The Islamist-conservative alliance

...confirmed. One must admire David Warren's candour:

Given the contrast between the modest demeanour of many young immigrant Muslim women, with their heads covered and their strollers full of babies -- and that of so many "native" young western women, childless but provocatively half-naked under the summer sun -- I have sometimes myself wondered which side I am on.

Not surprising, really. The strident and foolish accusations of an alleged "Islamist-Left" convergence have always been lies, pure and simple. It's not the Left that attacks gays, supports capital punishment, oppresses women, enjoys the notion of endless warfare, and favours long prison sentences and the lash.

The only real differences I can see between some social conservatives and their Islamist brethren, in fact, are pork and alcohol.

UPDATE: (h/t reader Todd)

G&M Poll on the Census

Updated

Most of Friday, the Yes- No split looked like this :



Suddenly overnight, it looks like this :



As The Pundit's Guide said at Creekside : "Also, pretty much proving the invalidity of voluntary surveys, n'est-ce pas?"

Participation in the above poll is of course voluntary, rather like democracy. If you or your government don't have accurate information or the means to obtain it, it doesn't work properly.

Personally I would have preferred a poll that asks : "Are you in favor of StatsCan having the same info you freely offer up to Facebook and your insurance agent?"

How come ...

Warren Kinsella got "an exemption" , as he terms it, from filling in the long-form census, while Sandra Finley got charged under federal law with non-compliance, and is still facing a $500 fine and three months in jail when her trial resumes in September?

What's the difference between...

...a bubble-blowing protester and Toronto Police officer Adam Josephs?

A: One is "human garbage." The other is a young woman.

[H/t Sister Sage]

Is Tony Clement lying?

Or are there unnamed "statisticians" at StatsCan who should be fired for gross incompetence?

As everyone is aware, Industry Minister Tony Clement, possibly taking his cue from US Congressional luminary Michelle Bachmann last year, is set to impose a massive case of corporate amnesia upon our country. In an unprecedented act of ideological vandalism, he will be scrapping the mandatory long-form census and introducing a statistically useless--and more expensive--voluntary version.

Clements' latest excuse for swimming manfully against the current of intelligence, common sense and statistical expertise is, according to today's Globe and Mail, that Statistics Canada is backing him up:

I asked [Statistics Canada] specifically, "Are you confident you can do your job?" They said "If you do these extra things: the extra advertising and the extra sample size, then yes, we can do our job."

Clements went on to say that the array of people and organizations now up in arms--including the legendary former Chief Statistician Ivan Fellagi, and the Statistical Society of Canada--"should trust Statistics Canada."

We have no way of checking whether StatsCan has really abandoned statistical methodology in favour of conservative voodoo, however, because it has been muzzled by the government:

The agency is no longer granting interviews on the issue and is now responding to inquiries with e-mail statements only.

As usual, the Ottawa Citizen's Dan Gardner is making hay with all this. But the know-nothings, once again, are winning. That's not Bluesfest you're hearing from afar on these balmy Ottawa summer nights, folks. It's the sound of banjos on Parliament Hill.

UPDATE: We don't need no information.

UPPERDATE: Looks like we have an answer to my question.

G20 Ten Most Wanted and their control group

At yesterday's presser, the Toronto Police media guy announced their "G20 Most Wanted Individuals" list :

"They are individuals who are not suspects - they are people who are wanted for criminal offences and the only difficulty that the investigative team has is at this point we don't know who they are so we're seeking the assistance of the public to identify them to us ."

He further advised they have "over 14,000 still images of individuals and over 500 videos", which they will be sharing with the Canadian Banking Association to run through their facial recognition software. Keep those citizen CDs and vids coming, he said.

So after ignoring the rioters for an hour and a half on June 26th in favour of taking their pictures, and then rounding up, IDing and photographing over a thousand hapless random citizens the following day, you will now use the banks' software tools to look for a match between the two groups.
Got it.
Well at least we know the point of the Sunday bucket detainments now - it was just their bad luck to be chosen to act as the control group.

Allô police!

Dawg's Blawg has a 'new' commenter whose knickers are on fire regarding the "thugs, hooligans and anarchists" that were referenced over and over and over and over and over by Conservative députés at a special meeting of the Public Safety and National Security Committee was held Monday : "Requested by Four (4) Members of the Committee to Undertake a Study of the Issues Surrounding Security at the G8 and G20 Summits".


Alors, to demonstrate that we are most eager and willing to assist the police in their efforts to identify the 10 Most Wanted, we ask our readers to help identify this alleged thug/hooligan/anarchist.


H/T to fern hill at DAMMIT JANET! and G20Justice.

When faith and facts collide: the spanking of Margaret Somerville

Regular readers will know that I have little time for the works of Margaret Somerville, the bioethics queen currently holding court at McGill University and uttering her edicts, decrees and injunctions through the popular press.

I have long suspected that Margo is a religious zealot in academic drag--opposing gay marriage, euthanasia and abortion, inveighing against stem cell research and adoption, but avoiding specifically religious vocabulary. (There is method in this madness, and I'm not alone in seeing it.)

Most recently, she published an op-ed piece in the Globe and Mail arguing that people who do not know their genetic origins suffer harm as a result, equivalent to the suffering of aboriginal children in residential schools. This prompted a letter from bioethicist Arthur Schafer and none other than Amir Attaran, a professor at the University of Ottawa. Attaran is better known perhaps for his opposition to our conduct of the Afghanistan war, but he works in the field of public health.

What follows is very lengthy--caveat lector--but it is worth reproducing as a prime example of how a seasoned academic, like Attaran, confronts mysticism and prejudice with facts and reason. It takes place in the course of a series of email exchanges which are here reproduced unabridged. I now yield the floor.

1. From: Amir Attaran
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 7:01 AM
To: Margaret Somerville
Subject: Your essay in the Globe and Mail

Dear Margaret,

I obviously profoundly disagree with you about gamete donation. To be totally frank, as scholars should be, I found your piece in the Globe over the weekend poorly done in its use of hand-picked anecdotes, to the exclusion of methodologically rigorous, scholarly evidence. Had it been written by a student of mine, it would have received a low mark for falling prey to a hoary statistical fallacy about comparisons of groups: i.e. that if donor-conceived people are psychologically equal to naturally-conceived people, then of course one will find a few donor-conceived people offering up dark and unhappy anecdotes about their origins, because as everyone knows there are naturally-born people (e.g. Woody Allen) who are clinically anxious, depressed, or otherwise neurotic about their origins.

In other words, even if donor-conceived people are not a jot worse off than naturally-conceived people, a teleologically-driven researcher will easily turn up anecdotes of unhappiness among them.

My view is that to research this question credibly, one has to leave the anecdotes aside, and if there is such a thing as donor-driven psychopathology, it should be observable in psychosocial cohort studies. Don’t you agree?

I attach at the end of this email seven such cohort studies and one review.* This is NOT an exhaustive list of studies, but it is the preponderance, and it is representative of the vast majority of studies in concluding that people born of donated gametes are psychologically no better or worse off than the population at large (and I am well aware that one or two studies somewhat disagree). These cohort studies in some cases have lengthy follow-up, into the adolescent years.

That said, I do not want to close my mind to contrary evidence, and so if I am wrong, can I please ask for a little reciprocity: i.e. can you please send me a collection of psychosocial studies which you think support the thesis in your article? Specifically, can you please send me a few studies -- not one isolated study, but a few -- which show that as a population, donor-conceived people are more likely to be of impaired mental health compared to naturally-conceived people?

If you undertake to send me those studies, I give you my solemn promise I will read them carefully, and after weighing the evidence, I will change my mind if that is warranted.

I look forward to receiving the studies from you.

Warm regards,
Amir
==============================================
Professor Amir Attaran, D. Phil. LL.B.
Canada Research Chair in Law, Population Health and Global Development Policy
Faculties of Law and Medicine; University of Ottawa

2. From: Margaret Somerville
Sent: July-13-10 11:50 AM
To: Amir Attaran
Subject: RE: Your essay in the Globe and Mail

Dear Professor Attaran,

I find the tone of your email arrogant and offensive and, consequently, would prefer not to engage in an exchange with you.
Sincerely,
Margo Somerville

Margaret Somerville AM, FRSC, DCL
McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law

3. Dear Margaret,

I mean zero offence and apologize unreservedly if you are offended. I am, however, trained as a scientist (DPhil, Oxford; MS, Caltech, BA, Berkeley) and the scientific culture is notoriously blunt when it comes to debate.

But surely, whether you were offended has no bearing on whether the harm that you allege exists in donor conception—harm that you compared to residential schools trauma—actually is real. That is a question to be decided purely by the evidence—and the tone of my email, or one’s religious leanings, or one’s inherent preferences, are simply irrelevant.

As professors both, let us have the maturity to treat this as a purely professional transaction: Can you please send me citations to psychosocial studies which you think support the thesis in your article? Specifically, can you please send me a few studies -- not one isolated study, but a few -- which show that as a population, donor-conceived people are more likely to be of impaired mental health compared to naturally-conceived people?

I have sent my evidence comprising seven original, peer-reviewed studies showing that donor-conceived children get on fine, equally well as their peers. Despite my best efforts to search, I am aware of no persuasive studies showing harm of the kind that you say exists.

But, that said, I always want to keep an open mind in case I am wrong, and so can I please ask for YOUR evidence?

Warm regards,
Amir

4. Dear Amir,

Over the years I have come into contact with many donor conceived people. To be quite frank it never occurred to me what the harm done to them was until I got to know them. I would not have characterized it as psychological harm (although that, too, may well be present), but as existential harm, which is what I was speaking about in my essay. A feeling of having been deliberately cut loose from their human roots and moorings and a longing to know through whom life travelled to them. They can feel this most keenly, it seems, when they themselves are considering having children, because they believe they would be inflicting the same loss they have suffered on their children. They feel a loss of identity and, as one of them said to me, “Each morning when I look in the mirror I feel that half of me is missing”. If you read Ishiguro’s book, “Never Let Me Go” you will find an extensive description of the kind of harm I am speaking about. And for first person donor conceived adults’ stories see http://www.infertilitynetwork.org/dc_offspring

As well the research psychologist David Vellaman has described how important a feeling of genetic identification with our close relatives is in forming our own identity. We identify traits in them that we also share and those traits we like, we decide to copy and those we dislike we vow “never to be like our mother”. It may well be that I’ve met more of these people than many other people, as the first cohort of donor conceived people to reach adulthood were in Australia, because Australia had the earliest, large IVF program in the world in the early 1980’s. In fact, the IVF researchers sought me out and I spent a sabbatical working with the program and did some of the legal and ethical work for them.

I believe the kind of harm I am describing deserves attention, even if it’s more ephemeral than “mental illness” measured through classic scientific research methodologies. Moreover, it deserves attention even if it is not common, although we have no idea how common it is. One problem with research in this area is that probably the vast majority of donor conceived children don’t know that is what they are so they can be followed. That also means that we then have the issue of the harm and ethics (or more accurately lack thereof) of deception. As well, those who do know their status can be traumatized by discussing it or they want to safeguard their privacy – all of which are “flow on” harms of donor conception. The current estimates are that between 30,000 and 60,000 donor conceived children are born in the US each year. We have no idea how many know their real status regarding their biological parentage.

For some evidence of the kind of harm you are interested in, there is a new report just released “My daddy’s name is donor” written by Elizabeth Marquardt et al. And I’ve just acted as an external examiner on a PhD thesis “A critical examination of Sperm Donation Practice” by Joanna Rose submitted to the Queensland University of Technology, which has 27 pages of references. That should be publicly available in the near future, if you want to follow up on the references.

I do not want to enter a debate with you about the validity of the science in the references you sent to me, but I’m sure you are aware that at least some studies of this kind can be challenged and have been.

I’m swamped with work and am not going to continue any debate, so please don’t be offended if I do not reply to any further emails.

Kind regards,
Margo

5. Margaret,

Thank you for your reply. If you have the Marquardt paper and Rose thesis to hand, would you please share the same?

I appreciate the honesty of your answer, though I find it surprising on one point. You say that donor-born children suffer “existential harm,” rather than “psychological harm.” Further, the picture you paint of this existential harm is not that it is permanent or debilitating, but “ephemeral.” You also say that it “deserves attention even if it is not common,” but you also qualify that by saying nobody knows how common it is, because it is impossible to measure.

Taking all those qualifiers at face value, aren’t you actually speaking of the flimsiest of threats, or in other words, a threat which practically (and I choose my words carefully here) is an article of faith?

I probably cannot change your mind on this, but I invite you to rethink the comparison you made in the Globe and Mail, where you likened this ephemeral, existential harm which may exist with egg or sperm donor offspring, to the more tangible, traumatic, lifelong psychological harm, often manifested by serious clinical psychoses, wrought upon Canada’s residential schools offspring? In arguing against creating donor offspring, you wrote in the Globe:

“Are we repeating in a new context and in new ways the terrible errors and grave injustices that occurred with Australia’s “stolen generation” of aboriginal children, the United Kingdom’s “home children” sent to Canada and other British Commonwealth countries, and the “scoop” of native children from reserves into Canadian residential schools?”

Now, that you have done me the courtesy of clarifying your position on the donor children, it appears you’ve retreated several furlongs from what you wrote in the Globe, and probably you wouldn’t make that comparison any longer. I am grateful for your flexibility on this matter, and I hope you stand by your softer position in the future.

But I have to say this, because all scholars, myself included, need to be reminded sometimes: As public intellectuals, Margaret, you and I both owe it to our readers to be scrupulously accurate and evidence-based in everything we write; otherwise we are no better than angry tabloid columnists. Please keep this in mind when you write for a popular audience, for where the writing is not accurate or evidence-based, it misleads, which is exactly the opposite of education.

Warm regards,
Amir

6. [From Margaret Somerville] Your email makes me realize that there is an error in my previous email, the word ephemeral, which I am grateful to have pointed out, but there is no damage done as this was a private email to you and not a public document. I meant by it intangible, but nevertheless very serious harm, as should be obvious from the context, but, that said, it’s not the correct word to express that. Consequently, the rest of what you’ve written based on that word is completely wrong and in no way states what I think. I completely stand by what I said in my Globe Essay, as stated. For the record, I do believe that we will look back on widespread donor conception, especially that which is unacknowledged, as a great human tragedy of the 21st Century equivalent to the other tragedies I named.

As to your sanctimonious preaching, I’m surprised that you claim the title of public intellectual for yourself, I’ve always considered that a label that only others can bestow, and I must admit that I, for one, have never thought of you in that way.

7. Dear Margaret,

I have treated you politely and professionally, but also firmly, because good scholarship demands that we hold one another to the best standards of evidence. If the shoe were on the other foot, I would hope that you would debate firmly and hold me to the same standards—and I would hope that I have the grace to deal with it.

Regrettably, you aren’t showing that grace, for your last email is quite intentionally and gratuitously insulting. I regret that is your choice, but being that it is, I will not accede to your request that yours was a private email, since I think your way of addressing an intellectual debate is not acceptable.

Warm regards,
Amir

8. [From Margaret Somerville] Re your request for Joanna Rose’s thesis: I would have thought that you would know that it would be a breach of privacy and academic ethics, and legally prohibited, for me to share with another person a student’s thesis, especially one to which I only had access as the external examiner.

At which point Attaran finally realized he was not involved in a genuine intellectual discussion at all, and retorted:

9. Calm down, Margaret. You could always ask Ms. Rose’s permission.
Amir

To those intrepid readers who have ventured this far--congratulations!--I think this exchange should be held up as an exemplar (at least until the very end) of how to conduct oneself with grace and politesse when confronted with ignorance and superstition cloaked in ethobabble. We can all learn a lesson from it--myself included.
__________
*1. Fertil Steril. 2006 Mar;85(3):610-8.

Egg donation parents and their children: follow-up at age 12 years.

Murray C, MacCallum F, Golombok S.

Family and Child Psychology Research Centre, City University, London, United
Kingdom. seg42@cam.ac.uk

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of parenting and psychological adjustment of egg
donation families as the child approaches adolescence in comparison with donor
insemination (DI) and IVF families. DESIGN: A study of 17 egg donation families,
35 DI families, and 34 IVF families with a 12-year-old child. Standardized
interview and questionnaire measures were administered to mothers and children.
SETTING: Follow-up of families recruited from three assisted conception units in
the United Kingdom. PATIENT(S): Mothers and their 12-year-old children conceived
through egg donation, DI, and IVF. INTERVENTION(S): Mothers and children were
interviewed and administered questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Parents'
marital and psychological state, quality of parent-child relationships, father's
contribution to parenting, and children's socioemotional development. RESULT(S):
No differences were found between the egg donation and IVF families. The
differences between egg donation and DI families reflected lower levels of
sensitive responding of egg donation mothers toward their children compared with
DI mothers. Donor insemination mothers were more likely to be emotionally
over-involved with their child than egg donation mothers. The egg donation
children were well adjusted in terms of their social and emotional development.
CONCLUSION(S): The findings are discussed in relation to the different pattern of
genetic relationships between egg donation and DI families and the secrecy
surrounding the use of donated gametes to conceive a child.

PMID: 16500327 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


2. Child Dev. 1995 Apr;66(2):285-98.

Families created by the new reproductive technologies: quality of parenting and
social and emotional development of the children.

Golombok S, Cook R, Bish A, Murray C.

Child and Family Psychology Unit, City University, London, UK.

The creation of families by means of the new reproductive technologies has raised
important questions about the psychological consequences for children,
particularly where gamete donation has been used in the child's conception.
Findings are presented of a study of family relationships and the social and
emotional development of children in families created as a result of the 2 most
widely used reproductive technologies, in vitro fertilization (IVF) and donor
insemination (DI), in comparison with control groups of families with a naturally
conceived child and adoptive families. The quality of parenting was assessed
using a standardized interview with the mother, and mothers and fathers completed
questionnaire measures of stress associated with parenting, marital satisfaction,
and emotional state. Data on children's psychiatric state were also obtained by
standardized interview with the mother, and by questionnaires completed by the
mothers and the children's teachers. The children were administered the
Separation Anxiety Test, the Family Relations Test, and the Pictorial Scale of
Perceived Competence and Social Acceptance. The results showed that the quality
of parenting in families with a child conceived by assisted conception is
superior to that shown by families with a naturally conceived child. No group
differences were found for any of the measures of children's emotions, behavior,
or relationships with parents. The findings are discussed in terms of their
implications for understanding the role of genetic ties in family functioning and
child development.

PMID: 7750366 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


3. Hum Reprod. 1996 Oct;11(10):2324-31.

The European study of assisted reproduction families: family functioning and
child development.

Golombok S, Brewaeys A, Cook R, Giavazzi MT, Guerra D, Mantovani A, van Hall E,
Crosignani PG, Dexeus S.

Family and Child Psychology Research Centre, City University, London, UK.

Findings are presented of a European study (conducted in the UK, Italy, Spain and
The Netherlands) of family relationships and the social and emotional development
of children in families created as a result of the two most widely used
reproductive technologies, in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and donor insemination
(DI), in comparison with control groups of families with naturally conceived
child and adoptive families. Mothers of children conceived by assisted
reproduction expressed greater warmth towards their child, were more emotionally
involved with their child, interacted more with their child and reported less
stress associated with parenting than mothers who conceived their child
naturally. Similarly, assisted reproduction fathers were found to interact more
with their child and to contribute more to parenting than fathers with a
naturally conceived child. With respect to the children themselves, no group
differences were found for either the presence of psychological disorder or for
children's perceptions of the quality of family relationships. The findings
relating to the quality of parenting and the socio-emotional development of the
children were similar in each of the four countries studied.

PMID: 8943550 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


4. J Fam Psychol. 2007 Jun;21(2):278-87.

Parenting and child development in families with a child conceived through embryo
donation.

MacCallum F, Golombok S, Brinsden P.

Department of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Fiona.Maccallum@warwick.ac.uk

Concerns have been raised regarding the potentially negative effects of
conception using donated embryos on parenting and child development. Findings are
presented of an exploratory study of families with a child conceived through
embryo donation. Twenty-one embryo donation families were compared with 28
adoptive families and 30 in vitro fertilization families on standardized
interview and questionnaire measures of the parents' marital and psychological
state, the quality of parent-child relationships, and the child's development. In
all 3 groups, the children were aged 2-5 years. The differences indicated higher
emotional overinvolvement and defensive responding in the embryo donation
families, along with greater secrecy about the child's origins. The children were
not at increased risk of psychological problems. The study provides interesting
but preliminary findings on parent-child relationships and child development in a
new family form.

PMID: 17605550 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


5. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1999 May;40(4):519-27.

Social versus biological parenting: family functioning and the socioemotional
development of children conceived by egg or sperm donation.

Golombok S, Murray C, Brinsden P, Abdalla H.

Family and Child Psychology Research Centre, City University, London, UK.

By investigating egg donation families, donor insemination families, adoptive
families, and families created by in vitro fertilization, the aim of the present
study was to examine parents' emotional well-being, the quality of parenting, and
childrens' socioemotional development in families with a child who is genetically
unrelated to the mother or the father. The differences that were found to exist
between families according to the presence or absence of genetic ties between
parents and their children reflected greater psychological well-being among
mothers and fathers in families where there was no genetic link between the
mother and the child. The families did not differ with respect to the quality of
parenting or the psychological adjustment of the child.

PMID: 10357159 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


6. Hum Reprod. 1997 Jun;12(6):1349-59.

Donor insemination: child development and family functioning in lesbian mother
families.

Brewaeys A, Ponjaert I, Van Hall EV, Golombok S.

Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, University
Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Findings are presented of a comparative study investigating the family
relationships and the emotional and gender development of children raised in
lesbian mother families. A total of 30 lesbian mother families with 4-8 year old
children created as a result of donor insemination (DI) were compared with 38
heterosexual families with a DI child and with 30 heterosexual families who had a
naturally conceived child. A variety of assessment measures, including a
standardized interview and questionnaires from the parents and psychological
testing of the child were used to collect the data. The quality of the couples'
relationships and the quality of the mother-child interaction did not differ
between lesbian mother families and either of the heterosexual family groups. The
quality of the interaction between the social mother and the child in lesbian
families was superior to that between the father and the child in both groups of
heterosexual families. Childrens' own perception of their parents was similar in
all family types; the social mother in lesbian families was regarded by the child
to be as much a 'parent' as the father in both types of heterosexual families.
With regard to their emotional/behavioural development, boys and girls raised in
lesbian mother families were well adjusted and their gender role development did
not differ from that of children raised in heterosexual families. These results
indicate that child and family development in lesbian mother families is similar
to that of heterosexual families.

PMID: 9222029 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


7. Child Dev. 1998 Apr;69(2):443-57.

Psychosocial adjustment among children conceived via donor insemination by
lesbian and heterosexual mothers.

Chan RW, Raboy B, Patterson CJ.

Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville 22903-2477,
USA. rwc8d@virginia.edu

This study examined the relations among family structure (e.g., number of
parents, parental sexual orientation), family process (e.g., parents'
relationship satisfaction, interparental conflict), and the psychological
adjustment of children who had been conceived via donor insemination. The 80
participating families, all of whom had conceived children using the resources of
a single sperm bank, included 55 families headed by lesbian and 25 families
headed by heterosexual parents. Fifty families were headed by couples and 30 by
single parents. Participating children averaged 7 years of age. Results showed
that children were developing in normal fashion, and that their adjustment was
unrelated to structural variables such as parental sexual orientation or the
number of parents in the household. These results held true for teacher reports
as well as for parent reports. Variables associated with family interactions and
processes were, however, significantly related to indices of children's
adjustment. Parents who were experiencing higher levels of parenting stress,
higher levels of interparental conflict, and lower levels of love for each other
had children who exhibited more behavior problems.

PMID: 9586218 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


8. Hum Reprod Update. 2001 Jan-Feb;7(1):38-46.

Review: parent-child relationships and child development in donor insemination
families.

Brewaeys A.

Netherlands Institute of Social Sexological Research, Utrecht.
Brewaeys@multiweb.nl

The present article reviews the empirical research regarding the parent-child
relationships and the development of children in donor insemination (DI)
families. Over the years, follow-up studies have appeared sporadically and,
despite the varying quality of the research methods, preliminary findings have
emerged. Heterosexual DI parents were psychologically well adjusted and had
stable marital relationships. DI parents showed a similar or higher quality of
parent-child interaction and a greater emotional involvement with their children
compared with naturally conceived families. The majority of studies which
investigated several aspects of child development found that, overall, DI
children were doing well. Findings with regard to emotional/behavioural
development, however, were divergent in that some studies identified an increase
of such problems while others did not. A steadily growing group within the DI
population is lesbian mother families. More recently, follow-up studies have been
carried out among DI children who were raised from birth by two mothers. Despite
many concerns about the well-being of these children, no adverse effects of this
alternative family structure on child development could be identified. As the DI
children in all investigations were still young, our knowledge about the
long-term effects of DI remains incomplete.

PMID: 11212073 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Public Safety Committee on thugs, hooligans, and hooligans

A special meeting of the Public Safety and National Security Committee was held yesterday : "Requested by Four (4) Members of the Committee to Undertake a Study of the Issues Surrounding Security at the G8 and G20 Summits".

Will there be a parliamentary study on G20 security issues?
Well, first they have to agree to a motion to have such a study and they have only two hours to get over this seemingly insurmountable procedural hurdle. Let's look in ....

Dave MacKenzie, Con : Motion to commend the efforts of the police to protect Canadians. Violent mob, thugs, hooligans ... violent mob of thugs and hooligans ... violent mob of thugs, hooligans, and anarchists who set fire to police cars ... mob of thugs, hooligans and anarchists ... cowards packed with weapons ... mob of ...

NDP Paul Dewar : Is this a new motion? What about the motion to have a study on security?

Con Chair Garry Breitkreuz : No, this is just a discussion. Go ahead, Mr. MacKenzie

Con Dave MacKenzie : Mob of thugs, hooligans, and anarchists ... let's wait for the ISU to do their study first.

Con Dean del Mastro : Summit a great success ... thugs, hooligans and anarchists ... anarchist groups ... call for a study is just a cheap political stunt ... Unlike the NDP-led coalition we stand for our police ... There have been no allegations of PMO interference ... NDP's coalition is lining itself up with anarchist groups ... We should trust the ISU and Toronto Police to do its final review - they have the expertise .... We should condemn the actions of anarchists, not give them a public forum to defend their criminal deeds and I believe the motion Mr. MacKenzie has discussed does do this - condemn the actions of these hooligans. This is the view of the overwhelming majority of Canadians - 75%. Stand with our police, stand with the appropriate bodies, and condemn the thugs and hooligans.

Con Paul Calandra : How disappointing to be here to promote the agenda of the thugs and hooligans ... hooligans and thugs ... [omigawd, now he's reading from the gov's promotional G20 pamphlet] ... growth prospects, make our financial systems stronger, going forward more work remains, transparency, we stand united with the people of Haiti, resist protectionism, [and finally he gets around to]....thugs, hooligans, and hooligans ...

Thugs, hooligans, and hooligans?

Oh dear, an unfortunate and probably unauthorized variation on the prepared text. No drink for you.

Anyway, as we're only at the half hour mark out of two hours here, I'll spare you the suspense. After many many more "thugs, hooligans, and anarchists", sometimes preceded by "mob of", and despite attempts by NDP Paul Dewar, Libs Andrew Kania and Mark Holland, and Bloc Maria Mourani to get around to the actual reason for convening this meeting - the motion to study G20 security issues - the committee adjourned without ever having a vote on it.

Well done, Public Safety and National Security Committee.

Pinging Constable A. Josephs, Toronto Police

The term of art to describe you, sir, is "dick."

[H/t Creative Revolution and the Reverend Paperboy, who got it right]

Oops! This link appears broken

"Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at www.thestar.com."
Ditto on Explorer : "Cannot find server".

I haven't been able to access the Toronto Star for a couple of days now and several recent source links I've made to Antonia Z at The Star are also non-functional.

Anyone else having the same trouble?

Taking leave of our census

It's old news already, covered well by other bloggers, but just a couple of quick notes:

• Are people aware that, once again, we--that is, Tony Clement and, of course, Stephen Harper, without whose divine approval not a blade of government grass stirs--are slavishly following in the footsteps of American politicians?
  
  Anyone remember Michele Bachmann, the far-right flake who is frequently the unwilling recipient of Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person in the World" award?
  
  

  Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

  Michele co-sponsored a bill just last year to--guess what?--gut the American census. Reasons? "Privacy concerns" -- utterly bogus, of course, but Clement is now channelling her. Do Canadian cons ever have ideas of their own?
  
  
• Be sure to read Dan Gardner's take-down today--referring to this move as "the Conservative government's latest act of gratuitous stupidity." He points to what should be obvious: a voluntary long-form is useless because of its inevitable sample bias. And here's more on that subject from blogger Stephen Gordon [h/t BCL].
  

Humanity vs Corporatism (Update)

Another round in the battle between do-gooders and evil-doers?

Taser International's lawyers are challenging the findings of the Braidwood Commission in the BC Supreme Court.

Taser International says its bottom line is hurting and its reputation has been slurred in the wake of a provincial public inquiry report that concluded the weapon can cause death. ...

David Neave, a lawyer for the U.S. manufacturer, told Judge Robert Sewell on Monday that Taser is concerned about Braidwood’s conclusion that the weapon can cause death. “It’s a slur on Taser that its device can kill,” Neave said. “That’s a slur that ought to be removed.”

Sewell noted the commission had concluded the “harm this product could cause carries with it a low risk of death.” However, Neave said there is no medical or scientific evidence to support that the weapon has caused any deaths.

Sewell challenged Neave further and said use of the weapon, if carried out by anyone other than police officers, could be considered assault causing bodily harm. “This product is designed to cause harm,” the judge said.

Neave rejected that. “It’s designed to incapacitate,” he said. “Certainly there is a pain component associated.”

I believe that the terms that I've emphasized, if employed by anyone other than a lawyer working for Taser International, could be considered weasel words.

Taser International claims that Braidwood's conclusions "had caused concern with customers around the world and it was hurting potential sales". The price of stock shares seems to be affected also, as a result of the commissioner's plain language observations that were widely disseminated in news items.

I blogged about Braidwood last year. I mentioned, and linked to a letter sent to Sofia Cisowski from Dr Mike Webster, RCMP staff psychologist. There are points that he used that need repeating, in light of what happened in Toronto during the g-20.

As in all democratic societies, the police in Canada are given the authority to use force to ensure that the laws of the country are upheld and public safety and security are maintained. This, of course, carries the expectation that police persons and their organizations will be accountable to the public for any use of force . However, even though the community provides the police with the ability to employ legitimate force, several questions arise:

i. What is a reasonable use of force?
ii. Why and under what circumstances is one type of force chosen over another?; and, iii. What standards are in place to ensure that there is consistency in addressing use of force situations?

The police, in Canada, have attempted to address these questions by developing use of force models. No matter whether it is the RCMP's Incident Management Intervention Model (IMIM) or the more widely used National Use of Force Framework (NUFF), these are attempts to integrate force options (e.g. presence, communication…etc.) with a generic decision making model (e.g. assess-plan-act). There are some key principles underlying these models:

i. The primary responsibility of a police person is to preserve and protect life;
ii. The primary objective of any use of force is to ensure public safety;
iii. The safety of the police person is essential to public safety; and,
iv. The use of force model does not replace the law.

In May 2009 blogpost, I refered to a tipping point,

"the level at which the momentum for change becomes unstoppable", as defined by Malcolm Gladwell in his book, refining the expression as a sociological term: "the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point."

Dr Dawg also used that expression in this post.

There are reports, many documented by lawyers who attempted to communicate with their clients (activists pre-emptively apprehended and detained in cells during the g-20) that young people from the province of Québec were specifically targeted by police organizations.

That information must be presented in the course of the civilian-led public review into the behaviour of the riot police in order to identify the source of directives that dictated their actions - even though the head of the Toronto Police union has rightfully stated that it won't be a a full-fledged public inquiry that would be legally binding, as ordered by the province.


Photo source.

Update: As more information about the abusive policing methods on display at the g-20 emerge, some media are suggesting that "the RCMP were largely at the helm" of the security operations. This makes the information supplied by Dr David Webster relevant to these circumstances also.

Man oh Mann - Redux

OK, since some claimed that the Penn State report was biased, we now have the Independent Climate Change E-mail Review report. Yet again the scientists involved are congratulated for producing excellent science. One of the interesting things about this report is that it actually looks at some of the issues involved. For example, one of the main criticisms of climate researchers is that they have not released their code. However the report actually investigated whether this was a real problem. Their finding:

33. Finding: The computer code required to read and analyse the instrumental temperature data is straightforward to write based upon the published literature. It amounts a few hundred lines of executable code (i.e. ignoring spaces and comments). Such code could be written by any research unit which is competent to reproduce or test the CRUTEM analysis. For the trial analysis of the Review Team, the code was written in less than two days and produced results similar to other independent analyses. No information was required from CRU to do this.

The report is full of other goodies such as:

20. Finding: This simple analysis and the comparisons in figures 6.1 and 6.2 give rise to the following findings:

• Any independent researcher may freely obtain the primary station data. It is impossible for a third party to withhold access to the data.

• It is impossible for a third party to tamper improperly with the data unless they have also been able to corrupt the GHCN and NCAR sources. We do not consider this to be a credible possibility, and in any case this would be easily detectable by comparison to the original NMO records or other sources such as the Hadley Centre.

• The steps needed to create a global temperature series from the data are straightforward to implement.

• The required computer code is straightforward and easily written by a competent researcher.

• The shape of the temperature trends obtained in all cases is very similar: in other words following the same process with the same data obtained from different sources generates very similar results.

Of course the report is wrong because the authors are biased, or the day it was published on ended in a "y" or something.

Crises of Capitalism

David Harvey asks if it is time to look beyond capitalism towards a new social order that would allow us to live within a system that really could be responsible, just, and humane.

Don't Say Au Revoir, Just Say Hors D'Oeuvre

I haven't been as bloggy as late, and that's because I've been desperately trying to wrap up stuff and meet deadlines, getting ready for tomorrow, when I drop off the map for three weeks.

If I can - if the stars line up and technology obliges - I will try to forward some images from the quest to Stageleft. Otherwise - see you in a month!

And to assuage the aching sense of loss you are no doubt experiencing as you contemplate the prospect of four balbless weeks - here's the second Stageleft Famous Farewells Quiz.

G-20 policing: the tipping point?

It's far from what we want, but it could be the next-best thing: an independent review of police actions during the G-20 in Toronto.

Even those who might have thought at first that I and others were a little over the top on the subject of Toronto police culture and its potential for harm may have joined in our mounting dismay as more and more stories and videos of police brutality have emerged over the past few days. But for sheer horror, this account might have been the one that prompted the powers that be to mount at least the semblance of an investigation:

[I]n came a line of armoured police, into an area the city had promised would be safe for peaceful demonstrations during the summit. They closed right in on John and his daughter and the two others and ordered them to move. Pruyn tried getting up and he fell, and it was all too slow for the police.

As Sarah began pleading with them to give her father a little time and space to get up because he is an amputee, they began kicking and hitting him. One of the police officers used his knee to press Pruyn’s head down so hard on the ground, said Pruyn in an interview this July 4 with Niagara At Large, that his head was still hurting a week later.

Accusing him of resisting arrest, they pulled his walking sticks away from him, tied his hands behind his back and ripped off his prosthetic leg. Then they told him to get up and hop, and when he said he couldn’t, they dragged him across the pavement, tearing skin off his elbows , with his hands still tied behind his back. His glasses were knocked off as they continued to accuse him of resisting arrest and of being a “spitter,” something he said he did not do. They took him to a warehouse and locked him in a steel-mesh cage where his nightmare continued for another 27 hours.

What kind of an organizational culture allows this sort of thing to happen? What kind of a police chief presides over it? What kind of a Premier blows it off?

This inquiry may not amount to a hill of beans. The Toronto Police Services Board that announced it today refused to listen to public deputations at its meeting, even one from former Toronto Mayor John Sewell. But we'll be watching, anxiously and with what hope is left to us, to see who will be conducting the investigation and what his or her terms of reference will be. Could there be light at the end of this very dark tunnel?

UPDATE: (July 14) Commenter "Morning: rightly points out that other police forces were involved. The Toronto Star made a similar point earlier this week, casting some gloom over the notion of a TPS Board inquiry, no matter how independent.

Homeland Security damage control in the Gulf

July 2 : CNN : "The US Coast Guard announced new rules keeping photographers, reporters and anyone else from coming within 65 feet of any response vessel or booms, out on the water or on beaches.Violators could face a fine of $40,000 and class D felony charges. The coast guard tried to make the exclusion zone 300 feet before scaling it down to 65 feet."

July 3 : MSNBC : A photographer taking pictures of a BP refinery in Texas was detained by a BP security official, local police and a man who said he was from the Department of Homeland Security.

July 4 : Bloomberg : The US government is expected to take over control of the central information website on the Gulf oil spill response that has been run jointly by various agencies and BP for the 2 1/2 months since the rig explosion.

The Department of Homeland Security wants a one-stop shop for information that is completely overseen by the government as it settles into the long-haul of dealing with the response to the disaster. The U.S. Coast Guard falls under Homeland Security's authority.

The deepwaterhorizonresponse.com site may still be maintained during the changeover, but ultimately it will be taken down altogether when the government moves the response information to its own website."

July 6 : Washington Post : "In the 77 days since oil from the ruptured Deepwater Horizon began to gush into the Gulf of Mexico, BP has skimmed or burned about 60 percent of the amount it promised regulators it could remove in a single day.

In a March report that was not questioned by federal officials, BP said it had the capacity to skim and remove 491,721 barrels of oil each day in the event of a major spill.

As of Monday, with about 2 million barrels released into the gulf, the skimming operations that were touted as key to preventing environmental disaster have averaged less than 900 barrels a day.

On Monday, the joint operations center for the federal government and BP reported that more than 671,428 barrels of an oil-water mixture have been captured and stored. About 90 percent of the mixture is water, so the true amount of oil skimmed is relatively small -- roughly 67,143 barrels of oil. Had the estimated amounts in the March response plan been accurate, 38 million barrels of oil could have been removed by now. "

Although the US House of Representatives voted 420 to 1 to give the presidential commission investigating the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico full subpoena power, the Republicans in the Senate have blocked it. There will be no real investigation.

The Coast Guard, under the auspices of Homeland Security, and Minerals Management Services, the federal body charged with (not doing any) oversight of oil drilling and now renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, will announce this week the creation of an expert panel to conduct a "preparedness review" for Deepwater Horizon.

G20 martial law - some questions

We have always known in Canada that there are laws lying in wait to trash the Charter of Rights hovering just beyond the sight lines of the courts. The Public Works Protection Act is just such a law, allowing, albeit for a limited time, otherwise illegal searches and seizures and arrests.

Here, constitutional lawyer Paul Cavalluzzo, lead commission council at the Walkerton and Maher Arar inquiries, goes through the act with Paul Jay of The Real News. Transcript here.

I have some further questions.

If I live within an arbitrarily designated "public works area", can Blackwater or a mall rent-a-cop or any other appointed "guard" legally enter my home and arrest me for attempting to deny them entry? Will they be armed?

If I don't consent to being ID'd and searched on my way to work, can I legally be prevented from going to work? I cannot prove this, as it is only anecdotal, but during the Vancouver Olympics, a contractor told me he lost an employee due to said employee being denied passage through Vancouver by the police for the duration of the Olympics for having written an anti-Olympics letter to the local paper that was never published.

If any of the protesters/shoppers/citizens arrested and detained in handcuffs for 24 hours and jammed in a 10 by 12 by 20 foot cage along with 40 other men are not formally charged and given their day in court, will there be no other opportunity to challenge these arbitrary Charter-free zones until the next time they are dusted off for a globalization bunfest?

And finally, why is Chief Bill Blair on the hot seat for having been given these extraordinary powers he didn't ask for when it was presumably the PMO that told the Ontario cabinet to ask for them?

Any responses from legal experts gratefully accepted.

In the meantime, while the Toronto's Police Services Board which holds Toronto Police to account sees no need for a public inquiry, support the Canadian Civil Liberties Association's petition to "repeal or amendment of the Public Works Protection Act to meet basic constitutional standards"

"There's no civil rights here in Ontario..."

"...How many times you gotta be told that?"

(@4:55)

[H/t DAMMIT JANET!]

UPDATE: Co-blogger Alison hears the comment as "no civil rights here in this area." Bad enough even so--the demonstrators were nowhere near the supposed 5-metre perimeter around the fence--but what do others hear @4:55?

Happy Pride Day, Toronto

And illegitimi non carborundum.

A proud Torontonian writes:

I don't know if you know what pride parades are like, but here in Toronto -apart from pride in and celebration of ourselves- everything and all gets protested: patriarchy; ableism; monogamy; racism; consumerism; eating meat; banning smoking; having to wear clothes (tried to ban that naked group of people some years back but police refused to enforce it) etc. There is room for groups standing up for the homeless, for disadvantaged youth, for the elderly. There even is room for promotion of the commercial activities of companies (banks, car dealers) who are proud to include us. Pride is diverse and is aimed at making all of us feel that we belong.

To me Pride is about showing ourselves and others who we are, what we are, how we want to be seen, how we want to relax and party and what we stand for. For a lot of people the fun is in watching gay men prance about (and good for them), but I think there should always be room for other facets of our lives, because I'm not just queer/bi and I want to show that too.

The mean streets: another account

From the Globe & Mail's Tabitha Southey:

An officer threatened to arrest me for standing on the street (I was with a journalist and a photographer who lives in the building that we were in front of), but after two days of the G20 in Toronto, I was almost as inured to that threat as I was to the random searches I saw going on, everywhere, blocks away from the designated high-security zone.

Earlier that day, well before the much-publicized destruction on Yonge Street, I'd been threatened with arrest for “obstructing” a search by trying to take a picture (at a respectful distance) of two young men being searched.

An officer there had tried to grab my cellphone. Other officers had crowded around. They boisterously mocked the psychiatric patients coming out of the mental-health hospital behind me.

When I eventually, after a heated exchange, asked the officer for a badge number, he walked toward me repeatedly, sticking his chest out so that, if I didn't step back quickly, I'd be hit. As he did this, he yelled, “You want my badge number? You want my badge number? You want my badge number?”

But her colleague Christie "I love a man in uniform" Blatchford drones on--as always, it seems, a walking example of the Ishmael Effect.

Civil liberties: abridged edition*

*"I know that some folks feel that their rights have been abridged, and there are avenues available to them and I would encourage them to pursue any remedies that are available to them through those avenues." --Dalton McGuinty

Having been pursued down avenues themselves, I wish them all good hunting. For those who want to help with the resuscitation of civil liberties in Ontario, please visit the Canadian Civil Liberties Association website and sign the petition.

This isn't properly ceremonial, by the way, but let me take this opportunity to announce that both Alison and Balbulican have agreed to stay on as co-bloggers after I get my thesis wrestled to the ground. I'm honoured to have their wit and wisdom here on an indeterminate basis. Please give them the hearty welcome they deserve.

This is what real journalism looks like

On June 26th Toronto Mayor David Miller exhorted Torontonians to put the previous day's G20 violence behind them and get out into the streets to enjoy their city. Theatre director Tommy Taylor took Miller's words to heart.

This is his story of his day. Arrested with his girlfriend for singing "Give Peace a Chance", held for more than 24 hours in handcuffs in a 10 by 12 by 20 foot cage along with 40 other men, wet and freezing cold, standing room only, no phone call, having to beg for a few sips of water, eventually passing out on the filthy floor.

One of the most compelling accounts on any subject I've read in some time, not least of all for his sympathy for the police forced into this position.

This is what real journalism looks like :

How I Got Arrested and Abused at the G20 in Toronto
by Tommy Taylor

via Boris and Back of the Book.

Sign the Canadian Civil Liberties Association Petiton for
~An independent inquiry into the actions of the police during the G20
~Amendment of the Public Works Protection Act to meet basic constitutional standards
~Reform to ensure that the Criminal Code provisions relating to “breach of the peace”, “unlawful assemblies” and “riots” are brought in line with constitutional standards

G20 : Letter of the Day

"What is the difference between being told that you do not have the right to public assembly and being told that if you do assemble you run the risk of being injured or arrested? In the first instance, your right has been taken away. In the second, if you stay at home, you have given up your right. The only way to protect your right, therefore, is to assemble after all.

The caution to stay away came officially from the American government, but no Canadian authority contradicted this. The high fences, newly purchased crowd control devices and the assembly of an army of 19,000 security officers served to reinforce this warning, which was essentially a threat.

The most frightening thing that could have happened would have been if the streets of Toronto had been empty last weekend. That is the only reason I went to Queen’s Park last Saturday afternoon. As Benjamin Franklin once wrote, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

No one is looking for any sympathy, but the next time there is news coverage of demonstrators protesting against a stolen election and being beaten by riot police in some Third World country, let us give thanks for the rights we do have. They will continue to stand up for us as long as we stand up for them."

Patrick Heenan, Mississauga

as posted in the Toronto Star and tweeted by the Divine Ms Z.

Good letter, huh?

Meanwhile over at NaPo, Kelly McPoll-land is happy to report that after watching the same footage of the same guy smashing a window on the TV news dozens of times every night, 1,003 Canadians told an Angus Reid poll they were disgusted by what happened at the G20 demos :

Poll finds G20 protesters blew it big time

Respondents were asked about their feelings about the demonstrations that
took place in Toronto during the G20 summit.
Two-thirds of Canadians (69%) are disgusted, 59% are ashamed, 57% are angry, and 54% are sad. In Toronto, the proportion of respondents who reported negative feelings was higher (Disgust 81%, Anger 74%, Sadness 65%, Shame 61%)

Notable that even at NaPo, more than half the commenters below the article pretty much agree with the feelings expressed in that poll - although for entirely opposite reasons - and a number link to the Canadians Demanding a Public Inquiry into Toronto G20 facebook page -currently over 36,000 members - where the commenters have no difficulty at all articulating why they are disgusted, ashamed, angry, and sad.

Man oh Mann

Well, this should put the last nail in the coffin of the whole CRU Hack incident. If you recall two investigations in the UK and one by Penn State revealed that there was no indication of wrongdoing contained in the stolen e-mails. However the investigation by Penn State did decide that since the committee was comprised of mostly administrators, they were not equipped to judge whether Dr. Mann had violated best practices issues. From that initial report:

Decision 4: The Inquiry Committee determined that "given that information emerged in the form of the emails purloined from CRU in November 2009, which have raised questions in the public's mind about Dr. Mann's conduct of his research activity, given that this may be undermining confidence in his findings as a scientist, and given that it may be undermining public trust in science in general and climate science specifically, an Investigatory Committee of faculty peers from diverse fields should be constituted under RA-I 0 to further consider this allegation."

Well, the committee of peers has finished its work and while I expected Dr. Mann to be cleared this turned out to not be the case. While he was exonerated on most issues (and commended for his research) they did find criticism, specifically:

The Investigatory Committee considers Dr. Mann's actions in sharing unpublished manuscripts with third parties, without first having received express consent from the authors of such manuscripts, to be careless and inappropriate. While sharing an unpublished manuscript on the basis of the author's implied consent may be an acceptable practice in the judgment of some individuals, the Investigatory Committee believes the best practice in this regard is to obtain express consent from the author before sharing an unpublished manuscript with third parties.

So in fact the criticism with Dr. Mann is that he is too open with sharing information. I wonder how this will be spun!

Toronto dystopia

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever. --George Orwell.

[H/t Impolitical]

What really happened.

Rachel S. returned to Montréal, her actions respected and supported by her network of family, friends and fellow students. She reported what she experienced and observed in Toronto during the g20 events.

But first, a video that faithfully depicts the actions of Rachel and her peers, peaceful activists, volunteers and committed citizens who took to the streets of Toronto, numbering 25,000 and more.

These are the images that the 'mainstream' media chose not to broadcast.



And now Rachel in all her eloquence, powerfully written and spoken.

On Wednesday, while on the way to an environmental justice protest in Toronto, in the lead-up to the G20, I had my first taste of the paranoia and the enormous police presence that has taken over the city. My friend Asha and I were walking with a sign condemning Canadian mining companies, and a light stick we were intending to tape to the sign to hold it up.

We were a few blocks away from the bus station at Bay and Dundas, and still a ways from the beginning of the protest we were moving towards, when two police officers stepped out of an alley and approached us. I transcribed our conversation immediately after it took place; it is as close as possible to verbatim:
Female Officer: Can I talk to you?
Myself: I don’t think I want to talk. Attempts to keep walking.
Female Officer: We’re concerned about your stick.
Asha: It’s for the sign.
Female Officer: I’m not concerned with you, with peaceful protesters. We’re removing it for your safety and ours from other protesters. (Both the officer and Asha are holding the stick at this point, though neither are pulling at it.) We’re not concerned about your sign, you can use something else that can’t be construed as a weapon.
Asha: It’s not a weapon, we’re going to a tour.
(A male police officer who had been standing back approaches.)
Male Officer: I doubt that you’re going to a tour with that sign.
Asha: No, we are. It’s a toxic tour.
Female Officer: We appreciate that but we need to take this. We’ll just keep it for you, we can tell you where it is.
Myself: What can I use to hold up my sign that you won’t consider a weapon?
Female Officer: I don’t know, you’ll have to figure that out on your own.
(Asha and I decide to give up the stick. She lets it go.)
Asha: There goes another civil liberty.
(We leave.)

Happy Canada Day: open thread

In, say, 100 words or less, what do you like best about our country?