<nettime> 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

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.

 
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net