Call in the Vice Squad: whatever they're on should be illegal
Published:
November 7, 2008 at 1:01am
Here’s yet another nugget from beneath the ‘Muscat writes to Obama’ story on www.timesofmalta.com:
V.Micallef (20 minutes ago)
I must remark the way certain bloggers have been flustered by the applause accorded Joseph Muscat on his congratulatory message to President-Elect Obama is simply … remarkable. I wonder why some people have become so sensitive. Is it perhaps the approaching manifestation of courage they are expected to witness in three days’ time? If that is the case, they are right. Muscat’s manifestation will be as overwhelming as Obama’s victory celebrations. Only on a smaller scale, given the size of our country.
11 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Oh for goodness sake !!… Is this guy serious or what? So now Joey is transmitting his arrogance to his very very silly followers. They cannot get ANYTHING right, can they?
@tony
Imsieken hallihom! It’s been a very long time that these guys had something to look forward to (politically of course). Hlief damdim ma qalghux dawn l-ahhar 30 sena!
What an a***hole!
Agree with above – now we have also the GWU protest in Valletta – soon we will be having AD and AN protesting
And don’t forget the anarcho-communists at Graffitti
This guy can’t be real! Someone must have made him up.
A spirit manifests itself not a human being or a group of people. Maybe some like to assimilate Joseph Muscat to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, something like in that funny poster on Maltafly where Joseph Muscat is depicted as Christ in heaven surrounded by angels. The Maltafly article was entitled NIZEL FOSTNA IL-MESSIJA by the way.
[Daphne – You tell them. Why do they think it’s called ‘the manifestation of the Holy Spirit’? The man responsible for Maltafly is usually around on this blog, so maybe he’ll pick it up. The joke will go right over the heads of those who think that the Maltese ‘manifestazzjoni’ translates literally into English as ‘manifestation’. ARE YOU OUT THERE, KURT FARRUGIA AND JASON MICALLEF? IT DOESN’T. YOU TALKING ABOUT A D-E-M-O-N-S-T-R-A-T-I-O-N NOT A MANIFESTATION.}
@ Daphne:
1. You’re wrong, the British often use the term ‘manifestation’ to describe protests – as in ‘manifestation of strength in numbers’.
2. I am not responsible for Maltafly, even though I once took responsibility for uploading an article about the oppression of the Palestinians.
@ Marcus:
1. By “Muscat’s manifestation” V. Micallef means ‘the manifestation organised by Muscat’, not his holy apparition.
2. The Maltafly Messija pic was a satirical piece, but evidently that was lost with you.
Bless you all, and may your venom taste like honey. Honey tarts sell cheaply.
[Daphne – I guess the not-so-subtle distinction between the meaning of ‘manifestation of strength’, manifestation of piety’, ‘manifestation of good will’ etc, on the one hand, and of ‘manifestation’ when wrongly used instead of ‘demonstration’ escapes you completely. People can’t manifest, but they can demonstrate. Muscat’s manifestation can mean one thing only: that he has died and his spirit has come back to haunt us. Muscat can’t organise a manifestation because people can’t manifest. However, he can CALL FOR A MANIFESTATION OF ANGER, COURAGE OR WHAT-HAVE-YOU DURING A DEMONSTRATION WHICH HE IS ORGANISING. Do you get the difference now? English is a very sophisticated language and it is replete with subtle differences in meaning which those for whom it is a ‘learnt’ language find hard to understand or pick up. The Labour Party is thinking of the usage of a similar word in Italian and Maltese. In English, it might have had that meaning once, but has since lost it – which is why British lobby-groups organise demos, not manifestations.]
But what do you expect from these people? Talk to them, listen to what they’re saying, notice their body language. They’ve completely switched to “ahna ha nirbhu zgur” mode again.
Bollocks to the defeat report. Bollocks to caution. Bollocks to the earthquake. Bollocks to change. “Issa ghandna lil-Joseph u ha nkissruh lil-Gonzi”. Will they ever learn?
First comparing Joseph Muscat to Tony Blair, and now to Barak Obama. Who’s next?
[Daphne – Berlusca.]
Some people just don’t get it. I never said I had anything against the satirical piece on Maltafly. I never even wrote anything against Maltafly. The satire could be depicted as it was in Maltafly only because of the reference it had to the way Joseph Muscat was actually being portrayed by the Labour media and by his own words (“Inhobbkom!” – remember?). In other words there had to be some kind of truth in it for the satire to work and have any value. So thumbs up to satire that works, inspires, entertains, whatever. And in this case the Maltafly satirical piece did work. (So prosit if that’s what you were fishing for! I’m surprised you had to point out it was a satirical piece and thought that I hadn’t noticed.) And with regards to your other critique of my comment, of course I knew that V. Micallef was referring to ‘the manifestation organised by Muscat’ and not his holy apparition. But the word manifestation just can’t be used in that context (in English). So just accept it, full stop! My original comment alluded to the fact that the word manifestation is being used wrongly by the Labour media and some might conveniently like to have it being used as it may conjecture images of a manifestation of a spirit as that of the holy spirit, like in that satirical piece on Maltafly. Now please don’t ask me to explain it to you again.