A green goal and removal of a stole -- it's all about the game of footie

Well, it's happened. Even the iconic FIFA organization is now marked by environmental social strife. Not that the world's pre-eminant soccer organization is upset with changes (in fact, it's not even responsible for the changes). Yet, the recent grumblings of Iranian women and the recent pledges by the South African government is cause for pause in the mighty footie realm.

So, what do I mean?

A recent petition demands that FIFA president, Mr Joseph S. Blatter, put pressure on the Iranian government to allow women into the stadium to watch the world's most international sport. The petition states that women are currently banned from participating (as observors) in Iran's participation in FIFA games -- and this exclusion prevents them from enjoying the inclusion of a culturally relevant past-time.

At present (and as any good theoretically a-political organization would do) FIFA is not weighing in on the debate. Rather, it is stepping back and taking the "we don't influence" politics approach -- an approach that simply does not exist in today's climate.

And speaking of climate -- while FIFA may be reluctant to engage in politics with the Iranian government it cannot avoid this aspect of international sports when dealing with the South African government.

In 2010 South Africa will host the FIFA Soccer World Cup -- an event that draws the attention of billions from all over the world. As a result the South African government has pledged to raise awareness (and standards) on water and energy conservation -- in an effort to green the game.

"We are committed to ensuring that South Africa learns from the Green Goal experience which vastly reduced the environmental impact of the 2006 World Cup in Germany," said Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Marthinus van Schalkwyk.

Hmmm, footie really is political -- whether the FIFA realize this or not.

For more information on the Iranian petition go to:
http://www.petitiononline.com/FIFAban/petition.html

For more information on FIFA go to:
http://access.fifa.com/en/article/0,0000,110908,00.html

For more information on South Africa's pledge for a green World Cup go to:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200612140740.html

Wal-Mart and Christian values go head to head in holiday season

Oh dear! It appears that Wal-Mart is acting in an un-Christian-like manner, or so say 130 pastors south of the border.

In an effort to draw attention to the low employment standards at the international mega-store, these 130 pastors formed a union-backed lobby group known as WakeUpWalMart.com. This newly formed organization sent a letter asking Wal-Mart's chief executive officer, Lee Scott, to provide higher standards to Wal-Mart employees and their families. The lobby group also released a new television ad featuring Pastor Joe Phelps of Highland Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, asking, "Would Jesus shop at Wal-Mart? Should you?" The pastor continues by asking, "can we continue to shop at Wal-Mart without insulting God?" He goes on to list allegations that Wal-Mart has violated child labor laws and engaged in gender-based discrimination and says half the company's 1.3 million U.S. employees aren't covered under the company health plan. The ad is set to run in 43 media markets.

In response to the advertisement Wal-Mart spokesman Dave Tovar said the United ad and its supporters are backing negative attacks while Wal-Mart is creating jobs.

"The fact is, union leadership is wasting millions of its members' dollars on a failing campaign against a company that is good for working families," Tovar said.

Of course, the un-Christian like employment practices of Wal-Mart cannot stop the buying blitz scheduled for next week. The mega-store announced yesterday that last-minute holiday shoppers will get a chance to shop at Wal-Mart Canada round the clock. While the books show it's an effort to boost the retail giant's year-end sales, the move affects 51 select stores across the nation starting on Monday. The round-the-clock sale will last until Dec. 24 -- a Sunday, ironically enough.

For more information go to:
http://wakeupwalmart.com/
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2006/12/13/walmart-shopping.html

Lego my bagel -- online petition targetting Dempsters

Hello mates,

It's time again to take the ol' mouse and click with your conscience.

On Metro Morning (CBC) this morning, two young women are calling on Canadians to reduce packaging -- their target (an example only) is a new product by Dempsters.

The new product is a bagel wrapped in hard packaging with diner-style sachets of peanut butter and a plastic knife (all individually wrapped) -- and all of this is triple-wrapped.

Talk about obsessive packaging (and an extraordinary waste). Talk about the rise and rise and rise of our solid waste ( -- wait! Didn't Toronto already go through an ordeal regarding solid waste...did we not learn that disposal is a problem and that reduce, reuse and recycle is essential?).

As a result Amy Nugent and Morwenna White have taken up the fight to reduce packaging. They have started an online petition calling on the government to implement standards and regulations regarding packaging. Their argument (and it is valid) is that voluntary regulation DOES NOT work. Period. And that is true. There are a variety of examples all across the consumer-minefield.

They are also asking people to mail their Dempster bagel back the president of the company. The address is listed on the first layer of packaging.

For the online petition go to: http://www.petitiononline.com/PKGREG/petition.html

Green travel getting a new boost from airlines

Travel.
It's fun; it's exciting; it's alluring; yet, to the mean green in all of us, it's a conundrum.

Travelling requires the use of carbon fuels, which, we all know, is a main contributer to green house gases and global warming. Unfortunately, the worst offender of this output is airline travel.

Yet, we live in a global world -- a world where families really do exist on either side of the pond and relaxation time really does include an escape to sun and surf.

So, how, then, can a green consumer make friendlier choices when it comes to travel -- in particular air travel?

According to PlanetSave (a web portal with green ideas for everyday living) we do have options. While the environment is not the main impetus for changing airline policy, the rising cost of oil (and the subsequent shrinking profit margin) IS enough to cause airlines all over the world to re-examine their methods of operation.

As such, PlanetSave believes that airlines have founder simple and safe ways to reduce their fuel burn, and thus their emissions. Solutions, such as winglets added to the aircraft, or flying more direct routes at energy-efficiency altitudes and speeds are methods being adopted by a large number of airlines. As is the eliminatino of excess weight and the use of electric vehicles for ground crew operations.

While all airlines are jumping on the efficiency wagon, PlanetSave does state that Asian and European airlines often have more advanced green programs than their American counterparts (but this is changing thanks to rising oil prices and savvy consumers like yourself). As such, PlanetSave singles out British Airways as a leader in this field of green-travel choices.

The stalwart of luxury travel, British Airways advocates an emissions trading scheme in the industry and has established carbon offsetting and sustainable-tourism initiatives. In the USA, JetBlue is potentially the greenest airline because of its newer, more fuel-efficient fleet and its in-flight recycling and waste-management programs. PlanetSave also gives kudos to American Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and several more for their in-flight recycling programs.

In the end, though, savvy, green travellers can opt for more sustainable choices by taking a few tips:

*Opt for direct flights instead of multiple stops—take-offs and landings are a major source of CO2 emissions.
*Choose an airline with fewer delays while the plane waits for a gate upon arrival, if possible. Planes burn excess fuel while waiting.
*Become a frequent flyer on an airline with a newer, more fuel-efficient fleet such as JetBlue, Singapore Airlines, or Virgin Atlantic.
*Consider purchasing carbon offset credits for the miles you fly.

Sign, sign, everywhere signs...

Today will be a short post.

It's just an alert for anyone interested or involved in cycling or climate change. There is a petition (online) asking the current Conservative government to put both issues front and forward by endorsing cycling across Canada.

To read the petition or get active go to:

http://www.gopetition.com/online/10170.html

Community meals means communion with commonality -- and that's the best sauce for hunger

We all know where any good party ends up: in the kitchen.

The kitchen is a hub -- it's the source of sustenance; a source of warmth and an easy place to find good icebreakers (let's face it, when pushed for conversation, nothing breaks the ice better than a discussion of food and wine).

So, it is with this in mind that I offer you two choices for community kitchen dinners this Friday night.

Community dinners (and subsequently community kitchens) are popping up all across Canada, yet, they are not a new notion. In fact, they are a return to values that were once prevalent in community-oriented cultures -- cultures that, in North America, have been usurped by the cult-of-the-individual. So, in a world of marketing and unauthentic experiences, community dinners are providing urban and rural dwellers with an opportunity to break bread with their extended community.

In Toronto, this Friday, there are two community dinners. The first is the long-standing tradition of Dufferin Grove Park. This community dinner attracts a wide variety of people from all across the neighbourhood (and beyond); as one community member stated, the dinner has helped to rejuvenate the community. For as little as $6 a plate ($5 if you bring your own plate) a person can look forward to a meal filled with locally produced food (purchased from the Farmer's Market held in the same park year round, every Thursday) and prepared onsite in the wood ovens. The second option is across town in Corktown. Again, the neighbours gather and for $5 a person can expect a home-cooked meal and chit-chat with people from every socio-economic and political background (including apolitical!).

Given our anonymous urban lives, these community dinners offer us all a chance to reach out and connect with the very people that deliver our papers, cut our lawns, teach our children and invest our money. They are a meeting point -- as food always is -- that does not rely on labels and schemas, but rather on nurturing and communion. And we could all use a little more communion.

Bring your plate (sustainability matters) and see you there!

Women is the N&*$er of the world -- Part 2

Today, I want to provide you a few lists, a bit of perspective and, perhaps, the possibility of change.

The reason? Seventeen years ago one man turned a gun on himself but not before killing 14 women and injuring 13 others at the École Polytechnique de Montréal.

While countless stories will provide his name, background, socio-economic and cultural status as well as intimate details of his suicide note and warped rational for his killing spree, I will refrain from doing this. Instead, I offer you the names of the dead. The direct victims of one man's violent, patriarchial attitudes towards women; one man's example of the desire for dominance and control over the "other half"; one example of the pervasive and prevalent attitude that women are secondary to men -- an attitude that continues to exist around the world.

People Killed
Geneviève Bergeron (b. 1968), civil engineering student.
Hélène Colgan (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Nathalie Croteau (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Barbara Daigneault (b. 1967) mechanical engineering student.
Anne-Marie Edward (b. 1968), chemical engineering student.
Maud Haviernick (b. 1960), materials engineering student.
Maryse Laganière (b. 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique's finance department.
Maryse Leclair (b. 1966), materials engineering student.
Anne-Marie Lemay (b. 1967), mechanical engineering student.
Sonia Pelletier (b. 1961), mechanical engineering student.
Michèle Richard (b. 1968), materials engineering student.
Annie St-Arneault (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Annie Turcotte (b. 1969), materials engineering student.
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (b. 1958), nursing student.

Now, take a moment. Read the list again. And sit with it. Sit with the knowledge that these women were innocent victims of one man's rage. Sit and reflect on the fact that they were punished, not for what they did, but for who they were. Now reflect on the fact that most of us, at least once in our life, will experience this unjustified and unwarranted hate directed at us - to some degree and on some level.

Done?

Good. Now remember how YOU felt when persecuted for being who you were. Recall the anger, the fear, the anguish and the confusion.

Got it?

Then take this into your day. Regardless of who you come across remember that prejudice, of any type, can and does kill. There is no rationalization that can justify hate and violence -- whether it is towards women, the LGBTQ community, Muslims, Christians, Jews, the list goes on. Yet, the only way we can truly break the cycle of us vs. them (differientation that leads to prejudice and hate) is to break down our own barriers and walls. Have courage. Persist. We will get through this.

Of course, for those more practically inclined, there are other actions that can and should be done. One such action is to support the Dec. 10th Campaign.

This campaign calls on all people (and organizations/corporations/institutions) to support the status of women in Canada -- a status, they report, which is seriously threatened. For more information of the Dec. 10th Campaign desires and rationale please scroll below to the declaration.

Finally, please examine the following list. It is the tally of all the women that died this year due to men on women violence in the GTA. The names are varied. The consequences are different. The reason is the same.

Women and Their Children Killed in the GTA in 2006
Yasmin Ashareh, 20
Seema Badhan, 19
Rose Boroja, 54
Colleen Bradley, 59
Kamlesh Dhingra, 58
Audrey Gates, 80
Wendy LaFleche, 41
Victoria LaFleche, 7
Jesse LaFleche, 3
Shao-Sang Liang, 38
Vivian Yuen-Yee Chau, 3
Ian Chau, five months
Dale Cheryl Mapstone, 29
Malena Morales, 31
Meherun Nessa, 35
Natalie Novak, 20
Rosa Peterman, 57
Gwendolyn Pilgrim, 35
Thayalini Subramaniam, 31
Malini Thayakumar, 36
Neruuya Thayakumar, 14
Gnanalakshmi Raman, 29

For more information on the Dec. 10th Campaign go to:
http://www.criaw-icref.ca/index_e.htm

For more information on the Dec. 6th Fund go to:
http://www.dec6fund.ca/what.htm

For more information on supporting the movement to end violence against women go to:
http://www.whiteribbon.ca/

Statement for the December 10th Campaign
For Women’s Equality and Human Rights
On December 10th, International Human Rights Day, Canada will mark the 25th anniversary of its ratification of the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Instead of celebrating this historical milestone, women in Canada are mobilizing to ensure that governments honour and respect their international and domestic human rights commitments. This is because over several months now, the federal government has acted in ways that deny most women’s realities, undermine women’s access to justice, and abandon its own obligation to advance women’s human rights in Canada.

Reality Denied

In 2006, the federal government made a number of important changes affecting women’s equality rights. These include a 40% cut to Status of Women Canada and the elimination of twelve regional Status of Women Canada offices. These measures signal a profound rejection of the realities of women’s lives. The justifications for these measures by Minister Beverley Oda are that women are strong, already equal, and don’t need these critical policy and legal supports. Although we acknowledge that women in Canada have won formal equality rights, we know that much more work must be done to make these equality rights a reality for all women in Canada. One indicator of this is women’s wages. On average, women still earn 71 cents on the male dollar, making Canada 38th in the world in terms of the wage gap ratio. Racialized and Aboriginal women earn significantly less. Their average annual income, respectively, is $16, 621 and $ 13,300. Further, even though 70% of mothers are in the paid work force, Canada still does not have in place a national child care program. According to the Toronto Community Foundation, over 10,000 children are on a waiting list for subsidized child care spaces in Toronto alone.

Access Denied

Access to justice is now denied to women on many fronts. In the last year, the federal government abolished the funding for the national child care program, decided not to adopt an improved federal pay equity law, eliminated all funds for the Court Challenges Program, removed the goal of equality from the mandate of the Women’s Program at Status of Women Canada, and prohibited the use of federal funds to engage in advocacy at any level of government, lobbying and most research. Other policy decisions have also contributed to denying women’s access to equality and their rights. Among these are the cuts to literacy programs, the lack of support for women and men who are homeless, the refusal to respect the Kyoto Protocol, the decisions to renege on the Kelowna Accord as well as Canada’s obstruction of the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Equality Denied

Instead of promoting women’s equality, the federal government is severely hindering: women’s capacity to organize, advocate and lobby. They won’t support women’s equality in the workplace and have limited women’s rights to challenge discrimination before the courts. Canada’s democratic safeguards are indeed being eroded and our internationally acclaimed human rights legacy is seriously in jeopardy.

Respect Your Commitment, Prime Minister Stephen Harper

We, the undersigned, urge Prime Minister Harper to respect his own election commitment to uphold women’s equality and human rights in Canada. During the 2006 election campaign, Mr. Harper stated:

“If elected, I will take concrete and immediate measures, as recommended by the United Nations, to ensure that Canada fully upholds its commitments to women in Canada." (January 18, 2006).

Prime Minister Harper is not respecting this commitment. The government’s approach jeopardizes the historic efforts by Canada to achieve women’s full equality, and disregards women’s human rights here at home. Rather than uphold his commitment to the women in Canada, the Prime Minister has in fact ignored the experience of millions of women in order to justify his government’s actions.

On December 10, we call on the federal Government to:

• Reverse its policy decisions on childcare, pay equity, the Court Challenges Program, Status of Women Canada, and the Women’s program..

• Respect the CEDAW Committee recommendations, by improving the living conditions and respecting the human rights of Aboriginal women, effectively addressing violence against women and women’s poverty, improving maternity and parental benefits, funding civil legal aid, changing immigration laws to respect the rights of live-in caregivers and ensuring a more equitable participation of women in the political institutions.

Women in Canada, because we are strong, determined and passionate, can and will not accept an erosion of their hard won and still fragile equality rights. Women are not living in poverty, as mothers, care-givers or elders, because they are weak or lack self-confidence. They do not choose to become the victims of violence at the hands of partners, family members or strangers. They do not wish to have their children taken from them because of a lack of access to safe and affordable housing. They have not chosen to be under-represented in Canada’s political life, or to be underpaid in countless workplaces across the country. Women, women’s organizations and our allies have chosen, however, to come together to call upon this government to reverse course and promote a collective respect for women’s equality and human rights.
Sincerely,

 Aboriginal Women’s Community-Based Studies Initiative
 Alliance des femmes de la francophonie canadienne
 Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
 Canadian Council of Muslim Women
 Canadian Federation of Students
 Canadian Federation of University Women
 Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action
 Canadian Labour Congress
 Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women
 Canadian Union of Public Employees
 Canadian Women's Community Economic Development Council
 Canadian Women’s Foundation
 Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada
 DAWN Ontario
 Fédération des femmes du Québec
 Feminists for Just and Equitable Public Policy
 MATCH International
 National Association of Women and the Law
 National Council of Women of Canada
 New Brunswick Advisory Council on the Status of Women
 Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses
 Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Newfoundland and Labrador
 Public Service Alliance of Canada
 Regroupement provincial des maisons d'hébergement et de transition pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
 Transition House Association of Nova Scotia
 Women’s Inter-Church Council of Canada
 Women’s Space
 YWCA Canada

Corporate responsibility is the new black

A few years ago only a couple of hundred multinationals were concerned enough with corporate responsibility to include this aspect of their conduct in annual reports.

This year analysts expect close to 2,000 such reports.

Bluntly put: this is exponential growth.

Andrew Brengle, senior analyst with Boston based KLD Research & Analytics, says that only 15 to 20 percent of these reports will be worth reading. He believes that only this small fraction of reports are thorough and comprehensive enough to provide a clear overview of corporate responsibility.

But the fact remains, more and more businesses realize the importance of ethical and responsible corporate decision-making. In otherwords responsibility and full disclosure is actually good business sense (que the choir, I feel a allehuai moment coming on!).

More and more businesses are attempting to communicate with employees and stakeholders through full disclosure. This move towards transperancy, then, forces companies to examine their decisions; this, in turn, provides impetus for making more responsible, ethical and sustainable decisions.

While Brengle may be right -- that the majority of these reports are simply surface attempts to appear responsible -- the fact still remains: consumers demanded, corporations responded; we care about the process not just about the outcome.

For more information on Brengle and the plethora of corporate responsibility reports go to:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1204/p25s01-wmgn.html

Ten years later the electric car is reborn

Ten years ago there was a cheaper, quieter, greener and more efficient alternative to the gas-combustable engine.

But we don't really know about it and we don't drive it because ten years ago the major car manufacturers, in conjunction with oil companies, governmental agencies and other lobbiests, set out to destroy the potential of this alternative transportation source.

That was 1996. This is 2006. This week, General Motors announced it is ready to launch a plug-in version of its upcoming two-mode hybrid model: the Saturn VUE Green Line. A plug-in version -- aka: electric car (or, at least, some variation of it).

In 1996, GM fought deep and dirty to destroy the electric car.

In 2006, the Big Three member announced its corporate intentions to expand its alternative fuel options.

So, what happened?

War happened. As did worldwide political unrest. Terrorism happened. As did socialization of the USA's fourth largest oil provider. Awareness happened. As did the momentum and belief in the decades of correlational proof on the human element of global warming.

In otherwords the GM (and perhaps other automakers) are living in a different world than 10 years ago.

In otherwords GM (and other automakers) can no longer make economic decisions based on short-term gain (five, ten, fifteen years is but a blip in a larger life-span). Instead, these major inhibitors and accelerators of transportation industry change have come to realize that to circle the proverbial wagons is to orchestrate one's own demise.

Though good ol' GM should be applauded for being the first major automaker to commit to producing a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle the sense of irony is a bit thick. At least, though, large corps are good foot-in-the-mouth swallowers. GM and other large corporations know that corporate image makeovers and PR games are all part and parcel of doing business in a global economy. So, applause the announcement, in my eyes, should be kept for other, not so large players in this realm.

In my view, applause for GM's decision to create and offer consumer accessible alternatives to the gas-combustable engine should be kept for people like Chris Paine and Jessie Deeter -- the writer/director and producer of Who Killed the Electric Car (an expose on the intentional death of an greener alternative to gas-powered cars in America).

Applause should also be kept for the thousands of Greenpeace activists, supporters and corporate personnel who have consistently drawn the public's attention to environmental issues such as global warming.

Applause should be kept for David Suzuki and all the people involved in his foundation that have kept up the barrage of news, views and data to support the need for a societal shift in how we think, act and feel about the Earth and its resources.

And applause should be kept for all those people, across the globe, that CHOOSE to ride their bike to work, take public transit, refuse to use plastic bags, continue to buy bulk (rather than fancy packaging) and opt for the admittedly rougher, but certainly far greener option of recycled personal hygiene paper products.

These are the true heros -- for without them, major automakers, such as GM, would not be in a position to realize public sentiment and corporate image is far more powerful than a small man with a big stick in an unstable oil-producing country half-way across the world.

For more information on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html

For more information on GM's announcement go to:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061110/AUTO01/611100327/1148

For more information on criticism on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F

Canada misses top ten in Gender Equality

Is it a surprise? Nordic Europe is the guiding light in gender equality. This is a region of the world that places quality of life and standard of life far above economic interests -- or perhaps they appreciate the fact that economic interest is always taken care of when we take care of our own.

Rather than focus on lowering taxes (the financial base with which to offer national programs and establish equalization plans) these countries focus on developing and nurturing all segments of their population. The result? Well, the obvious result, right now, is their high ranking in the World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report. The longer-term, less-obvious results deal with a higher standard of living than North America, a stronger social network than most Western democracies and an economic system that is based on educating it's population not lowering taxes for businesses.

To put it bluntly: Nordic Europe tops the list for gender equality out of 115 countries in the world. That's no small feat. The countries boast the
world's best maternity leave, the best political participation rates and an education system in which women now outnumber men.

The World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report 2006 named Sweden as the world's most progressive country when it comes to quality of the sexes, followed by Norway, Finland and Iceland.

Ranking the countries according to economic participation and opportunity, education, political empowerment and health and survival, Canada came in 13th and the United States ranked 29th. The small Middle East nation of Yemen came last in the global list.

Going green with Green Day

Punk rock is more than a fashion statement. While 'hawks, studs and pins became the visual symbol of the anti-status-quo, the rants and raves were the ideological rational for the less-than-angry music style. Enter pop-punk. This was the feel good, boppy punk that dominated the 90s. It started with Green Day and exploded with replica bands (namely: Blink 192, Sum 41, etc. etc). While these bands paid homage to punk roots, they borrowed the light and fluffy attitudes of pop to make the music more accessible to everyday kids (not just the angst-ridden trench-coat crowd).

But this is life -- and art, like life, comes full circle. Even as Green Day toured Canada on the 1998 Edgefest tour (and, yes, I was there...for each and every show) the kids from California were beginning to understand the power and prevalence of punk -- anti-authority, anti-corporate, socially relavent punk.

Now, in the 21st century the band that launched a musical style is turning back to its punk-rock roots. It started with the release of their last album, and was recently supported by their decision to promote clean and green.

In a press statement, release yesterday, Green Day announced their partnership with Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to urge young music fans to demand clean, renewable energy solutions. The rockers hope their latest cause will help break America's "dangerous dependence on oil".

Frontman Billie Joe Armstrong stated: "This campaign is about channelling the power of millions into something positive and powerful. People are sick of our oil addiction and feel like nobody is doing anything about it. The solutions are there, the support is there, but the leadership is not."

OK -- so the whole idea of formal partnership and corporate messaging goes against the pure-punk attitude of grassroots and underground; and so the call for positive solutions is a little different than the angry demand for destruction and dismantling of society and its values -- but the sentiment (to change the status quo) is as punk as you can get. Green is the new anti-corporate and punk is the ideal medium to get kids on board.

For more information on the Green Day initiative go to:
www.GreenDayNRDC.com

Volunteer your time -- and your car -- for Universal Housing

Got a car? Want to help the housing movement?
The National Housing Day group is holding a car rally on Nov. 22 and asking for volunteers to show up and raise a the roof -- so to speak.

The car rally will be held on Wednesday Nov. 22 at Sunnyside Park (on Lakeshore Blvd.). It starts at 10:30am (when cars will be decorated) and the procession of cars will start at 11am.

At present there are 25 vehicles confirmed, with pledges/promises from another 25. However, the National Housing group wants to build a caravan of at least 50 cars to parade around downtown Toronto, in an effort to raise awareness on housing issues.

To endorse the event send an email to: nhd_endorsement@hotmail.com
To register call TDRC at: 416-599-8372 or email us at tdrc@tdrc.net.

Sponsors of this event include CAW, TDRC and the TO Appeal For Federal Funding for Homelessness (SCPI $). Other endorsers are welcome.

All the information you need for this event is on the TDRC website,
www.tdrc.net/carrally.htm

A man, a memorial, a lesson in life

A few days late, but a worthwhile story to share.

This past weekend I had an opportunity to attend a life-affirming event -- an event that reminded me of the importance of passion; the fortitude of confidence; and the power of love.

It was a memorial.

At first glance, the memorial was to a man that had spent his entire life defending and supporting Canadian arts. This, in itself, deserves accolades. Canada is not often considered a passionate, drum-beating nation. We rarely cheer on our talent and seldom support our creative forces. Yet, despite this collective apathy a few champions do emerge -- Sid Adilman was definitely one of these champions. Even as the hippie-sixties were raging, Sid was busy pounding away the prose on Canadian artistic endeavours. As an entertainment reporter and columnist for numerous publications (but particularly the Toronto Star) he had the opportunity and the foresight to search out our Great White Northern identity in all artistic ventures. As such, he helped launch and define Canadian comedy, dance, music and broadcast. A feat that did not, and could not, go unnoticed.

But, despite the public acknowledgement of Sid's passion and persistence, another aspect of this quirky, delightful man emerged.

Sid was a romantic. Not just in love -- although a cross-cultural, transborder love affair with a Japanese woman he proposed to only a week after meeting, certainly proves his charm -- but also in life. He experienced joy and delight in the events and areas most Canadians take for granted. He delighted in food, in Canadian east-coast hospitality and never lost his way as a devoted, loving and supportive husband and father. This was the man we came to know during the two-hour memorial. This was the man sons Mio and Nobu had lost and wife Toshiko would mourn. This is the man whose life was dedicated to art, culture and the nurture of the creative.

Toskiko, Nobu, Mio -- my heart goes out to you for your loss. Thank you for sharing your husband and father with us. While we knew him as a prolific writer and the great defender of Canadian culture, you knew him as the man who loved to live. For this, alone, the man is worth remembering.

For more information please see:
http://www.nobu.ca/
http://thestar.blogs.com/azerb/2006/10/sid_adilman.html
http://blog.canadianjournalist.ca/blog/_archives/2006/10/15/2418635.html
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/story.html?id=a7051994-b01f-43f1-b69f-df47c421c77c&k=36558
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117952017.html?categoryid=25&cs=1

Shit is acceptable on national TV news

Apparently, in the United States, s%&t is news.

In an FCC ruling yesterday, the S-word was deemed acceptable as long as the the TV program even faintly resembled a news show.

The Federal Communications Commission reversed it's previous decision after reviewing and judging that a Survivor:Vanuatu contestant's use of the obscenity during an interview on a December 2004 episode of The Early Show on CBS was, in fact, acceptable. The contestant used a vulgar term for "smooth talker" to describe a fellow contestant.

Apparently the morning fluff-news show is news-worthy enough to allow a liberal tongue. Thank God...can you imagine trying to describe the city's best french toast without the use of powerful verbal descriptives!

Still, the reality is our vocabularly is inching closer and closer to devolution. For example, did you know that the simple term abandon was once represented by three descriptors: anforlætan; forlætan; ofgiefan -- all from Old English and none of them in continued use?

While the FCC ruling can be deemed an effort to reflect a more liberal attitude, it borders on linguicide. The approval on the use of vulgarities is more than a reflection of our liberal society; it is a reflection of our linguistic laziness. As a lazy culture we rely, too often, on four-letter vulgarities to describe a plethora of situations -- and this reliance on boorish words means that other, more refined descriptors are forgotten and dismissed.

As the Vocabula Review states: A society is generally as lax as its language.

While the FCC prides itself on being the moral last word for broadcast acceptability in the United States (and that, in itself, says a lot), I choose to ignore Big Brother's acceptance and condemnation of my verbally descriptive world. Instead, I will try and reform this particularly unpleasant potty-mouth of mine -- and that should take more than a few regulations and rules from a bureaucratic watch dog.

For an amusing take on vocabularly loss (and reclamation) go to:
http://vocabreclaim.blogspot.com/

For the full USA Today article on the FCC ruling go to:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2006-11-07-indecency-usat_x.htm

US elections and the advent of Death City

I was going to blog about the massive amounts of electoral porn we experienced last night.

Yes, south of the border was awash in elections, results, speeches and promises -- enough to titillate even the most jaded political junkies.

But the day is getting on and my desire to re-hash the thrills and chills of a democrate win are beginning to fade.

Instead, I wanted to offer a link to a new site based on a new horror. Most of us are too young to remember the impact of Orson Wells' War of the Worlds. At that time radio WAS the medium. Wells' -- a consummate writer -- engaged the public with a sci-fi horror that caused panic and disturbances all over North America. How thrilling!

Today, the Internet is the medium. Considered the source for news, views and research, the Internet offers us a glimpse into the real, the imagined and the in-between. Enter: the Death City.

A new, serialized writing project, Death City offers us a glimpse into the horrors and realities that could occur if a plague were to befall us.

Take a look: www.death-city.blogspot.com

Holy city? or Homo city? Israel stands up and out despite protests

"This is not a homo-city; this is a holy city."

So decried an orthodox cleric over the decision made by Jerusalem's attorney general to allow a gay pride parade through the streets of the revered city.

Has the irony sunk in yet?

There is no doubt that the city is steeped in historical meaning. Jews viewed the city as a holy place more than 3,000 years ago; Muslims trace their lineage back to former Jerusalem residents and consider one temple in the city as the third holiest site in the world; while, Christians continue to see this place as a the city where Jesus was crucified. Yet the common bond among all religions and people is that Jerusalem (along with Israel, as a whole) was populated and has evolved under a cloud of hate and prejudice.

The very fact that Israel exists is because the world turned its back on a group of people because of their life practices. Now, the same is happening inside the walls of one of the world's holiest cities.

Rather than honour the notion of "love thy neighbour" fights and protests have erupted all over the city to protest the planned gay pride parade.

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported over the weekend that: Dozens of fervently Orthodox Jews in Mea She’arim rioted at the news that the parade was to proceed, blocking off the city’s Shabbat Square with burning trash cans...The [attorney general's] approval [of the parade] caused a violent riot from hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews which left policemen wounded and saw the arrest of 30 people.

Just over 70 years ago the country was founded to protect ethnicity and religious convictions. Now, the very residents that have benefited from this foundation of love and tolerance are condemning people -- because they disagree with their love and companionship lifestyle.

Thank god for the rule of law.

Despite the close-minded actions of a the minority orthodox and fundamentalist religious groups in Israel, the country's attorney general, Menachem Mazuz, approved the twice-delayed parade in support of "freedom of expression". While religious leaders in the country may not condone the expression of the LGBTQ community it is clear that the country is still (thankfully) ruled by law (based on the very human rights Jews demanded almost a century ago).

While ultra-conservative views will never be changed, it is possible to equip a society and a culture with the facets of tolerance (and, hopefully, acceptance). This can only be done when equality and the freedom to express one's lifestyle choices is protected by for all under the law. While the Israeli government may be getting flak for its decision to proceed with the country's gay pride parade, I applaud their efforts to truly create an inclusive and tolerant society.

After all, that's why Israel, the nation, was first formed.

Oxfam and Starbucks: Head to Head with a mug of jo'

It's multi-national non-profit VS. multi-national corporation -- each vying to control the coffee; each vying for a piece of Ethiopia's growing coffee trade.

Last week Oxfam and Starbucks went head to head (via press releases) regarding Ethiopia's bid to trademark coffee names. Oxfam accused Starbucks of urging the National Coffee Association (a trade association for the US coffee industry) to oppose the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) applications to the US Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the "Sidamo," "Harar" and "Yirgacheffe" names. Starbucks countered with statistical evidence of its support for Ethiopian coffee farmers; the conglomerate noted that it favors a certification program as a better means to "protect geographically descriptive terms and ensure they represent quality products." Oxfam's response: Starbucks, stop being "disingenuous" and acknowledge your role in opposing the trademark application.

Now this is highstakes Corporate Responsibility in action. Starbucks built its brand and its image on socially responsible business practices. It was one of the first (and still one of the few) corporations to offer part-time employees health benefits; Starbucks markets its coffee based on better business practices (practices they determine and they enforce) and it pumps hundreds of thousands back into the community continent wide. Corporate responsibility is an important aspect of the Starbucks brand-image.

Enter Oxfam.

Oxfam is a confederation of 13 organizations that work together in more than 100 countries. Their mandate is to "increase worldwide public understanding that economic and social justice are crucial to sustainable development." That purpose is motivated by the fact that Oxfam wants to make equity the same priority as economic growth. From this rubrik, Oxfam has taken up the Ethiopian fight for rights and ownership. According to the non-profit, if Ethiopia secures the rights to the coffee names than the economically repressed country would capture more value from the trade -- this is because Ethiopia would have more control over the use of their names in the market, which enables farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price. Oxfam suggests that this shift (giving Ethiopia the trade name rights) would provide the Ethiopian coffee industry and its farmers an estimated $88 million (USD) extra per year.

The very public fight between Oxfam and Starbucks is reminiscent of earlier exchanges the two multi-nationals had over Fair Trade. A few years ago Oxfam and activists criticized Starbucks for insufficient support of Fair Trade. At that time, Starbucks pointed out that it was the largest purveyor of Fair Trade in the USA. At that time, Starbucks also stated that the primary factor holding it back from only using Fair Trade coffee was lack of supply. The coffee conglomerate also pointed to its numerous policies and actions in social and environmental standards to plantations that are not covered by Fair Trade standards.

The rhetoric, facts and opinions are rampant on both sides -- as this is confrontational activism. Rather than collaboration, Oxfam (and partners) have chosen to attack Starbucks. While questions still exist (such as, how will the patent ownership actually help Ethiopian farmers) they are being ignored in favour of positioning.

Corporate responsibility is important -- not only for the purposes of branding and image, but in terms of developing and fostering worldwide equity. However, corporate responsibility is still immersed in the school of confrontation -- a school that we know all too well (just look at any election, anywhere). This style of activism often ignores poignant and important questions in favour of quick and snappy sound bites. As such, facts get lost and lines are drawn and little is done to find a solution.

Regardless of your opinion on Starbucks, this mega-coffee-brand is the Wal-Mart of coffee companies in North America. As such, their buying power is an economic force in the coffee industry -- a worldwide industry that accounts for six-million tonnes of picked beans every year. If we are to create an equitable solution (that benefits farmers, companies and consumers) we will need to include Starbucks and other coffee companies in the debate. Oxfam's tactic of shaming is an old tactic and a good tactic, but in the end, it's good old fashioned discussion and compromise that will result in a responsible and equitable solution.

Until then, make mine a dark, Grande. Fair Trade, of course.

For more information on Oxfam's position on Ethiopian trademarked coffee go to:
http://www.oxfam.org/en/news/pressreleases2006/pr061026_starbucks

For more information on Starbuck's position go to:
http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=714

Addicted? or Dependent? You decide...

It is interesting to note that there is a discussion among certain professional folk regarding the use (and abuse) of the words addiction and dependence.

According to the dictionary, addiction is a term that refers to the state of being enslaved to a habit or practice or to something that is psychologically or physically habit-forming, as narcotics, to such an extent that its cessation causes severe trauma. At the same time, dependence is defined as the state of being psychologically or physiologically dependent on a drug after a prolonged period of use.

Obviously the terms have been used interchangeably -- both imply a reliance upon substances (or conditions) that cause a psychological and physical habit, yet, according to professionals, there is a difference. The rationale for determining and defining the difference is ever more present as our baby-boomer population ages. With age comes chronic conditions, which, can often mean pain and pain treatment. It is this condition that has prompted the medical and research professionals to determine and define the difference between dependence and addiction -- as pain maintenance often requires narcotics.

However, even as the professionals debate, other organizations are proactive in defining addiction and dependence. According to the American Pain Society, The American Academy of Pain Medicine, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine, there is a distinct difference between these two terms. Their consensus provides an alternative definition to these states (that clarifies the ambiguous definition provided in medical bible: the DSM).

Hence, the definition for addiction, according to the above bodies is:

a primary, chronic, neurobiological disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving.

Whereas, the definition of physical dependence is:

a state of adaptation that is manifested by a drug-class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.

While definitions cannot help the person suffering from addiction (or dependence) they can help the professionals that come in contact with these individuals. A better understanding of the condition can lead to a better understanding of how to treat the condition -- and this allows us not to assume that the treatment for addicts is as simple as the treatment for dependents.

For more information on the debate on terms go to:
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/163/11/2014-a

Buses of Believers call for closure on School of Assassins

"It is not power that corrupts, but fear" -- Aung San Suu Kyi, parent & Nobel Prize winner (resister to military dictatorship)

The term power is corrupted. For too long it has been associated with the negative --power corrupts; power to manipulate; power to control; power to own. Yet, power is not negative or positive, rather, it is a tool; a mechanism that can be used for unhealthy or healthy ends, depending on the person who weilds the power.

Why is this important? Because there is a long lineage of power used to overthrow the centries-old dictates of war and violence. Non-violence is an oft-maligned, oft-dismissed concept. A concept that is not given enough credit in our schools and intentionally overlooked in our societal aims. Non-violence, in its truest form, requires a processing within and a rejection of criticism, judgement and separation without.

While I may not be a religious person, I have often admired the fortitude and persistence of theological denominations in bringing a more peaceful perspective to life on Earth. As such, the blog this morning is in relation to non-violence, power and the Anglican Church.

This November a group of young Canadian Anglicans will be among those participating in a pilgrimage to the US Army School of the Americas (SOA). Originating in Toronto, the pilgrimage will include stops to various justice-seeking Christian communities before culminating at the gates of the SOA in Fort Benning, Georgia. The intention of the pilgrimage is to call for the closure of the SOA (now technically known as The Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation -- WHISC).

The WHISC is a combat training school for Latin American soldiers. In the 59 years of the school's history, the SOA (dubbed the "School of Assassins") has trained over 60,000 Latin American soldiers in counterinsurgency techniques, sniper training, commando and psychological warfare, military intelligence and interrogation tactics. While the efforts of the school do not fall in line with the precepts of the Anglican Church, the primary reason for shutting down the school is because these American-trained-graduates of the SOA have been known to use their skills to wage a war against their own people. As many who follow Latin American politics know, the targets of the SOA graduates include: educators, union organizers, clergy and religious workers, student leaders, and others working for the rights of the poor, who have been tortured, raped, assassinated, “disappeared,” massacred, and forced into refuge. Needless to say the work of the SOA helps to undermine human rights and propogates the necessity for violence.

Last year, the Student Christion Movement of Canada and the North America Region of the World Student Christian Federation (the two organizations responsible for the SOA pilgrimage) were able to coordinate a pilgrimage that placed 19,000 people in front of the Fort Benning gates. This year they expect more. The SOA non-violence wake to call for the closure of the School of Assassins will leave Toronto on November 16. These buses of believers (both Anglican and supporters of non-violence) will trek 1065 miles for their cause.

For more information contact: Rob Shearer, PWRDF Youth Initiative Staff Email: youth@pwrdf.org. Or call Rob at: 416 924-9199 x 366

As Mother Theresa said: Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person.

Wonder Woman reminds me of MY strength

In the 20th century there were few female role models that embodied strength, independence, beauty and brains. In fact, the prototypical icon would eventually be created by a husband and wife team in the early 1940s -- a working relationship that was uncommon, then, but would essentially provide the impetus for the ultimate, albeit fictional, superheroine.

Wonder Woman was first introduced in DC Comics by William Moulton Marston and wife Elizabeth Holloway Marston. She first appeared in All Star Comics #8 in December 1941 and was one of the first (and most famous) comic book uber-women; her defining role would be immortalized when she became a founding member of the Justice League.

And she was my hero.

In fact, I remember the first Halloween that I was given an opportunity to pick my character/costume. Up until then, I had simply chosen the flavour of the day -- a ghost, a ballerina, a Greek princess (please don't ask!). Then, at age seven, I turned. Earlier that year I had been introduced to comics -- a black hole for our literary house, but a boon for my visually starved mind. I spent hours in comic book stores and even more time becoming acquainted with the histories of various characters. While Captain America and Superman dominated the first-view racks, my fascination was drawn to quieter, more complex characters -- characters such as the brazen and bold, the sexy and sassy Wonder Woman.

As a fictional role model, Wonder Woman was the ultimate conception of an empowered, independent female. She was tough yet compassionate, intelligent and strong, and she had an overblown sense of justice that I found compelling and fascinating.

Of course, my introduction to Wonder Woman would leave an indelible mark on my early psyche. As a teenager I thought tough meant standing up and out (hell, Wonder Woman DID wear a one-piece body-piece with boobs out to here and legs up to there!); I also thought it meant that justice reigned supreme. While I didn't quite appreciate the softer side of feminity at the time, I would eventually grow into that realm of womanhood -- and again, return to the role model of the uber-woman.

I am not the only one. A charity event in Portland, Oregan is also returning to the tough-as-nails female protector. Raphael House and Bradley-Angel House are hosting the Wonder Woman Day on Sunday Oct. 29. The free all-ages event will include a trio of comic book artists signing Wonder Woman comics and special art prints, as well as a silent art auction with over 100 of the world's top artists contributing original art. The funds will go towards the advocacy and aid programs the shelters currently offer.

The fact is as a woman there are fewer role models both then and now. While famous woman continue to exist very few clearly do not rely on men for protection, guidance or aid. While I do not advocate the abolition of community or a lack of reliance among one other to fight and solve problems and issues, I do advocate the use of role-models to help us appreciate our innate strengths. In a world where women continue to make up 80% of the poverty stricken, these role models are more necessary now than ever before.

For that reason, I will be dedicating my Sunday to Wonder Woman.
I ask you to do the same.
Your actions do not have to grand or extreme -- but on Sunday take some time out and do at least ONE activity that epitimizes what it means to YOU to be a strong, dedicated feminist.

Lord knows, we certainly need more of those.

Water cooler exercises

There are times in our life where we become acutely aware of how we are perceived.

A mate of mine realized this when he was travelling through India over a decade ago. Originally he had been birthed in Karachi, Pakistan, but had spent 20+ years in Canada (starting from when he was a child). As such, he had grown up in Canadian culture, with Canadian values and a Canadian perspective. This perspective, then, included an innate belief that regardless of race, colour, creed (or another identifier) we are all equal under the law. Unfortunately, this sentiment was not shared by the Indian authorities. As tensions were rising between the old rivals of Pakistan and India, my mate quickly found himself in an Indian jail. According to Indian governmnent perspective he was Pakistan, regardless of his lack of affiliation with his place of birth. Even as he languished in the gritty jails of New Delhi, he believed he would be "rescued" as a Canadian. However, he found that it took days -- and a lot of convincing by two causasian travelling mates -- to convince the Canadian and then the Indian authorities that he was not a terrorist.

What my mate experienced was the disparate gap between perception and stereotypes. His experience left him stunned and hurt (as it should). He later became a legal professional.

The sad fact is our heuristics can hurt (rather than help) in how we deal with people. This scenario has never been more evident than how we are currently dealing with people of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent (particularly people whose dress self-identifies them as an alternative religion than Judao-Christian culture).

As such, I have a task for all you little social justice advocates. It's a simple task -- one that will not require legal action, or public display. Yet, the action is an essential component in breaking down the barriers that stand between us, our perceptions, and our steretypes.

The task is this: look within and acknowledge the stereotypes that YOU live by. Not the expectations you have of yourself based on your desires...but rather the expectations and beliefs you hold of yourself based on history and culture.

The fact is that in order to break down the limiting (and often hurtful) heuristics that dominate our culture and attitudes today, we need to begin challenging them -- and what better place to begin than within.

Since stereotypes are learned attitudes that have significant impact on our behavior -- learned attitudes that we develop from a variety of sources including television, books, music, our peers, families, etc. -- we need to acknowledge these generalizations we hold. NOTE: These generalizations can be positive or negative, but both can have negative consequences for the person or people being stereotyped.

The fact is, whenever we stereotype someone, we are ignoring them as an individual and lumping the whole group together as “they are all like that.” Stereotypes can be very difficult to change. Stereotypes happen when we judge people from our own frame of reference or our own cultural expectations about how people should look, behave, talk, etc. This can cause misunderstandings (on both sides) and misjudgments.

So here is your task for today: during a quiet moment (perhaps when you get that second or third cup of coffee) take a moment and acknowledge: what beliefs did I learn about myself based on television? Books? Music? Art? Now, go a little deeper and acknowledge what lessons you learned about yourself based on school curriculum (or lack thereof). Now pick a person in your place of work and do the same exercise. Don't worry about censoring your thoughts -- no one will know what comes up...this is YOUR exercise, your thoughts, your attempt to correct a lifetime of preconceptions.

And that's it.

The fact is, if we are ever to overcome stereotypes, we must first acknowledge that we are impacted by them -- both externally and internally. And since I cannot change the external it's time for all of us to take internal responsibility.

NOTE: I would love to know the results of this exercise. If you feel comfortable, drop me a line and let me know: what did you learn? Were there any shocking revelations? And, most importantly, did you see the heuristics that limit yourself and others?

Art at Resistence; Resistence as Art -- the 2006 Toronto Arcfest: Social Justice in Art

As a blogger who tries to keep abreast of socially just issues, I would be remiss if I didn't start off the week with a little plug for Arcfest -- Toronto's Social Justice Arts Festival.

The show runs from Oct. 22 to Oct. 29 and features over 100 artists in 25 events exploring local social justice issues. The venues are in Queen West, Parkdale, and other spots across Toronto; in true social justice fashion, the festival includes a diverse program of seasoned and emerging artists, panel discussions, speakers, workshops, and artist-community collaborations.

The full schedule for the event can be found at: http://www.arcfest.org/2006/schedule/date

While the schedule does not list events for Monday Oct. 23 (considered Black Monday by theatre folk) there are events all week. For example, tomorrow (Tues. Oct. 24) check out:

1) Resistance as Art; 6pm; Lennox Contemporary Gallery; Free; Through painting, sculpture, book arts, and other media, this exhibition examines legacies of colonization, issues of land rights, prison and incarceration, and classism.

2) Art as Resistance; 7:30pm; SPIN Gallery; By donation; Artists look at issues related to race, gender, and sexuality in this multi media exhibition.

3) Festival Opening; 7pm | SPIN Gallery | Suggested donation: $10; The festival kicks off with a key note address by Drew Hayden Taylor followed by a spoken word performance by The Fusilli project and dancehall rock by d'bi.young and the dubbin.revolushun.gangstars.

By the end of the week check out the workshops on offer. The FREE workshops include:
1) Forum Theatre Workshop; Saturday October 28th 2:30 pm – 4:30 pm; Parkdale Library Downstairs, 1303 Queen St West. Forum theatre is a form of community based education that is used for community building, conflict resolution and a way for a community to identify and examine social problems of importance.
2) Roots, Culture and Beats: Breakdancing For All; Sunday, Oct. 29th 2:00 pm - 4:00pm; Parkdale Library Downstairs, 1303 Queen St West. Callin’ all hip-hop loving, street-dance groupies, closeted b-girls and b-boys and true funk-adoring fans – old school and young – for a two hour workshop that explores the moves, beats, art and culture of breakdancing.
3) The Right Spin: The Art, Politics and Business of Deejaying in the City;
Sunday, October 29th 1:00 pm - 3:00pm; Queen West Arts Centre, 100a Ossington Ave (2 blocks north of Queen). Music transcends language and a good dj does more than just spin to the crowd. ARCfest presents a two-hour deejaying workshop for the politically savvy.
4)Responding: A Performance Art Workshop Exploring Issues Faced by Refugees; Saturday, October 28, 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm; Parkdale Library Downstairs, 1303 Queen St West. Responding is a workshop exploring refugee issues through performance art.

Sign up go to:
http://www.arcfest.org/2006/workshops

Burning the weed

The Viet-cong had a system of underground tunnels; the Germans blitzkrieged their way to dominance; and Pol Pot indoctrinated a nation. Every nation and dictator has their way of usurping the opposition and the Afghan insurgents are no different.

I reprint a story from Reuters (below) that offers an explanation as to why our troops cannot (or will not!) find the current Afghani insurgents. Also take a look at thelink to the b-roll footage of a British journalist reporting on the drug burning initiatives of UK troops. Both remind us that where there is smoke...there should be munchies.

OTTAWA, Canada (Reuters) -- Canadian troops fighting Taliban militants in Afghanistan have stumbled across an unexpected and potent enemy -- almost impenetrable forests of marijuana plants 10 feet tall.

General Rick Hillier, chief of the Canadian defense staff, said Thursday that Taliban fighters were using the forests as cover. In response, the crew of at least one armored car had camouflaged their vehicle with marijuana.

"The challenge is that marijuana plants absorb energy, heat very readily. It's very difficult to penetrate with thermal devices. ... And as a result you really have to be careful that the Taliban don't dodge in and out of those marijuana forests," he said in a speech in Ottawa, Canada.

"We tried burning them with white phosphorous -- it didn't work. We tried burning them with diesel -- it didn't work. The plants are so full of water right now ... that we simply couldn't burn them," he said.

Even successful incineration had its drawbacks.

"A couple of brown plants on the edges of some of those [forests] did catch on fire. But a section of soldiers that was downwind from that had some ill effects and decided that was probably not the right course of action," Hiller said dryly.

One soldier told him later: "Sir, three years ago before I joined the army, I never thought I'd say 'That damn marijuana'."

http://www.guzer.com/videos/stoned_reporter.php

All people need to become feminists

In recent weeks the media focused on the violent acts of a few individuals -- all of them young men. Though these violent acts appeared random and arbitrary, a common theme existed: they were all angry, young men who chose to exert their dissatisfaction with (insert reason here) by enacting violence an another. And these are the very same men that injure and kill women through domestic and other forms of violence.

So why care? There are shelters, police programs and non-governmental programs -- I ask again: why care?

Because 51% of women have experienced at least one incident of sexual or physical violence. The scary fact is that these statistics, taken from StatCan, are over a decade old. The scary fact is the trend persists. In fact, close to 60% of these women have experienced more than one violent incident.

More statistics include:
*62% of the victims who reported being sexually assaulted were under age 18 (taken from a 1998 survey)
*In 2000, women made up the vast majority of victims of sexual assault -- 86%, and other types of sexual offences (78%).
*80% of sexual assaults occur at home
*49% occur in broad daylight
*In 80% of cases reported to police, the victims knew the abuser -- about 10% were assaulted by a friend, 41% were assaulted by an acquaintance, 28% were assaulted by a family member, the remaining 20% were assaulted by a stranger.
*82% of women seeking accommodation at a shelter were escaping abuse
*about 1 in 10 women seeking accommodation in a shelter are repeat visitors with over five stints per year in shelters
*the largest portion of women staying in shelters (just over one-third) are between 25 and 34 years old.

Violence against women persists and will continue to do so until violent men (and I pick my words carefully) are dealt with -- openly, publically and rationally. The punitive system we currently have does nothing to help rehabilitate a violent offender -- particulary one that receives a rather light sentence for assaulting a partner or spouse. The criminal system does not deem this offence to be serious enough to warrant tougher sentences or alternative treatment. Rather, the criminal system is reactive rather than proactive. It waits until the damage is done (death, dismemberment, etc) before treating the abuser. There is another option. We could become proactive in dealing with these issues. Since violence often escalates, we could provide rehabilitative services to offenders as opposed to light-weight punitive sentences.

As women, we can also become educated in the problem. One way to do this is to read. Another way is to engage. This is the impetus behind this week's Week Without Violence - held by YMCA's across the continent. The week-long awareness campaign is aimed at women, for women, in an effort to talk about, deal with and attempt to solve the persistent violence against women that continues to exist within our society.

One event worth noting is this Saturday's The Power of Being a Girl Conference!. This is a free event, running from 10am to 4pm at the YWCA Girls Centre and is intended to help educate and empower girls between the ages of 14 and 17. Workshops include: D.I.Y Spa, Law and Order, Fact/Fiction, Yo Gal Relax & Yoga, So You think You Can Dance?, Sex in the City, The "F" Word, Project Personality, CSI:Net. Lunch, snacks and funk goody bags included!

To register go to: abc@ywcatoronto.

*For an excellent article on the importance of feminism and the necessity with dealing with male violence go to:
http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2006-09-21/news_story3.php

*For more information on sexual assault statistics go to:
http://www.metrac.org/

*For more information on shelter statistics go to:
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ncfv-cnivf/familyviolence/
pdfs/Transition%20Home%20Survey%201999-2000%20Fact
%20Sheets%20English.pdf

We need to rethink our prison system -- QUICKLY

We have a problem.

No, it's not going to effect your no-foam-double-latte this morning, nor will it have a direct impact on your work day (be it a corporate, entrepreneurial, or a home-based responsibilities) -- but we do have a problem. And because of our reluctance to deal with it a decade ago, it is getting worse.

The problem is the sheer number of women that are now being incarcerated.

I know: you do the crime, you do the time. Yes, I do agree with the necessity of taking responsibility for one's actions; I also believe that our actions can be directly and disproportionately impacted by our socio-economic needs.

In November 1996 the Canadian government published the four-thousand-page, $58 million Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP 1996), a report that reviewed and made recommendations about a wide range of social and economic issues related to Canada's Aboriginal peoples. The Globe and Mail's John Gray, summarized the conditions of natives in Canada: "an endless circle of disadvantage--family violence, educational failure, poverty, ill health, violence" (Gray 1997).

Now, a decade later, Beverley Jacobs, the president of the Native Women's Association of Canada, blamed aboriginal over-representation in the prison system on poverty, poor education, unemployment, dismal living commissions, alcoholism and violence in aboriginal communities.

Metis National Council President, Clément Chartier agreed saying in a recent press release that, "For years we have witnessed our men and women filling Canadian jails. We believe this is a direct correlation to the fact poverty and unemployment rates in our Métis communities have reached staggering proportions."

A 2004 CSC Research report found approximately 68% of the federal
Aboriginal offender population are First Nations, 34% are Métis and 4% are
Inuit.

Compare this to the proportion of the population made up by Aboriginals: at present, Aboriginals represent less than 2.7% of the country's population, yet, they make up nearly 18.5% of federal prison numbers. Statistics are even more dire for native women, who comprise 32% of all females in federal custody. The startling fact is, if current trends continue 25% of aboriginal Canadians could be incarcerated in less than a decade.

Canada's prison watchdog blasted the federal government on Monday for discriminating against aboriginal prisoners by putting a disproportionate number in maximum-security penitentiaries and segregation, keeping them jailed longer, and failing to provide proper programs to help them survive when they leave.

"The general picture is one of institutionalized discrimination," said Howard Sapers, the Correctional Investigator of Canada.

The fact is that despite the wide-ranging and damning Royal Report tabled in 1996, we as a country have done little to halt the "the endless circle of disadvantage" that Aboriginals and other socio-economically disadvantaged people find themselves in. Rather than institutionalized and societal change, we have relied on the quick incarceration fix -- rather than deal with our irrational fears (crime continues to decrease, yet our fear of crime continues to increase) we have chosen to ignore our part and lock up the perceived problem.

Don't believe me? Then examine the number of criminals currently incarcerated that were living below the poverty line before their conviction.

Snapshot data from Statistics Canada indicates that 47% of Aboriginal youth in custody lived in families that received social assistance. This, then, lends creedance to the notion that the central factor of the higher incarceration rates among Aboriginal people is poverty. Throw on top of this the large number of incarcerated Aboriginal youth with substance abuse problems. Approximately 57% of Aboriginal youth had a confirmed problem and an additional 24% had a suspected problem with alcohol and/or drugs. Substance abuse has been well documented as a correlate of criminal behaviour among youth (Dawkins, 1997; Huizinga & Jakob-Chien, 1998; Latimer, Kleinknecht, Hung & Gabor, 2003). Previous research has also demonstrated a clear link between alcohol or drug abuse and violent crime (Fergusson, Lynskey & Horwood, 1996; Watts & Wright, 1990), which is associated with more serious sentences. And this cycle starts early. Again, Statistics Canada Snapshot data indicates that 39% of Aboriginal youth were involved with child protection agencies. Recent research into the correlates of delinquency found that negative parenting (e.g., inconsistent parenting, low levels of supervision, harsh discipline) was significantly correlated with criminal behaviour among youth (Latimer, Kleinknecht, Hung & Gabor, 2003). Involvement with child protection agencies is a good indication that a youth has experienced negative parenting.

To lock up a criminal as a method of demanding responsibility for one's actions should be the intent of incarceration. Since the convicted will eventually re-enter society, it is hoped that this method of attempting to teach responsibility will enable a person to re-examine their life and determine a better course of action (a course that helps them become productive, rather than destructive, members of society). However, this is not the case. More often than not our penal system has become a holding and breeding ground for more and more criminal behaviour. Rather than learning, growing and changing, convicted felons become entrenched in institutionalized life and criminal behaviour. Part of the problem is the perceived disparity between "them" and "us" -- a disparity that is marked by economics, but also by opportunities and advantages.

As such, and due to the shocking statistics that are emerging this week, we need to, as a society, re-examine our use and abuse of the penal system. If we really are an inclusive society we also must become a tolerant society -- a society that holds people (criminals) accountable, yet provides opportunities for change.

We can start in the most diseffected communities; the reserves and small towns that are home to the relatively small Canadian Aboriginal population. By injecting time, money and expertise we may be able to create vibrant, responsive and inclusive communities that provide alternatives to criminal behaviour. If not, we are looking at a nation of incarcerated minorities -- a situation that can only be compared to intolerant regimes.

Lego my ammo - the arms trade, North Korea and the brink of war

North Korea 2006: A nuclear nation that "wants" peace but is not afraid of war.

People...we may actually be on the brink of a more traditional war -- a war between nations; a war between leaders; a war between long-range and long-term weapons of mass destruction.

The rhetoric has already started: the North Koreans are saying that the recently announced UN sanctions are merely a smoke screen for the desires of the United States. This subtefuge is necessary, say the North Koreans, because the States don't want anyone to know that their real motivation is to rid the world of Jong's specific style of socialism.

The United States (through the mouthpiece of Condoleezza Rice) keeps pushing the point that this tiny Asian nation has defied the internationally community, not once but twice in last two months (by setting announcing and then following through on the testing of nuclear weapons). She argues that the actions of Jong II antagonizes the international community, particularly when this once-media-shy-dictator suggests the possibility of more tests in the near future, despite the recent threat of economic sanctions.

At present, the current sanctions, announced by the United Nations, prohibits trade with North Korea in illicit materials, weapons and luxury items. However, Rice is on a mission to extend those sanctions into all economic facats of life.

However, her comments a few days ago, suggest that despite the unified front (at the UN), the international community is not aligned in how to deal with North Korea's actions -- or, for that matter, whether or not to deal with North Korea's actions.

"Every country in the region must share the burdens as well as the benefits of our common security," Rice said in comments aimed at China and South Korea, the two largest trading partners with North Korea. Rice continued by calling on nations to "collectively isolate" North Korea, adding that it "cannot destabilize the international system and then expect to exploit elaborate financial networks built for peaceful commerce."

There is truth to this. A lot of truth. North Korea is attempting to take the quick and dirty route to becoming a major player on the international stage. Consequences be damned. But what consequences? As long as South Korea and China continue to financially support and interact with this isolated nation, we, the leader's and citizens in other nation's around the world, have little recourse. Or do we?

A recent story comes to mind regarding China's decision to create labour unions. At the time multi-national corporations were up-in-arms (no pun intended) about the possibility of lost revenue. Here is where major trade nations (namely, those in the first world) can step in. By providing financial incentives to corporations that choose to support China's burgeoning Human Rights initiatives, we can also provide alternative economic resources to this large Asian trade partner -- this, then, enables us to make legitimate demands on China to halt all trade with Jong's rogue nation. (As Greg commented yesterday, while sanctions FEEL ineffectual, an economic action is really the only legitimate action a sovereign nation can take against another sovereign nation. Anything more and we begin to entice the angst and ire of other nation's over motives and desires).

Another aspect of this entire situation (as aptly pointed out in a comment yesterday by K-Dough) is China's closed-lipped refusal to limit the economic flow across it's large border with North Korea. While we can chastize the Chinese for directly impacting the war machine of the rogue nation (since this economic flow does not restrict the trade of weapons), we must take into consideration the reality of the weapons trade.

According to the World Policy Institute, there is "no single policy more at odds with President Bush’s pledge to "end tyranny in our world" than the United States’ role as the world’s leading arms exporting nation."

Yes, China engages in this trade. Yes, they have companies and factories and an economic benefit from this trade that is separate from the trade conducted by the United States -- however it is the hypocrisy of the US that set this dynamic up.

As the World Policy Institute report continues to state: "Although arms sales are often justified on the basis of their purported benefits, from securing access to overseas military facilities to rewarding coalition allies in conflicts such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, these alleged benefits often come at a high price. All too often, U.S. arms transfers end up fueling conflict, arming human rights abusers, or falling into the hands of U.S. adversaries."

The fact is human rights activists, peace advocates and sustainable business practitioners have called on the US to ammend, correct and restrict the trade of weapons. However, the ability to make massive amounts of money in an internationally liberal market is too tempting -- and as such, other countries, like China, eager to emerge as a powerful international player are also jumping on board this quick and easy money maker. This is one of the major reasons why China has not explicitly agreed to monitor and restrict the trade to North Korea -- if it did, it would have to give up a lucrative cash cow.

Unfortunately, the result always plays out to the lowest level of power. The common man in all nations are the ones that bear this brunt of hypocrisy. Whether it is the soldier that dies defending the rhetoric of any nation, the shopkeeper whose business fails because of lack of supplies; a skilled/unskilled labourer who was once employed in these suspect industries; a stock owner who loses their shirt in a reformed industry -- the final damage to any decision falls on the common man.

So, where do we go from here? Again, the activists have led the way. We need to actively monitor and control the arms trade -- place restrictive limits, rules and conditions that ALL nations and ALL mult-national corporations must follow. We must tighten our belts, as our wallets shrink, due to these restrictions -- because unless you are a socially responsible investor, YOUR retirement savings IS wrapped up in the arms trade. We must, as citizens, demand that OUR leaders practice sustainable trade practices. If we demand a new set of policies from China in how they economically deal with a rogue nation, like North Korea, we cannot, then, demand that they NOT move forward with economic, political and social decisions to better their employment and trade policies.

In otherwords, we need to decide if our safety as a person, a nation and as a world is more important than whether or not we can make more money in an under-regulated, under-reported industry of arms trade.

As for North Korea -- the ball is rolling. There is a new Japanese leader; there is a US administration content on trite reasons and conditions for international exchanges; and we have close to six billion people worldwide that can stand up and make a demand for peace. The North Korean situation is not going to go away -- but our reactions to the situation do not have to escalate into full-blown war. We can avoid retalitory actions, but we need to be cognisant of how other factors (other decisions) play into this exchange. As scientists pointed out at the turn of the last century: when a butterfly flaps its wings in one corner of the world, a tsunami is created in another. None of us live in isolation -- not even Jong II.

For more information on the World Policy Institute arms report go to:
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html

Public declaration & private diplomacy in an era of rogue dictators

It appears the world is settled on the type of action it condones towards North Korea.

Though the tiny, insular nation, that shares a large border with China, reportedly set off nuclear tests last week, a vote for sanctions was not taken in the United Nations until this past Saturday. While no one person, group or nation would admit it, the delayed response (and the public acknowledgement that North Korea had, in fact, set off nuclear weapons) is the balance between private and public diplomacy.

Since the public posturing of nations (including USA, China, Japan and North and South Korea) is to demand retribution from this rogue nation, it is the private diplomacy that is essential in dealing with such sensitive issues -- a diplomacy that could not occur without the space provided by ambiguity.

For that reason, it was essential that the official stance of each UN-member country not be made public until each of these UN-member countries had a chance to sit in their backrooms -- demanding, conceding and negotiating a resolution to North Korea's bold attempt to become a primary player in international politics.

While not the official reason -- this is why the UN and its member-nations (including China) took days to decide on the unified action. This is why their were rumours and reports that China, Japan and South Korea may not back the sanctions against North Korea. And this is why the UN resolution for economic sanctions was not passed for at least 72 hours after the fall-out of North Korea's nuclear testing.

The sad irony is this is not the first time the world has been pushed to the brink due to nuclear weapons. Who can forget the tense days and nights during the Cuban missile crisis? Or what about the volatile courtship between Pakistan and India that resulted in a nuclear race.

The sad fact is as long as one nation holds the ultimate destructive weapon (the nuclear bomb) all nations -- that want to play in the big leagues -- will be tempted to participate in the ownership of that destructive power. The scary fact is that not all of these nations are led by leaders that want the best for their citizens.

While the dangerous power play between North Korea and the world has caused division amongst UN-member nations -- the unified decision, made on Saturday, is an effort to try and curb both the sad and the scary fact; it is an effort to punish Kim Jong II (the North Korean leader) for wanting to become a major world player and it is an attempt to curb the ambitions of a dictator that appears unconcerned and apathetic to the consequences his actions may have on his citizens.

In the next week or so, we will begin to see whether or not the private diplomacy that is frantically taking place in the backrooms and boardrooms of our nations will in fact lend credence to the public declarations and sanctions that were decided over the weekend.

Optimist's vindication as China proposes labour laws

The glass is half full or half empty.

When it comes to Human Rights -- realists don't make a difference. You are either an optimist or a pessimist. The reason? Realists accept the status qua and assume that any change will be too insignificant to make a difference; pessimists expect no or little change, while optimists continue to hope, work and expect to solidify these rights for all of humanity.

So, why bring this up? Because China just announced that it is passing a law that would allow labour unions to organize and participate in this Asian giant's market; their (stated) rationale: to protect worker rights.

This is a miracle. And it an optimist's vindication.

As little as a decade ago a good deal of people bemoaned the impact of human rights activism. Their arguments hinged upon nations -- such as China -- that had refused to embrace these universal truths. And any gains the activist league made, critics denounced by citing continued abuses and atrocities in these suspect nations.

But as any good optimist will tell you: Hope is not faith with evidence; Hope is faith despite the evidence.

Evidence showed that since the 1980s (when China first introduced market forces into its economy) the Asian giant has been more interested in economic evolution then in human rights. As such, the country nurtured the conditions that enabled sweatshops and illegal factories to flourish -- working conditions that time and again proved to be harmful to workers health and safety.

This new law, however, would change all of that. It would protect worker's in all factories -- including foreign-owned factories. And it acknowledges -- again -- that human rights is an essential component to quality of life, standard of living and a universal truth.

While critics continue to poke holes (analysts warn that it will be hard to enforce the law in such a large country) optimists are celebrating. Though the law is far from perfect, and though sub-standard human rights conditions continue to exist in China, this law is a step towards solidifying the need to treat people with respect and dignity. The law is also a testamont -- that despite the apparently slow pace, leaders (economic and political) ARE listening to the demands of the people.

For China, a major reason for the new law is to curb the exponential growth that is occuring in the country at the moment. While the government is pleased with the growth, Chinese officials are aware that such growth can cause massive disparity, which leads to social unrest, crime and deconstruction of community. So, their solution is to secure rights for all.

The absolute irony, however, is the protest of foreign corporations who do business in China. Rather than applaud the officials of a country infamous for human rights abuses (and rather than trumpet the success of neo-liberal markets in opening up China's door to enable changes -- such as labour laws -- to take place) these corporations are threatening to take their business elsewhere (read: no laws to get in the way of profits).

Despite the obvious hypocrisy of foreign corporations, and despite the despair offered by realists and pessimists, the announcement by Chinese officials to enact labour laws is a powerful reminder: We do not get to dictate the results, but we do get to act and if we act with integrity, for integrity, eventually things start to happen.

For more information on the proposed Chinese labour law go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/business/worldbusiness/13sweat.html?
ei=5070&en=114dc0b42e050b6b&ex=1161403200&adxnnl=1&emc=eta1&adxnnlx=1160743610-e20kv0agl4KVJL6Fhp/NlQ
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=8283

Let go of my choco

Release the organic, veal-fed cocoa beans from captivity.

That's the plea for today.

Release the damn cocoa beans.

Cocoa beans are the precursor of chocolote -- the delectable confectionary whose market share reached an estimated value of $73.2 billion in 2001, a 21 percent increase since 1996, according to the International Cocoa Organization.

While not a staple food source, cocoa is big business. Sixty percent of all chocolate is still consumed in the first world nations of the USA and the European Union -- regions that represent only 20 percent of the world's population.

Yet, despite the delectable taste of dark, milk, white, and fruit-filled chocolate, people in the industry are suffering from our first world addiction to cheap goods.

Robin Romano, a photographer and human rights advocate, set out to document the lives of child slaves involved in cocoa production in the Ivory Coast. Their suffering, he says, should give people pause when purchasing candy bars.

According to Romano, one child slave from the Ivory Coast stated: “Tell them, when they're eating chocolate, they're eating my flesh.”

Romano, who took photographs of child slaves during two trips to Ivory Coast during the past several years, said the problem of child labor is deeply rooted in the global economic system.

“I believe in globalization and capitalism, but in its current form, globalization is grossly mismanaged,” he said. “What I saw broke my heart and made me weep.”

He said the story of child labor in the cocoa fields involves corrupt African governments, U.S. and European governments, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and transnational organizations.

“There is not a developed country that is without sin in this area,” Romano said, noting that Africa has suffered from globalization.

According to Romano, one million West African children toil in the chocolate fields. In a nation crippled by poverty and illiteracy, the children are lured by the promise of salaries and other benefits. Yet, once at the cocoa farms, the children are overworked, underfed, abused, and often crippled. At night, they are kept hostage by guards. They face brutal treatment, even death, if they try to escape.

Bama Athreya, executive director of the International Labour Rights Fund, said in an interview with the Independent, that "Nestlé has carelessly bought cocoa from plantations that use child slave labour." A charge Nestlé’s chief executive, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, rejected despite his acknowledgement that, "Children are working in the Ivory Coast, without a doubt."

As a result Athreya and Romano are urging consumers to take a stand against child labor by raising the issue with elected officials, and buying – and encouraging others to buy – fair trade products.

Fair trade sets a minimum price for commodities such as cocoa, he said, based on an amount that people in the producing countries can live on.

“Fair trade is making lives better for farmers,” he said, and “has the potential to be a turning point in the way the world economy works.”

For those requiring additional (personal) reasons, the WWF strongly urges consumers to avoid non-organic, non-fair trade chocolate based on the high levels of Lindane --an organochlorine pesticide that is linked with breast cancer. The pesticide is banned in Europe but still used in some cocoa-producing countries that is linked with breast cancer and can be found in factory-farmed cocoa.

So, we, here on the great Inter-Web, are asking consumers to boycott the Crunchies, the Wunderbars, the KitKats and the Dairy Milks. Instead, head to your local health food store, or grocery chain and vote for fair business practices by buying organic, fair-trade chocolate.

It's time the veal-fed cocoa bean was let loose in the neo-liberal jungle.

Hey buddy: can you spare a square?

Our tushies need to toughen up!

While soft, plushy, 16-ply TP is a favourite among North American well-to-do's, the fact is our addiction to plush pile is killing the planet one square at a time. And it's time to put a stop to it.

In a report released today by the WWF, tissue and toilet paper manufacturers were given a failing grade regarding environmental policy and sustainable practices. The main point of contention was that major paper product manufacturers were not doing enough to: a)prove their timber comes from sustainable sources, b)prevent illegal logging, c)deal with land rights conflicts.

The report specifically called upon consumers to boycott the "wasteful trend" toward luxury toilet paper (and other hygiene products). Instead, the WWF urged consumers to seek out products with higher recycled content. (The report also mentioned that "extra-white" paper products should also be avoided as the extensive bleaching process was harmful to the environment).

While the report did not mention specific manufacturers by name (except when assigning an environmental score), other sources state one paper-hygiene company to avoid is Kimberly-Clark. Considered the largest tissue-products company in the world, Kimberly-Clark amasses sales in 150 countries around the world (3/4 of the world's official nations buy TP from this company). Unfortunately Kimberly-Clark failed the WWF test with an environmental score below 50 percent.

The reason for the continued pressure on tissue-product practices is that, according to the World Resources Institute, almost 80 percent of the world's original forests have been degraded or completely destroyed. Much of the loss of these ancient forests is due to human industrial uses such as logging for wood and paper products; clearing for agricultural land; and oil, gas, and hydroelectric development. (NOTE: Canada's Boreal forest represents 25 percent of the world's remaining ancient forests.)

The importance of these forests is not lost on scientists and agronominists. The world's ancient forests maintain environmental systems that are essential for life on Earth. They influence weather by controlling rainfall and evaporation of water from soil. They help stabilize the world's climate by storing large amounts of carbon that would otherwise contribute to climate change. These forests also are home to around two-thirds of the world's land-based species of plants and animals. They are also home to millions of forest-based communities and people who depend on them for their survival — economically and spiritually.

As a result, consumers concerned with saving our forests -- sparing a tree one square at a time -- can avoid products by larger paper-product manufacturers. For example, Kimberly-Clark brands include: Kleenex Facial Tissues, Scott Toilet Paper and Paper Towels, Cottonelle Toilet Paper, and Viva Paper Towels.

For the more pro-active people among us go to your university, high school, governmental building, or large business and demand to know where they obtain their paper products. In North America, only about 1/5 of the pulp that Kimberly-Clark uses for its disposable tissue products comes from recycled sources, and most of that goes into the products that go to large institutions, not consumers.

In 2004, Greenpeace and the Natural Resources Defense Council set their sights on Kimberly-Clark's practice of sacrificing virgin forests at the Altar of Blowing and Wiping, particularly as the practice applies to Canada's ancient Boreal forests. The goal of their "Kleercut" campaign is to get consumers involved in pressuring Kimberly-Clark to stop this unnecessary, wasteful practice.

For a list of paper products to buy and avoid go to:
http://www.nrdc.org/land/forests/gtissue.asp
http://www.greenpeace.ca/tissue/download/guide_en.pdf
#search='best%20recycled%20paper%20products%20in%20canada'

To read the WWF report go to:
http://www.panda.org/news_facts/newsroom/index.cfm?uNewsID=82120

To read more about the Greenpeace Kleercut campaign go to:
http://www.kleercut.net/en/

To send an email to Kimberly-Clark protesting their unsustainable practices go to:
http://kleercut.net/en/sendtokc?PHPSESSID=97125610a81364d1ae6b9add7b2b2cc4

To read more about the Boreal Forests go to:
http://www.forestethics.org/article.php?list=type&type=18