I was tipped off, at some unearthly hour, that Saviour Balzan had made a passing reference to me in a piece in his online whatever.

He called me an apologist, twice, without telling anyone in whose interests I am (allegedly) an apologist, which is typical of the standards of innuendo journalism Balzan espouses, and he alleged that I work in tandem with an un-named other blogger, again typical of the man, resorting to playground "yah boo, sucks to you" tactics. He was talking, of course, about his nemesis, Daphne Caruana Galizia.

I do not "work in tandem" with Mrs Caruana Galizia and Balzan can believe this or not, as he pleases. It is in the nature of blogging, as he would know if he practised it rather than having a public video whine while grinding his personal axes, and on occasion the same subjects attract comment in similar vein, so a shallow examination, which is basically Balzan's level, would perhaps allow the impression that a concert is being performed.

Although it is disappointing to Balzan and his ilk, however, there is no concert, though perhaps he measures only using his own yardstick. In his rush to tell on me to people he imagines might have some sort of power to tell me what to write, Balzan of course did not worry about being accurate. Or even coherent.

As for Balzan's assertion that I parroted something written by Caruana Galizia about his late wife, for many reasons I doubt I have ever mentioned her but if he'd care to quote chapter and verse, even privately by email, I'd be able to comment further. I'm not generally in the habit of using private individuals as subjects, though unlike some, I don't pretend to infallibility.