Episode 141

full
Published on:

16th Jul 2024

Weaponizing Canadian Law for Israel

Investigative journalist Martin Lukacs from The Breach discusses his investigations into Toronto Police's Project Resolute and the secretive committee in the Ontario Attorney General's office tasked with cracking down on Palestinian solidarity activism.

A beefed up hate crimes unit is backed by a committee staffed with former Prosecutors who have openly declared their affinity for Israel and penchant for "leveraging criminal law for critical action". And we would have not heard anything about it had it not been for the tenacity of independent journalists like Martin and the mistakes of a local police board.

Hear the whole sordid story....

________________

All of our content is free - made possible by the generous sponsorships of our Patrons. If you would like to support us: Patreon

Follow us on Instagram

Resources:

Transcript
Speaker:

Greetings, friends. My name is Jess McLean, and I'm here to provide you with some blueprints

Speaker:

of disruption. This weekly podcast is dedicated to amplifying the work of activists, examining

Speaker:

power structures, and sharing the success stories from the grassroots. Through these discussions,

Speaker:

we hope to provide folks with the tools and the inspiration they need to start to dismantle

Speaker:

capitalism, decolonize our spaces, and bring about the political revolution that we know

Speaker:

we need. Martin, welcome back. For those who missed your last episode with us, can you introduce

Speaker:

yourself again? Yeah, thanks for having me, Jessa. My name's Martin Lukacs. I'm a journalist,

Speaker:

author, and the managing editor of The Breach, an independent outlet, launched about three

Speaker:

years ago now. If any of you are listening and you don't know what he means by The Breach,

Speaker:

then you haven't really been listening because I was telling Martin before we started recording,

Speaker:

our show heavily relies on their content and their investigative reports to... beef up a

Speaker:

lot of our stories, especially our rants, because they get us so angry reading your stuff. And

Speaker:

you know, I was extra triggered by your most recent article about the Ontario Attorney General

Speaker:

Secret Committee that you're going to tell us all about. And you quickly reminded us, though,

Speaker:

that was intrinsically tied to another article that had us riled up a few months back. detailed

Speaker:

Project Resolute, which is a project by the Ontario Police Services Hate Crimes Unit that

Speaker:

targeted Palestinian solidarity activists. So what first put you on, Martin, to the fact

Speaker:

that there may be a secret committee in the Ontario Attorney General's office? Well, let

Speaker:

me first say that, yeah, I love being, I love providing fodder for rants. submission of the

Speaker:

breach. How was I put onto this? Well, we've been, as you said, we've been reporting on

Speaker:

the policing crackdown on Palestinian solidarity in Toronto, but also broadly across Canada.

Speaker:

I think Toronto is probably where, because the Palestinian solidarity mobilization has been

Speaker:

the strongest, the police reaction has also been the most severe and aggressive. And...

Speaker:

Maybe I should take a step back and talk a little bit about the Project Resolute investigation

Speaker:

and then talk about this secretive committee within the attorney general's office, which

Speaker:

I think very much works hand in hand. So the Project Resolute is a special operation by

Speaker:

the Toronto police in the aftermath of October 7th, which really handed over the investigation

Speaker:

and policing of all Middle East protest to the hate crimes unit, which from that starting

Speaker:

point was politically perverse, politically biased. The assumption that all Middle East

Speaker:

protests, namely solidarity protests with Palestinians in Gaza, somehow has an inherent connection

Speaker:

to hate crimes fundamentally tilted the orientation of the police. And we have seen over the past

Speaker:

several months, an incredible commitment of public resources, policing personnel drawn

Speaker:

from all different units of the Toronto police, focusing in on Palestinian solidarity with

Speaker:

a number of kind of egregious examples of overreach. Police have engaged in nighttime raids on activist

Speaker:

homes, a tactic usually reserved violent criminal offenses. Because you expect weapons to be

Speaker:

a possibility and so you want to surprise them. Precisely. Or folks might be destroying evidence.

Speaker:

But yeah, typically it's reserved for violent offenders. Yeah, it's called, the police terminology

Speaker:

is guns and drugs. And they have snatched people off the street. They have. engaged in trying

Speaker:

to cultivate informants, especially among newer activists to the movement. They have used trumped

Speaker:

up bogus hate crime charges. That's been a key element of what the Toronto police project

Speaker:

Resolute has done, which is to try to weaponize hate crime offenses, to taint and undermine

Speaker:

and impose more severe charges against people doing Palestinian solidarity. because hate

Speaker:

crime charges bring with them more severe consequences. Having these operations be led by the hate

Speaker:

crime unit has meant that there has been a natural, there has been a natural outgrowth of there

Speaker:

being the leaders of this policing operation. The added charges of hate crime also bring

Speaker:

with them the added public scrutiny and reinforcement of the damaging narrative that Palestinian

Speaker:

solidarity is in itself a hate crime. Precisely. We see politicians making that direct claim

Speaker:

so explicitly. So in probably the most prominent example of Project Resolute's operations was

Speaker:

the Indigo 11 case, in which quite a banal act of mischief, namely politically posturing Indigo

Speaker:

to protest the CEO Heather Reisman's support and funding for the Israeli army resulted in

Speaker:

these nighttime raids, incredible surveillance, interrogations, and then the police making

Speaker:

a very big deal about how they were pursuing hate-motivated offenses, which netted them

Speaker:

headlines in all the mainstream publications from the Toronto Star all the way to the Toronto

Speaker:

Sun on the

Speaker:

what these activists had done was anti-Semitic, racist, a hate crime, which is of course an

Speaker:

absurd allegation. One of the activists charged is Jewish herself. The indigo protests were

Speaker:

started by Jewish groups in part. So not only in terms of the consequences, but in terms

Speaker:

of the public narrative that they have been able to tell, it has been incredibly damaging.

Speaker:

And through reporting on On Project Resolute, I started to learn from some of the lawyers

Speaker:

who have been involved in defending some of these activists about the existence of a secretive,

Speaker:

very shadowy committee within the attorney general's ministry called the Hate Crime Working Group.

Speaker:

Okay, okay. Before we get the skinny on the secret committee, which sounds so nefarious.

Speaker:

especially the way you frame it. I'm curious what your first reaction... Well, you know

Speaker:

what, in all of this, anything is believable at this point. So, you know, if folks were

Speaker:

coming to me with stories of a secret committee, I would definitely have taken them seriously

Speaker:

as well. But I do want to just add a little bit more about the Hate Crimes Unit and Project

Speaker:

Resolute, if we may. It does shock me. You talked about their expanded mandate that... Because

Speaker:

the Hate Crimes Unit has existed, obviously, before October 7th. Yeah, since the mid-90s.

Speaker:

But a bulk of these changes came quite quickly, right? You're talking about the end of October

Speaker:

and early November, where they explicitly added to their mandate to monitor or whatever the

Speaker:

protests involving the Middle East, which is just a way to count. Like, they mean Palestine.

Speaker:

The fact that they made any effort to use more inclusive language in something that's clearly

Speaker:

so racist. to begin with is kind of funny to me. You might as well have just said Palestine,

Speaker:

or you can't say Palestine, I guess. Yeah, it's classic police bureaucraties. Yeah, you'd have

Speaker:

to acknowledge Palestine. So they're sitting there going, well, we can't say that. So let's

Speaker:

just say the Middle East. Then next time they start hooting and hollering about another state,

Speaker:

we've got this on paper, we're good. But they didn't just expand their mandate, right? The

Speaker:

funding for them expanded so much as well as... their force, like you're talking about a six

Speaker:

officer force expanded into 32. Yeah, so there was six members expanded to 32, which is a

Speaker:

500% increase. In November, 2023. Yes, November, 2023. We saw this play out in the Indigo case

Speaker:

where, we know from police sources that there were eight officers working full time on that

Speaker:

case. They were... canvassing in neighborhoods for webcam footage from people's homes. They,

Speaker:

you know, and the cops, the supply cops doing overtime. I mean, there's a huge, huge amount

Speaker:

of resources. And then the police raids that night of in late November involved 50 officers,

Speaker:

a canine unit. I mean, that's like probably just for the raids alone, an expenditure of

Speaker:

a million dollars. I was going to say, were you able to quantify what Project Resolute

Speaker:

has cost Toronto taxpayers? The latest from police is that As of June, it's $16 million,

Speaker:

but that does not include, and what should be included is the expense on the legal side in

Speaker:

terms of then trying to prosecute these cases, which is probably a dozen more millions of

Speaker:

dollars. So I would guess that the policing and legal costs are in the realm of $30 million.

Speaker:

And we know that there are a few, at least a few. better options for spending that money

Speaker:

than harassing, targeting, criminalizing peaceful protest. Yeah, and what the report revealed

Speaker:

was that these night raids hadn't just taken place in the Indigo case, which we all learned

Speaker:

about through the arrests back in November, but there were other instances, including in

Speaker:

the case of the Gardner Expressway protests, there was a group of activists who stopped

Speaker:

traffic there for... literally no more than five minutes. No one was harmed. Palestinian

Speaker:

Canadian family had their, in Mississauga had their home raided after 5 a.m. in January.

Speaker:

Apparently when I spoke to the family, the police started ringing and banging the door so hard

Speaker:

that the dad and mom's bed on the second floor literally started shaking. And so this family

Speaker:

that had come from. Ramallah in 2005 and in fact had their homes raided, you know, 20 years

Speaker:

ago, were an absolute shock and horror. And I remember speaking to the individual's mom

Speaker:

and she was like, my first assumption was has he killed someone? You know, like what has

Speaker:

my son done? And you know, police kept the door open. In the, you know, this was late January

Speaker:

when the weather was frigid while they sat the family down. Um, while they searched the home,

Speaker:

they basically turned his, his room and a few others upside down and, you know, confiscate

Speaker:

several of his possessions, carted out computers, cell phones, clothing. Um, it was pretty incredible

Speaker:

though. The mom in particular, Suha, who I spoke to, reminded me about the just incredible like

Speaker:

resistance, resilience, and also just like humor that Palestinians I have met in the West Bank

Speaker:

have. I remember she, one of the things that the police said they were searching for was

Speaker:

a black and white keffiyeh. And she was like, we're Palestinian, we have dozens of keffiyehs.

Speaker:

Like, do you need us to help you with that? I also have free Palestine posters, do you

Speaker:

want those too? Yeah, so, you know, they kept their. wits about them and their sense of humor,

Speaker:

despite the horror, the experience that they had to go through. Her son, who's an elementary

Speaker:

school teacher, had his name broadcast in the media, thanks to the cops. He teaches at a

Speaker:

local school in Mississauga. People there found out about it. He used to volunteer at the local

Speaker:

YMCA. CTV News was broadcasting his arrest. And so incredibly damaging to the to the family's

Speaker:

reputation. And interestingly, the Crown has now dropped those charges. And is in fact has

Speaker:

dropped many of the indigo charges as well. So it really feels like they, on one level,

Speaker:

the cops know that, you know, the night raids and other aspects of the operation won't stand

Speaker:

a chance when challenged on charter grounds. But they, I think are hoping that they can

Speaker:

get their moment in the media, get themselves these slanted headlines, and that does wreck

Speaker:

the damage that they're hoping to effect, and then damn the prospects of actually getting

Speaker:

these charges to stick. So in many ways, the media effect is what they are going for, which

Speaker:

just shows how cynical this whole enterprise from the police and certainly the government

Speaker:

officials who are defending and supporting. this is. Yeah, and it's designed to demoralize

Speaker:

as well the individuals and those who hear the stories and their comrades expecting. We talked

Speaker:

to Anna Littman and like her worst fear was that some of these tactics that they were using

Speaker:

would scare people into doing actions as simple as blocking the road for five minutes or taping

Speaker:

a poster to a glass wall or window, you know, when we're trying to get people to be able

Speaker:

to escalate beyond some of these... more passive actions. It's really hard to see the consequences

Speaker:

play out like this. And I also imagine, it's not a point that I've picked up on before,

Speaker:

but you mentioned it earlier of the attempts to turn informants, turn activists into informants.

Speaker:

And I imagine putting them in these precarious situations helps them leverage those possibilities.

Speaker:

Can you speak to what the attempts to recruit informants look like because the audience here

Speaker:

are mostly activists and organizers who are trying to strike that delicate balance of pulling

Speaker:

in as many people as possible and trusting folks that wanna do the work with keeping everybody

Speaker:

safe and anticipating police infiltration? Yeah, the one case I reported on in the piece was,

Speaker:

a newer activist to the movement named Cyrus Reynolds, who had been involved in some of

Speaker:

the protests on the Avenue Road overpass. And he was one of the individuals who was arrested

Speaker:

in the days after the Toronto police banned any protest on the overpass. And that was very

Speaker:

much part of the project. It was claimed by Project Resolutive, one of their claimed achievements.

Speaker:

And he was arrested and at the local... police station once he was released, he was approached

Speaker:

by a detective who basically asked him to come to a side room within the police station and

Speaker:

introduced himself as someone who works with the informant protection program and basically

Speaker:

made an offer to Cyrus that if he could feed the cops intel then... you know, maybe he could

Speaker:

lend him a hand, you know, by implication, perhaps get those charges dropped for that service.

Speaker:

And Cyrus is someone who, you know, I think works in construction and he's a tradesman.

Speaker:

He'd never been an activist before. And Palestine, watching what was unfolding in Gaza, had spurred

Speaker:

him to action for the first time in his life. And so it seemed to me that someone newer to

Speaker:

the movement would be a natural target. for the police to try to turn. And he was outraged

Speaker:

by the suggestion and- Thank you, Cyrus. Point blank refused. The cop added a little bit of

Speaker:

complicit sexism. He was like, at the very end, he was like, don't tell your wife about this.

Speaker:

There's lots of things I don't tell my wife about either. He clearly told someone. And

Speaker:

I think that kind of attempt to isolate someone is also a classic, you know, police tactic.

Speaker:

Cyrus's charges also were ultimately dropped because there's absolutely no charter grounds

Speaker:

for arresting someone for peaceful protests on an overpass sidewalk. So cops will always

Speaker:

be trying to infiltrate our movements and develop informants. And I think if we maintain openness,

Speaker:

transparency, even as we escalate towards civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action.

Speaker:

That is always the best way to operate in the face of any kinds of police efforts to infiltrate

Speaker:

our movements. We just have to assume that that's always the case. And I think it can't allow

Speaker:

us not to have faith in people's good intentions and entry into our movements, because then

Speaker:

it just insinuates all kind of paranoia and really damages our ability to have faith in

Speaker:

each other, which is... really the only thing we have up against money and power. Just to

Speaker:

speak to your earlier point, Kevin Walby, who's a really super smart criminal justice professor

Speaker:

who studies policing, had a great phrase that I hadn't heard before which was strategic incapacitation.

Speaker:

And it's a kind of academic term, but it comes from the literature studying policing and it

Speaker:

emerges in the post-Occupy moment to try to explain. the role of police in that moment,

Speaker:

but certainly in many other moments. And I think that's a really good explanation for what the

Speaker:

police and government intentions are with this kind of crackdown. That yes, precisely bogus

Speaker:

charges, these kinds of very chilling and dramatic and aggressive arrests are intended to try

Speaker:

to undermine people's motivation to become involved in movements, especially new people. But I

Speaker:

think ultimately it hasn't worked, which is what's... So great. I think you're right on

Speaker:

that, but what it does do is it definitely drains a lot of resources. Definitely. Right? Even

Speaker:

if folks are still as motivated and some of them are even saying like, fuck my bail conditions,

Speaker:

you know, like literally have not slowed down at all. But you know, we're having to contribute

Speaker:

a lot to community defense funds and lawyers having to donate their time constantly to keep

Speaker:

this rotation of activists, get them out. get their bail conditions cleared, try to get some

Speaker:

of these charges dropped. So how maddening to find out that the cops are getting pre and

Speaker:

post charge consultations and advice from the secret committee that we had hinted at. Yeah,

Speaker:

so at long last, we'll get to the, I've been calling it a secretive committee because it's

Speaker:

not entirely secret in the sense that The people who know about it are, as I heard about this

Speaker:

from some lawyers who told me, to their surprise, these are defense lawyers, to their surprise,

Speaker:

as they were trying to negotiate withdrawals for some of these, for some of the most spurious

Speaker:

and bogus charges with Crown prosecutors, they were finding out that there was this committee

Speaker:

within the Attorney General's ministry that was intervening. in an effort to prevent the

Speaker:

withdrawal of these charges, to encourage more severe charges from being applied. And so I

Speaker:

started to look into this committee. And I say secretive in the sense that there is like a

Speaker:

cookie crumb trail out there because this advisory committee, which is made up of about two dozen

Speaker:

Crown prosecutors, most active, some resigned. or retired, excuse me, basically serve officially

Speaker:

to advise police before they lay charges in any hate-related investigations. And the cookie

Speaker:

crumb trail I found because often they give presentations to police conferences and those

Speaker:

are the few times where their membership in this hate crime working group is... indicated.

Speaker:

But I, once I had a sense of this from lawyers, I started trying to contact the ministry of

Speaker:

the attorney general. And it was funny, this happens sometimes, you get an immediate response

Speaker:

from in this case, the communications person who said, Oh, well, yeah, you know, received,

Speaker:

we'll, we'll look in, we'll look into this for you and get back to you. And then radio silence.

Speaker:

And then I left phone messages and followed up with emails over several months. And zero.

Speaker:

And so I started calling the Crown prosecutors themselves who I had an inkling that they might

Speaker:

be part of this group. And they would freak out when I when I got them on the phone and

Speaker:

be like, I can't talk to you. Like call the media spokespeople. I said, I've already done

Speaker:

that. Can you just confirm for me whether you are part of this group or not? And what is

Speaker:

the basic mandate? And they're like, I can't do that. And then I and then I really lucked

Speaker:

out. I'd started piecing

Speaker:

One of the assistant deputy ministers had written a memo to police service boards across the

Speaker:

country about the hate crime working group. And the Windsor police board, thank you so

Speaker:

much, accidentally, seems like accidentally just posted it. That's the first time ever

Speaker:

we've thanked a police board. Yes. Posted it on their website as part of a cache of documents.

Speaker:

Oopsies. oopsies, and that had the full list finally of all the members and it had an outlining

Speaker:

of the responsibilities of this hate crime working group. When did they do this? So it was formed

Speaker:

in it was formed in 2019. Yeah, but when did you get that release? Oh, that was a few weeks

Speaker:

ago. So I've been you must have been so giddy. I was so happy. I can imagine Martin. And I

Speaker:

was like, yeah, sometimes you get these sometimes you catch these lucky breaks from cops from

Speaker:

cops. Well, for the police service board. So who knows? Maybe their local city, local city

Speaker:

councilors. So we, that confirmed the people who were in the group and, you know, we were

Speaker:

doing research about the, the people involved. And it was interesting to discover that, um,

Speaker:

some of them had very clearly articulated views about Israel and Palestine. Um, notable biases,

Speaker:

one person in particular, or this to one of the chair has described herself of this. advisory

Speaker:

committee has described herself as being committed and loving the state of Israel. Another one

Speaker:

through some open source research I discovered has signed siege petitions, has given presentations

Speaker:

about using the law to very pro-Israeli legal groups that are trying to very aggressively

Speaker:

defend what Israel is doing in Gaza. I want to give the title for that because I feel like

Speaker:

it could be the title of this episode even. What did she call it? Leveraging criminal law

Speaker:

for critical action. That's the quiet part out loud. Yeah. Critical action is kind of couch.

Speaker:

It's kind of vague. But like, yeah, leveraging. It's a great point. Leveraging law, instrumentalizing

Speaker:

the law. The law is not, you know, in the in the liberal imagination, not supposed to be

Speaker:

leveraged. It's just supposed to be accorded to, you know. adhere to, not leveraged and

Speaker:

instrumentalized or weaponized. So that was, yeah, quite fascinating. She also let loose

Speaker:

on her LinkedIn post a few times and called a Canadian pro-Palestinian activist a terrorist.

Speaker:

The individual question is like, actually has noxious views, like they've said anti-Semitic

Speaker:

things and they've been condemned by many Palestinian solidarity groups, but. Persona non grata at

Speaker:

most actions. Yes. Yes, but definitely has not been charged with any terrorism related offenses.

Speaker:

So it was very revealing of the biases and outlook of one of these people who is supposed to be

Speaker:

advising the police on what is and isn't a hate crime. And that was that an active Crown prosecutor.

Speaker:

She resigned. She retired like about a year ago. And so yeah, so this committee far from

Speaker:

merely providing advice about what charges should be laid, was actually taking quite an active

Speaker:

interventionist role in trying to shape how police operate, not just giving them backing,

Speaker:

but encouraging a more aggressive crackdown on activists. In investigating them, I also

Speaker:

learned about a previous instance when they had been involved well before October 7th,

Speaker:

this dates back to 2021, when a Hamilton-based rabbi and activist with the IJV, David Mevisar,

Speaker:

had been arrested and charged for having just splashed some soluble red paint on the steps

Speaker:

of the Israeli consulate in protest of, at that time, Israel bombing Gaza and killing, I think,

Speaker:

260 people, flattening several residential buildings. And he had been charged with mischief. I spoke

Speaker:

to the lawyer who defended him and he recalls how, you know, in cases like this, like it's

Speaker:

barely a criminal charge, what he did. In these kinds of situations, it's almost automatic

Speaker:

that the Crown will accept community service or just withdraw the charges. Or sometimes

Speaker:

pay for the cost of repair. Exactly, or a donation to some kind of community charity. But in this

Speaker:

case, the lawyer was stunned when what actually happened was two very high profile, high ranking,

Speaker:

Crown prosecutors were deployed to work on the case. Both of them members of the hate crime

Speaker:

working group. Deployed. That sounds ominous. And one of them was the person in question

Speaker:

I was telling you about who has, you know, talked about leveraging the law with pro-Israeli groups.

Speaker:

Rochelle Derenfeld. Derenfeld? That's right. And they similarly, as in all these other cases

Speaker:

we've seen recently, you know, were pushing for more severe charges, were dragged out the

Speaker:

case for months and months and months. There was one other fascinating revelation that emerged

Speaker:

from this, which I think tells you a lot about the kind of political outlook and connections

Speaker:

of this group, which was, you know, in these situations, often police will you know, get

Speaker:

a victim statement from the victims, in this case, quote unquote, victims, the, you know,

Speaker:

the, the Israeli consulate staff, um, those stairs and yes, the stairs, soluble paint,

Speaker:

um, washed off by within an hour, um, by a rabbi of all people, a real menace, um, to Jewish

Speaker:

people. So, so what was striking is, and this came out through the the court proceedings

Speaker:

that the police hadn't actually been able to get through to the Israeli consulate staff.

Speaker:

But who had been able to get through to the consulate staff and was able to provide a statement

Speaker:

from them was these Crown prosecutors, these members of the hate crime working group. So

Speaker:

they had greater access to the Israeli consulate, representatives of the Israeli government than

Speaker:

the police themselves. Which to my mind... you know, shows that the kind of evident interlocks

Speaker:

that exists between essentially government officials, crown prosecutors in this case, and the Israeli

Speaker:

interests within the, within the Canadian state. Yeah. And I think, I think that is a larger

Speaker:

takeaway from the story to me, which is that I think this moment of an unfolding genocide

Speaker:

in Gaza and an incredible upsurge of mobilization. solidarity mobilizations in the West has, I

Speaker:

think, laid bare a lot of the latent pro-Israeli biases that exist in a lot of our institutions.

Speaker:

And they've had to, in order to defend the indefensible, a lot of these networks and interests within

Speaker:

institutions like the, in this case, the Attorney General's ministry have had to be activated

Speaker:

in a way where we have become aware of their operations in a way that we were not before.

Speaker:

I was going to say they're not latent anymore. That's the silver lining of all this, that

Speaker:

we're becoming far more conscious of these entrenched interests. And now the next task is to unveil

Speaker:

them and shine a spotlight and start to campaign against their ability to wreck the kind of

Speaker:

damage they're trying to wreck. Yeah, I just want to like, I can see people because I'm

Speaker:

feeling it when you hear just how brazen it's become. right, how open and you know when Martin

Speaker:

talks about them being activated and it was such gall you know that as though that might

Speaker:

be an assertive thing, a positive thing on their behalf right, that they just do this kind of

Speaker:

out in the open more so or you know it's been forced out in the open but there's been space

Speaker:

made for it but at the same time the reason it was always sort of hidden is because it's

Speaker:

so illegitimate and any kind of oppressive system like that. hurdle is taking the mask off because

Speaker:

once fully exposed as we are seeing now even with the concept of Zionism being fully understood

Speaker:

and the consequences of it, it's quickly becoming understood and then railed against, right?

Speaker:

Because once you fully understand something that oppressive or corrupt, you know, in the

Speaker:

case of the police relations with this lobby group. It's, it can't hold forever. It can't

Speaker:

hold out in the open like that forever. I do think the brazenness, for instance, of this

Speaker:

advisory committee, and certainly of lobby groups like CJE and others, is a sign of weakness.

Speaker:

It's not a sign of strength. I think they are, you know, in trying to defend the indefensible,

Speaker:

are finding themselves having to make... ever more contorted arguments, ever more baseless

Speaker:

allegations, or, you know, in the case of this advisory committee, yeah, put their finger

Speaker:

on the scale in a way they haven't had to in the past in order to do as much as possible

Speaker:

to do apologetics for the Israeli state. And so I think that, yeah, that is positive. Of

Speaker:

course, the consequences are positive, but it's positive that we now can see it. It doesn't

Speaker:

always feel that way though, you know what I mean? Where you're just like, how can they

Speaker:

be getting away with this? Like, how can you be so bold? The reason there's a reason that

Speaker:

they're, you know, the ministry didn't get back to us and there's a re you know, operating

Speaker:

in the shadows means that they can operate unaccountably, you know, my hope was that in reporting the

Speaker:

contours of this group's operations, it would mean that outlets like this Toronto star maybe

Speaker:

would follow up. And the government wouldn't be able not to return their phone calls in

Speaker:

the way that they don't return the phone calls of a small independent media outlet. That hasn't

Speaker:

happened and that probably speaks to the biases operative in places like the Toronto Star.

Speaker:

But at least we have lit the first match and hopefully now others eventually can start to

Speaker:

ask questions. Maybe it will take politicians also. demanding some answers about the operation

Speaker:

of this group, which is really about the politicization of the law, this overt leveraging of the law

Speaker:

to silence, smear, delegitimize and undermine the struggle for Palestinian rights. But now

Speaker:

that it's more in the open, we can call it out in a way we couldn't before. The danger is

Speaker:

though, if we don't, if it becomes normalized. despite his exposure, then we can only count

Speaker:

on this to repeat itself over and over again with every other movement that challenges the

Speaker:

status quo. Because although you've done an excellent job of demonstrating the ties between

Speaker:

Zionists and supporters of the Israeli lobby to the actions of the Toronto police and the

Speaker:

secretive committee, attorney general's office, Its application will extend beyond that, but

Speaker:

also that's what's giving a lot of folks in powerful places who perhaps could care less

Speaker:

about Israel one way or the other. Capitalists just, you know, in it for capital. This is

Speaker:

such an immense tool to be able to increase police powers and just the disregard for The

Speaker:

consequences of law, it means like how many times can you charge people and have them dropped

Speaker:

where there's no consequences? Because I imagine there's some of these activists, I hope, that

Speaker:

are launching legal battles, perhaps against wrongful arrest, wrongful prosecution. Because

Speaker:

some of them are just so blatantly obvious, especially when I think of the case of Skye

Speaker:

Johnson, where all of these charges were thrown at her for literally putting up couple sheets

Speaker:

of paper with scotch tape on a Starbucks and or the examples you gave. Oh, I'm not familiar

Speaker:

with this case. Yeah, that's in the Avenue Road area as well. It kind of what started police

Speaker:

attention in that area because they started to mobilize around this one particular activist

Speaker:

that was just like picked on and made an example of. So now if you Google her name, we had her

Speaker:

on the show, but. If you Google her name, unfortunately, it's just all these headlines about being a

Speaker:

terrorist supporter and being accused of a hate crime. And, you know, when you get her story,

Speaker:

the bail conditions imposed on her for taping up paper. And this was very, very early on

Speaker:

in the growth of the Palestinian solidarity movement. Like, not that I hate saying, you

Speaker:

know, using October 7th always as a measure, but... were kind of forced to sometimes. But

Speaker:

yeah, it's incredible the stories that we probably don't even know about. Like if I'm telling

Speaker:

you about Skye Johnson, how many other stories that, you know, they just didn't wanna tell

Speaker:

them or they turned informant, you know, or, you know, it's just too much for them and they've

Speaker:

stepped away from the movement now forever because it's just too much. Like some of these consequences,

Speaker:

even if your charges are dropped, like their lives have been turned upside down. So we clearly

Speaker:

have to get more exposure on this particular committee here in Ontario. Have there been

Speaker:

groups that are picking up on mobilizing around it that folks can? Not as far as I know. I

Speaker:

do, you know, as you know very well, there is a lot of legal support work happening and it

Speaker:

seems to me, yeah, defending some of these individuals, falsely accused of hate-motivated crimes. seems

Speaker:

to be the priority. It's hard to wrap your head around, you know? I don't know if it's necessarily

Speaker:

a thing that can be mobilized well around, you know? You mean it's like hard to put your finger

Speaker:

on like one demand or one individual to resign or anything like that, like how do you, it's

Speaker:

systemic. Yeah, exactly, yeah, that's part of it as well, you know? Like, do we want, are

Speaker:

we calling for them to democratize the hate crime working group, you know? No, probably

Speaker:

not. We could probably be better without the entity at all. I want to interject here because

Speaker:

I have an important point in my note that I didn't get to. And that is for folks out there

Speaker:

need to understand the support that things like hate crime units have. And hate crimes are

Speaker:

awful. I'm not sitting here saying we just need to let that exist in our society. But obviously,

Speaker:

you might already know I come from an abolitionist point of view to begin with, but the NDP, not

Speaker:

even just in its policy book or in its convention, but in their platform for the last election,

Speaker:

they had promises to increase funding for hate crime units. And you rightfully point out in

Speaker:

your original article about Project Resolute that Mayor Olivia Chow fully supported this

Speaker:

focus on safety and policing in response to what was happening in Palestine and the police

Speaker:

board has done nothing but facilitate all of this. So if you're looking to mobilize around

Speaker:

it in any way it could be at least to demand that your

Speaker:

the solution of hate crime units as a means to make our community safer. And I like this

Speaker:

goes beyond defunding the police, but you know, the, the NDP would never say they're pro police,

Speaker:

but they do, they do advocate for using these kinds of tools and to increase their funding

Speaker:

to the levels that we're seeing now that are then being utilized against our own movements.

Speaker:

So yes, the normalization of that is out of stock. Yeah. And I, you know, I agree. And

Speaker:

I do think that the weaponization of the hate crimes framework also raises some important,

Speaker:

deeper philosophical and political questions about problems inherent to the hate crimes

Speaker:

framework to start with. So, I mean, the hate crime framework individualizes the nature of

Speaker:

reactionary violence. It makes these things out to be that the culprit of such reactionary

Speaker:

violence is not reactionary ideologies, reactionary forces, reactionary political parties, it's

Speaker:

sole individuals. And it also lends itself to policing solutions. And ultimately, hate that

Speaker:

is an outgrowth of white supremacy, racism, all the normal operations of capitalism are

Speaker:

not best. attacked as hate crimes, but as those ideologies that we should be naming and fighting

Speaker:

politically. So police aren't going to be the solution to hate crimes. So I didn't realize

Speaker:

that the NDP had included that in their platform. So that's a good one for those working to shift

Speaker:

those kinds of policies. That would be an important one. And I think, yeah, I think now, over the

Speaker:

last few months... we've seen the in probably the most brazen and clear-cut ways how the

Speaker:

hate crime framework is so easily weaponizable against a marginalized subjugated population

Speaker:

like Palestinians and their allies. I mean, I think as one person I spoke to, I didn't

Speaker:

put this in the piece, but it's like, because it felt like too, it felt so obvious, but also

Speaker:

beyond the bounds of the piece, philosophically. I mean, if the police were genuinely interested

Speaker:

in pursuing hate crimes, then they would be, you know, laying siege to the government consulates

Speaker:

and government institutions, including Canada's, including the U.S. Embassy, including the rebel

Speaker:

news truck, Israeli consulate on this on this issue, you know, and obviously, like, that's

Speaker:

not the world we live in. That's not the function of police. But if we take hate crimes at their

Speaker:

face value, then that's what it would mean. But obviously, we live in a in the real world

Speaker:

where police are. servants and of capital of capitalist of their capitalist masters. So

Speaker:

that's not how things roll out. We kind of did the same with the Emergencies Act too. I feel

Speaker:

there was support for it because of the horribleness that became the Ottawa convoy. Right. Like

Speaker:

the well support on some sides. I think it was mistaken. Yeah. There were some proponent but

Speaker:

generally the NDP and some folks who just saw no other solution, right? Community-based solution

Speaker:

to the problem looked to police as that solution. And we often step into, when I say we, I don't

Speaker:

mean me and Mark. Yes. I mean, we collectively as the left, and I know we're not a homogenous

Speaker:

group either, but you know, it just exists that current of. not sometimes recognizing these

Speaker:

mechanisms because in the moment they may benefit us or at least curtail our perceived opponents.

Speaker:

Yes. And so we, yeah, we muddy those waters or we normalize things that really we should

Speaker:

be challenging, but they're just so difficult. Like it's really hard to have that hate crimes

Speaker:

unit shouldn't really be a thing conversation when folks. are experiencing hate crimes, especially

Speaker:

when you talk to, well, Muslim people will tell you every day of their lives here, visibly

Speaker:

Muslim people experience what you could call hate crimes all the time. And there's got to

Speaker:

be a solution to that. So it's such a deep conversation that people aren't making time for. So the

Speaker:

easy answer is, okay, we won't fund police, but we will fund these hate crime units because

Speaker:

that's really bad. That's something we can't just pretend doesn't happen. No, and Jewish,

Speaker:

I mean, Jewish communities are subject to hate crimes as well. Yeah, I think we have to think

Speaker:

hard about how our safety is not to be found in the police. And I mean, this the same principle

Speaker:

extends to the discussion about terrorist labels as well. You know, there are currents in the

Speaker:

left who want, for instance, like organizations like the JDL to be labeled as terrorists in

Speaker:

the same way that Palestinian organizations have been labeled as terrorist entities. But

Speaker:

this is an inherently reactionary framework that will only shore up the ability of the

Speaker:

government to use it against marginalized communities, left-wing organizations. And so it's a real

Speaker:

mistake, I think, to play into that. And the NDP certainly does that on that front as well.

