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 September 5, 2017

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol off.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight.

CO: Dreamers worst nightmare. Jesus Contreras helped people to safety in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey — before the Trump administration's announcement that it will rescind DACA left his own future anything but safe.

JD: Hollow victory. A Scottish mother has been fighting for years to have her infant son's coffin exhumed — and now that a forensic expert has confirmed it was empty, she wants answers.

CO: Divided loyalties. Police have charged four British Army members with belonging to a banned neo-Nazi extremist group. Our guest who's studying the rise of the far-right is not surprised.

JD: Hell on Wheels. A Canadian company’s armored vehicles are being used by the military in South Sudan and Canada's former ambassador there says his concerns about the deal that sent them there were ignored.

CO: Hey pig spider dont spend a little time with me. Australia bans an episode of the cartoon Peppa Pig, in which she invites a spider to tea — because if you sit down for scones with an Australian spider you won't get back up.

JD: And he didn't make the trail but he definitely blazed it. Joe McConaughey just completed the Appalachian Trail in a record shattering 45 days 12 hours and 15 minutes. And tonight we'll speak with the athlete they call, “Stringbean.” As It Happens, the Tuesday edition. Radio that reflects on the unbearable litheness of bean.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: DACA announcement, UK terrorism arrests, Joe "Stringbean" McConaughy sets Appalachian Trail record

DACA announcement

Guest: Jesus Contreras

JD: We are going to show great heart — that is what US President Donald Trump said back in February when he was asked about the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, also known as DACA. The program protects some undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children from deportation. Today Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that that program will be rescinded.

SOUNDCLIP

ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS: I'm here today to announce that the program known as DACA, that was effectuated under the Obama administration, is being rescinded. The docket program was implemented in 2012 and essentially provided a legal status for recipients for a renewable two-year term, work authorization, and all the benefits including participation in the Social Security program, to eight-hundred-thousand, mostly adult, illegal aliens. The effect that this unilateral executive amnesty, among other things, contributed to a surge of minors at the southern border that yielded terrible humanitarian consequences. It also denied jobs to hundreds-of-thousands of Americans by allowing those same illegal aliens to take those jobs.

JD: U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions at a press conference earlier today. As he mentioned some 800000 people in the United States are DACA recipients. They live all across the country, they do all kinds of work, including emergency response. In the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, Jesus Contreras was on the ground working to rescue people. He is a Houston based paramedic, he's also a DACA recipient. We reached Mr. Contreras in Miami.

CO: Jesus, how are you holding up after hearing this announcement from Attorney General Jeff Sessions?

JESUS CONTRERAS: You know, honestly despite the negativity, the disgusting message, and you know, disgusting rhetoric that that was used at that conference, I'm standing strong. You know, we as immigrants have battled through many, many tougher battles, and this is just another one of them.

CO: And I wonder how you feel, particularly since you as a paramedic, you have been and you're based in Texas, you’ve been in the Houston area for many days dealing with the people who need your help from hurricane Harvey. When did you actually hear about this announcement?

JC: Yes so I was in Houston throughout the six days — you know, we responded to many, many, calls . And as you would imagine we weren't able to, you know, be on the news, or on the phone or anything. And so when I got off of those six days I actually went straight to volunteering at the church and it was until that night that I heard about the ban of DACA. It was disappointing but we had hope, you know, that the President would keep his word. He said that he would have compassion for us and let us rest easy, and it turns out that he wasn’t a man of his word, and it was a big lie, and so it was, it was just a complete 180. You know, we just got done with one storm and we're facing yet another.

CO: And I understand you were quite exhausted after that those days that you were out there.

JC: Right, yes. A lot of our work was nonstop — very little sleep through those six days — and then you, know, volunteering. And so it's been a long week — it's been stressful. You know, we kind of got kicked while we were down dealing with the hurricane and we get kicked around by the President.

CO: And as a paramedic, as someone who has had this career, you were educated in the US, you've been there since you were six years old. What does this actually mean ? If this is going to be rescinded, if this DACA as it’s known — Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals — if that's gone, what does that do to your life?

JC: Yes. So after this six month period — if there is no resolution with DACA — then that means I lose my license to practice, I lose my job. You know, I lose my friends, my family — everything that I've worked for here. And like I was telling people, I'm not an anomaly, I'm not the only one that, you know, that's successful, and that's a first responder. There's many, many, many like me that are giving back to their community, that are, you know, working hard for the nation, and trying to be, you know, model citizens — who like me are, you know, just out there trying to have an opportunity.

CO: In the area where you are working and helping people — are there many people who live there who will be affected by this decision to rescind DACA?

JC: Yeah, definitely. You know, my coworkers, my family has a lot of friends and family that are under the same circumstance. I mean, there's a couple of others that are like me in my work, so to tell our work provider that we could potentially be deported and not show up to work the next day, it's kind of rough. But like I said, we're trying to remain positive, and keep the faith strong, and keep moving.

CO: Well remain positive about what? Because what you just heard the Attorney General of the United States, Jeff Sessions, being pretty firm about what he thinks should happen. We’ve read the Trump tweets and we know where the White House is at. We know even in the state you live in, in Texas they're even threatening to sue the federal government if they don't follow through on rescinding this program. So I know you're a man of faith, but where does it come from at this point?

JC: So my pastor just finished preaching a good message — it's the story of David and Goliath. And to be successful, and to prosper, sometimes you have opposition, and it's that opposition that elevates you, and makes a story out of that of what you are, and brings out the best in people. And right now that, that Goliath is Trump, it’s the government, but, you know, we here, just like David, are fighting and we're going to overcome this Goliath, and we're going to make, you know, make a story for ourselves and be in history as advocates, as successful people, and as citizens of the United States.

CO: But in six months you could be deported. According to this decision about DACA, you can lose your right to work. So in concrete terms, what can you do? I understand you have hope and faith that you can fight this — how? What are your tools at this point?

JC: Our tool is the national coverage. I understand that there's people in government that are against this and that are trying to get rid of us, but the majority of people here, are for us. And I think we can use the people and the movement that we've created here the last couple of days, to really put pressure on our state senate, on our local government, to push that pressure on to the White House, to the Congress, and right now it’s in the Congress's hands. But I feel if we put enough pressure on them we will get the results that we want.

CO: The people who are opposed to you, the people who support what the White House has announced, say that Dacca and this whole dreamer movement is just a smokescreen for criminals, or people who are taking jobs away from Americans — that you’re illegals — what do you say to them?

JC: I pray for them. I pray for their hearts to open, and for their minds to open up, and I would ask them, first and foremost, as a man of faith, if God does not deny me the freedom to be where I am, then who gives you the right to deny me that freedom? And I would ask them — I wouldn't respond to him with anything but questions — I would ask them, how is it that I have been a criminal, how is it that I have been taken away from your government, from your success? And when you really start to ask those questions people will start to see where I'm coming from, to see where we're coming from, and see what we're about.

CO: What would it mean if you had to go to Mexico?

JC: Well first and foremost I have, I have no plans on going back to Mexico — being pushed out. You know, I will fight to the end to stay here, and if I ever go to Mexico it’s because I'm going to go there for a vacation, not because I'm being pushed out of the country. But, say the situation were to occur I’d be in a country that I don't know — I'd have to start all over. I would have nothing there, so I wouldn't know what to do.

CO: Jesus I know this must have been a difficult week for you but I appreciate you speaking with us. Thank you.

JC: I appreciate. Thank you very much.

CO: Bye.

JC: Bye.

JD: Jesus Contreras is a paramedic. He is also a recipient of DACA — Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. We reached him today in Miami, and we did request an interview with the Attorney General of Texas who supports the resentment of, the rescindment rather, of the DACA program — he declined.

[Music: Ambient Piano]

UK terrorism arrests

Guest: Dan Jones

JD: They are British soldiers but U.K. authorities say four Army members are also members of another fighting force — the neo-Nazi group, “National Action” — those soldiers were arrested today. National Action was the first far-right group to be banned by the British government. The group has praised the man who murdered Labor MP Jo Cox, and has reportedly run secret military-style training camps. Dan Jones researches far-right extremism at the University of North Hampton. We reached him in Rushton, England.

CO: Mr. Jones, what did you think when you heard the news that four British soldiers, still serving in the army, have been arrested as being members of this notorious neo-Nazi group?

DAN JONES: I mean, obviously it's a very concerning development, especially given some of the more recent history where munitions have been supplied, or explosives, to dissident groups in Northern Ireland, as well as previous attempts — going back a few decades — to try to infiltrate the British army by the extreme right. So actually having these groups with an eliminationist desire getting access to people with military or military grade weaponry and training, is quite a serious development.

CO: And what does it tell you about the screening or the membership of the British army — that these men could have been part of it.

DJ: I’m not sure whether it says much about the screening of the army, but it certainly says a lot about the lack of monitoring of the far-right groups and their activities, and certainly says a lot about their targeting strategy — the fact that they know that they have a good incentive to target military people — as we've seen in various countries, and they will continue to try to get in there and get themselves access to the weaponry and training any way they can.

CO: Can you tell us a bit about this group called National Action?

DJ: Yeah, National Action was set up in 2013 and they really used quite shock tactics to make a name for themselves in what is quite a crowded area of the extreme right. They hold large events in town centres — screaming racist material over loudspeakers. They cover themselves — look very threatening with bandanas and hoodies — they throw Nazi salutes in Holocaust centres or Holocaust memorial sites. They tweeted anti-Semitic abuse to various MPs and they've kind of made a name for themselves championing far-right terrorists as well. So they spoke up quite a lot for Anders Breivik —who perpetrated the attacks in Norway in 2011 — and they also champion Tommy Mair, who shot and stabbed the MP Jo Cox, in 2016.

CO: And is that what prompted these arrests. I mean, is it just the membership in this group that led to the arrest of these four men, or was there some suspicion that they were planning something?

DJ: As the group was being prescribed by the government as an illegal terrorist organization, membership alone would be certainly reason to detain them. It was actually the first group of the far-right to be prescribed in that way. Previously the government has taken a much softer approach on the far-right. They've dealt with them through an old act called the Public Order Act of 1936 that was created to defeat Oswald Mosley in his Blackshirts back before the Second World War. So really this is kind of opening up a new toolbox to combat the far-right.

CO: And this this is the first to far-right British group to be banned since the Second World War under and under these laws as you described it. So why do you think it's taken so long for them to begin to act on these organizations?

DJ: I think part of it is they don't perceive the threat as being credible or serious. There has been a habit to ignore far-right extremism — far-right terror. If you look at the focus in reporting, if you look at the focus across government funding, increasingly there's been this kind of move towards looking at radical Islam — looking at Islamist terror. Yet if you look at statistics it is equally dangerous, if not more so, to kind of experiencing from the far right. We've seen various knife attacks, we've seen attempts to develop bombs, we've seen in one case people developing toxins in garages — they are serious and credible threat, and they're just not being given that kind of awareness, purely I think, because people have been so focused on Islamist terror, because they say that seems like an easy target, and it's politically much easier to, kind of create that sense of another or an outsider.

CO: Has this group — National Action — has it done any acts of violence. Has it hurt anybody physically?

DJ: Beyond minor scale, no. I'm not aware of anything that's really been ascribed to them, particularly it's been the large scale harassment and intimidation — breaches of our race relations law. But so far they didn't get involved in anything too serious that I'm aware of.

CO: And what do you think this signals? Do you think this is just finally catching up with some of this membership, or do you think that you're going to see more arrests of this nature in the UK?

DJ: I think regrettably, we will see more arrests of this type. I think there is a waking up to the threat of the far-right. I think there's a change across the world in how we appreciate the far-right, especially after the events in America in Charlottesville.

CO: What about the British military? Do you think that it will be doing some pretty serious searching through its rank and file at this point?

DJ: I think they're going to probably re-evaluate some things. They've, they've faced this historically. There were accusations of Oswald Mosley's groups recruiting in the barrack rooms during the days of conscription. Equally there was an infiltration of the army cadet force by a neo-Nazi group called Column 88 in the 70s and 80s. So they faced this before, but I think there will be some red faces, and they will be certainly looking at how their intelligence services can work better with the police at home.

CO: Mr. Jones thank you.

DJ: Not a problem. Thank you very much for having me.

JD: Dan Jones researchers far-right extremism at the University of North Hampton. We reached him in Rushton, England. And for more on this story go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih

[Music: Flutes & Oboes]

Joe "Stringbean" McConaughy sets Appalachian Trail record

Guest: Joe McConaughy

JD: Joe McConaughy deserves a rest. On Thursday the Boston College grad, whose nickname is “Stringbean” completed the Appalachian Trail — it is one of the United States great hikes. It runs more than 3500 kilometres through the mountains from Georgia up to Maine, and most people cannot finish it. And the ones who do finish it take six or seven months. Joe McConaughy hated the Appalachian Trail in just over 45 days. We reached Mr. McConaughy in Boston.

CO: Joe, how are your knees?

JOE MCCONAUGHY: My knees are swollen to say the least.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: And your feet?

JM: My feet are actually twice as swollen. Yeah, I might have a, I may have a serious knee injury and then there's a bunch of swelling and I don't foresee running at least for a few weeks.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: My nonprofessional opinion is, no don't do that. This 3500 kilometre trek you made — were you running, were you, were you running, hiking, walking — what combination of gaits did you have?

JM: Whatever. Whatever I could do to get myself from Georgia to Maine. I was running as much as I could.

CO: How often do you actually stop and rest?

JM: Pretty rarely. I had 15 active hours every day, and maybe around three or four hours of camp time, where I pretty much spend the whole time either taking care of my legs — either icing or elevating them — or eating. I spent a lot of time eating every day.

CO: And then you had this, at the very end, a completely sleepless sprint that you made to the end — how long were you actually the very and not sleeping at all?

JM: It was a long time. I did Thirty seven hours straight to the top of Katahdin. So Mount Katahdin in Maine is five-thousand-two-hundred-feet, and I climbed that after for doing about 105 miles. I finished the hundred-and-eleven-mile stretch after thirty seven hours. And then you get to the top — it's high 30 degree temperatures, it's hailing, it's 70-mile-an-hour winds — then you have to go back down the mountain. So we didn't get back in, and camping, and sleeping until another maybe four or five hours later. So it was probably in total 43 hours I was up.

CO: OK, when you describe things — like you had to ice your knees, you camped, what you had to eat —so what exactly were you carrying with you during all this time?

JM: Yes, so I had to use what was available to me. So I had 6.8 pounds worth of gear on my pack. And I iced in mountain streams, I elevated my legs by laying them against trees, I had some gauze that I picked up, which is how I compressed my legs. I essentially had a sleeping quilt, which is like a lighter version of a sleeping bag, and a bivy, which is essentially a tent without any space. Almost just a cover for your sleeping bag with a head some head space, and an extra pair of slightly warmer clothes, a tarp to cover my bivy in case it rained, and that was that was about it, and food — a lot of food.

CO: And so you say pick up your gauze along the way — what do you mean?

JM: So you run through towns, and I go pick up resupply packages, because, you know, I mail myself and all this stuff. So I'd pick up things along the way. You know, when you go through these towns they’ll have little stores and my knee — I had a ton of injuries, and my knees were some of the worst ones, and my quads actually — and I needed to get the swelling down, so I picked up some like wrap so that I could compress my legs at night, because it was just, you know, swelling that I couldn't control at all.

CO: What kept you going? What did he give us a sense of what it is that when you're just at those moments, I'm sure you are there a number of times like, “ Why am I doing this.?” What is it that actually kept you there?

JM: One of the biggest ones honestly, that that kept me going, I’d say was my girlfriend. You know, I'd get reception and during the whole trip we’d call or text. And it was always, never the conversation you'd want — we could never talk to each other really enough. But there were a few really, really bad moments of the trail, and every time I talk with her — you know I never really mentally broke down — which is crazy. There were a few times when I told myself, “Joe like, cry, throw things, put on a tantrum, give up, do whatever.” And I never actually did it. And a lot of times I think I kept some of my sanity. So I was able to get a few texts here and there from my girlfriend.

CO: What was your darkest moment?

JM: So I averaged around 80 kilometres a day. In the White Mountains in New Hampshire — It's regarded as the most challenging section — and it turns out I could only do 40 or 50 kilometres. Yes. So I had that moment when I was in the whites and I wasn't covering the ground I wanted to. And I go up this mountain called Galehead, and it's a straight up climb — really challenging — and I'm just starting to feel better after about a day and a half of doing really poorly, not going very far, and I take a wrong turn without realizing it, and I go about three hours off trail before I really catch what I did wrong and climb up a mountain. I go down 2000 feet and run the whole thing, and go really fast before I finally realized that I just went the wrong way, lost a bunch of time, and also from all the downhill running, I started and aggravated a previous injury I had, had, and then I had to hike all the way back up the same long stretch. And it was just devastating — you know, I lost all this time.

CO: Having now learned your worst moment — what was your best?

JM: Getting to the of Katahdin, it was just an incredible climb and it was really, really, really rough conditions at the top. But when you make it to the top of this thing and I, you know, get done with this 37-hour push, and I beat the record, and my best friend Josh and my girlfriend are just waiting for me in these, you know, 37, 38 degree temperature,s 70 mile an hour winds. I just couldn't help but hug them and smile. You know, thank God finally, I finally finished this thing off. And I was so humbled by the trail and so grateful that I got this opportunity, you know. And having them be there for me really, really showed how important it is. You know, the people who love you, and the people who support you at the end of the day are the ones who really matter.

CO: Joe Big congratulations to you.

JM: Thank you very much.

CO: And it's lovely speaking with you. Thank you.

JM: Great to speak with you too.

JD: Joe McCaughan completed the Appalachian Trail, self-supported, in 45-and-a-half days. We reached “Stringbean” in Boston.

[Music: 80s Pop]

Arabic Numerals

JD: Ask a simple question you get a simple answer, or in this case a simpleton answer. At a recent mayoral debate in a German town, the candidates for office faced questions. One of those candidates is Olfred Best, from an anti-immigrant neo-nazi party. He was asked about a supposed regulation in that town that requires homeowners to display their house numbers on their properties. Here is what the questioner said quote, “I find it alarming that in Volklingen many house numbers are displayed in Arabic numerals. How would you like to take action against this creeping foreigner infiltration?” unquote. To which Mr. Best decisively replied, quote, “You just wait until I am Mayor, I will change that. Then there will be normal numbers,” unquote. To which the audience responded with peals of laughter. Because Arabic numerals are of course what most of us in the English speaking German speaking world refer to as numerals or as Mr. Best refers to normal numbers. They were introduced in Europe centuries ago by Arab mathematicians.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Lydia Reid, South Sudan diplomat

Lydia Reid

Guest: Lydia Reid

JD: For more than four decades Lydia Reed has wanted to know what exactly happened to her son. In 1975 her baby, Gary Payton, died at a hospital in Scotland. He was just seven-days-old. There was a funeral but Ms. Reid suspected that there wasn't a body in the coffin — and it turns out she was right. After Ms. Reid was given a court order to exhume the coffin, a forensic expert has now confirmed that Gary Payton's remains were not inside. We reached Lydia Reid at her home in Edinburgh.

CO: Ms. Reid, first of all, I'm sorry about your news. This must be a very painful time for you.

LYDIA REID: It is — painful to for the whole family really.

CO: Can you describe the moment when you learned that your son's remains were not inside that coffin?

LR: Quite devastating. I was hoping to be wrong, and my gut instinct was, I was right. I was, I was hoping to be wrong, I didn't want to be right. There was just nothing there. No, no, no baby.

CO: And why did you suspect that there wasn't a baby in that coffin?

LR: For two reasons. One, I had actually been shown the wrong baby in the undertakers place in Cuthbertson, Edinburgh. And I'd also carried his coffin, and his coffin had nothing in it.

CO: You carried it and you felt there was no weight to it then?

LR: That’s right.

CO: What was actually inside the coffin when they opened it?

LR: There was a shawl, which my mother knitted for my son, and got crocheted for my son. And there was a shroud, which did not belong to my son, there was a hat that did not belong to my son, and there was a baby’s wristband and an I.D. band which may have — because we can't tell that yet — may have belonged to my son.

CO: And what did you think when you saw those things inside?

LR: I was outraged. There's nothing else you can say, you know, I was absolutely outraged. Where there should have been my son, there was clothes, you know, very carefully laid clothes. It was very bizarre the way it was done. Everything was laid out very carefully as if there was a baby inside.

CO: And why were you outraged?

LR: Because he wasn't there.

CO: And because you had been betrayed by the authorities then?

LR: That’s part of it I suppose, yes the betrayal is part of it, the lack of respect is part of it — the big thing is where is my son?

CO: What led to this exhumation? Your son Gary, he died 42 years ago and he was just a baby. Why were you able to get this grave opened?

LR: Well, I didn't have access to the grave for many years and I did not own the grave — I do now. I did not own it then, and I had to own it. So it was a long story but I had to own it before I could go to court and ask for the order to exhume him, and there was also the finding of, you know, a pathologist like Sue Black, who had the not just the authority, but the ability to look inside that grave and decide whether or not any remains had ever been there. There was a lot to be done before we could actually go through with the exhumation.

CO: What led, what led finally to people agreeing to this? I mean, there’s larger story isn't there, about not just Gary's death but the deaths of other babies. Can you tell us about that?

LR: That was kind of separate, if you like, and yet involved. The organ scandal went on for a long time in our country. I kept it in the media for a long time, because the more you pressure people, the more answers you get.

CO: And what's the what's the organ scandal?

LR: Pathologists would take a baby's body for post-mortem — with or without authorization — and they would remove organs, without authorization, and use them for research.

CO: Do you suspect that Gary was, your son's body was part of this?

LR: Yes.

CO: And will you be able to get any answers on that — do you think?

LR: I don't know. I can only say that I wouldn't give up until I find the answers, and that's all I can say.

CO: How did Gary die?

LR: He died because he had the procedure, which was feeding him blood through my womb, and into his gut. And during that time — the first the first procedure was fine, the second procedure, the catheter got stuck around his gut — the catheter had to be cut and left there, but none of us were aware of this. They then took him over for an operation to try and remove the catheter, but during the operation his heart stopped three times on the table, and he had massive brain damage.

CO: Your lawyers have told the BBC that they believe that Gary's death was a result of medical negligence on the part of one of the doctors.

LR: Absolutely, it was.

CO: Are you pursuing that as well?

LR: I can’t I'm barred from pursuing that. I did actually start pursuing that many years ago but for me money's not the important issue here. Money is the only justice I'll ever get for my son, I have no doubts about that, but money that you get from a case to do with medical negligence doesn't bring my son back. It doesn't give me the answers to what happened to my son. It's not, money is not my son.

CO: You're having a meeting tomorrow with the National Health Service in Scotland — do you think you'll ever find out what happened to your son?

LR: I don’t know. I can only tell you I won't stop until I do. They'll have to, they’ll have to kill me, I suppose to shut me up. I don't think that will happen. I think it's just a simple case of — I'm not going to stop until my son is found, I want my son back. I want to be able to bury him and feel as though he's in his grave. I think that's a right that every parent has. I think it's a right — that kind of respect is what my son deserves — he has a right to.

CO: Ms. Reid, I hope you get those answers, and you get satisfaction, and I'm so sorry how painful this must be. But thank you for speaking with us.

LR: You're very welcome. Thank you.

CO: Bye, bye.

JD: That was Lydia Reid, we reached her in Edinburgh, Scotland, and we did reach out to the NHS in Scotland — we did not hear back from them before we went to air. In a statement to the BBC the Deputy Chief Executive of NHS said quote, “Our condolences are with the family of Gary Payton. This matter is now being looked into by the police and we are unable to comment further,” unquote. We did hear back from Scotmid Co-operative Funeral's. A spokesperson said the company had reached out to police after learning about MS Reid's case. They said quote, “We hope that our actions in contacting the police will help give Mrs. Reid the answers to the questions she has raised about her son's funeral,” unquote.

[Music: Ambient:]

Sean Spicer

[Music: Ambient]

JD: And now an update on Sean Spicer. You may remember Mr. Spicer as comic actor Melissa McCarthy, but you may also remember him as himself, a person, and the former White House Press Secretary. In that capacity he said this,

SOUNDCLIP

SEAN SPICER: This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration period.

JD: And this.

SOUNDCLIP

SS: Yes, I believe that we have to be honest with the American people. I think sometimes we can disagree with the facts.

JD: Also this.

SOUNDCLIP

SS: If the President puts Russian salad dressing on his salad tonight, somehow that's a Russian connection.

JD: Over his six-month tenure as Press Secretary Mr. Spicer said lots of other dubious things. He also tweeted his password twice in two days, insisted President Trump doesn't own or wear bathrobes, called our Prime Minister Joe Trudeau, and at one point huddled among some bushes rather than speak to reporters. Well, last Thursday was Mr. Spicer's last day at the White House, and now a company called Worldwide Speaker's Group has confirmed that Mr. Spicer has joined its roster of paid orators. His first address in this new capacity will be to an investment bank conference next Monday. When you first hear how Worldwide Speakers Group is promoting Sean Spicer you might believe it is overselling him somewhat. Until you realize that, in fact, whomever wrote it may not be enthusiastically endorsing Mr. Spicer, so much as damning him with faint praise. Quote, “audiences around the world will benefit from the same candor, wit, and insight that Spicer brought to the White House briefing room,” unquote.

[Music: Ambient Chimes]

South Sudan diplomat

Guest: Nicholas Coghlan

JD: The killing continues in South Sudan tonight — so does the rhetoric of hate. Millions of civilians have been displaced since the fighting broke out in 2013, in what human rights groups are calling a campaign of war crimes. Now Canada's former envoy to the nation is describing his reaction in early 2015, when he learned that a Canadian company's armored vehicles had been deployed in the fighting. The Globe and Mail later reported that the Streit Group had built dozens of vehicles offshore for sale to the South Sudanese military. Nicholas Coghlan tells the story in his new memoir is called collapse of a country. We reached Mr. Coghlan in Maple Bay, British Columbia.

CO: Mr. Coughlin while you were ambassador how did you find out that a Canadian company — Streit Group — was selling armored vehicles to the South Sudan war effort?

NICHOLAS COGHLAN: Well, I was actually alerted on Twitter in the context of a number of tweets I'd been making on human rights and related issues. I received a fairly sarcastic tweet back with a photograph of an armored vehicle manufactured by Streit and a comment to the effect of, “wasn't I being a little hypocritical?”

CO: What did they mean by, “aren't you being a little bit hypocritical?”

NC: Well by quote, “preaching about human rights, international accountability,” while, certainly from the viewpoint of my critic, selling weapons, armored vehicles to one of the principal entities, the SPLA, and the army in South Sudan responsible for gross human rights abuses.

CO: What did you find out about Streit Group and what it had sold to the government of South Sudan?

NC: Well, I did a little bit of research and confirmed that fairly quickly. That was actually pretty much in open media. And after that point, whenever I was traveling, I kept my eyes open and sure enough, in at least two locations, I saw semi-wrecked, burnt-out, armored vehicles, precisely of that description once in Bentiu, and another time up near a place called Melut.

CO: Did you report your research and what you had learned, and this tweet that you got — did you report that to your superiors in Ottawa?

NC: Yes I did, yeah.

CO: And what was the response?

NC: Well, it was getting some attention and the departmental lawyers pored over it. And the essence of the response was that these vehicles were manufactured by Streit’s plant in the United Arab Emirates, and were therefore not liable to any kind of scrutiny or export control by the government of Canada.

CO: So there was no — it was completely legal that Streit group had sold these armoured vehicles to South Sudan?

NC: In a word, it was legal — whatever one might think about it ethically.

CO: What did you think of it ethically?

NC: Well, very good question. You know, of course that you know as a diplomat, one is one who is paid and employed to the to promote and explain government policy. So in a sense it's not my role to say —certainly not to question that publicly. Privately I did, yes, but in the end if it's government policy, then as a civil servant one's job is to implement policy.

CO: And what was Canada's policy in regards to South Sudan at that time?

NC: Well, extreme, extreme concern obviously with the nature of the conflict. We have a, you know, a large number of Canadian South-Sudanese victims of the conflict — we evacuated a large number of December 2013. The humanitarian situation is catastrophic, to be blunt, and getting worse. Human rights abuses of the worst kind, sexual violence, so a great deal of concern about what was then going on, and indeed, what is still going on today.

CO: So your responsibility was to denounce these human rights abuses on the part of the South Sudanese government, and the opposition as well, but this is the government that we're speaking of, and the same time this is a government that was buying armoured vehicles from a Canadian company.

NC: That's correct, yeah.

CO: Did that make you uncomfortable?

NC: Yes, it certainly did. The informal discussion was along the lines of, well it may be legal, but how ethical is it?

CO: And there was nothing that can be done — no way to shame the company that was selling the weapons, the weaponized vehicles to the army?

NC: Well, from what I understand, subsequently, and I'm sure that I've retired just over a year ago 14 months ago, I understand the current government Minister Freeland has actually tabled legislation — I'm not sure of its status — that would close this loophole, if you want to call it a loophole.

CO: the loophole being that the vehicles were manufactured in the United Arab Emirates and not in Canada?

NC: Precisely, yeah.

CO: At the time that Streit Group was selling these vehicles to the South Sudan government what was known about the human rights abuses in the country?

NC: South Sudan became independent in 2011 — it became independent with a huge surge of euphoria. Things started to go sour fairly quickly, I would say, you know, within the first year it became evident that the SPLA, you know, a liberation army, was not learning to be a more modern accountable army. So I would say, you know, fairly quickly the signals on human rights were moving from amber to red within a year of independence.I would say in 2012, 2015 — certainly before the crisis broke out in 2013.

CO: And by the end of 2013, December, with full out war, Human Rights Watch and others were reporting massive human rights abuses, that in Juba alone there were just large scale killings on the part of government — government soldiers were killing civilians, Neur people, by 2014 mass ethnic cleansing in the countryside then continued on to what people now say is something approaching what we saw in Rwanda.

NC: Yes. That analysis is correct. It's, it's become more complex but there certainly is a case to be made of a genocide-by-stealth under way in South Sudan at this time.

CO: At what point should, and would, Streit Group have known that this was going on?

NC: Well if they've been reading, I mean, from the point of view of being somebody based locally, you know, ambassadors never feel that the country of accreditation get sufficient publicity. And it's true the conflict in South Sudan has largely been overshadowed, obviously by Iraq, Syria, and more recently Yemen. But it was there for the reading in New York Times, Washington Post, and of course groups you mentioned, such as Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch.

CO: So they would have known, could have known, should have known, that this was going on in South Sudan, while they were is selling these weaponized vehicles to the country's government?

NC: I would certainly say could have and should have. Whether they did know, I can't comment on.

CO: How do you think the Canadian government should have responded when you when you learned of what was going on?

NC: I guess I would have hoped for a full and frank discussion with Streit, with the top level of management. Now, you know, who should have led that — whether that should have been, you know, the Minister of Trade, or some other member of the Canadian political establishment. One would have hoped for you know at least let's get to the bottom of this — What’s Streit’s story? How aware are they, or how were they? What are their intentions in the future? I'm not aware that that discussion took place and as far as I know it did not.

CO: All right we have to leave it there Mr. Coghlan. Thank you.

NC: Thank you very much. Thanks for your interest. Bye, bye.

CO: Bye, bye.

JD: Nicholas Coghlan is a former Canadian ambassador and served as Canada's envoy in South Sudan. His new book is entitled Collapse of a Country that is published this month by McGill-Queens University Press. We reached Mr. Coughlin in Maple Bay, British Columbia.

[Music: Ambient Guitar Plucks]

Peppa Pig

SOUNDCLIP

PEPPA PIG: I’m Peppa Pig. This is my little brother George. This is Mommy Pig, and this is Daddy Pig.

[LAUGHTER]

Peppa Pig

JD: How delightful. That clip is from the introduction to the animated TV series Peppa Pig — it is a popular British cartoon. It follows the life of two piglets — Peppa and her younger brother George — and their adventures with family and friends. It is preschool friendly, it is the last thing you would expect to draw controversy, and yet for the second time a 2004 episode in which Peppa and her family invite a spider by the name of Mr. Skinny Legs to tea, is causing a stir with some audiences. Here is a clip from that controversial episode.

SOUNDCLIP

PP: Mommy, Daddy, sit down. We Are all going to have tea with Mr. Skinny Legs. Who wants tea?

MOMMY AND DADDY PIG: Delicious.

NARRATOR: Peppa loves playing tea parties.

PP: Here’s your tea Mr. Skinny Legs.

JD: Now you were probably thinking what could possibly be wrong with that. Well nothing, except that Peppa Pig also airs in Australia, a place where Huntsman spiders with hairy 16-centimetre legspans roam, and where wimpy British arachnids, like Mr. Skinny Legs, are gobbled up in the crushing venomous fangs of the Sydney Funnel spider. Not the types of spiders you would want children handling or inviting to tea parties. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has now pulled the episode calling it quote, “inappropriate for Australian audiences,” unquote. It is banned from future broadcasts.

Back To Top »

Part 3: PSA study, Dexter Pottinger obit

Arnold Amber obit

JD: Arnold Amber marched in Toronto’s Labor Day parade every year — this time around however, he didn't make it. Arnold Amber Union-Leader, journalist, and advocate for press freedom died yesterday. He was 77 years old. Mr. Amber worked here at CBC for decades, and not only did he produce award-winning programs, he helped South African journalists cover their first democratic election. He also spent two decades as the President of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression — pushing for press rights both at home and abroad. Now here is Mr. Amber speaking to CBC Toronto host Matt Galloway on Metro Morning about the CJFE’s annual report card on media freedom in Canada. This is from 2012.

SOUNDCLIP

MATT GALLOWAY: The government gets an ‘F’ for the way journalists are denied access to information. Why an F?

ARNOLD AMBER: Well, because there are many aspects, not preventing journalists from speaking, but from providing information to journalists so that they can report on the stories they’d like to. For example, there are delays, there are what they call, redaction, and what happens there is when you finally get it — the redacted piece of information you get — might have 20 pages, but of which 15 are all blacked out.

MG: There was this amazing story that came out a few weeks ago in the Ottawa Citizen of a journalist who is trying to figure out further details of a study that was being done — a collaboration between the Canadian government and NASA — about why and how snow falls. Sent an email and it took them something like 15 emails, and endless conversations, and three days to figure out that they didn't want to actually tell him that information. And it was amusing to a lot of people because it was about bureaucracy, and how to cut through red tape, but a lot of people felt very threatened by that because it was a simple question that was given the run around for days, and days, and days. How threatening do you think that lack of transparency can actually be —not just to journalism but to democracy?

AA: Well that's the main point and by the way on that story the journalists finally picked up the phone and called someone at NASA, and the scientists got on the phone and answered all the questions right away.

[LAUGHTER]

AA: Funny but getting to the more serious point, the two issues that come up are accountability, transparency, and they lead right into what you said about democracy. You know, we keep worrying in this country that as we become a more, and more mature democracy, our voting numbers go down, other aspects of citizen involvement goes down. And, you know, if you don't have information how can you keep being involved in the democratic process? Sure. Compared to Mexico, compared to other countries where people are getting killed, we're OK but we have to better than OK.

JD: That was Arnold Amber of the Canadian Journalist for Free Expression speaking to CBC Toronto host Matt Galloway in 2012. Arnold Amber, who was also a longtime CBC journalist, died yesterday. He was 77 years old.

[Music: Ambient Electric Guitar]

PSA study

Guest: Ruth Etzioni

JD: Experts have long questioned the efficacy and safety of a routine, but controversial, blood test used to screen for prostate cancer. Now a new study says that this kind of screening can indeed help reduce a man's risk of dying from the disease by up to 30 per cent. The study looked specifically at the Prostate Specific Antigen blood test called the PSA test, and it re-examined data from two earlier studies, which had originally caused confusion because of their conflicting results. Ruth Etzioni is a Biostatistician with the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center — she co-authored the study. We reached Dr. Etzioni in Seattle.

CO: Dr. Etzioni, I think that we want to talk about this study, but I think a lot of men want to know first of all, should they get the PSA test or not?

DOCTOR RUTH ETZIONI: I would love to be able to give you a simple answer. I'm afraid that I can't because when it comes to PSA testing there's a question of both benefits, and there's also potential harms. And when it comes to something like harm and benefits, it really amounts to a person's values that they put on those, in order to make the decision that is right for them. What our work is about is clarifying, in this case benefit, because there's been a lot of confusion about whether the test really works.

CO: How did you decide that there is value to the test?

RE: Well, we certainly didn't set out to decide that. What we did was, we recognized that there was a great deal of uncertainty because the two biggest trials of screening gave apparently conflicting results, with one suggesting no benefit and one suggesting, what might be called, clinically important benefit. And what we were trying to do in the study was to see whether the two trials could in fact be reconciled by taking into account known differences in how the studies were implemented.

CO: So what did you find? How did you find that they did, in fact, both studies pointed somewhat in the same direction?

RE: What we did was first to recognize that it has to do with making the right comparison. What everyone is interested in is whether screening has a benefit compared with no screening. Now that might sound obvious, but in the case of the trials, that simple comparison — screening versus no screening — did not exactly happen as intended.

CO: Just to stay with the two trials — one was in Europe, was in the United States, to see if the PSA test had any impact on the rates of prostate cancer death — and so the U.S. study was that there was a test group that didn't have that PSA and the other that did. So what sort of went wrong there?

RE: The U.S. trial — it had to do with the timing of the trial. The trial was opened in 1993 and by that time the prostate screening test had already become widely used in the U.S.. And so even on the arm that was not supposed to be screened, there was a lot of screening. It was estimated that more than three fourths of the men had at least one test during the five year screening period.

CO: And can you blame them? My guess is that during that time there was a lot of talk a lot, a lot of media coverage about the importance of this PSA testing and what it might mean. So it’d be difficult to ask a group of men in a study not to have a PSA test, I would imagine.

RE: I think it was very difficult, and you know this is the problem when the horse gets out of the barn right, where hopefully, you want to be adopting interventions that have been shown to have an important benefit. And we just didn't know that. But, you know, there was a sense that earlier detection had to be helpful.

CO: And this is really a very important thing, because why is it determined that even if this is one-in-a-thousand men who avoid death from prostate cancer, why not test them? What is the downside of that?

RE: It's very interesting. First of all I would like to just note that that one-in-a-thousand is a number that likely understates the number that will benefit over the long term — that's only over 10 years. But the downside has to do with prostate cancer. It's a serious cancer and at the same time many men have cancers that would not even be diagnosed or cause problems without screening. So it's kind of a two-faced condition. And when you are screening it's like, you know, fishing with a big net and you know you catch some of the fish that you want to, and then you also catch a whole lot of other things that maybe you didn't want to catch in your net.

CO: And the issue here is that the people get treatments that are unnecessary, that are invasive, they have side effects, that for cancers or for what looks like cancer that may amount to nothing.

RE: Well it is cancer, but it's part of the aging condition, and it's not likely to pose serious harm. But the treatments are not trivial — there’s surgery there's radiation therapy — these can all have side effects that can really reduce quality of life.

CO: Do you recommend that men get PSA tests?

RE: I recommend knowledge. Our goal is to is to reduce uncertainty and to empower men to prioritize how they want to proceed and how they want to take care of their health.

CO: But as you know knowledge for some can be enlightening, and they can take advice and make decisions based on that. For others it's something fearful and they immediately would like to see whatever you can do to remove the cancer, or to stop any potential effects from that. So you're stuck there — knowledge for some is received differently than for others, is it not?

RE: You're absolutely right. And so, that's why when people ask a question like you just asked — whether men should be screened for prostate cancer — I will often say only be screened if you're willing not to treat. Part of knowledge about prostate cancer is that not all prostate cancers are created equal, but until we're able to integrate that and not to panic about a diagnosis, the harms of screening will still be something to be concerned about.

CO: Dr. Etzioni Thank you.

RE: I hope it’ll be helpful to your listeners.

CO: Yes, I hope so too.

RE: Thanks very much.

JD: That was Dr. Ruth Etzioni a Biostatistician with the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. We reached Dr. Etzioni in Seattle.

[Music: Ambient Strings]

BC meteor

JD: Social media lit up last night with reports of a bright flash that could be seen over parts of British Columbia and Alberta. Mark Jennings-Bates was enjoying the end of his long weekend by the shores Kootenay Lake when he saw the light. He spoke to Chris Walker host of CBC Daybreak south in Kelowna about what happened.

SOUNDCLIP

MARK JENNINGS BATES: Well, you know we were playing cards on our deck looking to be late. And all of a sudden — and it was dark at that time and very smoky skies — and all of a sudden the skies completely lit up as if it was a lightning storm, and all of us stopped. One of the card players said they saw fireworks, which of course would be illegal at the moment, and so we said, “no it wouldn't be fireworks,” but then there was a rumbling sound that went on for probably a minute, after that, as if there were an electrical storm. So it was very confusing, so I had actually went to the Internet and looked at the radar maps to see if there were any storms in the area, couldn't see anything. And then of course in the back of your mind you want to see if Kim Jong Un might have actually sent something over North America.

[LAUGHTER]

CHRIS WALKER: Oh boy.

MJB: But of course, we didn't know what it was. So I took to Facebook and put a post on and very quickly everybody started saying, yes we saw it too, we saw it too, and security camera footage came up that wasn't really conclusive, but yes, fantastic thing to witness. It was really cool.

JD: That was Mark Jennings-Bates speaking with Chris Walker host of CBC Daybreak south out of Kelowna, British Columbia, about his view of last night's meteor light show in British Columbia.

[Music: Trippy Trance]

Hispanic chamber DACA

JD: As we mentioned earlier in the program, and as you have no doubt been hearing throughout the day, today U.S. Attorney Generals Attorney General rather Jeff Sessions, announced the cancellation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, also known as DACA or the Dreamers Program. And that spurred Javier Palomarez to quit. President Trump's National Diversity Council. Mr. Palomares is the President of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. And here is part of what he said earlier on CNN, directing his remarks to President Trump.

SOUNDCLIP

JAVIER PALOMAREZ: I want to remind to him and his team that from an economic standpoint, and again we're business at people that the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, if you look at this purely from an economic standpoint, again, none of these young people gets government benefits of any sort — so they're not costing us anything. They pay over 2 billion dollars in taxes, in form of state and local taxes. It would cost the American taxpayer over 60 billion dollars to deport all these young people and over a 10 year period of time our economy would lose some 280 billion dollars of economic output if we get rid of these dreamers. Again there's no reason to take this on. This would be a deplorable action on behalf of this President, and I'm going to work until the bloody end to make sure that my case is being heard, and hopefully, hopefully joined by the likes of Speaker Ryan, John McCain Orrin Hatch, and many others in the Republican Party. Hopefully we can convince this President to do the right thing here.

JD: That was Javier Palomarez speaking earlier on CNN. Mr. Palomarez is the President of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Today he quit President Trump’s National Diversity Council over the DACA decision.

[Music: Building Waves]

Dexter Pottinger obit

Guest: Maurice Tomlinson

JD: He wasn't just out — he was out spoken — as a voice for the LGBT community in Jamaica, in a country where being gay is still dangerous. Last week Dexter Pottinger was stabbed to death in his home in Kingston. According to reports neighbours, who heard screams did not help him, nor did they immediately call the police. Maurice Tomlinson is a Jamaican Canadian gay rights activist. He knew Dexter Pottinger. We reached Mr. Tomlinson today on the island of Dominica.

CO: Mr. Tomlinson, where does the death of Dexter part leave the LGBTQ community in Jamaica?

MT: The sad reality is that for many of us, we are accustomed to deaths of this nature happening to members of our community. So while we are very sad, and shaken, especially by the response, or lack of response of his neighbours when Dexter was crying for assistance, the fact that they let him die and didn't call the police or anything — that shook us up. But we also know that, that is sadly how we are viewed — our lives are not considered important enough. So we just have to continue fighting.

CO: But he was, as I understand, he was just such a bright light in your community, and he is a colorful one — physically too because of his art, and for pride week, and so many things — he was very brave and outspoken, colorful man. And so what what kind of a hole does that leave for the LGBT community in Jamaica?

MT: It leaves a big hole. I mean, I'm not going to downplay the fact that his being the face of pride Jamaica was unprecedented. You know, the fact that he was willing to be visible in this way — many of us who do the work are behind the scenes. Myself I’m able to be visible primarily because I live outside of Jamaica, and I live in Canada. So the fact that he was doing that was an inspiration, it really had you know seemed to be a new dawn for many of us — that we could start to be visible.

CO: What do you know at this point about this brutal murder of Dexter Pottinger?

MT: So far all we know is that the neighbors heard him call for help at about 4 o'clock in the morning on Tuesday, and they didn't respond, but they saw someone driving away in a car later — they saw someone put something in the car, and then drive away later. So the car was found, and the television was missing, and they have a suspect in custody. So we are very happy that the police responded so quickly. The challenge now is getting the, you know, the justice system to work quickly to bring closure, because we've seen many instances where persons are arrested and the matter drags on or then they're acquitted on technicalities.

CO: It was this stabbing death and it appears that a number of things were stolen from his house — is that right?

MT: Correct, correct. A number of things — and his car was also stolen.

CO: And when talking about what culpability there is, is there anything that the neighbors themselves who heard the screams and didn't call the police — are they culpable in any way because of that?

MT: Well, in law, no, you know, sadly there isn't. But morally there certainly should be some level of culpability. And in Jamaica most Jamaicans identify as Christian, and you would think that their Christian conscience would you know require them, just like the good Samaritan, to help when someone is in trouble. But we know that also the fact of Dexter's orientation would have made it less likely for them to get involved, because he used to have parties at his home and they would quickly call the police to stop his parties — his gay parties. But hearing him call murder and call for help — they did not respond because, of course, this is probably somebody they didn't really want in their community.

CO: How difficult was it for Dexter Pottinger to be a gay activist — to be so outspoken in Jamaica? I know that you we've talked to you before, and you've described how you try to make inroads, you try to make the cause. But, you know, you have Canada to sort of go retreat to — how difficult was it for him?

MT: So the good thing for Dexter was that he had his art and his art form — you know he was a fashion designer, he was a makeup artist, he was a producer, he choreographed lots of the dancehall videos — which is ironic because some of our dance music is homophobic — but he gave a sort of aesthetic to the dancehall. And because of his role in society he was insulated to a certain extent, certainly not from some of the more negative responses, of his neighbors and other persons, but his craft gave him a certain level of protection, but he certainly was not above or insulated completely, from hostile words and from threats. I think though that he had established himself as such a consummate professional that even politicians protected him. We saw a very good statement from the Minister of Culture, who came out after his death condemning his death. And, you know, sending condolences to family and friends, because we realized that not only has the LGBT community lost a significant member of our body, but the Jamaican society has lost a truly, incredibly talented individual.

CO: And you think it is possible that his death will deter others from speaking out — or perhaps because there's been support including from a government minister and others — that it might encourage them?

MT: I think that the situation in Jamaica is that that LGBT human rights is now out of the tube — so it can be put back in — we are certainly not retreating. Montego Bay Pride is going ahead, and we have made a dedication that we're going to have a segment where we celebrate the lives of persons who have passed including Dexter. And that was not originally the plan but now we're going to do that because we are not about to retreat. We are not able to be cowed into silence again. We have seen too many of these deaths. We've seen too many persons lose their lives in senseless ways, and the society not respond. We have to take matters into our own hands now. We have to claim our space, and that's what we're doing. We're going to claim our space. We're going to demand respect from the society that so far has not been very respectful of us.

CO: Mr. Tomlinson it’s good to speak with you. Thank you.

MT: My pleasure.

JD: Maurice Tomlinson is a Jamaican-Canadian gay rights activist. We reached him today on the island of Dominica.

[Music: Laid Back Trance]

Nunavut rescue

JD: Over the weekend, CBC Iqaluit reporter Michael Salomone and his teenage son went out on the water to do some fishing. It was supposed to be a short trip but then the bad weather hit — and they went missing. It wasn't until early this morning that they were rescued. Here is how Mr. Salomone described the moment when he saw that Search and Rescue helicopter in the air.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL SALOMONE: I tried doing everything I can to signal it. I had a little reflective mirror that I use for that for that purpose. And I had a lamp that I had, a little LED headlamp trying to show them where we were in total darkness — 3 o'clock this morning. It took about half-an-hour before they found us and realized when this helicopter turned around. I don't know how they found us, but they are quite far away when they turned around and were clearly coming in our direction. It was an incredible overwhelming feeling knowing that we are going home, and we're still alive, and we're still healthy, and very thankful. The island that we found ourselves —that we were stuck in — because of high seas and we end up running out of gas, because the high seas. As a matter of fact because the weather was so bad the swells were probably one to two metres high in the little canoe. We had to swell up and down to keep up with the waves, and we found shelter in the cove near the American islands. As it turns out, I thought it was north not south we were close to the shipping channel area and realized that we'd run out of gas. So we had to paddle to an island nearby. And luckily in that island there's a great amount of driftwood that was there, that I tapped into. It kept us warm. We dried up, despite the rains and the heavy winds. There was an overwhelming feeling that this is where we were meant to be. I can't describe it in other way that we found the so much driftwood. Matter of fact we secured two rabbits and that's what we, that's what we ate.

JD: That was Michael Salomone, a CBC reporter in Iqaluit, who went missing after going out fishing with his son. They were rescued this morning.

[Music: Mellow Hip-Hop]

Sleeps with Fishes

It's kind of lonely in here right now. Carol has stepped out for a minute. The raccoons that nest in the studio ceiling must have headed out to eat garbage. It's just me, in a room with two microphones, a space heater, and that bare dangling lightbulb. It's times like these that I wish the studio was inside the Hotel Charleroi in Gosselies, Belgium — so I could rent a goldfish to hang out with. Recently a woman from New Zealand tweeted that her friend who was staying at the Hotel Charleroi had been offered the option to rent a single goldfish in a bowl to keep her company in a room. Now this was news to people on Twitter but it's not the dawning of the age of aquariums. The manager has since confirmed that the hotel has been offering this option since 2013. At the front desk there's a little sign that reads, “alone in your room and want company? Rent a fish three-euros-fifty-cents per night.” So if you're feeling like a fish out of water, a nominal fee will get you a fish in it. Now as to the non-financial value of a mute goldfish companion who is only there with you because it has to be — that's unclear. But if you're in Belgium it'll cost you less than €4 to find out for yourself. It may not be a full sized friend, but it's a pretty decent scaled model.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Sept. 5, 2017 episode transcript

More Stories Like This