Dear Mr. Director. Tarquin
if not thrown so brazen in politics was better.
We sympathized with much less embarrassment to a man who was wrongly seen nailed to a mistake. We would have done without reservations, as children of that the Church always teaches us not to judge, and to distinguish between sin and the sinner.
However, it is not respectful of your readers to continue to pretend that we are all so biased and gullible is not to be noticed that the ruling still exists, and that you're not just talking about an anonymous letter.
When Dr. Boffo has not even wanted to make public acts, and honor to the full truth, it was insulting to our intelligence to bet everything on the theory of libel and slander.
Okay, we are Catholics living in the world, so we men of the world, as well as charitable people. We understand that bad luck can happen in life to leave the phone unattended, and to have so betrayed by a wayward friend who used to molest a girl, plus he knows us.
can happen, for further misfortune, that friend ends up dying before they can accommodate all take the blame in the court ... and can also happen to be incredibly unlucky then goes to end the lawsuit but the call girl molested then does a time, or forgets, or refuses or whatever ... but in the end is not to say to the judge hearing your voice and then know that you were not the abuser, so they must perform.
And just to not to miss anything, it can also happen that when because of that incredible event, after a few years you are in contempt before the world as harassers and "known homosexuals," here, just then - at worst - it can happen that the same girl, hiding behind the no comment, and once again not even consider the case that was the harasser was another bad story, and in that homosexuality had nothing to do.
So, you may occasionally end up being affected as a result of a series of unlucky coincidences. But maybe at that point should be a bit 'of caution before you start shouting slander and libel, if it happens that a colleague's uncharitable you reproach the thing in front of everyone and do not even want him, as judges, to believe what has been your unfortunate story.
Yet you just installed as the interim Director , instead of trying to turn the page and blind us, we immediately asked to judge just on that matter and on the theory of defamation. With an impenetrability to the evidence of the facts - especially when he brought up the television - which frankly we would have expected from her, having read his articles.
In that part of the public still can not think of deployment criteria, you are given the idea that communication between people of Catholic logic family (In the worst sense of the word) takes precedence over everything. Also on that love for the truth in love, that we've been called recently by Pope Benedict.
In a country where now, at least in some quarters, even the kids who go home with a bad report card are tempted to blame Berlusconi, did not feel the need to see your journal so shamelessly with this easy to cede recall.
It has lost all credibility Future , and frankly has been astonished to see that this so decomposed to face the unpleasant question was adopted, first, by the highest representative of your "publisher".
Cardinal Bagnasco was really the minimum to expect more caution. It is unacceptable that this has not taken that he represents a group of newspapers, but all the Italian bishops, while Victor Felts, by contrast, represents only a newspaper, not the head of government.
In these situations, arguing only between peers, and the manner and tone befitting the reality that it represents, would have been more than appropriate.
So, dear Director, she has explicitly asked readers to judge: it is not so sure of their opinion.
0 comments:
Post a Comment