Updates from September, 2011 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • 10:23 on 2011/09/10 Permalink | Reply  

    This blog began a couple of months after September 11, 2001, and while the attacks and their aftermath can neither be blamed nor credited, something in the air at the time about 24-hour news and multiple sources was part of the zeitgeist that inspired it.

    I was supposed to work that afternoon at the studio. I woke around 9, made coffee and glanced over a few familiar spots on the net. I was still reading Usenet then, and one of my haunts was a newsgroup with a tradition of posting memorial haiku for dead notables.

    The first thing I saw was this:

    From: Ranjit Bhatnagar
    Subject: Bang bang

    Airplanes are smashing
    Into the World Trade Center
    I think I’ll stay home

    I still had a TV then, so I reached over and switched it on. For the next sixteen hours I stayed glued to both screens – nobody was doing anything else that day and the studio had called and said it was pointless to come in. I was glad of the TV because most media web servers were knocked over. Many of them put up a single news page for hours to cope with the onslaught.

    President Obama has sent a thank you note to Stephen Harper for Canada’s help that day, particularly praising the folks of Gander, who absorbed thousands of stranded passengers into their small town for days. It’s slightly ironic given that neither man was in power at the time, but only fair considering that George W. Bush never did.

    But that reminds me of a circumstance that puzzled me at the time, and still does. U.S. airspace was closed that day as soon as authorities twigged to the multi-pronged attack. Planes started landing in Canada. I remember watching Peter Mansbridge enumerating the flights landing in Vancouver… Winnipeg… Toronto… Halifax… Gander. He didn’t miss a beat, but I did. Not one landed here in Montreal. I waited for some explanation and it never came: had the U.S. decided Montreal was a hotbed of angry Muslim expats and best avoided, or had Canada made that decision for it? Or did Dorval Airport, as it was then, simply close its own door? If this has ever been clarified, I’ve missed it.

    It’s not difficult to find stories this weekend about the events ten years ago. Our media have special sections – Radio-Canada, La Presse, Le Devoir – and interactive features like the CBC’s where were you and Le Devoir’s où étiez-vous. I don’t think these are merely cynical ploys to engage the readership: everyone has a story, even one as bland as mine told above.

    The Journal de Montréal spoke to two folks from Quebec who were perilously close to the towers on the day about the nightmarish images that dogged their lives afterwards, but to some extent we all felt a touch of that. In most lives there are only a few days when we all go “whoa! we’ve just turned a collective corner!” and this was one of them.

     
    • Bill_the_Bear 12:19 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Kate, this page http://www.1montreal.ca/Montreal_Airport.php has some information about 9/11 at Dorval. This information fits with what I vaguely remember having read a year or two after, namely that the Canadian authorities had tried to limit the number of diverted flights landing at Montréal, Toronto (and maybe Ottawa, too).

    • Kate 12:36 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      That’s pretty scanty as information but thanks for the link.

    • mare 12:42 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      I was that day (my 14th day in Canada ever) staying in a friend’s apartment on the 16th floor of an apartment building on Bathurst in Toronto. It was right on the landing path of Pearson airport. I could literally *see* the pilots. I remember that there were less and less flights that day, not more.

      I was also glued to the TV that day (I saw plane nr 2 live and thought it was a replay) and the whole aftermath in Toronto made me leave and come to Montreal. September 11 is probably the reason I’m here now.

    • John 19:27 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      According to this report from Nav Canada, seven aircraft were diverted to Dorval, ten to Mirabel. They want to avoid, when possible, planes landing at Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver because of “security concerns” which could simply mean avoiding large centres in case more planes were hijacked.

    • Kate 10:28 on 2011/09/11 Permalink

      Thanks John. I guess that makes sense.

  • 09:22 on 2011/09/10 Permalink | Reply  

    A study published recently by the Office québécois de la langue française warns that, by the year 2031, francophones will be in a minority on the island of Montreal. But all is not lost – English is also expected to lose ground as allophone households grow from today’s 21%-ish to 30%-ish, and more allophones adopt French than English.

    On Twitter, Paul Wells just pointed out that two years ago, the year of trouble was predicted to be 2021, his comment: “All worriers have ever needed is a sufficiently distant point on the horizon.”

     
    • William 09:47 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Honestly, Trudeau told the state to get out of the bedrooms of the nation, but it seems to me that the OQLF is determined to come right back in the our homes via the front door. What difference does it make to them what languages our mothers speak as long as we’re doing business together in French?

    • walkerp 09:56 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Anxiety over the Other! News at 11:00! Maybe that’s one thing that can unite the two solitudes.

    • qatzelok 10:05 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      If everyone in Canada switched to French as a main language, it would resolve both Canada’s identity issues and the Quebec schism in one swoop. You do care about Canada, right?

    • Kevin 13:57 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Anyone else have the distinct feeling that if the OQLF included the burbs in its studies that those currently having heart attacks would get whiplash?

    • Kate 17:13 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Not sure about your demographic assumptions, Kevin. I think most of the south shore and couronne nord burbs are pretty francophone – in fact, this flight to the suburbs may be one reason why the city itself, the island, is seeing these linguistic changes. I’d have to dig into the studies to be more authoritative here – but since they’re done by a body which exists out of fear of loss of the French language they’re likely to be a little biased in the direction of making French look as endangered as possible, given the data collected – people want to keep their jobs – and they’re not my leisure reading of choice.

  • 09:17 on 2011/09/10 Permalink | Reply  

    A police cruiser clipped a pedestrian on Friday evening downtown; a passerby caught a bit of police brutality happening on the Main earlier this week.

     
  • 09:13 on 2011/09/10 Permalink | Reply  

    Plateau borough is getting it from all sides these days – the city is refusing to help it out with its budget but efforts it has made to raise the necessary dosh from extra taxes or raising parking rates have not gone down well either. La Presse asks ten questions of embroiled borough mayor Luc Ferrandez.

     
  • 08:32 on 2011/09/10 Permalink | Reply  

    Taxi drivers are complaining in this article chiefly about two things undercutting them – the 747 bus and Bixi. I can see their frustration but at the same time I would not want the city to lose those two services. It’s common sense to have an affordable express to the airport, and Bixi has fit so well into the city’s culture that it’s unthinkable now to have summer without it.

    Nothing in the article suggests that in the last couple of years a lot of folks who previously would’ve hailed a cab have tightened their belts and walked or taken public transit, but I think that’s the missing part of the picture.

     
    • Snowpea 08:58 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Again, it’s a Toronto article… feels like the Star loves bashing Montreal and feeling superior. :sigh:

    • ant6n 09:49 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      It’s weird how they frame bixi usage and the airport bus as a bad thing. Just the way the article starts is ridiculous:

      “Life for cabbies in a tough economy is never easy. But in Montreal, they’re facing an additional threat to their pocketbooks — government.”

      I’d say the biggest competition for taxis is still individual car ownership.

    • Kate 09:57 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Framing the 747 and the Bixi as unfair competition is the strongest play they can make.

    • Chris 10:07 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      and individual car ownership is heavily subsidized by government: they provide free roads, free parking, etc.

    • qatzelok 10:12 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Maybe a congestion charge to get into downtown – that is not charged to taxis – would increase the usage of taxis a bit by getting some cars off the roads – along with the other benefits.

    • ant6n 10:23 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Actually, having cabs pay a congestion charge shouldn’t really make a bit difference to them – even if it was like 10$.

    • Kate 12:45 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      The rules of the London congestion charge exempt taxis, which makes sense.

    • Marc 13:13 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      There are far, far, far too many cabs in Mtl. You see long lines of them at taxi stands. In Paris it’s the opposite; people line up at taxi stands to wait for cabs, as you would at a bus stop.

    • Chris 15:01 on 2011/09/10 Permalink

      Marc, not sure I can agree. With more taxis floating around, it reduces the average time from a phone call to them arriving at my home. One reason we have no car here, is that we know we can be in a car 5 minutes after a phone call.

    • Inderpal singh 04:18 on 2013/05/19 Permalink

      Hi
      I want to say that 747 buses have effect the Taxi drivers in montreal . One thing I don’t understand that the persons who can spend 2000 on airplane ticket , they cannot spend 40 $ on Taxi
      Only cheap people Take Bus. But it effect a Taxi drivers. Lot

    • GC 07:38 on 2013/05/19 Permalink

      That’s an easy one to answer. If another plane was landing at an airport a couple of miles away for $400, how many would still choose to spend $2000 on their plane ticket?

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
esc
cancel