. For example, though the situation on Canadian university campuses is not perfect, he said, there have been improvements in terms of how administrations respond to problems.

Hanley also said credit should be given where due, and intelligence agencies and law enforcement have, crucially, prevented several potential disasters from happening in Canada. More must be done, however, including additional immigration screening around connections to terrorist groups, and maintaining vigilance around foreign interference in politics and civil society, he said.

Further investigation is required around possible foreign support for domestic agitators, said Hanley. Although there is no solid evidence, there has been much speculation about external funding of anti-Israel activities, especially given the apparent preparedness of domestic groups immediately after the 10/7 attacks, he said.

“Has anybody shown us the smoking gun?” Hanley asked. “No. Do we suspect at least that there are foreign funds going into some of these campaigns? Sure.”

Ensuring government support for community security is an ongoing issue, as funding is cyclical. But Hanley noted that, while this support is necessary, it is also a response to the problem, which requires leadership and action that gets at the root of the issue – radicalization combined with a major increase in antisemitism.

The proposed changes contained in Bill C-9 are largely a step in the right direction in his view, but Hanley says no single approach can eliminate the underlying problem of antisemitism and hatred.

“None of these things are silver bullets on their own,” he said. “And we don’t want to raise community expectations that there is a silver bullet here.”

The Jewish community is feeling very alone, he said, and is looking for someone to fix the problem. The consensus among all those interviewed for this story is that political leadership must set the tone.

“I think the biggest piece – and we deliver this message at every level of government in every interaction – is we need to see clear leadership on this,” Hanley said. “We need our leaders to come out and say, clearly, this isn’t OK. You can’t target communities in Canada because of anger or frustrations from conflicts going on overseas, and what starts with our community isn’t going to end with our community.”

photo - Even before Oct. 7, 2023, antisemitism was an increasing problem in Canada – this photo comes from a Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs’ post about Ontario’s 2022 election. A lack of political will at all levels of government is one reason the problem continues to worsen — Even before Oct. 7, 2023, antisemitism was an increasing problem in Canada – this photo comes from a Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs’ post about Ontario’s 2022 election. A lack of political will at all levels of government is one reason the problem continues to worsen. *(photo from cija.ca)*

Jewish Canadians are frustrated with what appears like constant buck-passing, he said.

“The university says, ‘Well, actually, this is the police’s job.’ The police say, ‘Well, you know, we haven’t gotten any political cover from the city.’ The city says it’s the province. The province says it’s the feds,” Hanley explained. “And then you go around in the circle again and the feds say, ‘We don’t get involved in law enforcement in individual cases.’”

Aron Csaplaros, BC regional manager for B’nai Brith Canada, echoed several of Hanley’s comments and lauded the Bill C-9 provision that would create a law that most Canadians probably think already exists.

“In Canada, we do not right now have a freestanding hate crime offence,” he said. Instead, the Criminal Code prohibits wilful promotion of hatred and public incitement of hatred. At present, acts motivated by hate are usually prosecuted under general offences like mischief or assault, while bias or hate can be treated only as an aggravating factor at sentencing.

With Bill C-9, prosecutors would be able to lay a specific hate-crime charge that makes bias or hatred part of the offence itself. This means that prosecutions can centre explicitly on antisemitic or hateful motivation, and sentencing may be more severe because the hate element would be built into the crime rather than treated as secondary.

Bill C-9 would also create a prohibition against harassing people outside religious institutions.

“Everyone has the right to freedom of expression and protest,” said Csaplaros. “But, at the same time, those rights cannot come at the expense of the freedom of others.”

His views about the way things are handled – or not – are similar to Hanley’s.

“I think there’s a lot of passing the buck and finger-pointing going on between various levels of law enforcement and government,” said Csaplaros.

Like the other spokespeople the Independent interviewed, Csaplaros said he is not criticizing law enforcement.

“Law enforcement really needs to be empowered. They need to ensure that officers are using all of the resources available to them,” he said. “That means that all levels of government – federal, municipal, provincial – need to support law enforcement by ensuring clear directives and ensuring that they have the mandate.”

Officers on the frontline may need more awareness of the laws and the extent or limitations of those laws, he said. Crown prosecutors and the

judiciary might benefit from refreshers as well, he added.

Education is key, he said, not just for people at the frontline of law enforcement but for all Canadians. B’nai Brith is calling for a national digital literacy campaign so that all people, but especially young people, have the tools to be able to differentiate fact from fiction, disinformation from legitimate disagreement.

Jaime Kirzner-Roberts, senior director of policy and advocacy for Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre, said education is a core mandate of her organization. In this context, she has seen how the realities facing Jewish Canadians are questioned or discounted.

The centre educates a broad range of audiences, including law enforcement, government officials and civil society leaders. Almost invariably, she said, when trainers show statistics of antisemitic hate crimes, hands shoot up in the audience to contest the numbers, to question the methodologies or otherwise call into doubt the prevalence of attacks on Jews. Part of this, she believes, is due to the pervasiveness of the myth of the “powerful Jew.”

“This sort of racist understanding of the Jew has compromised the ability of the society to really understand that, in fact, we are the targets,” she said.

Even when people are not challenging the evidence, said Kirzner-Roberts, there seems to be a fundamental disconnect between approaches to antisemitism and reactions to other forms of racism.

“The response that we so often hear is, ‘Well, it’s a free country,’” she said. “This is not the kind of expression that you would get if the target were, in my opinion, anyone other than Jews.” This societal double standard is a challenge, she said.

Like the others interviewed, Kirzner-Roberts believes that leadership and political will are crucial to turning the tide. That includes legislation like Bill C-9 and also enforcement of existing laws. “There is a lot of legislation already that is being far underutilized,” she said.

Systemic issues, though, are addressed by leadership at the political level.

“We’re seeing a lack of political will across the board, and I’m talking here [about] cities, provinces and on the federal level,” said Kirzner-Roberts.

In addition to addressing the rise in hate-motivated crime and closing loopholes in existing laws, she said, Bill C-9 is important because it drives home the message of political will onto police and prosecutors.

Concerning actions

The federal government announced last week that they are eliminating the office of Canada’s Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism.

The announcement came in conjunction with the decision to eliminate the similar office of the Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, and the announcement that there will be a new Advisory Council on Rights, Equality and Inclusion.

It is hard to find fault with the hope expressed by the government that the new council, which will be comprised of prominent Canadians from academia as well as experts and community leaders, will foster social cohesion, rally Canadians around shared identity, combat racism and hate in all their forms, and help guide the government’s work in fighting racism. However, cutting the one position in Ottawa explicitly committed to addressing antisemitism just doesn’t seem wise.

Given the precipitous rise in antisemitism in Canada, we might assume that the office of antisemitism was not a great success. On the other hand, it is nearly impossible to measure success and failure on these matters. Perhaps things would have been markedly worse without it. In any event, for what was no doubt a barely negligible cost in the bigger scheme of the federal budget, the office was at least a nod toward taking the matter seriously.

Perhaps the new office will have profound impacts that the two eradicated offices did not. The problem is that, in so many ways, antisemitism is different in form and content from other forms of racism. It needs and deserves to be recognized and treated in ways that reflect this meaningful difference.

It is a symptom of the problem of antisemitism itself that this basic recognition of difference elicits condemnations of “Jewish exceptionalism,” or worse. It is an unavoidable truth, though, and the unique challenges of antisemitism are not addressed when elected officials, commentators, academics and antiracist activists seem congenitally incapable of condemning antisemitism without couching that condemnation in a basket of other biases and bigotries that deserve their own condemnation.

It should be reason for concern that the homogenization of antisemitism is now being institutionalized in an agency that lumps biases against Jews – which Statistics Canada says account for 70% of religiously motivated hate crimes and almost one in five of all hate crimes in the country – into a catch-all council dealing with a vast range of social ills. (The fact that antisemitism is grouped with “religiously motivated hate crimes” is a problematic but common misnomer for another editorial.)

A second, seemingly unrelated story in the news last week should amplify this concern.

In a minor political coup, Doly Begum, the deputy leader of the New Democratic Party in the Ontario legislature, blindsided her leader by suddenly resigning her legislative seat and announcing she would run federally – not for their federal counterpart, the NDP, but for Mark Carney’s Liberal party.

Political commentators have had a field day poking the entrails of Ontario’s NDP and wondering what it might mean for the federal Liberal government’s left flank as some people ponder a snap election this year.

Those attuned to other nuances of the story soon found that Begum has been one of the Ontario legislature’s most vocal anti-Israel voices, with a particular inclination toward the “genocide” claim. Given that provincial governments have precisely no foreign policy responsibilities, Begum’s fixation on this issue suggests she may bring a very particular agenda should she be elected in the upcoming by-election.

There is no way that the prime minister, the Liberal party and anyone else involved in these headline-topping machinations was not aware of their new recruit’s repeated and inflammatory comments on this topic.

The welcoming of Begum into the Liberal fold seems like another message to Canadians about this government’s approach to Israel and Palestine and the inevitable fallout of that conflict on domestic harmony.

Coming on the heels of the federal government’s recognition of a “state of Palestine” last year, it is hard to imagine the latest developments as anything short of a slap in the face to Jewish and pro-Israel Canadians, and anyone who cares about combatting Jew-hatred.

Recipes not always required

Were you part of the pandemic sourdough bread baking craze? I’ve been baking bread for around 40 years, but I’m not a sourdough baker. Maintaining the starter was something I couldn’t manage. Although I’ve made many kinds of bread, including weekly challah (twin teens eat a lot!), I found using store-bought yeast was fine. Besides, my biology professor husband disliked the colourful, dangerous things he saw growing when I tried to maintain a starter long ago. He supports our bread habit as we buy one pound of dried yeast at a time.

My approach isn’t exact. However, I produce bread that rises and tastes good even without a recipe. I don’t use all the technical terms that I saw on the internet during the pandemic bread-baking phase. I stick to basic ingredients and easy methods. Bakers have used these successfully for thousands of years.

All this seemed familiar when I started studying the Babylonian tractate of Menachot. Menachot delves into the exact ways the rabbis thought meal (grain) offerings should be measured, cooked, burnt and sacrificed in the Temple in Jerusalem. The rabbis who discussed this mostly lived long after the Temple was destroyed. They’d never seen Temple offerings but they still discussed detailed recipes and techniques for proper sacrifice.

I remember the many online discussions about sourdough science. These were often people who, while baking beautiful pandemic sourdough, had never made bread previously, as I had. Of course, all of us would be shamed before our ancestors who, using a wooden bowl ripe with wild yeast, turned out bread consistently, day in and day out, to feed their families.

You might think, well, this isn’t for me if I don’t bake bread. Perhaps you never have worried about the ancient grain offerings in Jerusalem, or the “shrewbread” that became our modern equivalent, challah. All these discussions came to a head in Menachot, page 18a.

A question arises about whether a specific offering is fit (acceptable) and why. First, we learn about a meaningful teacher-student relationship between Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua and Yosef the Babylonian.

Yosef the Babylonian learns something from Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua that doesn’t seem entirely right to him. He questions his teacher several times. After multiple repetitions of a simple answer, Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua finally gives Yosef the Babylonian more information. He recalls another contradictory teaching from Rabbi Eliezer that agrees with what Yosef the Babylonian remembers.

Yosef the Babylonian erupts in joy. Both men are emotional, moved by the experience they’ve had, where careful analysis brings them important understanding and resolution. Yosef the Babylonian is relieved – he had worried that what he’d remembered was a mistake because he couldn’t find anyone else who recalled what Rabbi Eliezer had taught. Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua cries, filled with wonder. They celebrate Torah study, which maintains an intellectual genealogy of teachers and students by the historic transmission of knowledge. It’s a careful recounting of discussion and disputes, rather than just a simple, reflexive answer.

Menachot 18a, like bread-baking, shows that, if we get bogged down in the technical details, we can also be swept up in the transformation that occurs when we get everything – that we study or bake – right. This story is about mistakes, forgetting, misinformation and complex opinions. This tractate might describe how to do defunct sacrifice recipes correctly. It’s also about how we transmit important knowledge. We need to keep the facts straight, without forgetting anything, and synthesize complex opinions.

This is relevant today. We’re struggling daily to keep track of what’s happening in the world. Is it legal? Is it ethical? How does it affect us? In an age of “instant” information, diminished international reporting, social media disinformation campaigns and simplistic interpretations, it’s no wonder that we need to work hard to figure out what’s happening. It’s just as important now to do one’s own footwork. We must ask questions and analyze information carefully, just as when Yosef the Babylonian sat with his teacher, Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua, sometime between 135 and 170 CE.

