Friday, September 12, 2014

Montreal will soon be home to four supervised injection sites for intravenous drug users. While the service is expected to cost $2.7 million annually, the Public Health Department said the health care system will ultimately come out the winner.



Montreal will soon be home to four supervised injection sites for intravenous drug users.


While the service is expected to cost $2.7 million annually, the Public Health Department said the health care system will ultimately come out the winner.
Insite supervised injection site marks 10-year milestone


Richard Massé, the director of Montreal Public Health, argues that while the the experiment may seem expensive, the quality of life will improve for the people who live near the sites, and for the drug users.


Massé said the social gains will surpass the cost if people consider the complications associated with injection drug use — hepatitis C, HIV and overdoses, among others — and the risk of contamination associated with dirty needles left lying around.


"You gain more with these services than leaving people to deal with their health problems, not to mention the social costs for the population living nearby," said Massé.
Report suggests Toronto test out safe injection sites


An additional $3.2 million will be needed to launch the service, buy equipment and renovate the designated spaces.


Massé said, according to a study commissioned by the city’s public health office, the service would pay for itself after four years.


The idea is not new — similar centres already exist in Vancouver and several Montreal-based organizations, particularly Cactus, have been lobbying for them for years.
Safe drug injection site rules emphasize local input


The Montreal health network will support community organizations that are already working with the target clientele. Three permanent centres, each with an injection room supervised by a nurse, will be implemented. A fourth, mobile centre will work to reach people in other areas that are particularly affected by intravenous drug use.


Massé said personnel won't administer injections and no drugs will be sold on site. However, medical services will be available in case of an overdose.


Montreal Public Health officials said they also hope that the supervised injection sites will encourage some drug users to eventually seek detox services.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

National Bureau of Air Accidents Investigation of Ukraine

National Bureau of Air Accidents Investigation of Ukraine





The National Bureau of Air Accidents Investigation of Ukraine (NBAAI, Ukrainian: Національне бюро з розслідування авіаційних подій та інцидентів з цивільними повітряними суднами) is the national civil aviation incident investigation authority of Ukraine, a "specialist expert organization" consisting of 40 experts and subordinated to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine.

The bureau was established on March 21, 2012 by the special Cabinet Decree #228[1] according to the provisions of the Aerial Code of Ukraine.

As of April 2012, Oleg Babenko was the Bureau Director[2]

Bureau is headquartered in Kiev at #14 Peremohy Ave. (highrise building of the Ministry of Infrastructure).



Contents
1 History
2 See also
3 References
4 External links


History

The NBAAI had requested that the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) participate in the international investigation of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17; the DSB received formal notice of the accident from the NBAAI on 18 July 2014.[3] The NBAAI delegated the investigation to the DSB because of the large number of Dutch passengers and the fact that the flight originated in Amsterdam.[4]
See also

Ukraine portal
Aviation portal
Disasters portal

State Aviation Administration of Ukraine
References[

Jump up^ Про утворення Національного бюро з розслідування авіаційних подій та інцидентів з цивільними повітряними суднами (Ukrainian)
Jump up^ Про призначення Бабенка О. Л. директором Національного бюро з розслідування авіаційних подій та інцидентів з цивільними повітряними суднами (Ukrainian)
Jump up^ "Investigation crash MH17, 17 July 2014 Donetsk Introduction" (Archive). Dutch Safety Board. Retrieved on 2 August 2014. "The Dutch Safety Board was formally informed on the air disaster by its Ukrainian counterpart (NBAAI) on 18 July 2014. The NBAAI also requested the Dutch Safety Board to participate in the international investigation. "
Jump up^ "Investigation crash MH17, 17 July 2014." Dutch Safety Board. Retrieved on 22 August 2014. "Ukraine has transferred responsibility for investigating the cause of the crash to the Dutch Safety Board. The request came from Ukraine. This request was made because the flight departed from the Netherlands, and due to the large number of Dutch nationals who died in the crash"
External links[edit]
National Bureau for Civilian Aircraft Events and Accidents Investigation
National Bureau for Civilian Aircraft Events and Accidents Investigation (Ukrainian)
Розслідуванням авіаційних подій та інцидентів з цивільними літаками займатиметься незалежна експертна установа (Archive) news on the Government Portal (Ukrainian)
Cхема системи розслідування подій у цивільній авіації (Archive) - The bureau's role within the national/ICAO Procedure of Civil Aviation Events Investigations (Ukrainian)
Катастрофу в Донецке расследует Нацбюро расследований авиапроисшествий (Archive) (Ukrainian)

[show]

v
t
e
Aviation accident and incident investigation agencies


This article about an aviation accident is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

This article about transport in Ukraine is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Monday, September 8, 2014

Khadr trying again to sue Canada, : claims conspiracy with U.S. Potential embarrassment to the U.S. should not stop former Guantanamo Bay prisoner Omar Khadr from alleging in an expanded civil suit that Ottawa conspired with Washington to torture him and breach his rights, federal court heard



Potential embarrassment to the U.S. should not stop former Guantanamo Bay prisoner Omar Khadr from alleging in an expanded civil suit that Ottawa conspired with Washington to torture him and breach his rights, federal court heard Wednesday.

In fact, Khadr’s lawyer, John Phillips, argued that doing so would allow a thorough airing of how the Americans treated him during years of detention.



“If this matter proceeds, I suspect the United States will be embarrassed by what comes out of the process,” Phillips told Judge Richard Mosley.

“(And) Canada is potentially liable for the torture and other punishment that was visited on Omar in Guantanamo.”

Khadr wants to expand his $20-million lawsuit against the Canadian government to include the allegation that Ottawa conspired with the U.S. to detain him indefinitely and otherwise abuse him at Guantanamo Bay.

For its part, federal lawyers argued international law does not allow Khadr to drag the U.S. into his civil action, first filed in 2004.

They also maintained that any abuses Khadr suffered at Guantanamo could be dealt with under his current statement of claim.

“He says he wants to affix Canada with U.S. acts alleged,” government lawyer Barney Brucker said.

“(But alleging) conspiracy is not necessary.”

Among other things, documents show Canadian agents went down to the infamous U.S. prison in 2003 and 2004 to interrogate the Toronto-born Khadr after first agreeing to share any intelligence with his American prosecutors.

Khadr’s military captors then subjected him to sleep-deprivation – known as the “frequent flyer” program – to soften him up for interrogation by the Canadians, previously released documents show.

Mosley, who reserved his decision, seemed disinclined to stop Khadr from trying to prove conspiracy – if the lawsuit gets to trial.

“There was clearly an effort to investigate and build a case against the plaintiff,” Mosley observed.

“That was something Canada took part in.”

Last December, Mosley ruled the proposed amendments to the lawsuit needed to be rewritten before the claims could be heard on their merits at a trial.

Phillips noted Canada made no effort to repatriate its citizen or to help Khadr deal with a prosecution under a military-commission process the U.S. Supreme Court itself ruled illegal in 2006.

He also pointed out that the Supreme Court of Canada later found that Ottawa had violated Khadr’s rights.

“I beg you to let this case proceed as pleaded,” he said to Mosley.

“We can’t have child soldiers treated the way they’ve been in Guantanamo by this government.”

The U.S. government has denied torturing Khadr, 27, who pleaded guilty to five war crimes in October 2010 before an American military commission for incidents that occurred in Afghanistan when he was 15.

The Americans had arrested him in July 2002 following a brutal firefight in which he was terribly injured and an American special forces soldier was killed.

He was returned to Canada in September 2012 and is currently incarcerated in Alberta.

Friday, September 5, 2014

From Melissa It is with great sadness that I announce the death of my mother, Joan Rivers.


From Melissa
September 4, 2014


“It is with great sadness that I announce the death of my mother, Joan Rivers. She passed peacefully at 1:17pm surrounded by family and close friends. My son and I would like to thank the doctors, nurses, and staff of Mount Sinai Hospital for the amazing care they provided for my mother.

Cooper and I have found ourselves humbled by the outpouring of love, support, and prayers we have received from around the world. They have been heard and appreciated.

My mother’s greatest joy in life was to make people laugh. Although that is difficult to do right now, I know her final wish would be that we return to laughing soon.”

Thursday, September 4, 2014

No-fly list numbers must stay secret: feds Federal security officials are resisting pressure to reveal how many people are on Canada’s no-fly list, arguing the information could help terrorists plot a catastrophic attack on an airliner.



OTTAWA – Federal security officials are resisting pressure to reveal how many people are on Canada’s no-fly list, arguing the information could help terrorists plot a catastrophic attack on an airliner.

In newly filed court documents, the government also contends that divulging the figure might damage relations with key allies, especially the United States.

Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault is challenging the government’s refusal to disclose the data to a Montreal journalist who requested it under the Access to Information Act.



La Presse reporter Daphne Cameron filed two requests for figures from 2006 through 2010 — one for the total number of people on the list, the second for the number of Canadian citizens.

Legault’s office investigated Cameron’s complaint against Transport Canada and recommended last year that the agency release the figures.

Transport Canada refused to comply, prompting Legault to take the case to the Federal Court of Canada.

Under the no-fly program in place since June 2007, airlines rely on a list of individuals considered “an immediate threat to civil aviation” should they board an aircraft.

Candidates for the no-fly roster — formally known as the Specified Persons List — are put forward by the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

Members of these agencies, along with representatives of Transport, the Canada Border Services Agency and the Justice Department, sit on an advisory panel that formally recommends names for inclusion. The public safety minister has the final say.

In withholding the numbers, Transport Canada invoked a section of the access law shielding information whose release could interfere with the conduct of international affairs as well as the detection, prevention or suppression of “hostile activities.”

In her May 2013 letter to then-transport minister Denis Lebel, filed with the court, Legault said she was not satisfied the exemption had been properly applied.

Disclosing an aggregate number of people on the no-fly list “would not allow an individual to determine whether he or she is on the list,” she wrote.

The roster is only one of a number of lists used by airlines to ensure aviation security, Legault added. Therefore, even if someone could conclude they were on the list, “this fact would not transform Canadian or Canadian-bound aircraft into ‘soft targets,’ as claimed by (Transport Canada).”

Christopher Free, a senior Transport Canada intelligence official, was consulted by Transport’s Access to Information division in March 2010 on whether the figures could be disclosed. Free concluded the number of names “was valuable information for terrorist operational planning” and that its release would harm national security, he says in an affidavit filed recently with the court.

“This determination is based on my understanding of how terrorist groups operate,” says Free, chief of operational and intelligence support within the aviation security operations branch of Transport.

“In order to plan and execute a successful attack and minimize risk, terrorist organizations must first solve the ‘intelligence problem’ of knowing and understanding the strengths, weaknesses and opportunities available with respect to their target.”

Portions of Free’s filing have been blacked out, with the court’s permission, in keeping with federal concerns about maintaining secrecy.

The United States has revealed there are about 16,000 people — including fewer than 500 Americans — on its no-fly list.

Still, Free says disclosure of the Canadian numbers could “adversely affect our relations with key allies, and especially the U.S.”

CSIS and Public Safety Canada back Transport’s bid to keep the figures under wraps.

“Although the information may at first appear innocuous, the Service maintains that it would be ill advised to expose the scope of Canada’s intelligence knowledge in this specific area of enforcement,” CSIS says in an October 2011 memo that has become part of the court file.

In a 2012 report, the watchdog that keeps an eye on CSIS said confusion over how the no-fly list should work had “significantly undermined” its potential to help keep the skies safe.

The Security Intelligence Review Committee said the notion of “an immediate threat to civil aviation” was open to interpretation, and federal agencies had “struggled” with nominating people for the list.