Have you noticed how progressive and liberal Joseph has started to reference God?
I cannot be the only one to have picked up on the fact that over the last few days, JosephMuscat2013 has begun to pepper his speeches with ‘jekk Alla jrid’ and ‘Alla ridt’.
There was the infamous reference to ‘jekk Alla jrid’ they will legislate for civil unions (well, there are those who say that God isn’t willing), and then I heard it a couple of times again today during his mass meeting speech in Gozo.
One of them was: “Alla ried li kont hdejn mara li…”. This when speaking about his igloo meeting in Marsaxlokk, when he just so happened (because God willed it) to be seated next to a woman who had a truly sorry tale to tell about cancer and asthma in the family.
Oh, I don’t think it was God who put her there.
But in any case, this ‘jekk Alla jrid’ is pulled straight out of The Eddie Fenech Adami Guide to Mesmerising a Crowd. The difference, of course, is that Eddie Fenech Adami had right on his side and his causes, unlike electricity tariffs, were truly great and significant.
Hekk nahseb, li mohhu f’jahseb Alla, miskin.
29 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
In reference to the caption, yes, Joseph thinks about God – himself.
The guy blatantly denies that he ever hurt anyone in his speeches and always was consistent in his calls for unity in the country. A few minutes later NET TV air him stating (footage from the time of Alfred Sant): The PN is our enemy (translated: Il PN huwa l-ghadu tal Partit Laburista), so much for consistency Dr Muscat.
Maybe an attempt to make up for the gaffe regarding Fenech’s miraculous vision?
Muscat used a teleprompter for the mass meeting. Nothing New.
Daphne, not to be anal, but it is “Alla ried” (God wanted) not “Alla ridt”. “Ridt” is the first person past tense (I wanted).
[Daphne – Yes, I changed it. I wasn’t thinking, sorry.]
After the comment he passed about the Madonna, I can’t believe the cheek he has in referencing God in his speeches.
I was particularly moved by the final scene when the mass meeting finished and Michelle was called to go next to him…he with a blue tie and she with a blue scarf, totally in contrast with the sea of red in front of them.
Malta taghna lkoll – imma illum Muscat qal li Ghawdex tal-Ghawdxin.
Changing to gas is not his prerogative.
The interconnector, the extension, the pipeline, the drive for renewable sources and getting the old buses off our roads weren’t decided with his contribution.
Not only that, Joseph backed the lynching crowd which opposed the Sant Antnin waste recycling plant at Marsascala when he was MEP.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2005-03-16/news/government-says-joseph-muscats-statement-is-a-strategy-to-block-funds-73174/
And yet his speech this morning sounded as if he’s battling the evil forces intent on keeping us enslaved in acloud of toxins and particulates.
Watched the repeat, the young woman with the red bob keeps changing her place. On Friday, she was to his left.
Iva, qeghdin sew, skond tal-PL il-PN jbezzgha bil-babaw, imma huma sa dan it-tant ibezzghu bil-cancer. Shame on you Joe.
Hate to say it but if he wins, and this remains the main election issue, he will have a mandate and it will become his prerogative.
Where is Gonzi’s rabbit?
Let’s put it this way, the main election issue is to what extent Labour’s lying.
Better still, to what extent Joseph’s lying. I’ve noticed an empty space opening around him lately.
Only Louis Grech seems comfortable posing next to him.
Ghax dawn tal-Labour ir-religjon dejjem uzawha kif u meta taqbel lilhom.
In light of the fact that Joseph Muscat has been targeting bisexuals, can an enterprising journalist ask Muscat whether he agrees with civil unions (why not marriages?) in which a person has both a husband and a wife?
If he does, what about a a man having two wives or a woman having two husbands? Indeed, why not three four or even fifteen spouses of either gender?
If he doesn’t agree, why not? Does he think that bisexuals, polygamists and polyandrists are children of a lesser god?
It would be fun to watch him tie himself up in knots. He won’t seem so liberal and progressive when he will eventually admit that a country has to have some sort of rules and regulations.
I’m tired of him trying to portray the Nationalists as backwards because they won’t allow a free for all. My feeling is that the sudden urge to do something about gays is not because there is a true belief in their rights but because too many male, pornographically saturated minds have concluded that lesbianism and anal sex are really cool.
The Labour Party is no more LGBT friendly than the Nationalist Party. I have never heard the Nationalist Party claim that it is against gay marriage. Joseph Muscat has said this multiple times.
