Canada’s view of the Ambassador

By Joel Thurtell

Before you read this article, I wish you would do a little field work.

Please hop in your car and drive to Windsor, Ontario.

If you don’t want to put money in Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun’s pocket, I propose that you take the Detroit-Windsor tunnel under the Detroit River. (Don’t forget your passport.)

The Ambassador Bridge is what I’d like you to see. The Canadian version.

On Thursday, December 4, 2008, I was in Detroit’s 36th District Court and heard Matty’s attorney and the president of his Detroit International Bridge Company argue that the bridge needs a 150-foot “buffer zone” on the bridge’s south side to be fenced off to keep out potential terrorists. This purported need occurred after 9/11 in 2001.

So, on the U.S. side, Matty took over part of a public park, fencing it off, placing phony “Homeland Security” signs on the fences at the east end of Riverside Park, erasing basketball courts and trees and using the park space to store construction materials.

He did more than that: Back in October, his security chief, Jack Teatsorth, explained that the bridge company did Detroit a favor by padlocking the city’s Riverside Park, replacing city gates and hanging another of Matty’s bogus “Homeland Security” no trespassing signs on the fence.  By court time Dec. 4, Matty’s people were denying they had anything to do with closing the boat ramp. Bridge company president Dan Stamper was vaguely blaming the boat launch shutdown on Wayne County or state of Michigan workers, apparently having forgotten the October statements made by his employee, Teatsorth.

Now that you’ve made your way to Windsor, please drive south from the tunnel. You’ll see the Ambassador Bridge. But do you see any fenced off parks? Do you see any fenced off “security” or “anti-terrorist” areas at all?

Oh sure, you’ll see Matty’s Canadian version of a “buffer zone” — literally dozens if not hundreds of perfectly fine homes boarded up — houses he bought, apparently to accommodate his plan for doubling the size of his bridge.

Whole neighborhoods vacated alongside his bridge. But do you see a fenced “buffer zone”?

I made that trip and drove through the bridge neighborhood, but I didn’t see any security fences. No guards, either.

What’s the difference?

Is Canada a lesser security risk than the U.S.?

Are Detroiters more prone to terrorism than Windsorites?

When have you heard of terrorism enacted by anyone from either town?

Why would Matty need a set of chain-link fences on the U.S. side, yet have no security effort in Canada?

You can drive or walk around or under the Ambassador in Windsor. Take pictures if you like. No worry about being harassed by Matty’s shotgun-toting goons when you walk in a public park.

Now, I’m not saying there is no need for security on the U.S. side of the bridge. Clearly, there is. For there is a huge difference between the Canadian and American sides, though it’s hard to see.

In Windsor, there is no bomb under the bridge.

Matty’s fence is misplaced at Riverside Park. If he’s truly worried about bridge safety, he needs to move all that chain-link a few hundred yards and close off that area under the bridge where he’s storing 300,000 gallons of diesel fuel and gasoline. Above the tanks and right under the bridge, trucks park so their drivers can take a break. Above the tanks, fuel tank trucks unload their explosive cargo — right under the bridge.

That’s the difference between Canada and the U.S. — you could drop a lit cigarette under the Ambassador in Windsor and not set off an explosion that might kill and maim people and destroy a bridge that carries 40 percent of the commerce between Canada and the United States.

Drop me a line at joelthurtell(at)gmail.com