C'è, tanto per cambiare, una gran bagarre riguardo le affermazioni fatte da Giorgo Napolitano - attuale Presidente della Repubblica Italiana - e le pesanti critiche pronunciate da Antonio Di Pietro, leader del partito politico "L'Italia Values. "I try to rebuild with a brief summary of what happened:
- After a process not too long nor too opposed the Parliament adopted an economic measure as" amnesty "in which, among other things, is laid the opportunity to return the money illegally earned abroad (Italian evade taxes) at a measly 5% to the State, the decriminalization of the offense of false accounting and the guarantee of anonymity for those who will benefit from the great opportunity offered.
- Yesterday, President Napolitano was in Basilicata for an institutional commitment, when a citizen approached him and told him " President, do not sign, do it for honest people . The First Citizen's then answered " In the Constitution it says that the President promulgates laws. If you do not sign today, Parliament voted out again the same law and is written into the Constitution at that point I am required to sign . That you do not know? "If you tell me not to sign, it means nothing .
- Yesterday, the Hon. Antonio Di Pietro has called "an act of cowardice" the signing of the law in question, prompting a bipartisan chorus of protests against him, with vibrant tips patriottistica defense of Napolitano from left-right-center-north-and south- -united and accusations to represent a subversive threat to the whole nation.
So: me of Peter is not much of a girlfriend who is nice (I still remember when, just stopped the toga of the scourge of the First Republic, solemnly declared that "never would have entered politics" and not even a week after it was already candidate who can not remember ..) also because I still think that the policy requires a form in addition to the essential content, form and Peter does not seem at all embody. Instead Napolitano gave me some sympathy, the first Communist President, however, balanced and wise, able to agree with distant parts of the exercise of common sense. Neapolitan perilous.
However, at the risk of being fingered as a terrorist-shaker-antitialiano, think as Di Pietro: the President has contravened a fundamental role in the supervisor and did not exercise a power that only he has the right to exercise , to refer bills to a message with a warning asking for a review. Only if the houses it to him without recurrence of changes to the text would be obliged to promulgate it: only in that case.
And to say that would not be lacking motivation to write the note for MPs and senators from that account to pay 5% tax is equivalent to giving 45% not paid when due - and for capital the order of several million euro a pop evasion are fine - so insulting all the honest taxpayers who have fulfilled their tax obligations, which so many money gained from illegal activities (drugs, weapons, forgery, etc. ..) may come clean clean in the pockets of the Mafia, Camorra, 'Ndrangheta and the various systems, without forcing these gentlemen to turn complex and expensive (the cost of laundering dirty currency varies from 40% to 75%, 5% sounds almost like a tip to the goalkeeper ..) that the anonymity guarantees peace and quiet of all those bastards who have impoverished the pockets of their employees, throwing on the streets whole families for their greed, without pay contributions, eating in the pot first and then the head of the workers.
Napolitano But this did not think, just as those who had ears to listen to him have suggested no eyes to read those who have written.
But for me the worst, that perhaps the word "vile" almost gentle, it was the answer given to the citizen that Lucan tried at the last minute to point out to him the shameful position he was taking: beyond the pedantic tone, in itself disturbing, the fact that they consider "useless" on the exercise of a right (or rather, our through him) has completely drained the meaning of his institutional role. Come faceva a sapere che il testo non sarebbe stato modificato? Come poteva immaginare che anche nella prossima votazione i 29 esponenti della cosidetta "opposizione" avrebbero dato forfait? Cosa gli fa credere che un atto così importante non avrebbe mosso l'opinione pubblica ad una riflessione collettiva, esercitando maggiori pressioni sui rappresentanti parlamentari, cambiando qualcosa in positivo?
Perchè ha calato le sue braghe e mostrato il nostro culo?
0 comments:
Post a Comment