Ezra Levant details Ukraine’s drone strikes on Russia’s Arctic and Siberian bomber bases, crippling a third of its Tu-22 and Tu-95 fleet—nuclear-capable assets exposed by an Obama-era arms treaty. Meanwhile, Toronto’s June 2nd pro-Hamas fundraiser saw chants of Jew hatred, police inaction under Chief Myron Demkew, and a replica hand grenade ignored, contrasting with swift responses to unrelated gun threats. Sue Ann Levy links this to Mayor Olivia Chow’s alleged anti-Semitic influence and rapid immigration under Trudeau (817,000 migrants by mid-2025), questioning why peaceful Muslims don’t condemn such violence while groups like Queers FOR Palestine normalize it. The episode warns of escalating threats—from Russian retaliation to potential domestic terror—highlighting systemic failures in law enforcement and political accountability that leave communities vulnerable. [Automatically generated summary]
Ukraine launching long-range drone attacks, actually based from within Russia, destroying about a third, reports say, of Russia's heavy bomber fleet.
Just incredible.
But like Pearl Harbor, is it a tactical victory that'll cause Russia to do things it never contemplated the same way Pearl Harbor pulled America into the war?
I'll talk about some of the strategic things to think about.
I'd also like to show you a lot of video clips.
So if you can, please go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe, and get the video version of this podcast.
Today's $8 a month, which helps us stay strong.
So please consider doing that.
Oh, yeah, one more thing.
Feel like Ottawa's got its boot on Alberta's neck?
Well, it's time to push back.
Join us for Rebel News Live, Saturday, June 14th at the Red Deer Curling Center.
Spend the day with Ezra Levant, me, Sheila Gunnreid, and a powerhouse lineup of freedom fighters, political thinkers, and grassroots leaders.
We're talking energy, free speech, and especially independence, and how the West can finally stop getting screwed.
This isn't just a conference.
It's a rallying cry.
Tickets are going fast.
Get yours now at donegettingscrewed.com.
Stand up, speak out, be there.
Tonight, Ukraine makes a daring attack on Russia's strategic bombers.
What happens next?
It's June 2nd, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Shame on you, you sensorious bug.
Hi, everybody.
I'm recording this in the morning.
I am off to Regina tonight for our Saskatchewan town hall on Western independence.
Surprise Attack Revealed00:15:03
It'll be very interesting.
We have about 500 people signed up, which is quite a few for a city the size of Regina.
So I'll have a full report tonight and tomorrow.
But I wanted to talk today about Russia and Ukraine.
They're meeting today for peace talks in Turkey, which is a good thing.
But I'm not sure how successful those meetings are going to be given the surprise attack that Ukraine launched on Russia over the weekend.
I've seen it compared to Pearl Harbor, actually.
Ukrainian drones launched from within Russia itself, attacking Russian air bases across the country, including as far away from the Ukrainian front line as possible.
Bases in the high Arctic, bases near Mongolia.
These are literally thousands of miles away from Ukraine.
Ukraine built a contraption that looked like part of a modular home, and they hired semi-truck drivers, Russians, to deliver these modular home components to various places in Russia.
And then at a key moment, they told the unsuspecting truck drivers to pull over to the side of the road for a minute.
And then the roofs of these fake modular homes opened up and swarms of attack drones flew out and were piloted into the nearby air bases and blew up a great number of Russia's strategic bombers.
The bombers were out in the open.
I'm going to talk a little bit more about that in a moment.
You'll be surprised why they were out in the open.
They were just sitting there on the runway.
And you can see footage taken from the drones themselves as the drone operators casually flew right over the bombers, selecting them and then blowing them up.
You can see the billowing black smoke from across air bases.
It was devastating.
Probably the single greatest loss of Russian equipment since the Second World War.
There were Tupolev 22s and 95s.
Those are sort of like America's B-1s and B-52s.
So they're not the ultra-modern versions, but they've been updated over the years.
They're the backbone of Russia's strategic bomber command.
That is, they can carry large bombs and large missiles, including cruise missiles, including nuclear missiles.
They've used the cruise missiles a lot during the Ukraine war, but their permanent purpose is as a strategic nuclear deterrent.
Like the West, Russia has nukes at sea in submarines, on land in silos and large launcher trucks, and in the air on bombers like these.
You have to take Ukraine's victory lap announcement with a grain of salt, but they claim they destroyed a third of Russia's long-range bomber fleet in a single day.
Billions of dollars worth.
And it's not just the money.
I don't even know if they're still making those bombers in Russia.
And if they are, that's likely years away.
It's an astonishing military feat.
I mentioned the Pearl Harbor comparison, which I've seen a lot.
I think it's pretty apt.
I've also seen it compared to the Israeli spycraft that supplied the Hezbollah terrorist group with pagers and then detonated those pagers, wiping out much of the leadership of Hezbollah.
By the way, Russia claims that Ukraine tried to shoot down Vladimir Putin's personal helicopter with a drone swarm.
Here's a clip of that from just last week.
It was absolutely right.
In the period of time, when the president worked in Kursk, the opponent started an unprecedented attack with the military aircraft.
