What’s Going On? Human Rights and the Quandary of Exceptions

I found him.

First row, seated, third from the right.

My grandfather, in his third-year engineering class photo, the University of Manitoba. 1932.

Steadfast gaze, feet planted firmly on the ground, in a suit, wearing a tie, and a knitted sweater peeking through the jacket lapels in the black and white of long ago. His right hand lies on his knee with the left hand on top of it, but not fully. As if in the moment that the photographer engaged the shutter, my grandfather shifted and the fingers of his left-hand slipped off in an uncharacteristic moment of distraction.

My grandfather, a significant presence in my childhood, was a serious man and based on the image in this photo, he was a serious young man, too.

As I gaze back at the image of this man that I knew and didn’t know, I wonder if he has any inkling of the life ahead of him. Of living in Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine. Of moving after graduation and returning to the region he had left in 1927 to join other members of the family who had settled in Brandon, Manitoba a decade or two earlier.

Palestine. Where he and his family, his wife and young children, would be forced to leave Haifa in 1948 in the great displacement of that era. The Nakba.

The first displacement of many for my grandfather. Driven out of Haifa in 1948, driven out of Beirut after the start of the Lebanese civil war in 1974, and forced to endure occupation for a time in the early 1980s while living in our ancestral village of Karoun in the Bekaa Valley.

My original intent had not been to reach out to the University of Manitoba archives to see if they could help me track down information about my grandfather as a young university undergrad.

My principal reason for making the trip to Winnipeg was to visit the Canadian Museum for Human Rights (CMHR) and specifically to visit their most recent exhibit, Palestine Uprooted: Nakba Past and Present (Uprooted).

Why?

Given the opportunity, privilege, and resources, the question is why not?

City skyline featuring a building of stone and glass in a spherical shape

Canadian Museum of Human Rights, Winnipeg, Manitoba

I hadn’t pursued the chance to visit Winnipeg and the CMHR after it opened in 2014, but I was propelled to do so now by the outcry against the Uprooted exhibit.

An outcry that just didn’t make sense to me, just as the punitive actions of those claiming a connection to the museum that followed the exhibit’s opening didn’t make sense to me either. That donors would withdraw their support and a board member resign because of an exhibit they claimed did not measure up to the standards and the values the museum purports to uphold. An exhibit that in my mind was topical, relevant, and necessary given the reality of the carnage that has unfolded since October 2023.

Mainstream media has also jumped on the bandwagon of disapprobation about Uprooted. The morning of my visit to the CMHR on August 26, 2026, the Globe & Mail published an article that was clearly designed to foment questions about CEO Isha Khan’s governance style rather than questioning the actions of those who have opposed an exhibit that speaks to a factual and ongoing historical reality.

A lived reality for so many including my grandfather who was living in Palestine in 1948. He was forced, in the face of unfolding terror, to abandon his home, his career, and all he had contributed to the community as a civil engineer during his time in Palestine.

I had to see the exhibit for myself.

To judge whether my feelings about the reactions to the exhibit were coming from my personal connection to the topic or whether the dismay that others were expressing was as irrational as it appeared to be from a distance or whether the opposition was warranted.

The exhibit, the one that has fuelled such outrage, is surprisingly small. It has been carefully and judiciously curated. Looking at the space that the exhibit occupies, my bewilderment grew. How could an exhibit that was so restrained be subjected to such manufactured contention when in fact it perfectly aligns with the stated objective, mission, and mandate of the CMHR, a national Canadian public institution that belongs to all Canadians?

The CMHR invites guests into its galleries with a question: What Are Human Rights?

The explanatory text the museum provides reads as follows:

Throughout history, people have grappled with ideas about human dignity, respect and responsibility. Today the term “human rights” generally refers to the rights and freedoms we have simply because we are human. It’s an idea thousands of years in the making.

“Simply because we are human.”

And the truth is that although this may be “an idea thousands of years in the making” it is a concept that is continually under threat and the experiences of people around the world do not equally reflect the ideals of rights and freedoms for all.

Elsewhere in the museum, there is another principle that is highlighted on plaques and banners including a banner that drops down a considerable vertical height, and which visitors can see from multiple vantage points. The plaques and the banner present an excerpt from Article 1 of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights and states simply and directly: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

“All human beings.” Not some human beings. All human beings.

