Newsgroup: it.arti.cinema
Titolo: [OT] Scandalo


"Fast'n'bulbous!"

questo modo.
E' la CNN. hai detto tutto, mio caro Enrico Battocchi. Cosa ti
aspettavi?
Vostro Affezionato
Roberto Pirani

violence.
Non so a che ora sia apparso il testo che tu citi. Adesso, alle 2 e
13, su
http://europe.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/11/10/gen.rome.rallies/index.html
io leggo un testo molto simile, ma con i numeri ribaltati:
-------------------------------------
Opposing rallies in Rome praise U.S., condemn war
ROME, Italy -- Anti-war sentiment dwarfed pro-U.S. feelings in Rome
Saturday as people protesting the war in Afghanistan outnumbered those
attending a rally led by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's
conservatives. 
According to police, some 100,000 opponents of the U.S.-led strikes
against Afghanistan shouted "niente guerra" (no war), as they waved
communist flags and anti-NATO banners near Rome's central railway
station. 
By contrast, a crowd of close to 40,000 attended the Berlusconi rally,
police estimated.They waved U.S. flags, as well as flags of Italy and
the European Union, as an orchestra played the "The Star Spangled
Banner." 
Security forces numbering some 6,000 were out en masse to prevent
violence
[...]
---------------------------------------
Il testo di cui ho quotato i primi quattro paragrafi risulta postato
sul sito della CNN alle 0043 GMT dell'11 novembre.
Il tuo messaggio e' delle 00.51 del nostro fuso orario, che' e' GMT+1.
Si profila un inquietante mistero giornalistico...
Joe Gillis
http://www.iaciners.org

protesters.
Finalmente il termine "dwarf" usato a proposito... a quando un
identico uso di "bald"?
 
"Pepper" Lory
...il magnifico duplex non-brizzolato di it.arti.cinema
---
"Io credo che l'amore sia la cosa più bella, naturale e salutare che i soldi possano comprare."
Steve Martin


http://europe.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/11/10/gen.rome.rallies/index.html
E' "europe", non "www", ci sta che dipenda da un redazione diversa.
Anche su CNNitalia i numeri sono giusti.
Forse i cazzoni in America hanno preso per buone le cifre scazzate da
Raiuno questo pomeriggio (che davano max 10.000 persone ai no-global)


identico uso di "bald"?
"A proposito" un cazzo, Nicola.


questo modo.
Mi sa invece che le cifre giuste siano queste.
Gli Stati Uniti hanno una tradizione centenaria nella libertà di stampa,
mentre sappiamo benissimo come la meschina stampa italiana si sia sempre
fatta influenzare da una inspiegabile sudditanza nei confronti di quella
enorme pattumiera chiamata "sinistra".
--
Fronte Antibolscevico
Feldmaresciallo di It.Arti.Cinema

 Berlusconi rally praises U.S.
... 
no... ma dico l'avete vista la diretta su rai1 con Cucuzza?
Ho retto tutto il discorso di Berlusconi senza cambiare canale, sto
invecchiando.
Vale
-- 
"Pienzame n'a ta vota
primma ca jesce 'o sole
finche' 'o scuro nun more
e accummencia 'o calore"

enorme pattumiera chiamata "sinistra".
Non dire stronzate.
Primo perche' la fantomatica stampa filo-sinistra si riduce a
Manifesto, Liberazione, Repubblica e giornali locali affiliati.
*Tutta* la stampa segnala cifre piu' alte per i no-global.
Il Corriere, per dirne uno che sicuramente filo-Ulivo non e'.
Perfino il faziosissimo "Il Tempo" concede 70.000 contro 40.000.
"Libero" e "Il giornale" in prima pagina piazzano bandiere ma tacciono
sul successo numerico.
Gli stessi organizzatori di Piazza del Popolo parlano di 40.000
presenze alla manifestazione pro-USA, e la questura concorda.
Per di piu', le filiali europea e italiana della CNN, come diciamo io
ed il Pacc in altri post, riportano cifre decisamente piu' plausibili.
Quindi vai a nasconderti te e il Berlusca, e tutti quelli che si
aspettavano 100.000 persone in Piazza del Popolo.


 invecchiando.
Ma no, è una forma di addestramento, di autodisciplina. Ora sei in
grado di resistere ad efferate torture.
vZ

 -------------
Affogheranno nella merda che producono!!!
Luke

 --
Il TG2 delle 20.30 di sabato 10/11 non ha dato cifre. Perché? Perché sono
in enorme imbarazzo, non possono mentire, non riescono piů. Hanno mentito
durante il pomeriggio, ma dopo che tutti hanno visto la marea umana, no
a quel punto cercheranno altri modi per sminuire la batosta, tipo quella
(fatta dal TG5) di introdurre la manifestazione del movimento buttando lě
 cose tipo ' E dopo i massacri di Genova....'
Luke

 cose tipo ' E dopo i massacri di Genova....'
Stessa cosa al TG1, dove hanno inserito con tono drammatico
un'immagine della famosa bandiera americana bruciata, abbandonata per
terra in mezzo alla gente che passava.
Senza commento, perche' in questo caso tornava utile tacere che chi
l'aveva fatto era stato cacciato dal servizio d'ordine.


 Stalin le notizie venivano falsate ad arte in questo modo.
Senti ma... informarsi da una fonte piu' seria (tipo New York Times) pare
brutto?
 Afghan War Divides Rome Into Two Rallies
MELINDA HENNEBERGER
[R] OME, Nov. 10 ? A huge "U.S.A. Day" pageant starring Prime Minister
Silvio Berlusconi brought tens of thousands of people into the Piazza del
Popolo tonight without provoking the violence that many had feared.
The air was tense because a similar number of antiwar marchers were
demonstrating at the same time, right across town.
In the end, though, Rome seemed almost as overrun with police officers as
with marchers, and the two groups of demonstrators never collided. The
authorities had banned flights over the city and closed the subways and a
number of streets.
The two demonstrations reflected growing divisions over the American-led
military campaign in Afghanistan. Though Parliament just voted
overwhelmingly to send almost 3,000 troops to join the effort, a survey
this week showed that only 51 percent of Italians polled supported the
war, down from 70 percent a month ago.
Mr. Berlusconi, who spoke for 40 minutes, invoked President John F.
Kennedy's "Ich bin ein Berliner" speech, as he said, "We are all citizens
of New York."
"Europe knows how much it owes to America," said Mr. Berlusconi, leader of
a center-right government. "We have to remember not to forget."
He got his biggest applause when he criticized the competing marchers,
saying: "A small, loud number of spoilers did not succeed in their attempt
to confuse us. Those who burn the American flag are stupid."
His opposition dismissed the entire event as a glorified political rally.
Francesco Rutelli, the opposition leader, who met with Italian troops
shipping out for Afghanistan today instead of attending a rally he said he
had not been invited to, called the rally "pure propaganda."
The idea of draping the square in American flags had been widely seen as a
provocation to terrorists, and was packaged as an act of defiance. "Only
cowards are not here," said Irenka Doubrava, a native of Prague who lives
in Rome. "I am worried, but I had to come."
Even some Berlusconi allies had opposed the rally, primarily over security
concerns. But Mr. Berlusconi has been eager to present himself as a
stalwart American ally, though one of his cabinet ministers complained
when the rally was first proposed, saying Italy should not feel it had
anything to prove.
The country has been on alert since the United States State Department
warned more than a month ago that "symbols of American capitalism in
Italy" might be targets. The terrorist suspect Osama bin Laden's most
recent video mentioned Italy as an enemy of Islam. Another concern was
that today's antiwar march was organized by the same "antiglobal" groups
that protested in Genoa last summer at a Group of 8 summit meeting, where
one young demonstrator was shot dead by police.
What turned into an antiwar march was originally supposed to coincide with
a planned meeting on world hunger this week, a meeting that was not held
after Mr. Berlusconi complained that it posed too big a security risk.
The march was peaceful, though several marchers painted antiwar slogans on
some buildings, and an American flag was burned.
"We're here against a war where civilians are dying, and we have to do
something," said one of the demonstrators, Elena Spinelli, 56, a social
worker from Rome.
-- 
ste

 questo modo.
non capisco per quale motivo voi comunisti vi ostiniate tanto a contare
quante persone si siano radunate in questa o quella piazza

quante persone si siano radunate in questa o quella piazza
Ragazzi, lo ripeto, basta co' 'sti fake, sono banali.


brutto?
Che cazzo di discorso e'?


 quante persone si siano radunate in questa o quella piazza
fosse per me non farei contare nemmeno i voti nelle urne, ha vinto questo o
quello, si fa' con la cannuccia piu' corta.

presenze alla
manifestazione pro-USA, e la questura concorda.
TGCOM (ci sono capitato
per caso, giuro) dà 25000 al corteo NoWar.
Qui si danno i numeri.
Ciao da
Antonello
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://usenet.iol.it
 

 quello, si fa' con la cannuccia piu' corta.
oppure come l'anno scorso in usa: "raga', alle cinque si va a casa, chi
e' fuori e' fuori, chi e' dentro e' dentro".
ffffffff
--
"niente , riflettevo sulla innegabile perfezione logica di cio' che
dici"

e' fuori e' fuori, chi e' dentro e' dentro".
Stando alle ultime notizie, se quel coglione di Gore si impuntava a
far ricontare le schede della Florida, aveva vinto.


 far ricontare le schede della Florida, aveva vinto.
Appunto. Anche sembrano cialtronate, ho scritto solo verita' vera,
quella che poi va nei libri di storia. Il termine ultimo per il
conteggio forse erano le 17.30, pero'. La superiore democrazia
statunitense. Gli si fa tardi per il weekend e via, la volonta' popolare
affanculo.


 e' fuori e' fuori, chi e' dentro e' dentro".
Hanno poi capito chi e' il Presidente?

 Hanno poi capito chi e' il Presidente?
il figlio fanullone di bush senior
fffffff

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Dai? Quello alcolizzato?
 
-- 
Pierangelo
"Uccidete le balene e salvate il plancton, produce ossigeno"

 Dai? Quello alcolizzato?
Arriva alla Casa Bianca, legge l'elenco degli inquilini e fa "Toh, un altro
che si chiama come me..."

 ricontare le schede della Florida, aveva vinto.
Beh, non e' del tutto vero. Il problema e' che la sua strategia
era comunque fallimentare. Riporto tutto l'articolo, anche se e'
lunghetto, perche' e' molto interessante.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html?todaysheadlines
A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's
presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if
the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount
of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.
Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have
charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr.
Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination
of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin
over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000
ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.
Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the
Florida standoff ? filing suit to force hand recounts in four
predominantly Democratic counties ? Mr. Bush would have kept his lead,
according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news
organizations.
But the consortium, looking at a broader group of rejected ballots than
those covered in the court decisions, 175,010 in all, found that Mr. Gore
might have won if the courts had ordered a full statewide recount of all
the rejected ballots. This also assumes that county canvassing boards
would have reached the same conclusions about the disputed ballots that
the consortium's independent observers did. The findings indicate that Mr.
Gore might have eked out a victory if he had pursued in court a course
like the one he publicly advocated when he called on the state to "count
all the votes."
In addition, the review found statistical support for the complaints of
many voters, particularly elderly Democrats in Palm Beach County, who said
in interviews after the election that confusing ballot designs may have
led them to spoil their ballots by voting for more than one candidate.
More than 113,000 voters cast ballots for two or more presidential
candidates. Of those, 75,000 chose Mr. Gore and a minor candidate; 29,000
chose Mr. Bush and a minor candidate. Because there was no clear
indication of what the voters intended, those numbers were not included in
the consortium's final tabulations.
Thus the most thorough examination of Florida's uncounted ballots provides
ammunition for both sides in what remains the most disputed and mystifying
presidential election in modern times. It illuminates in detail the
weaknesses of Florida's system that prevented many from voting as they
intended to. But it also provides support for the result that county
election officials and the courts ultimately arrived at ? a Bush victory
by the tiniest of margins.
The study, conducted over the last 10 months by a consortium of eight news
organizations assisted by professional statisticians, examined numerous
hypothetical ways of recounting the Florida ballots. Under some methods,
Mr. Gore would have emerged the winner; in others, Mr. Bush. But in each
one, the margin of victory was smaller than the 537- vote lead that state
election officials ultimately awarded Mr. Bush.
For example, if Florida's 67 counties had carried out the hand recount of
disputed ballots ordered by the Florida court on Dec. 8, applying the
standards that election officials said they would have used, Mr. Bush
would have emerged the victor by 493 votes. Florida officials had begun
such a recount the next day, but the effort was halted that afternoon when
the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 5-to-4 vote that a statewide
recount using varying standards threatened "irreparable harm" to Mr. Bush.
But the consortium's study shows that Mr. Bush would have won even if the
justices had not stepped in (and had further legal challenges not again
changed the trajectory of the battle), answering one of the abiding
mysteries of the Florida vote.
Even so, the media ballot review, carried out under rigorous rules far
removed from the chaos and partisan heat of the post-election dispute, is
unlikely to end the argument over the outcome of the 2000 presidential
election. The race was so close that it is possible to get different
results simply by applying different hypothetical vote-counting methods to
the thousands of uncounted ballots. And in every case, the ballot review
produced a result that was even closer than the official count ? a margin
of perhaps four or five thousandths of one percent out of about six
million ballots cast for president.
The consortium examined 175,010 ballots that vote-counting machines had
rejected last November. Those included so-called undervotes, or ballots on
which the machines could not discern a preference for president, and
overvotes, those on which voters marked more than one candidate.
The examination then sought to judge what might have been considered a
legal vote under various conditions ? from the strictest interpretation (a
clearly punched hole) to the most liberal (a small indentation, or dimple,
that indicated the voter was trying to punch a hole in the card). But even
under the most inclusive standards, the review found that at most, 24,619
ballots could have been interpreted as legal votes.
The numbers reveal the flaws in Mr. Gore's post-election tactics and, in
retrospect, why the Bush strategy of resisting county-by-county recounts
was ultimately successful.
In a finding rich with irony, the results show that even if Mr. Gore had
succeeded in his effort to force recounts of undervotes in the four
Democratic counties, Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Volusia, he still
would have lost, although by 225 votes rather than 537. An approach Mr.
Gore and his lawyers rejected as impractical ? a statewide recount ? could
have produced enough votes to tilt the election his way, no matter what
standard was chosen to judge voter intent.
Another complicating factor in the effort to untangle the result is the
overseas absentee ballots that arrived after Election Day. A New York
Times investigation earlier this year showed that 680 of the late-
arriving ballots did not meet Florida's standards yet were still counted.
The vast majority of those flawed ballots were accepted in counties that
favored Mr. Bush, after an aggressive effort by Bush strategists to
pressure officials to accept them.
 A statistical analysis conducted for The Times determined that if all
 counties had followed state law in reviewing the absentee ballots, Mr.
 Gore would have picked up as many as 290 additional votes, enough to tip
 the election in Mr. Gore's favor in some of the situations studied in the
 statewide ballot review.
But Mr. Gore chose not to challenge these ballots because many were from
members of the military overseas, and Mr. Gore did not want to be accused
of seeking to invalidate votes of men and women in uniform.
Democrats invested heavily in get- out-the-vote programs across Florida,
particularly among minorities, recent immigrants and retirees from the
Northeast. But their efforts were foiled by confusing ballot designs in
crucial counties that resulted in tens of thousands of Democratic voters
spoiling their ballots. More than 150,000 of those spoiled ballots did not
show evidence of voter intent even after independent observers closely
examined them and the most inclusive definition of what constituted a
valid vote was applied.
The majority of those ballots were spoiled because multiple choices were
made for president, often, apparently, because voters were confused by the
ballots. All were invalidated by county election officials and were
excluded from the consortium count because there was no clear proof of
voter intent, unless there were other clear signs of the voter's choice,
like a matching name on the line for a write-in candidate.
In Duval County, for example, 20 percent of the ballots from African-
American areas that went heavily for Mr. Gore were thrown out because
voters followed instructions to mark a vote on every page of the ballot.
In 62 precincts with black majorities in Duval County alone, nearly 3,000
people voted for Mr. Gore and a candidate whose name appeared on the
second page of the ballot, thus spoiling their votes.
In Palm Beach County, 5,310 people, most of them probably confused by the
infamous butterfly ballot, voted for Mr. Gore and Patrick J. Buchanan. The
confusion affected Bush voters as well, but only 2,600 voted for Mr. Bush
and another candidate.
The media consortium included The Times, The Wall Street Journal, The
Tribune Company, The Washington Post , The Associated Press, The St.
Petersburg Times, The Palm Beach Post and CNN. The group hired the
National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago in January
to examine the ballots. The research group employed teams of three workers
they called coders to examine each undervoted ballot and mark down what
they saw in detail. Three coders provided a bulwark against inaccuracy or
bias in the coding. For overvotes, one coder was used because there was
seldom disagreement among examiners in a trial run using three coders.
The data produced by the ballot review allows scrutiny of the disputed
Florida vote under a large number of situations and using a variety of
different standards that might have applied in a hand recount, including
the appearance of a dimple, a chad dangling by one or more corners and a
cleanly punched card.
The difficulty of perceiving dimples or detached chads can be measured by
the number of coders who saw them, but most of the ballot counts here are
based on what a simple majority ? two out of three coders ? recorded.
The different standards mostly involved competing notions of what
expresses voter intent on a punch card. The 29,974 ballots using optical
scanning equipment were mostly interpreted using a single standard ? any
unambiguous mark, whether a circle or a scribble or an X, on or near the
candidate name was considered evidence of voter intent.
If all the ballots had been reviewed under any of seven single standards,
and combined with the results of an examination of overvotes, Mr. Gore
would have won, by a very narrow margin. For example, using the most
permissive "dimpled chad" standard, nearly 25,000 additional votes would
have been reaped, yielding 644 net new votes for Mr. Gore and giving him a
107-vote victory margin.
But the dimple standard was also the subject of the most disagreement
among coders, and Mr. Bush fought the use of this standard in recounts in
Palm Beach, Broward and Miami- Dade Counties. Many dimples were so light
that only one coder saw them, and hundreds that were seen by two were not
seen by three. In fact, counting dimples that three people saw would have
given Mr. Gore a net of just 318 additional votes and kept Mr. Bush in the
lead by 219.
Using the most restrictive standard ? the fully punched ballot card ?
5,252 new votes would have been added to the Florida total, producing a
net gain of 652 votes for Mr. Gore, and a 115-vote victory margin.
All the other combinations likewise produced additional votes for Mr.
Gore, giving him a slight margin over Mr. Bush, when at least two of the
three coders agreed.
While these are fascinating findings, they do not represent a real- world
situation. There was no set of circumstances in the fevered days after the
election that would have produced a hand recount of all 175,000 overvotes
and undervotes.
The Florida Supreme Court urged a statewide recount and ordered the
state's 67 counties to begin a manual re-examination of the undervotes in
a ruling issued Dec. 8 that left Mr. Gore and his allies elated.
The Florida court's 4-to-3 ruling rejected Mr. Gore's plea for selective
recounts in four Democratic counties, but also Mr. Bush's demand for no
recounts at all. Justice Barbara Pariente, in her oral remarks, asked,
"Why wouldn't it be proper for any court, if they were going to order any
relief, to count the undervotes in all of the counties where, at the very
least, punch-card systems were operating?"
The court ultimately adopted her view, although extending it to all
counties, including those using ballots marked by pen and read by optical
scanning. Many counties immediately began the effort, applying different
standards and, in some cases, including overvotes.
The United States Supreme Court stepped in only hours after the counting
began, issuing an injunction to halt. Three days later, the justices
overturned the Florida court's ruling, sealing Mr. Bush's election.
But what if the recounts had gone forward, as Mr. Gore and his lawyers had
demanded?
The consortium asked all 67 counties what standard they would have used
and what ballots they would have manually recounted. Combining that
information with the detailed ballot examination found that Mr. Bush would
have won the election, by 493 votes if two of the three coders agreed on
what was on the ballot; by 389 counting only those ballots on which all
three agreed.
The Florida Legislature earlier this year banned punch-card ballots
statewide, directing counties to find a more reliable method. Many
counties will use paper ballots scanned by computers at voting places that
can give voters a second chance if their choices fail to register. In
counties that use that technology, just 1 in 200 ballots had uncountable
presidential votes, compared with 1 in 25 in punch-card counties.
Others will invest in computerized touch-screen machines that work like
automated teller machines.
Kirk Wolter, who supervised the ballot review for the National Opinion
Research Center, said that the study not only provided a comprehensive
review of uncounted ballots in Florida but would help point the way toward
more accurate and reliable voting systems. All data from the consortium
recount is available on the Web at 
www.norc.org
.
The review produced databases to study this election from a historical
perspective, said Mr. Wolter, the research center's senior vice president
for statistics and methodology, adding, "I hope in turn this can lead to
voting reform and better ways of doing this in future elections."
-- 
ste

Dai? Quello alcolizzato?
e gli e' andata di lusso
pensa se fosse uscito il bancarottiere!
-- 
Non e' importante il cammino, ma il camminare.