In this region, there were destroyed 46 military aircraft aircraft.
I have noticed that the intensity of the attack during the flight of the VHK on the territory of Kursk has significantly increased.
Therefore, we did a defensive fight at the same time and provided the safety of the President's plane in the air of the flight of the President's plane.
The task was completed.
The attack of the enemy of the enemy was reflected, and all the air targets were defeated.
So, the President's plane was practically in the zone of the military action?
Yes, exactly.
In the epicenter, the attack was massed by the enemy of the military aircraft.
Now, it's hard to know what to believe in the fog of war.
Propaganda and information are weapons too, of course, but the visual images coming from different Russian regions was striking.
I think it was a devastating blow.
There is jubilation on the Ukrainian side.
I've also seen mixed reports as to whether the U.S. was briefed on this mission.
Some reports say no, some say yes.
I find it hard to believe that Trump would support such an escalation on the eve of peace talks in Turkey, given how badly he seems to want those talks to succeed.
Remember, he once said he could end this war in 24 hours, but on the other hand, maybe Russia did not seem motivated enough to negotiate.
And so this sharp, swift attack may have adjusted their thinking about the risks of a continued war.
Maybe Trump's the guy who instructed it to proceed.
We don't know.
I mean, Ukraine has had some daring missions like this over the course of the war.
They've sunk most of Russia's Black Sea fleet, including the enormous flagship Moskva, Moscow.
Ukraine doesn't have a comparable Navy, of course.
The Ukrainian Navy was effectively seized by Russia when it captured the port of Sevastopol.
But Ukraine has become a leading practitioner in asymmetrical warfare.
They didn't need a big battle cruise missile to take out the Moscow or other big ships.
They didn't need a big ship.
is what I'm saying.
They just use missiles, or more and more, they use sea drones.
It also reminds me of the Ukrainian attack on the essential Kerch bridge from Russia into Crimea, another special operation.
I'm quite sure that even Trump and his Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State were unaware of the latest attack that other parts of the U.S., if that's the case, that other parts of the U.S. military would have been intimately involved.
So I actually think Trump probably gave it the green light to get the Russians more voted.
But even if he didn't know, there's no way other parts of the U.S. military didn't know.
Don't take it from a right-wing source.
The New York Times itself brags that the CIA has been directing the war from Kiev, being advisors.
Of course, it's U.S. money, U.S. weapons, U.S. training, U.S. advisors.
And hawkish U.S. senators of both parties, by the way, are eager to take credit for it and to explain their rationale, degrading the Russian military without provoking retaliation against the U.S. itself.
Here's Republican Senator Tim Scott.
By degrading the Russian military, we actually keep our homeland safer.
We keep our troops at home.
And we all understand Article 5 of NATO.
We have to deal with the American people.
I thought you said something about waiting until you return to talk.
So at the end of the day, I'm going to finish my...
I'll be happy to debate on this.
Go ahead and I'll respond.
I'll look forward to this one right now.
So at the end of the day, when you think about the fact that if you want to keep American troops at home, the attack on NATO territory would bring us and our troops in.
By degrading the Russian military, we reduce, if not eliminate, an attack on NATO territory.
Here's Republican Mitt Romney saying the same thing.
Russia attempted to attack Kyiv, the capital of a sovereign nation, has brutalized the people of Ukraine, has kidnapped children, and continues to rain horror upon the people of Ukraine.
I would note that our interest in Ukraine is not as if we're caring only for those people.
Our interest in Ukraine, in my view, is it's in America's interest, its interest in the people of the United States of America that Ukraine is successful in defending itself because the well-being, the livelihood, the life, the freedom, and the prosperity of Americans are also at stake.
And that's the reason that we're involved there.
And no one loves this war more than Lindsey Graham.
Here's what he had to say.
Free or die.
Free or die.
Now we are free.
Yes, and we will be.
And the Russians are dying.
The best money we've ever spent.
Thank you so much.
Now, I don't know if Trump wanted this attack on Russia, but I think it's pretty clear the deep state sure did.
For the entire Cold War, Western spies and generals have only dreamed of decimating Russia's strategic bomber stock in a fell swoop without losing a single man.
And more than that, striking fear into the entire Russian military-industrial complex.
Will there be another swarm attack today?
At the moment I'm recording this, there hasn't been an official response from Vladimir Putin yet.
Russia downplayed the seriousness of the attacks, saying they were limited in effectiveness and that they shot down most of the drones and they called it a terrorist attack.
But I think it's pretty clear that a large number of hard or impossible to replace heavy bombers were destroyed.
I can't believe they struck as far away as they did attacking Murmansk.
I've never been there, but it is so far north.
It's the largest city that's north of the Arctic Circle.
You know, it's 500 kilometers further north than a Kaluit.
Half a million people.
It's very high in the Arctic, and the drones got there.
Now, I don't know if the deep state wants this war to continue forever.
Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly said that he does indeed want peace, but then he often follows that up immediately with demands that seem like non-starters, like the idea that Russia would withdraw from all of Ukraine, including from Crimea, which it annexed a decade ago.
