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.