Remember, the old dictionary definition of the word Jesuit was ‘a clever person who deceives the people’.

At their higher level this military order has more power than you imagine Daphne, not all Jesuits are 4th vow, yet most are very intelligent men, as they accept no other. They were banned from Malta in 1768 and supposedly disbanded by the pope in 1773 after many complaints by various kings and nation leaders for their meddling and interference.

Most Jesuits ended up in Corsica where their newly minted avenger arose. Napoleon did payback service to any group or nation that slighted or previously kicked out the order, hence why Napy invaded Malta in 1798 and made the SMOM find a new home.
They were fully reinstated by the RC church in 1814 at Napoleon’s insistence and had full control of the church by the time of Pius IX infallibility proclamation in matters of faith in 1870.

Jesuits started to come back to Malta in the 1840s as educators to get their foot back in the door. These heirs to the Knights Templar where favoured by the upper middle classes and by some in the curia like Bishop Annetto Casolani and opposed by Bishop Pace Forno and the Dominicans.

They have a hand in all the political parties and are expert puppet masters in the oppo-same Punch’n Judy game of politics The Labour Party is in much of their hand as the so called Nationalists are.

As Joe Pesci said in JFK, “Its all fun and games man”.

Boiled puppy-meat was an occasional staple in the diet of some poor old people in Malta up to the 1950s.

And even later on not all the trapped sparrows “tat-trabok” ended up in a tiny cages as a lot went into pots.

I often wondered how many sparrows one has got to eat to feel satiated.

[Daphne – And snails.]

Odd that these top politicians all over the world are Jesuit-educated and are the biggest turncoats to their own nation’s interest.

Malta is choc a bloc with these coadjutors and so is the EU hierarchy.

They are all on the same page with ruinous policies that they all blindly agree to. The Jesuits were not kicked out of 60 nations throughout their history for nothing. Meddling is a fine and crafty art with these snakes.

[Daphne – I don’t share your opinion about Jesuits. At all. The problem lies, and I said this earlier today in response to another comment, with the sort of parents who choose to send their sons to Jesuit schools. Not all of them, of course, as this is just a generalisation, but if you study the social background of boys who went to St Aloysius College, you’ll notice that it tended to be ambitious lower middle class and working class, with very few exceptions. Sixth form college was another matter. When St Edward’s opened its doors in the 1920s, it hoovered up the sons of the so-called upper middle classes. My grandfathers’ generation went to St Aloysius and to the school run by the English Jesuits, St Ignatius. Their sons went to St Edward’s, except for my father, who went to the Lyceum because my grandfather, largely due to his experience as a boarder at St Aloysius, objected to any sort of school, most particularly boarding school, on principle, believing it to have been invented for the express purpose of making children suffer. St Edward’s then allowed boys home only to celebrate Christmas and Easter and for a short time in the summer. They weren’t even allowed home on the weekend. The generation after that also went to St Edward’s, but the following generation went to San Anton School – taf int, bhal ta’ Joseph u Michelle.]

It is what the Jesuits want.

All the politicos are Jesuit trained and nicely brainwashed.

[Daphne – I’m not sure I agree with you that it comes from the Jesuits. I think it comes from the home, and the fact that the majority of St Aloysius boys came from a certain kind of background/home. My husband was at that school and couldn’t be more different. I knew several boys (men, now) who went there, from ‘Sliema’ homes (not necessarily from Sliema; it’s just a cipher) who Franco would probably think of as St Edward’s types. Schools had an influence, yes, but the real influence came from the home.]

Not to blow my own horn but these 1950s tat-torca fuggers drove a lot of decent maltese families away from their beloved homeland and Malta got a salty concentration of spiteful and lazy ne’er do wells that showed their meanness in the 1970s and 1980s.

I am glad that I left the island at such a young age, at an innocent age that I did not know what a prostitute was.

Burning down the police stations in ’58 was a foreshadow of things to come. They even ruined Malta’s national day in ’59.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51841741@N07/7162324536/in/photostream

No, Daphne, I did not see all that you mention for the simple reason that I emigrated away from Malta with my family, all because my father could not stand the Labourite hatred and their shenanigans and favoritism based on political party lines and their caveman mentality, plus their union co-opting at the Dockyard during the 1950s.

And Dom is still alive – nasty bastards do live for ever unfortunately.

We used to get a lot of beggars knocking on our door in the sixties.

There wasn’t much of a ‘mizbla’ (tip) in those days, because we did not have that many consumables.

Most of the rubbish was biodegradable paper, and there was not much plastic around.

I remember my mother feeding us corned beef, with raw onion, tomatoes and bread.

He took the wool to Gozo to have it woven into blankets. We had a horse-drawn carriage and used to travel to the seaside.

Marsaskala and St Thomas Bay were deserted, unlike nowadays.

[Daphne – Yes, I have photographs taken at Ghajn Tuffieha (what people now call Golden Bay) in the early 1970s. We children are in the foreground, and stretching behind us in the background is nothing but sand empty of people.]

[Daphne – Because as a much better man than you once famously said, the poor will be with us always. But the reality is that we’re pretty good on the poverty front, largely because most European poverty is caused through loss of family networks and jobs, and there’s very little of that here. There will always be poor people mainly because there will always be people who have rotten judgement, are lazy and take bad decisions, the woman here being a prime example of that. And as for the man interviewed by The Times, who decided at 22 that he wouldn’t work again but still went on to father five children….Sure, I’d be poor too if I took a stupid loan on my house and lost it, then went to the casino and gambled everything else away. But that isn’t the kind of poverty we mean when we say “poor”, is it. That’s bankrupt, which is different in tone and meaning. The woman featured here isn’t poor, but technically bankrupt. There’s a difference. Even if the result is similar, the causes are not, and that’s what counts. Governments work to eradicate the causes of poverty rather than poverty itself, but they do not work to stop people from bankrupting themselves. That’s not the concern of the state, and as a liberal (I assume, given that you’re so keen on Joseph), you will appreciate the fundamental freedom of every individual to behave in a way that will make him bankrupt, without state interference.]