Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2019

The AIH Transcript for February 1, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Karen Gordon

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

KAREN GORDON: Good evening. I'm Karen Gordon. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

KG: Tonight...

CO: Felt like forever and ever, amen. But finally, a Dutch church has ended its months-long-nonstop church service because it has successfully helped the asylum seekers it was trying to protect.

KG: Duress code. Some detainees at a detention centre in El Paso, Texas, have been refusing to eat for weeks -- and then staff ended their hunger strike with painful force-feedings.

CO: The voice of freezin'. The Yukon Arctic Ultra isn't just a cold race, it's a cruel one. But despite the dangers, our guest will take part and he's trembling with anticipation.

KG: He said he didn't know beans -- and then he spilled them. The late Morton Sobell spent decades insisting he'd been framed -- before eventually admitting he had in fact been a spy for the Russians.

CO: Fuchsia shock. A Wisconsin professor doing research with UV light uses some colourful language after making a surprise discovery: that light makes flying squirrels glow pink.

KG: And out of the questions. Since 2017, a Michigan teen has written hundreds of quizzes for BuzzFeed for free -- but after major layoffs at the website she feels partly responsible so she's going off the questionnaire. As It Happens. The Friday Edition. Radio that knows just because everyone clicks doesn't mean everything clicks.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: 'It's a miracle': Dutch church ends 24/7 asylum vigil as family granted reprieve

Netherlands church

Guest: Derk Stegeman

KG: Derk Stegeman is finally free to take a break. Pastor Stegeman is one of the leaders of the Bethel International Church in The Hague. When we spoke to him in November, the church was about a month into a nonstop-24 hour a day prayer service. A family of asylum seekers had sought refuge in the church, and under Dutch law the police couldn't come and take them while a service was under way. Now 96 days after the service began the Dutch government appears to have agreed to let the family stay. We reached Pastor Derk Stegeman in The Hague.

CO: Pastor Derk Stegeman how did the Tamrazyan family react when they got the news that all those months of prayer had paid off?

DERK STEGEMAN: So first, confused. And then, of course very happy. But our first reaction was confusing because we had to understand what was the agreement of the government and it wasn't quite clear in the beginning.

CO: Is it clear now?

DS: Yes it's clear now -- that the large group of families will be evaluated. It's also clear that the family Tamrazyan -- it's almost certain that their application to stay in the Netherlands will be applied. But it's not definitive -- for them, for the family, and for us it's still a question.

CO: And you've been doing this nonstop church service -- 96 days of it. Now you're no longer doing that. You stop this 24 hour vigil.

DS: Yes yes. No we no longer do it. We cleaned up the chapel, and we have to paint the walls because [chuckles] three months of burning candles is leaving a lot of what is it...black stuff?

CO: The soot on the walls.

DS: Yes. So we have been cleaning up. Of course it's also a gap because it's 24 hours a day -- it's in your life -- I've been sleeping with my mobile phone, beneath my bed etc, so now we are organizing and giving service to well thank God and to thank a lot of people have been helping and participating in the service etc. So we are resting, and evaluating, and thinking, and reflecting, and well...restarting our normal lives [chuckles] I guess.

CO: But you had -- people came from all over the place, didn't they? To help you out, to make sure this service was continuous, because when we spoke with you back in November you were saying that there is a law that doesn't allow the police to or the authorities to interrupt religious ceremonies. So you had to keep this going -- did you expect to see so many people come and help you with that vigil?

DS: No of course not. In the beginning we thought it would be a burden and it would be very hard to organize a continuous service. After a few weeks we discovered that it is not a burden but it was our campfire. It was a way for other people to participate in what we were doing. At the end it's almost thousand pastors who have been participating. And I think almost 15,000 people who have been visiting the service -- a big number of them lots of times day and night. So it has been an enormous-extraordinary thing -- a movement in our churches but also a very intimate way of reinventing, literally reinventing church. We have to reflect on it. It's still something too big to understand even for us -- for ourselves.

CO: You were doing this for this one family, the Tamrazyan family. And then it grew, didn't it? It became about almost 700 people. So what were you able to accomplish for others beyond the Tamrazyans?

DS: Well when we started the church asylum service, the asylum was for the Tamrazyan family but we were also asking attention for the situation of all the other families because they were in the same situation. And of course there were other groups in the Netherlands who were demonstrating -- but for one of the most important political parties in the government, the church asylum has been very influential. So it was I think 10 days ago that Christian political party changed radically its opinion about the child amnesty regulation. And so it happened that it's concluded in a new decision of the government to re-evaluate the cases of all those families. So it's really a miracle.

CO: And people in other countries who were watching what was going on -- because as you know in Europe there is this, as there is elsewhere, there's a bit of rising xenophobia, rising anti-immigrant, anti-refugee sentiment that we've seen throughout politics in Europe. So you say you feel that it's redefined the liturgy, redefined the role of the church. What do you mean by that?

DS: Well I still don't know exactly. On the one side it is good news for us. I think good news for the church -- it's giving hope that there might be a new way for the church to find its place -- its significance also in society. And on the other hand we are also aware that the xenophobia in our society is not diminishing -- it's still growing. And so that's why I think it was also an exercise for the future.

CO: You used the word "miracle" which is when a pastor uses that word it carries a lot of weight. So this began with one family, and you feel that there has been something miraculous that's happened here, is that right?

DS: Yes yes. Because it is just by singing, and praying, and preaching that this happened. We were not organizing demonstrations. Yes we talked with politicians --but it was just the ongoing service that moved people to change their opinion. And I think sometimes we forget that prayer can do that.

CO: Do you think you have inspired others to see the power of prayer?

DS: Well that's what a lot of people say to us, so I think we should believe that. There were people from Italy -- specially coming for the asylum -- and they said to us, well the whole world is looking to what you are doing -- that might be a little bit exaggerated. But we had visitors from all over the world and we heard a lot of times that we are inspiring other people. And in fact I can imagine I was in the past inspired by things happening in other places in the world also so I can imagine. And when you are a little bit on a distance it might be possible that you can see it even better than for us who are so nearby.

CO: Well we have been watching it here as well. So Pastor Stegeman I appreciate speaking with you. We will keep in touch to see how things develop and how these families do. But thank you so much for speaking with us tonight.

DS: Thank you. Pleasure.

CO: Bye bye.

DS: Bye.

