Political ghosts of the past
There is no end to history. But, when does it start? All too often it is quoted in political argument to suit the subjective bent of the interlocutor. That is again proving to be the case as the unofficial electoral campaign gathers speed.
References to the past are part of the fear-factor constantly spun by Nationalist exponents, fellow travellers and dogs of war. Under one guise or another, they try to burden the present Labour leadership with real or fictitious sins of the past.
There can be no doubt that Labour’s years in office between 1971 and 1978 contained actions that shamed the party and the government, above all, Labour leaders Dom Mintoff and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, who had the authority and means to stamp them out. Equally, those of us who were part of the government at the time – as I was – are guilty by association, even if most of us had no bully boys of our own.
Nor can there be any doubt that the perpetrators of violence and rowdiness and the police officers who also participated or looked the other way were relatively few, though even one was more than too many. I also retain my belief that they included troublemakers – agent provocateurs – paid by elements who wanted to blacken the Labour Party. I wrote this in my collection of memories.
In a small discussion group that included heavyweight Nationalists, two of them asked me whether I had any evidence. I mentioned a name of a well-known thug. Oh, that one, was the dry reply. The subject was dropped and we moved on to other issues. I do not believe that the top echelons of the Nationalist Party knew what was going on. What I do believe is that no one can be choosey and see only one side of things.
Fifty years ago next Thursday, April 26, Parliament met for the first time after four years of direct colonial rule. The 16 Labour members who had been elected, including me, had suffered both the pains of mortal sin imposed by the bishops as well as personal insults and worse for months on end. We were subjected to further insults as we made our way to the Palace for the opening of the session.
As I entered the Tapestry Chamber to take my seat, a man sitting in the Strangers’ Gallery rose from his place, kicked me viciously in the shin and ran off. Later I learned that he had boasted to a group of policemen that he had kicked “that one-armed fellow” (Il-lostra x’daqqa ta’ sieq tajtu lil dak ta’ driegħ wieħed), in reference to my physical difference. I did not imagine then, or any time after, that the man had been encouraged to kick me by some Nationalist official.
Four years before that I was one of the demonstrators in Queen’s Way, as it then was. We were protesting against the manner the British government was treating Malta, something that the Nationalists too condemned and had historically joined the Labour government in a “break with Britain” resolution. Members of the British forces then based in Malta were kept out of sight.
Not so the police. Hundreds patrolled the demonstrators. A group of them beat up pockets of us ferociously with their batons, severely injuring a number of demonstrators.
Where does history start? Wherever it does one can find instances of senseless behaviour, of violence, of victimisation, some worse than others but all bad just the same.
Mercifully, with sense and God’s help, we have moved on. The rhetoric of politics is still harsh and politicians have not turned into beautifully winged angels. There is a common understanding about not stepping the line into violence. Nevertheless, some speeches and writings coming from or permitted by the top brass are an equally condemnable form of moral violence.
Leaders of the political groupings should lead by better example, using and urging measured language. The competition for office should be carried within the framework of reason, persuasion and decency. The past should be referred to so that we may learn from it, including the lesson that a few individuals could raise the heat well beyond what the leaders want, placing an obligation on them to take corrective action.
The point is that we should learn from the political ghosts of the past in order to move towards a better future. The future is what elections should be all about.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
40 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Giov DeMartino
Apr 26th 2012, 17:42
Imagine, just try to imagine Lino Spiteri addressing his leader as Franco Debono is addressing his! Just try to imagine. And Lino Spiteri, like all the other labour MP's knew that.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 26th 2012, 10:58
@ Mr Michael Debono, Yesterday, 11:29.
Please enlighten us!
What are Malta's diplomatic representatives abroad meant to do if not to to meet their opposite numbers abroad, friendly and not so friendly, so as to convey the Malta government point of view and so as to be able to report back to the Malta Foreign Office? I cannot believe that any intelligent and responsible foreign office official would be so stupid as to close down that useful channel of information by telling its diplomats "not to fraternise with certain foreign people". If anyone issued that instruction, and more so if he boasted to you about it, he would be proving his incompetence to run a Foreign Office.
While you are about it, could you please tell us how "not refusing to meet" his own ambassador and how donating to him an unremarkable "small gift of a bottle" would be clues to Dom Mintoff's character?
Evarist Saliba
Apr 25th 2012, 13:38
@ Michael Debono
"Mintoff never refused to see (me)." I never asked to see him, and whever he asked to see me I complied readily.
"Mintoff donated a small gift of a bottle to (me) which (I) did not refuse." I cannot recall such an incident . Could you elaborate? Could it be a bottle of a drink from North Korea?
"I was told not to fraternise with certain foreign people..." Absolutely not true, and therefore the accusation that I did not comply with such an instruction is baseless. My appointment as Malta's negotiating representative in international gatherings inevitably put me in contact with representatives of other countries. This could never be described as "fraternisation".
" The question of the site of the Seabed Authority (NOT the Law of the Sea)". The best persons to illuminate the Maltese public were Joe Attard Kinswell and Edgar Mizzi, both departed, who led the delagations to the Law of the Sea Conference, and Victor Gauci, who was the leader of the delegations when either of the two was not available. As a member of the delgation whenever the meetings were held in Geneva, and a close confidante of the heads of delegation I know the story second hand.
In brief, this was that Mintoff lost patience with the slow progress of the conference, dismissed the person who had conceived the idea wjhich led to
Mr Michael Debono
Apr 25th 2012, 11:29
And Mr Evarist Saliba was an Ambassador during the life of the MLP government. What a bad combination. Did he suffer any evil this Evarist Saliba. He was told more than once not to fraternise with certain foreign people, but that was useless he fraternised with them. And why Malta lost the H.Q of the Law of the Sea. Nobody better than Mr E. Saliba knows why! Mintoff did not refuse to meet Ambassador Saliba on the contrary he donated a small gift of a bottle to Evarist Saliba which he did not refuse. That was Dom Mintoff character.
Mr Michael Debono
Apr 25th 2012, 11:05
Writing about the past why stop to years after the war. Was there no violence before the war. Was there not the Fascists and probably the Nazis. That is the Past too and if reference ismade to the past don't include only as from the fifties but go further to the 30s. History has no limits.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 24th 2012, 17:18
@ Victor caruana, today at 11:24.
Qed inwissik biex ma ddeffisnix aktar fil-kummenti mhawwda u skifuzi tieghek.
Is-sur Seychell spjegalek b’mod car, u li ma jhalli l-ebda dubju, r-raguni vera ghaliex kien gie kkalpestat ghall-ebda raguni valida. Dan kien biss ghaliex ma kienx jaqbel maz-zwieg tal-MLP mal-GWU u ghaliex xtaq gustament li jkun hemm assistenza ta’ tabib fuq il-post, fit-tarzna stess, fl-interess tal-haddiema fix-xoghol perikolus taghhom. L-insinwazzjonijiet tieghek, taht forma ta’ domandi, ma jaghmlulekx gieh. Ghalaq halqek.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 24th 2012, 16:11
@ Michael Sciortino, Yesterday at 21:39.
Why accuse Mr Lino Spiteri and "PN apologists" of "wanting to fight the election on the past? It is Joseph Muscat himself who is recalling into service the MLP past relics (or their offspring) from that violent past and it is he who is relocating them in the forefront of the LP for the next election.
The electorate is being pushed into pre-election mood. Apart from yourself do you think that there are many voters who are interested in the future of the euro or the Tobin tax or the future international economic situation when the LP can only propose "wait and see" solutions when challenged about such bread and butter issues as its "in pectore" solution of water and electricity bills?
Michael Sciortino
Apr 24th 2012, 21:52
Anybody who wants my vote has to give me their opinion on such matters. So far no one is doing so.
It would be a pity if the electorate is not interested in the matters that I mentioned. All this harping about past thuggery will not lead us anywhere and the resurrection of ghosts is a way to alienate the people from the challenges of the future.
I abhor all kinds of violence but everything has to be seen and understood in its context. Both sides have skeletons is their cupboards which would be wise for all to leave them there hidden from sight.
By the way violence takes many shapes and forms and psychological or moral violence is equally abhorrent even though it leaves no outward bruises.
Henry S Pace
Apr 23rd 2012, 22:02
' Political ghosts of the past '
Mr Spiteri seems to have a very short memory or rather wishes to evade Political facts.
What about the Qui-i-Sana PN meeting which was disrupted by Labour thugs.
Its a short lived memory.
Michael Sciortino
Apr 23rd 2012, 21:39
"The future is what elections should be all about" concludes Mr. Spiteri. Yet Mr. Spiteri's last few articles have been all about the past. I am mystified how an intelligent columnist like Mr. Spiteri cannot see the traps being laid by the PN apologists.
The PN apologists want to fight the election on the past and here he is Mr. Spiteri obliging them by talking of events from 30 to 50 years ago.
I agree that the elections are all about the future. As a first rate economist I would be interested to read Mr. Spiteri's opinion on the Euro. How Europe can achieve growth despite the austerity measures being adopted everywhere? The effects of the Tobin tax proposed by the Germans and the French and how it would effect the economy of Europe and in particular its effect on Malta. Would a Tobin tax prevent a repetition of the 2008 financial meltdown whose effects are still being felt?
These are the discussions that I would like to see discussed in these columns. Thank you.
Victor Laiviera
Apr 23rd 2012, 21:03
According to "The Slate", a magazine published by the Washington Post, Simon Busuttil and David Casa were among 28 MEPs who voted against a motion calling for the restrictions on the sale of spy technology to dictatorial regimes.
Can the PN explain this vote? Are they in favour of Governments spying on their own people? What led to this decision?
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/04/19/european_politicians_who_voted_against_resolution_on_selling_spy_tech_to_dictators_.html
Michael Seychell
Apr 23rd 2012, 20:31
Sur. Victor Caruana - Ergajt qrajt it-tieni parti tat-tieni kumment tieghek, fejn inti ghadt - "Nahseb li seychell jikkonferma l-lajburizmu tieghu jekk jaghmlu lilu kap. Kieku ras kbira ghandu...Il-problema ta' go fiha...jekk int tabib u tfittex naqra issib kuncett jghidulu regression....marda tal-mohh (apparti li hu kuncett matematiku wkoll)"
Nhoss li jkun xieraq li nwissik ukoll li din il-parti tat-tieni kumment tieghek huwa wkoll x'aktarx libellus - jekk mhux aktar minn dawk il-hmerijiet li ktibt fl-ewwel kumment tieghek.
Michael Seychell
Tal-Pieta
victor caruana
Apr 24th 2012, 11:24
Sur Seychell
Forsi hemm problema tal-malti u xi definizzjonijiet. niehu pacenzja u nispjega.
Ma ghidtx li int kont taghmel il-bombi ecc. Xtaqt spjega ghaliex kienu jaqbdu mieghek bl-ikrah skond int. Qisu f'dak iz-zmien hlief nies irrazzjonali ma kienx hawn. Ma nahsibx li tinnega li kienu jaghmlu l-bombi, jincitaw, jiddiskriminaw kontra l-laburisti etc. Ghalhekk xtaq inkun naf jekk il-laburisti ta' dak iz-zmien kienux jahsbu xi haga hazina fik, anke jekk zbaljati.
Il-kuncett regression tfisser iffissar f'xi haga li grat ilu u li tibqa tirrepeti ad nauseam. Dan kien f'kumment iehor mhux ghalik izda ghal kumment tas-sur Francis Saliba, biex nispjega li l-argumenti tieghek ma jregix ghax kull meta nbidel il-leader tal-PL dejjem bqajt taghtihom tort ta' dak li tghid li gara lilek. Int qed tinsulenta li kull laburist meta tibqa tinsisti li l-hazin li ghamlu whud dak iz-zmien jehel bihom kulhadd. Dejjaqtni. Qisu int biss hawn f'Malta. Nista nghidlek li jien ukoll kont diskriminat u vjolentat psikologikament bl-ikrah minn nies li illum huma maghrufa. Izda qatt ma wahhalt f'Gonzi u n-Nazzjonalisti kolla ta' dak li sofrejt. u ma ffissajtx b'daqshekk. Qed tifhem id-differenza. Ma nixtieqx inkaxkar lil dawn in-nies fil-pubbliku ghax insejt.
Michael Seychell
Apr 24th 2012, 18:18
Sur Victor Caruana - Il-Kumment tieghek ta' llum 24 ta' April zgur ma jistax jitqies bhala wiehed rikoncilljattiv - anzi komplejt fejn hallejt il-bierah b'attakki personali.
Ser nieqaf hawn sakhemm ikun decis jekk ghaandhomx jittiehdu passi ohra - f'liema kas dawn ma jkunux fuq din il-'media' .
Michael Seychell
Tal-Pieta
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 23rd 2012, 20:28
@ Victor Caruana today at 18:18.
Ma ghidtli xejn siewi u jien ma nafx li dahhaqt lil xi hadd – certament lilek zgur ma dahhaqtekx mit-ton irrabjat tal-kumment tieghek.
Li Seychell kellu xi haga minn dejjem kontra Mintoff hi opinjoni tieghek u tista’ zzommha ghalik. Dak li hu zgur hu li kemm Mintoff kif ukoll KMB kellhom genju kif idawwru n-nies kontrihom – jien wiehed minnhom ghax, qabel ma gejt ivvitimizzat bl-ahrax u ntortament, jien qatt ma kelli lebda nteress fil-politka lokali.
Muscat kellu l-opportunita li jkompli miexi fuq il-passi non-vjolenti ta’ Sant imma ghazel li jmur lura ghan-nies imcappsa bil-vjolenza ta’ zmien Mintoff u ta' zmien Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici. DAK hu ezempju xieraq ta’ “regression” i.e. meta Muscat sejjah lura l-istess mexxejja laburisti li Alfred Sant kien warrab.
Michael Seychell
Apr 23rd 2012, 19:50
Sur Victor Caruana -
Qed nirriproduci l-ewwel kumment tieghek, fejn ghidt "Forsi kienu jaghmlulek hekk ghax kienu jahsbu li int jew shabek kontu taghmlu l-bombi wara l-bibien tan-nies, jew li tincitaw il-vjolenza, jew forsi kont iggib il-kuntrabandu? Ta' x'hix? qatt ma ghattielna x'kienu jahsbu li kont qed taghmel int f'dawk iz-zmienijiet. forsi twassal l-ismijiet tal-laburisti ghat-transfers jew biex ma jinghatawx xoghol? Ghidilna ghaliex kont meqjus lajburist perikoluz?????
Il-kumment tieghek aktarx li jikkostitwixxi insinwazzjonijiet libelluzi u qieghed ghalhekk nirriserva d-dritt li niehu dawk il-passi li jidhirli xierqa fic-cirkostanzi.
Fit-tieni kumment tieghek inti ghidt li jien kelli kontra Mintoff, Karmenu, Sant u Muscat.
Sur Caruana naccertak li jien ma ghandi xejn personali kontra il-Mexxeja tal-Partit Laburista, izda dan ma jfissirx li jien ma ghandix dritt li nikkritika it-tmexxija politika taghhom.
Nista nghidlek ukoll li minkejja l-kritika politika li naghmel, il-mexxeja tal-Partit Laburista nklus ukoll iz-zewg deputati mexxeja, ma jahsbuiex kif tahsiba int fuqi, tant li kull meta ltqajna f'xi okkazzjoni jew fit-triq dejjem tkellima ta' nies civili li ahna.
Niehu l-okkazzjoni li nirringrazzja lit-Tabib Francis Saliba li irribatta l-kumment tieghek fil-konfront tieghi.
Michael Seychell
Tal-Pieta
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 23rd 2012, 19:38
@ Victor Laiviera, today at 16:16.
No “diplomacy” is involved when representatives of a political party, now in opposition, praises to the high heavens an oppressive foreign dictatorial regime, trying to acquire long-range nuclear capability and alarming the rest of the free world. Still more ominous is the fact that that local political party, when it was the ruling party, had concluded a secret arms deal for the supply of free weapons and ammunition of a type not intended to repel some foreign invasion, but which would come in very useful to suppress the democratic political opposition. Those weapons came complete with instructors on techniques how to suppress the right to peaceful assembly during legitimate opposition political meetings.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 23rd 2012, 17:32
@ victor caruana, Today, 16:53
Mela ma tifhimx bl-Inglis? Is-sur Seychell fil-paragrafu ta' qabel l-ahhar qallek car u tond ghaliex gie msawwat. Naqliblek ghall-Malti:
"Lino zomm f'mohhok li l-vittmi tal-ingustizzji u l-vjolenza mill-Labour Party u l-marmalja ta' dak il-partit ma kienux biss partitarji Nazzjonalisti imma wkoll persuni ohra bhal Joe Attard Kingswell u jien stess meta "d-dnubijiet" taghna kienu biss ghax konna kontra z-zwieg bejn il-Labour Party u l-General Workers Union, u fil-kas tieghi ghax insistejt li ma tul l-istrike tat-tobba kellu jkun hemm tabib fid-Drydocks ghal-gid tal-haddiema."
Is sur-Seychell kien wiegeb ghas-sitt mistoqsijiet tieghek sa minn qabel ma kont fassalthom!
.
Michael Seychell
Apr 23rd 2012, 15:49
Lino - You stated that "There can be no doubt that Labour’s years in office between 1971 and 1978 contained actions that shamed the party and the government, above all, Labour leaders Dom Mintoff and Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, who had the authority and means to stamp them out."
Let me start by stating that I would have put the horrible years of violence as being between 1976 - imkmediatly after the election and 1987 and not stopping at 1978, as you chose to do, thus forgetting the worst events that happened between 1984 and 1987 - such as the Zebbug and Rabat P.N. meetings; Tal-Barrani; the killing of Raymond Caruana and to top it all the frame up of Pietru Busuttil with this murder, as well as the attack at the Curia, the burning of the Times and the violent attack on the house and family members of Dr. E. Fenech Adami.
You also stated that "Equally, those of us who were part of the government at the time – as I was – are guilty by association, even if most of us had no bully boys of our own." I want to add here that you yourself and all the other Ministers and M.P.s as well as the top Party officials were even more guilty buy 'omission', or rather by failing to raise up your voices to stop the excessive violence happening during a period of more than 10 years.
You mentioned your collection of memories, which I have read some years back, but I still remember vividly that the only time you stated that you acted wrongly was during the Highjack incident when KMB refused to accept the American special forces’ intervention and opted for the Egyptian soldiers. .
At no stage have you condemned the atrocities committed by your Party in your memoirs, stated that you should have at least tried to stop the violence that was happening during those years. On the contrary even during your comments in the film 'Dear Dom' whilst you admitted that Mintoff did many mistakes during his time, you kept on harping that most of the time Mintoff had good intentions but he was misunderstood - as we say in Maltese you chose to 'Tahslu u tixxottah' - wash him and dry him.
Lino you should keep in mind that the victims of injustices and violence by the Labour Party and its thugs were not the PN supporters only, but also persons like Joe Attard Kingswell and myself when our 'sins' were only because we were against the fusion between the Labour Party and the General Workers Union, and in my case for insisting that during the Doctors Strike there should be in attendance a Doctor at the Dry-docks in the interest of the workers.
My final point it would interesting to hear from you some comments on the institutionalised corruption of the time, which included the imprisonment of a businessman for whistle-blowing on a Minister, and the fact that a renowned criminal was given a 'quasi' state funeral which was attended by most, if not all the Cabinet and Labour officials of the time!
victor caruana
Apr 23rd 2012, 16:53
sur seychell
int bhala l-akbar lajburista li qatt kien hawn kont tigi arrestat jew ittorturat? U dan ghaliex?
Forsi kienu jaghmlulek hekk ghax kienu jahsbu li int jew shabek kontu taghmlu l-bombi wara l-bibien tan-nies, jew li tincitaw il-vjolenza, jew forsi kont iggib il-kuntrabandu? Ta' x'hix? qatt ma ghattielna x'kienu jahsbu li kont qed taghmel int f'dawk iz-zmienijiet. forsi twassal l-ismijiet tal-laburisti ghat-transfers jew biex ma jinghatawx xoghol? Ghidilna ghaliex kont meqjus lajburist perikoluz?????
Mr Edward Caruana Galizia
Apr 23rd 2012, 15:19
It's not a question of drawing a line. The way I see it you judge a person by their past actions, especially when they are running for election. Their past actions also frame their present ones, they do X because they did Y.
The memories you recalled of how the Nationalists were, although valid, are not relevant since no one in the party today is responsible for them. If they were then I for one would not vote for them.
However, when it comes to the PL, what we can see is the very same people from the 80s coming back, therefore their past is very much relevant.
Are we to forget what you yourself admitted for the sake of "looking to the future."? Yes, elections should be about the future. But we need to protect the future. That means not forgetting the past.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Apr 23rd 2012, 14:45
Nationalist exponents cannot be justly accused of trying to “burden the present Labour leadership with real or fictitious sins of the past”. That is the fault of Joseph Muscat. It is he who has reinstalled prominently the artificers of that undeniable MLP “past” which was an enthusiastic and energetic fulfilment of Mintoff’s belief that political violence was admissible. Muscat welcomed back those hateful personalities after Alfred Sant had eschewed them, raising some hopes.
I wish I could agree that: “ … the perpetrators of violence and rowdiness and the police officers who also participated or looked the other way were relatively few …”. That was not my experience starting from the time when I was Police Medical Officer who was obliged to retire from the service precisely because I would not join the ranks of a progressively increasing number of “police officers who also participated or looked the other way”. That rot spread inexorably and pervasively throughout the ranks of the Special Mobile Unit, the Dipartiment tal-Investigazzjoni Kriminali” the Security Section and up to the Commissioner of Police himself.
No agent provocateurs were involved in the burning down of The Times, in assaulting the family of Dr Eddie Fenech Adami and the sacking of his home both under the eyes of the nearby police unless one counts the state media that spread alarmist false news. No agent provocateur was needed to ransack NP party clubs, to spray them with lethal machinegun fire murdering one occupant or for the police to plant the murder weapon in the farm of an Innocent person.
At Tal-Barrani the agents provocateurs were the thugs and the minister in charge who renounced his responsibility to enforce the law and to protect the right of freedom of assembly as decreed by the law courts, but instead ranged the police in support of violent criminals.
Whatever reprehensible violence was suffered by MLP supporters this violence can never be honestly attributed to any Nationalist Party leader because no one of them is on record as advocating political violence as “admissible”, or as tolerating it for years on end and actually praising the perpetrators as the aristocracy of the party.
In his time as Prime Minister, Alfred Sant had given a clear intimation that that MLP political violence, and the promoters of that violence were things of the past. Joseph Muscat’s recall of those elements has destroyed that hope. He did it on his own without any assistance from any “Nationalist exponents, fellow travellers and dogs of war” or agent provocateurs.
Emanuel Curmi
Apr 23rd 2012, 14:36
Basically I do not believe in Ghosts nor do I believe in invoking history to shame the parties for the sins of their predecessors. On the other hand I do miss any form of real evolution in the way the present parties conduct their day to day affairs and while it is not openly militant, it is still unmistakeably partisan. Although more subtle nowadays, both parties still practice a philosophy of fermenting political hostilities where modern communications are openly and unashamedly used to carry out systematic character assassinations to discredit political rivals while themselves keeping a semblance of respectability. How many times have we seen politicians washing their hands or pleading ignorance of the exposed organized corruption and misconduct within their ranks? Lino Spiteri is unfortunately, not really any better and despite having had to endure a lot of political injustices and beatings, actually resorted to the same means to crash opponents albeit as a complacent witness. There is more than a touch of remorse in his blogs about his insights of the past (& present) but probably his absolution will only come when that legacy is eradicated once and for all in the way party politics are still being conducted nowadays.
Robert Callus
Apr 23rd 2012, 14:30
It has become the PN's overused strategy to alienate the public from its own inefficiencies by scaring them of the PL's past.
http://robertcallus.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/ghosts-of-decades-gone-by/
There are many things I don't like in the today's PL, especially its vague non-proposals and not being much different from the PN. But being a violent party is NOT one of them. Because it isn't.
Victor Borg
Apr 23rd 2012, 14:28
Mr.Gianninu Saliba i dont know where you were on 28th April 1958, as an apprentice in the naval dockyard i had to go to work even though the whole of Malta was at a stand still. Hopefully you know why the GWU called for a national strike,and this for your information had nothing to do with Malta's intergration with Great Britain but only because the British government wanted to cut down on costs and started with what then was called the rundown and Malta's dockyard along with the one in Singapore and the one in Chatam in England were to be closed and in those days Malta's economy relied heavily on the dockyard, while going home on foot to Qormi were i lived i had to pass through a large number of police and yes i saw how Degray's police treated their countrymen. Mr.Saliba in september of 1959 i lost my job with the admiralty though i was studying to become an electronics technician,then i went to Australia to further my studies. I am pretty sure that Joseph Muscat will get us out of the mess your beloved Gonzipn put us into.
Tony Mangion
Apr 23rd 2012, 12:52
Surely I do not acclaim Lino Spiteri for most of the writing in his "Political gosts of the past", as I expected him to be stronger and more straight to the point in his today's openion piece.
In the third paragraph of his contribution he shouldred in a very clear mode, the then Labour Leaders Dom and Karmenu and those forming the Labour Government for the shameful actions between 1971 and 1978 while when coming to accusing those who by their actions wanted to blacken the Labour Government he juat said that they have been paid by elements to accomplish their mission.The least I would have expected from Lino is that as he found no problem in shouldering the shamefull actions of the 1971/78 he would also mention the names of those "Nationalist heavyweight" who turned the Nelson"s eye when the subject was on the well known Nationalist though guys.
Evarist Saliba
Apr 23rd 2012, 12:40
"The future is what elections should be about."
Quite true, but how can one foresee the future. No political crystal ball exists, and a cynic would be quite justified in treating electoral promises, usually tailored to woo all shades of voters, with a good pinch of salt. On the other hand, the actual past performance of those seeking election is palpable.
A fair question is how far is one to delve into the past since the temptatioon is always there to choose the point which is most convenient.
However, the present situation has evolved, and the past is assuming greater relevance, because it has been dragged into the present by the very same people who would like to oblierate it.
Why is Malta's secret treaty with North Korea being brought up? It is because the minister who was directly involved in that treaty has been brought back into the leadership of the PL in the capacity of its officer responsible for the party's external relations, and what was said during the very rercent meeting with the ambassador of North Korea (at which he was present) echoes the relationship which existed with that country a quarter of a century ago.
Why is the human rights record under Dom Mintoff being highlighted? It is becuase the daughter of Dom Mintoff is being presented to the electorate as the PL's star candidate at the next general election, and she asked to be enlightened obout this record, pretending that she was not aware that there was anything wrong with that record. Sufferers have duly obliged.
The PL had all the opportunity to change all this, but it chose not ot do so.
David Bezzina
Apr 23rd 2012, 14:17
BACK IN 1991,A CERTAIN PN ADMINISTRATION WITH A CERTAIN LAWRENCE GONZI WHO WAS PART OF THE DELEGATION VOTED FOR NORTH KOREA TO JOIN THE UN.NOW HOW'S THAT FOR IRONY AND HYPOCRISY.
Victor Laiviera
Apr 23rd 2012, 16:16
As a former high-level diplomat, one would have expected more "diplomacy" from you.
You are surely aware that most treaties between governments, especially one involving security, are confidential/secret. If I am wrong, perhaps you could direct me where to consult the contracts signed by our Government to purchase arms and supplies for our armed forces/police since 1987. Or where I can find the text of the conditions of Malta's membership of the PfP.
Evarist Saliba
Apr 23rd 2012, 19:46
@ David Bezzina
Accepting any nation as a member of the UN, even those with whose policies one does not agree, is not an act of irony or hypocricy. Any nation has the right to be a member of the UN. And members have an obligation to abide by decisions of the UN Security Council. That is one way or ensuring an open dialogue.
@ Victor Laiviera
Not one single bilateral agreement entered into by Malta, on any subject,with any state, has a clause in it which states that it should be kept secret. All agreements are deposited with the United Nations. There have been any news items which record the donation, or purchase, of aircraft or seacraft for military purposes, and these involve countries including Libya, the USA, Germany, Italy......... ONLY THE ONE WITH NORTH KOREA IS THE EXCEPTION.
And just in case you have forgotten, may I remind you that the agreement also included the training of the police in methods to torture on persons in detention. I had these described to me in detail by Peruvian Dr Gustavo Coloma-Pardo in August 1984 in Geneva. The Maltese police officer who denied the accusation by the Peruvian businessman was subsequently found guilty in a Maltese court of inflicted such treatment on Maltese persons under detention.
Victor Laiviera
Apr 23rd 2012, 20:46
I see you omitted to tell me where I can check out the conditions for Malta's entry in the PfP.
I assume that, in 25 years, the PN has had ample time to publish the full text of the North Korean Treaty. Where can I obtain a copy, please? I like to verify things for myself.
Evarist Saliba
Apr 24th 2012, 16:47
@ Victor Laiviera
As for the Partnership for Peace (PfP) may I suggest that you ask the LP.
There is nothing secret about the PfP which is a wide open agreement involving any number of states.
There is no special clause for Malta to keep secret what it may choose to participate in.
It seems that when you lose an argument, which is most of the time, you just resort to fire indiscriminate questions.
Alfred Grech
Apr 23rd 2012, 12:31
Very well said Lino and full of facts and truths. Maltese politics have been and still are very dirty. As Victor said in his comment, instead of boots they use their pens and keyboards.
It is time the government works for the good of the people and not to oppress them. Many of us have become slaves of the high cost of living, an area which is tormenting many and little is being done by the government to help the situation. We need to breath fresh air with decent administration and not with fear of whether we're going to have enough money to buy the basics. I feel I'm living in an oppressed country.
The past was very ugly and we want to make sure it won't repeat itself.
Gianninu Saliba
Apr 23rd 2012, 12:26
Lino Spiteri, as usual, is trying to play with words. First he talks about what happened on 26 April 1962 and then, in the next paragraph, he refers to what happened four years earlier. Is he trying to confuse people and make them believe that in 1958 the violence he was referring to had anything to do with the PN? The 1958 violence was all their (Labour's) doing. They woke up and realized that Integration, thanks to Dr. Gorg Borg Olivier, was not in the bag. It was then that they joined the PN and chose to go for Independence (one of the may Labour U-Turns), but to be different to the PN they chose violence as the means to try and attain what Dr. Borg Olivier, six years later achieved peacefully. That's the difference between the PN and Labour. The PN convinces others that our way is the right way, yet, it might take years to persuade the others, but then the U-Turns happen... and Joseph Muscat is becoming an expert in coming up with U-Turns. No wonder, Lino Spiteri wants the future to be what the elections should be all about. Lino, people should judge the political parties on what they do and not on what they say. And then vote according to the judgement.
Ludgard Scicluna
Apr 23rd 2012, 11:20
Dear Lino,
I want to salute you in this manner. You are a real .GENTLEMAN. You know history very well.
Political Ghost or not, that's the TRUE HISTORY, and History repeat itself. You and many others, including
my father had suffered a lot. But by prudence and lot of sacrifices, you all succeeded to show your christian
believes and your true ideology for the love of the Maltese working class. Years have passed, and my father
Tony Scicluna mil-Birgu passed away. But my friend, you are still alive. Keep writing these wonderful articles. God be with you forever.
Ludgard Scicluna.
David Bezzina
Apr 23rd 2012, 11:16
A VERY GOOD ANALYSIS.THE PROBLEM IS THAT THOSE WHO ARE DESPERATE TO STAY IN POWER DO NOT KNOW ANY BETTER THAN TO COUGH UP THE PAST.
Jonathan Zammit Lapira
Apr 23rd 2012, 10:07
I think there is a misprint in the article. The years should read 1971--1987 not 1971-1978.
However Mr. Spiteri is right all the way. The PN and Gonzi has nothing to boast about re their achievments while in office except for the high tariffs of electricity, water, gas and petrol. And also for the deliberate spending of people's money and taxes into projects without sense like the roofless theather and parliament building right in the entrance of Valletta. for them what is important is to invent stories re North Korea when it was GonziPN who met and supported this nation together with Iran.
Victor Laiviera
Apr 23rd 2012, 09:45
" Nevertheless, some speeches and writings coming from or permitted by the top brass are an equally condemnable form of moral violence."
Well said indeed. Political thuggery is alive and well in Malta. The only difference is that, whereas in the past the thugs used their fists and boots, nowadays they use their pens and/or keyboards.
And they are worse in a way because, while the "old" one knew no better, today's keyboard thugs certainly do.
Gianninu Saliba
Apr 23rd 2012, 12:31
Eddy and Victor, two ghosts from the past. They only clap when they hear the word Mintoff. It's people like Mr. Laiviera, Mr. Privitera, Dr. Schiberas Trigona and Mr. Lino Spiteri, not to mention Mr. Joe Debono Grech, who seem to appear like a dark cloud trying to hide Labour's infamous past.
Eddy Privitera
Apr 23rd 2012, 09:31
Prosit Lino ! Nispera li dawk kollha, inkluz il-ministru George Pullicino li kiteb f'The Times illuk biex jerga jbezza lill-votanti bil-passat ta' ghexieren ta' snin ilu, jaqraw xi ktibt int illum !
Please choose the reason of your report below: