Jump to content

Talk:Francesco Cossiga/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

SARCASM, ANYONE?

whoever purports to convince the world that cossiga believes 9/11 to have been a conspiracy is a fool, and doesn't know the first thing about the temperament of one of the finest italian statesmen of the 20th century. I am ashamed that wikipedia has allowed itself to sink to such low depths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.110.53 (talk) 01:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

As a native Italian speaker and a person who is used to late president Cossiga's extremely dry sense of humour in the media, I definitely agree about his having intended to sound sarcastic. He was poking fun at the left.93.149.185.243 (talk) 15:02, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you add that he belives that 911 was perpetrated by the CIA? /AUTOSIGN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.201.1.109 (talk) 16:34, September 4, 2008 (UTC)

Finest Italian statesmen? A fascist more like. Or did you forget Operation Gladio? 84.30.88.83 (talk) 00:50, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I added the word ironic to let the reader understand the statement was ironic, the word know in it means think--Sumail (talk) 10:35, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
There is no indication in reliable sources that the statement would have been ironic.  Cs32en Talk to me  13:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Miscellaneous news

I introduced this section because the news I moved there doesn't seem to me so important to be included in the page. Still, I didn't want to erase it without listening to other opinions. Let me know. Cviviani —Preceding undated comment added 11:35, March 23, 2006 (UTC).

I don`t agree with you. Important news should be added.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.34.214.65 (talk) 9:49, October 19, 2007 (UTC)

conspiracy notions

I've removed some conspiracy notions of Brenneke and Razin, per WP:NPOV. Intangible2.0 02:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

What exactly defines a "conspiracy notion" do you think you might want to restate that as "alternative theories" and repost. You have basically used a common misnomer to slander this person. The word conspiracy does not equate to an invalid notion, because people conspire to do things all the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamzarian (talk • contribs) 21:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

italian wiki

Can someone please translate the italian article to add something here?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.34.214.65 (talk) 9:49, October 19, 2007

Warning! Ironic statement.

The statement quoted in this wiki page means the opposite of what it is said to mean! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icarwiz (talk • contribs) 12:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

thank you! I made a similar remark but it was erased, I really hope yours won't. cviviani —Preceding comment was added at 23:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing even close to satire within, quite opposite, it is inline with Mr. Cossigas previous remarks, such as he made in 2001 when he stated:
The mastermind of the attack must have been a “sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only to recruit fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel. I add one thing: it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and flight security personnel.”
Please do not reinsert such warnings; we are not here to issue those, honestly. Tachyonbursts (talk) 03:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
sure warnings should not be on wikipedia. however people who don't know Cossiga might think he really believes what he says in that interview, and for whoever is remotely aware of the role of Cossiga in Italian politics and of his thinking he was clearly being provocative. As very often he does. so I believe that, in some way, the reader should be warned - otherwise he could be misleaded.
as far as your citation is concerned, I don't see how it implies the things that Cossiga says in the interview. cviviani —Preceding comment was added at 14:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Birth Date

He was born in 1928 wasn't he? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.87.186.52 (talk) 09:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

'Statements to Corriere della Sera regarding 9/11' section

On reading the abovenamed section, it seems by using such a large blockquote, we are potentially in violation of copyright. Furthermore, the material appears to be on the extreme fringe of relevance as far as a biographical article of the subject is concerned. I feel it should be removed. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 06:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd suggest paring it down to a paragraph, but not removing it completely. More importantly, this article leaves out that he was -only teasing- when he made those statements. Basically what happened is that this story got picked up by some alternative media in the U.S., which translated his statements without irony, and then all that got seized on by the "Truther" movement. We should probably have just a paragraph of source X said A, source Y said B, so as to demystify the conspiracy theory. I think we can get the undue weight problems fixed with careful wording. Squidfryerchef (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't see any irony in the Italian wording of Cossiga's statement, as reported in Corriere della Sera. Maybe we should consult a native Italian speaker on this matter.  Cs32en  02:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
The blockquote is stylistically awkward and should be replaced by a description of what Cossiga said, possibly with shorter inline quotes from the article. It is probably not easy to reach consensus on how to paraphrase what he said (this may well be the reason why there is just a verbatim quote at the moment). Therefore, I suggest to discuss proposals for an alternate text on this talk page here, before changing the article itself. Quotes in Italian may be added in the footnotes. I do not think there is a copyright problem with the current quote, however.  Cs32en  02:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Irony or no, I don't see any particular biographical relevance. He may indeed have said it, but either there is too little context to indicate its relevance, or there just isn't any relevance. It's a very awkward passage in its current guise, not just stylistically, although I agree on that point too. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
There was no irony in Cossiga's words. The occasion was a video by Osama Bin Laden in which Al Qaeda included some threats regarding Silvio Berlusconi. Cossiga said that this video was a fake, produced by Mediaset (Berlusconi's TV company) and given to Al-Jazeera just to allow Berlusconi gain some local consensus as an alleged potential target of terrorist attacks. This was the main argument of the interview, indeed, and he talked about 9/11's alleged responsibilities just to enforce his opinion. Even if Cossiga was not new to extravagant "revelations", this one is a bit thicker than the other ones, given its content and considering that it came from a former head of state (and a faithful American ally, too); whatever one may conclude (true or false) about it, I believe that it's therefore not irrelevant at all, so IMHO it should be kept inside the article. --g (talk) 23:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

there was never any irony or sarcasm in his expression, he saw the 9/11 attacks as many other wise people definitely as an inside job. come on people, we have 2010, don't ignore science! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.162.131 (talk) 05:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Science DOES NOT support the notion of 9/11 as an inside job. Crackpot delusionalists, anti-Americans, anti-westererners, anti-Israelis and anti-Semites do. ----DanTD (talk) 03:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Clean-up

I have corrected what was not exactly the best example of written English on Wikipedia. I am very ignorant regarding Italian politics and am of the opinion that some of the content here is rather dubious. I was left at odds with the use of abbreviations for the party names; I do not know the names of Italian political parties and thus could not clarify their abbreviations. --Île flottante (talk) 22:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Most of the article contains correct data, it was the person to be intimately controversial. I was trying to add more sources, but currently most search results lead to obituaries, which have more or less all the same content and don't go too much in depth. However, as said, the article is correct. For strange it might seem :-) --g (talk) 00:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

where are the proofs????????==

"In 1977, when Cossiga was minister of internal affairs, police squads organized by Cossiga shot against a demonstration in Rome, killing student Giorgiana Masi. Cossiga for many years stated that she was killed by her companions"

there aren't any real proofs that giorgiana masi was killed by a policeman! probably someone is confusing cossiga for pinochet, or italy for a fascist latin american dictatorship! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Axe84 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Addition to 'Controversial Statements'?

Notable quote on the Agent Provocateur page : "Francesco Cossiga, former head of secret services and Head of state of Italy, advised the 2008 minister in charge of the police, on how to deal with the protests from teachers and students:[8]

He should do what I did when I was Minister of the Interior. [...] infiltrate the movement with agents provocateurs inclined to do anything [...] And after that, with the strength of the gained population consent, [...] beat them for blood and beat for blood also those teachers that incite them. Especially the teachers. Not the elderly, of course, but the girl teachers yes."

Source is in Italian so cant verify it. Seems like a notable addition — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glen newell (talk • contribs) 02:26, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Francesco Cossiga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francesco Cossiga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:14, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francesco Cossiga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Secret Association

Is missing that was part of the P2 and Gladio. Tigre-samolaco (talk) 06:50, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Do you have credible sources? Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 15:42, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Francesco_Cossiga/Archive_1&oldid=1089046709"