Thursday, December 16, 2021

Tornado-hit factory sued; workers said they couldn't leave

MAYFIELD, Ky. (AP) — Survivors of a tornado that leveled a Kentucky candle factory, killing eight workers, have filed a lawsuit claiming their employer demonstrated “flagrant indifference” by refusing to allow employees to go home early as the storm approached.

As legal fallout from the catastrophic weather started surfacing, steady rainfall added to the survivors' misery. As they picked through what remained of their homes, roofers patched holes and cleanup crews removed massive piles of downed trees and other debris. Storm-stricken parts of western Kentucky could get up to 2 inches (5 centimeters) of rain by Sunday, officials said.

“It’s not right for the people who have had their homes knocked down, that are trying to salvage it, are now having all this rain on top of it,” Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said Thursday.

The lawsuit, filed in state court late Wednesday, accuses the Mayfield Consumer Products candle production company of violating Kentucky occupational safety and health workplace standards by keeping its staff at work despite the danger of death and injury. The lawsuit claims that workers were threatened with termination if they left in the hours before the tornado hit. The suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages.

“It’s a straightforward claim, exactly what this statute was meant to address,” Amos Jones, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney representing employees, said by phone Thursday.

Bob Ferguson, speaking on behalf of the company located in the western Kentucky town of Mayfield, previously insisted that employees were free to leave anytime, and he denied that they would have faced retribution if they left the factory. Ferguson did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment Thursday.

The company’s CEO, Troy Propes, said in a statement Wednesday that the company was retaining “an independent expert team” to review the actions of managers and employees leading up to when the tornado struck the factory.

“We’re confident that our team leaders acted entirely appropriately and were, in fact, heroic in their efforts to shelter our employees,” Propes said. “We are hearing accounts from a few employees that our procedures were not followed. We’re going to do a thorough review of what happened.”

The lawsuit claims the factory had “up to three and half hours before the tornado hit its place of business to allow its employees to leave its worksite as safety precautions.” The factory showed “flagrant indifference to the rights” of the workers by refusing to do so, the lawsuit said.

Factory employee Haley Conder told The Associated Press on Tuesday that a supervisor threatened her with written disciplinary action if she went home early because storms were approaching.

Conder questioned why the company did not encourage workers to go home — or at least give them a better understanding of the danger — between a first tornado siren around 6 p.m. Friday and another one around 9 p.m., shortly before the tornado hit.

The only plaintiff identified in the lawsuit is Elijah Johnson, who was working the night shift at the candle factory when the storm struck. The wording of the lawsuit says it was filed by Johnson and on behalf of “others similarly situated.” Others aren't identified by name for “fear of reprisal,” Jones said.

After days of not knowing how many workers died at the factory, authorities are now “pretty close to certainty” that no more than eight perished, Beshear said Thursday.

The governor said it was “an absolute miracle” that more lives were not lost. “I will tell you, I was almost certain that the number would be 70,” he said. “But thank God, others either left or escaped.”

More than 100 people were working on candle orders when the twister flattened the facility. The company later said many employees who survived left the site and went to homes with no phone service, adding to the confusion over who was missing.

The lawsuit was filed less than a week after the storms that began Friday night destroyed lives and property from Arkansas to Illinois and in parts of neighboring states, carving a more than 200-mile (320-kilometer) path through Kentucky alone.

Beshear has said that Kentucky’s workplace safety agency would look into the eight deaths. That kind of investigation is routine whenever workers are killed on the job.

Bruce Schreiner, The Associated Press
Bungie's head of HR steps down following reports of toxic workplace culture

Mariella Moon 11 hrs ago

Gayle d'Hondt has stepped down as head of HR at Bungie after 14 years, according to IGN. The move comes shortly after the same publication released a report with accounts by former and current Bungie employees painting a picture of a workplace culture that's both toxic and sexist. In some instances, HR personnel were reportedly unwilling to help complainants and actively protected harmful individuals.

In her email sent to employees and seen by IGN, d'Hondt said she wants to do "everything in [her] power to make sure everyone who works [at Bungie] has a safe, welcoming, and supportive environment." It's necessary, she added, for the company's HR team to move forward with membership "largely comprised of people new to Bungie." d'Hondt didn't say who would be replacing her, but she told employees in the email that the HR team needs "to be trusted to be [their] advocates — not labeled as 'enablers' or seen as company resources who provide bad actors with safe harbor." It's also unclear if d'Hondt is leaving the video game developer completely or just moving to a different role.

© Chesnot via Getty Images PARIS, FRANCE - OCTOBER 31: Gamers play the video game 'Destiny 2' developed by Bungie Studios and published by Activision during the 'Paris Games Week' on October 31, 2017 in Paris, France. 'Paris Games Week' is an international trade fair for video games to be held from October 31 to November 5, 2017. (Photo by Chesnot/Getty Images)

The former HR head mentioned about her own experience with an abuser at the company, as well: A male executive whom she thought was her friend. While she didn't name her abuser, she said Bungie eventually fired him. She concluded:

"I am proud of the work I did at this company. I believe I made recommendations that were in the best interest of our people and in service of the company we wish to become. I also believe we made some mistakes, and that to become the better version of ourselves — the company I know we can be – we have to acknowledge and confront them, in good faith, and grow together."

While IGN's report showed the company in a less-than-flattering light, it also showed how the studio is struggling to shake its toxic culture in an effort to foster a better one. In response to it, company CEO Pete Parsons published an apology letter, admitting that Bungie's "actions or, in some cases, inactions, caused these people pain." He also talked about the changes the company has made over the past few years to make it a better place for employees, including removing bad actors irrespective of their "tenure, seniority or interpersonal relationships."
ECOCIDE
Texas pipeline company charged in California oil spill


LOS ANGELES (AP) — A Houston-based oil company and two subsidiaries were indicted Wednesday for a crude spill that fouled Southern California waters and beaches in October, an event prosecutors say was caused in part by failing to properly act when alarms repeatedly alerted workers to a pipeline rupture.
© Provided by The Canadian Press

Amplify Energy Corp. and its companies that operate several oil rigs and a pipeline off Long Beach were charged by a federal grand jury with a single misdemeanor count of illegally discharging oil.

Investigators believe the pipeline was weakened when a cargo ship's anchor snagged it in high winds in January, months before it ultimately ruptured Oct. 1, spilling up to about 25,000 gallons (94,600 liters) of crude oil in the ocean.

U.S. prosecutors said the companies were negligent six ways, including failing to respond to eight leak detection system alarms over a 13-hour period that should have alerted them to the spill and would have minimized the damage. Instead, the pipeline was shut down after each alarm and then restarted, spewing more oil into the ocean.

Amplify blamed the unnamed shipping company for displacing the pipeline and said workers on and offshore responded to what they believed were false alarms because the system wasn't functioning properly. It was signaling a potential leak at the platform where no leak was occurring, the company said.

The leak, in fact, was from a section of undersea pipe 4 miles (6.4 kilometers) miles away, Amplify said.

“Had the crew known there was an actual oil spill in the water, they would have shut down the pipeline immediately," the company said.

The Associated Press first reported last week that Amplify's leak detection system was not fully functional. At the time, the company declined to explain what that meant.

AP in October reported on questions surrounding the company’s failure to respond to an alarm.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Coast Guard said Wednesday that it was responding to a report of a sheen off the coast of Bolsa Chica State Beach but hadn't determined the source and planned to fly over the scene Thursday morning.

The area is in the same general vicinity as that of the October leak, although the pipeline currently is out of service.

In that case, the first pipeline rupture alarm sounded at 4:10 p.m. Oct. 1, but the leak was not discovered until well after sunrise the next morning and reported about 9 a.m. Citizens on shore called 911 to report the strong smell of crude that first afternoon, and an anchored cargo vessel reported seeing a large sheen on the water before sunset.

Local authorities who went looking for a spill Oct. 1 didn’t find it. The Coast Guard said it was too dark to go out and search for the spill by the time they received a report about it. They went out after sunrise, finding it around the time the company reported it.

Just days after the spill, Amplify CEO Martyn Willsher had refused to answer questions at news conferences about the timeline surrounding the spill and a report that an alarm at 2:30 a.m. Oct. 2 alerted controllers about a possible spill. He maintained the company didn’t learn of the spill until a boat saw a sheen on the water at 8:09 a.m. that morning.

Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley said the indictment validates residents who had detected the spill a day earlier and reported it.

“It’s terrible that they basically lied to the community during the press briefings and caused people to believe that what they saw with their own eyes or smelled or knew was actually not true,” she said. “What we know now is that the company knew this, and the alarms went off like they were supposed to, and nobody did anything.”

Even after the eighth and final alarm sounded, the pipeline operated for nearly an hour in the early morning, prosecutors said.

Pipeline safety advocate Bill Caram said the indictment paints a picture of a reckless company.

“I understand there are false positives on leak detection systems but this is our treasured coastline,” said Caram, director of the Bellingham, Washington-based Pipeline Safety Trust. “The fact that they kept hitting the snooze button and ignoring alarms, stopping and starting this pipeline and all the while leaking oil in the Pacific Ocean is reckless and egregious.”

Prosecutors also found that the pipeline was understaffed and the crew was fatigued and insufficiently trained in the leak detection system.

The indictment’s description of company personnel as fatigued pointed to a long-standing industry problem, said pipeline expert Ramanan Krishnamoorti with the University of Houston.

“Fatigue and overworked staff is old and trite and inexcusable,” he said. “This has been demonstrated over and over again as being the single most important vulnerability.”

It’s not clear why it took so long for the 1/2-inch (1.25-centimeter) thick steel line to leak after the apparent anchor incident, or whether another anchor strike or other incident led to the rupture and spill.

The spill came ashore at Huntington Beach and forced about a weeklong closure of the city’s beaches and others along the Orange County coast. Fishing in the affected area resumed only recently, after testing confirmed fish did not have unsafe levels of oil toxins.

If convicted, the charge carries up to five years of probation for the corporation and fines that could total millions of dollars.

___

Brown reported from Billings, Montana. Associated Press reporter Amy Taxin contributed.

Brian Melley And Matthew Brown, The Associated Press
SOUNDS FAMILIAR
Steve Bannon Hopes for Century of Pro-Trump Republican Rule: 
Jahrhundert der Pro-Trump-republikanischen Herrschaft

'We Reign for 100 Years'
100 JAHRE REICH

Steve Bannon voiced his hope that supporters of former President Donald Trump will govern the country for a century, saying he hopes they will "reign for 100 years."

© Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images Former Trump administration White House advisor Steve Bannon speaks to reporters outside of the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal District Court House on November 15 in Washington, D.C.

Jason Lemon 

Bannon, a former Trump adviser, made the remark during an episode of his War Room podcast on Wednesday. The comment came as he and former Trump adviser Jason Miller discussed the upcoming 2022 midterms as well as the presidential election in 2024.

"I would say as far as Biden, I don't see any way that he stands for re-election in 2024," Miller, the CEO of Gettr who served on Trump's 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns, told Bannon. He predicted that Democratic "elites" would tell Biden he needs to step aside after the 2022 midterms. He projected that Republicans will win big in those races.

"Best-case scenario for Democrats is that Republicans have a 60-seat landslide. I'm even hearing things like a historic 90-, even 100-seat, landslide—one of the biggest, if not the biggest in history," Miller said.

Bannon quickly responded, "Yeah, 100 seats, we reign for 100 years. I gotta tell you, this is the key."

Trump formally pardoned Bannon right before he departed office in January. The former president's ally had been charged with fraud related to a crowdfunding campaign he launched in an effort to fund a border wall between the U.S. and Mexico. Bannon was then indicted last month for criminal contempt of Congress after he refused to comply with a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Bannon, like many other Trump loyalists, has become a key promoter of the former president's baseless theory that the 2020 election was "rigged" or "stolen" in favor of President Joe Biden. He has regularly promoted the claims on his War Room podcast while also touting pro-Trump Republicans' efforts to take back control of Congress and the White House.

"This is Trumpism in power. That's when we went to the 4,000 shock troops we have to have that's going to man the government," Bannon said during an episode of his podcast earlier this month. He called on Trump supporters to prepare to take control.

"Get them ready now. Right? We're going to hit the beach with the landing teams and the beachhead teams and all that nomenclature they use when President Trump wins in 2024—or before," he said.

Historical precedent and recent polling suggest that Republicans will take control of the House of Representatives, and possibly the Senate, during the 2022 midterms. The party of the president in power generally loses a significant number of seats in Congress during the midterms of their first term. Because the Democrats control the House and Senate only by the narrowest of margins, even just a few seats flipping in Republicans' favor would shift the balance of power in the legislative chambers.

Polling conducted this month by CNBC found that Republicans are preferred by voters over Democrats, by a double-digit margin, to control Congress. While just about a third (34 percent) of respondents said they prefer Democrats controlling the legislative branch, 44 percent said they prefer Republicans. That's a 10-point lead for the GOP less than a year before the midterms will take place.

Meanwhile, Trump continues to tease the possibility of a presidential run in 2024—although he has not announced his intentions. Biden has said that he plans to seek another term. But with a sagging approval rating and concerns about his age (79), many political observers speculate that the president will step aside and let another Democrat run in 2024.

PATRIARCHY IS FEMICIDE 
Girl shot dead by Taliban while family was preparing to flee to Canada
Stewart Bell and Jeff Semple 

© Family handout

A 10-year-old girl was shot dead in Afghanistan while her family was preparing to flee to Canada under an immigration program for Afghans who worked for the Canadian Forces, multiple sources said Thursday.

The girl, Nazifa, was killed when gunfire erupted near a Taliban checkpoint in Kandahar on the night of Dec. 10, her father and the Canadian veterans group Aman Lara told Global News in interviews.

The father had worked for the Canadian military in Kandahar until 2011. The family was approved for resettlement by Canada, but was stuck in Afghanistan due to the lack of evacuation efforts.

“I can confirm this family did have approval to come to Canada, and they didn’t make it out in time, and it’s a very poignant example of what can happen,” said Kynan Walper, an Aman Lara spokesperson.

Nazifa's father Bashir said his daughter was a top student and was learning English to prepare for her new life in Canada. (He asked to be identified only by his first name for safety reasons.)

She was returning from a family wedding at about 11 p.m. Friday when the car she was in cleared a Taliban checkpoint, but then came under fire. The vehicle hit a building and caught fire. Nazifa died instantly and three others were injured.

Read more:
Inside the Kabul safe houses where Afghans wait to be evacuated to Canada

It’s unclear why the Taliban shot at the vehicle. Bashir said his family may have been targeted because he worked for the Canadian and U.S. forces, but there were also indications it was a result of Taliban negligence.

Bashir’s brother-in-law Mohammad said the driver of the vehicle thought he had been cleared to pass through the checkpoint, but when he did so, the Taliban started shooting.

The family was in Kandahar to prepare their applications for Afghan passports, which they needed to enter a neighbouring country like Pakistan and make their way to Canada, Bashir said.

“I am requesting the government of Canada to help us get out of this country, and get us out of this fear we are living in now,” said Bashir, speaking through an interpreter.

While the Canadian government has said it would resettle Afghans who helped the military mission in Kandahar, four months after the Taliban seized Kabul, fewer than 3,800 have arrived.

Another 1,755 have come to Canada through a humanitarian program.

Thousands more remain stranded in the country due to the suspension of evacuation flights, and border control measures in neighbouring countries that prevent them from fleeing.

Aman Lara confirmed the family was on its list of evacuees it was trying to assist, and said the death showed the risks resulting from delays in Afghan resettlement efforts.

“There was a 10-year-old girl who was shot ... when she should have been on her way to Canada. This was avoidable and it was bound to happen, and it’s going to happen more,” Walper said.

“We need to do better, and I understand that everyone’s trying, but we need to do better, we need to pick this up," he said.

“We need to get the log-jams resolved, wherever they lay, whether it be through flights, whether it be through ground movements, whether it be through co-operation with other countries, we need to continue this with a renewed urgency so this does not happen again.”

Read more:
The Taliban is rebranding Kabul with its white flags, but what comes next has Afghans on edge

As it seeks international recognition and the resumption of foreign aid, the Taliban has vowed not to retaliate against its former enemies. But given the Taliban's long history of killing Afghans who supported the international forces, locals who worked for the Canadian military fear they will be targeted.

The United Nations deputy high commissioner for human rights, Nada Al-Nashif, said this week that despite an amnesty announced by the Taliban, there were “credible allegations” of more than 100 killings of former Afghan national security forces and others tied to the former government.

"At least 72 killings were attributed to the Taliban, and in several cases the bodies were publicly displayed," she said.

Bashir said he was a carpenter for the Canadian Forces from 2006 to 2011. Walper said the family had been approved to come to Canada but was among the many unable to leave Afghanistan.

“I can confirm that this individual was a family member of a primary applicant who had a connection to the Canadian Forces,” he said. “He had worked alongside Canadian Forces and that work put them at significant risk.”

Read more:
Canada’s response to fall of Afghanistan target of new special committee of MPs

Neither Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada nor the office of Immigration Minister Sean Fraser have responded to requests for comment, but the Conservative opposition called the killing "horrific and heartbreaking."

“We need answers from the federal government as to why this family could not get out of Afghanistan in time," said Conservative leader Erin O'Toole.

He said a parliamentary committee set up last week by opposition parties would "explore these questions and examine ways we can help ensure no other families experience such loss."

Last month, the minister's press secretary Alexander Cohen said the government was working with Afghans to ensure they had the required documents, and cooperating with transit countries to allow them entry.

"The major hurdle in getting people out of Afghanistan remains the fact the country is under the control of the Taliban, with extremely volatile conditions on the ground," he said at the time.

Stewart.Bell@globalnews.ca
Nebraska's Republican governor joins Joe Biden in calling on Kellogg's to negotiate with striking workers: 'Retaining your people should be a priority'

insider@insider.com (Juliana Kaplan)
© Provided by Business Insider
 Keisha Richardson, 15-year Kellogg employee, waves to cars honking as they pass by as she gathers with union workers from Kellogg's while they picket outside the cereal maker's headquarters as they remain on strike in Battle Creek, Michigan,
 U.S REUTERS/Emily Elconin/File Photo

Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts, a two-term Republican, is urging Kellogg's to negotiate with strikers.
After more than two months, Kellogg's said it will permanently replace striking union workers.
Ricketts joins politicians like Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders in supporting the workers.

Nebraska governor Pete Ricketts — a Republican serving his second term in office and the former COO of TD Ameritrade — has called upon Kellogg's CEO Steve Cahillane to resume negotiations with striking workers.

In a letter dated December 12, Ricketts said that Nebraskans working in food processing "stepped up to help our state feed the nation and world," noting that workers helped increase Kellogg's revenue in 2020.

"Given the extraordinary commitment displayed by Kellogg's employees over the past two years, the successes they have helped Kellogg's to achieve, and the inflationary pressures they're facing, I urge you to return to the bargaining table," Ricketts said.

On Friday, President Joe Biden said that he was "deeply troubled by reports of Kellogg's plans to permanently replace striking workers," and called on employers to meet unions at the bargaining table. Senator Bernie Sanders has said he'll join a rally with striking Kellogg's workers in Michigan later this week.

Ricketts' letter signals a possible bipartisan shift towards supporting the striking workers. It's a notable move from a Republican governor who previously threatened to withhold federal relief funds for cities if masks were mandated in local government offices, and ended federal unemployment benefits months early in an effort to get workers to return.

Kellogg's workers at four plants — including one in Omaha, Nebraska — have been on strike for over two months. The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International union workers are pushing back against what they say is an unfair two-tier wage system. On December 7, workers "overwhelmingly voted to reject" the company's latest tentative agreement offer.

After union workers voted down the tentative agreement, Kellogg said "the prolonged work stoppage has left us no choice but to hire permanent replacement employees in positions vacated by striking workers." That meant that 1,400 striking workers were facing replacement.

Ricketts said that he was writing "to express my hope that Kellogg's will reconsider its decision to discontinue negotiations" with the union, and that "retaining your people should be a priority."

"We remain ready and willing to continue negotiations," Kellogg spokesperson Kris Bahner said in a statement to Insider. "We have made every effort to reach a fair agreement, including making six offers to the union throughout negotiations, all of which have included wage and benefits increases for every employee on top of what is already an industry-leading compensation package."

Dan Osborn, president of the local union branch in Omaha, Nebraska, told Insider in a message that Rickett's letter shows this is a truly bipartisan message.

"I would like to express my gratitude on behalf of the 450 members of BCTGM Local 50G to Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts for acknowledging our cause to save the American blue collar worker," Osborn said.



Fox Hosts Knew—And Lied Anyway

Text messages sent to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows reveal a disturbing truth.
Daniel Constante / Alamy; Getty; Paul Spella / The Atlantic
DECEMBER 16, 2021, 1:30 PM ET
About the author: Adam Serwer is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers politics.

According to right-wing media figures, the January 6 sacking of the Capitol that disrupted the counting of the 2020 electoral votes was “a false-flag operation.” It was just “politicians” having their “jobs disrupted for two hours.” It was “mostly peaceful.” It was a “setup,” or perhaps it was the work of “antifa,” but those who were arrested and prosecuted are definitely “political prisoners.” Whatever happened, whether it was just a few misguided tourists or an inside job, Donald Trump is certainly not to blame and should not face punishment.

Or at least that’s what these Fox News personalities have said publicly. In fact, they understood exactly what was happening and who was responsible.

As part of its investigation into the Capitol riot, Congress has released a series of text messages between then–White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Fox News personalities, exchanged on January 6. The texts show that the network’s stars, contrary to the deliberate obfuscation campaign they have since offered, were well aware of who was responsible for the attack on the Capitol, and who could have prevented it.

Trump said to his supporters at the rally that day, “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” and told them to march on the Capitol in the hopes of preventing Congress from certifying Joe Biden's victory. As the mob ransacked the building, the Fox host Laura Ingraham told Meadows, “The president needs to tell people in the Capitol to go home,” and warned that “this is hurting all of us. He is destroying his legacy.” The morning-show host Brian Kilmeade implored Meadows: “Please, get him on TV. Destroying everything you have accomplished.” The prime-time host Sean Hannity urged Meadows to get Trump to “ask people to leave the Capitol.” Subsequently, all three hosts downplayed Trump’s responsibility for what happened, or sought to cast blame on others, knowingly misleading their viewers. If the rally had been peaceful, if the mob had not been full of Trump supporters, if this were an inside job, then appealing to Trump to stop it would not have made sense.

The texts provide a concrete record of what much of the right-wing media, and Fox News in particular, have since tried to obscure: A violent mob of Trump supporters, incited by falsehoods promoted by right-wing outlets and Trump himself about the election being stolen, sought to overturn the results by force. That violence was but the last desperate effort of a months-long campaign to invalidate the election results by pressuring election officials, state legislators, the Supreme Court, and ultimately former Vice President Mike Pence to use their power to install Trump as president against the will of the electorate.

The messages also highlight Fox News’s unusual relationship with its audience, which involves the conservative media’s most trusted figures consciously lying to their viewers. The texts between Meadows and the Fox News hosts are hardly the only example of the network’s personalities deliberately misleading their audience: From downplaying the deadliness of COVID to making misleading assertions about the effectiveness of the vaccines, to advancing the false claims of voter fraud that helped motivate the riot in the first place, Fox and its satellites have shown little hesitation in exploiting the confidence of conservative viewers who are convinced that the network is one of the few trustworthy outlets in a media landscape they regard with fierce hostility.

The roots of that hostility are worth reflecting on in light of these revelations. Fox News presents itself as a necessary counterweight to the supposed left-wing bias of other media outlets. Its defenders argue that the mainstream media have made so many glaring mistakes, the press can no longer be trusted, and it is therefore natural for Americans to seek alternatives.

The press does make mistakes, sometimes very serious ones—the coverage of the run-up to the invasion of Iraq is a prominent example. Developing stories are often subject to revision as new facts are uncovered, which to some audiences can feel like evidence of carelessness, negligence, or bias. Although the criticism the media face under such circumstances is often harsh, a healthy public skepticism of the press is as important to democracy as a thriving press.

But even errors of fact and framing, ideology or analysis, are different from what Fox News hosts do, which is attempt to get their viewers to believe things they themselves know are false. Fox News is distinct not only from most other broadcasters, but also from conservative magazines and websites whose writers are right-wing but maintain a sense of intellectual independence. Fox News’s symbiotic relationship with the Republican Party makes the outlet roughly as reliable as most politicians, who are more inclined to tell voters what they think they want to hear than what they ought to know.

It’s common to say that conservatives distrust the media, but conservative viewers trust Fox about as much as Democrats trust CNN. The fact that its most popular personalities consciously lie to their audiences has not diminished that trust; it has made Fox the most successful cable-news channel. It is difficult then, to argue that inaccuracy is what has eroded other outlets’ trust with conservatives—the reverse is true. More factual coverage would not strengthen Fox News’s bond with its viewers; it would likely drive them elsewhere. The outlet shapes this demand, but it also bends to it.

A conservative news outlet that sought to compete on accuracy would maintain standards of rigor that would not allow its most famous ambassadors to knowingly lie to their viewers, or it would sanction them for doing so. But Fox News understands that its success depends on maintaining a fantasy world, rather than doing anything to disturb it. This is why some of its most marquee personalities, who shared the same horror as most other Americans at the events of January 6, caked on their makeup, stared into the camera, and lied to the people who trust them the most. What makes Fox News unique is not that it is conservative, but that its on-air personalities understand that telling lies is their job. Their texts on January 6, and their conduct since, leave no other conclusion.

Teachers, students gather against Quebec's Bill 21 after hijab-wearing teacher forced from classroom


Organizers of a campaign against Quebec's Bill 21 are making
 20,000 buttons for Quebecers to wear. (Facebook/Non a la Loi 21)

Luca Caruso-Moro
CTVNewsMontreal.ca Digital Reporter
Andrew Brennan
CTV News Montreal Assignment Editor/Videojournalist
Published Wednesday, December 15, 2021
 
MONTREAL -- Teachers gathered in downtown Montreal Wednesday demanding an overhaul to Quebec’s controversial Bill 21 after a teacher in Chelsea, Que. was removed from her classroom for wearing a hijab.

Bill 21, also commonly referred to as Quebec’s secularism law, bans some public servants deemed to be in positions of authority -- such as teachers, judges and police officers -- from wearing religious symbols on the job.

Passed in 2019, national debate has exploded again after Fatemeh Anvari, a Grade 3 teacher at Chelsea Elementary School, was told she could no longer continue in her role on Dec. 3 because her of her hijab.

Speakers at the gathering called on Quebec Premier Francois Legault, whose party enacted the bill, to look at the law through the lens of history.

“Fatima is not the first victim. Maybe hers is the first face that we see so clearly, but as indeviduals, there are many victims (of the law),” said Ehab Latoyef of Non a la Loi 21. “There were so many people who could not get a job, or had to leave the province.”

“There are those who had to choose between their livelihood and their (religious) beliefs,” he added.

It came a day after protestors gathered in Anvari’s hometown of Chelsea, Que. to voice their outrage at the law.

“We’re here to represent Ms. Fatemeh and all the other people who wear hijabs,” says Zoe Neldrum, a student in the Grade 3 class Anvari used to teach, “because it’s wrong and unfair and we want her to be our teacher again because she’s one of the best teachers we ever had.”

“We just wanted to make sure that the Quebec government knows that they can’t get away with this in our community,” David Harris, an organizer of the protest, told CTV News Ottawa. “We see this as a Bill that clearly goes too far in the name of secularism.”

"When it comes to members of our community, we want to show that we stand up for them," Harris said.

‘NOT A RACIST SOCIETY’


“Quebec is not, big underline, is not a racist society,” said Canadian Muslim Forum (CMF) President Samer Majzoub in an interview with CTV News.

However, he continued, Bill 21 “is directly or indirectly approving discrimination, whether we like it or not.”

The CMF announced their formal opposition to the law on Wednesday, writing in a statement that the government ought to at least exclude the education sector from its jurisdiction.

“The education sector, which is an extremely important one, has been witnessing a severe need for qualified educational staff,” wrote the CMF.

Meanwhile, some federal lawmakers pushed for federal intervention in the provincial law.

Conservative Sen. Salma Ataullahjan released a statement calling Bill 21 "discriminatory and racist," and while the law is provincial, not federal, BC Conservative MP Mark Strahl said he thinks "some issues transcend jurisdiction."

"We can't let laws like that go unchallenged," he told reporters before heading into the Tories' national caucus meeting Wednesday, where he said the issue would be raised.

While Prime Minister Trudeau and Opposition Leader Erin O’Toole have both voiced their displeasure with the law, neither have made public any plans to challenge it.

In a recent interview with the prime minister on CTV’s Question Period, Trudeau didn’t mince words, calling Bill 21 outrightly “unjust.”

However, he said, “the best place to be fighting this as a first step is for Quebecers themselves to be challenging this unjust law in their courts that their provincial government put forward,” Trudeau said.

“We have taken (a) very clear stance that this bill is … wrong. We have also said we’re not putting aside the possibility of challenging it at the Supreme Court.”

Meanwhile, Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole has said that while he personally opposes the law, he believes it's one that Quebecers alone must deal with.


  

Calls grow from Liberal, Tory MPs for federal intervention in Quebec’s Bill 21

By Stephanie Taylor The Canadian Press
Posted December 15, 2021 8:52 pm

Protest held in Montreal in support of Quebec teacher reassigned over hijab



The Liberal government and Opposition Conservatives are facing calls from within to mount a more direct challenge to Quebec’s controversial secularism law after a teacher was removed from the classroom for wearing a hijab.

Federal parties and their MPs have spent the past week reacting to the law, known as Bill 21, which bans some public servants deemed to be in positions of authority — such as teachers, judges and police officers — from wearing religious symbols on the job.

The law was passed in 2019, but received renewed attention outside Quebec last week after news broke that Fatemeh Anvari, a Grade 3 teacher, was told she could no longer teach in a classroom because she wore a hijab.

READ MORE: Calgary looking at joining other cities’ support of legal challenge of Quebec’s Bill 21

One of the federal politicians calling for a more forceful condemnation of the law was Conservative MP Mark Strahl, a representative from British Columbia.

Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole has said that while he personally opposes the law, he believes it’s one that Quebecers alone must deal with and that a government led by him would not intervene in any court challenge to it.

But Strahl said he thinks “some issues transcend jurisdiction.”

2:07Bloc Quebecois demands government answer whether it will mount legal challenge to Quebec’s Bill 21Bloc 

The MP said he thinks Conservatives should re-examine their stance, which he said is unclear, and be prepared to challenge the law in court.

“We can’t let laws like that go unchallenged,” he told reporters before heading into the Tories’ national caucus meeting Wednesday, where he said the issue would be raised.

“It’s a position that’s shared by many, many of my colleagues.”

Conservative Sen. Salma Ataullahjan released a statement calling Bill 21 “discriminatory and racist,” saying she cannot in good conscience remain silent while fellow Canadians are being blatantly targeted.

READ MORE: Prime Minister Trudeau not stepping into fight against Bill 21 — for now

In a subsequent interview, she said she felt compelled as a Muslim to speak out and believes there has been a lack of leadership all around on the issue.

“We can’t be selective about human rights,” she said.

Despite the wish from some to adopt a tougher stand, O’Toole and other members of his caucus left the meeting saying nothing had changed.

On his way out, O’Toole, speaking in French, reiterated his personal opposition to the law and said Conservatives must speak as a team on important issues.

As for the Liberals, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reiterated Wednesday that he has not ruled out federal intervention “at an appropriate time” in a court challenge to the law. For now though, he suggested it’s best to let Quebecers themselves lead that fight.
5:40Trudeau comments on Quebec teacher reassigned due to her hijab as result of Bill 21


“I think the one thing to remember in all this is that Quebecers believe in a free and open society. Quebecers believe in freedom of expression, Quebecers believe in the equality of men and women, Quebecers believe in freedom of religion, freedom of conscience,” he told a news conference.

“And right now, a whole bunch of Quebecers are asking themselves questions about how in a free society someone could lose her job because of her religion.”

During Wednesday’s question period, Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet challenged Trudeau to put Quebec’s public opinion on the matter to the test in a referendum. Polls suggest the majority of Quebecers support the law.

The Bloc leader also blasted Trudeau for allowing United Nations Ambassador Bob Rae to call the law discriminatory, which Blanchet said amounted to Quebec-bashing.

On Tuesday, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh shifted from his earlier stance to say he would support Ottawa stepping into a court challenge.

Liberal MP Salma Zahid, who wears a hijab, issued a statement this week saying it was time for Ottawa to join the legal challenge against the law mounted by the National Council of Canadian Muslims and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.


READ MORE: Quebec’s Bill 21 again faces questions amid outrage over London, Ont. vehicle attack

“This cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged,” she said.

“To date, the challenge has come from civil society. But as the party that brought the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to Canada, as a government that champions human rights around the world, we cannot allow the weight of this fight to be carried by civil society alone.”

Montreal Liberal MP Anthony Housefather alsosaid this week he wants a national debate on the use of and rules around the notwithstanding clause, which Quebec Premier Francois Legault pre-emptively invoked. The clause gives provincial legislatures and Parliament the ability to bring in legislation that overrides provisions in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for five years.

It’s a conversation others have suggested is long overdue, four decades after the clause was created as part of constitutional talks. Housefather said the discussion should include whether the clause can be invoked without an actual court challenge of the law in question, as Legault did when Bill 21 was passed.

Newly elected Ottawa Liberal MP Jenna Sudds had similar sentiments in a statement she issued on the secularism law. She called it “a manifestation of intolerant and xenophobic sentiments” that may need federal intervention.

“Canadian governments at all levels have an unwavering commitment to the principles of freedom of religion and expression,” she said. “We cannot in good conscience stand idly by and allow this bill to go unchallenged, for what we permit, we promote.”

— With files from Mia Rabson

Toronto·BRAMPTON

Brampton calls on cities across Canada to 'join the fight' against Quebec's Bill 21

Local residents, organizations applaud action; Calgary's

 mayor to bring urgent motion in support

Brampton mayor Patrick Brown announced at a press conference on Wednesday morning that city council was introducing a motion calling on Canadian cities to donate to the legal fund fighting Bill 21 in the Quebec Court of Appeal. (CBC)

When Quebec enacted Bill 21 in March 2019, Razia Hamidi had an unfortunate decision to make.

She could continue living in the province that had just made it illegal for people like her to work in the public sector, or she could leave.

Hamidi chose to leave and a year and a half ago, resettled in Brampton, Ont. with her family.

"The climate it's created in Quebec was really something I didn't want to live through anymore, being a woman who is visibly Muslim and wears the headscarf," Hamidi said. "I feel like [Bill 21] legitimizes a lot of Islamophobia that exists in Quebec."

On Wednesday, Hamidi was happy to learn that Brampton mayor Patrick Brown had issued an appeal to 100 Canadian mayors to "join the fight" against Quebec's Bill 21.

As part of a motion carried in a special council meeting at Brampton city hall, Brown invited mayors and councils from across the country to donate to legal funds fighting Bill 21 in courts.

"Gone are the days when we can turn a blind eye to an injustice we see across municipal, provincial, and even federal boundaries," Brown wrote in a letter. "Quebecers of all faiths are our brothers and sisters. They need our help."

Razia Hamidi moved to Brampton, Ont. from Quebec shortly after the province passed Bill 21. (Submitted by Razia Hamidi)

Hamidi welcomed the mayor's motion, recalling participating in multiple Montreal organizations trying to create allyship and gather funding for the legal battle against the bill during her time in Quebec.

She says until now the burden for legal fees was on the backs of mosques, churches, synagogues, gurdwaras, and non-profit organizations like the National Council of Canadian Muslims, and the World Sikh Organization of Canada.

By late Wednesday afternoon, the motion had already won the support of Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek.

In a tweet, Gondek said that she'd spoken to Brampton's mayor, agreed with his proposal and would bring an urgent motion to Calgary city council to "make a contribution for the legal challenge."

"We stand united in protecting racialized communities against discrimination," Gondek wrote.

Leaders will 'have to answer for which side of history they were on'

Bill 21 prohibits public workers in Quebec from wearing religious symbols, whether a headscarf, a turban, a kippah or a visible crucifix. The bill targets Muslims, Sikhs, Jews and Christians, many of whom wear religious symbols as an expression of their identity.

How many of our fathers and brothers were told to cut their hair and remove their turbans to gain employment? How can we possibly turn the clock back now?- WSO senior vice president Sharanjeet Kaur

Hamidi says the bill "was a big factor in finally deciding to move back to Ontario with my family, not wanting to live in a province where the government is actively creating this tiered system of citizenship based on your religious identity and expression."

"I think a lot of local and municipal leaders, especially I hope our federal leaders, are going to have to answer for which side of history they were on in this period of Canada," Hamidi said, noting the bill has been in effect for two years.

Last week, a teacher in Chelsea, Que., Fatemeh Anvari, was reassigned from her job as a teacher to a position outside the classroom because she wore a headscarf.

Shortly after, Quebec's premier Francois Legault said the teacher shouldn't have been hired in the first place. That prompted backlash from communities across the country.

'Racism is expensive'

In a public letter issued Wednesday, Brown said, "A contribution from 100 municipalities across Canada is a small price to pay versus the repetitional harm that Canada will suffer and the future financial compensation that may come about if we allow this to stand."

"Racism is expensive, doing the right thing is a good investment," he added.

NCCM's executive director Mustafa Farooq, who has long been involved in the fight against Bill 21, said Brown's motion Wednesday was "nothing short of historic," and that he hopes it will prompt other cities to step up.

"I think anybody that believes in civil liberties and in the basic dignity of human beings should oppose [Bill 21]," he said. "There are many, many Quebecers who stand in opposition to this bill and will continue to stand in opposition until it's struck down."

Recently graduated B.Ed. student Amrit Kaur, centre, spoke during a news conference with members of the National Council of Canadian Muslims Mustafa Farooq, left, and Bochra Manai, right, in 2019, when plans were outlined to lawfully challenge the Quebec government's Bill 21. (Graham Hughes/The Canadian Press)

While Farooq spoke to city council at a special meeting on Wednesday, so did WSO senior vice president Sharanjeet Kaur, who noted that one of the organization's board members, Amrit Kaur, had to leave Quebec for British Columbia because she couldn't work as a teacher as someone who wore a turban.

"When our community first heard of this bill, our parents and our grandparents started to recall the trauma of what they faced when they first arrived in Canada," she told city council.

"How many of our fathers and brothers were told to cut their hair and remove their turbans to gain employment? How can we possibly turn the clock back now?"

At a special council meeting on Wednesday, Brown and city councillors unanimously passed the motion to support legal challenges against Bill 21 and provide a one-time contribution of $100,000 to joint legal challenges by NCCM, WSO, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

Kaur, a resident of Brampton, commended the city for being the first municipality in Canada to pass a motion against Bill 21, first back in 2019, and then again on Wednesday.

"Choosing between our faith and employment are not choices we should have ever had to make."

Calgary mayor hopes to join fight against controversial Quebec Bill 21

Bill 21 prohibits some public servants from wearing

 religious symbols on the job

Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek spoke to reporters Wednesday, calling a 2019 Quebec law "unconscionable." (Mike Symington/CBC)

Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek wants to join other municipalities in supporting a legal challenge of a controversial Quebec law. 

The law, known as Bill 21, prohibits some public servants including teachers and other government employees deemed to be in positions of authority, from wearing religious symbols on the job, including a headscarf, a turban, a kippah or a visible crucifix. 

This comes after a Quebec teacher was forced from her job in the classroom for wearing a hijab.

"What Quebec is doing is absolutely unconscionable… we are issuing a challenge to other municipalities in this country, asking us to contribute towards the legal challenge to get rid of Bill 21," Gondek said.  

"Sometimes there are things that are the last straw, and that teacher — who was let go for no reason other than wearing what they will call a religious symbol — that was the end of it," Gondek said. 

Gondek says she spoke with Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown who issued the call. Brown says his city council is committing $100,000 to a legal challenge by the National Council of Canadian Muslims. She will be looking for Calgary to contribute the same amount. 

In a public letter issued Wednesday, Brown asked mayors across Canada to donate to the fund.

"I don't need to tell you that Jewish women who wear wigs, Sikh men who wear turbans, Christians who wear a cross are all at risk of being victims of this un-Canadian legislation, which infringes on fundamental rights of Canadians by discriminating against their religious freedom," Brown wrote.

"Bill 21 is in stark conflict with everything we've been taught and everything we've taught our children about who we are as a country. It's a fact that even young children in the classroom are aware of."  

Calgary city council will discuss the motion next week on whether Calgary should also contribute to the legal challenge.

Bill 21 was tabled in and adopted into law in 2019, the government of Premier François Legault used a parliamentary mechanism called closure to speed its passage.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Monday that he would not join the legal challenge against Bill 21. 

Speaking to CBC Montreal on Monday Legault said the bill was voted on democratically and was supported by the majority of Quebecers. 

"They can wear their religious sign on the street, at home, everywhere else," he said. 

With files from Scott Dippel, Jade Markus, Peter Zimonjic