Progressive, my eye – not to mention something crass
Dammit, I'm going to have to pretend I'm pushing him for the European Parliament
Here’s that parliamentary cabaret act called Joseph Muscat, as quoted in The Times today:
“Dr Muscat said the opposition together with progressive forces in the country had always insisted that the right to vote should be given to all. It was the progressive forces who had expanded voting rights from a multiple vote according to one’s property, with a worker having no vote, to voting rights for all men irrespective of their financial worth, and subsequently to universal vote also for women. This had flown in the face of whoever maintained that women should not be burdened with such responsibilities as the right to vote.”
Labour, a progressive force? Don’t make me laugh. Every step forwards this little country has taken as long as I can remember has been despite the Labour Party and not because of it. Since 1971, all the Labour Party has done is push Malta further backwards socially and economically. Real progress only began in 1987, and we all know that it’s no thanks to Labour that we are where we are today.
We’re certainly not in the European Union because of Labour’s progressive force. Labour tried to keep us out. Joseph Muscat didn’t achieve fame and fortune as an MEP because Labour is a progressive force. He got there thanks to the Nationalist government, which worked for EU membership and got it, and it’s thanks to that same Nationalist government that he was able to use his MEP status to piggy-back into the party leadership.
Labour isn’t progressive. It’s regressive. And oppressive.
As for Joseph Muscat’s boasting about Labour’s progressiveness in the sphere of voting rights, he’s asking for a giant raspberry to be blown in his direction. Is this the man who needed five years of hindsight as an MEP to work out that the Yes vote ‘might have won’ the referendum on EU membership? Oh gosh, yes – it is the very same one.
A party that first ignored and then denied a referendum result that was as clear as day should put a zip on it, rather than taking to the parliamentary floor to boast about how progressive it is.
Six years ago, Labour told electors – those who voted No as well as those who voted Yes – that their vote counted for nothing and would be ignored. Joseph Muscat was one of them. So would he please just shut up?
44 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
“Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.”
Elbert Hubbard
Probably Joseph tries to forget that voters – both men and women – risked their limbs if they were known to be Nationalist and went to vote in such places like Zejtun during the democratic rule of good old Dom.
Progressive today? Did you hear him screaming during Wednesday’s parliamentary sitting? At first I thought it was Joe Debono Grech … possibly Joe was supporting the leader in the background … but the leading voice was definitely Joseph’s … he sounded hysterical. Possibly to please the Debono Grechs.
[Daphne – When men start screaming and shouting like that in the workplace, I can’t help suspecting that their wife or home environment is giving them a hard time and that they’re getting it out of their system. It’s the reverse of what happens with those men who have a hard time at the office then go home and take it out on the wife and kids.]
http://www.maltastar.com/pages/ms09dart.asp?a=1307
“The state should do its job and never stop working to make health care the best it can be, Labour Leader Dr Joseph Muscat said during a visit to Mater Dei’s Rainbow Ward.
Accompanied by his wife, Michelle Muscat and accompanied by Parliamentary Secretary for Health Joe Cassar, Dr Muscat toured the Rainbow Ward on Thursday, meeting children and chatting to parents and staff alike.”
Please correct me if I am wrong…but I would have thought that “Parliamentary Secretary for Health Joe Cassar”…was the host… Ustja!…and not accompanying the Doktor and Misses.
Istja kemm ma tahmlux!!!
Insomma, kullhadd b’xi fissazzjoni f’din id-dinja.
[Daphne – I have no time for prats.]
I think the Labour Party is not perfect but it sure is the most progressive. May be you don’t remember the Labour government from 1971 to 1987. It was during this period that Malta became a republic with the vote of the majority of the Maltese parliament.
[Daphne – I can assure you that the vast majority of people on this blog remember the Labour government/s (plural, might I remind you) of 1971 to 1987, which is how we are able to form an opinion, from direct experience. We also remember the anti-EU Labour opposition of 1987 to 1992, the anti-EU Labour government of 1996 to 1998, and the anti-EU Labour opposition of 1998 to 2003 and of 2003 to 2008. After that, there is the not-quite-sure-where-we-stand Labour opposition of Joseph ‘with hindsight the Yes vote might have won’ Muscat. Give me a break, will you. My dog is more progressive than the Malta Labour Party.]
Hey Daphne, count my dog in as well, please.
In my opinion the Labour Party was never anti-EU. It was only against Malta becoming a full member before the nation is economically strong enough. Do you think that all is roses now that we are members of the EU? ASK THE HUNTERS?
DON’T TAKE ME WRONG, i AM IN FAVOUR OF EU MEMBERSHIP, OK.
Mr Fenech,
1. Screw the hunters. The sooner they all bash their brains in or commit some other kind of hara kiri, the better.
2.The Labour Party is, was and always will be anti EU, because it never had the balls to stand on its own feet. The EU means that the MLP, if elected, cannot do what it wants in this country. EU=Democracy=An everlastingly Uncomfortable MLP
3. The EU means that if elected, the MLP can’t screw around with the economy by employing all and sundry in some ‘dipartiment’ or other, nor can it take over people’s businesses and banks, nor can it run roughshod over people’s rights because now it’s their ‘turn to govern’.
4. Kindly review your use of the English language. The words “don’t take me wrong” indicate a certain crassness about the way you submit your posts. Think in English, my friend, and then write down your thoughts.
Right, here we go again. In 2003 it wasn’t a choice between “Yes, let’s join” and “Not now, later”. It was Yes or No. Now or Never. And please drop this ridiculous Santian phrase, “full member”. There are members and non-members. No such thing as “full” or “half” members.
“Do you think all is roses?”, you then ask. You know, in theological circles there’s this thing called “invincible ignorance”.
@HP Baxxter.
it is absolutely right was you said! And that’s why I think the referendum was a complete farse! The question in the referendum was whether you want to join the EU or NOT. But was it the right question the ask at that time? I believe the whole argument of the MLP at that time was that, apart from a temporary partnership proposed, we were not ready to join at the moment and never ruled out the possible future membeship. WE WERE NOT READY! Were we? I beleive you are so intelligent, fighting the holy war against the ‘invincible ignorance’ that can enlighten me…..
Do you think the opinion of “THE HUNTERS” is a good yardstick with which to measure the effects of EU membership?
There never has been any such thing as partial membership of the EU. It takes more than blind belief to make something real. As for waiting till ‘the nation is economically strong enough’, you could wait until kingdom come, but a Mediterranean island can’t grow its economy by just adding water, no matter what rubbish the former MLP leader successfully and cynically sold to those he viewed as his intellectual inferiors.
What about associate membership?
C Fenech. Of course we remember the good old days of Labour governments. That is precisely why we keep on voting PN. Even with Jseph Muscat at the helm, the PL is there for our continued entertainment and nothing else. Life would otherwise be so dull.
Yes, keep on mentioning the past. In the meantime the Labour Party is ahead in the polls and Muscat is the most trusted leader, simply because the Maltese people at the moment don’t give a s*** of 2003, 2008 or whatever. They care about their high energy bills, the cost of living, immigration, hunting, and their jobs. I follow radio 101 and Net TV and the latest strategy I take it to be: ‘Try to convince the people that we were ALWAYS convinced about the EU, the Labour Party was not’ … At the end of the day, WHO CARES. I care about my future not what Sant did in 2003.
[Daphne – Yes, I know. I’m always going on about the fact that Maltese people have a serious problem with thinking skills – basically because Maltese schools and Maltese parents (who tend not to have any themselves) don’t teach them. People who can think assess the consequences of any course of action they take. To do this, they assess the past as well as the present so as to have some gauge of the future. The reason you are asked for your CV when you apply for a job is because your prospective employers don’t take the attitude ‘Oh, I don’t care about his past; I only care about what he says he can do for us.’ If you think that a man whose sole track record is as a Super One hack and a Eurosceptic MEP for a brief four years can solve this country’s problems, you are just adding to them.]
Frankly Daphne it’s not that your beloved Gonzi and his mates have been performing very well. So yes obviously our present position depends on the not so distant past. And that is perhaps why many can’t wait to chuck Gonzi out. It was very close in 2008 with Sant leading the Labour Camp. Wow more than 50% of those who cast valid votes in 2008 are brainless.
[Daphne – Well, I wouldn’t say they are brainless. I’d say that thinking skills are a really serious problem. The desire to remove Lawrence Gonzi and replace him with a Super One reporter who is not particularly bright is symptomatic of this. Leaving politics aside, I know who I would choose if I were interviewing them for a senior corporate position. The fact that so many Maltese people can’t think really worries me, because it affects all areas of life and not just voting patterns. I suspect it is a major factor in the increasing messes in personal and family lives, too. I don’t know how you see it, but I’ve often been in conversation with people and thought ‘My god, they really can’t see the bigger picture and they’re not thinking long term.’ It’s got little to do with actual education or social background. A couple of years ago I was having a chat with a woman who keeps animals up the road, and she summed it up by saying that people on the whole don’t factor in the likely or even just possible consequences of their actions. They don’t ask themselves, if I do this, what comes next? It’s all impulsive and emotional.]
Daphne – “a Eurosceptic MEP for a brief four years” is a very wrong assessment for Joseph Muscat (and Labour). Labour’s inner core, led by George Vella and followed reluctantly by Alfred Sant, changed overnight after the 2003 election defeat, even marginalising the KMB Eurosceptics out of the playing field. By June/July 2004, when the KMB remnants lost the internal vote over the EU Constitution, Labour could be described as a Europhile party.
[Daphne – A Europhile party with anti-EU supporters? That’s interesting.]
At the time, Labour failed to recognise the middle road: the possibility of accepting the will of the people for EU membership, while still retaining an EU-critical stance (an EU-critical stance is something you wouldn’t understand, so don’t bother). They could have done this even if they wished to join the PES (a lot is possible in the European Parliament if only one knows how to go about it). Instead they did the full Monty: they became total Europhiles which pissed off a lot of Eurosceptics.
It is only when they realised that the loss of between 7,000 and 10,000 Eurosceptic voters eventually cost them the 2008 elections that they loosened up a bit. Joseph Muscat had no other option but to recognise that the Labour ‘family’ is diverse and the party needs to be inclusive and pluralistic – which Alfred Sant had been promising, but never really sought to apply in practice.
In short, you say that Muscat’s ‘conversion’ followed his four-year stint as an MEP when in fact this happened immediately after the 2003 elections.
[Daphne – Then it’s even worse than I thought. Muscat really does not have beliefs. He only has opportunities.]
No Daphne, it’s not worse than you thought. In 2003 the people said Yes to membership in a referendum and again in an election one month later. Recognising the will of the people is a democratic act. My point of course is that they went too far to the Europhile side. But for a rookie like you this makes little sense. Perhaps it’s best you keep to analysing the Angelik phenomenon – that’s where you truly excel.
[Daphne – Rookie? Hardly. My track record in that field is a lot more successful than yours, sweetheart. I just find it convenient to hide my light under a bushel. Changing one’s opinion depending on what you think people want is not a democratic act but an act of opportunism. Political parties have policies and beliefs. Their job is to drum up support for those policies and beliefs, and not to change them by popular demand. Your way of thinking perfectly encapsulates why Labour has failed repeatedly over the last 32 years: it doesn’t stand for anything. Meanwhile, the Nationalist Party has been very clear about what it stands for. It has not tailor-made its policies according to market research. It decided those policies were best and convinced people of the wisdom of them. What you are describing is a Labour Party that feels comfortable turning on the racist xenophobe act when it registers that racism is a popular Maltese sentiment. Get this: electors are not a special breed, but ordinary people, you and me. We can tell the difference between a person who is convinced of what he is saying and a person who is telling us what he thinks we want to hear. People don’t change their opinion overnight because of an electoral result, not if they are truly convinced of it. If the No vote had won, it wouldn’t have changed my opinion that Malta’s place is in the European Union.]
So by this you mean that Labour should have disregarded the vote and kept on insisting that Malta stays out of the Union? Imagine that – you wouldn’t have been writing about consistency now.
[Daphne – Kevin, please understand the difference between saying things and meaning them. What Labour said or didn’t say after 2003 is IRRELEVANT. What counts is what Labour believes. Belief in whether Malta should be in the European Union or not has nothing to do with majority rule: it has to do with consideration of the arguments for and against, and reaching a conclusion. Hence, if Labour believed on 8 March 2003 that EU membership was wholly unsuitable for Malta, then one assumes that Labour still believed the same thing on 9 March, despite the referendum result. Either that, or it wasn’t a belief at all, but an assumed position. If you tell me that the experience of five years in the European Union has caused Labour to change its mind, after seeing that it turned out to be a good thing after all, then that is something I would accept, because experience does change people’s minds. But changing your mind according to what you think people want you to say? No. That screams ‘I’m shallow’ and ‘I never meant it’. The problem Labour has now is that nobody actually knows what it really believes about the EU. What we know is only what Muscat says.]
You know, Daphne, once I warned you that you are fast becoming another Benoit. You’d do yourself a lot of good if you take heed. The only difference is that she does not twist arguments the way you do.
[Daphne – If I were another Benoit, Kevin, I would be just that – another Benoit. But I’m obviously not, so don’t waste your breath. Men are extremely irritating in this business of comparing one woman who writes with another woman who writes. Try finding a man to whom to compare me, if you must compare me to anyone, instead of going on the basis of sexual organs. Marie Benoit has far more in common with you, despite the different genitals. You both support the same political party, and you both voted against EU membership, and you both, when left unable to answer, accuse your ‘opponent’ of twisting words.]
Here’s some Benoit for light entertainment:
I quote from the ‘Life and Times’ of the Madame herself:
“The presentation was done in English since a good number in the audience were visitors and anyway the Maltese present were all English speakers or they would not have been there listening to Mozart and Haydn.”
And look at this, “naughty” Brian Schembri let la Madam down:
“On a final note let me say that there were many who thought it was a pity and also impolite in view of the number of visitors who so graciously support the Manoel Theatre, when Maestro Schembri spoke in Maltese at some length at the closing of the concert, thus completely ignoring those who did not understand a word of what he was saying. He is a much travelled man, lived in Russia and Paris, speaks both Russian and French fluently and also a speaker of English. The least he could have done is to speak in Maltese (since he seems so nostalgic for our native language) but also give a resumé in English thus acknowledging the presence of those who could understand absolutely nothing of what he was saying. How much more embracing and good-mannered of Dr Gonzi, Mr Albert Fenech and Ms Jo Caruana to give their brief presentation at the beginning in English. Sorry Brian, why do you always want to be a naughty boy and go against the grain?”
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=86865
[Daphne – You illustrate my point. Those who know me know that I speak Maltese or English as and when appropriate. The person you quote, on the other hand, is a Sacred Heart girl who never grew up, and who insists of speaking to everyone in English, including members of the Labour and Union Press newsrooms, who have difficulty with the language and are far more comfortable speaking Maltese. They don’t diss her for doing it because she votes for the same party, even though she sounds absolutely ludicrous. However, I must say that in this case I agree with her completely. When your audience is international, good manners dictate that you speak a universally understood language – English – especially when you have no problems with the language yourself. Making a point of speaking Maltese and cutting out many members of your audience is sheer bad manners. Unfortunately, it reveals poor breeding rather than national pride.]
But of course you agree with her. That is my point, dearest.
[Daphne – I think you’ll find that all people who know their manners will see it exactly the same way. It is neither here nor there. You might as well suggest that we see things the same way because we handle our cutlery in an identical fashion.]
Interesting exchange of views. Political parties in Malta whether they like it or not have to embrace the fact that Malta is an EU country. Not doing so would be poltical suicide. So what’s wrong with that?
[Daphne – To spell it out: there is a world of difference in meaning between ‘We believe that EU membership is good for Malta’ and ‘We have no choice but to back EU membership because the majority has voted in its favour.’]
Incidentally, talking about the past : the church school saga which exemplifies Mintoff’s and KMB’s arrogant 80s was about free Church school education with as well as church properties. I may be mistaken but at the time two of Fenech Adami’s cavalli di battaglia were the above issues. Oh well after 1987 the church and state agreed about both issues in a manner that is not much different to what Mintoff had proposed. By your definition, Daphne, Fenech Adami was an opportunist as much as Joseph Muscat.
[Daphne – Hardly. The Labour government wanted the church to provide free education using its own resources. It was a way of ‘punishing’ the Catholic Church in the same way that the same socialist government used to punish the rich (though not all) or those perceived to be privileged. The Nationalist government arranged for church education to be subsidised by the tax-payer so that the schools wouldn’t collapse, having realised that a return to the previous fee-paying regime would have meant that hundreds of children of free-loading parents would have been pulled out of church schools as soon as fees had to be paid, causing a great deal of disruption. The end result is that the tax-payer is funding the education not just of those in state schools, but also of those in church schools. The government partly offset this financial burden by reaching agreement on joint administration of church-owned property. A Labour government would simply have requisitioned the lot. The Nationalist government’s handling of the church schools issue was one of damage limitation, as with so many other problems caused by Labour. Had Labour not made that mess, church schools would have been allowed to carry on charging fees, and that would have been a good thing as they would have retained their integrity and identity, which have long since been dissipated. All the children who would in previous generations have been sent to church schools are now being sent to expensive fee-paying independent schools, with the result that the social culture of church schools is now no different to that of state schools.]
Christ, Alan, yes, it WAS the right question. With the EU, the sooner you join, the better.
Mario Debono, poor taste indeed. It might (I think might not) interest you to know that two hunters actually did ‘commit some other kind of hara kiri’ a few weeks ago and this as a direct result of the situation they have been placed in. If you think that the emotional stress these people are under at the moment is just some story that the FKNK has made up to garner sympathy, I assure you it is not.
I personally have many hunter friends, neighbours and employees that have had their way of life unjustly snatched away and I know exactly what they are going through at the moment. Although I am a hunter, I have not allowed it to engulf me in the same manner but I talk to these people daily and I can feel their pain and anger. What does get to me though is the blatant and unchallenged lies that come out of our politicians’ mouths. How do they get away with it?
I don’t expect you, from the comfort of your armchair, to understand what it means to live a hunter’s life, but I would expect a little more sensitivity on your part.
As for bashing my brains in, at least I’m blessed with a brain that reasons in a balanced manner and that understands the meaning of tolerance and space. The only thing that makes me want to bang my head against a wall out of desperation is the worryingly aggressive and merciless tone of your post.
Antoine Vella,
The hunters’ situation might not be a good yardstick with which to measure the effects of EU membership but I wonder if it is going to be a good yardstick with which to measure the results of the next MEP elections. Only time will tell.
Mr Mizzi, I reiterate, what I said, and more. If someone committed suicide because he couldn’t fire at some bird, he doesn’t deserve to be alive anyway.
[Daphne – Hey, hey let’s calm down here. I think we had all better distinguish between hunting as a passatemp and hunting as an addiction. Those who kill themselves or fall into depression are addicts, not hunters. They are suffering from the same psychological condition that causes other forms of pathologically obsessive behaviour. Hunting just happened to be their trigger and their fixation. It could have been drinking, or gambling, or one woman (or man), or shopping, or cocaine, or the gym, or whatever. People in that situation need help, not more of the same. Mario is right in saying that this isn’t normal psychology and A. Mizzi is right in saying they deserve sympathetic treatment – but I would say they deserve compassion not because they can’t hunt but because they are addicts and addicts have hardly any control over their behaviour.]
I’m hopeful that all those who believe in “kacca u nsib ghal dejjem” may follow their example. Or else get some other kind of hobby.
As for the “way of life” you tout, and the “situation” these people are in, they are figments of unstable minds. Don’t get me wrong. Anyone can be a hunter. I just cannot stand hunting. If to get rid of hunting we have to make do without hunters, then so be it. If they can’t see reason, their place is not here.
I hold very extreme views on hunting. M’ghandkomx dritt tohorgu toqtlu dak li mhux taghkom. Daqshekk.
Now, if you want to borrow my Japanese long and short swords…..just contact me.
Shame and Shame on you Mr Debono! Well, I strongly believe that this world does not need people like YOU!! I assure you Sir that I will be praying for you to get rid of your hatred! True Christianity!
Mr. Debono,
Should we pass on your comments to the family members of the two dead men? And Ms. Caruana Galizia, should we try to console the same families with your analysis of the situation?
FKNK
[Daphne – No, but you could set up within the FKNK the equivalent of an addiction support group for those who need help. You’re a hunter, too, right? Are you going to top yourself because you can’t hunt? No. That’s because you’re psychologically stable. Now that you have seen firsthand the consequences of extreme addiction, obsession, compulsion, whatever, perhaps you could take on board the wisdom of such a move. These two men did not kill themselves because they were deprived of their hobby. They killed themselves because there was an underlying psychological problem. People without psychological problems do not kill themselves.]
Fools rush in…or about Joseph…et al…
“Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.”
Plato
“…Nationalist Party MP Beppe Fenech Adami said that the Opposition Leader’s scathing attack on voting at St Vincent de Paule in the last general election went to show that Dr Muscat was ill-informed about the voting process at the elderly home. He explained that the person chosen by the Electoral Commission to supervise voting is Labour representative Joe Buttigieg and the Labour Party has effectively got the majority of votes at St Vincent de Paule…”
http://www.di-ve.com/Default.aspx?ID=72&Action=1&NewsID=60147&newscategory=36
[Daphne – “elderly home”, eh?]
“DON’T TAKE ME WRONG” – What’s the right way to “take you” then, honey-bunch?
[Daphne – Please, no. He might suggest something that has been freshly waxed.]
Daphne
If you consider the actions of the two hunters that committed suicide the result of their addictions, then it might please you to know that addictions can also take the form of people totally blinded by their political allegiance. I happen to know quite a few addicted in this way!
[Daphne – Your point being what, exactly? All addictions, compulsions and obsessions are the sign of an unbalanced mind. Interests and hobbies are not the same as addictions, compulsions and obsessions. What we are talking about here is the distinction between somebody who likes a glass or two of wine every evening, and somebody who has to drink whenever he can, and who becomes dangerous to himself and others when drink is denied him. I know you enjoy hunting and champion the cause, but I hardly think you’re going to jump off Mosta bridge even if told that you can never, ever pick up a gun again – at least from what I know of you.]
Indeed these poor souls needed help. The best help they could have got would have been the honouring of the PN guarantee on spring hunting.
[Daphne – No, Mark, please look at this objectively. Men who commit suicide if denied the freedom to shoot birds in spring need psychiatric help and no other. They would have needed psychiatric help even if there was no ban on spring hunting. The ban did nothing more than expose their psychiatric problems, which were hitherto concealed. From a public relations point of view, you people who like hunting are making a serious mistake in associating yourself with this kind of mental instability. You are portraying hunting itself as a mental illness and hunters as psychologically unstable in general, when this is not the case and these were just two disturbed individuals among thousands of normal ones.]
If you need to know what hunters worldwide go through during every hunting season see what an expert in human behaviour has to say.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v68RFLd8ask
I tend to agree that these people might have needed professional help, but when seeing comments by the likes of Mario Debono, then I honestly believe the persons in need of immediate psychiatric treatment are definitely not addicted hunters, but the obsessed anti hunters.
[Daphne – Mario is not the most tactful of people, however one point he made struck a chord with those of us who have absolutely no interest in bird-shooting. We can’t understand why other people believe they have the God-given right to go out and shoot birds which are not theirs. If they were your birds, then fine. Nobody would give a damn, except perhaps some birds’ rights fanatics. But they’re not your birds. When I’m enjoying watching a flock of birds, and somebody with a gun comes out and shoots them, what he is saying is that his right to shoot them dead supersedes my right to enjoy watching them. That’s the most incredible arrogance.]
This is the first time I visited your notebook and I never realised you allowed such filth to be published. Surely apart from your comment urging the matter to calm down, such an extremist deserves to be reported to the police.
[Daphne – Which extremist? Mario? Come on. You people who shoot birds will never begin to mend your public-affairs fences until you at least try to understand the point of view of the rest of us who don’t shoot birds. You expect us to understand you, but do you even begin to try to understand how we feel about it? It’s your way or no way. If your hobby involved kicking a ball around on a pitch, nobody would bother. But you have the kind of hobby that impinges on public property, public life and the rights and freedoms of others. You should at least understand that those others are going to have something to say about it.]
Ms. Caruana Galizia are you also a psychologist or maybe an anthropologist?
No the birds may not belong to the hunters, however neither do they belong to you.
And yes we have made the report about Mr. Debono’s comments to the Cyber Unit within the Police Corps.
FKNK
[Daphne – I am sure they will take your report very seriously indeed. If I were to adopt the same hysterical attitude as you do, I would have to make several reports a week to the police about the stuff that is written about me on hunters’ sites. You are clearly novices.
When creatures belong to no one in particular it does not follow that they are there for the taking by anyone. It is precisely because I do not think they belong to me that I do no more than look, and don’t shoot.]
Maybe it would be more courageous, Mr FKNK, to use your real name, as I do. Otherwise you are just a bully using the police instead of a gun. Enough said. Off you go to make another report!
When it was announced recently that there is to be no spring hunting, a section of the internet press was inundated with entries on the lines of – ‘you will not be allowed to enter into private land for walks’ and ‘you will have to keep to the public roads’, which is as it should be, because whatever is private belongs to the individual and whatever is public belongs to the whole community.
So with the same reasoning, whatever does not belong to the individual belongs to the community, and no individual has the right to take what belongs to the community.
This includes:
a.) all public land on which hides have been built without authority;
b.) what many hunters believe to be their right to trespass into other private land/fields to track/collect their quarry;
c.) the damage done to third parties by poisoning the soil with lead shot (can somebody produce the figure for the amount of lead shot imported into the country yearly?);
d.) and last but not least the quarry itself.
No one can claim a right at the expense of third parties.
Daphne
“We can’t understand why other people believe they have the God-given right to go out and shoot birds”
In fact it is not a God-given right, but a right according to set directives issued by the European Commission in what is known as the Birds Directive, a right that all hunters throughout Europe exercise. It is far from what you term as arrogance. Indeed we all have a right to enjoy birds. The problem with your line of argument is that you fail to distinguish between what is termed as a game bird and other species which are totally protected. Are you implying that your right to watch birds supersedes mine to shoot what I legally can?
[Daphne – On the contrary, I do distinguish between the two, because as is clearly known to regular readers of this blog, I am not a believer in animal rights nor an illogical fanatic. I don’t, for example, conclude that dogs have more rights than cows. My objection to bird-shooting is on the basis of annoyance caused to others (I would object similarly to somebody playing loud club music beneath my window at 5am as I do to volleys of gun-shot at the same time of day), and the destruction of creatures with rarity value. As far as I’m concerned, you can shoot all the ducks, chickens, pigeons and sparrows you please. But when there’s a hoopoe in my garden or a golden oriole, and a battery of men with guns who have heard it lined up and waiting for it to fly over the wall, then I have to draw the line. Do what you like within the law, but the sickness we were talking about a few comments along makes certain people unable to resist when they see a bird they may not shoot – no more than a compulsive gambler can resist a gaming machine, or an alcoholic can resist a tray of drinks. I can’t even begin to describe to you the panic and anger I felt recently while watching birds of prey swooping in the valley down below and then hearing guns and watching them disperse. People are against what is illegal, and not against what is legal. The problem is that we have run up against too many incidents of illegal hunting, and the impression we get is that rather too many hunters are just barely controlling themselves.]
If this is the case then you fall within the category of birds’ rights fanatics.
[Daphne – How little you know. There are two ducks in my oven as we speak.]
As for your comments, you fail to comment about the video clip I attached. If you were to listen carefully, the hunter undergoes a change in behavior during the hunting season. Very few are able to understand such a change unless of course they are hunters or birdwatchers.
[Daphne – I was in a hurry. Was it by any chance an interview with Mark Anthony Falzon? If so, then I had watched it on a previous occasion. The change in behaviour that he describes is the change in behaviour experienced by all those with an obsession, compulsion or passion. It is not peculiar to bird-shooters. To give you a rough comparison, place a woman in a big-city shopping centre with a platinum card and the instruction to spend freely, and the same changes will be registered. Animals experience that change in the mating season – lots of human beings do, too, in the spring. Not to put too fine a point on it, the ‘changes in behaviour’ that men who shoot experience in the spring are the changes in behaviour that men experience in the spring, full stop. Only they have displaced the primordial urge to hunt for fresh mates with the equally primordial urge to hunt for birds, which has less dire consequences. It’s another reason why only men shoot and women don’t.]
Can you confirm your acceptance of hunting as regulated by the EU’s Birds Directive. If not then I’m afraid any other of your comments about hunting are nothing but superfluous as your bias would be effecting your sense of logic.
[Daphne – I am as uninterested in hunting as I am in competitive sports and athletics. The only reason I bother with the subject at all is where it tramples on my right not to be disturbed by guns and not to have rare birds I enjoy watching shot dead so that I can no longer enjoy watching them. If footballers were to begin playing football on main roads so that we couldn’t use our cars, then I would have something to say about football. If I lived in Britain, and you shot grouse on your moor, I wouldn’t give a hoot about it because you wouldn’t be in my face.]
Daphne,
I believe you have not answered Mr Mark Mifsud Bonnici’s simple question. Are you in favour of spring hunting for turtle-dove and quail (game)? A yes or a no will be sufficient.
[Daphne – I answered with the truth: that I don’t give a flying f**k as long as no one is bothering me all hours of the day and even before dawn, as long as no protected species are being shot, and as long as breeding levels can be maintained. Obviously, if I had to choose freely, I would opt for no shooting at all, because living in a bird-free environment is weird and ghastly in a way that hits home hard when travelling. But I can see that this is not an option, so severe restrictions are a good compromise. The public-affairs problem isn’t mine; it’s yours: the fact that nobody likes bird-shooters except other bird-shooters and some members of their families. It would help your cause if you were to ask yourselves why, instead of hating the rest of us and developing a siege mentality.]
I also believe that you might be deviating a bit from the initial problem here. I strongly believe that you should never have allowed such comments as those of Mr Mario Debono. They are an insult to the human race! I just cannot believe how a person could harbour such hatred towards fellow human-beings.
[Daphne – Don’t over-react.]
Finally I urge you to refresh your memory and find time to watch Mark Anthony Falzon’s interview.
[Daphne – No need. I have a good memory. I also know him and understand the context in which he speaks, and what he means, far better than you do.]
Daphne, I reacted because a shameful person actually over-reacted. I still cannot believe how you could have allowed such comments.
[Daphne – If you were not a newcomer to this blog, you would know that I upload even worse comments about myself.]
It appears that you are not prepared to discuss the matter in a serious manner. You should realise that it is not just hunters and their families which defend hunting. Many Maltese citizens know the meaning of love, respect and tolerance and are in no way bothered with hunters being able to enjoy their traditional pastime! I might point out that even you are not bothered with hunting. It is poaching and abuse which bother you, not to mention your having to wake up early in the morning!
[Daphne – Exactly. But sadly, the only way we can get any peace and effective enforcement of the law is through a blanket ban. Now, when you hear shots, you know by definition that somebody is breaking the law. Before, you had no idea whether he was shooting at a protected bird or not. If hunters had policed their own before this happened, things would not have come to a head. It was a mess before, even you have to admit it.]
“It’s another reason why only men shoot and women don’t.”
Are you serious! I wouldn’t repeat such a statement if I were you. If you ever bother to watch the popular Caccia e Pesca channel you will find out how wrong you are. I have shot together with women hunters on many occasions, who apart from a “platinum card” obsession also share my passion for hunting.
[Daphne – The occasional swallow does not make a summer. Hunting as practised in the Mediterranean remains strictly a men’s sport.]
As for your reason to be against hunting as it tramples on your right not to be disturbed by guns. Well my “moor” happens not to be in England, but on the opposite side of the valley from where you live – about about half a mile under Maurice Mizzi’s house, quite close to the large olive grove. This is my own personal property and if as you say, if this were Britain you would not give a hoot. So this being Malta, should this make any difference?
[Daphne – For the obvious reason that a British moor is several hundred acres not a fraction of an acre and narrowly bounded by third-party property. When you stand on your little kingdom and shoot, you wake up, irritate and annoy very many other people who are sleeping, working and relaxing in their little kingdoms. You can’t possibly own any land in the valley because it is all owned by the Joint Office. At most, you might have a lease or hunting rights.]
Are you stating that the Maltese hunter should not have the same right to use his land for hunting as the British hunters does?
[Daphne – Yes, I am. It’s a question of space and boundaries. Land leased out for hunting in Britain is never in places where hundreds of people live. You do not get people shooting over garden walls or outside bedroom windows. You are not supposed to do that here, either, but you do so because of the get-out clause that defines an ‘inhabited area’ as somewhere more than a hundred people live, so when you’re getting up the noses of 99 people, you’re safe.]
Hunting in the area of Bidnija that you live in existed long before the first stone of your residence was ever laid. You were definitely aware of hunters in the area before you took up residence there. So what are you expecting? The law states that a specific distance is to be maintained when hunting next to inhabited areas, it also specifies what is legal quarry and what is protected. Do you expect laws to be changed to accommodate your fancy?
[Daphne – Men used to beat their wives when it pleased them before we moved in, too, but times move on and common mores change. Your defence is rubbish. It was put to the test recently in court by people protesting against a fireworks factory that predated their arrival there, and they won. The fact remains that in a densely populated area like Malta dangerous sports involving guns and fireworks must be strictly controlled, and priority given to people who are just trying to live in peace.]
If anyone breaks these laws you have all the right to report them, however you have no right to complain of noises related to some people’s right of use of their part of the countryside.
[Daphne – Of course I do. No one has the right to drive others nuts purely for their own entertainment. Imagine if I had to keep music booming all day.]
If indeed the noise of gunfire annoys you, the solution is quite simple. A pair of ear plugs cost only a few cents, far less then the expense of shifting residence.
[Daphne – This is exactly the sort of arrogance people can’t stand about those who shoot. You expect US to go around with ear-plugs and confine ourselves to certain areas just so you can do as you please. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t work like that. How about if I were to park my car outside your house at 2am and turn up the music, justifying my action with the fact that I’m on a public road and sitting in my car?]
And if you consider the lack of response of the police to your complaints as being the problem, then direct your criticism towards the real problem.
[Daphne – I never bother with the police. But I have given serious thought to the matter of buying a gun and shooting back – not at the shooters, of course, but enough to scare off every winged creature in the vicinity.]
In the area were I live (San Pawl Tat Targa) I have to put up with quarry blasting that has damaged and devalued my property, dust and the noise of constant traffic. This is far worse than a few shotgun blasts during the five months’ shooting season. However I have learned to accept these inconveniences as unlike yourself, I am not driven by any bias.
[Daphne – You’re the one who bought the house on the quarry. I would have never done any such thing. In fact, I remember the house going up, driving past it every day, and wondering who on earth would choose to live there. It’s a really cute house, but that quarry….]
British moors are a dream for any hunter and non-hunter, the longing for large expanses of undisturbed open space is every Maltese dream. But unless we face reality, then we are bound to remain complaining about the bother of other people’s activities.
Tolerance seems to be a word you so far do not comprehend. Often this proves to be the solution to many “problems.”
[Daphne – Tolerance is a word that shooters do not understand. On the other hand, every one else has had no choice but to tolerate shooters.]
“I have shot together with women hunters on many occasions”:
Without meaning to sound insulting to anyone, I’d say that they’re probably butch.
@Mario Debono. I koew you were shallow, but I never believed you could be THAT shallow.
Dear Daphne,
This is the first time I am visiting this site and believe me, I think you have a lot of free time to stay answering all these interventions.
[Daphne – No, I have an enormous workload but I’m not a fusspot.]
I am an educated person but I cannot really speak intelligently about your dwelling as I have no idea where you live. This means that the following comments are circumstantial depending on whether the next sentence is correct.
It seems to me that you bought yourself a nice farmhouse in the countryside for you to have golden orioles and hoopes in your garden.
[Daphne – I live in a 1960s house two minutes from Mosta.]
If this is the case please note that the correct word in Maltese for your dwelling is `Razzett` [Daphne – Hohum. The usual. My Maltese grammar and spelling are a lot better than that of many people who speak nothing but Maltese, I’ll have you know.] and hunting is carried out close to real farmhouses all the time during the hunting season. Most farmers in real functional farmhouses wake up early in the morning to take care of the farm animals unless they are out hunting on their land in proximity of the same farmhouse (razzett) and so are not disturbed by 5am gunshots.
[Daphne – I’ve lived here for two decades. I really don’t need any guide to the habits of people who work the land, but thank you for trying.]
If you bought one and decided to convert it, it was entirely your choice and nobody obliged you to live there.
[Daphne – I’m not a converted farmhouse type of person. I would never live in one. I like large windows, big rooms, white walls and natural light.]
The gunshots are part and parcel with the same views you enjoy probably thanks to the same hunters that shoot the guns who in time planted trees and maintained rubble walls for you to enjoy the sight of.
[Daphne – Oh grow up, honestly. I’ll tell you about something else that’s part and parcel of farming life: over-use of pesticides, insecticides and chemical fertilisers. Not only are there no birds round here, but no insects either, except for survive-the-apocalypse flies.]
If you want to live without hearing gunshots you can choose to live in Sliema Front or any part of Malta which is heavily urbanised. Still chances are you will hear gunshots on the odd good hunting day as Malta is very small and gunshots can be heard from miles away.
[Daphne – My point exactly: a small bunch of people annoying everyone else.]
Just an observation: ‘hunters’ is not the name of a species, so why do people who like hunting act like one? More to the point, why do they argue their case as though there is any such thing as a sacrosanct right to shoot birds?
1. Take my advice and follow Caccia e Pesca to see for yourself the number of women that hunt in Mediterranean countries before reaching wrong conclusions.
[Daphne – Yes, they’re all over the place, aren’t they, like the women who play football.]
2. Actually its an area of 16 tumoli and I assure you its privately owned. I never said it was in the valley, only said it was on the other side, Reaching wrong conclusions again.
[Daphne – You said it’s beneath my house and near the olive grove. That’s in the valley.]
3. If you kept music booming all day it would not be illegal, most bars do that anyway. The law says you can do so till 11 p.m.
[Daphne – That illustrates the difference between you and me. The fact that the law allows me to disturb people until 11pm does not mean that I feel perfectly within my rights to do so, and I won’t.]
4. I use ear plugs whilst shooting, as do most shooters, so if you have a problem with early morning shots, what’s wrong with wearing ear plugs so as no to hear them. I know of many people that wear them not to hear their spouse snoring! As for music from a car at 2a.m, that would be totally illegal, whilst hunting at dawn is perfectly legal. The sound of a shot travels far so I can see no better alternative then the ear plugs suggested.
[Daphne – You are an extremely selfish, self-centred and bigoted person. You wear your ear-plugs to diminish the effect of a problem you create for yourself. You have no right to demand that other people wear ear-plugs too because of the noise that you make. A well-mannered person would avoid disturbing others, rather than demand that they wear ear-plugs to avoid hearing the noise he’s making.]
5. You don’t bother with the police because you know you have no right to stop what you complain about since it is perfectly legal. Your buying a gun and shooting at birds to scare them off, therefore shows the real issue is not about noise! Indeed you sound confused!
[Daphne – I am not at all confused. I don’t call the police because I am pragmatic. I see no point in dragging them out here when I know that by the time they arrive, the culprit will have left. Also, the valley is large and the shot could be coming from anywhere within it. It is practically impossible for the police to trace the person. I think I can tell the difference between a bird of prey and a turtle-dove, thank you. Also, the shots I hear now are obviously illegal shooting, given that there is a ban.]
6. In fact, I did not buy my house. I had it built. Also, I lived in my parents’ house which is next door to mine for just under 40 years, long before the quarry ever existed. You would never have done such a thing, and yet you bought a house in the country were you knew hunting was practised, and now complain about a known “problem”. This is what I meant by saying that unlike yourself I have learned to put up with the inconvenience.
[Daphne – I’m not the sort of person who puts up with inconveniences, especially when they are unjust, uncivilised, offensive and now, even illegal. It is precisely because I do not put up with inconveniences that I left Tower Road, Sliema, one of the most inconvenient places that one can possibly choose to live.]
7. In your case, how do you expect hunters that own land adjacent to yours to show their tolerance. Do you expect them to wait for you to leave your house before they start shooting.
[Daphne – Shooting should never be permitted next to houses. The fact that it is is quite beyond belief. As was established in the Gharghur fireworks factory judgement recently, it makes no difference whether two or two hundred people live in the area – a fireworks factory should not be allowed. The same principle should be applied to shooting. I have had my scalp burned by lead shot while in my own garden. If birds fly close to our house, when a shooter misses, the shot lands on our property. I find birds riddled with blood beneath my windows, which means that they were hit while flying over my garden. This is outrageous.]
8. Tolerance is accepting to live with the “problems” of country life. Have you ever had manure laid out in the fields next door? Or a tractor buzzing from the break of dawn till dusk? Are these not problems too. Or is it just the shots that annoy you?
[Daphne – Please don’t be irrational. I accept the smells and noises necessary to grow the food that we eat. I do not accept the capricious causing of a public nuisance for the selfish delectation of a few. That’s why the comparison to playing loud music is so very apt. It achieves nothing, annoys others and is completely selfish.]
Indeed Daphne, how about swapping houses with me.
[Daphne – You should be so lucky.]
In addition to my previous comment:
Association of women hunters – France
http://membres.lycos.fr/beaussy/contenu.html
The italian hunting federation’s president is a woman
http://www.confavi.it/
If you would like any more details of hunting associations around the Mediterranean that have thousands of female hunters as members, iIwill gladly supply them.
Indeed, far from being butch as you suggested, many women enjoy more than just needlework.
[Daphne – I never said anything about butch. I merely pointed out that the springtime sexual urge to hunt for a mate is often sublimated into the springtime urge to shoot birds, which is just as well for those who are married.]
Another example of progressive Labour- http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/04/26/t3.html
[Daphne – Yes, well, that’s what happens when you field cabbages for candidates.]