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 August 31, 2017

Hosts: Susan Bonner and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

SUSAN BONNER: Hello I'm Susan Bonner.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening, I'm Jeff Douglas. This is as it happens [Music: Theme]

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

SB: Sad and enraged. A court fails to convict anyone for murdering Benazir Bhutto, leaving one of the Prime Minister's former aides wondering what's wrong inside the Pakistani state?

JB: Flying in the face. An Afghan asylum seeker in London gets a last-minute reprieve, after the pilot of his flight back to Afghanistan refused to take off with him aboard.

SB: Letter of the law. A group of HIV-positive patients sues a U.S. health insurance company after it mails details of their health status in see-through envelopes.

JD: Steeple-chaste. A priest in Quebec City says goodbye to the school kids next door after the bell tower of his old church starts teetering a little further each day.

SB: Flush with cash. The demand for tickets was so incensed they had to hire police to monitor the porta potties. But wait until you hear what the winner of the latest “Chase the Ace” charity draw plans to do with her cash.

JD: And chews quick. An American scientist explains how the ants he's been studying managed to snap their jaws shut 700 times quicker than the blink of an eye. As It Happens, the Thursday edition. Radio where sometimes people shoot their mouths off, but never quite like that.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Bhutto: former aide, Afghan deportation, ant bite researcher

Bhutto former aid

Guest: Husain Haqqani

“Ten years later and we still await justice.” That was the reaction from one of Benazir Bhutto's daughters today to the verdict for the men accused of her mother's assassination. Five suspects were acquitted in Pakistan and two senior police officers were found guilty, not of murder, but of mishandling evidence. Most disappointing for the Bhutto family is that General Pervez Musharraf, the former dictator who was also charged with murder in the death, is now considered a fugitive after he failed to appear in court. Hussain Haqqani was a close friend and aide to Benazir Bhutto. We reached him in Washington D.C.

SB: Mr. Haqqani, nearly a decade later no one has yet been held responsible for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. How do you feel about that?

HUSSAIN HAQQANI: I feel it both sad and enraged. It is unfortunate that even though the Pakistan People's Party that Benazir Bhutto led was in office for five years, the investigation was not conducted the way it should have been. And now, the people who were charged have basically been let off. Except for those who washed down the site of the murder, which shouldn't have been done, but Iare they the only ones responsible? Why has the state of Pakistan not been able to find the people who actually pulled the trigger and who set off the bomb? And why is General Musharraf not being held accountable both for not providing her protection and for covering up the investigation?

SB: How do you answer those questions? Why do you think those questions still remain?

HH: I think that the Pakistani deep state, the Pakistani Intelligence Service and the Pakistani authorities that are deeply involved in fostering and accepting terrorism do not want too much to be uncovered about the groups and the individuals we have been involved in her murder. That is one explanation. The other part of it is that the United Nations conducted an inquiry and you have probably seen Mr. Mendoza's report. It implies that the Pakistani state apparatus, in its persecution of Benazir Bhutto, went to the extent of not really caring about her security. So there are elements in the state that do not want those issues to be uncovered or to be discussed further. As far as the leadership is concerned, they want to survive in the current political environment in Pakistan where the military rules supreme. So it's not in their interest either to push the military too hard into finding answers to tough questions about the assassination.

SB: For people who had pinned their hopes on the justice system, this trial that ended today — one of the most controversial trials in the country's history — going on for years and then ending the way it did today with five acquittals and just these two police officers who you referenced convicted, but not for murder, and then General Pervez Musharraf missing entirely. Was this just a case of the court's hands being tied or was there just not simply sufficient evidence for conviction on murder?

HH: I cannot speak specifically to the legal questions that the court may have looked at. But what I can say is that Pakistan is not a country where many people get justice, unfortunately. We have hundreds of missing persons right now, whom the deep state is believed to have abducted. But there is no accountability for that. In a country where there is a semi-authoritarian system where elections are held and people are elected and they're given some share of power. But real power is wielded by people sitting in dark offices, running things in the name of national security. Justice always does not come. In this case, there was some expectation that because Benazir Bhutto's assassination had saddened the entire nation. All political parties felt sad about it, even those who opposed her. And the Pakistani military had responsibility in trying to get to the root of it so that there would not be further similar terrorist action in the country. There was some expectation that there will be at least some justice and that expectation has been completely dashed today.

SB: What about Pervez Musharraf? A spokesperson for him told us earlier that the general will return to Pakistan, quote, “in due time”. And that in the meantime everyone, including the Pakistani government, knows where Musharraf is. It's no secret. How do you respond to that?

HH: Well, let's be honest, that is not the same thing as saying he was cooperative with either the U.N. inquiry or with the prosecution of this particular case. The rest is, of course, just fluff for the media. I am not saying that I have any evidence that he was involved in Benazir Bhutto's murder, but I do think he has an obligation to answer questions which he has consistently refused to do.

SB: Do you believe he will ever return to Pakistan?

HH: I am not certain whether he will or will not return. Of course, in Pakistan's case, the Pakistani military and intelligence services have a level of impunity and they do protect people who served in their ranks. And no Pakistani former military chief has been held accountable for anything. Four of them have taken part in violation of the Constitution. They have never been put on trial. Their corruption has never been investigated. And each one of them has basically been buried with full honors. So will General Musharraf at some point be able to return by his juniors saying he has a right to come back to the country? I will not be surprised if that happens.

SB: Will you be speaking with the Bhutto family?

HH: I hope that I get a chance to speak to members of the family, especially the children, whom I have great love and fondness for. And I hope that I can, at this time, be there for them just as I was when they were mourning their mother. Now they are mourning the lack of justice for their mother and they need all our affection and love in this moment.

SB: You say you want to be there for them. What do you think they need? What can you tell them to help them?

HH: Well, one can only reassure them that there are people who care about their mother and them. And that the deep injustices of Pakistan that Benazir Bhutto fought in her life needs to be fought even now. Just because she didn't get justice either in her life or her death does not mean that people of Pakistan should not continue to fight for justice. And if members of the Bhutto family want to do that there are many people like myself who would support them in doing so.

SB: Mr. Haqqani, thank you so much for your time today.

HH: Pleasure talking to you.

SB: Goodbye.

HH: Bye.

JD: Hussain Haqqani was a close friend and a former aide to Benazir Bhutto. Mr Haqqani was also Pakistan's Ambassador to the United States. We reached him in Washington D.C.

[Music: Cultural]

Afghan deportation

Guest: Bridget Chapman

JD: Samim Bigzad appeared to have run out of time. On the weekend, the 22-year-old Afghan asylum seeker was put on a plane in London to be deported from Britain. And then the pilot of the Turkish flight intervened. Brigitte Chapman is a campaigner for Mr. Bigzad. We reached her in Folkestone, England.

SB: Ms. Chapman, you went to the airport on the day Samim Bigzad was supposed to be deported. Did you actually believe you'd be able to stop this flight?

BRIDGET CHAPMAN: We didn't know, but we just felt we had to give it our best shot, you know? There really wasn't any other option. So we went and we tried. And we thought we'd fail to be honest.

SB: What were you saying to the passengers who were getting on this Turkish Airlines flight?

BC: We were just talking very quietly and respectfully and just letting them know that there was somebody on the plane who was not willing passenger, that it was a forced deportation and we were letting them know that he faced the threat — the very credible threat — of beheading back in Afghanistan.

SB: And what kind of reception were you getting from people? How did they react?

BC: People were very nice. Some people really didn't want to get involved. But there were quite a lot people who wanted to engage in that and spoke to us and were very concerned and sympathetic about it.

SB: So you went through all of that and then you saw the plane take off. What was that like for you?

