[Nettime-bold] Foreign Press and Tiscali's money

["Content-Wire.com" <PGalaxy@compuserve.com>]

Dear Nettimers

Around the  9 April, following a couple of  interventions on a related
topic,
we posted  our concerns that Mr Berlusconi may not exactly be suitable for
office
and lamented the lack of interest  in Italy's serious threat to democracy
from the national  - understandable considering he controls most of it -
as well as from   foreign press and media 

I am glad to have seen several articles in foreign press since (New York
Times, International Herald Tribune,
Independent, FT, Guardian and Economist) and I am very thankful to all
nettimers around the world  who
have taken an interest, in particular those journalists and editors who
understand the importance of discussing
the serious circumstances and potential adverse consequences of the
political integrity and stability for Europe.

We are also very pleased that The Economist stance reflects our concerns
and opionion about 
the case, we post the article below, as it makes a powerful case
documenting all the appropriate arguments
better than we could have done.

Most of all, it's great to see the power of this medium , so let's keep up
the good
work.

The question I am working on next is : does anybody know where is the money
coming from
that is funding Tiscali conquest of European internet companies?  

Tiscali had an unprecendente success in raising capital from the moment of
its IPO, approximately
a year and a half ago. How come in a climate of dot com doom and recession
Tiscali is coming through unscathed and is munching up all largest Isp in
the continent, one by one, very quickly over the last few months?


 Where do they get all that money from? Any chance of piles of money being
recycled?
You never know. Better check just in case we have a worst case scenario.

Anyone else getting suspicious?

Thoughts  welcome


Paola Di Maio

(content-wire.com)

        
  
  

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=593654

Fit to run Italy?
Apr 26th 2001
>From The Economist print edition 

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 

 
Get article background

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.

 


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold