Newsgroup: it.politica
Titolo: E' severamente VIETATO FARE DOMANDE al datore di lavoro dello stalliere di Arcore.

Cari utenti dell'NG,
Adesso BerlusKa-Mediaset querelera' anche L'Economist (cosi' almeno ha
dichiarato...). Un altro giornale prestigioso - la bibbia del
capitalismo mondiale -  e' caduto nell'albo nero del cavaliere. E
troppi ce ne mettera' ancora, BerlusKa il Bugiarduska, di nomi e
cognomi su quell'albo nero dei suoi nemici. Ormai l'Europa ha mandato
un chiaro segnale: Berlusconi, con la sua indisponibilita' alle regole
della trasparenza e della democrazia, costituisce un vero pericolo per
la democrazia occidentale. Non tanto per il conflitto d'interessi
(gia' di per se' fenomeno inquietante)  ma per la sua pretesa di
sottrarsi alle domande ed al confronto richiestogli dall'opinione
pubblica in CAMPAGNA ELETTORALE.
Vi sottopongo l'articolo dell'Economist, scaricable peraltro dal sito
Internet del periodico.
Apr 26th 2001
From The Economist print edition 
<<Fit to run Italy?>>
<<The known facts about Silvio Berlusconi, never mind the unanswered
questions, rule him out for high office, even though his countrymen
seem poised to make him prime minister>>
AP
<<IN ANY self-respecting democracy it would be unthinkable that the
man assumed to be on the verge of being elected prime minister would
recently have come under investigation for, among other things,
money-laundering, complicity in murder, connections with the Mafia,
tax evasion and the bribing of politicians, judges and the tax police.
But the country is Italy and the man is Silvio Berlusconi, almost
certainly its richest citizen. As our own investigations make plain
(see article), Mr Berlusconi is not fit to lead the government of any
country, least of all one of the world's richest democracies. 
Many of Mr Berlusconi's supporters, who include most of Italy's
businessmen, decry such criticism as born of naivety, ignorance and
malevolence. They say that it is he, not the Italian people, who is
the victim of dishonesty. They say that ever since he entered
politics, only seven years ago, he has been persecuted by left-wing
magistrates, journalists and politicians, all jealous of his wealth
and fearful of his intention to renovate Italy and do away with the
old guard. They add, moreover, that even if Mr Berlusconi did pay off
tax inspectors (under duress, of course), what of it? That was the way
that business in Italy was done when he made his fortune. He was no
worse than anyone else-only cleverer, and a bigger target. Why pick on
the man who has the vision, flair and courage to offer his services so
magnanimously to the nation? 
Besides, the excusers' mantra goes on, it has become clear that most
Italians, including many on the left, have grown bored with the
long-running saga of Mr Berlusconi's legal travails. Many of his
countrymen have a not-so-sneaking regard for the way in which he has
cocked a snook at the tax laws-and at the authority of the state. If
he can do so well for himself, surely he is all the more qualified to
help Italians at large. 
Plausible but wrong 
Alas, nothing in this barrel of casuistry holds water. The questions
and concerns about Mr Berlusconi are voiced not just by opponents on
the left. The notion that he was himself the main victim of dishonest
tax inspectors and malign magistrates is fanciful. Never do those who
defend him mention the losses to the state-in other words, the Italian
people-that would result from the waiving of taxes by the tax
inspectors he is said to have bribed. Besides, Mr Berlusconi is under
investigation for crimes that are not mere peccadillos committed in
the face of red tape and nitpicking taxmen. True, under Italy's
tortuous judicial system, in only one case against him has a final
verdict been handed down: this case involved illegal political
donations and the court did not find him innocent. But our
investigation shows that he has a compelling case to answer on a
string of grave charges. In addition, his strange and long-standing
reluctance to explain the origin of his earliest sources of wealth
casts a pall over his entire business reputation.
In any event, in any normal country the voters-and probably the
law-would not have given Mr Berlusconi his chance at the polls without
first obliging him to divest himself of many of his wide-reaching
assets. The conflict of interest between his own business and affairs
of state would be gargantuan. Worth perhaps $14 billion, he is
intricately involved in vast areas of Italian finance, commerce and
broadcasting with ramifications into almost every aspect of business
and public life; his empire includes banks, insurance, property,
publishing, advertising, the media and football. Even during his
ill-fated earlier stint as prime minister, in 1994, he issued an array
of decrees that impinged heavily on his commercial activities. If he
wins again on May 13th, he will control a good 90% of all national
television broadcasting. He has made not the slightest effort to
resolve this clear conflict.
Why so little concern in Italy? 
There are historical reasons why so many Italians are unswayed by the
case for keeping Mr Berlusconi out of high office. It is a sad truth
that for years they had little cause to respect the institutions or
rules of the state. Until a decade ago, Italy was run according to a
corrupt arrangement under which all the supposedly respectable
parties, usually led by the Christian Democrats, ruled in perpetual
but oft-changing coalition to keep communists and fascists out of
office. After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, centrists and
refashioned ex-communists filled the gap that opened up on the left,
while Mr Berlusconi's movement jumped into the vacuum on the right.
The mani pulite (clean hands) campaign against corruption after 1992
was enthusiastically taken up by the people and, all in all, venality
is less pervasive than it was. But the same old attitude of disrespect
for laws, institutions and the courts lingers. And Mr Berlusconi,
peddling amiability and showmanship, has persuaded many Italians that
he at least stands for something new. We show that in the central
matter of probity that is not so.
Which is far from saying that Mr Berlusconi does not offer some
sensible policies, or that Italy has no need of reform. The judicial
system might well benefit from an overhaul. Indeed, the entire
constitution is ripe for change. The executive is too weak, the
legislature too prone to indecision, the voting system too
proportional. But these problems are of a different order to the one
of suspected criminality at the top. 
Mr Berlusconi's strongest claim is that many of the charges against
him-whether of conflict of interest or of much greater crimes-have
been known for years, and yet most Italians seem untroubled. In other
words, though the judiciary may not agree, the court of public opinion
finds him innocent. If the judiciary is indeed politically motivated,
that is a terrible condemnation of the Italian state. If, on the other
hand, the judiciary is independent, the public's acquittal is a
terrible condemnation of the electorate. Either way, the election of
Mr Berlusconi as prime minister would mark a dark day for Italian
democracy and the rule of law.>>
alessandro balducci

dichiarato...). Un altro giornale prestigioso - la bibbia del
Compagno cialtrone, si vede che i tanti giornali che il
cicciobabbeo ha querelato da sindaco non erano autorevoli.