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 2017

The AIH Transcript for October 26, 2017

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

HELEN MANN: Hello, I'm Helen Mann, sitting in for Carol off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening, I'm Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

HM: More than money on his mind. Abdullah Almalki and two other Canadians were paid more than 30 million dollars for Canada's role in their torture in Syria, but he says the compensation does nothing to stop the nightmares.

JD: Haunted by a house. When a German woman discovers something terrible about her grandfather's home, she sends a letter of apology to the man who'd been forced to leave that home during the Holocaust.

HM: Power suit. After dozens of allegations of sexual misconduct, Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein has been on the defensive — until today, when he launched a lawsuit against his former company.

JD: They'll take the pen and the sword. Facing threats and violence, Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta announces it will arm its employees, and train them in self-defense, but not everyone's convinced that will help.

HM: She had herself rolling in the aisles. At least, that's one of the things I would do, along with putting my seat back all the way for once, if I was in the same situation as our guest: the only passenger on a flight from Glasgow to Greece.

JD: And...will colourheads prevail? Six different times, Roger Thorns has embarked on fruitless searches for the elusive pink-headed duck — and now, he's hoping the seventh time is a charm.

JD: As It Happens, the Thursday edition. Radio that knows he's had some dark times in the past, but he's looking forward to a bright fuchsia.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Abdullah Almalki, Weinstein latest, Scottish solo flyer

Abdullah Almalki

Guest: Abdullah Almalki

JD: Thirty-one-point-three million dollars. That is how much Ottawa has reportedly paid to three Canadians who were wrongfully accused of terrorism, and then tortured in Syria. And this means that each man will receive roughly the same compensation as Omar Khadar, the child soldier who was detained at Guantanamo Bay. In Ottawa this afternoon, Prime Minister Trudeau was asked whether those numbers seem right.

SOUNDCLIP

JUSTIN TRUDEAU This is never about what the individual did, or to put a more direct spin on it, whether or not they deserved to be tortured. Because Canada has made it very clear nobody ever deserves to be tortured. And when a Canadian Government either is complicit in that, or was not active enough in preventing it, there needs to be a responsibility taken. And I certainly hope that people remain concerned, angry and even outraged at these settlements, because no future government should ever imagine that it's a good idea or an acceptable idea to allow Canadians fundamental rights to be violated.

JD: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaking in Ottawa this afternoon. Abdullah Almalki is one of the three men who agreed to this settlement with the government. Mr. Almalki was imprisoned in Syria and tortured for 22 months, beginning in 2002. We reached Abdullah Alaliki in Ottawa.

CO: Mr. Almaliki, what do you think of what the prime minister had to say?

ABDULLAH ALMALKI: Well, two points: The first one is I think it's a good step. It's something that is good that governments need to take note that torture is not acceptable — that they should not be complicit in torture. But there's the next step that the government should now move to hold these Canadian officials who were complicit in my torture accountable. I think this is critical for us as a country. We as citizens need to see concrete steps that would protect us from abuse and be assured that if we did not do something wrong, that we will not be targeted and treated as if we were criminals just because of our skin colour, race or religion. We know from two Canadian inquires that Canadian officials were complicit in the torture, that they provided questions to the Syrian military intelligence, that they did send false information to the intelligence before my detention and after my detention and they did not really lift a finger asking the Syrians to release me.

HM: And so when you say you would like them to be held accountable, what would that look like?

AA: I mean personally, for me as a person, my faith requires me to condemn horrible actions, but not to hate the people doing the action. And after considerable struggle that lasted many years, I was able to reach this point when it came to the Syrian and Canadian officials who were complicit in my torture. I do not hate or have feelings of revenge to anyone. However, in order to stop and improve and make even better our country, we need to hold every person who was complicit in my torture or the torture of others accountable. Now, what we know is that many of these Canadian officials they were promoted after.

HM: Again though, what do you mean by accountable? I'd like to know what you would like to see happen to them?

AA: Well, torture is a criminal offense. They need to be charged and have their fair trial based on the evidence that the government has and we have of their complicity in torture.

HM: We know that you are unable to speak about the actual terms of the settlement; that's legal prevention. You have though seen the controversy that Omar Khadar faced when news of his multimillion dollar settlement became public. Do you have concerns that that same kind of pushback might happen with regards to you?

AA: Well, I don't know. I mean there are considerable differences between Mr. Khadar’s circumstances and settlements and my circumstances and settlement. you know, and very considerable ones. In my case, we know that there was an official. We know that there was a public inquiry, which found that I did not do anything wrong. And that goes to the point that the Prime Minister when he said you know it doesn't have to do anything with what the person did or did not do. Well, I did not do anything wrong. And you don't have to take my word for it. In 2008, the report stated this very clearly that I did not do anything wrong. I was innocent and Canadian officials sent knowingly false information to the Syrians.

HM: What was it like for you as you were confined in that prison, being tortured and then, also having to deal with the knowledge that the Canadian government wanted you there. What effect did that have on you?

AA: It was a terrible feeling really. As a businessman before, I used to travel the world. And I really you know always enjoyed that last leg of the trip, when I boarded the plane to Canada — back home. I always felt safe at home. I always had the notion that my country would protect me. I never thought, and maybe this is a problem with many of us engineers and businessmen that we don't pay too much attention to politics. We don't know what's happening outside our sphere of engineering and business. But you know I thought, maybe naively, that my country was protecting me. I didn't know what was happening in the world. I didn't know that this would happen. I didn't know you know what the RCMP and CSIS might do or Foreign Affairs might do. It was a real feeling of betrayal. It's a bad feeling. I mean you want to live and you know this is my home, and part of that 15 years flight was for an apology reforming the system and a settlement. But you know, to feel at home you need to feel being welcomed at home. I mean never really faced racism before in my life here in Canada. I grew up in Ottawa; I went to university, started my business, got married, had children and never really felt that I was treated in a racist way before. To have this hitting me and for many years, even after I came back from Syria, to see that racism and bigotry played a huge role in this it wasn't easy.

HM: And as you move forward, now that this settlement is finally behind you. Are you feeling some optimism? Are the lasting effects still there for you?

