Opinion | Condemning all hatred must not mean ignoring who is being targeted - Toronto Star

A letter writer states all hatred is dangerous, but not all communities are experiencing it with the same frequency as those in the Jewish community, as was evident in Sunday’s shooting in Belleville.

As a long-time politician I see one area where we desperately need leadership in the coming, Sept. 18

Kathleen Wynne’s call to confront hatred could hardly have been more timely. Within days, gunfire erupted outside a Belleville synagogue on Sunday.

Jews gathering to worship on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar found themselves taking cover from gunfire, a police officer heroically protecting them was seriously wounded, and what might have happened without his presence is frightening to contemplate.

Wynne is right that hatred directed against any community is intolerable and must be confronted. Having known and worked with her for many years, I do not doubt the sincerity of her concern.

However, condemning all hatred must not prevent us from acknowledging when one community is being targeted with exceptional frequency and intensity. Antisemitism has risen to levels Canadian Jews have not experienced in generations. Jewish schools, synagogues, businesses and individuals have increasingly become targets of intimidation, vandalism and violence.

This is not about competing in some grotesque “hate Olympics.” It is about recognizing the evidence and responding honestly to the particular threat before us. All hatred is dangerous, but not all communities are experiencing it today with the same frequency, urgency or potentially deadly consequences as are we in the Jewish community.

Whatever investigators ultimately determine about the motive in Belleville, what happened there underscores the vulnerability many Canadian Jews now feel simply gathering as Jews.

I commend Wynne for addressing hatred in Ontario. But today’s crisis of Jew hatred, demands urgent, immediate and focused attention. The shooting at the Belleville synagogue shocks us, but sadly it does not surprise us.

My husband and I are in our late 70s and were in Toronto visiting family recently.

We live in Ottawa and rarely order an Uber because we own our own vehicles and are rather technologically unsophisticated. We found ourselves at the Yonge and York Mills subway station on Friday, Sept. 11 in the late afternoon and needed an Uber to get to our hotel.

Clearly we were struggling with the app when Grace, a beautiful young lady sitting next to us, offered to help. Not only did she competently order the Uber, she offered to stand outside with us to make sure we got into the car safely. Not confident about where the Uber driver would park, she crossed the street to hail the Uber driver to inform him where we were standing. Luckily the driver parked near us and we successfully arrived at our hotel a short time later.

Unfortunately, Torontonians get a bad rap for being unfriendly. Here is an excellent example that all it takes is one person to reach out to strangers and make a positive impression. This young lady, Grace,  should be celebrated by the city of Toronto for her generosity and kindness.

Good deeds like hers help to make Toronto shine in a world wrought with selfishness.

Grace, wherever you are, thank you!

Fifteen of the 56 Commonwealth countries recognize King Charles as their head of state. This is called the Commonwealth Realm. Canada, U.K., Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica among others make up the realm.

Why is there no conversation about a Commonwealth Realm Trade Agreement?

Or, one step further, why is there no conversation about a broader Commonwealth Trade Agreement?

I encourage Canada to pursue these conversations in parallel with our possible new relationship with the European Union. In some ways, it is quite remarkable such an agreement doesn’t already exist. Although King Charles’ head of state role is mostly symbolic, surely his supportive voice would be helpful to make this happen.

This special relationship merits special trade relations.

Mark Carney’s flight plan means turbulence for Canadian air travellers, Sept. 17

I am utterly frustrated. Prime Minister Mark Carney has said, “We are the masters of our own destiny. We are masters in our own home.”

Please don’t let this government destroy — or sell off — our home, because what will we come home to when all is said and done?

I recognize Canada is facing serious economic pressures largely outside our control. But privatizing four of Canada’s major airports is not the answer to our economic problems. Why is the government so willing to sell off and privatize so much of this country — airports in particular?

Have we learned nothing from the 407? Officials say there will be guidelines around any sale, but I don’t trust it will be done right. When a company is under pressure to deliver big dividends to shareholders, something gives — higher fares, reduced service and more nickel-and-diming on things like parking and baggage.

My fear is air travel will become as unaffordable as the 407 already is — and loved ones, pushed by job markets and housing costs into cities far from Southern Ontario, will become that much harder to visit.

Airport privatization is a bad decision by the government.

I found Gerrard Weedon’s recent letter to the editor (“Selling airports is an ill conceived idea,” Sept. 18) interesting. He says he won’t vote for Carney if he goes ahead with his privatization plans.

I wonder how many other Canadians are one-issue voters?

And I wonder how they weigh their issues?

There is a decision-making theory where a person lays out all the factors that are important to them in deciding something. In choosing a car, for example, gas consumption, interior noise and insurance rates might be factors. Then the factors are weighted and given a numeric value. Only after making their model do people go out and compare cars.

Voters could do the same. What issue is more important? Give it a higher weight. If something would just be nice to have, give it a lower rating. Then rate the candidates. And meanwhile, let them know what is important to you. Carney and my MP already know I want elder care excluded from any foreign privatization.

How do they know? Because I told them.

What could private investment mean to Pearson airport and Toronto travellers? Here’s what the experts say, Sept. 16

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s drive to privatize Canada’s four top international airports is a 100-year mistake.

Airports are foundational to the success of our key regional economies. Ceding control of these critical hubs to onshore and offshore faceless corporate boardrooms will be a betrayal of economic and political sovereignty.

And if this matters little, most studies of airport privatization show benefits to air travellers and business fall well short of claims.

I understand the Trump-induced mania for quick and decisive action, but don’t trip over your values on the way to the teller.

Five famous Canadians who attended private school, Sept. 18

There are probably more famous Canadians who didn’t go to private school than those who did. Private schools are often more about connections than they are about education.

A bright kid will do well anywhere. People involved in the Arts or Sports (4 of the 5 that were profiled) generally excel because of talent or skill. Politics (the arena of the fifth person mentioned) involves an ability to schmooze.

The most important education system should be the public system, because it’s free and doesn’t rely on those who are fortunate enough to afford a private education.

The public system presently needs improvement, no question, but it gives people an education who otherwise wouldn’t be able to get one. If everyone can afford the private system then we wouldn’t need the public system.

But until everyone wins a lottery, the public system is still the best option and the one where the emphasis should be.

Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request.

There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again.

You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply.

Opinion articles are based on the author’s interpretations and judgments of facts, data and events. More details