Astrid Vella declares that she is not a sexually transmitted disease
Look here, I'm not a pixxikalda
I’ve started to go through the two enormous files which Astrid Vella has submitted to the courts as evidence that I have libelled her through this blog.
The experience has confirmed what I knew already: that the woman thinks she has a right to a place in public life without being mocked or criticised.
Everything she has underlined with her trusty pencil is fair comment. My own highly experienced libel lawyer would have never allowed me to take anything like that to court, even if I were prissy enough to want to do so in the first place.
Astrid should sack her lawyer, before I get the chance to wipe the floor with him in court.
I promised you that I would tell you what she’s underlined. That will have to wait a bit. For now, I’ll leave you with this.
Somebody posted a comment calling her a pixxikalda.
Can you imagine the scene in court?
“Sur magistrat, I’m not a sexually transmitted disease that comes back just when you think it’s gone forever. And I have the evidence to prove it.”
This reminds me of when Labour’s Toni Abela threatened to sue me for calling him a female sexual organ, then thought better of it (“Sur magistrat, jien miniex gh***.”) and sued me for calling him a clown instead.
Then there was the time when Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici sued me for calling him a crackpot.
“Sur magistrat, jien miniex crackpot.”
Astrid, like herpes, is forever.
8 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
“the woman thinks she has a right to a place in public life without being mocked or criticised.”
The Times certainly beleives so: they publish every little statement issued by her in the name of FAA, irrispective of its news value (like Joseph’s quick trip under the French cultural programme), and they censor any online comments which are mildly critical of her.
I can confirm that not one of my comments about her has ever been published by timesofmalta.com.
Aren’t FAA holding a protest favur l-ambjent shortly?
On TV she mentioned the projects they were protesting about. At the end she casually mentioned that they were also protesting against the new Houses of Parliament as on some master plan or other there was written that they should take over some empty palazzo or other, so all government’s plans are illegal and have to be scrapped.
Is she also protesting about the Australia hall, mate?
When the libel case was instituted, someone had stated that the composition of MEPA’s Appeals Boards had been changed. One month on, the MEPA website is still showing that Dr. Ian Spiteri Bailey, reported to be Astrid’s lawyer on this matter, is on one of the Appeals Boards. Can this information be confirmed?
From MEPA website:
“The decisions of the Board are final, except on points of law decided by the Board, which may be challenged in the Court of Appeal.
The Board (1) is currently composed as follows:
Dr. Ian Spiteri Bailey
LL.D (Chairman)
Appointed Committee Members are:
Perit Saviour Borg
A. & C.E.
Dr. Conrad Thake
B.E. & A. (Hons.), MA, Ph.D. (Berkeley) A. & C.E”
Hmm pesce calda…the kitchen must be getting hot…
@ P. Shaw
I can vouch for that!
Pixxikalda is indeed the best way to describe certain people.