X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Wed Apr  1 14:12:48 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929ed1ec0903310721r1e0bc432h9c133b4a50b9e952@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f826636f0903310443q7b3d368cv4b48fed0e932d726@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0903310510g16034969t443f3815461a17c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<f826636f0903310552raa07cd4udfda1386af8f2fe4@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0903310721r1e0bc432h9c133b4a50b9e952@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 15:12:04 +0300
Message-ID: <f826636f0904010512q364fe87fkc4f272e9a4ebba9f@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 1.2
X-Spam_score_int: 12
X-Spam_bar: +
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  It is not about Obama. Things happen, it's
	understandable. It's about whether there is a cover up or a conspiracy
	theory. Unfortunately there are a lot of indications that suggest a
	cover up is not excluded: [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (1.2 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.4 HTML_10_20             BODY: Message is 10% to 20% HTML
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] question
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/private/folks>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9034316129737583085=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 2.5
X-Spam_score_int: 25
X-Spam_bar: ++
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  It is not about Obama. Things happen, it's
	understandable. It's about whether there is a cover up or a conspiracy
	theory. Unfortunately there are a lot of indications that suggest a
	cover up is not excluded: [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (2.5 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.0 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60%
	[score: 0.4734]
	1.4 HTML_10_20             BODY: Message is 10% to 20% HTML
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	-0.6 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============9034316129737583085==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364d2ee142df7204667d397c

--0016364d2ee142df7204667d397c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

It is not about Obama. Things happen, it's understandable. It's about
whether there is a cover up or a conspiracy theory. Unfortunately there are
a lot of indications that suggest a cover up is not excluded:

1) No video. You and me are not the only people who searched it and did not
find.

Note: I am dismissing the possibility that a White House event goes
unrecorded.

Note: I am dismissing the possibility of someone being able to record things
inside the White House without proper clearance. I am sure the journalists
don't just walk with video-enabled cell phones. It's White House, and it is
absolutely normal that there is a safe proof way to check all in and out
communications. So, obviously the WH has the ability to view all recordings.
The problem is: what is there on that recording that it has not been cleared
out? The video of something that happened 2 weeks ago can not possibly
contain classified national security information.

2) Why did Obama come to deliver the second speech?... The logical
explanation is that Obama read the wrong speech in the first place, and he
had now to deliver his own. It's an embarrassing moment, but nothing more.
Things happen, it's just a matter of life. It's nothing compared to the fall
out if there is a cover up. And by the way, if it was indeed the case that
Obama read the wrong speech, then he obviously is not stupid, because he was
able to change a number of words on the go, such as "we are a small country"
--> "we are a big country", and others. I can not say I would have done a
better job than Obama. The only embarrassing thing could be that Obama did
not read his speech before delivering it. But even that is ok, b/c it's just
a St. Patrick Day speech, not something important. Unpleasant, but nothing
out of ordinary comparing to other presidents. Why do we need the cover up?
Did anyone thought Obama was a Nobel Prise laureate? No. Obama is just an
ordinary person, and I don't thing anyone expected him to be perfect.

3) Why didn't the Irish prime-minister simply wait for his speech to come
out on the prompter, or why didn't he use written notes, or at least
improvise? Why did Obama had to come? The logical explanation is that there
was no other speech by Cowen, that his words were already said, and he could
not continue any more, no matter how much they waited for the teleprompter
to correct. To know that for sure, there is only one way: to see to the full
version of Obama's first speech. Then it should be pretty obvious to
determine whether it's a cover up or a conspiracy theory.

4) The logical explanation why the take is not being released is the cover
up has gone way to far. Releasing the tape would indicate the cover up, and
that would be a huge scandal. Many heads would have to fall. But not
Obama's. Obama was elected president and he should do his job, but people
who hold on the tape would have to suffer the consequences.

