Luciano ‘Il Sogno’ Busuttil really does have trouble with English
So this morning, timesofmalta.com runs a report which opens with these lines:
Former Home Affairs Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said today that lawyers who had backed the no-confidence motion against him avoided eye contact yesterday when he returned to work in court.
“Maybe their conscience was pricking them,” the former minister said on TVAM, adding that many appeared to be shocked to see him return to work as a lawyer in court.
And Luciano Busuttil, who appears to have had time to pop into court in between driving his children from Il Sogno to Chiswick House School, rushes to post a comment beneath:
Not true. I greeted him and talked normally.
This is such bad form on so many levels that I don’t know quite where to begin, and suspect that it would all be lost on him anyway. Not only has he absolutely no idea why he shouldn’t say something like that given the context and the circumstances, but he is so damned thick that he won’t understand any explanation he gets.
So let’s stick to an English lesson, which he just might be able to work with.
“Lawyers who backed the no-confidence motion” does not mean “all lawyers who backed the no-confidence motion”. It means some of them.
Also, Luciano Busuttil has clearly not understood that what Mifsud Bonnici is saying here is that those lawyer MPs have a conscience which appears to have just kicked in with the realisation of what they have done, causing them to feel shame and embarrassment and leave them unable to look him in the eye.
Busuttil can’t see that this is not criticism of those people’s manners, and that rushing to say that he greeted his victim and talked to him normally raises questions about his own conscience and the lack of it, and whether or not he is an absolute fool and total lightweight.
Luciano, do yourself a favour and spend the rest of the day trying to work out why greeting your victim “normally” is nothing to boast about, and the many things it says about you.
25 Comments Comment
Reply to minn mars Click here to cancel reply
In other words, some lawyers who had backed the no-confidence motion had their consciences pricking them. Other lawyers who had backed the no-confidence motion are just pricks.
I had started to reply to his comment on timesofmalta.com to point out that it was out of order because if he thinks that speaking to his victim normally is appropriate in the circumstances, then he is a sandwich short of a picnic.
Mid-paragraph it dawned on me who I was directing my comments towards and I just closed the window. What a waste of space the man is.
This is like when Luciano Busuttil greeted Richard Cachia Caruana (presumably “normally”) at the Westin Dragonara, then rushed to tell the Labour Party that he was there.
He made it a point to stress that he talked normally to Carm Mfsud Bonnici, making it obvious that normally he does not talk in a normal manner.
So does he usually stutter ?
“Maybe their conscience was pricking them…” – I expected a joke to follow that.
Which portfolio is cabinet minister Luciano Busuttil going to get? We have a right to know.
‘…and talked normally’. This must be the news item here.
He’s got four speeds for talking: slow, normal, fast and reverse.
Kull meta jiftah halqu jghaxxaqha dal-bniedem. Ma nistax nifhem kif sar avukat.
Luciano does go to court between driving around.
He is one of those lawyers usually accompanied by Toni Abela who go to the front pew during criminal proceedings and talk to each other so loudly (looking around to make sure that everyone sees them) that you cannot make out what your lawyer and the magistrate are saying about your case.
Daphne, as per your argument, you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t.,
And Judas greeted Christ with a kiss.
…”and talked normally”?
As opposed to what? A stutter? A lisp? Maybe the result of a cleft brain?
Kolonja nemel ghandha IQ iktar minnu.
Here’s another one totally oblivious to the enormity of what they’ve done to a decent human being.
To them all’s fair in love and war and it’s perfectly fine to hang, draw and quarter someone in one building and exchange pleasantries with same in another building, barely two blocks down the road.
I was going to write that this behaviour beggars belief but, on second thoughts, it’s exactly what we’ve come to expect from these buffoons.
Unless you spell it out more clearly still, the honourable Luciano Busuttil will still not get it.
By rights, anyone who took an active part in the plot to deprive a deserving and honest Minister of his ministerial post and being complicit in Dr Franco Debono’s avowed personal revenge SHOULD feel ashamed and should feel the need to avoid eye contact with his victim.
Luciano Busuttil votes for a vindictive and personal motion against Carm Mifsud Bonnici but still “greets him and talks normally”.
I bet he’ll do the same after he votes for the other vindictive and very personal motion against Richard Cachia Caruana.
Just goes to show Luciano Busuttil is even worse than his colleagues who at least felt some pricking from their consciences.
When I read Luciano’s comment, I was quite amazed that he hadn’t quite understood what Carm Mifsud Bonnici meant. The conclusion one has to necessarily reach from Luciano’s response is that he has no conscience. Ex admissis, as lawyers would say.
I wonder how this lot got their LLDs. Here’s another one: try reading Dr Rachel Tua’s writing. She doesn’t even know the difference between steak and stake. OMG.
Yes, but she’s incredibly well-connected, which makes up for any deficiencies.
Surprisingly, another lawyer who has difficulty in expressing himself (except when swearing) is Jose Herrera.
Interviewed by Saviour Balzan, he said that “I was sceptical (about changes to the motion) for two reasons, in retrospect” and was faitfhfully reported in the Malta Today report.
The choice of words seemed strange and, in a comment, I asked how one could be sceptical in retrospect. My comment wasn’t uploaded but at least the report has been corrected. The video clip however is still there (11 minutes 28 seconds)
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/national/Jose-Herrera-sceptical-about-asking-for-CMB-s-resignation-20120605
Daphne..Even the grammar is incorrect.
He should have written:
Not true. I greeted and spoke to him as usual.
What he wrote infers that he greeted him and talked in a normal way, not necessarily to CMB, but for a period (undefined) following the greeting . Given the person in question I would hazard a guess that the period in question would definitely be of a very short duration.
“… many appeared to be shocked to see him return to work as a lawyer in court.”
What was he expected to do? Years ago ministers had a right to continue practising their profession. The same people who were surprised seeing Carmelo as a lawyer at the law courts are probably the same people who expected ministers not to be paid a full salary for a full time job.
I wouldn’t be surprised that Dr Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici will earn more and work less as a Lawyer/MP.
What goes round comes around: when Franco dethroned Carmelo from minister he automatically added competition directly against his private practice. I think he will tell us about his sufferings in his private practice.
Something on these lines “Issa jien kont naf li jekk inwaqqa’ lil Carm minn ministru xi klijenti minn tieghi se jmorru ghandu. Araw x’sagrificcju ghamilt.”
It is normal for the opposition to vote against the government.
I think that the culprit for the resignation of KMF was FD.So there was no reason for KMB to think or imagine that the lawyers from the other side tried to avoid eye contact with him..What happened in parliament was normal except for the negative vote from their side.
[Daphne – No, it isn’t normal at all. The Opposition votes WITH the government routinely on pieces of legislation. It is only the exceptions which make the news. It is normal for the Opposition to vote against, for example, the budget, exceptional pieces of controversial (to the Opposition) legislation, and so on. Also, you are not reasoning well: it was the Opposition which brought the motion. So in this case, it was the government voting against the Opposition, and not the other way round. Bringing a motion before parliament for the resignation of a minister is not normal, and must be founded on exceptional reasons: lying, cheating, stealing, grave misdemeaour, and the like. It’s certainly not for the routine running of the ministry.]