UPDATED: Would You Hug A Terrorist?

There is no question that here in the West, we like to treat death almost as an embarrassment; we sanitize it, hide it away in hospitals and palliative care units, and conduct our lives with a kind of cognitive dissonance, believing on some level that while it happens to others, somehow an exception will be made in our case.

Not for us the graphic horror of many deaths: severed limbs, exposed entrails, torrents of blood. One need only look at how photos of the Boston Marathon victims were doctored to realize the truth of our aversions.

Unfortunately, in the many war-torn areas of our fractured world, especially the Middle East, people do not have that option. Their lives are often a daily series of bombardments shattering their communities and their lives that cannot withstand even the greatest efforts at denial.

Why are we so isolated from their suffering, their maiming, their deaths? Modern technology, of course, allows countries like ours to attack from a distance, using drones, long-range missiles, etc., the resulting images just fuzzy war-video game images that are broadcast to us. It is all too easy to dissociate from real life and its deadly consequences.

Fortunately, there is a movement entitled Hug A Terrorist that is seeking to combat the depersonalization that permits us to accept obscene terms such as 'collateral damage' with equanimity. It was started last summer by two Palestinian-Syrian girls as a response to the carnage in Gaza to show that the people who are labelled terrorists are often just innocent, ordinary people, many of them mere children:



Yesterday, McMaster University in Hamilton hosted an event inspired by that video. You can click here to watch the news report.

While it garnered widespread support, there were those who objected to it, such as local Harper MP David Sweet, who tweeted that he agreed with [the]sentiments ... [but] considered the campaign "outrageous and poorly timed."

Others felt even more strongly:

[A] handful of other Mac students watched the activity. Wearing a yarmulke, 3rd-year student Zach Harris said he thought the campaign made light of terrorism.

"It belittles the word," he said.

Another nearby student, Sarah Kohanzadeh, said she thought students passing by were uncomfortable with the campaign.

Neither Harris nor Kohanzadeh went across the hall to talk with the pro-Palestinian students, they said. Both of them belong to the university's Israel on Campus group, but said they were watching the campaign in the Student Centre independently of the group.

"We're trying to stay low," Kohanzadeh said.

Jacob Klugsberg, a 4th year student, said he found the campaign offensive in using the concept of terrorism "ironically or in a joking way." He said he did walk across the hall to talk. He said he hopes the campus can be a place where discussions happen to move toward "lasting peace."

Happily, unlike in the 'real world,' disagreements did not devolve into violence.

UPDATE: Ira Rosen, of the Hamilton Jewish Federation Public Relations Committee, takes grave exception to the event:

This stunt is morally reprehensible and deeply offensive and casts the very real human suffering caused by terrorists as a joke. It is an insult to the memory of Canadians, indeed to all people, who have fought and died at the hands of terrorists.

You can read his full response here.

Some Inspiration From Kevin Page - UPDATED

There is an excellent piece in this morning's Star by outgoing Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page. In it, he talks about how his son's death was the catalyst for his abandoning a natural desire for job security and his subsequent pursuit of the job which has incurred so much Harper wrath while at the same time endearing him to millions of Canadians. Unfortunately, the piece seems to be only in the print edition, but should it become available online, I will provide a link.

At the end of his article, Page urges all of us to write to our M.P. and let them know how they feel about the government's purposeful and myriad efforts at concealing information essential to a healthy democracy and informed Parliamentary debate. Inspired by his words, I have sent off an email to my Conservative M.P. David Sweet. I reproduce it below. If you find any part of it useful, feel free to use it in your own communications with your representative:

Dear Mr. Sweet,

Having read outgoing Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page's column in this morning's Star, I have decided to take his advice and write to you. As his five-year tenure made abundantly clear, your government has consistently betrayed its commitment to openness and transparency in a number of ways, not the least being its refusal to provide the kind of financial information to Parliament that would have allowed for a full and informed debate and evaluation of government policies. While examples abound, the true costs of the F-35 fighter jets and details on how the government will meet its deficit-fighting targets are but two. A true democracy does not conceal information as a kind of precious commodity to be guarded at all costs.

I have written to you several times in the past, not so much with the expectation that my words would in any way influence you or your government but rather to make you aware that there are many who oppose Mr. Harper's policies in general and your constituency representation in particular. I am writing now to ask you to look within and ask yourself why you went into politics in the first place. Have the goals, methodology, and policies of your government, which have done so much to impair democracy and disaffect so many citizens from its processes, been consonant with your original purpose?

If they have not, then I call upon you to try find the kind of moral courage shown by people like Mr. Page and the former head of Statistics Canada, Munir Sheikh, and do the right thing by speaking out for the needs of Canada and not just your party's narrow interests.

I know that what I am asking is not easy, but I firmly believe that the future of this country depends upon M.P.s who are willing to risk their careers for the betterment of all citizens. Otherwise, our democracy will continue its descent into a sad parody of what it once was.

Sincerely,

Lorne Warwick

UPDATE: Kevin Page's article is now available on the Star's website.

My Letter To My Tory M.P.

As mentioned in my previous post, the Harper Conservatives are starting to receive 'blowback' as a result of their heavy-handed and undemocratic push of Bill C-38, their budget omnibus bill. Now would seem to be a propitious time to express how we feel about M.P.s whose fealty to 'Dear Leader' renders impossible any meaningful representation of their constituents.

Here is my letter to David Sweet, the M.P. for the riding of Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale.

Dear Mr. Sweet:

I am writing to express my deep dissatisfaction with your government in general and your constituency representation in particular.

Being part of three protests near your constituency office has been an educational experience for all involved. High on the hill overlooking Dundas, inaccessible by public transit, your choice of location seems symbolically apt for the distant and disdainful view that Harper Conservatives hold 'for the people.' Coupled with your office's hiding behind the property manager's 'no trespassing' edict and the engagement of the local police to prevent a direct democratic expression of displeasure makes your separation and isolation complete.

Your party, by facilely dismissing all criticism and countervailing views as the work of fear mongers or the result of foreign influences, makes your disdain for democracy palpable. Claiming to hold the only truth worth holding is to have the evangelical fervour of the fanatical. To dismiss the concerns of your constituents as you blithely mouth the party line is to show your contempt for those you pretend to represent.

I speak for many others when I say that I shall work very hard to defeat you in the next election. However, given that it is three years in the future, I and many others will spend the intervening time informing, educating, and persuading our fellow Canadians to reengage in the political process so that by 2015, more than your 'true believers' will show up at the polls, and with any luck, your government will be recognized for what it is.

Sincerely,

Lorne Warwick

It's Time To Show Some National Self-Respect

When I was a child, I was afraid of many people: my teachers, who believed in strapping and slapping us as early as Grade One, school bullies who periodically picked on me, and some of the thuggish people residing in my working-class neighbourhood who enjoyed verbally assaulting those even more powerless than themselves.

It didn't occur all at once, but gradually, as I got older, whatever was in my personality that encouraged easy victimhood changed, and I started to assert myself as an individual. And over the years I have discovered that although my battles are not always won, there are clear and healthy psychological benefits in refusing to adopt a passive acceptance of the injustices and indignities the world can offer. Sometimes there are victories to be savored which can be particularly sweet.

It is therefore difficult for me to watch so many of my fellow Canadians wearing personae of passivity, indifference, and helplessness in response to the national bullying that is the defining characteristic of the Harper regime, the arrogant thrusting through of the budget omnibus bill just the latest example. Far too many of us are content to allow our video games, our smart phones and our sundry other diversions to narcotize and infantilize us while the country we love is being radically altered by a government that respects neither its constituents nor the values that define us as a nation.

It is time for everyone to grow up.

A story in yesterday's Globe suggests that Harper's latest assault on democracy could prove to be a costly one for his government, as Tory M.P's are hearing from constituents loudly complaining over thuggish tactics to pass a budget bill that includes far too many non-budgetary items, many of which, for example, pertain to the weakening and, in many cases, the dismantling of environmental protections and oversights.

Now is the time to communicate volubly and voluminously our displeasure.

Now is the time to begin the long process of reclaiming our democracy and educating ourselves to the perils it faces.

Now is the time to start mobilizing our opposition to this regime so that 2015 does not repeat recent history.

I have an out-of-town-commitment today, but in my next post, I hope to have composed a letter to my M.P. David Sweet, putting him on notice by expressing some of the things I have discussed above.

Another Event That Conservative M.P. David Sweet Will Not Attend

For those living in my neck of the woods, the following may be of interest. Unfortunately, due to a prior commitment, I can't attend. And, although it will come as no surprise except perhaps to the naive or politically ignorant, neither will my M.P., Conservative David Sweet, a decision his sycophantic followers no doubt concur with:

The following is the message about the Bill C-38 Public Forum tomorrow:

You have heard a lot about Bill C-38 (Federal Budget Implementation Act) over the past few days.

If you want to learn more about this Trojan Horse Bill please plan to attend a Public Forum which has been planned for this Saturday.

What: Public Forum on Bill C-38

When: Saturday, June 16, 2012

Time: 1:00 to 3:00 p.m.

Where: Dundas Town Hall Auditorium, 60 Main Street, Dundas. There is an elevator at the back for people who want it.

Speakers: Representatives of the Liberal Party, Green Party and the NDP. David Sweet was invited but he has declined the invitation and is not sending a representative. (my italics)

This is an opportunity to hear from our elected representatives and other party candidates what this budget implementation bill is really about.

Bring your questions and concerns.

Please bring your family, friends and neighbours. This is a community event organized by 10 community organizations working together to raise public awareness about Bill C-38.

An Independent M.P. Condemns Harper Omnibus Bill

I was just reading my weekly community paper, and my M.P., the disingenuous David Sweet, indulges in a debasement of language befitting Orwell's 1984. For example, despite the tremendous havoc the Harper omnibus bill will wreak on environmental protection, Sweet says that under Bill C-38, "environmental initiatives will not be diminished at all."

A refreshing contrast to this gross distortion of the truth is offered by Bruce Hyer, the independent M.P. for Thunder Bay. In a Huffington Post article, he provides a very lucid and readable analysis of some of the bill's most devastating effects out of which a clear pattern of the Harper agenda emerges.

Let's hope that some day, in a future that is now difficult to imagine, the majority of our elected representatives will respect language, not abuse it with their politically expedient lies.

Sign, Sign, Everywhere a Sign

A few pictures and signs from last night's protest near Conservative M.P David Sweet's constituency office. As in the previous protest against Bill C- 38, we were prevented from demonstrating in front of his office by the Hamilton Police, on orders from the property owner, Kevin Vanderlaan (IPC Investments).

A few of us arrived early before being ordered off the property by the police.

A camera-shy Hamilton police sergeant.

Stoically standing on guard protecting private property rights?

This final sign, I think, reflects the view of many of Mr. Sweet's constituents.

Another Failure of the Press

I had an experience yesterday that served only to deepen my cynicism about the mainstream press (The Toronto Star being the sole exception). I called The Hamilton Spectator's Stephanie Crozier to suggest that her story about Friday's protest at the constituency office of my Conservative M.P., David Sweet, had overlooked an important element, the fact that a No Trespass sign had been erected at the entrance to the strip mall housing Mr. Sweet's office.

She told me that she didn't see how that was newsworthy. I tried to point out to her that it was a violation of our fundamental rights as citizens of a democracy, and that the kind of gated community mentality represented by the sign was perhaps also indicative of a deeper problem with what is happening in this country under Harper.

Her response was that the interdiction seemed reasonable, given that the owner's property had allegedly suffered some damage to plants some time ago. She had not pressed him on whether this damage had been caused by an individual or a group. As well, she had spoken to Sweet's office manager, who had stayed behind a locked constituency door during the protest, despite the fact that it was supposed to be open to constituents. Again, she saw this as perfectly reasonable.

While she was pleasant and cordial enough in our telephone discussion, I got the distinct impression as we ended our conversation that she had pegged me as some sort of crank.

Why am I even bothering to write about this? Is my ego so fragile that I cannot accept that my view did not hold sway over her? Not at all. It's just that when one remembers that a free press used to be regarded as a mainstay in protecting our democracy, it is yet another reminder of how debased our fragile democracy has become, and that the press has done little to mitigate that slide.

Another Way To Fight Omnibus Bill C-38

I received the following from one of the people I was protesting with the other day near Conservative M.P. David Sweet's constituency office. It offers yet another tool in the fight against Haper's undemocratic push to remake Canada in his image:

I know many of you are upset and outraged about the 2012 Budget Bill that Harper is trying to slam through parliament with his majority. Here is one quick little step you can take to help stop the Bill being passed - take away his majority! There were 7 Conservative MPs who missed the final budget vote earlier this year for a number of reasons, let's convince them again!

Action #20: Here is the set of seven Conservative MPs. Please email them and ask that they "call in sick" on the day of the final budget vote. It will only take a few minutes of your time. Please feel free to pass this along to encourage others to participate.

1. Michael Chong: michael.chong@parl.gc.ca

2. Joe Daniel: Joe.Daniel@parl.gc.ca

3. Barry Devolin: barry.devolin@parl.gc.ca

4. John Duncan: john.duncan@parl.gc.ca

5. Rick Dykstra: rick.dykstra@parl.gc.ca

6. Kerry-Lynne Findlay: Kerry-Lynne.Findlay@parl.gc.ca

7. Diane Finley: diane.finley@parl.gc.ca

Here are two possibilities for the text of the email:

Dear Honourable XXX,

I am emailing you to respectfully ask that you not participate in the upcoming budget vote -- call in sick instead. The process of including legislation in the budget bill circumvents our democratic process and makes a farce of our democracy. The erosion of democracy and citizens rights bit by bit leads ultimately to a dictatorial system. If the changes to environmental legislation are legitimate and have merit, then they will be able to withstand scrutiny in the house, in the press and in the minds of the people. Please defend our democracy and insist that this budget bill be divided up appropriately.

'Lest we forget' Hundreds of thousands of Canadian men and women have lost their lives in two world wars to protect our democracy. Think of their sacrifice.

Sincerely,

OR

Dear Honourable XXX,

I am emailing you to respectfully ask that you not participate in the upcoming budget vote -- call in sick instead. The gutting of 50 years of environmental legislation will have profound implications for the health and safety of Canadians, who are growing increasingly concerned about Budget 2012. If the changes to environmental legislation are legitimate and have merit, then they will be able to withstand scrutiny in a bill of their own. Please defend our democracy and insist that this budget be broken up into manageable bills.

Sincerely,

Gated Democracy? - Protesting The Harper Omnibus Budget Bill - Part 2

Yesterday I got a glimpse of the kind of democratic expression that is considered acceptable under the Harper regime. It is one that I found profoundly disturbing.

Almost a week ago I wrote a post describing a march organized by Leadnow.ca to the constituency office of my Conservative M.P., David Sweet. Yesterday, another demonstration to protest Bill C-38, the Harper budget omnibus bill, took place, this one organized by the local chapter of the Council of Canadians and joined by a variety of groups and individuals.

Despite the short notice, this march from downtown Dundas up to Mr. Sweet's office in Greensville was well-attended, and I was very pleased by the healthy presence of young Canadians, each participant bound by a deep concern for the dark road Stephen Harper and his acolytes are leading us down.

However, young and old alike were in for an unpleasant surprise upon arrival at our destination. We were met with a No Trespassing sign at the entrance to the strip mall housing Sweet's constituency office, an interdiction authorized by the property owner, IPC Investments, we were told.

Not one to be satisfied with such an expedient and un-Canadian dismissal of democracy, I ventured onto the property to ask for the owner. Flanked by four Hamilton police officers (all of whom, I must say, discharged their perceived duties in a very professional and non-confrontational manner), I spoke to the owner, who refused to give his name. (I later learned his identity, but it seems pointless to give it here, as I suspect his is an attitude endemic in Harperland.)

I asked him why we were being denied access to the office of our M.P., and he told me it was private property. When I persisted in my questions, he said there had been an incident of property destruction a couple of months ago, at which point the officer told him he didn't have to answer my questions. Interestingly, a lawyer who was in attendance later contacted the property owner who "alleged that people in the past had caused damage by breaking foliage and walking on plants," none of which was in evidence in this concreted and rather sterile-looking strip mall.

Thus literally relegated to the street (also an apt metaphor for where this battle must be fought), many of the attendees spoke eloquently about their concerns over the omnibus bill. Representatives from labour, the environment, poverty and political action groups, as well as former politicians and individuals, all united by their love of this country and their compassion for its members, offered moving perspectives on the dangers inherent in the Harper push to fundamentally alter the values and traditions that I would like to think the majority of Canadians hold dear.

Many of yesterday's attendees were veterans of the battles to safeguard those values, maintain our democratic rights, and hold our politicians accountable to those they were elected to represent and serve. Many others were young and just beginning to take up those battles, but all were united in their passion and their determination to fight for the things truly worth fighting for in this life.

It is this spirit that the Harper regime can never really understand. It is this spirit that Harper and his followers would love to crush. But it is also this spirit that, as both history and contemporary world events amply demonstrate, is the one aspect of humanity that is truly invincible, and will never die.

A Short But Not So Sweet Letter

Here is a copy of the letter that I just fired off to my Conservative Member of Parliament, David Sweet:

Dear Mr. Sweet,

Although I am sure you are only too aware of the hypocrisy involved, it seems more than passing strange that your government should suddenly cancel the Katimavik program, leaving in the lurch young people who had opted for the program over university next fall (http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1166033--young-canadians-in-limbo-after-conservatives-cancel-katimavik ), ostensibly in the name of austerity, while your International Development Minister, Bev Oda, has no compunction about profligately spending the taxpayers’ money for her own comfort (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/23/bev-oda-savoy-hotel_n_1444818.html?ref=canada).

Any thoughts on the matter, or should I just rely on the usual spin your government puts on all of its embarrassments?

Sincerely,

Lorne Warwick

There's No Business Like Snow Business

When I was young, there used to be a polite term for B.S. We called it a snow job, and that seems as apt a description as any of the latest Harper government capitulation to the cancerous tentacles of unfettered capitalism running virtually unchecked throughout this country thanks to our 'leader's' diseased love of all things corporate.

As I wrote last evening, despite the fact that U.S. Steel lost its appeal against the federal government, it is essentially getting a free pass for its Hamilton operation by promising to keep the plant going until 2015 and promising capital investments of $50 million by the end of that time. Of course, for those able to think critically and not simply trust to the magnanimity of a company that already betrayed its employment promises and locked out its workers for almost a year after it was given permission to buy the former Stelco, these promises mean nothing.

The failure of the Harper government to show any integrity in attempting to put the force of law behind foreign takeover promises does mean something, however, to those affected by this sell-out.

Consider the following:

Opposition politicians and workers: outraged by a deal they say contains no specifics on employment or production in Canada and offers nothing to workers harmed by the company’s failure to keep its original promises.

Leaders of the United Steel Workers: “blindsided” by the deal, even though they have intervener status in the action to seek back wages its members would have earned under the company’s original promise to employ an average of 3,105 workers for three years after purchasing Stelco.

“We didn’t know any of this was going to happen and yet we’re the ones affected by their failure to live up to their promises,” said Rolf Gerstenberger, president of Local 1005, which represents workers in Hamilton. “Where’s our redress now? Our members were unjustly laid off and they should be made whole.”

Bill Ferguson, president of Nanticoke’s Local 8782: “incomprehensible” for the government to drop the case without ensuring workers got some kind of compensation.

“We are shocked that our government has cut this secret deal, without even the decency of consulting those who are most affected,” he added. “Our communities and our working families — particularly those whose jobs have disappeared — have been abandoned by U.S. Steel, and now our own government.”

Ken Neumann, Canadian director of USW: “This is a complete abdication of the government’s responsibility to Canadian workers,” he said. “It’s just outrageous that we have no commitment to jobs now.”

Local MPs Wayne Marston and Chris Charlton, both of the NDP, said they were troubled by utter lack of detail in the settlement announcement.

“The government is dropping this lawsuit in exchange for more promises after taking the company to court for not keeping its promises in the first place,” Charlton said. “For all we know this just allows the company to fatten the calf for three years and then sell it.”

Of course, the Harper government's local cheerleader, M.P. David Sweet, a practising Christian blithely untroubled by anything his government does, even its export of death, I mean asbestos, to third-world countries, described the capitulation “as an “extraordinary” achievement that ensures steel production in Hamilton through the next three years.

“By agreeing to this (U.S. Steel) has indicated that they are here for the long term,” he said. “Agreeing to invest that kind of money sends a very positive signal that they are here for the long term.”

And of course, with the current band of renegades holding the reins of power federally, the voices and opinions of Mr. Sweet and his ilk are the only ones that matter here, aren't they?

David Sweet's Video Appearance

While Conservative M.P. David Sweet is coming under criticism after his appearance in a video honouring James Hubley, a gay teen who was bullied before his suicide, I have a different interpretation of his participation which I am sure many will disagree with (which is fine, by the way).

I gather that the controversy surrounding Sweet stems from the fact that he has previously expressed his religious view that homosexuality is unacceptable in the eyes of God. Now, everyone wants him to clarify his position, implying that his appearance in the video is either hypocritical or politically opportunistic.

I see it differently. Despite the 'gottcha' mentality that now pervades our society and which is probably at the root of much of this ado, I see his appearance in the video not as a negative event, but as a positive one. Casting aside for the moment my usual cynicism, I can't help but think that his decision to participate was done after some significant soul-searching, and marks a brave choice for a member of a party whose constituents are often angry, intolerant and dismissive of concepts such as differing sexual orientations.

So for me, David Sweet, even though he refuses to discuss the issue further, has made a moral choice that transcends both party affiliation and religious beliefs. And for that, I commend him.

A Reminder to My MP

I am a great believer in holding our politicians to account. Even though they may prove to be ultimately meaningless gestures, letters to our elected representatives at the very least remind them that their opposition is not simply going to give up and accept the atrocities they commit in our names.

The following is the latest letter I sent to my Member of Parliament, David Sweet:

Dear Mr. Sweet,

Given your government’s refusal to end the export of asbestos, and given the fact that your government was the sole nation to oppose the labeling of asbestos as a toxic substance under Annex 111 of the Rotterdam Convention which would have required the inclusion of explicit instructions in the handling of this deadly material, perhaps you can prevail upon your leader to include the following with all subsequent shipments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jifoNSXvTuQ

At the very least, the inhabitants of countries like India should know the future that awaits them, thanks to your government’s insistence on elevating economics over morality and human decency.

Sincerely,
Lorne Warwick

Please sign this petition urging Prime Minister Harper to stop threatening Michaela Keyserlingk and to stop exporting asbestos.

The Asbestos Wars – My Response To The Position Of My Conservative MP

Given Canada's unconscionable ongoing export of death (i.e., asbestos) and given that it is back in the media spotlight thanks to the brave efforts of Michaela Keyserlingk, about whom I wrote a brief posting yesterday, now seems a propitious moment to post the response I wrote to my Member of Parliament, David Sweet, on June 20th of this year, after he responded to my expression of concern calling for the termination of this deadly practice.

While I never publish emails that I have received, as I feel they are private communication between me and the other party, I don't see anything improper about posting my response to such communication.

Here it is:

Dear Mr. Sweet,

Thank you for your reply to the concerns I expressed regarding the ongoing export of chrysotile and the request that Canada join the United Nation in banning its production and export. While I appreciate that over the years you have always made an effort to respond to matters I have written to you about, I find that I must take issue about your and your Government's cavalier attitude toward asbestos.

In you response, you cite that the well-documented lethal impact of asbestos use is the result of past mishandling, and that Canada promotes the safe handling and use of this deadly product. Putting aside the fact that asbestos has been removed from Canadian buildings since its deadly nature was understood, I have to wonder whether you and your Government are indulging in either a form of sophistry or self-delusion when you imply that countries such as India, which regularly use this product, are going to handle it in a manner that will ensure the safety of its workers.

Despite the fact that India is an emerging economic powerhouse, it still is, even by the most generous of criteria, a developing country that is well-known for its willingness to exploit the labour of men, women, and children in the most dangerous of situations, not unlike the practices
cultivated in the West as the Industrial Revolution took hold. So by instructing upon the safe use of asbestos, you may have discharged your legal obligation, but not your moral one.

By all accounts you are a good person, one who embraces the tenets of Christianity. I urge you to consider the central message of that religion, as espoused by Christ: to love and honour God through caring for our fellow human beings, a commission that is often so very hard to adhere to, even in the best of times.

I realize that once a decision is made, the caucus must speak with one voice. I guess the question that I leave you to consider is this: have you, both in your capacity as the people's representative and as the chair of the Commons Industry, Science and Technology Committee, done everything possible to follow what your heart tells you is the right thing to do on this issue?

Please sign this petition urging Prime Minister Harper to stop threatening Michaela Keyserlingk and to stop exporting asbestos.