Interesting spin on some positive changes in Somalia:

A few months ago, Mogadishu’s chaotic roads were ruled by red-eyed, open-shirted militia, speeding along in their technicals – the open vehicles with anti-aircraft guns mounted on the back – weaving from one side to the other to avoid the potholes.

Today, one of the world’s most dangerous cities has been tamed: law-abiding men and women motor along without a gun at their side, keeping steadily to the speed limit, and not daring to swerve for craters.

Why can’t we use our brains to solve the political stalemate instead of fighting?
Female student

This transformation is down to the rule of the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC), which took control of Mogadishu in June and much of southern Somalia since then.

Moving from militant anarchy to stable theocracy clearly has its up-side, but history shows that even stable theocracies are far from a panacea for people’s needs, let alone free from violence or above corruption and prejudice. The UIC is being reported as moderate and perhaps even embracing women’s rights to be educated and join the workforce but, as the saying goes, the proof will be in the pudding.

Another case of pot calling the kettle black? I just found this odd quote in the news:

“The material errors and material misrepresentations are so egregious that HBO should pull the documentary,” Diebold Election System president David Byrd wrote. “Failing that, a pre-airing rebuttal and disclaimer are not only appropriate but also in the best interests of HBO and its subscribers.”

The harm of the HBO documentary is not clear. Critical thinking by the public about democracy and electronic voting systems? If Diebold systems were truly safe to use and secure, they would have nothing to worry about, right? On the other hand, the harm from material errors and material misrepresentations by an electronic voting systems manufacturer would lead to botched elections and undermining the cornerstone of democracy. Should voting systems be “pulled” as soon as egregious errors and misrepresentations about security are found?

Perhaps if Diebold would like to take such a strong position on what constitutes an “egregious” error and misrepresentation by HBO, they could at least see the film?

While Diebold spokesman David Bear said company officials had yet to see the film, he said the firm was never contacted by the filmmakers when they were making the documentary.

[…]

HBO contends that Diebold has confused [Hacking Democracy with VoterGate].

“It appears the film Diebold is responding to is not the film HBO is airing,” [HBO spokesman] Cusson said.

And then perhaps Diebold could also explain why they are still selling electronic voting systems without a paper-trail? Talk about willfully exposing the public to egregious errors…

I believe Ed Felton has made Diebold’s totally flawed logic painfully clear already, so while I welcome their new position on protecting the public, I just wish they held themselves to the same standard.