Anti-NATO? Antisemitic, Apparently

It feels as though someone, somewhere, says this every day, but this week has been an extremely stupid time in Canadian news media. The primary culprit has been a slew of politicians declaring that a protest against NATO on November 22 in Montreal devolved into an "antisemitic" riot.

One may ask themselves, "How does a protest against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization foster the environment for an antisemitic riot?" That's a very good question. There has been no answer.

Like always, it's important to interpret the coverage as perpetuating a bias towards police narratives. The Globe and Mail piece on the riot describes a "clash" between anti-NATO and pro-Palestinian protesters and police. Actions on the part of the protesters are described as "attempting to smash windows of the downtown Montreal convention centre." Montreal police are cited early, declaring their "dispersal operation" was caused by "several infractions committed during the ongoing protest."

What were these infractions? In terms of arrests, two men and one woman were arrested for "obstructing a police officer in their duty." Additionally, the woman was charged with "assaulting a peace officer."

Postmedia-owned newspaper The Montreal Gazette highlighted the salacious details in the headline. "Cars burned, windows smashed at pro-Palestinian, anti-NATO demonstration in Montreal."

Actions of the protesters, and those implied to be by them, are frontloaded. These include setting "an effigy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on fire in the middle of the crowd." Then they describe "small explosive devices and metal items" thrown at police officers, without describing from where or what these explosive devices were. Firecrackers? IEDs? Grenades? Mentos in Diet Coke cans? No. As of other outlet's reporting, they were "smoke bombs." The metal items possibly refer to metal barriers tossed into the street.

As for one of the burning cars, journalist Hadi Hassin posted images obtained by TVA that revealed a likely cause was a smoke grenade fired by the police. Montreal police have yet to comment at time of writing.

Violent? Certainly, keeping in mind the targets of violence were simple property. Violent towards humans? The police were, as protesters reportedly were injured and taken to the hospital. Yes, one protester was charged with assaulting an officer, though whether they're found guilty remains to be seen. But no acts of antisemitism have been reported from this protest.

That's not what politicians believe, however. According to them, this entire demonstration was an explosion of antisemitic hate.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau posted "Acts of antisemitism, intimidation, and violence must be condemned wherever we see them." Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, never missing an opportunity to attack Trudeau, said he refused to condemn "anti-semitic riots in Montreal." Quebec Premier François Legault described the event as "hateful... with attacks specifically targeting the Jewish community." Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly said the demonstration "was actually violence, hate and antisemitism." At the same conference, Defence Minister Bill Blair condemned the "hatred and antisemitism that was on display, in the strongest possible terms."

With this rhetoric coming from our political leaders, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Jewish people were dragged out into the streets of Montreal and beaten. But again, there have been absolutely no reports of any antisemitic attacks or behaviour at the event. Zero.

This isn't speculation. CBC News reported that, "As of Saturday afternoon, Montreal police said they have not received any reports of antisemitic acts or other hate crimes related to the demonstration."

It's entirely possible, though unlikely, that acts of antisemitism will be uncovered. Montreal Police Chief Fady Dagher stated he anticipates more arrests in the coming weeks. However, as The Canadian Press reported Dagher "could not make a firm link between Friday's acts and antisemitism." For the purposes of these statements, however, it's irrelevant. At the time all these comments were made, there was zero evidence of antisemitic attacks or hate crimes.

Despite this, it's often reported as two opposing sides words against each other. In an article by The Canadian Press (via Global News), this is made readily apparent. Politicians called the violence "acts of anti-Semitism, but protesters deny the claim..."

The purpose of the demonstration, which thankfully has been reported, was to protest NATO. Divest for Palestine and the Convergence of Anti-Capitalist Struggles were the two groups who organized the protest on Friday. The Canadian Press (via CityNews) reported comments by Benoît Allard, a member of Divest for Palestine, who said he and other protesters were injured by police. But crucially, they report his comments that they were demonstrating against the state of Israel and Netanyahu.

Another protest was organized on Saturday by Le Mouvement Québécois pour la Paix. Jad Kabbanji, the president of the organization, said NATO countries have supplied arms to Israel, and that the military alliance has "destabilized multiple regions across the globe and created military conflicts, notably in the Middle East and eastern Europe." Greg Beaune, their vice president, also condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, adding that NATO has stoked tensions in regards to the war.

The purposes of these demonstrations, as expressed by multiple organizers, is to draw attention to Canada (and NATO's) complicity in genocide committed by Israel and to condemn militarism perpetrated by NATO. A burnt effigy of Netanyahu does not qualify as antisemitic, especially considering he is wanted for crimes against humanity. Broken windows, burned cars and smoke bombs in isolation don't translate to Kristallnacht, and to draw comparison is deeply insulting to victims of Nazi Germany.

Let's follow through the implications of calling this protest and subsequent "riot" antisemitic. Our leaders have so entwined Israel with Judaism that any demonstration against Israel, a country currently under investigation for genocide, led by a man charged with crimes against humanity, is antisemitic. Further, following this logic, protesting NATO is also antisemitic. Considering how a main pillar of modern antisemitism is the belief that Jewish people are responsible for running the world, this association has horrific implications. It doesn't matter, apparently. Israel is to be defended at any cost.

Why is news media refusing to confront statements from these politicians? Why have they only reached out for comment from organizers, rather than directly challenge patently false assumptions by politicians? Why are they using Jewish people as a shield to defend Israel from all protest?

An actual focus on antisemitic instances is overshadowed by this opportunistic outrage. The discourse has reached the point where no actual evidence is needed to label pro-Palestinian demonstrations as antisemitic. It's patently absurd.