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 2025

The AIH transcript for April 16, 2025

For more episodes of this podcast, please click this link.

NIL KÖKSAL: Hello, I'm Nil Köksal.

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

[theme]

CH: Tonight:

NK: A debatable point. The Green Party is disinvited from the leader's debates after intentionally reducing its number of candidates -- a move one longtime political strategist tells us could spell the end of the party.

CH: In lock step. The president of El Salvador got a warm welcome from Donald Trump this week. We'll hear how the man who calls himself the world's "coolest dictator" ended up imprisoning U.S. citizens on Salvadoran soil.

NK: The other side of their stories. Four journalists in Russia are sentenced to spend years in a penal colony for working with an organization founded by the late Alexei Navalny -- even though they say they were reporting on it, not to it.

CH: Goal oriented. The first-ever professional women's soccer game on Canadian soil is about to be played; founder and soccer star Diana Matheson tells us what it took to get there.

NK: Shelf-fulfilling prophecy. A bookstore in a small Michigan town found a bigger space -- so residents lent their hands to transfer more than 9,000 books, one by one, to the new place, in a couple of hours.

CH: And...there was hell to pee. [NK chuckles] They could barely urinate in the gadgets made for male pilots -- so women in the U.S. Air Force are relieved that they'll be able to relieve themselves in a device designed for them.

CH: As It Happens, the Wednesday Edition. Radio that monitors the jet stream.

[theme]

Part 1: Green Party Exclusion, DW Journalists Sentenced, Chelsea Mich. Bookstore

Green Party Exclusion

Guest: Scott Reid

CH: There's no longer any debate that there's no debate for the Green Party. As you've probably heard, the commission in charge of the federal leaders' debates has revoked the Party's invitation to both the French- and English-language debates -- which are taking place tonight and tomorrow, respectively. The commission says the party did not meet the criteria because it intentionally chose to reduce the number of candidates running across the country, for strategic reasons. Earlier today, Green Party co-leader Jonathan Pedneault responded to the news.

SOUNDCLIP

JONATHAN PEDNEAULT: Let me be clear, their last-minute decision to exclude the Green Party of Canada from the leaders' debate is not only unjust and baseless because we met the criteria, it is undemocratic. It comes more than seven days -- seven days -- after the final list of candidates was received and announced by Elections Canada. And it follows a coordinated campaign by the Bloc Québécois and Conservative commentators, people who are less interested in informing Canadians than they are in protecting their political turf. They're afraid.

CH: Green Party co-leader Jonathan Pedneault. Scott Reid is a political strategist and former advisor to Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin. We reached him in Toronto earlier today.

NK: Scott, do you think Canadians, voters, are missing out by not hearing from the Greens in these debates?

SCOTT REID: Well, I do think that it would alter the dynamic of the debate, particularly the French language debate because Jonathan Pedneault is an appealing communicator, he's a fluent francophone, and, you know, more francophones in a debate that features a front-runner who's not a comfortable francophone I think would make for a different debate. So, I don't know if it's going to change the outcome of the election. I don't think the Greens are gonna sweep up a tonne of seats anywhere under any circumstance. But I think you can make an argument that it will affect this evening's debate in Quebec.

NK: And in terms of the other candidates, who might benefit from their absence, if anyone?

SR: Oh, I work on the clear assumption that the Bloc, the Conservatives at minimum, and based on their posture, the NDP, did not want to see the Greens there. But I think in that context of this election, this moment with these few days left, I think in particular the Boc and Conservatives did want Pedneault there just chewing up clock and getting in the way of their efforts to try to, you know, bring down the rising star that has, you know, really characterized Carney's campaign so far. They want to lay some lumber to Mark Carney. And they don't want another francophone in there chewing up the clock and making it harder for them to swing.

NK: In terms of why the decision was made, just to break it down a little bit for our listeners, to join the debate, parties have to meet two of three requirements. They have to have a sitting MP in Parliament, have the support of at least four per cent of the electorate, and most germain for this moment, having candidates run in 90 per cent of the ridings. We know that the Debate Commission has said that this, you know, they intentionally reduced this number -- the party did. They intended to run 343 candidates. They made a strategic decision to reduce the number of candidates running. Was that the fatal flaw here, in your view?

SR: Unquestionably. The only word for the Green Party's decision to withdraw that large number of candidates and put its participation in these debates in peril is boneheaded. And it's just an astonishing own-goal for a political party that has nothing to celebrate during this election, and whose only hope frankly came down to displaying Jonathan Pedneault on the debate stage. He's the only fresh face that they have. And that is something they took away from themselves. Now, I think Pedneault can make a legitimate argument about how this decision was made, when it was communicated, the manner in which it was adjudicated. But I don't know that they have much of a credible case as to the basis of the decision. The foundation of the decision seems, to me, to be iron-clad. And frankly, it's the fault of the Green Party, and the short-sightedness in withdrawing all those candidates.

NK: Why do you think they would do that then?

SR: I think they were foolish. I think that they were looking at it in terms of what it would mean for Election Day, and not thinking clearly enough about the vulnerability with respect to the debates. So they assumed they had passed the threshold, they had to pass the date -- the 28 days prior -- and they thought it was free sailing from that point on for the debates. And so, now they're looking at the election saying, well, let's remove some of these candidates so that we can, you know, better serve the purpose of ensuring the Conservatives aren't elected. Well, that's fine if they want to make the decision, that's how they want to organize their political strategy and that's just fine. But don't be surprised when, then, you find yourself in breach of the rules as set forth by the Debate Commission. And if you didn't think about it, if you did anticipate it, well, that's not on the commission, that's not the Conservative Party, that's not on the New Democrats, that's only you

NK: We heard in the clip there that they do sound surprised and angry, certainly. And, in the statement they released, they said, you know, the commission confirmed our eligibility. We met their criteria. We were invited. And they are saying that this is coming from pressure from their political opponents. And they talk specifically about Bloc leader, the Bloc in general, but the leader, Yves-Francois Blanchet as well.

SR: I think that's right, but that's not relevant. I mean, I hate to be harsh, but they can be correct in that assessment. They can certainly be correct in their judgment of the motives of the Bloc. Ultimately, this would not be an issue had they not put themselves in this place of jeopardy. And I quarrel with the way in which the commission came to this decision. I find it puzzling that on April 14th, the commission was defending its decision to permit the Green Party to participate. And then, today, it reverses that. I think there's questions to be asked about commission. But, ultimately, I don't think you can quarrel Pedneault with the soundness of their judgment.

NK: Pedneault, we know at this stage at least, according to the polls, is certainly trailing in his own Montreal riding. What do you think the long-term implications of all of this might be for the party?

SR: Oh, I think this is going to be devastating for the party. I think that Pedneault's hope, I mean, their strategy is not national. Their strategy is extraordinarily specific and riding-specific. They were hoping that Pedneault could survive. They want to win in Guelph. There's a couple of other spots, obviously. You know, they'd like to see Elizabeth May returned. And I think all of that is in jeopardy. Maybe they'll hang on to one seat, but quite possibly they'll be wiped right off the map. And this unprofessional experiment with co-leaders and meeting the tests of the commission but then withdrawing candidates to be in violation of the commission's rules, all of it is evidence of a complete Muppet movie. And you know, I'm sorry, but if you're going to run a political party on a national basis with seats in Parliament and aspirations to have a real effect on our parliament, our politics, our public policy, well then you're gonna have to conduct yourself in a professional way. And this just smacks of unprofessionalism and improvised poor judgment.

NK: Really great to have you on the show, Scott. I appreciate it.

SR: Thanks so much. A real blast to be on.

CH: Scott Reid is a political strategist and former advisor to Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin. We reached him in Toronto earlier today. We contacted the Green Party for an interview, but we did not hear back by air time. But in a letter to the Debates Commission, the Party said it, quote, "reject[s] any suggestion we deliberately removed candidates." Unquote.

[newsy theme]

DW Journalists Sentenced

Guest: Juri Rescheto

CH: In courtroom footage captured yesterday, they wore handcuffs and defiant expressions -- flashing the occasional smile or peace sign to the cameras. Russian journalists Sergei Karelin, Konstantin Gabov, Antonina Favorskaya and Artem Kriger used to report on precisely the kind of sentence they're now facing: five years and six months each, for their alleged involvement with what the Kremlin calls an "extremist" organisation, founded by the late opposition figure Alexei Navalny. The journalists all say they were just reporting on the organization, not members. And two of them did much of that reporting for the German public broadcaster, DW. Juri Rescheto is DW's Riga Bureau Chief. We reached him in Riga, Latvia.

NK: Juri, I know you used to work with Konstantin Gabov and Sergei Karelin. Do you have a sense of how they're holding up in custody?

JURI RESCHETO: I was in touch with both of them. We wrote letters to each other. It's, by the way, very important to keep in touch with prisoners, even though the letters have been censored in the prison. They try to stay optimistic. They try stay positive and to keep this great sense of humour, even in these bad circumstances. But they also reported on very, very bad conditions. They were treated like criminals -- like very, very bad criminals -- in the prison

NK: And when did you last exchange letters?

JR: It was maybe two weeks or so before the verdict was booked.

NK: And what was their sense then? I know this decision doesn't come as a huge surprise to many people, but that doesn't mean it still wasn't difficult to hear or take. What were they thinking and saying when they last spoke to you about what might happen?

JR: Well, actually, we couldn't be very open, let's say, and very honest in our letters because all the letters were read by the authorities, by the censorship authority in the prison. So, we talked rather about nice things, so to say. But of course, they were very, very worried. I had, even though, the sense or the impression that they didn't realize how difficult the situation for them is, and was. I think they both were hoping that they wouldn't get that huge sentence.

NK: Five-and-a-half years in prison for your former colleagues, as well as Antonina Favarskaya and Artem Kriger. The Kremlin, as you know, accuses them of being involved with Alexei Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation. And Russian authorities -- the Kremlin -- call that a, quote, extremist group. What do you

know about the Anti-Corruption Foundation and what it does or does not do?

JR: The Anti-Corruption Foundation of opposition politician Alexei Navalny is known to millions of Russians for its investigative documentaries. In those videos, filmmakers, the producers expose corruption in the Russian elite, above all in the Kremlin. The first and most-clicked, most-viewed film was about a suspected palace of President Putin on the Black Sea. That movie had an enormous effect in Russia. This was followed by other documentaries about ex-president Medvedev, Putin's generals and ministers. Then, of course, Navalny himself was a highly dangerous politician for Putin, for the Kremlin. He mobilized millions onto the streets, especially young people, to protest against Putin. Nobody in Russia has managed to do that in the 25 years of Putin's rule, except Navalny. And not just in Moscow and St. Petersburg, but in many, many large Russian cities throughout the country.

NK: Is there any indication, any evidence that any of these four journalists were, in fact, members of this organization, as opposed to what they say they were doing, which is reporters covering the work of the organization?

JR: Well, the four journalists have claimed that they were not guilty the whole time. They said they were convicted because of their professional activity, that is, just journalism. They have said that they reported on the activities of the Navalny foundation, but not for the foundation itself. The news portal for which Konstantin Gabov, for example, shot the public opinion polls in Moscow is not registered in Russia either as a so-called foreign agent or a so-called undesirable organization. What's important to understand, I think, is that the Russian authorities want to destroy everything, punish everything, and make us forget anything, everything that has anything to do with the name Navalny and his foundation. Navalny was, and I would say remains, a red threat for the Kremlin even after his death.

NK: Novaya Gazeta, the independent newspaper which we've talked about on this program, published, a the Associated Press is quoting a statement, that Konstantin Gabov prepared for the courts. And it says in part, quote, I understand perfectly well what kind of country I live in throughout Russia. Throughout history, Russia has never been different. There's nothing new in the current situation. Independent journalism is equated to extremism. Can you tell us a bit more about Sergei and Konstantin, what they're like to work with?

JR: Yes, absolutely. I have known two of the four journalists. You mentioned them, their names, Konstantin Gabov and Sergei Karelin. Yeah, they both worked for Deutsche Welle's Moscow office, which I managed before the Russian authorities banned it in 2022, just one month before the war in Ukraine started. Konstantin was one of our correspondents. He reported from Moscow for the Russian language program. And Sergei Karelin was one of our cameraman. I traveled all over Russia with him, from the south to beyond the Arctic Circle. And both are very kind, very smart people with a great sense of humour, and of course, first and foremost, very good journalists. After the closure of our Moscow bureau, they stayed in Russia and worked for various international media. And you mentioned the final statements of Konstantin. Konstantin said, indeed, it was important for him to stay in Russia until the end, and to report on Russia from Russia, which we, what we do now here in Latvia, we report on Russian from abroad. But for him, it wasn't important to stay there. And Sergei Karelin, he became personal in his final statement. He mentioned his little daughter, for whom he was not only a father, he said, but also a storyteller, who told her many stories about the world after his many business trips as a cameraman.

