"Buon Giorno!" Welcome to another Sicilian Pulitzer prize issue of "Only In Italy!"
It appears that the treatment of livestock in Italy is more humane than horses in Rome. It is nice to see the government taking an active role in this terrible problem. The tourists that pay for this experience are just as much to blame! I especially like your gladiator comment. Elizabeth C.
Thanks for the comment, Elisabetta! We would like to start a petition to have arrogant gladiators pull the carriages like rickshaws. It would be lovely. Tourists should also have the possibility to pet them and feed them slop and the occasional carrot.
Enjoy the issue, keep writing and Grazie!
The Google employees were accused of breaking Italian law by allowing the video to be posted online. Judge Oscar Magi absolved the three of defamation but convicted them of privacy violations.
The three employees, Peter Fleischer, David Drummond and George De Los Reyes, received suspended six-month sentences, while a fourth defendant, product manager Arvind Desikan, was acquitted.
David Drummond, chief legal officer at Google and one of those convicted, said he was "outraged" by the decision.
"I intend to vigorously appeal this dangerous ruling. It sets a chilling precedent," he said.
"If individuals like myself and my Google colleagues who had nothing to do with the harassing incident, its filming or its uploading onto Google Video can be held criminally liable solely by virtue of our position at Google, every employee of any internet hosting service faces similar liability," he added.
Peter Fleischer, privacy counsel at Google, questioned how many internet platforms would be able to continue if the decision held.
"I realize I am just a pawn in a large battle of forces, but I remain confident that today's ruling will be over-turned on appeal," he said.
The verdict is likely to have ramifications for content providers around the globe. Google said at the trial that pre-screening all YouTube content was impossible.
The video at the center of the case was posted on Google Video in 2006 shortly before the firm acquired YouTube. Prosecutors argued that Google broke Italian privacy law by not seeking the consent of all the parties involved before allowing it to go online. Google's lawyers said that the video was removed as soon as it was brought to its attention and that the firm also provided information on who posted it.
As a result four students were expelled from their school in Turin, northern Italy.
"Ma vaffanculo!" This is why some of us hate being alive!
Isn't it fascinating that Italian media is full of incredibly untalented naked women and embarrassing revelations about both Italian celebrities and people? But what Italian prosecutors labeled a battle over so-called "privacy violations" may well have had another goal.
The truth is any concern for privacy in this case is just a cover for an assertion of power over irritating online companies in Italy.
Could it be possible that this assertion of power came from a Prime Minister with asbestos for hair who sees Google as a threat to his interests, since he and his family own 45% of all media in the country and also has considerable influence over the boring state-run televisions?
Or could it be we have stupid laws? SI! The reason we have stupid laws is because we have ludicrous corrupt politicians who create them instead of passing the time picking fleas off themselves.
However; the judge in this case isn't necessarily either stupid or corrupt. Unfortunately and quite often a clever Italian judge who recognizes a trivial law will set up a trial case (preferably against people or companies big enough to take care of themselves like Google) which they know will almost certainly go to appeal. Once it goes to appeal, any precedent set is more restraining on Italy's lower courts. This is one of the most powerful ways in which the Italian judiciary can use the legal system to highlight loony laws.
Regardless of how the situation ends and considering the almost worthless and pathetic condition of Italy's judicial system, the Italian public will never take this conviction seriously.
In a new report on the Catholic Church's role in the region, the CEI expressed alarm both at the prevalence of violence against women and their growing clout in the ranks of organized crime.
It said that southern Italian women were "still the victims of a rigid culture of familism" that refuses to see them as anything but homemakers. The CEI contended that the notion of woman as domestic and subservient lent itself to violence against them.
It denied that women's rising influence in the mafia marked an exception to the rule, saying that it stemmed instead from a "perverse vision of their role as mothers".
Women in Italian organized crime have proved to be no wallflowers in the world of violence...and there's a good possibility they have buried people in those walls. They have made it into the enterprise syndicate where they are fully involved in the enterprise of crime (accounting, ordering the violence, organizing the structure, and cooking the last meals).
These are not daintily little princesses who have emerged from universities. These are troublesome broads (pardon, professional women) who have grown up in the school of hard knocks. We aren't talking white-collar crime. We're talking about women who have only seen crime as a way of life.
"Porca di quella vacca", can you picture yourself being married to one of these? Suddenly, taking out the trash is a picnic!
- No need for an alarm clock. One glance from her and you're awake.
- Your beautiful little villa turns into a military style bunker. She goes so-called "shopping" and visiting her so-called "girlfriends" and you're stuck having to paint the high walls, trim the barbed wire, feed the guard dogs, change the DVDs in the CCTVs and sweep the watchtowers.
And when you open your mouth, it seems it's only to change whichever foot was previously there.
The victim, 40, was placed in an induced coma to prevent brain damage from the head wounds he suffered after the animal charged out of the woods and slammed into his scooter. Doctors said he was on the little-travelled road for nearly three quarters of an hour before a motorist passed by and called the authorities.
They said he probably would have been killed had he not been wearing a helmet.
Wild boars in Italy usually weigh between 50 to 90 kg, or as much as an adult human being, but specimens shot in Tuscany have been recorded to weigh as much as 150 kg (331 lbs). They are compact, muscular creatures who rely on their girth, low-center of gravity and sharp tusks to defend themselves.
While a cornered boar can be dangerous and even lethal, experts say they are far more docile than their fearsome reputation suggests. They have, however, been blamed for road accidents in the past.
In July 2008, a wild boar ran onto a motorway near Florence causing a crash in which a woman suffered minor injuries.
(At the insurance claims office) "Cazzarola", what were the odds of that?
Without a doubt this was an unfortunate accident and we sincerely hope the victim has a rapid and thorough recovery. However, this does not mean "Pumbaa" the boar should receive the blame or be hunted down. After all, anyone who has ever driven an automobile, scooter, or simply attempted to cross a damn street in Italy is well aware there is no difference between a reckless and conceited lunatic on a Vespa scooter and a reckless celebrity pig.
Vespa = Pumbaa
In traffic: They head immediately for "any" opening that appears, no matter if it's not large enough to allow them through; if it isn't big enough now, it may soon be and they won't want to waste a single second. If another idiot (or wild animal) heads for the same gap, they accelerate as fast as their scooters (or little legs) will allow them while shouting (or grunting) at them at the top of their voices.
Speed limits: These jackasses ignore them all. If stopped by the police (or forest rangers), they simply show an air of total disbelief that they could have possibly been breaking any law. They wave their hands (or large head and tusks) about wildly to indicate they saw no sign, even if they are standing directly under the actual sign.
Pedestrian crossings: Very dangerous for the common visitor. If pedestrians are already on the crossing when they happen upon it, they merely accelerate towards them; they will get out of the way or they won't. Either way, the idiot (or wild animal) do not concern themselves.
Overtaking: Overtaking is permissible everywhere; they don't think for one second that, just because there's a junction, a level crossing, senior citizens, an oncoming truck, or in this case, another scooter, that they should for one second consider backing off. They simply attempt the overtake. Things will be fine or they won't. Either way, it's not the idiot's (or wild animal's) concern.