2 Video - Domenica 7 Aprile - Dott. Rosario

Don't miss what Andrea, our teacher, says about the last sentences. Attention, who has deletions, who has lost, who has been suspended from work, who has had damages, etc. etc. It is clear that mortality has increased, it is clear that this genetic treatment, he said it even in the European Commission, did not block at all the hematoma, he never said it blocked the infection. Good evening everyone, in the last month many things have happened, but tonight there is a change in course, I ask you for a little patience. I ask you for a little patience and sentences, in particular three, one from the Constitutional Court, one from the Court of Cassation and one from the Court of Appeal in Livorno. I'll tell you about it next week, don't worry. As well as a fundamental aspect for the infamous Legevon Enzyme. By the way, just a note, we talked before about the inoculation for papillomavirus, keep in mind that it is not mandatory. There is still a week of suspense, we'll see next week in detail. Why? Because those five minutes tonight, I would like to draw your attention to a fundamental thing. I wonder, do we have to give up without even fighting? You know what I'm talking about, elections. More and more often we have many who keep telling us it's useless to go and vote, it's useless to go and vote because you are not recognized by anyone. Ah, but once they are elected, they all become the same dough. Gentlemen, it's not like that. Absolutely not. It's not like that and we can prove it. First of all, they showed me, they told me, but Giuseppe Chiesa, he said that no one represents us and therefore it's useless to go and vote. Let's say the whole thing. If you go and see, it's all printed, because let's remember, Giuseppe Chiesa died suddenly. I'm not saying anything. It was April 26, 2012. But he died suddenly that night in Rome. But that's another story, another point. Let's move on. He founded his own party, he founded his own media and he was going to vote. He was consistent. Other people have also been consistent. Once you get there, because they say they are all, they all eat in the same canteen. How did they tell me? Yes, they sit separately to eat together. It's not like that. There are exceptions. There are very important exceptions. So, what do we have to say? First of all, I have a fundamental doubt that could, I remember the condition, that these people who tell us to go and vote, it's because they could be supported by a lobby that, instead, is interested that we don't go and vote. With a very simple excuse. They say they don't have the representativeness, they can't do anything. No, gentlemen. Why? The people who go and vote, whether they are many or few, look that they have managed a party, that there is a quorum for the validity of the elections, political, European, regional. So, if they go and vote in 20 out of 11 million, those 20 are made up to 100, so 20 voters, 100%. Someone took 10 votes, if you want to cover the majority, you take 55% of the seats in Parliament, in the House of Representatives, rather than in the Senate of the Republic. This, must be explained to me by those gentlemen who say they don't have representativeness, the people who are elected. There is also another gentleman who has now returned and says, no, Meloni was not, they were evaluating the last elections, Meloni is not the majority of Italians because it was voted only by 25%. No, gentlemen. We must not say all those who are part of the electoral body, we must see how many went to express themselves. Then we can forget that the law of 1957 that said there is no longer a vote, this is what we want, which was removed in 1993, perhaps also because in 1993 there was an increase of people who no longer vote. But remember that voting means choosing, and if you don't choose, it means that you give up and apply to someone else. So it is very important, also because these gentlemen who fight a lot, remember me a lot. I would like to make a quotation, from the Gospel of John, chapter 11, verse 16. Take a look at what Thomas said, a week before, that we all go, Jesus, with you. If you die, we will all die. How many died? How many were under the cross when he was crucified? This is obvious, then logically no one can break the religion he wants. But how many were under it? How many fought? They all went away. So the times have passed. Let's see a moment where we can defend ourselves in a correct way, also for those who died. It happened to me, yes, it happened to me now, an incredible thing. We have a new friend, Dr. Rosario will introduce him, a truly important person. I will stop here for this week. Good evening. Later I will continue. Wait, wait, Mrs. Laura Castelli was already honorable, she came to Turin to contribute, to unite all groups of dissent, all groups of dissent in one big group for the people. Because there is no right and left, and so she came today to contribute to the various groups of dissent, but also to the people who are faithful to the Constitution and human rights, so, excuse me, Andrea, if a person does not go to vote, he simply allows that 20% to do everything he should not do. If the trees are cut in Corso Belgio, or in the Royal Gardens, we have discovered that there are 60 neighborhoods, it is because someone gave them the center and power to that 20% to do that. If they have made the largest collection of human history in Italy, if you do not put the genetic material that does not block the invention of tomorrow's work, it is because abstentionism has said, I'm not going to vote, but