On the referendum for the abolition of the mandatory Green pass, “what persuaded and involved me was the reasoning of the lawyer Paolo Sceusa, who launched a heartfelt appeal to international law before denouncing the behavior of our government, extremely incorrect in cracking the pact of loyalty between institutions and people “. Carlo Freccero thus explains, in a letter to the director of the Press, his decision to join the collection of signatures for the abolition of the Green Pass. “In the Italian version published in the European Official Gazette of 15 June 2021 – says the former director of the RAI – a fundamental passage of the text of the European Official Journal was omitted, namely the sentence relating to the people who ‘have chosen to not be vaccinated ‘and that, nevertheless, must not be subject to discrimination. The correction of 5 July 2021 was worthless, the current legislation on the Green Pass in fact totally ignores the appeal to avoid discrimination. ‘The people must have the tools to decide’, argue the promoters of the referendum, a committee composed largely of highly qualified jurists ”. “I reflected – dece Freccero -. I understand that my presence may seem meaningless in the midst of so much specialized wisdom. But I am convinced of the opposite. My role is that of a communications expert and as such I could not help but notice the massive propaganda and disinformation campaign waged by the mainstream media with a unanimity that is unprecedented in the history of the country. The referendum is an opportunity to have access to institutional spaces and to get our arguments to the electorate. After that, citizens will decide freely and not under the pressure of fear triggered by the pandemic. Here I am also responding to friends who have objected that, technically, the referendum is an own goal, since the vaccination obligation will disappear with the introduction of treatments that will make illegal a vaccine without authorization and justified only by the emergency “. “Behind the Green Pass in reality, there is much more – adds Freccero – The World Health Organization has recently published the prototype of a vaccination card to be adopted by the states. The Green Pass is destined to become the embryo of the future digital identification card targeted by the ‘Great Reset’ being implemented. For those who do not know what it is, I refer to two books by economist Klaus Schwab ‘Covid 19 The Great Reset’ and ‘Fourth digital revolution’. According to Schwab, the pandemic is a unique opportunity to achieve the ‘Great Reset’ already illustrated in the essay ‘The fourth industrial revolution’. All this is confirmed by the Recovery Fund project, which has the same objective as the ‘Great Reset’. I believe that the new normal we are living in will not end with vaccines, but will continue over time, with the digital revolution and the green revolution. Let’s face it: it is not the pandemic that caused the economic crisis. It is rather the economic crisis that caused the pandemic, or at least amplified it in order to complete the ‘Great Reset’ ”. “It is right that the people, the object of what is in the making, can, as happens in all democracies, be subject and decide whether or not they want to continue along the path traced by the elites. The answer will come later. In my head the referendums are destined to finally open a wide debate on all these open questions “, concludes Freccero to which the director of the Press replies:” Dear Freccero, thank you for your kind letter – replies Massimo Giannini – For my training, I listen and respect (almost) all opinions. But what you express, to explain your adhesion to the referendum to abrogate the Green Pass, I completely disagree. I strongly reject his accusations of ‘disinformation’ aimed at the ‘mainstream media’. I do not agree with his thesis on the ‘Great Reset’ which, despite the subtle and sometimes perverse fascination of conspiracy theories, seems to me totally unfounded, in the sense that it has no concrete foundation in the reality of the facts. If I publish your letter it is because I have always appreciated your intellectual vivacity. And because I believe in the pluralism of information which, by giving space to the ‘different opinion’, can sometimes bring out (as in this case) its evident fallacy ”.