In a recent interview on The Thinking Muslim, Tayab Ali, A lawyer specializing in counter terrorism, international security and international law, stated that he will not allow the West to get away with complicity to the war crimes being perpetrated against the Palestinians by Israel.  Ali is Director of International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP).  Among other impressive roles, Mr. Ali has represented clients in the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The international law that Mr.  Ali will invoke was erected from the destruction of WW2.  As Israel has declared “never again” so too does the international system of law.  Ali believes that to allow Israel and those complicit to rest under the impunity that has protected them for so long, runs counter to the values that the West exports; that in fact the system will collapse if it fails to stand  and uphold the beliefs, values and thus the derived policies that make it a democracy.   “It is the politicians and the lack of political will that are the assess [not the law itself] says Tayab Ali.

Ali has stated that international law, although immature in outcome is developed enough to identify complicity to a war crime. Alongside other international law, Article 147 of the Geneva Convention indicates a list of separate crimes wherein the sum of those crimes amounts to genocide.  ICJP is preparing criminal prosecution files against commentators, politicians, and suppliers of weapons complicit with the war crimes against Palestinians.

Think about this!  If a commentator on the war, or a politician supports what Israel is doing toward the Palestinians presently and it is determined by law that war crimes have been committed in the strip, then those supporting Israel are, by definition, criminals.  This is no small undertaking for Mr. Ali and the consequences of this path need to be scrutinized. The weight Mr. Ali’s law suit carries if the outcome rules as war crimes the activity such as reporiting on, or lending military, political and financial aid to for a particular country at war, is enormous. Each participant in war must be certain they are supporting a just cause. The outcome of this prosecution could result in President Joe Biden being convicted of criminal activity for supporting an American ally.  America advising its Ally Israel to dial down the war while funnelling in the fuel to keep it going is the hypocrisy many in the streets are decrying.

At the very least, Tayab Ali’s proceedings highlights the seriousness of what it means for a country and its infrastructure (media, and military) to involve itself in war.  I’ve not yet sorted out my feelings or cognitive reaction to this monumental move by ICJP, but it has my attention.  What does it mean, if anything, for countries to stand by and watch genocide happen (it has not been proven that Israel has committed genocide, although many commentators are saying this)?  Morally there is an obligation, but what effect will law have on this inaction? If Mr. Ali loses in court, could there be a counter law suit for what might amount to defamation? What if support for Israel can be argued as supporting its sovereign right to defend itself where proportionally (an international law guiding defense) the civilian carnage is justified to eliminate the threat of terror? Is support for Hamas a war crime: will this case get it’s day in Court?

As citizens we must educate ourselves on these matters.  Canada ratified the Geneva Convention in 1965 and acceded 4 protocols since then.  How we present ourselves on this issue aligns our position, on a continuum, with the demands of international law.  Our feelings are important, nevertheless if we agree with codified law, we submit to a system of accountability.

I have a candy dish that reads ‘I’ll be home for Christmas… and in therapy after that.”  Some of us dread the family gathering for various reasons, including the fights over prickly topics.  Instead of avoiding difficult conversations this season, there is a strategy to embrace them and emerge unscathed with a greater connection and appreciation for those we love.  I would guess that most of us gather with friends and family that we have at least some affection toward.  Why not deepen those relationships through an exchange of ideas beyond the weird weather or talk of endless consumerism?

One of the common sayings among the younger generation is: “I feel like” and then they proceed to reveal not a feeling, but a thought.  I asked one of these young friends why she uses the term.  Her response was wonderful: “because it softens my answer.”  This “I’m not a know it all” posture will be the first in a list of ingredients for the Canadian Conversational Cocktail:  A fail-safe against a bungled communication hangover.

1. Admit to yourself that you don’t know it all.
   In a quiet moment ask yourself the simple question:  Is there more to learn on this topic? Am I open to hearing something that amends, contradicts, or tweaks my point of view, and what would I do with that information?  There’s a range of responses of course:  we can ignore it and bulldoze the idea.  We may react with fear that we “got it wrong” and then what would that mean? Another option is to let the information steep slowly before taking small sips.  I recommend watching a movie this holiday called “The Command” I promise the lessons from this film will impact you for a life time!
2. Ask yourself: What do I want from this relationship?
   If you only want surface contact that is a legitimate end game.  If, however, you want something deeper take the risk and lead with an interest toward the heart and mind of the other person.  If you want to dominate the relationship this article will subvert your goal, so move on.  I would suggest the book:  Leading like Atilla the Hun.  Knowing your goal will reduce stress and focus your energy where most productive.
3. Let go of domination.
   This is a corollary to connection, and I confess it is difficult for me. Everyone loses when a relationship is broken or damaged.  We cannot claim to be a winner when we no longer speak to one another.   Ask a friend to let you know if they notice a pattern of the desire to win overtaking the goal of connecting with the person you are speaking with.  It is difficult to see ourselves as being overbearing when we are engaged in the practice of it.  Another way to let go of domination is to visualize where the conversation will take you; picture the person’s face and determine if their expression is the one you are trying to achieve if domination wins the day.
4. Notice your feelings.
   The experiencing of anxiety or nausea or avoidance when the conversation gets heated up is a signal that something isn’t on track. Take note of negative feelings so you can make a course correction if the situation gets heated.  My daughter has found huge relief she tells me, when she names the feeling.  This takes a lot of practice. Negative feelings are a clue that things might be going south.  ‘It’s helpful for both to say: “I’m feeling” and then attempt to identify the feeling.  Ask to take a break and reconvene, or if you become emotionally regulated through the process of acknowledging your feelings, carry on. You can also notice the other person’s feelings and ask them if they are ok to continue the conversation.
5. Make a plan to ensure that your person of interest wins by your hand.
   That could mean you send them a note of appreciation or do an errand for them. Go out of your way to show kindness and compassion. There’s an old adage:  people don’t care how much you know until they know how much care.
6. Be curious!
   There are so many open-ended questions that will illicit more information.  Receiving someone else’s thoughts and feelings draws them into your space.  Listening well does not equal agreement, it means you have a clear enough picture of the other person to dive deeper into their perspective.  Only after a lengthy stretch of listening do we get into the heart of the other person.  This may take more than one conversation.  A gathering at Christmas may be an opportunity to invite more discussion.  We never lose when we listen well.  Some questions that are helpful:  what’s it like to? How do you feel when?  What are your thoughts on?  I want to follow up:  when you said… what did you mean by that?
7. Set the stage for peace.
   I mean low lighting, well prepared, warm food, warm drinks, pillows.  An atmosphere of warmth and welcome will go a long way to develop closeness.  Many of these things are done automatically as part of tradition without even realizing how they impact mood and set the stage for connection.  Taking someone’s coat when they walk through the door signals a desire that they stay a while.  Imagine how the person you are in conflict would feel if they were treated with this kind of respect and care.
8. Limit alcohol.
   It’s a well -known fact among my circle of friends that I cannot drink.  If you end up apologizing for your behavior after alcohol consumption, cut it out of your life sister!

Please share your ingredients to add to this holiday cocktail.  I’ll be sure to post them and if you would be vulnerable enough to share your stories from the holiday, I will post them as well:  the good, the bad and the ugly. I will do the same; I’m already working on mending a bad situation that I contributed to last Christmas.

I wish you all a joyful season:  As the angel announced, I repeat the sounding joy: “Peace on Earth and good will toward all.”

–Many of you, no doubt will disagree with me in what follows.  You are welcome here.  Let us do again what Canadians once did best: carefully, thoughtfully, at times heatedly discuss important issues while remaining united.

Like the rest of Canada, I watched countless hours of the inquiry into the use of the Emergency Act, and still, the COVID saga continues.  I just finished Tamara Lich’s Book Hold the Line.  If you have forgotten, or never knew, Ms. Lich is the key leader of Freedom Convoy.  Not the “so called Freedom Convoy” that corporate media like to refer to the movement as.  She and Chris Barber, another leader of the Convoy now stand trial for the charge of mischief, and inciting others to mischief.

This kind of mischief is not the dictionary definition which reads “playful mis-behaviour or troublemaking especially in children.”  Although the three weeks in the Ottawa capital saw the protesters engaging in a great deal of playful, joyful, inclusive and communal activity.  Mischief under the criminal code is written as follows:

section 430 (1) Everyone commits mischief who wilfully. (a) destroys or damages property; (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective; (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property…

For this false charge, Tamara Lich was arrested, stripped outside a police station in sub zero temperature and put in jail twice for a total of 49 days, some of which she spent in solitary. Non consenting solitary confinement is now considered torture by most mental health professionals.

Before you say to yourself, “good she deserved the police to take off her winter jacket steps away from the warmth of the inside of a police station and search her in the cold and dark” please, Canadian, read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Before you say to yourself, “Oh good, this genuine Metis grandmother deserved to be thrown into a cell freezing, wet, exhausted “with a cement slab for a bed…that sucked the little warmth [she] had left in [her] body…” and refused even a blanket: please, my fellow Canadian, take a moment to reflect.

Sometimes, when emotions run high and horns are disturbingly loud, making it difficult to think, sleep and be, we can forget that Canada is a democracy where even cold-blooded killers are afforded certain dignities and rights under our laws.  It is easy to forget that in Canada we are innocent until proven guilty, especially when main stream media is paid for by its government to forget the role of journalism.  CTV, CBC and Global characterize this legitimate peaceful protest as

1. Foreign Funded (Which in part it was. However, there was no desire to focus on the Canadians who donated the bulk of the funds. Ironically CBC complained that those who claimed they retracted their ‘foreign fund story’ never contacted them to get the real story. Talk about a kettle/pot problem),
2. Swastika flag waving (One flag not a part of the protest: against millions of Canadian flags),
3. Designed as an Insurrection (Not one move was made to overthrow the government by the Freedom Convoy, who made countless attempts to engage in dialogue that was met with a Prime Minister who fled the nation’s capitol),
4. Fringe (how 6 million vocal Canadians and how many more silent can be called fringe is the result of What Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University calls “illusion of consent”)
5. Unacceptable movement. (Unacceptable to whom)?
6. Dangerous (The Freedom Convoy Participants not only cleaned downtown Ottawa, fed the homeless, frequented businesses, they were continually dancing, drumming, hugging.  The Freedom Convoy cooperated with the police unil the last days when they attempted to stand their ground while kneeling, unarmed holding the charter in their hands before a brutal display of force).

Although Canadian corporate media refused to understand and capture the essence of the protest with its grass roots emergence and the learning curve that comes with it, much of the wider world saw it as a free and fabulous demonstration of Canada’s Citizens exercising their constitutional right to a peaceful protest.

Peaceful, until Trudeau’s army of force stepped in with intent to do violence should Canadians refuse to back down from their lawful, albeit highly disruptive presence.  The Emergency Act police crushed the process. Independent news sources captured the violence: pepper spray, horses, batons and body slams, kicking and punching to many, including veteran’s calling out as they were brutally taken to the ground. One veteran pleaded “I’m not resisting, I’m peaceful” yet his fellow Canadian in uniform slammed him to the ground. He asked for a different position because of wounds incurred during battle for your freedom and mine. He was denied.

What took place in Ottawa was an amazing moment of the people peacefully speaking truth to power.

The 16 – day trial of these two freedom leaders is an opportunity for the media, government, and judiciary of Canada to redeem these institutions.  In the service of protecting a just, free and democratic society, the court shall find both individuals innocent of all charges.  The media shall honestly explain why, and the government shall soon change hands as the people of Canada elect officials who will never again allow this political prisoner incident to ever darken our way again.

Join me as Conversation Café continues this discussion. Please contact me using the ‘Contact Page.’ I welcome your engagement.  If you wish your response to be posted, we will determine that together.

–Many of you, no doubt will disagree with me in what follows.  You are welcome here.  Let us do again what Canadians once did best: carefully, thoughtfully, at times heatedly discuss important issues while remaining united.

Like the rest of Canada, I watched countless hours of the inquiry into the use of the Emergency Act, and still, the COVID saga continues.  I just finished Tamara Lich’s Book Hold the Line.  If you have forgotten, or never knew, Ms. Lich is the key leader of Freedom Convoy.  Not the “so called Freedom Convoy” that corporate media like to refer to the movement as.  She and Chris Barber, another leader of the Convoy now stand trial for the charge of mischief, and inciting others to mischief.

This kind of mischief is not the dictionary definition which reads “playful mis-behaviour or troublemaking especially in children.”  Although the three weeks in the Ottawa capital saw the protesters engaging in a great deal of playful, joyful, inclusive and communal activity.  Mischief under the criminal code is written as follows:

section 430 (1) Everyone commits mischief who wilfully. (a) destroys or damages property; (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective; (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property…

For this false charge, Tamara Lich was arrested, stripped outside a police station in sub zero temperature and put in jail twice for a total of 49 days, some of which she spent in solitary. Non consenting solitary confinement is now considered torture by most mental health professionals.

Before you say to yourself, “good she deserved the police to take off her winter jacket steps away from the warmth of the inside of a police station and search her in the cold and dark” please, Canadian, read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Before you say to yourself, “Oh good, this genuine Metis grandmother deserved to be thrown into a cell freezing, wet, exhausted “with a cement slab for a bed…that sucked the little warmth [she] had left in [her] body…” and refused even a blanket: please, my fellow Canadian, take a moment to reflect.

Sometimes, when emotions run high and horns are disturbingly loud, making it difficult to think, sleep and be, we can forget that Canada is a democracy where even cold-blooded killers are afforded certain dignities and rights under our laws.  It is easy to forget that in Canada we are innocent until proven guilty, especially when main stream media is paid for by its government to forget the role of journalism.  CTV, CBC and Global characterize this legitimate peaceful protest as

1. Foreign Funded (Which in part it was. However, there was no desire to focus on the Canadians who donated the bulk of the funds. Ironically CBC complained that those who claimed they retracted their ‘foreign fund story’ never contacted them to get the real story. Talk about a kettle/pot problem),
2. Swastika flag waving (One flag not a part of the protest: against millions of Canadian flags),
3. Designed as an Insurrection (Not one move was made to overthrow the government by the Freedom Convoy, who made countless attempts to engage in dialogue that was met with a Prime Minister who fled the nation’s capitol),
4. Fringe (how 6 million vocal Canadians and how many more silent can be called fringe is the result of What Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University calls “illusion of consent”)
5. Unacceptable movement. (Unacceptable to whom)?
6. Dangerous (The Freedom Convoy Participants not only cleaned downtown Ottawa, fed the homeless, frequented businesses, they were continually dancing, drumming, hugging.  The Freedom Convoy cooperated with the police unil the last days when they attempted to stand their ground while kneeling, unarmed holding the charter in their hands before a brutal display of force).

Although Canadian corporate media refused to understand and capture the essence of the protest with its grass roots emergence and the learning curve that comes with it, much of the wider world saw it as a free and fabulous demonstration of Canada’s Citizens exercising their constitutional right to a peaceful protest.

Peaceful, until Trudeau’s army of force stepped in with intent to do violence should Canadians refuse to back down from their lawful, albeit highly disruptive presence.  The Emergency Act police crushed the process. Independent news sources captured the violence: pepper spray, horses, batons and body slams, kicking and punching to many, including veteran’s calling out as they were brutally taken to the ground. One veteran pleaded “I’m not resisting, I’m peaceful” yet his fellow Canadian in uniform slammed him to the ground. He asked for a different position because of wounds incurred during battle for your freedom and mine. He was denied.

What took place in Ottawa was an amazing moment of the people peacefully speaking truth to power.

The 16 – day trial of these two freedom leaders is an opportunity for the media, government, and judiciary of Canada to redeem these institutions.  In the service of protecting a just, free and democratic society, the court shall find both individuals innocent of all charges.  The media shall honestly explain why, and the government shall soon change hands as the people of Canada elect officials who will never again allow this political prisoner incident to ever darken our way again.

Join me as Conversation Café continues this discussion. Please contact me using the ‘Contact Page.’ I welcome your engagement.  If you wish your response to be posted, we will determine that together.