We can get swept up in the technical aspects of our lives, whether it’s sourdough baking or legal proceedings. Yet, we also have that practical compass that guides us. I know intuitively, after decades of practice, how to throw together flour, salt, water and yeast, when to add sweetness, oil or eggs, and why. It’s a gut feeling, as deep as my internal moral compass that reacts when I see something wrong happening. Perhaps it’s how Judaism, my family or my community has shaped me, just as environment shapes all of us. Perhaps it’s an innate sense of the worth of each human being, as we are made in the image of the Divine. We know when things are going off the rails, and when we need to keep asking the hard questions to make change.

You could infer that all this refers to the current US upheaval, but it also relates to many other issues. For instance, at home, recent research found that Canadian Jews weren’t wrong about the CBC’s bias in reporting on the Israel-Hamas war. Statistical analysis indicates that yes, headlines, interviewer choices and perspectives lacked objectivity. If you, like me, questioned the CBC’s reporting over the last two years, just like Yosef questioned Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua, this information is reassuring.

Farther away, Israelis care passionately about democracy. Israelis ask their government tough questions, including protesting its poor record in protecting Arab citizens and its failure to provide a sufficient inquiry concerning Oct. 7. Regarding Iran’s upheaval, the Islamic regime’s repression means protesters risk murder, injury, torture and rape. Brave questioning of authority and pursuit of truthful information aren’t specific to one culture or country.

Yosef the Babylonian doubted himself. He repeatedly nudged his teacher. He worried that he’d made a mistake, but then bravely sought clarity to understand the bigger picture. We, too, can be so persistent that authority figures, like our teachers and government officials, must answer with thorough responses. Let’s not get bogged down in the technical details. It’s not whether you say that your bread dough rests, or uses an autolyze. Rather, listen to your gut. Go for the big questions. Think hard. Act to take the moral high ground. We all deserve something better. Let’s hope soon to break bread together, in peace and safety, with emotional, deep discussions.

Joanne Seiff has written regularly for the Winnipeg Free Press and various Jewish publications. She is the author of three books, including From the Outside In: Jewish Post Columns 2015-2016, a collection of essays available for digital download or as a paperback from Amazon. Check her out on Instagram @yrnspinner or at joanneseiff.blogspot.com.

When boundaries have shifted

The beginning of January has not been easy in Winnipeg. We’ve dealt with hate crime graffiti, including swastikas, on Shaarey Zedek Synagogue, Kelvin High School, the Abu Bakr Al-Siddique Mosque, as well as a hookah café, residential properties and street signs. For my household, it was personal. It hit our congregation and my kids’ school. It marred street signs near where we live. It defaced a mosque where I know one of the members. This is a lot to deal with. The police triumphantly made an arrest, but, from what I’ve heard, it seems unlikely that this individual did all these crimes. The story is familiar to Canadians at this point. Here it is.

Hate crimes happen. “Oh!” our leaders say. “Hate crimes are horrible. This isn’t Canadian. We will seek justice!” Then, an intermittent flow of outrage and misinformation follows. Suddenly, there’s an arrest. Everything’s solved. Canadians live happily ever after.

That is, until a new crime pops up. When that’s reported, the response sometimes is, “Well, this isn’t fitting into our narrative. We don’t know how this happened.” It even extends to, “Oh, we (police or officials) don’t clean up graffiti, so you can go ahead and do this yourself.” Essentially, another episode is swept under the rug as inconvenient.

I learned about the Overton Window in a social science class years ago. However, when it came up in reference to societal change and antisemitism, I had to review its meaning. The term is neither positive nor negative. It defines something that we have all experienced. Imagine you have a spectrum of beliefs: about school choice, disabilities, tolerance and diversity, human rights, whatever. The term was originally designed to describe how a politician might use a “window” to define policies on this spectrum. Occasionally, it’s used to say where someone’s beliefs fall on the political spectrum. We can shift the Overton Window; for instance, towards increased accessibility for those with disabilities. Some shifts are good, some are not. This term helps describe what’s happening with respect to antisemitism.

As the police described their arrest of the suspect in this recent series of hate graffiti, they said something like they “would have to examine the motive behind the crimes.” I was flummoxed. How could a swastika on a minority’s place of worship or a public school be anything other than an act of hate? Discussion followed about the suspect’s mental health situation, as he is unwell. Soon after he was released from custody, he was arrested again, for breaking into a home and violating the conditions of his release.

Many people have mental health issues, but going out in the dark at 4 a.m. to paint swastikas isn’t a normal, common expression of those challenges. People who perform hateful acts should face consequences. The Overton Window of what is considered “acceptable” antisemitism seems to have shifted.

I’m guessing there are multiple people committing this hate in our city. Yet the narrative here indicates that “Hurray! We’ve got the culprit” and no more effort is being made to resolve the bigger issues.

Meanwhile, I concluded my Daf Yomi (daily page of Talmud study) of Tractate Zevachim, on how sacrifices worked in the days of the Temple in Jerusalem. I’m lucky I didn’t start my learning with this – it felt like a slog. However, I continued studying the tractate, even while I found it somewhat dry and lacking in fun aggadah (stories).

Zevachim examines questions like when is a religious ritual sacrifice acceptable? What is the right physical and mental space for doing these holy rituals? When is it considered transgressive because it’s done wrong? When is it accepted even if it is not done in quite the right time or place? What rituals are exempt from repercussions, even if they are not done exactly right or considered acceptable practices?

These questions are intellectual exercises. We have no Temple in Jerusalem. The rabbis quoted in this approximately 1,500-year-old text didn’t have a Temple anymore. We Jews in modernity don’t do ritual sacrifice. Still, questions about what feels acceptable or forbidden, exempt or meaningful, have real-life repercussions. When the rabbis discussed different parts of ritual, they considered shifting their Overton Window about what they could see as correct, acceptable, exempt from punishment, or such a violation that one was cut off from the Jewish people.

Historically, the Overton Window about what’s considered appropriate discourse or hate speech has also shifted – multiple times. Slurs and crimes against Jews are commonplace throughout millennia. We’ve also had some golden eras, when things felt safe.

This January was another shift in Winnipeg. It’s been horrible, but we knew it was coming. It’s part of a worldwide shift of what’s considered “acceptable” antisemitism. I’ve been asked what can be done. I suggested giving this hate a broad, inclusive definition. Re-read the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition. Nothing good is intended when someone spray paints a swastika on a synagogue door. It’s even more of a threat when it’s on a classroom whiteboard or hidden in a Jewish kid’s locker, as was the recent case.

We must educate people about history, including how to avoid antisemitic hate. Make that education required. With definitions and education, our window of what’s acceptable or a crime firms up.

These experiences have felt like a terrible personal violation. It feels threatening and unsafe. Yet, our congregation responded with courage and love. We welcomed many non-Jewish supporters at our Shabbat services afterwards. We responded with pride and inclusivity.

The kid was so brave. He took a photo of the graffiti on his locker, asked a parent for help, went to the school office. Now, there’s a police report, all his classmates know what happened.

The kid also faced extended questioning from administrators about “if he’d told the whole story.” He was told that “everyone makes mistakes.” One lesson the kid learned is that maybe reporting the hate crime itself was a mistake, because, instead of supporting him, the approach involved the suggestion that the victim did the graffiti to begin with. This is bad news, and a familiar type of antisemitism, where Jewish victims are blamed for having “brought it on themselves.” We shouldn’t say this to any victim. It’s not OK. If this is treated as being OK, it means that victims may trust institutions less, and report less often.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Actions like education and transparency can clean up and eradicate hate. We don’t know who did this, but we know who we are. We’re Jewish. We’ve been here before. We’re made of stern, proud stuff. The Overton Window has shifted. It’s time to ask our allies to all lean in to help shove it back again.

Joanne Seiff has written regularly for the Winnipeg Free Press and various Jewish publications. She is the author of three books, including From the Outside In: Jewish Post Columns 2015-2016, a collection of essays available for digital download or as a paperback from Amazon. Check her out on Instagram @yrnspinner or at joanneseiff.blogspot.com.

A new strategy to brighten up BC

Communities across British Columbia gathered for Hanukkah, including in Vancouver, shown here, and in Delta, Maple Ridge and Whistler. (photo by Caryl Dolinko)

At moments of heightened threat, the instinct to pull inward is natural. Jewish history gives us many reasons to do so. Too often, the dominant public stories about Jewish life are stories of persecution, expulsion and death. Our museums, memorials and education efforts rightly preserve these memories. They matter. But they are not the whole story of who we are.

When those narratives stand alone, they can unintentionally cast Jews primarily as victims rather than as a living people defined by courage, creativity, resilience and contribution. At a time when antisemitism is rising, that framing matters – not only for how others see us, but for how we show up ourselves.

photo - Hanukkah in Delta — Hanukkah in Delta. *(photo from Jewish Federation)*

This question – how to respond without retreating – was at the heart of months of work by an antisemitism task force convened by the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver. Confronting antisemitism cannot rely solely on crisis response. We must, of course, put out fires when they arise. But we must also plant trees – investing in long-term efforts that cultivate allyship while celebrating Jewish life itself, strengthening joy, pride and confidence.

Bringing this approach into being at Hanukkah was not just timely, but strategic. Hanukkah tells a story that stands in contrast to narratives of Jewish victimhood. It is a story of bravery and resistance, of strength and victory against overwhelming odds, of miracles made possible through human action. It is about light that is meant to be seen – placed in windows, carried into public space.

Strong brands matter. They shape perception. They create familiarity and emotional safety. They allow people to connect through shared values and comfort. That is why the Jewish Federation chose not simply to celebrate Hanukkah this year, but to brand it. Brighten BC is a province-wide initiative designed to combat antisemitism through confident visibility and deeper integration into shared civic life.

photo - Hanukkah in Maple Ridge — Hanukkah in Maple Ridge. *(photo from Jewish Federation)*

Over eight nights, nearly 70 public Hanukkah events took place across close to 30 communities throughout British Columbia, a community of about 40,000 Jews. Menorahs were lit in town squares, at local fire halls and other civic sites. Neighbours, first responders, municipal leaders and community partners gathered alongside Jewish families. The City of Vancouver proclaimed the week Brighten BC Week. Destination Vancouver listed Brighten BC celebrations on its “Attractions and Things to Do in Vancouver” webpage. Online, the campaign reached about 19,000 people through #BrightenBC. Initiatives like the Best Hanukkah Donut Contest – engaging nearly 400 participants – reinforced the campaign’s tone: joyful, human and easy to join.

photo - Hanukkah in Whistler — Hanukkah in Whistler. *(photo from Jewish Federation)*

On the first day of Hanukkah, the Jewish world was shaken by the violent attack at Bondi Beach in Australia. But the tragedy did not redefine Brighten BC – it tested it. That morning, event registrations surged across the province as community members and allies chose presence over retreat. Security protocols were immediately elevated, with police and fire departments becoming operational partners to ensure gatherings could proceed safely and openly.

On the first night of Hanukkah, communities gathered across British Columbia, including at the Silber Family Agam Menorah, on the grounds of the Vancouver Art Gallery, the same site where extremists had burned the Canadian flag on the first anniversary of Oct. 7. Gathering there was not an act of provocation. It was an act of belonging.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe taught, “A little light dispels a lot of darkness.” This Hanukkah, we didn’t just celebrate. We invited, we aligned, we showed up. We chose light – and invited others to stand in it with us.

The next phase of this work is about identifying other widely recognized, positively associated cultural moments that can serve as platforms for shared celebration and connection – moments with strong emotional resonance, public expression and low barriers to participation.

– Courtesy Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver

Johnson awarded for human rights work

Pat Johnson has been selected by the government of Romania for the 2025 Ambassador Mihnea Constantinescu National Award for outstanding merits in combating antisemitism, xenophobia, radicalization and hate speech. He was nominated for the honour by the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver.

photo - Pat Johnson — Pat Johnson *(photo courtesy)*

The jury’s decision to award the 2025 prize to Johnson took into account the innovative nature of his activities and their long-term impact, his substantial civic commitment and contributions to public education, Romania’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in the announcement.

Johnson, who readers will know, is on the editorial board of the Jewish Independent and has been part of the newspaper for almost 30 years. He is a writer and public figure with more than 30 years of experience promoting human rights and equal opportunities, combating antisemitism, discrimination and prejudice. He is the founder of Upstanders Canada, a grassroots movement to encourage Canadians (especially non-Jewish Canadians) to stand against antisemitism and anti-Zionism. Readers can follow him at pat604johnson.substack.com.

“The work this prize represents – standing against antisemitism, hate and distortion of history – is collective, ongoing, and carried by so many people. I see this prize as encouragement for all people to keep going, to speak clearly, and to just show up,” said Johnson.

Ambassador Mihnea Constantinescu was a senior Romanian diplomat. Among many other things, he served as Romania’s chair of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, and chaired the meeting that adopted the working definition of antisemitism.