NK: Is there a possibility of appeal for these journalists at this point?

JR: They are going to appeal, but I would say there are no chances to have any success. If you consider that only one per cent of all Russian verdicts, appeals, become successful, so to say, I say no chance.

NK: Juri, I thank you for your time. Please take care.

JR: Thank you.

CH: Juri Rescheto is DW's Riga Bureau Chief. We reached him in Riga, Latvia.

[calypso]

Chelsea Mich. Bookstore

Guest: Michelle Tuplin

CH: Moving is one of the absolute worst things you ever have to do. And when you have about 9,000 of a thing that you need to move, the go-to method would presumably be this. Pack all 9,000 things up in dozens and dozens of boxes. you rent a truck, you carry all the boxes onto the truck, you drive the truck to the new place, you carry all the boxes off the truck, you moan about your back pain, you have some pizza, and then you spend several hours -- or days -- lying on the floor amongst the boxes until your body works again. But when independent bookstore owner Michelle Tuplin had to move thousands of books to her business' new location -- about a block away -- she went with another method. Michelle Tuplin owns Serendipity Books in Chelsea, Michigan, and that's where we reached her.

NK: Michelle, how are the books settling in, in their new home?

MICHELLE TUPLIN: Well, it's all been so crazy around here, I haven't really had a chance to look yet, but I'm sure they're very happy.

NK: Are they all piled up, or are they on the shelves?

MT: No, no, they're all very neat in their correct spots.

NK: So efficient already.

MT: Yes.

NK: The question is also, [chuckle] how they all got there? How did you manage to move them all?

MT: Well, it was all a bit crazy, but we put a call out to the community and asked people to participate in what we termed a book brigade. And that meant that we asked people to line up from the old bookstore on Middle Street to the new spot on Main Street, and then to pass the books one by one in a human chain down the street.

NK: 9,100 Books, one by one. [MT chuckles] How many people?

MT: Well, so we ended up with about 300 people, which was just crazy. We didn't have a sign-up, and so we really didn't know what to expect. We just hoped that we would have enough people to make that human chain. And we had so many people that we had to form a second chain.

NK: So, you had two chains straight lined going down between the two stores, and each just passing along the books. It's very simple. It's ingenious. It's not a new invention, but it was certainly effective. How long did it take?

MT: It took just under two hours, and the way that we passed them, you know, it was section by section. And so, the crazy thing is that, really, items for the most part stayed in the right section and in alphabetical order. So for us, in the new space, you now, there really is no unboxing or rearranging, re-alphabetizing. It's really pretty organized.

NK: [both laugh] It's a brilliant strategy, perhaps not surprising for book fans and someone who owns a bookstore. Why go this route in the first place though?

MT: Well, because, honestly, people want to be a part of indie book stores. And the community really feels a sense of ownership to Serendipity Books, as they do, I think, with many Indie book stores. And we had so many offers of help. You know, so many people wanted to help. And we really wanted to be able to involve people in a meaningful way and an inclusive way, too. So we, you know, we didn't want to ask people to move heavy boxes. This way, book by book, it would both be effective and it would be inclusive as well.

NK: So, who were the volunteers that made up this book brigade?

MT: So, we had people from five, six years old all the way through to 91. Somebody brought their dog. And everybody was kind of having a bit of a street party as they were passing the books. People were singing, they were telling stories, they we're reviewing the books as they moved along. You know, there was lots of excitement as they got to the romance section. It was just so fun.

NK: Scandolus, yes. [chuckling] How long have you owned the bookshop?

MT: So, I've owned the bookstore as a sole owner since 2017.

NK: So, how have you seen things change? Because as much as people, many people, love their independent or local bookstores, it's certainly not a secret to you, or a surprise to you to know that it's a tough business for local independent shops. And we've seen a resurgence in recent years.

MT: Yeah, I mean it is a tough business, but I think people recognize that they want these books in their communities. They know what an independent bookstore in a community means, at least in Chelsea, and it means community involvement, it means community discussion, access to diverse books, all those great things. And people seem to know that if that's what they want then they have to support the bookstore. So, they have, that's why people are doing, and then, with that support, of course, comes a sense of ownership and involvement, too. And I think that's what we saw in action on Sunday.

NK: I wonder, Michelle, how this, this experience, this specific experience you had last weekend, but also owning and running Serendipity Books, what it has done for you?

MT: Well, I mean, this specific experience, honestly, has been kind of crazy because, well, first of all, you know, on a personal level, it's just so emotional to come down the steps in the old space, see this huge line of people, everybody's so happy, and just really excited about the book store in the space. And that was just, that was amazing. Old friends, my son's Second Grade teacher was standing there and she gave me a hug. She taught my son probably 17 years ago. So, on a personal level, just really emotional. And then, of course, we posted videos online and everything went viral. And so, then the last two days has been crazy as we've fielded calls from all over the world, literally about this tiny independent book store in Chelsea, Michigan.

NK: It's all very lovely, Michelle. I appreciate this and good luck with the opening.

MT: Thank you so much.

CH: Michelle Tuplin is the owner of Serendipity Books in Chelsea, Michigan.

[industrial]

SOUNDCLIP

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: I'm here at the airport. I'm about to board my flight for San Salvador. The goal of this mission is to let the Trump administration, to let the government of El Salvador know that we are going to keep fighting to bring Abrego Garcia home until he returns to his family.

CH: That’s Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, boarding a flight to El Salvador earlier today. The country's president, Nayib Bukele, was welcomed this week at the White House -- and has been praised extensively by President Donald Trump for imprisoning hundreds of migrants deported from the United States. Those deportees are now incarcerated alongside thousands of Salvadorans swept up in mass arrests carried out since President Bukele imposed a state of emergency in 2022. Here's President Bukele speaking on Monday alongside President Trump.

SOUNDCLIP

NAYIB BUKELE: We actually turned the murder capital of the world, that was what the journalists called, right, murder capital of world, into the safest country in the Western Hemisphere. And sometimes they say that we imprison thousands. I like to say that we actually liberated millions. So, you know, like --

DONALD TRUMP: It's very good. [laughter all around] Who gave him that line? Do you think I can use that? [more laughter]

CH: Vera Bergengruen is one of few American journalists who has interviewed Nayib Bukele. She's the national security reporter for the Wall Street Journal. And we reached her in Washington, D.C.