BC: Well, we couldn't see the plane from where we were. But we were tracking it on the Turkish Airlines website. And you can see you know in real time what's happening. And there was a delay of 46 minutes, which they said was due to the weather, which we thought was weird because it was a beautiful day. So that gave us some hope. But then the plane took off and a member of Turkish Airlines staff, who'd been very nice, and I believe was totally genuine told us that the plane had gone with everybody on it. So we thought we'd failed and it was horrible. I mean there were there were tears. We were really upset. We were just so frustrated you know that something so awful was happening right under our noses and we felt powerless to stop it.

SB: And then?

BC: We all came home. I travel back to the south coast of the U.K. from Heathrow; it is quite a long way. It was a sad journey. I went to bed. I felt very low and then my phone buzzed and it was Samim’s housemate and it was a two word message and it just said, “he's here.” And I said, “what do you mean he's here?” She said, “He's just called me. The pilot refused to take him.” So you know we just… I mean we sort of did this weird laugh crying because I just was so happy, but relieved. It was amazing. It was just amazing.

SB: What's your understanding of what actually happened on the flight?

BC: Well, I would love to have been a fly on the wall of that plane. I mean, obviously, I've only read secondhand reports, but I understand that Samim did stand up and make it clear that he was going unwillingly, which we were worried about. We were really worried that he was going to just be very compliant because that's the kind of person he is. He is very gentle and compliant. We were really worried he wouldn't say anything, but we think that he did. And you know the pilot said he wasn't going to take him because it wasn't safe to do so.

SB: What reasons did the pilot give? Has he spoken out about why he made the decision he made?

BC: No. We don't know who it is and we don't know if it's a man or a woman? We just don't know anything. And Turkish Airlines have not commented. So we don't know what his reasons were. We don't know if the social media campaign that we had targeting Turkish Airlines had got through to him? Whether it was passengers talking? Whether it was Samim? We just don't know what made the difference, but I would like to kiss him or her?

SB: So what do you know about where Samim Bigzad is now.

BC: He's back in a detention center near Heathrow. He's in a worse detention center than before because the one he's in now is specifically for criminals. He's not a criminal. So it feels like he's been punished for having you know foiled to the British authorities. We're really worried about him and were really worried that they will attempt to deport him again quite soon.

SB: So this is not over?

BC: Oh, It is far from over. We'll fight them every step of the way. You know whatever we can do, we will do it. I will not stand by. We will not stand by and let somebody be sent back to almost certain death. That's just a terrible thing to do.

SB: Explain a little bit more what you know about what he might face if he returns to Afghanistan?

BC: I've worked quite a lot with refugees from Afghanistan, and you know the Taliban they don't mess about. If they make a threat, they really mean it. And I know young people who’ve seen relatives executed in front of them. And Samim’s family have a construction company as I understand it that did some work for the Army and the Taliban don't like that. And they made a direct threat about Samim that if he returned he would be they would be beheaded.

SB: You say that you're not going to let him be deported. What will you do if there is another attempt to deport him?

BC: We will try the same thing again. We will work with lawyers to put in a fresh appeal. He should have the right to make a fresh appeal and you know the Home Office here, who are the people that make the decisions about whether people stay or not, they make a lot of mistakes. There's a lot of decisions that have been overturned and we really hope that we can achieve that with Samim.

SB: You sound so relieved when you're talking about this success at least. How hopeful are you that you will achieve the ultimate success and have him granted asylum?

BC: You know, whilst he's here and he's not in Afghanistan there is hope. But I am worried. I am really worried that the British government will try to deport him again and do it very soon. But not just him you know there's a whole load of young people. I think the UK deported about 2,000 asylum seekers back to Afghanistan last year. And if I as a British person wanted to go to Afghanistan and looked on the Foreign Office website for travel guidance, it would say it's not safe to go there. Well, if it is no safe for me to go there why is it safe for them to go there? We've made a big mess in Afghanistan. Britain is directly responsible with its failed foreign policy for a terrible mess in Afghanistan. To walk away and say it's nothing to do with us, you guys just get on with it is totally irresponsible. And as a as a British citizen, I'm ashamed. I'm ashamed of my government at the moment.

SB: Ms. Chapman, thank you for telling us about this.

BC: Thank you for being interested. We really appreciate it.

SB: Goodbye

BC: Bye bye.

JD: Bridget Chapman is a campaigner for Afghan asylum seeker Samim Bigzad. We reached her in Folkestone, England. We have more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Ant bite researcher

Guest: Fred Larabee

“I'm interested in Insect mouthparts.” That's not me. That is how Fred Larabee’s bio reads on Twitter. And given that, it should be no surprise that the entomologist has a new study out on a specific type of insect, and the specifics of its specific mouthparts. Now, what might surprise you is what Mr. Larabee learned about just how fast a Myrmoteras ant can move its jaws. His study was published yesterday in the Journal of Experimental Biology. Mr. Larabee is the lead author. We reached him in Washington D.C.

SB: Mr. Larabee, just how fast are these ants moving their jaws?

FRED LARABEE: Oh, they're very fast. They snap their jaws shut in about half a millisecond, which is about 700 times faster than a blink of an eye. And during the strike, they reach peak speed of about 60 miles per hour.

SB: Really?

FL: Yeah. It's what we call a “spring-loaded system”. So by incorporating latches and springs into a movement, these animals are able to generate speeds that are much, much faster than they would be by direct muscle action.

SB: Now, when we refer to these ants jaws it's not the way our job functions. We're talking specifically about two appendages that move from side to side; they don't move up and down. What's the significance of that?

FL: Insects, instead of having you know a jaw like a vertebrate does, they have several different appendages around their oral cavity. Ants primarily use mandibles as they're called for grinding up material or processing their diet. And in ants, instead of moving up and down like your jaw does, they move side to side. And trap jaw ants their mandibles are pretty special in that they're incredibly long compared to other ants. They're so long that when they open them they actually open up a very wide gape. In the trap jaw ants that I was studying they open them up to approximately 270 degrees, so they're wide open they're actually sort of pointing behind them.

SB: And how did you study these ants.

FL: So to measure the speed of their jaw strikes we have to use a high-speed camera that we attached to a microscope in order to magnify the specimen and actually be able to see everything that is happening. And then the high speed camera allowed us to slow their movement down to actually be able to resolve the whole movement and measure the speed. And then to be able to visualize the internal components of their head and figure out what anatomical structures were acting as the different components of the spring-loaded system, we had to use a special device called an X-ray micro tomography or a micro-CT. It's basically a CAT scan for very small specimens.

SB: So how did you react then when you actually got to see all of these details up close?

FL: It was very exciting. Nobody had studied these particular ants for their trap jaw before. So everything we were able to see with kind of new and exciting. And, in particular, the speed of the jaws because nobody had measured that before. And on top of that, once you're able to slow things down with a high-speed camera, you see things that you don't normally see sort of with the naked eye. And so we were able to see things like the spring structure, which we think is on the back of the head. We were only able to see that and notice it because of the high speed camera. Prior to the strike, you can see the whole back of the head sort of deforming. And without slowing it down, we wouldn't have had any idea that that was actually happening during the strike. Additionally, with the with the micro-CT being able to see all those structures and see where the muscles are attaching and how the whole system would be configured made it much easier to be able to figure out what all the different muscles and components were actually doing during the strike.

SB: What's the evolutionary significance of this?

FL: Yeah. So trap jaws have actually evolved multiple times, independently across ants at least four times. And so it's actually an example of what's called convergent evolution, where repeatedly evolution has come up with slightly different solutions to the same problem. And most trap jaw ants are specialists on a very special kind of prey called spring tails or very small, tiny insects that also live in the leaf litter where these ants live and forage. And they have a very fast defensive mechanism. They have a tail that’s also spring-loaded and they're able to use that to escape from prey. And so these ants, because they have such fast jaws, can catch these very fast prey.

SB: You know listening to you talk the Washington Post describes you as an “ant jaw enthusiast” and your Twitter handle is “@bugbiter”. Can I ask you what your family and friends think about this clear obsession that you have with the mouths of insects?

FL: Well, at this point, I think they're all kind of used to it and are over it. But you know early on when I was a kid following bugs around the garden and collecting things constantly I mean they certainly thought it was a little strange.

SB: And when you tell them that you were going to work today to actually x-ray an ant did you get any interesting responses?

FL: Oh sure. Yeah, I mean along the lines of why would you want to do that? Or even just befuddlement.

SB: Well, thanks for explaining it all to us. It’s pretty interesting stuff.

FL: Sure, my pleasure.

SB: Bye bye.

FL: Bye.

JD: Fred Larabee is a researcher in the department of entomology at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History in Washington D.C. And if you would like to see some pictures of these Myrmoteras ants, they’re on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Electronica]

Skip Prokop obit

JD: “Turning down Woodstock.” That is what Skip Prokop told a reporter who asked him about his biggest regret. The Lighthouse drummer seems to have worried about drugs. He said, quote, “I thought you're not going to be able to get a glass of water without something in it.” Skip Prokop died yesterday, not far from where he was born in Hamilton, Ontario. And for most of his 73 years, he lived one of the great Canadian rock and roll lives. In the 60s he played with Janis Joplin. Then he wrote for Three Dog Night. But it was Mr. Prokop’s role as the founder of Lighthouse that would earn him that Woodstock invite. The band was made up of mostly Canadians and they would become one of the country's most successful recording acts. But their music blended rock with jazz and they had cellists and they had a fluegelhorniest in the lineup. And it took fans a while to come around to that. So that same reporter asked Mr. Prokop about the best moment in his career and he said, quote, “Probably Carnegie Hall. The place wasn't full and we were playing this really beautiful song that had only orchestral sounds and the people started to boo and throw things. But then after we'd released the hits and went back, it was a totally different audience. It was sold out. They were giving us a standing ovation. It gave me chills up and down my spine and I turned to Paul [who was the band's co-founder] and said we've made it buddy.”

Part 2: HIV privacy breach, bell tower

HIV privacy breach

Guest: Ronda Goldfein

JD: A person’s HIV-status is often something they like to keep to themselves. This summer however, the health insurance company Aetna is being accused of putting thousands of people's privacy at risk. The company sent out letters to clients with information about their HIV drugs visible through the envelopes clear window. Now, some of those affected have joined a class action lawsuit against Aetna lead plaintiff is using the pseudonym “Andrew Beckett”, that's a reference to Tom Hanks character in the ‘93 film “Philadelphia”. Rhonda Goldfein is representing the anonymous plaintiffs. She is with the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania. We reached her in Philadelphia.

SB: Ms. Goldfein, what are your client's concerns about having their HIV-status exposed?

RONDA GOLDFEIN: People with HIV have faced all types of stigma, discrimination and violence as a result of their status being disclosed. One of the important issues in this case is this isn't a technical violation of the law. This isn't a violation of my credit card numbers were released or my social security number was released because those folks can come forward and say they had a problem. My clients are both horrified that their information is released and afraid to report that their information was released.

SB: What exactly was visible through this window in the envelope?

RG: You could see a couple of lines of text. And so we have now received you know dozens of these envelopes. And you can see anywhere between two and four lines of text and it's clear that it's instructions on filling your HIV medicine prescription.

SB: So who are they worried might have seen this information?

RG: So for some folks they know exactly who saw because they report coming home from work and seeing their mother crying. Or getting a message from a roommate you need to look at this. Or they know that their employee, who was house sitting during a vacation, saw it when they got the mail. Other folks have no idea who saw it. They know by definition the mail carrier saw it, but they don't know who else saw it.

SB: So those are examples of in some cases how people were immediately affected. Are there any specific cases of discrimination stemming from this privacy breach?

RG: Sadly, we've already heard of a handful of cases of people who have lost their housing as a result of the person they were living with getting this information. And that ranges from a roommate to a family member. The response and the stigma around HIV is unique and profound. People have very strong reactions. They don't understand how HIV is transmitted. They have mistaken ideas about risk and they strike out both figuratively and literally against people with HIV.

SB: And what have your clients told you about instances that happened to them as soon as they realized they saw the letter they realized what people might have seen. What did they tell you about how they reacted?

RG: They were horrified, angry, but fearful of what would happen. Imagine your most private information is out and you don't know who saw it. You don't know where it went and it's not just your most private information, but it's private information that could result in you losing your job. People report that they went to work, they know the co-worker saw it and they're looking at every person. Does that person know? Are they all whispering about me?

SB: How did this privacy breach occur?

RG: We're not exactly sure how it got started, but we know where it ended. These letters that Aetna has reported sending out to 12,000 members were in a large window envelope. We don't yet know why they chose to use those envelopes that put people at risk. We're hoping we will find out.

SB: What are you hoping comes from the lawsuit?

RG: We're still assessing that. The lawsuit began with us publicizing a demand letter to Aetna that said stop this immediately. Do not send out one more letter. The second goal was to remind people who are holding medical information that you need to redouble your effort to make sure it's secure. And the third goal of publicizing the demand was to let people who received these letters know that they had some place to turn somebody to talk to about it. Among the things that we have heard from folks is that they thought they were the only one who received it. And so now they know that my law firm is gathering information to talk to folks about this. And it’s giving them some comfort that there is a place that they can say oh, my gosh! This thing happened and what should I do.

SB: The company has apologized. It's admitted that it made a mistake and says it's working to make sure it never happens again. Why then go forward with the lawsuit?

RG: Certainly, the fact that the company recognizes its error and promises to do better in the future is good. But you don't get to devastate people's lives and say OK, no harm, no foul.

SB: The lead plaintiff is using the name Andrew Beckett. Can you tell us the significance of that pseudonym?

RG: Sure. So Andrew Beckett was the Tom Hanks character in the movie “Philadelphia”. And we selected that name both in tribute to Jonathan Demme, who made the film who died not that long ago, because he feels that the movie came to symbolize a way of establishing the rights of people with HIV.

SB: And yet, here we are nearly 25 years later. Does that stigma and that message still resonate?

RG: Absolutely. We're sad to say that that stigma is still alive as well. And certainly, you know when Jonathan Demme made that film and he's talked about this publicly like he thought that this would address the issue. I don't think he thought that it would solve the issue, but would address it. But 25 years later, we are absolutely still at the point where we need to be protective of people’s HIV-status. I mean the great irony here is we say look, HIV is a virus and there's no shame in having a virus. Disease is random, there's no shame in that. And yet, because of the stigma — because of the discrimination — we need to be ever mindful to protect people's privacy.

SB: Ms Goldfein, thank you so much.

RG: Thank you.

JD: Ronda Goldfein is the executive director of the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania. We reached her in Philadelphia.

[Music: Jazz]

Proud Boys

JD: Canada's top soldier called their behavior deplorable. But today, the military announced that four members of the Proud Boys will be allowed to stay in the Canadian Forces. The Proud Boys describe themselves as a, quote, “fraternal organization of Western Chauvinists, who will no longer apologize for creating the modern world.” Unquote. On July 1^st, you'll recall the four man attempted to disrupt a rally in Halifax. Indigenous activists were demanding the removal of a statue of Edward Cornwallis, the founder of the city of Halifax, who offered a bounty for the scalps of Indigenous people. The video shows the four forces members smirking as they confronted the protesters. Rear-Admiral John Newton however, was not smiling as he spoke to reporters today. The head of the Navy in Atlantic Canada said that the four will resume regular duties, but they must pass a probationary period to remain in the military. Here's some of what Rear-Admiral Newton had to say.

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN NEWTON: This is a permanent mark on a member’s record. And. If you don't adhere to the conditions, you are subject to release.

REPORTER: What do you say to people who say the consequences aren't going far enough?

JN: The consequences are very serious. You've got to realize there's consequences at a very personal level in community, with relationships, with our own families and with our communities. There is a failure of relationships between those members and other members and their ship's companies. There's a huge loss in that very personal level. And then the consequences of adhering to the conditions of the probationary period are very serious. They are very onerous. They have to work hard at them. They have to be measured in their in the standard that we expect them to live up to. And because this is a permanent record, any trespass against those conditions, any repeat leads to a release from the Canadian Armed Forces.

REPORTER: Why do they deserve to stay in the Navy given all the issues that you've listed?

JN: Everybody — all of us — hit walls in our life. We make errors in judgment. We have career failings. We have shortcomings with our finances. We suffer from addictions. There's many reasons we all have failings in our life. In their poor judgment as relatively young Canadian Forces members who are still being socialized into what those Queen's regulations and order say, what they expected code of conduct is, how they misjudged the power of social media and how they did not intend and didn't want this to occur. But now find this far more complex as a full breadth of what's been exposed here. They hit a matter of personal poor judgment that they have to learn from. And I think because I don't have a huge surplus of people in the Canadian Armed Forces who have already spent millions of dollars training that in their mistake and in this learning, which I see in their eyes and my interviews with them, that they will restore the trust between them and their chain of command. They will be a good investment in the long term and they will become foot soldiers as I always hope of better policies application within our ranks.

JD: Rear-Admiral John Newton speaking in Halifax. Today, the Canadian Forces announced that four members of the military who confronted Indigenous activists this summer can resume their military duties. A fifth man who was involved that day has since left the military in a process that began before the incident.

[Music: Calming folk]

Bell tower

Guest: John Picher

JD: In Quebec City, some streets are blocked off, and a schoolyard is closed because of a teetering bell tower. The people at Saint-Sauveur Church knew the historic tower needed repairs. They didn't, however, realize until recently just how badly the tower was leaning. John Picher is the Cchurch's priest. We reached him in Quebec City.

SB: Father Picher, when did you notice that that something was happening with your bell tower?

JOHN PICHER: Well, we had been envisioning some repairs to our bell tower now during the last two years because we noticed that the outside of it was damaged and rain water was pouring in to the bell tower. But, at that time, we thought that it was only an outside repair. But this year, about three months ago, we noticed that there were also inside damages to the wooden structure. So we had an architect and engineer make us research on that and they said that, obviously, we had to make an inside repair at the latest spring 2018. But three days ago, the architect came again and he noticed that there was a problem with the bell tower because it was inclined a little bit more than it had been two weeks ago, so it means that the bell tower was moving.

SB: Can you describe for us how badly the structure is actually tilting?

JP: Well, I think the architect said that it was something about a 10-degree angle, so it doesn't seem to be much. But when you consider the weight of the old structure, and especially that there is an iron cross at the top of the tower, it's really dangerous. The most dangerous is when we realised that it was moving so how much would it move in the next two or three months we didn't know. So after consulting professionals and also the people of the municipality about the dangers, we decided that it was very important for the safety of the people living around and for our schoolchildren to have a security perimeter installed last Monday. And now we are proceeding naturally with huge repairs on the bell tower.

SB: What is the biggest worry you have about this bell tower?

JP: Well, the biggest worry was that it could crumble and damage the church very heavily and that it could also kill or hurt people. So this worry should be resolved tonight or tomorrow because there will be a process of stabilizing the tower. But it's not enough to stabilize it. It will also have to be dismantled —partially dismantled — about 60 feet high. And repaired before this part of the bell tower could be put down. So it's a dismantling and rebuilding, which is a long and costly process, obviously.

SB: It sounds like it is. How historic is your tower and your church?

JP: Well, it's a landmark of Quebec City because in the downtown area, it's the third oldest parish. And the bell tower is very, very high, about 180 feet high, so it's really a landmark for the area.

SB: And people must feel so connected to it, as must you. Can you tell me how you feel about all of this uncertainty? What was your reaction when you realized how dangerous this was?

JP: Well, the immediate worry was, obviously, the safety of the people. So for the last four days, we have almost only thought about the safety. It's sure that the tower will have to fall to think about the future as well. We wanted the congregation to remain alive, so there is a parish hall in which we will celebrate mass for the next few weeks. And some of the activities of various groups and committees will go on. We are planning to reopen the church in about two or three weeks from now. But, obviously, without the bell tower, so it won't be visually it won't be the same church. It's sure that the people will want the bell tower to be rebuilt. Technically, it's possible. But we have to see if we can afford the cost.

SB: How do you feel about the fact that there's still some uncertainty that you may not be able to afford this putting it back to the way it was?

JP: Well, I feel mostly for the people who have been living in the parish for all their life and who are very much involved in the parish. Not only the people who are regularly attending mass, but many people who identify themselves with the neighborhood and the parish. So I feel very strongly for them and I hope that something good will happen. Myself, I’m rather old, so I'm not sure if I will still be there when the church has rebuilt, but the importance is for the congregation.

SB: Well, Father Picher, merci. Thank you for your time and for telling us about it.

JP: Merci, au revoir.

JD: John Picher is the parish priest of Saint-Sauveur Church in Quebec City. That's where we reached him.

[Music: Post-rock]

Harvey Piano

JD: A few inches higher and the keyboard would have been fully submerged. On Tuesday, Aric Harding returned to his flooded Texas home. Mr. Harding and his family have been living at a nearby house. He went home to see if he could pick up some of his kids stuffed animals. And as he waded through his living room, he saw the family piano and he took a moment to sit down and play.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: Aric Harding playing the piano]

JD: That is the sound of Aric Harding playing piano in knee-deep water in his home in Texas. The video has been shared widely since it was posted on social media. in caption Mr. Harding writes, quote, “I think it's all finally sinking in a little. What we used to have going as a city is gone. I really think God is going to do something completely new here. I'm excited to see the new beauty in the suffering.” Unquote.

[Music: Ambient]

Chase the Ace

SOUNDCLIP

ANNOUNCER: And it is… the ace of spades!!!

[Sound: Much rejoicing]

JD: That was the moment last night when Newfoundland's Marge Gorman picked the ace of spades from the deck and won more than 2.6 million dollars. Her pick ended at the latest Chase the Ace charity draw that has been going on for months in the Goulds area of St. John's. And after more than 40 weeks of draws, last night's event was going to be the last no matter what. School starts next week and the events have become notorious for drawing massive crowds and creating heavy traffic. Marge Gorman and her husband, Don, spoke with reporters after the win. Here's a bit of what they had to say.

SOUNDCLIP

MARE GORMAN: We won this with three other couples. My son and his girlfriend, William Gorman and Alisha Kelly. And her parents, Mike and Susan Kelly. And My stser and her husband.

REPORTER: What are you going to do with the money?

MG: I don't know! I just can’t believe it.

REPORTER: How were you feeling as soon as you checked the number?

MG: My husband, we wrote down the numbers on a piece of paper, right? And this ticket, he came up to me after and said I think we forgot to write this down. I said OK. So we wrote down that one and then after he said check it again and that was the lucky ticket.

REPORTER: And was that the winner?

MG: Yes!

REPORTER: Wow! You almost missed it. How long where you waiting in line today?

MG: He was out there since 11 o’clock this morning.

REPORTER: What are you going to buy?

MG: I have no idea.

REPORTER: And are you working, Marge?

MG: Yes, I do homecare. But I`m now going to retire.

JD: That was Marge Gorman speaking with reporters after winning the Chase the Ace jackpot yesterday in Saint John’s.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

August 31, 2017 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode