Pie Palace

“Innocent until proven guilty.” Remember that phrase? As of Monday afternoon, it seems to have gone out of style.

I’m referring, of course, to the allegations that Col. Russell Williams killed Jessica Lloyd and Cpl. Marie-France Comeau, and sexually assaulted two others. The Citizen has trumpeted the story on their front page for three days this week. The CBC radio news has found reasons to mention it in most of their news casts, going to far as to refer to it as the colonel case. Coverage has been heavy enough that General Walter “there-are-no-allegations-of-torture-whoops-yes-there-are” Natynczyk gave a press conference yesterday about an anti-military backlash.

Amid this rash of coverage, it’s easy to forget that the accused hasn’t been convicted. We don’t know what the evidence is. We haven’t heard anything more than allegations. We must consider Williams innocent until he is proven otherwise.

For that to happen, our news outlets have to learn some self control. The case has everything an editor could ask for to boost ratings: beautiful women, sex, violence, a fall from grace, and a small-town celebrity. But that doesn’t excuse the feeding frenzy going on right now. Williams may turn out to be innocent: the police may have made a mistake, new evidence may come to light, or the evidence provided may be insufficient.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I assume that the police are doing their job, and that they have strong evidence, and are likely to win a conviction when this comes to court. If Williams is guilty of these horrific crimes, then I hope he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and his life is ruined. But until he has his day in court, we must give him the benefit of the doubt.

In case you’re looking for some podcast action, here’s the Pie Palace endorsed list:

Highly recommended:

• Planet Money (by NPR) – I can’t recommend this podcast enough. It’s a lay-person’s economics show, covering current issues relating to the US economy. The hosts are to economics what ninjas are to kicking ass. And they do it without being boring.
  
• The Age of Persuasion (by CBC and Pirate Radio) – An insider’s view of advertising. Given that it’s produced by an advertising writer, it’s not surprisingly that it’s really, really fun to listen to. A little short on content, but the production value makes up for that.

Recommended:

• Search Engine (by TVO) – A current affairs show dealing specifically with internet-related issues. It’s pretty geeky, which is probably why CBC dropped it, but the host is knowledgeable and (kind of) funny.
  
• This American Life (by NPR) – A general interest show. Each podcast features four or five stories relating to a theme. It’s kind of humorous, but occasionally dips into serious topics. About half the episodes are too saccharine for my taste.
  
• White Coat, Black Art (by CBC) – A current affairs program about health related issues. The host, an ER doctor, interviews doctors and other health professionals for their perspective on various issues. The show is interesting, but rarely looks at the public policy side of medicine (such as lowering cost, improving quality of service). Worth listening to, nonetheless.

Recommended with reservations:

• Shot of Jaq – A show about open source from a couple of Ubuntu employees. Each show covers a specific topic, and is intended to get listeners talking on the show’s website. The shows are quick (which is probably the best thing about them) but tend to ramble. The hosts rarely offer much insight into the issue they’re talking about.
  
• The Current (by CBC) – A middling current affairs program. Each podcast is about 20 minutes long, in which the host tries to conduct at least two sets of interviews. The interviews usually sound rushed, and the guests are of variable quality. At the end of each program, I feel like I’ve been given a quick overview of the given topic, but without any real depth. I’m not sure why I keep listening to this.
  
• Quirks and Quarks (by CBC) – I really, really want to like this show. It’s CBC’s sole science show. It features interviews with various boffins about their latest discoveries. But it’s really, really dry. As much as I try to listen to it, I find myself tuning it out. Which is too bad, since the quality of reporting is top notch, and the host does a great job at making complex information accessible.

Terrible:

• The Moth – Imagine the worst whackjobery of CBC’s Ideas, mixed with the bland self-adulation of CBC’s Tapestry. Each relatively quick episode is supposedly a true story from some egoist’s person’s life, being told on-stage without props or a script. It’s like nails on a chalk-board. I suffered through four episodes before I finally unsubscribed. Why did it take so long? Because I’m a masochist.

How do you define success when it comes to a protest? Two weeks ago, when I hooked up with Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP), I would have defined a successful protest as having a bunch of people show up.

In that case, today’s protest against Stephen Harper shutting down Parliament was epic. Sorry, EPIK!!!!1. 3,500+ folks turned out. Speakers spoke. Fists were shaken. Signs were waved.

So what?

Let’s geek out a little bit here. Why hold a protest?

1. To scare the bejesus out of your opposition. Imagine your company pays kids in Sri Lanka to chew asbestos to make iPhones. Everyone likes iPhones, nobody cares about cancer kids overseas. Life is good. Until one day when you show up at work and there are a thousand people burning you in effigy. You may start to consider other ways of making iPhones.
2. To impress the pundits. Media, commentators, bloggers, and other self-declared arbiters of importance will pooh-pooh your cause when they think it’s just you and your mom who care about it. When you and your mom organize a rally that brings a couple of thousand people out, those commentators will change their position. And if they think you’re important, that helps scare your opposition all the more, and draw more folks into your movement.
3. To attract more supporters. It’s really disheartening to feel like you’re the only person who feels something. A rally can help solve that. It’s shows potential supporters that they aren’t alone and they have a group to plug into. Hopefully, it will swell your ranks, and enable future (metaphoric) asskicking on your issue.

All of this said, we’re in a weird place. We have certainly have an opposition: Harper and every power-grubbing prime minister from the past 30 years. But we don’t have an “us”. Yeah, there are 213,178 people in a Facebook group, and three opposition parties doing everything they can to ride our momentum; but there’s nobody at the head of CAPP waving a sword and yelling “CHARGE!”

So what did our protest accomplish?

1. Scared the opposition? Hard to tell. Intrepid PiePalace reporters are busily peeking in the windows of 24 Sussex to see if a night-light was left on. When we find out, you’ll be the first to know.
2. Impressed the pundits? Maybe. Mostly? Definitely.
3. Attracted more supporters? Again, hard to tell. The Facebook membership seems to have plateaued, but it seems unlikely to grow, since it was explicitly aimed at this weekend’s protest.

A sympathetic observer might call that two out of three. An unsympathetic type might call that one out of three. Either way, it’s better than a fail. We’ll know the real result when we see the responses from MPs, the government, and the public.

I just got home from Ottawa anti-prorogation rally. 3,500 braved sub-zero temperatures for two hours to show their support for our Parliamentary democracy. Nothing short of awesome. Well done, Ottawa! (I’ll post pics once I warm up)

To be “winning”, for once. I started refreshing the anti-prorogation Facebook group’s web page. Every few seconds, when I refresh, another few people have joined the group. It’s gone from less than twenty thousand when I saw it on Monday, to 98,840 now. Yeah, it’s just a Facebook group. But it feels nice to be part of something verging on a majority.

Another year, another prorogation.

In December 2008, Stephen Harper faced a united opposition willing to vote his government down. He prorogued Parliament.

In December 2009, Stephen Harper faced questions about his government’s policies in Afghanistan and an unfriendly Senate. He prorogued Parliament again.

When Parliament is prorogued, all of the government legislation working its way through the House is discarded. Committees are disbanded before they’ve reached a productive resolution. Harper’s action costs taxpayers money and slows down the work of government. Worse, it’s an abuse of the law: Harper appears to be shutting down our legislature for partisan reasons. Instead of taking his lumps, Harper is taking his ball and going home.

Happily, the story seems to be gaining traction. A Facebook group protesting the move has doubled in size in the last 24 hours: it’s now up to over 40,000 members. Comments on CBC seem to universally damn Harper’s decision. There’s talk of a rally on January 25 23 to protest the prorogation.

In some senses, a rally won’t have any effect. Parliament won’t reconvene until March, regardless of how many rallies are held. But it may remind our Prime Minister that he is a public servant, and as such, he should be working on our behalf. To quote Mr. Harper:

When a government starts trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent … is when it’s rapidly losing its moral authority to govern.

