Talk:Su Excelencia

message: :Image:Su-excelencia.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Su-excelencia.jpg

message: This stub fails to expose the tremendous coincidences with real world geopolitics; the film was prophetic many years before Mexico's ambassador at the United Nations repeated many actions depicted in the film;  Mexico's role at the Security Council in February 2002 (ambassador Adolfo Aguilar Zinser) is exactly the same as in the film: a poor, Third World country has to give the final vote in a final decision to approve or veto a war.
In the movie, Ambassador Lopitos (Cantinflas), is courted by both the Imperialist country (The "green ones") and the Communist country (The "red ones")... this represents the conflict between the USA together with their puppet allies, against the rest of the world; in respect to the war and the inminent invasion of Irak.
COINCIDENCES:
;1966 "Su Excelencia" Film:
:Poor country "Republica de los Cocos"
;2002 Real World:
:Mexico
;1966 movie:
:Money (capitalism) country "Dolaronia" pushing for world dominance.
;2002 Real World:
:USA and puppet allies pushing U.N. to approve Irak invasion.
;1966 movie:
:Left leaning (communism) country "Pepeslavia".
;2002 Reality:
:Rest of the World.
;1966 movie Ambasador: "Lopitos" (Cantinflas)
;2002 U.N. Security Council presidency: mexican Ambassador Aguilar Zinser.
;1966 movie: Summit of world leaders.
;2002 Reality: Security Council of UN
In the film, some African countries decline vetoing war or voting against the Money driven "Dolaronia"(USA), fearing cuts in Economic help funds.
In the Real World, the two previous U.N. Security Council presidency were two AFRICAN countries (Mali and Mauritius)also decided not to vote against war, fearing economic punishment from USA and its puppet allies.
Close to the end of the movie, ambassador Lopitos resigns, seeing that the conflict will not be peacefully resolved.
In the Real World, the vote of ambassador Aguilar Zinser is not sufficient to overcome the pressures of the Pro-american bloc and the Irak invasion goes on easily.
After the facts, the movie, even considering it as a commedy, was tremendously prophetic and "real" in a sense. The main actor "Cantinflas" and the writer of the script too were dead many years before the actual historic events happened and the Irak war decisions were taken.  amclaussen.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.20 (talk) 22:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In reality, Mexico's first prominent defiance of the United States on non-bilateral non-Latin-American matters in the post-WW2 era was voting for UNGA 3379, which didn't turn out too well for Mexico... AnonMoos (talk) 05:00, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: THIS MOVIE WAS ALMOST PROPHETIC!