Report, what I don’t understand about the Gasparri-Cyberealm case
The Gasparri-Cyberealm case according to Report (Rai3) and questions from Teo Dalavecuras
Dear director,
I'll start by saying that when I read or hear about services, intelligence and the like I have the feeling that a fog bank appears before me: it's a subject I've really never known or understood anything about apart from what you learn from James Bond films .
With the typical curiosity of the ignorant, I follow the StartMag articles on the subject and on Sunday evening I also sat through the entire Report program hosted by Sigfrido Ranucci, but it continues to be unclear to me whether Cyberealm as such could constitute a threat to the security of our country and/or whether the threat depends on the fact that the president of the board of directors of Cyberealm is the good Maurizio Gasparri, a long-standing politician and therefore, by definition, inside the arcana imperii of our beloved country.
However, from the weekend's full immersion in the fascinating world of cyber espionage I gained a couple of reflections that I entrust to you.
The first is that in a country where for years and years an intelligence university proudly operated but maintained its registered office in Malta (still in the EU, of course), anything is possible.
The second specifically concerns the Gasparri-Cyberealm case. If I have not misunderstood, Gasparri, as president of a company entirely owned by an Israeli citizen who deals with cybersecurity and perhaps close to Israeli services, and at the same time vice-president of the Senate, was not a very good sight. In reality, the show wasn't there precisely because the protagonist had failed to declare his position as president of a joint-stock company, which as a member of Parliament he was required to disclose.
If this is the case, I find it even more difficult to understand. The office of director of companies registered in the commercial register is in the public domain, anyone can know the names of all directors, partners and auditors of any company in a few seconds; no sane person who, when required to declare his/her capacity as director of company Gasparri "justified" the lack of disclosure with the fact that he was president, but "not operational", adding "for good reason" that the obligation to declare concerns the directors but he was in fact president.
I hope that among Gasparri's voters there is neither a notary nor a lawyer, nor an accountant or an accountant, because with displays of intelligence of this level all votes would be lost forever.
In any case, the doubt is lacerating: for a good year, at Palazzo Madama, we had a vice-president devoid of sense, or among the tasks of the Palazzo Madama services there is no provision for a confirmation of what was declared by the newly elected senators with the results of public registers, at least of online ones?
Certainly, having managed to keep his corporate position secret for an entire year, Gasparri has demonstrated at least one positive thing about himself: he is one of the few – perhaps the only one, as far as we know – politician who has no enemy .
However, a question remains that torments me: assuming and not granting that Gasparri gave his precious strategic advice to Cyberealm, and perhaps even some contacts, to carry out this activity it was absolutely essential to "spend", with the cultured and inclined, the title as president of Cyberealm itself?
I know, director, with such naive questions I expose my ignorance. But I trust in your indulgence.
Good evening,
Teo Dalavecuras
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/mondo/report-che-cosa-non-capisco-del-caso-gasparri-cyberealm/ on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 06:20:39 +0000.