AA: Well, I'm still optimistic. Had I not have had that optimism before I don't think I would have been able to fight all these years to get that long-awaited apology from the government at the end. But I still have hope. After everything that went through, I still feel that Canada is the best country in the world. And as a duty I think for all of us — as a duty for you know everyone who lives in Canada — I think our duty is to better our country. So I still have hope. If we don't have hope I don't think anything would happen. I think there are good people in the government. I think there are good officials and bureaucrats. There are terrible ones, criminal ones, they’re the ones which you know go from the scale of you know having been involved in criminal, despicable acts — to some simply turning a blind eye. But there are good ones and I still have hope.

HM: Mr. Almaliki, I very much appreciate you speaking with us today. Thank you very much.

AA: Thank you.

CO: Bye bye.

AA: Bye

JDL: Abdullah Almaliki is an Ottawa electronics engineer. He was imprisoned and tortured in Syria for 22 months, beginning in 2002. The other two men were part of the 31-million-dollar settlement are Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin. Both were also tortured in Syria. The Canadian government has given all three a formal apology for the role it played in their abuse.

[Music: Ambient]

Weinstein latest

Guest: Richard Roth

JD: Harvey Weinstein is already facing a tsunami of potential legal troubles. The high-powered movie producer has been ousted from his company, and many women have come forward alleging sexual harassment and sexual assault. Three police forces have reportedly opened investigations into his behavior. But today, Mr. Weinstein made his own legal maneuver: suing his former company — The Weinstein Co — for access to company records. Richard Roth is U.S. entertainment lawyer. We reached him in Atlanta.

HM: Mr. Roth, what do you think is behind Harvey Weinstein's lawsuit against his former company?

RICHARD ROTH: Well, Harvey Weinstein has been shut out. So he has no ability to defend the accusations that have been brought against him, the litigations is being brought against him. He has no access to his email. He has no access to the settlement agreement he entered into. So he's really been just shut out of everything. And the lawsuit essentially tries to get back so he can defend these, and he can actually deal with the allegations be hurled at him.

HM: The suit actually says he's trying to get access to company records to help defend both himself and the company. So what kind of records do you think he's looking for?

RR: He's looking for all the emails that were exchanged between he and all these potential plaintiffs and the company. He’s looking for the settlement agreement that he entered that he and/or the company entered into with these women. He's looking for any kind of document underlining these claims that have been lodged against him.

HM: Right, is there not though a risk here that these records could confirm what all these women are alleging against him?

RR: [Sound: Laughter] That is the ultimate irony. The risk is that he's going to get documents and they're going to hurt him. But my belief is he probably has… in his mind, rightfully or wrongfully, some belief that there is documents that will support him.

HM: Is there any value do you think in his mind, or that of his lawyer that in somehow you know launching a suit, he's trying to portray himself as you know the maligned party to some degree in all of this?

RR: Well, I think that's essentially what's going on here. This lawsuit may be more of a publicity stunt than really a lawsuit seeking relief. Because he has been saying, and he maintains throughout, that any kind of sex was consensual. He essentially is trying to fight back through the press. The problem with his fight-back is that you know one woman says it it's one thing; ten women say it's another thing. There are 65 women that have alleged inappropriate conduct. All from inappropriate touching to actually forcible rape, so it's an attempt to not have him get drenched. You know, it's almost like putting a napkin on your head in the middle of a massive snowstorm or rainstorm and from that trying not to get wet. So it's really sort of comical.

HM: If you were his lawyer, would you recommend this? It sounds like you think this is not a smart thing?

RR: Unless there's something… a document he can get his hands on which says Mrs. A or Mrs. B alleges this. Yet, for example, she sent me naked pictures of herself. You know, so if there's documents out there that really will show that a lot of the allegations are not true, then I would essentially support it. The proof is in the pudding; we don't know yet. But without that, I would probably not have to take this step.

HM: What about the legal options that might be available to the women who have come forward to make these allegations against Harvey Weinstein? What are those options when it comes to civil lawsuits potentially against him?

RR: Yeah, I mean they all can and are suing, so long as it's within the statute of limitations. Be it in California or New York. The problem is whether or not Mr. Weinstein and/or the company have sufficient money. I mean they’re suing for monetary damages. There just may not be enough funds to pay these women. So their only recourse is civilly or to try to get the prosecutor to go after them criminally. Many of them are beyond the statute. Third, they have three options: one is a civil lawsuit, two is go to the authorities — that's a toughie — and then three is just come out and say it happened to me too and try to stop this power play by these executives. I mean these are not acts of sex; these acts of power.

HM: Now, you mentioned a statute on these potential civil cases. There is no statute when it comes to sexual assault and under criminal law. It's been reported that police in London, England; Los Angeles and New York have opened criminal investigations against Mr. Weinstein. Based on what you have heard so far, what do you think is the likelihood that charges will be laid against him?

RR: Another great question. There’s two major problems: Major problem number one is to prove a criminal case, the standard is much higher. It's what's called the “beyond a reasonable doubt standard”. You have to show that that Mr. Weinstein engaged this inappropriate conduct beyond a reasonable doubt, as opposed to what's called “tipping the scales”, by a preponderance of the evidence in the civil case, so criminal cases are much harder to prove by the authorities. The second problem they have is that all of these women, depending on who tries to get him indicted, will have to endure a very rigorous cross-examination. You know, you told this person it was January 5th. You told that person January 8th. You said it was in the hotel room. Now, you're saying it's somewhere else. So if a good criminal defense lawyer can poke holes in the victim's facts, then they may be able to defeat a criminal prosecution. So the criminal prosecution is going to be difficult. It clearly is because of the standard and because there can be holes poked in the woman's you know version of the facts. The other problem is that you generally do not have a litany of women testify. And if he engaged in rape against Ms. Smith, It doesn't mean that Ms. Jones, Ms. Doe and any other women get to testify in that case. The pattern is a tough argument. And generally speaking — New York, California and London — they're not going to indict him unless they think they can win.

HM: All right. Richard Roth, I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this with us. Thank you very much.

RR: Hey, thank you so much.

HM: Bye bye.

JD: Richard Roth is an entertainment lawyer. We reached him in Atlanta.

[Music: Rock]

Scottish solo flyer

Guest: Karon Grieve

JD: This past weekend, Karon Grieve headed to the airport in Glasgow to catch a flight to Greece. She's spending some time on the island of Crete to work on a romantic crime novel. But when she got to the airport, she began to think that something might be unusual about her flight. We reached Karon Grieve in Agia Galini on Crete.

HM: Ms. Grieve, you were at the airport before your flight. What tipped you off that something might be up?

KARON GRIEVE: When I went to check in desk, I was joking with the guy there saying how many people were on the flight? We kind of counted it down from ten. And when I got to four, I said you are joking me. And he said no, there's only three on the flight. So I thought there was three people. And when I went to the actual gate — the boarding gate — there was no one there. And I thought hang on, I'm in the wrong place. And Glasgow Airport is huge; it's a very big airport. And there was a sign there, so I thought yeah, I'm at the right place. And I looked around and then the guy came up to me and he said hi, are you Karon? And I went yeah. And he said you're the only passenger, you have an entire jet all to yourself.

HM: What did you say?

KG: Well, I can’t actually say the words because you’re on the radio. But I thought Oh, wow! You are kidding me? And he said yeah, the other people haven't turned up, so you have a Jet all to yourself.

HM: And Jet, we’re talking a major plane, right?

KG: 189 seats or 289 — something like that.

HM: And you're already on a first-name-basis with the people at the gate?

KG: Well yeah, because then the pilot — who was a woman, which was absolutely wonderful called Laura turned up — and the first officer, who needless to say was the only man on board. Haha, we outnumbered him. And the four flight attendants all turned up and they all said to me hi, are you Karon? By this time thinking I am in a surreal outer universe. And they said yeah, you are the only passenger; you are a total VIP.

HM: So did they board with you? Did you all get on together? Or did they make you wait like you normally do?

KG: Well, they went on because the first officer had to get the plane all organized. And the crew were sort of getting things ready. And then they called me down and I went on this flight and they said you get the best seat on the plane; you get number one, which is right at the front with all the leg room. And then Laura, the pilot, came and sat next to me and she was chattering away about the aircraft and everything. And she said to me look, the minute that fasten seat belt sign goes off, feel free to run up and down if you really want to.

HM: Did you?

KG: Yeah, why not? I mean it would be rude not to, wouldn't it?

HM: It would. Now, tell me what it felt like on that plane? I can hardly imagine.

KG: Well, I think the most embarrassing thing was when one of the stewardesses had to do a safety talk you know and put on the life jacket thing and everything. And she said to me look I have to do this; it's a legal requirement. And I went yeah, OK. So it was a bit like you know when you have one of these romantic singers singing to you in a restaurant and you do a complete clap? It was a bit like that.

HM: So you get this personalized demonstration for safety. Then, you know service starts on these planes usually quite a ways in, and you usually have to wait quite a long time before you get your bag of pretzels and your drink or whatever. What was the service like?

KG: Oh no, right away the girl said to me look you can have a free meal, and we'll bring it to the minute the light goes off. And then you can have drinks, which I truly did. I mean again, it would be rude not to. And the pilot was fantastic because she made all the announcements to me personally. She would come on the channel saying Hi Karon and the girls, were now flying over Croatia if you look out on you left-hand side. And then later when it got dark, she said Karon quick! Look on the other side of the plane. We are going through a lightning storm. And it was the most amazing thing I've ever seen. And even the girls on the plane had never seen anything like it.

HM: Can I ask how much you paid for the ticket?

KG: 46 pounds, which I don't know what that is in your money. But 46 pounds in the UK.

HM: yeah, it's $80 I think thereabouts. And how long was this flight?

KG: Four-hours-and-twenty-minutes.

HM: So for four-hours-and-twenty-minutes you're the queen of the air?

KG: Absolutely. And I sat there and I was working on my book, so it was great I got lots of work done. I'm writing a novel — a romantic crime novel — so it was great. I got lots of work done.

HM: What's it called?

KG: It's called “The Dime Store Divas Mysteries”.

HM: And what does that mean?

KG: Because I'm a chef and I have cookbooks and a website called Larder Love. And so this is all it's a romantic mystery, whodunit murder. And it's all connected with food.

HM: Oh, I like that. I love the idea of that. Who are the characters?

KG: Well, the characters… I kind of based them on people locally, but I’ve mixed them all up. It's all set in a very small village in Scotland. And I do live in a small village, but this is a hodgepodge of people. So I use everybody that I know and I sort of take all their quirks and I put them together into different characters.

HM: I have an idea. Why don't you have two people show up on a plane and there's a romance started.

KG: Yeah, that would be even better. It would be even better if it was me that showed up on the plane with Johnny Depp. How about that?

HM: Well, I'm glad you had fun with it. And maybe it will end up in your work somewhere.

KG: It definitely will because the next series of romantic novels will be set in Crete. And, of course, I'm going to use this. I would be mad not to.

HM: You sure would. Have fun. I hope your flight home isn't too crowded.

KG: Oh I know, yeah. It’s going to be awful isn't it? Thank you very much.

HM: OK. Bye bye.

KG: Cheers then.

JD: Karon Grieve is a writer who was recently the solo passenger on a flight. We reached her on Crete.

[Music: Jazz]

Psychopath studies

JD: You were on a business, you're hiring, you run into a perennial problem: you've got a candidate who seems ideal, but is a psychopath. Do you give them a shot? Well, a couple of new studies might help you with that decision. The first, by researchers at the University of Plymouth, suggests that, under certain circumstances, a psychopath may be just the person for the job. Psychopaths tend to lack empathy, and be anti-social. So, if you say, run a family restaurant that prides itself on friendly, down-home service, you may not be inclined to hire anyone with that particular disorder. But what if one day, during the dinner rush, you have to kill one person in order to serve a bunch of other people? Restaurant owners are nodding knowingly right now because that happens. And according to this new study, you might want a psychopath on hand when it does, but not for the reason you might think. The sacrifice one person to save more people dilemma is a common ethical thought experiment. But the Plymouth researchers added a new element: they also subjected their subjects to a virtual-reality scenario, in which the subject physically acted out their responses. Now, you would expect psychopaths would be more likely to choose to let someone die in order that more someones might live. They weren't. Where the psychopaths came in handy though was when it came to the actual killing of the virtual person in the virtual-reality. That they did without hesitation, and with unusual relish. To sum up, they won't help you make that tough decision, but they will enthusiastically help you execute that decision… and person. Oh, and that second study, which is significantly more surprising: psychopaths are not good hedge fund managers.

Part 2: Holocaust apology, Novaya Gazeta protection, pink-headed duck

Holocaust apology

Guest: Peter Hirschmann

“It is hardly bearable to start thinking about the details — what a horror a nightmare that must have been to live through this.” That is from a letter written to Peter Hirschmann by a woman in Nuremberg, Germany. Had never met her. But her family history had a lasting impact on his life. Mr. Hirshmann is a German Jew, who was forced to flee his childhood home in Nuremberg for the US when he was 14-years-old, at the beginning of the Holocaust in 1939. The woman who wrote to him is named Doris Schott-Neuse. Her grandfather acquired Mr. Hirschmann's family home after it was seized by the Nazis. After she learned that, she sent Mr. Hirchmann a letter asking for his forgiveness. We reached Peter Hirschmann in Livingston, New Jersey.

CO: Mr. Hirschmann, can you take me back to the moment that you opened and read this letter? How did you react? How did you feel?

PETER HIRSCHMANN: Well number one, I was very much surprised because the type of letter that I received I'm sure that’s the only one ever written by someone from Germany who had similar experiences to somebody like me who was at the other end of that. And when I opened it up and read the details, tears came to my eyes because, in many ways, it brought back wonderful memories and some very sad memories and some very frightening memories of my past in Germany.

HM: What exactly was in the letter? What was said?

PH: It was an apology for what someone in her family — mainly her grandfather, and possibly her grandmother — had done with respect to our home because her home had been taken away from us at one point by the Nazi regime of Germany. And it had been turned over to the grandparents.

HM: So this is a home that had been in your family that was taken from you by the Nazis, and then her family ended up in it. And that's so long ago, did Ms. Schott-Neuse say why she reached out to you now, all these years later?

PH: Yes, because she suddenly realized something that she didn't understand before: that her family background involved people who were Nazi criminals. She never believed that her mother or her grandfather, grandmother were ever involved in something so horrible. But she started to think that some of the things she heard about how her family got into possession of this home didn't sound regular to her. And she started to delve into it. She checked the public records in my former hometown to find out just when these transfers of ownership occurred, and under what circumstances? And from that, she realized that her grandfather must have been a Nazi criminal. She also found, out of course, who the people were who lived there. And she made it her business to find me, which she did. And once she did, she sent me the letter.

HM: And did she say to you in the letter how making this discovery made her feel?

PH: It made her feel guilty, and she wanted to apologize, which she did very beautifully and very eloquently in her letter.

HM: How old were you, Peter when you left the house?

PH: I was 14.

HM: And what are your memories of the place? Do you have a favourite place in that home that stands out for you?

PH: Well, it’s one of the fine homes in Nuremburg. it's a large property and so on. And I just had a wonderful life there, until Hitler made it impossible to enjoy anything about our existence in Germany after he came to power. They actually threw us out of the house at a point, which was just two months before we got out to come to the United States. It's hard to comprehend. But on the other hand, it became attuned to that because Hitler began in 1933, and things got worse by the day. So when they finally took the house away from us, that was just the final straw to a long list of indignities that were bestowed upon us all along.

HM: What effect did that have on your life at the time? What was it like for you as they came to power as a teenager — a young teenager?

PH: Our friends were all kinds of people: Jewish people, not Jewish people and those who became part of Hitler's movement, all of a sudden, wouldn't talk to me. And, certainly, wouldn’t have any friendly connections with us. And, ultimately, we were left just with our Jewish friends, and we made the best of it. You know, for a number of years, my father was an officer in the German army — a decorated officer in World War One — a true German patriot. He couldn't believe that Hitler's regime wasn't blown over by its own weight. And until it became so bad that he had no choice but to apply for visas to the United States, which he didn't get for for the four of us — my brother, me, my mother and him — for three years for three years. And, finally, we all got out in 1939.

HM: You have been in touch with Ms. Schott-Neuse since the letter was received. Can you share with us what you have said to her?

PH: I explained that the letter brought tears to my eyes for a number of reasons: one of them because it was about my beloved childhood home that I had lost. But it also made me sad because I realized she was suffering, and she was totally blameless. When she found out about the Nazi past of her family and how the house had been acquired and how she is now the granddaughter. How instead of just ignoring it, she actually confronted it and made it her business to find me, so that she could apologize for something that she wasn't to be blamed for. In addition, I wished her well for her future, and hoped that she would learn not to look to the past so much, but look to the future and that sort of thing, you know?

HM: Mr. Hirschmann, it's quite the story, and I'm glad you were willing to share it with us. Thank you so much.

PT: All right. You’s absolutely welcome.

HM: All right. You take care. Goodbye.

PT: Goodbye.

JD: Peter Hirschmann is a Holocaust survivor who received a letter from the granddaughter of the man who took his family home. We reached him in Livingston, New Jersey. For more on the story, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Novaya Gazeta protection

Guest: Pavel Kanygin

“If the state is not ready to protect us, we will protect ourselves.” That is what one editor of Russia's top opposition newspaper, Novaya Gazeta, said today. The newspaper plans on training and arming its staff with weapons containing rubber bullets. This is in direct response to a brazen attack on a Russian radio journalist earlier this week. A man broke into an independent radio station, Ekho Moskvy, and stabbed well-known host Tatiana Felgenhauer in the neck. She is still recovering in hospital. It is the latest in a string of violent attacks on independent journalists in Russia. Pavel Kanygin is a special correspondent with Novaya Gazeta, and he is a friend of Ms. Felgenhauer’s. We reached him in Moscow.

HM: Pavel, do you think that if you had a weapon to protect yourself, you would feel safer working as a journalist in Russia?

PAVEL KANYGIN: Oh, actually I don't know. Still, I haven't decided even for myself if I need a gun actually. So it seems to be a quite complex question, but what are we left with if the government can’t protect us? Journalists in Russia are very vulnerable people, and do we feel insecure when riding from home to office. And when travelling somewhere on assignment, even to meet with people, we always feels insecure.

HM: Has it occurred to you before that you might want to arm yourself?

PK: I never wanted to get armed actually. You need to understand that I'm a war correspondent, I used to work in the east of Ukraine, and I had been working there for two years actually. I was captured twice by rebels there. And I can say that no gun would have saved me from a capturing actually. Maybe even worse things could’ve happened with me if I had had a gun.

HM: So what do you think of your newspaper, Novaya Gazeta, making this decision that it should arm its journalists, is it a good idea?

PK: The whole discussion is a good idea actually. The question my editor raised is a very good idea. It's a very complicated topic to discuss, but I'm sure that even this discussion makes government pay more attention to the issue in terms of protection of journalists.

HM: I understand that you are a friend of Tatyana Felgenhauer, who was stabbed in the neck earlier this week while in the newsroom. First of all, how is she doing?

PK: Yes, Tatyana is a friend of mine and the whole Novaya Gazeta, and we are really worried about her. But thanks to the surgeons, she's recovering. She's in intensive care now, and I hope she's going to be all right.

HM: Russian authorities have named Tatyana’s alleged attacker as Boris Grits. He's a 48-year-old, dual-citizen of Russia and Israel. What more do we know about Mr. Grits and the motivation?

PK: As I know, he is believed to be not mentally stable. Now, he was put in a psychiatric hospital.

HM: A spokesperson for President Putin has said this was a madman, an incident that would be impossible to predict. Do you accept that?

PK: Actually I don't know. Yes, he said that person was a madman, but it's strange because all those madmen they choose to attack people like independent journalists. They never choose to attack people from a state-run TV channel. We need to investigate this person, Boris Grits, you know? He arranged the whole operation, how to get to the radio station, to the office of radio station, He plotted the whole idea and it's not so easy to organize such a thing in the center of the big city of Moscow. I'm sure that he was motivated by Russian state TV channel. Of course, he was listener of the radio station, but he also was a viewer of Russian TV channels. He just consumed all this stuff from the television, and he came to Ekho Moskvy and did these awful things with Tatyana.

HM: And is it true state TV singled out Tatyana for being what they called a “puppet of the United States”?

PK: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, Russia-24, this is a state-run TV channel, blamed her to be a kind of a puppet of the State Department of the United States. They just emphasized that Tatyana is a kind of agent. I don't know what to say?

HM: Novaya Gazeta has had six journalists killed since 2001. Many people will remember Anna Politkovskaya, who shot and killed in 2006. Why do you think the paper is such a target?

PK: We are the one and only independent Russian media. And, of course, we are the target of the government oligarch. We are very vulnerable because the only paper which can provide people in society with the news — with the investigations of corrupted schemes of Russian government.

HM: Who ultimately do you think should be held responsible for these acts of violence against journalists?

PK: I think the government is responsible for this situation. We feel absolutely insecure, and I think that government should provide us with protection. And I'm 100 per cent sure that the government can change the whole situation actually if they stop naming us as the enemy, as a puppet of the State Department of the U.S. and that would be the best solution.

HM: If the paper goes ahead with this this plan to arm journalists, will you take one?

PK: I didn’t decide yet. I need to think of it. I'm not sure that it's a good idea to get armed, you know? But I'm sure that the discussion should be raised, you know?

HM: So you think when the editors are talking about arming their staff, it's really more about sending a message?

PK: Yes, exactly. The message that my editor sent to the government is clear: we need to be protected. We need to get protection from the government. And I think it's very important for us know to be heard by the government.

HM: All right. Pavel, thank you very much for talking to us.

PK: Yes, thank you too. Bye.

JD: Pavel Kanygin is a special correspondent with the Novaya Gazeta. We reached him in Moscow.

[Music: Jazz]

Pink-headed duck

Guest: Richard Thorns

JD: 20 years ago, Richard Thorns became obsessed with a duck. Not one duck in particular, I should stress, but a species of duck: the pink-headed duck. Mr. Thorns is obsessed with spotting the pink-headed duck in the wild. The only problem is that the species has not been spotted since 1949. So far, he has mounted six expeditions to the wilds of Myanmar. They were all unsuccessful. But he believes his luck will change with his seventh, which he has just embarked on. We reached Richard Thorns in Northern Myanmar.

HM: Richard Thorns, any sign of this pink-headed duck yet?

RICHARD THORNS: There was some interesting news that we had. We went to a village yesterday, and a villager said that he was walking to work one morning along this little village road next to the wetland, and it startled a large birds. And in it was a bird with a bright pink head. And he thought oh, that's a strange-looking bird. And he told me this story. And it was actually a news story. This happened some 19 years ago. And so tomorrow, we're taking the elephants and we’re going to be doing what the Victorians did 150 years ago. We’re going to try and flush the critter out if we can.

HM: Now, you say a bright pink head, that gives me some indication. But can you give us a bit of a better sense of what one of these birds looks like?

RT: Yeah, mostly it's quite a large duck — about the size of a mallard — chocolate brown with black plumage. But the striking thing about the bird is that it's got a very long, straight neck — it doesn't curve very much. It's been described in the past as a rose pink. And, incidentally, the chap who told his story today in the village said in the books, they say it's not very pretty, but he said this in the flesh, it’s beautiful.

HM: We know birders get pretty obsessed with finding particular types of bird. What is it about the pink-headed duck for you? How did this begin?

RT: Well, nearly 20 years ago, I was a shop assistant in southern England, and I didn't have really an awful lot going on in my life. And I went up to the local library and I got a book on extinct birds… actually it wasn't on extinct birds, come to think of it. It was actually endangered birds. And there were three case histories of birds that had already gone: the dodo, the great auk of the North Atlantic and lo-and-behold, the third one was India’s pink-headed duck. I'd never heard of a pink-headed duck. And I just thought well, it's probably gone for good and isn't that a shame? And then the author said even though it became extinct very recently, and I think that’s something like half-a-dozen words. But that just changed everything for me. I just knew that I was going to find it. You know, it's one of the things that just hits you straight between the eyes and just changes your life, you know? And they don't come around very often. And when they do, it's a great thing. It really is.

HM: I have to ask, what do your family and friends think of this?

RT: Well, I think in my father's life, he’d tried to really defend me to the hill. And get dreadfully annoyed and upset with all the people who collapsed into puddles of laughter, which is sometimes what happens. You get lots of jokes about hoisin sauce and cucumbers. A lot of people basically you know they find it quite funny actually. I suppose that's kind of natural really. You know, if people want to sort of rib me for it that's fine.

HM: Yeah, you've been focused on this for so long. You have to have thought about what it's going to mean for you if you ever actually do see this duck after 20 years. Can you share with us what you imagine that will be like for you?

RT: Well yeah, I mean I have thought about this a lot actually. You know, how’s it going to feel? You see it, and then you think well, five seconds ago that moment was part of the last 20 years and I haven't seen it. But I have now and everything changes, you know? So it’ll be this kind of dividing light. I don't know how I’m going to feel, to be honest. I think it's an unpredictable science, and I think it's going to be a history-changing moment. It will be enormous if this pink-headed duck turns up. It really will be. It will be a National Geographic moment and all the rest of it. But for me personally, You can’t really pin it down to a knee-jerk thing. It’s what I gave up a halfway decent way of life for, you know? It’s cost be $20,000, and I’ve been bitten by a spider, chased by a water buffalo, I’ve broken my hand in a boating accident and I keep coming back for more.Because why wouldn’t you?

HM: I hope for your sake, and for the rest of us, that this duck is out there.

RT: I have to tell you that if the pink-headed duck is there, and I think in this wetland there's a very good chance. If I can probably go in there further now, I think there’s a very good chance. We're going to be five days on the elephants, me and my team. We’re going to criss-cross this particular wetland. And the habitat is perfect. I'm going to give it everything I've got. But what I really want to do is basically show the world what a pink-headed duck looks like in colour, and it will just be wow!

HM: Thank you again for talking with us; the very best of luck.

RT: You’re very kind. Thank you so much.

HM: Bye.

RT: Bye.

JD: We reached Richard Thorns in Northern Myanmar. If you'd like to see some photographs of the pink-headed duck — not a live pink-headed duck — unfortunately for us, and for Mr. Thorns — but a stuffed pink-headed duck, co to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

Part 3: Ouellette arrest, stolen Italian coffee table

Ouellette arrest

Guest: Marie-Maude Denis

JD: “A shock and a surprise.” That is how Quebec premier Phillippe Couillard is describing yesterday's arrest of one of his own Liberal Party MNAs by UPAC, the province’s anti-corruption squad. Guy Ouellette is the MNA in question. Before he is elected, Minister Ouellette spent 30 years as a police officer on the provincial force. Marie-Maude Denis is the host of Radio Canada’s investigative programme, “Enquete”. We reached her in Montreal.

HM: Marie-Maude, first of all, what are your sources telling you about the actual arrest, and how that took place?

MARIE-MAUDE DENIS: Well, it couldn't be more dramatic than what happened yesterday. Yesterday morning, the UPAC, the permanent anti-corruption squad in Quebec, raided the houses of two of their members or former members: a retired policeman and another active policeman. And while they were at his house, they took his telephone and they started texting to Guy Ouellette, who was at the Question Period at the very precise time when he received the text messages from who he thought was the retired cop. And the retired cop was saying things like I'm going to go to see the journalist, and I'm going to tell them all of everything that happened. I have to see you. And then, Guy Ouellette took his car and drove in the suburbs of Quebec City to meet with who he thought would be the retired cop. But when he got to the meeting, it was investigators from the UPAC waiting for him, and they arrested him and took him in for questioning.

HM: He's is not the first Quebec politician to be arrested by an anti-corruption unit. What is it about him that makes this arrest such a particular shock?

MMD: It's definitely another story if you compare it to what happened in the past. We have to go back in 2013, when the UPAC started investigation, which was about a system of illegal financing of the Liberal Party. And it came pretty early in the investigation that they were suspecting the very top of the Liberal Party at that time and possibly Jean Charest, Quebec’s former premier himself was, if not a suspect, a person of great interest in that investigation. And a lot of media did stories about those findings years ago. But last spring, one published documents directly from this investigation with a police document with Jean Charest’s name and his whereabouts and declarations of witnesses. And a few days later, the commissioner of the UPAC was appearing in front of a committee. And you can't beat the irony that Guy Ouellette was the chairman of that committee. The commissioner told all the MNAs there I will catch that bandit who leaked the documents because the stakes are very high. The credibility of the UPAC was very low, seeing that such confidential documents could come out in the media. So that went away for a few months, until yesterday — when, finally, — it appears that Guy Ouellette himself may have a link in leaking those documents to the journalists.

HM: Politics is not Mr. Ouelette’s first career. He was a police officer, but for people outside Quebec, they may not understand what his role was on the police force. He was fairly prominent in that job as well. Can you tell us a bit about what he did?

MMD: He was a superstar, Helen, in the time of the biker war in the early 90s. He knew everything about the bikers, there name, their nickname, their date of birth and he's a very, very good communicator. So he gave interviews every day in the media — or almost. And he had this image of tough law and order; one man alone against the bikers. He had a very, very strong personality. So it was no surprise that he was invited to go into politics. And it was always quite a mystery that he was never made minister. He was very displeased about that. It was no secret.

HM: Now, if he was indeed one of those who is behind these leaks, what would have motivated him do you think to be doing that?

MMD: Well, that's a very, very good question. And we can't see into his head. That's, of course, if he took a part in the leaking of those documents. But I can give you some keys in the context. So last spring, Guy Ouellette gave some interviews to say that he was feeling that he was pushed aside by the establishment of the Quebec Liberal Party. That's no secret. He said it publicly, and his loathes the commissioner of the anti-corruption squad.

HM: He loathes him.

MMD: They had conflicts for years. Guy Ouellette made no secret that he wanted to replace him as the commissioner of the Quebec anti-corruption squad. They were both really important at the Quebec police in the 90s, and beginning of the 2000s. But there's no friendship between the two men. And this adds to the irony of the whole thing.

HM: Everyone seems to be wondering if Mr. Ouellette will actually be charged? What will you be watching for beyond that?

MMD: I think this investigation is bigger than what we saw yesterday. I think it's going to go on and there might be more leaks identified. But the bigger picture is that there should be some developments in the upcoming year.

HM: Marie-Maude, thank you very much for explaining it to us.

MMD: You're welcome, Helen.

HM: OK. Bye bye.

JD: Marie-Maude Denis is the host of Radio Canada’s investigative progrramme “Enqete”. We reached her in Montreal.

[Music: Jazz]

Dateline: Noise-canceling fork

JD: Dateline Japan.

[Sound: Slurping some ramen]

JD: This is the sound of someone slurping ramen noodles. Presumably, a sound that some people are really into, given that that video has been viewed more than 300,000 times. But, of course, for some of us, something about it is deeply disturbing. Like nails on a chalkboard. Or like someone slurping chalk off the ledge in front of the chalkboard. Of course… that's enough of the slurping sound thanks. Of course, there is a long tradition of slurping Ramen noodles in Japan. And it allows you to really take in all the flavours and the aromas. Recently, however, some people… thanks guys, that's going to do it with the slurping really? Mostly foreigners unfamiliar with that tradition, and therefore, uncomfortable with it. Guys, enough with the sound please! A button’s stuck. You can't turn off the slurping? OK, OK, that's OK. We can get through this somehow. Actually, coincidentally, it will help me make what could have been a very tough segue. The Japanese company Nissin has just introduced a not all gimmicky invention: a fork that can hear you when you're slurping, and trigger your phone to make a sound that covers it up. OK, now the button is unstuck. OK well, OK, OK. Let's just enjoy this brief moment of silence. That's nice. OK now, here is a brief clip from the promotional video for the new noise-cancelling Otohiko fork, by Nissin. So listen as the fork tells the phone slurping is happening, and the phone responds with a gentle slurp-covering whoosh.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: This definitely takes all the fun out of ramen. I was taught that you can slurp ramen. That is why I like it so much]

JD: It’s a whoosh, but it sounds like a flush. It's silly. And, as I say, it's a gimmick. It's a fun, limited-edition joke item with no actual application in the real world. So thanks Nissin, but if we could get onto some…

[Sound: Yes! Slurping!]

JD: I want the fork. Will someone call the fork people.

[Music: Soundtrack music]

From Our Archives: Gregory Baum obit

JD: Throughout his life, Gregory Baum challenged the conservative orthodoxies of the Catholic Church, as an outspoken liberal and progressive voice, from both inside and outside the clergy. In the 1960s, he served as a peritus, or a theological adviser, at Vatican II. And he was instrumental in pushing for reform on the church's views towards contraception in Canada — a movement, which culminated in the controversial Winnipeg's statement of 1968. In essence, the document upheld that an individual should be free to consult her own conscience, rather than submit to blanket condemnation from the church when considering birth control. Gregory Baum died last week. He was 94-years-old. Professor Baum left the church in 1974, he married and he became a professor of theology. But he continued to court controversy until the end, with the publication last year of his memoir, “The Oil Has Not Run Dry”. In it, he reveals his homosexuality and that his wife accepted his male partner — also a former priest. In 1979, Professor Baum came to the defense of another reformist priest, this Swiss-born Reverend Hans Kung, who had been found guilty of heresy by Rome. Professor Baum was one of 70 Catholic theologians across North America who signed a petition in support of Reverend Kung. Here's some of his conversation with former As It Happens host Barbara Frum, from our archives.

SOUNDCLIP

BARBRA FRUM: Does this decision on Kung represent a worrying trend as far as you're concerned? Are you distressed by what it might be saying about this new pope and the church?

GREGORY BAUM: Yes, I am distressed. I think this could be a signal for a campaign against the free exercise of theology in the Catholic Church. After all, he isn't the only one who is in trouble. There are a number of other theologians who have been called to Rome, and are being investigated. Kung was invited to come to Rome a number of times to defend his views. He never went there because he said I don't go to a court when the court procedure are not written down. When I cannot have guarantees as to how I shall be examined. If I can't know beforehand what I'm being accused of, and so on. I would say that the pre-modern. You see this in the Middle Ages and in the subsequent centuries. Courts were handled very secretly. And today, in the modern world, we expect lawyers to operate according to a public law, that you know beforehand what you are accused of, that you could choose a lawyer if you so want to, that you can pay your defense and so on.

BF: Who are your accusers in a case like this? Do we know who the members of the court are?

GB: Well, I mean we know vaguely that one particular body in Rome — the Congregation for Christian Doctrine — is involved in this. And we know who the head is and we know some of the people in it. But we don't know beforehand who will be sitting there, and what they will be interested in, and so on.

BF: It's like the Ayatollah’s Revolutionary Council.

GB: [Sound: Laughter] Well, I mean in Iran also, these are kind of pre-modern religious courts that is all prior to the Enlightenment, and the kind of legal revolution that took place in the west in the 18th century. I mean I feel that the pope comes from you know from Poland. In the the Eastern European communist countries, there is no liberal tradition or Democratic tradition. So I feel that this sort of party discipline is very much at home with the kind of second-world he comes from. Seems to me that reflects an Eastern European experience. That is if you fight against the communist regime in Poland, then you think of the church as being a kind of tightly disciplined body that resists the other tightly organized bodies.

BF: Has it brought back to your own decision to leave the church for theological reasons?

GB: [Sound: Laughter] Well no, I mean I didn’t leave the church, but I resigned from the priesthood. And this is something really quite different. I'm very much a Catholic theologian in the Catholic stream, and controversy is just part of that.

JD: From our archives, that was Catholic theologian Gregory Baum speaking with Barbara Frum, in December of 1979. Gregory Baum died last week. He was 94-years-old.

[Music: Blues rock]

Stolen Italian coffee table

Guest: Dario Del Bufalo

JD: It was a search warrant for a coffee table. And when it was seized from the home on Park Avenue, the owners were heartbroken. For 50 years, it had been their most beloved piece of furniture. And now, the coffee table is back in the hands of the Italian government. But it wasn't the table the Italians wanted. It was the square marble tile on top of the legs. Turns out that that tile had been crafted 2000 years ago. And at some point along its journey, it was stolen. Dario Del Bufalo is an art expert in ancient marbles, has written a book that made mention of the missing mosaic. He helped solve the mystery. We reached him in Rome.

HM: Mr. Del Bufalo, how does it feel for you to know that this coffee table — an ancient mosaic tile — is back in the hands of the Italian government?

DARIO DEL BUFALO: Well finally! It’s good after maybe 70 years of lost. This is the word I used in my book, “Porphyry” that I published in 2013. Under the colour picture of this mosaic, I wrote lost.

Now you say “Porphyry”, why is the book called “Porphyry”? what is it about the tile that brought that name?

DDB: Because four of the most beautiful round the circles that you can see in the mosaic panel like are these four circles of red imperia porphyry. Porphyry is a volcanic stone. So it's a lava marble. This reddish lava with white spots — very, very hard.

HM: And what else can you tell us about the design of the tile?

DDB: I mean this is done at around 30-35 A.D., 2000 years ago. But, to me, the design can be associated with some of the geometrical designs of the 1930s in Europe. It's very modern and very ancient at the same time.

HM: And this was crafted for the emperor Caligula 2000 years ago, what was it to be used for?

DDB: This is a four by four feet fragment, let’s say. But it's an entire tile made for part of the pavement of a special space of this huge ship. So it's a huge apartment that floats. On top of the boats, you can actually see marble columns. And there was a temple as a matter of fact, burning perfumes for the gods and marble pavements. So this was one part of the marble pavement of this very top luxury boat. And then once you are in the center of the lake, you can do some festivity for the gods. And in the evening, they turn into parties.

HM: And Caligula was known for having some pretty extreme parties. Many of them would have been held on this boat?

DDB: Yes. Because he started with one of the smaller boat, then it was so popular — the parties where so good on those boats. You could do anything because nobody else can see you or hear you. There are no journalists that can say how tremendous were their parties. And Caligula was beloved by the entourage of the Emperor, but hated by many, many Romans. And after his assassination, these boats were sunk into the lake.

HM: Now, they stayed there for thousands of years, and were rediscovered by the fascist leader Benito Mussolini in the 1930s. Tell us what happened then with this title?

DDB: Mussolini liked to restore the Roman Empire. And he spent a lot of money to drain part of the lake. With the boats he found gilded bronze, pieces of gold, many marbles and beautiful artifacts. Some of them are in the Louvre. Some of them are in the Roman museums. But the war came in, so in 1944, most of the refugees went to feel safe in these museums. All of a sudden, things that were kept in this museum somebody took away during these years.

HM: I gather you'd heard stories about this particular piece of mosaic tile. How did you learn it was sitting in a Park Avenue apartment and being used as a coffee table?

DDB: Well, by studying all the marbles, I found out that there was a black and white picture with all the pieces they found, mosaics, bronze and beautiful art pieces. Then, I remembered there was a colour picture of this mosaic in a book of 1971 of one of one of my professors. So I asked this professor where did you get the colour picture of this mosaic? And he told me that he had this photo from an art dealer in Rome. We know it was in 1960s in Rome, all of a sudden, disappears. When in 2013, I came in New York City to give a speech and to make my book signing. In that occasion, someone looking at my book pictures recognized the mosaic, and said this is a mosaic of Helen. And another one said yes, I remember. She lives in New York on Park Avenue. I stopped them and I said what are you talking about? You mean this mosaic is in New York? And they said yes.

HM: It was in the hands of this woman, Helen Fioratti, she had it in her apartment on Park Avenue. How did it end up getting returned?

DDB: I must say that the discovery was made by my book. On my book, I published the black and white photographs, and I published the colour photograph of the 60s. And somebody went to Mrs. Fioratti’s apartment and knocked on the door and said excuse me, do you really have this mosaic. And she said yes.

HM: Ms. Fioratti says that she and her husband bought this piece in good faith. What do you say to that? Do you have sympathy for her that she's had this in her home for 45 years and doesn't have it anymore?

DDB: At the beginning, I was a little bit sorry for her. But when the district attorney asked Ms. Fioratti OK, if it's yours, show me the documents that attest the fact that you exported it from Europe to America. When did it come and how? And she had none of this. I don't really see the point where or from whom MRS. Fioratti bought, in good for not, the piece. The point is that in legally the piece tin Rome is an archeological piece, belonging to the state of Italy was smuggled to America. To see the real thing in a museum, rather than in living room in a New York apartment, I must say that much more people can really enjoy it. And that's the place where it should be.

HM: Mr. Del Bufalo, thank you for taking us through this journey.

DDB: Thank you so much.

HM: OK. Good to talk to you. Bye bye.

DDB: Bye bye. Goodnight.

JD: Dario Del Bufalo is an art expert in ancient marbles. He helped solve the mystery of a long-lost, 2000-year-old marble mosaic. We reached him in Rome.

[Music: Cultural]

Michael Bay Dora

JD: This is what the Nick Jr. program “Dora the Explorer” sounds like.

SOUNDCLIP

DORA: I'm playing “Loud and Soft” This is loud! This is soft. Loud! Soft.

JD: This is what Director Michael Bay's movie “Transformers: The last Knight sounds like.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: Explosions and things]

JD: The first is a children's show, in which viewers are encouraged to help a young girl and her monkey sidekick, Boots, have adventures — while preventing the sneaky Fox, Swiper, from stealing stuff. The second is a movie, in which the Transformers join up with a professor from Oxford and the guy Mark Wahlberg plays to save the world with the help of a magic staff. It is not difficult to tell them apart. But there is to be a live-action “Dora the Explorer” movie, and it might blur the lines a bit. Plus, it will probably end up more loud then soft. Because, weirdly, Michael Bay, the guy who directed Armageddon and all the Transformer movies and various other movies in which everything happens as chaotically and noisily as possible, is one of the producers. If your kids are Dora fans that might not even be the most off-putting part. In the show, Dora is seven or eight; she lives in a magical land. In the planned movie, She will apparently be a teenager who has just moved to the city, which means Boots the monkey is probably going to be a lot more jaded. And this raises many questions. One, is it still a movie about Dora the Explorer if the only thing it shares with the series is that her name is Dora? Two, is there any real monkey that will tolerate being forced to wear boots, or will it be some kind of CGI nightmare? And three, will Dora be able to hear us yelling Swiper, no swiping, over a cacophony of car crashes and gunfire. My point is friends, prepare yourself. It might be an adaptation in the spirit of the show. Or, since Michael Bay is involved, it might be this.

SOUNDCLIP

DORA AND BOOTS: Say it with us. Swiper, no swiping. Swiper, no swiping. Swiper, no swiping.

[Sound: Explosions and stuff]

SWIPER: Oh man!

DORA: Thanks for helping us stop Swiper.

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

October 26, 2017 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode