Bambi would like to briefly comment
on an article by Ms. Katie Tower in the Sackville Tribune (September 9,
2019) entitled “Sackville town council could undergo salary review”
“I knew what the compensation package was when I ran for office and I’m
happy with it”.
Tower’s article continues to read as follows:
“Evans said he doesn’t support the idea of pursuing any kind of salary
review, either by council itself or by a citizen-led committee. He said council
is paid well, both in terms of salary and benefits, which includes a life,
health and dental package.
“If you add those two together and you compare it to every other
comparable-sized municipality in New Brunswick, we’re the best compensated,” he
said. “We seem to be doing very well.”
Mmm… Bambi has three burning questions for Councillor Evan:
(1). Is your comment just an expression of an innocent virtue signalling?
(2). Or does this “Look at me, I am so good (always better than others)” attitude also serve to prevent your current or future colleagues from a potential wage increase?
(3). Maybe you do not need an increase yourself, for whatever reason. Good
for you but what about others?
Regardless, your input on this matter may be perceived as being uncollegial.
Ironically, this could backfire on you in the outcomes of future elections.
Bambi would like to share a deep thought by Mr. Stéphane Laporte from La Presse that made her smile. This journalist’s daily thoughts can be quite sarcastic yet always clever.
Thought of the day by Mr. Stéphane Laporte (La Presse, Sept 13, 2018)
“Jagmeet Singh could become Prime Minister of Canada, but he could not become a primary (or elementary) school teacher in Québec” (Bambi’s translation).
«Jagmeet Singh pourrait devenir premier ministre du Canada, mais ne pourrait pas enseigner dans une école primaire au Québec» (Mr. Laporte’s original French text).
This thought reflects the cultural difference in the conceptualization of secularity between Québec and the rest of our country.
Yes, we can smile (and even laugh) at ourselves in any situation; of course, with all due respect to Mr. Singh (and his peers from all the other parties), to Canada, and to Québec (needless to say here that Bambi supports its laws, including Bill 21).
After reading this thought, Bambi felt the urge to be even more sarcastic than Mr. Laporte (it’s Friday night ?). She could not help not to think to herself:
Justin Trudeau could hardly remain Prime Minister of Canada, but he could easily become a school teacher again, even in Québec.
Where are the voices of our radical feminists to denounce honour killing abroad?
This beautiful young woman’s name is Israa (Ghrayeb).
Israa was a make-up artist from a village near Bethlehem. She died a month ago after being rushed to the hospital with severe wounds. Her family members killed her…in the name of honour (simply because of a picture on Instagram!).
Three male relatives of Israa have been
officially charged. Will they go to jail? And if so, for how long?
Will their story serve to make others whose brains may become blinded by the same murderous madness stop to reflect: Enough senseless tragedies in the name of a cultural attachment to an ideological concept like family honour. Fruitful coping efforts are possible when we allow our rationality and (psychological) flexibility to operate. Yes, it is possible to learn to solve conflicts without resorting to crimes. Some ingredients that can help deal with bursts of anger may be simple common sense, love, forgiveness, and humour.
Since the beginning of 2019, 19 Palestinian women
died in cases of domestic violence, according to L’Orient Le Jour (Israa
is # 19).
There is no impunity, largely because there
is no legal protection yet.
A bill that was supposed to put an end to impunity in domestic violence was finalized in 2004. It is still not adopted by the Palestinian Government, even if the Palestinian Prime Minister declared that the protection of women should be reinforced. Despite his good intentions, it is hard to pass such bill. A culture of “real” patriarchy truly exists in this part of the world.
First, let’s stop to think about the term
*honour killing*. Victims, mostly women (+ at times men), are perceived as having
caused dishonour to their family because of a shameful behaviour, that is judged
as being immoral. This real or just suspected behaviour may be refusing a pre-arranged
marriage, having been sexually assaulted, appearing in a picture with a man, being
suspected of having kissed a man or having had an intimate relation before marriage,
being gay, etc.
Why would honour killing be still committed by some in 2019? Why would the so-called honour of a family be valued more than loving one’s children or forgiving them (for any real, perceived, or even simply suspected behaviour)?
Make no mistake. Israa’s story is NOT only made in Palestine. This sad story could have occurred anywhere in the world, including Canada (i.e., the Shafias, if you recall). However, these tragedies occur primarily in Arab and Muslim countries (e.g., Pakistan, Iran). In Arab countries, we can think of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and sadly even in Lebanon where, in 2011, the Parliament agreed by a majority to abolish an Article, which was used in the past as an excuse to reduce sentences related to honour killing. That was a piece of good news… but, to truly get rid of honour killing, there should also be a general shift in societal attitudes toward gender-based violence, via massive educational programs in all the communities, perhaps especially in highly religious ones. Even if honour killing is more cultural than religious per se, religion may act as a carrying vehicle for it.
Honour killing also occurs in other countries,
namely in South America (e.g., Ecuador, Brazil) and in Asian countries, namely
Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and Cambodia. One must also note that in India, honour
killing can occur in all sorts of families, including Sikh (in Punjab) and Hindu.
Like the horrible murders in Kingston, ON,
Canada (i.e., Shafia’s family), several cases of honour killing have occurred throughout
France and also in the UK (also in immigrant families).
The article in Le Monde above was published
in 2011. It is hard to believe that we are in 2019 and such crimes are still
tolerated in some other countries.
Related to this, Bambi cannot help but to
wonder to herself: Where are our radical Canadian feminists to join their voices
to the tireless women (and men) who have denounced this honour killing?
Perhaps they are too busy denouncing rape cultures
or patriarchy in our civilized societies? Perhaps they are comfortable in their
“safe spaces”, who knows? Or perhaps like our politicians and societies, they are
exhibiting political correctness.
Anyhow, Israa’s story ended with her death. Other forms of barbaric stories, also committed in the name of cultural traditions, lead to another form of death (the brutal unsolicited end of sexual pleasure in life). I am thinking specifically of cases of vaginal mutilation in some parts of the world (e.g., 27 African countries as well Yemen, Irak, and Indonesia):
On this differently disturbing note, Bambi would like to end by hoping that Israa is resting in peace now. May her memory be eternal… Israa, in addition to being beautiful, you were a make-up artist on earth. May you enjoy your rest; wherever you are, perhaps somewhere among the *beautiful* stars in the sky.
Bambi would like to share a cartoon by Mr. Yannick Lemay (“La caricature d’Ygreck” in the Journal de Québec; September 9, 2019) without any comment (just a smile ?):
Bambi usually follows the news from Québec with great
interest.
Herein she will comment on this article entitled “Le bloc Québécois veut que Ottawa respecte la laicité au Québec” (The Bloc Québécois wants Ottawa to respect Québec secular state):
She would like to thank the Bloc Québécois, even if
she does not reside in the Belle Province (clearly not a potential voter).
The Bloc Québécois is simply reminding Ottawa (i.e.,
our current Prime Minister) and the rest of Canada (i.e., leaders May and Singh
as well as some former politicians from Alberta) and organizations from the
rest of Canada that this new bill is made in Québec and is meant for Québec… In
other terms, please all remember to respect Québec’s will (the bill is supported
by the majority of the Québec population; maybe it was controversial but only in
Montreal; sometimes for legitimate concerns; other times for other reasons).
It is hard for the rest of Canada, and maybe the rest
of North America, to understand the history and mindset of Québec, especially
when often people and politicians alike forget that Québec is a distinct nation
(even within our beautiful Canada).
To come back to Bill 21, there have been many articles
written about it. Many of them, if not most, include errors and/or omissions.
Contrary to what people think, whether they like this bill
or not, it came after 10 years of public debate.
To clarify this bill, here is a quick summary:
Four principles:
The separation of state and
religion
The religious neutrality of
the state
The equality of all citizens
Freedom of conscience and
freedom of religion
Some government
employees in positions of authority, such as prosecutors and police
officers, as well as teachers and principals of public primary and secondary
schools, will not be able to wear religious symbols in the performance of their
duties.
The Act
specifies that persons who were in office on March 27, 2019, retain the right
to wear a religious sign, as long as they hold the same function within the
same organization.
The bill also clarifies that public services must be
provided and received without a covered face during an identity check or if needed
for security reasons.
Compared to other similar secular bills in other
countries, the bill is moderate (ex., more than in France or even Switzerland).
Not surprising to me because the bill reflects Québec’s pragmatism, tolerance,
and collective self-respect.
This law is a natural historical logic to Québec’s
past (a domineering Catholic Church, which led to a Quiet revolution).
Bambi took the time to reflect about this bill. She clearly
supports it or supports Québec’s will.
This being said, spontaneously, she first saw the
logic and merit of the police and lawyers not wearing religious or tribal
symbols (+ of course, the part of the law about the security). She struggled a
lot, especially at first, to see the government logic behind the extension of
this bill to teachers/school principals (as authority figures). Maybe she still
does not fully understand it but she endorses it, especially with the reactions
of (religious and other) lobby groups and the media.
Perhaps Québec is naive still. It does not understand that we can indoctrinate kids without wearing any symbol, religious or not. She also thinks that it is not because you are wearing a religious symbol that you would be narrow-minded… although you may have trouble teaching topics like evolutionary biology, who knows?
She also wonders why the bill didn’t extend to universities to protect education students/trainees, wearing religious symbols, who are aspiring for a job in the public sector? However, the government made the choice to legally protect only current employees. So, luckily no one would lose his/her job!
Yes, it is sad to imagine one single woman (or man, if
any) who may find herself prevented from applying to a job in public schools
and risk being isolated in their homes ☹.
However, one must remember that they can apply for jobs in the private sector.
Anyhow, this law is less authoritarian as it does not
force students not to wear any religious symbols (so much more moderate than in
France or, at one point, in Turkey).
Now, why does Bambi think that this bill is wise…. Because Québec respected its past and took the time to think of its future, preventing potential problems like those we see elsewhere, sadly like in her home country or even its neighbouring Israel, when religious lobbies become too powerful.
Bambi thinks that this bill is about the secularity of the government; not about removing any right to anyone. The government made a compromise and removed a traditional cross from its National Assembly. Even if Bambi has (Christian) faith in her heart (+ her family includes members of 7 different religions), she salutes this gesture. According to her, it was even about time for a province which government is now officially and fully secular.
To conclude, Bambi would like to thank the Bloc Québécois again and cite a (translated) quote from the Honourable Simon Jolin-Barrette, Minister of Immigration, Diversity and Inclusion and Government House Leader: “We have just written an important page in the history of Québec. The public has been waiting for this moment for more than ten years, and our government has had the courage to finally act in this way with rigor and pragmatism. It is legitimate for the Québec nation to decide how secularism applies in its territory and in its institutions. I am proud, on behalf of your government, to finally affirm and define the secularism of the state by placing it in Québec law for the first time”.
Thank you Québec for having the courage to govern and for perhaps providing an example to the world of how to stand for one’s values.
Bambi just read an interesting and informative article entitled “How to keep your pets calm in a big storm” by Mr. Aaron Beswick in the Sackville tribune:
Without having any pet living under their roof, she
can easily imagine that they would be made anxious by the noise of the wind,
the feeling that a storm is passing by or even just approaching. Just like
kids. Just like us.
Mr. Beswick’s article brought some childhood memories
to her mind.
Made nervous by loud shelling noises, her neighbours’
dog used to run to the shelter with them. Sometimes he would scratch the floor
for minutes in a row until they managed to calm him down.
As a child, Bambi used to take care of wild cats on
the street, thinking to herself that, as humans, we are caring for each other,
but who does care for them? That was before becoming allergic to cats later in
life.
At one point in time, she was feeding and trying to
nurture two adult cats and, eventually, their 7 kitten. She called the adult
cats Nancy and Roy (imagining them to be siblings), only to discover a few months
later that Roy was pregnant– almost at the same time as Nancy (mmm—Clearly
then, Roy was not a male cat. Silly Bambi ?).
Eventually, all these cats died at once (but that was a different story).
Another cute cat sadly lost an eye and a tail during a
round of shelling and a bomb explosion respectively. He (she?) remained alive
and even reproduced, after learning to run to a shelter so fast, even before the
(human) neighbours.
Bambi was serious about helping those cats to the point
of throwing food to them from the balcony. After her parents risked their lives
to do groceries, Bambi did something stupid: Her mom opened the fridge a few
hours after returning home. To her horror, she didn’t find neither the freshly
bought ham nor the cheese. Why? Well, Bambi threw all the food to the street cats
from the balcony!
Another time, and this was a freaky memory, she and her family were escaping to the Beirut airport. They were driving fast under snipers’ shooting, along with shelling here and there. Bambi’s dad asked his kids to lower their heads whilst driving fast on that particularly dangerous highway. It was like a movie scene… Bambi, the youngest child, saw an injured cat and started to beg her dad to save her. Her loving dad stepped out of the car fast to help the cat. She learned years after the truth about this cat: Her dad found it already dead (likely injured by a driver saving his/her life). He pushed the unlucky cat to the side of the road and returned running to the car. He told Bambi: “She will be fine there; her mom will take care of her”. Bambi’s own mom was not impressed by her spouse’s (risky) behaviour. Perhaps this is what parents do, out of love, to try to bring a glimpse of normality and humanity into absurdly violent situations?
Many years after this incident, when Bambi was 24 (=
last year ?;
that was a joke), she made a trip to the Middle East to visit. Her parents invited
her to (the island of) Cyprus for a weekend; Cyprus is 20 minutes away from Lebanon
by airplane. A weird experience happened there: Just like a dog, Bambi felt an
earthquake coming a few seconds before it occurred. Her parents thought that
their youngest daughter was being weird by sharing that she feels something big
about to happen. She warned them twice about it. Indeed, a few seconds later, a
major earthquake took place in Turkey ☹.
Bambi’s hotel room had tiny damage in its walls. This is how big that earthquake
was (90 people died and about 240 others were injured).
Bambi does
not pretend to have any psychological explanation to the strange story above.
She admits that she is a deer. Perhaps for a few seconds, she had been a sensitive
dog.
In this section, there is even an article on Mr. Maxime
Bernier vs Greta. My question is simply: Why?
Why are we using our kids (along with Greta, the passionate young activist) in this indoctrination machinery?
Bambi was not a fan of Mr. Harper’s era. She has never
voted neither for him nor for his party. However, she cannot help but to recall
how he had expressed a wise idea back then: reducing the funding to the CBC. It
turned out that he did not have the courage to proceed with this. Someone will
have to do it one of these days, Bambi is thinking now.
This is no longer journalism. This is propaganda.
Bambi had wished that our tax money would fund research for real energy-efficient solutions to environmental problems.
If we continue down this path, our kids’ critical
thinking would be in danger, not just ours ☹.
Well, after this sad discovery, Bambi continued her
tour of the media. She came across an interview or chat between Mr. Bernier &
Dr. Gad Saad. Food for though… It is refreshing to see two independent minds
chatting, whether we agree with them or not, on some or all the topics.
Thank you to Mr. Bernier & Dr. Saad (he is Lebanese-Canadian, cool ?).
“The young environmental activist Greta Thunberg arrived to New York yesterday, after sailing across the Atlantic on a “zero-carbon” boat. She comes to our continent to attend the UN World Climate Summit in late September.
We cannot blame a young girl for being aware of social issues, let alone blame her for being a committed activist. One can even ignore certain contradictions in the speech of the one who candidly seems to be the voice of her generation.
Except that…
Except that I put a stop to a huge public relations operation, which exceeds this girl and seems to be meant to take us for idiots (“des nonos”, in French). Greta arrived by sailboat. Some media relayed that she made a trip with “zero carbon emissions”, without any nuance.
Let’s be serious here: this racing yacht was built with highly polluting materials. It was not initially designed to serve to bring food to poor people, but rather to practice a form of sailing race for multimillionaires. The sailors who accompanied Greta will return by plane and another crew will arrive in New York, also by plane, to take charge of the boat return trip home.
Even wackier, the young activist says she does not know how she will return back to Sweden. Let’s play the riddle game! Oh yes! I think she will take the airplane to return back home.
She does not say it now. Her father knows it. Her public relations managers know it. Does she know and lie to preserve her image? Or do we keep her in ignorance about it? Either way, there is a DEEP unease.
All others will fly
Everything is absurd in this sailing story. First, the total operation will have generated more travel by plane than if Greta had made a simple return trip with her father in a seat in economy class.
Then Greta attends a summit where hundreds of participants from around the world will be travelling by plane. To develop her logic of boycotting the polluting aircraft further, it would have been necessary to demand the end of these international meetings and to suggest holding them by videoconference.
As genuine as her activism is, Greta is trapped in her logical cul-de-sac. To go on a sailing trip, she had to associate herself with the wealthy family of Princess Caroline of Monaco. They too take advantage of her image big time. This solution is in no way accessible to ordinary mortals.
Greta amplifies the problem that is at the heart of climate change. Politicians, companies, organizations, all are fully exploiting the climate change card to improve their image. Meanwhile, there are few concrete and applicable solutions for ordinary people.
I cannot wait to see the number of journalists who will be at the airport on the day of her return flight…”
Bambi wishes Greta safe travels, regardless of her mode of transport back home: “Ha en trevlig resa” Greta. Remember to take good care.
Bambi had wished that our English-speaking and French-speaking Catholic nuns would have come together to denouncing child abuse cases by some priests around the world.
Instead, they chose to go public for other reasons,
promoting divestment from fossil fuels, the forthcoming UN climate meeting, and
the Paris Accord.
How odd Bambi finds. In her mind, nuns usually pray
and do good deeds from time to time. Not politics or economics usually (she is
saying this whilst also being concerned about the quality of our environment
and the impact of changing/warming climate conditions).
The only good part of their call to action was perhaps
seeing them sharing some actions which they take for the sake of the environment.
For this, we do not need to look as far as congregations in Québec or elsewhere
in Canada. Across her street, Bambi can see her conscious neighborhood equipped
with solar systems and with energy-efficient ideas. This is likely the good influence
of some genuine environmental local initiatives that she salutes.
Bambi was made particularly curious by the last paragraph of the French article above (in which there is a video to the news from the TVA channel). She had the idea of searching the net about the pope. This is how she googled the website of the Communist party of Québec (whose former leader, Mr. André Parizeau, is now running in the federal election with the Bloc Québécois). She discovered an interesting post about the communist ideology of the Pope signed by Mr. Parizeau himself (http://www.pcq.qc.ca/Dossiers//Autres/Archives/page_article.php?article_id=2625), entitled “Even the Pope calls for the fight against capitalism”.
In the text by Mr. Parizeau, we can read the following (translated) paragraph: “… In a gesture that contrasts with all his predecessors, the new Pope Francis has outright called on the peoples of the world to mobilize and unite to fight against capitalism and to work for the establishment of a new world order, which is no longer based on the constant search for more profits by some, against others; but rather based on the search for the common good.”
To come back to the article/video in the Journal of Montreal, signed jointly by the “Agence QMI et Agence France-Presse”, it is written: “…. François salutes the young activists of the climate cause, saying that they deserve concrete action rather than “neglected commitments for partisan interests and convenience”. The pope added that all eyes should be on the UN climate summit scheduled for September 23, calling on governments to “significantly accelerate action” to contain global warming, in line with the Paris Agreement of 2015. “May God (…) give us the courage to do good without waiting for others to start, without waiting until it is too late,” he pleaded”.
Interesting all this. No clue what it means precisely.
In her mind, all this Paris Accord matter seems to be a globalist form of communism.
It reminds her of an interesting article written by Dr. Bruce Pardy, a Professor of Law at Queen’s University, in the Financial Post in May, 2018 (https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/let-the-paris-climate-deal-die-it-was-never-good-for-anything-anyway). The article is worth reading as food for thought. Perhaps today more than ever. It is entitled: “Let the Paris climate deal die. It was never good for anything, anyway. Opinion: Paris is a climate fairy tale. It has always been more about money and politics than the environment”.
Without being an expert
in environmental studies or economics, Bambi can appreciate the intelligent
piece by Dr. Pardy.
She is sure the Holy
Father is well-meaning, so are the nuns for sure. However, we must think with
our rational brains and not our idealistic ideology. Communism has not worked.
History has demonstrated it. Why is it still so appealing in 2019?
As a conclusion to this
post, Bambi would like to borrow Professor Pardy’s own words: “If human action
is not causing the climate to change, Paris is irrelevant. If it is, then Paris
is an obstacle to actual solutions. If there is a crisis, it will be solved
when someone develops a low-carbon energy source as useful and cheap as fossil
fuels. A transition will then occur without government interventions and
international declarations. Until then, Paris will fix nothing. It serves
interests that have little to do with atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gases”.
