Latest / Kvetch & Release / 610 CKTB | “Passenger Jet Crashes”: Why CBC Won’t Call 9/11 a Terrorist Attack

Transcript

610 CKTB | “Passenger Jet Crashes”: Why CBC Won’t Call 9/11 a Terrorist Attack · Kvetch & Release

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Litke's Got a Take with John Litke. And good morning, John.
• 0:04
  Speaker 2: Good morning, Gene.
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: What a morning it has been. So let's talk about
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: this Richard Cranium at the CBC. John, when you read
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: the CBC, and this one guy told journalistic people, reporters
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: and writers, to call 911, passenger jet crashes occurred. Instead
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: of a terrorist attack, which is exactly what it was,
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: 25th anniversary coming up, what went through your mind?
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: You know, it's on face value. It's purely offensive. I mean,
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: the numbers are right. The legal listing of the terrorist
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: entity is right. The CBC's defense of attribution, not denial, still,
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: you know, it reads like they're just describing an accident
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: that occurred. But think about what we're talking about here. 2,977 people.
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: humans murdered, 24 Canadians killed, 158 Canadian soldiers who ultimately
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: would die in Afghanistan as a result of it, the
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: incredible people of Gander who opened up their homes to
• 1:06
  Speaker 2: thousands of strangers, and the response from our national public
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: broadcaster is reducing the definition and the defining of mass
• 1:13
  Speaker 2: casualty atrocity of our generation to the linguistic equivalent of
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: a severe air traffic control glitch. These aren't passenger jet crashes,
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: and that's not journalistic neutrality. That's a slap in the
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: face to every victim, every first responder, every Canadian soldier
• 1:30
  Speaker 2: who lost their lives and served, and every Canadian, quite frankly,
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: who lost someone close to them. We don't need linguistic
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: gymnastics that borders on providing rhetorical cover to actual terrorists,
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: and it's unacceptable for our taxpayer-funded public broadcaster.
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no kidding. Kind of like calling World War II
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: Disagreement No. 2. In any event, the CBC says they're
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: just stating the physical facts to remain strictly objective. Now,
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: how the heck does that square with what Canadians actually
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: experienced that day? I was on the air. Friends of
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: mine at Cantor Fitzgerald died. How do you even square
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: that up?
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: It doesn't square at all. It completely fractures the reality,
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: the collective reality, the shared reality that we all experienced.
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is what, the first, this is the
• 2:18
  Speaker 2: first anniversary where a generation of children didn't experience it,
• 2:23
  Speaker 2: weren't there for it. So it's a really, it's a really...
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: special one in that sense, but it's also a turning
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: of the page. We have to make sure that we
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: honor the memory of the people. So this fractures reality.
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: A mechanical failure or a mid-air collision or an operational
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: error is what causes a passenger jet crash. Flying hijacked
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: aircraft into skyscrapers with deliberate calculated intent to murder thousands
• 2:47
  Speaker 2: of civilians for ideological purposes, it's terrorism, period, full stop.
• 2:52
  Speaker 2: The people in Gander didn't open their doors and their
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: homes and their hearts because of a few accidental plane crashes.
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: Canadians didn't step up because of some mistakes in the air.
• 3:04
  Speaker 2: The average Canadian doesn't consult internal corporate journalistic style books
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: before turning into the national news, nor should they have
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: to decode euphemisms. What they expect is common sense, and
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: sanitizing mass murder under the guise of pedantry in a
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: style book doesn't make people look objective. It makes them
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: look detached from basic human reality and morality.
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, CBC defends us by saying they can't adopt
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: government language without risking becoming the state media. But all
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: you have to do is watch Power and Politics with
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: David Cochran in the afternoon or Rosemary Barton. Both of
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: them gently caress the Prime Minister's derriere on a daily basis.
• 3:46
  Speaker 2: You know i putting that aside and that you know
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: that that's a fair point i i i i say
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: the argument complete bump it's unadulterated unadulterated nonsense if we're
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: talking about a third world autocracy were dictator calls political
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: dissidents terrorists on a whim to throw them in the
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: gulag fine i get it maintain your editorial distance but
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: this is canada a constitutional democracy governed by the rule
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: of law and one organization is listed as a designated
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: terrorist entity under section eighty three point oh five of
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: the criminal code That isn't a political opinion, and it's
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: not regime propaganda. It's statutory law vetted by law enforcement,
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: intelligence services, and upheld in our courts. And if our
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: publicly funded broadcaster treats Canadian law and statutory fact as
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: subjective opinion, who are they serving?
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, you've pointed out a massive double standard in
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: how the CBC treats different types of language. So how
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: does their hesitation on legal terror terms compare to their
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: use of modern law? social terminology.
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, this is a glaring, unmistakable double standard.
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: CBC knows their audience, and they're making calculated choices here.
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: They have zero hesitation when it comes to integrating modern
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: social terminology, progressive cultural jargon, and trendy identity language directly
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: into their anchor desk voice without demanding third-party attribution or
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: hiding behind quotation marks. And I have no issues with
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: people using preferred pronouns, but, you know, they're not saying
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: that it needs to be attributed as such. but they
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: do it because it fits their internal newsroom culture and
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: it signals the right virtues. But when it comes to
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: designating an entity that murdered thousands of people on 9-11
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: using Canadian statutory law, suddenly they transform their hyper-cautious constitutional
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: lawyers into constitutional lawyers wringing their hands on things. The
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: social jargon is good, but the legal reality is bad,
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: and it's blatant hypocrisy.
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: Okay. So we're kind of talking shop here, you and me.
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: But for listeners tuning in who thinks this is just
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: media insiders fighting over grammar, why does this matter to
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: the average taxpayer? We all fund the CBC last year
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: to the tune of $ 1. 5 billion.
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, that's it right there, full stop. One
• 6:04
  Speaker 2: and a half billion dollars a year to fund this
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: network is a huge amount. Canadians expect when they pay
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: the public broadcaster that it will inform the country with clarity,
• 6:14
  Speaker 2: with spine, and with truth. Not run an Orwellian translation
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: service shop during moments of national crisis or commemorations as such.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: When a network takes public dollars but refuses to call
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: a terrorist attack a terrorist attack, that erodes core trust
• 6:29
  Speaker 2: in our public institutions, and it sends a direct message
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: to the average Canadian taxpayer that the executive suites running
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: CBC hold the public's intelligence, their values, and our collective
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: memories in complete contempt.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: Okay, if you had this CBC guy on, who I
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: have named Richard Cranium, on the line right now, what
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: is the exact change you would demand he and they
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: make to their style book immediately?
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: I would tell them to scrap the pedantry and insert
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: a common sense and rule of law clause immediately. If
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: an entity is formally designated a terrorist entity, Gene, under
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: the Criminal Code of Canada, or if an event is
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: universally recognized as a mass casualty act of terrorism, like 9-11,
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: Reporters should be able to, and quite frankly mandated, to
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: call it what it is in plain, direct English. Stop
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: treating criminal code facts like dirty words. Stop sanitizing history
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: to appease your newsroom virtues and sensibilities. And start respecting
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: the intelligence and the collective memories of the Canadian public
• 7:35
  Speaker 2: with respect.
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: It's a great take, but I just want to add
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: one thing to it, and I don't know if you
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: have heard this or not this morning. The 25th anniversary
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: of 9-11 is coming up next month, and they no
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: longer give speeches at 9-11. They still name off all
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: the names and ring the bell. Donald Trump wanted to
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: give a speech, and they told him, well, we don't
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: do speeches at 9-11 anymore. We honor the dead. So
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: guess who's not going to show up to 9-11? The
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: President of the United States in New York City. He's
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: going to go to the Pentagon instead. Why? Because he
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: can give a speech. That's Donald Trump for you. It's
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: never about all the people who died. It's only all
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: about him.
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: Well, you know, keep them as far away as possible.
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: And remember what happened. It was just hours after the
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: towers came down. Trump was on New York radio and
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: he said, you know, I used to have the tallest
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: building in New York until the towers went up. But
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: I guess now that they're down, I have the tallest
• 8:32
  Speaker 2: building again.
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: A great take. Have a fantastic weekend. We'll get another
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: take from you and talk on Monday.
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: Looking forward to it. You have a great one as well.
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: John Litke, Litke's Got a Take.