Dorin

2009/3/31 Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>

> 2009/3/31 Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>
>
>> This article is very confusing. It portrays the event as a Mr. Cowen's
>> mistake, but it was Mr. Obama's...  Can you find the speech on youtube or
>> somewhere else, so that we can watch the whole enchilada? :)
>>
> I haven't found the video, but seeing the reports, my understanding is
> this:
>
> * First scheduled speech was Obama's.  Obama read it, using the
> teleprompter.
> * Second scheduled speech was Irish PM's.  For reasons I don't entirely
> understand but which seem to be have been some sort of simple mistake on a
> teleprompter operator's part, or possibly a technical malfunction, the
> teleprompter fed Obama's speech to Irish PM, too.
> * Irish PM started with the speech, then realised it was a wrong one.
> * Hilarity ensued.
> * For some reason -- perhaps because he felt the Irish PM couldn't continue
> with the right speech, either due to embarrassment or due to fits of
> laughter -- Obama proceeded to read the Irish PM's speech, off the
> teleprompter.
>
> Teleprompters are supposed to be 'hidden', sort of like a modern taboo.  In
> this case, a teleprompter became rather obvious to the participants.
>  Revelation of taboo is cognitively painful; it might have hampered their
> capability to reasonably respond.  This kind of things happen.
>
> As far as I can tell, the blogosphere is mainly echoing Rush Limbaugh's
> long diatribe, which essentially claimed that because Obama thanked himself
> in the end of Irish PM's speech which he read, he must be stupid.  It's a
> silly argument, but what else is new?  Limbaugh makes a very comfortable
> living making such silly arguments.
>
> I'm presuming the blunder just isn't available in video.  The reasons do
> not necessarily have to do with censorship.  If I understand properly, the
> event was repeated twice that day, because not all participants could fit
> into the room at once.  In such a case, it's very plausible that the press
> taped one of the two copies, and the blunder happened on the other one.
>
> Normally, most video clips of celebrities or politicians getting
> embarrassed end up on Youtube pretty fast.  If this didn't, then it's likely
> it's because the video was not made, for some reason.  If it had been
> censored, some sort of paparazzi-specialised newspaper or website would have
> put a bounty on it, and we'd heard of *that*, if not the leaked video.
>  Things like this have also happened before.
>
> If you're looking for Big Brother, you might want to consider: why wouldn't
> any onlooker have a cameraphone for recording the blunder?  I don't know,
> but I can think of at least two reasons:
> * it's considered faux pas to tape the president by a cameraphone on a
> formal meeting;
> * the Secret Service (whose main raison d'etre is securing the president)
> prohibited onlookers from carrying phones or cameraphones to the event, as
> some sort of weird security measure.
>
> --
> Andres Soolo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

--0016364d2ee142df7204667d397c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It is not about Obama. Things happen, it&#39;s understandable. It&#39;s abo=
ut whether there is a cover up or a conspiracy theory. Unfortunately there =
are a lot of indications that suggest a cover up is not excluded:<br><br>
1) No video. You and me are not the only people who searched it and did not=
 find.<br><br>Note: I am dismissing the possibility that a White House even=
t goes unrecorded.<br><br>Note: I am dismissing the possibility of someone =
being able to record things inside the White House without proper clearance=
. I am sure the journalists don&#39;t just walk with video-enabled cell pho=
nes. It&#39;s White House, and it is absolutely normal that there is a safe=
 proof way to check all in and out communications. So, obviously the WH has=
 the ability to view all recordings. The problem is: what is there on that =
recording that it has not been cleared out? The video of something that hap=
pened 2 weeks ago can not possibly contain classified national security inf=
ormation.<br>
<br>2) Why did Obama come to deliver the second speech?... The logical expl=
anation is that Obama read the wrong speech in the first place, and he had =
now to deliver his own. It&#39;s an embarrassing moment, but nothing more. =
Things happen, it&#39;s just a matter of life. It&#39;s nothing compared to=
 the fall out if there is a cover up. And by the way, if it was indeed the =
case that Obama read the wrong speech, then he obviously is not stupid, bec=
ause he was able to change a number of words on the go, such as &quot;we ar=
e a small country&quot; --&gt; &quot;we are a big country&quot;, and others=
. I can not say I would have done a better job than Obama. The only embarra=
ssing thing could be that Obama did not read his speech before delivering i=
t. But even that is ok, b/c it&#39;s just a St. Patrick Day speech, not som=
ething important. Unpleasant, but nothing out of ordinary comparing to othe=
r presidents. Why do we need the cover up? Did anyone thought Obama was a N=
obel Prise laureate? No. Obama is just an ordinary person, and I don&#39;t =
thing anyone expected him to be perfect. <br>
<br>3) Why didn&#39;t the Irish prime-minister simply wait for his speech t=
o come out on the prompter, or why didn&#39;t he use written notes, or at l=
east improvise? Why did Obama had to come? The logical explanation is that =
there was no other speech by Cowen, that his words were already said, and h=
e could not continue any more, no matter how much they waited for the telep=
rompter to correct. To know that for sure, there is only one way: to see to=
 the full version of Obama&#39;s first speech. Then it should be pretty obv=
ious to determine whether it&#39;s a cover up or a conspiracy theory.<br>
<br>4) The logical explanation why the take is not being released is the co=
ver up has gone way to far. Releasing the tape would indicate the cover up,=
 and that would be a huge scandal. Many heads would have to fall. But not O=
bama&#39;s. Obama was elected president and he should do his job, but peopl=
e who hold on the tape would have to suffer the consequences.<br>
<br>Dorin<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/3/31 Digwuren <span dir=3D=
"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:digwuren@gmail.com">digwuren@gmail.com</a>&gt;<=
/span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid=
 rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im">2009/3/31 Dorin Cheptea <span =
dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dorin.cheptea@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank=
">dorin.cheptea@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0p=
t 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">

<p>This article is very confusing. It portrays the event as a Mr. Cowen&#39=
;s mistake, but it was Mr. Obama&#39;s...=A0 Can you find the speech on you=
tube or somewhere else, so that we can watch the whole enchilada? :)</p>
</blockquote>
<div>I haven&#39;t found the video, but seeing the reports, my understandin=
g is this:</div><div><br></div><div>* First scheduled speech was Obama&#39;=
s. =A0Obama read it, using the teleprompter.</div><div>* Second scheduled s=
peech was Irish PM&#39;s. =A0For reasons I don&#39;t entirely understand bu=
t which seem to be have been some sort of simple mistake on a teleprompter =
operator&#39;s part, or possibly a technical malfunction, the teleprompter =
fed Obama&#39;s speech to Irish PM, too.</div>

<div>* Irish PM started with the speech, then realised it was a wrong one.<=
/div><div>* Hilarity ensued.</div><div>* For some reason -- perhaps because=
 he felt the Irish PM couldn&#39;t continue with the right speech, either d=
ue to embarrassment or due to fits of laughter -- Obama proceeded to read t=
he Irish PM&#39;s speech, off the teleprompter.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Teleprompters are supposed to be &#39;hidden&#39;, sort=
 of like a modern taboo. =A0In this case, a teleprompter became rather obvi=
ous to the participants. =A0Revelation of taboo is cognitively painful; it =
might have hampered their capability to reasonably respond. =A0This kind of=
 things happen.<br>

</div><div><br></div><div>As far as I can tell, the blogosphere is mainly e=
choing Rush Limbaugh&#39;s long diatribe, which essentially claimed that be=
cause Obama thanked himself in the end of Irish PM&#39;s speech which he re=
ad, he must be stupid. =A0It&#39;s a silly argument, but what else is new? =
=A0Limbaugh makes a very comfortable living making such silly arguments.</d=
iv>

<div><br></div><div>I&#39;m presuming the blunder just isn&#39;t available =
in video. =A0The reasons do not necessarily have to do with censorship. =A0=
If I understand properly, the event was repeated twice that day, because no=
t all participants could fit into the room at once. =A0In such a case, it&#=
39;s very plausible that the press taped one of the two copies, and the blu=
nder happened on the other one.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Normally, most video clips of celebrities or politician=
s getting embarrassed end up on Youtube pretty fast. =A0If this didn&#39;t,=
 then it&#39;s likely it&#39;s because the video was not made, for some rea=
son. =A0If it had been censored, some sort of paparazzi-specialised newspap=
er or website would have put a bounty on it, and we&#39;d heard of *that*, =
if not the leaked video. =A0Things like this have also happened before.</di=
v>

<div><br></div><div>If you&#39;re looking for Big Brother, you might want t=
o consider: why wouldn&#39;t any onlooker have a cameraphone for recording =
the blunder? =A0I don&#39;t know, but I can think of at least two reasons:<=
/div>

<div>* it&#39;s considered <span style=3D"font-style: italic;">faux pas</sp=
an>=A0to tape the president by a cameraphone on a formal meeting;</div><div=
>* the Secret Service (whose main <span style=3D"font-style: italic;">raiso=
n d&#39;etre</span>=A0is securing the president) prohibited onlookers from =
carrying phones or cameraphones to the event, as some sort of weird securit=
y measure.</div>

<div><br></div><div>--=A0<br></div></div>Andres Soolo<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikipedia statistics discussion list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=
=3D"_blank">http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>

--0016364d2ee142df7204667d397c--


--===============9034316129737583085==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============9034316129737583085==--


