FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Is the crime here only because Fatmir Xhafaj is bored? Isn't the Constitution of the Republic guaranteeing the right to speech, that is, any kind of speech, be it satire, parody, parody, or even mockery...
Ervin Saljanji was sentenced today with a final decision, after bringing a fable to denounce something that has been proven. That Fatmir Xhafaj's brother was a drug trafficker. In reality, this is a fact, and as it is known, Agron Xhafaj went to prison in Italy after the show 'babale'. So he admitted that he was a condemned character.
Where did Salianji go wrong? Because he made a montage? Which had actors in setting up a documentary parody to show a real fact.
Don't all investigative shows on national television do this every day? Who don't really sift through the facts but bring the problems that exist in a certain event or case with satirical and gallant notes?
Was Saljanji convicted? In fact, even with the Constitution, Saljanji is not responsible for what he does as a deputy, because the Constitution protects him. If they have to be punished, is it the whole series of dinner shows that at the time of the 'Babale show' shocked us with the scandal that was produced in the laboratory?
But why did Eni Vasili, Blendi Fevziu, Arjan Çani and other showmen of political shows not verify it? When was there even then more than a doubt that we are dealing with an alla fix parody rather than a reality show?
Of course, releasing the father film as an original tape when in fact it was some kind of artificial intelligence without seeing this thing, we are dealing with exaggeration. But Fatmir's Agroni was doomed. How would Brisida of the former Rama and the former Illyrian, whose whereabouts are unknown today, say: where is the problem here?
The problem is that we are dealing with a parody, a montage, a satire, an exaggeration to get to the denunciation of Agron Xhafa. And where is the crime here?
Is the crime here only because Fatmir Xhafaj is bored? Isn't the Constitution of the Republic guaranteeing the right of speech, that is, of any kind of speech, be it satire, parody, parody, or even mockery. It's an opinion. In justice there is a clear logic: cause and effect. Director Salijani's film may have upset Fatmir Xhafajn and caused his removal from the post of Minister of the Interior, as well as his brother's imprisonment, but basically all of these were true. Only the road to the truth has been a bit dicey. But didn't the Comte de Sade do much worse than that in the 19th century, when with his novels taken out of prison he removed the hypocritical mask of the Parisian elite of the time?
Agreed, the fact is that Ervin Salianji supported and maybe even financed a montage, but he had a purpose. But at the end of the day it's all free expression. He, that is, Ervin Salianji, is being punished only for his opinion, which in the end was efficient, because he told the world that we had an interior minister who should not be like that.
Ervini, as a beardless man, can be an axami, he can be a little cocky, but at the end of the day he has the right to be like that because he doesn't fall on anyone's neck. It is his right to be who he will be, especially since he is a character voted by the people. Therefore, his punishment is because he produced a parody, not because he committed a crime. Crimes are committed by the ministers of Bablok every day and no one puts them to the stamp. They even boast about them on social networks. / Pamphlet
Lini një Përgjigje