geenoo Banned

In short... I think I’ll pass too. I can’t afford to read books where I have to pay attention to every word. Tasty review.

It's not possible.... I read the review by skipping like a frog to avoid "surprises," then I go to the comments below and... almost you guys even give away the ending, maybe not the ending, but if you describe the mechanisms of the film that's even worse!!! Damn.... shit... one waits for years.... damn....

One thing: why is it that after millennia, only Israelis tend to maintain their "race"? I mean: all the other various ethnicities... blacks, yellows, Hispanics, Chinese, Indians, Europeans have, over the centuries, mixed until they became part of entire nations (the U.S., for example: a melting pot of many ethnicities with a president who is a man of color). Why do Jews need and want to prioritize this predominance of their race above all and everyone else? What sense does it make? Why, after 2000 years of history in the U.S., France, Italy, China, have they not integrated? Is it possible that after 2000 years, I say 2000, they felt the need for a new nation, all with a different mother tongue, all with their own nationality, etc.? I mean, I do not claim to be an Etruscan to the four winds. It comes to mind, just randomly, the story of the Kurds, driven out by everyone, killed, martyred, with recent genocides as well. Wouldn't it be the case for them, for example, to be given a piece of land, even if it were among dry and desolate mountains? Oh, mine is a sincere, straightforward, and absolutely non-retorical question. I have not and have not given myself the answer. Regarding the millennia-long history of wars, oppressions, tragedies, the Holocaust, etc., I prefer to evaluate case by case, year by year, situation by situation what happens in Israel and to its people. That is, I assess very, very differently the Holocaust and Sharon's walk, what it meant, and everything that came after. Just as I do with all other episodes. I would lean towards a temporal detachment: every act must be evaluated for what it is and not always seen and assessed in light of the 2000 years of preceding history.

The Stylo video is cool, the "song" isn't bad.

Uhhhh... enjoyment!

DE LORENZO: Premising that, despite many opposing opinions here on debaser, I try to take your posts seriously. 1) I confirm, I am on the side of the judges even when they condemn Sofri, when they acquit the Law Enforcement Agencies in the first instance for the events of the G8 in Genoa, and when they condemn them again on appeal (yesterday). 2) I too believe that Berlusconi and Dell'Utri fear the consequences of a possible conviction against them. They could end up in jail, given the pending proceedings against them. And considering that, once convicted, Berlusconi would be forced to leave his position, finding himself exposed on the front of the ad-personam laws that could still be useful to him. This explains his fifteen-year frenzy of saying he will reform justice while only making small laws that, even after many "smoky turns," serve to save his skin. 3) Agreed, according to the law, a person should only be declared guilty of an act after a definitive sentence. But if you allow me, I would like to know everything (as in every civilized country in the world) about who will represent me in Parliament since this will influence the fate of my country; 4) Minzolini speaks for himself. He is turning TG1 into a caricature. He is a sad servant. The fact that Ingroia also says nonsense is understandable. But Minzolini makes no distinctions. His editorials are the most mindless I have had the misfortune to listen to from mamma Rai for many years now. Even the CAF couldn't have done worse. I conclude with some reasoning: why have Berlusconi and his government, as I said before, never made a serious law on justice? Why do trials always last decades? Why is there a lack of personnel, photocopy paper, etc.? Why, for those who know something about it, has nothing really changed? Here is my formula for improving justice: More magistrates. The state should conduct an examination for 3,000 magistrates a year, not 300. Because they are few and have to do a mountain of work. Moreover, being few increases their power (which makes no sense for them to have in this measure, in a civilized country, eh..) and makes it easier for those who see them as targets. Let there be once and for all this blessed equality between the defense and the prosecutor. Detaching the latter from the magistrate. And above all, let's increase human and non-human resources. Let's make these offices, as well as the courts, work 8 hours a day and not 5 as is currently the case, because there are no clerks (unpaid). Let's give more resources to the law enforcement agencies. Where do we find the resources? Let's cut public spending. Chop, chop.. away with provinces, away with mountain communities, away with a thousand useless public offices. And instead? Instead, intercepts are changed, and a short trial is made... and maybe even a nice DL when they are unable to respect the most elementary legal norms.

I'm really glad about the participation in a topic that is, in some ways, "difficult" and not very popular. TELESPALLABOB: I agree with you. Interceptions alone are not enough. I've talked about "spark" in this regard. Interceptions are usually just the starting point, the beginning of an investigation. It's clear that then witnesses, documents, facts, etc. are needed, just as they have been. But interceptions are essential to get started. Ingroia is "just" a prosecutor. In a normal country, I wouldn't see him as a kind of hero. Something that you describe as "Chilling." He would be just a simple state official. Unfortunately, it's different in Italy. And if a parent has to point out a role model for their children, I'm sure that today I would choose Ingroia (and many other magistrates). Unfortunately.

No, wait... on one thing you are right: that music is no longer there.

Coolermaster this morning you woke up very '80s disco party vibes! Do you feel sorry for those who lived that period as a tacky person, in small towns or even in less privileged families? I feel very "close" to you if you do. I was the geek who lived in a small town. But I still enjoyed the '80s. You, of course... were lucky in your Milanodabere, with parties, nightclubs, and multimillion-dollar shopping. But then, the party ended. However, I believe that if you were still 20, you would feel right at home in this new Milanodafottere.

Thank you all. Think about how much this matters to me to write about it after years of floating around here :-) Telespallabob: One) Exactly. You read it right. The spark for the maxi-trial was a wiretap of a Sicilian mafia member who was desperately seeking help by calling someone named "Roberto" in America. This was reported to us by Ingroia in the meeting I mentioned. Do we want to at least believe him, since he collaborated with Falcone and Borsellino starting from 1987? That "Roberto" was indeed Tommaso Buscetta. Anyway, we shouldn't be too relaxed because the various reforms also target the law on collaborators...; Two) Of course I know. But I wasn't supposed to write a question and answer. It's a review. A way to throw out some suggestions. A personal interpretation. It's not a journalistic investigation like "Il fatto". For that, there’s Travaglio. Three) Exactly, that passage is chilling. As someone understood, it is deliberately chilling. It's also rhetorical, exaggerated, and paradoxical. I wanted to simplify, to subliminally convey the situation. The exaggeration seemed crystal clear to me. It's obvious that a magistrate is just doing their job. But perhaps you didn't live through the years of the massacres or you haven't fully processed what happened, both before and after. In short, you can tell me everything, but saying that "I didn't understand the meaning of certain battles" is a no. You can't say that, for many reasons you don't know.