it has allowed that government, it does not care about the parties, to that ideology, which here is the struggle for the human rights of the Constitution, to those people who have violated the right from article 32 to do what they want. So abstentionism is nothing else, no, I'm not doing what you want, because my grandchildren do not have to make vermeal, my grandchildren do not have to eat synthetic meat or synthetic wine, my grandchildren must be able to eat Italian food, farmers must not disappear because they put the votive vote. Absolutely not. So this is the fight, also political, but violent, for human rights and the Constitution, or we continue to violate. Those who do not vote allow this stuff here. I am against any form of let it pass, because these are the vocations of the human rights of the Constitution, clearly. Come, I introduce you, I know you will come to Turin to help this effort. So, Laura, please. Laura Castelli, I thank you for this hospitality, my two friends told me to come and see what Rosario does. And what Rosario does with the citizens. So I came here for this, it's a bit out of the blue, this was not planned, but we can say that the vote is an important issue, especially because if you do not do what you think is right for the people you share with and represent, someone will do it for you. And the institutions that today are seen as those places where you do not have to go, because they suck, because when you enter you do not want to leave anymore, because when you enter you are different, are also those places where honest people, when they enter, are able to continue to be honest and they can make a difference and they do. I say this because this is my personal experience, which is that of a person who started in activism, in civilization, in their own territory, and for a thousand reasons of life has made paths and has always done the accounts with his conscience. Today I can continue to get up in the morning and look in the mirror because I have never changed what I was able to do for the people who asked me. I have taken care a lot of municipalities, I have taken care a lot of social. I have made reforms that have allowed people to have rights that they did not have before, but it is not a merit, no one tells it, you will never find this stuff in the newspapers, you will not find it, and I am happy so. I did it because I had to do it and because they asked me to do it and I was able to do it. When that experience was over, instead of getting me to buy from any party, I decided to start doing what I started when I was 15 years old, that is, to fight for the things I believe in. And I started from scratch, totally from scratch, with the experience I had, which can certainly be even more helpful than what I had when I was 15 years old, and I realized that in the meantime many things had happened, that is, more and more people did not go to vote anymore, more and more people were put in that category called the anti-system, the dissent, and more and more people believed that continuing to remain separated in this dissent could be an added value. Today this parliament is in a bad position because the world of dissent has fought to the death without getting together. I did it for human logic, only human, the name to put on the list, the symbol to choose, these are normal things, to be human, for which we must forgive ourselves, but mistakes that have changed history, because today this parliament, if it had had another history, a truly united world of dissent, that today would have inside that parliament different people, people who today, when I continue to read the rules, I have been in parliament for 10 years, more than 5 years in government, 8 years of public money, today when I read those laws, I read them, I understand the damage they do, and I ask myself, regardless of who votes in favor or against, because often the vote in favor or against is an ideology, I read it, I understood it, and I say, wow, in this parliament, if there were different people, you would do other things. It happened to me to be on the roof of Montecito to defend the constitution, because it could not be changed, it was a bit of a mess. I could do it, so what I want to tell you is, I will not repeat my name, I will not tell you what I will do from now on, because this is not it, but I tell you that deciding not to vote is a choice that we can no longer make, because we have come to the end, there is nothing else to give as a gift of our life, we have come to the maximum of the solidarity that we could give them, we have come to the maximum of the rights that we have given them, we have come to the maximum of all these things, there is no space. I know that you will come and so on, the concept is, many know it, not everyone knows it, my role is to fight abstentionism, my role is to say, if you do not want to vote, our grandchildren continue to suffer what they have suffered, there is one of the various attempts and that of going to write. That 20-25% is commanding right and left, obeying the current European Commission, and it is only 20-25%, it would be enough that 30% of those 70% went to vote, and we get to the second point, and they go home, they all go home, they must be poor people, I do not care, but I support, I support, I support all the forces of dissent, and I repeat, as Humility says, in all squares, in all parks, for four years, I support as long as the last four years, I have been in front of hospitals, in front of the prefecture, in the squares, to give the truth, to divulge the truth, risking life, from minor crime, from organized crime. So, dear abstentionist, you say, but if they go to the parliament, you are talking about something serious now, if they go to the parliament, they go to buy and write, no, here there are people who have had the courage, like you, to do civil disobedience, to be suspended from work, to eat bread and tomato for months, you have been able, I have not, so you, if you change, I give you all my votes, all my votes, that they are people of the last four years, and not recycled, then I support everyone. Bye, goodbye. There will be? Yes. Who asks who should vote? Follow, follow the next lessons and you will see that a group will be there. Thank you. However, it will certainly be a people made, a party made by the people, then we play it, it goes wrong, but not abstentionism. A wife who allows her husband to do whatever he wants, then it is obvious that he becomes a victim. There are, and sometimes you have to know how to say no at the right time, it's called dignity, but above all, save the guard. Bye. Yes, however, they told me that you can not wait a week, so I will summarize briefly what I had announced and was foreseen. In the last month, we witnessed three very important sentences. The first sentence is the Constitutional Court, which was already commented on by many other illustrious people, but they did not highlight, in my opinion, an important aspect. That is, I briefly summarize what happened. We are talking about a law of the autonomous province of Bolzano. Remember, the autonomous province of Bolzano with the province of Trento are two entities that can pass laws. Why have I always told you, learn the hierarchy of the sources of law, so that no one can take us around? Very well. In this case, the Constitutional Court has nothing but revalidated this concept, that is, in Bolzano, if you remember, there was this law, which said that all those exercising public exercise, all those who have certain activities, they must absolutely check the green certification, otherwise they will be sanctioned. Well, there was someone who was sanctioned, we arrived in the Constitutional Court, the sentence was to be provided on March 28th, and the Constitutional Court said in the hierarchy of the sources that there cannot be a subordinate law that goes against a subordinate law, because that is an exclusive competence of the State. So, what happened? It was declared unconstitutional, so with the law of the province of Bolzano it was removed, all the sanctions must not be paid and only for. But why is it important? Because if we spend a moment and look at our rights, this sentence is also important because of what? No! Because of what? No! Why? When we go to say I don't wear a mask, and he says, but there is the circular, the circular in the hierarchy of the sources of the law, where is it? So, it referred to Chiare Rettere ten days ago the Constitutional Court that governs the hierarchy of the sources. To many in this regard, to many commentators in this regard, it has escaped. Let's remember it. So, you have to put on a new light, no, because there is no law, God and Article 31 of the Constitution. There is the circular, but the circular and the subdelegate, above all, let's also remember the subdelegate, let's remember that in April there will be the sentence of merit of the late section 3. Because we had the suspension that was not given, but now that there are still a few inquiries, we will get there. We must be the first. Why are we considered ignorant? Think that the right has been taken away from everyone, from everyone, but really everyone, the study addresses. Because many come, some are still there, but in high schools they do not exist. In many activities they do not exist. But there is the famous thing that is called civic education and it is nothing more than Agenda 2030. Attention! So you have to do the right thing. Second important sentence. Yes, it is the sentence of the Constitutional Court number 50, which says that according to the provisions, it must be respected that the sentence number 50 of the Constitutional Court 5.0 of 2024. You can find it, you can go and type Constitutional Court sentence number 50 of 2024. The second that had more media resonance was that of the Court of Cassation that in Florence there were several people some of whom said I do not close or I open. Remember there were some ... This had more clamor and the sentence 1616 in 2024 Court of Cassation third penal section. Why penal section? Penal section because you have committed a crime you have put health in danger. What did he say? No, not like that. It is not a crime to keep it open. So this is an important let's say precedent. You know anyway that in our legal system it is not that the precedents are valid, but they are certain laws as in other regions but they are important. Yes. If you had a salesman at the gym, the shop that was open and the city guard came and put the mount in the light of these two sentences what can happen? Undoubtedly in one possible merit is the importance precedent of the Court of Cassation and then you have to be careful because what was the penalty? Because if for a circular, because he did not have a mask or because I did something against him. The question is, the shops that were left open during the mass and they did not let's say, they did not obey the restrictions. You can enter if you have done inoculum or not. No, because we are talking about you, you have not done inoculum. So it is very important that in the next sentence because the judge of Pace di Borno and for the judge of Pace di Borno even here, instead, can make history. You all know that the obligation of inoculation had a beginning and a term. So when they say ah, but there will be sanctions. Very well. But there is a principle in our judicial order which is that of the favor of the victim, that is, of the victim, excuse me, I don't even want to say it, in favor of the one who commits a crime or in any case who does something that he should not do. So in favor of people who commit a crime. I try to be simpler like this, without saying the Latin name. So what happens if I have a rule that told me, you must have this until it is finished? So all the sanctions for the favor of the one who are not obedient are to be canceled. This is an important principle, an important, an application of a great principle that exists in our order. So there is no more emergency, even if they would always like to say that it is renewed. So these three sentences, we can see them and we can logically, from each of them, some important aspects that can defend us in our life. One last thing, instead of saying it, I will say it in the end. First thing, papillomavirus, as I said before, is not a mandatory eradication. So there are regions, in Lombardy, as I looked before for a moment, also in the same place, the invitation letter is sent with a date of the day or the time at the completion of the eleventh year of age. What happens? Whoever does not show up is reintroduced the following year. What does it mean? It is not mandatory. Thank you, no. Simple. Because it is not mandatory. But, since the law Lorenzini, published in 119, in 2017, where there are big holes, because they foresaw that the percentages of problems had to be revised, when nothing was done, I feel only guilty, I have investigated what was there or what is there, I observe vaccines, or presumed vaccines, at least some of these, because some say that there is everything, according to these studies, it would be nice to have a study on the other side, because I say it is not nice or bad, there should be studies that say one thing and other studies on the other side, or on the third side, logically, it is logical that if I go to the host and he tells me that the wine is good, there should be different studies, different analyses. Let's go on. Practically, there is one important thing, there can be, as the law says, in Article 1,3, inoculations can be omitted. There are practically two fundamental things. First, when it comes to the results of the exams, the person who has been inoculated has already controlled the disease. The other most important things, if I do not know that I have been inoculated, there must be a certain danger for health, or I have specific clinical conditions that prevent me from being subjected, and practically the need to have further information, why? Because it is not clear to me if I can take those substances or not. They can be either in the host or in the host. So, there are many ways. Many say, we communicate to social services, so we take you away. It is true that the law says so, but even the Lorenzini has imposed very high fines, up to 7,500 euros, which have been removed as a conversion. The maximum is 500 euros. Let's remember that it is applicable to 689, so a third of the maximum, a double of the minimum, in favor of the person who is inoculated. Logically, another aspect must be emphasized. Why? Because the laws that recognize, and we can start to see also under this aspect, the fundamental principle of non-inoculation comes back in great detail. Why? First of all, let's say that if I am the exercise of the theory on the minor, and I start to say that I do not want my son to understand something that is not right, I have the right to have a whole series of information, I can subject my son to that therapy. But what happens? It happens that there are only two laws. One is 210 of 1992, the other is 2005, number 229. And you see that these laws exercise in a very large way. If my son remains blocked, he can no longer walk, he can no longer attend the daily activities of life. I am pleased that they give me the invalidity to my son with the law 104.92, article 3.3, but 541 a month do not solve my life. Because he will have to give me a lot more to cure him. And then, what happens when I, the parent, am no longer there? So, what does the law tell me? The law says, yes, 90, 100,000 euros. 90, 100,000 euros, gentlemen, how much time does it take? So, let me tell you just one thing. Do you remember? The Talibomide. The Talibomide was approved in the 1950s and in 1962. In my opinion, my relationship with the Talibomide is like this, let's say, preparing this internet. Think about it. The Talibomide, which made 10,000 people even without a brain, without hands, with dementia, practically the companies that have produced this beauty of substance after 40 years. After 40 years, the law to resuscitate those who were the object of this study, because in fact that was also a study, is the law 244 of 2007 in Italy. So, think about it, more than 50 years have passed. Let's say 50 years. For some, a little more than 50 years depends on how many parents have taken this substance. So, the principle of the law is fundamental, but the important thing is to be able to show the true value of the substance if we can on another occasion. I leave the floor to you. So, see you next time. We will continue to communicate to all groups to connect. We will deepen other important aspects with more time. Thank you, a hug to everyone. I stop at the end for the speeches or individual listening. Thank you.