KG: Derk Stegeman is a pastor at the Bethel International Church. We reached him in The Hague, The Netherlands. And you can find out more about that story on the As It Happens website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Yukon race

Guest: Russ Reinbolt

KG: Nobody would say the Yukon Arctic Ultra is for wimps. Last year, more than one person actually lost appendages while racing for days across the snowy tundra. And still, unbelievably, 85 people have signed up to start this year's race on Sunday. One of them is Russ Reinbolt, an E.R. doctor from California and a first timer. We reached Mr. Reinbolt in Whitehorse, Yukon.

CO: Russ you've just flown into Whitehorse from sunny warm San Diego. How cold is it where you are right now?

RUSS REINBOLT: It's 18 below zero Fahrenheit.

CO: [Laughs] I got it. I used to know how to translate this but I'll just say it's cold out there -- I think it's about -20 Celsius -- [Russ agrees] maybe I'm just making that up, and it's cold! And so do you have all the kit and the gear you need?

RR: I do. I am set. I'm probably going overboard because I'm taking every precaution possible to avoid frostbite. I had a funny exchange though at the Subway restaurant last night. I had four layers on, and my hat, and multiple gloves, and the very first thing that the cashier asked me -- he didn't ask me what I wanted, he asked me, you're not from around here are you? [Carol laughs] And I said ha! How did you know that? He says, because you have four layers on. So I thought that was kind of funny.

CO: Okay let's talk about this race you're going to get into. You're going to -- well it's 300 miles, 480 kilometres, right?

RR: Correct.

CO: The Yukon Arctic Ultra. Why do you want to do this?

RR: Oh my gosh...I wish I had a standard answer for that because it's so complex. But the main reason is because I want to continue to try to maximize my potential both physically and mentally. And a race this hard well definitely challenge me maximally. So I think that if I'm able to rise up for the challenge I will be able to maximize my physical and mental potential. And then there are other reasons as well. Of course you know it's so doggone beautiful out here. And then also I'm actually an emergency doctor, so it's a very high-stress-fast-paced profession, so correspondingly I like to get away from that. And by running, hiking, out in the wilderness is the perfect medicine for that.

CO: People have lost limbs doing this Yukon Arctic Ultra. And there was an Italian racer who lost both his legs -- amputated at the shin. He lost his right hand, and most of his left hand, from frostbite -- from being frozen. So this is life threatening isn't it?

RR: Absolutely absolutely. And that's why I'm taking every precaution possible to avoid getting even close to that scenario. You know as a physician my hands are my lifeline. And I've got to be very careful. So that's why I've got the best gear possible. I've got multiple combinations that I can wear. I've got net mittens that were handmade out of Sweden. I've got wool liner gloves. I've got three different layers -- three different types of down mittens. So if I end up getting frostbite -- it will be completely unacceptable. I really -- I'm not concerned because I think I'm going to be very well-prepared, and then most importantly is that I'm going to make sound decisions. I'm not going to make mistakes. I'm not going to do anything risky. I'm not going to risk getting my hands wet for example. I'm not going to keep my hands out of my gloves longer than I absolutely have to -- for example when I'm digging out for food from my bag I'm going to do it as quickly as possible.

CO: And what have others told you about how possible it is even to avoid all the things that -- as you do a race like this, as you get more and more tired, as some people have described becoming delirious, confused -- how certain are you that you can make all the right decisions?

RR: Yeah I'm very confident that I will exercise good judgment at all times because I have made mistakes in previous ultra-marathons up to this point. So I've definitely learned from those experiences. I did a 240 mile race a few months ago where I only slept about two hours and 15 minutes. And that simply was not enough sleep. I just kept charging and charging and charging, and I should have stopped and rested and slept. And I will do that in this race so that I don't get to the point where I'm risking making a bad decision.

CO: Now you will be pulling the sled behind you, right?

RR: Yes.

CO: What do you carry? And how heavy is it?

RR: I've got pretty much everything in there besides the kitchen sink. I've got so much stuff. I've got a sleeping bag that's rated 60 below. I've got multiple thermoses of water. I've got a stove so I can melt snow for water if I need it. I've got tons of food. Got bags of bacon because they're high fat, high calorie. I've got all my clothes. You name it. Pretty much everything you need to survive out in the wilderness for multiple days.

CO: Except the kitchen sink.

RR: Except the kitchen sink. Yes.

CO: And if you do get into trouble, if you do get to a situation where it's life and limb we're talking. Can you get out? Is there a way to bail?

RR: There absolutely is. I'm renting a satellite phone which I can always call if I have to you know for help -- can call 911. But then also every participant in this event has a GPS tracker, has a spot device, and every 15 minutes that pings so that people can follow along. But then of course there's a 911 button for emergency evacuation. Of course it would take quite a bit of time to get evacuated, but if things get really bad for example I fall and break my femur or something like that or I'm just so cold and I can't warm up, I would hit that button and then the emergency rescue would occur.

CO: And you have been warned by the organizers that you could die out there?

RR: Absolutely. That's one of the first things that the race director mentioned in our phone interview. He is so cautious now as a result of last year -- I don't think he made any mistakes last year to be honest with you -- but he's still so cautious he wants every participant to have a great experience and doesn't want to have anybody get into trouble.

CO: What does your family say about you running in this race?

RR: They universally think I'm absolutely off my rocker. My wife doesn't support me. She's very concerned about my safety. I've got two young daughters that are my life. But they after all these years now -- they pretty much have given up trying to figure out why in the heck I do this silly stuff.

CO: Well Russ I hope you do it safely and you heed all cautions you have put upon yourself. It sounds like you have thought it through. Good luck to you.

RR: Thank you very much. I really enjoyed talking with you.

CO: You too. Bye bye.

RR: Bye bye.

KG: Russ Reinbolt is an E.R. doctor from San Diego. We reached him in Whitehorse -- where the highest temperatures this weekend will be -24 Celsius.

[Music]

Ron Joyce

KG: He was the singular king of double-doubles. Ron Joyce, the man behind Tim Horton's success, died yesterday at his home in Burlington, Ontario. He was 88. He was born in Tatamagouche, Nova Scotia in 1930. And he grew up in poverty. But then he moved to Hamilton, Ontario -- and NHL star Tim Horton chose him to open the first shop in the chain. Ron Joyce said he knew "zero" about making doughnuts during his first shift, but he built the brand into a billion dollar empire. He also established the Tim Hortons Children's Foundation, and the Joyce Family Foundation. But some chapters of his success story aren't inspiring. After Mr. Horton died, tensions between his wife Laurie Horton and Mr. Joyce escalated, over ownership of the company. And in 2013 a woman alleged he had sexually assaulted her and sued him for 7.5-million dollars -- Mr. Joyce denied it and the case is ongoing. In October of 2006, Mr. Joyce spoke with Shelagh Rogers, host of "Sounds Like Canada" about the key to the coffee shop's success -- and the night Tim Horton died in a car crash.

SOUNDCLIP

RON JOYCE: He had taken a snapshot in the jaw. And I'm not sure when it was -- the day before or the morning of -- but what happened Shelagh is that he left after the second because there was so much -- after second period because he was so much in pain. So I went back to the office and my wife was with me and he was there sitting in the office in the dark with his driving gloves on -- his overcoat, with his feet up on the desk, and he had this blue and white ice pack on his jaw which he believed was broken -- I think it was. It looked a little comical to me at the time. But we sat and talked till about 4 o'clock in the morning. And I think in many ways we [inaudible] each other a lot and where were going with the business. And we had 38 stores. And at 4 o'clock in the morning I said to him, Timmy I've got to be in Sarnia at 8:00 -- I have got to get some sleep, c'mon sleep in my home. So he said okay I'll lock up. And he'd come over and he'd give me a little hug like he'd do quit often -- and a kiss on the cheek and said, I love you blub. [Chuckles] That's something to do with my girth.

SHELAGH ROGERS: I want to talk to you -- what you do now -- I know that you've built a luxury resort and golf course called Fox Harb'r about 20 kilometres away from Tatamagouche -- the town in Nova Scotia you grew up in. So you're sailing and you're playing golf. But what kind of coffee do you serve there?

RON JOYCE: There's only one coffee [chuckles].

SHELAGH ROGERS: Is it?

RON JOYCE: It's only the Tim Hortons. I have coffee on my sailing boat. I have coffee at my home -- Tim Hortons coffee at my home because I still think it's the best coffee there is -- on that basic fundamental formula, freshness -- always fresh. I am just a believer in freshness and we do that extremely well at Tim Hortons.

KG: That was Ron Joyce on CBC's "Sounds Like Canada" in October 2006. Mr. Joyce died yesterday. He was 88.

[Music]

Buzzfeed quiz teen

Guest: Rachel McMahon

KG: 19-year-old Rachel McMahon has been writing quizzes for the website BuzzFeed for a while now. And she's really-really good at it. But she didn't realize how good until the company's Director of Quizzes was laid off this week -- along with about 200 other employees. That's when Ms. McMahon learned -- through a blog post -- that she was driving a lot of traffic to Buzzfeed's website. And she was doing it all for free. So this week she stopped. Rachel McMahon is studying communications at Grand Valley State University. We reached her at home in Grand Valley, Michigan.

CO: Rachel I know you have been getting a lot of attention this week -- now that everyone knows that you are behind so many of the most successful Buzzfeed quizzes, what's that been like for you?

RACHEL MCMAHON: It's been overwhelming, but also like really incredible because I didn't think I'd ever have [chuckles] opportunities like this -- and now people are just messaging me constantly, giving me ideas and offering me jobs, and it's really crazy because I'm only a sophomore in college.

CO: Now let's talk a bit about the kinds of quizzes you're doing before you knew that you were so popular. When did you start doing these quizzes?

RM: I started making quizzes in April of 2017. So I was in high school still, and I actually started making them in my high school yearbook class -- so [chuckles] I kind of got hooked on them because they were just really fun. And BuzzFeed kept promoting them to their quiz page, so I was like obviously they like them so I kind of just kept going.

CO: Can you give us some examples of quizzes that you did?

RM: Yeah. They kind of get really random [chuckles] at times. But I know like my most popular one is 'Like Or Pass on these Pop-Tart flavors and we'll guess your relationship status' -- and that one actually has 851,000 views -- so that was my highest. This one is 'Eat a ton of candy and we'll tell you which fun dessert you should try.' I have ones like 'Eat some food in every colour and we'll guess your biggest pet peeve.' So they're kind of just random. And I've noticed that food being involved actually really gets people drawn to the quizzes.

CO: And Pop-Tarts apparently.

RM: Yeah Pop-Tarts -- I guess people really enjoy.

CO: All right so this was kind of fun for you. And when did you start to find out that you might have been making a lot of money for BuzzFeed?

RM: I always knew I was obviously driving traffic to the site because my quizzes would get promoted, so obviously people are taking them. But I never realized that I was giving BuzzFeed that much money and that much traffic -- because until a few days ago when I read that I was the second largest traffic driver to the site worldwide that's when I realize, wow! I must be making them a lot of money.

CO: Did they ever tell you that that you were so successful for them? And you were doing this for free I presume, right?

RM: Yeah. It was all for free. Around Christmas time -- this past December -- they sent me like a little gift bag with small things like water bottles, and cups, and a shirt. And they actually put a note in there that said I was their top user of 2013 so I think I had 130 million views so I knew I was doing good. And I just didn't know I was the second largest.

CO: Did you ever ask them if they would pay you for this?

RM: I never really thought of that because I mean I would tell my friends and family about this and they'd be like, why aren't you getting paid? Like they were all so confused.

CO: Why have you stopped as of this week? Why did you stop writing quizzes?

RM: I stopped because of all the things going down right now definitely with BuzzFeed and the layoffs. And I kind of felt that I shouldn't be providing this content any more for free, especially because BuzzFeed has laid off a lot of their employees. So I don't think it's really fair if BuzzFeed just leans completely on these people making them for free.

CO: Now I wonder what effect it had on you when you saw this blog post by the person who was actually the Editor of Quizzes for BuzzFeed who is among the more than 200 people who lost their jobs this week -- 15 percent of the labor force of BuzzFeed was let go -- He says that, he writes in this post, that a teenager in Michigan who for some reason makes dozens of quizzes every week and she is generating revenue for the company and not being paid. So he refers to this as being the kind of ruthless capitalist thing to do. What affect did it have on you when you got cited in this blog post like that?

RM: Yeah so I kind of came across the blog posts like randomly. I was just on Twitter and saw and I was like, ou I'm kind of interested because I'm kind of connected with Buzzfeed. When I read that paragraph about like me basically 'the Michigan teen' I felt kind of like a weight put on my shoulders and I kind of felt like, am I one of the reasons that all these people lost their jobs? Because BuzzFeed obviously realized that they can just lean on people like me who post all these quizzes for free and they don't need to pay the workers, so I kind of felt like really upset. And I sent out a tweet saying that like I felt bad. And thankfully everyone's reassured me that I should not put that on myself. And it's been nice since then, but initially I was really upset.

CO: You felt responsible?

RM: Yeah because I was posting all of these quizzes for free -- BuzzFeed realized that they could use people like me and fire people who were creating quizzes -- like actually working for Buzzfeed. So I kind of felt like it was my fault.

CO: You have actually heard from BuzzFeed itself, what was that conversation all about?

RM: Yeah I was trying to get a hold of BuzzFeed because I wanted to figure this out because obviously I enjoy making the quizzes because I've made so many and I didn't really want to stop but I knew that I needed something from it more than just getting nothing. So I actually got to FaceTime some people there. So we kind of just talked about maybe an option doing like freelancing for them and I think I'm going to look at that as an option. But it's also hard because I do have so many other offers now.

CO: How promising are these offers or these conversations you're having about work?

RM: It's been crazy some of them. They're just like offering me jobs right on the spot. And it's just crazy because like I said I'm in college -- I didn't really know what I wanted to do in my career -- and now I have all these options so it's really good.

CO: Now I know that your mom was one of the people who was urging you from the very beginning to get paid for the work you were doing for Buzzfeed. What does she think about all of this?

RM: She definitely thinks it's crazy and she definitely agrees with my decision to stop making the quizzes at least for now until we figure it all out. But she's been really supportive so it's nice to have someone who knows everything about it help me go along this journey.

CO: Okay I'm glad she's there for you. Rachel it was good to talk to you. Thank you.

RM: Thanks for having me.

CO: Bye bye.

RM: Bye.

KG: Rachel McMahon is the author of hundreds of Buzzfeed quizzes. We reached her at home in Grand Valley, Michigan. For more on this story, and to find links to some of Rachel's work, checkout: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Part 2: Detainees in a Texas detention centre force fed after going on a hunger-strike

El Paso hunger strike

Guest: Ruby Kaur

KG: A group of people in immigration detention in Texas are protesting their treatment by refusing to eat. Immigration officials say 11 people tried to stop eating in mid-January, but officials aren't letting them. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or 'ICE' say they are hydrating and force feeding the detainees by order of a federal judge. Ruby Kaur is a lawyer representing two of the people on a hunger strike. We reached her in Novi, Michigan.

CO: Ms. Kaur what brought your clients to this decision and to go on a hunger strike?

RUBY KAUR: It was mainly the discrimination they are facing. It was mainly the racism factor as well. In detention centres there are Indians and there are other nationalities -- in this specific detention centre in El Paso. Other nationalities have been given much more better treatment than the Indian nationals.

CO: Can you tell us a bit more about how they were being treated?

RK: So I can specifically talk about Indians -- so when they enter the country they are eligible for bonds. What's happening is other nationalities have been granted bonds freely and they are out of detention centres but these Indians they are not granted bonds.

CO: And what do the bonds do? What does it mean to get those bonds?

RK: Bonds specifically means that they would be able -- so they're posting like surety in a way that they would come back and appear in all their court cases and all the ICE check-ins and that they would not flee.

CO: Okay so they would be able to leave these detention centres?

RK: Yes they would be able to leave the detention centre. They can effectively fight their cases outside the detention centres without having to go through this psychological and emotional warfare.

CO: Can you tell us what's happened now that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement "ICE" is now force feeding your clients?

RK: They have been force fed for the past -- so they've been on a hunger strike for almost a month now, and ICE has been force feeding them for the past I believe at least ten days -- but [inaudible] more than that -- but at least 10 days. So they're using nasogastric pipe to feed them. And they are also using IV.

CO: Just tell us about this nasogastric pipe. What do they do?

RK: So they put pipes through their nose and they push some liquid through. I don't know much about science but all I know is that they put a pipe through their nose and there's some liquid that has been given to them through it. And the side effect of that is some of the individuals they have been bleeding through their nose because initially in a couple of them the pipe that they had put through the nose was not the correct one and they ended up bleeding through the nose. Now some of them are also bleeding -- they have rectal bleeding actually.

CO: And what is something that they are legally allowed to do, the agents?

RK: So courts usually have said if they're on a hunger strike just check their you know like heart rate, check their rate, check their you know vitals, but if it's not absolutely necessary no -- they should not and they're not supposed to.

CO: Right. And how painful is it when this happens?

RK: It's very painful for them both psychologically, emotionally, physically. I mean if they're bleeding -- I mean this is something serious.

CO: Does it give them other health problems?

RK: Of course -- they have been vomiting as well and they have lost a lot of weight -- they've been vomiting because of that liquid that's been pushed through in their system.

CO: ICE say they have an order from a federal judge that allows them to do this. What do you make of that?

RK: I mean their attorneys weren't you know informed of getting an order. They weren't informed that they were going to get the order. Rather they are telling these detainees we are going to send you back to India -- we are going to like you know put you in solitary confinement, and they're just intimidating tactics. You know these individuals they don't understand English -- they did not speak English, so they have no idea what's going on.

CO: Have they been able to make any kind of refugee claim?

RK: That's what they have when they entered the country -- they turned themselves in -- and that's what they were claiming. But again, they have not been afforded a fair due process.

CO: And they're being held in detention until they can go through that process. And so have you been actually able to see the order from the federal judge that says that they're able to force feed them?

RK: No. We have requested it, and we have not been given access to it or we have not found it.

CO: You can't find the existence of the order that says that they can force feed these people.

RK: It's possible that it's under seal -- so if it's under seal then it's not available to public.

CO: Doesn't ICE have some kind of policy about this? I mean it can't be the first time there have been hunger strikes...

RK: Absolutely -- this is not the first time this is happening. And it has been happening repetitively actually there in El Paso. And the last name a similar situation happened in 2014. We have also a hunger strike in Tacoma. You know since 2017 there have been like dozens of them in Tacoma.

CO: And what has the law has said about the legality of that in other places?

RK: If you want to be fed or you do not want to be fed you absolutely have a right to tell them no -- you know -- or yes if you want to be fed. I mean at this point they're insulting individuals on integrity you know by forcefully feeding them.

CO: Well not just their integrity -- if they are by law they're allowed to say I don't want to be force fed, they're violating their rights as well -- their legal rights, is that the case?

RK: Right. And they're torturing them absolutely. I mean they're torturing them by force feeding them and they're -- at the same time they're telling them consistently, we're going to throw you in a solitary confinement -- nobody will have access to you guys. I mean that's not the right way to approach this or resolve this matter.

CO: And so these are the kinds of threats they've been getting in addition to the force feeding?

RK: Absolutely.

CO: Is there anybody in the facility who can translate for them?

RK: No. So these Indians to speak Punjabi specifically -- there are also other Gujaratis and you know other Indians as well -- but because they're so far in the remote area -- I mean remote in a way that you know there is no Indians or much Indian community there. So yes, they have had limited access to you know who they can talk to and speak with -- and no Indian translator there.

CO: And in a statement ICE said that yes they were forcing people to eat. They were using this method but they said they were doing it for the health and the welfare of the detainees that they were trying to keep them alive. What do you say to ICE when they say that?

RK: No. It's a cover-up. You know, it's a cover-up. They're just covering up for the fact that, we are force feeding you and it's okay. I mean when did force feeding become okay?

CO: All right Ms. Kaur we will leave it there. And I appreciate you telling us about this. Thank you.

RK: Thank you so much.

KG: We reached Ruby Kaur in Novi, Michigan.

[Music]

Morton Sobell

KG: The 1951 trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg mesmerized America -- and played up fears of a so-called Red Scare. It was a case the government said, of Americans spying for the Soviets -- handing over secrets of the atomic bomb. The Rosenbergs were convicted and executed by electric chair. That you probably know. What you may not know is that a man named Morton Sobell was tried alongside the Rosenbergs, but spared their fate. Instead he served 18 years in jail for conspiracy to commit espionage. He went on to live to the age of 101. And now it's being reported that Mr. Sobell died in December. Throughout most of his life he adamantly insisted that he'd been framed. Until 2008 -- when he finally admitted that he may have been what you call a Soviet spy after all. And for his remaining years he let details trickle out, restocking suspicions that had been burning all along. Long before that in 1974, Morton Sobell spoke with As It Happens host Barbara Frum about his book "On Doing Time," the trial -- and the enduring controversy around it.

SOUNDCLIP

BARBARA FRUM: I would imagine it's of tremendous interest and pleasure to you that after so many years in prison, after such an old story that this trial and this case has never been forgotten, and that public interest now is maybe as great as it's always been.

MORTON SOBELL: Yes this gives a reason for satisfaction -- and as a matter of fact, as I say in the book, all the time I was in prison I felt that there would come a day eventually when the case would come before the American people and the Canadian people in a time after the hysteria had died down when it would be examined with more dispassionate eyes -- and the truth would finally emerge as it has been ever since the trial itself.

BARBARA FRUM: Well you say truth and yet that's of course what has kept you alive. There is still so much controversy. What's your view of it now?

MORTON SOBELL: My view is very very simple -- this trial was held at a time during the period of McCarthyism -- the beginning 1951. And its main function was the same as any political trial to heat up the climate, to increase the hysteria. While in court we were technically convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage -- in all of the press releases as well as in court, the emphasis was on communism, communism, communism, communism. So this was what the trial was all about.

BARBARA FRUM: What do you mean? Rather than who stole the atom bomb and gave it to the Russians?

MORTON SOBELL: Well no -- who stole the atom bomb was then 'it was a communist who stole the atom bomb.' The atom bomb was then the vehicle with which they were able to condemn the communists. But the issue was, right, as you say it was the atom bomb. The American government felt it had to explain the loss of their monopoly. They really had kid themselves into the belief that they had a monopoly on the atom bomb -- and how could some peasants make an atom bomb without of course somebody stealing it. But the main object at that time was to frighten the American-left into conformity. And as history show, they succeeded all too well.

BARBARA FRUM: How much bitterness do you and your wife have that you were swept into this thing -- you served 18 years in prison. It's true you weren't executed as the Rosenbergs were. But still the case is identified with them and you're very much aren't you a lesser figure? You were swept in. You were completely implicated, and yet people really don't think you were involved.

MORTON SOBELL: It's true. I was swept in. I was completely implicated as you say because I was accused of being a member of the conspiracy and being a member of the conspiracy -- I'm as guilty as anybody else. However I am here today talking to you solely by virtue of the fact that the government in leveling their charges never charged that I had anything to do with the atom bomb. You see -- the evidence that the government produced against Julius and Ethel involved the atom bomb. Against me, it was having to do with -- a friend of mine said that I tried to get him to give me a pamphlet pertaining to naval ordnance. And naval ordnance only warranted 30 years, whereas the atom bomb warranted death -- especially since as the judge said this great secret allowed the North Koreans to attack South Korea with the consequence the result of fifty thousand deaths for Julius and Ethel which is how he justified the death sentence. He was bouncing the 50,000 deaths of the Americans in Korea against the deaths of two 'traitors' as he called them.

BARBARA FRUM: How well had you known the Rosenbergs?

MORTON SOBELL: Well I had known Julius in college. He was in the class before mine -- and you know how you generally know people. We had fairly much the same political outlook. We were members of the Young Communist League at City College. Then after we graduated I would see him once or twice a year. When I married we would visit with him the same frequency. It was just casual. But however the fact that we were both left meant that our relationship was a warm relationship -- warmer than such casual visiting might indicate.

BARBARA FRUM: Do you think looking back -- have you changed your mind about his guilt or innocence?

MORTON SOBELL: No. As a matter of fact, the other way around. at the beginning I may have thought there was some possibility that he was involved -- as time went on and more and more evidence has been produced that the case was a frame up -- that the government framed much of the evidence that was produced at the trial -- I've become more and more convinced that he was as innocent as I was.

BARBARA FRUM: What was it like being a defendant in that court? What was your reaction to the behaviour of your co-defendants to the evidence coming out? It must have astounded you too, eh?

MORTON SOBELL: No. The damn thing was so unbelievable that I felt like a spectator. I felt like a spectator at that trial. I didn't...I didn't believe this was coming out against me because I didn't have anything to do with it, and I couldn't put myself in a position of a defendant.

KG: Morton Sobell -- a man convicted alongside Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in the infamous Cold War spy trial, speaking with Barbara Frum in 1974. Now as I mentioned, much later in life he admitted that he actually had handed over military intelligence to the Soviets and he implicated Julius Rosenberg as well. In 2008 when a New York Times reporter asked him if all of that made him a spy? He said quote "yeah, yeah, yeah, call it that. I never thought of it as that in those terms." Morton Sobell died on December 26 in Manhattan. He was 101 years old.

[Music]

Pink Squirrels

KG: One ounce of the almond-flavoured liqueur Creme de Noyaux. One ounce of Creme de Cacao. One ounce of heavy cream. Shake with ice and strain into a cocktail glass. Or, point a UV light at an actual flying squirrel. Both of the above are recipes for Pink Squirrels. The first -- the cocktail -- was invented in the 1950s in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The second was recently, and accidentally, invented by Jon Martin -- a professor at Northland College, also in Wisconsin. Professor Martin's discovery involved didn't involve alcohol rather, but was still intoxicating. He routinely uses a UV light to find fluorescent flora and fauna in the forest near his house. Then as he told Newsweek magazine quote "One evening I hear the unmistakable chirp of a flying squirrel at our bird feeder. I point the light at it, and bam! Pink fluorescence." Further research found that the regular old non-flying squirrels do not glow pink under UV light, but almost every single one of the flying squirrels they tested did turn a kind of blazing fuchsia colour. The lead author of the new study on the phenomenon, biologist Paula Spaeth Anich of Northland College, does not believe this is fashion-related. Her team believes it might be for camouflage -- helping the flying squirrels blend into their surroundings and confusing predators. Or, since they're nocturnal, it might help them see each other and communicate in the dark. The research will continue. But right now, the real life pink squirrels have scientists feeling like Pink Squirrel cocktails: shaken, but in a good way.

[Music]

Part 3: The trial of Mexican drug lord Joaquín Guzmán

Remains uncovered

Guest: Jamie Diemert

KG: This week, the answer to a 60-year-old mystery was recovered from the bottom of a Saskatchewan lake. In 1959, pilot Ray Gran and conservation officer Harold Thompson crashed a Cessna 180 floatplane into Peter Pond Lake. Last summer Mr. Gran's daughter, Linda, located the wreckage. But RCMP divers were unable to reach the plane. This week they plan to try again. And Martin Gran, Ray's nephew, was there. He spoke with CBC Saskatchewan.

SOUNDCLIP

MARTIN GRAN: You know it's been a long time -- it has been a story that we've known about and thought about our entire lives. And I don't know what this week will bring -- but if it brings some resolution, and especially for Linda, then you know that's the real goal here. It's such an important moment for the family -- for me in particular -- and I feel if that were me and the situation was reversed, I would really hope that a family member could be present. It seems like a sacred moment and just to be there -- and even to experience the location and the people that live in the area just to see that and to be part of that, is an honour and a privilege.

KG: Yesterday, divers pulled the remains of two people from the submerged Cessna. Jamie Diemert is the Underwater Recovery Team Co-ordinator for the Saskatchewan RCMP. We reached him in Regina.

CO: Jamie when did you first hear about the plane at the bottom of Peter Pond Lake?

JAMIE DIEMERT: I first heard about it in August, I guess it was. They notified us that private sonar company had located what they believe was the plane.

CO: And what do you know about that flight -- this is 60 years ago that that plane went down, what do you know about it?

JD: Well my understanding for the flight was just that they had run into some poor weather conditions -- and people from the area had believed that it had crashed in the lake. I know our RCMP Underwater Recovery Team had been up several years ago on different spots where other people had thought they located the plane, and it wasn't there. They hadn't found it.

CO: And I understand it was the family of the pilot who was able to locate the wreckage last summer. Why didn't the search go on then? Why did you wait until now to do it?

JD: During that time, the weather was quite rough where it's located in the lake -- it has a tendency of the wind can really cause large waves. We were able to get the information we needed at the time, but where it's positioned we aren't able to really secure a large enough platform to be able to work off of well -- and just come up with the plan that it was a lot safer to do under the ice because the platform of the ice is so stable.

CO: But it's very cold to dive in that. What the considerations did you give to that?

JD: It is very cold. So we did have to set up temporary shelters overtop the ice hole and run heaters to be able to work in and limit any time of anybody outside as well as travel to and from had to be taken into special consideration as well. The water temperature of the actual lake was 2 degrees -- just due to the depth of it being 20 metres, it would still normally be very cold at that depth anyway so the water temperature doesn't change a great deal it's just the air temperature that would change for our working conditions.

CO: And you went under, what could you see?

JD: You could see less than two metres for visibility. There's a lot of sediment in the water and there's no ambient light, so we're just using flashlights going down our working line. You can see the plane, but there wasn't enough visibility to see the whole plane. So you can just see the part that you were actually looking at -- only about a metre away or so.

CO: And how were you able to locate the remains of the two men: of the pilot Ray Gran and the conservation officer who was his only companion that day, Harold Thompson?

JD: We had searched around the plane and then of course searching in the plane is where we had located the items and the remains.

CO: The two men were still in the cockpit?

JD: Yes they were. Yes they were.

CO: I know that it must have been very difficult, very gruesome -- how difficult was it to extract them from the cockpit?

JD: It is difficult in a way that anytime you move anything that has that much silt around it, you're going to lose all your visibility as well as there's entanglement hazards with the plane wreckage. So we needed two divers in the water: one to be able to do the recoveries, and the other diver to be able to make sure that the first diver could exit the plane when it was time for them to leave. So over the period of five different dives that day we did the recoveries and then out of the water and through the ice.

CO: And how important was it to the families that those remains were recovered?

JD: I think it's very important. I had met with representatives from both families -- and some of the family members were on site with us and I believe it was quite emotional for them.

CO: What did they say to you when you recovered the remains of their family members?

JD: They were very thankful. They were very thankful for the closure -- for this.

CO: It must have been so difficult.

JD: It...it is.

CO: Have you ever had to recover bodies before?

JD: Yes. Yes, several.

CO: And you didn't just recover their remains you were able to -- even with the difficulty with the visibility -- you were able to get some things, some other objects. What else did you recover?

JD: There was a couple different items. There was a knife in a sheath, some clothing parts, as well as a camera -- take for granted it's a film camera in a case.

CO: Any chance that any of the photos would still be intact in that camera?

JD: I can't make a guess on that. But I'm sure the coroner is going to do everything they can to see if they can develop those pictures.

CO: I understand there was also a wallet you found.

JD: Yes that's correct there was a wallet.

CO: And so were they all given to the family?

JD: Those items get given to the coroner -- because I mean this is still an investigation.

CO: So it's been 60 years since that plane went down and those two men were lost. So what happens now?

JD: Well the coroner -- they have to go through their investigation to try to identify the person, to make sure those remains are the ones that we think they are -- believe they are, and then try to identify which personal belongings belong to those people.

CO: And anything you saw -- anything that's been recovered that might be some clue as to what happened that day?

JD: I can't speculate on what happened. We didn't bring up anything that would really help in that matter.

CO: Most important thing you bought in that would help would be the remains of those men -- for those families.

JD: That's right I believe so yes.

CO: Jamie I appreciate you speaking with us. Thank you.

JD: Thank you.

KG: Jamie Diemert is the coordinator of the Saskatchewan RCMP Underwater Team. We reached him in Regina.

[Music]

S.N.C. Lavalin

Guest: Vincent Larouche

KG: Pierre Duhaime was the boss of a multi-national powerhouse. But this morning the former SNC-Lavalin CEO pleaded guilty for his role in the bribery scandal surrounding the construction of a Montreal mega-hospital. Mr. Duhaime was due to stand trial on Monday on a list of charges that included fraud, conspiracy, and the use of forged documents. Vincent Larouche helped break that story in 2012. The La Presse investigative reporter has followed every twist and turn since. We reached Mr. Larouche in Montreal.

CO: Vincent first of all what has Pierre Duhaime admitted to this morning?

VINCENT LAROUCHE: He has admitted his participation in a very small part of this whole scandal that has rocked the McGill University Health Centre for years now. He was facing 16 criminal charges, and he pleaded guilty after having made a deal with the prosecution. He pleaded guilty to only one charge which was helping a public officer commit a breach of trust. So basically what he said is he knew that one of his subordinates at SNC-Lavalin was talking to a public officer during the bidding process for the construction of the super hospital -- and he closed his eyes even though he should have known that this was a breach of the rules and that any reasonable person would have guessed that those two were exchanging classified information that could help SNC-Lavalin win the contract illegally. And we know now that SNC-Lavalin paid 22.5-million in bribes to the officials at the hospital. But he said he never knew that the bribes were paid, he didn't benefit from any of it, and he just closed his eyes and let things go and put the blame basically on one of his subordinates.

CO: He left SNC-Lavalin in March 2012 after it was revealed that he had approved 56 million dollars in payments to what were called undisclosed agents. So was that part of this pleading today?

VL: Well it's common knowledge now that he accepted those 56 million payments to unregular agents. Now he didn't admit that he knew any of this money was going to Quebec officials at the MUHC -- the health centre. We know that it's a regular thing for a company like SNC-Lavalin at that time it was a regular thing to pay some what they called agents -- it's a very polite term to design an individual in a foreign country, for example they had some in Algeria, they had some in Tunisia, Saudi Arabia -- people who would help them win a contract in a foreign country. What those people do with the millions they pay them -- maybe they don't want to know exactly. Now it was a common thing to do that in foreign countries where those practices are accepted and sometimes even mandatory -- but it wasn't ever in the rules of the company to do that in Canada. And it's common knowledge that he closed his eyes to some of those payments that were attributed to foreign projects and were finally used for local projects here.

CO: And it's so tangled. I mean we can't even in this program we couldn't outlined as much of what went on there. And we've covered it over the years and it involved well Arthur Porter who is now deceased who died a fugitive in Panama. You have well like what -- four people who have pleaded guilty in this deal. And this is just one of the problems that SNC-Lavalin has been dealing with. How many cases are out there right now? How many different -- well bribery charges, people who are serving time, who are pleading guilty -- how many of these cases exist now throughout the world for that company?

VL: One of the former high ranking managers of SNC-Lavalin, Riadh Ben Aissa -- he was based in Montreal and he served jail time in Switzerland relating to bribes that were paid in Libya under the Gaddafi regime -- and he's now cooperating with the RCMP who have laid criminal charges against the company itself for bribes that were paid to the Gaddafi regime. So the company's facing criminal charges which is a very very big concern for the company. If it would be declared guilty that would impact their ability to win public contracts in Canada. On an another front there is an ongoing criminal investigation by the RCMP on some payments that could have been made to get a contract for some bridges that had to be repaired in Montreal which was also a federal project. Those are the main things that they have to deal with right now -- and they continue to pose a big threat to the future of that company -- the finances of the company have been, their image and their reputation, have been impacted by all these investigations. And it's far from over as we speak.

CO: But now the company says it's turned a page, that it now has this new CEO, Neil Bruce, who people respect. The idea that somehow these days of corruption and payments and undisclosed agents, it's in their past. Is that the case? Has SNC-Lavalin really turned the corner?

VL: Well if we look at all the players that were involved in all those cases that we discussed and even some of the players that were not charged but whose role was maybe shady or not maybe the best representation of what you would wish for an ethical company -- some maybe who could look the other way or closed their eyes -- nobody amongst them is still there. They really had a very big change in management and they did it pretty fast at the time.

CO: All right we'll leave it there. Vincent thank you.

VL: All right. Have a nice day.

CO: You too. Bye.

KG: Vincent Larouche is a reporter with La Presse. We reached him in Montreal.

[Music]

El Chapo trial

Guest: Amanda Ottaway

KG: The fate of Joaquin Guzman -- more famous, and infamous, as "El Chapo" -- will now be decided by a jury. The trial of the accused Mexican drug lord wrapped up yesterday in a U.S. federal court in New York City. More than two months after it started, one of Mr. Guzman's defence lawyers delivered closing arguments to end the parade of colourful witnesses with the often gruesome stories. Now the jury has the weekend off before deliberations begin next week. Amanda Ottaway is a court reporter for Courthouse News. We reached her in New York City.

CO: Amanda can you just describe first of all the scene in the courtroom yesterday as this trial drew to a close.

AMANDA OTTAWAY: So the last two days were closing arguments -- and the defence attorney who gave the closing argument was one of three of 'El Chapo' Guzman's lawyers, Jeffrey Lichtman, and he is a showman. I mean he is your defense attorney's defense attorney. He focused mainly -- I mean brought it back around some of his main arguments which are that 'El Chapo' Guzman was actually framed and that Guzman actually has done nothing. And also he wanted to really discredit the cooperating witnesses. 14 people took the stand against Guzman during this trial. And so he's trying to get the jury -- I mean and this is not an uncommon tactic at all -- he's trying to get the jury to not believe the cooperators because if they do believe what cooperators say it's pretty damning evidence against his client.

CO: Some of the words he used -- he described these cooperators, these witnesses, as: animals, bad people, killers, worst criminals ever, bottomless pit, immorality of immorality, utter animals, wild vicious animals -- I mean he had every word he could roll out to try and discredit them. But at the same time did he end up really mounting much of a defense of El Chapo?

AO: No he didn't. And it's tough. I mean they've had their work cut out for them -- the prosecution has laid out an incredibly huge and complex case. They have brought forth mountains of evidence, over 50 witnesses and all testified against this guy. So he's trying to kind of get like 1 juror to just kind of be like, hang on! I don't think we can convict. And that's all he needs.

CO: In that appeal he pointed out, well come on you know that you can't trust prosecutors, you can't trust the U.S. government -- I ask you what has blind faith in your government ever gotten? So he is trying to make -- obviously to reach somebody to think well you know you can't trust even what you've seen in these weeks of evidence and all the things put on the table including bricks of cocaine, and rifles, and AK-47s, grenade launchers, all of this. Ignore that -- you just can't trust any of it, right?

AO: Absolutely. And that is a valid criticism in some ways you know -- I think we all are aware that the drug war has not been an entirely clean war you know. It's gotten ugly sometimes. And there are allegations of U.S. law enforcement, of Mexican law enforcement, not maybe acting as we might want them to. That has not really made it into the trial -- that the judge has kept it really really laser focused on Guzman and his alleged drug shipments. But there are definitely stories out there that DEA agents have allowed people to traffic drugs in order to catch somebody else or things like that. So that's kind of what Lichtman was appealing to, was those outside stories. And one of the lines at the end of his argument was, but for the grace of God it could be any of us. Basically saying you know who's to say the prosecutors will not come for you next -- which is I think a bit of a stretch given all of the different things Guzman is charged with. And given the three decade period in which he is said to have committed these crimes.

CO: There were of course some rumors, some discussion, as to whether or not Mr. Guzman would be able to do what he has done in the past which is to have just extraordinary escapes from custody. So was there any concern, any moment, when anyone thought that was going to happen in Brooklyn?

AO: I mean there was one day where the lights went out briefly in the courtroom and a journalist shouted, 'he's gone' as a joke -- and it was totally a joke and everyone laughed. There was a day early on in the trial where I think a toilet overflowed on the floor where the courtroom was, and so they dismissed early for the day. But really I mean the security in this trial has been incredible. There's you know -- I counted eight U.S. Marshals in the courtroom yesterday. There were probably more as well as other law enforcement. There is two metal detectors -- one is right outside the courtroom. There's explosives sniffing dogs there. NYPD barriers. I mean it's a fortress.

CO: Can you just remind us what the jury now has to decide in terms of the charges?

AO: Yeah so the indictment has been whittled down to ten charges. The biggest one is a count one it's a continuing criminal enterprise. There's also nine other counts: money laundering, and using a weapon, conspiracy. But mostly they're drug trafficking charges.

CO: And how did he look himself? How did he present himself in court?

AO: Guzman has, since the beginning, appeared alert in court. He appears to listen intently. He's clean shaven which is in contrast to you know his famous mustache. But he is very pale because he's being held in solitary confinement when he's not in the courtroom. He doesn't go outside. But he comes in every day and looks for his wife in the gallery, waves to her, and smiles and then sets in and appears to listen. I saw him hug his lawyer Eduardo Balarezo as he was being led out of the courtroom yesterday.

CO: What is likely to be his time in jail? If he is convicted, what's he looking at possibly?

AO: It's likely that he will spend the rest of his life in prison if he's convicted.

CO: In the United States?

AO: In the United States.

CO: All right. We'll be watching. Thank you very much.

AO: Thank you for the time. Bye.

KG: Amanda Ottaway is a court reporter who's been covering the trial of Joaquin Guzman, better known as "El Chapo," for Courthouse News. She's in New York.

[Music]

Cold temperatures

KG: The polar vortex that's afflicting huge swaths of Canada and the U.S. is starting to test a lot of people's patience. And not for the first time. Canadians have been dizzied by polar vortices before -- and we didn't take too kindly to it, then either. For example back in 2014, one listener left a now-legendary voicemail for CBC Saskatchewan. "Morning Edition" host Sheila Coles had been trying to cheer listeners up by telling them to look forward to weekend temperatures that would hit zero degrees Celsius -- which made zero difference to this caller. And a warning: this caller is angry and some of his language reflects that.

SOUNDCLIP

CALLER: Sheila please, please, please, don't tell us how nice it's going to be this weekend because it's going to go up to -1, okay? Because it's not going to be nice -- because the freaking wind is just going to howl, okay. Every time it warms up, the hot air rises and the wind just howls. So it ain't going to be nice. And being a person that lives rurally, I can tell you that when it's 30 below, okay, Celsius you can take your mitts off for half an hour and do things outside, okay, when there's no wind blowing at 30 below. But when it is zero or minus five even, okay, you take your mitts off and your hands freeze instantly. So I can tell you, okay, this weekend is going to be the physical [inaudible], okay, because the wind is going to be howling and then it's going to be only minus one -- so then it's going to melt and have a bunch of hog-slop. So knock off how nice it's going to be please. Okay. It's just sickening! Okay. This province is the [bleep] hole of the world and it'll suck the life out of you, okay. It'll suck the will to live out of you. Okay. Because it's just a piece of crap with wind howling every day. And you're not hiking or biking or skiing or you're not doing anything, okay. It's the A-hole of the world and we pay to live here. We pay to live here! Super high taxes. So please knock off tonight, okay, because this [bleep] place is a piece of shit. Okay. So please, please, please knock off the 'how nice it's going to be' because it ain't -- because the wind's going to be howling. Okay. Thank you. Bye.

KG: The voicemail from an anonymous caller left for a CBC Saskatchewan back in 2014.

February 1, 2019 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode