Politics
Locked Up Abroad
Apr 3rd
Have you ever seen the show Locked Up Abroad? I stumbled upon the program while channel surfing the other night. I caught a few minutes of the National Geographic Channel show, which centered on a guy who went to Peru with a woman he met at a bar. Unbeknownst to the young man, the woman was attempting to pay off a loan shark by smuggling cocaine (two suitcases full) back into the U.S. While she eventually took the blame, the young man was tied up in legal nightmares for several months.
It was a very interesting show, and if anything, it will put a fear of being arrested abroad in you! Other episodes of the show have taken place in Chechnya, the Philippines, Colombia, Bangladesh, Brazil and more. It is on Wednesday nights at 10 p.m. The show also offers harrowing looks at people kidnapped while abroad — which is an even scarier prospect.
This is certainly a concern for travelers, and preparing yourself, knowing what to do should something serious occur, accidentally or otherwise, is important. Global Traveler covered the topic in a special feature in our July 2008 issue. Click here to read the story.
Of the top 10 places where Americans are most likely to get arrested, six of them are in Mexico — Tijuana (1), Guadalajara (2), Nuevo Laredo (3), Mexico City (5), Merida (8) and Nogales (9). The other top spots are London (4), Toronto (6), Nassau, Bahamas (7) and Hong Kong (10).
A movie that came to mind while I was watching Locked Up Abroad was Brokedown Palace, with Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale. It is about two best friends, recent high school graduates, who take a trip to Thailand. After meeting a cute Australian, they follow him to Hong Kong but are arrested in the airport for drug smuggling.
The U.S. State Department’s Web site has information for Americans arrested while abroad, with their rights and a guide to what assistance they can expect from the embassies and consulars.
-Kimberly Krol, eFlyer editor, circulation and public relations executive
The Capital Scene
Nov 11th
Last week I traveled to Washington, DC, on Amtrak from New York for a daytrip of meetings. One great advantage of traveling with Amtrak is that even though it can be crowded, sometimes you can change your train ticket even after you’ve purchased it or missed your train, without any troubles. But I reserved a late train in the evening to ensure I wouldn’t have to rush out of the afternoon meetings.
Anyway, I did have some time in the evening to walk around DC, an occasion I rarely have and so I took full advantage. A friend met me for dinner at the Willard Intercontinental, and as the weather was summerlike, we sat outside, and I took in the political scene.
Almost every passerby’s conversation revolved around the recent election, and every corner store had Obama-Biden paraphernalia for sale. What made the night extra special for me was just before catching my train, around 8:30 p.m., we took a stroll down Pennsylvania Avenue right past the front lawn of the White House.
I probably had not done that since I was a little girl. Having traveled the world since then and having seen the homes of many heads of state from a distance, it was awe-inspiring and humbling to stand so close to the home of the President of the United States. It was peaceful, beautiful and a truly great symbol of this country. Whoever resides in the White House, be it President Bush, President-elect Obama or future presidents, I wish them all the best of luck, because no home so beautiful comes without hard work!
 Alex Young, vice president and associate publisher
“Resolved . . .”
Oct 11th
I’ve watched both presidential debates this season, plus the v.p. debate and some covering state and local positions. I don’t know why I still tune in when years of experience have taught me that no matter the party, candidate or position, these forums rarely provide me with the kind of information I am seeking to help me decide whom to vote for. Well, okay, maybe they do give me the opportunity to see how these men and women think on their feet, but rarely do any of them answer a question directly. I get so frustrated with vague, generalized responses; bits of stump speeches I’ve heard numerous times already; and attacks on and claims against their opponents.
What I want is brief, concise answers to the questions that were posed. I DON’T want candidate A to describe his/her position in terms of what he/she states is candidate B’s position. I’ve decided that the current debate format (which, let’s face it, doesn’t really look or sound like a genuine debate) should be ditched in favor of an opportunity for each person to address questions posed to him/her individually. It would look something like this:
The candidates don’t appear on stage at the same time, saving them from the temptation to start pointing fingers at each other.
Each candidate is presented with the same questions and given the same length of time to answer them.
Going overtime results in a shut-off of the microphone and/or camera, penalty points, and/or a mild electric shock! The same penalties hold true if the candidate wanders off topic or begins talking about the opponent or his/her position rather than the candidate’s own.
I don’t know if such a system would be more entertaining than the current “debates” are (well, perhaps so if the electric shock is used!), but it would almost certainly be more enlightening.
Patty Vanikiotis, proofreader