If you watch the entire 20-minute Zelensky meeting with Trump a few months ago, it did seem like he wanted to scupper the deal that he was supposed to sign that day at the White House.
The attack yesterday was spectacular and daring and leading edge, and it'll stop Russia from using heavy bombers to launch missiles at Ukraine from within Russian territory, which was their advantage.
They would take off, fire the missiles, and land all without ever going into Russia, Ukrainian airspace, risking being hit with anti-aircraft defenses.
So that will obviously be degraded now.
But look, Russia on the ground is still grinding away World War I style, World War II style, just trench battles with sheer manpower and artillery, almost like, you know, almost like ancient times.
I mean, yeah, there's drones there, but it's just blood and men.
They pretty much expelled the Ukrainian forces that had invaded the Russian province of Kursk.
And in the last few weeks, they've seized another 100 square miles of Ukraine.
The war grinds on.
Trump is right when he says this is a bloodbath that neither side should want.
Here's Trump a few weeks ago.
I have a message for both parties.
Get this war ended.
We're losing 5,000 soldiers a week, Russian and Ukrainian soldiers, and other people also, by the way.
And I say, get this stupid war finished.
That's my message for both of them.
I think he's getting exasperated.
Maybe he did greenlight this attack.
But here's the thing: here's why this attack on the bombers is different, in my amateur opinion.
Look, killing 5,000 soldiers is a disaster.
It's 5,000 disasters.
And it's happening every week.
And over the years, that adds up to hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded men on both sides.
I don't know if there were any casualties in these drone attacks on the bombers, although I saw a video of a Russian walking into one of these disguised drone launchers, and it seemed to detonate like a booby trap.
But if you said five people had died, I'd believe it as compared to 5,000.
But it greatly degraded Russia's strategic ability, which is why it's so widely cheered by Ukraine and especially NATO allies.
But back to Pearl Harbor and the Israel Pager attack on Hezbollah.
The Israeli pagers took out, I don't know, about 3,000 or so Hezbollah senior leaders, and then shortly afterwards, they fired a missile that killed the senior leader of Hezbollah.
So these attacks on Hezbollah didn't actually degrade Hezbollah's equipment.
That came in other raids, but it totally decapitated the organization.
Like the top 3,000 guys in the terrorist army, it would be like blowing up every Russian soldier above a certain rank, including Putin.
This attack on the bombers did the opposite.
It destroyed valuable and powerful equipment, but left the regime in charge.
That's one difference, obviously.
The Pearl Harbor analogy is a better fit.
A sneak attack far away from the home country, destroying priceless military assets, a shock and awe attack.
That's what happened here.
But remember what Admiral Yamamoto of Japan reportedly said after Pearl Harbor.
Said, I fear all we have done is to waken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.
And that's true.
They killed thousands of Americans that day, December 7th, 1941.
And they sunk a number of capital ships.
Most were repaired, though.
The aircraft carriers were at sea and weren't touched.
But mainly, what did Pearl Harbor do in the sweep of history?
It spurred America into joining the war.
It was the day of infamy, as Roosevelt called it.
America declared war in Japan.
Right afterwards, Germany and Italy declared war in America.
America declared war.
And then the rest is history.
Pearl Harbor was a tactical success.
But I think it was an enormous strategic blunder, don't you think?
I'm not sure if Russia will be like what Yamamoto said.
I think Putin is already filled with a terrible resolve.
I think Russia's economy is already mobilized, as are their men.
Russia was the country that invaded Ukraine in the first place.
It didn't need to be coaxed into this war.
It started the war.
And here's what worries me, and it's what Professor John Mearsheimer has warned about repeatedly.
If Russia faces an existential crisis, if its military is wiped out, if it is driven out of Crimea, it has a nuclear doctrine that allows for a first strike.
That's their standing orders.
Putin's Nuclear Dilemma00:10:57
Can I show you a debate from three years ago between Mearsheimer and Evelyn Farkas of the McCain Institute in Arizona?
So you know she's hawkish.
Listen to Mearsheimer describe his fear about what Putin might do if he's backed into a corner.
And that what John F. Kennedy did during the Cuban Missile Crisis was try to find a way to cool things off.
Now, in response, Farkas says the opposite.
She wants to ramp things up.
She says America could actually join the war directly, though she doesn't go so far as to call for U.S. troops on the ground.
She says that if Russia uses a nuke in Ukraine, the U.S. and NATO should respond with nukes, even though Ukraine isn't in NATO and doesn't have a defense treaty like a NATO ally.
I've watched this video twice and I find Farkas terrifying.
The way she casually talks about using nukes to protect the world order.
Here, watch it.
I'm going to show you a four and a half minute clip.
I hope you don't mind, but I just couldn't stop listening to this.
This was three years ago.
I think we're very close to this.
Take a look.
We know that the one circumstance in which a great power is likely to use nuclear weapons is when its survival is threatened, when it thinks a decisive defeat is being inflicted on it.
And what the Biden administration is bent on doing is inflicting a decisive defeat on Russia.
We are threatening its survival.
We are presenting the Russians with an existential threat.
And this, again, is the one circumstance where they might use nuclear weapons.
