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 2016

The AIH Transcript for April 7, 2017

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

CO: Hello, I'm Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

CO: Strike and counterstrike. The U.S. launches dozens of missiles at an Syrian air base in retaliation for the gas attack that killed dozens this week – but an Assad loyalist says the American attack is unfounded and illegal.

JD: Action and interaction. A Syrian opposition politician finds hope in President Trump's decision to attack – and a signal of possible cooperation to come.

CO: Defending the offensive. The former deputy secretary of state under President Obama thinks the new administration did the right thing by striking Syria – but that smart diplomacy must come next.

JD: Shattered city. Stockholm is the latest victim of an apparent terrorist attack in which a truck was used as a weapon. We'll speak with a student who was shopping when someone drove through a department store wall.

CO: Elbow griefs. In a baseball game on Tuesday, one player is hit with the ball three times while trying to get home – twice on the arms and once on the helmet – but manages to bounce back.

JD: And...witless inspection program. In a small Indiana community, Brad Cox has just been selected as the village idiot – and tonight, we'll have more on a guy who is actually not a moron.
As It Happens, the Friday edition. Radio that saves the last dunce for you.

[Music]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Syria: pro-Assad MP/opposition, Stockholm attack

Syria: pro-Assad MP / opposition

Guest: Fares Shehabi, Bassma Kodmani

JEFF DOUGLAS: The missiles came in the early morning hours and when they flew over residents in the Syrian province of Homs they were so bright it felt like daytime.
Mateea Zefa witnessed the missile strikes targeting a shrine airbase. He lives nearby. Through an interpreter he told the BBC what he saw.

SOUNDCLIP

MATEEA ZEFA: I’m around 800 meters from the air base. They bombed us. We rushed, my children and I, to check what was happening. We saw lots of bombs, loads of them. It was a tough night. Was seeing fire up to 100 meters in the air or more. It was lighting the whole sky. Horrible bombing. My house was damaged and almost all windows broke and walls cracked me. In the morning, I saw the base was totally destroyed. People left. There was a lot of damage. I know that on the other side of the base, houses were totally destroyed, more than on our site.

JD: Mateea Zefa is a Syrian resident who witnessed U.S. missile striking a Syrian airbase. U.S. President Donald Trump ordered that strike as a direct response to this week's chemical weapons attack in Idlib Province which left more than 70 people dead. Syrian President Bashar al Assad has called the missile attack quote “a disgraceful act.”
Fares Shehabi is a Syrian politican, loyal to President Assad. We reached Mr. Shehabi in Aleppo.

CAROL OFF: Mr. Shehabi, do you see this missile strike as an act of war against the Syrian regime?

MATEEA ZEFA: Actually it's a population of international law and it is another violation of relying on known terrorist organizations, Al-Quaeda’s forces to get the information from.

CO: Well it seems that the US president Donald Trump and the Trump administration say that their evidence comes from reliable sources. And as far as doing something illegal, he said Mr. Trump says that this is a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians, choked out the lives of helpless men, women, and children. Doesn't that merit some kind of response on the part of the United States internationally?

MZ: Actually the one Mr. Trump tells us where the Iraqi WMDs we heard of in 2003, a very compelling argument by Colin Powell, and so Iraq was destroyed. Two million people were killed. So far we haven't found any WMDs. When this happens, then I can say their sources are reliable. I know exactly what happened. These sarin gas we found in East Aleppo some of them when we liberated the remaining of our city, we found chemical arsenal. The ones that exploded or spread in the [unintelligible] bunker were transferred to [unintelligible] from Libya. We do not have any chemical weapons. The UN confirmed it, the Obama administration confirmed it, that they dismantled all of our chemical arsenal. We do not have any chemical arsenal. We never used before and we don't intend to use in the future.

CO: Well it seems that the evidence that they use is that you do have those weapons. And you are referring to this theory that the sarin gas attack was because there was an airstrike that hit a weapons depot that was controlled by the opposition, by the rebels. Is that what you're referring to?

MZ: Because it's not the opposition or rebels. These are Al-Quaeda, [unintelligible]. The guys who are running [unintelligible] area Quaeda. When we hit them, and we have to hit them, this is our obligation. We're not going to sit and watch these guys conquer our towns and villages. This is Syria, we have a strong army, and we will retaliate.

CO: Chemical weapons experts who studied this, they said that it's not possible that would happen to those men women and children was because of hitting a weapons depot. An air strike or a bomb hitting a weapons depot would destroy the sarin gas weapons and not disperse it. So it's not consistent with what we saw on the ground.

MZ: Look look, other chemical experts also, and eyewitness reports, say otherwise. Look, any video from White Helmets doesn't have any credibility. White Helmets is the civil arm of Al-Qaida.

CO: Are you saying that there was no chemical attack? You're saying that these people we saw, the pictures we saw, the doctors we spoke with, the aid agencies who went in there, that none of this is true. That there was not dozens of people, 100 people killed.

MZ: A lot of it is a fabrication. I want to remind you of something. In 2013, our soldiers were victims of chemical attack an area called… near Aleppo. And when we demanded the UN commission to come over, we saw a fabrication near Damascus of a chemical attack. This is absurd. It's nonsense and the U.S. attack was also prepared before this chemical show. It was not spontaneous. It was set before beforehand. We have pictures of these guys in the same area where chemical weapons close a month ago.

CO: Well this is a very elaborate conspiracy theory. I just wonder if you're saying as well that the Syrian airstrike deliberately hit a weapons depot with chemical weapons in it. Is that not a likely attack on humans if you're going to attack a weapons depot that has chemical weapons in it?

MZ: No actually our pilots do not really chat with the terrorists on the ground before hitting them. And what were kids doing there? There are no schools there. There are not playgrounds there. Are you telling me that those schools were taking lessons inside a bunker?

CO: So you're saying these children were not killed? Are you saying all of this is a giant lie?

MZ: Bo no no no. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is a lot of these children were killed by the same people who videotaped them. That's what I'm saying. This is what we saw now in Eastern Aleppo as well. And we have solid proof of that.

CO: Al-Qaeda or not, there are civilians there. Do you deny that civilians are being killed and are being injured and are under attack?

MZ: Do you deny also that non-civilians were killed by U.S. tomahawks? Do you deny that four kids were killed near the airport? Do you deny that?

CO: Do you have that evidence?

MZ: Yes we have evidence. We have solid evidence.

CO: What do you want your government to do and it’s Russian allies in response to what the United States has done overnight?

MZ: We do not want any escalation with the United States. We have to continue liberating Syria until we get rid of the last terrorist from our land.

CO: And does it matter sir, and sir, does it matter how many civilians get killed in the course of that?

