Thursday, March 10, 2005

A little note, but interesting

In his latest show (, Beppe Grillo talks about the World Wide Web and the richness of information it contains (he talks also about the Digital Divide, something that also Cesare is interested in). He highlights the great difference between the WWW on one side and the television on the other, pointing out that in the Internet, if you know how to move (and this is really important), you have the power: the power to change, as soon as you want, the source of the information you receive.
On TV, if you don’t like Murdoch, Berlusconi or Thaksin Shinawatra (the Thai prime minister), you can’t simply change channel: you will find the same emptiness, the same lack of meaning (not really always, luckily!).
On the Internet, if you don’t rely on a source of information, you can simply change the site you’re surfing, every time you want. And if you don’t like this blog as a source of interesting comments on this interesting and so pathetic world, you can simply type another URL on your browser address bar (I really hope it’s Mozilla Firefox) and change your view of the world. For example, you can go to Beppe Grillo’s site: And you can also go to this site, where you can find the documentary that PBS (a US television) made on the Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi and his effect on Italian politics and the media, a documentary that somebody called CITIZEN BERLUSCONI (do you remember Citizen Kane?): you can comment on it here.

Freedom Part II

First, sorry for the delay. I’m back and I choose to start a new post (instead of commenting on the old one, where Cesare began the discussion) to highlight this argument. I hope you will like this.
Luckily, this word doesn’t have the same meaning worldwide. Luckily the world doesn’t need a responsible leadership worldwide, like the US or the Pope. Luckily the mankind doesn’t need someone that tell which are the essential human freedoms we need.
Luckily, because otherwise we couldn’t listen to the teachings of the Supreme Writer and Thinker, Ms Oriana Fallaci, without asking ourselves a lot of questions about the great difference that stands between Frank’s word (freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship [which?] God, freedom from want, freedom from fear) and the opinions of a woman that think that the only possible freedom is from the Muslim world and that the only possible freedom is defined as the western one.
I don’t think so, I think that the first freedom, the most relevant one, is the freedom to choose what are the freedoms we need and from what we want to be free.
Why does nobody talk about the fact that maybe the Middle East simply wants the freedom from the presence of the United States in the region?
Why does nobody talk about the fact that maybe women want the freedom of choosing whether have a baby or not?
Why does nobody talk about the fact that people should really have the freedom of worship every God (or Gods, or nothing) they want, without always having to demonstrate a faith they don’t feel towards a divinity they even know? Even if this God is Allah and even if this worship means a different view on this world?
Why does nobody talk about the fact that people should have the freedom to choose the sex of their partner?
Why does nobody, neither Frank Delano, talk about these and a lot of other freedoms?
I think that neither the Western nor the Eastern world have the answer to these questions, but maybe it’s time to end considering only our view of the Truth, our view of the Freedom.Maybe freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere, and I agree with that. But who decide what is the meaning of the human rights?

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Giuliana Sgrena is Free !!

Our happiness, however, is dramatically wrapped by a disturbing epilogue. A secret agent of Italian’s intelligence SISMI has been killed in a gunfire at a checkpoint to the way to Baghdaad’s airport.
In this strange situation, we are happy for the liberation of Giuliana, and proud of how Italy has reacted to her kidnapping. But we should learn to separate people from problems.
In terms of human lives, nothing really changes: a death has occurred. And each human being is equally important as the others.
In terms of political achievement, an hostage has been set free (we actually don’t know if by way of some money) and this is much better rather than what happened with Enzo Baldoni, whose body hasn’t still come back. However, still in terms of political achievement a key agent has been killed. An agent that is not only made of his thoughts, his family, his children, his life. An agent that, politically speaking, was made of recruiting, training, know-how, skills. A set of qualities that will be hard to put together again in a difficult area like the Iraq. This is a great political, even military, loss.
But SISMI’s world is obscure, and I cannot yet understand how a man could die in an armored car, I hope wearing a full metal jacket. I cannot yet understand even how a gunfire could happen in that circumstances.
So, today, my happiness is not really such an happiness. It’s a relief for a woman’s destiny, a sadness for a man’s destiny, and big stomachache for how so-thought talented diplomatic officials, civil servants, ambassadors, so-acclaimed generals, politics’ strives turned into results.

Wednesday, March 02, 2005

Freedom, Liberté, Hurryya

Freedom, Liberté and , do they mean the same worldwide ?

Giuliana Sgrena was kidnapped in Iraq on February, 4th. This Blog wants Giuliana to be set free.
I am appreciating all the sensibilities that are spreading in Italy, among its people, all the signals that are being sent. I am wondering about many others kidnapping that ended happily, and about those who did not.

I am thinking that similar words have different meanings worldwide.

I would like to start a discussion among the different meanings of this words, referring to our common sense of the terms freedom and liberté after the French revolution, that definitly gave a new shape to this word in Europe.

In my opinion, we should talk about freedoms rather than freedom.
Frank Delano Roosevelt said:
I suppose that every realist knows that the democratic way of life is at this moment being directly assailed in every part of the world [...] I find it unhappily necessary to report that the future and the safety of our country and of our democracy are overwhelmingly involved in events far beyond our borders [...]
In the future days which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms. The first is freedom of speech and expression --everywhere in the world. The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way-- everywhere in the world. The third is freedom from want, which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants --everywhere in the world. The fourth is freedom from fear, which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor --anywhere in the wold. That is no vision of a distant millennium
Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere.

6 January, 1941 (see here)

No matter our own political feelings, freedom should mean the supremacy of human rights everywhere, and so must do hurryya.

(sorry if I didn't post something like this before, I wouldn't be obvious)