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 November 13, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight...

CO: Access to grind. CNN sues U.S. President Donald Trump demanding he restore reporter Jim Acosta's White House press pass after it was unceremoniously revoked last week.

JD: Office politics. After a long bidding process Amazon announces the cities that will be part of its so-called HQ 2 Expansion. But some people see that expansion as more of an invasion.

CO: A lack of common senses. Officials in Nunavut say there are too many polar bears and they're a threat to public safety. But scientists in the south say the bears are under threat.

JD: He was the fabled "good guy with a gun." But while a black security guard was holding a shooting suspect at gunpoint outside a bar in Illinois the police showed up and killed him.

CO: Tongue depressor. In a decision that left one Dutch cream cheese company with a bad taste in its mouth, the European Court of Justice rules you cannot copyright a flavor.

JD: And... shape up -- and ship out. So when a Nova Scotia artist installed a chunk of an infamous abandoned ship on his lawn he hoped to provoke thought -- he has instead just provoked his neighbors. As It Happens. The Tuesday edition. Radio that guesses they want him to get it, the hull, out of there.

[Music]

Part 1: CNN Lawsuit

CNN lawsuit

Guest: Margaret Sullivan

JD: CNN v. Donald J. Trump. That is no longer just the President's spin on his relationship with the cable news network. It is also now the case name of a lawsuit filed today. CNN is suing President Trump and several of his aides on behalf of their White House correspondent Jim Acosta. They are aiming to get his press pass back. It was revoked last week after a bizarre and confrontational press conference. White House Press Secretary, Sarah Sanders, said in a statement "This is just more grandstanding from CNN and we will vigorously defend against this lawsuit." It is an unusual move for a press outlet to sue the administration it covers but it is a move that Margaret Sullivan called for as early as last week. Ms. Sullivan is a media columnist for The Washington Post and the former public editor of The New York Times. We reached her in New York.

CO: Margaret you were saying last week that CNN should sue the Trump Whitehouse -- did you think they would actually do it?

MARGARET SULLIVAN: You know I wasn't sure. I'm glad though that they have decided to do it. Of course I don't think for a moment that I had any influence on it but when I really thought about what could a news organization do in response to this that would be sensible and effective -- I kind of ticked through the possibilities you know: a walkout, a boycott, a strong you know verbal statement -- and I thought none of those things are going to make a bit of difference. What might make a difference is a legal decision or a legal challenge. So I think that in a way it was the only recourse they had.

CO: And what kind of a legal decision would make any difference?

MS: Well if a court decides that the administration cannot decide who gets press credentials based on the fact that you know they don't like this reporter's coverage, which is really what this is about, then that could -- it actually could protect not only Jim Acosta's press credential but also could inhibit this White House and other White Houses and other government officials from trying to pick and choose who covers them based on whether they like the journalism that they're producing which I'm convinced is what this is about. Although the White House has said it's because he wouldn't hand over the microphone to their intern -- but that's I think something of a fig leaf.

CO: Now on that issue of not turning over the microphone as we know there was a video released by the White House that showed Jim Acosta doing something somewhat aggressive. We've learned that that was because the film had been had been altered to make it appear that way. Does that play a role? The fact that there was an effort to show that Jim Acosta was being more aggressive than he actually was at that moment.

MS: So the White House when they originally took Acosta's press credential away gave as a reason that he had "laid hands on" this young woman. You know when you look at the video the non-sped up video -- it seems pretty clear to me that he was just sort of [inaudible] he didn't hit her or anything like it. And interestingly now the White House has backed off that and said that the reason for it is that he wouldn't give up the mic. But I think that even so I think that's not what this is about. They don't like CNN. They don't like Jim Acosta. And it's part of President Trump's sort of animus towards the press and his using the press as kind of a convenient enemy that actually works well for him politically with his base.

CO: And so on that note -- is it possible that a suit like this could actually backfire? That there's actually a downside to doing this when you actually do what his base believes the media's doing which has become the enemy.

MS: I think that President Trump's base has as a strong predilection to believe what he says and not always what another observer might conclude. But there may be a downside to it. But I still think that they had to do something to defend what amounts to press rights in this situation. Otherwise you're sort of saying, oh the White House should get to decide who covers them. And that's just not acceptable.

CO: What are the rules? What are the criteria that are used in order to give someone accreditation to the White House?

MS: So there is an organization that gives congressional press passes out and that people -- it's an organization of journalists. And generally those people are the ones that are also given White House press credentials so that it's not the White House saying yes I think we want MSNBC in here, or no, probably more like yes we'd like Fox News and Breitbart here but we don't want MSNBC. It's really not up to them.

CO: Do you know of any precedent for this kind of action through the history of the press corps at the White House?

MS: There's very little along this line. There was a 1977 case in which a reporter for The Nation magazine was not able to get or had his press credential taken away. And the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals actually ended up ruling in favor of the magazine so that probably -- it may bode well for Acosta and CNN.

CO: And so you said that there's a concern that if you don't stand up to this one that there will be others -- has Donald Trump or anyone in the White House hinted that there are other people they'd like to ban from the White House?

MS: Yes in fact I think just within the past day or so President Trump said you know and we'll see who else we don't like here. And you know he's been very very insulting and demeaning particularly to some black female journalists. Just in the past week three of them who are well respected members of the press corps and President Trump said very demeaning things you're a loser, you're stupid, you know you ask stupid questions. And it might well be that if nothing happened after banning Acosta you know he might decide to say well I'm going to go after these people now. So I think there needed to be a real line drawn in the sand and you know you're absolutely right that it does put CNN in opposition to the president and we don't want that as journalists -- we don't want to be the enemy that he says we are. But at some point you have to defend yourself and not only defend yourself but defend the principle and the right to cover the president. This is our role in society.

CO: There are so many instances where President Trump has spoken about Jim Acosta as you know has called him, crazy Jim Acosta of fake new CNN -- I think it's kind of a phrase that he uses and so will that become part of the body of evidence that there is some bias against this particular journalist?

MS: You know I don't know that that will come up but it certainly seems that there's been some particular dislike there. I mean I suppose the White House could make the case that Acosta hasn't been fair in his coverage. But again I don't think that's the core issue here because who's to say what fair coverage if we leave that up to the White House to say what they like -- we're all in trouble.

CO: We will be watching. Margaret I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

MS: Thank you very much.

CO: Bye.

JD: Margaret Sullivan is a media columnist with The Washington Post. She is also the former public editor of The New York Times. We reached her in New York City.

[Music]

Nunavut polar bears

Guest: Andrew Derocher

JD: To people all over the world the polar bear has become a symbol of the devastating effects of climate change and the Canadian government has noted that some polar bear populations are in steep decline. But the government of Nunavut begs to differ. In a draft management plan the territorial government claims that there are actually too many polar bears in parts of the territory and that the large number of bears are posing a threat to public safety. Andrew Derocher is a polar bear scientist at the University of Alberta. We reached him on the tundra about 40 kilometres east of Churchill, Manitoba.

CO: Mr. Derocher what is your biggest concern when you read a report that suggests there are too many polar bears in Nunavut?

ANDREW DEROCHER: Well I think it's always a question of perspective and it's interesting because of course local people are seeing more polar bears in their communities and when you see something like that you make the assumption that there's a lot more polar bears around. And it's interesting in the population that I'm in right now on the shores of Hudson Bay we know that this population has declined by over 30 percent. But over that same period that the population has been declining we're seeing more and more human bear conflicts in the communities -- particularly in Nunavut.

CO: Okay but now this draft report says that no polar bear declines can currently be attributed to climate change. How do you respond to that?

AD: Well that's somebody that's not understanding the scientific literature because it's very clear that polar bear populations have declined to the populations in Nunavut. That's the one that's in western Hudson Bay that is shared between Manitoba and Nunavut. The one in the southern Hudson Bay which is the one in Ontario that is shared with Nunavut as well and the hunters in Sanikiluaq. The Belcher Islands hunt that one. So those two populations are down -- this one by 30 percent, the one in southern Hudson Bay by about 18 percent. And that is attributed to sea ice loss.

CO: But they're talking about the polar bears in Nunavut -- is there a distinction?

AD: No because the bears that are in this area are hunted by Nunavut hunters so it's not a distinction.

CO: They are saying that of the13 bear populations -- 9 of them are growing and none is shrinking.

AD: That is not matching the scientific consensus of what we're seeing and it's interesting because even the surveys that have been done by Nunavut in this part of the Arctic indicate that the populations are declining. So it's again -- there's an interesting conflict here between the scientific perspective and traditional ecological knowledge -- and this has been something that's not new but it's certainly being solidified in the new management plan.

CO: But now they are saying their traditional knowledge, their observations, they're living in these communities, they have been here for generations, they can see what's happening, they're more aware of it from their knowledge which is land based and observation based. Yours is as you call it scientific literature -- scientific consensus. They're saying that you're wrong -- that they have a better observation post than you do to see what's happening.

AD: Well I've worked with many Inuit hunters over the years and it's always a question of scale. So when I've worked with them we sometimes work together out from the helicopters and you know they are always surprised by the scale that we sample. We go much greater distances much farther. We work on places and ice that they would never travel over because it's just not safe to -- so traditional knowledge works very well with sort of the recent ecological conditions and then looking backwards in time there's a lot of cultural history that comes on the perspectives but a changing climate really fundamentally alters the playing field that we're going to be dealing with in the future. So the concerns I've got about this management plan is it's still sort of stuck into a paradigm that was established when Harvest rules came into effect about 40 years ago and we haven't really adapted to the reality that the sea ice is disappearing and that is indisputable -- and you can talk to anybody in the communities they know the ice is changing.

CO: How much do you actually consult on traditional knowledge for your science? Because this is their argument isn't it that southern scientists come up, they do their research, I know you're in the regions quite a bit but you don't live there and your science is based on your data, on your data gathering, and they have this other knowledge -- and did you consult with them on that?

AD: We've always worked with hunters in the community so we're almost always working with them out on the land and on the sea ice when we're doing our work. So there is a difference in perspective that comes from that for sure. But again it's really not a conflict between what we're saying and what they're saying. It's really that scientists have one type of looking at the issue and traditional knowledge has another and it really falls to the managers to integrate that information. I'm not trained in traditional knowledge. We do use it so we talk to the hunters -- we'd say well where are the bears denning? And they would tell us very well. What are they eating in different areas? Where are they traveling? And we use that information when we try to build our scientific studies and that's been done since the very earliest days of research on polar bears. So it's an interesting dilemma that's occurred and I think the big thing is it's got to be a merging of understanding that really brings us forward in time rather than sort of saying one is right and one is wrong. It really behooves us to find the middle ground and the solutions here.

CO: That merging of understanding that gets set back doesn't it when you have something like last summer National Geographic a video that two and a half billion people downloaded to watch showing footage of an emaciated polar bear stating in this video that this is what climate change looks like. National Geographic has subsequently said that they have no evidence it was climate change. They don't even know why the bear was ill. Those are the sorts of things that they point to is examples of how the south distorts things for a market that includes movie actors and singers and songwriters and those who have a different narrative about what's going on the Arctic. Can you see why they don't trust you?

AD: It's again -- it's not really a question of trust I think, it's also a question of marketing and how things are presented. And that National Geographic issue was, to put it mildly, unfortunate. And scientifically we were never pushing that that was climate change. I've seen starving polar bears for over 35 years of research that I've done on the species. But at the end of the day polar bears really are under the jurisdiction of Nunavut to decide how to manage them and as a scientist I have no say and I don't really criticize that. I think that when you ignore the science you're not doing a service to working with the best possible information that's available.

CO: We will leave it there. Mr. Derocher thank you.

AD: Thank you very much.

JD: Andrew Derocher is a polar bear scientist at the University of Alberta. We reached him on the tundra about 40 kilometres east of Churchill, Manitoba. We did request a response and an interview from the Government of Nunavut. We were told the Premier is travelling but we will get a response later on in the week.

[Music]

Farley Mowat tribute

Guest: Brian MacNevin

JD: We have all heard the cliché about beauty but the truth is ugliness is in the eye of the beholder as well, isn't it? And some beholders in Bridgewater, Nova Scotia say that a sculpture made out of a chunk of the controversial Sea Shepherd vessel the Farley Mowat is an eyesore. And the mayor says he's been getting an earful from local residents.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I can say that I received myself about a half dozen calls -- and that's just me. I would say that that probably translates to close the same calls for most councillors and then staff would have received the number of calls and emails as well. And I do know that some people actually came into town hall to express their concern.

JD: That was Mayor David Mitchell of Bridgewater, Nova Scotia speaking with CBC Nova Scotia this morning. The town has demanded that the artist behind that piece take it down. Brian MacNevin is said artist. We reached him at home earlier today.

CO: Brian first of all what does this work on your front lawn look like?

BRIAN MACNEVIN: Well imagine a big chunk of the bow that includes the name plate of the Farley Mowat ship being chopped out by a company that cutting the ship up into pieces. And through that I have as a support structure -- a railroad track that I purchase from the whole of the Farley Mowat ship when it was being cut up in Lunenburg sticking out the front of it.

CO: And a little picket fence around there and some flowers I think?

BM: The picket fence I took down I thought it might help to domesticate and make the piece look a little safer because they had called it unsightly and dangerous. It's not dangerous. Unsightly. Well I put the picket fence up and then I didn't like the way the picket fence took away from the overall structure, it kind of dominated it too much, so I removed that.

CO: Now you're not saying that this is a work of art or that it's beautiful -- it's quite raw looking isn't it?

BM: It is very raw. It's kind of a souvenir. So the idea of painting it or making it more beautiful or you know how do you enhance something that is just a keepsake in some sense. Now you have to keep in mind that this has been a five year trial for me. I first purchased a name plate of Tracey Dobbs when the ship was being cut up in 2013. My intention at that point because I was buying a lot of artifacts from the ship, the ship's logs and other items. And in fact the Sea Shepherd Society people came to our house and I gave them some of the items that I had purchased from Tracey Dobbs.

CO: Would you just point out -- the Farley Mowat, a research vessel -- registered as a research vessel was part of the Sea Shepherd fleet that was ultimately seized by the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans right.

BM: Yes but the initial reason why I purchased the bow name plate was -- I wanted to take it up to Cape Breton on the roof of the car and just give it to Farley Mowat. It seemed like a really nice way of meeting the man. You know. I didn't know whether he wanted the name plate or not but it was like, here Farley here's the name plate from the ship that is named after you. A way of meeting him.

CO: And basically so you wanted to give it to Farley, you couldn't -- he passed away. And so now you've got it on your front lawn now and the town hall -- you just heard the mayor who says that he's getting dozens of complaints about it from people who don't want it there. It's pretty conspicuous, isn't it? So is there something else you could do with it to make people happy about it?

BM: I don't know. You know I see it as a memorial to both the ship and the author and by extension to marine conservation activism. You know that's an issue down here that doesn't go over big. You know I live in the world of [inaudible] mythologies -- not Farley Mowat mythologies. These people were the first to deal with issues like [inaudible] whaling, ceiling -- but we still have issues like offshore oil drilling, and fishing banks, you know plastic in the sea, pulp mills that are dumping waste into the water. It's not gone away. The question that I'd like to raise with this work is how far one goes with marine conservation activism.

CO: And again -- the Farley Mowat was seized, it had huge fines on it, it had accrued all kinds of costs because it was [unintelligible] for a long time before it was finally broken up for scrap. So what is the message that you want to send by putting this piece with the nameplate out on your lawn?

BM: You know it holds a whole bunch of stories -- both Farley Mowat, stories of the Sea Shepherd Society and the railroad track going through it. We have no railroad to Bridgewater -- I'm seeing it as an object that one looks at and then brings their imagination to. In much the same way in Lunenburg they have a piece of the Berlin Wall. If you did not know what the Berlin Wall was it would look like a large chunk of cement. Do young people today read Farley Mowat? I read Farley Mowat when I was in high school. Do they know who Farley Mowat is? Believe it or not I had people who don't know who Farley Mowat is come and talk to me. I've had a few that actually have taken the time to stop the car come in and talk to me about this work and they think very positively of it. But I also wanted it to function like a bit of interference. A bit like a noise or a glitch.

CO: The town council as you know is meeting tonight to decide if it will remove your sculptures -- so what will you do if you lose? Your own lawyer's warning you're likely to lose. So what will you do if the vote goes against you?

BM: Well I hope you have some listeners out there that might have some suggestions. I'm open to possibilities. A letter from the town council was very threatening -- they could come on our property and take the object away, cut it up, throw it away, and we would be sent the bill. I didn't want that to happen and that's why I had to get a lawyer. So yes I want to keep it. I want to find a good home for it.

CO: Well we will let that message go out there if somebody has an idea. And Brian we will follow this story. And thanks for speaking with us.

BM: Okay thanks for your call.

CO: Take care. Bye bye.

BM: Okay. Bye bye.

JD: Brian MacNevin is an artist who created a sculpture out of a piece of the Farley Mowat and installed it on his front lawn. We reached him earlier today in Bridgewater, Nova Scotia. We have posted a photograph of Mr. MacNevin's work on our Twitter feed @CBCAsItHappens. And if you do have any thoughts about what should happen to the work should he lose that case -- give us a shout 416-205-5687. Or drop us a line on Facebook or Twitter both of those accounts CBC As It Happens.

[Music]

Cream cheese and copyright

JD: "There is no accounting for taste!" Or in the original Latin, "De gustibus non est disputandum." It's one of those old sayings that is so true, isn't it? And so annoying. Especially, if someone says that Latin one. That is not to my taste and I feel pretty strongly that there is accounting for that and that accounting is... that is gross. Now annoying or not, though, it is definitely true. And not just in cases where you and your friend disagree about which "Mamma Mia!" Movie is better but also in the hallowed halls of the European Court of Justice. In 2015 the makers of a Dutch cream cheese called Heksenkaas took a rival company to court claiming copyright infringement. They argued that another brand of cream cheese with herbs in it Witte Wievenkaas tasted much too much like theirs. Seems simple enough but legally speaking it was a case with many complex flavors and essences. And now three years later the European Court of Justice has ruled a taste cannot be protected by copyright. In the ruling the court wrote "The taste of a food product cannot be defined with precision and objectivity." So in other words taste is subjective and can be influenced by all kinds of factors and you cannot copyright that which is not objectively yours. And so three years and thousands of words later Europe's keenest legal minds have literally concluded there there's no accounting for taste. And the ruling itself proves that, doesn't it? Because the makers of Witte Wievenkaas no doubt believe it is completely tasteful whereas the makers of Heksenkaas find it in the worst possible taste.

[Music]

Part 2: Amazon announces ‘HQ2’ cities

Amazon HQ

Guest: Ron T. Kim

JD: Today New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio made a big announcement. Long Island City, in the New York borough of Queens, had beat out hundreds of other competitors. It was named as the next site for a new headquarters of e-commerce giant, Amazon. The other site of the so-called "HQ 2" is the suburb of Arlington, Virginia. Amazon has behaved as though it's handing residents in both locations a generous and enormous gift. But the backlash to the deal has been swift with lawmakers and community advocates warning of gentrification and increased inequality. Ron T. Kim is a New York state assemblyman who represents parts of Queens. We reached him in Flushing, New York.

CO: Mr. Kim when you first heard confirmation that Amazon had landed on Long Island City as one of the sites of their new headquarters, what came to mind?

RON KIM: I was stunned by the numbers that were cited today in the agreement that the governor and the mayor had come to -- almost two billion dollars of taxpayers money that they agreed to give to the richest man on the planet. I was shocked.

CO: A lot of places wanted to be in your shoes, wanted to be the place -- you know how many municipalities, how many cities, competed for this. So what's wrong with what you got?

RK: I mean I think that in itself is also very shocking that we've allowed this super monopoly mega corporation to really manipulate the system and pit cities against each other. And at the end of the day it isn't a full-fledged headquarters as they promised. This was merely just an expansion. And I think the cities and the states -- they've given up so much of their time, energy, and data for a private company like Amazon and the return on the investment that's going to come out of these billions of dollars -- every economist and research have proven that there's absolutely no statistical correlation between economic growth and job growth with these type of subsidy programs.

CO: Okay let's just look at some of the things that apparently they've agreed on. You mentioned that the governor and the mayor have offered Amazon things for an exchange with those state subsidies that are tied to the company creating 25,000 jobs in Long Island City -- so that's nothing to sneeze at is it?

RK: Well first of all those jobs were already in the pipeline whether the money's there or not. It was just a matter of where were going to provide those jobs. Amazon is designed -- their fundamental business model is to get big as possible and expand and grow -- that money is not going directly to [inaudible] what the money does that's been given to them will be extracted out of New York and will be going to directly into the pockets of top executives and Jeff Bezos. It's no different than what President Donald Trump did with the two trillion -- one point five trillion dollars last year of corporate tax breaks -- telling the public that it is going to create jobs. But what it really did was corporations bought back stocks rewarding their top -- you know board of directors and investors. This is the same thing that's going to happen. It's a direct transfer of wealth and money out of our local neighbourhoods.

CO: This new headquarters will be next to -- well, a very large housing project, Queens bridge Houses. The claim is that it will benefit people in that community, will it not?

RK: Right but why are we competing for some chump change at the end of the deal -- if the state of New York had all that money imagine we actually invest it directly and give that money directly to the people in those housing units that are struggling everyday living paycheck to paycheck with so much debt and financial woes -- and instead of going to directly to help them why are we giving so much of that money to the richest man in the world and expect them to in the back hand hope that they'll do some positive things to the local neighbourhoods.

CO: The wealthiest man in the world you're referring to is Jeff Bezos of Amazon. So is it any corporation, any large corporation, that would be setting up in this way or is it Amazon and Jeff Bezos that you think is something that is not healthy, is not useful, to your community?

RK: Yeah I mean we've had other tech companies come in and they're not asking for any subsidies. They come in and they compete. They pay market value to set up their shop including Google and Facebook. They didn't receive a single dime from the city in New York. But Jeff Bezos -- their business model has always been to figure out how to pit people against each other. Pit customers. Pit cities. Pit politicians -- against each other and really exploit the market and that's the core of their business model. They are a super monopoly company that have become the market. They don't just control the market, they become the market. And it is completely unhealthy for our democracy and our ability to compete and helping small businesses and entrepreneurs in places like Queens.

CO: There is a strong tradition of organized labour in New York. How would that work? How would that culture work with the Amazon culture?

RK: Yeah I mean there a number of labour groups that are protesting or organizing rallies and they're getting ready to push back. And hopefully we can claw back -- and I have legislative ideas as well to go into session and claw back some of these agreements. This is a perfect opportunity to distinguish who will be right -- on the right side of history. The neo-liberal you know technocrats or the people who is going to fight for the people on the ground.

CO: There's a movement to resist it. But aren't you going to find a lot of people who are going to be lining up for those job fairs and those resume workshops that Amazon has promised to spend five million dollars on. Aren't they going to be saying yeah we want this?

RK: I think there are plenty of people that don't have a choice. The way that we designed the system but if you look -- if you go into some of these innovative hubs in places like Bushwick and other neighbourhoods that are doing amazing innovative tech work that's actually adding value to our ecosystem instead of extracting value like Amazon. Young people understand that -- [inaudible] millennials in particular that are entering this new tech space understand the difference between a company like Amazon versus a real innovative company that can add value to our economy.

CO: We will be watching. And thank you for speaking with us Mr. Kim.

RK: Thank you so much for your time.

JD: Ron T. Kim is a New York state assemblyman representing the 40th district. We reached him in Flushing, New York.

[Music]

Calgary plebiscite

JD: Calgary held its Olympic plebiscite today. The question was simple, are you for or against Calgary hosting the 2026 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games? The answer is a bit more complex. Now the results of today's vote will not be binding but the Province of Alberta has said that it will withdraw its funding if residents vote no. And opinion is divided. Here's what CBC Calgary's Reid Southwick heard from voters earlier today.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: I voted yes. I think it will provide some economic benefits. I think that we're going to get from infrastructure that we wouldn't get otherwise. And I also believe that it's good for the spirit of the city. I think we need a little bit of unity. Not a bad thing.

VOICE 2: I voted no.

VOICE 3: How come?

VOICE 2: Because I don't believe it's a good investment. For one thing the cost estimates are just plain wrong. Three hundred ninety million dollars is just the tip of the iceberg of what it will cost Calgary. The story that they're saying we will get ten dollars back for every one dollar invested is just a plain lie. Basically I think it's a bad idea.

VOICE 4: I was undecided and kind of on the 'no' side up until about 24 hours ago. And I ran into my neighbor who basically said that companies who are coming to Calgary would come more frequently if there was a higher sense of community spirit in hosting the Olympics this is a way to prove that. So that's why I voted yes.

VOICE 5: It's somewhat annoying that the city has given the 'yes' people a lot of money and they've given the 'no' people nothing. And you kind of look and say, well is this the elites pushing the agenda? It sticks out to me -- fairly obvious and fairly blatantly. It just strikes me as not a good deal.

VOICE 6: I came to vote because I was in the Olympics in Vancouver. Thought that was the most wonderful thing I've ever been to and I think if anyone can do this it is Calgary so I'm hoping people will realise this is not only about the money, this is about the world and the people that come together and that's what I'm here for.

JD: Those are just some Calgary voters sharing their thoughts about today's Olympic plebiscite with CBC's Reid Southwick.

[Music]

Illinois shooting

Guest: Marvin Hunter

JD: It was early Sunday morning at a bar in Robbins, Illinois -- when the shooting began. According to a witness an armed security guard got involved and took a suspect to the ground outside holding him down. But that security guard 26-year-old Jemel Roberson would end up dead. The black man was reportedly shot by a police officer. Marvin Hunter knew Mr. Roberson -- he is the pastor at Grace Memorial Baptist Church. We reached Pastor Hunter in Chicago.

CO: Pastor Hunter, I'm sorry for your loss.

MARVIN HUNTER: Thank you.

CO: What are you remembering today about Jemel Roberson?

MH: Well I'm actually here in the church now and I'm looking at this organ and thinking about this young man that came here. And he actually came as like a freelance organ player but he after being here while he had began to say to me that he wanted to actually become a permanent musician here at the church -- and that he had expressed to me that he had been learning how to play the organ from another young man that I knew and he had a real passion for that. But I think the thing that is sticking with me the most is not his talent but his desire to have his house. He was trying to get an apartment, which he got, because he was trying to get custody of his son. I think he actually obtained that. And he was excited about being able to raise his son and love him and have him grow up and become a productive part of society.

CO: Before we go into what happened and I know you weren't there so you can't tell us much but just tell us a bit more about Jemel Roberson and his organ playing -- how was he on the organ? What kind of sound did he make?

MH: He had absolute potential. And I think everyone that knew and heard him saw that. He had not -- in my assessment which you know the apex of what he could have grown into being on the organ. But those songs that he knew he played them with passion, he played them with the spirituality. And he loved God because he could play it and when he was playing the organ you could see it and you could hear it in the chords that he was feeling. And he was very passionate about what he did.

CO: He was just not playing the organ at your church -- he had other churches in the area he was playing for as well, is that right?

MH: That is right. He played -- as I said he was a freelancer, and you know he was learning but he had gotten well enough to he could carry services. He unlike a lot of the young men he could play the old songs that preachers like me like to hear and sing -- and songs that are culturally relevant to Missionary Baptist Church. He knew them. He remembers them. And he could play those kinds of songs. And I thought that was really good.

CO: At the same time he was working as a security guard in this bar. For people who don't know what happened, can you just tell us what you know about how Jemel Roberson died?

MH: I guess the word 'know' I need to clarify -- this is primarily what I've read in the papers and what has just kind of been told to me from people to people. The jury is still out as to what all the facts are. But the common things that people are saying to me is that there was some young men that came into the bar which he was working. They came in and they were inebriated and disruptive. And he began -- he and the staff that worked with him to remove them from the bar. I was told that the young men left and they came back and began shooting and he put his life on the line to defuse that. The Midlothian police arrived. And they just came to -- what I guess they believed to be a diffuse situation -- where they need to diffuse. And the people were screaming -- he is the security guard, he is the security guard... and the guy just shot.

CO: And this is what you've -- as you mentioned there will be an investigation. There are a lot of facts we don't have yet about what happened and we don't know if there's security cameras or whatever. But from what you've been told from people and what you've been able to find out -- that's the story.

MH: Absolutely. And I'm told that there is video. Now here's what I know as a matter of fact -- and the matter of fact is this police officer, that did this shooting, is living under the same [inaudible] in his mind of authority as Jason Van Dyke -- which killed my nephew four years ago, Laquan McDonald -- and that is the uniform peace officers' disciplinary act.

CO: For the -- Canadian audience might not remember Laquan McDonald. You are his great uncle as you just mentioned and he was 17 years old when he was fatally shot by a white police officer -- black boy. And this as you mentioned officer Van Dyke was convicted of second degree murder. And are you thinking about Laquan -- your nephew today as you hear the story of Jemel Roberson?

MH: Absolutely. The moment that happened. He was shot 16 times and he died of multiple gunshot. And what did they call it -- when you bleed out -- he literally bled to death.

CO: He was walking away from the police officer when he was shot.

MH: He was walking away. He was absolutely no threat to police. And the same is in Jemel's case. Jemel's was no threat to the police officer that killed him -- the witnesses are saying. I'm sorry go right ahead.

CO: I know you have spoken with -- I believe you've spoken with Jemel Roberson's mother. How is she doing?

MH: Well she is as heartbroken as any mother would be. This was my first conversation with her. She's a very very kind and soft spoken lady. I didn't hear you know a lot of hate in her but I could hear the pain. Look this young man was a good young man and he was -- this is not you know no add on for effects. He was honestly a good young man. And when you met him he gave you the impression of a person that knew how to love people. He died doing just what he would have done a thousand times. And that is trying to save the lives of people and help wherever he could. This is very unfortunate.

CO: Pastor Hunter again I'm sorry for the loss of this young man and the lost to your church. And I appreciate you talking to us today. Thank you.

MH: Thank you so much and thank all of those that have prayed for our family and all of these families around this country. God bless you.

CO: Take care. Bye bye.

JD: We reached Pastor Marvin Hunter in Chicago. Jemel Roberson's family has filed a federal lawsuit following his death which alleges the shooting was excessive and unreasonable. We reached out to Illinois State Police and the Cook County Sheriff's Office both told us they are investigating the incident.

[Music]

Kyrsten Sinema

JD: A week after mid-term election day the state of Arizona finally has a senator. After a neck and neck race Democrat, Kyrsten Sinema, was finally announced as the winner ahead of Republican, Martha McSally. Ms. Sinema's win makes her the first female senator ever elected in Arizona. Here is part of her victory speech from last night.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I am so honoured that Arizonans chose our vision of a better Arizona. And now it's time to get to work. Arizonans had a choice between two very different ways forward. One focused on fear and party politics. And one focused on Arizona and the issues that matter to everyday families. Arizona rejected what has become far too common in our country. Name calling. Petty personal attacks. And doing and saying whatever it takes just to get elected. It's dangerous and it lessens who we are as a country. But Arizona proved that there is a better way forward. We can work with people who are different than us. We can be friends with people who are different than us. We can love and care about people who are different than us. We can keep people who are different than us safe. We can be good people who care deeply about each other even when we disagree.

JD: That was part of Democrat, Kyrsten Sinema's speech after she was announced as the winner of Arizona's Senate race.

Buddy the donkey

VOICE: From coast to coast on CBC Radio and around the world on shortwave, this is As It Happens.

CO: Hello I'm Carol Off.

JD: And I'm Jeff Douglas.

CO: Celebrating 50 years...

JD: Of As It Happens. Ouu just three days from now we will be celebrating the big 50th birthday of As It Happens with a big on air party. We're going to have some former hosts on, a quiz on all things AIH, and perhaps a pun or two -- if we feel like it. It will also feature some favorite moments as requested by you -- our listener. Interviews like this one from April of 2007 when Carol spoke with a Dallas lawyer by the name of Gregory Shamoun, after his donkey became the subject of a legal dispute.

SOUNDCLIP

CO: Buddy is of course the name of your donkey?

VOICE: Buddy is my ass. That's correct.

CO: Can you [Laughs] describe your ass for us please?

VOICE: My ass is about 300 pounds and it's three and a half feet tall. And my ass is kind of furry and very well trained, very well groomed, and housebroken.

CO: And so [Laughs] was he court-broken? Was he fairly well behaved in court?

VOICE: He was a gem. He was one of the best witnesses I've ever had in 18 years as a lawyer.

CO: Now what was the point of bringing him in?

VOICE: The best evidence of my ass's behavior is looking at my ass face to face.

CO: [Laughs] So did the jury get a pretty good look at it? At him?

VOICE: All six jurors got a face to face picture of my ass right in the courtroom. We did my ranch hand -- walked him around the jury box and I gave them an opportunity to pat my ass or talk to my ass and then after they observed --then my ass went back home.

CO: [Laughs] Now I understand that you do a very good impression of Buddy.

VOICE: I can. Do y'all want to hear him?

CO: I'd love to.

[Makes donkey noises]

VOICE: Now that's Buddy.

JD: Now it may be totally reasonable to believe that that story tops the very specific category of strange-yet-funny interview involving a barnyard animal. But does it? Does it? Find out on Friday when you will hear -- yes even weirder stuff on our 50th anniversary special on CBC Radio One.

[Music]

Part 3: Why Ireland is creating women-only professorships at its universities

Women only professorships

Guest: Pat O'Connor

JD: Ireland has a new plan to combat gender inequality in universities -- and that is women only professorships. Over the next three years the government promises to fund approximately 45 professorial positions specifically for women. Now currently, women make up less than a quarter of professorial posts. Pat O'Connor is part of that twenty five percent. In 1997 she became the first female professor at the University of Limerick. She is now a professor emeritus of sociology and social policy and has contributed or did contribute to a report for the government on gender inequality in Irish academia. We reach Professor Pat O'Connor in Dunmore East, Ireland.

CO: Professor O'Connor it seems that more women will soon have the title of 'professor' in Ireland. What does that mean for you?

PAT O'CONNOR: Well when I was appointed professor and I was the first professor to be appointed in the University of Limerick I felt very daunted actually by it. This was back in 1997 -- and I felt the shoes of a professor were very large and very male -- and so I hope we can create a world where women, young women, don't feel so daunted by these shoes or don't see them as so very male.

CO: It's interesting that you would say that it's the women themselves that need to see that they have earned those positions or they should have them and that the men have to step aside or is it a bit of both?

PC: I don't think it's -- I mean there is a problem with gender in the context of gender inequality in Irish higher education. Women's chance of basically getting a professorship is 1 in 15 -- whereas men's chance is 1 in 5.

CO: Okay just want to talk to you a bit about how this compares with other universities. You say in the University of Limerick you were the first female professor and you became a professor in 1997. How does Ireland compare with other countries?

PC: Well now Ireland overall there are 7 public universities in Ireland and 24 percent of those at full professoriate level are now women which would be in fact a little higher than the EU. Ireland has been influenced by global currents and there has been a very rapid change in all sorts of social areas. For example gay marriage -- we were traditionally, when I was a young woman, we were a very Catholic, a very patriarchal society, and all that has begun to change.

CO: Now you say that -- if I understand correctly, 45 professor positions will be specifically for women at universities and technology institutes in Ireland. Is that right?

PC: Basically in universities or institute of technology but these will be specifically in areas where women are underrepresented and higher education institutions will have to show to funding party -- to the higher education authority that they made other efforts to deal with the problem. And so only in that context will they be given permission to basically get one or more of these positions and then they will be run in the normal professoriate way. There's no question that people will kind of coming off the streets to get a professorial position if they're a woman.

CO: I just wonder if in any way there's a downside or this could kind of backfire in this sense that -- will then people make the argument well then that we have these designated places where positions for women and so they should be not considered as strongly for other positions because well women are being taken care of here -- so we don't have to be so active looking for women for other positions because we have this policy, is there a danger of that?

PC: Well that of course is a possibility but it is in recognition of that -- the other measures have been put in place including for example the higher education authority will tie funding to the proportion of women who are also in senior administration positions. But certainly universities and institutes of higher education they will not be able to use these polls to basically bulk up their figures.

CO: I suspect you're going to get some pushback from those who will say that you're fighting sexism with sexism -- and that women can only get these jobs by excluding men. So what will be your response to that?

PC: Well my response is that men and people who are bad minded say a lot of nasty things about women -- and occupying female only basically professorships are not the only targets of their ire and criticism.

CO: Okay but an answer to their argument -- Yes all that is true but what is the answer? What do you say to that?

PC: The criteria will be the normal ones at professoriate level. We know that there are endemic systemic pressures which prejudice -- even the most intelligent men and women to favour men and this is part of an overall package which will attempt as a structural and cultural level to level the playing pitch for women.

CO: Your prime minister said yesterday or during the weekend he said that this was -- the gender inequality is deeply ingrained in your society. You mentioned yourself it's a very patriarchal and Catholic -- so you have gender discrimination laws in Ireland and some are saying that the government -- well the government's expecting challenges in court against this new program -- according to Ireland's gender discrimination laws, what do you expect there?

PC: Well there are two points to be made here. Firstly, gender discrimination laws do not prevent discriminary actions at an interactional level. All sorts of little biases that creep in which have been demonstrated they've been called micro-political practices, small adjustments, small biases, basically have been documented even in Sweden. Right. Basically doubt raisers being more likely to be raised about women if women come from a prestigious institution. The question is are they piggy backing on that.

CO: Okay but to answer the question -- how do you fight that?

PC: You fight it through changing the culture. And that's the first point-- it's at an interactional level so you require a change in the culture -- not simply laws. And your second point that will this breach laws? There are a number of cases of this kind of positive action in the Netherlands, in a number of other countries, and they have not been found to be in breach of the law. And the Minister for Higher Education has checked this out.

CO: All right we'll be watching. Professor O'Connor good to talk to you. Thank you.

PC: Thank you.

CO: Good night.

JD: Pat O'Connor is a professor emeritus at the University of Limerick. We reached her in Dunmore East. And we have more on this story on our website cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Éric Dupont

JD: Eric Dupont's publisher describes his Giller nominated book as a "big fat whopper of a tall tale." And at 608 pages it is literally tall and it does have an impressive girth. "Songs for the Cold of Heart" is the sprawling intergenerational story of the Lamontagne family. It begins in Riviere-du-loup, Quebec in 1919 before taking readers to Rome and Nagasaki and beyond. The winner of the one hundred thousand dollars Scotiabank Giller Prize will be announced on November 19th. And leading up to the event we here at As It Happens are playing readings by all five finalists. So here now is Eric Dupont reading from Songs for the Cold of Heart.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: In the family portrait taken by the photographer in June 1968 Louis Lamontagne and his wife are sitting on the love seat upholstered in a magenta floral print on a chestnut background. Irene is dressed in black. And he's wearing the look of someone who has lost something important and he's wondering where ever it might have gone. Between husband and wife an empty space, large enough for a child to sit in. Standing behind them their two oldest children. First, Mark an attractive austere young man looking every bit like he just stepped out of a Botticelli self-portrait -- the same fleshy lips, the same hungry and [inaudible] eyes, his hand on the frail shoulder of his big sister, Madeleine, who's standing tall and proud as befits Lamontagne -- although everyone knows without being able to explain exactly how or why that her mind is occupied with some complex mental arithmetic as is a [inaudible]. She's wearing a pale coloured dress. A necklace. Her hair nicely done. Of course she's pretty! Doesn't she look like with her hair cut into a bob like that. The Lamontagne parents sitting on their love seat are looking their age, Irene especially. Dark rings. Crow's feet -- practically ostrich feet. Papa Louis now has a round belly, greying temples, wary eyes, but he's still the best looking of the bunch. Closely followed by his son Mark, a dangerous rival. But where has little Luke gone? The dreamy child who needed his meat chopped up for him. It must have happened shortly after John F. Kennedy's assassination. Luke then 9 was playing with a cousin, a boy little younger than himself, still in the imaginative world they had created for themselves no one else was allowed into their childish games. Papa Louis had strictly forbidden them from running around the caskets in the basements and from getting too close to the room where he embalmed the bodies. Fear of Luke's father had kept them away but curiosity had drawn them back and that's how during a game of hide and seek Luke had slipped inside a huge oak casket. It had a hard time opening it but it had closed over him in no time at all. The cousin counted to 100 upstairs. Mark was looking on having been vaguely told to keep an eye on the boys that afternoon. Papa Louis had business in town. Irene was out running errands. The cousin began to look for Luke in the upstairs bedrooms -- a decision that many would later say played a part in the tragedy. Not finding him upstairs he made his way down to the basement. Nothing. Alarmed the cousin reported Luke's disappearance to Mark who helped him look everywhere a second time. It was only when Madeleine came back from Solange's house that light was shed literally on the mystery. Generally more observant than her brothers, Madeleine had long since noticed the youngest child's interest in what went on in a basement and paying no heed to the Papa Louis warning -- Madeleine with Mark's help opened the lids on the four caskets that took up half the basement. She found young Luke suffocated in the smallest casket of all. His skin blue. His face scratched. He had ripped his hair out. It was this detail that would haunt Madeleine in her dreams.

JD: That was Eric Dupont reading from his novel Songs for the Cold of Heart -- at a Scotiabank Giller Prize, between the pages event, in Calgary. Mr. Dupont is one of five finalists shortlisted for this year's 100-thousand dollars Scotiabank Giller Prize. The winner will be announced on November 19th on CBC Television and of course right here on CBC Radio One.

[Music]

Brexit

JD: Theresa May believes she's got her Brexit deal. The British PM says negotiators have finally agreed on terms for her country's withdrawal from the European Union. Now she just has to get her cabinet to sign on when she shows them the details tomorrow. Boris Johnson isn't waiting though. The ever outspoken former foreign minister is rejecting the proposal -- sight unseen.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: We're going to stay in the customs union on this deal. We're going to stay effectively in large parts of the single market. And that means it’s vassal state stuff. For the first time in a thousand years, this place, this parliament, will not have a say over the laws that govern this country. It is a quite incredible state of affairs. It will mean that we are having to accept rules and regulations from Brussels over which we have no say ourselves. It is utterly unacceptable to anybody who believes in democracy. It is not the right way forward. And there is a kicker, and the kicker is, that not only are we going to remain in the customs union and in large parts of the single market but also we will not have protected our precious union because if you look at what they've agreed today -- again you must caveat this and say you look at the reports then it is also accepted that there must be customs and regulation checks down the Irish Sea between Great Britain and Northern Ireland which currently do not exist. And for the first time since partition Dublin, under these proposals, would have more say in some aspects of the government in Northern Ireland than London. So I don't see how you can support it from a democratic point of view. I don't see how unionist can support it. I don't see how you can support if you believe in political economic freedom of this country. So if you ask my question, am I going to vote against it? The answer is yes.

JD: That was former UK Foreign Minister Boris Johnson speaking to reporters in London, UK earlier today.

[Music]

World Heritage Dutch windmills

Guest: Anja Noorlander

JD: The village of Kinderdijk in the Netherlands is the UNESCO World Heritage site dotted with 19 picturesque windmills which still work as they did and have since the mid-18th century when they were built. It attracts hundreds of thousands of tourists a year. Dwarfing in numbers the 60 or so Kinderdijk residents who live amongst and operate these windmills. Now the millers say that they have had enough. Anja Noorlander is a miller and we reached her in Kinderdijk.

CO: Anja what's your problem with the tourists in your town -- in Kinderdijk?

ANJA KINDERDIJK: Oh we don't have any problems with the tourist. We love the area so we really understand that the rest of the world want to see the world heritage, Kinderdijk. That's not a problem. The problem is that it's a little village and at this moment we get six hundred thousand visitors a year.

CO: And what do the visitors do when they come and see you in Kinderdijk?

AK: They really want to see a mill on the inside, so that's possible, of course we have one museum mill. But they think it's one big museum. So they go into gardens of people. Going inside other mills where people are living in. So that's difficult. And sometimes I even can't get my boat because somebody else is going away with it.

CO: Oh good heavens.

AK: Yeah they think it's one big museum. They think I'm an actor. [Chuckles]

CO: So you wear wooden shoes, you have a boat, and you live in a windmill. So they think you're part of the props?

AK: Yeah they think I'm Snow White in Disneyland or something.

CO: I understand some people have come home to find people eating at their table or even on their toilet?

AK: Yes that is true, yes. And even people are walking in our garden. Using our bikes. The most difficult part of it is that the foundation world heritage Kinderdijk -- the city council and everything they rule the area but they don't talk with the millers. So now they have a long range plan for the future and they don't talk with us -- 60 people who live in this area. And the problem is they are now building bridges -- bridge made of [inaudible] visiting centre in the area to get more tourists over here and that's damaging the area.

CO: UNESCO site -- it's vulnerable. But are there not limits -- I think there was an agreement at some point as to how many visitors you could bear each year but how many visitors is the town council wanting to accept?

AK: 400-thousands. But they let it go a few years ago and if you don't understand why -- it's always about money.

CO: But doesn't that help you? I mean doesn't the area need money because these are expensive to maintain? Right?

AK: Yeah. We have enough money for it. They have now two and a half million euro bank accounts -- extra, so we can manage those mills so it's the money we already getting.

CO: What is it that you like about living in a windmill?

AK: Did you ever fall in love? [Chuckles] You cannot explain it. You get a special feeling. And it's the machine -- it's not only a building, it's something that lives if you get a symbiotic relationship with it's because the mill lives because there is a miller and a miller lives because there is a mill and that makes it so special.

CO: Did you grow up in a mill?

AK: No I didn't. I chose for it. I'm one of the few who lives here who chose for it. There's even a family who lives here for ten generations -- for more than 300 years. It's not a choice, that's a way of living. I choose for it. If you live here with your family for 300 years that's longer than your country exists -- and this is how it is now.

CO: But basically it is a house or a shelter but it's a big giant wooden machine from the 1700s and you live there.

AK: Yeah. When it really storms the mill really moves a little bit like a ship [chuckles] it's so special. Some people are scared about it but I love it when I'm lying in my bed and I feel the mill move a little bit going and you hear the cracking and the sounds and everything and the wind blowing through the little hole. I love it.

CO: All right so you're not helping [chuckles] because if you don't want more tourists to come -- you're making everyone who's listening to want to get on a plane.

AK: Everybody is welcome, but I think if you really want to come -- please visit us next year. But no, I really think that everybody has the opportunity come here. But I think somebody and I think the foundation will heritage Kinderdijk they have to say a ceiling -- there has to be ceiling like [inaudible] museum or something -- you have to say you can only visit this year 600,000 and not more. If you want to come -- and you [inaudible] 600,000, you have to come next year.

CO: All right Anja but I warn you that you should not be the person who tries persuade people not to come.

AK: It's so difficult because I understand why people come here. I make every day, still I make pictures about the area. Sometimes I even get tears in my eyes when I wake up and I see the sun coming up and I think, oh my gosh! I'm so really excited every day that I can be here. So I understand that people want to visit. There has to be stuff otherwise. There are so many people you can't even feel how it is.

CO: All right Anja we'll leave it there and it's just absolutely charming to hear about your life there and I appreciate you describing it for us. Thank you.

AK: Okay you're welcome.

CO: Good night.

AK: Have a nice day.

CO: You too. Bye.

AK: Bye.

JD: Anja Noorlander is a miller in the Dutch town of Kinderdijk which is where we reached her. If you'd like to read more on this story and see what these really charming, centuries old, windmills look like visit us cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Tuk

JD: Tuk is a dog but he is also a critic and he does not like the music today's kids play or the music that today's adults play. Tuk hates music, period. When Tuk first went to live with his owner, Mike Mansfield, noticed that whenever his family played music Tuk would howl and whine and cry. At first it seemed cute and then it was concerning. Mr. Mansfield has tried everything -- he took Tuk to the vet to see if something was wrong with his ears. And eventually Mr. Mansfield has just had to stop playing music in his house altogether. So here is Loren McGinnis host of CBC Yellowknife "Trailbreaker" speaking with Mr. Mansfield and getting a taste of Tuk's vocal range.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: All right. Set this up. What do you have in your hand? What are you about to do? And what should we expect?

VOICE 2: Well I've got a guitar in my hands and I'll probably play a few strings here and we'll probably expect Tuk react by howling, screaming, and most likely leaving the room -- trying to get to the end bedroom or the dining room.

VOICE 1: And what's our strategy when he does that?

VOICE 2: So right now we're trying -- when he's in that type of reaction we try not to give him eye contact. Try not to give him attention. And then if he settles into it then that's when we move and give him treats and snuggles and scratches and show him love.

VOICE 1: So I'm not going to chase him around with my microphone. Although I'm going to try and get a bit of this sound so.

VOICE 2: It won't be hard to get it on there.

[Plays guitar strings and Tuk howls]

VOICE 1: It's a strong association -- just goes away.

VOICE 2: Yeah totally. As soon as it stops, he stops.

VOICE 1: I mean he moved away but other than that there is not evidence of suffering like it's sort of weirdly participatory -- it would just be like my first impression, observation.

VOICE 2: Totally. And it definitely gets worse if he can't get away then he gets into more of a panic mode.

VOICE 1: Like pacing? Panting? Or what does that look like?

VOICE 2: Pacing. Panting. Even lying down tail between his legs.

JD: That was Mike Mansfield speaking with CBC Yellowknife's Loren McGinnis. Mr. Mansfield is now trying immersion therapy on Tuk and is playing soft music throughout the day. He says he will continue to work on Tuk's anxiety even if it takes years.

[Music]

UFO sighting

JD: The call came in at 6:47 a.m. local time. On Friday morning a British Airways pilot contacted air traffic control at the Shannon Airport in Ireland. The pilot reported "a very bright light moving so fast across the sky." She was on route from Montreal to London and she wanted to know why she had not been notified about military exercises taking place in her flight path. The air traffic controller broke the news to her -- there was no military exercises scheduled for that area. And that is when another pilot chimed in saying he had also spotted something moving at a speed that was "astronomical. Like Mach 2 or something." And then another pilot called. Here's a bit of what it sounded like on the air traffic controller’s radio.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Appears to be multiple objects following the same sort of trajectory very [inaudible] as we were.

VOICE 2: Okay that's copied. And was there a direction it was going in or anything?

VOICE 1: [Inaudible] 11'o clock position -- two bright lights.

VOICE 2: Roger. That's copied. Thank you.

VOICE 3: Glad. It wasn't just me.

VOICE 1: No. Very interesting that one.

VOICE 4: Just so you know that other aircraft in the air have also reported the same thing so we're going to have a look and see.

JD: 'Glad it wasn't just me.' That was the sound of pilots reporting multiple UFO sightings to air traffic control last Friday at the Shannon Airport in Ireland. One pilot suggested that the UFO might have been "a meteor or another object making some kind of re-entry." The Irish Aviation Authority is investigating the reports.

November 13, 2018 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode