A tight-knit Toronto hospital unit cared for the dying. Then, a war thousands of miles away tore them apart

No winners in this:

…Unsubstantiated claims, then an unsettling development

The investigation into the complaints by Algu and the two doctors who attended the January meeting found they were unsubstantiated. There was no evidence that the meeting was an effort to silence voices advocating for Palestinians, nor was there evidence that they were working in a poisoned environment, the investigation report said.

It also concluded that Algu’s two colleagues were not rehired at a time when there was a funding crunch as well as overstaffing. Shearer previously noted it was a norm at the centre to overstaff.

She also said their bias claims were tainted by discussions they had among themselves after they filed their complaints. Algu’s lawyer told the investigator during the probe that the complainants’ views “should not be discounted simply because they talked about a very difficult workplace situation with one another.”

A day later, the result of the environment assessment came in.

It found Sinai Health leadership did not effectively manage the challenges relating to the expression of views around Israel-Palestine because the leaders had adopted a “softer, compassionate approach” and did not clearly and decisively communicate expectations and boundaries during a complex geopolitical situation, Sinai Health told palliative care staff in a memo.

The investigator also said the point of the assessment was not to make factual findings about any particular individual. But the report went on to focus on Algu, whom the investigator concluded appeared to have a “disproportionately negative impact” on the workplace culture.

Algu said she felt baffled: Was her advocacy an issue for the hospital or was it not?

…The assessment cited “many” unnamed colleagues, defined as at least eight people, as saying Algu’s social media advocacy was “irresponsible” and “offensive,” and not respectful of patient care or safety.

There was a perception that Algu used work time for personal advocacy and solicited colleagues for political causes, those interviewees said.

But no specifics were offered. The assessment did not cite any specific tweet or act of advocacy as an example of wrongdoing, Algu said, it relied on perceptions and feelings. Her complaint, on the other hand, offered specific emails to support her allegations of a poisoned work environment. As for advocating during work, she said she used to sometimes tweet during breaks like other physicians, but she stopped even those sometime in early 2024.

“I did go to a small number of protests on work days but would take vacation days for that.” she said. She also did not identify herself as a Sinai employee in any of her public advocacy, Algu said.

She said did not even know her conduct was being investigated as part of the workplace environment assessment until the final report was given to her.

Labour and Employment lawyer Jackie Esmonde, who represented Algu, declined to comment on the Sinai situation, but said that, in general, it was “extremely unusual and procedurally unfair for a workplace investigation to make negative findings against an employee without giving the opportunity to both know about the allegations and respond.”

The documents the Star reviewed contained no examples in support of the findings. Sinai Health did not offer any details when asked about the specific concerns related to Algu.

“We don’t share details or comment about our employees, physicians, scientists, learners or volunteers,” the Sinai spokesperson said. “Our highest priority is to ensure accessible and safe care for all.”

Investigator Gillian Shearer declined to comment, citing lawyer-client confidentiality. She said, “I conducted the investigation fairly and considered all the available relevant evidence.” Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt declined to comment.

Before she was given details of the investigations, Algu was told Sinai had dismissed her complaint about Hershl Berman’s tweet.

Posts on X did not count as workplace conduct in this case, Osler concluded, because the communications were unrelated to Sinai Health and did not become workplace conduct simply because Algu and Berman were both colleagues.

Berman had posted “a picture of my face, my social profile, my tweet, and called me a racist,” Algu said, noting that Sinai had considered his social media as being outside of the workplace. “Yet, somehow my social media was considered workplace,” she said. She also said that she never referenced patients in her social media, while Berman did, yet she was the one called out by the workplace investigator for not considering patient safety.

Concerns over Berman’s social media resurfaced this year during an election to choose the next president of the Ontario Medical Association (OMA). Berman was one of five candidates to lead the prominent advocacy group for a one-year term.

“What is at issue here is not disagreement; it is conduct,” more than 150 doctors told the OMA in a letter in February. Algu, who was by then not a part of Sinai, also signed it. “Publicly branding colleagues as antisemitic, hateful, or aligned with Hamas/extremist groups without due process or evidence crosses from discourse into harassment, intimidation, and reputational attack,” the letter said.

The OMA hired an external evaluator to review the candidates’ social media. While the evaluator found no grounds to exclude Berman from the race, his posts — from late 2024 through December 2025 — were flagged as having used “language frequently characterized by a confrontational and combative tone.” No other candidates’ social media was flagged.

After another candidate soundly won the race, Berman told the National Post his religion was a factor in the treatment he received.

Candidates for OMA presidents and board directors have been subject to social media checks since 2021, and the screening is standard during an election, the OMA told the Star. The vetting “is not focused on personal opinions or positions but on interactions that could impact eligibility to hold office,” a spokesperson said….

Source: A tight-knit Toronto hospital unit cared for the dying. Then, a war thousands of miles away tore them apart

Urback: Hate absolutely has its place in Canada. It has been normalized, ignored and excused

Unfortunately correct, particularly for the Jewish community but not limited to it:

…We know that hate has its place in Canada not simply because these acts have occurred, but because nothing meaningful is being done about them. The Prime Minister won’t name the problem. Law enforcement, Crown prosecutors and politicians all blame each other for failing to take action. Ottawa’s response is to assemble an advisory council on Rights, Equality and Inclusion, and to throw money at Jewish institutions to beef up their security. That is as clear an admission as anything that hate indeed has its place in Canada: We know the hate is here, but instead of tackling it, we’ll give you money to insulate yourselves from it. 

This is Canada’s new normal. A bakery’s windows are smashed, and we sigh and move on. Buildings are shot at, and we click our tongues. Many Jews are now actively exploring emigration to places where hate is less readily excused or ignored, unlike in Canada, where politicians insist “this is not who we are” while pretending not to recognize what this country has become. 

A day after the attacks on Kiva’s Bakery, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture Marc Miller, who will also chair the Advisory Council on Rights, Equality and Inclusion, wrote on X that “Antisemitism has no place in our communities, and it is an attack on the values of inclusion and respect that define our country.” But that view is precisely the problem. Antisemitism absolutely has a well-established place in our communities now; a weekend trip to Bathurst and Sheppard will confirm that. The more pertinent question before the government now is if it intends to actually do something about it, or simply offer money for bulletproof glass and continue deluding itself with the notion that hate has not been normalized in Canada.

Source: Hate absolutely has its place in Canada. It has been normalized, ignored and excused

ICYMI Lederman: Antisemitic Messi conspiracy theories constitute unsportsmanlike conduct

Sigh:

….It’s one thing to lose your mind over a soccer tournament – healthy, even, to immerse yourself in sports and take a breather from the horrors of the world. But this lunacy is evidence of a world infected by antisemitism: where even a good news story – the astonishing prowess of a once-in-a-lifetime player – gets squished into a crazed antisemitic conspiracy theory. Even though the guy is not even Jewish.

“Football unites the world,” the FIFA motto goes.

Not quite, reality has responded. 

After an Israeli politician complained about Mr. Lamal hoisting the Palestinian flag last spring, claiming that this fostered hatred, Spain’s Prime Minister countered that those who consider waving a national flag to be hatred had either “lost their minds or have been blinded by ignominy.” 

There’s a lot of that going around. 

It is impossible, especially in this climate, to hold a sports tournament in a vacuum, completely divorced from the politics of the day. But this – using the World Cup to spread antisemitic conspiracy theories and in the process, demean its greatest player – is so messed up. A beautiful game used for such an ugly purpose.

Source: Antisemitic Messi conspiracy theories constitute unsportsmanlike conduct

Coren | It can be healthy to debate Israel and Palestine but on the ground little will change

Good discussion regarding the Church of England’s reference to genocide:

…In a highly controversial vote, they encouraged congregations to read and engage with “Moment of Truth: Faith in a Time of Genocide,” a report by Palestinian Christians that accuses Israel of genocide and describes the country as a “colonial enterprise.” In other words, the report wasn’t adopted as church policy but accepted as a “heartfelt expression of the lived experience of Palestinian Christians.”

The country’s chief rabbi described the decision as “shameful” and a “sad day for Jewish-Christian relations” and numerous Anglicans have complained that the language used is unnecessarily provocative, one-sided, and taken directly out of a Marxist playbook.

That’s harsh because Archbishop of Canterbury Sarah Mullally and fellow bishops have repeatedly and passionately condemned antisemitism, and during the debate she spoke of “the pain and trauma of the appalling 7 October attacks” that remains, “a daily reality for Jewish people in Israel and around the world.”

While Palestinians certainly and understandably feel as if they’re constant victims of colonialism, Zionism itself was an ideology produced by desperation rather than a policy based on exploitation. The 1290 expulsion from England was one of many throughout Europe, accompanied by mass slaughter, terror, discrimination, and eventually the Holocaust. Jews in Arab countries were expelled from where they’d lived for centuries between 1948 and the 1970s. Where else could all of these people go apart from to a land where they have proven historic and genetic links?

As for genocide, we often hear that scholars of the subject believe that the Gaza campaign and the general Israeli approach to Palestine is indeed genocidal. Actually, there’s a profound division among experts. While Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is often unjust and the military campaign in Gaza appallingly costly, does Israel seriously want to murder every single Palestinian wherever they live?

The most infamous example of genocide was the Nazi attempt to eliminate the Jews as a people and expunge them from human consciousness. It was industrial mass slaughter and had nothing to do with national security or territorial expansion. Surely, we can criticize Israeli actions without employing such language.

Perhaps if the Israel-Palestine issue had been more thoroughly and openly discussed in the past, and if churches had had the courage to do so, the narrative would now be more considered, but some of those currently so outraged by the synod decision were in the past the fiercest opponents of any sort of dissent. Yes, it’s true that Israel is treated differently than other countries by its opponents, but also by its supporters. Double standards do have that tendency.

The fuss over all this will continue for a while but on the ground in Israel and Palestine it will change little. Those at the synod were good people rather than a performative street mob and genuinely do seek peace and progress. They also look to a Jewish Messiah who told his followers to shock the world with their ideas and guaranteed them that it wouldn’t be easy. He preached all this largely to a Jewish people living in a Jewish land, and the irony of it all should be obvious.

Something has to change but language matters very much indeed.

Source: Opinion | It can be healthy to debate Israel and Palestine but on the ground little will change

‘Something concrete’: Why Asian-Canadians were moved to denounce antisemitism

Of note:

In the emerging movement of non-Jews speaking out against rampant antisemitism in Canada, Fo Niemi and his coalition of Asian community groups in Montreal stand out as veterans.

When a city synagogue was firebombed last month, the Centre for Research-Action on Race Relations (CRARR) brought together a coalition of Asian communities – ranging from Cambodian, Chinese, Vietnamese and Filipino – to denounce antisemitism and support the Jewish community.

These were, in his words, “small steps to heal, bond and build solidarity.”

Niemi, a co-founder and executive director of the nonprofit, said the goal was “to do something concrete. We don’t want to just talk. We want to build things that could be lasting, so it can be better evidence of how much we have in common.”

CRARR, whose mandate is to promote racial equality and combat racism, also held a multi-faith, multi-ethnic dedication service on June 30, to honour Constable Mohamed Lamine Benredouane, killed while responding to a June 22 shooting in Côte-des-Neiges, and 68-year-old bystander Michel Moshe Mizrahi, who was killed in the same incident….

Source: ‘Something concrete’: Why Asian-Canadians were moved to denounce antisemitism

PEN America: A Free-Speech Meltdown

Sad:

…Maybe the most revealing aspect of this eruption, though, is just how little it took to set it off. Thursday’s article nodded to the curtailed freedoms of Israeli and Jewish writers without taking any ideological side. It was far from a battle cry or a shift in priorities. It was just a way of acknowledging, in the measured but principled language common to PEN America, that the past three years of discourse have had an effect on a large group of writers. For anyone who has spoken to Israeli or Jewish artists—as I have—this is undeniable; you hear it everywhere. This reality does not neutralize the cause of pro-Palestinian writers or the suffering in Gaza and elsewhere. The fact that the article was perceived that way, and that it led to the resignation of a president, tells us all a great deal about the hair-trigger moment we live in, and about the precarity of the liberal principles on which PEN America was founded.  

Source: A Free-Speech Meltdown

Gail Asper isn’t visibly angry about ‘Nakba’ exhibit. But she’s resolute about fixing the rights museum

More on the CMHR Nakba controversy:

…“As a national federal museum,” she says, “there’s a very high standard here. This isn’t a community-centred exhibit. I fought for the designation, for this to be a federal institution with all the imprimatur and gravitas that title entails, because I wanted to show Canadians that this isn’t just the opinion of Izzy Asper or, you know, me or anybody else. This is something that matters to Canadians, that human rights are so important to Canadians, and Stephen Harper was the prime minister that finally delivered this as the national federal museum.

“It feels intentional that the Jewish voice and connection to this museum is deliberately being diminished,” she observes. Her phone and inbox have been “exploding” since the announcement. Supporters who trusted the Aspers to create something intellectually honest feel betrayed.

“The whole point of the museum is to bring people together,” she explains. “The whole point is to have dialogue and debate. So the whole point of this exhibit, as I said to everybody, was that there are hard truths on both sides. Let’s have all the hard truths and let’s have the rational, quiet, respectful debate the museum was intended to inspire.”

“But when you obliterate one side of the narrative so egregiously, obviously, and so ideologically and intentionally, you lose that trust from one part of the participants. And that’s where I really am so disappointed in the museum. They didn’t have to do it this way.”

She made repeated efforts to steer things differently, including a presentation to the board six weeks before opening. As an honorary board member, she reminded them of the museum’s mandate and warned about fanning antisemitism at a fraught time. There was no meaningful response.

“I just thought this is heartless,” she says. “There is no compassion for the place that we have now found ourselves in the Jewish community.”

Then, one week before opening, the sole Jewish board member, Mark Berlin, resigned. “I think he was gaslit,” Gail says. Berlin, a respected human rights lawyer who had lived and worked in Ramallah, called her before stepping down. “It was a very sad conversation,” but she understood.”…

Source: Gail Asper isn’t visibly angry about ‘Nakba’ exhibit. But she’s resolute about fixing the rights museum

Foran: A quarter-century after his death, how is Mordecai Richler’s work remembered?

Always interesting to see what happens with the passage of time. I remember well the controversies, have read many of his books, seen the film adaptations of Duddy Kravitz and Barney’s Version, recall that my mother felt uncomfortable with his portrayal of Canadian Jews. Still worth reading IMO:

…English Canada, in contrast, has not kept faith in its “hero.” As he acknowledged, Richler was a chronicler of his times, and times – along with literary tastes – change. His voice, masculine and provocative, could tilt into the intemperate, especially when pressing a joke or grievance. Our age is quick to judge modes of expression declared deviant from our own progressive standards. 

Finally, nearly all literary criticism now emanates from within our universities, and with few exceptions, the professors just haven’t been interested.

Time usually sorts things out for artists. Either the work endures or it doesn’t. Mordecai Richler had his day and may have another up ahead. The pleasures of this erudite, funny, deeply moral writer are many, and veteran readers will envy newcomers to his books, especially the novels. Meanwhile, the invitation of Solomon Gursky Was Here stands. 

Source: A quarter-century after his death, how is Mordecai Richler’s work remembered?

Why Is Canada’s Refugee Board relying on Francesca Albanese?: Randolph Hahn for Inside Policy

Reasonable question that deserves an answer. Difference between her official reports and activism? Institutional capture?

Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) decides who receives refugee protection — and for many successful claimants, a pathway to permanent residence and citizenship. Those decisions depend in part on country information the IRB makes available to its decision-makers as authoritative background material.

That is why one name appearing in the IRB’s National Documentation Packages should alarm anyone who expects Canada’s refugee system to rely on balanced and credible sources: the highly controversial Francesca Albanese, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Albanese has become one of the world’s most polarizing UN officials. She has been sanctioned by the United States, condemned by several democratic governments, and publicly rebuked by Canada itself. In 2024, Canada’s Permanent Mission in Geneva described her remarks as “unacceptable and incompatible with her duty of impartiality” and added that “antisemitism has no place anywhere.”

Yet, while the Canadian government has distanced itself from Albanese, the IRB continues to include her in reports in its official country documentation for Israel and for what it characterizes as the Occupied Palestinian Territories. After experienced Canadian immigration lawyers formally challenged the decision, the Board reviewed the matter — and chose to keep her reports in place….

Source: Why Is Canada’s Refugee Board relying on Francesca Albanese?: Randolph Hahn for Inside Policy

ICYMI – Jack Jedwab: Antisemitism flies in the face of Canadian multiculturalism

Agreed:

…“Outside Israel, Canada has one of the highest proportions of Holocaust survivors in the world — part of a community that has made a profound mark on this country. When that history is treated as expendable, Jewish belonging becomes easier to question as well. For that reason, Canadian Multiculturalism Day should be an occasion not only to celebrate diversity, but also to recognize the challenges multiculturalism faces when prejudice is rationalized, historical memory is minimized, or minority communities are made vulnerable by conflicts beyond Canada’s borders.

That is why it is important to guard against those who would appropriate Canadian Multiculturalism Day in support of political agendas. A day meant to celebrate pluralism and strengthen mutual respect should not be turned into an occasion for advancing political narratives that decontextualize history or invite Canadians to view one community through the grievances of another. Multiculturalism is not served by selective memory, nor by historical accounts that intensify suspicion and fuel resentment. Ideally its objective should be to reduce intercultural tension, not to exacerbate it.”

Source: Jack Jedwab: Antisemitism flies in the face of Canadian multiculturalism