MZ: Of course it matters. 1.2 million civilians are occupied by Al-Quaeda. We have to liberate them. Of course it matters.

CO: Just a week ago, President Trump was saying that Bashar al Assad was someone who would keep power. He could work with Mr. Assad, that he seemed that there was a relationship. This week there is no more relationship. Do you think that there has been a strategic mistake on the part of your president here which has broken your connections with the United States?

MZ: Assad is not a stupid person. He is a survivor. For six years, he was trying so hard to shift the U.S. opinion of what's happening in Syria. Six days ago, we were we were so happy that Trump finally said that he is shifting his priorities and wants to do the right thing. It's a clear indication that this is plotted only to mess this up. They succeeded in messing it up. It is not us, we are victims of this plot.

CO: We will leave it there. Mr. Shehabi, Thank you.

MZ: You're welcome.

JD: Fares Shehabi is a Syrian Member of Parliament. He represents Aleppo. We reached him in Aleppo.
Syrian opposition officials met with members of President Trump's administration in Washington D.C today. Bassma Kodmani was among them. Ms. Kodmani is the spokesperson for the Syria Opposition High Negotiations Committee. We reached her in D.C.

CO: Ms. Kodmani, we have just heard from a Syrian politician who says these missile strikes are a violation of international law. How do you interpret them?

BASSMA KODMANI: I don't believe that the Syrian regime has much to say other than this is a violation of its sovereignty. But as you, as everyone knows, the violations of all international norms and UN Security Council resolutions, all of this has just been violated through the use of chemical weapons so I would not take very seriously those kinds of statements frankly.

CO: What we heard from also from the Syrian politician Fares Shehabi is that there was no reason for Bashar al Assad to make a chemical weapons strike against the village because he was winning the war, he had a relationship with Mr. Trump, who said a week ago that they were OK with Bashar Assad in power. That he had no motivation to do something of such an extreme nature and that he said it’s some sort of a conspiracy to drive a wedge between Syria and the United States. What do you say?

BK: Well to have the conspiracy to drive a wedge I think is not something that really is credible. What we are seeing is covering with pseudo analysis the evidence that cannot be denied. That is what is happening. So saying that there was no reason to do so because it's winning on the ground doesn't stand in the face of the evidence we have. I believe there is here a testing of the will of this new administration. If he could get away with that, he could continue with impunity could continue as it has been the case for the last six years with no response the United States, no condemnation from the Security Council, while the civilian population is powerless and exposed to his attacks. Today these are chemical weapons but we have seen thousands and thousands of barrel bombs who kill every time people by the dozens. Indiscriminate weapons. I think Assad has just told us once more that he is the main obstacle to all of that. Fighting terrorism, stopping the flow of refugees, and ensuring a political transition.

CO: You're part of the Syrian opposition negotiations Committee for the Syrian opposition. You've been trying to, well you have met with the administration a number of times since Mr. Trump became the president. Did you see this coming? Did you have any indication that they would do something like this missile strike?

BK: To be honest we didn't expect such a strike but it was clear from the from what the administration was stating but also from meetings that this new administration was entirely focused on fighting terrorism, fighting this so-called Islamic State in Syria, and had no interest in seeing the linkage between fighting terrorism and reaching a political transition and getting to the point where we don't have to deal with the main obstacle who is Assad and we have been pushing this argument. You cannot de-link fighting terrorism from the main cause, the one who is manufacturing radical ideology and terrorism every day. And that is what Syria is about. So if we're not linking those two, the fight against terrorism will never lead to any durable sustainable result.

CO: And so do you think that day that the administration, Mr. Trump is now hearing that message, or do you think this was something, because he was very emotional in his statement, he saw the images, he was deeply moved. Was it because he now sees things from your point of view or he has his own ideas?

BK: I believe Donald Trump was sincerely moved by the images. Who wouldn't? I mean children are suffocating. I think what we have seen in his attitude is that that idea which was only one track of fighting terrorism, suddenly the strategy was set off track. And if Assad only understands the language of force, then these kinds of strikes maybe will convey the message to him that now is the time that he cooperates. He is telling the international community “I will be the obstacle for ever”. Going to Geneva is not producing anything because we have no partner for peace negotiation so far. We've been trying for the last three years with no results. So we just hope that some leverage is going to come out of this response and have a serious political transition.

CO: Just finally, we've heard just recently from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. They're saying that the airbase that was hit with these missile strikes is already back in operation. That Syrian war planes are taking off this evening to carry out airstrikes on the countryside in Homs. Is it possible that we're going to see Bashar al-Assad get more aggressive as a way of retaliating?

BK: Unfortunately it's quite possible. The question really is whether in Russia the message was received in a constructive way and whether Russia is willing to rein in its ally or let him escalate. I think the signals are on the ground are telling us what Russia's reaction is and what Russia's intentions are vis a vis the new administration.
I do hope, in private, that Russians will start understanding that this is going to be a disaster. That this time Russia will be paying a price for it, not just the Syrian population.

CO: Ms. Kodmani, thank you for joining us.

BK: Thank you. Alright.

CO: And good night.

BK: Bye-bye.

JD: Bassma Kodmani is the spokesperson for the Syria Opposition High Negotiations Committee. We reached her in Washington, D.C. Later on this program, we'll be speaking to former Deputy Secretary of State under President Obama, Tony Blinken. Mr. Blinken thinks the airstrikes were the right military move, but what comes next is going to be the real challenge.

[Music]

Stockholm attack

Guest: Christoffer Ung

JD: "Sweden has been attacked."
That was the message from the country's prime minister, Stefan Löfven, this afternoon.
Just before three pm, a stolen beer truck was driven into people in a busy pedestrian area in downtown Stockholm. Then the driver smashed the truck into an upscale department store. At least four are confirmed dead, more than a dozen injured.
Christoffer Ung was shopping at the store when the attack happened. We reached him in Stockholm.

CO: Christoffer, I know you were inside this shopping center when this incident happened. What happened, what did you see?

CHRISTOFFER UNG: I'd been doing my shopping and was heading towards the exit. And about ten meters from the exit, I hear loud noise, and the wall comes out like an avalanche. White wall, shattering glass.

CO: The wall of the mall, the outside wall is coming.

CU: Yeah. The walls are coming towards us. There was glass shattering, things flying everywhere, and people running around me in panic screaming. And everyone was heading away from the wall coming in.

CO: And what did you think was happening when you saw that?

CU: My first thought was that maybe it was a bomb that had gone off. That was my first thought and then my second thought was, you know, getting out and getting safe. So I was heading right towards it, towards the exit where everything happened. So it was, just you know, turning around and running as fast as you could.

CO: And did you do that as well?

CU: I did. My first instinct was trying to see if I could do something to help but then so many people were just running running the other way towards me so I had basically no other choice but to leg it myself.

CO: Did you see the truck that was that it hit the shopping mall?

CU: Not while I was inside, no. When I was inside, all I saw was the wall coming towards us. But when we got outside the building, we could, I could see the exit, the back of the truck sticking out. There was flames coming out from the building and dark smoke pouring out as well.

CO: And what do you understand happened? What have you learned as to what the truck did?

CU: From what I've been hearing, the truck had been stolen. It was running through a pedestrian area mowing people down. I think it wasn’t long before it heading into the building.

CO: How crowded, how busy was the mall at this point?

CU: Oh it's busy on Friday afternoon. There’s lots of people.

CO: Did anyone get hurt where you were?

CU: I didn't see anyone inside the department store. I didn't see anyone left behind in the department store when I was getting out. Well when we got out, I could see people lying in the street.

CO: That's been very disturbing for you to see that.

CU: Yes. Yes. It's really, I mean when you're in the moment, you have so much adrenaline that you don't really think about it, but now when the adrenaline is coming down, you feel a shock coming on. Really really nasty.

CO: And what are your thoughts and feelings now that you're able to kind of process what you saw?

CU: I'm thankful I was so slow inside the department store that it wasn’t me and I'm terribly sad for all the victims and all the families. My thoughts are going out to them.

CO: That must've been so shocking for people on a pedestrian walkway to see a truck coming so fast down the road.

CU: Oh definitely. I mean, I don't think you realize what's about to happen. The first though must be like “Oh that's strange. This is not supposed to be here.” And yeah it's really shocking.

CO: Did you talk to anybody outside when you when you finally got out there?

CU: Yeah. I tried to comfort one woman who was quite upset and there were there were people coming out to me and asking what’s happened, what’s happened. So I really didn’t know what happened but I mean just explaining what I saw and what I heard.

CO: Were you able to comfort that woman?

CU: Hopefully a little bit. I mean she was clearly shocked. All I could do was talk to her calmly and try to calm her down. And then there was really panic, panic the atmosphere around, and then became came rumours about gunfire and people with guns, so people started running away and it was quite panicky all around.

CO: What effect do you think this is going to have on people in Stockholm.

CU: Hopefully it won't have much effect. Because if it does, the terrorists have won. So I hope people will go about to living their lives as best they can. Just staying having everything normal.

CO: Will your own experiences change how you move or how you live in any way.

CU: Not consciously at least, not consciously. I can never be certain about how I would feel in certain situations but I really hope I won't change, and I hope I won't be afraid of anything or anyone because that would be real sad.

CO: Christoffer, I’m happy that you’re alright. And it must have been a very difficult day for you. I'll let you go so you can have some time to absorb all this, but thank you very much for speaking with us.

CU: Thank you, Carol. It's been a pleasure. Thank you.

JD: Christoffer Ung is a law student who witnessed the truck attack in Sweden today. We reached him in Stockholm.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Syria: Washington, village idiot

Syria: Washington

Guest: Tom Blinken

JEFF DOUGLAS: In a very politically polarized Washington D.C. The missile strikes ordered by President Donald Trump last night have drawn raw rare bipartisan support. Even members of the Obama administration which opted out of a missile strike after a similar chemical attack in 2013 have praised the move. But how President Trump will handle what comes next that's another question.
Tom Blinken was a deputy secretary of state under President Obama. He has written an op-ed in The New York Times today titled "After The Missiles, We Need Smart Diplomacy On Syria." We reached him in Washington, D.C.

CAROL OFF: Mr. Blinken, why do you think that Donald Trump did the right thing last night?

TOM BLINKEN: I think the president did the right thing because the use of sarin gas, the chemical weapon, not only produced these horrific deaths that the entire world saw, but it violated a norm that's been in place since the end of World War One, not to use chemical or biological weapons in armed conflict. That's a norm that the world signed on to. And when it is egregiously violated as it was this week by the Syrians, someone or someones have to stand up against it. It can't happen with impunity.

CO: OK. But you are part of the administration of Barack Obama. When in 2013 a very similar attack a thousand people killed in a gas attack, and President Obama had already said that that was a red line that was crossed, he would act and he didn't. So have you changed your view?

TB: Well in fact he did. And as a result of the policy we pursued and the actions we took, without firing a shot, we were able to eliminate the vast bulk of Syria's chemical weapons. Virtually all of the infrastructure to make it. And while we didn't get everything, we got most of it. And imagine, without that agreement, the thousands of tons of chemical weapons still floating around Syria today in the hands not only of the Assad regime, but groups like the Islamic State, as bad as what we saw this week was it would have been exponentially worse without the agreement that was reached in 2013.

CO: Well we heard from a Syrian opposition leader in the show who said that the only thing that Mr. Bashar al-Assad understands is violence, and so that without this kind of a strike that we saw last night, he doesn't he doesn't get the message. Clearly he kept some of the weapons. Do you regret that there wasn't some more decisive, more aggressive strike on Bashar al-Assad at the time that might have deterred him from doing this?

TB: No. You know, again back even when this vast stockpile existed, had we taken a strike, we wouldn't have attacked the chemical weapons. We couldn't, that would have created an environmental humanitarian disaster. As a result of what we did, virtually all of it is gone. Tragically there is some residual. But Trump faces a vastly different situation, which is the strategic stockpile gone, the infrastructure mostly gone.

CO: The address that Mr. Trump made about the strike, he spoke of the barbarism, he spoke of the horror of it killing of beautiful babies, suffocating them. It was a very emotional response. Is it possible that this strike comes from that? There was a response by President known to act impulsively. Or do you think it was calculated and strategic.

TB: Look it's very hard to know. I can't read the president's mind, but certainly it appears from everything I saw that he was profoundly moved by the images that came out of Syria as a result of this horrific attack. And that's to his credit. He responded in a very human fashion. Now, I would hope that he would bring that same human response to the plight of Syrian refugees that he continues to try to bar from this country. Anyone affected by the Civil War including those fleeing violence. I would hope we'd get the same humanitarian response. But I think he did respond in a human fashion, but he also stood up for a very important international principle.

CO: What does he take this from here? I mean so you've seen this before. We've been in this movie. You make this kind of a strike but you have to have a strategy, a plan. What do you think?

TB: You're exactly right. And I think that is the big question, what comes next? There's an opportunity to use this to leverage Russia, to leverage the Assad regime, to move them in a better direction. To insist with Russia that it needs to rein in Assad, to go back to the bargaining table and to try to move toward some settlement of the civil war which has been going on for far too long and taking so many lives. And I think there's an opportunity to make clear to Russia that we will hold it accountable for Assad's actions so that it can forget about any kind of counterterrorism cooperation unless and until it rains in the regime. And there's an opportunity to try to use the leverage that comes from the missile strikes the president took.

CO: But how delicate and how or how dangerous is it for Mr. Trump to continue in a unilateral way. I mean who does he need to draw into this?

TB: Well you're always better off doing things in partnership. It only adds to the legitimacy of the enterprise. And so bringing as much of the rest of the world along as possible, I would put a premium on it. I think there's work being done at the United Nations to do that. And put Russia on the spot. Make it veto a resolution. Make it clear that Russia is standing with someone who has egregiously used biological weapons against its own people.

CO: So he needs to start using institutions that he has been maligning, like the United Nations, the Security Council.

TB: Ironically, you're I think you're right. Ironically someone who said that he wants America first and is not interested in defending the so-called liberal international order became its number one defender with this action. Something like the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Geneva Treaty. That's at the heart of that liberal international order.

CO: We heard from U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley. She's saying that the strike was a measured action but they are prepared to do more. I mean once again, the possibility being drawn into a broader intervention, a war, that has no end and also ends in the greatest fear, another failed state.

TB: Yeah that's very much a concern. And I think two things that I think the president and the administration have to look at. One is what are the opportunities to use this as leverage to try to move the civil war in a better direction? But two, avoid any of the unintended consequences that flow from using force that could actually make things much more complicated for example, in the fight against the Islamic State. And also, just as you suggested rightly, avoiding mission creep that leads to escalation that you don't control and you wind up being drawn more and more in and then owning everything, which is not a place that the United States or any other country wants to be. So it's a very fine line to walk.

CO: You mentioned how Donald Trump was lamenting the killing of the children and the babies and yet the same time United States, he's not allowing Syrian refugees into the country. We also know that thebudget that he has put forward, he's calling for cuts to programs that were helping many of the children out of Syria. What larger thing do you want to see him do in order to make this point that he's made?

TB: Well I would hope that this very human response that we've apparently seen again is extended to all the victims of this conflict. There shouldn't be in effect, discrimination in your human emotions when it comes to trying to help the victims of this conflict.

CO: We will leave it there. Mr. Blinken, thank you.

TB: Great to be with you. Thanks for having me.

JD: Tony Blinken was the Deputy Secretary of State under President Obama. We reached him in Washington D.C.

[Music]

Scots Canada

JD: People in Scotland are divided about their place in the United Kingdom these days, as they have been for quite some time, what with Brexit and all. So much so that First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon is pushing for another referendum on independence.
Scotland, Canadian author Ken McGoogan feels your pain. He has an offer for you: if you break up with Britain, Canada will welcome you with open arms as its newest province.
Mr. McGoogan is the author of "How the Scots Invented Canada". And this morning, he spoke with the host of The Calgary Eyeopener, David Gray -- who began by asking him why Scotland should consider this new relationship.

SOUNDCLIP

KEN MCGOOGAN: Well there's a multitude of reasons I'd say, they're not happy with the way things are right now. And with being frog marched to the European Union, most of them are not impressed with see the populist forces that are driving politics in both the UK and the US. There's a lot of logic to it. You want me to go on?

DAVID GRAY: You know what, I want you to walk me through the logic if you could.

KM: Economically, there's 5.3 million Scots. Here in Canada we have 4.7 million people of Scottish ancestry. You put those two together, you've got 10 million people of Scottish ancestry in a country of 41 million. So that's one quarter of the population. That would give the Scots more clout in any application to the EU, would stabilize the currency.

DG: How could it be a good thing for Canada?

KM: The addition of Scotland would give Canada a toehold, if you will, in Europe.

DG: Any sense as to whether this could gather any steam in Scotland.

KM: Yeah, well I've gotten a huge response. I mean this started out as a short blog post of literally 170 words. Letters are still flooding in, my blog exploded in my small little cyber world. It's viral with over 7000 views.

JD: Ken McGoogan is the author of How the Scots Invented Canada. This morning he spoke with David Gray host of The Calgary Eyeopener.

[Music]

Listeners Respond: Deer hits guy

JD: Before the security camera footage came out, no one believed him.
Last night, we spoke to Cary McCook of the Kwadacha First Nation in Fort Ware, British Columbia. Cary told us how he was run over by a deer in a hotel parking lot on April 1st -- a story so unlikely even his mother dismissed it as an April Fools' prank until he showed her a video of the freak accident.
Here's how he described the run-in to Carol:

SOUNDCLIP

CARY MCCOOK: I thought I was going to have a quiet relaxing night. Turns out that fate, or I would call it nature, had other plans.

CO: Now what I can see from the video, we're going to get people to look at it. Someone pulls up in a truck and lets you off. And what happens then?

CM: OK I get the truck, shut the door, as you see I turn my back towards when I shut the door, and I start to make my way towards the entrance. I hear three gallops to my left, before I could process, there was a deer. I tried to get out of the way because my left leg was going left; my right leg was going right leaving me in the middle. Bam I got hit by Bambi.

JD: That's Cary McCook on As It Happens last night, describing the moment he was blindsided by a runaway deer.
Following that interview, many of you responded to Mr. McCook's story and the video we posted online.

CO: On Facebook, Molly Walts wrote: "I had this happen the morning of one of my daughters' Skate Test Days! Laid me flat in the mud." And Catherine Sarginson added: "Love this story. Glad everyone is OK. Laughed out loud at the thought of the deer boasting that she took out a First Nations Hunter."

JD: On our website, Willard Llewellyn wrote: "She hit like a good linebacker!" Pete Lang called it: "Revenge of Bambi!" And Lorraine Allen wrote: "Oh, gosh. I nearly got run down once by a large buck on a mission in early November. But I was in the woods, not on an urban street. That had't've hurt!"

CO: Finally, Sara Krynitzki recalled: "I was driving on a small highway in northern Ontario a few summers ago, saw a deer in the distance on the side of the road and slowed to a stop. The deer then proceeded to run into the highway and right into my car, fell over, and then ran into the bush. So weird."

JD: Thank you to everyone who contacted us. We always appreciate hearing from you. You also can find us on Facebook or Twitter at @cbcasithappens. You can email us at aih@cbc.ca. Or you can call us, that is our favourite, radio, voices, they go well together. 416-205-5687. And you can find more on this story -- including video of Cary McCook's run-in with the deer -- on our website, at cbc.ca/aih.

Village Idiot

Guest: Brad Cox

JD: Brad Cox is an idiot that is not an insult. That is his title. Last week Mr. Cox was elected the official village idiot of Story, Indiana. This is the 16th year that story is handed out the title we had to know what Brad caulks did to earn this honor. We reached him at his studio. Cox Creek mill, a 20 minute drive from Story.

CO: Brad, our congratulations in order here.

BRAD COX: Thank you.

CO: So are you happy to be victorious in this village idiot campaign?

BC: Yeah it's a pretty big deal. You know, done it for 16 years at this place.

CO: And is this the first time that you have actually been chosen as the village idiot?

BC: Yeah, what it is is they nominate it and they actually have a form and the bartender keeps it underneath the little is store’s till, and they draw from that.

CO: And how did you get nominated?

BC: My wife actually the one that nominated me for the death of her car because I killed her car.

CO: How did you come to kill your wife's car?

BC: Well this particular vehicle I've had for ten years, OK. It's got two hundred and fifty thousand miles on it. I've changed the oil at 60 or 70 times. So I'm very familiar with it. But this day was really busy and I was doing some things, and I accidentally drain the transmission oil totally out thinking it was the oil plug. Refilled the car thus overfilling the vehicle and blowing off an engine.

CO: Sorry, Brad can you repeat that because you cut out for a second there.

BC: Yeah my phone keeps beeping because I'm getting a thousand calls on the village idiot award. It blew the engine, actually blew the engine by overfilling the oil in the vehicle. And here's the irony of the whole thing here is like I said, I'm not a great mechanic, but I can change my oil so I've got three boys. Tyler, Brice and Briar, and all three of them guys have been trained on this particular vehicle. When, you know Tyler was 16, I showed him this is how you drain oil, this is how you're a man. OK. And so for me to make a mistake on this particular vehicle is ridiculous, OK?

CO: OK. So your mistake was is that you want to change the way of what you ended up draining the transmission fluid and so there was an overflow of oil and no transmission fluid.

BC: Exactly.

CO: Yikes. But you didn't know that. So then what happened?

BC: So then my wife takes off and calls me and says the car’s got black smoke pouring out of it and she was actually going to jump out, stop and jump out. Thought it was on fire I was smoking so bad. It's pouring black smoke out, it's bucking like a horse. And so I went gave her my truck so she can go to work and I drove that back home.

CO: At what point did you figure out that you had made this big mistake?

BC: Well that's another ironic thing is I didn't figure it out because I've done this so many times. There's no possible way that I could have messed this up. So I talked to my middle son, and my middle son says “Mom drove through the creek.” There's a little creek you can go back to our house. And I said “What do you what do you mean she drove it through the creek?” So then I give my wife a tongue lashing: “I can't believe you drove that car to the creek. That's probably what blew the engine up.” I tell her.

CO: So you tried to blame your wife.

BC: Yes. Because I just found this information out because I don't know what's wrong. So that's all I can figure out. She drove through the creek so I take it to the mechanic next day, I said “Stephanie drove it through the creek. You know [unintelligible] after that.” I said “I don't know just check it out.” I come in the next day and all their faces are long. Like somebody just you know ran their dog over. And I said “What's wrong?” And my mechanic goes, “Sit down, let me tell you something.” And he's the one that told me “You drained the transmission oil out.” So that's how I found out.

CO: When you when you when you were told that you had drained the transmission fluid out and there was no transmission fluid in there. How did you respond?

BC: Well all of magazines, there was a magazine rack, I took my left hand I swiped them off there, and into the lobby. And then I had to go home and tell my wife after I'd been given her heck about this, I got to go home and tell her that I'm the one that blew her car up.

CO: So now did you apologize to her?

BC: Yeah. Yeah I had to apologize.

CO: And so then she decided the best remedy for this was to nominate you for the Village Idiot Award.

BC: Yes I'm thinking so.

CO: And did you think you'd actually win?

BC: You know I don't know, it's a pretty stiff competition. I think the one girl one year was on her way to work and lit a cigarette and had so much hair product that her hair burst in flames like the, like the Michael Jackson commercial, and another guy forgot to tighten his brand new tires and they flew off or something, I don't know. There was quite a few of them over the last 16 years.

CO: Did you ever think that you would join that crowd?

BC: No I've been lucky enough because we've got this art studio to be on some things, you know and to be interviewed for a lot of things. But I think the biggest one that’s going to put me over the top is the village idiot award.

CO: And what do you what do your kids saying about this?

BC: Well you know my son under 26 and 20 and so their phones are blown up. And I've known those kids and coached him in basketball so they're all like “Hey I just seen your dad you know on this and that”

CO: And then as the village idiot.

BC: Yeah. The Washington Post, USA Today, you know, national newspapers.

CO: So if you wanted to be famous, this is not how you want to be famous.

BC: Yeah. I mean I guess any publicity is good right?

CO: And is your wife enjoying being the wife of the village idiot?

BC: Mrs. Village Idiot you mean? Yeah. And I think she has worked into it.

CO: She brought that on herself.

BC: Yeah. And the last thing is I just had a customer here because we have the art studio. He makes a purchase from me and gets ready to leave and he says “Hey I don't want to offend you or anything but there is a story– the guy’s from two hours away from here, he don't even live here– he goes “There’s a story I read yesterday of a Village Idiot and you can't look like that guy.” And I said “I am that guy.” And he goes “No way.” And he was so excited. It was like meeting the president something you know?

CO: Did he buy anything else knowing that he was buying it from the village idiot?

BC: Yeah. Well he had me sign it.

CO: Brad thank you.

BC: Thank you. Bye-bye.

CO: Bye-bye.

JD: Brad Cox is the official village idiot of Story, Indiana. He's also an artist, and we reached him at his Cox Creek Mill Studio, near Nashville, Indiana.

[Music]

3 ball hit

JD: St. Louis Cardinals' outfielder Stephen Piscotty likely had one thing on his mind when he stepped up to the plate: make it home. And he did succeed, he scored the Cardinals’ their first run against the Chicago Cubs in the fifth inning Tuesday night. No thanks to the ball, however -- which seemed to have a mind of its own -- and had Stephen Piscotty on it.
In his at-bat, he suffered a hit to the elbow from the Cubs' pitcher, Jake Arrieta. And then he was struck again, on his other elbow, while stealing second. And as he slid into home, the ball -- thrown by Cubs' infielder Javier Báez -- struck his helmet.
Mr. Piscotty was cleared of any concussion risk the next day but he did lay on the ground for several minutes while medical personnel examined him.
Here's the mlb-dot-com blow-by-blow of his trip around the bases.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound of crowd in baseball stadium]

Now Piscotty, now he's hit by the pitch. Ball gets away Piscotty to second and he’s hit again.
Little chopper slowly hit right side. Wong may beat it out, he does. Ball gets away. Here comes Piscotty. He is safe. As the ball hit him in the head, maybe in the face. And Stephen appears to be alright as he scores the first cardinal run.

Cardinals outfielder Stephen Piscotty getting hit by the ball three times in one trip around the bases Tuesday evening. The next day, he spoke to reporters about the incident.

SOUNDCLIP

STEPHEN PISCOTTY: Yeah I haven’t seen that before. And to actually live it was something pretty crazy. Glad I'm OK. But yeah that was hard to believe the events.

REPORTER: When you get hit, when you get hit by that ball in the face. Are you aware of like that throw it at me or do you blacked out there? Or what were you feeling at that moment?

SP: Definitely didn't black out. But like I said I was kind of stunned and didn't realize what happened. After a few seconds, kind of feared I got hit in the face. But thankfully the helmet flap was there and took most of the force of it.

JD: St. Louis Cardinals number 55, Stephen Piscotty, speaking to reporters Wednesday about being hit three times on his way around the bases.

Back To Top »

Part 3: Tom Vilsack, Mexican reporter detained

JEFF DOUGLAS: War as the saying goes is hell. But according to Brian Williams It can look kind of heavenly. As U.S. forces launched their cruise missiles at Shayrat Air Field last night, the NBC anchor waxed poetic about the nighttime images of the guided bombs being launched. Here's a clip of what he said while conducting an interview.

SOUNDCLIP

BRIAN WILLIAMS: We see these beautiful pictures at night from the decks of these two U.S. Navy vessels in the eastern Mediterranean. I am tempted to quote the great Leonard Cohen “I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons” and they are beautiful pictures of fearsome armaments making what is for them a brief flight over to this airfield. What did they hit? What are you convinced that they hit?

JD: That was NBC News anchor Brian Williams quoting Leonard Cohen after seeing images of cruise missiles being launched at Syria last night.

[Music]

Trump on NAFTA

Guest: Tom Vilsack

JD: It all sounded so simple. U.S. President Donald Trump had promised to renegotiate NAFTA but when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau went to Washington earlier this year the U.S. president did his best to set aside any Canadian fears.

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: We have a very outstanding trade relationship with Canada. We'll be tweaking it. We'll be doing certain things that are going to benefit both of our countries. It's a much less severe situation than what's taken place on the southern border on the southern border for many many years, the transaction was not fair to the United States. So our relationship with Canada is outstanding. And we're going to work together make it even better.

JD: That was Donald Trump speaking earlier this year in Washington D.C.. There are however some powerful interests across the U.S. who do not see Canada in quite the same light and with NAFTA talks on the horizon, they are looking for a leg up against what they say is unfair Canadian competition. Tom Vilsack was Barack Obama's agriculture secretary. He's now the CEO of the U.S. Dairy Export Council. We reached Mr. Vilsack in Denver.

CAROL OFF: Mr. Vilsack, Donald Trump has said that the United States trade relationship with Canada is “outstanding.” Is that how U.S. dairy exporters see the border right now?

TOM VILSACK: Not today. We certainly appreciate and value the friendship and relationship we've had with Canada in trade but in Derry, it has been a difficult relationship.

CO: What's the issue today?

TV: Well the issue today is the development of a new classification system as part of the Canadian national ingredient strategy which is now essentially preventing imports from the US. We've had a longstanding relationship with a number of processors where producers from Wisconsin and other states have been furnishing product and have now been advised that the committee process will no longer take the U.S. imports. And the reality is that this is indeed a system that Canada has established which has caused friction throughout our relationship because it is basically a closed system.
It is leading to not only an inability for us to import but it also is costing Canadian consumers more money because milk is much more expensive because they have such a closed system. And it's an issue that we've raised on a number of occasions with Canadian officials when I was secretary and continue to raise it today. As we look at a renegotiation or restructuring of NAFTA, the hope would be from the dairy industry that one of the principal areas of discussion will be this dairy system in Canada.

CO: One of the things that the Dairy Farmers of Canada are saying in an answer to you in reaction to what you're saying about this is that they say the issue isn't trade policy or trying to keep American product out of the Canadian market. They say there is just simply too much milk, that there's just not enough market for the amount of milk that is available and that this is the consequence.

TV: Well that would be fine if we had open borders and we had an open system. The market would then decide and determine. Prices would fluctuate and that would impact demand and supply. But the reality is, you've got a closed system up there which makes it extremely difficult. And candidly, we need more detail in terms of how the system actually was designed to work. There have been some statements to suggest that part of the consequence of this system is that imports from the U.S. would be limited. We don't think that's compliant with international rules or regulations. That's why we've asked for more information and it's a bit frustrating when we don't get the requested information.

CO: You mentioned the closed system and I think you're referring to kind of supply management systems. Is that right?

TV: That's right.

CO: From your own experience with agriculture, how likely is it that Canada is going to give up that supply management system without a big fight?

TV: Well I'm sure that there will be vigorous debate and discussion in the context of the restructuring and renegotiating and modernizing of NAFTA. I would sincerely hope that if that process proceeds, that dairy is an issue that's front and center in terms of the U.S. position as we modernize and strengthen NAFTA. We attempted that discussion in that process and the Trans-Pacific partnership discussions. And there was a little give, not much, but a little give in that process of negotiation. So one would expect that there would be a willingness to at least consider it and look at it and understand that it is a deep concern for American producers and for the American government.

CO: So that's from the Canadian side. What have you heard in response from the Trump administration to what changes you'd like to see in NAFTA?

TV: Well the Trump administration is currently trying to get all of its players in place. We still don't have a secretary of agriculture confirmed which is unfortunate but I am confident that once Governor Perdue is confirmed in late April, that he will carry that message very clearly and the administration will understand that's an important consideration to consider in any discussion or renegotiation of NAFTA.

CO: In general about trade, we heard from Mr. Trump that he thought NAFTA was a disaster. We have since heard that he may just want tweaks to NAFTA. Now we have a clear understanding that there's going to be more than tweaks. Former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney has warned Canadians that it's going to be a very tough fight, that it's not going to be easy. What do you anticipate how. How aggressive do you think the Trump administration will be in NAFTA talks?

TV: Well I expect from the from the rhetoric that we've had from the limited number of people in the administration that this will be a negotiation that is held in good faith but one that basically seeks to provide more balance in the relationship. And obviously, when you talk about more balance that means give and take on all sides. When you have given take obviously people are going to defend the current status quo where they are receiving some benefit but they need, we all need to look at the long term importance of this relationship. This North American relationship between the three countries and I think we need to keep that in mind as as we go forward in terms of being willing to make changes and adjustments that will provide for freer and fairer trade so that we don't get a significant backlash in any one of the three countries involved.

CO: And just to be clear, the elimination of Canada's supply management system. Is that something that you would ask them to to suggest as an opening gambit in these talks?

TV: Well we're not you know we're not in a position to basically telegraph what the negotiation position is going to be, but I would say this. It's obvious that this has been a concern for some time and there needs to be greater openness in the Canadian system, and clearly with the most recent action which is now causing a great deal of concern, where dairies that have made equipment purchases and made investments based on a long term market have now found those market that market to be closed. Basically they are told that they are no longer going to be able to sell their products into Canada. You know that's obviously a deep concern and it threatens the survival of a number of dairies throughout the United States and particularly in the upper northern states.
So it is a concern and it's something that we believe needs to be addressed and should be aggressively addressed in the discussions and negotiations that will take place.

CO: Thank you very much for speaking with us Mr. Vilsack.

TV: Thank you.

JD: Tom Vilsack was Barack Obama's Agriculture Secretary. He is now the CEO of the U.S. Dairy Export Council. We reached him in Denver.

[Music]

Corcoran on Dozier school

Guest: Richard Corcoran

A 51 bodies were found buried on the grounds of the Arthur Dozier School for Boys in Mariana Florida buried in unmarked graves. It is believed that that is only half the number of children who died there. For decades, staff at the state run reform school abused and neglected the children in their charge. The school was finally shuttered in 2011 and only after that were forensic anthropologists allowed onto the grounds to search for remains. And even then, not without a fight from the state. Now the Florida legislature is considering a bill to officially apologize to those who suffered at the school. And this week, at a press conference with Attorney General Pam Bondi and the forensic anthropologist who led the charge to uncover those unmarked graves, Dr. Erin Kimberly, the Republican speaker of the house took the step of expressing his own remorse. Here's Speaker Richard Corcoran for the record.

SOUNDCLIP

RICHARD CORCORAN: I had the chance right before him to speak to some of the Dozier boys and Okeechobee boys. I just want to first give a tremendous thank you to the numerous folks from General Bondi to former Governor Martinez, but specifically to Dr. Kimberly, I had the honour to meet her probably a year ago or so, and she started telling me the story, and she told me her life story. She also unearthed tragedy in Kosovo. And in that conversation, she invited me to one of her exhumations. I went to it. She gave me the video of the children of Dozier, the lost children of Dozier.
And then that led me to watching video after video after video after video. For those of us who don't know, I have six children. And the youngest two are an 8 year old boy and a 4 year old girl. The youngest child who was tortured and abused and Dozier was six years old.
And so I looked into it and then I talked to General Bondi. I remember my wife waking up in the middle of the night that I was listening to it. She goes "What the heck are you watching because it just..." and I said "It's a true story, it really happened here in Florida." And I got with General Bondi. And we went through every machination. There's still one of the guards who tortured these children still alive. And we went through every machination to try to figure out how we could still prosecute and bring justice. ANd we'll still work at it. We're not going to give up yet. But having said all that, I got with Chairman Sprouse, Representative Davis, Leader Cruz. And I think what we're doing is a good, solid, minimum first step. The resolution to apologize on behalf of the legislature, I cannot say with enough heartfelt remorse, that it's taken this long for a legislature with all the evidence that is before us to come forth and apologize for what has to be one of the blackest moments on our state's history.
And as much as we apologize for the grave injustice that was done to these now men but young children, we hope that there will be some degree of healing and closure that can take place knowing that it's being recognized. But the most important part is that it never happens again to anybody else at any time in our state's history.

JD: For the record that was the speaker of the Florida House of legislature, Richard Corcoran. He was apologizing for the brutal treatment of children who attended the state run Arthur Dozier School for Boys in Mariana.

[Music]

Mexican reporter detained

Guest: Martin Mendez

JD: Martin Mendez fled Mexico for the United States because he believed his life was in danger. He did not expect to wind up in a Texas detention center with no release in sight. Sr. Mendez is a journalist. He says he was beaten and threatened by Mexican federal police in response to a critical article that he wrote last year on abuse by the force. Now he has spent more than two months in immigration detention in El Paso. Carlos Spector is Sr. Mendez's lawyer. We reached Sr. Spector in Austin.

CO: Mr. Spector, why is your client, this journalist Martin Mendez, why is he locked up?

CARLOS SPECTOR: Mr. Mendez is locked up because he came to the U.S. border on February 5th seeking political asylum at El Paso, Texas. The new policy vis a vis asylum seekers pursuant to the executive orders of the Trump administration is to deny release of asylum seekers at the border. And this policy is really in response to their campaign promise of stopping the practice of catch and release.

CO: So that's why he is behind bars in the United States. Why was he leaving Mexico. Can you tell us what happened to him there?

CS: Well last year he covered an incident involving the Mexican federal police, who were involved in a car accident, and in the course of that car accident, the federal police got out of their car and the car that hit them, they assaulted the driver and the passengers, eight police officers.
And what he did he took pictures and he wrote an article the next day. So it was a result of his coverage that they assaulted him because they were very critical of course of the abuse of the of the citizen. And as a result of that he filed a series of complaints with the National Commission for Human Rights and with Reporters Without Borders, and as a result of the coverage and the denunciation, he was subsequently further threatened, human rights organizations felt they couldn't protect them, and they referred him to me in the U.S. to seek asylum.

CO: So at what point did he know that he believe that he could not safely live in Mexico anymore?

CS: When we went to Tijuana and was hiding out, the federal police had moved a coworker of his to give him his phone number and his whereabouts. And at that point, he felt that it wasn't safe for him anywhere in the country. Now, this also occurred in the context of assaults and murders of other Mexican journalists in Veracruz and in his home state of Guerrero.

CO: This is something we have covered a great deal on our program. Mexico is considered one of the deadliest places for journalists in the world, and very few cases where anyone was ever brought to justice. So this is the background to that. Has your client has Mr. Mendez filed a refugee claim, an asylum claim in the United States?

CS: That's why he's doing. The first step in the asylum process here is to pass a credible fear interview which is the first step in the asylum process, which then permits you to seek release from detention. On March 1st, he passed a credible fear interview and subsequently, we requested that he be released by immigration and customs enforcement and they denied that request on that basis that he represents a flight risk. And this is so, even though he entered the country lawfully, he filed this claim for the specific purpose of going to an asylum hearing. Yet they denied it on the basis that he is a flight risk.

CO: Well what can you do about that? I mean is there any is there any reason why Mr. Mendez would flee, would not to return for an asylum hearing? He wants to go through that, does he not? He seems to have a good case.

CS: Absolutely. He came after exhausting procedures, administrative procedures in Mexico, by filing in human rights complaint with the appropriate agencies, he came to the border with a letter of support from the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders, and I accompanied him to the bridge. It was clear he was seeking asylum. And so it's what it is is a pretext to denial. The real reason is that he happened to come to the border at some point in time that the Trump administration is implementing with full force in effect its policy of blanket denial of release of asylum applicants with the express purpose of deterring other asylum applicants. And so that has been the struggle that the immigration bar along the border for the last couple of months has endeavoured to respond to.

CO: How long might his process for his asylum application, how long might it take?

CS: If he's not released, up to a year. And that's why we've engaged in the Amnesty International, the Committee to Protect Journalists, and other human rights first and other organizations, to bring to bear sufficient public pressure and an international campaign which Reporters Without Borders will be initiating next week, denouncing the criminalization of the asylum process and the fact that what he seeks is liberty and dignity in filing the asylum process. It is still not a crime even under the Trump administration to seek asylum.

CO: Do you think that, if the goal on the part of the Trump administration is to detain people like this in order to be a deterrent, do you think that that might work? Do you think that journalists whose lives are in danger in Mexico will not go to the United States to seek asylum because they fear they're going to end up incarcerated?

CS: Yes, I think that that work that will have an effect. Now what that may mean is that they won't come to the bridge and seek to enter the country lawfully, but enter the country unlawfully. And so the irony of it is that the Trump policy of mandatory detention will really increase illegal immigration.

CO: Mr. Spektor, we will stay in touch and follow developments in this case. Thank you for speaking with us.

CS: Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure. Bye bye.

JD: Carlos Spector is the attorney for Martin Mendez. We reached Mr. Spector in Austin.

[Music]

Arthur Bisguier obituary

JD: You could say that Arthur Bisguier moved in mysterious ways, even to himself. He once famously asked "I don't know what I am going to play. So how can he know what I am going to play?" And that intuitive sense generally served him well.
Mostly self-taught, by his early 20s, Mr. Bisguier, who died Wednesday at the age of 87, was a rising star in American chess, dominating several national championships, until he faced off against a 13 year old prodigy by the name of Bobby Fischer. And although he won his initial bout against Mr. Fischer, that victory would be his last. Their second game ended in a draw. The next 13 went to Fisher. Mr. Bidguier spoke with As It Happens quite a few times in the 1980s. Over the course of the longest chess contest to date, between Garry Kasparov and then World Champion Anatoly Karpov.
The epic 48 game series played out over one 159 days, more than five months. Mr. Bisguier shared some of his insights about the standoff with former opposite happens host, Elizabeth Gray. Here's some of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

ELIZABETH GRAY: Mr. Bidguier, what's happening in this match? It's almost as though it's in a whole different match suddenly.

ARTHUR BISGUIER: It's almost as if we have separate and distinct matches. The first one being won by Karpov, five to nothing, at the end of 27 games, and the second one being won by Kasparov, three nothing, and at 21 games.

EG: What does it do to the theory or this speculation that the match was fixed from the beginning for Karpov?

AB: It would seem to destroy that theory. Either that, or the Russian are being, if it is they're being extremely clever. But it would still be strange why would they allow Karpov to look as bad as he has in a last number of games.

EG: So it's not possible to treat this as a normal kind of scenario.

AB: Well we've never had a match of this sort before. In the history of chess, as far as I can think of in any type of competition, have two players played each other for four months in a row. This is without precedent.
Of the two, one would think that Kasparov is the younger player, the player who's got perhaps the better physical condition, the better nerves, it may be wearing on him. Then there are other theories have been in the past. Theories that might conceivably justify this, although again I must emphasize that they're only theories. One, for example Lev Alburt has promulgated the thesis that Karpov has been taking some sort of speed, something to keep him active, to keep his mind sharp, and this cannot be maintained over a certain amount of time time. And that if he stops taking it there's a certain, either withdrawal or a certain lack of concentration will come and take its place. It might fit this scenario if this is all possible.

EG: Isn't Albert the one who's also speculated that there might be a hypnotist in the audience.

AB: His theory is that the hypnotist is known to be a specialist in drugs as well, and that this is what he's into. This is with Karpov. But again, there's nothing to bear this out. I mean, from a strictly objective point of view, the planner match by and large has been pretty good. I mean it's true Karparov has played better in the second half, and Karpov played better in the first half, but but as far as I'm concerned, it's on a par with a majority of world championship matches, maybe even better than most.

JD: Former As It Happens host Elizabeth Gray in conversation with American chess grandmaster Arthur Bisguier, in February of 1985. Garry Kasparov would eventually prevail over Anatoly Karpov to become the youngest world champion at the age of 22. Arthur Bisguier was named the Dean of American chess by the U.S. Chess Chess Federation in 2005. He died Wednesday. He was 87 years old.

[Music]

Pepsi ad follow: Out of control director

JD: You may have heard our coverage this week of one of the biggest advertising fails of the year. The Pepsi ad, a commercial featuring supermodel Kendall Jenner being drawn into something resembling a street protest, then sharing a touching moment of unity with a police officer, all down to a can of Pepsi. Cue the global ridicule, and it turns out that misguided ad wasn't even original. This week, various people pointed out its resemblance to the 1999 video for Out of Control by the Chemical Brothers. In that video, there's chaos in the streets, and a confrontation with police, diffused by a bottle of pop.
There is a crucial difference however. The Chemical Brothers video was satire, Pepsi's commercial, not at all. Pepsi has since pulled the ad. And the director of the Out of Control video Andrew "W.I.Z." Whiston, has issued a statement and the statement reads "The original inspiration for my Chemical Brothers film came from The Clash lyric. 'Huh, you think it's funny turning rebellion into money. Crystallizing a deep felt anger that when it comes to the profit margin, absolutely nothing is sacred, not even heartfelt expressions for social justice.' We made this film in 1999. However today the inevitable has materialized. It's become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you were ever in doubt about the carnivorous nature of advertising in this Pepsi spot says it all. Right now big business is laughing. Clutching our hard-earned dollar all the way to the bank. Our love, our sweat, our beauty is being sold back to us, two for the price of one. Yet can this travesty be a wake up call? To us all and to those in front of the camera as well as behind, no longer will we be prostitutes, no longer will we be muppets. Power to the people" That is a statement from music video director Andrew "W.I.Z" Whiston.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Friday April 7, 2017 transcript

More Stories Like This