'National treason'

GaleaL

Apr 30th 2009, 09:06

Iris Azzopardi
That is what freedom of information is all about Iris.
That's the pitiful situation the people have been brought into by the present government.

Albert Spiteri

Apr 29th 2009, 17:12

Tim Ripard keeps insisting on coming out incredibly ignorant of anything historic. I will do my best to explain in a way that even Timmy may somehow understand. Prior to March 1979 Malta was never, EVER, free of foreign military presence. After March 1979, we stopped being some country's military base for the first time EVER. That is the significance of March 1979 FREEDOM DAY, dear Timmy. For the first time ever we started earning a living based on visible and invisible exports. It was a start which the NP did its utmost to obstruct. So the significance of the achievement, today, after 30 years, is enormous. Because in spite of the enormous natural difficulties Malta had to overcome, it had also to prevail against those created from within (the NP) and foreign conservative pro-nato hawkish politicians from without.
Today's young were born and bred in a Malta free from foreign militarism. Isn't that something Timmy? So please, no matter what side of the political divide you stand on, do learn to appreciate the political and social miracle brought about thanks to Freedom Day. Without that day, all of Malta would today still be a Nato base.

Albert Spiteri

Apr 29th 2009, 16:00

Joseph Cauchi - What you say here is false! Most Maltese were in favour of Labour's policies vis-a-vis NATO. That was why Labour won in 1971. Malta wanted to end the Economic agreement, which Britain forced upon Borg Olivier in the 1964 bogus independence negotiations.
As always with ALL Nationalist governments, the nationalist bankrupted Malta during the 60's. The Malta government had only Libya to turn to for the financial assistance required to maintain the policies entered into by the Mintoff government.
Libya proved to be a useful ally and partner, not only then, but for all the years since.
One mid-week day, towards the end of 1971, RAI UNO, in its 1pm news run an item about Malta and quoted "reliable sources". That evening all Maltese, proclaimed RAI, would demonstrate in Valletta against Mintoff's handling of the military base problem. That same evening a spontaneous demonstration DID take place in Valletta, thousands upon thousands of workers from all walks in life came out strong in support of the Mintoff Government and angry against RAI's interference in our affairs. RAI, learnt a lesson about charlatan "reliable sources".
If proven, Ives Debarro's alleged criminal actions constitute national treason.

Alfred Farrugia

Apr 29th 2009, 15:49

A few questions:

Was the Maltese diplomat revealing information that was not being reported in the Libyan newspapers, or other sections of the Libyan media?

What was the substance of these so-called revelations? What do diplomats from different countries speak about when they meet?

If the Maltese diplomat was not present in the discussions of the Maltese visiting delegations, how could he reveal what was discussed?

Were these so-called revelations divulged in secret meetings, or exchanged in social functions?

Is it possible that the Maltese diplomat was in fact revealing nothing secret, and was trying to get information from British diplomats?

Was the Head of the Maltese Mission aware of these meetings and discussions?

Was the channel of communication one-way or two-way?

Did the Maltese diplomat report to his Head of Mission any information obtained from British or other foreign diplomats?

Was the Maltese Mission in Libya relaying any information to the Foreign Ministry in Valletta on the basis of such meetings?

Has Dr. Alfred Sant full knowledge of what his diplomat friend of friends might have discussed with foreign diplomats when he was in power?

R. Sciberras

Apr 29th 2009, 13:34

@Joseph Cauchi - Whatever the reasons or situations every public service employee, let alone a diplomat, is strictly bound by secrecy and should be loyal unconditionally to the Government of the day irrispective of his/her political beliefs.

Iris Azzopardi

Apr 29th 2009, 12:30

The British government deserves to be condemned for permitting this to be made public, irrespective of whether it constituted an offence in Malta or not. No serious foreign office or intelligence service throws its sources to the dogs for no reason at all. It should have known that it involved people not only still living, but still in public service.
But ethics were never New Labour's forte.....

Tim Ripard

Apr 29th 2009, 12:06

As I've already had occasion to remark, if Malta was not 'free' prior to 1st April 1979, but was subjugated by the U.K., as the Labour Party claim, there can have been no treason. Either that or 'Freedom Day' was a farce!

Joseph Cauchi

Apr 29th 2009, 10:55

.

It is alleged that Mr. DeBarro had passed some information to the British Government while the Maltese Government at that time was negotiating some deals with Col. Muammar Gaddafi of Libya.

Malta at that time was under a defense lease agreement with Britain which had to expire on the 31st. March, 1979, hence “Freedom Day”.

In those days, Malta was passing through a very difficult period as the “unknown beckons”!

Many of the Maltese were not in agreement with the Government of Malta in its way it was handling the situation when it was clear that Malta was going to be somehow linked with Col. Gaddafi of Libya, which many Maltese were very sceptical, to say the least!

These were turbulent years for Malta, as many Maltese did not want to end up under the clutches of Muammar Gaddafi.

If these allegations are true, one might consider Mr. Yves DeBarro as either a traitor or as a hero!

It depends how you look at it.

With hindsight one may conclude that in actual fact Col. Gaddafi was not that benevolent benefactor to us when one considers the episode of the “Saipem Due”!

../..