Black banner with white text that drops down two levels of a building with a statement about human rights.

Excerpt from Article 1 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The preferred storytelling method at the CMHR is to showcase the voices of people affected by situations that have contravened their freedoms, denied their dignity, and negated their rights including the right to peace and security let alone rights such as shelter, food, and clean water.

These voices make the abstract harm of different eras, times, and locations real. As do the many personal effects that capture the losses, the grief, the tragedy of being expelled from one’s home, being driven out of one’s land, and, more fundamentally, being denied one’s humanity.

That’s why Uprooted has raised such a commotion. In capturing the voices of Palestinians who can demonstrate their material losses as well as the moral, intellectual, and physical harms that they have suffered, people from across the world who visit the CMHR, or those who visit virtually, gain insight into what it means for a human being, for a family, for a community to lose everything.

Such insights play a critical role in shifting narratives and shifting narratives always, always, always poses a threat to power and authority. It undermines the ability to control telling a story in only one way and from only one perspective. It encourages folks to ask why instead of insisting that they accept a position without question.

In Uprooted, for example, there is a short video of a Palestinian Canadian woman telling the story of her family. She holds the key to her ancestral home and talks about what it means to hold on to such a key through seventy-five years of occupation. A key to a home she can no longer visit and to which she is forbidden to return.

Watching the short video in the display, I was overcome with the uncanny feeling of deep understanding and identification. I know what she was talking about. I know that it’s not a lie. I know that is not an imagined harm. I know all that because my grandmother had such a key hanging on the wall in our family home in Karoun, Lebanon. It was the key to her home in Haifa, the home she had to leave behind, the home she dreamed of seeing again.

She never did see that home again.

I understood and identified with the testimony of the witness in the Uprooted video because during a 2019 visit to Jerusalem, a family friend drove us by his grandfather’s house — his mother’s family home — a home that his mother and her siblings grew up in, a home that they cannot even get near let allow claim. They are in their nineties.

But when a narrative is based on the dehumanization of a subject anything that humanizes that subject is a threat. Making human stories real through first-person accounts opens the space for individual critical thinking, and it opens doubt about single-sided narratives that have been constructed and disseminated for so long.

Does the museum deserve the punishing withdrawal of support including criticism from a federal government minister because of Uprooted? No.

Does the museum deserve accolades for seeing all humans as equal and for telling the stories of those whose freedom and rights have been and continue to be questioned, challenged, and undermined to support apartheid, occupation, and genocide? Yes.

Rather than a dereliction of duty, the CMHR and its leadership team have fulfilled the terms of their mandate with honour, compassion, and integrity.

So, what are my next steps?

Encouraging others to visit the museum, to see the exhibit, among all the other exhibits, and to sit with questions about the need for the exhibit, the reason it’s created such controversy, and the role each of us plays in working towards justice.

Museum display panel with photograph and text.

A display panel from the CMHR Palestine Uprooted exhibit

To stand up for curatorial independence and freedom for interference that insists on perpetuating one narrative above all others.

Asking folks, within their means, to donate to the museum.

And that’s what I’ll be doing. I’ll be talking to my family and seeing what steps we can take, in the tradition of philanthropy that my parents have instilled in us, to support the work of the CMHR to tell stories — without dictating or tying our support to having only certain stories told or advocating for certain stories to be withheld.

And even though so much of my grandfather’s story is lost to time, I hope that in this way our family will help to ensure that other stories are recorded and shared so that instead of perpetuating injustices we can use the power of such narrative storytelling to uphold the principle that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

To David Eby: These Conversations Must Continue

I was invited on Tuesday morning on to do a CBC Radio studio interview. The invitation was extended because of an email I had sent objecting to the framing of the reaction to Ms. Robinson’s hateful rhetoric as the Muslim community’s issue with her remarks.

I had also published a blog post demanding Ms. Robinson’s resignation, which I believe was another reason the show asked me to appear. Once the news broke that Ms. Robinson had resigned from cabinet, CBC Radio uninvited me. I was told the show’s producers had decided to pivot to another angle.

I’m not going to question the merit of the show’s decision although I was disappointed to lose the opportunity to contribute to a broader public conversation.

Since I was denied the opportunity to share my thoughts on air, I would like to take the time to share a few of my thoughts with you here.

There are three points I’d like to bring to your attention:

1. Ms. Robinson is out of cabinet, but it took a significant amount of community action, a lot of protest, and a general sense of alarm for you, David Eby, to act. It took too long.

What the delay indicates to me, is that there’s a lot of work that you need to do on your own education regarding Palestinian history, the grave injustices that have marked the last 75 years of occupation, and the terrible human cost that we are witnessing every moment of every day.

Ms. Robinson’s resignation, this one outcome, cannot be seen as an ending. It’s just the start of a process in rediscovering empathy, enhancing understanding, and recognizing the value of Palestinian lives, past, present, and future.

2. Ms. Robinson has held the portfolio as Minister of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills for a while now. Given that her remarks have now exposed her ideological biases, it’s essential for you to investigate the decisions she has made while in that position to ensure that racism and Islamophobia did not play a part in any policy or operational decision that she initiated, made, and implemented.

3. The issue of what is happening in Palestine, both in Gaza and throughout the West Bank, is greater than whether Ms. Robinson has left cabinet. As such, these conversations must continue, and the dialogue can’t just be about pivoting to discuss the fact that Ms. Robinson is no longer a Minister and what that means for you, your government, and your re-election prospects.

Victoria Parliament Buildings - © ReemaFaris.com

BC Legislature, Victoria, BC

Oh, and one more thing before I go.

Those attempting to excuse Ms. Robinson’s remarks as a mistake, or those attacking the individuals demanding her resignation, are wrong. Ms. Robinson’s remarks were not a mistake, and she is not the subject of a vendetta.

People reacted to the evidence of her ingrained beliefs, a revelation to some and for those who have been following the breadcrumbs on her social media trail, a confirmation of a deeply unsettling behaviour pattern.

As I drove to work on Tuesday, anticipating that the invitation I had received earlier that morning would be withdrawn if your afternoon announcement included the news of Ms. Robinson’s resignation, I listened to the noon show on CBC.

The host read an email from a listener who explained her contention that Ms. Robinson did not need to resign by writing that all humans are equal.

That’s precisely the point. All humans are equal and as such deserve the rights and dignities afforded to people such as Ms. Robinson, the email writer herself, and you. Palestinians are humans, too, and nothing is more important at this time then advocating for their right to live in peace and to act when others treat them as disposable, erase them from history, and deny the truth of their existence.

To Selina Robinson: Resign Now

How dare you Selina Robinson!

How dare you take one part of history to erase another!

Do you know how clearly you’ve demonstrated your own ignorance by spouting the hateful rhetoric that Palestine was “a crappy piece of land with nothing on it”?

How dare you annihilate the memory, lives, and legacies of “several hundred thousand people” with a shrug of your shoulders as if they were no more than a few motes of dust to brush off the sleeve of your jacket!

How dare you assert that the land of Palestine was there for colonial powers to offer up to others as a plum reward! As if it were their right to give away land they had forcibly occupied. To treat the land as a token that they could forfeit in a high stakes’ poker game.

Do you even know that Zionist leaders considered other parts of the world before settling on Palestine as the one that was theirs to seize as a homeland?

How dare you deny the history and experience of people such as my grandfather and grandmother! They had productive lives in Haifa until 1948 when Israel’s expansionist march through and over people’s existence forced them to flee to Lebanon! My grandmother narrowly escaped a sniper’s bullet and my grandfather had to give up everything, leaving behind all he had built up through his professional career as a civil engineer.

My grandparents lost everything, and they were among the fortunate who had a place to go. They could return to the Lebanese village they were born in, unlike the many who were forced to live in refugee camps, left stateless, left to dream of the homes that were once theirs and denied the right to return to the homes now occupied by settlers who displaced them.

How dare you imply that my grandparents’ lives were nothing! How dare you deny the reality of all other Palestinian lives, of people who lived in Palestine with family trees rooted in the fertile soil that extended back not decades or years, but centuries!

How dare you deny a culture of a people, a history of a population, the lives of mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, children, aunts, uncles, cousins, grandmothers, grandfathers, friends, relatives and loved ones who shared and continue to share traditions, customs, music, art, poetry, craft, food, and who nourished the lands they tilled and harvested!

How dare you deny the productive labour that created a land that was given away because it was desirable and wanted and envied!

How dare you mythologize the moral superiority and inherent worth of one group of people to rationalize the deaths of over 25,000 souls, injuries to over 65,000 human beings, and the catastrophic destruction of hospitals, homes, playgrounds, schools, and universities, such places of learning as you are responsible for here!

How dare you legitimize the trauma that will mark generations to come! How dare you support undermining the rule of law, ignoring the International Court of Justice, and rendering international order virtually meaningless!

How dare you claim the authority to sit as a representative of the people in the BC Legislature, let alone as Minister of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills, when your comments today displayed your own lack of education, your tenuous understanding of the facts, your ideological bias, your indisputable racism, and your utter lack of humanity!

How dare you!

Resign.

Now.

Reema Faris

cc. David Eby

Remembering Uncle P. – A Tribute

I don’t know how to do it.

I don’t know how to understand a world that no longer has Uncle Pethro in it.

It’s not that I’m overwhelmed with grief at his passing. Losing my mother eight years ago shifted my perspective on death and dying. So, I am sad, I am heartbroken, I am bereft, but I am not in pieces.

Still, the journey of saying a final goodbye to someone who has been a constant fixture in my life is difficult. Coming to terms with the impact his loss has on others is even more fraught with emotions.

The formal obituary tells the story of Uncle Pethro’s life and outlines the legacies of his accomplishments, achievements, and successes. It pays tribute to his extended and extensive family and honours the woman who stood by his side over six decades, matching him stride for stride over the years, my Aunt Madge.

But who was this man to me?

Two men play backgammon in a well-furnished family room.
Uncle Pethro and Dad playing backgammon (Toronto, 2019)

My mother’s first cousin and one of her best friends. Uncle Pethro and my mom shared a bond that helped each of them triumph over the reality of being outsiders. Others consigned them to the margins. They asserted their right to be at and in the centre. They made sure they were seen, heard, and recognized without compromising what they stood for and who they wanted to be. They did not accept the spaces others relegated them to and forged their own paths, carved out more imaginative lives, lived bigger stories than the ones others wrote for them. 

Uncle Pethro was the man who would say, “Let me look at you!” even if you were standing right in front of him. He didn’t just want to see the face you presented to the world, he wanted to see the essence of who you were on the inside.

He was also the man with the all-consuming embrace. The man whose arms would wrap around you and make you feel protected, invincible, and treasured.

He was the man whose voice echoed in the room, whose voice was deep, resonant, and full. And — I say this with love — it’s a voice you heard often and at length because he loved to pontificate! He wanted to dig out the complexities of life, to talk about its nuances, to sort out its chaotic randomness at the same time that he could be rude, crude, and indelicate.

He was the man who had a pride of place. He loved Jamaica, the land of his birth, in all its contradictions, even if it was the home he had to leave to find the space to be free and to become the man he wanted to be.

He was generous, caring, and thoughtful, opening his doors, at home and at work, to a diversity of folk. He and Aunt Madge entertained well and often, and they set a standard as hosts that is difficult to achieve, and essential to emulate.

We all forgave Uncle Pethro his bombastic nature because underneath it all beat a passionate, life-full, and cheery heart.

Until it didn’t.

Ultimately, it was Uncle Pethro’s body that stopped working with him and started to work against him, that whittled away at him.

He was stalwart throughout each health crisis that battered him. His physical strength and mental toughness, along with Aunt Madge’s love, diligence, and care, carried him further and for longer than seemed possible.

When I moved to Toronto in 1986, Uncle Pethro and Aunt Madge welcomed me into their home and made sure I never felt alone in the vastness of the city or lost in the gulf of the choice I had made when I left home.

They saw me through the ups and downs of my time in that city, celebrated with me when things went well and consoled me when they did not. We shared food, drink, and conversation. We built a bond that transcended the familial connection. That feeling of being a part of each other’s lives became even stronger after I returned to Vancouver and our visits, because of the distance, became occasional rather than frequent.

Having spent the last few days in Toronto with Aunt Madge and the family, I’ve been reflecting on the past and ruminating on the future. Now I’m sitting here in seat 2B on Porter Air, Flight 309, surrounded by strangers, high above the clouds, and anxious to get home. I’m trying to make the pictures in my mind, of the vibrant, vital person I knew and loved, more animated and I’m fighting the way I feel that they are blurring and ebbing already. I’m trying to understand this new world that has lost that singular gravelly voice, that strong embrace, that hearty appetite, that appreciation for beauty, and that gift of laughter.

It’s not about making a saint out of my Uncle Pethro or remembering him as a paragon of virtue. It’s about knowing to love him as the man that he was.

Because if there’s anything I’ve learned from the years of being in Uncle Pethro’s company, is that to be human is divine even if we are flawed and our lives are finite.

To understand this world without Uncle Pethro is to understand that it was better with him in it, and that it will still be good because he was once a part of my mornings and my days, my nights, my years, my joys and my sorrows.

I will remember him. 

Rest in peace Uncle Pethro. 

Walk good.

Fragments of a Whole Being Belonging

I belong to Air Canada.

In this moment. January 2020.

Buckled into Seat 14C.

Far above where birds take flight. The place where dreams alone can live.

In this moment, I belong to this unbounded world above the clouds. A creature of the air.

This air-borne liberation is a mirage.

I know my feet belong on the ground. A creature of the earth.

I am on a flight to Montreal to visit friends. Their relocation to this city will bring me back again and again because our friendship is long standing and we will nurture it. My friends have also made me belong to Montreal again.

Framed through the trees, the city of Montreal is visible in the distance.

Again, because this is the city where my parents met. Where I was born, but never lived in for long. What part of me, then, belongs here? Belongs to this city where I speak the language only to a moderate level of fluency? Because all of me would not be if it weren’t for this city.

But countries and cities pull at me from all different directions.

Jamaica – my mother’s birthplace. Lebanon – my father’s. Kuwait – where my sister was born. Calgary – where my youngest sister was born. And Vancouver where we settled in 1974 and where my family has stayed since. All of us have ventured afar over the years, whether alone or together, to travel or to live for fragments of time. Toronto – where I lived for six years.

My whole being is a mosaic of spaces, places, and time. Of different cultures and societies. I identify with all of them and I identify with none of them. I am rooted in my experiences with each and am unrooted because I do not feel like I wholly belong in any of them.

They have all shaped me as have other cities I’ve visited, especially those that feel as if they are the locations where I ought to be, where I yearn to be.

In Montreal, my friends and I go to a movie they want to share with me. Their second viewing, my first.

Antigone (in French, Canada, 2019). Sophie Deraspe’s screenplay and her direction. Based on the Ancient Greek play by Sophocles. A play I know. A play that belongs to me because I have studied it, absorbed it, discussed it, taught it, remember it.

This film, this Antigone, which now belongs to me, too, tells the story of an immigrant family to Canada. Two girls, two boys, and a Grandmother, haunted by the memories of the children’s parents murdered in Algeria, in the country that they once belonged to.

In this country, this foreign Canada, do they belong?

Lions Gate Bridge appears in the distance spanning from West Vancouver to Stanley Park on a clear day with bright blue sky.

Ismène, the older girl, has built a successful career as a hair stylist. The grandmother cooks, cleans, loves each child ferociously. Antigone is fearlessly devoted to the family, to their story, to their truth. In an address to her class, “une exposition,” she elevates her classmates from a state of boredom, heads on the desk, eyes rolling, to whip-straight postures, eyes that pierce through teenage school inertia. Her story of survival, loss, and grief lures them to listen.

Antigone’s two brothers? Étéocle and Polynice? The fierce family love envelops the two brothers and yet they search for belonging elsewhere.

Why isn’t their family enough?

And why do men so often find belonging in violence, especially vulnerable men?

The story of this dislocated, relocated family unravels in flashbacks and in real time. Antigone’s knowledge of her brothers, the appearance of their being and belonging, is contradicted by the reality she grasps in hindsight.

She remembers a night. Polynice creeps home late, after dark. He opens the fridge door, she startles him in the kitchen. He stands in the shadows, the pale light casting an eerie halo around him. Bruised, bloodied, black-eyed, he exults to his sister “I’m in,” “I’m in.”

In what? In toxic brotherhood? In a position to provide for his family now? In hopelessness? In power? In control, as illusory as that power and control may be?

Polynice is not a lone wolf. What he decides matters. It affects him, his brother, his sisters, his grandmother, his community. But he makes choices as if he were alone. Is his choice a resistance to belonging to this family or is it his way to belong more meaningfully?

His choice is made as if he were an island. But no person is an island.

As much as we may long for separation, for isolation. Long to escape duties, obligations, chores, stress, news, disasters, worries, fears. But a hermetic existence is possible for only a few, it is life’s answer or life’s purpose for even fewer.

Most of us, the vast majority, need – crave – connection. We are social creatures. Socialized creatures. We achieve our potential by being a part of a world wide web and I do not mean losing ourselves in the emptiness of cyberspace or discarding hours of our life on the internet.

We want to belong. We are part of a world of belonging.

We recognize that we are as others are. Lost, found, lonely, together, alive, dying, needy, giving, angry, happy, sad, joyful, cruel, kind, hateful, loving, powerful, powerless, smart, stupid, healthy, sick, caring, selfish, playful, serious, studious, ignorant, ambitious, lackadaisical, safe, unsafe, privileged, oppressed, worried, carefree, careful, careless, faithful, faithless, believing, unbelieving. Free, not free.

Isolation, being alone, is a desire, a fantasy, as is belonging. The former is a choice, the latter inescapable. We are compelled into connection. We are born into a web of connections.

We have to negotiate with ourselves as much as with others. We negotiate with life, with experiences. And despite this we are often unprepared for what life throws at us.

Perhaps there is a toxic underpinning to the idea of belonging. After all, embedded in the word “belong” is the idea of ownership. My husband, my wife, my spouse, my daughter, my son, my child, my father, my mother, my parents, my sister, my brother, my siblings, my niece, my nephew, my uncle, my aunt, my grandparents, my cousins, my relatives, my friend, my colleague, my acquaintance, my pet, my community, my neighbourhood, my job, my school, my work, my career, my money, my dreams, my aspirations, my humour, my loss, my grief, my beliefs, my body, my pain.

Would we be better served by leaving belonging to refer to objects? When we talk about humans, living creatures, plants, trees, the earth and the webs of existence in which we’re enmeshed, would it be better use other verbs: “connect,” “embrace,” “cherish,” “know,” “love”? I connect with this city; this city connects with me. This family embraces me; I embrace this family. These friends cherish me; I cherish these friends. I know that person; that person knows me. You love me; I love you.

A scenic look at the blue ocean on a hot sunny day with palm trees in the distance and low, fluffy white clouds in the distance.

Words alone will not remake belonging. We need to excavate the purpose, the meaning, the appeal, the allure, the temptation of belonging.

Why do we care about belonging? Why do we need to belong?

Where do we belong? To whom do we belong?

Where do I belong? To whom do I belong? Who belongs with me, to me?

I think we can only remake belonging if we learn to transcend the boundaries of belonging and not belonging. To embrace the ambiguity and uncertainty of embodying different states and ways of being. To be unbounded. To imagine our lives as bigger than what we can see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. Bigger than our dreams, bigger than our imaginations.

Bigger than our communities of “same as me.”

As big as our hearts.

Because we belong nowhere and everywhere.

I belong nowhere and everywhere.

I may live in Vancouver, but fragments of me are dispersed. Unless I identify with everywhere, I can’t care about the world, the environment, the fragile state of humanity’s existence.

We belong to nothing and everything.

I belong to nothing and everything.

Because I am not beholden or enthralled by a particular thing or person and yet I am curious about all the world has to offer.

We belong to no one and everyone.

I belong to no one and everyone.

Because I am not an object to be owned and yet I am human as you are human, as he is human, as she is human, as they are human, as the many are human.

This heart belongs to those I love, but not as a thing for them to own.

It is a gift that says they are valued and valuable.

This soul is untethered in a state of un-belonging.

The essence of me is free.