.
Feedback

Filmmakers Seek Justice in Bhopal

Stanford University hosted a two-day conference on the worst industrial disaster in history, which continues to kill and maim thousands.

Twisted legs. Mute tongues. A protruding red mass of flesh for an eye. 

These are a handful of the horrific deformities children now live with because of the world's worst-ever industrial disaster: the Union Carbide gas leak in the city of Bhopal, India.

Between 10,000 and 25,000 people died when the gas - primarily consisting of a fatal compound called methyl isocyanate - leaked from a poorly-maintained facility. So many died that the city ran out of wood for individual funeral pyres, instead resorting to mass cremations.

Still, the tragedy is not over. Soil and water polluted with a range of toxic chemicals, including mercury and arsenic, continue to sicken and kill residents. Each day in Bhopal, one person dies because they've been poisoned by the plant.

Stanford University held the Students for Bhopal's seventh annual conference from Oct. 14-16 to continue the conversation surrounding the disaster and advocate for justice. Students and activists from all over the country arrived for the educational event, and a highlight was the screening of a 2010 documentary called Bhopali, a title which means "one who is from Bhopal."

Despite the fact that most of the audience had seen the movie many times before, more than one viewer had to leave the room because they were so overwhelmed with emotion.

Union Carbide produced chemicals en masse mostly for pesticide use in Bhopal, and was run by CEO Warren Anderson. According to the documentary, Anderson and other top officials in the company were aware of safety hazards at the plant, and had even cut back on key safety measures to save nominal sums of money - the equivalent of $70 a day.

Anderson has an outstanding warrant with the Indian government for this reason, but failed to appear in court. The U.S. has not extradited him, and according to reports, Anderson lives a luxurious life in the Hamptons with multiple homes in other parts of the country. Dow Chemical, the world's second-largest chemical manufacturer, bought Union Carbide after the disaster.

Almost 27 years have passed since the tragedy, yet as the film explains, a deadlock between of the Indian and U.S. governments and Dow has left the area as polluted as ever before. The situation is grim: local Indian government officials deny any pollution despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary, the U.S. government has refused to enforce international clean-up laws, and Dow argues that if the Indian government sees nothing wrong, they have no reason to take action. 

Meanwhile, residents of Bhopal - many of whom are already living in abject poverty - continue to drink polluted water because they have no other choice. In the film, many Bhopali people call the city "hell on earth." 

The film was produced by Kirk Palayan, who held a Q&A after the event. Palayan and director Van Maximilian Carlson managed to bypass traditional film visas in order to finish the movie as quickly as possible, and shot the film single-handedly in two trips to the city.

Palayan said the film was "more important and emotional than anything we'd ever done before."

The producer was impressed that most of the people they met were friendly and open to the duo, despite the fact that they were American.

"If I were in their shoes, I'd probably be throwing rocks at people like me," he said.  

The film has won several awards, including the 2011 Slamdance Film Festival. It has also been entered to be considered for the Best Documentary Feature category nomination for the 2012 Academy Awards.

Visit www.bhopal.org for a full history and how you can help the victims.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Los Altos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
David R. May 20, 2013 at 01:18 pm
I saw a public report that said most of the discussion related to carpooling and so forth, sinceRead More Blach is separated so much from the rest of the school. You know, things like dropping off both kids at Egan, and then a group of kids headed for Blach share a ride or vice versa. I don't see how any nonparents can really help with that.
mtnview_parent April 12, 2013 at 03:06 am
The only problem with the charter school is that they cause more problem than they solve. TheyRead More want to close Covington, then Blach. So, they don't provide flexibility at all. They keep going to court. This is a case were the remedy is worst than the disease. The original idea is that we have to be creative with the 10th site. Land is scarce, and most likely, we cannot provide the same facility than other school within the district. People are not happy about being moved from their school (with good reason I feel) Solution: provide an inspiring project. May be an immersion program, or a more academic program, or maybe a program to help english learner from K-3. If we don't innovate with a more flexible program, we might just need to redraw the boundaries every 5-7 years. Nobody can foresee the future, but you can build flexibility.
Mitch Caldwell April 11, 2013 at 11:36 pm
Maybe offering a magnet school could help with stability? It can balance out enrollment at otherRead More schools so that attendance boundaries do not have to be redrawn. Isn't the charter school doing that for the LASD district right now?
mtnview_parent April 11, 2013 at 10:36 pm
I saw you had a good discussion on the definition of a neighborhood school. But beyond theRead More definitions, I would like to ask why does palo Alto school District and Cupertino School district have a mix of neighborhood school and some choice school. Those are two high performing district right next to us. Can a choice school be an excellent way to stop the highly disruptive attendance boundary change ? People say I am for statu quo, that I am against change. I feel that family and children need stability, that is why we don't change spouse at the pace the BoT change the attendance boundary. People who want some stability at home (and their school) do make a reasonable request.