Stop dreaming sabih !

And after you’ve asked your mother who your father was, be proud of your name and tell us all. Then call people names, brave heart.

Daphne, I fear that you may have missed my opening line. When I said that I am in full agreement with the overriding gist of your argument what I was saying was that I too deplore the proposition that voting Labour is somehow the sensible option for persons who feel that the Nationalist Party has let them down on the National Bank issue.

There is no basis to support that kind of twisted logic or spineless behaviour.

My comment was never intended to defend that position, and I and Steve Sant do not share a common line of argumentation.

My contribution was solely intended to shed light on what I feel is the all too convenient excuse as used by Nationalist governments since 1987: the separation of powers.

The Nationalist government would have done this country a favour had it taken the first opportunity at its disposal to declare the taking of the NBM shares as the deplorable act of a tyrannical government, apologised on behalf of the government and it would probably have got away then with only a token compensation.

[Daphne – Yes, I share this view.]

From my experience there are very few who see this as a question of financial gain. For most it is a question of justice, the rule of law and the need for a country to release itself from the shackles of its past and to breakaway, and disassociate itself from, the tyrannical acts of its past leaders.

Article 344 of the Criminal Code: “Whosoever shall in Malta knowingly receive or purchase any property which has been stolen, misapplied or obtained by means of any offence, whether committed in Malta or abroad, or shall knowingly take part, in any manner whatsoever, in the sale or disposal of the same, shall, on conviction, be liable …” – which is why I say that, had it been anybody else other than the government, it would be criminal.

I do not defend any proposal to support Labour. I am, however, resisting any defence of what the Nationalists have done and failed to do on this matter. The Nationalists, by enjoying the spoils of their predecessors, hove lost their entitlement to plead innocence of the injustices perpetrated in 1973/1974.

While we’re at it, we could look into the re-exportation of discounted Libyan oil at non-discounted prices, in a personal capacity. With, oh I don’t know, a Dutch business partner perhaps.

Or if we wanted to look further back we could consider the ethics of being the minister for post-war reconstruction and participating in that reconstruction in one’s personal capacity as an architect.

Or being involved in the public works department and knowing where the new roads are going to pass…. and buying up (indirectly, no doubt) the property close by… Well we know how that works with ‘public’ gardens.

Inbreeding IS a source of lower IQ over time, whether you like it or not. It’s a fact not an opinion. It’s just not the ONLY source.

Is it the case here? Who knows. On the other hand, if it was the ONLY source I’d say the gentleman was his own first cousin.

If he’s the Sant Something I know, he’s a moron.

From the tone of your broadside, and the quite harsh words you us in my regard, I guess that to-day you are in what I call your killer mood.

I have learnt through experience to keep away and close my mouth when ladies are in that mood.’

So I will do so and avoid another thrashing.

Anyway you made my day.

What they miss is that a government defends itself before the courts on the basis that the money belongs to the taxpayer. Anyone heard Joseph mentioning the car tax class action lately?

This cannot preclude the shareholders’ right to get back their assets, which begs the following; If Mintoff suspended the constitution, it should also follow he removed any immunity his role as prime minister had at the time

I say the whole electorate deserves to have a look into the financial records registering the money trail as well as a couple of Swiss bank accounts. We’d be surprised.

Mintoff transformed the Labour Party into a vehicle for his interests, effectively making it a commercial bank. Maybe Stefania Craxi, a favourite on Joe Grima’s Inkontri, could help. As could Joe Sammut, whose business, up till last year, included managing transactions between Libya and Rome.

Frankly, those 3000 would be better off fire-bombing Mintoff’s door (metaphorically, I hasten to add), than firing salvos into their own feet.

Ian Refalo is one of the current advisers to shareholders. He will be at next Monday’s meeting at the Salesians hall in Sliema.

[Daphne – And he is also Mintoff’s lawyer.]