And I think we should be going to enormous lengths to make sure that we don't put them into a position where they even countenance using nuclear weapons, much less use them.
Evelyn Farkas, is that the risk here that the U.S. confronts by changing the goal?
Well, Russia's nuclear policy does allow for the use of nuclear weapons first against an adversary if it feels that the existence of the state is in question, that it's in jeopardy.
And I think that leaves a lot of room for subjective interpretation.
And of course, that will be Vladimir Putin's interpretation.
But I think what we cannot forget right now is that we are also a nuclear power.
We have deterrence in place.
Vladimir Putin does not want a nuclear war with the United States or NATO.
And for that matter, he doesn't want a conventional war with us either because he can barely win the one he's waging right now in Ukraine.
So I don't think we should be deterred by this fear that he's going to reach for nuclear weapons.
We cannot rule it out.
I'm not dismissing it.
But I also think that the objective that we have right now, the stakes are so high, it's nothing less.
It's not just about Ukraine.
It's about the international order.
And we're fighting here to stop Vladimir Putin from turning after Ukraine to Georgia and Moldova, to destroying NATO, to essentially reasserting a sphere of influence system, which is what we put to bed after the end of World War II when we set up the United Nations and the rules-based order.
John Mearsheimer, I hear you saying you fear that Russia cannot be deterred, that there may be a decision made by Vladimir Putin to use weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, and that what?
That the U.S. is moving inexorably in that direction?
Well, I think it's very important to understand that if he were to use nuclear weapons, he would use them in all likelihood in Western Ukraine.
And there are no NATO or American forces in Western Ukraine.
So he would not be attacking us.
He would be using those weapons in Ukraine.
And the question is, what do we do then?
And I'm not sure what we would do then.
Would we use nuclear weapons?
Would we then get dragged into the war?
You know, when Professor Farkas talks about the consequences of this for the world order, I'm more worried about the consequences if we end up getting hit with nuclear weapons.
I mean, we want to remember what President Kennedy did during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
He was in a similar situation.
What he did was he tried to dampen the conflict.
He tried to work out some sort of deal with Khrushchev so we could both avoid getting vaporized.
What the Biden administration is doing is exactly the opposite.
It's upping the ante.
It's putting Putin in a position where he might very well use nuclear weapons.
Again, I think this is remarkably foolish.
Evelyn Farkas, what do you see happening if Vladimir Putin were to resort to tactical nuclear weapons?
What do you see the U.S. response?
Again, I think he's most likely to use them, Judy, if he feels that there will be no consequences for him.
If he thinks that we will not counter with a nuclear use, I know it's a horrible thing to contemplate, but that is how deterrence works.
Or if he thinks that we will not enter the war directly.
And actually, I think that I'm not sure whether our government would actually use nuclear force in response, though we have to say that because that's part of deterrence.
But what I do think is that if there is a nuclear use, if the nuclear taboo comes off, if nuclear weapons are used for the first time since World War II, and Vladimir Putin may well do that if he thinks we won't respond, I think President Biden will then enter the war directly.
That doesn't mean troops on the ground, but it means that Russia will lose.
So I think that Vladimir Putin is likely smart enough to understand the danger for himself.
He's not going to reach for a nuclear weapon right now.
He is already proceeding, I think, a little bit more cautiously from what we can see.
Of course, it remains to be seen how this all ends, but he's not interested in taking on the United States and NATO.
I think Vladimir Putin is actually quite calm.
I've seen him make public statements repeatedly about the need not to react from emotion or fear.
I think he's more rational than some of his critics accuse him of being.
He's not crazy.
He didn't strike the West after it assisted in blowing up the Moscow or the Kerch Bridge or the Nord Stream gas pipeline.
He wasn't provoked.
I don't actually think he'll do anything crazy here like use a nuke.
I just don't think he would.
But there could come a point where he would, if he genuinely felt Russia was on the verge of some sort of a military collapse, a collapse of its nuclear deterrent, which is the stated goal of some U.S. leaders.
I mean, here's what scares me.
If you remove Russia's strategic bombers, you have removed one of the three legs of the nuclear triad.
That's sort of Cold War talk.
You got nukes based on land, based at sea, and based in the air.
The whole reason is so that you have a second strike ability.
If the other side launches a war against you, you can still have some surviving nukes to shoot back.
And with that balance of power, you've got the mutually assured destruction.
It's the very fact that it was a balance that kept the world safe for decades.
If it was an imbalance, one side might have been provoked to act.
The whole reason we didn't go to war with Russia was because of a balance.
Well, if you can wipe out a third of Russia's bombers in a day, and maybe go back for more, all of a sudden, what have you done?
It's not so much that you've helped things on the ground in Ukraine.
Sure, it's helped.
But it's that you've eroded Russia's strategic security.
Will they wait for a second drone attack?
Will they wait for a third one?
Will they allow their nuclear deterrent to be removed?
And I don't know about Joe Biden, and you could hear in that debate they were talking about Joe Biden, but I'm pretty sure that Trump will not authorize nuking Putin as any sort of response.
But one last point: why were those Russian bombers just out in the open like that?
I mean, so vulnerable.
Why weren't they at least in some sort of bunker or shelter?
Like, there wasn't even a fence around them, not even a tarp over them.
Even though they were in far-flung regions, why were they so visible?
Well, the answer to that might surprise you.
It's because America negotiated that with Russia.
In an arms reduction treaty signed by Barack Obama, the U.S. and Russia agreed to park their nuclear bombers out in the open so that the other side could count them and track them using spy satellites.
It was part of the deal.
There's other rights, like to be able to inspect things, I think, up to 18 times a year or something.
I skimmed the treaty today.
I didn't know.
That's why the bombers are parked outside.
It's also why U.S. bombers are parked outside.
There's so many aerial pictures of runways with B-52s and B-1s and the modern B-2 stealth bomber.
And if you were ever thinking, why do they just park out in the open, the American side, it's because it's part of the treaty.
That's why there's so many photos.
It's fun to look at the photos of bombers.
It's sort of the I'll show you if you show me part of the treaty.
In other words, Ukraine and their CIA military advisors specifically used the arms treaty as a way to destroy Russian bombers.
They were out in the open because America asked Russia to keep them in the open and vice versa.
And the CIA-backed Ukrainian military used that to get at the bombers.
Do you think Russia is going to stay in that treaty?
Now, maybe you're excited by all this.
Maybe to you, the only good Russian is a dead Russian.
Maybe you've wanted to degrade Russia's military for decades and you find this miraculous.
And I get it.
Putin is a former KGB agent, probably a murderer, certainly an authoritarian ruler.
And he did invade Ukraine.
That is all true.
Put aside his justification for the invasion.
Put aside right and wrong, even.
But just ask yourself pragmatically, if Russia did indeed face political and military annihilation, if it risked losing its nuclear deterrent and felt like it was existentially threatened, because Zelensky and some in NATO and the EU want that.
If Russia was suddenly so very weak and backed into a corner, I'm not talking about Ukraine on the ground in the trenches.
I'm talking about you're wiping out the nuclear deterrent all across the Russian Federation.
What's the likelihood been that Russia would use a tactical nuke against Ukraine?
What would America do in response?
You know, when Hedgeblow was blown up, there were some minor consequences, but they're done.
Nightmare Scenario: Anti-Semitism00:15:57
They're over.
They're not just wounded and about to get back up.
They are vaporized and they've been driven out of Syria too.
That did not happen to Russia.
The equipment's gone, but the people are there.
The Russian military, the Red Army, they're wounded and angry.
Yes, it was a brilliant tactical move, just like Pearl Harbor was.
But anyone who thinks the world is safer today doesn't understand, I think, that authoritarian regimes put their survival above all else.
And if they're faced with a nuclear choice to use it or lose it, they might just use it.
Stay with us for more.
Casa Loma, located in Midtown Toronto, is a top tourist attraction.
Sometimes it is also a venue for fundraisers.
Sometimes people get married there.
It's usually a very beautiful and tranquil place in Hogtown, but not last Tuesday.
That's because Castle Loma was a venue that attracted the pro-Hamas crowd.
And suddenly the grounds of Casaloma shockers, well, they were filled with chants of Jew hatred.
As for the police, well, Operation Normal, which is to say, they did absolutely nothing.
With more on this most recent disgrace is Sue Ann Levy.
She writes for Juno News, and I'm so happy to have her here today.
Sue Ann, thank you so much for joining me.
And tell me, bring me back to last Tuesday.
What was it that attracted the rank and file members of that group I call the Hamasholes?
Well, I think, you know, I think they probably knew.
First of all, it was in a residential neighborhood, and I think they probably knew that security or sense that security would not be tight.
And they also, I mean, it was a fundraiser and it was expensive to attend.
So why not go after Jews who have a few few bucks and harass them?
Mostly elderly, by the way.
Mostly elderly.
Denise and I were among the youngest there.
And what was the castle hosting that night that drew the Jew haters to it in the first place?
Well, it was ironically the Abraham Global Peace Initiative, which has been started as an adjunct to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and fights.
Get it?
Get this.
Anti-Semitism.
So, yeah, and here we had it playing out right in front of us as we tried to enter the facility.
And Swin, I mean, anti-Semitism, it is a thing.
We've seen that in the streets of Toronto and in other Western cities for the last 19 months.
I know in Toronto, the Jewish population is less than 4% of the overall population.
But in terms of hate crimes, anti-Jew hatred is more than 40%.
What's going on here?
I think part of the problem is the lack of leadership by our politicians, A, and almost zero law enforcement when it comes to those breaking the criminal code, such as chanting genocide, which is what these people do every weekend, which is contrary to Section 319.
Why is this being tolerated, Sue Anne?
Well, it stems from the top, Dave.
You and I both know it.
We have a mayor who I always knew she'd be a train wreck as a mayor.
I've known her for 25 years, Olivia Chow.
But I think she's anti-Semitic.
I mean, I think that she goes out of her way to avoid Jewish events.
She's slow to respond when things do happen.
And she's been seen almost weekly wearing her headscarf.
I call them schematas.
Some people have taken exception to that.
Wearing a headscarf and cosplaying, attending various Muslim events.
And, you know, I think that she and many of the, I call them the Hamas caucus at City Hall, have given a message, a clear message to the police to keep their hands off.
And we also have a very, very weak police chief, you know, a guy who blocked me on Twitter because he didn't like being called weak, Myron Demke.
So it stems from the top, but I also think social media, I think that they have been enabled by social media, by our weak politicians, and there are no consequences for their behavior.
You know, I think you're right.
And I think Chief Myron Demkew, Sue Ann, I think he's the worst police chief in Toronto history.
And given that Bill Blair, Bill Blair rather, used to be a police chief, that's saying something.
And by the way, let's just sort of a brief clip from last Sunday.
I bumped into you at the Walk with Israel, but before the walk kicked off, I had the pleasure, such as it was, to confront Chief DemQ.
And wow, I was surprised, Sue Ann.
I think he carries around a taser and a gun, but he ran away from me like a scared little pussycat.
Check this out.
Hey, good morning, Chief DemQ.
Chief, can you tell me why peaceful counter demonstrators and independent media have been arrested by your members these last 19 months?
Excuse me.
Chief Demkew, can you, why are you tolerating anti-Semitism in our streets?
Chief Demkew, why are you a coward?
Why do you prevent us from going to press conferences that you put on?
You are a coward.
What a coward.
Yeah, so the point is he wouldn't comment on the double standard.
He wouldn't say anything about why lawlessness is running wild.
But to your original point, I think you're correct.
I think the politicians have done the math, the electoral math.
They realize that there are five times as many Muslims as Jews in Canada.
And hey, it's just business, baby.
And by the way, I'm not saying all Muslims subscribe to this garbage.
They don't.
But I think this is the mindset driving politicians like Olivia Chow, who are likely telling the likes of Chief Demkew hands off when it comes to the pro-Hamas sect.
Yeah, and then don't forget her deputy mayor, Osma Malik, is I exposed her in 2014.
So that's like 11 years ago that she had marched in an anti-Israel protest celebrating Hezbollah.
So and she's a wicked person.
You know, and I think Olivia, she's whispering in Olivia's ear about the hands-off attitude kind of thing.
But, you know, this is like an accident waiting to happen.
Dave, look what happened in Boulder, Colorado.
Yes.
And the poor core, one of Holocaust survivor, the poor Jews, innocent Jews, being burned by an illegal, an illegal immigrant who was in and had overstayed his welcome.
And, you know, social media is so toxic now that, you know, who's to say we wouldn't have a copycat doing the exact same thing here in Toronto or Montreal.
And we and the Jewish community do not feel protected whatsoever.
You know, you're so right, Sue Ann.
That Boulder, Colorado story is so disturbing.
Here's an illegal immigrant from Egypt chanting free, free Palestine as he tries to incinerate Jews and the Boulder, Colorado police chief going out of his way.
Let's not jump to terrorism right now.
I mean, given the facts of the matter, Sue Ann, I would argue that it looks very terroristry, if that's a word, and it probably isn't worth it.
The FBI is already calling it a targeted terror attack.
Would you also refer to it as a terror attack?
So I've been in contact with our local FBI multiple times.
We are in contact with them here.
We are not calling it a terror attack at this point.
Again, it's way too early to speculate motive.
You know, I know there's a lot out there on social media, but I ask people just to give us a little bit of patience while we work through a really complex scene.
A lot of witnesses were here.
We've taken them to another location to debrief them and interview them.
As we do that, I think the picture will become more clear.
But it would be irresponsible for me to speculate on motive this early on.
We're only a couple hours into this thing.
Going back to the walk with Israel, where I met you face to face, you know, there was a point where I discovered, and let's we can show the visual here, an individual with the pro-Hamas people toting around a hand grenade.
I personally think it's a replica hand grenade, but who knows?
I said to the police officers, officers, aren't you going to inspect that hand grenade?
And they ignored me completely, Sue Ann.
And this guy was within throwing distance of thousands of marchers for the state of Israel.
Why the hell did they take such a hands-off approach?
I can tell you, if you went to the airport with such a thing, you'd probably be tackled by security.
I don't get it, Sue-Anne.
Sir, is that a real grenade or a toy grenade?
Do you understand English?
Officer, do we know if that's a real grenade or a toy grenade?
You're not concerned about that?
This is amazing, folks.
This man is holding what appears to be a grenade.
I don't know if it's real or fake.
And the police aren't interested.
And it's funny, just eight days ago, Avery Armstrong and I, my camera woman, we were at the corner of Lawrence and Midland, and we saw somebody with a handgun in his waistband.
Well, what do we do?
We called 911 and the police responded.
They got on it right away as well.
They should.
Now, if a handgun or a replica handgun, whatever it was, I don't think they caught the guy yet.
If that's unacceptable, why is there a grenade in full view of these officers?
Like, this is shocking.
Well, it's funny because I think Denise and I, Denise being my wife, we spoke to some of the cops, the bike cops, after the event last Tuesday night, the unfortunate event.
And I think many of them are fed up.
They've clearly been given their marching orders to stand there.
And they did stand there as Denise and I were, I was called out by name as I tried to enter Cataloma.
People screaming and taunting, calling us baby killers, inhuman, you know, death to the Jews kind of thing.
It was very unsettling.
But I think these guys have been given their marching orders.
And you know what's going to happen, Dave?
I hope it doesn't, but something terrible is going to happen.
And then they'll all be wringing their hands, clutching their pearls, saying, oh my God, like it happened at Boulder.
The mayor ignored the Jewish community.
I was reading last night.
There are constant concerns about anti-Semitism, rising anti-Semitism.
Does it sound very familiar?
That's happening in Toronto, a much bigger city.
And I just am really concerned.
You know, I was thinking about it last night.
Should we start carrying some protective, some mace with us?
Do I have to do that?
Do I have to carry something to protect myself now?
Of course, if I stuck a knife or I brandished a knife, I'd end up arrested so quickly.
You know, it's unbelievable the double standard here in the city.
Oh, Suanne, you don't have to convince me.
I was arrested five times last year simply for practicing journalism in the public square.
But there's almost a mindset, and I don't know if it's the brass ordering the rank and file to adhere to this.
That if there are peaceful counter-demonstrators, if there are members of the independent press who might be asking impolite questions, toss them in the paddy wagon because they might further incite the mob.
You know, it reminds me of the dark old days of when a woman was sexually assaulted and on the stand she'd be asked, How much leg were you showing that day?
How much cleavage were you showing that day?
This is unbelievable, Sue Anne.
If these people who are already hotheads get further enraged, that's their problem, not those who I would say are on the right side of history.
Well, it all goes back, Dave, to them not enforcing consequences.
There's a wonderful lawyer, Mark Sandler, who started this organization.
He's, and he's, I heard him speak last year, and he issues a newsletter.
I urge your listeners to check it out.
He's talked about all the ways that the police can arrest these Hamasniks and use the laws that are in place.
There are laws about blocking the roadway, causing a disturbance, masking.
So many of them mask.
Nobody is enforcing that law.
And if there were some consequences, so they scream a little bit.
So the Muslim organizations, you know, cry Islamophobia.
I don't give a crap at this point.
I really don't.
There has to be some consequences for their behavior.
100%.
And I got to tell you, Sue Ann, law enforcement and the politicians in this city are now lying.
Law enforcement last month lied about an ambulance being blocked by these pro-Hamas people.
They lied about the timeline.
Said that the light bar on the ambulance wasn't on.
We we have video evidence that shows it was indeed on.
And the city?
When it comes to um, the latest infringement, which is groups of these people um blocking uh important thoroughfares to pray.
They say they have a constitutional right to pray.
They do not have a right.
I get so incensed when I hear this.
They're obstructing the roadway yeah, you know.
And if they just bring out the water canyons, i'm not Islamophobic in the slightest, but bring out the water cannons.
Video Evidence Reveals00:04:38
They've gotten away with enough.
They're doing it in in some European countries, but all you have to do is look at what happened Paris the other night.
Yeah, they have been allowed to run unchecked.
Paris was burning.
It's so sad to see what happens.
These are not peaceful people.
These are not peaceful protesters.
They want to make a mess of our society and I, like you said, it's not all Muslims, but I often wonder where the peaceful Muslims are.
Why are they not speaking up?
I agree, I would like to see that more.
And, by the way, to finish my point, so when yes, you do have a constitutional right to pray, but you do not have a constitutional right to block a street to pray, and often there is a mosque within walking distance.
So this is, I think this is a demonstration of Islamist exceptionalism.
This is a middle finger uh, to the west, and because they get away with everything well, of course they're gonna further push the envelope, don't you think?
Yeah, it's like a small child, a spoiled child, who throws a temper tantrum and mommy says oh, you're okay, go to a timeout room, but five minutes later she comes with an ice cream or a little toy, you know, and it's the same thing.
There are no consequences.
And these people have pushed the envelope and pushed the envelope, and I really, really do, and i'm not trying to sound alarmist, but I really do fear that someone's going to get hurt.
Well, you know, what you said isn't conjecture in terms of bringing treats.
We've seen the Toronto police bring these cats uh, coffee and tin bits on cold days.
I guess you uh can get a little chilly chanting genocide in the middle of january.
But you know Suann, we should leave it with this, because you did mention uh, your lovely wife Denise, and uh, you are openly lesbian.
And this is the beginning.
Uh, is it pride month or pride season?
I'm losing track.
You know what it went from pride We Pride Day to pride weekend, to pride month, to pride season, and I don't know when that season ends.
I have no idea.
This is what i'm leading up to, Suann.
I see groups that identify with their signage.
They're called, for example, Queers FOR Palestine and you know, it's kind of like chickens for colonel Saunders in my book.
We know full well that if you were openly queer in Gaza, uh well, Well, you'd only have to buy a one-way plane ticket.
That's right.
You're making the throat slash, but I believe the preferred method is to be tossed from a rooftop.
Sue Ann, please, especially given your sexual orientation, please educate me how people with that kind of sexual orientation or gender identification identify with people who want them dead.