UPDATE: I had the wrong date for the rally. As RG mentions in the comments, it’s January 23, not January 25.

The Centretown News is running a story about a municipal party being assembled here in O-town. David Chernushenko is the only member of the coalition who is speaking publicly.

I’m glad to see that David is getting back into politics. Longtime PiePalace readers will remember that I volunteered with his various election campaigns when he was running for the Green Party in Ottawa-Centre. He reeks of credibility and honesty. He’s one of the few people I’ve met who should be in politics.

Having said that, I don’t want to see parties pushing into City Hall. Party politics acts to homogenize elected representatives. Party members must vote according to the party line, and private members’ bills rarely pass. At best, politicians must work within their parties to push ideas forward. At worst, parties are petty fiefdoms that only represent the views and priorities of a small elite.

I wish David the best of luck. He would be a welcome addition to City Council.

And no, that isn’t a membership card in my pocket. I’m just happy to see your new catalog. Your FANTASTIC new catalog.

The crunky old catalog has been replaced with a shiny new BiblioCommons website. With a bit of searching, I managed to track down some info on BiblioCommons:

1. They have a terrible website.
2. Their founder, Beth Jefferson, appears to be a mix of volunteer-ist and entrepreneur (imagine that!).
3. Beth talks about BiblioCommons in a podcast I haven’t listened to yet.
4. They seem to snarf information from Amazon. (Their images come directly from Amazon)
5. I am addicted to annotating books.

As far as I can tell, they don’t have an official API. I managed to find a Drupal module that professes to do BiblioCommons stuff, but I don’t know enough about Drupal to tell what it’s up to.

And their login pages confuse cURL. Boo!

Earlier this week, Richard Colvin dropped a political bomb, suggesting that his reports of torture had been ignored by the Conservative government. The respected diplomat said:

As I learned more about our detainee practices, I came to a conclusion they were contrary to Canada’s values, contrary to Canada’s interests, contrary to Canada’s official policies and also contrary to international law. That is, they were un-Canadian, counterproductive and probably illegal.
[...]
According to a very authoritative source, many of the Afghans we detained had no connection to insurgency whatsoever

The allegation is serious. According to his testimony to the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan, Canadian soldiers routinely handed over detainees to Afghan authorities, who were then routinely tortured. During 2006 and 2007, Colvin produced over 17 reports telling higher-ups that that abuse was happening. Initially, his reports were ignored. Then he was told not to put things on paper.

He compared Canada’s performance with that of the British and Dutch, whose military took many fewer prisoners while operating in equally dangerous environments. British and Dutch militaries reported each hand-over to their parliaments, and monitored the prisoners’ condition in Afghan prisons. Canada did no such thing, citing security concerns.

Our military went so far as to ignore the Red Cross for three months when the NGO tried to inform our mission in Afghanistan that our detainees were suffering torture.

Initially, government lawyers attempted to prevent Colvin from speaking in front of the Committee. Since his allegations, Peter MacKay has called Colvin a Taliban stooge: nothing short of hearsay, second- or third-hand information, or that which came directly from the Taliban and blamed the Liberals. The federal government has refused to pay Colvin’s legal bills, even though he is a whistle-blower.

This is not my Canada. This is not what Canada means. We are better than this.

We are the country that invented peace keeping. Our country is built on peaceful compromise between the colonies of two warring empires. We have never needed a revolution to clean our government. Our country was born democratic. We export human rights. Or so I want to believe.

Perhaps this is what we’ve become. Perhaps our defining moment wasn’t when Lester B. Pearson created the first peace keeping force in 1997. Perhaps it was the Somalia murders and cover-up in 1993.

I hope not.

Google has announced an experimental alternative to HTTP: SPDY. It’s a datagram-oriented protocol that multiplexes streams across a single TCP connection to minimize latency. The initial explanation sounds pretty neat.