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 2019

The AIH Transcript for August 23, 2019

Hosts: Helen Mann and Ramraajh Sharvendiran

Helen Mann: Hello, I’m Helen Mann, sitting in for Carol Off

RAMRAAJH SHARVENDIRAN: Good evening, I'm Ramraajh Sharvendiran. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

RS: Tonight:

HM: Looking the author way. CBC journalist Aaron Wherry found himself in the news this week — when a Conservative MP called on him to share his notes from interviews with the Prime Minister for his book.

RS: Anti-gag reflex. Zimbabwean comedian Samantha Kureya isn't afraid to joke about the powers-that-be — but a terrifying incident this week made it clear some people want her to be afraid.

HM: Generous to a fault line. The late David Koch's support of climate change deniers and right-wing groups exacerbated the political divide in the U.S. But our guest says he was more than a stock villain.

RS: "Grace" period. Twenty-five years ago, Jeff Buckley put himself on the map with an album that was all over the map — and tonight we'll mark a quarter-century since the release of "Grace".

HM: A lot riding on something no one's riding in. This summer, people gather at Calgary's St. Louis Hotel to bet on horse races, and listen to dramatic calls of horse races — despite the fact that there are no actual horses.

RS: And... putting themselves off the map. Officials in the city of Bielefeld, Germany are tired of people saying their hometown doesn't actually exist — so they're offering a million euros to anyone who can prove Bielefeld's not there.

RS: As It Happens, the Friday edition. Radio that feels like this offer just came out of nowhere.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Aaron Wherry, David Koch, throwback horse racing

Aaron Wherry

Guest: Aaron Wherry

RS: There's been lots of talk lately on Parliament Hill around a newly-published Justin Trudeau biography. But this week, one opposition member was more interested in the author of the book than the Prime Minister. Conservative MP Lisa Raitt tabled a last-minute motion at the ethics committee this week, discussing the SNC-Lavalin affair.

SOUNDCLIP

LISA RAITT: I have a quick motion, Mr. Chair, if I may. And I assume it'll be disposed of very quickly. But I thought I'd give it a shot, nonetheless. Given the fact that we're not going to hear from the Ethics Commissioner, and given a fact that we do have this book that is out there from Aaron Wherry called “Promise and Peril”. That seems to indicate the Prime Minister has breached Cabinet confidentiality. I move that the committee request Aaron Wherry, author of Promise and Peril: a Biography of Justin Trudeau”, to table all recordings, notes, and other materials that he collected during his interviews of the prime minister that relate to materials that fall outside of the ordering council waiving cabinet confidence in the SNC-Lavalin and matter, so that the committee can determine whether the prime minister breached Cabinet confidence.

RS: Conservative MP Lisa Raitt, tabling a motion this week to bring CBC parliamentary journalist Aaron Wherry to the ethics committee. The motion was shut down. We reached Aaron Wherry in Ottawa.

HM: Aaron, you had been paying some attention to this Ethics Committee hearing on Wednesday. How did you feel to hear your name come up?

AARON WHERRY: It was definitely a bit surreal. I've covered lots of committee hearings and listened to lots of debates. I've never had to sit there and listen as I myself was debated.

HM: Lisa Raitt, as we heard, asked there for recordings, notes, and other materials during your conversations with Justin Trudeau. What do you make of that?

AW: You know I mean a lot of people have commented on this, and I'll leave it to others to comment. I appreciate that she at least worked the title of the book into emotion. But otherwise, I leave it to others to comment.

HM: The motion was defeated — not though without some pushback from other members who criticized Ms. Raitt’s motion. Had you been asked to appear, what information might you've been able to share?

AW: I'm not sure. I'm somewhat glad I didn't have to make that decision. I presume that I wouldn't have been able to offer much except the book, essentially. You know it sort of speaks for itself — or should speak for itself.

HM: Have you given thought to why Lisa Raitt called on you to testify?

AW: You know I'm not sure. You'd have to ask her. She has said since that it was a request, and I would have been free to say no to it. But otherwise, I don't really know.

HM: So what details about the SNC-Lavalin affair do we learn from your book that weren't already known?

AW: So a few things, I guess. First of all, the prime minister speaks fairly candidly about his relationship with Jody Wilson-Raybould. And talks a bit about the complications in their relationship, and how it worked leading up to the SNC-Lavalin affair. I get into from the prime minister's perspective, his meetings with Jody Wilson-Raybould in Vancouver. As well as the discussions that took place you know after this became public and after Jody Wilson-Raybould left Cabinet that sort of the attempts I guess to try to resolve the situation.

HM: One thing that that you did find out was about the discussions they had held — the prime minister and Jody Wilson-Raybould — about crafting a joint mutual statement about SNC-Lavalin. It was supposed to be kind of a truce, but it never came about. Why not?

AW: Well, so the prime minister his explanation is that over those two months or I guess about two months where they were discussing her kind of coming back or at least sort of resolving the situation and being a member of the Liberal caucus that there were these discussions about some kind of joint statement that they would both issue that would essentially sort of set out both sides. Set out that Ms. Wilson-Raybould felt there had been inappropriate pressure. Set out that the prime minister didn't feel or didn't think he had done anything wrong. And that they were never intending to appropriately pressure her. And essentially cast a way for them to sort of resolve the situation. I guess almost agree to disagree and move forward. According to the prime minister's version of events, what he told me was that they were going back and forth on this statement. And what essentially came back to him was a draft that would just have him essentially apologizing for inappropriately pressuring her. You know apologizing to Jody Wilson-Raybould. And at that point the discussion the discussions sort of finally broke down because in the prime minister's point of view, in the prime minister's opinion, he had done nothing wrong, and so he had nothing to apologize for.

HM: Justin Trudeau agreed to be interviewed for the book. As we discussed, he talked about regrets involving his relationship with Jody Wilson-Raybould as it broke down. How much did he share with you about that?

AW: A fair bit. In one of our last — I guess it was our last conversation — he said he had long felt that it was unfortunate or he had I guess regretted the fact that he and the justice minister weren't I think his phrase is super simpatico. He explains it sort of by comparing and contrasting it with his relationship with other ministers in that you know for a minister like Chrystia Freeland or Bill Morneau. There may be disagreements. And at the end of the day, the prime minister has to make a call, and it may not be what the minister wants. But that the minister essentially accepts that that's what the prime minister's job is, and it's his job to sort of make the call and see the decision from a larger perspective. His version of events to me was that she sort of took things more personally. And that it was harder to disagree with her I guess is a way of putting it. That she you know took certain issues I guess understandably in some cases like Indigenous justice very personally. And it was difficult to essentially disagree with her and more to sort of move forward in the same way he would with other ministers.

HM: So is it fair to say the tensions in their relationship might have existed even beyond the SNC-Lavalin case?

AW: Yeah, I think that's definitely the case. I think that there were long-standing tensions there. And I think as read sort of what happened, and even if you read the Ethics Commissioner's report, you can sort of see where those tensions kind of complicated or almost polluted the situation.

HM: You know this was supposed to be more a biography of Justin Trudeau, but we’re all focusing on the SNC-Lavalin affair and the things you uncovered. What does his handling of the affair do you think tell us about the prime minister and his style of leadership?

AW: I think if you go back on this to the very start of Jody Wilson-Raybould being appointed to cabinet, it was a very ambitious move. And I think to a certain degree those ambitions the amount of significance attached to her appointment probably contributed to this situation and to a certain degree and then made it that much harder to deal with it. To that extent, I think this situation speaks to how much this government wanted to do and how much it wanted to accomplish and how difficult that turned out to be. The other points of this in terms of the prime minister I think are no crisis happens because of one issue, right? It's always a dozen issues that compound that lead to the greatest crises. And I think to a certain degree that's what you've seen here in terms of an office that was probably focused on more things than it could possibly handle that fall in terms of NAFTA, in terms of trade the Trans Mountain expansion. And that sort of led to what we saw. And I think ultimately leads back to the prime minister wanting to, as he says, do things differently and the consequences of failure in that regard. If you try to do things differently and then you don't quite land it, things can add up and lead to huge issues that you didn't see coming.

