This is Gaza, as filmed by Hernán Zin

I did say in my last post that I don’t want to see any documentaries about Palestine, as it is too painful.

I did see the film Born in Gaza. Far from a film. I cried and shuddered at the unique cinematography and music in front of me, sitting in a wide auditorium surrounded by hundreds of people – comrades, strangers, and newcomers to the colonization of Palestine. I was telling myself, this is not a movie. I am not sitting here watching a movie and crying because it is sentimental, sad or horrific. This is Gaza, as filmed by Hernán Zin.

In the conversation that ensued with the audience following the screening of the film, Zin shares that this is not his first visit to Gaza. He published a book as well on the atrocities committed on the Palestinians trapped there.

In the Q&A, I asked the first question, my eyes still red and paper tissues crumpled in my hands, ”how did you feel being there? Seeing those children? What was the personal impact on you?”

‘’I feel angry when I am in Gaza.’’ ‘’This is the most unique and cruel treatment, war or violence I have ever witnessed. There is nothing like this in the world. There is no where on Earth where a population is being bombed and they are not allowed to escape.’’

Samia Botmeh also participated and led the Q&A asking the audience to engage in principled solidarity with all Palestinians through Boycott Divestment and Sanctions. As the only way to end abuse is to pressure the abuser. The only way to end abuse is to let the abuser know in no uncertain terms that they are engaging in something unacceptable to all of us. The only way to end abuse, is to say that is it not okay to treat people in the way they have been treated by a colonizing government. The only way to end abuse is to stop the resources, weapons, and money that the abuser benefits from to carry out their abuse under whichever name they choose to carry their abuse.

When a friend asked me if I was going to see Born in Gaza, I replied that I cannot see films on Palestine anymore. I have no regrets seeing this film last night, nor did I expect to see Hernán Zin join the conversation live via skype from Madrid.

Hernán’s answers are flawless, moving, and engaging. One woman asked what is the value of making these films as she felt disgusted and angry after watching it. She cites the children who speak in the film asking for psychological help to overcome the murder of their brother, cousin, father, or neighbour, and the sight of blood and bodies that they witnessed. She says that these children need help now. What can we do for them now? To this Zin answers that showing the dignity of these children and inviting them to share their suffering and message to the world, is something. He shares the example of when he was in India, and was severely sick with no nearby hospital. At that moment, he thought, I don’t want to die without anyone knowing. I want someone’s attention and empathy. This is what going to Gaza and meeting the people affected is about. Giving their voice the power to reach us and maybe we can do something. 400,000 children in Gaza are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

Reading the credits at the end of the film, I read mostly Spanish names. Every time I encounter someone doing something so beautiful and so powerful to denounce the violations done to Palestinians, I am amazed and touched, especially when they are not from Palestine.

It is testament to the extent of the ongoing man-made catastrophe inflicted on the Palestinian people.nacido

I don’t want to see Jerusalem in IMAX

In an interview on Radio-Canada’s Second regard, Daniel Ferguson, the producer of Jerusalem 3D by National Geographic Entertainment, says and indicates at the beginning of the film to the viewers, that this film will not touch the Palestine Israel conflict.

Daniel Ferguson, a Montrealer, who traveled to Jerusalem, with the documentary crew and with his family, shared his fascination for a place that he describes as beautiful. He mentions in the Radio-Canada interview that, for this documentary, he asks a boy who is Jewish if he has friends who are Christian or ‘Islamic’, as Ferguson puts it. And Ferguson relays that the boy replies that he doesn’t or is not interested. Ferguson then says to the journalist that the boy’s answer struck him as to how people in Jerusalem live in their own bubble.

Is the author of this documentary aware that the government and military of Israel occupy Palestine in its entirety and spend billions of dollars in building physical barriers, and social, economic and psychological barriers so that a Palestinian person cannot come in contact with an Israeli Jewish person? And that road divisions and other methods forbid Palestinians from coming in contact with other Palestinians?

Can a work such as a documentary or newspaper article hold any credence or value if it is incomplete in its presentation of the context and of facts?

As a Palestinian, an Arab, a Muslim and a human rights activist, I cannot watch this. Nor can I watch a film that chooses to show an image that is not congruent with the place it chooses as its muse. Especially, if this place is marked by grave violations to the lives and rights of its inhabitants, dead or alive, or to its natural environment.

It is like the time when the daily Metro newspaper, distributed in subway stations and city bus stations, published a two-page feature on tourism in Israel. Not one word appears about the historical land of Palestine, Palestinians, or that for a century now, apartheid is built and people suffer by being forcibly displaced, imprisoned, murdered, maimed and traumatized.

If this tourism article even plainly said: hire a tourism guide to view the apartheid wall, checkpoints and camps of the displaced indigenous population, it would be less offensive. As hypocrisy offends.

Coming across this article is not like seeing an advertisement in the Montreal Gazette, a mainstream newspaper, asking the reader to visit Israel and writing: Once you visit Israel, you are not the same. While the motto carries truth, this is a paid advertising – albeit willing published in a newspaper that should reconsider publishing tourism ads about a place that violates International law and every United Nations resolution that relates to the human rights of the indigenous population in Palestine Israel.

However when a newspaper publishes an article inviting readers to visit Israel and hire a tour guide, this is grave. Do the editors, authors, and financiers of this newspaper know that Israel is created and sustained through apartheid and war crimes? This question is alarming enough. Or, is it that the whole crew of this news publication does not care that their article demonstrates complete ignorance and insensitivity to a long-lasting and current human rights struggle?

It is perplexing and insulting. And cannot contribute to the universal healing we need today. I feel like every person around the planet needs to turn to the next person and say: I am sorry. I acknowledge your pain. I am sorry if I had a role in inflicting it. I will work to end the suffering for your healing and mine.

Only then can we collectively turn the page on the legacy of colonialism and discrimination that still inhabit our society.

I attended a presentation by a university professor in the field of social work who is the daughter of survivors of World War II. She recently published a book on how to help survivors of genocide and other traumas. Her focus is on Jewish survivors of World War II. I asked her if acknowledgement of the atrocities committed during World War II by German authorities and by Germans help in the healing process? Her response is: yes, immensely.

Every people who suffered and still suffer deserve and need acknowledgement and adequate reparation by those responsible for the crimes inflicted on them, their children and their ancestors.

Standing in the midst of a crowd in Montreal in front of the office of the premier of Québec during a protest to denounce the silence on the crimes against humanity that were happening in Gaza as of July, 2014, I heard a boy who was walking by, ask his father: What is this protest for? The father replies: The Arabs and Jews over there fight because they can’t get along.

The perpetuation of this harmful myth needs to stop. To this day, journalists or professors or others, mainly in Canada and the USA, surprisingly demonstrate a complete ignorance of the true nature behind the suffering in Palestine Israel. Land, water, mineral, gas possession. Otherwise, why are Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists, Agnostics, not inclusively and equally welcome to live in the place called the State of Israel?

Nor can I see documentaries, films, or books that authentically present Palestine. Whether these books or films are about Palestine’s beauty before its British and current Zionist Israeli occupation, or about the Palestine ravaged by colonialism. Both – before and after Palestine – are equally painful. To see how something you love was before the damage, is just as painful.

I once invited a journalist and author to Montreal to present his latest work on the Zionist occupation and oppression of Palestinian life. Before the talk, he asked me on my thoughts about his book. I answered without qualms that I have not read his book nor will I. I cannot. I cannot read more about Palestinian suffering at the hands of a brutal apartheid.

I replied: You wrote this for them, the Zionists, and for others who are unaware of this man-made tragedy. I cannot read more about the torture, senseless imprisonment, confiscation and destruction of lands and trees and homes, the damaging of youth and family and civil resistance.

I cannot. Why should I? It would be masochistic. Should the recipient of illegal, discriminatory and violent treatment be the reader of works describing this illegality and immorality? Should I read about how my people and other peoples are suffering at the hands of soldiers, governments, and corporations and their employees? These works by journalists, authors, artists and activists are for those unaware. Or people who are involved in the inflicting of pain or who are involved in aiding the inflicting of pain. So they may become aware of the wrongdoing on the people and the nature, and the wrongdoing on themselves and their souls.

As a Palestinian professor from Birzeit University clearly says: ‘’Ending violence, invasion, colonization, colonialism, oppression, segregation, apartheid, disrespect, discrimination of anyone, saves all of humanity, including the humanity of those doing the oppressing.’’ This professor is Samia Botmeh, who resides in Ramallah and is born in a Palestinian village near Jerusalem. Samia is a visiting professor currently in Montreal. At the screening and discussion of the documentary film Roadmap to Apartheid, Samia shares that she can travel to Montreal but has been unable to visit Jerusalem for the last six years because she is a Palestinian. I wonder what Samia thinks of the film Jerusalem 3D currently shown at the Montréal Science Centre? I will ask her on the Wednesday March 11, 2015 edition of Caravan, broadcast at 2:00 pm EST on CKUT radio 90.3 FM in Montreal or streaming around the world at http://www.ckut.ca. This will be an hour discussion with Samia on her daily life in Palestine Israel and as part of the 2015 edition of Israeli Apartheid Week.

Our deep need for love leads to

joining The Bachelor.

The Bachelor

The Bachelor’s season 18 premiere features Juan Pablo Galavis http://www.usmagazine.com @usweekly

I can actually sometimes enjoy this American show on ABC, depending on who #TheBachelor or #TheBachelorette is – ”The B” for short – and on the charm of the participants.

After several seasons, the blatantly problematic premise of the show is becoming clearer.

In life, outside of the production company and cameras and lavish setting, can we pursue and fall in love and kiss and hug and more, with 25 or more people, in the same period, and with them knowing about it?

Granted, participants on The B willingly take part in the show. They probably sign up among hundreds. They leave their job, family, and in some cases, their child or children, and travel to a mansion and join about 25 other hopefuls in falling in love or, in being chosen by The B.

Are they paid? Are they compensated for the hurt and suffering?

Travel to fantastical locations, albeit resort-like, in extravagant hotels with everything provided, is part of the deal. But I don’t think you can take part on the show just for the ride. The premise is: You are here to fall in love and or want to be chosen by The B.

Even though participants are 25-35 years old, with impressive professions like opera singer, pediatric nurse, attorney, entrepreneurs, they get hurt, disappointed and upset when they are not chosen or given a rose. Or, when The B has a date with another participant, and it gets steamy.

They knew this. We know this. And we all watch them get crushed, hurt, embarrassed and cry on camera when all they want is to fall in love. They came for love. They came to find love.

All I want is to find someone who loves me and whom I love and have a family.

Surely, we can all relate. And I empathize with the feelings that the participants experience, while being perplexed as to why they would embark on such a show. Wouldn’t you want to keep your heartache and romance private?

It’s still astonishing that season after season, a fresh slew of recruits join #TheBachelor or #TheBachelorette. It’s like joining the army. You know you’re gonna get hurt. Yet, they still do it.

You ask yourself, would I join this romantic wonderland if I’m interested in The Bachelor featured?

Falling in love, with the intention and stated purpose of getting married is already an emotional roller coaster. To compete for love and have it televised? That’s crazy.

Who’s to blame? The producers or the participants?

I am sure Chris Harrison and the ABC crew want to produce a show that doesn’t harm anyone.

I think the alternative is a halal or kosher or Amish version of The Bachelor, where it is the same concept – finding love – but with zero physical intimacy, because I think this is where the participants get irked. ”He kissed her too!”  Of course he did.

Burning Love, produced by Ben Stiller’s Red Hour Digital

Burning Love, produced by Ben Stiller’s Red Hour Digital

So the #Olympics are over

Now that the winter Olympics are behind us, I do want to make a commentary on this whole human-made phenomenon/activity.

Um. Where to begin.

The treating of athletes like heroes, with the media attention, almost reverence. The bloated sense of nationalism, that isn’t otherwise present. The complete and utter attention by media networks on this sports-competition-phenomenon-activity at the cost of our treasured television programs, like Parenthood. The intense merchandising from fast food restaurants – if you can call them restaurants – to mittens.

It’s too much.

I love sports and fitness and athleticism and witnessing what the human mind and body can do together, with a lot of training and will. Sure.

It’s just not an ever-consuming thing for me. To have it everywhere, all the time, is inconsiderate, in my opinion, to those of us leading our lives without need for all this advertising, marketing and shouting about which country flag got what.

Also, there are human violations.

So, this is not the first time a worldwide, highly media-covered – as I just mentioned – gigantic event omits the key fact that these athletic and nationalistic displays are organized in a place where violations to humans’ rights took place, and sometimes, are still taking place.

What is the participating athlete’s position in all this?

In 2008 the Olympics were held in Beijing. This brings back to life Amnesty International’s work around the Beijing Olympics, related to human rights abuses in China.

black-power-salute-at-the-olympics

TOMMIE SMITH (CENTER) AND JOHN CARLOS (RIGHT) SHOWING THE RAISED FIST ON THE PODIUM AFTER THE 200M IN THE 1968 SUMMER OLYMPICS IN MEXICO, WHILE SILVER MEDALLIST PETER NORMAN FROM AUSTRALIA (LEFT) WEARS AN OLYMPIC PROJECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS BADGE TO SHOW HIS SUPPORT FOR THE TWO U.S. ATHLETES

I have always asked myself this question when the world media blatantly ignores the history or tragedy of the location where a huge event will be taking place.

Shouldn’t athletes also receive training and briefing on where they are going to perform, give their blood, sweat and tears, and have a life-marking event?

If an athlete or coach or organizer or sponsor looks up the place, or reads independent media outlets or high quality media networks, and realizes: Hey! This government that will be hosting us has committed human rights violations without addressing them. Do I still want to take part and pretend like my presence and involvement in this highly commercialized event is somehow not related to what happened there?

Can athletes sway the choice of where they will perform?

I wonder if enough athletes married their athletic stamina to solidarity and consciousness, if these games would take on a more noble meaning.

And then, I would watch.

P.S. “On February 7, about 300 ethnic Circassians gathered for a demonstration in front of the Russian embassy in the Jordanian capital. Holding signs with slogans such as: ‘No to the Falsification of Circassian History’, they blasted the choice of Sochi, Russia, as the site of this year’s Winter Olympics.The Sochi area, Circassians say, is the site of what they consider to be a genocide, carried out 150 years ago by invading Russian soldiers.”

For the rest of the article by @elizabethwhitty : http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/02/jordan-circassians-balk-at-sochi-olympics-201421972329112257.html

I think it should be called: The Palestine Taboo

Nawal Jabarin, 12, and her brothers, two-month-old Issa and two-year-old Jibril, in their West Bank home. Photograph: Quique Kierszenbaum for the Guardian

Nawal Jabarin, 12, and her brothers, two-month-old Issa and two-year-old Jibril, in their West Bank home. Photograph: Quique Kierszenbaum for the Guardian

A dear acquaintance just published an article entitled: ”The Israel Taboo. Money and sex aren’t the only things Canadians don’t talk about” in the January – February 2014 edition of The Walrus Magazine.

Joseph Rosen then asked me to take part in a roundtable about his article at the Drawn & Quarterly Bookstore in Montreal.

I shared the stage with Joseph, the author of the article, The Israel Taboo, Eric Scott, a filmmaker, and Yakov Rabkin, a university professor.

I was flattered, touched and grateful for Joseph’s generosity. He didn’t have to.

The Israel Taboo is written by a man who is Jewish, explaining his Jewish education, and his view on the effect of a traumatic narrative and historical violence on generations. Jewish generations.

I, a Palestinian by heritage from my Dad, read this article and felt a mirrored education, traumatic narrative and historical violence seep into my veins, and in my heart.

My education, narrative and historical violence is transmitted silently. My father does not talk about what he and his family went through in 1948, in their village.

I think it is not taboo to talk about Israel, as Israel is everywhere. Soda Stream. US presidential electoral speeches, from all American candidates, not just from one. Canada’s Prime Minister talks about Israel, and says how much he loves Israel and traveled there on January 20, 2014, with 208 people on the Canadian Prime Minister’s invitation.

Israel is definitely present.

I often meet people who like to tell me they are Jewish and that they just came back from Israel.

I, however, in the same dinner where people are telling  me about the several times they went to Israel, don’t talk about Palestine.

I don’t trumpet Palestine. Although I love it. I ache for it. I want to defend it and its honour. I want to help its people who are fighting for freedom and human rights.

Mostly, we are fighting for a fair representation of who we are. We are not violent nor less important.

We are a beautiful people. Our history and culture have been covered by something called Israel.

So, I think it’s the Palestine Taboo. What many people don’t like to talk about, because they are talking about Israel.

Where is the Soda Stream controversy?

SJ-Sodastream-Party

Scarlett Johansson announcing her deal with SodaStream CEO Daniel Birnbaum at the Gramercy Park Hotel Rooftop Club, 10 January 2014: “I am beyond thrilled to share my enthusiasm for SodaStream with the world!” Source: Scarlett Johansson not only abandons Oxfam but throws it under the bus, Phan Nguyen, @Mondoweiss

Palestinians working at Soda Stream in illegal Israel colony

Palestinians work at a SodaStream factory on January 30, 2014 in the Mishor Adumim industrial park, next to the West Bank settlement of Maale Adumim.(AFP PHOTO/MENAHEM KAHANA) Source: The Daily Star Lebanon http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Jan-30/245894-israels-sodastream-under-fire-over-west-bank-factory.ashx#ixzz2smMqtBGG

Soda Stream is the latest company, at least from my Twitter radar, to be under scrutiny and in the news.

News, can also come from fellow social media hipsters talking about what’s happening. Since what is considered mainstream media may or may not report on major issues.

I am not using the word hipster in a derogatory way at all. Just in a loving, cute way. It can include activists, and just social media users.

So here’s the situation in case you haven’t been attuned.

And this is how I told it to my friend the other night as we were sipping rooibos tea and eating bad-for-you-store-bought cookies at my kitchen table. I felt like I was telling this sounds-insane-to-be-true story as I watched my unaware-of-Palestine-and-Israel-politics friend’s face acquire an expression of: Say what!

Scarlett Johanssen, talented actor in movies like Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Match Point, and Lost in Translation, as well as many other stellar movies, is a spokeperson for a company called Soda Stream. This fun little name is of a company that makes and sells, in department stores and other places, machines for household use to make your own carbonated water, if you so really desire.

I don’t drink carbonated liquids so this is another consumer product for company profits, as I see it.

Scarlett Johanssen also happened to be one of illustrious Oxfam’s global ambassadors, whom raise awareness about difficulties around the world, by leveraging their fame.

Now, Oxfam is a humanitarian organization that speaks out on violations of human rights wherever they may be, raises funds and sends people, staff and volunteers, all around the planet, to co-build with the people, projects that enrich lives.

So, Oxfam is against violations to rights, and therefore, is against the illegal settlements or colonies built and being built by the state of Israel. All settlements built by the Israeli state are built for Jews only, and at the detriment of people who were already living on that land. These people, called Palestinians, lived in historical Palestine, way pre-1948, and are, for the most part, now world refugees. Look up the history of Israel.

So, because Soda Stream is an Israeli company, and built its largest factory in the of course illegal Israeli settlement of Ma’ale Adumim, which is on Palestinian land in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, the mere existence of the business and of the factory represent an ethical problem.

In addition, the Palestinian employees in this factory have come out to say that they are not treated with respect by the employers. They do not receive equal wages to the Israeli employees, among other violations to their rights as employees and as Palestinians.

So. Where is the controversy? I ask.

Soda Stream is on the first hand abusing employees. And on the second hand, abusing employees whose home was ripped out from them so that an Israeli business who employs them could be built. And their home was ripped from them so that this factory could be built in a larger context of military occupation.

So, I ask again: where is the controversy?

Controversy, in my opinion, happens when there is something good while there is something bad. Like, Madonna may be controversial because she is a talented performer while she exhibits certain outfits or no outfit, and dances, that may be judged vulgar.

Now, in the Soda Stream in occupied Palestine case that we have here – Oh, and Scarlett Johanssen decided to leave Oxfam and stay with Soda Stream as the company’s spokesperson for the bubble liquid – there would’ve been controversy had Soda Stream’s management been fair and respectful with all its employees, and in particular, with respect to the Ma’ale Adumim factory.

Then, we would say, gee, this Israeli company is actually paying Palestinian employees well and treating all of them as equals, and the Palestinian employees, whose land was robbed for this company’s factory to be built, are actually content to have a good livelihood there, considering the circumstances, i.e. an occupation of their native land.

Therein would lie the conundrum or controversy. Good employer, but factory on an illegal settlement.

However, sadly, there is no such controversy here.

Soda Stream is enslaving its Palestinian employees while profiting from an illegal and internationally condemned occupation.

It’s all around bad.

Some super sources:

The use of Palestinian workers in the Soda Stream controversy:

http://972mag.com/the-cynical-exploitation-of…/86698/

http://mondoweiss.net/…/palestinians-sodastream…

http://electronicintifada.net/…/sodastream-treats…/12441

Why BDS: http://www.cjpme.org/DisplayDocument.aspx?DO=853&RecID=93&DocumentID=1093&SaveMode=0

“Embauchez un guide si vous allez en Israël”

This beautiful hand colored map is a steel pla...

Hand colored map and steel plate engraving of Palestine (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I board the metro this afternoon, and open the Metro daily that is distributed in every metro station and around the city. In the two-page travel feature, I see an article of Metro World Newssigned Jane Borden, entitled: “Césarée, une ville construite avant Jésus-Christ” about visiting Israel.

At first, I ignore the article, feeling disturbed.

Then, I decide to read it to see how it is written; how are described the history, the conflict, the huge separation wall taking over agricultural and ancestral lands, the checkpoints, the daily home demolitions and arrests, the protests over lost rights, the uprootings and burning of olive trees, Oh, and the Palestinian inhabitants fighting for their lives.

It’s one thing to see an advertisement to tour Israel.

It’s another to publish a journalistic piece about a place with ongoing and dire violations of human rights.

This is not the first time.

Watching Pour le plaisir one afternoon, a show I appreciate on Radio-Canada, I am surprised to hear Jean-Michel Dufaux report about a trip to Israel, describing enthusiastically the restaurants, bars and sites he visited, as if it were any other place.

It always feels like an unexpected slap. 

By all means, visit Israel. Visit anywhere you want. However, if you are going to submit and broadcast a piece about a place, be honest, be thorough, be accurate.

If you are interested in tours of the West Bank, the organisation Breaking the Silence offers guided tours to Hebron and the South Hebron Hills, allowing an unmediated encounter with the reality of military occupation. The tour guides, all former Israeli combatants who served in these areas, share from their experiences to help illustrate the Israeli government’s policies enacted by the IDF – Israel Defense Forces.

We’re doing it wrong

Bhopal memorial for those killed and disabled ...

Bhopal memorial for those killed and disabled by the 1984 toxic gas release. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If you’ve read my blog, you know or expect that I will write about the Rana Plaza.

In the ethics course during my graduate studies in public relations, I was pleasantly surprised that we were presented cases to analyse, such as the Bhopal disaster of December of 1984 – actually connoted in wikipedia as the Bhopal disaster – brought to India by Union Carbide Corporation.

The objective of the assignment was to examine this deadly and marking disaster from all angles such that accountability is assigned and lessons learned. This, from our perspective as students of this ethics course of the fall 2011 university session. I don’t know if society takes note.

I thoroughly enjoyed analysing this case, and felt upset to learn about the deaths, maiming, blinding, and other pain caused by the gas leak that happened in the night of December 2nd at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

In my assignment, I presented principles and benefits of corporate responsibility in ensuring adequate wages, safety for everyone in and outside of the plant, and respect of the environmental regulations and standards. These seem obvious for a company or an executive who wants to save himself or herself headache and worry over distant operations; or even local operations for that matter. Also obvious are the time and expense and media attention of a lawsuit, especially in the case that people are killed in association with or by direct cause of a company action or negligence.

Of course, I could cite British Petroleum in the April 2010 Gulf of Mexico epic spill and the death of 11 workers, as well as the suicides of fishermen and other workers, as only one of the repercussions from the negligence and cost reduction objective, or obsession, of this internationally successful company.  The chief executive officer at the time of the 2010 spill claimed he was not aware of what led to this fatal explosion.

Now, 2013, April, 300 people officially counted as killed under rubble in a factory where they were forced to fabricate clothing to be shipped on the sea and brought to malls in America and Canada.

Hmmmm.

Is corporate responsibility still a mysterious term? Are the links between managerial thinking and decisions and the life of people over there, and our life, our decisions, our purchases, our conscience, our moral grounds, still mysterious?

I think, sadly, 300 deaths and 300 multiplied by the family and friends make the links clearer.

Of course, the nature of corporate action and its impacts are dissimulated to the larger public or to the shopper.

Do you know who knows, though? Many people.

The executives, the suppliers, maybe some shareholders, accountants, the legal team, and certain employees who are in management roles and who carry out the policies and strategic objectives dictated by headquarters.

Most tragedies, and perhaps every tragedy, could be prevented if someone, or a couple, said:

“No. This doesn’t sound right.”

Or at the weekly team meeting: “How are the people treated in the factories in Bangladesh fabricating our clothing? Do we know?”

The asker may get stared at, or shut down like he or she were a freak. But it’s a worthy question.

The shopper also knows.

A “made in” label is sewn with care on every garment and object.

A label that poses the question: Who? How much are they paid? How are they treated? Where are they working?

I still hear: hey, these people are lucky to have a job and earn $40 a month.

What does that say about how we value life? Or someone’s work?

This someone made what we proudly hang in our closet. It could be your comfortable pyjamas that you love so much.

If we ponder what we buy, and from whom we buy it, and act with conscience, the cycle would rectify itself.

People feel dissociated from what they buy, saying: What do I care? This item is at a good price and I am not harming anyone by buying it.

Well, you are paying for an item, and thereby adding to the financial success and thereby long term viability of the company who is selling you this item. And the company is making the item that you purchased by using people. Using them in a way that is harmful. In a way that you would not accept to work in.

Is it still harmless for you to buy without thinking?

Hello, we are not stupid

Media Freedom

Media Freedom (Photo credit: AK Rockefeller)

We have come to cringe following a violent act because of how the corporate media will display such an act. Inundating their channels with repetitive images and videos and slogans of fear.

Where is the information? The background? The truth?

Let’s not forget the predictable blaming that ensues. Is it justified? Is it proven? Or is this another opportunity to chastise and demonize a wide population?

Worse than the act of violence, is the violent way the painful, violent act is utilized.

We know the media’s stance is false, as we often see survivors or family members of the killed, come forth and ask for understanding and peace, and advocate the obvious: if someone is proven responsible, the culture, geographical location, or faith they claim to belong to, do not become responsible as well.

The author of a violent act is the author. And not every person, old or infant, man or woman, who are of the same country or faith.

Can we still be friends?

Keystone XL demonstration, White House,8-23-20...

Keystone XL demonstration, White House,8-23-2011 Photo Credit: Josh Lopez (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This question often springs to mind when I am in discussion with friends about the student strike that rocked Montreal last spring and summer, the American and Canadian military excursions in Iraq and Afghanistan, among other civilizations, and the building of the Keystone XL pipeline.               As examples.

When these issues come up, sometimes I tense up because I cannot believe what I am hearing. If this were an acquaintance speaking, or someone I just met, then it’s easy to smile and move away. However, when you hear a friend whom you’ve known for years defend government decisions that harm people and that are discriminatory, I find it hard to find a common ground.

I do explain my activist point of view, and share the knowledge I know from reading, daily, Truthout, Common Dreams, The Guardian, 972 magazine. However, after intensive arguing from the friend’s side, who is trying to justify inhumane actions by repeating political and governmental rhetoric that is not reflective of the views on the ground, I feel torn.

I wonder, am I really going to stop seeing this person after years, because we disagree politically or economically?

No, we disagree on human rights.

Am I able to hold onto this friendship even though we don’t agree on the universality of human rights? On the predominance of nature preservation over corporate and governmental practices?

If we cannot agree on a vision of an egalitarian, self-respecting, inclusive society, I am not sure what’s left to agree on.

How do you engage with friends who cheer conservative, exclusionary mindsets? Who believe that a homeless person deserves their fate? “Get a job!” they like to say and that ends it. You know, get a job, and the problem of increasing homelessness, due to a variety of societally-shared factors, will disappear.

How do you engage?