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 September 4, 2018

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

Prologue

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

JEFF DOULAS: Good evening. I'm Jeff Douglas and this is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight…

HM: Home free. They left their unsafe homelands and spent years waiting in Turkey to have their asylum claim accepted. And now finally a gay refugee couple is safe in Vancouver.

JD: Catching some waves. Remember the mysterious symptoms that afflicted North American diplomats in China and Cuba. Our guest says she's found the cause — microwave radiation.

HM: Slipping on the Bannon appeal. The New Yorker cancels a controversial live interview with former Trump adviser Steve Bannon. But The Economist says he will still be a guest at its public event — our guest says she won't be.

JD: 50 years is such a fun age. We're celebrating the half-century mark in the traditional fashion — buying gold microphones and creating an online timeline goes all the way back to 1968.

HM: As a stop, it's a non-starter. There are four contenders left for worst bus stop in North America. And even if you've got the fare, the one in B.C. is seriously no fair.

JD: And…Goody, two shoes. The FBI held a press conference to announce the recovery of a pair of those sparkly ruby slippers from The Wizard of Oz, which were stolen from a museum more than ten years ago. As It Happens: The Tuesday Edition. Radio that understands the sequins of events.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Gay refugee couple, New Yorker: Steve Bannon, Worst bus stop

Gay refugee couple

Guest: Alireza and Kiran

JD: Alireza and Kiran can finally breathe a little bit easier. We've told you their story before. They are a gay refugee couple. They've been waiting for years in limbo in Turkey for a country to accept their asylum claim. Last week, they finally touched down in Vancouver. It is the end of a long and stressful saga for the couple. They had originally fled their home countries of Iran and India and had filed for asylum in the United States only to be rejected when the travel ban came down. And when a group of private sponsors in Vancouver heard their story they set into motion a plan to sponsor the couple. And now at last they are safe and sound in Vancouver, which is where we reached Alireza and Kiran, whose full identities we are protecting because their family and friends still do not know they are gay.

HM: Alireza and Kiran, welcome to Canada.

ALIREZA: Hi. Thank you so much.

HM: So when you first landed in Vancouver last week Alireza, what was the moment like for you?

A: It was like the greatest moment I experienced in the last many years of my life. Slowly, I’m trying to still digest the feeling like to be free finally and safe here.

HM: Kiran, what about for you?

KIRAN: Yes, it's the same thing for me. After what we went through it was the best day of our lives. And then we learned it was real, we already felt home, we already felt safe.

HM: Alireza, when we spoke with you earlier this summer you were in dire straits. Turkish authorities were forcing you and Kiran to live in separate cities. Kiran needed to move to Istanbul for mental health treatment. And you were not permitted to join him. Here's what you said at the time. Let's listen.

SOUNDCLIP

A: We both are actually in the same state since we have got the news and we really don't know what to do. If they separate us the worst thing that going to happen. We actually came to Turkey and we sought asylum in this country we left the persecution in our country just to live together and we only have each other’s support and this separation will break us.

HM: Alireza how does it feel to hear yourself describe the situation like that just a few months ago?

A: Well, it was a really, really bad and hard time because we were stuck in this situation which we had no clue how to solve it. So it was a really, really bad time. And I feel so happy that Canada and the beautiful people of Canada, they helped us to get out of that situation.

HM: In fact, after the conversation you had with Carol you ended up getting the incredible news from the Canadian consulate in Ankara. Tell me about that call?

A: I don't know how to describe my feeling when I received the call that I was being called for the interview with the embassy and I was in tears. I mean, after we disonnected the call I was standing in the same place and I couldn't control my feelings for more than half an hour. I was just speechless and I didn't know what to say or how to react because I really didn't expect that to happen. And it was the greatest thing that happened for us and it kind washed off all our bad feelings which has happened because of the problems we face.

HM: Tell me about your interactions with the people at the consulate? What did they say to you? How did that go?

A: The interview went very, very well. The officer at the consulate, she was a really, really kind person. She really listened to our problems. And she even informed us about our rights, that in Canada we would be even able to be safe together and nobody is going to separate us anymore and we can be safe.

HM: Kiran, what about for you? As this was all happening, tell me what was going through your mind?

K: We were happy at the same time we really had a lot of concerns as to what is going to happen next. How long will it take.

HM: But then at the same time just after this you were also called in, as I understand it, for questioning by Turkish immigration authorities. What happened there?

K: Yes, unfortunately I had to go to the migration office every week for my attendance. They gave me an appointment for an interview and they told me that my situation would be assessed and, you know, they see if I can stay in Turkey or deport me.

HM: So they were threatening to deport you?

K: Yes. I told them I am a UNHCR recognized refugee but they said we don't consider that certificate. I was being intimidated by the officers and he was putting words in my mouth and he was trying to make me say something which he could use it against me.

HM: Why do you think you were singled out?

K: The migration police in Turkey is used to harassing refugees and they are not used to somebody fighting for their rights. And when I wanted to transfer to Istanbul for my treatment I gave them on the papers required and I completed all the documents which were needed. They were troubling me and they wanted me to give up, but I did not. So it seems they had a grudge against me.

HM: How did you end up getting on that plane to Vancouver then?

K: Luckily we had the IOM representatives at the airport. They helped me through and I did create some problems for not having that Turkish ID, which the migration police had taken back from me. And the IOM representatives at the airport they helped me.

HM: Alireza, tell me about those moments right after that plane lifted off the ground?

A: We were not sure if we really are going to leave that country finally and be away from all those problems and harassment and discrimination we face there. So we were holding each other’s hand and we were so happy that we are really, really leaving. And the flight took off so we kind of had a sigh of relief that we are leaving Turkey and we are going to the beautiful country of Canada and be with their beautiful people who gave us this opportunity to be safe and together.

HM: And now you're in Vancouver. Kiran, what are your first impressions of the city?

K: It's amazing. It's a very beautiful city and I'm so lucky to be here. You know, I'm not just saying it, I am very lucky to be here in this beautiful city. And I have a lot of people — the sponsors who gave us a very warm welcome and they are very kind people and they are really taking great care of us.

HM: So Alireza, what's next for both of you?

A: Well, we are going to start making our life here and experiencing how it is to be free and together. And soon we are planning to do our arrangement to get married hopefully.

HM: Nice.

A: So that's part of our plan.

HM: Well, congratulations to you both. Maybe you'll let us know when you actually decide to tie the knot?

A: Thank you. Sure.

HM: I wish you the very best. We’re really happy that you're in Canada and that you're willing to share your story with us yet again.

A: Thank you so much. And we're really happy to be here and be among the beautiful people of Canada. Thank you.

HM: Bye-bye.

A: Bye.

JD: Alireza and Kiran are a gay refugee couple now living in Vancouver. We are protecting their full identities because their family and friends do not know that they're gay. To learn more about this case and our coverage of it go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient Acoustic Guitar Plucks]

New Yorker: Steve Bannon

Guest: Laurie Penny

JD: He was billed as the headliner of New Yorker magazine's flashy October festival and he was certainly a headline-grabbing guest — former Donald Trump advisor Steve Bannon. But that invitation caused an explosion of protest. And now the magazine has rescinded its invitation. That leaves another major magazine with its own Steve Bannon problem. The Economist has announced that it too will be interviewing Mr. Bannon as part of its Open Future Festival. And that has prompted British columnist and author Laurie Penny to announce that she is dropping out of that event. We reached Laurie Penny in London.

HM: Laurie Penny, why did you decide that you could not in good conscience appear at the same event as Steve Bannon?

LAURIE PENNY: Well Steve Bannon is somebody who is the architect in the Trump regime. He is what he calls himself an ‘economic nationalist’. His is what I would consider a fascist and what many people would consider a fascist depending on how you define that. I don't — in good conscience I can't appear at an event which would dignify a man like that with a platform. The Economist is a prestigious magazine with a long pedigree. And just by inviting him that sends a message that these ideas are worth debating, that they have some legitimacy, that, you know, that there's a question about them. And I don't think there should be a question. There are some people who merely giving them airtime gives them a win.

HM: You know, Steve Bannon is arguably one of the architects of a political movement that has become hugely influential, especially in the United States, helping elect the president right now. Why should people shy away from questioning him about the ideology he espouses and the power he's helped accumulate?

LP: Well, people should absolutely question him. People should hold them to account at every turn. And one of the ways of holding him to account is making it clear that you can't just enact these policies then walk away and then expect to be invited in and have people be polite to you in the halls of the liberal establishment. I think that is one way of holding a man like this to account. And, you know, I'm sure people will be questioning him for many years to come. I know that there are journalists investigating, working on all of these things, but dignifying him with a platform like this, with a public stage like this at The Economist or at the New Yorker — I don’t think it sends the right message at all.

HM: In terms of both The Economist and The New Yorker, the editors promised that they would challenge and question Mr. Bannon. And then these are people who are known to have journalistic rigor, who have the bondfides to challenge someone like Mr. Bannon. Could it not have been an illuminating exercise for you to hear the economist challenge him?

LP: Honestly, I don't — I'm not interested in hearing new arguments for fascism or for misogyny or for white supremacy. I don’t believe there are any arguments about misogyny or fascism or white supremacy. There are only new recruits. And new recruits are what people like Bannon, people like Trump get every time they are given publicity and given legitimacy. I'm all for journalistic rigor but this is not just a journalistic exercise. You know, this is people within the media — which also play a cultural role — giving a certain kind of cultural prestige to this man.

HM: So do you have a problem with The Economist or The New Yorker rigorously interviewing Mr. Bannon or is it because of the prestige of the event?

LP: It's the prestige of the event, mainly, honestly. Although, you know, I think there have been enough people like that. I have interviewed people in the far-right myself. There are some people who don't agree with that decision. I’m not somebody who says you should absolutely never try and understand where these people are coming from. I feel like having done a few interviews of this kind myself, I've got a pretty good idea. And I think, you know, we've heard a lot of these people, we've heard from them for four or five years. What challenges can possibly be brought? You know I challenge I would like to see rather than having him ask him endless questions expecting him to give pact answers about why you should claim racism as a badge of honour? Something he actually said, something Steve Bannon actually said to the Front National in France just the other day. Rather than challenging him, I would like to have him on the stage and play that recording of the kids being dragged away from their parents at the Mexican border. Just have him sit there and listen to it and try and explain you know he's a eco-nationalist dogma over that noise — that's the challenge I would like to see. I'll be totally up for that. Sorry. Turns out I'm angrier than I thought.

HM: I don't think you have to apologize for your anger.

LP: Sorry. Even on Canadian radio?

HM: even on Canadian radio. the editor in chief of The Economist has put out a statement defending the invitation to do your banner. And it says in part “The future of open societies will not be secured by like-minded people speaking to each other in an echo chamber.” Is there a danger in this call to disinvite Steve Bannon, that it plays into the idea that the left is an echo chamber that cannot, not only hear opposing views, but doesn't have the tools or information to challenge those views if it doesn't kind of get insight from the people who espouse them?

LP: Of course there is that danger and this is why people like bannered have left coming and going right now because there was, I really feel for The Economist. Honestly, I do and I didn't create this trouble for them. There was really good position they can take, right. If they don't disinvite then they seem to be they are dignifying a fascist with a platform. But if they do, then, you know, in some ways they are betraying their ideal of open debate solving everything, which I personally don't believe it does. I wish it did. I don't think it does. So, you know, honestly, there is one choice you can make which doesn't support a stereotype that the right wing have about the left. So rather than that why don't we just refuse to debate on those terms? Why not refuse to be on the defensive? And my way of doing that is just saying that I'm not even going to engage. I don't want to engage these people I don't want to give them airtime. There is absolutely a place for a vigorous debate for journalistic questioning. I'm not going to sit up there and pretend and be civil in the same forum as a guy like that.

HM: Ms. Penny, thank you very much for your time today. We appreciate it.

LP: It's a pleasure.

JD: Laurie Penny is a columnist and author. We reached her in London, U.K.

[Music: Electric Guitar Strums]

Worst bus stop

Guest: Jason Lee

JD: It is an annual race to the bottom with lots of stops. Each and every year Streets Blog, a website for those who are best described as transportation enthusiasts, runs the ‘Sorry Bus Top Contest.’ The site asks readers to submit what they believe is the worst, most dangerous, most dilapidated and least-accessible bus stop in America. This year a bus stop in Pitt Meadows, British Columbia was so appalling it not only made the cut, it made the top, or perhaps bottom four of the competition. Forget about a comfortable seating area. Forget about an enclosed space. It is a pole stuck into a concrete barrier at the side of a highway. Jason Lee is a concerned transit rider who exposed Translink bus stop numbers 61452. We reach Mr. Lee in San Francisco

HM: Mr. Lee, what does the bus stop and question look like?

JASON LEE: The bus stop is alongside a busy highway. There is a barrier maybe two thirds of a metre tall that people waiting for the bus have to climb over in order to reach the bus or they will have to wait on the highway side of the barrier directly exposed to traffic.

HM: And when you say highway, where? Where exactly is it?

JL: This is on Lougheed Highway, which is a major roadway that connects some of Vancouver's exurbs with the inner part of the Vancouver region.

HM: It sounds awkward at best.

JL: Yes.

HM: And dangerous?

JL: Yeah, very dangerous. Based on statistics from British Columbia, between 2004 and 2013, there were 33 fatal crashes along that roadway, which is the second highest in the province.

HM: Are there any openings in this barrier that people could just walk through?

JL: There is an opening about maybe 50 meters or so before the stop. But if people aren't waiting at the stop they might not have time to actually run and catch the bus. And there's a potential for the driver to not see the person waiting and just go right through without stopping.

HM: And I guess that the temptation might be to stand on the highway side to avoid that but then that would increase the risk.

JL: That's absolutely correct.

HM: What about for people who have disabilities? I mean, is that accessible at all?

JL: Not that I could tell. If someone uses a wheelchair they really have to use the side that's exposed to the highway and there isn't a lot of room for error there.

HM: Right. Do you know how long a stop has been like this?

JL: I have no idea. I do know that the province did a major replacement of the nearby Pitt River bridge, which is just down the road way from there. That was done in 2009. So presumably some of the stop’s design elements might have been dating back there, but I have no I don't know one way or the other.

HM: Do you know how much that project cost?

JL: Yeah that project, based on a press release from the ministry of transportation and infrastructure, cost $198 million.

HM: What do you think of the fact they were able to find the money for that repair but that this bus stop remains the way it is?

JL: You know, that's quite frankly, disappointing. I think it was, you know, just not a priority.

HM: You don't live in Pitt Meadows. In fact, you don't even live in Canada. What were you doing riding around Vancouver on city buses?

JL: I was attending a conference held by the American Public Transportation Association, an annual workshop they do to promote multi-modalism and sustainability. I had a day off prior to that conference and I wanted to explore the lower mainland area.

HM: Is this something you generally do when you travel, check out transportation systems?

JL: Along with other things, yeah, absolutely.

HM: So what makes you so passionate about public transportation?

JL: Well, public transportation is really a democratic way of getting around. It's open to all people regardless of their income status, gender identity, race, ethnicity, background — and really allows a diverse group of people to connect from their homes to places of employment, schools and other life opportunities.

HM: So as someone whose profession is in the public transportation sector you must have some design thoughts about this particular stop. What could be done to improve it?

JL: Well, first of all, I'm not a traffic engineer so I would defer to people in that area who might have a little bit more expertise than I do there. However, I would say that number one: there needs to be potentially an opening in that barrier so that people can wait on the safer side. Another thing is there needs to be better enforcement of the bus-only lane there. That bus-only lane is used by other private vehicles when it should not be. And I think that's part of the problem as those vehicles are speeding along there is a potential for them to have a collision with people waiting at that stop.

HM: So do you think British Columbians should be offended maybe that an outsider has shamed, whether intentionally or not, one of their bus stops?

JL: Well, I think British Columbia's actually should be quite proud of the TransLink transit system that operates in the Lower Mainland. It's one of the fastest growing transit systems over a couple decades now — and in fact, registered the highest ridership growth of any system in either the United States or Canada last year. Translink has really emphasized mobility not just in the Vancouver core but in the suburbs surrounding there. So I think they should be very proud. I think in this particular case though it does appear to be the exception to the rule. So no, I don't think they should be ashamed at all.

HM: Well Mr. Lee, thank you for your interest and also for sharing it with us. Thank you.

JL: Thank you very much.

HM: Okay. Bye-bye.

HM: That was concerned transit user and employee Jason Lee. We reached him in San Francisco. And if you'd like to see what this sorry bus stop looks like visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

AIH 50^th Anniversary

SOUNDCLIP

AUDIO MONTAGE OF FORMER AS IT HAPPENS HOSTS

CAROL OFF: I'm Carol Off.

JD: And I'm Geoff Douglas.

CO: Celebrating 50 years.

JD: Of As It Happens. As you may have heard on last night's program, this week marks the beginning of an autumn-long celebration As It Happens 50th anniversary. We've been on the air since 1968, and over five decades, according to our research, we have put on more than a zillion voices on the air. That research is ongoing but in the meantime to mark this milestone or kilometre stone in Canada we have put together a timeline of some of our most memorable interviews. You can find the interactive timeline on our website. That of course is www.cbc.ca/aih. And here is a taste of what you will find when you get there.

HM: For starters this is what it sounded like when cohosts Philip Forsyth and Harry Brown took to the air on November 18 1968 for As It Happens maiden voyage.

SOUNDCLIP

PHILIP FORSYTH: We’re going to rollercoaster across the country talking to you about different stories and ideas and we hope to be hearing back from you, the listeners, with some of your own ideas and views on the show.

HARRY BROWN: And we'll be rollercoastering as the phrase which our producer has coined this occasion and the other which we hope will follow it. But the end is five hours away.

PF: That's right. So stay with us As It Happens.

JD: Good Lord. That five-hour roller coaster ride complete with Doctor Who-esque theme music was a hit. Here's a more sobering conversation. This is from 11 years later, from January 9th of 1980, the Canadian Cancer Society's Bill Vigors speaking to former host Barbara Frum on the day Terry Fox announced his cancer had returned ending his Marathon Of Hope.

SOUNDCLIP

BV: He's the greatest person that ever met. He's a 22-year-old kid who's got more guts than anybody I've ever met in my life. Taught me a about life too. It’s hard to explain. It's been a fantastic two-and-a-half-months. It’s sad to see it end this way, but at the same time I really do believe the whole run to Terry was a dream. And maybe I’m a dreamer too, but I think it will go on forever.

HM: On any given night As It Happens might make you cry. Ideally, we’ll make you think. If you're a fan of puns we might even get a few laughs. But one thing is predictable, nothing is predictable. Like in 1976 when former host Barbara Frum a spoke with a British farmer who couldn't quite hear her question about his world record breaking giant cabbage.

SOUNDCLIP

BARBARA FRUM: What did you feed the god damn cabbage?

FARMER: I’ll send you a picture of it.

BF: I don't what a picture of it. I just want to know what you fed it.

FARMER: Huh? Pardon?

JD: Whether guests hear us or not As It Happens hosts do ask the tough questions. And as you peruse the timeline of the last five decades of this program you will find Carol's 2016 interview with Trumpettes USA founder Toni Holt Kramer proves it. Here's what it sounded like when Ms. Kramer tried to defend U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump after that audio recording in which he bragged about groping women without their consent.

SOUNDCLIP

TONI HOLT KRAMER: I'm not excusing it, it was terrible, but it was no more terrible than Hillary Clinton calling half of us who support Donald Trump deplorable.

CAROL OFF: So you think that's no different when he says that he will kiss women when he wants to, grab their genitals, grope them?

THK: I think it's tic-tac-toe, you know, it's like sticks and stones can break your bones, you know, but names will never hurt you.

HM: Just some of the many voices you'll find on our interactive timeline showcasing legendary interviews from 50 years’ worth of As It Happens. This week marks the beginning of an autumn-long celebration of As It Happens’ Fiftieth anniversary. To find the time line and more about the show's 50 years check out our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Microwave attacks, Dorothy's shoes

Microwave attacks

Guest: Beatrice Golomb

JD: An intensely loud buzzing, grinding or piercing squeal coming from a specific direction, followed by months of headaches, disorientation and trouble paying attention. Those were the markers of a mysterious ailment which struck down American and Canadian diplomats in Cuba and China between 2016 and 2017. The so-called ‘sonic attacks’ forced both governments to bring their people home early for fear that a third-party was purposefully targeting their personnel. No conclusive agent or weapon has been identified. Although various explanations have been suggested — including microwave weapons. And while a report released in March did not link the symptoms to microwaves, one researcher is now certain microwave electromagnetic radiation was indeed to blame. Beatrice Golomb is that researcher. She is a professor of medicine at the University of California San Diego.

HM: Professor Golomb, why do you believe microwaves might be behind these ailments that have been experienced by American and Canadian diplomats?

PROFESSOR BEATRICE GOLOMB: Well, the thesis rests on three pillars. The first relates to the peculiar sounds reported by diplomats and the experiences surrounding them. The second relates to the specifics of the symptoms reported. And the third relates to how fuses microwaves in embassy settings. So regarding the noises, the noises that were reported included chirping, grinding and ringing, exactly noises that are reported as part of what's called the ‘microwave auditory effect.’ The reason that sound differs from person to person or perceive sounds is because the microwave auditory effect perceptions relate not to the frequency of radiation, but to head dimensions as well as pulse characteristics. Different people have different head dimensions they perceive different things from the same source. The second point is that the sounds were heard primarily at night, which is consistent with knowledge that low ambient noise is necessary for this effect to occur. The third point is that some diplomats reported that within the territory in which they heard the sound it seemed to follow them as they walked. Fixed sound sources don't seem to follow people, but this microwave auditory effect, or Frey effect, does seem to follow people.

HM: Should we assume that if this does turn out to be due to microwaves that it is intentional? Is it necessarily weaponized microwaves?

BG: It doesn't have to be weaponized. The three possibilities are: weapons, surveillance devices — or I’ll include in the same category — counter surveillance devices. And the third would be actually, very unlikely in this case, innocent communications sources of the kinds that lead to these same health problems in some people in the civilian sector.

HM: If it turns out this was a weapon, how does it get targeted to affect a certain individual or group of individuals?

BG: In the same way that you would target a laser, right — based on the positioning of the emitting device relative to the individual. But again, I think my hypothesis would probably veer toward the surveillance end of things. It is well known that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow was microwaved from 1953 to the late 1980s or 1990s depending on the source. The U.S. engaged in shielding efforts related to that. Health problems were reported by diplomats. It was believed according to New York Times articles from 1976 or 74 that it had been bugging by Moscow but that Russia reported that what they were doing is trying to thwart our surveillance devices that were on the roof of the embassy.

HM: So you think that these diplomats in China and in Cuba may have suffered these consequences as a result of listening devices?

BG: I see no reason that's been reported to assume weaponry in favour of surveillance devices. What I have seen so far appears compatible with surveillance.

HM: What is the implication in terms of long term exposure to these kind of waves?

BG: Well, that's a good question. And actually Russia is well ahead of us in doing research in this area. And some Russian Studies from the 1970s in which they followed people who had occupational exposure to radio frequency microwave radiation, what they stated was that particularly for people whose effects were at least moderate, the most important thing in determining the long-term health course was avoidance of re-exposure.

HM: So people who have been exposed should not be in that situation again?

BG: Well, especially the ones who have at least moderate affects.

HM: I've read that it's much like someone experiencing symptoms of a concussion but having not had an actual head injury.

BG: Yes, aspects of that are very much like a concussion in both the diplomats and in quote ‘electro sensitive’ people in the civilian sector — imaging studies look like traumatic brain injury. It's also noted that at least a fraction of the individuals affected had prior head injuries. It turns out that both had injury and radiofrequency radiation cause injury in part by something called oxidative stress, the kind of damage that antioxidants help protect against.

HM: Cuba in particular has denied any role in weaponizing anything towards these diplomats. It doesn't appear…

BG: I mean, I think that you know a lot of people might be wondering whether Russia as opposed to Cuba might have involvement in this given their long history of doing research in this area and given the past microwaving of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow as well as their strong relationships with Cuba.

HM: Is the main evidence here that nothing else has turned up? I mean, it seems to take a long time to come to this conclusion.

BG: No, that is not the main evidence. Let me go back to the reason I was trying to get to the specific points about the sound characteristics is that it is not only the case that those with microwaves but they contradict other sources like sound. There was nothing else that fits that profile. There's not other sources of sound that follow people around the room, that are localized with laser-like specificity, that are heard only at night, that differ in character from person to person with those characteristics including chirpin,g ringing, grinding, buzzing etc. Additionally, the profile of symptoms matches strikingly with the profile of symptoms reported in people who have radiofrequency, what might be called radiowave sickness or microwave sickness — including tinnitus, dizziness, anxiety, nausea and with lower level problems including speech problems, balance problems, nose bleed etc.

HM: So given what you're saying, given the strength of the evidence that you're offering, why do you think other researchers didn't look at this possibility sooner? Because one of the injured diplomats his lawyer has said that he believed microwaves were responsible some years ago.

BG: One hypothesis would be that, you know, the multitrillion dollar industry and people aren't really excited about upsetting the apple cart. That's one hypothesis.

HM: And when you say multitrillion dollar industry, what?

BG: The telecom industry — the industry that uses microwave radio frequency radiation including pulse radiation.

HM: What do you hope your research will do in terms of protecting other diplomats overseas?

BG: If the correct cause is actually identified then mechanisms both for protection in terms of things like shielding and also treatments that may ameliorate the symptoms and improve recovery may be implemented as opposed to the lines of thinking are going in the wrong direction.

HM: Professor Golomb, thank you very much for discussing your research with us.

BG: Thank you so much for your kind attention.

HM: OK. Bye-bye.

JD: Beatrice Golomb is a professor of medicine at the University of California in the San Diego School of Medicine. That is where we reached her. We have more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient Bass]

Dorothy's shoes

Guest: Jon Miner

JD: That, of course, is the scene from The Wizard of Oz where in Dorothy taps her ruby red slippers and returns home to Kansas. There is no place like home. Several different pairs of those famous red sequined heels are said to have been used by Judy Garland when she was filming the movie. Since then some have been put on display at museums, including the Judy Garland Museum in Minnesota. More than a decade ago someone stole that mismatched pair of slippers. And over the years while there were leads controversies and cash rewards there appeared to be no breaks in the case. Until today, when the FBI announced that it had recovered the ruby red slippers during an undercover operation in Minneapolis. An official revealed the slippers at a press conference. She took a piece of black fabric off of a glass box as she said “Now under the rainbow she revealed the shoes.” Although officials did reveal little about how they were found. Jon Miner is the founder of the Judy Garland Museum in Grand Rapids, Minnesota. And that is where we reached him.

HM: Mr. Miner, what hope did you have after these 13 years that these shoes would be found?

JON MINER: I said the most exciting thing we ever had happen in our museum, which is 30 years old, was the day the slippers were stolen. It is only exceeded by the last week.

HM: Right, so the most exciting thing. Was it also one of the most horrifying things?

JM: I know it was funny, which is funny because we were renting them from a movie person in Los Angeles and it was about a week before we were returning them and somebody broke in the museum, broke the window and broke the case the slippers were in. They were secured.

HM: How are you feeling today now that they're back?

JM: We're feeling really good. There's no place like home. And, you know, there are only four pair of ruby slippers in the world and one of them is at the Institute in Washington at the Smithsonian, and one is owned by a private party and one is owned by the new museum in Los Angeles that is owned by DiCaprio and Spielberg. They're movie stars here. And the other we were we were loaning, we were using. So it's — we're excited. The whole town is excited. And we're getting a lot of phone calls. It's kind of exciting.

HM: Is it all anybody's talking about?

JM: It's all anybody — and I’ve even said we're overriding Trump right now, we're getting more business than he is.

HM: But it does seem like even law enforcement made kind of a big deal of this. You had an official from the FBI along with your local police forces chief.

JM: Do you know what the ruby slippers are worth? They're estimating that pair of ruby slippers is worth $6 million.

HM: That's insane. Well, given the value of these items I guess it's no surprise that law enforcement was so concerned about this. What did you learn today about how they were recovered?

JM: We're still sworn to secrecy actually on quite a bit. They allowed some things to be said on TV but because we have recovered them we've seen them, they’re real, that didn't just happen today or yesterday. So the Smithsonian has given us the okay and we've authenticated them so everything's okay there.

HM: The police talked about extortion being investigated. What do you know about that?

JM: They’re investigating everything and that's why we can't share any information because we've only so far shared with the police department and the FBI and to find them to locate them and to actually physically get them it's the first half of the battle. The next half will be to nail down — and have a list of people etc. So we actually put out on the national wire today and hopefully we'll get some more information that will take us the rest of the way.

HM: At the time of the theft there were lots of questions. I mean, the there was a failed alarm system, there was a lack of video surveillance. Some feared this was an inside job, and there was even some speculation that the owner who loaned them up to you might have been involved in some effort to collect insurance money. Now he's denied that all along. What do you make of all those allegations?

JM: Well, you know, I don't really know. I think there were about 100 different allegations. But somebody broke in the museum that night. It wasn't really the alarm the problem, the problem was the door that they smashed the glass.

HM: But did it ever occur to you that it was kind of odd that the alarm didn't go off?

JM: No, no, not in Grand Rapids, Minnesota. We've never had a problem like this in the world and we're not sure why or what happened. We don't have any idea but it wouldn't have made any difference because the whole perpetration was done in roughly 35 seconds so it wouldn't have helped us anyway. But the point is that that's what we're working on right now with the police department and the FBI.

HM: When will they be on display again?

JM: We'll find out probably in a week or two. We're not going to do anything except keep them in the vault for now. And then we'll find out in the next couple of weeks and we'll take it a couple weeks by couple of weeks.

HM: Still more unanswered questions obviously.

JM: Boy lots of them yet but the biggest one is answered. We've got them, we can touch them. We know they're real. We were worried because some of the reasons that were yielded to us were they were burned that the people that did it who we know names. I mean, burned them. But it's truly that's not the case. But it may be the case that the people that were saying these things just said them because they didn't want anybody to look for him.

HM: Do you have a suspect? Do the police have someone in mind? Do you know that there's someone in mind that you just can't tell us?

JM: Yeah, that's about it. Yeah.

HM: Okay, well Mr. Miner, we'll have to follow up on this. Thank you for talking to us. Bye-bye.

JM: Bye-bye.

HM: We reached Jon Miner in Grand Rapids, Minnesota.

[Music: Ambient Tones]

Lindsay Kemp Obit

JD: The world has lost a truly original and great artist of the stage. That is how musician Kate Bush responded to the death of her onetime teacher Lindsay Kemp. Many people share that feeling about the influential British dancer, mime and choreographer since the news of his death last month at the age of 80. Actor Barnaby Edwards said quote “The world will be less fun and less naughty without him.” Mr Kemp was a dancer since childhood. He once told the BBC about the troubles he had in the Air Force because instead of marching he would dance. He said quote “I found dancing much more pleasurable than walking.” Over his decades long career he would become a teacher to artists like Ms. Bush and also a mentor to David Bowie. And regarding his naughtiness, he performed in a production called Flowers which prompted some tut-tutting for its sexually explicit nature. In 1978 ads that show was set to open in Toronto Lindsay Kemp spoke to the CBC.

SOUNDCLIP

LINDSAY KEMP: I mean, I use every image that that in fact gives me pleasure. That's my only yardstick whenever I'm working on a production. I always think of doing the things that will please me. I'm usually very displeased and frequently very bored when I go to the theatre, you know. So what I endeavor to do is to present the kind of theatre that I find very attractive, which is a much more visual theatre. I get overly bored with the yak yak yakking all the time. I think that even the best plays have too many words. I also think that even the ballets have too many steps and so on, you know. So what I endeavour to do on this stage is simply to fill the stage with many, many very wonderful visual images. It's rather like the movies. My technique is very much influenced by the movies, you know, the way things look. I constantly tried to spring on the audience yet another surprise. A great influence on my life was with Diaghilev and the Russian ballet. And when John Cocteau wanted to work with the Russian ballet he asked Diaghilev what he should do. And Diaghilev replied ‘Tell them why John, astonish me.’ What I endeavor to do is to constantly astonish the audience with new things, new gifts, new images — everything in fact that springs to mind.

HOST: And shocking an audience is as much part of that, I presume?

LK: Surprising an audience, I'm often accused of deliberately and willfully shocking, which isn't really what I set out to do. I'm never too upset when they are shocked because I know that most of us rather enjoy a shock.

HOST: It's a nice shiver.

LK: Yes, it’s rather nice. What the endeavor to do is to take people off the ground, you know, is to make them forget quite who they were and what they were when they came into the theater. The shocks I hope would be pleasurable shocks like the shocks that one gets at a fairground in the ghost trains and in the tunnel of love.

JD: From our archives that was Lindsay Kemp speaking with the CBC back in March of 1978. Mr. Kemp died last month at the age of 80.

Back To Top »

Part 3: Apartment fire, Language inventor

Fear Trump Reaction

JD: It is called Fear and it will not be available until next week. But Bob Woodward's book about the Trump presidency is already getting some stinging reviews. The president's spokeswoman said today quote “This book is nothing more than fabricated stories, many by former disgruntled employees.” And Mr. Trump's chief of staff said quote “The idea I ever called the president an idiot is not true.” Counterpoint, in one of the excerpts out today, General John Kelly says quote “He's an idiot. It's pointless to try to convince him of anything. He's gone off the rails. We're in crazy town. I don't even know why any of us are here,” unquote. According to the book Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has a clearer sense of purpose. He is quoted as telling Mr. Trump “We're doing this in order to prevent World War 3.” After being questioned about the cost of the U.S. involvement in South Korea. And then there's the ‘what he doesn't see won't hurt us’ approach taken by former economics adviser Gary Cohn. He is quoted as responding to a letter pulling the U.S. out of NAFTA with the words quote “I can stop this. I'll just take the paper off his desk.” But when Donald Trump called Mr. Woodward last month, the U.S. president's main concern appeared to be that he had not been given a chance to contribute to the book himself — except that he had as Mr. Woodward told the president he made repeated requests including one through communications adviser Kellyanne Conway. Here is some of that call.

SOUNDCLIP

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I certainly don't mind talking to you and I wish I could have spoken to you but nobody called my office. I mean, you went through different people.

BOB WOODWARD: Mr. President, how can I spend all this time talking to people like Kellyanne and Raj and Republican senators.

DT: Who are the senators? They never called me about it.

BW: Senator Graham said he had you talk to you about talking to me. Now is that's not true?

DT: Senator Graham actually mentioned it quickly on one meeting and he said, you know, that is true. He mentioned it quickly not like, you know, and I would certainly have thought that maybe you would have called the office, but that's ok I'll speak to Kellyanne. In fact, she just walked in. I'm talking to Bob Woodward. He said that he told you about speaking to me, but you never told me. Why didn't you tell me? I would have been very happy to speak to him. So what are you going to do? So I have another bad book coming out.

BW: Everything is going to be factual and it is not a good thing for my business, if I may say this to you Mr. President, to the presidency or to the country to not have real full exchanges on these. And I broke my spear on it trying to get to you.

DT: Well other than Lindsey who did quickly mention it, nobody mentioned it. Nobody told me about it. Well, let me ask you why don’t you speak to Kellyanne and ask her? She never told me about it.

KELLYANNE CONWAY: Hi Bob, how are you?

BW: Remember two-and-a-half-months ago you came over and I laid out I wanted to talk to the president. And you said you would get back to me.

KC: I do. And I put in the request. But it was rejected. I can only take it so far. I guess I can bring it right to the president next time.

BW: Listen I talked to anyone I could.

KC: You talked to a number of people and they all said no.

BW: I talked to Raj. I tried about six to seven people, I tried. You know, you and I spent a whole lunch on it Kellyanne.

KC: I did. I presented it to the people here who make those decisions. But, anyway I’ll give you back to the president and I'm glad to hear you tried through seven or eight different people. You should tell him all the names. Thank you.

DT: But you never called for me. It would have been nice Bob if you called for me at my office. I mean I have a secretary, I have two, three secretaries. If you were to call directly, a lot of people are afraid — to Raj, I hardly speak to Raj. I do, I do, and Kelly and went to somebody but she didn't come to me. Well she should have come to me. She does have access to me, absolutely, she has direct access. But you didn't come to me. And you know what, that's OK, I'll just end up with another bad book.

KC: You need to know I made maximum effort.

DT: All right. It's too bad. Yes, I'm just hearing about it and I heard — I did hear from Lindsay but I'm just hearing about it. So we're going to have a very inaccurate book and that's too bad. But I don't blame you entirely. Well accurate is that nobody's ever done a better job than I'm doing as president.

JD: That was Donald Trump on the phone with journalist Bob Woodward last month. Woodward's book on the Trump presidency is called Fear. It'll be out next week.

[Music: 50’s Band]

Apartment Fire

Guest: Alex Krueger

JD: Alex Krueger has been out of his home for two weeks. He, his partner and his six-year-old son are among the 1,500 people forced out of their high rise apartment in Toronto's St. James Town neighbourhood after a six-alarm fire broke out there last month. They've been told that they will not be able to move back in until Thanksgiving. Others will have to wait even longer. And on top of all that stress — today was the first day of school. The Kruger's are relatively fortunate. They're staying with family downtown. But Alex Krueger says not everyone has been so lucky. We reached Alex Krueger in Toronto.

HM: Mr. Krueger, tell us what the last two weeks have been like for you and your family?

ALEX KRUEGER: Well, my family is comparatively very privileged because we have family in the city that we've been able to stay with since the fire. I mean, it's been harrowing to a degree, I mean, when you lose your home it's a lot to take. But we've been very fortunate.

HM: Tell me about the day the fire broke out? What happened?

AK: The fire alarm went off about 1:00 o'clock. I was working from home. My partner was out of town for work and my son was with his mother. When the fire alarm went off I paid very little attention because the fire alarm in that building goes off a lot. Shortly thereafter, I heard the fire trucks and I saw, you know, every fire truck in the city descending on the building. And shortly thereafter, I checked the hallway which was full of smoke and the firefighters directed us to barricade ourselves in, wet towels under the doors and get to the balcony.

HM: What was going through your mind at that time?

AK: To be quite honest with you, whether or not I would see my son again. It was very scary. I was there for about eight-and-a-half-hours before the firefighters were able to make it up to my unit because I'm on the 18th floor.

HM: What's the unit like now? How damaged is it?

AK: I've been back in. It's difficult to say how bad the smoke damage is because, of course, the whole building still smells very strong of smoke. And also of rotting food at this point because the power has been out for over a week.

HM: You mentioned that your son was with his mother at the time so he wasn't with you. How is he handling the aftermath?

AK: He's having a tough time. He's six and he was really upset that he wasn't going to be able to go back to our apartment because we've been there for three years. And then also he just started Grade 1 today. So it's been a lot for him to take in a short period of time.

HM: A lot of kids, I guess, were going back to school today who lived in the building normally. You mentioned there's a lot of tough situations. How are they coping with that getting their kids to this neighbourhood school?

AK: A lot of them are having a tremendous amount of difficulty. The party line that’s been set out is that everyone has been re-homed. And that's frankly not accurate. There are still people staying in shelters. There are still people who are being relocated as far away as Guelph and Brampton. And I know from neighbours that I've spoken to that while they're going to make every effort to ensure their children are able to get to school, they don't have the resources available to really make that a sure thing.

HM: There were also stories that some people were housed in hotels but then were forced to leave those hotels so they've been moving around a lot?

AK: Yes, that's correct. A lot of my neighbours said that they were asked to leave because there was a lot going on in the city just this weekend. Fan Expo was happening and people had prepared for those rooms so they were asked to vacate.

HM: You mentioned that you've been back to the apartment. What have you been able to retrieve?

AK: Thanks to the help of my brother-in-law, my partner and I were able to retrieve our clothing, our pertinent documents, passports that sort of thing. I got my modem, one of my guitars and a bunch of stuff for my son, but we couldn't move any furniture or any of the larger electronics or anything like that or dishes or books or anything of that nature. It was really just what we could put into bags.

HM: What about other people? What are your neighbours trying to get out?

AK: Well, the night of the fire I saw a lot of people carrying out — they were told to grab essentials — but I know I saw a lot of people coming out with pots and pans and bedding and everything they could possibly grab. And the sense that I got was speaking my neighbors that they were concerned that when they came back there things would be destroyed or stolen. And they didn't want to leave anything because this is literally all they have. And a lot of people are not in a position — even those with insurance — are not in a position to necessarily replace everything because, of course, insurance takes a while to pay out as well. So even if they have it they're going to be without for a long period of time.

HM: What do you think of the way the City of Toronto has handled this?

AK: Frankly, I'm appalled. There are 1,500 people that have been displaced, which is roughly the size of a high school. And my concern is that I was deeply, deeply upset to hear the mayor come out and call upon the people of Toronto to deal with this, to you know, give of their own pockets and their own homes because the city is not prepared to do so. I mean, the building said the same thing. It's like go talk to your family. You know, go call your friends.

HM: Do you think the mayor and the city should bear responsibility for the private building and rehousing people?

AK: I think that according to the strictest interpretation of the law they're under no obligation to do so. I think if they had a bit of humanity they would consider doing so. I believe that this if we want to be a world class city, which the mayor and everybody else likes to talk about a whole lot, that perhaps we ought to give up to that and help out people who are disadvantaged, who are already living in low-income housing and don't have anywhere to go. Toronto Fire Service and Red Cross did an exemplary job. I don't include them in this whatsoever. They were excellent. But it concerns me deeply that we're talking of 1,500 people, there's three-and-a-half-million people in this city. What happens if there were more people? We can't even take care of 1,500 people? That's abhorrent.

HM: Given the vacancy rate in this city, which we know is extremely low, what solutions would you offer? Where do you think people should be homed?

AK: Well, I think it needs to be a larger conversation. If the vacancy rate is so low and we don't have places to put these people, perhaps we should be prioritizing that. Perhaps we should be looking at dedicating areas or spaces rather than building another new condo project, perhaps we could be looking at building more affordable housing for people who are of low income living in this city, particularly in the event of an emergency. I know that's kind of a pithy answer but I'm also not a city planner. I have my taxes go to pay city planners.

HM: Will you ultimately returning to that apartment?

AK: I will absolutely not. I was thinking of moving anyway and this has just solidified it for me. I don't feel safe moving my family back into that house. It was a terrifying experience to be there. I’m deeply glad that my son and my partner were not to there share in it. But I will not move my family back. I'm disgusted and I want nothing further to do with them.

HM: Mr. Krueger, thank you so much for taking us through what you and the other people in the building have been through and I wish you the very best in your new home.

AK: Thank you very much and I sincerely hope that this coverage will help my neighbours because those are the people that really, really need it right now. Thank you so much for covering this.

HM: Goodbye.

AK: Take care.

JD: We reached Alex Krueger in Toronto.

[Music: Synth Bass]

Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing

JD: The confirmation hearings for Donald Trump's second nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court kicked off today. Judge Brett Kavanaugh appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee — and within seconds, literally — Democrats expressed their displeasure with the process, starting with Senator Kamala Harris interrupting the Republican Committee Chair Chuck Grassley.

SOUNDCLIP

CHUCK GRASSLEY: Good morning. I welcome everyone to this confirmation hearing on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to serve as Associate Justice on the Supreme Court.

KAMALA HARRIS: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized for a question before we proceed. Mr. Chairman, I’d like to be recognized to ask a question before we proceed. The committee received just last night, less than 15 hours ago, 42,000 pages of documents that we have not had an opportunity to review or read or analyze.

CG: You're out of order. I'll proceed.

KH: We cannot possibly move forward Mr. Chairman.

CG: I extend very warm welcome to Judge Kavanaugh.

KH: We have not been given an opportunity to have a meaningful hearing on this nominee.

CG: His wife Ashley, their two daughters.

AMY KLOBUCHAR: Mr. Chairman, I agree with my colleague Senator Harris. Mr. Chairman, we received 42,000 documents that we haven’t been able to review last night. And we believe this hearing should be postponed.

CG: I know this is an exciting day for all for you here. And you’re rightly proud of the judge.

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: Mr. Chairman, if we cannot be recognized, I move to adjourn.

CG: The American people.

RB: Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn. Mr. Chairman, we have been denied real access to the documents we need to advise, which turns this hearing into a charade and a mockery of our norm.

JD: That was Democratic senators Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar and Richard Blumenthal trying, and ultimately failing, to delay the confirmation hearing of Judge Brett Kavanaugh earlier today.

[Music: Lo-Fi Hip-Hop]

Geoffrey Owens Good Morning America

JD: Stars of the screens big and small are not seen as being humble folk like you and I. They are special because they're famous. They are rich. So there was stunned disbelief when news outlets began reporting that Geoffrey Owens, best known for playing Elvin on The Cosby Show, was photographed working at a grocery store in New Jersey. People were shocked that a former TV star was stuffing bags of food for normal people — lesser people like you and me. What could possibly have happened to force a celebrity to get a job like a regular person? Well today, Geoffrey Owens himself, appeared on Geoffrey Owens to answer that question.

SOUNDCLIP

GEOFFREY OWENS: I do want to say this. You know, this business of my being the ‘Cosby guy’ who got shamed for working at Trader Joe's. That's going to pass. You know, that that's going to, you know, in some measure of time that's going to pass away. But I hope what doesn't pass is this idea that people are now thinking this rethinking about what it means to work. You know, the honour of the working person and the dignity of work. And I hope that this period that we're not where we have a heightened sensitivity about that and a re-evaluation of what it means to work and that a re-evaluation of the idea that some jobs are better than others because that's actually not true. There is no job that's better than another job. It might pay better. It might have better benefits. It might look better on a resumé and on paper — but actually it's not better. Every job is worthwhile and valuable. And if we have a, you know, a kind of a rethinking about that because of what's happened to me, that would be great. But no one should feel sorry for me, either from a positive or negative perspective. I've had a great life. I've had a great career and I've had a career that most actors would really, you know, would die for. So no one has to feel sorry for me. I'm doing fine.

JD: Geoffrey Owens, best known for his role in The Cosby Show,s peaking on Good Morning America. Owens was recently photographed working at a grocery store, Trader Joe's, in New Jersey.

[Music: Experimental]

Language Inventor

Guest: Christine Schreyer

JD: When film studios need a really authentic sounding fake language they call Christine Schreyer. Ms. Schreyer is a full time anthropology professor at the University of British Columbia's Okanagan campus. And in her spare time she crafts the words sentences and phrases for movies like Power Rangers and Man of Steel. Here's a bit from Power Rangers

SOUNDCLIP

CHARACTER SPEAKING UNINTELLIGIBLE LANGUAGE

JD: A warrior speaking in the movie Power Rangers. Now those fictional films were based in outer space of course, but our latest effort brings her back to Earth 20,000 years ago. We reached Christine Schreyer at her office in Kelowna.

HM: Professor Schreyer, how is it that a serious academic ends up creating fake languages for Hollywood blockbusters?

CHRISTINE SCHREYER: Through academic research actually. I was interested, when Avatar came out, in the people who were learning Na'vi, the language from Avatar and I did an academic study of those people wondering why they were learning the language and what lessons they might have for people trying to learn endangered languages. And that led me to Man of Steel, my first language that I worked on.

HM: Are there are a lot of people who embrace these languages from films and kind of get engaged in using them?

CS: There are. When languages are authentically created fans really appreciate that and pick up on it. And if the movie is something that has a large fan base there will be a large portion of the people who are fans of that movie who are going to learn the language.

HM: Are there are a lot of films that have invented languages? I'm trying to think, I mean, I know many people to speak Klingon, but that's kind of only when it comes to mind.

CS: Yeah Klingon, The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, where the Tolkien languages they were adapted for the films. There's also Avatar and there's Avatar 2 and 3 coming out. And then there's been a lot of popular TV shows such as Game of Thrones and some other sci-fi networks. The CW had the 100. So there's a growing trend for sure.

HM: So you start looking into this, you start writing about it and somehow Hollywood comes across your work?

CS: That's right. So when I was doing my survey of Na'vi speakers UBC, where I work, did a media release about that research and it ended up on the cover of The Globe and Mail. And the production designer named Alex McDowell for Man of Steel was flying from Chicago where they were filming the Smallville portion to Toronto and then to Vancouver where they were going to film the Kryptonian portion. And so he saw my work on the cover of The Globe and Mail and sent me an e-mail when he landed in Vancouver.

HM: Where do you start in trying to create a whole new language?

CS: Definitely with the sound, sound is the for the building blocks of any language and it depends on what you're looking for. So my work with Man of Steel and Power Rangers, was another one I looked at, those both were based on long histories of TV shows and movies. And so I looked at what had already been produced there and then used that to build a sound system and then how the words would be constructed. With Alpha, the new movie is based on what our ancestors would have spoken 20,000 years ago. So we look at historical linguistics and how our language is spoken today have evolved and their estimated ancestors and those are called proto-languages.

HM: Tell us about the language that you have created for this film?

CS: So for Alpha the language is called Bayemma. And in the film before the film came out people were calling it the Cro-Magnon language because that's who the people are supposed to be. And so I did base it on three different protolanguages that are estimated to have been sproken around that time period — Proto-Nostratic, Proto-Euroasiatic, and Proto-DeneCaucasian — and what the sound systems were like that and then developed vocabulary as the script was presented to me. I started out with two or three scenes that were test scenes for the actor Kodi Smit-McPhee, who is the main actor in the movie.

HM: So when you're drawing on these sources are pretty speculative I would think for Cro-Magnon men, no?

CS: Absolutely, yes. So we can look at what languages are spoken today and then estimate back a generation and then when we go from that generation to the next one we get more and more estimations. So that worked okay for Alpha because creative license was also a part of the movie making industry.

HM: So can you speak a few phrases for us of Bayemma?

CS: Sure. One of the ones that is spoken in the film is “You will hunt at my side.”

HM: OK. Can you give me another one?

CS: “You are my family now” is something the boy says to the wolf and he says “Moatta eel pinew”

HM: Now what about the language of Krypton that you created. Maybe you could give us a taste of that so we can hear the comparison?

CS: Sure. Maybe I'll say thank you in both languages. So in Bayemma to say thank you you say “Eh Sulu Pidame”, which literally means I hold gratitude for you. And in Kryptonina you say “Benmuh Hima.”

HM: Are some actors better than others expressing these new languages?

CS: Yes, they are. I don't like to bash any actor, but yeah, there were some who were definitely better and more invested in the process. So Johannes Johanson had very long speeches and he worked very hard, and by the end he was able to say ‘I think I want to say this, is how you would say that?’ And I would say ‘Yep that's it. You've got it.’

HM: We just had one of those big fan expos here in Toronto where you see people who really get into the culture in the design of different films. And I guess the language is part of that. Why do you think people are so drawn to these fake languages?

CS: Oh, it's because it also helps them express their identity as these fans. But also it's a way for Na’vi when they ask people why are you learning this language from Avatar. They said they felt like they didn't want to appropriate somebody else's language so they couldn't learn Navajo, that was somebody else's language but they could learn Na’vi because it was something that was for everyone. And also the Communities of fans that develop around the languages are also so welcoming that people really enjoy that experience as well.

HM: What's next for you?

CS: Back to school and teaching tomorrow. I'm not quitting my day job at UBC Okanagan any time soon. And we'll see if any other producers come knocking on my door.

HM: All right. Well Professor Schreyer, thank you very much for telling us about your work.

CS: My pleasure. Thanks for your interest.

HM: Okay. Bye-bye.

CS: Bye.

JD: Christine Schreyer is an anthropology professor at the University of British Columbia's Okanagan campus when she's not creating fake languages for film. We reached her at her office in Kelowna. And you heard from the professor. We want to now hear from you. Give us a call if you have been waiting for a chance to bust out your Klingon or if you know a few words in a fake language from film or television. Call talkback: 416-205-5687, leave us a message with your tongue — whatever tongue.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

September 4, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This