Speaker:

We've seen this happening on the foreign interference debate as well, and it's playing out now, yeah,

Speaker:

I think, in the hate crime debate as well. To the extent that there is a debate, I don't

Speaker:

think it's like a particularly live debate yet, but it should it should happen. I think I think

Speaker:

it's going to take more journalism, including from the mainstream outlets, to elevate it

Speaker:

to an issue of, you know, public debate. Yeah, like pressing public debate. I wonder through

Speaker:

all of the interviews that you've done on this and all the research, whether you could offer

Speaker:

any advice to organizers and activists who are. in this environment now, like maybe they haven't

Speaker:

experienced it, that heavy hand just yet. But you know, especially from maybe your discussions

Speaker:

with lawyers and what has been working for them in terms of getting charges dropped or pushing

Speaker:

back against this influence that's coming from the Attorney General's office. I mean, I would

Speaker:

just say keep doing what you're doing. And yeah, as someone who has been... on and off involved

Speaker:

in Palestinian solidarity for 20 years now. Like it has been incredible to witness the

Speaker:

flourishing of this movement, the entry of people who have never been active before in any kind

Speaker:

of political organizing. And it seems clear to me that the attempts to chill the movement

Speaker:

haven't worked. Like, yes, it's true, as you mentioned earlier, that many of the... you

Speaker:

know, day-to-day organizers are now wrapped up in doing legal solidarity and fundraising.

Speaker:

I mean, that to some degree is inevitable, I think, in our work. Um, but I, it has been

Speaker:

moving to me that in his latest incarnation, the, the student encampments, people, people's

Speaker:

appetite and, um, courage has grown by leaps and bounds rather than diminishing in the face

Speaker:

of, you know, police threats, police brutality and, uh, the long arm of the law. Yeah, I think

Speaker:

I'm inspired. And I think the fact that the charges are being dropped is a very good sign

Speaker:

that the police overreached, probably in a way that they understood and that we're all on

Speaker:

the right path. And the more we can broaden the movement, bring newcomers in, the stronger

Speaker:

we'll be in fighting this really pitched battle right now over defining the terms of the debate

Speaker:

that I think will play out now in the coming years. And I think our hand, the hand of those

Speaker:

committed to Palestinian liberation and dignity for all who live in the Middle East has been

Speaker:

strengthened, despite the brazen and aggressive and much better funded efforts of our opponents.

Speaker:

So I'm quite heartened about where we're at, just the horrendous toll that unfold in Gaza.

Speaker:

I think for those of us who have a long-term view, which we have to, unfortunately, because

Speaker:

these struggles for decolonization take decades and generations, I think I'm very hopeful,

Speaker:

despite everything, about where the movement is at right now. And I think the work that

Speaker:

everyone is doing and the sacrifices people are making will pay off. They will. Thank you,

Speaker:

Martin. Again, I very much appreciate your role and your team's role at the breach in giving

Speaker:

us ammunition in our fight. Quite often we sense that these things are happening, they feel

Speaker:

unfair, it feels heavy handed, you know it's corrupt, especially some of the charges we've

Speaker:

talked about like unlawful assembly while masked as added charges, and you just, you could see

Speaker:

that it was

Speaker:

it is and we know what its end purpose is. We know where it's coming from. We've got some

Speaker:

names and that's a fucking start to eat away at that part. And we it's also a flag to other

Speaker:

urban centers that are likely going to be experiencing this kind of interference as well. Right? Perhaps

Speaker:

you under covered something in Ontario. But I can't imagine that this is not replicated

Speaker:

elsewhere to some level. So, you know, exposing it here starts that process. And I imagine

Speaker:

it's very validating for some of the people who have been through it, maybe even saw it,

Speaker:

but couldn't get anybody to listen to them to kind of uncover it all and show it to them

Speaker:

and be like, you're not, you're not imagining this. This is happening. This is a lot more

Speaker:

coming down on you than you deserved. Yeah. That's important for our movement that there's

Speaker:

journalists out there doing that work to essentially protect the activists in the long run so that

Speaker:

we can do what we gotta do. So thank you. Thank you, Martin, also for taking the time and coming

Speaker:

on Blueprints. We very much appreciate it. That is a wrap on another episode of Blueprints

Speaker:

of Disruption. Thank you for joining us. Also a very big thank you to the producer of our

Speaker:

show, Santiago Helu-Quintero. Blueprints of Disruption is an independent production operated

Speaker:

cooperatively. You can follow us on Twitter at BPEofDisruption. If you'd like to help us

Speaker:

continue disrupting the status quo, please share our content and if you have the means, consider

Speaker:

becoming a patron. Not only does our support come from the progressive community, so does

Speaker:

our content. So reach out to us and let us know what or who we should be amplifying. So until

Speaker:

next time, keep disrupting.

Listen for free

Show artwork for Blueprints of Disruption

About the Podcast

Blueprints of Disruption
A Podcast for Rabble Rousers
Blueprints of Disruption is dedicated to amplifying the work of activists, organizers and rabble rousers. This weekly podcast, hosted by Jessa McLean and Santiago Helou Quintero, features in-depth discussions that explore different ways to challenge capitalism, decolonize spaces and create movements on the ground. Together we will disrupt the status quo one episode at a time.

About your hosts

Jessa McLean

Profile picture for Jessa McLean
Host, Jessa McLean is a socialist political and community organizer from Ontario.

Santiago Helou Quintero

Profile picture for Santiago Helou Quintero
Producer