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 2018

The AIH Transcript for April 27, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

CO: Hello, I'm Carol.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight…

CO: Good Korea moves. After a year of threats and taunts North Korea says it's ready to play nice and South Korea seems ready to play along. But a former senior defence official says it's too early to celebrate.

JD: Where's the catch? Lobster fishermen say they're all for protecting right whales. But Ottawa’s new rules won't do the job and will make it hard for them to do theirs.

CO: In order of appearance. The U.S. restaurant chain Twin Peaks wink-ally refers to its female servers as ‘scenic views.’ And now former staff have filed a complaint saying they were rated for their looks.

JD: Home is where the heart is. At last, six years after it was stolen the 800-year-old heart of a patron saint has been recovered and returned to the Dublin church where it belongs.

CO: A leg to stand on again. In fact, a seven-year-old girl hopes she'll dance on that leg again too — now that doctors have removed the middle part, attached her lower leg to her thigh — backwards — to turn her ankle into a knee.

JD: And…A visit from the toot fairy. Last night we were severely scolded by a chemical engineer for saying Uranus would smell like human flatulence. But tonight another listener politely steps in to clear the air. As It Happens: The Friday Edition. Radio that rises on a point of odour.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Koreas summit, Twin Peaks, Saint's heart found

Koreas summit

Guest: Abe Denmark

JD: Today something happened that would have been unthinkable just a few short months ago. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and South Korean president Moon Jae-in met in person for a one on one talks — and it ended in a warm embrace in front of the cameras. Abe Denmark is the director of the Asia Program at the Wilson Center and served as the deputy assistant secretary of defense under U.S. President Barack Obama. We reached Mr. Denmark in Washington.

CO: Mr. Denmark, what did you think when you saw those extraordinary images of the two Korean leaders today?

ABE DENMARK: It was really remarkable to see the two leaders meet at the DMZ. I've been to that site many, many times. And the idea of the North and South Korean leaders meeting at that site was really quite remarkable. Seeing Kim Jong-un in a free and open and democratic South Korea, even if just for a little bit of time really I think raised in people's imagination just what may be possible with this sort of diplomacy.

CO: But they were — it’s just extraordinary. They were holding hands. They're walking across the border, they're stopping for photos looking in both directions. And it's just — when you think of it just a short time ago Kim Jong-un and President Trump were comparing the size of their nuclear buttons.

AD: It's true. And the Korean peninsula, over the last several decades, have seen several major swings between hope for peace and very difficult confrontation. And this seems to be one of the more optimistic swings of the pendulum.

CO: Is it just theater though? Is it just political diplomatic theater?

AD: Well it remains to be seen. The current engagements between North and South Korea that we saw were very heavy on symbolism and theater. The agreement that they announced was very optimistic and full of hope but very lacking in detail about how we may achieve these objectives. And that's been the challenge on the Korean Peninsula for decades. Not identifying the goals, but rather how to get there. And this agreement, again, was very — almost silent on the details of how we actually get to this vision that they announced.

CO: And as you point out very ambitious. Can you just give us the bare bones of what they what they have announced as their objectives?

AD: Sure. They announced their intention to end officially the Korean War, which has been at an armistice since 1953 and signing a peace treaty. They also announced their intention to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, which is a North Korean phrase that entails very specific assumptions. And they also expressed their intention to disarm, as part of a broader peace regime, disarm their militaries as part of a broader peace regime and reduce military tensions. But again those are the objectives identified. very unclear how they get there and really sort of tying those sorts of objectives up for a potential summit between Kim Jong-un and President Trump.

CO: And so yes this is, of course, Mr. Trump is tweeting that this is an amazing day and he in all caps, Korean War to end. And he tweets good things are happening but only time will tell. And so what role, if any, did President Trump play in arriving at these two Korean leaders in a meeting today?

AD: I think President Trump and his administration deserves a great deal of credit for deepening economic sanctions that were begun during the Obama administration and by really tightening on pressure, especially getting the Chinese on board. And so I think, you know, President Trump is in charge of the United States at the moment so he earns the victory. And it's also his responsibility to see this through.

CO: And there's another player too, isn’t it, there’s China. And so is it possible that this Mr. Kim's mysterious trip to China recently had something to do with this?

AD: Absolutely. The visit that Kim Jong-un paid to Beijing and meeting with Xi Jinping, I think was absolutely critical. And one of the lingering questions in my mind is what may have been promised between the two sides, what North Korea committed to China, what China committed to North Korea. We already have seen some indications that China was reducing its enforcement of economic sanctions on North Korea, really just in the days after Kim Jong-un’s visit to Beijing. And Xi Jinping sent a very clear signal that China will not be ignored, China will not be cut out and China will need to play an important role, really regardless of how this goes, if diplomacy succeeds or if it fails. China is going to have a very critical role to play here.

CO: No matter what the United States or China does, it's going to come down to what North and South Korea want and how much they want this, right? So what did they get out of it? What would be North Korea's interest if they did denuclearize, what would they get for that?

AD: Well, that's the key question. What, if any, package of inducements would convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons? As you may know North Korea has agreed to denuclearize several times, including in 2005 when the United States pledged security guarantees and eventual normalization of relations as well as economic inducements in exchange for North Korea's agreement to denuclearize. And 13 months after that agreement, North Korea tested its first nuclear device. So, so far we have not figured out if there is any combination of threats or inducements that would convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons. I personally am very skeptical that North Korea will ever get there. President Trump has expressed his confidence that Kim Jong-un is being genuine and that North Korea will actually denuclearize as part of this process. But as President Trump likes to say, time will tell.

CO: All right, well we will be watching very closely to see where this goes. Mr. Denmark, I appreciate speaking with you, thank you.

AD: Thank you very much.

JD: Abe Denmark is the director of the Asia Program at the Wilson Center. He Served as the deputy assistant secretary of defense under President Obama. We reached Mr. Denmark in Washington.

[Music: Ambient Tones]

Twin Peaks

Guest: Darryl Rodriguez

JD: Eats, drinks, scenic views. That is the slogan of a chain of restaurants in the United States called ‘Twin Peaks.’ The company's website describes restaurants as quote “A lodge full of friendly and attentive Twin Peaks girls. Others describe the restaurants, regrettably as breast-aurants. Well now some of the friendly and attentive employees who used to work at the restaurant in Orland Park, Illinois — outside Chicago, have filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They say they had to wear lingerie to work and were rated based on appearance. Darryl Rodriguez is one of the women involved in the complaint. We reached her in Chicago Ridge.

CO: Darryl, for those who haven't heard of a Twin Peaks restaurant before, what's it like?

DARRYL RODRIGUEZ: Basically, Twin Peaks is kind of like a spin off on Hooters. Inside of the restaurant is more like a lodge cabin-based theme. The girls’ uniforms represent a male lumberjack. We would wear red plaid, khaki shorts, snow boots and long socks.

CO: Not quite the same as what a lumberjack is wearing. What does a Twin Peaks girl, as they call them, what does she look like?

DR: She supposed to look glamorous, makeup done, hair done, fit — they were trying to tell us that we’re supposed to look like the girl next door.

CO: How much flesh were you expected to show in your lumberjack outfit?

DR: So, well it was different because when I got hired they told us they were going more of the conservative route. They didn't want to be the old Twin Peaks because before, I guess, it was really — they showed a lot of skin, it was very raunchy, they wanted to show a lot of gaudy jewelry. When we got hired they told us they want more of the conservative look like almost as if we're like Buffalo Wild Wings but with a little sex appeal.

CO: But then things changed, right. What were you expected to wear eventually?

DR: Well, it wasn't expected, it just happened out of nowhere. It went from conservative, not very gaudy, not very over the top, and then six months in everything changed — you need to wear more makeup, your hair needs to be more done, you need to show more skin. The uniform change from a regular T-shirt, which basically show a little midriff, but barely some cleavage, and from that T-shirt to a shorter shirt, which you would tuck in under your bra. So basically it looks like you're wearing a plaid lumberjack bra, basically, with sleeves.

CO: And now the — I mean there were other — there were kind of theme days, right? There's lingerie you had to wear, right?

DR: Yeah. That was the first, first one I remember though the lingerie was Black Friday and we had to wear all black lingerie. I don't know. That was just — it was so crazy to me to do it because I've never — I didn't want to do it originally because I already had an altercation with my boyfriend and he didn't want me to do it. But they said if you don't show up here for your shift you're fired or if you don't want to do it you can leave or you can get fired or whatever, you know. But I didn't have another job lined up.

CO: But the dress requirements were so serious that the police actually got involved at one point, is that right?

DR: Yeah. So, basically it was Black Friday around November. Then in October we had Halloween and then around February, which was sweetheart week, we had — basically people were wearing, I think, red white and pink lingerie. That's when the police came. They came the day when they went to warn the managers — I was working the morning shift and out behind the bar. Basically, the police came in — and we were already wearing our sweetheart week lingerie. They basically tried giving us a warning saying we don't like what you're wearing they're showing too much, what they said buttocks. And there was a lot of families and stuff so that everybody was kind of disgusted when they first did that. Then the next day that's when my older co-worker Sarah got a ticket for indecent exposure.

CO: There’s something else I want to ask you about that sounds quite degrading, that you actually were lined up and your bodies were examined to see how toned and, well, what you looked like — how sexy you were.

DR: Basically at the beginning of a shift we would be lined up. Whoever our manager was who was grading would look at everybody up and down, say what you need to fix say, like oh well you're wearing enough makeup, you need to put some more on or you can't work, fix your hair. There was times when managers would even say stuff about your body saying, oh your arms are too flabby, or when girls would be like ‘how come my tone grade is this?’ They’d be like ‘It’s really flabby, you need to start working out.’ But those same girls are working out, are lifting, are healthy looking. They would say that they're fat. They would pinch their love handles to prove to them this is why you're not getting the grade, you know, like it's just very degrading and it was done in front of everybody.

CO: And then you got assigned the tables — the best tables according to how fit you were, how your body was.

DR: Yeah. Because what I've noticed — because it was different when I was at the bar. But when I went to serve I started seeing how it really was and I realized Oh wow like my tone is what matters the most, more than what my actual sales were. I could have the highest sales and have an average tone and still be low in the rank. Girls who would have the best tone and OK sales would be high in the rank. So those girls would get to pick their sections first. And, of course, they're going to pick the best sections and then they go in order. So whoever has the worst rank would have the worst sections all the way in the back where no one wants to sit and not make any money.

CO: So now what do you hope to achieve by filing this complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission?

DR: I just hope, for myself, I just hope that a lot of other women and men can speak up for themselves. Because I know, I'm pretty sure that this happens in a lot of other food and beverage industries, but I just hope people would come out and speak out and it's OK and really realize that it's not OK to be abused in the workplace.

CO: What lasting effects has it had on you?

DR: I know for sure it's really taken a toll on my self-esteem. I used to be so confident. I even ran track in college and I did very well for myself and just being there for almost a year I started viewing myself in a negative way. So I know my confidence went down and I still struggle today like there's times when I really think ‘Oh maybe I'm not good enough, or I am fat or, you know, and I think too much about it. And I used to never think about it, you know, because I was always constantly body ashamed. I was constantly graded and ranked and that, of course, affects your tips, how you work, you know, like that's your livelihood.

CO: Well, we will keep in touch and see how this turns out, this challenge, Darryl. And I think a lot of people listening can and identify with what you went through, and I appreciate you telling it to us.

DR: Thank you so much.

JD: Darryl Rodriguez is a former employee of a Twin Peaks restaurant in Illinois. We reached her in Chicago Ridge. And we did contact Twin Peaks for comment on this story. We did not hear back from them before airtime. But in an e-mail to The Chicago Sun Times the company's CEO said in a statement quote “Twin Peaks does not tolerate any type of harassment or discrimination and has strict policies and training practices in place to make sure every guest and employee is treated equally and with great respect. We look forward to vigorously defending ourselves against these outrageous and baseless allegations.” If you'd like to see some photographs go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Piano Ballad]

Saint's heart found

Guest: Dermot Dunne

JD: In March of 2012 there was a robbery at a cathedral in Dublin and someone stole the church's heart. That was true figuratively because it was also true literally. The thief had taken the eight hundred year old heart of Patron Saint Laurence O'Toole. And for six long years that heart was lost. Finally the police found it, and yesterday evening at an official ceremony it was formally returned to Christ Church Cathedral. We reached the cathedral's dean Dermot Dunne in Dublin.

CO: Dean Dunne, first of all, what does it mean to you and the cathedral to have this heart back?

DERMOT DUNNE: Words can't really describe the emotion that is felt by the heart being back at the cathedral. We're overjoyed. And for six years I was always conscious that the heart was taken during my watch as Dean in the cathedral and I was worrying that I was going to leave the cathedral with that mark that a precious item had gone from the Cathedral. The fact that this is back is so wonderful and especially when I'm still dean at the cathedral it feels so right for me.

CO: How did it come to be stolen back in 2012? I understand it’s been there since — it’s been in cathedral since the 13th century. So what happened in 2012?

DD: In 2012 two people, I think it was all premeditated. They knew what they were looking for. They knew exactly where it was. I think it was planned. They came in at a time when the cathedral was quiet and from the staff of the cathedral were going about their work. They caught their moment. They had wire cutters with them. They opened the cage and where the relic was and just took it out, put it in the rucksack and took off.

CO: That was in 2012. Where did police find the relic?

DD: They never told me where they found it, they just said that they had found it in their field, buried in a field somewhere around Dublin. But it was reported on our national news that it was found in our local city park, the Phoenix Park, which is quite a large park in the centre of Dublin.

CO: I mean, why would somebody want to steal this relic?

DD: I was expecting that people were going to look for ransom. From an economic point of view it's worthless, but some criminals would think that well maybe the tracks would pay money to have it back but we never got a direct request for that.

CO: Can you tell us a bit about the relic itself, the heart? This is of a saint of Laurence O'Toole. is it actually in a box. is it in some kind of a container?

DD: The heart itself is enclosed in a a metal heart-shaped chamber and that's encased in a metal cage. Now the story of the heart is that Laurence O'Toole, who died, I think in 1160, he died on his way through Rome. He died in a place called Eu in northern France and he was buried there. But they took his heart and brought it back to Dublin, his beloved Dublin. And it was placed in the cathedral, which he built himself as the second Archbishop of Dublin. And it has been there for the last 800 years.

CO: Until these people broke in and stole it?

DD: Yes. And it was quite devastating at the time. I was heartbroken when I realized that it had gone.

CO: Now that just a bit more about the saint himself. Is he associated with miracles? He was canonized very shortly after he died, wasn't he?

DD: He was canonized and 1225 by Pope Honorius II. Miracles would have been attributed to him because he wouldn’t have been canonized un less he

passed that test that miracles would be attributed to him. He’s quite significant and why it's significant for us is that we are a reform church, the Anglican Church. But this is a pre-reformation relic that was attached to a pre-reformation Cathedral. And what this relic does is that it unites tradition in Dublin, all traditions in Dublin because it is linked back to pre-reformation. And he being the second Archbishop of Dublin, he really set fire to Christianity in Dublin. And building the Cathedral was building a solid heart of Christianity in Dublin. And that's why it's so significant.

CO: It’s so significant to have his heart at the heart of it?

DD: Yes. And we call ourselves as a cathedral, ‘The Spiritual Heart of Dublin.’

CO: What have police told you about who stole it? Do they know? Any charges yet?

DD: No, they haven't charge anything yet. They said their investigations are ongoing. I have to say I'm not asking any questions because I'm just happy that the heart is back. I let the police do their own work and whatever comes of that is their business.

CO: And is it in good condition?

DD: It is. They looked after it well. It's not damaged. It seems to have been put into a plastic bag and buried in the ground. But it's still fully intact.

CO: Well it sounds like another miracle has happened that you got it back.

DD: I'm amazed, even though I kept up hope all the time, I am really amazed that it is back. It is incredible that after six years it should be returned.

CO: The saint is still doing his work, I guess.

DD: I guess so.

CO: Dean Dunne, it's good to speak with you. I'm glad you got your relic back. Thank you.

DD: Thank you very much. Thank you. All the best to you.

CO: The very reverent Dermot Dunne is the dean of Christ Church Cathedral in Dublin. And that is where we reached him. And if you'd like to see photographs of the relic, that has now been returned, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient Synth]

Uranus Follow Up

JD: Gustav Holst's Uranus, the magician. Now as we have learned this week here Uranus, as we very much enjoy calling it, is kind of a magician. It's two biggest tricks are producing a horrible stench and then starting a heated debate about that horrible stench. A quick recap — on Tuesday Carol spoke with Professor Patrick Irwin of Oxford University. Professor Irwin told us about the discovery of hydrogen sulfide in your Uranus atmosphere. Hydrogen sulfide stinks like rotten eggs, or as we and other media giddily reported — like farts. And then we get an email from San Francisco chemical engineer Chauncey Hare, who flat out rejected flatulence. Chauncey wrote “Flatus is a decomposition product of carbon based compounds such as carbohydrates in the bowel. There is essentially little or no sulphur in foods that could end up in hydrogen sulfide. Good luck on better fact checking next time.” Ouch. Apparently we had failed due to false fart facts. What a humiliating reason for a 50-year-old radio program to be canceled. And then we got this note from Ryan Bloom of Victoria B.C., which begins quote “The American chemist who wrote you may know some of his chemistry but not his biology. There are numerous sulfur-rich foods and there are those most known for causing awful smelling flatulence. Yes — fart-related vindication. And then after enumerating all the foods rich in sulphur Mr. Bloom continues quote “It takes very low concentrations of hydrogen sulfide gas in flatulence to set people running, or at least blaming the dog. And indeed the worst smelling flatulence, as most people probably would concur, is that which contains hydrogen sulfide gas. Your chemist should speak to a biologist or a gastroenterologist or just consult Google before tossing such accusations your way.” Thank you so much for writing Mr. Bloom, and thank you for nothing Uranus your reek is wreaking havoc around here.

[Music: Luau]

Back To Top »

Part 2: Lobster fisherman, Leg amputation dancer

Lobster fisherman

Guest: Carl Allen

JD: Lobster fishermen are concerned that new rules to protect whales may also threaten their livelihoods. After 18 North Atlantic right whales were killed last year, the government announced new restrictions on rigging and equipment for lobster and crab fishermen. That included the closure of some fishing grounds off New Brunswick and temporary restrictions in areas where whales are spotted. Well today, Lobster fishermen held an emergency meeting with Federal Fisheries Minister Dominic LeBlanc about the new rules. Carl Allen was there. Mr. Allen is a fisherman. He is also the president of the Maritime Fishermen's Union. We reached Carl Allen in Moncton.

CO: Mr. Allen, what was your takeaway from the meeting with the Fisheries Minister today?

CARL ALLEN: You know, I mean, our takeaway is that he's steadfast in his position on some of the regulations and rules for the fisheries. I mean, he completely heard us out, we made our case for why we think we're in the right direction here. He made his case for why he thinks the decision he has taken is the right one. We just have to respectfully disagree.

CO: So what's, in your mind, what do you think is the worst case scenario about how these rules could affect lobster fishermen?

CA: So worst case scenario on the lobster fishery is the dynamic closures close significant portions of our area where whales have never normally been present. They've never, you know, we can't say this enough times that there's never been a North America right whale killed in Canadian lobster gear in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. But because the whole map isn't drawn out into square blocks we're just arbitrarily closing. So you could have a couple of hundred fishermen that end up losing their season. You know, I made the comment earlier, you know, you go into downtown Toronto tomorrow and you tell 200 small businesses that we're going to close half your year for reasons that are hard to understand and don't make common sense to them. How do you think that they would react?

CO: But he says — now this is what the minister is saying —this is a quote. “We recognize it may cause an inconvenience for these fishermen to have to perhaps go to other areas.” He's suggesting that they can go elsewhere to catch their lobsters.

CA: Well, it's I don't think it's quite that simple. And inconvenience is a very well-chosen word. But, you know, let's look at the two fisheries so start with snow crab where really the first impact was, because obviously it was snow crab gear that the whales are being entangled in. There is a real fear right now within the snow crab fleet that the static closure that was announced April 28, which starts tomorrow, is actually going to lead to a right whale entanglement because as it stands right now there's no whales in the Gulf because these fishermen are displaced. Now they're crowded with other fishermen, which means a gear density is going to be higher, the catch rate is going to be lower. Therefore the season is going to be longer. So there's a genuine fear within the snow crab industry that that some of these decisions that were taken may actually lead to a right whale entanglement. And in the lobster industry you have to displace fishermen onto their neighbours — there's only so much geography to work with. And, again, you're going to have gear densities that are higher. The more we stay spread out the better we all do.

CO: Now you mentioned the snow crab fishermen, and, as you know, snow crab fishermen are feel that they are part of the problem and they want to be part of the solution. But you're saying the lobster fishermen do not see themselves as part of the problem for the whales?

CA: Yes. And the lobster industry it feels like — not that we don't want to do anything. There's still gear measurements that are affecting the lobster industry with float rope and the amount of traps you can have on a line. And we accept that all that stuff, even though we don't see the logic on how the whole Gulf of St Lawrence suite of fisheries are all getting painted with a set of regulations based on right whale problems in the snow crab fishery, but we were willing to accept a lot of this and do our part. It's just we feel that these closures and potential closures just — where's the common sense. The boys, I can't make them see the common sense in the decisions that have been taken.

CO: As you are mentioning last year and what happened in that, which has led to all these changes that 18 North Atlantic right whales were killed in Canadian and U.S. waters last year. And a number of them were entangled in fishing gear. And what we heard from the Minister today is that he says the reality is the whales don't distinguish between a rope attached to crab traps or a rope attached to a lobster traps.

CA: No, when they encounter it. There has never been a record it right whale entanglement in Canadian lobster gear in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. It's never happened.

CO: Has it happened elsewhere, anyplace else?

CA: Yes, it's happened, it's a problem in the U.S. and it's funny how the U.S. likes to paint us — I think it's part of a diversion plan to detract from their own problem.

CO: But you're saying that the problem you have is that the restrictions that they're now going to put on lobster fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence is a problem? You feel that it's excessive and unnecessary?

CA: Well, I'll use the analogy: It's like killing mosquitoes with a ten pound sledgehammer. Yup you killed the mosquito. You know, chances are if you close a lobster zone there will be no right whale entanglements in lobster gear if there's no lobster gear there. But do you need to be that forceful and that heavy and that excessive? No I don't think so personally. You know, this is not the first crisis that the fishing industry on the East Coast has faced. And in the past the way we got out of crisis is the most efficient way is to tackle it from a logical standpoint and take common sense solutions to fix real problems. There's an absolute fear and I understand, you know, the Minister has a sincere fear that if we do entangle a right whale this year that the U.S. might possibly close the border to all Canadian seafood products, which is debatable. But that's also a unique world we find ourselves in where you don't know what Washington is going to do one day to the next, right? So there's that real uncertainty. We understand the minister’s arguments. We just respectfully disagree.

CO: All right, we'll leave it there Mr. Allen. We'll be following this story. Thank you.

CA: Thank you so much.

CA: Carl Allen is the president of the Maritime Fishermen's Union. We reached him in Moncton.

[Music: Ambient Bass Tones]

Vancouver Police Sexual Assault Apology

JD: It happened one night two years ago on a street in East Vancouver. Catherine Francioli was walking home when she says a man knocked her to the ground, pinned down and attempted to sexually assault her. She got away, thankfully, and called 911 — but afterwards she ended up filing a complaint against police. Talking about her experience, Ms. Francioli says she felt like she was quote “Screaming into the darkness and no one was calling back.” unquote. Well now Vancouver police have issued an apology to Ms. Francioli. At a meeting yesterday, officials said that while the investigation was taken seriously communication was poor. Also yesterday Catherine Francioli spoke with the CBC. Here's some of what she said.

SOUNDCLIP

CATHERINE FRANCIOLI: I had to pursue pretty much every step of my case. I had to call him every time, with the exception of them calling me to say that they had a DNA match the initial time, or for the first piece of evidence that they submitted — that was the only time that I really got a call from him that didn't have me calling him beforehand and leaving a message or trying to contact him in some way. But I feel like that's — it's not that my case is cookie cutter in the sense that this is what happens to every woman, but what most often happens with most sexual assault victims that I've met is that there is this level of disappointment or offence or no conclusion to their case. And when I got to experience mine first firsthand, I started to see why. I was just like there's nobody here, there's nobody to talk to. And the system that they're using right now, whether it's forensics or just general investigation, it's slow. And it's slow enough that I think that a lot of these cases might get lost in the mix like mine definitely did. Today in the meeting, and also in the review that they wrote, they kept saying in two months, we did everything in two months. That's actually not true. It took, apparently, four months for them to get the DNA results back. It took six months for me to do a photo lineup. And that photo lineup only happened because I called them to find out my results a month after they were in to find out that there was a negative one. Snd I told them, I said I haven't even done a photo lineup and they said oh well you know those are unreliable and we we're not going to do that and I was like OK. And then the next day they call me and my old detective is like oh ‘Do you want to do a photo lineup?’ And it was like ‘Yes I do’ but it's six months later and it was far too much time has passed and it didn't work.

JD: That was Catherine Francioli speaking with the CBC yesterday about the response she received from Vancouver police after an attack in 2016. No charges were ever filed in her case.

[Music: Ambient Tones]

Leg amputation dancer

Guest: Amelia Eldred & Michelle Yardley-Eldred

JD: Not long before her seventh birthday a young dancer with dreams of performing on stage received a devastating diagnosis. Doctors had discovered a 10 centimetre tumor in her left femur and the tumor did not respond to chemotherapy. Doctors told her and her parents that the limb would need to be amputated — but they did have a solution to help the child maintain her mobility. They would remove the central part of her leg and then attach her lower leg to her thigh backwards so that her ankle and her heel could be used as a knee. When she later uses a prosthetic. Amelia Eldred is that seven-year-old dancer Michelle Yardley Eldred is her mom. We reached them in Kingsbury, U.K.

CO: Amelia, how are you doing?

AMELIA ELDRED: Good.

CO: How has it been since your operation, you had that three months ago?

AE: Yeah, it’s been really good.

CO: How does your leg feel?

AE: It feels different, but not different. It’s hard to explain.

CO: So maybe your mum can explain? Michelle what can you tell us about this operation and how it's different, but not different?

MYE: Well she had to have the leg fully amputated, but to enable her to be able to have a prosthetic they saved the lower part of her leg from below the knee and then rotated it 180 degrees and reattached it. So now she’s got what was her calf as her thigh and her heel will be used as a knee for when she gets a prosthetic leg. So the difference is she feels the leg and she's got full range of movement, which is amazing. But I think the different bit she’s on about is because her foot is the wrong way round, at the moment she's retraining her brain to move to the direction she wants because she's trying to move it to the left but because her brain is used to her foot being the other way round — instead of going left now it’s going right, if you understand what I mean.

CO: I do. Amelia, what's that like to deal with?

AE: It’s weird.

CO: Does it take some getting used to?

AE: Yeah, it really is.

CO: And what does it look like?

AE: Well it looks like the bottom half is the wrong way around.

MYE: You have to concentrate really hard, don’t you?

AE: Yes.

MYE: Explain, Amelia, the game that we do.

AE: There’s this game and Mom says a direction and I have to point my leg in it. Every time she says left, I go right, and every time she says right I go left. I have to keep practicing.

CO: So you have to train your brain to do to do the opposite of what it used to do?

AE: Yep.

CO: Wow, that's hard.

MYE: Yes. She’s just getting used to it and I get it to close her eyes sometimes and we practice it that way so that her brain is being retrained.

CO: Michelle, how did you feel when the doctors suggested that your daughter have this operation?

MYE: Well, the first that suggestion — we were hoping first of all that they would save her leg and do limb salvage and be able to place a rod where the tumor had been. But after two rounds of chemotherapy the tumor hadn’t shrunk and then we were told it have to be full leg amputation. They have to allow for any damaged tissue around the tumor. And that, first of all, was the only option we thought we had. And then we went and saw and the surgeon at the hospital and he gave us a second option — the second choice of this rotationplasty and we went away to think about it and researched it, looked it up and saw some amazing people that had had it done mainly in other countries than in the U.K. and it was just — the option to be able to say that this will enable you to get a prosthetic leg to go on and dance, climb and do all the things you used to do, ride bikes. It was just that the best solution we saw.

CO: Amelia, what did you think of this solution?

AE: It was amazing.

CO: So did you think if you had the surgery that you'd dance again?

AE: Yeah.

MYE: Yeah, that’s what she want to do.

CO: And not just dance but all kinds of things.

MYE: Yes. There are many things that she used to do. So she said she can't wait to be active again doing gymnastics, acrobatics, riding a bike, climbing. She was a very active child, so to be able to do all that again would be amazing.

CO: And that means being able to be fitted with a prosthetic limb that would be attached to the ankle joint, right?

MYE: Yeah, the ankle joint then because it's facing the wrong way it would work a knee joint. So she'll be like a lower limb amputee and she'll be also have a lot more range of mobility and hopefully we’re hoping to get all different legs to and enable her to do all these different sports and things that she wants to do.

CO: And plus having her own joint, it’s her own, not an artificial knee, it's going to be her joint doing the action.

AE: Yeah, her joint doing all the work.

CO: Really extraordinary. Amelia, when you had the operation, when they removed the tumor, were you happy to say goodbye to that?

AE: I was happy.

CO: Do you remember what you said? Because I read that you had something to say to your tumor before you had it removed.

MYE: Just as she had the anesthetic she said “Goodbye, tumor.” And then as soon as she woke up she feels changed into a catchphrase of “Goodbye tumor, see you loser.”

CO: What an amazing girl. Amelia, can I ask you something?

AE: Yeah.

CO: Now I understand that you were reading about another girl who was a dancer just like you and she had the same operation, whose name is Gabby? What did you think about her?

AE: Well, she's just amazing.

MYE: Yes she was fascinated that she takes off ballet foot to put on different like ballet shoes. The video that’s online is what we showed her when we were trying to explain the surgery she could have. And we weren’t sure how she’d react, but as soon as she saw that video, she literally said “Wow, that's amazing.” That was it, she wanted to be able to be like Gabby.

CO: Amelia, why did you think Gabby was so amazing?

AE: Because she dances like me and one day I’ll be able to do that like her.

CO: I think you probably will and a lot more, you know. Can I say one thing to you?

AE: Yeah.

CO: Not a question, I’m going to tell you something. I think you're amazing.

AE: Yeah, lots of people say that.

CO: They're right.

AE: Thank you.

CO: You're very welcome. Amelia, thank you for speaking with us, and I wish you all the success in your career as a dancer.

AE: Thank you. Bye.

CO: Michelle, thank you so much.

MYE: Thank you.

CO: All right. Bye.

MYE: Bye.

JD: That was seven-year-old Amelia Eldred and her mom Michelle Yardley-Eldred. We reached them in Kingsbury, U.K. And if you would like to see some photographs of Amelia and her new leg go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

Back To Top »

Part 3: Hot Docs: "The Feeling of Being Watched" feature interview

Hot Docs: "That Feeling You're Being Watched" feature interview

Guest:

JD: After 9/11, the FBI subjected a Muslim community in a suburb of Chicago to what it called "Operation Vulgar Betrayal". Algerian-American filmmaker Assia Boundaoui is the director of a new documentary, called "The Feeling of Being Watched", which chronicles the extensive surveillance to which she and her neighbours were subjected.

CO: Assia, first of all, welcome to the As It Happens studio.

ASSIA BOUNDAOUI: Thank you so much for having me.

CO: Your documentary begins with one of your own encounters with the FBI when you were just a teenager. Can you describe that night and how you felt?

AB: I remember we had you just moved into a house down the block from where I grew up. And it was a was a new block and they had just put in some of the light poles and electric poles and all that construction was happening during the day. And I remember late at night —my bedroom window face the street — and seeing like lights shining into the bedroom window and being really startled and looking out the window and seeing an unmarked van and men in like a utility truck working on the light pole. And I was confused as to why that was happening in the middle of the night and really worried why are these guys out here on this ladder doing something with the light pole in the middle of the night? And I went to my mother's bedroom and I woke her up and I said “This is happening outside the window. What should we do, should we call the police?” My mother was not at all startled and she said you know “Don't worry, it's not a big deal. It's probably just the FBI go back to bed.”

[LAUGHTER]

CO: That moment at the beginning when your mother casually tells you that, did you have any idea the degree to which your community was under surveillance and that everybody knew?

AB: It was something that was so ubiquitous that, you know, it was just part of our daily lives and it would interfere in our daily lives in this way that almost seemed normal. It was such a part of the way we grew up, it was normalized — we would see cars parked on the end of the street. So it was just the way we grew up. Like some kids grow up being warned not to talk to strangers because their parents are afraid of them getting kidnapped, like our parents were afraid of the FBI and we were warned not to talk to the FBI and to be careful. And so it was just, you know, I don't remember anyone ever telling me we were under surveillance or the FBI suspects us, it was just something I always knew.

CO: At what point did you learn about this operation, ‘Operation Vulgar Betrayal?’ The name alone is — when you discover that is the name of an operation of investigation in your own community it must be horrifying. What point did you learn that actually existed?

AB: I started by going door to door and sort of getting people's anecdotal stories in my neighbourhood. There were stories people had whispered but not really talked out loud about and I wanted to collect everyone's witness testimony. And I thought these anecdotal stories were important. And then I wanted to understand how these stories are connected. What actually happened here? What was the FBI officially up to in our community? I started by going to the library and going through microfilm and doing research online. And I happened upon the name of the investigation ‘Operation Vulgar Betrayal’ that started in Chicago in the 90s and went on for more than a decade. And the name alone was startling to me. You know, I mean, how do you name an investigation Vulgar Betrayal? You've already decided that these people are traitors, that they've betrayed their country. And that's the premise that you're entering into that investigation on. What kind of investigation really is it? And knowing and learning the name was just the beginning of understanding this very complicated investigation that really was premised mostly on profiling, profiling of this religious and ethnic community.

CO: And what were they looking for?

AB: They were looking for terrorism. It was terrorism a financing investigation. They made the assumption that all of our institutions — our mosques, our charities, our schools — were basically just one big front for terrorism, that they were raising money and sending money abroad for terrorism financing. You know, after 12 years of investigation, more than that in fact, not a single person was ever convicted of anything related to terrorism in my community. They never found that any of these charities were doing what they suspected or these mosques were doing what they suspected. And yet these investigations continued and persisted way longer than they ought to. And that was because of 9/11. So, you know, in 2000 they were realizing that there was nothing really coming out of these investigations. They haven't found the evidence that they suspected and they were in the process of wrapping them up and closing the investigations and then the 9/11 attacks happened and the environment, the atmosphere in the country changed and they reopened these failed investigations and they continued for another decade.

CO: It's interesting that your community in Bridgeview, Illinois is predominantly Palestinian. And that's they were looking for connections to the Palestinian community to the Middle East. Is that what your sense was?

AB: That was part of it. At first that was the premise, that because the community is predominantly Palestinian American this was — these investigations started in 1993 around the time of the first intifada — that this had something to do with that. But, in fact, while I continue to dig and when I started to get documents from the FBI about these investigations, I found that in fact it began in 1985. Eight years before there was an investigation that started looking at the Muslim Student Associations, which are the organizations at universities and colleges — student organizations, and looking at you know the largest American Muslim organizations in the country starting in the 80s. And that was way before the Palestinian conflict had come to a head. So it was more than just Palestine, it was just the suspicion of immigrants, Muslim organizing and institutions in the country and just kind of blanket suspicion of all of them.

CO: But is there, just I mean, obviously it's a huge net they put out. We'll get into how intrusive and invasive this was into your lives. But at the same time was there no premise on which this was based? I mean there is money that they suspect is being funneled into terrorist organizations from Canada and the United States. I mean, was there no premise in which you think this was based?

AB: I think there was a premise in at least the investigation that started in 1993-1996, the premise was there is all of this activity, geopolitical events that are happening in Palestine and Israel, and we need to look at the communities abroad in the diaspora that are collecting money and sending money back home. And that's something immigrant communities do everywhere. They're concerned with their families that they left back home. They're concerned with the events happening in those places and they raise money for humanitarian causes for those places and that's actually something that is characteristic of our community — that has always been the case that immigrant communities do that. That they started looking at it as something suspicious that was part of the premise and started in the 90s.

CO: And after 9/11. I mean, what I'm getting at is that there is money that does go back to organizations who are sponsors of terror. And, as we know, the biggest victims of terrorism in the world are Muslims in other countries. So this, especially after 9/11, there was a lot of that kind of look. So do you think that that was the baseline? That there was some ok they maybe should have been looking for something, but it was how they did it and who they did it?

AB: I think that was a part of it. I think that also though, terrorism financing investigations are based on a false premise. They’re based on the premise that terrorism costs a lot of money and that you need international donors to sponsor it. But, in fact, what we know about terrorism, it's very localized, doesn't cost very much money and it's usually raised very, very locally. So what the FBI was doing in this time was using a mafia model of organized crime, chasing the money. And they started applying that to terrorism. Whether that was effective, many people have written about that that actually is not an effective way to chase terrorism at all, that it's very hard to trace the money and there's not that much money involved that's being raised for terrorism in any case. So I think the premise itself, on these terrorism financing investigations, were flawed.

CO: But the effect was to intimidate people?

AB: I mean, my conclusion was that yeah, when you put such a large and wide net around an entire community, that the effect is that is that. People feel threatened, they feel targeted and they don't understand why. And the long term effects of that are hyper-paranoia, are fragmentation of trust within a community, the networks that hold the community itself are now under suspicion and under the limelight and so people stop associating, people stop donating to those organizations. People felt safer not going to the mosque if there was so much heat on the mosque and staying home. So it's really had a very chilling effect in our community that people were afraid to associate or afraid to talk to each other about what was going on because you didn't know if perhaps your neighbour was an informant or had they talked to the FBI. And so what it does to a tight-knit community is it goes after the foundations of the connections, of the relationships between people. And that starts to fragment. And that was really — that was the most detrimental impact that these investigations have had on us.

CO: You're listening to as it happens and I'm speaking with Assia Boundaoui. She's the director of a new documentary film called "The Feeling Of Being Watched," which just made its international premiere at the Hot Docs Film Festival in Toronto. Assia, you were describing how people were so afraid to talk about this and you were teasing this out, that you wanted them to know. But then you took the next step you say OK what we need to do is to now go to the FBI and say “What are you up to? I want the documents. I want to know everything you've been looking at.” And that's where you began your first investigation was your own community to know the extent to which this existed and then to actually take that to the FBI and say I want to know what you're up to. How did you go about that?

AB: Well, there's a unique law in the United States, I think they have a similar one in Canada, called the Freedom of Information Act — the FOIA — which grants the public access to government records. And you can ask for government records on yourself and on your family and on your community. So I'm a journalist and what I wanted really was to find hard evidence that would validate or invalidate the stories that I was hearing in my community. And I started by trying to reach first person sources. I reached out to dozens of FBI agents trying to get people to talk on the record. I had a few off the record meetings but, en masse, people wanted to distance themselves from this investigation, didn't want to talk on the record about it. So my next step was to try to find primary documents that would speak to this. So I started to file Freedom of Information Acts. And I thought like okay people don't want to talk about this my only chance of finding out exactly what happened is to get the records themselves. And that was such a long process, long bureaucratic process, basically took years from the moment I filed the first Freedom of Information Act to the moment that I got the first document. And, in fact, I ended up having to sue the FBI in federal court to get these records in an expedited manner.

CO: You did, I think, the impossible from the filmmakers point of view, is that you made documents look dramatic. You had tables covered with tens-of-thousands of pages of documents that you finally got after you wrested out of control — had to pry it out of their fingers and you had all these things, these stickies all over the walls and everything. And it's just when you start to put it together like that in the rooms that you took over and put it in your Mum's house I think, it is extraordinary what you start to put together. Can you describe what you began to understand about the degree to which your community was under surveillance?

AB: Sure. So, basically the FBI admitted to having 33,123 pages of records about the surveillance of my community in this investigation ‘Operation Vulgar Betrayal.’ And, you know, it's not — there is no one document that has all of the answers in it. And I think maybe in the beginning I was looking for that one, you know, the red flag that would show that what the FBI did was so clearly wrong that they had violated our rights. I realized eventually getting all of the documents said it was a picture that it was painting, all of these documents together. And they're heavily redacted, mind you. There are a lot of white holes in them. A lot of pages have been redacted entirely. So it's a lot of context clues that you have to take. But it was a picture that was becoming clearer and clearer the more documents I got. And that was just it was a picture of, essentially, the FBI thought there was a mass conspiracy that was happening among American Muslim institutions, all over the country, not just in Chicago that this conspiracy involved financing terrorism overseas. And there were there were hundreds of people's names on these lists. There were dozens of mosques and elementary schools, my elementary school was listed by name and these documents. They had like a parent-teacher conference like meetings, minutes for parent-teacher conferences in the file, like what is the parent-teacher conference at my elementary school — what does that have to do with this criminal investigation? So it was wild. Basically, they cast the net so far they collected thousands of pages of documents on law abiding citizens en masse. And the problem with that is these files exist in perpetuity in the FBI headquarters and they are shareable and accessible to dozens of other American agencies, intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies. So once you have a record it exists forever. And it's not an innocence collection of information, this information is collected with a very particular purpose and it doesn't go away, it stays. So what happens when you collect this much records on people? This is very scary and very dangerous that law abiding citizens have records like this in these agencies and that they will always exist there.

CO: As you pursued this investigation, as a journalist you are very open about it as one must be and transparent, but very sinister things began to happen to you. I mean, and you didn't know if you were just being paranoid, and often you asked the people are you just being paranoid or did you really think the FBI is watching you. And then you were going through the same things. What is going on? I feel that there is something spooky going on. And you didn't know if you're being paranoid. Tell us about some of these more sinister things that began to happen to you?

AB: I mean, we are we are making a film about surveillance while we were under surveillance essentially. And the deeper we got into the investigation, the deeper I got into the rabbit hole, the more paranoid I became. But I think justifiably paranoid, too. So, you know, at a certain point — and this happened exactly when I started reaching out to a lot of the FBI agents — I got to alert from Google. Google basically warned me that government attackers had hacked into my accounts, my Google drives, my e-mail, my calendar account and that I had been hacked. And that was shocking because usually you don't know you're under surveillance until after the fact. It's very rare that in the moment that it's happening you're alerted that it's happening.

CO: And that's possibly because they want you to know that

AB: Maybe. Yeah. And this is kind of the theory that I come to at the very end, that all of this overt surveillance, you know, like there's nothing really secretive about it. This overt surveillance, maybe they wanted us to see them. Maybe they parked the cars down the street and they had this physical surveillance because they wanted us to see them? And this is sort of the conclusion I come to, that the paranoia we experienced was not an accidental effect. You know, perhaps that was the purpose, the purpose was to make people in the community paranoid, to rattle the cage and see if any criminals come out of the woodworks. And the question I ask is, what happens when you rattle the cage and there are no criminals inside? What does that do to the people in the cage? And I think that some of that paranoia, when there are cars parked in front of your house, when you see people taking photographs of you from the car, that that is intentional they want you to see them watching you. And that you know at a certain point your paranoia is as effective tool of control as the surveillance because you start monitoring yourself —you walk a different way, you talk a different way, you interact differently when you think people are watching you. And that in itself is a form of control.

CO: There is a scene, which happens while you're doing your investigation, where the police arrive in your community en masse, and not just police, armed police at night, in the dark — but they arrive with an armoured vehicle, a militarized vehicle that goes down the streets. And what was going, what was happening?

AB: At the time we were told — this happened in Ramadan — there were night prayers going on. So there were at least 2,000 people in the mosque that night. And suddenly, you know, we were at home and I heard helicopters outside and then saw two thought to and I said “Oh no, what's happening?” The first thing we assumed was — this was shortly after Trump was elected we thought maybe this was a hate crime, that people were coming to protest our existence or that we were under attack somehow. And then quickly we realized no that the presence is all police and it's like militarized police, what are they doing here? On the night of they told us this was a bank robbery and three men with assault rifles were loose in the community and that's why they needed that police presence. A lot of people questioned that story because there were no ambulances, there were no EMTs around. If there are people loose with assault rifles shouldn’t there be EMTs? And moreover, the police went and searched inside of a lot of people's houses and there weren't people home. There were young teens home at the time. There were no warrants and there were searches made of people's houses, allegedly searching for these bank robbers that were on the loose. The next day in the press they said the official response from law enforcement was this was not a bank robbery. I contacted both the FBI and the police asking them what was this. They said this is an active criminal investigation and we cannot tell you exactly what's going on. So given our experience with law enforcement in the community, a lot of people assume this was a drill. This is a drill for law enforcement to prepare for something happening when they would need to lock down the neighbourhood and search people's houses, or maybe this was just an excuse to get into certain people's houses. There is such a lack of trust of law enforcement that we had all types of rumors going around and nobody ever confirmed it to us. They came into our neighbourhood and did this and law enforcement never felt they had any obligation to explain to us what that was about. And this is, in my opinion, part of this way that they just treat our community. It's a lack of respect that they can just come sort of and do whatever they want. And that they can count on people not saying anything about it. And I think that is like very exemplary of the relationship our community, and Muslim communities in the U.S., have had with law enforcement in general, that there is just a lack of trust and they don't tell us anything and we assume the worst.

CO: I’m speaking with Assia Boundaoui and you're listening to As It Happens. We are talking about her new documentary film called "The Feeling of Being Watched," which is that the hot docs film festival in Toronto. Assia, your mother, who is, I think, the star of the show, she's the most amazing character, and she's just so — just these moments of insight. But she gets a visit, someone comes to the house and she calls you about it, something very spooky. Tell us about the man who came looking for you at your mother's house?

AB: So essentially the lead FBI agent on Vulgar Betrayal showed up at my mother's house shortly after we won our lawsuit against the FBI and came around asking for me and came to my mom's house and knocked on her door and talked to her looking for me and gave her a number for me to call, not an official FBI business card, just his name scribbled down on a post it note and gave it to my mom.

CO: Bob.

AB: Bob, just Bob. That was it. And so Bob and a phone number and immediately I was like I think this is, this was the lead FBI agent that is getting in touch with me.

CO: But he said something very odd to you in this phone call, which is that oh I didn't know you lived on that street, my old stomping grounds.

AB: Yeah.

CO: What does he mean by that?

AB: I mean, this is the lead FBI agent who conducted surveillance in this community, so he knew — he was back in the end the place where he conducted surveillance for decades.

CO: This is his workplace, it’s your home, this was street where you live, where all these people live and try to just carry on their lives. And for him this is his workplace.

AB: And mind you he has not been active like on ‘Vulgar Betrayal’ for more than 15 years. So he's an active FBI agent but he hasn't worked on this investigation. He was removed from this investigation for more than 15 years, so that he still feels ownership almost of this story, of my neighbourhood, of what I'm doing, was really wild to me that he wanted me to know that he knew what I was up to. And if that was meant to scare me away from what I was doing, it wasn't effective. And this whole film has been about process and about showing the journalistic process. This is not just about the result. It's about how we got there and what we needed to do to access the truth. And we felt that him showing up was part of that process and needed to be included in the film.

CO: The police depend on us, on citizens to help them. They turn to people for information to report on things. Do you think atany point that the police, the FBI, recognize that what they do is the opposite here. That the community you come from are people who are afraid of them? Your mother even says that the biggest effect here is fear. And that drives you in the not out. You don't trust them and they actually diminish their ability to do their jobs because of what they did in this community.

AB: Absolutely. I think it's just like plain and simple — constitutional rights aside, human rights aside — it's just not effective policing. It’s just not effective national security policies. Yeah, it was not effective what they did. And that if you want to be effective law enforcement you need to have a relationship of trust with the communities around you, that you need to be able to come in and say hey we're having this problem or actually count on people to say when there is a problem to come to you. And it creates a lot of other issues beyond terrorism. You know, there are domestic violence issues in the community, people don't call the police. You know, there are a lot of issues when we do need the police because, in fact, it's their obligation to protect us too, you know, not just to protect America from us — but to protect us. And so you have a lot of community issues, and I've talked to social service organizations in the community that talk about this, that it creates a lot of other issues within the community when you don't trust the police, when you don't feel you can call them. And that's a problem because, in fact, they're obligated to serve us as well.

CO: Have people in your community, have they seen your documentary?

AB: Some of them have. I showed it to my family and the people in the film before we finished.

CO: And how do you feel about it?

AB: It's kind of amazing, actually. I feel like they walked out of the screenings with their head held high in a way. This was a thing we whispered about, and I think also internalized a lot of shame about. When people when someone tells you you're bad, you're bad, you’re bad for such a long time, at a certain point you start to believe that and that becomes the way you look at yourself. And I think that we needed to say no there's no shame about this, to stop whispering and talk out loud about it.

CO: There's nothing to hide.

AB: There's nothing to hide, there's nothing to hide. And even though you're afraid you should talk out loud about it because it will help you be less afraid. So I think that there's a real healing that is happening around talking about this out loud, and taking this from the dirty little secret and putting it out in the public and making other people aware that had no idea things like this happen, in other communities, that this is happening and that if you experienced this you have nothing to be ashamed of and that, in fact, sharing your story and realizing it didn't just happen to you happened to her and her and him — that there is a power in that collective story. And I think that's what we're trying to do now get people to share these stories. And it validates their experience, in a way. People who just maybe thought I'm just crazy paranoid, it validated them. No, you're not paranoid, this did happen and it wasn't right. It shouldn't have happened.

CO: The film is "The Feeling of Being Watched". And if you get a chance to watch it you should because it's an extraordinary documentary. Assia, thank you so much for coming.

AB: Thank you so much for having me.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

April 27, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This