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 2016

The AIH Transcript for January 2, 2017

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

SOUNDCLIP

One minute to the bills.

JOHN PERRY: This is As It Happens. I'm John Perry, a producer on the show. You know how it works. There's a phone line, we’re on one end, someone is on the other end, and in between, a great story.

SOUNDCLIP

Here we go.

[Music: Theme]

HELEN MANN: Hello I’m Helen Mann.

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

HM: Tonight. The calendar changed but nothing else did. A horrific attack in Istanbul nightclub leaves dozens of people dead and leaves no question that 2017 will be another year of attacks in Turkey.

JD: Crime against nature. To celebrate Canada's 150th birthday this year, admission to national parks is free, which has an Alberta naturalist worry that a stampede of hikers will make the outdoors not so great.

HM: Judging a book by its lack of coverage. To protest Simon Schuster book deal with Milo Yiannopoulos, The Chicago Review of Books says it won't write about any of that company's publications.

JD: And the letters of the law. To celebrate California's new marijuana legislation, someone climbs up to that famous sign in Los Angeles early on New Year's Day and changes it from ‘Hollywood’ to ‘Hollyweed.’ As It Happens the Monday edition. Or, radio that moves into 2017 with the greatest and biggest of ease.

[Music]

Part 1: Turkey attack update, National Parks free admission, Milo Yiannopoulos book deal

Turkey Attack Update

Guest: Egeman Bağış

JEFF DOUGLAS: It happened about 90 minutes after the clock struck midnight in Turkey. A gunman got out of a taxi cab, and entered an Istanbul nightclub during New Year's celebrations. He fired 180 bullets into the crowd over the course of seven minutes. Then he fled.
The attack in Reina Nightclub early Sunday morning left at least 39 dead, and 69 more injured. Many who survived did so by playing dead, or miraculously avoiding the hail of bullets. Here are the voices of some of the survivors.

SOUNDCLIP

The first bullet came from here, passed from here, and explosion and come here but the Lebanese passport saved me, saved my heart.

I was in the toilets. The electricity went out, and I was like yes, OK. That's all. And I said my last goodbyes to one of my friends telling OK, good bye, that's all. I love you. Yeah that was the end and I thought because the gun shootings stopped, and then I was thinking to myself. I think he's going to explode himself, and we’re going to die in the toilets, in the bathroom.

JD: Some of the survivors of the attack at Reina Nightclub, speaking to media. While police continue to search for the perpetrator, ISIS has already claimed responsibility. It's the latest in a string of attacks in Turkey.
Last month, bombs outside an Istanbul soccer stadium killed 39 people. Later, a gunman inside an art exhibit in Ankara assassinated the Russian Ambassador. And since Sunday's attack, many have been raising questions about Turkey's security measures.
Egeman Bağış is the former Minister of European Union Affairs in Turkey, and a member of Turkish Parliament with the ruling AK Party. We reached him in Istanbul.

HELEN MANN: Mr. Bağış, this attack is such a terrible way for your country to be bringing in the New Year. How are people there coping today?

EGEMAN BAGIS: Well the country is united against people from left and right, men, women, children. Different ethnicities, different religious groups are all united and they're all condemning terrorism. We have been fighting against PKK terrorism. We're fighting against Daesh ISIS. We know how hard dealing with terrorism is?

HM: Why do you think the gunmen targeted the Reina Nightclub in particular on the weekend.

EB: Well I think they are trying to create instability in Turkey. They’re trying to break Turkey apart from where she belongs, which is the Western world. They're trying to scare the people in Turkey and they're trying to create instability in the country.

HM: This nightclub is frequented by a lot of tourists as I understand it as well.

EB: This is one of the most well-known places of Istanbul. Many tourists, many artists who have ever come to Turkey, have visited this place. And this was New Year's Eve, and they are trying to create an atmosphere of fright in the country, at a time when people were so hopeful that a new beginning was emerging.

HM: You know, given that Turkey has been under a state of emergency since the summer time, and the coup attempt. All the security on the streets that's been added. I'm just wondering how you think this gunman was able to successfully carry out this attack.

EB: It's apparent that this gunman was very experienced. He was a cold blooded murderer. He came in with a rifle, automatic rifle, shooting at people, and he killed everyone on his way. And he didn't mind killing civilians. So he’s a psychopath.

