Comments on: Astrid Vella – her public affairs tactics are modelled on those of Alfred Sant

By: Anthony Farrugia

Anthony Farrugia — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:38:40 +0000

Anybody saw the repeat on One TV of an interview with our Astrid by Mario Vella in a quaint programme called Tango (?). Good thing I had a light lunch.

By: xdcc

xdcc — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:50:18 +0000

This is how they operate.

FAA and other NGOs issue a statement against a development in Qala claiming that it is partially ODZ.

MEPA issues a statement defending the approval of the application and contradicting the claims of the NGOs.

People, most likely instigated by FAA, attack the credibility of MEPA. Here are the first four comments on the timesofmalta.com under the relevnat news item:

“Ray Sultana (3 hours, 57 minutes ago)
This authority is the shame of the nation. Not even the damning report by the Mepa auditor seems to have dampened its crazy desire to ruin Malta. Everlasting shame on all of you! Disgusting!!

d.magro (4 hours, 55 minutes ago)
No confidence in MEPA and its directors. You are destroying nature and you must answer before GOD ALMIGHTY. Shame on you.

Mark Sammut (5 hours, 23 minutes ago)
Noone has control over this authority… DCC members are ruining our landscape….

Galea. L (5 hours, 59 minutes ago)
NO ONE BELIEVED YOU ANY LONGER MEPA.”

As stated in a previous post “Guest post: The Victims of Megaphone Posturing” the very principles which underpin democracy are going down one by one.

Some people call this Fascist tactics.

You’re next Mr. Walker. Just wait for it. Every time you contradict Astrid Vella, your credibility and your reputation will be under attack.

By: John Azzopardi

John Azzopardi — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:41:09 +0000

Astrid & Co…what a waste of space!

By: P

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:21:19 +0000

Mr Vella’s preposterous claims remind me of her demand that the St John’s Cathedral tapestries be displayed “in a palazzo” – and so many of her followers actually believed that this is somehow possible. Obviously she had no idea of the size and number of tapestries involved. Incredible.

By: mc

mc — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:18:06 +0000

Astrid Vella used a similar tactic in the Ghar il-Lembi case. She produced an old map of Sliema and claimed that this was proof that the house was the oldest house in Sliema. Typical of old maps, the drawing showed very little detail and nothing with which to correlate with a modern map to determine location. And yet to her it was conclusive proof.

[Daphne – Actually, what she produced was a map of Fort Tigne. The ‘houses’ which she indicated were barracks and administration buildings within the fort. She mistook this for a street with houses. When the architect Conrad Thake wrote to the newspapers to correct her, she contradicted him and insisted she was right. It was quite incredible.]

The developer and an architect who contested this claim were subject to a barrage of letters bordering on the libellous. From a previous post – ‘Astrid’s toy soldiers’ – in this blog, I now understand how those letters were organised.

With all the mayhem and manipulation, it was The Times that gave prominence to Astrid Vella’s version, irrespective of what the developer and an expert on baroque architecture said. Did The Times’ journalist have an agenda or was it just a case of trying to increase readership by being sensational?

By: Milone

Milone — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:19:50 +0000

In reply to Josephine.

So much has happened in between…

A world war, for instance, and – to take a myopic view of the matter – the destruction of several parts of Valletta that have kept FAA busy over the past few months.

By: Josephine

Josephine — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:49:07 +0000

The woman is ridiculous, going on about plans drawn up in the 1920s, for heaven’s sake!

How could one even begin to compare the 1920s to 2009? So much has happened in between; life itself has changed, to begin with.

By: maryanne

maryanne — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:26:29 +0000

There is a difference between ” no interest was shown” and “the proposal was deemed to be too costly so the idea was not pursued”.

[Daphne – Exactly. It appears that plenty of interest was shown – always if Astrid’s information is correct, and if she wasn’t shown a letterhead from Guggenheim & Guggenheim Co Ltd.]