Coup d'état

What does a coup d'état look like?

We have all seen the news footage of these events, lets go down memory lane... Iran 1979... The Philippines 1986... Yugoslavia 2000... Argentina 2001... The Philippines again 2001... Bolivia 2003... Georgia 2003... Ukraine 2004/5... Ecuador 2005... Bolivia again 2005 (remind me not to move to Bolivia anytime soon) .... and of course Canada 2009...

WAIT, CANADA!!??!! 2009!!! My math, history, and geography all suck, but I think that means HERE and NOW. Oh crap, why didn't I see the burning cars, protesters getting shot, and the army mobilized to seize power... I slept in today, but seriously did I miss it ALL? No. Sorry. Wrong! This is Canad; that kind of stuff doesn't happen here, we do things differently than those crazy banana republics.

Well, that is correct. This is Canada and yes we do things differently here. Here our coup d'état didn't involve guns, or mass protests, or a significant change in our way of life. In fact, it was intended on never even receiving any press, but thankfully their well-laid revolutionary plans were thwarted and it did (sort-of) make the news (in a manner of speaking). Now as Canadians we must recognize what happened, understand the purposeful, malicious intent behind it and ensure it NEVER happens again.

You are now likely wondering what exactly I am talking about and possibly even wondering what my tin foil hat looks like. However, please let me explain. First of all what I am talking about first hit the news on the afternoon of Thursday Oct 8, 2009. Here is the article. Now on first read it appears to be a fairly innocent slip of the tongue that Stephen Harper responded to in a fairly harsh manner. The particularly savvy among us would recognize the shrewd political maneuverings of Harper's minority government. To be honest, my interest in the story before an hour ago was nothing more than interest in the "meta" politics involved and the cleverness at Stephan Harper's actions in the grand scheme of things. However today with this news article, the whole tone of the story changes and you start to see the toes of the coup d'état poking out from under the blanket of deception.

Here is the situation and a relative time-line:

1. Monday October 5, 2009 Governor General Michaelle Jean refers to herself as Canada's Head of State twice during a speech given to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
2. Wednesday October 7, 2009 The Prime Ministers Office issues a statement saying that Queen Elizabeth II is Canada's Head of State, and said that the Governor General should not be referring to herself as Canada's Head of State.
3. Friday October 9, 2009 Rideau Hall launches a new website with numerous references to Governor General Michaelle Jean as "head of state"
4. Retired Liberal Senator Laurier LaPierre publicly announces that all 'decent Canadians' should accept Governor General Michaelle Jean as Canada's Head of State and that our monarchist system needs to be done away with.
   

So what does this mean? First of all it demonstrates clear "intent" on behalf of the Governor General. Monday's speech was no slip of the tongue. It was part of a clear plan to establish herself as Canada's recognized Head of State from the member nations of the United Nations. This is evidenced by the rolling out of a new website on Friday in order of establish herself as the recognized Head of State for Canada by the citizens of Canada. Remember rolling out a revised website is not the same as issuing a press release, it takes weeks or months to roll-out a new website. This time-line for quietly introducing the new website was in the works weeks before the Governor General's "slip of the tongue" at the UN.

Stephen Harper publicly denouncing the Governor General for referring to herself as the Head of State was the "kink" in her plan. Laurier LaPierre's public statement on Friday was an attempt to counter Harper's statement and try to compel "decent Canadians" to recognize the Governor General as the Head of State.

This is nothing short of scary when you consider what could have happened if nothing was said. The Governor General gets international recognition as our Head of State, through the website and other internal educational means she essentially tricks normal Canadians that she has always been the head of state, and then when it comes time that a replacement was to be appointed the trap is sprung. Who determines the next Governor General? Well the Head of State does, after considering the recommendations of the current Prime Minister. So now we have the outgoing Governor General appointing the incoming Governor General... umm the only thing that differs from a true Monarchy is the tradition of WHO gets appointed, but the reality of the situation is the same, Governor General Michaelle Jean would have started a line of Royalty.

Now you may all think to yourself "but that is impossible, we would then stop her!" But How? Legally she has the status quo of being the recognized Head of State both internally and internationally. Legally she is the Commander in Chief and is ultimately the one who holds the power to order the Canadian Military to do this, that, or the other. Constitutionally the matter would be muddied as then the distinction of exactly WHO is the Head of State is debated with Governor General Michaelle Jean having 5 years of status quo on her side.

Bottom line is we would either be forced to accept our new Queen Michaelle Jean, try and find resolution through the courts... unlikely, or have an all out Civil War, where everyone of us decides who we each believe to be Canada's Head of State, and then we all grab guns and start killing our friends and family who don't agree with us.

Never thought I would be thankful that Stephen Harper did anything, but the realization that he may well have inadvertently prevented an all out civil war (or Revolution depending on your outlook) by his political games taunting the Governor General and the Opposition to forcing an election while he was looking at a potential majority.

Catastrophe Averted, now I must make dinner, ahh what a day :)

Here Kitty Kitty....

So here in the lovely city of Calgary, Alberta, some unbelievably stupid individual thought to himself "Hey, it's 1am on a Sunday night, and since I am incredibly stupid and am pissed off that I spent yet another weekend with no date I am going to change that!!! I know, if I break into the Zoo, scale the outer perimeter fence of the tiger enclosure, and get a picture of me petting the tiger then all of my women problems will be over!!" As can be expected Monday morning greeted Calgarians with the following headlines...

Tiger Injures Man at Calgary Zoo

Oh My God. I mean seriously how STUPID could one person be? If only the tiger could have gotten at his reproductive areas, then the gene pool could have hugely benefited from this incident! Unfortunately it appears from the various news coverage on the mauling, that there isn't any explicit damage to his reproductive capabilities. We can always hope for secondary infections or at least take solace in the fact that any man that stupid will be exceptionally unlikely to reproduce.

While I know someone must not be able to reproduce as a result of their own stupidity to officially qualify for a Darwin's Award, but there is still hope, and in the mean time, I think he certainly deserves a Future Darwin Hopeful Award for all his fine effort to improve the future for us all.