Text:
”Good day to you all. The day started off with a great interview with Carlo Azeglio Ciampi in La Repubblica, curiously, however the significance of this interview gets a bit cushioned by La Repubblica, because this interview is all against the current Head of State, Giorgio Napolitano, and who is it that gave this interview to Massimo Giannini? The previous Head of State, Carlo Azeglio Ciampi.


Now I’ll read to you this bit and you can tell me if it reminds you of something: “reforms are done for the citizens and not for individuals. I’ve always thought that and today I am even more convinced than ever: we’ve had enough of “ad personam” laws that don’t resolve the problems of the people and don’t help the country to improve” OK, well, lots of people can follow that. Then Ciampi, who is now a Life Senator and was from 1999 to 2006, the President of the Republic, and who has thus seen loads of those laws that were not for the citizens but were for one person or his accomplices and has even turned back a few , (you’ll remember that Ciampi returned to sender the number one Gasparri law, he returned to sender the Castelli judicial shake up, he returned to sender the Pecorella law, the one that abolished the appeal by the Public Prosecutor but not be the defendant, and then a few other snippets, but anyway, those were the most important things, those that were “ad aziendam and ad Benlusconem” or “ad Berlusconum” are those three there, that he rejected. Unfortunately he did not reject the “Save Rete Quattro” law, that is the decree to save Rete Quattro, that had the signature of Berlusconi, that is of the one who benefited from the decree that saved Rete Quattro or otherwise – within a week – it was December, Christmas of 2003 – according to the verdict of the Constitutional Court, the analogue broadcasting of Rete Quattro would have had to be shut down and sent off onto satellite, or , in order to keep going on analogue, it would have had to have a change of ownership, that is to be sold off with a serious advertising disadvantage for Berlusconi, who however continued to gather in the cash from the advertising with a TV station that without that decree, was unauthorised and that was legalised “ex post”, naturally without overcoming the points raised by the Constitutional Court and then of the European Court of Justice. Bear in mind that, if you are there trying desperately to sort things out with these digital terrestrial devices, you owe it to Berlusconi and Gasparri: we should call it the “digital Berlusconi/ Gasparri” not “digital terrestrial”! This “ciofeca”, this medieval technology that doesn’t work, that turns itself off in front of your eyes, that breaks up the image for you and that lets you see little squares like a cross word puzzle, the thing called digital terrestrial, has been flogged off to us as the “technology of the future” and in reality it’s much worse than the preceding technology, and it even costs a lot more, so that you can see much worse, and for which you are paying to see much worse than before. It’s called Gasparri/ Berlusconi. We are paying for the conflict of interests of Berlusconi and his valet, his servant “Cavalier” Maurizio Gasparri, because it was he who told the story to a country that lapped it up and even to a Head of State who should have behaved differently, in my opinion, who according to his second version of the Gasparri law, the one that followed the one that Ciampi returned to sender, that Italy would have had digital terrestrial by 2006. We are now in 2009 and even now we can see into what state this technology has fallen, that by 2006, we would have had digital terrestrial, which would have given us thousands and thousands of channels: having all those thousands of channels, as this gentleman said, Berlusconi’s three disappear and thus there’s no longer that dominant position denounced by the Constitutional Court.

...