The Maltese LGBT community shouldn’t take Joseph Muscat at his word but should ask specifically what kind of law, if any, he plans to introduce. Where is the roadmap? Does his whole prospective parliamentary group endorse it or will it be voted on with a free vote? What about the right to adopt children?
Malta is pretty much up to date when it comes to human rights. Gay marriage is still a relatively new concept in most of the western world (let alone the rest) and it’s neither surprising nor shocking that it hasn’t been introduced in Malta yet. Even in countries which have taken steps to introduce it, there are still arguments, demonstrations and legal cases against it. It’s far from a settled issue.
The Nationalist Party has a very good track record when it comes to human rights. It gave equality to women (read Daphne’s posts to see how Labour treated women), it stood up for refugees (Labour proposed to let them drown), it gave disabled people the right to a disability pension even if they had property or other assets (under Labour, benefits used to be immediately withdrawn if a disabled person acquired some valuable assets), it put disabled children into mainstream schools and gave them the services of learning support assistants, it introduced a commissioner for children’s rights, it wanted us to join the EU which has notoriously tough laws on discrimination and it even, although admittedly grudgingly, made sure that the divorce bill would go through parliament after the people voted in favour of it.
The reasons why I believe that the Nationalist Party is more LGBT friendly than the Labour Party are that:
a) The Nationalists don’t ghettoise people. They neither set up LGBT PN nor Disabled PN. They have gays and, for the first time in Maltese history, a blind man running for the upcoming election.
b) The Nationalists’ agenda is based on values. From Eddie Fenech Adami’s cry of “Is-sewwa jirbah zgur.” to last December’s PN billboard showing a baby boy and wishing everyone Merry Christmas, one can tell that they always seek to do what is morally right and at the appropriate time.
c) The Nationalist Party was already working on a cohabitation law before parliament was dissolved. (This is why Labour need to be asked what the law will be like exactly. It might very well be the same as the Nationalists were proposing.)
The Labour Party, on the other hand, is an opportunist par excellence. Not only does it have a terrible history when it comes to human rights (beatings, killings, legalising anal rape and so on) but it doesn’t even seem to believe in any values whatsoever. It just copies Barack Obama’s moves hoping that it will too win the election. Just like Obama, Muscat claimed that his views on gay relationships have “evolved”. Can this man say ANYTHING original?
The question needs to be asked again: Why not marriage? Obama endorsed marriage not civil unions after all. I guess Joseph Muscat is not as progressive and liberal as he thinks he is.
One last point: To any people who are planning to vote Labour solely on this issue, I would like to ask them whether it’s worth risking one’s economic future just for the right to get a civil union (not even a marriage). What’s the point of being civilly unionised if you don’t have a job or the economy is crumbling? I think this is the question which gays who voted for José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (a fellow socialist who Joseph Muscat once cheered on) keep asking themselves.
The risk of single issue voters, any single issue voters, is that they fail to see the bigger picture. Would you deny your children a bright future just to be able to hunt whenever you want to? Would you risk your own future just to be able to smoke a joint on Friday night? Would you risk everything just to be civilly unionised (not even married)?
The truth is that gays have it pretty good in Malta. They can set up house together, they can be gainfully employed and as individuals, they have pretty much the same rights as everyone else.
I could barely believe it when in The Sunday Times leader this morning, it was claimed that their survey shows that people take the economy, health and education for granted. In which world have people been living in since 2008?
It is time for all single issue voters to wake up and smell the coffee.
All good except for your paragraph b). Do not be misled – a billboard is nothing more than marketing and propaganda.
True, a billboard is a marketing and propaganda tool.
But would an entity advertise a product it does not firmly believe in?
What does Labour honestly believe in, other than jumping on other people’s bandwagons?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130113/elections-news/labour-holding-first-campaign-mass-meeting.453107
When someone starts mentioning God and starts taking oaths I immediately start looking for evidence and start doubting the veracity of the statement.
Thank God he did not say “Nahlef fuq uliedi”.
Common sense dictates that the incidence of pulmonary diseases should be higher in the Inner Harbour Area than Marsaxlokk (more precisely Fgura,Tarxien and Paola) – first, because Delimara power station pollutes less than the Marsa one and secondly because the prevailing wind in Marsaxlokk is the North West which blows seawards.
I’m sure this unidentified and mysterious “mara xiha” was not a specialist in pulmonary diseases. Joseph’s reaction should have been different. I think Joseph was telling a plain lie.
By any chance do her grandchildren’s parents smoke?
Only last year Muscat was ready to put shiploads of coal ash from the prototype Sargas Plant at Marsaxlokk Bay. Now he’s going to solve this fictitious woman’s problems by placing two big bombs, on her doorstep, which are one hundred times the size of the Qajjenza LPG Filling Plant dismantled under Gonzi’s watch without much fanfare for the benefit of the people living in the Marsaxlokk Bay area.
‘Under my watch’, Joseph will be shown what he truly is: a liar.
This should be an eye opener for us:
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130113/world/greece-raises-power-tariffs.453116
Nassumi li kellhom meeting kbir gewwa Ghawdex ghax tghidx kemm telghu Maltin bil-privates.
Kemm baqghu lura dawn in-nies.
Ghadhom jemmnu li bil-folol kbar fit-toroq terbah il-gvern!
Il-gvern terbhu bil-verita’ u bil-gid lejn il-poplu mela bil-fantaziji u progetti fantazmi. Kull min hu tal-mistier qed jghid li din l-invenzjoni tal-power station il gdida ma’ taghmilx sens.
Aktar u aktar in-nefqa ta’ dawk il-miljuni kollha u kif huwa ippjanat li jigi iffinanzjat dan il-progett falz ghax dan huwa kollu bzar fl’ghajnejn tal-poplu Malti li jekk ma’ joqoghdx attent Joseph Muscat idahhalna go hajt.
Biex inqerr mieghek, il-folol tal-PL ghandom effett.
Wara l-bizgha li taqbdek meta tarhom tkun trid tmur int thabbat bieb bieb tikkonvnci lin-nies li triq wahda ghandna, il-PN.
Barra minn hekk, wara 25 sena’fl-oppozizzjoni, apparti dawk is-sentejn, tista timmagina x’rabja ghandom fuqhom certu nies. Ahna uhud minnhom nafuhom, ilhom is-snin jilghabuha tal-puliti imma il-hdura ga bdiet tidher bejn ix-xquq, u dawn sahansitra tal-familja.
Totally agree with Riya. It is so disappointing that the magority of the general public is however blind to all this according to the published polls.
Biex qed tistaghgeb? Insejthom id-dehriet ta’ Tonio taghna?
I have a question. If Eddie Fenech Adami in your views, was a social liberal Prime Minister – which I agree with you – then what difference does it make to use the phrase ‘Jekk Alla Jrid’? It’s a Maltese expression at the end of the day. Other societies have Insha’Allah.
[Daphne – And other societies have ‘God willing’, Luigi, but in none of those languages is it only an expression. It’s used by those who believe it. And no intelligent person would ever link God’s will to civil unions, if only for the simple reason that it makes no sense at all, and – in societies more alert than ours – it would also cause massive offence. Precisely because it is offensive. Fenech Adami was and still is a true believer. Muscat patently is not.]
You have to come across your audience now and tell us what do you think about Labour’s proposal on Civil Union. This had to be in the PN’s electoral manifesto if they want to be consistent with their logo of diversity. Diversity is not about religion only but also about different people and minorities.
[Daphne – I can’t understand why Labour gays are so pathetic and content to accept a different form of discrimination as progress. Isn’t marriage what you/they want? They why are you allowing yourselves to be fobbed up with a second-class civil union, and thanking the person who promises it to you. How does that work, exactly? Joseph Muscat tells you/them specifically and explicitly that he does not approve of and will not legislate for same-sex marriage, but you can have a token civil union instead to shut you up, and you salivate at his boots. This is the equivalent of women being told, in the days before equal pay for equal work, that discrimination against them was going to be removed by making it mandatory to pay them two-thirds of what men were paid, instead of just half. I still don’t think that not allowing same-sex couples to marry is discriminatory, because technically it is not. But you seem to think it is, so why don’t you demand the whole hog.]
Karl Gouder the openly gay MP, is coming across as an imbecile. You can’t be a gay MP and not campaign for civil liberties. He is on the wrong side. If I were him I would feel embarrassed by his own party.
[Daphne – Karl Gouder is right. Cyrus Engerer is wrong. Nobody should EVER allow themselves to be defined, still less make the mistake of defining themselves, by their gender or sexuality. Why should women politicians be ghettoised into speaking about women’s issues? Why should homosexual politicians be ghettoised into speaking about gay rights? Our gender and sexuality are incidental – that is exactly what equality is all about.]
In my opinion, the PN is not the social liberal party anymore. It was in the past. It’s not anymore. When I say it was in the past, only from an economic policies point of view and not from civil rights of minorities and majorities point of view.
[Daphne – Not to be patronising or anything, but I don’t think you know enough about this subject. What did the PN do for civil liberties? It took us into the European Union, against the massed forces of the angry Labour Party. There’s nothing more to be said, really.]
You have a problem with the Labour Party and I don’t blame you not to see anything good in them. That’s your opinion and we know it.
[Daphne – There is very little that is good in the Labour Party, Luigi, and that little is far eclipsed by outrageous bad.]
But I truly believe that if there’ll be another party other than the Nationalist Party, say the Party of Strickland, you would shy away from the PN, because I can sense it that you are not comfortable with their policies when it comes to civil rights.
[Daphne – I am very comfortable with their policies on civil rights. I campaigned for EU membership, not against it. You can’t have ‘civil rights’ in a democratic vacuum, this is what you don’t understand. There was divorce in the Soviet Union, Luigi.]
Policies aren’t only about the economy and democracy is not only freedom of expression. Democracy takes into account that minority rights are respected as well. The basic civil right i.e. divorce had to be introduced in this country with the Prime Minister voting against the people’s will, in parliament.
I bet, you won’t upload this comment, because it hits the nail on its head.
[Daphne – On the contrary, I appreciate the opportunity to address some of your issues. As I said, there was divorce in the Soviet Union and yes, freedom of expression is the essential underpinning of all democracy. Everything else derives from that – including respect for minorities.]
I really appreciated your reply. To some extent I agree with you. To some othe issues I have some doubts. But thank you for answering me.
[Daphne – My pleasure.]
If only the Labour media would accord the same courtesy of a reply on questions regarding national interest.
Say, the fantasy about building an unnecessary power station?
Who the interested ‘investor’ is and how much he is willing to chip in?
Where exactly does Joseph-Konrad-Toni-Louis et al plan to build the gas tanks?
How long will it take to construct the ‘tanks’ assuming that a decision is at hand whether to build above ground or underground?
How long will the process take for MEPA’s approval?
Will MEPA be abolished before any application is presented? To whom? Certainly not to the EU.
Has a company which will build the power station already been selected?
Would that not contravene rules regarding tendering process?
Has Labour already arranged to receive only one ‘acceptable’ bid?
Is this what Labour refers to as ‘transparency’?
If all this is accomplished in 24 months, does it mean that the inter-connector and EU financed gas pipeline will become history?
Who will build the three gas tankers needed to deliver LNG and how much?
I also voted Yes for the EU and also voted PN at that time. I was still young back then. I truly believe that second-class civil union is much better than nothing and it’s the first process to introduce and consolidate further rights. Maybe if Muscat will be Prime Minister, in the following legislature will promise Gay Marriage. Nothe that Civil Union is the closest to Gay Marriage. What the PN is proposing is simply a contract. That’s all.
[Daphne – Ah, you voted Yes to EU membership and then PN because you will still young back then, and therefore, impressionable and gullible, I imagine you wish to suggest. What do you think a civil union is if not simply a contract? What do you think civil marriage is, if not simply a contract? The only form of marriage that is not ‘simply a contract’ is a religious rite, which is not a contract at all, except where explicitly recognised by the state, as with Catholic marriages in Malta, which turns them into a contract by making them subject to marriage law. The law and the state deal in contracts. They do not deal in Hallmark cards.]
Excellent point Daphne.
Recognition of what lies behind a bond lasting a lifetime isn’t the state’s, even more so since divorce was introduced.
It’s a cultural shift, which cannot rest on the instruments of legislation. Regulation is there to inhibit the exact opposite.
Seeing certain comments being passed this week directed at Busuttil, they betray a horrific gut instinct.
My, how difficult. Ok, I agree with you that it’s a contract.
[Daphne – You don’t have to agree with me, Luigi. This isn’t a matter of opinion. It’s a solid fact: civil marriage is a contract. Civil union is a contract. The rights and obligations are contractual.]
Explain this. So if couple of the same sex get married abroad, why isn’t it recognised in Malta.
[Daphne – It isn’t recognised elsewhere, either, where there is no same-sex marriage. Even within the United States, every state has its own legal regime. Same-sex couples can marry in one state but not another.]
What the PN is proposing is a simple contract which does not cover this.
[Daphne – Have you asked Joseph Muscat how his civil union contract will differ from 1. a marriage contract and 2. a cohabitation contract?]
Religious rites are simply for those who believe in it and have lots of money to waste.
[Daphne – Religious rites don’t cost money. Priests don’t charge a fee to marry two people. It’s the dresses and parties that cost money. Those are not part of the religious rite, and most people have them with a civil marriage too.]
Even poor families, make it a point to waste so much money. But, that’s their belief.