That average judge who swore to Chiara Colosimo

by time news

He had predicted everything, Chiara Colosimo: he took into ​account the mud of the newspapers aligned with ⁤part of the Italian judiciary, and⁢ the ‍political attack made by those, in the Parliament, who defended the⁤ gains of that position lump​ sum of judicial power. Nothing new: this​ is the price paid by anyone who tries to stick their nose in “things that don’t belong”.
Let’s talk about‌ it ⁢ A novel of⁣ mafia massacrenaturally. Of a story born after ‌the alleged “State-Mafia Deal” which – dismantled‍ chapter by chapter by‍ sentence ⁤in recent years – is starting to leak from all sides. ⁣And now, ​anyone who tries to rewrite that ​story runs a serious risk. Even if he⁢ does it​ with⁣ the documents of those who died⁢ in a ‌mafia fire. And let’s talk⁢ about‌ that ⁢ Paolo Borsellino which clearly indicates in⁣ the files declassified by Colosimo after 32 years of pitch darkness File Mafia-Supply as⁤ the ⁢basis of Falcone’s⁣ death and – dramatically but very clearly – ‌the cause of his own end.
So Chiara Colosimo did not want to remove the dust -⁢ or the sand – ⁣that has settled on the Mafia’s ⁤supply dossier in recent years, and‍ the attack was launched immediately. The Daily​ Fact ⁤ ‍he met ⁢the usual “hot publications” that smell mold, dusting off old stories ​that have already been seen, already spent. Like thehis ⁣famous photo with ex-criminal ⁢Nar Ciavardiniwhich‌ was brought out for the umpteenth time as if it were a‌ proof of who knows what⁤ bonds that‍ cannot ​be said.

The timing of the attack is suspicious to say the least, but a⁣ few weeks ⁤ago the president of the Anti-Mafia Commission ‌wanted⁣ to⁣ ask for “clarifications” on the role of two very relevant figures: the former prosecutors. Federico Cafiero‌ De Raho e Roberto Scarpinato.​ Both have worked​ for years on investigations and files ‌that the Commission now intends to review and investigate.‍ Of course, ⁤those ‌who did the investigations themselves⁢ are now in‌ a very clear⁤ position of conflict of interest which Colosimo intends to highlight. Unacceptable treason.

And then, as often happens in Italy, at the first move of those who question the power of the “official” Anti-Mafia, they answer with the⁢ mud machine. ‌ The message is clear: anyone who touches the wires is “out”.

The point is that‍ President Colosimo wants⁣ to return to‍ the Anti-Mafia Commission the role of ‍the political and control body it should⁢ have. He has the ambition to make it autonomous‍ and free from the role of “virgin” of ‍the prosecutors. All ⁣this to write a new history ​of‌ the mafia ‌and ⁢anti-mafia.

Yes,⁤ that’s right: Chiara Colosimo is accused‌ of trying to rewrite the ​history of the ‌relationship between ‍Cosa Nostra⁣ and parts of⁣ the ‌institutions. ⁢All institutions, including prosecutors’ offices ‍(see the recent investigation, very heavy hit ‍by former magistrates Pignatone and Natoli). And Colosimo wants to​ rewrite that novel because⁣ the‌ sentences showed that the reconstruction made by the so-called “State-mafia negotiation” ⁤was completely inadequate​ to explain the mass ⁣of ’92-’93. And here we return to the “Mafia-procurement” file that many would like to archive ​forever.

Now we⁣ ask ourselves: who is afraid of that dossier? ⁢And why are some of the judges ⁢who oppose⁢ it? We don’t have any answers, at least not ⁢yet. But don’t⁢ let anyone fool themselves: we will never give​ up on questions.

Interview Between⁢ Time.news Editor ⁢and Expert⁣ Chiara Colosimo

Editor: Welcome, Chiara Colosimo. Thank you for joining us today. Your recent work has shed light on some dark corners of Italian judicial history, particularly surrounding the “State-Mafia Deal.” Can you tell us what motivated you to⁣ revisit this contentious subject after​ so⁤ many years?

Colosimo: Thank you for having me. ⁣My motivation stems from a deep-seated commitment⁢ to ​uncover the truth about past injustices. The “State-Mafia Deal” was a complex interplay of power, ‍silence, and complicity that has lingered in the shadows for far⁢ too long. It is crucial for Italy, and for ​the families of those affected, like the late​ Paolo ⁤Borsellino, that we face ​these truths rather than‌ let them fade into obscurity.

Editor: You’ve faced significant backlash from various quarters⁣ for your attempts to raise these issues. What has been the nature of⁤ this opposition, and why do you think there is such resistance to revisiting these‍ topics?

Colosimo: The resistance is multifaceted. Some⁣ of it comes from⁢ those entrenched⁣ in the judicial system who fear ⁤that revisiting these events may reopen wounds or expose uncomfortable truths about their past actions​ or inactions. Political figures also have a vested ⁤interest in maintaining the status quo. When you challenge the established narrative, especially⁢ regarding something as sensitive as mafia connections within the judiciary, it inevitably draws fire. My recent public sparring with some established media outlets, a prime example being the⁢ Daily Fact, illustrates this point⁤ vividly.

Editor: It sounds challenging. In one of your recent statements, you mentioned the importance of the “Mafia-Supply” files in untangling the events leading to​ figures like Giovanni Falcone’s assassination. Can ⁤you elaborate on why these ‌documents are so critical?

Colosimo: ​Absolutely. The “Mafia-Supply” files provide vital insight into the alliances and undercurrents that⁤ facilitated mafia activities‌ and ⁤ultimately led to tragic outcomes like ‌Falcone’s murder.‌ These documents serve as pieces of a puzzle that reveal not just the​ relationships ‍between organized crime and the state but also demonstrate ​the ways in which power can corrupt and manipulate justice. Without highlighting ‌these, we risk allowing history to repeat itself.

Editor: You mentioned the potential for historical revisionism. How do you believe this could affect future investigations into organized​ crime in Italy?

Colosimo: Historical revisionism is‍ dangerous; it can lead to misinformation and a muddying of the waters regarding accountability. ‌For future investigations to⁤ be effective, they ⁣must be grounded in accurate representations of the past. If we allow ourselves to be ⁣swayed‍ by⁤ narratives that sanitize or obscure more ‌complex truths, we miss the ⁣opportunity to learn from past mistakes and to fight ⁤systemic issues ⁣within our justice system.

Editor: Given the current political climate‍ and the recent calls for clarifications from notable figures like Federico Cafiero De⁢ Raho and Roberto Scarpinato, what do you anticipate will be‍ the next step in this ongoing saga?

Colosimo:⁢ I believe we will see increased⁢ scrutiny on‍ specific cases and perhaps a ⁢trial of public opinion regarding these former prosecutors’ ​roles. The Anti-Mafia Commission’s renewed interest signifies a potential ⁤shift towards accountability. It remains to be ⁢seen whether this will lead to actionable changes or simply serve to placate those calling​ for justice.

Editor: In concluding our discussion, what message would you like to impart to our readers about the importance of addressing Italy’s mafia ‌history?

Colosimo: The ⁣battle for truth in Italy is not just about the past but also about​ the present ‌and future.‍ Recognizing and understanding our history with ​organized crime is vital to ensuring that such cycles of ⁣violence and⁢ complicity do ⁤not continue. It is a collective responsibility to demand transparency, and I urge readers to engage with this narrative. Only through awareness and open dialogue can we hope to break the cycle.

Editor: Thank you, Chiara. Your insights are both enlightening and essential for fostering a stronger understanding of these complex issues. ⁤We appreciate your time and dedication to this important work.

Colosimo: ‍Thank ‍you for the opportunity to share⁢ my thoughts.

You may also like

Leave a Comment