Now I know it’s old news but let me add 2 final questions and my own broader conclusion about this matter;
So here goes;
1) Was Mr. Jean-Noël Barrot responding in parliament – when announcing his decision – to an accurate representation by Ms. Caroline Yadan of what Ms. Albanese said and if not was Ms. Yadan ever questioned about making any false accusation or is fake news now the order of the day; remember that adding or omitting a word can change the entire context – right?
2) If there are indeed concerns about Ms. Francesca Albanese’s current and/or previous remarks has she been given an opportunity to respond before the decision to ask for her resignation. After all she does represent the United Nations and when such accusation are levelled against politicians/government ministers it is customary to provide them with ample opportunity to directly defend themselves in parliament or in some other public forum by directly confronting their accusers rather than each making statements separately in different settings/media platforms and the one with the stronger “hand” can just make his/her own interpretation and run with it. In fact had Mr. Barrot chosen that direct approach in confronting Ms. Albanese he may well have won the argument in such a situation based on merit and that would have been totally fine/proper and I suspect it would have also given him plenty in the way of credit along the way. You see; the concept of shutting down someone you disagree with is slowly becoming the norm in politics nowadays; kinda like the “executive order” trump enjoys using when confronting those who stand in the way of his narratives-he just signs them off.
So to sum up let me respectfully suggest that there are bigger issues at play here if one only cares/dares to consider the bigger picture rather than the theatrics driving it. I’m also slowly coming to the conclusion that the concept of (left, right and centre are really becoming meaningless in politics); what is more meaningful is confronting/dealing with issues based on their merits and nothing else and here its either a “Yes” or a “No” – as simple as that; I can’t care less about the ideology you subscribe to because its natural that we all have one based on our life experiences so lets move on and be more pragmatic in our views and much less confrontational about our belief system; obviously so long as it’s NOT dehumanising in any way, shape or form.
Well, that’s my final word on this matter, and I’m sure some will probably love this part most of all..
A Post about Democracy
Democracy’s Major Upgrade – Moving to Democracy 2.0 To Eliminate Political Hijacking