HM: But we're told he passed through three security checkpoints in a taxi before he got to the club. The club is across from a police station and there are 25000 officers in Istanbul alone that night. Does that not raise some concerns for you?

EB: The checkpoints of the club that he entered, he shot everyone down. He was walking in with an automatic rifle as he was just shooting left and right.

HM: Some are questioning the experience of those cops around Istanbul, because after the coup, a lot of police and security officials were purged by the government, and these some of these are new people. Do you think that could have been one of the factors here in terms of the breakdown in security?

EB: Well those police officers who were fired from their duties belonged to another terrorist organization who did not mind using our own warplanes to bomb our own parliament back in July. So we could not have kept them on duty. It was only natural for them to be fired. And some of them have been arrested and they are now being prosecuted. This could not have been prevented that easily. We went through a similar incident in Brussels, in Paris, in Berlin. It's very difficult to stop them.

HM: As you know, there are many people who question whether that number of police officers were disloyal to the government and questioned the nature of the purge. You're confident that that they would not have been more effective on the streets than the police were this weekend?

EB: I have no doubt about that. I had full confidence in our security office and our police force, and I'm glad that my police force has been cleansed of terrorists.

HM: According to one report, we're seeing more than 500 people have been killed in Turkey since July of 2015 in major attacks. What more then do you think could be done to prevent these kinds of incidents?

EB: It's a very awkward situation right now because we are dealing with many terrorist organizations at the same time. But we're not getting the due cooperation and support and solidarity from our allies. There is lack of intelligence sharing, vis-à-vis our allies. We're trying to fight with ISIS in al-Bab, in Syria, in Iraq, and our allies have been fighting with ISIS by not providing as much support and intelligence on this point. We have a saying in Turkish “If your neighbor's house is on fire and if you don't have them put it out, that fire will eventually burn your own home.”

HM: What difference would increased intelligence have had on the situation at this nightclub? Because we've heard from the owner of the club that he was already given advance notice that the place would be at risk. Would it have made much difference to have any more information about this particular attacker?

EB: I'm not talking about only this incident but overall, Turkey deserves much more cooperation and support from our allies.

HM: Given the ground that ISIS has been losing in Syria and Iraq, how fearful are you that they will continue to target Turkey with increased venom?

EB: The only way to deal with terrorism is through determination. And we are determined to fight against terrorism, with or without the support of our allies. I haven't seen any soldiers from Canada or the United States fighting alongside my soldiers to be honest.

HM: Do you think that there's any value in the criticism that perhaps your government has been fighting the wrong people, that they've been so focused in the aftermath of that coup that they're not dealing effectively with the external threat?

EB: No I don't believe in that. That’s just propaganda to damage the impression of Turkey. We are dealing with PKK terrorism for the last 40 years. And that has not been one single PKK terrorist that has been extradited from any of the European countries.

HM: No one is suggesting this particular attack any more was related to the PKK. We heard perhaps it might be Kurdish fighters.

EB: This particular attack is not related to PKK but this is an approach on how to deal with terror and have to have solidarity among allies. And that's what we need.

HM: There's a lot of concern about the crackdown on human rights in Turkey right now, though. What do you say to those countries that are concerned about that?

EB: That is your approach. I don’t believe in it. I think human rights issues in Turkey are not as bad as they are reported in the Western media. Because my parliament was attacked, my city was burned down, and I know that these terrorists are bloody and they’re cruel. And the only way to deal with terrorism is through determination.

HM: Mr. Bağış, thank you for taking time to talk to us.

EB: Thank you. Thank you.

JD: Egeman Bağış is the former Minister of European Union Affairs in Turkey, and a member of Turkish Parliament with the ruling AK Party. Again, 39 people were killed early Sunday morning at an Istanbul nightclub, including one Canadian. She has been identified as Alaa Al-Muhandis from Milton, Ontario. We have more on this story on our Website, cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

National Parks free admission

Guest: Ben Gadd

JD: To celebrate Canada's 150th birthday, Parks Canada is throwing open the gates and offering free admission to national parks across this country. And so far, almost a million people have ordered their free parks passes online. But some conservationists say that that plan could turn some parks into endless traffic jams and damage the natural wonders visitors are there to see. Ben Gadd is an author of 10 books on the Rocky Mountains. He is a retired guide. We reached Mr. Gadd in Canmore, Alberta.

HM: Ben, paint is a picture of what it is you fear National parks could look like during and after all these visitors arrive?

BG: So what you're going to see is lots and lots more cars at, say the gate to Banff National Park. We already get lineups almost a kilometer long there of people lining up to buy their passes to come in for the day. Once they're in the park, these crowds are just going to kind of plug up the… oh, say the road up to the hot springs at Banff, and end up to the lake at Lake Louise and things like that, so we can expect an awful lot of traffic for one thing.

HM: And that's going to be at places, as you mentioned Banff, Jasper, the really popular parks especially.

BG: Yeah yeah. But you know Parks Canada is also saying hey you should go visit the less the less popular parks you know. That bugs me a bit because the one thing we don't need more of, in any of these national parks, is people. The wildlife are barely coping as it is, and while I think we should all go to our national parks and visit, we shouldn't just go in mass, you know, and plug everything up.

HM: How stretched are the resources right now and in terms of the park wardens and staff generally?

BG: Alas, Parks Canada doesn't have the money and the staff to keep up with what they've already got. The park budget was cut terribly in the Mulroney years and under the Harper government. There isn't enough money in there to really look after the place properly. We all know that. And in defense of Parks Canada, I mean, they do the best they can. I really admire these folks who are trying to handle all this. But when you know when the money isn't forthcoming from Parliament, what can you do?

HM: A lot of your concerns seem to be related to the heavy use of cars. Is it better if people come on buses if they're encouraged perhaps to do more outdoor activities, more hiking, and not be just driving through in their own vehicles.

BG: Oh certainly. Buses are both better environmentally, when they're full of people. You know, you're getting more people per drop of diesel fuel going through than you do in any car. And that brings up a really important point Helen, and that is that we need more shuttle service in the national parks. Parks Canada's experimented with that, the last couple of summers in the Lake Louise area, on the drive to Marine Lake which is all plugged up with cars by about nine o'clock every morning. And you can get on a shuttle, a free shuttle, and be taken up there. And that's all to the good. Now this does dump possibly more people out at the end, you know, at Marine Lake. But most of those folks just want to walk up to the lakeshore, and you know, look at it and take a picture and go home anyway.
If you get back on the trails, you get away from the crowds, and that's how you do it. You go you go for a hike, get a couple of kilometers back, and you see very few people compare to what you would see right at the trailhead. So it's always the best way to get a wilderness experience is to go to the wilderness on foot. You know, perfectly obvious.

HM: You mentioned things like bears getting hit by cars, but you have other concerns as well, as I understand it, about the implications of all these visitors on wildlife. What are the problems you see?

BG: You know, you can make a list of things that happen when you put a whole lot of people into an area all at once, and there's air pollution and there's noise and there's a whole lot of laundry being washed in the hotels and there's a whole lot of garbage you know going out from the restaurants and all that. It just basically is that the more people you get in one place, the more damage is done, unless that place is really equipped to handle them.

HM: And yet, you know tourism is a very big business in this country, and particularly in those areas. It's nice to think that foreign visitors in particular want to come to our country and experience a beauty they don't see elsewhere. Isn't that a good thing? Doesn’t that spread the word about how beautiful Canada is?

BG: I think people should come in and enjoy the national parks from all over, of course. The problem is if we get too many. And one way to handle that, you know, is just to put some limits on things. For example, if you want to go out to Lake O'Hara over in the Yoho National Park, and Lake O'Hara is one of these world class, you know, gems of the Rockies. Well quite a few years ago, Parks Canada set it up such that you don't get there unless you get on a school bus which goes up this little road, and only a certain number of seats are available, it only runs at certain times of day, and when it's booked up, that's it. The only other way to get is to walk 12 kilometers uphill before you even get to the trail heads to the beautiful places there. So that kind of natural filter puts most of the people on the bus. It's strictly limited. And when I go up there in the summertime, I find the place not overrun. It's a great way to do things and I think we're going to see that more and more.

