Weather warning (plus the shame of Canada).

First the shame side. The Province has an interesting editorial that harmonizes with my view on that Robert Dziekanski fiasco in Vancouver. Nobody who isn't circling the wagons can look at that situation and say that everything went the way it should have. As the editorial points out, every involved agency in that sordid affair has brought changes into effect to prevent such an incident from happening again. Every agency, that is, except the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

The RCMP in this matter have smeared not only their force's honour and reputation, they've smeared the reputation of the country as a whole. I know of no Canadian expats anywhere who've not had to contend with people asking questions about Robert Dziekanski and how his death was allowed to happen. Canada's image as a kind, gentle and above all humane nation was struck a serious blow by this affair and it looks like the RCMP are bound and determined to keep it that way.

The testimony of the first officer (Constable Gerry Rundel, for the record) is flatly laughable. Four burly, presumably well-trained men (they'd better be damned well trained for the price tag that force bears!) in body armour felt afraid of a solitary pudgy man with a stapler? Excuse me? If it were not an actionable piece of slander or libel (whichever applies to online communication) I would suggest that Constable Rundel has been spending just a little bit too much time in the special section of the evidence room with the funny plants if he thinks this is a plausible explanation.

This goes double for when this same "peace officer" said he was afraid of the man's combative stance. (That combative stance, for the record, as the video shows, was hands down at his side, albeit with a stapler in his hand. Pretty fierce weapon a desktop stapler. I can see why four burly, well-trained, armoured police officers were in fear for their lives!)

Finally, the flat-out lying in the testimony gets to me. Constable Rundel claims that the four "peace officers" in question didn't discuss a game plan before encountering Robert Dziekanski. That this was allowed to go unanswered in the inquiry is beyond belief. In the video of the matter – the full video, not the bowdlerized version that reached television – you can clearly hear one officer asking for clearance to taze and another giving it: both before the officers had even come on the scene, mind, to assess the situation. Not only had some planning been done beforehand (and caught on record) but that planning basically consisted of "let's taze him and call it a day".

Not the RCMP's finest hour indeed. I can't help but remember that the Airborne regiment was disbanded for similar behaviour and they, arguably, had something resembling a reason to pound that Somali kid. (Not a good reason, note, just something resembling a reason.)

OK, rant is over. On to the weather. Tomorrow is going to be a lovely day according to forecasts. A high of 0C with freezing rain and the threat of a full-blown ice storm. Given the hinky nature of infrastructure in this city, if the ice storm happens you can expect me to be incommunicado for anywhere from a few hours to a few weeks depending on the severity. If I suddenly drop off the face of the planet don't worry about it. I'm probably just shivering in my home without electricity and/or Internet.

Global warming my ass.

Am I missing something?

So some protesters go to another country, participate in an illegal protest, get arrested and ... the whole world freaks out? What did people expect? And why is it such an international incident? What happens to people who go to, say, the USA, participate in an illegal protest and get caught? Why does the world not react with shocked outrage when the USA, or Great Britain, or Canada, or Germany, or France or any other country in the world arrests and ejects lawbreakers?

OK, this scares me.

It seems that the UK wants to follow the American path to Nazism. This war on an emotion is turning into a great tool for the authoritarian instinct. When will Canada follow suit? When will Canada join the USA in suspending civil rights and join the UK as one of the most surveilled countries in the world? I suspect it will be sooner than anybody thinks, cynic that I am, but this is one of those rare cases where I'd be really super-happy to be wrong.

I think it's instructive, for those in Canada who think "it can't happen here", to compare a couple of things. Specifically I want to compare police presence in Canada (and, quickly, the USA) to police presence in China. Of the two countries, China is the one referred to as a police state (and despite the tone of this message, I actually agree with that designation). Yet here's the funny thing: while living in Canada -- Ottawa, to be specific -- I had more official interaction with police officers (as opposed to social interaction or just happening to see them in passing) in an average month than I've had in China in nearly six years.

Yet China is a police state, but Canada is not. How sure are you of this? Think carefully before answering, because the price of a wrong answer is the freedom that is supposedly the cornerstone of our society.

Let me kick it up a notch. A long time ago I went to Houston for a job interview. (I was even offered a job, but idiot border regulations torpedoed my chances there. "Free Trade" has as much relation to freedom of trade as the "Democratic Korean People's Republic" has to democracy or the people.) The experience was an eye-opener in many ways. In one concentrated dose I got some of my stereotypes of Texas obliterated (Houston is an astonishingly diverse and cosmopolitan city!) and horrifyingly confirmed (the gun culture is at the level of insanity -- one of the people who interviewed me brought out a handgun to show off after I admired a "sculpture" that turned out to be a hard disk after being shot several times). I also had something nasty confirmed about the "Land of the Free". In my grand total of ... say 36 hours ... in Houston, I had more interaction with police officers or other gun-wielding officials of the state than I would get in a typical month in Ottawa or in six years of living in a police state!

And this was years before 9/11.

So if you really don't think a police state is possible in Canada (or Britain or the USA or wherever), keep this in mind: you're already half-way there. The USA has essentially suspended habeas corpus -- it's just going about it the smart "salami tactics" way. It also has a long history of taking laws intended for one purpose and applying them generally (War on Plant Products, anyone?) as time passes. The UK has more official surveillance cameras, both in terms of population and in terms of raw numbers (if memory serves), than any other nation. (The USA has fewer official cameras, of course, but for that can subpoena any camera logs they like should they feel they need it, so the effect is largely similar.)

And Canada? Well, I'm out of touch with Canada right now. I've been away for an absurd length of time and internal Canadian news doesn't often reach the international press. Given Canada's history, however, it's only a matter of time before we import Yet Another Bad Idea from the USA. The time span for that ranges from 5 to 20 years with the pattern being the dumber the idea the quicker we tend to take to it. So I really am afraid that Canada is following the USA's lead into Nazism.

Which leaves me in the awkward position of wondering if living in this police state isn't a better choice right now, especially given that I've got an expanding family to consider.