Talk:Cesare Battisti (militant)

message: Giordaano (talk) 08:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signature 

message: The most important thing about Battisti is that he is a former member of a revolutionary organization and condamned to life term in Italy for four murders. Then comes the writing activity.
For this reason, I'll change "Battisti is a writer and..." to "Battisti is a former member of revolutionary organization and..." as it was before Tazmaniac's edit. -- Lasah 20:04, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Current activity precedes past activities. Battisti has forsaken armed struggle since Aldo Moro's 1978 assassination. You don't start an article on François Mitterrand by saying: "He was a far-right sympathisant", neither an article on Jacques Chirac by saying "he was a Communist sympathisant, who signed the Stockholm Appeal in the 1950s". Tazmaniacs 15:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Mitterand is mainly famous for being a French former politician and head of state. Same goes for Chirac. They both are widely known and perceived as such. OTOH, Battisti is first and foremost known due to his criminal deeds during the 70's, and due to his much-debated judiciary cases. His books are not as nearly as famous compared to his judicial history. --Hauteville 22:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writer or revolutionary? 

message: Because many self-styled "progressive" "intellectuals" consider that extreme leftwingers, who have been condemned in Italy for trifles such as murder etc , and have run away, actually went "in exile".
This sounds, obviously, more romantic. This whole article seems written by someone who thinks that the Italian Republic and Italian justice are a joke. Personally, I disagree.
By the way, Cesare Battisti "is considered a national hero in Italy". No, sorry that's the "other" Cesare Battisti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesare_Battisti), an exilee who however was hanged by Austria-Hungary for acting on his political convictions . He has exactly 10 lines on Wikipedia. 
Clearly, the former PAC (armed proletarian for communism) Cesare Battisti deserves much, much more attention.|Giordaano]] 23:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why? 

message: :::I love Dike, the Greek goddess of Justice, because she often punishes the persons who speak too much and don’t study at all. But I love the databases too. This chapter will give you a quite accurate definition of  two concepts: hypocrisy and chauvinism! Do you remember when LDH claimed :
:::" French justice pleaded that the anti-terrorist legislation enacted in Italy during the "years of lead" "went against the French conception of law," which, along with the European Court of Human Rights, prohibited in particular to extradite a person condemned in absentia if that person was denied the right to a new trial" ? Can you remember when this phrase was written in the article? There is still a little trace of this wrong and false statement in the article : "Defenders of Battisti, among whom the Human Rights League (LDH), consider that France's decision to extradite Battisti was illegal, since Battisti would not have the right to a new trial, after having been judged in absentia."
:::This is a quite long lecture but, I swear, beautiful and instructive. Taz, please, may you read all first to say that this part should be transferred under France and Human Right? You should remember you have reported all the nuts that LDH have said on the fairness of the Italian trial!
:::First to start you should consider that this phrase is still in the article: . WOW! Please can you remember well this part - it's quite important -: "...that person ( the defendant obviously) had not been in a condition to adequately defend himself during his trial"?
:::Oh Dike, I love you so much!  In the European Court of Human Right: Case of Krombach v. FRANCE, Application no. 29731/96, decided on 13 February 2001, French Trial in absentia, French condemned for violation of  the article 6 of ECHR, because:
:::“67.  Although the Court accepts that the conviction is not final, it considers that the procedure whereby the accused is entitled to a retrial in the event of the contempt being purged cannot be equated to a “remedy” within the ordinary meaning of that word, since its availability depends on a circumstance, namely the accused’s arrest, which by definition is not a voluntary act on the accused’s part.
:::It is true that the contempt will also be purged if the accused surrenders to custody. The Court considers that that condition for obtaining a retrial means that this is not a domestic remedy that it would be reasonable to require the applicant to exhaust for the purposes of Article 35 of the Convention, since all an applicant is required to do under the prior-exhaustion-of-domestic-remedies rule is to apply in the manner and time prescribed by domestic law for remedies that are apt to alleviate the situation complained of.
:::Further, should a retrial be held, it will not of itself avoid or remedy violations that have occurred at the trial in absentia stage. Lastly, there is no prescribed form or time-limit for purging the contempt and it is a procedure that may prove purely hypothetical if the accused is not arrested or does not surrender to custody before the time allowed for enforcing the sentence expires.
:::68.  Consequently, the Government’s preliminary objection must be dismissed.
:::(…)
:::B.  The Court’s assessment
:::82.  As the requirements of paragraph 3 of Article 6 are to be seen as particular aspects of the right to a fair trial guaranteed by paragraph 1, the Court will examine the complaint under both provisions taken together (see Van Geyseghem, cited above, § 27).
:::83.  The present case is distinguishable from the cases of Goddi, Colozza, F.C.B. and T. v. Italy (judgment of 9 April 1984, Series A no. 76, p. 10, § 26; judgment cited above, pp. 14-15, § 28; judgment of 28 August 1991, Series A no. 208-B, pp. 20-21, §§ 30-33; and judgment of 12 October 1992, Series A no. 245-C, pp. 41-42, § 27), which all concerned the Italian procedure for trial in absentia, in that the applicant in the instant case was served with notice of the date of the hearing before the Paris Assize Court and it was his decision not to appear. His situation is therefore comparable to that examined by the Court in the cases of Poitrimol, Lala, Pelladoah and Van Geyseghem, cited above.
:::84.  The Court notes that in the first of those three cases it said that it was of capital importance that a defendant should appear and that the legislature had accordingly to be able to discourage unjustified absences (see Poitrimol, cited above, p. 15, § 35). In the latter two cases, however, it added: “it is also of crucial importance for the fairness of the criminal justice system that the accused be adequately defended, both at first instance and on appeal, the more so if, as is the case under Netherlands law, no objection may be filed against a default judgment given on appeal” (see Lala, cited above, p. 13, § 33, and Pelladoah, cited above, pp. 34-35, § 40). It added that the latter interest prevailed. Consequently, the fact that the defendant, in spite of having been properly summonsed, did not appear, could not – even in the absence of an excuse – justify depriving him of his right under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention to be defended by counsel (ibid.). It was for the courts to ensure that a trial was fair and, accordingly, that counsel who attended trial for the apparent purpose of defending the accused in his absence, was given the opportunity to do so (ibid., p. 14, § 34, and p. 35, § 41).
:::85.  It is true that proceedings that take place in the accused’s absence will not of themselves be incompatible with the Convention if the accused may subsequently obtain, from a court which has heard him, a fresh determination of the merits of the charge (see, mutatis mutandis, Colozza, cited above, p. 15, § 29). The Court cannot, however, accept the French Government’s submission that the fact that it was not possible to apply to have a conviction entered in default set aside was a decisive factor for the Court in its reasoning in Lala and Pelladoah, as the clause commencing with the adverbial phrase “the more so” was added to the judgments as a subsidiary consideration (see p. 13, § 33, and pp. 34-35, § 40, respectively).
:::86.  The Court sees no reason to depart from that approach, which was last reaffirmed in Van Geyseghem, cited above, §§ 33 and 34, simply because the criminal proceedings in the instant case took place before an assize court and not before a criminal court or a court of appeal on appeal from a criminal court.
:::It has never been disputed that it is of capital importance that a defendant should appear, both because of his right to a hearing and because of the need to verify the accuracy of his statements and compare them with those of the victim – whose interests need to be protected – and of the witnesses (see Poitrimol, cited above, p. 15, § 35). That applies to trials both in the assize court and in the criminal court.
:::87.  In the Court’s view, the procedure for a retrial after the contempt has been purged only affects the effective exercise of the defence rights if the accused is arrested, for in such cases the authorities have a positive obligation to afford the accused the opportunity to have a complete rehearing of the case in his or her presence. On the other hand, there can be no question of an accused being obliged to surrender to custody in order to secure the right to be retried in conditions that comply with Article 6 of the Convention, for that would entail making the exercise of the right to a fair hearing conditional on the accused offering up his or her physical liberty as a form of guarantee (see, mutatis mutandis, Khalfaoui v.France, no. 34791/97, §§ 43 and 44, ECHR 1999-IX).
:::88.  The Court must now examine whether in practice the bar on defence lawyers appearing for the applicant at the trial before the Paris Assize Court adversely affected his right to a fair hearing. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the applicant had clearly manifested an intention not to attend the hearing before the Assize Court and, therefore, not to represent himself. On the other hand, the case file shows that he wished to be defended by his lawyers, who had been given authorities to that end and were present at the hearing.
:::89.  The Court cannot adopt the Government’s narrow construction of the word “assistance” within the meaning of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention. It sees no reason for departing from the opinion it expressed on that subject in Poitrimol (see the judgment cited above, pp. 14-15, § 34), in which the Government had already suggested that a distinction should be drawn between “assistance” and “representation” for the purposes of proceedings in the criminal court.
:::Although not absolute, the right of everyone charged with a criminal offence to be effectively defended by a lawyer, assigned officially if need be, is one of the fundamental features of a fair trial. A person charged with a criminal offence does not lose the benefit of this right merely on account of not being present at the trial. Even if the legislature must be able to discourage unjustified absences, it cannot penalise them by creating exceptions to the right to legal assistance (see Van Geyseghem, cited above, § 34).
:::90.  In the instant case, the Court observes that the wording of Article 630 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure makes the bar on lawyers representing an accused being tried in absentia absolute and that an assize court trying such an accused has no possibility of derogating from that rule.
:::The Court considers, however, that it should have been for the Assize Court, which was sitting without a jury, to afford the applicant’s lawyers, who were present at the hearing, an opportunity to put forward the defence case even in the applicant’s absence as, in the instant case, the argument they intended to rely on concerned a point of law (see paragraph 44 above), namely an objection on public-policy grounds based on an estoppel per rem judicatam and the non bis in idem rule (see, mutatis mutandis, Artico v. Italy, judgment of 13 May 1980, Series A no. 37, pp. 16-17, § 34). The Government have not suggested that the Assize Court would have had had no jurisdiction to examine the issue had it given the applicant’s lawyers permission to plead it. Lastly, the Court observes that the applicant’s lawyers were not given permission to represent their clients at the hearing before the Assize Court on the civil claims. To penalise the applicant’s failure to appear by such an absolute bar on any defence appears manifestly disproportionate.
:::91.  In conclusion, there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 6 § 3 (c).2"
:::For the full sentence:
:::http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&action=html&highlight=France%20%7C%20Krombach&sessionid=10131230&skin=hudoc-en
::: The article 630 of the French code de procedure penale - des contumaces -: Aucun avocat, aucun avoué ne peut se présenter pour l'accusé contumax. Toutefois, si l'accusé est dans l'impossibilité absolue de déférer à l'injonction contenue dans l'ordonnance prévue par l'article 627-21, ses parents ou ses amis peuvent proposer son excuse.
:::in: http://www.lexinter.net/PROCPEN/index.htm
:::Really have LDH, Vargas and co. blamed the Italian trial in absentia when the French one forbids the lawyers for the defendant? How could we define this behaviour?
::: I'll try to answer. For France this beahviour means that: the French principles of law - i.e. the criminal procedure code - prohibit to a person, condemned in absentia, from being in a condition to adequately defend himself during his trial. For LDH, Vargas and co. who don't know this interesting ECtHR sentence - a landmark!- this beahviour means two things: A) that LDH doesn't study and B) that Vargas and co. are writers not readers!
 
:::Oh Dike! It’s so wonderful: the French trial in absentia goes against the ECHR conception of law the Battisti's one, no! But…so all that they: LDH, Vargas, HBL and friends have said and written on Battisti’s trial in absentia and on the need of a retrial is  untrue! You can see that the decision is dated 2001. And now what should I think about the others things that they have said on Battisti’s Italian trial? Maybe that they are inaccurate, inexact and mainly false and untrue! 
:::Maybe we should re-write the article and we could re-balance all the narrative less on the French side and more on the true one. Maybe, for the sake of charity, we should delete all the POV statements reporting what "France justice" -it's true it is blind! - thinks about the Italian one. I think it would be better, we can not explain that France justice is, sometime, quite worse than Italian - that isn't perfect -, adding everytime all international sentences - not writer's opinions- that proof this! Ciao --Dedofreg 12:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you please point out which part exactly of the article you are troubled with, and we will workit out. I am more than willing to improve the article, but I am sure you understand that the point is not to give your truth, nor your opinion, but to expose third parties opinion. That you or I dislike this or that opinion is quite beside the point. Give us facts, keep it short, and let's work the formulation (and please try to improve the article, as you have done indirectly Dedo, instead of just limiting ourselves to ideological fights --- God i am tired of ideological fights, is it possible to cooperate with people who disagree ? This is the whole point of Wikipedia...) Once again, you may give valuable information, but I'm sure that discussions about Dike should be limited to Dike. The case here is about Battisti & things that revolve around him, not about claiming that France is a beautiful country or that Italy is even more lovely! Ciao! Tazmaniacs 03:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  An amazing story about the French trial in absentia and the ECtHR 

message: I removed this, because I don't think it is relevant to Battisti. Tazmaniacs 02:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'We must also remember' 

message: I find the current title of this page, 'Cesare Battisti (1954-)', pretty unsatisfactory; we never use dates in titles of people, as it just looks unnecessary. It was previously at Cesare Battisti (activist), but moved for NPOV reasons; actually, 'activist' seems like a fairly neutral description to me, and preferable to the current title, but I can see there are problems with that choice as well. 
It would be best if we could simply move it to Cesare Battisti, but that name is already used for the First World War Italian patriot. Perhaps we should move that article to something else, as this person certainly seems to be the more notable Cesare Battisti... does anyone else have any suggestions on the best solution here? Terraxos (talk) 22:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're looking for NPOV problems! :) Actually, if we don't use a date, the only way to distinguish him from the other Battisti is either as an "activist" or as an "author". Both are unsatisfactory, as that he was an activist in the 1970s can't be enough to characterize his literary activities today, and, on the other hand, branding him as an "author" is overlooking his past activist activities, for which he has encountered some judicial problems today. So, I think leaving it as it is now is the best, consensual, solution. Tazmaniacs (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Activist is very NPOV for a murderer and author is not at all the reason why he is known... the date remains the less bad solution --Bombastus (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title? 

message: ( I moved my text up and inserted a new title below in order to separate different themes. This title concerns my proposal of removing the adjective terrorist refering to Battisti, the tag terrorism from this discussion page and the excess of references to 'terrorism' on the whole article. Hope you find appropriate to add a new title just above your post and understand the purpose of separating topics :-) --129.199.98.39 (talk) 10:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorism ??? 

message: It is absurd to say that the decision by Brazil to give asylum to Battisti was criticized "mainly by right-wing sectors" in Italy, Brazil and other countries.
Italian public opinion is almost unanimously (and strongly) critical of this decision, including the left-wing opposition party (Democratic Party).Giordaano (talk) 11:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim that Veja supported Tarso Genro's decision is one of the most absurd claims ever to be made in the history of Wikipedia. Please do not mislead non-Brazilians with such false statements. The decision has also received widespread condemnation, both from the media and the public opinion. RafaAzevedo  msg 08:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Calm down, Rafa. When CtgPi posted it, she was not aware of the magazine's change of position. :-) --LQST (talk) 14:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asylum in Brazil 

message: Once again : there is no such thing as an "alleged activist" or an "alleged militant". There is no law in Italy against activists, or militants. People didn't run away from Italy because they were "alleged activists" or accused of being "militants", but because they were accused of terrorist activities (or, if you prefer, of murder, bank robberies and so on .Giordaano (talk) 19:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: TO LSQT "several instruments to create a situation of juridical exception and a policial state were created in the repression of political movements" ? Please be neutral! NO (very personal) political views in Wiki. DCGIURSUN (talk) 10:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Hi, 80.181.107.85. It seems 129.199.98.39 proposed the change above some days ago, and the tag has been removed quickly because this article is a bibliography of a living person. --LQST (talk) 17:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Copying from above: "First I see the tag 'bibliography of living people' and then I see he is called terrorist. He is not being officially charged for any act of terrorism. Even in Italy, he was trialed as a common criminal. Am I wrong? Shoundn't this adjective be just removed, as well as the terrorism tag in the discussion page? --129.199.98.39 (talk) 10:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Hi, 87.7.138.214. You like to join the discussion? --LQST (talk) 09:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  To LSQT 

message: Reuters - 14/11/2009 15:50:24 reporting by Stuart Grudgings, editing by Vicki Allen
RIO DE JANEIRO, Nov 14 (Reuters) - Former Italian leftist guerrilla Cesare Battisti has gone on a hunger strike in a Brazilian prison to protest his possible extradition to face murder charges in his home country, a Brazilian senator said.Battisti handed Senator Jose Nery a letter addressed to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva saying he was ready to die in Brazil rather than be sent back to Italy, where he is wanted on four murder charges from the 1970s, Nery said on his website late on Friday."I am ready to die if I have to but never at the hands of my executioners," the letter said.Brazil's Supreme Court is expected to make a final ruling on Battisti's extradition in the coming days. Judges are currently split, with four in favor and four against, leaving the chief justice with the deciding vote.Italy, which says Battisti is a terrorist, has pressured Brazil strongly to extradite him since Lula decided in January to grant him political refugee status.Battisti, 54, escaped from an Italian prison in 1981 and lived in France for years, but fled when Paris approved his extradition in 2006 and was arrested on the run in Brazil.He risks life in prison in Italy on the murder charges dating from the 1970s, a violent period known as the "Years of Lead," when he belonged to a guerrilla group called "Armed Proletarians for Communism." He denies the murder charges.I hope this will help. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 23:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  REFILE-Italian former guerrilla on hunger strike in Brazil 

message: I think the article name is very poor. is there any precedent for such a name? I understand why Cesare Battisti (author) isnt appropriate as he is both an author and a convicted criminal. Any ideas for a better neutral name. Thanks, SqueakBox talk contribs 14:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I really do not know. But, certainly he's much more famous as criminal. In pt.wiki, it.wiki, fr.wiki is "Cesare Battisti (1954)" Best regards DCGIURSUN (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

text: How about Cesare Battisti (fugitive)? I know we have to change it if he goes back but it may do for now. I thnk it's better than the ghastly 1954. Dr.K.praxislogos  18:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur that this would be the most accurate way to describe him. If no one objects in the next week or so I will change it. Hammersbach (talk) 00:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not that sure anymore. We may run into WP:BLP problems. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:19, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how, he is still a fugitive. Specifically what BLP issue could we possibly be running afoul of? Hammersbach (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Any time we add a negative or controversial characterisation to someone's name it automatically falls under BLP. I also don't thing that characterisations such as "Murderer, fugitive, adulterer" etc. can easily be appended to someone's name and they don't sound too encyclopaedic to me. All in all by trying to fix the current name I think we may be creating a worse one. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 20:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

text: How about Cesare Battisti (Lula's protegé)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.48.60.10 (talk) 17:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: Brasil gave freedom to Battisti because italian government is driven by mafia, otherwise Battisti can not have a fair process in Italy because I would be politically haunted.
There are no mentions on the fact that the italian mass-media depict Battisti as a common criminal (why they do not talk about the other italian assassins who live abroad?)and censore the opinions of all the italians who do not want Battisti to be judged in Italy.
For more informations take a look to the portuguese page.
I think it is necessary to write this. --Moscone (talk) 14:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Battisti should be locked up in an Italian prison long time ago. Please don't bring partisanship views to here. --Lecen (talk) 22:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberation and italian censored mass-media 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cesare Battisti (born 1954). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090118084017/http://www.lejdd.fr:80/cmc/international/200903/battisti-bresil-terre-d-asile_179088.html to http://www.lejdd.fr/cmc/international/200903/battisti-bresil-terre-d-asile_179088.html
*Added  tag to http://ultimainstancia.uol.com.br/colunas/ler_noticia.php?idNoticia=61273
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091015231307/http://ultimainstancia.uol.com.br/noticia/61304.shtml to http://ultimainstancia.uol.com.br/noticia/61304.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110904022130/http://www.anhourago.eu/show.aspx?l=8656660&d=504 to http://www.anhourago.eu/show.aspx?l=8656660&d=504
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070321155723/http://www.ansa.it:80/opencms/export/site/notizie/rubriche/approfondimenti/visualizza_new.html_2113687881.html to http://www.ansa.it/opencms/export/site/notizie/rubriche/approfondimenti/visualizza_new.html_2113687881.html
*Added  tag to http://www.ilmanifesto.it/archivi/fuoripagina/anno/2009/mese/01/articolo/247/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061211093235/http://www.ump.assemblee-nationale.fr/article.php3?id_article=3262 to http://www.ump.assemblee-nationale.fr/article.php3?id_article=3262
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070504103715/http://www.conseil-etat.fr:80/ce/jurispd/index_ac_ld0515.shtml to http://www.conseil-etat.fr/ce/jurispd/index_ac_ld0515.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081121032952/http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article296897.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article296897.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070609171954/http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/InformationNotes/INFONOTENo92.htm to http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/InformationNotes/INFONOTENo92.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090120082011/http://portal.rpc.com.br:80/gazetadopovo/vidapublica/conteudo.phtml?tl=1&id=848074&tit=Presidente-da-Italia-manda-carta-de-pesar-a-Lula-pelo-asilo-a-Battisti to http://portal.rpc.com.br/gazetadopovo/vidapublica/conteudo.phtml?tl=1&id=848074&tit=Presidente-da-Italia-manda-carta-de-pesar-a-Lula-pelo-asilo-a-Battisti
*Added  tag to http://br.noticias.yahoo.com/stf-rejeita-reclama
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720231039/http://usm2000.free.fr/article.php3?id_article=142 to http://usm2000.free.fr/article.php3?id_article=142
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cesare Battisti (born 1954). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131101173931/http://www.iltempo.it/cronache/2012/12/12/l-appello-battisti-in-italia-e-in-galera-1.207919 to http://www.iltempo.it/cronache/2012/12/12/l-appello-battisti-in-italia-e-in-galera-1.207919
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cesare Battisti (born 1954). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070611113655/http://www.ldh-toulon.net/spip.php?article1940 to http://www.ldh-toulon.net/spip.php?article1940
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:10, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I wonder why this information was absent from the article. Apparently the victims were fascists? So this attack was part of an ongoing back and forth between fascists and anti-fascists. "Italian fascist Lino Sabbadin was killed outside Venice on Feb. 16, 1979, by members of the autonomist urban guerrilla group, Proletari Armati per il Comunismo (PAC). Author Cesare Battisti (pictured) would be convicted as an accessory to the killing in absentia." I think this is important to mention in the article, no? 76.14.117.19 (talk) 01:10, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: More details of the victims