atxhomeguide.com

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

In France, voting has traditionally been a low-tech experience: voters isolate themselves in a booth, put a pre-printed sheet of paper indicating their candidate of choice into an envelope. After officials verify the voter’s identity, the voter drops the envelope into the ballot box and signs the voting roll. French electoral law rather strictly codifies the proceedings. Since 1988, ballot boxes must be transparent so that voters and observers can witness that no envelopes are present at the start of the vote and that no envelopes are added except those of the duly counted and authorized voters. Candidates can send representatives to witness every part of the process. In the evening, votes are counted by volunteers under heavy supervision, following specific procedures.

In the past, voting machines, though authorized by law, were scarce. But this year, during presidential elections (the first round was April 22, the second is on May 6), the country is shaken by controversy about the machines intended to count about 1.5 million votes.

As in the United States, there is a group of academic computer scientists that oppose voting machines. They argue that voting machines replace a public, easily understandable counting process, where large-scale fraud would entail large-scale corruption, by an opaque process where votes are counted by machines that voters have to blindly trust. Voting machines have to be approved by the Ministry of the Interior, but this approval is based on confidential reports by private companies. Opponents to the machines point out that the Ministry was long held by Nicolas Sarkozy, who happens to be the leading candidate. Opponents also list a number of weaknesses and discrepancies that have occurred in other countries using voting machines.

All main political parties except UMP, Mr Sarkozy’s ruling party, oppose the voting machines. Some citizens have filed for court injunctions against the voting machines. Opponents have given detailed instructions that voting witnesses should check whether the machines correspond exactly to an approved type, including software versions, and fulfill all legal conditions. In a sign of the frenzy over the issue, on April 12 the Ministry of the Interior issued a last-minute authorization for a specific model (hardware, firmware). The stakes are high: votes on unapproved machines should be canceled by the Constitutional Council for the official count.

The opposition has crystallized on the Paris suburb of Issy-les-Moulineaux. Issy’s mayor, André Santini is a well-known technophile; his city organizes a “World E-Gov Forum”. Here too, last minute fixes are at work. The machines delivered to the city are of a yet-to-be-approved type. The manufacturer, the American company ES&S voting systems, is now delivering older 2005 machines. Le Monde reports that other municipalities have already replaced their recent machines by an older, approved, model.

Proponents of the machines, such as the French company France Élection, claim they are being defamed and dispute the competence of their critics. Elected officials supporting the machines claim the machines save on paper, time, and the need to find volunteers to count votes.

Friday, July 15, 2005

About 200 cars were burned by young people on the night of July 13 in Île-de-France, the metropolitan area of Paris. As the police cars arrived, youths began to pelt the vehicles with rocks, firecrackers and bottles. Rioters broke store windows at Argenteuil. Police used flash-balls and smoke grenades. The riots ended with 70 men being arrested. A police officer was wounded by a rocket and was taken to hospital. Shop windows were broken at Argenteuil. It is not the first time vehicles have been attacked on 13-14 July in France.

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Militants in north-west Pakistan blew up a fuel tanker carrying supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan on Monday. More than ten armed men shot at the tanker and fired a rocket at the vehicle outside Peshawar city, and the driver and a passenger were injured in the attack, although no loss of life is reported.

Head of the north-western city’s administration, Sahibzada Anees, said “About ten armed people fired at a tanker carrying petrol for NATO forces and later lobbed a rocket at the vehicle, which set alight some 78,000 litres (17,000 gallons) of fuel”.

According to witnesses, the tanker was quickly in flames. The residents of the areas were successfully rescued by police and fire fighters and the blaze was brought under control. Police have launched a search operation in nearby areas, although with no success.

Nobody has yet claimed responsibility for the attack. Oil tankers and trucks bringing goods from port city of Karachi for allied forces battling the Taliban in Afghanistan have been regularly attacked. About 80% of supplies destined for the more than 113 thousand NATO troops in Afghanistan have to pass through Pakistan. The coalition forces bring 70% of supplies through Pakistan every month, from a total of two thousand truckloads.

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale Member of Provincial Parliament Dr. Kuldip S. Kular invites “everyone” to his community barbecque.

The event lasts from 1 until 4 pm in the northwest corner of Chinguasousy Park, at 9050 Bramalea Road in Brampton. The BBQ is free.

Kular was elected into office in 2003, having come to Campbellton, New Brunswick in 1974 to set up a family medical practice.

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Rico Daniels is a British TV presenter living in France who is known for his two television series — The Salvager — whilst he still lived in the UK and then Le Salvager after he moved to France. Rico has been in a variety of jobs but his passion is now his profession – he turns unwanted ‘junk’ into unusual pieces of furniture. Rico’s creations and the methods used to fabricate them are the subject of the Salvager shows.

Rico spoke to Wikinews in January about his inspiration and early life, future plans, other hobbies and more. Read on for the full exclusive interview, published for the first time:

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

An internal government committee has been created to look at Australia’s nuclear energy role. The Federal Government has admitted it has set up a “secret committee” to examine the economics and science of nuclear power. During a Senate estimates committee, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s deputy secretary, Duncan Lewis confirmed that the committee had been formed following statements by US President George W Bush to create a global nuclear energy partnership. He told the Senate estimates that the committee would effectively try to develop an Australian perspective on the American proposal.

Labor Opposition environment spokesman, Anthony Albanese, says the information has not been made public because of the sensitivity of the issue. “This hasn’t been announced, the work’s been done behind-the-scenes because the Government knows that this is indeed a very dangerous path for Australia to go on,” he said.

Greens Senator Christine Milne said that the establishment of a secret committee to look at nuclear power was deeply troubling: “Prime Minister John Howard says he wants a full public debate on whether Australia should adopt nuclear power, yet his government has set up a secret committee to examine the matter,” Senator Milne said.

“The latest evidence about climate change supports the Greens’ position that nuclear power is no solution to climate change, as the government claims. As well as being dangerous it is too slow to mobilise,” Senator Milne said in a media release.

Democrats Leader Lyn Allison says it is extraordinary that the Government did not make the details of the committee public. “It’s very clear… that we’re looking here at a very secret, narrow and possibly a biased inquiry,” she said. “If that’s where it is going, in fact we’ll be moving as soon as we can to establish a Senate inquiry into this, we think it needs to be open, it needs to be public.” Senator Allison said in a media release that Howard’s push for nuclear power “is greed and glow in the dark politics…”

“The Government has no plan for power generation into the future that doesn’t add to greenhouse emissions or produce intractable waste. The enrichment process is energy-intensive and Australia is already the world’s highest per capita greenhouse gas emitter. We cannot afford another energy guzzling industry, especially when this government has abandoned renewable energy,” she said. “Enriching uranium concentrates the isotopes making the uranium more hazardous, more polluting, and makes Australia a greater target for nuclear terrorism.”

Senator Milne said on the Democrats website: “Australians want leadership on this issue, not knee jerk reactions to what George Bush thinks is a good idea. They want a debate that isn’t set up to merely justify selling enriched uranium and nuclear power.”

Anthony Albanese says John Howard’s push for a nuclear energy debate would become “Australia’s nightmare.” Mr Albanese said Mr Howard’s views were retrospective and not in Australia’s best interests: “This is classic John Howard whether it be the GST, whether it be the extreme industrial relations agenda, or whether it be this nuclear fantasy which will become Australia’s nightmare – John Howard always returns to the past,” Mr Albanese said in a News Limited article.

“For John Howard to say that there hasn’t been a debate on nuclear energy would suggest that he went to sleep in the 50s and he’s just woken up.” Mr Albanese said the dangers and costs of nuclear energy outweighed the energy benefits. “The problems of cost, safety, waste disposals and nuclear proliferation in the climate of terrorism are more acute today than they’ve ever been.”