Barring someone because they're Israeli?
It's not legal, if that's what happened here.
An Ontario farm that has received federal funding is being taken to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario - for allegedly refusing to hire a man because he is an Israeli.
As revealed in the Sun last June, a self-described “regenerative farm” farm called Evermeadow near Cobourg was advertising online for what it called “home stays.” When Israeli Tal Nahum contacted Evermeadow co-owner Joshua Noiseux to apply, Noiseux wrote back.
According to the complaint, Noiseux’s message said: “We have a policy regarding requests of people from Israel. If you are against the current genocide and in favour of Palestinian liberation we would be happy to entertain your request to stay … if you are in support of militarist Zionism we will be unable to host you.”
Evermeadow has received thousands from the Government of Canada in between 2021 and 2024 for “creating jobs,” Employment and Social Development Canada documents confirm. The program’s own rules explicitly outlaw discrimination on prohibited grounds, such as sex, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation.
Refusing accommodation or employment because someone is a Jew is also contrary to provincial human rights codes, across Canada.
In his complaint to the Human Rights Tribunal, Nahum describes Evermeadow’s treatment as “a blatant act of discrimination” because he is a citizen of Israel and “of Jewish ancestry.” Nahum, who has worked on other farms in Canada, is interested in agriculture. Noiseux’s response shocked him, his complaint says, and injured his dignity, feelings and self-respect.
Noiseux was contacted for comment about the human rights action, as well as whether Evermeadow should have been eligible for federal funds. He did not reply before deadline. However, previously, he asked this writer to be “considerate of our family’s privacy as we endure this smear campaign.”
Despite that desire for privacy, word of Noiseux’s alleged refusal to employ a “Zionist” circulated widely online. The former mayor of Peterborough, Diane Therrien, even weighed in, writing to Noiseux: “Sounds like you avoided a real dangerous situation having that person around! Zios keep showing us how violent and unhinged they are. Sorry you are having to deal with this, your community appreciates you!”
The American Jewish Committee has said that “antisemites often use ‘Zionist’ or ‘Zio’ as shorthand for Jew.” The neologism “Zio” was reportedly first popularized by David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Contacted for comment about her use of that term, Therrien - now an executive with the Canadian Union of Public Employees - did not respond.
In his filed response to Nahum’s complaint, Noiseux acknowledges writing his message to the Nahum. “It was important… that any guest residing in [our] home be aware of [our] political views,” he states, and then goes on to claim that human rights law does not apply because he and his wife were only seeking “casual help” on their farm, and there was no discrimination.
A mediation hearing in the human rights case is scheduled for August, in which Nahum is seeking $50,000 in damages and a requirement that Evermeadow’s operators get human rights training. Nahum’s lawyer, Marty Gobin, declined further comment on the action, saying only: "The proceeding before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has not concluded and the applicant has no comment at this time.”
Hmm... This should be interesting. That same Ontario Human Rights Tribunal levied a stiff fine against a tiny rural town's mayor and council and ordered them to take "re-education" because they had refused to declare a Gay Pride month. It didn't seem to matter that, far from being specifically AGAINST alternative sexuality, the council simply felt that the business of sexuality was none of the town's business period, and that they should be focused instead on more typical town concerns like roads and police and fire protection. As the council put it, they don't have a "straight" sex celebration either. The Pride activists who filed that complaint were especially vindictive and gleeful in "winning" their case, and showed no restraint in villifying that little opponent, ironically missing the point that their own malicious conduct was doing far more to foster anti-gay resentment than any refusal to issue a pro-Pride proclamation could ever do. Only a very small minded mean spirited individual kicks his perceived enemy when they are already down. In so doing, they lost all moral high ground, even if they did think they won the "battle". Smart going guys. But it seems like "Gay = good, Jewish = bad" in modern left wing politics, so it'll be interesting to see what techicality excuses the defendent in this new Tribunal kangaroo court. Let's hope the OHRT rises above kangaroo this time. Hope so. but I won't hold my breath. As for "re-education" that practice reminds me of what a lot of communist dictatorships like to do with dissent. Not surprising that it's a favorite among the woke left. Check out George Orwell's "1984" for a primer in totalitarian re-education programs. Careful lefties: the freedom of belief you take away might one day be your own.
All of this is happening with a blessing from all government levels: federal, provincial, local. Until our elected officials stay indifferent situation will go worse and worse.