Sometimes, it's better to zip your mouth
And it’s better to keep something else zipped up, too, but I won’t go into any great detail there. Anthony Zammit, the Labour MP and surgeon who famously told us that he is the only person to have seen Alfred Sant on the inside as well as the outside, and who gave a rousing speech to a thousand harridans before the general election, has seen fit to give an interview to The Times, describing his ordeal at the hands of two robbers, and his clever wits. It’s carried on the front page today.
As soon as I read about the robbery, my instant reaction was: “Ha, it’s probably some rough trade who had the key to the house.” “Kif dejjem tahseb hazin?” my husband said, as men sometimes do in their touching Polly-Anna naivety. “The most obvious explanation is usually the factual one,” I replied annoyingly.
So today I was gratified to read on the front page of The Times that Zammit knows the names and even the nicknames of those who tied him up, gagged him and held a sawn-off shotgun to his head (some people actually pay to have this kind of thing done to them – OK, Daphne, that’s enough). He said that he used his wits to pry this information out of them while he was being robbed – you know, like at a cocktail party, I imagine. “How do you do? I’m Anthony Zammit. And you are?”
Quote: “I called the guy by name, and told him that if he did not shoot me, I was going to die of a heart attack, and they would be blamed anyway.”
I was even more gratified that my favourite ‘obvious explanation’ theory had proved to be correct once more, when I read that CCTV footage showed the two men using a key to get into the house. They didn’t break in. They just pulled out a key to the front door and unlocked it, easy as pie. And where did they get the key? Zammit told the newspaper that he thinks the robbers “were commissioned” by whoever “got hold of” his house-key. Four people have a key to his house, apparently, each of whom he “trusts blindly”, and he “recently also handed a bunch of his keys to a fifth trusted person”. Ahem. I imagine that at least one of them is the cleaner, but the others? If it’s none of our business, then he has no business giving large and semi-explicit interviews to the press. Sometimes, there’s virtue in keeping a low profile, especially when what you think might generate votes might actually turn out to generate a nice, big case of “ooh, I wish I could disappear” embarrassment. Zammit says that one of these five trusted people must have betrayed him, or else his front-door key was taken from one of them and copied without that person’s knowledge.
I hate to think what circles he might move in, but quite frankly, I don’t think little old ladies asleep in their beds are at risk of the same thing happening to them, as he seems to believe. If he comes right back and says that it’s none of our business, then the response is that he should keep his mouth shut, or watch who he mixes with and what he gets up to now that he’s Labour’s highly prized MP and touted to be Prime Minister Muscat’s minister of health. Muscat can’t afford to have a health minister whose house-key somehow falls into the hands of strange men with sawn-off shotguns. His office key might suffer the same fate. That’s stating the obvious. It’s why background checks are carried out on government ministers and why, in Britain, they’re monitored by MI5, including (and especially) when it comes to their private life.
I can’t help thinking that this case recalls the murder of Alfie Rizzo and that of Mr Jones of Amery Street, Sliema, round the corner from where I grew up, who was found dead on his sofa, stabbed with what the newspapers reported to be “a scissors”.
And I can’t help but think, too, that the Labour Party is so undiscriminating in the candidates it chooses to lionise, that it really risks having embarrassment raise its ugly head, as with my sixth-form college classmate Sandro Schembri Adami. But then perhaps these things don’t matter much to them: after all, all the big cheeses were out in force in the front pews at Rizzo’s funeral – a pederast who maintained the pretence of married life while cruising Gzira for boys who were not necessarily homosexual but desperate for money (rent boys, in other words), one of whom ended up killing him in a frenzy of disgusted rage.
This is the sort of thing that happens when homosexual men, for reasons best known to themselves, refuse to come out of the closet and instead lead a ‘secret’ life buoyed up by hypocrisy, which Malta being Malta can never be anything more than an open secret. I so much admire the new generation of homosexual men – I know a few who were schoolfriends of my sons – who have the confidence to come right out with the truth and live an honest life. Because they have self-respect, they are respected. It wasn’t so easy for my generation, many of whom left Malta to live that honest life, or came out really late in life, in their 30s or 40s. And it was far, far more difficult for the generation before mine, most of whom never came out at all. Think about it: how many openly gay men do you know who are in their 50s, 60s and 70s, compared to all those you know who are in their 20s, 30s and 40s? The trouble is that when you’ve spent a lifetime pretending to be otherwise, it takes more guts than most people have to change tack. But lifting the burden of secrecy is such a blessed relief, after the initial trauma, that I’m surprised so many men seem to prefer a cloak-and-dagger existence.
45 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
While I was reading Mr Zammit’s interview I had the niggling feeling that it was a PR job…to gloss over something unsavoury…a botched PR job but a PR job nonetheless…The piece was full of soundbites like using your mind instead of your body. Well, using his brain isn’t something foremost on his mind when Mr Zammit speaks. Ahjar ghalaq halqu.
What are you suggesting Daphne? This is a little below the belt…….
Daph, are you impyling that Anthony Zammit is a closet homosexual?
[Daphne – I’m not implying anything. It’s a known fact that Anthony Zammit is gay. I’m from his neighbourhood, remember. As somebody from a generation younger than his, I just find it strange that people would prefer to live a life of hiding and pretending, rather than coming to terms with their sexuality.]\
Curiouser and curiouser….
…and there I was feeling sorry for the poor schnook!!!!!
Daphne, When I heard about this mugging, I came exactly to the same conclusion as you did. They came in and left through the front door without breaking in. One does not need to be Sherlock Holmes to conclude that they had a key.I was told off by my wife when I told her that it must have been some friends of his that had a key…………His interview, well not much to say about it except that it reminded me of the interview he had when he operated on his Lejder.
@gerald – Yes, that is where it is usually found.
@ Kieli
Tajbaaaaaaaaa!!!
Is this guy for real?
[Moderator – Yes, he’s for real, and another good example of poor Labour Party judgement. Laqwa li ghandhom wiehed pulit minn tas-Sliema. Boy, is he ever going to give them a hard time….]
Doesn’t the MLP vet its candidates?
[Moderator – Apparently not, given that beggars can’t be choosers.]
“Kif tlajt fuq mal-Pulizija mill-ewwel indunajt li kien hemm xi ħaġa ħażina meta rajt il-bieb tal-kamra tas-sodda magħluq GHAX IL-PROFESSUR DEJJEM KIEN IHALLIH MIFTUH” (Philip, “li jiehu hsieb il-Zammit” (according to news reports), after being summoned by the police to open the door to the house after having been alerted by the owner of the neighbouring bar – Extracted from here, though it was also reported in The Times, I believe:
http://www.l-orizzont.com/news.asp?newsitemid=46531 )
[Moderator – Oh, but don’t you know? Men of a certain generation always need somebody else to take care of them, and if it’s a woman, in-nies jahsbu hazin.]
It’s when stories such as this one hit the media waves when I rue the fact that we don’t have the tabloid press…
Too much pussyfooting around this one…
Who knows if we will ever get to the bottom of this story…there is so much spinning that it is making me dizzy
It’s a funny blog especially when it comes to leaving a comment about the blog… Name (required) oh yeah and Mail (required) ahaaa and for what ?!!!?! Come on give me a break!
Not much to comment about this article except that it shows a lot of intolerance and disrespect to a world reknown surgeon.
Thanks Anthony for the sacred service you give to your country. I wish others can give a fraction of what you give, starting from the author of this funny blog.
[Moderator – Oh, but don’t you know? Men of a certain generation always need somebody else to take care of them, and if it’s a woman, in-nies jahsbu hazin.]
… so in this case, it might have been a better idea had it been a woman
Although Mr Rizzo might not have been publicly out, I can assure all that he was not a closet case. There are several factors that the public might not be aware of in terms of his private life but one does not have to necessarily make one’s private matters public. He was open with his wife and closest friends. I have chosen to make my homosexuality public and have done so with the hope of changing people’s attitudes. I do not expect the same of others. We both know people who are open to their friends but do not necessarily make it public knowledge. It is their business. I recall Mr Rizzo with great respect. In the sometimes inhospitable place that public broadcasting was, he along with two other people there made me feel welcome.
I still fail to understand the link between Zammit being gay an him getting mugged….I bet you’re too good for us.
P.s….In his long career Zammit has helped thousands of people, often at no cost whatsoever…I beleive he deserves something more than this cheap ridicule.
[Daphne – Read the post again, please. There is no link between Zammit being gay per se and his being mugged. I would be the last person to say that sort of thing. But there might very well be a link between the covert lifestyle he appears to lead and the fact that such dangerous men had a key to his house, were able to enter freely through the front door, and Zammit knows both their names and their nicknames. Being gay has nothing to do with it. Having a secret ‘other life’ that you would rather hide from the public does. He might just as well have been a high-profile heterosexual man who gets his kicks from secretly mixing with the low-life and associating with drug-trafficking pimps who procure prostitutes and cocaine for him. Somebody in that position can end up in a similar sort of mess, too. From Zammit’s own description of the experience, these men seem to have had another agenda besides robbery: roughing him up. They really seem to have had it in for him. While I am great defender of the right of private individuals to live as they please without scrutiny or interference, as long as it is only consenting adults who are involved, I think it is a very bad idea for people who hold public office and positions of trust to have secret lives that they consider embarrassing enough to wish to conceal – whether it’s men with men or men with women. There is simply too much risk involved.]
It seems that Daphne wants to pass Prof Zammit from the same kind of trial which Oscar Wilde had to endure….so liberal of you Daphne.
As Prof Zammit said himself, he told his story so as that it might serve as a source of courage for all those who have fallen victims of criminals….
Rent boys or no rent boys, if your allegation is true, it’s after all their choice…
[Daphne – Yes, Chris, as you said it’s his choice: but that choice involves either being up front about his life, or leaving public life. You can’t have it both ways: a secret life in the public eye. And quite frankly, what is he ashamed of, in this day and age? Your comparison to Oscar Wilde is entirely fatuous. Oscar Wilde was a brillliant person, living at a time when sodomy was a criminal offence. Zammit is no Oscar Wilde, and nothing sexual he does is a criminal act, given that one assumes only consenting adults are involved. Please draw a distinction between his sexual preferences, to which nobody can object, and what appear to be his feelings of shame about those sexual preferences, to which we are free to object. Yes, I object to the message Zammit is transmitting: that he has to conceal his sexuality to receive acceptance in public life. He is not only a bad role model for other gay people, but he shores up the public perception of gay= shame = secrecy. Why be ashamed? I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being gay, but Zammit appears to think so.]
@ meerkat. so you’re saying that MLP should exclude gays from becoming candidates? My dear, this is MLP not PN. It is Gonzi who said that he doesn’t want any gays on Pn’s ticket. (hmmmmmmmmm now let me think, David Casa is a nationalist MEP isn’t he?)…the point is that MLP is more tolerant than PN.
[Moderator – The Labour Party is more tolerant than the Nationalist Party – not of homosexuals, but of poor standards in public life.]
Daphne, I can’t say that your analysis is completely off the mark, but what makes you so sure that the robbery and assault had anything to do with Zammit’s sexuality? Whether you’re right or wrong, you’ve invaded a man’s privacy by outing him when he would rather keep his sexuality private, and you’ve done so when the man has just suffered a major trauma. Whatever the issues may be in the bigger picture, some empathy would not go amiss. I agree that in an ideal world people would be open about their sexuality, or rather that sexuality would not be an issue, but it is ultimately a personal decision.
@ Moderator: http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2006/01/22/t2.html
[Daphne – I’m not sure, of course, but given what I know so far, I think it’s more than likely, because the men entered using a key and he knew their names. Please remember that Zammit is a VERY public figure, who capitalised on the fact that he operated on Alfred Sant to successfully win a parliamentary seat in the last election. He took to the podium at Labour meetings, boasted about his performance, and campaigned for the election of both the Labour Party and himself. He was gunning for a place in Sant’s cabinet as minister of health. I completely disagree with, and am disgusted by, prying into the private lives of public persons, by newspapers and similar. The point I have made here is that Zammit has invaded his own privacy, so to speak, by rushing to give an interview instead of keeping quiet. He appears to have a strong exhibitionist streak. Nobody would have said anything, myself included, had he said nothing himself. I’m really not interested in what people get up to between the sheets or on the kitchen-table. I don’t care whether they get a kick out of being bound and gagged. But I am quite annoyed at attempts by public persons to dress up situations as something they are not. And I am even more annoyed by ‘let’s pretend’ coverage in the newspapers, with everybody skirting the obvious subject – as with the murder of Alfie Rizzo, which was made out to be some kind of accidental chance encounter with a petty thief. Oh, please.]
@ Chris Borg
No I did not say that and kindly do not put words in my mouth. what I meant was that MLP should be more careful to choose candidates who do not have questionable dealings. Everybody knows that Mr Zammit is gay and I have no problems with that.
Hah comparison to Oscar Wilde! Unbelievable! I am sure this brilliant Irish playwright/novelist/poet would not have come up with the drivel of having seen Sant from inside or such crap.
Qualcosa non quadra in questa storia.
One thing really left me perplexed – apparently the thieves or whoever they were spent two hours in there ? Am I right ?
Why all that time ?
[Moderator – You’re not the only one to have noticed that. So far the only facts we know for sure – as distinct from what Zammit said – is that the man who runs the bar next to Zammit’s home alerted the police and Zammit’s friend after seeing two men leave the house at night. The police then entered the house with this friend, Philip, and found Zammit bound and gagged in the bedroom. The default assumption was that he had been assaulted by burglars, but there could as easily be other explanations, and the burglary story used as a cover-up for what might be considered an embarrassing situation.]
Spiru,
I am currently having a (deserved) multi-week break from work, and apart from lazing around and watching Olympics during the early morning and day, during the night I am watching the latest seasons of TV series like CSI, NCIS, Crossing Jordan and Law and Order.
From what I gathered from your comment, it seems that you are also watching similar stuff….
zammit should be wise enough to remember that saying about the monkey who exposes more and more of its backside, the higher it decides to climb up the tree.
Daphne I still cannot understand the reason for this article. What one does in his/her private life is their own business, as long as it is between consenting adults.
If the guy were part of a homophobic party or an MEP casting votes to block legislation in favour of increased gay rights, then I would agree that his private life should be exposed to show the hypocrisy. Mr. Zammit is doing none of this so I think his right to a private life should be respected.
[Daphne – How do you know that ‘Mr Zammit is doing none of this’? The only facts that have been established so far are that (1) a neighbouring bar-tender saw two men leaving at night by the front door and alerted the police, (2) the men entered the legitimate way through the front door using a key, (3) they stayed there for two hours, (4) Zammit knows their names, and (5) when the police went to investigate, they found Mr Zammit bound and gagged in the bedroom. Mr Zammit then gave an interview saying that he had been robbed. You may have been born yesterday, but I wasn’t. The point isn’t what he gets up to in his spare time, but whether he just might be trying to sell it to a gullible public as an unexplained attack on his person from which he heroically defended himself. That is a perfectly legitimate question to ask about a person who wants our votes and is trying to become a cabinet minister. If you think otherwise, then we belong to different value systems: it’s not about the sex, it’s about the big question-mark over the truth about what he’s saying. Oh, and I find it most peculiar that the only physical description he gave of these men is that one of them had small feet, a size 38. Normally, the first thing we notice about people is whether they are shorter or taller than we are, and whether they are bigger or smaller, and when asked to give a description, height and body size are the first things we mention – not shoe size, even if the shoe is positioned on our neck.]
Well, maybe Prof Zammit should follow the “village lawyer” and hire some bodyguards….but he should make sure that they afford a papocc. Maybe he could pick them at the bridge at St Julian’s :)
This post/article attacks the victim. I’m not just referring to the hold-up. It attacks also his alleged/presumed sexual orientation. Instead of commenting on the pressures which society puts on gays this article attacks a person who, according to this same article is a closet gay, without keeping in mind how society was at the time of the person’s formation.
A person doesn’t have to tell the whole world if he’s gay so as no to be considered a closet gay.
n.b. do you think that it’s a coincidence that Prof Zammit is Labour’s spokesman on minority rights?
[Daphne – First off, the Maltese word for shoe, any shoes including those worn for sports, is ‘zarbun’ not ‘papocc’. The latter is the Maltese word for bedroom slippers or carpet slippers, or just plain slippers of the sort worn ONLY in the house in cold weather, made of wool or velvet and sometimes lined with fleece. Secondly, it shows you don’t know me from Adam when you imagine that I am the sort of person who goes round attacking people because of their sexual orientation. Thirdly, like Mr Zammit, I and all my contemporaries grew up in a very different Malta. We don’t live in that Malta now, and so we live contemporary lives and not 1970s lives. Zammit can do the same and if he doesn’t, he’s a coward. There is no place for cowards in politics, especially not when they are party spokesmen for minority rights, of all things.]
I only read the online version of last Saturday’s The Times now but as soon as I learnt of this matter on the news last week (I do not recall the day) I smelt a rat.
For starters, who would burgle a house and remain with its occupant for two hours? I have a sneaking feeling that the “burglary” (if indeed there was one – not even Mr. Zammit seems to be convinced) was just a mise-en-scene to disguise some other reason for the break-in. The criminals were evidently more interested in harming Mr. Zammit than actually stealing.
Furthermore, since the thieves wore a balaclava and a carnival mask, (and hence clearly they were concerned with not being recognised and identified) how on earth did he manage to get their names?? I mean, I’m no Sherlock Holmes, but it stands out a mile that something is afoot. My feeling is that Mr. Zammit knew who the perpetrators were (he might have recognised them from their voices or their physiques, particularly if they were the ones who had his house-keys) and this so-called battle of the wits is just a seemingly-clever way to give an explanation of how he knows the perpetrators’ names.
There are other particulars which show that the burglars were not professionals (neglecting the CCTV aspect and using house-keys and not even feigning a break-in thus reducing the amount of suspects to a mere handful, if not less) and that they were not really intent on stealing (if silver fell from a plastic bag, why not pick it up in two hours?). It was the barman who raised the alarm because otherwise the perpetrators(apparently anyway) would have stayed there (or so the story goes, anyway). Many loose ends which, even if tied up, show no clear picture.
Having said all this, however, I do not mean to diminish or ridicule any of Mr. Zammit’s professional prestige and humanity or diminish his ordeal by any degree. I have been mugged in Malta once and it was a very violent episode so I can never ridicule what anybody undergoes. However, I can’t believe his version of the facts.
Finally, Daphne, your comment about men’s naivete’ really struck a chord with me! I’m always deeply surprised (and sometimes shocked admittedly) at my husband’s naivete’ and sometimes I suspect that I must be a really bad person to think of certain things. But I’m very frequently (if not always) proved right. My husband hardly ever is. So, I really see what you mean.
@ Daphne. Alot can be said about the MLP, but certainly not that it is a homophobic party and to date I do not recall Mr. Zammit blocking any legislation in favour of gay rights; that is why I said ‘Mr. Zammit is doing none of this’
If indeed he is trying to cover up a story or derail a police investigation, then yes he should be exposed and even face police investigation. But until further facts surface, a bit of caution would not go amiss. You might be right after all, and you will tell all of us ‘I told you so!’ … but what if not?
My point was that your article seemed more directed at exposing his personal sexual preferences and inform everyone that Mr. Zammit is gay rather than driving the point home that maybe there are other facts which he is trying to conceal. I think that is why some of us took exception to it. Maybe the same point (Mr. Zammit trying to cover up a story) could have been made without so much reference to his sexual preferences.
It’s not about Mr. Zammit, because in all honesty, I’m not a big fan of his since he reminds me very much of Emmy Bezzina with his attention seeking antics and knack for self promotion, it is just that to me one’s private life should be just that; private!
Being a libertarian at heart I would prefer to err on the side of cation and ensure that the right to a private life is respected.
[Daphne – Then we agree on quite a lot. I certainly don’t think that the Labour Party is a homophobic party. Like you, Anthony Zammit reminds me of Emy Bezzina: there’s something a little odd there which rings the alarm bells. I am not interested in Zammit’s sex life AT ALL. I too think that public figures have the right to a private life. I am, on the other hand, extremely interested in why he felt he had to rush to give an explanation via The Times, and why he didn’t look at all bruised for somebody who had been as badly roughed up as he said. I am extremely uncomfortable with the idea of politicians using newspapers to pull the wool over the eyes of those who, because they are cut off from the action and have no access to background information, take the printed story at face value.]
What I also find suspiciious is that the bartender knows that Mr Zammit usually keeps his bedroom door closed… not yer typical bartender I think…
[Daphne – It wasn’t the bar-tender who knew that, but his friend Philip, “li jiehu hsiebu”. But that’s by the by. Our home help knows whether I keep the bedroom door open or closed.]
@ daphne
even worse mela
I only read the online version of last Saturday’s The Times now but as soon as I learnt of this matter on the news last week (I do not recall the day) I smelt a rat.
For starters, who would burgle a house and remain with its occupant for two hours? I have a sneaking feeling that the “burglary” (if indeed there was one – not even Mr. Zammit seems to be convinced) was just a mise-en-scene to disguise some other reason for the break-in. The criminals were evidently more interested in harming Mr. Zammit than actually stealing.
Furthermore, since the thieves wore a balaclava and a carnival mask, (and hence clearly they were concerned with not being recognised and identified) how on earth did he manage to get their names?? I mean, I’m no Sherlock Holmes, but it stands out a mile that something is afoot. My feeling is that Mr. Zammit knew who the perpetrators were (he might have recognised them from their voices or their physiques, particularly if they were the ones who had his house-keys) and this so-called battle of the wits is just a seemingly-clever way to give an explanation of how he knows the perpetrators’ names.
There are other particulars which show that the burglars were not professionals (neglecting the CCTV aspect and using house-keys and not even feigning a break-in thus reducing the amount of suspects to a mere handful, if not less) and that they were not really intent on stealing (if silver fell from a plastic bag, why not pick it up in two hours?). It was the barman who raised the alarm because otherwise the perpetrators(apparently anyway) would have stayed there (or so the story goes, anyway). Many loose ends which, even if tied up, show no clear picture.
Having said all this, however, I do not mean to diminish or ridicule any of Mr. Zammit’s professional prestige and humanity or diminish his ordeal by any degree. I have been mugged in Malta once and it was a very violent episode so I can never ridicule what anybody undergoes. However, I can’t believe his version of the facts.
Finally, Daphne, your comment about men’s naivete’ really struck a chord with me! I’m always deeply surprised (and sometimes shocked admittedly) at my husband’s naivete’ and sometimes I suspect that I must be a really bad person to think of certain things. But I’m very frequently (if not always) proved right. My husband hardly ever is. So, I really see what you mean.
missek tisthi titkellem hekk fuq mr.zammit wara x-xoghol li jaghmel. Min jaf kemm ferrah nies wara li salvalhom lil xi hadd mil-familjari taghhom min xi marda li hakmithom…. avolja tixtieq hafna deni li min ma jaqbilx politikament mieghek, jiena ma nixtieqx li tghaddi min dak li jghaddu pazjenti ta’ mr.zammit. Biss l-aktar li wegghajt b’dan l-artiklu meta semmejt nies li sfortunatmant m’ghadhomx maghna. Biss ftakar li l-familjari ghadhom jimmisjaw u jhobbu lil gheziez taghom.. Irrifletti fuq dan kollhu li qed taghmel u ieqaf tweggha nies innocenti
For a catholic country, you sure are a Christian lot. St Paul might well have taken the venom out of the island’s snakes and vipers but he had little difficulty finding a place on the tongues of some of my fellow Maltese.
I am out and proud but respect others’ right to stay in the closet PROVIDED they do not do anything to jeopardise the rights of other gay men and lesbians. Naturally when a person is dead, historians are at liberty to speculate.
I do not see how Rizzo and Jones were pederasts. They may have liked younger men but calling them pederasts is giving a new meaning to the word. They were victims of vile crimes.
As to Zammit’s sexuality or for that matter that of the aggressors, I see no relevance whatsoever to the fact that he was a victim of a home invasion. So following from your logic, does this mean that gay men and lesbians are unworthy of protection because they are not “out”?
Zammit may have made a bad judgment when he handed his house keys to a friend or friends (who am I to know?), but who has not made a bad judgment? I certainly would not be the one to cast any stones?
What disappoints me is the venom of some of my fellow Maltese which is motivated by one fact only: Zammit’s membership of the MLP. They take pleasure in the fact that a member of the MLP has suffered.
Now go back to your Sunday Masses, your novenas and your litanies and congratulate yourselves on your religious fervour.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
[Daphne – Please don’t get all militant and hysterical. Ganging up with and defending other people purely on the basis of a shared sexuality is not just unwise, but nonsensical. You might feel that you’re ‘all in it together’ because you think that gays are an oppressed and persecuted minority, but the fact is that there is nothing gays experience that hasn’t already been – and is still being – experienced by women over long centuries. As a woman in the public eye with views that are considered hugely unwomanly, I know exactly what I am talking about. You shouldn’t feel you have to stick up for Rizzo or Jones or Zammit just because they were/are gay like you are. In fact, my advice is that you shouldn’t, because it’s not worth being associated with another person’s sleazy reputation. All you have in common is your sexuality. It’s not as though they’re your friends or relatives. And quite honestly, you should be able to understand, whether you’re gay or not, why society views with distaste men who cruise the streets at night looking for boys who will accept money to have sex with them. Don’t worry, they view men who cruise the streets for underage girls with exactly the same distaste. If men who cruise for young girls are perverts, then men who cruise for young boys are perverts too, and wise homosexual men who prefer straightforward relationships with adults have the good sense not to rank themselves alongside. Yes, men who have sex with boys (and a 16-year-old is a boy) are defined as pederasts. There is no word, as far as I know, for men who pursue schoolgirls, but where I come from, we call them Humbert Humberts. Also, if you knew me at all or had ever read anything I’ve written, you will know that I am the last person in this country to be found saying a novena (I don’t even know what it is) or thrashing about in the throes of religious fervour. If you think I’m a homophobe, don’t take my word for it, but please ask around: my interest in other people’s sexuality is minimal to the point of non-existence.]
Daphne, I now know where the venom went. Just because I respect a living person’s right to privacy, it does not follow that I am not critical of other gay men and lesbians.
Obviously logic is not one of your great strengths.
What I am saying is that your article is unaccepting of other people’s political views hence your attack on a victim of a home invasion.
And I do not care whether you are a homophobe or not (poor “sods” who know you!) but I worry about a few other things such as whether it is time for you to grow up and get some culture and education into you. Do you have any tertiary qualifications? Or do you think that because you can string a few sentences together, you are a journalist? Much of what you write is cliche-ridden and, with respect, quite ordinary.
Int mara veru dardira? U ghidtilna minn Tas-Sliema? Ma nafx ghaliex il-gazzetti Maltin jaghtukom spazzju.
Find yourself a brandy and go and get a life. In your case, a novena or two may not be a bad idea.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
[Daphne – You give gay men a very bad name. Actually, come to think of it I remember you on television, some kind of kind activist – one of those hysterically paranoid ones who thinks everyone is out to get them. I won’t tackle your rubbish insults, but I will say that anyone who wants to keep his privacy intact should not stand for election, gun for a ministerial portfolio, or give interviews to the newspapers about how he was tied up in his bedroom. Enough said.]
Paranoid? I plead guilty. I always thought of myself as a Daphne Caruana Galizia mincing around with that Sliema English accent. And I did not know you had qualifications in psychology? But then you are from Sliema and that makes you an expert in everything, doesn’t it?
As for me giving a bad name to gay men and lesbians, well I have never pretended to represent gay men and lesbians. Unlike you, a shining example of womanhood (if not ladyhood), I am fraught with failings.
But is this not a case of the pot calling the kettle black? You don’t mind attacking murdered individuals and wrongly accusing them of being pederasts and taking the mickey out of a victim of a home invasion but you get all too sensitive when someone criticises you and your imagined skills as a journalist. I ask again: what tertiary qualifications do you have?
You also criticize a former Prime Minister of Malta and accuse him of being unwashed, a man in his 90s who only has a few years left. If I were him and I knew I would be sitting next to you, I would not wash for weeks. With respect, it is your mind and soul that need a good wash.
Take a good look at yourself and respect human beings for what they are … human. You are a vile woman notwithstanding your double-barrelled surname. Good journalists can still be critical but respectful.
Now go back to your hole and “dont enough said” me.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
[Daphne – Kemm int anitpatiku, jahasra. Such a shame you fall into the homophobic stereotype of the gay bitch and do your cause no end of harm. You say you don’t claim (not ‘pretend’ – how come decades in Australia never taught you the difference between the two?) to represent gays, yet the only reason I know your name and face is because at one time you were all over the place insisting that you’re an oppressed minority (oh baby, you should try being a woman). So let’s see: you’ve got a chip because of your sexuality, a chip because of your social background (evidenced by your prejudice against tas-Sliema), a quite obvious hatred of women (one of those kinds of gays, not the other kind we love because they love us), and a chip because of your politics. And given the general hamallu cercur tone of your comments, it comes as no surprise to find that you are a Mintoff supporter. From your cave in Australia you’re still fighting the battles of the early 1970s. Attaboy! Australia needs you!]
Oh dear! You’re falling back into stereotypes. So if someone returns your compliments and he is gay, then he must be a gay bitch. And gay men hate women. And homosexuals are pederasts. And you are not a homophobe? Give us a break. How old are you? I take it you are a woman of “some” years. Is it not time to take up knitting but given that pastime requires needles, it may not be such a good idea?
If you have suffered discrimination then it may well be because of who you are rather than on account of your gender!
By the way, do you know that “daphne” was a nymph who when pursued by Apollo was saved by being changed into a laurel tree. If pursued, what will you change into? A gay bitch?
Perhaps I should send the same message someone (I understand he has your surname) gave Super One. It was a four letter word and is offered for viewing on the internet. Do you know that person?
I ask again: what are your qualifications? What makes you a JOURNALIST?
For your edification, I include the following dictionary definition of “pretend”:
Pronunciation: (pri-tend’), [key]
—v.t.
1. to cause or attempt to cause (what is not so) to seem so: to pretend illness; to pretend that nothing is wrong.
2. to appear falsely, as to deceive; feign: to pretend to go to sleep.
3. to make believe: The children pretended to be cowboys.
4. to presume; venture: I can’t pretend to say what went wrong.
5. to allege or profess, esp. insincerely or falsely: He pretended to have no knowledge of her whereabouts.
—v.i.
1. to make believe.
2. to lay claim to (usually fol. by to): She pretended to the throne.
3. to make pretensions (usually fol. by to): He pretends to great knowledge.
4. Obs.to aspire, as a suitor or candidate (fol. by to).
—adj.
Informal.make-believe; simulated; counterfeit: pretend diamonds.
Now I taught you something you did not know. So there is a limit to your “bottomless” knowledge. Oh dear! L-iskola tan-nuna was not that good after all.
For the record, no I do not hate women. My mother is one and so were my maternal and paternal grandmothers. And all were ladies!
Also for the record, I admire Mintoff for having the balls to decriminalise homosexuality. Remember the opposition to it of the Nationalist Party when two senior party members were frequenting beats looking for young (male) trade?
And finally, also for the record, no I am not against Sliema. It was lovely before the developers turned it into tomorrow’s slum. I simply detest those who try to be more English than the English notwithstanding their mediterranean looks and demeanor. Get it.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
[Daphne – The only stereotype I believe exists is that of the typical Mintoffian supporter, as exemplified by you. Apart from that, there are quite clearly a lot of problems you should have tackled a long time ago, instead of running away to Australia to escape the consequences of your hero’s policies.]
My dear if not darling Daphne
You again jump to conclusions. I left Malta in 1965, as a 17 year old. Mintoff was not yet Prime Minister. I was also a member of the MUSEUM and I spent many hours in many churches praying for the relection of Borg Olivier. My father was night editor of Il-Berqa (Mabel’s paper). My mother and her family with one or two exceptions were all pro-NP.
Mintoff is a former prime minister and a statesman and should be shown due respect as we should show respect towards all former prime ministers and presidents whatever their political background. They can be criticised respectfully and I hope I do so in my forthcoming book which you will no doubt find some full stop or comma or an imagined grammatical error to criticize but between you and me I do not give a brass rasoo.
For your information, in Australia, I have voted for all major and one political party. Federally, I prefer the Conservatives. Statewise, I prefer Labour. Council wise, I prefer the Greens. Without bragging, someone with an MA Hons in Politicial Science from an overseas university is unlikely to be so politically naive as to think that any one party has all the answers. There is such a thing as a “party convergence thesis” if you ever heard of it.
And for the record, when I published my last book, it was the NP that first approached me. In-Nazzjon dedicated three pages to the book. It was the best newspaper coverage I received. The MLP was slow to come on board but eventually also gave excellent coverage of the book. There are good people on both sides of politics. I admired Alfred Sant. And there are good people in the Church too notwithstanding my reputation for being anti-clerical.
Let me be blunt. You graduated in archaeology, not journalism. Your articles dig dirt (real or imagined). My concerns about what you write are as follows:
(a) You are intolerant and have a deep and some might argue pathological hatred of the MLP;
(b) You are intolerant of others’ sexuality (and having gay friends means nothing) and if they happen to be gay, you call them names and accuse them of using “rent boys” (if they do, it is their own business provided these “rent boys” are not under age or being exploited); and
(c) You try to make yourself look good by putting down others.
(For the record, no, I do not use rent boys but I respect the right of others to use their own money as they think fit.)
At your age (44), you should be excelling in journalism instead of writing this offensive rubbish. Mind you, you do raise good points but these are lost in your hatred of almost anything you do not agree with. Perhaps you should take your cue from people like Charles Arrigo. I can tell you I did not agree with him on a number of issues but he was a gentleman. A Maltese who gave journalism a good name.
You may think of yourself as one of the “puliti” but really you behave more like a hamalla. And I would have thought a liberated woman like you who no doubt has burnt her bra (or am I wrong?) would have kept her maiden surname. But then Caruana Galizia sounds so much better than Vella.
Many happy returns on your birthday a few days ago. By the way, there were four evangelists: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (not three!). Naming children is such a dangerous business.
I think it is you who should “zip [her] mouth”, not Anthony Zammit MP. You owe Anthony Zammit MP an apology. You give the NP a bad name.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
[Daphne – At 60 years old and after 43 years in Australia, I’m afraid to say that you are still as parochial, petty and small-minded as you must have been in the days you went to the 1960s version of Il-Muzew. It’s amazing, you can take the horse to water, but you really can’t make him drink. And actually, I would have loved to have kept my maiden surname, not least because the family I come from has been far more distinguished and for very much longer than my husband’s. But unfortunately, that was not an option when I married in 1985, because women, like gay men, were severely discriminated against. It was not the Labour Party which introduced that option, incidentally. Oh and by the way, my sons are not named after the evangelists. Whatever your chip might possibly be, I would think that at 60, it’s high time you relaxed a little and shed that anger.]
Hi Daphne-I thought of writing this in Maltese, but on second thought I opted for the easy way out (which seems like the obvious choice for most of my Maltese brothers and sisters) since I left Malta at the age of 12 and still find it hard to spell words which contain the “Ghajn”(gh). By the way congratulations to those patriots (above) Amanda Mallia and Evan for being true to our culture and writing in Maltese. I wish I had your educational qualities.
It seems that your article has generated quite a bit of controversy and if I may get straight to the point, I found your conclusions concerning Dr. Zammit quite intrusive and distasteful. No doubt, Mr. Zammit seems to have a rather annoying streak of narcissism which I’m sure many innocent citizens have been subjected to or even worse traumatized by and I feel that it would be most beneficial for him to address this issue professionally considering his high political profile and medical prowess. But then again, narcissism is a condition that affects many, including some journalists.
I would suggest to you, that perhaps in future you need to exercise better judgment in cases of a similar nature and remember that Mr. Zammit and others deserve their right to privacy in such matters. You alleged that everyone knows he’s gay, pardon me, I didn’t! Neither did some of my extended family who live in Malta including those who support the current prime-minister (which I might add seems like an excellent NP choice and one who shows some strong political talent). You see, like Joseph Chetcuti (a contributor to this column), I believe that we should still respect those who don’t share our political convictions instead of allowing a primitive thought process to give rise to sensationalism and unnecessary, trashy gossip. I do however respect your democratic right to free speech.
I would further like to add that I don’t understand this pathological desire which my fellow Maltese seem to have when it comes to writing and communicating in English, a language that is shared by most countries on the globe yet no culture other than the English speaking countries themselves use it to the extent that we Maltese do. Is this our way of self-gratification? I mean so we can appear more sophisticated? Taparsi edukati, puliti, jew tal-pepe? I mean, shouldn’t we really endeavor to master our own language skills at least to the point of being equal to that of a foreign one? I feel that we need to take a good look at ourselves and learn to stand proud of our culture and heritage which is strongly connected to the Maltese language. We really need to join in solidarity so that our language is cultivated and practiced amongst not just ourselves but also amongst many generations to come. Perhaps an article on this topic or a similar one would be more characteristic of the responsibilities a journalist has towards his/her readers.
Vincent Difesa – You clearly couldn’t have understood what was written in English in my comment somewhere above, which you referred to in your post of today, unless – as is more likely – you were being sarcastic.
The Maltese words posted under my name in the comment in question were merely quoted verbatim from a newspaper, the link to which was posted immediately beneath such quote.
As for your Labour-oozing comment regarding the use of English vs Maltese on this blog, well, I’d rather ignore it.
If you’d prefer to read /post comments on a blog in Maltese, then there are quite a few to where you may migrate.
Amanda Mallia – After scanning through the posts to make sure that Evan was not the only one to have replied in Maltese, I saw your reply and included you (unfortunately, I didn’t re-read it). Although I have no doubt that it came across as sarcastic, I confess and assure you that it was done in error, so my sincere apologies.
I however do not or cannot understand what relevance political standing has with patriotism and my suggestion that we put a halt to this anglicized division within our community. Living in Australia has taught me that the Anglo Saxon culture is indeed an exceptional race of thinkers with an immense understanding of science and law (to name a few). A race which holds some of the most recognized universities world wide. They are also some of the greatest contributors towards technological developments, a race which I truly respect and admire.
We share a world where we need them and it seems that they need us since we often see them on Maltese shores. A perfectly co-habitable planet we live on indeed! Whether we do or don’t (need them) doesn’t alter the fact that they walk on two legs, like us, bleed red, like us and are equal, like us. One of the main differences is that no matter which political party they belong to, they choose to speak and write in their mother tongue. This is the same for all other cultures, except the Maltese. I believe that political motivation should have no bearing on one’s heritage just like political motivation should have no bearing on, for example a child’s right to education.
My political convictions are probably not typically Maltese. I admit that Mintoff was an exceptional leader, but will equally admit that for example under the NP leadership, Malta’s place in the Eurovision song contest has escalated (I realize that to most that may be insignificant to the point of shallow) but to a musician like me, that carries a lot of magnitude. I have seen your current prime minister on a number of television interviews and I also confess that if I lived in Malta, he would have my support. In my opinion, an undoubtedly profound and well educated man with a highly professional disposition, even more so than Dr. Zammit. I honestly fail to see why having pride in our language and its use in the media is “Labour-oozing”. I support political diversity and respect other’s opinion without the need to classify them as belonging to a particular party.
Vincent Difesa – You state that you live in Australia. By your reasoning, then, should you not be communicating with fellow inhabitants there in the original language of the country, which was probably the language used by Aborigines?
Nobody called English people superior in any way, less so English-spekaing ones. With a chip as big as the one you appear to have on your shoulder, I’m surprised that you have not disappeared into the Australian outback.
As for your comment that Mintoff was “an exceptional leader” – especially the fact that you chose to pass it in tandem with one about the Eurovision Song Contest, of all things – only shows, Mr Difesa, that there is an enormous cultural gap between us. Any further attempt at discussion with you would thus only fall on deaf ears, so I rest my case.
Amanda Mallia,
Unbeknown to you, there is immense unity amongst the Aboriginal communities where great care is now given towards the preservation of the many number of surviving Aboriginal dialects. Aboriginal written language is still being mastered by the Aboriginal people which makes its use rather awkward in a developed country such as Australia. I would however support the Aboriginal community in making the language more accessible and it to be introduced within our schools. This plan is still in its infancy and I have no doubt that it will become reality one day; but will the non-Aboriginal citizens support such a language particularly when the English tongue has been practiced here for so many generations? Only time will tell! But for you to make a comparison between an ancient language (Aboriginal) which is still in its evolutionary stages therefore incapable of success in today’s era of education/commerce etc… with another language (Maltese) that has been established, recognised and practiced by the entire nation for more than two millennia is ludicrous. The Aboriginal languages/dialects are an estimated 700 and there still is no principal or universal Aboriginal language one at present. Your first paragraph has therefore been addressed. You raised a good point, but based on the circumstances its relevance is not conclusive!
Also, perhaps unbeknown to you, I live in an Australian city (located South, where it’s too cold for Aboriginals to inhabit) which became an English settlement after the English had colonized it somewhere around 1788. This country is governed under Australian rule and the language practiced at the time I arrived was English although as more Australian people prefer to call it “The Australian language”. And indeed it is, I doubt that any person from a foreign country would be able to read true Australian literature and successfully manage to understand its content without an Australian dictionary. The point I’m here making is that Australia has it’s own language, but the alternative (being the Aboriginal one) is currently inadequate in its structure and falls short of much used and needed terminology. Besides, the highest cultural population in Australia is the English and their descendants. Although Malta has had a number of overseas influences, to my knowledge, the land is occupied by a majority of Maltese of Phoenician and Carthaginian descent and not of Anglo-Saxon extraction.
Furthermore, having traveled to a few countries (namely the French, Italian, Greek and most Asian ones), I have never seen citizens who make continuous English references in their language like the Maltese. Understandably, they’re not all trying to be pretentious, but they’re also showing ignorance as well as a lack of ability towards their natural mother tongue. Australia has a huge diversity of cultures and I assure you that to the Greeks, the Greek language is superior, to the Italians, the Italian one and to the English, American and Australian, the English. I wish I could say the same of the Maltese who persist in bastardizing their language. Have we no pride? “What a confused nation”! was what an Australian friend of mine once exclaimed after being to Malta and noticing the incredible amount of English influences on Television, the media and the general public. And yes, he had a lot of lovely things to say about our hospitality and the things that we know us Maltese are good at, but cultural affection within our verbal communication was here reported as lacking. He was also an avid supporter of Joe Bjelke-Peterson of the former Nationalist party leaders (if that should at all be relevant). Do I think Maltese are confused? Perhaps, a little, so much discourse and journalism is done in English that we casually start using the English (instead of Maltese)for words which we can’t think of at the time instead of making an honest or thorough effort.
I would have thought that Nationalism was exactly that, a support for what is Nationalistic, culture and language being amongst the chief topics. Being a teacher and having a natural love for education, I view my interest about all that I have submitted so far as passionate, and to suggest that any of what I have had to say is a revelation of having a chip on my shoulder only reflects that perhaps you may be the one with a chip on your shoulder concerning the Maltese language and its right to its superiority amongst the languages within our homeland. Maybe I may need to relax a little, but certainly there’s no chip I’m aware of.
One other thing, my use of the Eurovision example was only inserted as a basic example (so as not to make a huge political case of anything) of how under the current leadership, positive influences from abroad are helping shape our music industry and that Malta’s contributions have increased significantly since 1991. In addition, music remains one of the most recognized and powerful tools available in demonstrating to the world that we have the technology and talent to contribute to the common good. Music is one of the few topics that is proclaimed by both the educated and the minimally educated, is a source of communication, does not discriminate in terms of race or culture and appreciated by young and old alike. Perhaps you should have also noted that I made absolutely no mention of Mintoff’s past successes so as not to appear a Labourist, which I might add is a party that probably to your greatest surprise, I haven’t voted for in almost 20 years.
In conclusion, if the majority of Maltese were given an opportunity to debate this topic within an acceptable period of time, and after all relevant matters were presented, and a referendum was taken and even than, perhaps the concept would thus be rejected, or you, Amanda Mallia, were to explain to me the significance and necessity of such persistent English use within our culture, I assure you, than, like you, I would rest my case.
Vincent Difesa: What would that referendum question be?
Hi Corrine Vella: Thank you for your interest and thank you Daphne for allowing me to use your space. Corrine, please note that in my opinion, the referendum question(s) should only be posed after an adequate or higher level of awareness is brought across to the nation on cultural issues and influences, for example food, clothing, song, dance and more importantly, language. We should also remind them how the Maltese language had to earn its right to be the official language over the Italian one in 1934. What great lengths our forefathers had to go through in order to provide us with a right which other countries assume as legacy. The question(s) should tackle the primary factors of one of the most fundamental principles of culture, thus being language. A question which tackles the cultural pride within a nation and one, which in time, could further help unify all Maltese (in Malta and abroad) without exclusion.
The question(s) could be worded as such:
Is the Maltese language in danger of extinction? Are we, (advertently or inadvertently) choosing to communicate in a foreign language purely for the sake of convenience or perhaps, superiority? And could the benefits of such persistent use of the English possibly undermine, sabotage or even threaten a unity which can only be discerned through our cultural pride?
Who knows, perhaps it could one day be the question(s) that could give rise to the Pro-Maltese Maltese movement… but than again, for those that may oppose it, it could also be scrutinized as the movement of the Maltese with the chip on their shoulder!
(Daphne – This is an interesting debate, but referendums are not glorified opinion polls. They are decision-taking mechanisms. So in a referendum there is just one question, and it’s about a decision not an opinion. A referendum question would be ‘Should Maltese cease to be the national language of Malta? Yes (Box for tick) or No (box for tick). ‘Is Maltese in danger of extinction?’ is not a referendum question.)
That’s true and clearly my example(s) were not satisfactory. What I should have suggested is indeed an opinion poll which would perhaps lead to a referendum pending on the outcome. Your alternative, (although a more appropriate question for a referendum) doesn’t completely cover it though… but it’s the general idea.
In Australia they have this law which prohibits television and radio hosts from using American pronunciation on English vocabulary whilst they’re on air. This is of course done to preserve the Australian language from foreign influence namely American. Often it has to do with the “a” vowel, for example the word “Plant” should be exactly that and not “Plent” or “Chance” instead of “Chens” or “Cens” (as my name Vincent is pronounced in Maltese). So perhaps a more appropriate referendum question would therefore be, should television and radio presenters when speaking in Maltese be permitted to use anglicized vocabulary? After all, we’re often all influenced by the media at some stage or other.
check LV Replica Delightful Monogram GM M40354 LV Replica Monogram Canvas Stresa GM Bag M51188 with confident LV Replica Mini Lin Angele M95622 , for special offer