Luca Logi

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:


    > But why should HE care? It's only the ordinary citizens of his country
    > that might be at risk! HE'S protected by the Secret Service (and
    > whisked away to some "protected" site underground somewhere, in the
    > event of any forseen danger of attack).


Well, on Sept. 11th it looked like even the Secret Service had some
doubt about what was happening next (actually, this is quite
understandable).

-- -----------------------------------------------------
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Luca Logi

Charles Hawtrey wrote:


    > Experience argues strongly against the truth of this statement, both
    > over the long term and more recently. The Indonesians stayed "low
    > key" with respect to terrorism yet it didn't prevent the Bali bombing.


I am glad you quoted Indonesia. For example, is it true that U.S.
government is considering giving an US$ 50,000,000 aid to the very
Indonesian army that killed so many (Christian) civilians in East Timor?
The funding was suspended under Clinton, but is being reinstated by Mr.
Bush.

-- -----------------------------------------------------
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Luca Logi

Paul Tauger wrote:


    > I am very opposed to the war with Iraq. I believe George Bush and his
    > group are motivated primarily, if not exclusively, by the prospect of
    > controlling Iraqi oil. However, it does a tremendous disservice to
    > the fight against fanatic Islamicist terrorism to pretend it is
    > motivated by anything other than a desire by these terrorist cowards
    > to achieve world theocratic supremacy.


Well, this is expressed in quite acceptable terms. This deserves a
thoughtful reply I don't have the time to write now; I hope for
tomorrow.

-- -----------------------------------------------------
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Paul Tauger

"Luca Logi" wrote in message
news:1fq34rm.k8h1sc8xz7q7N%[email protected]...
    > Paul Tauger wrote:
    > > I can not speak for Italian law, as I know little about it. In the
    > > US, suspects are presumed innocent, which means the state has the
    > > burden of proving them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The
    > > presumption of innocence merely means that suspects don't have to
    > > prove their innocence to be acquitted of a crime, the state must prove
    > > their guilt.
    > It is so also in Italy, but not in Guantanamo...

That's a very glib answer. However, the Al Qaeda members held in Guantanamo
are not charged under the criminal law system. I don't know what particular
status they've been accorded, but I'll be very honest with you . . . I
couldn't care less.


    > -- -----------------------------------------------------
    > Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Truck Rfd

Feel safe to travel both in france or germany.
Both countries sold there soul to terrorist for
monetary gain.
Please don't apologize for American behavior.
Stop kissing their butt,when they come to America,they act like a bunch
of arrogant lunatics.
USA all the way

Lucasginn

    >f, tomorrow, the US renounced it's
    >intentions to invade Iraq (which I really wish it would), withdrew all
    >support for Israel and let it be devoured by its hostile Arab neighbors, and
    >withdrew all US troops from Saudi Arabia, the terrorist attacks would
    >continue, because the US is not, and will never be, a Muslim theocracy --
    >the same "flaw" which has made Italy, France, Russia, Britain and Indonesia
    >targets of the terrorists.

How very true. Fundamentalist Islam's war against the West is about gender
equality, sexual freedom, intellectual freedom, freedom of religion, and
freedom of speech. Bin Laden and his ilk hate our freedoms and lifestyles. The
terrorists have commented disdainfully on our "uncovered women," and our
leisure culture. Even if the crisis in Palestine was resolved and there was no
war against Iraq, the fundamentalists would continue their campaign of murder.

Evelynvogtgamble

Luca Logi wrote:
    >
    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
    >
    > > But why should HE care? It's only the ordinary citizens of his country
    > > that might be at risk! HE'S protected by the Secret Service (and
    > > whisked away to some "protected" site underground somewhere, in the
    > > event of any forseen danger of attack).
    >
    > Well, on Sept. 11th it looked like even the Secret Service had some
    > doubt about what was happening next (actually, this is quite
    > understandable).


I DID say "forseen danger".
    >
    > -- -----------------------------------------------------
    > Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Evelynvogtgamble

Truck Rfd wrote:
    >
    > Feel safe to travel both in france or germany.
    > Both countries sold there soul to terrorist for
    > monetary gain.
    > Please don't apologize for American behavior.
    > Stop kissing their butt,when they come to America,they act like a bunch
    > of arrogant lunatics.
    > USA all the way

Now tell us how you REALLY feel. (Jerk!) Obviously you're the kind of
American who gives the rest of your countrymen a bad name.

Luca Logi

Paul Tauger wrote:

    > Yet, you had said this:
    >
    > "When you are at it, tell your elected representatives to ask Dubya to
    > stay low key also. It may well avoid being targeted."
    >
    > Your implication was that American foreign policy was responsible for
    > America being targetted by terrorists. That simply is not true, as
    > was found out by Indonesia and Russia, who were also attacked, and
    > Italy, Great Britain and France, who were fortunate enough to arrest
    > the terrorists before they could attack there.


What is lacking in your analisys is a bit of historical deepnees. For
example, I know that *now* Bin Laden is a mad terrorist trying to impose
his own teocratic ideas. But twenty years ago it was a precious
anticomunist pawn in the Afghanistan war, and so it was nurtured to make
war to Russia. American intelligence even built a training camp for his
men. All the same, Saddam then was the containing force to Iran, and so
he was duly armed and sustained - and he wasn't any better a bloody
dictator as he was now.

In due time, these politics have backfired against USA - as the politics
of sustaining the Saudi royal house is backfiring now.

I wonder if staying low key, and stopping helping all these undecent
people could actually make the situation better in the long run. You
know, if USA had not helped the Shah and his infamous police, maybe it
wouldn't have been a Khomeini revolution, and it wouldn't have been
necessary to help Saddam to keep Khomeini quiet, and it wouldn't have
been necessary to install troops in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to keep
Saddam quiet.

It is a chain of events. Maybe if you manage to break it you can hope in
a bit of future quietness. Maybe.




-- -----------------------------------------------------
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Charles Hawtrey

On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 23:32:45 +0100, [email protected] (Luca Logi) wrote:

    >Charles Hawtrey wrote:
    >> Experience argues strongly against the truth of this statement, both
    >> over the long term and more recently. The Indonesians stayed "low
    >> key" with respect to terrorism yet it didn't prevent the Bali bombing.
    >I am glad you quoted Indonesia. For example, is it true that U.S.
    >government is considering giving an US$ 50,000,000 aid to the very
    >Indonesian army that killed so many (Christian) civilians in East Timor?
    >The funding was suspended under Clinton, but is being reinstated by Mr.
    >Bush.

First, let me congratulate you on deft change of subject from how to
keep a low profile in the eyes of terrorists, to the failures of U.S.
foreign policy.

Second, the amount in question is less than you state, though only by
a factor of about 100 ($400,000 rather than $50,000,000).

The U.S. suspended all funding to the Indonesian military several
years ago, in large part because of the abuses in East Timor. The
resumption of a miniscule amound of funding is intended as a "carrot"
to continue the small reforms that the Indonesian military supposedly
has made. For further details on U.S. funding to the Indonesian
military, see http://www.senate.gov/~leahy/press/200207/071802a.html
(remarks by a senator known as a staunch liberal).

To see just how bad the situation is in Indonesia, read the reports by
Human Rights Watch, http://www.hrw.org/asia/indonesia.php .

In any event both the U.S. and Europeans give aid to some rather
dubious characters. The U.S. funds Indonesia and other dubious
nations; the Europeans fund the Palestinian Authority; and both fund a
variety of corrupt African oligarchies.

Personally I would prefer to withhold ALL aid from nations that carry
out egregious human rights abuses, but then I don't set policy - a
fact for which everyone can give thanks, I'm sure.


___________________________________________
Unit #02582: Endangered Old-Growth Redwood
Toothpick Artisans, LLC [TINEOGRTALLC]
--
Frivolity is a stern taskmaster.

Luca Logi

Charles Hawtrey wrote:

    > Second, the amount in question is less than you state, though only by
    > a factor of about 100 ($400,000 rather than $50,000,000).


Sorry for the error, but I took my figure from the US magazine "Foreign
Affairs" (www.foreignaffairs.org). I checked it again, and it reads
(Jan/Feb 2003 issue, page 89): "Administration officials have downplayed
this decision to renew military aid, stressing that most of the proposed
$50 million package is directed at the police rather than the military."
(Of course, the Indonesia police is as bad as the military).


-- -----------------------------------------------------
Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Paul Tauger

"Luca Logi" wrote in message
news:1fq3x87.1e0j8k61ut1gilN%[email protected]...
    > Paul Tauger wrote:
    > > Yet, you had said this:
    > >
    > > "When you are at it, tell your elected representatives to ask Dubya to
    > > stay low key also. It may well avoid being targeted."
    > >
    > > Your implication was that American foreign policy was responsible for
    > > America being targetted by terrorists. That simply is not true, as
    > > was found out by Indonesia and Russia, who were also attacked, and
    > > Italy, Great Britain and France, who were fortunate enough to arrest
    > > the terrorists before they could attack there.
    > What is lacking in your analisys is a bit of historical deepnees. For
    > example, I know that *now* Bin Laden is a mad terrorist trying to impose
    > his own teocratic ideas. But twenty years ago it was a precious
    > anticomunist pawn in the Afghanistan war, and so it was nurtured to make
    > war to Russia. American intelligence even built a training camp for his
    > men. All the same, Saddam then was the containing force to Iran, and so
    > he was duly armed and sustained - and he wasn't any better a bloody
    > dictator as he was now.
    > In due time, these politics have backfired against USA - as the politics
    > of sustaining the Saudi royal house is backfiring now.
    > I wonder if staying low key, and stopping helping all these undecent
    > people could actually make the situation better in the long run. You
    > know, if USA had not helped the Shah and his infamous police, maybe it
    > wouldn't have been a Khomeini revolution, and it wouldn't have been
    > necessary to help Saddam to keep Khomeini quiet, and it wouldn't have
    > been necessary to install troops in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to keep
    > Saddam quiet.
    > It is a chain of events. Maybe if you manage to break it you can hope in
    > a bit of future quietness. Maybe.

You're talking about hindsight, here. I have no idea whether the world
would have evolved differently of not had the US not meddled as you've
described.

However, I'm absolutely convinced that the one-time Mujahadeen who fought
the Soviet Union would have become our present-day terrorists with or
without US assistance.


    > -- -----------------------------------------------------
    > Luca Logi - Firenze - Italy e-mail: [email protected]

Mike Jacoubowsky

    > Not all American travelers wear red, white and blue blinders - quite a
    > few of us cringe when we see/hear some of our fellow-countrymen abroad!
    > (And why many of us do our best to erase that image of Americans in
    > European eyes.)

Cringe is an understatement. I was once part of a fairly large group of
Americans at a restaurant (perhaps 30?) and one of our group, before even
having too much to drink, decided to make a point of mentioning, loud enough
for our waitress to hear, that the French should be more appreciative of the
fact that we saved their butts in WWII. He then went on to ask the waitress
if she spoke English, to which she replied of course, it helps to be able to
communicate with travelers and, by the way, it would be very considerate if
*you* (meaning us) could have the decency of attempting to pick up at least
a little bit of French while you're visiting.

Large groups of people from one place, traveling overseas, make for rudeness
you just don't see in smaller groups. Safety in numbers or something. I've
seen it repeatedly, particularly at restaurants. People making fun of just
about anything that's different, instead of enjoying that things *are*
different. If you want everything to be the same as home, why travel in the
first place? It's the differences that make travel fascinating!

But I should add that I've spoken with tour operators here in the US, and
they say the same things occur with foreigners touring here.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Padraig Breathnach wrote:
    > >
    > > [email protected] (Kurt J. Fischer) wrote:
    > >
    > > > Not to abuse my fellow USA'ers, but they can avoid targeting by
the bad guys
    > > >by staying low key. Two years ago, I was in the Nice airport and some
    > > >American was yelling that he had been mistreated by some French
Official. I
    > > >don't know what happened, but there he was in the airport, demanding
that all
    > > >Americans immediately depart France and never return. OK - he was
making a
    > > >fool of himself.
    > > >
    > > > On a previous trip, some young American woman, chewing her gum
as loudly as
    > > >possible, was complaining "why don't they use regular money?" What
can one do
    > > >but roll their eyes?
    > > >
    > > Gawd! If I, a European, commented on such behaviour by Americans,
    > > there would be a storm of protest. Are you sure that you are really
    > > American?
    > Not all American travelers wear red, white and blue blinders - quite a
    > few of us cringe when we see/hear some of our fellow-countrymen abroad!
    > (And why many of us do our best to erase that image of Americans in
    > European eyes.)
    > >
    > > PB

Kyle

My wife and I cancelled our European tour. Both of us are scared of
terrorist targeting older Americans. Instead we are plannining a Meditterean
cruise. Anyone else making these plans?






"Keith M" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Hi Kurt,
    > I agree with most of what you said.
    > I've travelled overseas three times last year, twice to Europe, and had
zero
    > problems, minus one grumpy Italian trying to pawn some stolen stuff off on
    > me. Terrorism hasn't stopped my travelling at all, although the economy
    > sure is trying my nerves!
    > I, too, have seen some "ugly" americans abound. It's a shame, but I try
to
    > distance myself from them. The behaviors of some people are enough to
make
    > me cringe. I've found though, that these are often the same people who
look
    > like idiots in the USA too. It's not that the location gives them bad
    > manners --- they've had it all their lives.
    > I've only been once(that I know of) an 'ugly' american, in Madrid airport.
    > I was fighting with the payphones, and the payphones were winning. With a
    > fair amount of travel experience, I usually don't have any trouble
figuring
    > out local dialing prefixes, etc etc. Suffice to say that we were tired
from
    > travelling all day, and I ended up MF'ing to myself as I go to find some
    > (more) spare pesetas, with no place to get change. As I was checking in
    > with my wife, I was using somewhat overly graphic(and probably overly
loud,
    > as well) language detailing my problems. An american turned around and
    > said, "Please, the payphones take these" and handed me a few coins.
    > Although a nice gesture, I have a feeling it was as much to shut me up, as
    > to help me.
    > I did travel one time, with another american(their first time to Europe),
    > who simply didn't understand the need to be a little more reserved. Being
a
    > little too loud on the underground, asking one or two too many people to
    > take their picture in front of the street WC, etc. Quite embarassing to
me,
    > especially travelling with them. Thinking back to my first trip to
Europe,
    > I do remember making a conscious effort to simply be quiet and smile.
    > From Pittsburgh PA,
    > Keith M

Stratos Fear

In article ,
"kyle" wrote:

    > My wife and I cancelled our European tour. Both of us are scared of
    > terrorist targeting older Americans. Instead we are plannining a Meditterean
    > cruise. Anyone else making these plans?

Leon Klinghoffer.



Stratos