open Democracy News Analysis - globalisation - Comments

mario corti on "Silvio Berlusconi: ten more questions "

mario corti — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:08:14 +0100

Dear Editor

I sent a letter a while ago concerning the new draft law limiting wiretapping in Italy. If I remember correctly it had a title. Something like: "Italians equate wiretapping with democracy and media freedom". It was pertinent to the subjects discussed in this forum. It did not contain insults, and it was published. Now I do not find it in the forum anymore. Is there any particular reason why my letter,, published under #500, was removed?

spamgreg on "Torture: America's policy, Europe's shame"

spamgreg — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:23:39 +0100

Not *all* europeans are guilty, far from that. It is only the stupid leaders of those countries who participated in the shameful attack on Iraq. The evil leaders of those countries who fell into shame : Australia, Bulgaria, South Corea, Denmark, Spain, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Lituania, Netherland, Philippinia, PolandPortugal, Romania, UK, Tchzchekia (or something, excuse me I can't spell it), Slovaquia, Turquey, Ukrainia. These leaders all knew the reasons for war were fake, and they often acted against the will of their own people who demonstrated by the millions.

Their main evil leaders are : of course the evil Briton Tony Blair first, then José Manuel Durão Barroso (yes, the fat UE unelected chief, he organized meetings of the other warpigs). Also the horrible Rupert Murdoch put all his power for the war. And too, Israel, who was extremely happy that their friend the USA attacks Iraq.

My country France has been so much spat upon for being against this crime, so I'm pityless with these bastards warpigs : let them all die. But also, I don't want innocents be blamed for crimes of others. So no, not *all* of europe.

SpamGreg

roberto esposito on "Silvio Berlusconi: ten more questions "

roberto esposito — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:51:42 +0100

I back perdon to all non italian speacking readers, but I want all Italians to understand my point without misunderstandings.

For non italian speacking you can read my post under title "Ten question to Italians" to know my position.

- Voli di Stato

La magistratura ha disposto il non luogo a procedere perchè non è reato viaggiare come ospiti in un volo di stato in presenza di una figura titolata ad effettuare quel volo.

MA

Quanto costa un volo di stato?

Quanti voli di stato sono stati effettuati da e per la Sardegna al solo scopo di trasportare personaggi (titolati ad usarli) per trascorrere un periodo di vacanze personali?

La situazione economica del paese consente di sperperare danaro pubblico per permettere al Presidente del Consiglio di raggiungere Villa Certosa per le sue vacanze personali? (con o senza ospiti a bordo)

P.S. I voli di stato, su decisione del governo, saranno d'ora in avanti gestiti dai servizi segreti (coperti dal segreto e dunque per poterli visionare si dovrà avviare un iter complesso e soprattutto ci sarà la possibilità di opposizione alla consegna).

- Feste private con "Escort"

Le feste private in residenze private sono cose "private".

Quali reati si configurano quando una "Escort" chiede favori personali ad un Presidente del Consiglio in carica (concessione per la costruzione di un residence) in cambio di "compagnia" ?

A che titolo un personaggio del mondo economico mette a disposizione di un Primo Ministro in carica "Escort" a pagamento?

Quali reati si configurano quando un personaggio del mondo economico fornisce "Escort" da lui pagate per partecipare a feste private nelle residenze private di un Primo Ministro in carica?

- Diritto all'informazione

I media hanno il diritto ed il dovere di dare informazioni corrette e complete.

I notiziari radio-televisivi e la stampa scritta, hanno dato informazioni corrette e complete sull'indagine della Magistratura di Bari sul caso di sospetta corruzione da parte di imprenditori pugliesi?

E’ corretto che un Primo Ministro in carica non senta la necessità di dare spiegazioni pubbliche (in un pubblico dibattito con contraddittorio) sugli argomenti della campagna organizzata da acuni organi di stampa (definita "spazzatura") ?

La sfera "privata" di un personaggio "pubblico" come un Primo Ministro in carica, sono esclusivamente fatti personali?

Se le illazioni di alcuni organi di stampa sono false, perchè il Primo Ministro non ha fino ad oggi presentato alcuna querela (A parte di quella presentata contro "El Pais" per aver pubblicato foto la cui pubblicazione è proibita in Italia)?

Chi ha dato voce alle condanne dell'ONU, della Chiesa Cattolica e del mondo civile sul pugno di ferro nei confronti degli immigrati e dei rifugiati?

- Moralità privata e responsabilità pubbliche

Nei paesi anglosassoni (Gran Bretagna, Stati Uniti D’america, Germania) i personaggi pubblici ed i politici rispondono pubblicamente della loro moralità personale.

In Germania l’ex cancelliere Helmut Koll è praticamente scomparso dalla vita pubblica per non aver saputo mantenere le promesse elettorali.

Negli Stati Uniti il caso Watergate portò alla richiesta di impeachment e alle dimissioni dell'allora Presidente degli Stati Uniti Richard Nixon.

In Gran Bretagna, il Primo Ministro laburista Gordon Brown sta lottando per la sua sopravvivenza politica ed il ministro del Lavoro James Pournell si è già dimesso per alcuni rimborsi non dovuti.

In Italia come si comportano i personaggi politici soggetto di scandali?

Link per conoscere quello che la stampa italiana non dice:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/silvio-berlusconi-ten-more-questions

http://www.elpais.com/global/

http://nytimes.com/

http://www.independent.co.uk/

roberto esposito on "Silvio Berlusconi: ten more questions "

roberto esposito — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:16:03 +0100

Ask question to Mr. Berlusconi seemed useless effort since he had no intention (so far) to answer and/or explain.

As long as we have a gleam of democracy in Italy, it is supposed that decision power is in the hands of Italian voters, therefore, instead of loosing time waiting for answers that will never come, I prefer to ask 10 question to Italian voters because I am interested indeed to know their deep intention:

Ten question to the Italians

1) Are you willing to observe all law and regulation? (Pay all due taxes, observe highway code, abandon sheer bad manners, build together a civilized community)

2) Are you willing to open your mind and listen your politic opponents without considering them as enemy?

3) Are you ready and prepeared to fight in order to give them the opportunity to expose their ideas?

4) Are you ready and prepeared to accept the results of political elections and consider any elected member as a representative of all Italians?

5) Are you willing to spend the same enthusiasm in political discussion as you spend on football discussion?

6) Are you ready and prepeared to stop struggle against the Establishments?

7) Are you willing to democratically discuss the changes of Democratic Enstablishment and Italian Constitution?

8) Are you ready and prepeared to work hard to have them changed democratically?

9) Are you ready and prepeared to work hard to improve the bad Italian reputation at international level (Mafia, corruption, spaghetti and mandolino, tifosi, good-for-nothing ....... )

10) Do you feel yourself an Italian citizen, an European citizen, a World citizen?

JEYASENTHI on "Sri Lanka - camps, media…genocide? "

JEYASENTHI — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:31:02 +0100

It is not CIVIL WAR but SYSTEMATIC RACIST GENOCIDE by Srilanka using Buddhism and Democracy to fool the world.
Srilankan army commander, Ministers and the Medievil Monks(please don't insult the Great Buddhism by naming the Monks as Buddhists because they humiliate Buddhism when they act and open their NAZI mouths every time when they talk)recently repeated their RACIST MOTTO - Srilanka ONLY for SInhalese not for Tamils or Muslims.
And, the Same Army Commander just days ago declared that TAMILS DON't NEED TO HAVE ANY POLITICAL SOLUTION AT ALL.
And, the president declared there is no Minorities- meaning The Srilanka going to COLONISE all island with SINHALESE to stop minorities to rise again demanding autonomy.
The NAKED SRILANKAN RACISM is OBVIOUS one not elusive but the whole world behaving like BLINDED gullible people even now after Srilanka locked the so called liberated 300,000 Tamils in the NAZI style BARBED WIRED CONCENTRATION CAMPS.
It is about time the whole world ISOLATE the Srilankan Sinhella fundamentalist NAZI regime like the APATHEID SOUTH AFRICA. Srilanka was the only one sent cricket team to APATHEID South Africa against the World Boycott.
And, hold UN referendum in North and East of the island to know the will of minorities like the one held in East Timor.
Tamils were the only owners of the ENTIRE ISLAND called Srilanka.
1)Muslims adopted Tamil as their mother tongue because Tamils were the only rulers of the island like we came to the UK and adopted English.

2)Sinhala language itself created out of Tamil, example 90% of Sinhala alphabet resembles and sounds similar to those of Tamil and more than 25% of Sinhala words are Tamil words.

Seyon on "Sri Lanka - camps, media…genocide? "

Seyon — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:24:39 +0100

2)Sinhala language itself created out of Tamil, example 90% of Sinhala alphabet resembles and sounds similar to those of Tamil and more than 25% of Sinhala words are Tamil words.

KyllieKay80 on "Uses of genocide: Kenya, Georgia, Israel, Sri Lanka"

KyllieKay80 — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:34:51 +0100

t's a shame that the word genocide even exists. It's human nature to oppress and retaliate. It's the natural flow of humanity.

How do we explain this? It is not so much human suffering as such which evidently bothers some people, but human suffering in so far as Israel was responsible for it

Kylie

Lose 40 Pounds Fast
Fast Way to Lose Weight

George W. Jones on "The new executive politics: a democratic challenge "

George W. Jones — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:45:38 +0100

Saskia is so wrong in saying the heart of the issue is the overweening power of the executive branch and the loss of power by the legislature, and that the answer is to strengthen the power of parliaments.
1. Her main example is the USA, which already has a separation of powers between executive and legislature, so if the dysfunctions she identifies are so apparent in the USA, we in the UK should not seek to replicate separation of powers here.
2. In the UK the governance problem is not the overweening power of the executive but its weakeness against the overweening power of the legislature seeking to acquire the separation of powers independence featured in the USA.
3. The overweening power of the legislature is symbolised in the new building for MPs, Portcullis House, a huge monstrosity housing luxurious offices and facilities for MPs.
4. The Thatcherite introduction in 1979 of a system of departmental select committees has so developed that many of them attempt to set themselves up as rival governments to the real government, propounding rival policies to those coming from the government that people voted to exercise the responsibilities of governing.
5. Some chairmen of select committees have been acting as if they were the equivalent of ministers, seeking publicity to antagonise the Government they were elected to support.
6.Not since the mid-19th century have so many MPs been so rebellious, voting against their own Government.
7. These overmighty MPs champion a variety of sectional special-interest and single-issue cause groups, deliberately challenging the attempts of the Government to promote the general public interest. Such groups make great use of MPs and select committees to advance their causes; they have captured much of the legislature.
8 The media praise such "independence" by rebel MPs to embarrass the Government; they denigrate Government whips and even loyalty to party. Supporting a party, even giving money to one, is treated as if it were a criminal offence, disqualifying a supporter of such a voluntary organisation from holding public office.
9. . The House of Lords, non-elected and unaccountable, has become in recent years more and more an obstacle to the elected Government.
10. The insidious advocates of separation of powers have already weakened the Government by enhancing the powers of judges, also non-elected and unaccountable, who frustrate the Government's policies for protecting the public interest.
11. The Government, far from overweening, is feeble and indecisive, almost paralysed in the face of attacks from the media and even from its own MPs, from select committees, the House of Lords the courts, and from the array of sectional pressure groups.
12 The power of the legislature in the UK has been increased and should be diminished, not futher enhanced. The Government should be empowered to promote the general public interest, and be held accountable to voters for its performance at general elections. Saskia should recognise the need for this new executive politics.

roderick Russell on "The new executive politics: a democratic challenge "

roderick Russell — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:14:14 +0100

May I comment on Saskia Sassen’s excellent article on the failure of democracy. She is absolutely correct when she says “The rebalancing of a disturbed and dysfunctional system needs to begin by recognizing the nature and scale of the problem.”

I would suggest that the situation is at its worst in countries such as the UK and Canada that have a parliamentary system of governance were the executive branch is not separated from the legislative branch, so that the democratic balance that an independent legislature can provide is effectively lost.

Ms. Sassen refers to corruption and lack of accountability which is surely a reflection on the ethics of the times. There will always be some corruption, but the question surely is – Has the level of corruption reached the point where powerful interests can effectively override rule of law; so that the democracy has in reality become just a sham. The measure of the quality of the democracy is not whether a country’s institutions respect rule of law most of the time, but that they also respect rule of law where their establishments are pulling the other way.

The problem is huge. When democratic institutions can flagrantly violate the principle of rule of law, then they have also chosen to abandon democracy. One practical example of this ongoing systematic failure of democracy is outlined in the wiki:

http://zerzetzen.wikispaces.com

The failure of democratic institutions to uphold rule of law is indeed a democratic challenge, and it is time that we recognized “the nature and scale of this problem”.

Roderick Russell
#207, 1733 -27 Ave. SW
Calgary AB T2T 1G9 Canada
403.229.0864

Felixfree on "Uses of genocide: Kenya, Georgia, Israel, Sri Lanka"

Felixfree — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:37:11 +0100

Genocide and war is the most shabby act wich humen can do!

Freebies

bigC - one last time on "The new executive politics: a democratic challenge "

bigC - one last time — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:06:21 +0100

An excellent article.

It's a bit troubling that although, as the author notes, the neo-liberal/free market model has been thoroughly discredited by the finance crisis, the trends she has identified continue to apply and are supported by most political and economic commentators.

Is this a time lag as the discredited commentators wait to be replaced by those who predicted this mess? Or are we simply returning to business as usual as the peak of this particular crisis (allegedly) passes?

bjmaclac on "A tale of two paradigms"

bjmaclac — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 07:11:02 +0100

The most disturbing reaction I get from reading an article such as this one is the realization that only a very small percentage of those with the ability to read it, actually will read it. That which is stimulating to only a few, does not appeal to the infotainment tastes of the so-called unwashed masses. Our global political masters are simply filling the power vacuum due to lack of interest - or any sense of political empowerment - by the late, great mass of civil society. Now that the discourse on internal and domestic security (most elonquently articulated by the demagogues of political and social atuthority) has been effective in internalizing citizens' fears about terrorists and terrorism; and has most effectively marginalized various themes on civil disbedience, we now have a most obedient and less critical typology of good democratic citizen.

"So long as I stay within the security of my home saying nothing, doing nothing, while I watch protesters on the evening news getting their faces rifle-butted, I have nothing to fear. Politics don't really matter all that much to me. Best left to the experts."

Not logged in Lawrence Efana on "Too little, too late? The UN and the global financial crisis "

Not logged in Lawrence Efana — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:22:32 +0100

Question-mark sub-part of the authors' title is more challenging than might otherwise be appreciated. Frankly, another question must be raised: What could The UN have done, thinking of the real power it doesn't have? Like others we come across often, who lament - wishing The UN could have the power it should, David Held explains ("Global challenges: accountability and effectiveness" (oD 17 January 2008) why the wishes are hard to fulfil in spite of the governance innovations of recent decades, which could equip it with more real power to live-up-to its global challenges and expectations. Held's primary point is: "weak and fragmented global-governance system" tend to stifle authoritative involvement due to "complex unbundling of sovereignty, territoriality and political forces", best evident in the plurality of actors, a variety of political processes, and diverse levels of co-ordination and operation.

The UN has been portrayed in many different ways. That we all know. It does achieve a lot of the good and so further peace and progress. But, should we settle thereafter to make a sense of it in the global financial crisis - we are entering into trouble waters! Like operative political values, especially at nation states' and regional levels wittingly or unwittingly put limits on UN operative frames, so too we are likely to equivocally argue that so-called economic modus operandi - values] promise not to relax the limits. In all as independent or interdependent areas, surely we see the impact of governance innovations. The hope in "the opportunity" referred to by both authors might in the long-run mature through such an impact.

That the burdens of political and economic systems constrain the operational functions of The UN: world organization] hence alarm expectations of peoples in various parts of the world should warn about real achievements or failures attributed to activities of various small and larger group world summit meetings, all resulting lessons, tied particularly to the meltdowns and the impacts on ODA and ODI, remain parts of above burdens. Why ECOSOC, for example, might not have played a significant role in tackling current financial crisis could be hard to separate from the general state of world politics and economics as we know, sympathize with or criticize - for want of best way to align and change. The legitimacy of IFIs, their modus-operandi, as a realization of the best ways to use investments as a part of the equalizing tool in search of balance and sustainable development in the world, might have to be seen beyond technical efficiency or interests, to convince about the moral integrity of its functions.

It is nice to note in the paper that its authors agree that one of the ways to keep abreast on interrelated issues is for the UN to actively coordinate dialogues on country-development models: country case-study routines to support world sustainable development. Impossible to say how many readers of this paper closely focus on: "exit strategies" from the present crisis. Similarly impossible to say how readers of the paper respond to cited individuals and all the references listed. Personally, I feel the joy to have focused on the exhilarating interview with Paul Krugman - the Nobel Prize Economist]. Since the current 'much-talked and written about meltdown' gained an extraordinary foothold alongside the US presidential election campaigns, we are living to see culminations upon culminations. There might be other interpretations and summaries of history of the crisis and so also opinions about "exit strategies". Someone might argue: whatever - are un-free from politics, values and technical strategies. I wouldn't argue any differently and yet it strikes me pragmatic and sane to see Paul Krugman, well embedded in history of this economic ailment, shy-not-away in his favor for 'regulation' instead of 'deregulation'. Not only that, so let me quote from the said interview: to stress on why I admire his argument: "...... All of that is true. I have a more mundane view about what we do. I just want a stronger welfare state, and a little bit more social democracy. And some restoration of the labour movement as a counterweight. I'm not sure - maybe I'm just not thinking about it deeply enough. I guess I've got the same attitude Keynes had, which was he was looking for almost technical fixes. You're looking for ways to fix the parts that have gone wrong rather than replace the whole thing....."

Many have been critical against raw capitalism and greed, and for that reason agitated for system overhaul of various undefined dimensions. What do you expect in the heat of confusion. Now we take the time to calm down and note that the profuse leak in our house is possible to fix by calling in plumbers. Don't miss it, we must also have mindset plumbers! The UN future, doubt me not lies partly here!

Eduardo 'how to make friends' Amado on "Uses of genocide: Kenya, Georgia, Israel, Sri Lanka"

Eduardo 'how to make friends' Amado — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:48:50 +0100

What is going to happen there?

That regime is absolutely insane, with the supreme leader basically saying that democracy is non-existent.

I'm really not sure about the future of that nation, and I'm afraid for them.

(Contributing author at - How to make Friends - TheFriendshipBlueprint.com)

Not logged in on "Silvio Berlusconi: ten more questions "

Not logged in — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:37:57 +0100

I'd like to invite all the first ladies who are going to come to Italy with their husbands for G8 to change their mind. Don't come to Italy.
Berlusconi is a monster, against democracy and he has no respect for women. For him they are only sexual toys. Besides he permitted to their stupid newspaper to insult his wife when she ask divorce.
DON'T COME TO ITALY PLEASE. This will be a bad trick to play to our small small Napoleon