Kory Teneycke, a former top spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, has resigned from the effort he started to bring a right-leaning TV network to Canada.
He said controversy over SUN TV, which he acknowledged he helped fuel, is hurting the project's chances of acquiring the regulatory approvals it seeks.
"Part of leading a team is knowing when your presence is a detriment to success," Mr. Teneycke said at a press conference on Parliament Hill.
He announced Wednesday morning he is therefore stepping down as vice-president of business development at Quebecor Media, a job that included managing Sun Media's Ottawa news bureau.
He declined to answer questions at a Parliament Hill news conference, including whether his resignation is linked to his recent battle with Avaaz, a U.S.-based activist group campaigning against a “Fox News North” network in Canada.
Avaaz has asked Ottawa Police and the RCMP to investigate who sabotaged its online petition against SUN TV News, alleging in their request that Mr. Teneycke had knowledge of the perpetrator. It said Internet data reveals the alleged fraudster was based in Ottawa and using a Rogers Internet connection at the time.
Since June, Mr. Teneycke, a political aide-turned media mogul, has mounted an aggressive and sometimes bitter public relations campaign to generate interest in SUN TV.
Mr. Teneycke openly derided mainstream news organizations as the "lame-stream media" and lashed out at critics, calling former CBC TV journalist Don Newman "the Helen Thomas of Canada." That was a reference to the long-time White House reporter who resigned in embarrassment this summer after she said Israelis should “get the hell out of Palestine” and “go home” to places such as Germany.
"Over the summer this controversy has gotten out of hand. It has morphed from one of market differentiation to something more vicious and vitriolic," Mr. Teneycke said.
"And yes at times I have contributed to the debasing of that debate myself."
Earlier this week Avaaz, the online-petition organizer, announced it had asked Ottawa Police and RCMP to probe what it alleged was tampering with its SUN TV petition. It said someone operating from an Ottawa-based web address was adding fictional and real names and email addresses to a petition to stop SUN TV.
Mr. Teneycke said he intends his exit to make things easier for Quebecor.
“It is my hope that my departure will hit the reset button, lower the temperature and allow a more rational debate over the television license for Sun TV news to occur,” he said. “One not tainted by politics and controversies of the past month.”
He said he was still “intensely passionate” about the project - aimed at “filling a void in the market by offering Canadians a new choice and a new voice.”
Former Mulroney spokesman Luc Lavoie will take over from Mr. Teneycke as the leader on the Sun TV News file, Quebecor announced. Mr. Lavoie has had a long association with Quebecor.
“We would like to thank Kory for the excellent work he has performed for our company, and we wish him the best of luck in his future endeavours”, Quebecor CEO Pierre Karl Péladeau said in a statement.
The issue became particularly controversial as a result of the petition from Avaaz, a U.S. special interest group, condemning the Sun TV operation.
Canadian literary icon Margaret Atwood signed the petition, not as a way of censoring the network but to express her concern over a pattern she saw developing as to how the Harper government treats senior officials whose opinions are not on side.
There was some speculation that CRTC head Konrad von Finckenstein’s position was in jeopardy because he didn’t grant Mr. Teneycke’s network its desired licence.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Afghan deaths focus Joint Task Force 2, or JTF2. investigation
Two criminal investigations launched by military police into the actions of Canadian special forces soldiers in Afghanistan probed the alleged improper killing of Afghans, CBC News has learned.
Military sources said that the first investigation, called Sand Trap 1, resulted in no charges being laid against any Canadian soldiers.
But the second investigation, called Sand Trap 2, seems to suggest another nation may have been involved in the alleged improper killing being investigated.
A briefing note written for Defence Minister Peter MacKay and obtained by CBC News also appears to point in this direction. It talks about military police talking with military lawyers to discuss "jurisdiction" and "liaison."
Throughout the Afghan engagement Canadian special forces operated jointly with those of other nations, including Afghanistan and the U.S.
On Monday, CBC News revealed that Canada's Defence Department quietly began a major inquiry in 2008 into the military's highly secretive force known as Joint Task Force 2, or JTF2.
The military investigation began after a member of JTF2 raised serious allegations against another member of the force and the force in general relating to events that happened between 2005 and 2008.
That investigation, called Sand Trap 1, ended after a year and a half with no charges but sparked a second, wider criminal investigation into broader issues called Sand Trap 2, which is still going on.
In addition, a military board of inquiry, which investigates major problems within the Canadian Forces, is looking into administrative and non-criminal issues surrounding the case, and is hearing 100 witnesses as it conducts its probe.
Rear-Admiral Robert Davidson of the Canadian Forces acknowledged in a statement that Sand Trap 1 "identified other matters that warranted a second investigation," known as Sand Trap 2, which is still ongoing.
"Any speculation about these matters while investigative processes are ongoing is unhelpful and may taint the environment in which the investigation is taking place," said Davidson, who is director of staff for the Strategic Joint Staff.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/09/14/sand-trap.html#socialcomments#ixzz0zZFaYoVb
Military sources said that the first investigation, called Sand Trap 1, resulted in no charges being laid against any Canadian soldiers.
But the second investigation, called Sand Trap 2, seems to suggest another nation may have been involved in the alleged improper killing being investigated.
A briefing note written for Defence Minister Peter MacKay and obtained by CBC News also appears to point in this direction. It talks about military police talking with military lawyers to discuss "jurisdiction" and "liaison."
Throughout the Afghan engagement Canadian special forces operated jointly with those of other nations, including Afghanistan and the U.S.
On Monday, CBC News revealed that Canada's Defence Department quietly began a major inquiry in 2008 into the military's highly secretive force known as Joint Task Force 2, or JTF2.
The military investigation began after a member of JTF2 raised serious allegations against another member of the force and the force in general relating to events that happened between 2005 and 2008.
That investigation, called Sand Trap 1, ended after a year and a half with no charges but sparked a second, wider criminal investigation into broader issues called Sand Trap 2, which is still going on.
In addition, a military board of inquiry, which investigates major problems within the Canadian Forces, is looking into administrative and non-criminal issues surrounding the case, and is hearing 100 witnesses as it conducts its probe.
Rear-Admiral Robert Davidson of the Canadian Forces acknowledged in a statement that Sand Trap 1 "identified other matters that warranted a second investigation," known as Sand Trap 2, which is still ongoing.
"Any speculation about these matters while investigative processes are ongoing is unhelpful and may taint the environment in which the investigation is taking place," said Davidson, who is director of staff for the Strategic Joint Staff.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/09/14/sand-trap.html#socialcomments#ixzz0zZFaYoVb
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Joint Task Force 2 or JTF2 actions in Afghanistan probed.
Canada's Defence Department quietly began a major inquiry into the Afghanistan operations of the military's elite special forces unit two years ago, CBC News has learned.
The investigation began in 2008 after a member of the highly secretive task force, known as Joint Task Force 2 or JTF2, raised serious allegations against another member of the force and the force in general, the military has confirmed.
The allegations centred on events that took place between 2005 and 2008, said navy Capt. David Scanlon, but he would provide no details about them.
Military briefing note
Read the 2009 note on Sand Trap written by Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's chief of defence staff.
The investigation, called Sand Trap I, ended after a few months with no charges laid, but the probe sparked a larger investigation into broader allegations. That investigation, called Sand Trap II, is still underway.
CBC News has learned the handling of detainees may have triggered the initial investigation, although the current probe is much wider than that.
The Sand Trap investigations should not taint the reputation of the military, Scanlon said.
"The Canadian Forces have been operating in the very complex Afghan theatre for almost a decade, and the vast majority of Canadian Forces personnel are performing their tough assignments with typical Canadian honesty and integrity," he said.
Briefing note to MacKay
A few details of the investigation are contained in a November 2009 military briefing note written by Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's chief of defence staff, and obtained by the CBC through an Access to Information Act request.
In the note, Natynczyk tells Defence Minister Peter MacKay that a board of inquiry is investigating Sand Trap II and started hearing from witnesses in May 2009. Military boards of inquiry are called to formally investigate accidents, misconduct or other major problems within the Canadian Forces.
News tips
If you have more information on this story, or other story idea, please contact investigations@cbc.ca.
At the time the note was written, Natynczyk wrote that 60 witnesses had testified before the board, and another 40 still needed to give testimony. He expected testimony to be complete by December 2009, with a report submitted by April 2010.
Scanlon said the board of inquiry is focusing on the broader administrative and non-criminal aspects of the allegations at the heart of Sand Trap II.
He said investigators are receiving full co-operation from the special forces unit, and any charges that might arise would be be made public.
High-risk operations
The military has never said much about the work of JTF2, although it has revealed the unit has been involved in high-risk operations against high-value targets, including Taliban and al-Qaeda commanders.
The unit has also been involved in pursuing insurgents who build and plant roadside bombs, and the networks that supply them, the military has said.
During the three year period at the centre of the Sand Trap investigations, 2005 to 2008, the JTF2 unit was attached to an American special forces command based in Kandahar. JTF2 took its tactical direction from the Americans.
The Sand Trap investigations are not part of the Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC) public hearings into allegations that military police failed to investigate senior officers responsible for transfers allegedly involving a risk of torture.
"This is a distinct and broader investigation," Scalon said. "Far broader than anything the MPCC would look at."
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/09/13/detainee-investigation.html#socialcomments#ixzz0zTTpYEil
The investigation began in 2008 after a member of the highly secretive task force, known as Joint Task Force 2 or JTF2, raised serious allegations against another member of the force and the force in general, the military has confirmed.
The allegations centred on events that took place between 2005 and 2008, said navy Capt. David Scanlon, but he would provide no details about them.
Military briefing note
Read the 2009 note on Sand Trap written by Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's chief of defence staff.
The investigation, called Sand Trap I, ended after a few months with no charges laid, but the probe sparked a larger investigation into broader allegations. That investigation, called Sand Trap II, is still underway.
CBC News has learned the handling of detainees may have triggered the initial investigation, although the current probe is much wider than that.
The Sand Trap investigations should not taint the reputation of the military, Scanlon said.
"The Canadian Forces have been operating in the very complex Afghan theatre for almost a decade, and the vast majority of Canadian Forces personnel are performing their tough assignments with typical Canadian honesty and integrity," he said.
Briefing note to MacKay
A few details of the investigation are contained in a November 2009 military briefing note written by Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's chief of defence staff, and obtained by the CBC through an Access to Information Act request.
In the note, Natynczyk tells Defence Minister Peter MacKay that a board of inquiry is investigating Sand Trap II and started hearing from witnesses in May 2009. Military boards of inquiry are called to formally investigate accidents, misconduct or other major problems within the Canadian Forces.
News tips
If you have more information on this story, or other story idea, please contact investigations@cbc.ca.
At the time the note was written, Natynczyk wrote that 60 witnesses had testified before the board, and another 40 still needed to give testimony. He expected testimony to be complete by December 2009, with a report submitted by April 2010.
Scanlon said the board of inquiry is focusing on the broader administrative and non-criminal aspects of the allegations at the heart of Sand Trap II.
He said investigators are receiving full co-operation from the special forces unit, and any charges that might arise would be be made public.
High-risk operations
The military has never said much about the work of JTF2, although it has revealed the unit has been involved in high-risk operations against high-value targets, including Taliban and al-Qaeda commanders.
The unit has also been involved in pursuing insurgents who build and plant roadside bombs, and the networks that supply them, the military has said.
During the three year period at the centre of the Sand Trap investigations, 2005 to 2008, the JTF2 unit was attached to an American special forces command based in Kandahar. JTF2 took its tactical direction from the Americans.
The Sand Trap investigations are not part of the Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC) public hearings into allegations that military police failed to investigate senior officers responsible for transfers allegedly involving a risk of torture.
"This is a distinct and broader investigation," Scalon said. "Far broader than anything the MPCC would look at."
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/09/13/detainee-investigation.html#socialcomments#ixzz0zTTpYEil
Monday, September 13, 2010
Ottawa’s media rules muzzling federal scientists : The Harper government has tightened the muzzle on federal scientists, going so far as to control when and what they can say about floods at the end of the last ice age.
The Harper government has tightened the muzzle on federal scientists, going so far as to control when and what they can say about floods at the end of the last ice age.
Natural Resources Canada scientists were told this spring they need “pre-approval” from Minister Christian Paradis’ office to speak with national and international journalists. Their “media lines” also need ministerial approval, say documents obtained by Postmedia News through access-to-information legislation.
The documents say the “new” rules went into force in March and reveal how they apply to not only to contentious issues including the oilsands, but benign subjects such as floods that occurred 13,000 years ago.
They also give a glimpse of how Canadians are being cut off from scientists whose work is financed by taxpayers, critics say, and is often of significant public interest — be it about fish stocks, genetically modified crops or mercury pollution in the Athabasca River.
“It’s Orwellian,” says Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at University of Victoria. The public, he says, has a right to know what federal scientists are discovering and learning.
Scientists at NRCan, many of them world experts, study everything from seabeds to melting glaciers. They have long been able to discuss their research, until the rules changed this spring.
“We have new media interview procedures that require pre-approval of certain types of interview requests by the minister’s office,” wrote Judy Samoil, NRCan’s western regional communications manager, in a March 24 email to colleagues.
The policy applies to “high-profile” issues such as “climate change, oilsands” and when “the reporter is with an international or national media organization (such as the CBC or the Canwest paper chain),” she wrote.
The Canwest papers are now part of Postmedia Network Inc.
Samoil later elaborated, saying “the regional communications managers were advised of this change a couple of weeks ago.”
The documents show the new rules being so broadly applied that one scientist was not permitted to discuss a study in a major research journal without “pre-approval” from political staff in Paradis’ office.
NRCan scientist Scott Dallimore co-authored the study, published in the journal Nature on April 1, about a colossal flood that swept across northern Canada 13,000 years ago, when massive ice dams gave way at the end of the last ice age.
The study was considered so newsworthy that two British universities issued releases to alert the international media.
It was, however, deemed so sensitive in Ottawa that Dallimore, who works at NRCan’s laboratories outside Victoria, was told he had to wait for clearance from the minister’s office.
Dallimore tried to tell the department’s communications managers the flood study was anything but politically sensitive. “This is a blue sky science paper,” he said in one email, noting: “There are no anticipated links to minerals, energy or anthropogenic climate change.”
But the bureaucrats in Ottawa insisted. “We will have to get the minister’s office approval before going ahead with this interview,” Patti Robson, the department’s media relations manager, wrote in an email after a reporter from Postmedia News (then Canwest News Service) approached Dallimore.
Robson asked Dallimore to provide the reporter’s questions and “the proposed responses,” saying: “We will send it up to MO (minister’s office) for approval.” Robson said interviews about the flood study needed ministerial approval for two reasons: the inquiring reporter represented a “national news outlet” and the “subject has wide-ranging implications.”
Emails flew at NRCan as word of ministerial “pre-approval” rules spread.
“Gosh this is news to me . . . shouldn’t we have something explaining all this by an email from the upper ups,” Dallimore wrote in one message. His work on gas hydrates and permafrost in the Arctic has attracted national and international attention, and until this spring Dallimore had been free to discuss his research with reporters.
His boss was also baffled. “Can you direct us to the new media interview procedures?” wrote Carmel Lowe, director of the Geological Survey of Canada in NRCan Pacific region, on March 29 to Michael Buzzell, manager of NRCan’s ministerial communications branch in Ottawa.
Lowe said in a telephone interview that she never did receive clarification on the new procedures.
Robson has switched jobs and Micheline Joanisse is now acting media relations manager at NRCan. Joanisse says the “new media interview procedures” referred to in the documents fit with the government communications policy introduced in 2006.
“The minister is the primary spokesperson for Natural Resources Canada. As such, he needs to be made aware of issues in the media which involve the department so he can effectively fulfil his role,” Joanisse said in a prepared statement.
“Departmental officials speaking on behalf of the department are to consult the minister’s office in preparing responses,” Joanisse says. “While this may have been misinterpreted as being a new policy, it has been in place for years.”
The documents show several communications managers, policy advisers, political staff and senior officials were involved drafting and vetting “media lines” on the ancient flood study.
Dallimore finally got clearance to talk to reporters from Margaux Stastny, director of communication in Paradis’ office, on March 31, a week after NRCan communications branch was told the study was appearing in Nature, and two days after reporters began approaching Dallimore for interviews.
By the time Dallimore and the “media lines” got the OK, the reporters’ deadlines had passed and they had already completed their stories about the ancient flood. Canwest News Service, CBC, ABC, Reuters, and other organizations based their reports on interviews with co-authors of the study from other universities outside Canada that responded to interview requests promptly.
This effectively “muzzled” Dallimore by not allowing him to do timely interviews, says Weaver, at the University of Victoria, who says the incident shows how “ridiculous” the situation has got in Ottawa.
“If you can’t get access to a nice, feel-good science story about flooding at the end of last glaciation, can you imagine trying to get access to scientists with information about cadmium and mercury in the Athabasca River? Absolutely impossible,” says Weaver, in reference to growing controversy over contaminants downstream from Alberta’s oilsands.
Environment Canada and Health Canada now tightly control media access to researchers and orchestrate interviews that are approved. Environment Canada has even produced “media lines” for federal scientists to stick to when discussing climate studies they have co-authored with Weaver and are based on research paid for through his university grants.
“There is no question that there is an orchestrated campaign at the federal level to make sure that their scientists can’t communicate to the public about what they do,” says Weaver, adding that the crackdown is seriously undermining morale in federal labs. “Science is about generating new knowledge and communicating it to others.”
The control and micro-management points to a high level of “science illiteracy” in the upper ranks of the federal government, he says, and “incredible disrespect” for both the researchers and the taxpayers footing the government’s multi-billion-dollar science bill.
“The sad reality is that these guys in Ottawa think federal scientists work for them,” says Weaver. “They don’t, they work for the people of Canada.
“This is science funded by Canada for the public good,” he says. “It is not science funded to produce briefing notes for ministers so they can get elected in the next federal campaign.”
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+media+rules+muzzling+federal+scientists/3513960/story.html#ixzz0zNT0PbY9
Natural Resources Canada scientists were told this spring they need “pre-approval” from Minister Christian Paradis’ office to speak with national and international journalists. Their “media lines” also need ministerial approval, say documents obtained by Postmedia News through access-to-information legislation.
The documents say the “new” rules went into force in March and reveal how they apply to not only to contentious issues including the oilsands, but benign subjects such as floods that occurred 13,000 years ago.
They also give a glimpse of how Canadians are being cut off from scientists whose work is financed by taxpayers, critics say, and is often of significant public interest — be it about fish stocks, genetically modified crops or mercury pollution in the Athabasca River.
“It’s Orwellian,” says Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at University of Victoria. The public, he says, has a right to know what federal scientists are discovering and learning.
Scientists at NRCan, many of them world experts, study everything from seabeds to melting glaciers. They have long been able to discuss their research, until the rules changed this spring.
“We have new media interview procedures that require pre-approval of certain types of interview requests by the minister’s office,” wrote Judy Samoil, NRCan’s western regional communications manager, in a March 24 email to colleagues.
The policy applies to “high-profile” issues such as “climate change, oilsands” and when “the reporter is with an international or national media organization (such as the CBC or the Canwest paper chain),” she wrote.
The Canwest papers are now part of Postmedia Network Inc.
Samoil later elaborated, saying “the regional communications managers were advised of this change a couple of weeks ago.”
The documents show the new rules being so broadly applied that one scientist was not permitted to discuss a study in a major research journal without “pre-approval” from political staff in Paradis’ office.
NRCan scientist Scott Dallimore co-authored the study, published in the journal Nature on April 1, about a colossal flood that swept across northern Canada 13,000 years ago, when massive ice dams gave way at the end of the last ice age.
The study was considered so newsworthy that two British universities issued releases to alert the international media.
It was, however, deemed so sensitive in Ottawa that Dallimore, who works at NRCan’s laboratories outside Victoria, was told he had to wait for clearance from the minister’s office.
Dallimore tried to tell the department’s communications managers the flood study was anything but politically sensitive. “This is a blue sky science paper,” he said in one email, noting: “There are no anticipated links to minerals, energy or anthropogenic climate change.”
But the bureaucrats in Ottawa insisted. “We will have to get the minister’s office approval before going ahead with this interview,” Patti Robson, the department’s media relations manager, wrote in an email after a reporter from Postmedia News (then Canwest News Service) approached Dallimore.
Robson asked Dallimore to provide the reporter’s questions and “the proposed responses,” saying: “We will send it up to MO (minister’s office) for approval.” Robson said interviews about the flood study needed ministerial approval for two reasons: the inquiring reporter represented a “national news outlet” and the “subject has wide-ranging implications.”
Emails flew at NRCan as word of ministerial “pre-approval” rules spread.
“Gosh this is news to me . . . shouldn’t we have something explaining all this by an email from the upper ups,” Dallimore wrote in one message. His work on gas hydrates and permafrost in the Arctic has attracted national and international attention, and until this spring Dallimore had been free to discuss his research with reporters.
His boss was also baffled. “Can you direct us to the new media interview procedures?” wrote Carmel Lowe, director of the Geological Survey of Canada in NRCan Pacific region, on March 29 to Michael Buzzell, manager of NRCan’s ministerial communications branch in Ottawa.
Lowe said in a telephone interview that she never did receive clarification on the new procedures.
Robson has switched jobs and Micheline Joanisse is now acting media relations manager at NRCan. Joanisse says the “new media interview procedures” referred to in the documents fit with the government communications policy introduced in 2006.
“The minister is the primary spokesperson for Natural Resources Canada. As such, he needs to be made aware of issues in the media which involve the department so he can effectively fulfil his role,” Joanisse said in a prepared statement.
“Departmental officials speaking on behalf of the department are to consult the minister’s office in preparing responses,” Joanisse says. “While this may have been misinterpreted as being a new policy, it has been in place for years.”
The documents show several communications managers, policy advisers, political staff and senior officials were involved drafting and vetting “media lines” on the ancient flood study.
Dallimore finally got clearance to talk to reporters from Margaux Stastny, director of communication in Paradis’ office, on March 31, a week after NRCan communications branch was told the study was appearing in Nature, and two days after reporters began approaching Dallimore for interviews.
By the time Dallimore and the “media lines” got the OK, the reporters’ deadlines had passed and they had already completed their stories about the ancient flood. Canwest News Service, CBC, ABC, Reuters, and other organizations based their reports on interviews with co-authors of the study from other universities outside Canada that responded to interview requests promptly.
This effectively “muzzled” Dallimore by not allowing him to do timely interviews, says Weaver, at the University of Victoria, who says the incident shows how “ridiculous” the situation has got in Ottawa.
“If you can’t get access to a nice, feel-good science story about flooding at the end of last glaciation, can you imagine trying to get access to scientists with information about cadmium and mercury in the Athabasca River? Absolutely impossible,” says Weaver, in reference to growing controversy over contaminants downstream from Alberta’s oilsands.
Environment Canada and Health Canada now tightly control media access to researchers and orchestrate interviews that are approved. Environment Canada has even produced “media lines” for federal scientists to stick to when discussing climate studies they have co-authored with Weaver and are based on research paid for through his university grants.
“There is no question that there is an orchestrated campaign at the federal level to make sure that their scientists can’t communicate to the public about what they do,” says Weaver, adding that the crackdown is seriously undermining morale in federal labs. “Science is about generating new knowledge and communicating it to others.”
The control and micro-management points to a high level of “science illiteracy” in the upper ranks of the federal government, he says, and “incredible disrespect” for both the researchers and the taxpayers footing the government’s multi-billion-dollar science bill.
“The sad reality is that these guys in Ottawa think federal scientists work for them,” says Weaver. “They don’t, they work for the people of Canada.
“This is science funded by Canada for the public good,” he says. “It is not science funded to produce briefing notes for ministers so they can get elected in the next federal campaign.”
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+media+rules+muzzling+federal+scientists/3513960/story.html#ixzz0zNT0PbY9
Sunday, September 12, 2010
sex movie worm An email that purports to offer free pornography but actually contains a virus is spreading like wildfire across the internet, security experts have warned.
The email is entitled "Here you have" and holds within a link that appears to direct users to a PDF document.
In fact the link contains no documents but, if clicked, will enable the virus to access the user's Outlook address book and email itself to every contact contained within.
sending pornographic emailsIt will also attempt to disable any security programmes by deleting them, allowing it to remain hidden on the computer's hard drive.
The worm can also be passed on by unsecured links between computers sharing a network.
BBC News reported that companies including Nasa, AIG, Disney, Procter & Gamble and Wells Fargo are all having difficulties preventing the worm from spreading through their systems, with employees receiving hundreds of copies of the email.
The website on which the worm was based was shut down on Thursday evening, but it is expected that other forms of the virus will continue to spread.
Kaspersky, the security company, said the worm targeted Outlook in the same way as previous viruses such as the ILoveYou bug, which spread across the world in 2000.
In fact the link contains no documents but, if clicked, will enable the virus to access the user's Outlook address book and email itself to every contact contained within.
sending pornographic emailsIt will also attempt to disable any security programmes by deleting them, allowing it to remain hidden on the computer's hard drive.
The worm can also be passed on by unsecured links between computers sharing a network.
BBC News reported that companies including Nasa, AIG, Disney, Procter & Gamble and Wells Fargo are all having difficulties preventing the worm from spreading through their systems, with employees receiving hundreds of copies of the email.
The website on which the worm was based was shut down on Thursday evening, but it is expected that other forms of the virus will continue to spread.
Kaspersky, the security company, said the worm targeted Outlook in the same way as previous viruses such as the ILoveYou bug, which spread across the world in 2000.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Abdelrazik torture has the green light from the Federal Court of Canada.
OTTAWA — A potentially groundbreaking case on federal responsibility in torture cases has the green light from the Federal Court of Canada.
The court has dismissed the federal government's attempt to strike out much of the lawsuit filed by Abousfian Abdelrazik.
The Montreal man was arrested but not charged during a 2003 visit to Sudan to see his ill mother.
Abelrazik alleges negligence on the part of Canadian Security Intelligence Service officials that resulted in his detention and caused him severe physical and mental injuries.
Paul Champ, Abdelrazik's lawyer, says the ruling is notable because it clearly recognizes torture as grounds for a lawsuit.
He says it also opens the court's door to other Canadian citizens abused in detention abroad "while Canadian officials did little or nothing to help."
The court has dismissed the federal government's attempt to strike out much of the lawsuit filed by Abousfian Abdelrazik.
The Montreal man was arrested but not charged during a 2003 visit to Sudan to see his ill mother.
Abelrazik alleges negligence on the part of Canadian Security Intelligence Service officials that resulted in his detention and caused him severe physical and mental injuries.
Paul Champ, Abdelrazik's lawyer, says the ruling is notable because it clearly recognizes torture as grounds for a lawsuit.
He says it also opens the court's door to other Canadian citizens abused in detention abroad "while Canadian officials did little or nothing to help."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)