HM: At the risk of creating even more of a problem for one particular area, can you share with us your favorite spot to spend time in the parks this summer?

BG: Probably my favorite place is to be standing at Marine Lake, up on top of the big rock pile.

HM: It's beautiful.

BG: You've probably been there.

HM: I have.

BG: Most of us have. This is this is an iconic Canadian view for many years, I took tour groups up there, People who are interested in the geology and the natural history. And we stood up there, and everybody says, this is fantastic and wonderful and it is. And it, to a large extent it can handle the numbers up there. The trails are pretty well hardened, and there's some more work that needs to be done to keep up with this. Parks Canada doesn't have the money to really maintain its infrastructure. A good shuttle service and so on, you could walk up there, you and all the crowds, and just set up so that it can be handled.

HM: All right Ben, thank you for speaking with us.

BG: You're welcome.

HM: Okay bye bye.

BG: Bye.

JD: Ben Gadd is a retired Rocky Mountains guide. We reached Canmore, Alberta.

[Music]

Milo Yiannopoulos book deal

Guest: Adam Morgan

JD: Milo Yiannopolous was deemed too offensive even for the hotbed of harassment that is Twitter. But apparently, he's not too offensive for the giant publishing house Simon and Schuster.
Last week, it was revealed that the company had given Milo Yiannopolous a book deal. A big one. And many in the literary world are not impressed. Among them, Adam Morgan.
Mr. Morgan is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Chicago Review of Books. The publication has announced that it will not review a single Simon and Schuster book this year, in protest. We reached Adam Morgan in Chicago.

HM: Mr. Morgan, what did you first think when you heard that Milo Yiannopoulos was getting a book deal from Simon and Schuster?

ADAM MORGAN: I thought it was really unfortunate that a mainstream publisher, one of the five largest publishers in the United States, would take a step towards normalizing hate speech.

HM: What do you know of this book and the plans for it?

AM: So I don't know a lot about the book other than the fact that it's called Dangerous and that it is written by my Milo Yiannopoulos, and that he received $250,000 advance for the book on his contract. I haven't read, you know, a review copy of the book, or seen any of the book, I’ve just you know heard the things that Milo has said in the past in interviews, and in his articles on Breitbart and many of his speeches that he's given at universities across the country.

HM: Yeah. Well for those who aren't familiar with him, could you tell us why he is so notorious? What he's done to gain that notoriety?

AM: Sure. So he has become very popular, similar to the way that Donald Trump became popular for ‘speaking his mind’ and not being afraid to say offensive things. But in Milo’s case, he's even admitted himself that he is offensive on purpose because he knows that that will get headlines and that will get him plenty of fans, even if it gets him banned from Twitter and other forms of social media.

HM: That Twitter ban happened in the summer because he took on the African-American comedian in New York, Leslie Jones. And it was a very heated exchange. Do you remember anything about that?

AM: Yes I do remember that. You know, he was not a fan of the movie that Leslie Jones was in, Ghostbusters, the reboot Ghostbusters with Leslie and three other women. But what really set off critics and what caused Twitter to ban him wasn't that he criticized the movie, or that he criticized, you know the production, or the acting, or anything like that. It was that he resorted to personal attacks on actually all four of the women, not just Leslie Jones. Calling them fat, calling them ugly, telling Leslie Jones that she looked like a black dude. And then while he didn't post anything particularly racist to Leslie Jones, he singled her out as a target for his mass following of Twitter trolls, who then attacked her and forced her to seek help from Twitter itself.

HM: Now you have announced the Chicago Review of Books will not be reviewing any Simon and Schuster titles in 2017. Why go that far?

AM: Sure. So again we actually didn't call for a boycott of Simon and Schuster by readers, and we don't expect other review outlets or news outlets to boycott Simon Schuster for us. It’s as simple as we would rather spend the time giving free publicity to a different publisher who isn't normalising hate speech. We're really passionate about independent presses and small presses. So when we cover a big five publisher, Simon and Schuster is one of the five ‘big five publishers’ of the United States, when we cover one of them, it's because we think one of their books is really worth talking about. Last year in 2016, we covered 15 Simon and Schuster books. So this year, in 2017, we would rather use those 15 slots on a publisher that isn't normalizing hate speech.