HM: We are nine weeks away from an election. How does it feel to have been drawn into this almost like a character in the SNC-Lavalin affair when you're gonna be focused on your work going forward?

AW: It's odd. It's very odd and slightly uncomfortable. You know journalists we aren't really built or interested in being characters. We're more than happy to sort of sit on the sidelines and make judgments about the characters. And so it is a bit odd to hear your name spoken at a parliamentary committee hearing. You know the book is focused on much larger issues and much bigger questions. And I look forward to getting back to those issues and those questions over the next several weeks.

HM: All right, Aaron, thank you very much for speaking with us.

AW: Thanks for having me.

HM: Okay. Bye.

RS: Aaron Wherry is a senior writer for CBC's Parliament Hill bureau. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music: Horns!]

David Koch

Guest: Daniel Schulman

RS: A shadowy climate-change denier who fueled the Tea Party Movement. A sensitive family man who shed a tear at the beauty of his daughter's ballet performances. A Manhattan playboy competing with Donald Trump for dates in the '80s. Depending on who you talk to, David Koch was either a generous hero, or a treacherous villain. The 79-year-old industrialist died today. He leaves behind a wife and three children, a multi-billion dollar organization, and a complicated legacy. Daniel Schulman is a senior editor in the Washington bureau of Mother Jones magazine. He is also the author of a book about the Koch brothers called "Sons of Wichita". We reached him near Melrose, Massachusetts.

HM: Daniel Schulman, what was David Koch like in person?

DANIEL SCHULMAN: David was sort of an imposing figure. He was very tall; over six-feet-four maybe about six-feet-five, but generally a kind of a genial guy. I only met him on one occasion, which was at the Republican National Convention in 2012 — when I was at work on my biography of the Koch brothers. I remember him saying something like make sure you do a good job.

HM: You wrote in Mother Jones today that there were two David Kochs. What do you mean?

DS: What I mean by that is that on the one hand, David really wanted to portray himself as a philanthropist in the classic sense. Kind of a Carnegie-esque figure. And he gave you know one hundred million dollars at a clip to medical research institutions, to a theater at Lincoln Center, et cetera, et cetera. But then there was the other piece of his legacy — which was his political giving and his role as kind of the sidekick to his brother Charles Koch in their political activities.

HM: You mentioned his arch-conservatism — he and his brother particularly known for that. I mean really seen as I guess villains by the progressive left in the United States. What were the roots of their beliefs?

DS: It really goes back to their father, who formed what is now today Koch Industries. And he was actually a founding member of the John Birch Society, sort of an anti-communist organization in the United States; a very right-wing group. And they inherited their beliefs from their father. Basically, strong free-market views, limited government. I mean David Koch ran for vice-president on the Libertarian Party ticket in 1980. You know the platform at that point was calling for the abolishment of Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, shutting down the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Education, a variety of other government agencies. So their beliefs really are very, very limited government to the point of almost no government at all.

HM: Well, as a matter of fact, that Libertarian view even put them to the right of it I guess of some traditional Republicans. They really played a role in the development of the Tea Party movement.

DS: Yes, it was interesting. Their evolution was kind of interesting because they started trying to work through the Libertarian Party. And then when that endeavour became a little bit too quixotic for them, they sort of cozied up to the Republicans. And you really saw during the emergence of the Tea Party these activists advocating a lot of the views that the brothers had held for many, many years. And frankly had difficulty mainstreaming.

HM: We're told that both brothers — David and Charles — and there were two other brothers as well, but the two brothers were worth an estimated 58 billion dollars U.S. each. What was the source of that wealth?

DS: Well, the source of that wealth is Koch Industries — which is the second largest private corporation in the United States. This is a company that touches people's lives every day in ways that you could scarcely imagine. And I'm talking you know anything from gas, to steak, to Stainmaster Carpet, to spandex, to building materials, to paper. You know you really can't go through a day without encountering one of their products.

HM: And we know they as we've discussed fueled sort of right-wing movements beyond mainstream politics as well. They were involved in the development of think tanks. And a lot of people today are talking about their impact on the discussion about climate change.

DS: For many years, both brothers helped to fund groups that have sowed skepticism about climate change. They were certainly very active in doing that.

HM: It's interesting reading the different characterizations of David Koch today. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo describing him as a, quote, “Compassionate philanthropist, successful businessman, and a proud American.” And then on the other hand, the activist and filmmaker Adam Best tweeting, quote, “Calling David Koch a philanthropist is like calling Hannibal Lecter a chef.” What do you see as David Koch’s ongoing legacy?

DS: That's why I sort of say there were two David Kochs. I mean he was a philanthropist. There's no question about that. He also channeled millions into a variety of right-wing causes. I don't think it's cut and dry to render his legacy either being one of good or evil as his progressive detractors would like to portray it.

HM: It's hard though to come to terms with a man who you know denied climate change, promoted vouchers for charter schools, fought labour unions. On the other hand, developing Lincoln Center, providing a lot of moneys to public television in the United States, do you think he was bothered by the image of him as this ultra-right villain?

DS: Yes, I think that got to him. And you certainly saw in more recent years what appeared to me like a image rehabilitation involving both the company and involving David Koch. And I think some of his more recent donations might have traced back to this goal of changing his image. I think he was very uncomfortable being portrayed as this right-wing caricature. He was very much someone who liked to attend social events in New York. And certainly there was a period of time when his image as a philanthropist and his image as a right-wing mega donor came into conflict in uncomfortable ways.

HM: So now Koch Industries and the brothers’ political advocacy group Americans for Prosperity are really I guess fully in the hands of his brother Charles. So what happens now? How did those organizations outlive David?

DS: I think that the brothers, starting years ago, tried to build an organization that would go on after their time. They gathered together a large group of donors that could fund their favourite causes. And they built a political operation. And I say they, but Charles was really the driving force behind this. And David was more the public face. But they’ve built an operation that rivaled — and rivals — the Republican Party itself in terms of its ability to raise funds. And this is an organization that has its own data operation, and works through a variety of advocacy groups to put forward its agenda. So I very much think that his political legacy will live on far after him.

HM: All right. Daniel Schulman, thanks very much for sharing your thoughts with us.

DS: My pleasure.

HM: Okay, bye-bye.

DS: Bye, thanks.

RS: Daniel Schulman is a senior editor with Mother Jones magazine. He's written a book about the Koch brothers called "Sons of Wichita". We reached him in Melrose, Massachusetts. Industrialist David Koch died today. He was 79 years old.

[Music: Electronica]

Throwback horse racing

Guest: Dave Kelly

RS: After more than a decade of relative quiet, the horse races at Calgary's St. Louis Hotel have returned this summer. The historic building is famous partly because of the patronage of former Alberta premier Ralph Klein. But it's also known for its exciting, weekly contest of thoroughbreds. There's just one slightly unusual thing you should know about those horse races — there are no actual horses in them. But believe Dave Kelly when he says that that doesn't take away from the excitement. Mr. Kelly has been the weekly host and announcer of fantasy horse racing since its return. We reached him in the basement of the St. Louis Hotel, while he was getting ready for this week's show.

HM: Dave Kelly, a horse race without horses? You are going to have to explain?

DAVE KELLY: This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever done. But also the most fun thing I've ever done. [HM laughs] There is a guy who used to do imaginary horse races in Calgary for three decades, George Stephenson in a in a smoky, dingy basement bar called Imaginary Horse Races, and the entire bar would bet on those races.

HM: And real money or imaginary money?

DK: Well no, it was real. But they had to get around the gambling laws, so as long as you were betting quarters at your table with each other, then it was fine. There's no house money. There was nothing like that. It was a fun thing, but a ridiculous thing.

HM: What was it that inspired him to start doing this?

DK: So George was an M.C., joke-telling kind of an entertainer about Calgary in the 80s. And they all went for drinks at this bar, the St. Louis, and his and at his table, at noon, he said he passed on a napkin with a bunch of horse names on. It was just for fun. Everybody bet on a race, what do you think? And they all threw in a quarter, and then he just took the napkin he went, and he went, and they're off. And Jolly Jumper’s in the lead. He just made up the entire race. And then the table beside them said we want to do that. And within six months, the bar gave him the microphone, and the entire bar was doing it. And for three decades, he brought race sheets. He had opening music. They were lined up. The BBC, when they were here for the Olympics, did an international story about these ridiculous horse races. And it became this insane Calgary tradition.

HM: Do you have any idea how much the take was for the winner?

DK: Well see, this is the thing. It depends on your table because there's eight at a table, so if everybody put in whatever they put in, that person would get the pot. So you know you could make upwards of five dollars maybe even ten on a good day.

HM: Ooooooo, high rollers! Now George Stephenson died about five years ago, I guess.

DK: Yes.

HM: How did you get roped into this?

DK: Well, we do this thing called Best of Calgary where we celebrate great things that happen in our city. And our city has had its share of ups and downs. And the last time it was down, we said hey, we need to celebrate what’s great. And this was one of those what about something from the past that's great? And we thought can we revive George Stephenson’s legacy, and do this for him? So that's what we're doing.

HM: Now you're getting ready to go on stage to do this week's show. We want an idea what it's going to sound like. So let's hear what happens when the horses are straight out of the gate?

DK: To give you a sense, my race — and there's four of them — the one I'm going to be doing it'll start a bit like. There’s the hoorn, and they’re off. Hoof Harted comes out hard and fat. But Adios, brother is in behind, and Moment’s Choice is chasing in close. And I'll do the entire race until I get to the end. And you say to yourself is there gonna be a photo finish? Well, yes there is; sponsored by Woodword’s One Hour Photo Finishing. We'll be right back with that race call in a second.

HM: Do you know who is going to win when you start?

DK: Yes, I do. Like George had the skill because he did it forever, he could wing it. I can't wing it I have to write it out. Otherwise, I forget horses, I forget to call them, I get completely confused.

HM: Where’d you come up with the names for these horses?

DK: These are George’s. And here's what's so fun. We have recordings of George. So there are four races every Friday. George calls the first and third race every time. So though there's old timers who remember George who come and who's just about melt when they hear George's voice come over the speakers. And then we have celebrity guests come in and do various calls throughout the summer.

HM: Wow. So I want how you compare your style to Mr. Stephenson’s? And actually, he was impersonating someone named Joe Carberry. So how do you compare to both of them?

DK: I am a very weak substitute. But the way it works is if I give people enough beer, then they think I sound just like them.

HM: I imagine beer fuels a lot of this, Right?

DK: [laughs] They say this place was smoke, the first three feet from the ceiling with smoke, and the bottom three feet was grease from the chicken. So I think yeah, there's a lot of smoke, beer, chicken to get people through it. And it certainly took off.

HM: You've been doing these races all summer. What do you think it is that people are enjoying so much?

DK: I think the fact that it's truly ludicrous. [ HM laughs] It makes no sense. There is no reason for this to be successful. There's no reason for it to exist. And people think it's that dumb and there's beer, I want to be part of it.

HM: And this is temporary. [ DK laughs] Do you think there's a move to have this thing carry on year round?

DK: Like a national movement perhaps?

HM: Maybe.

DK: [laughing] I think it would be a great antidote to the election coming up, who knows? But we don't know. It's taken off for the summer. And it's really fun. And maybe you know across Calgary and across Canada if there's enough beer and enough people who want to do something ludicrous, we have the idea for it.

HM: Okay. Well, good luck. Put down a quarter for the one you know is going to win, and put it in my name, okay?

DK: [heavy laughter] I'll send you the check.

HM: It'll just be between you and me.

DK: That’s all that matters. Exactly.

HM: Okay. Dave, thanks so much.

DK: What a treat. Thank you.

HM: Okay. Bye-bye.

DK: Bye now.

RS: Dave Kelly is the host and announcer of the fantasy horse races at the St. Louis Hotel in Calgary. That's where we reached him. You're probably wondering what it sounds like at the Hotel when Mr. Kelly calls a race. So were we. So Mr. Kelly kindly provided us with the sound of some of today's action.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: A ton of cheering and banging on tables drowns out the calls of a horse race that isn’t really happening]

RS: Dave Kelly, calling a fantasy horse race at the St. Louis Hotel in Calgary today.

[Music: Indie folk]

Part two: Zimbabwe comedian, German city

Zimbabwe comedian

Guest: Silvia Mukwindidza

RS: Zimbabwean comedian Samantha Kureya hoped the ouster of the country's former President, Robert Mugabe, would make it easier for her to joke freely. So she did. But this week, a horrifying incident showed there are still people who want her to watch what she says. Ms. Kureya's friends and family say she was abducted from her home by masked gunmen on Wednesday. They say she was stripped, beaten, and forced to drink sewer water before being released. Ms. Kureya is now in hiding. Silvia Mukwindidza is a friend and colleague of Samantha Kureya. We reached her in Harare, Zimbabwe.

HM: Sylvia Mukwindidza, how is your friend Samantha doing now?

SILVIA MUKWINDIDZA: She has a few bruises, and swollen parts. But she doesn't have any broken bones. But she's trying to get better.

HM: How are her spirits?

SM: She's very traumatized. You can imagine someone was abducted and beaten up with weapons and also forced to drink sewer water and forced to take off all of her clothes. And someone walked her around the neighbourhood naked begging for help. So you can imagine the amount of time she might need to actually get better.

HM: She was forced to drink sewer water?

SM: Yes.

HM: And has she been ill because of that?

SM: She quickly got medical help. So probably that's helping. We managed to get medical attention as soon as we got her.

HM: What can you tell us about the abduction itself and what happened?

SM: She was taken from her home. The broke her door, ambushed her , and left with her. They also arrested her family, beat up her sister. They were pointing guns at the rest of the family. She doesn't really recall how many men there were, but there was quite a number of them. And then they left, they forced her to lie down in their car, and they were beating her. They asked her to take off her clothes, asked her to drink sewer water, and they took her to a neighbourhood that she didn’t know and left her. When she got up, she tried to get some clothes because she was walking around naked. She went to a house and asked for help. This is the sixth house. They agreed to help her, but they actually had to throw the dress to her through the windows because they didn't want to get out. They were all so scared. She found some people who told her where she was. And so they gave her their phone, and she managed to send a call me back to her brother.

HM: Do you have any idea who might be behind this abduction?

SM: It's really tricky to identify him because these men wear masks, but could be trained people because of the weapons that they had.

HM: So you say they were likely trained because they had the weapons that that others wouldn't have?

SM: By trained people, yes.

HM: So police, military, something like that?

SM: maybe.

HM: What about Samantha's comedy might have made her a target for this attack?

SM: We don't focus on a single issue or specific issues. But we focus on anything that is of human interest. Economy or political or religious, we just comment on anything that we feel needs attention in terms of dialogue. So as long as it concerns the rights of the people or as long as it's of human interest, we try to comment on that using satire. We don't know who exactly gets offended along the way. All we try to do is talk about things maybe that are missed by the mainstream media. Or that are missed in the headlines. Maybe it could have provoked people from political groups or social groups or religious groups. We're not really sure.

HM: Last year, Samantha told the BBC that your company, Bus Stop TV, was hoping for more freedom of expression — after Robert Mugabe was forced from office. It sounds like there was expectation that Emmerson Managua might make things better. Is there any indication of that?

SM: We are still in the transition process, so probably too soon to say. But we can't really say if we're getting better. But I think it's just too soon to say if people now have more freedom or even comedians now have more freedom to express themselves. But looking at what has happened, and what has happened before, we can't really say it’s gotten better.

HM: You can't say.

SM: Yeah, even on the mass production that we did, someone commented on our platform that it was now Samantha’s turn to get abducted. But we only realized it after a Samantha Kureya was abducted that this person had actually made this statement. But we don't know who they are. We don't know where they're from or whatever they represent.

HM: Have you reported any of this to police?

SM: Yes, we've reported after Samantha was abducted, her brother went to the police station, and even after she was found, they went to the police as well and made a police case.

HM: Given your concerns about who might be behind this abduction, how hopeful are you that the people responsible will be held to account?

SM: We are just hopeful that the police will do their best to locate the people who did this. But it’s really difficult to pinpoint and say who did it. But we a just keeping our fingers crossed.

HM: You're keeping your fingers crossed. Well, I hope she recovers well. And wish you the best. Thank you very much for talking with us, Silvia. We appreciate it.

SM: All right. So welcome

RS: Silvia Mukwindidza is a friend and colleague of Zimbabwean comedian, Samantha Kureya. We reached Ms. Mukwindidza in Harare. Ms. Kureya is currently in hiding for her safety.

[Music: Country rock]

Goodale Jack Letts

RS: This week, opposition leader Andrew Scheer said he won't lift a finger to help Jack Letts. Jack Letts is a British-Canadian man imprisoned in northern Syria. There are allegations that Mr. Letts joined ISIS while he was in Syria, although his parents insist he was there for humanitarian reasons. Canada's Minister of Public Safety, Ralph Goodale, didn't use the same language as his Conservative colleague. But speaking to reporters in Regina today, he made clear that he wouldn't facilitate Mr. Letts' return to Canada.

SOUNDCLIP

RALPH GOODALE: Mr. Letts is part of a group of people — globally quite a large group in terms of Canadians a very small group — but a group of people who left the comfortable confines of Western democracy to travel halfway around the world to associate themselves with some of the most evil and vile atrocities in modern history. And they need to assume the responsibility for their actions. That part of the world is dangerous. It's dysfunctional. There is no immediate Canadian diplomatic presence. So the government of Canada will obviously apply the law and the constitution. But there is no legal obligation to facilitate the return of a person in that circumstance to Canada. We had a discussion of this at a meeting of the Five Eyes security ministers last month in London. The discussion amongst all of us was we've all got this problem. If we want to prosecute, we need to be able to satisfy our own domestic evidentiary rules. And obviously Canada's priority with respect to all of these individuals is to find the evidence, lay the charges, prosecute to the fullest extent of the law, and have the appropriate consequences. Under Canadian law, a Canadian Canadian citizen — no matter how reprehensible — is entitled to re-enter the country. But there is no obligation — legal or otherwise — on the Canadian government to facilitate their return from some foreign location to the country they are. They are entitled to re-enter. But this question is the facilitation of return. And there is no legal obligation to facilitate that return.

RS: Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, speaking to reporters today from Regina.

[Music: Percussive jazz]

German City

Guest: Jens Franzke

RS: For people from Bielefeld, Germany, the joke is all too familiar. You tell someone at a party where you're from, and they say, in German, "Ha, but Bielefeld doesn't exist!". Then they slap your shoulder and roar with laughter, while you whisper "Good one". Also in German. What's supposed to be funny is that decades ago, in the very early days of the Internet, someone came up with the conspiracy theory that Bielefeld — a city of 341 thousand people — was not actually real. It is, of course, real. But now the city has decided, for better or for worse, to embrace the idea. It's offering a one-million euro reward to anybody who can prove it's not really there. Jens Franzke is a Press Officer for the city of Bielefeld.

HM: Mr. Franzke, are we reaching you in Bielefeld today?

JENS FRANZKE: You are, You are.

HM: Can you offer us any proof?

JF: [laughs] Can I offer any proof? Wait, let me think. Can I offer any proof? Maybe! I'm still here and talking.

HM: Oh, okay. How did all this start? Where did the conspiracy theory originate?

JF: The guy behind the whole idea is called Achim Held. He is an engineer from the northern part of Germany. And 25 years ago, he met someone from Bielefeld on a party. And nobody on the party had ever been to Bielefeld. So sometime in the party someone said oh, maybe this whole town does not exist. And this just developed like a running gag between friends. A few weeks after that, the friends were on the highway — the German autobahn — and they passed our city — they Passed Bielefeld on the highway — and the exit was closed. Like the name Bielefeld was crossed off. So the guys they went nuts in the car. Look, look, it does exist. It's true. It's true. And they just developed the idea, and that wennt on and on and on. And they put the CIA and aliens everything into it. And one day, Achim Held decided just to write the whole thing up to make fun of strange conspiracy theories that were developing in the Internet. The ones that tried to make fun of all the people that are afraid of chem trails and aliens and the CIA and the dark sinister forces. There are just tiny very few people actually believe in the conspiracy that our city does not exist. But the majority just gets it that it's just a joke.

HM: Oh dear. Now I've looked it up, and I see that Bielefeld is actually the 18th largest city in Germany.

JF: It is. Yes, it is.

HM: There's 340,000 people there. What is it like to be one of those people when you travel elsewhere in Germany and you have to say where you're from?

JF: It's pretty funny because nine out of ten times, the other person says oh, Bielefeld. It doesn't exist, right? So everybody knows this running joke. And Bielefeld gets made fun of a lot of times.

HM: Has it grown it grown a little bit tired maybe?

JF: To be honest, yeah. Actually, that's the point of the whole campaign or the whole story because the whole thing is now started 25 years ago. And we were thinking let's try to do something positive with it. This time we're having fun with the conspiracy instead of the other way round.

HM: Aren’t you kind of fanning the flames a little bit by doing this?

JF: We were thinking a lot about that because there is a risk drawing even more attention to this whole thing. Our thinking was first, this story does exist. And in Germany, it's big. It's huge. Everybody knows about it. So ignoring it's not an option, actually. And we were thinking okay, what option do we have here? Do something with it, actually. Become active. Become the one who is telling the joke themselves, and writing another chapter, writing a completely new chapter. And the end of this campaign, of this competition so to speak, will be that the city of Bielefeld will say goodbye to the Bielefeld conspiracy.

HM: I see.

JF: We’ll do a little ceremony at the end. We tried to do write our own chapter now with this thing.

HM: Now you have already as I understand it received some submissions. What kind of proof are people offering?

JF: Actually, we have received 500 submissions from all over the world.

HM: Wow!

JF: And they differ very much. Most of the people just get that we're having fun here. And so most of the proofs are they are jokes themselves. So they make up crazy stuff with Photoshop. They are manipulating Google Maps. They are posting different kind of pictures. Some people are really developing really complex mathematical proofs. So like if this then that. And this equals this, and so on and so on. So you read this stuff and you're getting lost in the middle and thinking whoa. So the range of the submissions is a really wide range from really complicated stuff to just really funny and sweet emails we're getting from all over the world.

HM: What happens if someone actually manages to prove that you don't exist?

JF: Then we have a problem. A big problem.

HM: Do you have that million euros to give?

JF: Actually, if we do not exist, where do you get your money from?

HM: Oh, that's a good question. All right, you got me. [ HM and JF laugh] Mr. Franzke, it sounds like you're at least having some fun with this. Good luck.

JF: Thank you very much. Bye.

RS: We reached Jens Franzke in Bielefeld, Germany. Or at least we think we did.

[Music: Folk]

Jeff Buckley’s Grace

RS: He was the kind of guy who would have sounded good singing the phone book. He didn't. But on his first album, Jeff Buckley sang pretty much everything else. That album was called "Grace". It was released 25 years ago today. And it wasn't instantly considered a classic: some critics found it a little sprawling, eclectic to the point of being disorienting, and distinctly overambitious. Which is understandable, in a way — it was 1994, right in the middle of the grunge era, when ambition seemed suspect. And it was clear that Jeff Buckley wanted listeners to hear what he was capable of. He belted out hard rock, but he also convincingly covered Nina Simone. He sang a couple of fairly straightforward break-up songs, but he also recorded what many think is the definitive version of Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah". And he stuck his version of a 16th-century English hymn in there as well. It shouldn't work, but it does. And it left people excited to hear what he'd do next — which made it all the sadder when he drowned while swimming in the Mississippi River in 1997 — leaving behind just the one studio album.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

August 23, 2019 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode