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 2021

The AIH Transcript For September 10, 2021

[hosts]Carol Off, Chris Howden[/hosts]

CAROL OFF: Hello, I'm Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening. I'm Chris Howden. This is “As It Happens”.

[music: theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight:

CO: Unfair warning. Two days before 9/11, al-Qaeda committed another act of terror -- the assassination of an Afghan resistance leader who'd raised the alarm about the threat posed by the group. I'll speak with a friend who was by his side that day.

CH: Long lost. Claudia Szurkowski's father died in the 9/11 attacks, before she was born. Now, the 19-year-old says her father is still a part of her life, even though she never knew him.

CO: Pointing in the wrong direction. A California state senator wants to stop plastic companies from slapping the universal recycling symbol on products that can't actually be recycled.

CH: Inquiry into an inquiry. A question asked at the election debate yesterday has tempers flaring today -- and our guest explains why Premier Francois Legault is calling it an attack on Quebec.

CO: Kleenexes and o's. The organizer of the annual Ig Nobels tells us whether an orgasm is an effective nasal decongestant -- and why handing out that prize was just one of the climaxes of last night's event.

CH: And …you can't fight this feline anymore. We've been told that laser pointers are great for cats -- but new research shows that fruitlessly chasing a little red dot around really messes with their minds.

CH: “As It Happens”, the Friday edition. Radio that knows you think it's fun -- but your cat just never gets the point.

[music: theme]

Part 1: Afghanistan Assassination Anniversary, Election: Quebec Debate Question, Ig Nobel

Afghanistan Assassination Anniversary

Guest: Masood Khalili

CH: Twenty years ago, a world-changing event occurred in the United States: the attacks of 9/11. But two days earlier, another stunning act of terror took place in Afghanistan. It was perpetrated by the same group -- al-Qaeda. And it was ordered by the same man -- Osama bin Laden. On September 9th, 2001, Ahmad Shah Massoud -- the last major commander of the resistance against the Taliban -- was assassinated. The killers were two al-Qaeda operatives posing as reporters. They targeted Commander Massoud after he tried to warn the world about the threat posed by bin Laden and his followers. Masood Khalili was a close aide of Mr. Massoud -- who was there when he was killed.

CO: Mr. Khalili, what are your thoughts and your feelings as you mark the 20th anniversary of your friend's death?

MASOOD KHALILI: One very hard, madame. Hard because I have lost a friend who was just beside me sitting in a night before we were talking politics and even poetry. And, of course, also, above that, Afghanistan lost a great man. A hero and a man who was a leader and lead the country towards freedom.

CO: The agents working for Osama bin Laden, who got access to Commander Massoud to... in order to assassinate him, very difficult thing to get that access. You were right there with them. You were watching this unfold in those minutes before he was killed. Were you suspicious of these two men?

MK: No, not at all. They're two boys or two journalists, pretending journalists, who were waiting to get an interview. And I said it's good because we have to talk to the whole of Arab countries and tell them what's going on with Osama bin Laden. So these two sat there. One had a camera. The other one sat beside Commander Masood, just half a metre of him. I was on the right side. And then he asked questions, about 15 questions. No suspicion. And the questions were like this: why you are against Osama bin Laden? Why you are talking about terrorism? It's Islam. It's not terrorism. Commander just smiled and said, OK. Bomb goes off, and it was a big blast. The man who appeared on interviewing and had the suicidal jacket, he was in pieces. And the other one who had the camera, he escaped. And then, Commander was dying right on the spot. And I was injured; lost my eye, lost my ear, and more than 300 or 400 or more pieces of shrapnel in my body. And I got unconscious, too, until I opened my eyes and I saw Commander in the helicopter. And maybe two hours after that, and I found that Commander was having, you know, blood in his face, and that's it. I got unconscious until my wife pushed me, and I opened my eyes. And she told me that what happened to Commander Masood.

CO: This assassination was two days before September the 11th. Commander Massoud had been trying to warn the Americans and Europe. He had been in Europe just months earlier, warning that Osama bin Laden, with the assistance of the Taliban, were planning something big. And trying to warn the United States of the same. Why do you think they didn't listen to him?

MK: Well, that's still is a question, ma'm, for me. I have got guesses that maybe because Pakistan had very good relations with America and still, I think, has. And working as a kind of glass for America to see what's going on in Afghanistan. They might have told him that while he is Commander Masood, he is just saying things. The other one, we were abandoned at the time. When we entered Kabul and defeated the Soviets, we were abandoned totally. [chuckling] No one was paying any attention. So because of that abundance, they did not listen to us. And the third reason that they did not listen, that was new for everyone that someone says that you are in danger. Commander Masood didn't know himself also that it would happen there in New York. This is the thing that it was new, and they did not pay attention. And, unfortunately, 9/11 happened.

CO: Within 48 hours. And in Afghanistan, Commander Massoud was known as the "Lion of Panjshir". He had... some parts of his war record criticized, but he was trying to reconcile enemies. He was fighting the Taliban. What impact did Commander Massoud's death have in Afghanistan?

MK: First thing that he was an honest man. He believed in the trust of the people. Two, he was a moderate person. He was a Muslim, a strong Muslim, but not Islamist. Number three, he believed in freedom. He wanted just to see freedom in this country. No. Four, he believed much more than war, in peace. Always, he was telling me that, oh, my goodness, when that comes that we have peace, and I sit in my own garden, and we just read poetry. So... so these things happen that people liked him, and this is why he was killed.

CO: You and Commander Massoud thought that if you could defeat the Taliban, you could bring peace, you could sit in your garden, as you said, and read poetry to each other. And I know that Mr. Massoud had about 30,000 books in his library. But at the same time, you had been already fighting as a freedom fighter for many years. There's already been so much war. And I just want to play a clip of a conversation, this program we had with you in 1988, 33 years ago, and just want to listen... listen to yourself at that time.

SOUNDCLIP

MK: Well, we Afghans do not trust Soviets. We Afghans do not trust communists. Anything wrong anywhere, especially with our friends, we suspect them. And we do have the... I think that the reason, very solid reasons to suspect Soviets that they are the plotters everywhere in the world. Whatever you find that the friends or freedom fighters, all freedom fighters are doing something, you know?

CO: That was you speaking in 1988. Of course, that was the war against the Soviets. Different war, different time, but decades of war in your country. Did you think at that time, could you imagine in 1988 that Afghanistan would be in such a perpetual state of battle?

MK: No, unfortunately, I did not have that vision. I thought we would be in Afghanistan, and things will be OK. I was wrong. When we entered Kabul, we celebrating our victory that against the Soviets. We said that we won war, but we lost peace. Because the proxy wars were started. And our friends who were helping us did not come to help us again. So this is why I did not know. I did not believe. I did not think about. Otherwise, we would have thought about when we go to Kabul what we would do?

CO: But now, this... all these years, the... now the United States leaving once again Afghanistan after 20 years of fighting there after 9/11. And now we see your friend's son, Shah Massoud's son, Ahmad, who is attempting to lead some kind of a resistance to the Taliban right now. What advice would you give him?

MK: To be... to follow the path of his father, be with people, get the trust of the people, mobilize people, but always think one thing: war should not be your goal. Peace should be your goal because no war is good. No peace is bad.

CO: Mr. Khalili, I appreciate you telling us the story of your friend on this anniversary. And I hope you do see that peace in your country. It's so long overdue. And thank you.

MK: God bless you. God bless you. Thank you.

CH: Masood Khalili was a close aide to Afghan commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, who was assassinated twenty years ago yesterday. Mr. Khalili is also a writer and a former diplomat. He lives in the United States, but we're not revealing his exact location to protect his safety. You can find more on that story on our Web page at: www.cbc.ca/aih. And later on "As It Happens", we'll have an interview with one of the many children of the victims of 9/11 who never knew their parents.

[music: uke!!!]

Election: Quebec Debate Question

Guest: Mireille Paquet

CH: François Legault is denouncing what he's calling "an attack" on Quebec. One you may have watched on TV or heard on the radio. The Quebec Premier says it took place at last night's English-language federal leaders debate. His issue is not with one of the politicians on stage. It's with a question that the moderator, Shachi Kurl, put to Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet.

SOUNDCLIP

SHACHI KURL: You deny that Quebec has problems with racism, yet you defend legislation such as bills 96 and 21, which marginalize religious minorities, Anglophones and Allophones. Quebec is recognized as a distinct society. But for those outside the province, please help them understand why your party also supports these discriminatory laws?

YVES-FRANCOIS BLANCHET: The question seems to imply the answer you want. Those laws are not about discrimination. They are about the values of Quebec.

CH: That was from an exchange between Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet and moderator Shachi Kurl at last night's English-language election debate. It's prompted outrage from columnists and politicians in Quebec. Mireille Paquet is the Research Chair on the Politics of Immigration at Concordia University. We reached her in Montreal.

CO: Professor Paquet, when you heard that exchange last night, what did you think?

MIREILLE PAQUET: I was surprised. I felt like the question was clumsy and poorly worded. I also was a little surprised about the decision to ask the question At that moment. I think it's the elephant in the room and has to be discussed. But I wasn't certain about where we were going in introducing the debate with this question when it came to Blanchet? And more broadly, though, I don't think that this question really served the public interest. And it allowed for several truths to be reinforced. So, you know, it allowed for Blanchet to speak as if he was representing all of Quebecers and as if Quebecers were all united around the legislation. But it also, in a way, reinforced tropes in English Canada about Quebec being the only place that is illiberal or that wouldn't support minorities.

CO: Now, just so people who are not as familiar or have forgotten Bill 21, it's a bill that says that teachers, police officers, many government officials, civil servants are forbidden from wearing religious symbols at work. And the superior court in Quebec has itself said that it marginalizes and ostracizes people. So what was particularly wrong about the question that says that people are discriminated against in Quebec because of this law?

MP: I don't think that there was nothing wrong about saying that in a question. I think that what is strange is in a federal debate, asking a federal party leader about a provincial legislation when you're asking all the other leaders about their actual platform for federal jurisdictions, right? So I think there was something about that that was strangely presented -- but also saying that for a lot of Quebecers, I would include myself into that. But for a lot of Quebecers, there is a feeling that English Canada has not really understood what these laws were about. And that is what Blanchet has been attempting to say during these debate, saying that these laws, as far as he's concerned, are not about discrimination. The court might disagree. I might disagree. But for a lot of voters, it is about cultural protection. It is about language protection. And the fact that there is rarely an engagement with those concerns can be frustrating for sure.

CO: But there are Quebecers who agree that these laws are discriminatory, including Justin Trudeau himself, who, though he doesn't seem to be saying it now, in 2019, he said, I'm totally against Bill 21. I think in a free society, we shouldn't legitimize or allow discrimination against anyone. And so, this... these are laws that are regarded in... by many in Canada, the rest of Canada, as being discriminatory. Is that not true?

MP: Indeed. Indeed, absolutely. And I'd say that I want to once again reiterate that several people in Quebec, myself included, consider these laws to be discriminatory. Justin Trudeau was quite clear about that as well in the two French debates. He wasn't as adamant about that, interestingly, yesterday. But I think that ultimately, I think the question in that way during the debate didn't allow for this level of detailed discussion about the fact that Quebec is grappling with this issue as well, right? So you have a division within society with some people that are very for the laws, some people that are against Bill 21 or 96. And that, you know, there are several contests judicially and within institutions for these laws. So, you know, in this format, it becomes difficult to go into all the nuances. And to be entirely honest, I'm not sure what would be the right venue to discuss this? But what I noticed, though, is that since yesterday, you have only... you can only see a reinforcement of the position of both camps, right? With Legault and Blanchet saying that this is an offence to Quebec, this is an offence to the Quebec nation, and kind of adding to this language of being disrespected and oppressed by English Canada. And on the other hand, if you turn to English Canadian media, what you hear is once again, well, you know, the representative and the Quebec elite will not recognize the discrimination occur. I'm wondering who is served by... by these two kind of extreme views? I think they're both partially right. But they don't allow us to actually discuss and find a way out as a country.

CP: And so Mr. Blanchet, though, in the rest of Canada, is criticized for how he also responded to questions involving Indigenous rights and the protection of... of... of Indigenous people, comparing Quebec's situation to those of First Nations. Did that resonate with Quebecers?

MP: It's interesting, right? In the Quebec press, in the French-speaking press, I haven't heard as much as that. I would not disagree with that criticism. I think that this was extremely awkward. But the question that started the debate has really been what most commentators have focussed on today.

CO: And just finally, do you think that what happened last night, especially that exchange, what impact might it have on the outcome of this election?

MP: I think that when it comes to Quebec voters for the federal election, it will only reinforce those that were already intending on voting for Bloc. Today, Legault didn't necessarily repudiate his idea or his statement about the Conservative Party being the least dangerous for Quebec foundation and Quebec jurisdiction. So I think that those that planned on voting for the Conservatives will likely do so. So I'm wondering, and I think it's too early to say, whether that will really have an effect on Quebec votes for the federal election. What I'm seeing, however, is this potentially having an effect on the provincial election in Quebec next year. Today, it was very clear that the Legault was kind of positioning himself as a defender of Quebec and kind of bringing back his version of nationalism and his version of, you know, defending Quebec's interests within the federation. And so I think we can expect yesterday to have more impact on… on that.

CO: All right. We'll be watching. Professor Paquet, it's good to talk to you. Thank you.

MP: A pleasure.

CH: Mireille Paquet is the Research Chair on the Politics of Immigration at Concordia University. She's in Montreal.

[music: vocalization]

Ig Nobel

Guest: Marc Abrahams

CH: No one likes a stuffy nose. There's the throbbing headache, the mountain of sodden tissues -- and nowadays, of course, the dreaded COVID test. Now, you can try taking sinus meds or any number of homespun remedies. But it's hard to kick a stubborn head cold. Now, luckily, scientists got busy and came up with a new treatment that might do the trick: orgasms. [clears throat] Last night, a team of scientists in Germany were awarded an Ig Nobel prize for their research, which tested whether orgasms helped relieve nasal congestion. Now, if you're a fan of "As It Happens", you know we're a fan of the annual competition, which bestows prizes on the people behind the year's most unusual and off-the-wall science. Marc Abrahams is the organizer of the Ig Nobels and the editor of the Annals of Improbable Research. We reached him in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

CO: Marc, do you think there is enough scientific evidence that orgasms clear the nasal passages?

MARC ABRAHAMS: What an interesting question you ask. What would be enough evidence? [both chuckle] And would any two people agree on what is enough evidence? There's now plenty of evidence. Enough, I don't know? But plenty thanks to the team in Europe who won an Ig Nobel prize by testing exactly that. They say that sexual orgasm is as effective as decongestant medicine [CO chuckles] in clearing up breathing problems.

CO: I can't believe that "As It Happens" missed this story! But what… [chuckle] how did they prove that? I mean, you'd think that people who are the --

MA: How much detail… [CO chuckles] how much detail are you asking me to go? [chuckling]

CO: I'm just thinking that... is it... is it your nasal cavity... is that you're really concentrating on? I mean, I just wonder how they actually tested this.

MA: I can send you a copy of the paper. [CO chuckles] I think that's a better answer than anything I could give you at this particular moment.

CO: What's your favourite win this year of the Ig Nobels?

MA: There are 10 prizes, you know, and every year. And each of them does something that makes people laugh then think. That's why they get Ig Nobel prizes. The first one we gave out in the ceremony yesterday was to a scientist in Sweden who has spent a lot of time analyzing the sounds that cats make -- the communication sounds. And this is a scientist, Susanne Schötz. She classifies cat speech into, oh, I think, at least 10 or 12 different kinds of things. Meows, chirping, howling, growling. There's a long list.

CO: And that... which surprise did she win for that study?

MA: That was the biology prize.

CO: And now, the transportation prize is an interesting one, dealing with the transportation of rhinoceroses, which I think there's a better way to actually transport them. I would think that they would rather not be transported at all. But what's that award?

MA: I'm interested here too in the phrasing you used. When you say that's a better way of transporting them, how do you transport rhinoceroses?

CO: I had never given any thought until I saw this award!

MA: Ah! Well, this is an international team, and the particular rhinoceroses were and are in Namibia. They were planning to move the rhinoceros from a place that was becoming increasingly dangerous. But how do you move Rhinoceroses long distance? They really decided a helicopter would make the journey much better. Well, how do you lift [chuckling] a rhinoceros by helicopter in the safest way for the rhinoceros? So that was the question. Some of them are veterinarians who had spent a lot of time with this kind of animal. And they thought that doing it upside down might be better for a lot of reasons. Before they did it with any rhinoceroses, they tested it on themselves. They said it's pretty clear that doing it upside down was healthier for the rhinoceroses.

CO: OK! Well, I mean, who can dispute that I suppose, unless we can interview the rhinoceroses? But tell us --

MA: Or try it on your own.

CO: [laughing] what about, now, the economics prize sounds a bit personal on someone's part, but Pavlo Blavatskyy, who claims that there is a correlation between national corruption and obesity. What's that about?

MA: He tried to gather information about a lot of high-level politicians in the former Soviet Union countries. And he compared their body mass index, which is, you know, very rough, very roughly a measure of how round rather than how skinny they are. The countries that seem to have economies that are extremely corrupt seem to have officials who are larger than the other countries.

CO: [chuckling] What, there are no thin oligarchs?

MA: He wasn't saying there are none. [CO chuckles] But he was saying that when he looked at a whole bunch of them, that seemed to be a very distinct pattern.

CO: Oh, again, I don't know how we missed this one? Who won the peace prize, the Ig Nobel Prize for Peace?

MA: [chuckling] That was a team at the University of Utah that tried by experiment to answer the question of whether human men primarily, who grow beards, whether those beards protect them, physically protect them, from punches to the face, compared to men who don't have beards? And what they say they discovered was that, yeah, a beard does absorb a pretty fair amount of the energy from a punch. Not all of it, but a noticeable amount. This may be part of the reason that we evolved beards over time compared to other animals that don't have beards.

CO: But I guess they were also in this study disputing the claim that men grow beards to be more attractive to women. And they don't --

MA: No! [CO chuckles] I don't think... I don't think they were disputing that at all.

CO: They only have to ask women, and they would know that it's not attractive.

MA: Things... things can have many, many reasons at the same time. [CO chuckles] And also, that they don't seem to be dogmatic about it, saying this is the whole story at all.

CO: Right.

MA: They're just saying, hmm, you know, this is quite a possibility. By the way, they got the idea to start looking at this from a discussion that one of them had 10 years ago in a hallway at a scientific conference with one of his colleagues. They were discussing sperm whales. And somehow, this led to the [chuckling] question of humans punching each other in the face.

CO: But did they test it by actually, like, punching each other? Is that... or how do they actually prove their thesis?

MA: No, they... they considered that. [chuckling] And instead, they use models, sheepskins and weights that dropped and found a bunch of other things.

CO: [chuckling] OK!

MA: But they... they did not use any... any human faces or fists.

CO: Good thing! All right, Marc, till next year. [MA chuckles] I'm sure there'll be more. And we're going to have to do a better job at finding these before you... you give them awards.

MA: [chuckling] Well, it's a big world out there with, you know, what is it, seven billion people now?

CO: And there are just so many... so many studies like these. And so, you just... you have to pick and choose. All right, till next year.

MA: Till next year. Thanks.

CO: Bye.

CH: Marc Abrahams is the organizer of the Ig Nobels. And he spoke to us from Cambridge, Massachusetts.

[music: folk]

Part 2: 9/11 Anniversary, California Recycling Symbol

9/11 Anniversary

Guest: Claudia Szurkowski

CH: Claudia Szurkowski never met her father. He died before she was born. He was in the World Trade Center the morning it was attacked on 9/11. She's one of many people who were robbed of their parents that day. And now, 20 years later, they're grown up -- adults who were shaped by the loss of fathers and mothers they don't remember. We reached Claudia Szurkowski in Naples, Florida.

CO: Claudia, I know you never met your father, but what have you learned as to what kind of person he was

CLAUDIA SZURKOWSKI: Um, growing up learning about him, I learned that he was a very outgoing and sociable person. He always loved adventure and to smile and just looked at the bright side of every situation that he encountered.

CO: And what does your mom say about him? What did... what has she told you over the years about your dad?

CS: The one thing that's always stuck with me about what she told me is that he was ecstatic to be a father. He was so happy when he found out that she was pregnant with my older sister, Alex. And then when they found out about me a week before 9/11, it was just that excitement all over again.

CO: Wow. And so you've seen pictures of him, do you see yourself in him? Do you... do you see... does anyone say, hey, you look a lot like your dad?

CS: Um, so I have pictures of him in my room. And growing up, and even today, I... I am told that I am a spitting image of him. My mom always told my older sister and I that we're split 50-50 down the middle. I have my mom's personality, and I look exactly like my dad. And my sister is the complete opposite. She looks like my mom and acts like my dad.

CO: But she... your sister knew your father, right?

CS: She was three-and-a-half when he passed.

CO: So your mother was pregnant with you when he died? He was in the World Trade Center that day, but he didn't work there. So how did he come to be there when 9/11 happened?

CS: Right. So he worked for a contracting union, and he was assigned to different sites. He was called that night that he was going to be assigned to the 104th of the North Tower, just, you know, an in-and-out job. Just go fix something before, you know, the businesses open at 9:00 a.m. So he was there from 7:00 to 9:00. And he just... he never made it home.

CO: He went for 7:00 in the morning. That was for... the job was just a brief one. The first plane hit at 8:45, didn't it?

CS Yeah, 8:45 was when the first plane hit. So my mom is assuming that he was probably, like, on his way home.

CO: And so 104th floor, there was no way down, I guess?

CS: No, he was above the impact zone, so everything kind of collapsed.

CO: So you... have you tried to... and your mom, have you tried to piece together what might have happened with him that morning?

CS: Our assumption or what we have come to the conclusion of is that he was probably in an elevator or getting into the elevator to go downstairs to come home. And then the blast from the jet fuel or something probably is what caused his death.

CO: How did you come to learn? What was... what happened that morning, that day?

CS: So my grandmother, his mom, called my other grandma, my mom's mom. She called her work to kind of tell her that she needs to go to my mom. And so my grandma went all the way home to my mom, and she's like, did you see, did she look at the news? My mom completely shut out the world. She... for weeks, she always made sure the TV was off. She didn't go outside. She didn't sleep. She didn't eat. She told me she was just waiting for him to come home every single day. She was just longing that he would walk through the door. And it was harder for her because she had a three-and-a-half-year-old that was always asking, when is dad going to come home? So it was very difficult for her. My mom didn't even know that the towers fell until weeks later when my godmother actually told her, come on, let's get out of the house, let's do something. And she looked over at the skyline, and she saw that the towers were gone.

CO: How did she not know?

CS: She made sure to keep the TV off. She didn't know... once... after she found out a plane hit the building, she turned it off. She tried calling my dad, and it went straight to voicemail. She had no idea what was going on. So she obviously assumed the worst and just turned all the news off. She didn't let anybody talk about it. All she was doing was waiting for him. She shut out the world.

CO: And then she saw the horizon, and the towers were gone?

CS: Right.

CO: And your dad was gone, too.

CS: Yeah. She said it took her a long time to... to really understand that he's gone.

CO: At some point, though, she did try to put together. And so how much in your family as you were growing up, and you're 19 now, how much did your family talk about your father's death and what happened on 9/11?

CS: We talk about it all the time. One thing we always do is when we get together with family, we always, you know, either share a story or two about him or... or do try... to do something that he would do, you know, like just to see if my mom would be like, oh, my god, Norbert did that! And things like that. Like, we try our best to bring him out of us by being that bubbly, adventurous, always laughing character.

CO: So, though you grew up without him, how has he influenced your life?

CS: He has influenced my life pretty heavily, actually. Because of what happened to him, it has pushed me into a career path that I want to keep that from happening again. It's pushed me into a homeland security law school-type career so I can keep from having thousands of other families go through the same thing.

CO: At some point, maybe in your life, you'll have children of your own. How do you think you'll... you'll teach your kids about their grandfather?

CS: I... I really never thought of that. Wow, I'm sorry. That’s a little difficult, but I never really thought of it. I kind of just... if I would have to say, I would have to do it the way my mom did. Is always be open to questions and always have pictures that my... my future kids can ask me about. And always have a story to tell. Like my mom, me growing up, she never said no to a question that I wanted to ask her, no matter the time, the day. If she was tired, if she wasn't, you know, and I would do the same thing for my kids, and I would go through the same, you know, learning structure that my mom did, letting us research our own, watch these documentaries, go to the memorial site. I would have to do it the same way she did.

CO: Do you remember going down to the site of 9/11 at some point after his death?

CS: We go every year. Well, we try our best to go every year. The very first time that I actually remember being there was when I was six, six or seven.

CO: And will you go on this 9/11?

CS: Yep. We fly out tomorrow.

CO: Claudia, I appreciate you telling us about Norbert, about your dad, and telling us the story of yourself. Thank you.

CS: Thank you so much. Bye.

CH: Claudia Szurkowski's father Norbert died in the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. We reached her earlier this week in Naples, Florida.

[music: ambient]

Alberta Elective Surgeries

CH: When you hear "elective surgery," you may not think of things like heart failure and brain cancer. But Alberta patients say provincial health services are cancelling procedures related to both. Their accounts follow the news that Alberta Health Services, or AHS, is postponing scheduled surgeries across all zones to help create ICU capacity for COVID-19 patients. The province has nearly 16-thousand active cases today -- and 679 people are currently in hospital. David MacLeod is a Calgary man who was supposed to go under the knife for heart surgery today. Eric Mulder lives in Sherwood Park and was supposed to undergo surgery this past Wednesday.

SOUNDCLIP

DAVID MACLEOD: I was supposed to have surgery today. And my surgery is listed as urgent. And I don't understand where people are talking about it being elective surgery. It's not elective surgery. I have to have this, or I cease is the bottom line. And I mean, you know, I have to have a valve replacement. So there is a bit of time. But when it's listed as urgent, you have to have it done. If that valve, let's go, I’m history. So, you know, these people that decided not to get vaccinated, they don't seem to be paying the price like those of us that have been vaccinated and are trying to do the right thing here. And I respect everybody's right not to get vaccinated. You know, I don't think you can be told what to put into your body. But by the same token, you know, if you're a smoker, you can't go into a bar or restaurant and smoke because the air is toxic. Well, these people are breathing toxic things as well. So why is it... why is there a difference between the two? If you're not vaccinated, you shouldn't be allowed to go in and mix with other people. It's as simple as that.

TRAVIS MCEWAN: I was diagnosed with a glioma. It’s a… they don't know exactly what type of tumour it is. That's what this surgery would tell them. And... and that would also inform the oncologists on what type of chemo and radiation to start. So a lot of things hinge on this surgery. And my wife's parents came up from Newfoundland to help her and myself out with the surgery and the care afterwards. And submitted my paperwork to go on sickness leave from work. Signed up for EI and all that fun stuff. And I got a call on Tuesday afternoon, and they said that my surgery was cancelled. And that took me by shock. I... first thing I responded with was, OK. What's the new date for the surgery? And they told me that one hasn't been scheduled. There’s no reason given there at all. And I have no answers. And my care is up in the air.

CH: David MacLeod and Eric Mulder are awaiting urgent surgeries in Alberta. They spoke with the CBC’s David Gray in Calgary and Travis McEwan in Edmonton. In a statement to the CBC, AHS acknowledged having to postpone, quote, "a small number of cancer surgeries," and said, "we wish we did not have to take this step. However, we need to ensure we can increase ICU capacity to meet patient demand."

[music: world music]

California Recycling Symbol

Guest: Ben Allen

CH: Ask any kid to draw the recycling symbol, and they'll probably have no trouble. But ask an adult what that logo on a piece of plastic actually means, and they might be confused. It turns out that just because a product has one of those "chasing arrow" symbols on it doesn't mean it can be fully, or even partially, recycled. That's because different jurisdictions have different rules on the plastics they can accept. Now, a California law aims to ban companies from putting that recycling symbol on plastics that can't be recycled. Ben Allen is the state senator who's sponsoring the law. We reached him in Sacramento.

CO: Senator Allen, how is it that companies have been able to put this recycling symbol on their products without them actually being recyclable?

BEN ALLEN: One of the challenges when we're dealing with plastic is that a lot of plastic is technically recyclable under the best of circumstances, but it's not actually recyclable in the real world. And so, a lot of companies have been hiding behind the theoretical recyclability of their products, getting consumers to feel good about buying their products. And then, of course, the consumers throw those products into the... into the blue recycling bin. But at the end of the day, they're not recycled, and they really don't have a fighting chance of being recycled. So it's deceptive. I think it's a way for companies to make people feel good about the products. But at the end of the day, these items were not being recycled. So what we're trying to do with this bill is to put in some truth in advertising and basically tell folks, look, if the item is not truly recyclable, you shouldn't be able to use the recycling symbol.

CO: Can you give us examples of products that have this symbol but actually are not able to be recycled?

BA: Well, sadly, most plastics that are not the ones and twos. So if you look at... if you look at your recycling, if you actually take a hard look at a piece of plastic, there will oftentimes be a number inside that recycling symbol. And the one... if it's a one or two, it's got a high chance it's a highly recyclable plastic, but the numbers three through seven are typically not recycled in, you know, out there in the world. Now, by the way, there are also folks who put the recycling symbol on their product and then there's literally they're not recyclable. And we've actually asked them, you know what... what... what... what are you doing putting this item on there? Oh, we were just trying to encourage recycling in general. [chuckling] So it's... it's --

CO: Do think... how... how do you respond to that? That sounds a bit disingenuous.

BA: It's just... it's absurd. It... it's entirely disingenuous, and it's what we're trying to address with this bill.

CO: But I mean, as far as the things that... I mean, in Canada, we are... there's going to be an effort soon to limit single-use plastics, just have them banned completely. But at the same time, the same issue is here, that these things are... people believe them to be recyclable. They put them in the bins. So what happens when it actually gets to recycling stations? What effect does that have?

BA: They have to be sorted. And oftentimes, they end up... that... that adds cost to the recycling system. And adds cost to the sorting system. Some... in some cases, it can be a real problem, especially in the case of film, which is very thin and very malleable. And the film ends up getting caught in other recycling streams and ends up making those recycling streams less pure and more contaminated. A lot of the film was oftentimes getting into the paper streams, for example, and really dramatically lowering... lowering the calibre of the... of the paper quality for recycling.

CO: Do you have any idea what percentage of the stuff that... that the recycling companies are trying to sort through that is actually not recyclable?

BA: That's a great question. It's hard to know exactly. But, you know, just to give you an idea, less than 15 per cent of single-use plastic is actually recycled. You know, you probably ought to get a haulier or someone who works in recycling business on the phone just to kind of talk to you about how much... what percentage of the... of the stuff that's coming through the blue bins that actually ends up getting recycled. But it's something... it's in that... it's in that area. It's around 25 per cent or so.

CO: And some of the companies in California are saying that they spend, I mean, so much of their labour is simply bundling up all that non-recyclable material for... to put it in landfill, right?

BA: Absolutely. Absolutely.

CO: Now, what kind of response have you had from the plastic manufacturers?

BA: Well, the plastics manufacturers, everyone's different. Some of them have... have understood what we're trying to do. They… they… they realize there's a problem. And they've actually been pretty open to the discussion. Some, I think, raised the sorts of concerns... oh, well, if you do the change here, then it's going to force us to make changes elsewhere in the country and different, you know, states have different rules and regulations. And they've thrown up all sorts of arguments about how it's going to be a hassle for them. And sometimes you hear, well, these items could be recycled. Why would we want to do anything that would make it less likely they'll be recycled? Well, you know, my answer to that, of course, is they're not being recycled. And we actually wrote in an onramp into the bill so that for those items where there's a... there's a tangible plan for recyclability, we can... we can... we can get those... those items will be allowed to use the recycling symbol again, but they have to actually show that there's a real plan to make... to make these items recycled. I think the plastics industry, honestly, for years and years, has been skating by hoping that people won't pay too much attention to what's actually happening in the recycling system.

CO: Just finally, just give us a sense of what is actually in your bill and how it changes the laws on labelling of recyclable products?

BA: It's ultimately a very simple measure. It basically says if you... you know, our current law prohibits a manufacturer from making an untruthful environmental claim, such as earth-friendly or recyclable. And so this bill extends the prohibition to the use of the chasing arrow symbol, the recycling symbol if a product or packaging is not truly recyclable. And so we say this is a truth in advertising concept. If your item is recyclable, please put that recycling symbol on there, get people to recycle it. But if it's not, you shouldn't and you shouldn't try to hide behind the symbol to try to claim that your... your product is environmentally responsible.

CO: If people buy products with that symbol on it because they think, ah, I'm OK. I can consume this, and then it will be recycled. And what a good boy am I! Is it possible that will people change their... their consumer habits if they don't have that symbol?

BA: Yeah, we're hoping that people will... with the passage of this bill, people will have better understanding, more knowledge, more information about the realities. And, you know, nothing in this bill prevents people from purchasing products that aren't recyclable. But now, they... they're not going to be duped into thinking the item is recyclable, which is... which is a problem on two levels. First of all, we obviously want people to be thinking about sustainability when they purchase things. But in addition, and perhaps most importantly, we don't want them tossing the non-recyclable items into the recycling bin because that actually ends up gumming up the recycling system and making it even harder to make recycling pencil out.

CO: All right. Well, I'm sure lots of jurisdictions are interested in your efforts with this bill, Senator Allen. And appreciate speaking with you.

BA: Thank you so much.

CH: Ben Allen is a California state senator. We reached him in Sacramento.

[ music: pop beat]

Feline Compulsive Disorder

CH: There it is again. There on the floor. It keeps showing up, and zipping away, but this time -- this time you're going to get it. New strategy: you pretend you don't see it. And then pounce! You got it! This time you got that little red jerk -- wait, where...where is it? It was just here. You had it. Imagine that. Imagine that every so often, a tiny red dot appears somewhere near you and wiggles around. But when you slap a paw down on it -- it's gone. How would that make you feel? And what would that do to your tiny cat psyche? I know: a lot of us cat owners tease our pets with laser pointers. We thought it was just harmless fun! But no: a new study confirms what animal experts have said for a long time: laser pointers are actually hazardous to your cat's mental health. See, when that laser point first appears in your cat's vision, it triggers its hunting instinct. Which, if the prey is a mouse, leads to a chase, followed by a disturbing ritual of smacking and tossing and neck-breaking and eventual evisceration. Satisfying! But if the prey is a red dot, there is no satisfaction at all. It's intangible, uncatchable, and unevisceratable. It's like cattus interruptus -- which, over time, may cause anxiety, and a condition called Feline Compulsive Disorder. So if your cat looks stressed out, and you have a laser pointer, there's not a lot of detective work involved. Just...connect the dot.

[music: jazz]

Part 3: Lawrence Schimel Banned Books, Barbados Stowaway Lizard

Lawrence Schimel Banned Books

Guest: Lawrence Schimel

CH: Lawrence Schimel has written some pretty risqué books for adults -- "The Mammoth Book of Gay Erotica" among them. But it's the two-time Lambda Literary Award winner's recent children's books that have generated the most controversy. And they're about as innocuous as it gets. A pair of colourful board books about the kind of stuff colourful board books are about. Cats. Dogs. Moms. Dads. Waking up. Going to sleep. The fact that the moms are a couple in "Early One Morning" and the dads are a couple in "Bedtime, Not Playtime!" barely registers. But it registered with authorities in Hungary and Russia, where translated editions of the books have landed booksellers and distributors in hot water. Both titles are illustrated by Elīna Brasliņa and will be published in English and French in North America next week. We reached Lawrence Schimel in Madrid.

CO: Lawrence, can we begin if you could describe these two books -- “Early One Morning”, and “Bedtime, Not Playtime” -- Just what's the gist of these two stories?

LAWRENCE SCHIMEL: So when Elīna Brasliņa and I decided to... to make these books, there had been other... there are, of course, other children's books that have LGBT characters in them, but we thought that there was a need for books that weren't about overcoming homophobia or anything like that, that were just fun, playful books that happened to be taking place in same-sex families. So that was what we set out to do. The books are basically, “Early One Morning” is a morning book, and “Bedtime, Not Playtime” is obviously a goodnight book. So they're sort of everyday domestic adventure is about kids and their pets that just happen to have two moms in one case and two dads in the other.

CO: Right, so early one morning is a story of a boy who has two moms. And the “Bedtime, Not Playtime” is a girl with two dads, right?

LS: Exactly. Although more important than the moms or the dads, in “Early One Morning”, the boy wakes up early, and his moms and his sister are still asleep. The only one who's awake is the cat. So they have adventures together. And in “Bedtime, not playtime”. A girl is getting ready for bed, and her dog wants to play. And so when her two dads are reading a bedtime story, the dog gets jealous, jumps on the bed, steals the bear, and then adventures ensue as everyone tries to get the bear back.

CO: Right. So the books are not about having same-sex parents. There just happens to be same-sex parents in the lives of these two children?

LS: Exactly. That was our... you know, we wanted to do books that showed or depicted queer families, but we're not about that. That's not the... the motivator of the plot. It's not... you know, it's... it's irrelevant in some levels, although it's not irrelevant in others, you know what I mean? There's a lack of those kinds of books. Almost all the books that we know in many different languages that feature LGBT characters for kids are about, you know, that LGBT angle is the purpose of the book. And we felt that there was a need for books that had more incidental representation. So that was important to us. But it's not important to the plot.

CO: You originally wrote these board books in Spanish. They have now been translated into other languages, other places, including two very controversial countries. And I want to begin by... by asking you about what happened in Hungary when it first became clear to you that these books were going to generate a lot of pushback. Can you tell us what happened?

LS: So in Hungary, the two books were published in a single volume under the title of Micsoda Család,

which is “What a Family”. And what happened... so in Hungary, they had... maybe a few weeks after these books had been published, they were published by a Rainbow Family organization in Hungary, and all of the Hungarian press reviewed them both positive and negative. You know, a lot of the state-controlled press was very negative. There was actually a 40-minute television program about the books. And I'm like, OK, there are 16 rhymes. I don't know how they got 40 minutes [laughing] out of attacking these poor little books. And so one of the things that happened after that, though, is that they... they passed new regulations in Hungary. Forbidding, you know, for anyone under 18 to see anything LGBT-related. And that could be anything from an advertisement for a same-sex couple or for, let's say, a Netflix show that just happened to show a gay or lesbian couple, various things like that. So that law was about to happen. And the day before it went into effect, the government attacked a bookstore for having sold the books without warning customers that the books contained, quote/unquote, families that were not traditional. And so there was a fine of 250,000 Forints against this bookstore chain for not warning customers. So it was like a multi-pronged attack against the book, not only passing the propaganda law but also going after the booksellers to sort of create this climate of fear around anything LGBT-related and children.

CO: And this... the county commissioner who levied that fine said it was, as you said, how the books, he said it was how the books were shelved and just how they were displayed. And this is the quote, there is no way…. or the translation, there is no way of knowing that this book is about a family that is different than a normal family. What went through your mind when you heard that?

LS: I mean, anger. [chuckling] You know, our lives are not things that need to be hidden from children. And actually, the LGBT propaganda laws, as these are called in both Hungary and in Russia as well. The people who are probably being harmed most, I think, are the children and the children in general. So, I mean, it creates this climate of fear that affects, of course, any child who either is in a same-sex family or is wondering about their own sexuality. But it also, you know, they're not saying that LGBT people don't exist. They're just saying that we can't talk about it with them until they're 18. So the only thing is... so they turn 18, and it’s like, the government's like, oh, we've been lying to you for the last, you know, 18 years of your life. And these people exist that we've been hiding them, you know what I mean? They're unprepared for the world, especially in the globalized world that we live in. Even if they try and do this within their own countries, the moment their kids go out into the world and, you know, meet LGBT people or are themselves, they're just unprepared. So these laws, in general, are only there fear-mongering. There's so much vagueness that, you know, is it illegal for a... for a parent in Hungary, for instance, to read these books to their kid? That's something that's not covered. So there was anger, and there was more determination to keep fighting against... against these laws. I mean, that's one of the things that I've been humbled and amazed by is there are 33 editions so far that are confirmed for the books and 27 different languages. And so, you know, on one level, even though the the homophobia from Russia and from Hungary have been a lot of international news, the other side of the story is how many people are working to make these joyful queer stories available for kids in their countries.

CO: The laws that were changed just last December in Hungary. It was a story we covered on this program. And this is when Hungary passed a new definition of a family defined as a man and a woman who are married and have children. It doesn't allow adoption. They’ve actually made it even more difficult to adopt children than it had been previously. And we interviewed a man, Marton Pal, the father in a same-sex relationship, about his... he had one child already adopted, and he was about to adopt another one when this happened. And I just want to play a bit of what Marton told us in that interview last December.

SOUNDCLIP

MARTON PAL: I'm sorry. This is a little bit hard to talk about. So imagine what kind of message you’re sending to young people, right? So I'm 37. I have a husband. I have a kid. I have a family. But imagine if there's someone who is, I don't know, 16, 18 years old starting his life and… and what they can expect? How they can have a family, right? How they can live a full life? [sniffle] And if the Constitution is saying that... stating that they are not equal and they are not normal, it’s not right. This is... this is pure discrimination. And these kids, they need hope. They need a sign. They need… [sniffle] I'm sorry.

CO: That's Marton Pal. What do you know of Marton Pal’s story?

LS: Marton is actually the publisher in Hungary. He's the head of the Rainbow Family Association that published the book. [chuckle] You know, and I mean, to give you another side of the story, shortly after the books were published, Marton went into one of the major children's book sellers and asked the clerk behind the counter if they had any books that showed Rainbow Families? And he had done this a number of years ago. And, you know, there was nothing… there was nothing. And now, after the book was published, he was able to go in and find books that... that show his family. And that was something that was so... you know, he started to cry when... when he was able to go into a bookstore after the books were distributed and ask for books that showed his family, which had been invisibilized, not just for his own kids, but for all the cross Hungarian society. I mean, that's one of the things that for me has been so wonderful is seeing, you know, the reaction from the Hungarian government was homophobic, but the Hungarian people has been so supportive of the project. I mean, I loved seeing so many families posting pictures of their kids, reading the book on Instagram, saying, you know, social disobedience, you know, to fight against the law, to say they want... they want their kids to live in a plural, diverse society and, you know, to have access to books that reflect that society.

CO: So in Hungary, the chain of bookstores that was selling your books was... or the book was... was fined. But I want to ask about Russia, where they had a different way of trying to prevent your books from getting into the hands of young people. Can you tell us what that strategy was?

LS: In Russia, the way that the law works, you can't... these are board books. So they’re books intended for the youngest readers. Anything LGBT has to be 18-plus. And so in Russia, the books were published again by an NGO, the LGBT Network, together with the Charitable Foundation Sphere, which is considered a foreign agent in Russia because of the LGBT advocacy work that they do. And this is sort of how these laws work. They sort of try and make homosexuality something foreign as opposed to this is something belonging to us, you know what I mean? So a lot of it is, you know, using discrimination and contrasting it to national fervour. So in... in Russia, the books are published by this NGO. They're not offered for sale to get around problems with selling this material. So the books are, you know, had to be clearly identified 18-plus. And it's part of a campaign for them to try and repeal this law showing how, you know, these... these books have nothing that is offensive. [chuckle] You know, there's no... they're not about the sexuality. There's nothing sexual about the books. There's nothing that, you know, our lives don't need to be hidden from children. And so they're using the books to... to try and highlight that and underscore that, you know, the... the absurdity of the law on the one hand and the noxiousness of the law on the other that it's being used to penalize and discriminate against books like this, right.

CO: So what has it meant? Because we know that in... in Russia, they... they have been changing laws to make it even same-sex unions are more difficult. They're not recognized. It's very difficult to adopt to... to have children in same-sex relationships there. What do you know about how the book has been received?

LS: It's been... there are many people who have welcomed the books because they've had nothing that showed their lives or the lives of their friends or families or things like that. It's also been attacked quite a lot. You know, there was state television programs. One of the... I think it was the vice deputy of the central committee of the Communist Party accused me of committing, quote/unquote, fifth column attacks against Russia. A lot of the comments, you know, I mean, they say never read the comments. And that's definitely something that's true. I keep getting there's a lot of anti-Semitism in addition to the homophobia. So it's it's look at what these this foreigner is doing. And not only that, he's a Jew. So, I mean, it's just sort of the hate-mongering, and it's sort of exponentially as if it's not bad enough that they're trying to brainwash our kids with LGBT families. You know, it's also a Jew who's doing it, so.

CO: My gosh!

LS: You know, there's been a lot of that. [chuckling] I try not to read the comments. Sometimes I sort of summon courage to do so and block preventively a lot of people on social media just to make sure that the trolls don't come... come after us.

CO: And as painful as it must be to not only be accused of these things, but to have to get... to see not just homophobic but anti-Semitic things about yourself. I mean, you... the fact that these are controversial. And, in fact, in Hungary, a lawmaker actually shredded a copy of another one of your books in parliament to make a point. Is it something that you... that's actually good for the awareness of these books? That actually, the more they push back, the more exposed these laws become?

LS: So, I mean, that's an interesting question. It's been fascinating to see the reactions to people here. So, for instance, after the Spanish news, they did a report about the backlash in Hungary and Russia. And my husband's colleagues at the hospital where he works, it was interesting, all of the women asked how I am and how I'm feeling about all of this horrible stuff that's going on? And almost all of the men said, oh, it's great PR for the book. So, I mean, it was very interesting that the gender lines broke down very binary that way of people's reactions to it. In the case of the reaction of the laws and the sort of pushback against it, that is many people who otherwise might have been indifferent... I mean, certainly the case in Hungary, the law that has been made against these books, and especially there was a new update to that law that just went into effect on Sunday. So these books cannot be shown in a bookstore window. They must be wrapped in plastic. They cannot be sold within 200 metres of a school or a church as if they were drugs or something like that. It's trying to associate this material with, you know, dangerous, forbidden, illegal substances. So... but so many people in Hungary who might have otherwise been indifferent because of the government's homophobia have gone out of their way to fight against this. So, in that case, there definitely has been positive outcomes, despite, unfortunately, that the law exists and it's still on the books. And, you know, another positive outcome has been, you know, just yesterday, I... we settled the agreement for an addition to come out in Luxembourgish, which is the 27th language, the 33rd edition.

CO: So these books are around the world and in so many different languages and making a difference, I'm sure, for so many families. I appreciate speaking with you, Lawrence. Thank you.

LS: Thank you.

CH: Lawrence Schimel is the author of "Early One Morning" and "Bedtime, Not Playtime!" Both books will be published in North America next week by Orca Books. And for more on that story, visit our website at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[music: folk guitar]

Kyle Kematch Obit

CH: As one of the founders of Drag the Red, Kyle Kematch spent years seeking closure for himself and others. The volunteer group scours Winnipeg's Red River for any trace of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls -- Kyle's sister among them. Mr. Kematch's own sudden death last week was a huge blow for a community of volunteers, friends, and family that he worked with and inspired. Drag the Red co-founder Bernadette Smith told the CBC about the legacy of a man she says was dedicated and selfless.

SOUNDCLIP

BERNADETTE SMITH: So Drag the Red wouldn't have started without Kyle. We were really trying to get the police to do it. The police wouldn't do it. And Kyle came forward as a family member and said, let's do it. So really, you know, his legacy is, is this boat, the searching, community coming together, and the prevention. You know, people thinking twice about putting somebody in this river. And for families to know that somebody is doing something, you know, to search for their loved ones. Kyle was so dedicated. You know, our boat broke down, and he was out there in a canoe, you know, dragging the river in a canoe. He was out there, you know, even on the banks of the river, throwing a hook and, you know, trying to... to find some evidence to find someone's loved one.

AUSTIN GRABISH: You were both brought together by tragedy, both never found your sisters,

Speaker 6: but brought a lot of closure to other families. Maybe you want to talk to us about that?

BS: Yeah, my sister went missing in 2008, and Kyle's went missing in 2010. And I actually worked with his sister, Amber, and knew Kyle prior to, you know, his sister going missing. And when... when that happened, you know, he reached out to our family. And when that happened to his family, of course, you know, that created a... a bond between our families. And really, you know, that tragedy has created a bond between a lot of families. There's many here tonight that are, you know, their loved ones gone missing, or they've been murdered, or they've been found in this river. And it's unfortunate, you know, that were brought together by that. But it's bringing people together and connecting. And I think, you know, his legacy is going to live on with his daughter. His daughter is going to continue to work with Drag the Red, and.

AG: She was on the boat earlier today.

BS: She was. She went on, and they did a ceremony, a tobacco offering ceremony, to the river, as Kyle did every single time that he went onto the river. He always offered his tobacco, you know, for his safety and for the other people that were on the boat and that they would find whatever they were supposed to find. And, you know, she's a young woman that wants to continue that legacy. And we're just so fortunate to... to have her join us.

CH: That was Bernadette Smith remembering her friend and co-founder of Drag the Red, Kyle Kematch. She spoke with the CBC's Austin Grabish. Mr. Kematch died suddenly last week.

[music: ambient]

Barbados Stowaway Lizard

Guest: Lisa Russell

CH: When Lisa Russell got home from a vacation in the Barbados, she was surprised to discover that she'd brought one of the locals home with her: a gecko. We reached Ms. Russell in South Yorkshire, England.

CO: Lisa, as you unpacked your bags after your holiday, at what point did you discover you had a stowaway?

LISA RUSSELL: Well, I took my suitcase to the washing machine. I've got a clean side and a dirty side. And I was just sorting the washing out, and I picked up the clean side, which was the bra area, and I saw something black on it. I thought, oh, what's that? Picked up the bra, shook it because I thought it was actually a dead lizard squashed, and it started to roll.

CO: [laughing] What?! How did you react to that?

LR: Well, I let off a scream because I was surprised. I expected it to be dead. And when I screamed, my husband jumped up and said, what's the matter? He thought someone was in the house. And I said, I've got a lizard, and it's alive. [both chuckle]

CO: And where did... where did this... where did this guy go?

LR: Once it had been clamped to my bra, I didn't want to move anywhere. In fact, it's a she because she's been nicknamed Barbie, have you been told?

CO: Yes. Yes. And so you've decided it's a Barbie? [chuckling]

LR: Yeah. Well, no, I didn't call it Barbie. All the other news from my local area called her Barbie.

CO: Right.

LR: Because she's from Barbados. Barbie like bra, so it all rhymes.

CO: Got it. OK, so she... but she, Barbie, didn't stick to your bra. She actually jumped off your bra?

LR: No, she, I... I had the where you put your arm through, where you'd connect it at the back. I've got it up, so it was hanging down. So she scurried up the bra towards my had that was holding it. [CO chuckles] And she never... she never jumped off or anything like that. So I just moved into the kitchen and popped into a, well, the biggest container I could find really until I rang the RSPCA.

CO: How big is this lizard?

LR: She's at least five centimetres. She looks really tiny on the photographs. But from her head to her tail, she's at least five centimetres.

CO: How do you think she got into your luggage and got into your bra?

LR: I have no idea at all, because like I said, it was the clean side. I'd not even worn that bra on holiday. And I must have scooped out of the drawer that my underwear was in. I had not even worn that bra.

CO: I have to admit, the first time when I first saw this story, I thought that this gecko had come home with you from Barbados in a bra that you were wearing.

LR: In my bra. Yes, I know. I think a lot of people have thought that. I think I'd have probably realized a little bit... a little bit of scratching around. [laughing]

CO: You probably would have picked it out that there was something in there.

LR: Yeah.

CO: Right. That was what I thought. But you never know. And so anyway, so this lizard got... you got it into some kind of container. But you decided you didn't want to kill Barbie?

LR: Oh, no, definitely not. I mean, a lot of people may have put it out on the garden, but I couldn't imagine coming all that way from Barbados, so the four thousand miles to get maybe eaten by a bird or another wild animal. So my first instincts were to try and protect her and, hopefully, let her live.

CO: But she did manage to survive... this... was... was in your... it wasn't in your carry-on, right? This was stowed luggage. This was like --

LR Yes. Underneath the... underneath the aircraft. And the suitcase as well was jam-packed. I always take so many clothes on holiday. So obviously, I have a clean side and a dirty side, and I even got to sit on the case to zip my zip up. So I'm surprised she didn't even get squashed, bless her!

CO: Oh dear! It must be a very soft bra that she managed to get herself into there?

LR: Yes, it will is. [both laugh]

CO: OK, so now, where is the lizard now?

LR: So the RSPCA came to collect her. She's gone to a reptile house obviously who can look after her properly. They give her a squirt of water spread, sprayed her when we got there. They said she was smacking her little lips. So that made me laugh. [CO chuckles] And she will most likely live her life there.

CO: But now she's obviously a hardy little girl because she did manage to survive in the luggage, but she would not survive in your climate, right? So she's going to be an indoor lizard.

LR: Yes. So obviously, the tropical house will love the equipment that they'll need for the gecko to survive. And then they'll have professional people who know what they'll eat and everything like that. So that... that won't be an issue in England.

CO: Will you be visiting Barbie?

LR: [chuckling] Do you know what? I think I probably would like to in a year or so just to see how much she's grown.

CO: [both chuckle] Now, why do you think this... you've had a lot of response to this, right? What --

LR: I can't believe it. I've never been asked. I want to be famous, but I never wanted to be famous for a gecko. [laughing]

CO: Or be famous for a gecko that was hiding in your bra. All right, Lisa, I'll let you go. Thanks.

LR: Thank you so much for calling.

CO: Bye.

LR: Bye-bye.

CH: That was British traveller Lisa Russell. She returned home to South Yorkshire, England, from a vacation in Barbados to find that a gecko had sneaked into her luggage.

[music: hip-hop beat]

Glowing Animals

CH: Birds do it. Bees… I'm not sure. No idea about educated fleas, either. But wasps, definitely. And when I say "do it", of course I mean emit an eerie fluorescent glow under ultraviolet light for no discernible reason. You might recall that last year we told you that platypus fur had been found to glow green and purple under blacklight -- as if being producing venom and laying eggs, and having a duck bill and a beaver tail wasn't weird enough. Platypuses: you're trying too hard. But opossums, some North American flying squirrels, springhares, and wombats also glow different colours under blacklight. And now, according to a new paper in the Journal of the Royal Society "Interface" -- paper-wasp larvae have joined the party. Which seems like a rave circa 1995 -- based on the glowiness alone. On a night-time mission in a forest in Vietnam, one of the researchers discovered a colony whose underside glowed fluorescent green -- as though it had been dipped in glow-in-the-dark slime. It turned out to be the silk that larvae use to protect themselves as they dissolve their bodies and reform into adults. Further research showed the intensity of the glow to be three times brighter than any other terrestrial fluorescer. All of which is cool. But confusing. Because so far, nobody so far has shed any light on where all this glowing is going. Which means for now, we're left waiting for the next lightbulb moment.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

September 10, 2021 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This