ROME - In 1972 two journalists from the Washington Post began an investigation into the behavior President of the United States of America, Nixon, and the entourage of his closest associates, accused of spying on their opponents of the Party Democrat. The investigation went on for two years with a series of articles documented more and more bitter against the President, supported by documents and testimony often covered by anonymity. The White House tried in every way to intimidate the publisher (even the publisher) of that paper without success. Two years later, in 1974, Nixon resigned from office to avoid an imminent and inevitable indictment was put in by Congress. In 1998, that twenty-four years after the conclusion of the "Watergate" scandal broke Lewinsky, now dubbed "Sexygate. This time the target was Bill Clinton, Democratic President. The offense was not even a crime but anti-oral sex made repeatedly in the oval room of the White House. For months the newspapers and television stations around the U.S. and the world opened their pages to the revelations about oral sex between Monica and Bill, the players were interviewed dozens of times and so did Hillary, the wife of the President. The privacy and Clinton's sexual misbehavior were told in detail. When the mandate the younger Bush, a Republican, won the election hands down. No one in America proposed restrictions on press freedom. White House and Congress they launched no law prohibiting anything to the press as that for deep-rooted conviction of Americans, the private life of politicians and public have always been under the control "media" without restriction except in cases of defamatory and slanderous untruth. A few weeks ago was presented at the Cannes Film Festival the film "Il Divo" directed by Sorrentino who has won the Jury Prize. The protagonist is a talented Italian actor who plays Giulio Andreotti, the overall focus of the film is guilty even if not deliberately solves the riddle of the man who was politically seven times prime minister and was accused by newspapers and the courts of any kind of wickedness. Andreotti has not sued the filmmakers. I say more: Andreotti was involved in a serious process, sentenced to very severe penalties in the first-instance trials, later reduced or deleted and permanently reversed on appeal to the Supreme Court. He has never escaped the process, dealt with them and his lawyers have defended with tenacity and professionalism made. Nothing to do with the air of subversive Ghedini, lawyer, defender of Silvio Berlusconi and editor of the law "ad personam" in favor of his client. I recall here the case of Nixon, Clinton and Andreotti because they mark a huge difference than if Berlusconi. Differences regarding both the protagonists of the four cases, the conformity of most of the Italian press over the American, the bewildered public opinion with respect to our responsiveness to the overseas and finally the inability Members of the center-to distinguish their role as members of the legislature by the insane desire of a prime minister who wants to liberate from any institutional control, judicial, political, media. * * * We must protect the dignity of individuals. Sacrosanct principle. To protect it is the penal code offenses and provided for slander and defamation. Aggravated by the press. If you consider the penalties too light is just aggravating. If the processes are slow to do so to make them faster. The rest against the press usually goes for "direct route". To protect the dignity of individuals (and even of public figures) it is necessary that there is dignity. Nixon who uses his powers for the President to spy on political opponents has no dignity. Clinton is rolling on the carpet of the Oval Office with Monica has no dignity. Berlusconi fiddles with a director of Rai tissue to place him well known, that same ruling favors private initiatives for its future, negotiate collusion between RAI and Mediaset executives of public service and even a member of the Control of Communications and ultimately use some of these powers to convince members of the Senate to abandon the majority and pass on his side, has no dignity. But it still less when cut out the silhouette of his defendant in a law-blocking processes, which clog the entire judicial system. At the same time sends out a face shield law that the four highest offices of state. All with the connivance of the Presidents of the chambers, which allow amendments to be inserted unacceptable and inadmissible in texts of the decree approved by the President of the Republic. Giorgio Napolitano is well aware of its role as "impartial" even if the reckless actions of the "premier" make it increasingly narrow its area of \u200b\u200bmediation. But you can be sure that it will use the powers of its jurisdiction if, when the draft law on the immunity of the upper echelons of the state will be presented in Parliament and scheduling, the majority will not withdraw the amendment process stops placed surreptitiously in- Decree-Law safety. You can be sure that the head of state will return to the Chambers a bill that contained unfortunate that amendment, inserted without his knowledge and not blocked as it was his bounden duty by the President of the Senate. Not as unconstitutional, but for lack of need for urgency. Must address the constitutionality of the Court when it will be called into question, both for the security bill for the immunity of high office and for the duration of that immune privilege. A colleague does not lack talent but who is suffering (so it seems) of a worrying prolapse of morality ethics, recently wrote of the need to give Berlusconi a sort of safe conduct judiciary, the only way, in his view, will solve the Italian anomaly. Of course who should take charge of this delicate operation that should be the opposition would prevail and thus the basis for legitimacy in the face of public opinion. Encourage wickedness (or Mattana) policies of a defendant risen to the top of the power to purchase credit from a public opinion largely chloroformed, is it true that cynicism is fashionable in politics, but also should not rule the roost in the "media" . Instead dominates how! This is a culmination of the record-breaking pass. * * * I confess: I have a weakness for Marcegaglia. It is clear, definite and says yes, yes, no no. A hair wave. A female masculinity. His recipe is less taxes, less spending, wages coupled with productivity. The program also Berlusconi and Tremonti, but with some differences of no small importance. First option: to lower taxes if they do not speak until 2013. They had promised to bring the tax burden from 43 to 40 percent, but now that the votes they have had them tell us that in 2013 the tax burden will be the 42.90. She is glad the Marcegaglia? I'd like to know about these things but she does not speak on this point even if they did a blizzard at the time of Padoa-Schioppa and Visco. At least they took their money and Confindustria evaders have five points less than IRES and IRAP. Tremonti IRES has already returned to the original level, five and a half points more. She is happy lady? I say, yes, yes, no, no, nobody died. Does anyone really gives us a shred of the skin to contract precarious or black. You should not assume that those expelled by Confindustria in black? Expenses. Cutting waste is good. Continuity with Padoa-Schioppa. The research division of Confindustria has honestly pointed out: continuity. But Tremonti not only cuts the intermediate expenses, cut everything. Tremonti is good. But you, dear Emma, \u200b\u200bnotes with great disappointment that the growth will be zero in 2008 and 2009, if all goes well, will rise to 0.6. Come on luxury. With inflation at 3.6 and for energy and food to 5.5. Zero growth. Investment below zero. Cutting expenditure deflator. But two billion thrown to the ICI. Three hundred million thrown for Alitalia, which are about to become a million and a half if Banca Intesa will give the green light. Add to this, we add up these figures and the alms of the 500 million one-off poor pensioners. Four billion are already thrown out the window. But no wage increases unless productivity increases. But its industrial kind Marcegaglia, their productivity is not to have done wonders. Unless the cost of the work to compress. New products? No way. Search? Idem. Meanwhile, the stock market collapses. It is not his fault, Mrs. Emma, \u200b\u200bnor Tremonti, or Dragons. But collapses. Trichet will raise rates while the Fed will lower them. Who is right? Perhaps Dragons would comment and perhaps Tremonti and maybe Confindustria. Berlusconi is exempted. He takes care of processes Ghedini, soldiers in the street with La Russa and cataloging of "Roma" with Maroni. He is right that the genius of Altan latest issue of espresso: a small woman with red lips and eyes thoughtfully says, "but I'm afraid I do not know what." Italians have them so low.
0 comments:
Post a Comment