NK: Vera, when you sat down with Bukele, what struck you?

VERA BERGENGRUEN: One of the most interesting things about Bukele is how young he is. President Trump did reiterate that. He told him he looked like a teenager the first time he met him. But, you know, he's only 43 and he is very self-assured. This is someone who has a very keen sense of esthetics. So, when you notice him in El Salvador, he has received a lot of presidents. He's received, you know, Donald Jr., he tends to have a very particular body language where he leans back. He's very deliberate in his movements. And that makes the other person lean forward in order to kind of hear him. And he is very particular about how he likes to present himself. And as we can see, he does that in all of his, all the videos that he likes to present on social media. He's the most popular leader on TikTok in the world. So, you know, I think what is most striking about him, again, is how assured he is, and how you can tell that he's calibrating every moment for how it comes off on the other end.

NK: Whatever the packaging and presentation, as you well know, Vera, he is playing from the classic authoritarian playbook. The country's murder rate, as we heard in that clip, has dropped. But how?

VB: Yeah, so he took the most simple, and some people would say too simple, approach, which is to declare a state of emergency, suspend all civil rights, suspend due process. And what that enabled him to do is to just round up, not obviously convicted gang members, but anyone who could possibly have been in contact with gang members. And let's remember, El Salvador did have a huge gang problem. They were overrunning the country, they were running part of the country, they were infiltrating the government. So, this was a very real problem. People were terrorized by them, and they ruled the country for years. And the crackdown has definitely been effective. But again, the way he did it was by suspending most civil rights, suspending due process, incarcerating thousands and thousands of people, and not really giving them a way to declare their innocence, to prove their innocence. And so, you know, it's definitely clear, according to human rights organizations and even El Salvador's own government, that a lot of innocent people got swept up as well. But again, definitely effective.

NK: This, relationship, this love affair with Donald Trump and Donald Trump supporters, and that goes both ways. This relationship did not happen overnight. It was built long before Monday's visit to Washington. Take our listeners through how it came to be, that relationship.

VB: Bukele is very online, if that makes sense. He is, he's always on Twitter. He speaks in the language of the online right-wing movements of the kind of young, right-wing MAGA types. And he has been presenting himself like that for a long time. And it's very striking that he tweets mainly in English, for example. I mean, obviously Salvadorians speaks Spanish. So, he has cultivated this image for a very long time of this young, charismatic guy who took matters into his own hands, was very tough on crime. And, you know, in many ways, everything he's doing are the kind of things that the more far-right elements of America's Republican Party and Trump's party wish they could do. He basically has a one-party state. He got rid of judges that were standing in his way. He changed the makeup of the Supreme Court.and he also changed the constitution to run for another term, even though that was technically against the constitution. So, you know, he did all these things and I think that made him very popular among Trump's kind of orbit and the MAGA types because they're seeing in him something they wish they could do. And there's a wonderful simplicity to it, you know? They're like, you know, if somebody seems to be a bad guy, if somebody seems to a gang member, you just put him in jail and innocent people benefit. And it's a very simple, obviously, it's never as simple in real life, but it's very appealing. And we've seen, if you ever look at the comments under his videos, people all over the world from Europe to South America to Africa are saying we need our own Bukele. So, you know, I think that popularity definitely was organic, but he also has been very careful to cultivate that. He has invited, again, Trump's own son, Tucker Carlson, a very popular TV host here, right-wing allies and lawmakers from the U.S., he's invited them to El Salvador. He takes them to, you know, people around him take them to nice restaurants. They show them the beaches. They take him to the centre of the city and say three years ago, you would have murdered here. Now, you can walk here. And all of them tend to come back and talk about this and really marvel at this turnaround. So, he has cultivated this for years and it's been very effective.

NK: We know Democrat Senator Chris Van Hollen is there in El Salvador now, trying to secure the release of Abrego Garcia, the man who was mistakenly deported, as we know. The U.S. Administration admits that, but has refused to return him to the United States. Is Van Hollen's presence actually likely to move Bukele?

VB: I think it's very unlikely. Bukele clearly has, you know, he's been crystal clear that his allegiance is to Trump. He wants to work specifically with the Trump administration, with the White House. He's not going to be seen as doing anything to help, you now, obviously, somebody from the other party. But, you know, actually, just before I spoke with you, I saw that Van Hollen, you know, he met with the vice president of El Salvador. He repeatedly requested to speak to his constituent, to Abrego Garcia. The vice president told him he couldn't, then he asked if he could call him, or if it was possible to have him call his wife, you know, to basically show that he was okay. And that also wasn't possible. And what the vice president basically said was, we are holding this person, we're being paid. El Salvador is being paid by the U.S. to detain this person at CECOT, which is this notorious prison. That was his response. It's basically, we are doing this at your country's direction. There's nothing I can do. And so his presence is very unlikely, obviously, to sway Bukele himself. And the government maintains, just say the word and we'll release, he's saying it's up to the United States, and the United State says it's up to El Salvador. So, you know, I don't really see this resolving itself unless there was even more pressure on Trump in some other way.

NK: Vera, I appreciate your time. Thank you for this.

VB: Thank you so much

CH: Vera Bergengruen is the national security reporter for the Wall Street Journal. She's in Washington D.C.

[ambient]

Calif. Wooing Canadians

CH: At first, it sounds like a pretty enticing offer: come enjoy the sun, the sand, and the wine. And just ignore the guy who keeps talking about taking away your sovereignty. In a new video, that is essentially the plea California Governor Gavin Newsom is making to Canadians. It's part of a $5.2 million ad campaign intended to lure tourists back to the state. And although Mr. Newsom only refers to Donald Trump as "you-know-who", it's clear that it's the president's threat of making Canada the 51st state that's hurting California's bottom line. One of the cities feeling it the most is Palm Springs. Earlier this month, the city put up dozens of red banners featuring a Canadian flag heart nestled between the words “Palm Springs” and “Canada.” This morning, Mayor Ron deHarte explained why he and the governor are making the effort.

SOUNDCLIP

RON DEHARTE: Well, it's a nice gesture, and we certainly appreciate the governor's effort. But, you know, our reach with these, the banners on April 4th in Palm Springs, it was not as deep as that. And some people think it is totally economic related. We put the banners originally to say, thank you. We appreciate you. We understand we're in this together. Canadians are our neighbours, they are here for many months out of the year. They are part of our community and they're our friends. We volunteer with them, we eat dinner with them, we hike with them, we golf with them. So, they're a big part of the community. And our message originally, and still today is, we appreciate you and we want to send the message back home to those who may have already gone back to Canada that we truly appreciate and value the friendship that we have.

STEPHEN QUINN: You said the banners weren't, you know, exclusively about the economic interests, but how important are Canadian visitors to the economy of Palm Springs?

RD: Yeah, without any doubt. You know, our gesture was, thank you, we appreciate you. But without any doubt the Canadian travel market is our number one international travel market for Palm Springs and has been consistently. So, Canadians that travel to Palm Springs, many of whom stay for months on end, so that's why they become a real part of our community. There's about 300,000 annually that travel to Palm Springs. So, it has a real impact that represents about 2,000 jobs here in Palm Springs, our servers, hotel, workers, maids, cleaners, janitorial, groundskeepers, you name it. About 2,000 lives depend on the tourism that comes into Palm Springs from Canada.

SQ: Can you give us an elevator pitch to Vancouverites for why they should travel to Palm Springs, you know, despite the difficulties they may encounter crossing the border?

RD: Well, you know, I'm not gonna twist anybody's arm. When the time is right and people feel comfortable, they'll, we know and we will welcome them with open arms back in Palm Springs, but we understand. This is a challenging time right now. And the negative comments that are coming out of the administration, there's no place for that. So, when folks feel comfortable again and we don't have this craziness going on, we're going to welcome everybody back to Palm Springs when they decide the time is right.

CH: That was the mayor of Palm Springs, Ron deHarte, talking to Stephen Quinn, host of The Early Edition in B.C.

[folk]

Diana Matheson

Guest: Diana Matheson

CH: Tonight, when the referee blows the whistle at Vancouver's BC Place, it will mark more than just the start of a soccer game. It will mark the launch of the new Northern Super League -- and the first professional women's soccer game ever played on Canadian soil. The match is between Vancouver Rise FC and Calgary Wild FC -- two of the teams across Canada that make up the league, which includes clubs in Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto. And it's the brainchild of Canadian soccer star Diana Matheson, who has spent years making her dream a reality. We reached Diana Matheson in Vancouver before the game.

NK: It's crunch time, I know, Diana, but what does someone with your history, your accomplishments and what you're about to do, what do you feel in moments like this? Butterflies? Does someone like you feel butterflies?

DIANA MATHESON: Oh my gosh, I don't even know what a moment like this is. I'm only doing this one once. I mean, yeah, two-and-a-half years of just working on this project with the end in mind being these opening games. And now, yeah, kickoff is here. So, I'm feeling lots of emotions already, and I think they're probably all going to hit me for real Wednesday evening.

NK: Do you let yourself picture these women, these players finally taking to the pitch for the first time on Canadian soil?

DM: Yeah, like that's been the, I'm a big believer in, you know, you need a clear vision, you need a clear end in mind. That was you know what John Herdman brought to our women's national team program that brought us such success. And in the, yeah, we went the entrepreneur route, we went to startup route. We built a league from scratch. It's been at times a very stressful, lots of uncertainty two-and-a-half years. And it's been a picturing of opening game, of all the home openers, of the players on the field, of the fans in the stands, of professional soccer being played in Canada, that's what I've been picturing.

NK: Mind movie on loop getting you ready for this moment. Give our listeners a sense of what they will

NK: Future Diana Mathesons.

DM: Thank you, yes.

NK: [chuckling] Obviously. You might not want to say it, but we're gonna say it, for sure. You know, I certainly remember you were on our show back in 2022, our producer Sarah and I still can't believe that was 2022, three years ago, when you first announced the league. I genuinely cannot believe it's been three years. But at that time, I asked you what you think all of this will mean for young girls? And here's what you said.

SOUNDCLIP

DM: I'm very much looking forward to that day, and I hope lots of people across Canada are. I hope today brought a smile to a lot of people's faces, and I hope there's players out there who are in their teams and they know this league is coming and they're you know going to train a little harder, or there's a few more kids who take up soccer now because maybe playing pro is an option for them.

NK: Those teenagers now have a pro women's soccer league in Canada. What does that mean to you today?

DM: Yeah, everything. And I've been lucky and grateful that lots of teenagers and older teenagers now in their twenties and other folks have come up and thanked me for what they're doing because they wanted to work in this space. It's very awkward. I never know what to say. But it's building an industry in Canada that we're world-class at, women's sport, Canadians are world-class at it. Women's professional sport is just getting started. But Canadians are really, really good at it. I've actually, I've said the anecdote a couple of times now. My wife is Anastasia Bucsis, the wonderful, talented CBC sports host, and she was an Olympic speed skater. And she said many times it was watching Catriona Le May Doan on TV that birthed your skating dreams, but it was also hearing the legend, Steve Armitage, on the broadcast call that birthed her broadcast dreams. And now, she's grown up to be a broadcaster. So I think with this, you can dream of being a player, but not everyone's an athlete. And some people want to be a coach, or referee, or want a job in sport business like me, or in the media like you. And there's a spot for anyone in where they see themselves.

NK: You mentioned Erin McLeod, one of your former teammates, incoming Halifax Tides player. Erin was speaking to Sportsnet and was speaking through tears about what your work, your hard work, has meant to her personally. And the fact that you just wouldn't take no for an answer means that lives have been changed. Do you feel proud of yourself at this point?

DM: Yeah, I think with, yes, I mean, it's been a lot of, like, three years of just head down, work hard. That's what made me successful as an athlete, I think makes me successful now. But we've had, we're really lucky. We've had some incredible people come join the team, like Christina Letts, our league president, joined in May. She's built an amazing team. And now, there's this huge machine at the league and clubs that's working behind the scenes and all these things happen. It's not like two years ago where I knew about them or had to do them for them to happen. And I think that's given me a bit more space to kind of zoom out and just see what's been accomplished. And I am proud of that. And, I think, most of all proud of the just people we've attracted to this project, like Erin McLeod, who I can tell you right now is going to be the main voice for the athlete group and building up whatever player group they want, to Christina Letts, to all the players, coaches, everyone. We've had people, you know, move home or move to this country to be a part of this league that didn't exist. Like, they've all left existing leagues and clubs where they knew their teammates, they knew their coach, they knew the standard of play. And they've taken a leap to come to this new league we're building. And I'm absolutely proud of that.

NK: It's been a particularly big year for women's sports. The PWHL filling NHL arenas in its second season. As part of its takeover tour, the WNBA last season, 54 million viewers, a record. But as you well know, pay equity, viewership, attention, the type of coverage is not the same as men's sports. Is parity on all levels the ultimate goal here?

DM: It is. I think it's just a matter of time. And it will take time. I think in the past, there's been really successful women's sport events, you saw there was always interest there. But then, you know, the culture maybe wasn't quite ready for it, and the investment wasn't there, or the data wasn't here to make the business case yet. And so, there wasn't really professional environments yet for the game, whether it was soccer or hockey, to grow week in and week out, develop players, professional players week in, week out. Build a fan base week in, week out. And that has shifted so significantly in the last five, 10 years. And really, to me, since COVID onwards, there's been, for the first time, in my opinion, significant investment in the business of women's sport, and treating it on par with the business of men's sport, treating it like the good investment it is. And now, we're at the beginning of this industry, an industry that's growing much faster than men's sport because it's much smaller and much newer, but the sky's the limit. And Canada's got its foot in the door relatively easy here. We've got hockey, soccer's coming, women's basketball next year. We're one of the most progressive cultures in the world when it comes to putting our girls and women in sport and supporting them. We've got a fan base that supports sport, so I hope Canada knows that this is a new industry, the sky's the limit, and Canada is world-class at it. And everyone's looking to support Canada and build in Canada and spend your dollars in Canada this year. Well, there's six NSL clubs across Canada. You can get a taste of the different cultures from coast to coast, so come check us out.

NK: A pleasure, Diana. Thank you for this.

DM: Thank you so much for having me again. And last time we spoke in 2022, we did not yet have our league president, Christina Letts, who is, I believe your number one fan of As It Happens. So, I just want to give her a quick shoutout.

NK: Oh, thank you. Thanks, Christina. I appreciate that. Well, tell her thank you, we love making the show, and it makes us really happy to hear when people enjoy it.

DM: Will do. Thanks for having me.

NK: Take care.

CH: We reached Diana Matheson in Vancouver, ahead of tonight's game.

[ambient]

Part 3: Afghanistan/Pakistan Border, ALTA. Involuntary Treatment, University Newspapers

Afghanistan/Pakistan Border

Guest: Sherine Ibrahim

CH: Every day for weeks now, thousands of people have crossed the border from Pakistan to Afghanistan. The spike in crossings comes as Pakistan ramps up mass deportations of Afghan refugees and migrants. Many of those facing deportation have been in Pakistan for decades, where they settled after fleeing conflict in their home country. And human rights groups say they're facing an increasingly hostile situation there. Sherine Ibrahim was at the Afghanistan-Pakistan border today, providing support for returnees through the International Rescue Committee. We reached her in Kabul.

NK: Sherine, you were near the Torcum border crossing today at the Omari camp. What did you see?

SHERINE IBRAHIM: Today was a very warm day. We saw a few returnees enter the camp. And many of them are families of up to eight people. Many of them getting ready to settle for a while until they find alternative homes.

NK: What kinds of things did the people you saw today, if you were able to speak to them, what did they tell you about the kind of calculations and decisions they're making?

SI: Well, obviously, it's a great concern to them that they're coming into Afghanistan at the current time. They know that they have to find shelter, they have find food, they had to find livelihood opportunities for themselves. And so, it's the time of great insecurity for them. Many of them have been outside of Afghanistan for years, if not decades. They will need to find ways to reintegrate and stabilize their lives and their livelihoods. But for now, they're making ends meet. They're being supported by several UN agencies and INGOs. But, of course, this support is not permanent, it's temporary. And, obviously, with now the spike in numbers, 3,000 estimated in the last week, with some reports saying that it's up to 8,000 returnees a day, there's going to be a stretch on resources.

NK: And 60,000 people, according to the UN's International Organization for Migration, since the beginning of April. You mentioned people have been there for years, in some cases decades, the Associated Press reporting on one man who's lived there for 50 years, but you've met people who share that experience, including a young boy. What did he tell you?

SI: Well, I tried to engage with this very young boy and asked him whether he would speak to me in Pashto or Dari, obviously, through a translator. And he said he only knew Urdu. So, obviously, he will need to spend time in his new home, getting re-integrated into society, familiar with a new context, and unsure of the future. So, you know, for children, especially those who I saw today, it's not just reintegration, but it's really just also getting a sense of familiarity with a very new surrounding. So, for the young boy I met today, and many, many other young children, it is a very unfamiliar context.

[sombre instrumental]

NYT Therme Investigation

CH: The re-development of Ontario Place in Toronto has been making headlines for years now. Most notably, the part of the site that will be a spa -- built and operated by a wellness company called "Therme". Therme won the bid for the land, and a peculiarly long 95-year lease along with it. And ever since, the deal has been the source of backlash and protest. Now, a New York Times investigation has found Therme may have lied to the province about its resume. Matina Stevis-Gridneff, the Canada bureau chief for The New York Times, talked to the CBC about her investigation today.

SOUNDCLIP

MATINA STEVIS-GRIDNEFF: At the end of last year, in December, the Ontario auditor general that looked at Ontario Place sort of found in the documents that Therme had submitted to Infrastructure Ontario to secure this lease, something curious. The company had claimed in two different parts of its submissions that it was operating four, and in a separate document, six spas in Europe. It used this as evidence of its deep experience as it was bidding for what we know is a really, really important lease here in Toronto. What we found was that that just wasn't true. In reality, Therme had built and was operating just one spa, one wellness facility, north of Bucharest, the capital of Romania. Therme scored big with Toronto. It brought its concept here. It will bring its concept here. And was able then to really use that success to bid for other public contracts. We know, for example, that it's eyeing a truly global expansion. So, what we are seeing is that Toronto was really a linchpin in the company's evolution and development. And, you know, they made it here and they're going to be able to make it in other places, it seems because they've got this tremendously valuable contract with the government of Ontario to develop the West Island.

CH: That's Canada bureau chief for The New York Times Matina Stevis-Gridneff speaking with David Common, host of Metro Morning. During a press conference today on another matter, Ontario Premier Doug Ford was inevitably asked about the investigation. Here's what he had to say when a reporter asked him if he had been scammed by Therme.

SOUNDCLIP

DOUG FORD: No. When I heard this allegation, I went directly to the minister and to the deputy and said, here, look into this. Now I understand they are all one company. So, one bought the other company. So, I guess they are a larger, stronger company. But they are going to look into this allegation and find out and make sure that all the t's are crossed and i's are dotted. I want to see the detailed agreement. Folks, when stuff like this gets chosen, no matter through a world-class operation like Infrastructure Ontario or other places, I don't go out there and pick what train we are doing or buying for Metrolinx, or this or that. I rely on our agencies, Infrastructure Ontario. So, I will look into it. I will dig deep, don't worry.

CH: Ontario Premier Doug Ford taking questions from reporters today.

[ambient]

ALTA. Involuntary Treatment

Guest: Harini Sivalingam

CH: Alberta could soon become the first Canadian province to legally force people with addictions into treatment. Yesterday, Premier Danielle Smith introduced the new legislation.

SOUNDCLIP

DANIELLE SMITH: Our government is 100 per cent committed to helping those struggling with addiction in their pursuit of recovery, and that's why we promised Albertans that we would bring forward compassionate intervention as a tool to save lives. And today, we're delivering on that promise by introducing Bill 53, the Compassionate Intervention Act.

CH: If it is passed into law, family members, health care professionals, or police officers could identify people in need of treatment. And after a 72-hour detox, a three-person commission would determine whether they should be held for treatment, for up to six months. Today, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association issued a statement stating its strong opposition to the law. Harini Sivalingam is the director of the Equality Program at the organization. We reached her in Toronto.

NK: Harini, if this bill becomes law, could it survive a charter challenge?

HARINI SIVALINGAM: So, there is some concerns around, obviously, civil liberties and charter rights. Forced treatment directly impacts rights to liberty, security of the person, and equality rights. So, we feel that, at the CCLA that, this law would raise significant constitutional issues, and it would be very difficult for this law to withstand a charter challenge.

NK: From what you've heard from the province on this, and taking a look at the bill, when you look at specifically how the province will determine who could be subjected to involuntary treatment, what are the concerns you have there?

HS: Yes, we have serious concerns that this legislation would violate fundamental rights of individuals, undermining personal autonomy and the right to make decisions about one's body and health care. So, we know that substance abuse is an alarming and pressing epidemic. And while addiction is a serious issue, it can't be solved through forced treatment. There's nothing compassionate about forcing people into treatment against their will. So, we feel the harms from this policy and laws that would compel people into treatment against their will are dangerous for the rights implications, but they're also not effective. It's a much more effective long-term solutions to deal with addiction if you are investing in resources to help support individuals into voluntary treatment and not forcing them into treatment.

NK: The province of Alberta, and specifically Premier Smith, obviously disagree with your thinking on this. We have a little bit more about what Premier Smith said today about their reasoning behind this.

SOUNDCLIP

DANIELLE SMITH: It's important to remember that people in the clutches of addiction are unable to help themselves. The insidious power of addiction means the only thing that matters is their next high. It isn't a lifestyle choice, it's a treatable illness.

NK: What do you say to that argument?

HS: So, I think here we're relying on dangerous stereotypes and stigmatizing people with addictions. Having an addiction is very complex. There's a lot of underlying issues and causes and social factors that can lead to somebody having an addiction. But I think what we're missing here is that it's possible to have an addiction but still have capacity to consent. And I think that what the government in Alberta is doing is conflating the issues of addictions and presuming that because somebody has an addiction that they don't have capacity, and that's a fundamental flaw. You can suffer from addiction, or you can have addiction and still be able to give or refuse consent for medical treatment.

NK: What damage is done, in your view, if that understanding is not there?

HS: Yeah. Liberty is our most sacred and cherished freedom, right? Being restrained or being held against your will is a classic violation of our autonomy and basic human rights.

NK: Alberta's minister of mental health and addiction, Dan Williams, was on our show before on this issue, and he has said repeatedly that this, in their view, is a health-care-first approach. He was also at the same press conference as the Premier yesterday, so we'll play you a bit of what he said.

SOUNDCLIP

DAN WILLIAMS: The real option on the table is whether or not we should provide addiction treatment for those suffering or leave them. Leave them to live intermittently homeless, subject to physical and sexual violence in so-called drug camps, where individuals do not receive the care that anyone would if they're diagnosed with schizophrenia rather than addiction.

NK: He's saying that if we do this for people who have a serious mental illness, he cites schizophrenia, then why wouldn't we do it for this other kind of disease? How do you respond?

HS: So, yes, there is involuntary treatment for people with mental health illnesses. There are procedural safeguards, and the courts have actually recognized that provincial laws on involuntarily treatment are overbroad, arbitrary, and unreasonable. So, we don't see why in this case we're targeting people with addiction for involuntary treatment that the courts wouldn't find similarly that there are constitutional issues if these treatment plans are not in accordance with fundamental justice and are seen as being reasonable.

NK: What do you think the province of Alberta's goal is here if you don't think this is going to be effective?

HS: So, I think the goal is to help people with addictions, but I think they're going about this the wrong way. The government should focus on voluntary treatment, investing in treatment centres and support that can help people overcome their addiction through voluntary treatment and not forcing people against their will into treatments that the effectiveness is very questionable. The other thing I wanted to maybe highlight that is not as focused on is that involuntary treatment will cause significant harm to disproportionately members of marginalized communities like Indigenous, Black, racialized, women, 2SLGBTQIA+ communities, people with disabilities, and especially those living in poverty. And what we've seen, history has shown us, that detaining and pathologizing people from these vulnerable groups for their own good is actually a slippery slope and can be very harmful with policies like this. And I think we need to really look at solutions that are rights-respecting when we're looking at addressing complex social problems like addiction.

NK: This is a provincial first. Are you concerned that there's going to be a second, third, fourth, and spread across the country?

HS: Yeah, I think that's one of the dangers. We've already seen other jurisdictions like British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, for example, talking about similar legislation. I know New Brunswick, the previous government, also talked about introducing involuntary treatment, like, you know laws. And I think this is a very dangerous precedent for other jurisdictions that are considering similar legislation. You know, we really need to focus on solutions that will, like, you now increase resources and support for individuals and families who are affected by addiction, but do so in a way that's rights-respecting and look at the long-term solutions that are effective, evidence-based by experts.

NK: Harini, I appreciate your time. Thank you.

HS: Thank you.

CH: Harini Sivalingam is the director of the Equality Program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. We reached her in Toronto.

[hip-hop]

University Newspapers

Guest: Adam Kinder

CH: It might seem obvious that articles published in the Columbia Political Review are political. The student outlet publishes op-eds, interviews, and political analysis on everything from campus news to international affairs. But these days, there are topics that some contributors are more reluctant to touch. And in recent weeks, now that students at several universities have been detained by ICE, and the Trump administration is imposing strict demands on campuses, a handful of writers want their articles taken down altogether. Adam Kinder is the editor of the Columbia Political Review. We reached him in New York.

NK: Adam, when people reach out to you and ask you to take down their articles, what kinds of reasons are they giving?

ADAM KINDER: So, in the cases that we've received take down requests, we've had writers in some cases kind of provide nebulous, you know, justifications saying, hey, I just really don't want my name out there right now. But in other cases, we've had, you know, writers specifically cite what's going on and say, hey, I would really just prefer to keep myself safe and keep my family safe. That said, in a general sense I think for as much as people have been scared or are chilling their own speech as a result of kind of the political atmosphere on campus and in the country right now, there's been a significant contingent of people that have also been galvanized by what's going on and are continuing to speak up.

NK: So, people are still sending you their work and hoping to be published and getting their message across, but those people who reach out with those different reasons, sometimes vague as you suggest there, what do you say to them?

AK: Well we always offer them the ability to republish at any point that they would like. We always, you know, if somebody is taking the time to reach out to us to say, hey, I would prefer, you know, my article is not up on the website right now, we oblige. And we also offer, you know, if they would like to comment on the situation you know in general, or if they still have some element of the argument that they want out there, then we encourage them to publish anonymously, which is a policy that we haven't really entertained in the past, but which now we're expanding and advertising and really getting out there to the whole student body.

NK: What is it like for you to have to take those articles down though given the work you do?

AK: Fortunately, these requests are not nearly like the deluge that I would imagine are coming to a lot of different publications. But, you know, it's saddening. I don't want to have our work or the work that we do with our writers placing anyone in especially physical danger. But also, it's just as a publication that relies on the principle of, the principle and the practice of free speech, it's disappointing that our country has gotten to this point. But, to be honest with you, what's encouraging is the fact that we are continuing our output at levels that are unprecedented, even for our history, and that people are interested, people are reading. We're getting our print magazine out this next week, and people are continuing to stay engaged, despite how personally depressing the situation may seem.

NK: One very vivid and recent example of someone's life being impacted and changed because of an opinion piece is certainly Rümeysa Öztürk, the Tufts University student. We've talked about it on the show and people know the video. She was taken into custody by ICE, and she has been in custody since last month. And she had written an opinion peace calling on her own school to divest from companies that have ties to Israel. Were you expecting these kinds of requests to start coming in?

AK: After that, yes, absolutely. Like, I've spoken with, you know, multiple writers, especially international students, who are worried. And to the extent that they've requested it, we've been willing to basically give people the ability to hold off from meeting their article minimums and things like that until we have a little bit more clarity about the situation in general, what seems to be safe to write about and what's not. That said, we're always encouraging everyone to be honest and to write from their own perspective and not to moderate simply because you're basically to acquiesce in the way that the administration has to what the government is demanding from students right now.

NK: Your school's administration.

AK: Yes, the Columbia administration.

NK: So, you've received, as I understand it, about a dozen of these types of requests. What kinds of topics are we talking about here?

AK: We've had probably about half a dozen people request takedowns. And then, we've had about half a dozen more request hiatuses. So, a total of a dozen in that case. And I would say that, like, overall, people are much more scared to talk about Palestine than anything else, to be honest with you. But now people, especially because of like heightened tensions between the US and everywhere else, and especially international students that, you know, for example, you know, live in China Writing or being critical of either the U.S. or the Chinese government is another kind of sticking point that we're learning how to navigate as tensions are kind of inflamed. Beyond that, there is a worry that this is going to extend beyond Gaza into other issues. For now, we have only heard mainly rumblings of that. But my personal opinion is that soon, especially as a contestation between the Trump administration and universities heats up, that this going to continue to escalate in ways that maybe we didn't expect.

NK: How will you brace for that, for the unexpected?

AK: I'd personally, and the approach that most aligns with what our function as a student publication is, is to just keep on keeping on. To continue writing, to continue being transgressive where that's necessary, and to ultimately represent what the student body feels. And the student feels very, very strongly about the direction that the university has taken in response to the government, the direction the country is headed right now, and the direction of free speech on college campuses. We are, at the end of the day, a venue to allow all voices on the undergraduate campus to speak. And we're going to continue to do that tenfold now.

NK: I appreciate this, Adam. Thanks for coming on the show.

AK: Thank you very much.

CH: Adam Kinder is the editor of the Columbia Political Review. We reached him in New York.

[psychedelic rock]

Hacked Pedestrian Crossings

CH: When pedestrians push the button, they're hearing from people who push their buttons. In Silicon Valley, people waiting to cross the street are getting a real surprise: instead of hearing the usual robotic voice telling them to "walk" or "wait," they're hearing fake greetings from fake Elon Musk and fake Mark Zuckerberg. Take a listen.

SOUNDCLIP

ROBOTIC VOICE: Wait!

AI ELON MUSK: Hi, this is Elon Musk. Welcome to Palo Alto, the home of Tesla Engineering. You know they say money can't buy happiness, and I guess that's true. God knows I've tried, but it can buy a Cybertruck, and that's pretty sick, right? Right?

[could it be... is that the Talkback beep? Or an AI Talkback beep?]

AI MARK ZUCKERBERG: Hi, this is Mark Zuckerberg, but real ones call me The Zuck. You know, it's normal to feel uncomfortable or even violated as we forcefully insert AI into every facet of your conscious experience. And, I just want to assure you, you don't need to worry. Because there's absolutely nothing you can do to stop it. Anyway, see ya.

CH: It turns out, several pedestrian crossings were hacked across three California cities last weekend: Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and Redwood City. Municipal officials don't know who's responsible, or how the messages ended up being played at the crossings. In the meantime, the audible signals on crosswalks have been disabled while engineers work on fixing them.

The AIH Transcript For April 16, 2025

Social Sharing