Homeless for 12 years, college student now helps others trapped on the streets

 


“I see nothing but misery,” he said. “Homelessness. Violence. Fear. Drug use.”


He knows it all too well. He struggled through addiction. Struggled through homelessness for over a decade.


“I didn’t really care about nothing or anybody,” said Lennon. “Nobody really gave a crap about me.”


But he managed to pull himself out. Learned along the way how much some people care about others. 


After 12 years on the streets of Toronto, he’s now living with his girlfriend, attending George Brown College in the Community Worker Program and completing a work placement at Sanctuary Ministries.


“I didn’t panhandle or anything,” he said, referring to the time when he was on the streets. 


“I was too proud. Don’t get me wrong. I shouldn’t have been proud. But that was just kind of my way of thought.”


Lennon grew up small town Ontario. 


“Where I’m from we were taught you don’t ask anybody for nothing,” said Lennon. “You make it yourself. So unfortunately, I struggled pretty much that whole 12 years.”


With the constant fear of being attacked. Racism in the shelters. Being dirty all the time.


“Trying to find that place to shower to take care of yourself,” he said. “Most shelters, I know they’re there to help but at the same time they don’t make it easy.”


Though the streets aren’t easy either. 


“Just a big war on the street in itself,” said Lennon. 


“You’re at war with yourself when you’re on the street. You’ve got to find your inner being of who you are, where you want to be and how you’re going to get there.”


When Lennon finally did, things began to change.


He started to heal. Returned to school. But not without the help of a College sponsor.


“I’m doing it slowly but surely,” he said. “I’ve got ADD and a few small disabilities so it’s really hard for me to speak on a professional level. There’s too much street in my bones.”


And that’s what makes him the ideal outreach worker. 


On Tuesday, the 32-year-old came to the monthly homeless memorial vigil outside of the Church of Holy Trinity, wearing a large blue backpack loaded with clean socks, underwear and other necessities homeless people need to get by on the street. 


Items the rest of us take for granted.


“I have to give Toronto credit,” he said. “We do look after our own. But the homelessness situation will never change.”


Especially when governments keep telling us the money isn’t there. Keep telling us we need to cut services in order to balance budgets.


“When that can’t be farther from the truth,” he said. 


“People need to open up their eyes and take a look around. It’s a system to keep you in. And to pull yourself out of it is damn near impossible.”

Kahsatstenhsera: Indigenous Resistance to Tar Sands Pipelines

Reclaim Turtle Island released this great new video documentary on the Indigenous resistance to the pipelines. "This short documentary details contemporary Indigenous resistance to tar sands pipeline expansion, in particular the Line 9 and Energy East pipelines, which threaten the health of our territories in the northeast of Turtle Island. It includes the voices and perspectives of Dene, Wolastiqiyik, Mi’kmaq, Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee and Wet’suwet’en land defenders."


Image: Reclaim Turtle Island

Single-payer: A sustainable alternative to for-profit health insurance in the U.S.

"We apologize for the inconvenience. The Marketplace is currently undergoing regularly scheduled maintenance and will be back up Monday 10/7/3013." You read it right, 3013. That was the message on the homepage of the New York state health insurance exchange website this past weekend.


Yes, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), popularly known as Obamacare, is going through difficult birth pains, as the marketplace websites went live only to crash. The government is not giving out numbers, but informed observers speculate that very few people have succeeded in signing up for any of the plans so far.


The ACA rollout occurred as Republicans shut down the government in their attempt to defund Obamacare. But their strategy backfired. Had there been no shutdown, all of the attention would have been on the disastrous rollout. The fundamental issue, at the core of the health-care dispute, is typically ignored and goes unreported: The for-profit health-insurance industry in the United States is profoundly inefficient and costly, and a sane and sustainable alternative exists -- single-payer, otherwise known as expanded and improved Medicare for all. Just change the age of eligibility from 65 to zero.


"When Medicare was rolled out in 1966, it was rolled out in six months using index cards," Dr. Steffie Woolhandler told me Monday. "So if you have a simple system, you do not have to have all this expense and all this complexity and work." Woolhandler is professor of public health at CUNY-Hunter College and a primary-care physician. She is a visiting professor at Harvard Medical School and the co-founder of Physicians for a National Health Program, or PNHP. PNHP is an organization with 17,000 physicians as members, advocating for a single-payer health-care system in the U.S.


What is single-payer? Critics denounce it as "socialized medicine," while ignoring that single-payer is already immensely popular in the U.S., as Medicare. A 2011 Harris poll found that Medicare enjoyed 88 percent support from American adults, followed closely by Social Security. Woolhandler explained that with a Medicare-for-all system, "you would get a card the day you're born, and you'd keep it your entire life. It would entitle you to medical care, all needed medical care, without co-payments, without deductibles. And because it's such a simple system, like Social Security, there would be very low administrative expenses. We would save about $400 billion [per year]." Dr. Woolhandler went on, rather than "thousands of different plans, tons of different co-payments, deductibles and restrictions -- one single-payer plan, which is what we need for all Americans to give the Americans really the choice they want ... not the choice between insurance company A or insurance company B. They want the choice of any doctor or hospital, like you get with traditional Medicare."


Monthly premiums in most cases are expected to decrease with Obamacare's health-exchange systems, which will enhance the transparency and ease of comparison for people shopping for a health-insurance policy. If and when the technical problems are eliminated from the online health insurance exchanges, and people can easily shop, there will likely be a huge number of people buying policies for the first time. The ACA offers important advances, which even single-payer advocates acknowledge: subsidies for low-income applicants will make insurance affordable for the first time. Medicaid expansion also will bring many poor people into the umbrella of coverage. Young people can stay on their parents' insurance until the age of 26. People with so-called pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied insurance.


While the ACA was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court, the opinion gave states the option to opt out of the Medicaid expansion, which 26 states with Republican governors have done. A New York Times analysis of census data showed that up to 8 million poor people, mostly African-Americans and single mothers, and mostly in the Deep South, will be stranded without insurance, too poor to qualify for ACA subsidies, but stuck in a state that rejected Medicaid expansion.


So, while partisan bickering (between members of Congress who have among the best health and benefits packages in the U.S.) has shut down the government, the populace of the United States is still straitjacketed into a system of expensive, for-profit health insurance. We pay twice as much per capita as other industrialized countries, and have poorer health and lower life expectancy. The economic logic of single-payer is inescapable. Whether Obamacare is a pathway to get there is uncertain. As Dr. Woolhandler summed up, "It's only a road to single-payer if we fight for single-payer."


Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.


Amy Goodman is the host of Democracy Now!, a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 1,000 stations in North America. She is the co-author of The Silenced Majority, a New York Times best-seller.


Islamophobia or anti-Muslim sentiment? Uncovering the roots of anti-Muslim discourse

Recently, I watched an interview on French TV involving the controversial Muslim thinker Tariq Ramadan. The French journalist intentionally refused to use the word Islamophobia. She wrongly equated Islamophobia to one's right to criticize Islam, or its values, insinuating that Muslims have thin skins and can never accept freedom of speech (remember the controversies around the Danish cartoons or the Innocence of Muslims movie).


Personally, I never liked the word "Islamophobia" per se. It reminded me of a strange condition or a syndrome like claustrophobia or arachnophobia. The term is heavy, difficult to pronounce, and is totally ignored by the mainstream media for good or bad reasons.


While used by the European Union and in some UN publications and conferences, the term is contested and not really understood by the mainstream population.


But beyond the linguistic disagreement and philosophical debates over the term, a relevant question remains: do we have a problem with Muslims and Islam, and if yes, what are the roots of the problem?


In the October 3 issue of Maclean's, an Angus Reid poll indicates that 54 per cent of Canadians hold an unfavourable view of Islam, compared to 46 per cent in 2009. The article doesn't use the term Islamophobia but it clearly indicates that there is an anti-Muslim sentiment in Canada. Without pointing to any explicit reasons behind this sharp rise in statistics, the article alludes to the debate around the veil and the burqa, as well as to the raging debate with respect to the charter of values project in Quebec.


In his book The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims, the American author Nathan Lean supports the thesis that in the U.S. there exists a real Islamophobia industry with shareholders, products and consumers. This murky industry is well funded by anonymous donors who are sometimes exposed through lengthy and complex journalistic investigations.


Lean identifies two main stakeholders of this industry: some groups from the Christian right and few other groups from the pro-Israel right. It is interesting to note that there is often a "holy" alliance between these various groups.


Lean's book is not based on a conspiracy theory that attempts to make Muslims look like the innocent victims of a dark machination concocted by marginalized cults or a bunch of Islam haters. Instead, his book is a compilation of statistics supported by facts which demonstrate that an elaborate anti-Muslim discourse does indeed exist, and it has its active proponents and funders.


Take the example of Brigitte Gabriel and her organization, the American Congress for Truth (ACT). In 2009, this organization -- at the beginning of the anti-Sharia wave in the U.S. -- had an annual budget of $1.6 million. Gabriel's annual salary was $180,000. In a 2007 speech she delivered at the Christian United for Israel annual conference, she bluntly declared that, "the difference, my friends, between Israel and the Arab world is the difference between civilization and barbarism." Later, she explained that her words were cited out of context.


Lean writes about the Clarion Fund, a pro-Israel organization that funded movies like Obsession (very similar to the movie Fitna by Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician turned filmmaker, another big player inside this industry) or Iranium (about nuclear activity in Iran). A reporter from Salon tracked the funding of these propaganda films to Barre Seid, a wealthy Chicago businessman who is part of another obscure fund named the Donors Capital Funds. From 2007 to 2009, this fund poured "nearly $21 million into anti-Muslim causes," reports Lean.


To give the anti-Muslim industry a less foreign connotation and make it seem an ordinary and legitimate business, there is always the story of a Muslim who "escapes" a horrific childhood or a tragic civil war and then becomes a fierce criticizer of the Islamic faith and its adherents. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the perfect example of this character. Hirsi Ali grew up as a Muslim but later renounced her faith and became a convinced atheist. She has been "recycled," immediately after her expulsion from the Netherlands, by a right-wing think-tank, the American Enterprise Institute. Hirsi Ali became an eloquent spokesperson for their ideas and agenda.


Another sort of character in this industry is the "good Muslim" (to use the same language of Mahmood Mamdani's "good Muslims and bad Muslims"), typically a smart and well-educated professional who would play the role of the "native informant" by approving all the information relied upon by the anti-Muslim camp. For instance, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser in the U.S. plays this role extremely well. "We've surrendered the Constitution to the jihadists," he testified at the infamous hearing, compared by many as a new Inquisition, on radical Islam initiated by the U.S. Congressman Peter King in 2010.


Some of the many deeper reasons underneath this anti-Muslim propaganda are to maintain a constant climate of fear where it becomes simpler for governments to introduce tighter security measures and legislations. Muslim issues became more and more easily used wedge politics to gain in the polls and distract people's attention from real economic and social problems. Maintaining an anti-Muslim discourse, where the Muslim is identified as the enemy, is also profitable for the arms industry and for many war supporters (Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen). Moreover, for some Israeli settlers' groups, drawing parallels between Islamic terrorism as an ideology and the Palestinians' struggle to regain their rights, is certainly a way to justify their illegal occupation of the lands within public opinion.


In Canada, similar voices, organizations, characters and messages are conveyed to the general population. The debate around the veil or the burqa is not the real culprit behind the sharp rise in anti-Muslim "sentiments"; it is rather the symptom of a tense climate that is poisoned on a daily basis by an industry that is not easily identifiable. This industry has nefarious objectives with unspoken motives and interests to protect that sometimes travel far beyond our borders.


Nathan Lean will be speaking in Toronto on October 26 as part of a panel discussion titled "Fostering Fear: Examining the Roots of Anti-Muslim Discourse," with Doug Saunders, author of The Myth of the Muslim Tide. For information and tickets, go to: http://fosteringfear.eventbrite.ca/


Monia Mazigh was born and raised in Tunisia and immigrated to Canada in 1991. Mazigh was catapulted onto the public stage in 2002 when her husband, Maher Arar, was deported to Syria where he was tortured and held without charge for over a year. She campaigned tirelessly for his release. Mazigh holds a PhD in finance from McGill University. In 2008, she published a memoir, Hope and Despair, about her pursuit of justice, and in 2011, a novel in French, Miroirs et mirages.