I think they're crazy in the head, frankly, most of them.
And I also think that they've subscribed to this DEI oppressor-oppressed mentality where we're the oppressors being Jews, and they feel that the Muslims or the Palestinians are oppressed, but they hate us.
There was a clip of a man who was gay confronting a Muslim woman right here in Toronto.
And she said, go away.
We hate you.
We hate you.
And you've got like the rainbow flag hanging over.
And I'm thinking, buddy, wake up.
Wake up to what's going on.
They don't, you know, they really dislike you.
But, you know, it's also called suicide empathy, if you've heard that term.
They just feel sorry for these people and they want to be part of something.
They also want to, like most of these people who are at Casaloma, I would venture to say are disenfranchised, dregs of society.
You know, I saw them in their masks and they looked like they needed a shower.
They badly needed a shower.
And, you know, and a lot of them were queers for Palestine.
Unbelievable.
Well, you know, I'm very grateful that neither you or your wife experienced physical harm.
We know that Karim Assad's videographer, Lee, he actually had his pants pulled down, which to me is borderline sexual assault.
I mean, we can laugh about it, but I would hate to have that happen to me.
Not Properly Vetted Immigrants00:04:37
Mr. McDuff, who sued.
I have a girl on video who pulled my pants down.
All right.
Suann, it's being tolerated for 19 months, going on 20 months.
Where does it go from here?
Does it take an actual, God forbid, serious injury or even death of a Jew?
Or even that isn't enough to move the needle.
Last word goes to you, my friend.
I think it does, but I think what it takes is we Jews and the Jewish community speaking out, marching, protesting.
I've determined that this summer I am going to go to whatever meeting I can and speak up and look at these politicians in the face, look at the police board in the face and say, you know, you have let our community down.
How dare you?
My wife thinks they should be sued.
There should be a class action suit and that some lawyer should come forward and sue Olivia Chow, sue the police, sue the police services board for allowing this to happen.
You know, I never thought about that, Sue Ann.
What an incredible concept.
And really, I think you have basis for, I don't know, dereliction of duty because this dog don't hunt, as they say in Alabama.
Well, Sue Anne, you stay safe out there.
Sometimes I don't recognize the streets of my beloved birthplace.
And I guess one last thing, I want to get your take on this, Sue Ann.
Is this an indictment of the failure of official state multiculturalism?
And by that, I mean, when we go back to 1971, when Pierre Elliott Trudeau officially enshrined multiculturalism, there was an unspoken deal, wasn't there?
Which was this, come to Canada, pursue the Canadian promise, take advantage of all our social welfare programs.
In return, all we ask is this, behave, obey the law, do not import your age-old hatreds to our Dominion.
But as we've seen for the last 19 months plus, that ain't the case in reality, is it?
Well, I think it speaks to the rapid immigration, the attempts by the Trudeau government and now Carney to bring Mark Carney to bring in all these immigrants, not properly vetted.
I mean, Mark Miller should be, you know, raped over the coals for bringing in all these Gazans with all their, you know, hates towards Jews.
And I don't know what they're thinking.
Maybe they're looking for new voters.
I don't know, but they're not properly vetted.
And they spew their hate on the streets.
They don't respect Canadian laws and customs.
I've interviewed in my time when I was at the sun, mostly people who respected the immigration system and came in legally, came in, jumped through all the hoops, are respectful people of society, earning a good living, making, and I still remember doing that.
And this is not the, these are not the kind of people that Canada should be welcoming.
100%.
And again, it's the political class.
I remember Walk with Israel.
That was an event for a who's who of the political elite to be seen at.
But this year, no Mayor Chow, no Premier Ford, no Prime Minister Carney.
So we kind of get the idea of where they stand.
Sue Ann, a pleasure as always.
Thank you so much.
And I guess...
See my Jewish star?
Yes, you know, I only say this half jokingly.
You might not want to walk in certain areas of the GTA with that on display, sadly.
I don't care.
I don't care.
I'm proud of who I am, and I'm not going to stop wearing it.
There you go.
That's the spirit.
Sue Ann Levy of Juneau News.
you so much once again.
You're welcome.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
On the Romanian migrant in Ireland, Patricia Fisher says, and poor Lucy Connolly was jailed for a short rant on the internet that she got rid of.
Wake up, UK.
You know, I saw that the UK Attorney General himself personally recommended that Connolly be kept in for 31 months.
That's that wife of a politician who tweeted rude things for a few hours.
Why Vigilantes Fill Gaps00:00:48
Imagine 31 months in prison.
Omerta says, sometimes you need vigilantes because, like you said, the police are doing nothing.
We don't want to live in a war of all against all, as Hobbes put it.
We want police to have control, but if they don't do their job, men with broad chests will come in and do it for them.
12v71 Detroit says 2 million foreigners per month headed to Canada.
Thanks, Carney.
I don't think it's 2 million a month.
I think maybe that's a typo.
It's 200,000 a month.
Yes, 817,000 migrants have come to Canada so far in 2025.
It's a staggering number.
I think it's the highest ever.
And I think it's a deep problem that we haven't even begun to see the foul fruits of.