HM: Now some of those authors who are published by Simon and Schuster say they're unhappy with calls for… well you say you've not called for a boycott, but some have. And they're worried about that, saying that their works are going to be punished for the decision to publish Milo Yiannopoulos. What do you say to them?

AM: Yeah I've actually spoken with a lot of them. It is unfair. Right it's not fair to take out our grievances on authors who have nothing to do with, you know, the editorial people in charge at Simon and Schuster. So, again they will publish some fantastic books next year. They have some great imprints like 37 Ink and some great authors. We would just rather… it's like, if my favorite restaurant hired Milo, I just wouldn't eat there anymore. I wouldn't ask people to stop going, I wouldn't try to run the restaurant out of business. I wouldn't want to negatively affect the other waiters at that restaurant. It's just not somewhere that I would want to eat anymore. And that's what we've done by not covering Simon and Schuster. And those other authors that I've spoken with, who don't think this is fair, I've offered to cover different editions of their book that have been put out by British presses and Australian presses. We just won't mention the Simon and Schuster editions of their book, or link to any purchase options for the Simon and Schuster editions.

HM: Have you had any response from Simon and Schuster to the decision?

AM: No we have not had any response from Simon Schuster and I didn't really expect them to respond to us personally.

HM: There are questions about, I guess, freedom of speech, freedom to publish anything. Is… are you concerned that you're cracking down on their right to publish what they see fit in this way.

AM: No not at all actually. I truly believe Milo has the right to say anything he wants to say, and I believe Simon and Schuster has the right to publish anything they want to publish. And along the same lines Chicago Review of Books have the right to cover whatever books we want to cover. It's not an issue of free speech, it's really an issue of free market capitalism. You have every right to say what you want but it doesn't protect you from repercussions in the market.

HM: This particular imprint of Simon and Schuster, Threshold Books is known as a conservative imprint. I mean, that’s what they’re known for. They've published books by Glenn Beck, Dick Cheney, Laura Ingraham. There’s also of course Ann Coulter, published by a different published but who expresses the same kind of views as Milo Yiannopoulos. I'm just wondering why this particular book deal is is causing you such concern?

AM: Sure. So yes for us it's not a matter of conservative versus liberal ideology, or Republican versus Democrat. There are certainly plenty of authors out there that I personally disagree with and that the editors at the site disagree with. So it's not a political stance for us. For us it's just about human decency. It's not about any of the political ideas that Milo represents, it's about his rhetoric and how hateful it is and dehumanizing. And the fact that that kind of rhetoric has real world consequences in perpetuating things like racism, misogyny, Islamophobia, transphobia and so on.

HM: The Yiannopoulos book isn't due out till March, but already it is an advance sales at the top of Amazon's censorship and politics bestseller list. Do you fear that the publicity around your decision and some companies or individuals calling for a boycott may actually be helping him sell more books?

AM: Yeah I do think it probably gave him more attention among his following of you know, mostly bigoted people. So I'm OK with the fact that maybe more bigots might buy his book because we spoke out against it. But it doesn't mean everyone should stay silent.

CO: Mr. Morgan thank you for talking with us. Appreciate it.

AM: Of course, thank you very much Helen.

CO: All right, bye bye.

JD: Adam Morgan is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Chicago Review of Books. We reached him in Chicago.

[Music]

Dateline, Hollyweed

JD: Dateline, Hollyweed?

[Music]

JD: Residents of Los Angeles, California, awoke on New Year's Day to learn that one of their biggest icons had undergone a facelift.
Since 1923, the Hollywood sign has stood high in Hollywood hills. But sometime between midnight and 2 a.m. on January 1st, someone edited that famous showbiz beacon to read "Hollyweed."
Police say they're searching for the culprit behind the, "hijinks." They're wanted for trespassing. But others say the rewrite is little more than a rehash.
It's likely a celebration of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act. The law makes recreational use more or less OK, at least as far as the state is concerned.
But this isn't the first time California's mellowed on Mary Jane. In 1975, the state rolled back possession from a felony to a misdemeanor. And on December 31st of that year, an art student named Danny Finegood and some co-conspirators twisted their way high into the Hollywood hills. And by New Year's morning the Hollywood sign read "Hollyweed."

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Jan 2, 2017 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode