Thanks to the brouhaha about the election a statement by the Mullah a.k.a. the Mayor of Mosta went largely unnoticed.

L-orizzont of Monday February 4, 2008 gave us this gem of a paragraph:

“The Mayor of Mosta clearly stated that as a Catholic and as long as he remains Mayor of Mosta he will not let the celebration of civil marriages in the offices of the Local Council of Mosta.” (p.19)

Though I am not planning on marrying either ecclesiastically or civilly I find this statement highly preposterous and offensive. Civil marriage was introduced in Malta by the Labour Government in 1975.

Its introduction was beneficial to the Church. Before the introduction of civil marriage all those who wanted to marry in Malta had to celebrate a Church marriage. This forced also those who did not believe or were not practicing to perform an essentially religious act that they had no faith in. The introduction of civil marriage was positive to the Church because it helped her move away (at least in this aspect) from the cultural form of Christianity which characterised religious practice in Malta for centuries.

Its introduction bestowed on an ever increasing number of Maltese a basic human right. Now they could have their marriage sanctioned by the state and not by a Church for whom they cared not. People’s consciences were respected. Civil marriage is a right legally enjoyed by all who want to use it. No one let alone the Mayor of Mosta can deprive them of this right. If he does not want to perform the ceremony I think he should have the right to abstain but he has no right not to let the premises of the Council used for this purpose.

Last Sunday Dr Chetcuti Caruana spoke more as a Mullah than as a Mayor. He treated the Local Council more as a madrasa than as democratic and popular structure.

Years ago we had the Republic of Zejtun based on violence. I hope that we will not now have the Republic of Mosta based on bigotry.

What the secretaries did not do

The general secretaries of the PN and the MLP should be congratulated for their joint statement appealing to their supporters to be prudent and tolerant throughout and after the electoral campaign. They agreed that during and after the campaigns, people would not be carried to or from political activities in open trucks and vans and no unlicensed or derelict cars would be used. Jason and Joe appealed to their supporters to avoid incidents.

It is not a historic agreement (there were others similar to it before) but it is positive just the same. It is another step in the direction the country has now been following for many years i.e. general elections free from physical violence.

But in recent years that was an opposite and negative movement: an increase in moral “violence” resulting from the over politicisation of the party media. One would have expected the general secretaries to target this kind of “violence” which could be more vicious and harmful than physical violence.

I would have expected the general secretaries to promise the following:

i. The news bulletins on their radio and television stations would be bulletins with news and not mere propaganda. At present they are a mixture of comments, twisted facts, innuendos and allegations all rolled in one. Their motto is: opinions are sacred, facts are free, and insinuation is supreme.

ii. All discussion programmes on the same stations would have an equitable proportion of persons with different opinions and all would be permitted to air their views.

iii. Quotes and sound bites would not be taken out of context or chopped of in the middle to give an impression totally opposite to what the speaker said in the first place.

iv. A number of promotion spots for the Partit Nazzjonalista would be broadcast on the media of the Labour Party and vice versa.

v. Both parties should co-produce a number of political spots urgent their supporters to respect those on the other side.

vi. Manwel Cuschieri and if there is an equivalent on the other side would be drawn off the air immediately.

vii. Programmes in the scheme of electoral broadcasts of the Broadcasting Authority would also be carried by the stations.

Jason and Joe the little dessert you provided is good but it leaves all hungry and under nourished. What you gave us is not the most important thing that you should give us.

Xi twerwir! The hunters are coming

Crudely, simply but correctly put, killing is at the heart of hunting fanatics. There are men, and I guess some woman, who have pleasure in capriciously killing members of other species. The more they kill the more their pleasure heightens to the point of climax.

Now that we are in the vote hunting seasons the hunters’ ghaqda deemed it fit to turn its guns on our politicians. And what better way there is to terrorise politicians than to use that awful four letter word? I dare not write but I guess if I give you its consonants you will figure the rest: V*T*.

They said that have close to 18,000 v*t*s at their disposal. Quite naturally they did not add their wives and kids. They expect that these will follow suit. They also mention a few thousand trappers. Tot them up and you will have over 50,000 suldati ta’ l-azzar.

So you see, the future of this fair land is in the hands of those fanatics who get their kicks from killing. Did I hear someone mentioning the common good; macro economic solutions, more jobs, a first class education for our kids or good social services? To hell with the future of our children so long as we kill the birds, the ghaqda thinks that hunters think.

They are wrong. Most hunters are not fanatics. They will put their sports (or so they call it) in the second, third or fifth place compared to the priorities I mentioned. This is what they did during the elections for the European Parliament. The hunters’ electoral candidate netted in just over 3,000 votes. Quite a far cry from the 50.000 suldati ta’ azzar they claim they have.