No, I don’t think Joseph Muscat wrote the president’s speech
Published:
April 7, 2013 at 3:06pm
This is a very particular sort of nasty character we are talking about. He would have derived far more satisfaction from asking Individual X or Individual Y to write that speech, then gloating while listening to George Abela humiliate himself in reading out a litany of Labour propaganda slogans/catchphrases and partisan insults to Lawrence Gonzi and his government, written by one of Lawrence Gonzi’s worst enemies.
This is exactly how that kind of mind works, and believe me when I say that I know what I am talking about.
49 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Mr Chief Communications maybe?
[Daphne – No, that is absolutely NOT what I meant. Why would Muscat derive a perverse pleasure from having the president read out insults to Gonzi, and praise for Labour, written by his chief of communications? That would be considered part of his chief of communications’ job. You clearly don’t understand this sort of personality at all. He would derive the greatest satisfaction from having it written (secretly, which makes the pleasure greater), for instance, by Jeffrey Pullicino or Franco Debono. Given that he can’t trust them not to blab, think of somebody in a similar category who can be trusted to keep mum. The pleasure, to be more specific, comes from dominating the writer by getting him to perform what is in reality a demeaning and humiliating role which has been presented to him, flatteringly, as involvement in a conspiracy which makes him feel ‘in’ and important. Somebody with Muscat’s personality then sits back and gets his rocks off – to use a crude expression which suffices – by watching others humiliate and debase themselves at the end of his strings.]
Franco Debono.
No, he’s too busy with other things. It is someone with plenty of time on his hands.
No Reader, I reckon the style’s more in keeping with that prime snake Varist.
More likely Mr Prisoner in Brussels.
Dr Abela must refuse to read it. He can refuse.I am thinking that I will not give any money to Comunity Chest Fund.
You needn’t donate to the Community Chest Fund. You can make a donation to a deserving cause directly.
Boycott already done from my end. Ever since he opened the palace gates to film the taghna lkoll video.
Some convert who thinks that effect on a man is pretty normal?
Mugliett, perhaps? Could have been his reward. His name has been conspicuously absent from Joseph Muscat’s reward list.
Franco Debono? No he can’t write.
JPO perhaps?
I would place a bet on Mario Cutajar.
Have a look at Jose here. They never could distinguish between party and government.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130407/local/political-singing-at-g-anafest-launch.464462
Humiliate himself my a…e!
He took the opportunity to let the steam out. God knows how he wanted to be on Fosos to chant with his mates.
This was the time for him to make amends, to send out a message: Jien magħkom ukoll.
He is no fool. A man of better calibre would have refused outright to read that speech, but he wanted to get the message across that he is still a Laburist of that sort. To me he was an accomplice not a victim.
Agreed 100%
I honestly think it was Me-Shall who wrote that speech. She was Alfred Sant’s secretary after all, so she knows what ropes to pull.
http://www.sott.net/article/260411-The-psychopathic-personality#.UWFyc6iVRMo.mailto
Wouldn’t you say that this post contradicts this other one?
(http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2013/04/joseph-muscat-sought-to-ridicule-the-president-not-the-leader-of-the-opposition/)
[Daphne – No, because the speech would have been written according to his brief. Obviously. Muscat could have easily written those things himself but somebody with that kind of personality would not have missed the opportunity to add to the pleasure.]
I would be surprised if, the person Daphne suspects of writing the speech, is capable all by himself, of stringing together such a rant.
Although, such material wouldn’t be totally out of place during, say, a cockfight.
http://zekzik.com/2013/04/07/il-kredibilta-tal-president-fin-nofs/
In 1981 we had perverse elections result, in 2013 we have a perverse P.M.
Let them to it. Let the claustrophobia set in.
That all those who voted for change submit to self-censorship, keep it in.
When liberty requires distance from the state, let them daze on the dank stale air exhaled by his movement.
Voldemort comes to mind.
Talking of communicating with the masses, what is this all about?
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2013-04-07/opinions/fiscal-slippage-and-the-euro-after-cyprus-1339817992/
“The 2012 deficit that the former administration had estimated just 33 days before the year end at €180 million has, in fact, come in at more than twice that, at €362 million. From 2.7 per cent of GDP, it exploded to 5.4 per cent.”
Hold on. According to the government, the deficit is now around 3.5% which is adjusted upwards from the previous figure of 2.7% as calculated by the previous administration. And now it’s 5.4%
Has he just doubled it for a laugh ?
Why is this person (who I believe has labour connections) saying it’s 5.4% ? It just proves the point that you put 6 economists in a room and you get 6 different answers.
What’s to say that the deficit isn’t actually the original 2.7% on this reckoning ?
Alfred Mifsud doesn’t just “have Labour connections”. He once had pretensions to the leadership throne himself, and is lying in wait for a constitutional position in a major financial institution. The current incumbent’s resignation was requested but the request was withdrawn when it was pointed out that the institution in question is not answerable to government.
His brother is facing prosecution for bribery when he was at Enemalta.
It’s a pity that in the particular role that he is vying for, he cannot print a new series of notes with Muscat’s face on it just like one of the predecessors did with Agatha Barbara.
His hands will be tied now, not unlike the eighties.
The question is whether he will use his future role’s discretion to invest the national reserves in UBS funds.
With his smile, Joseph Muscat was sucessful in attracting funds from non sophisticated villagers who put all their savings in UBS funds, not knowing the investment risk they incurred.
J.Dalli.BA
jien ghalija waqat maskla ohra, kitbu min kitbu ftit li xejn jinteresani, dak suppost president tal poplu kollu u mhux ta nofs nazzjon, ghalkemm ghalija mill bierah l hawn mghadux il president tieghi, u ha nibbojkotjah f dak kollu li ha jaghmel, SHAME ON YOU Mr President
Il-President suppost ikun taghna llkoll imma, kif qeghdin naraw, il-partiggjanizmu ghadu haj u ha jkun il-modus operandi ta’ dan il-gvern ghal dawn il-hames snin li gejjin.
The President has his speech writer …. Who is he?
Doesn’t matter who wrote it,the president should NOT have read it.
Keep it up, JM.
Your attempt at humiliating what is at present the minority will only serve to harden its resolve.
No Retreat, No Surrender.
Oh, and you can stick your Second Republic where the sun doesn’t shine.
I don’t think it’s a question of ‘who wrote the speech?’ It was the President who read it and endorsed it. Shame, in my humble opinion, falls fully on the President.
This does not detract from the Labour’s foul play. The speech was definitely intended to show Maltese society that the Presidency is no longer the highest institution in the Maltese Islands. It is squarely subordinate to the Labour Government. The speech confirms that it is the Prime Minister who’s pulling the strings of the President.
The speech is also a clear message to Maltese society that, now, no one is above Joseph Muscat. Be cautious my friends. We’re back in the 80s. But this time things will be worse. Labour has an astounding majority in Parliament and the Nationalist Party has still to find its feet after the resounding defeat!
It could have easily been Mr. President’s son who wrote it.
So Lawrence Gonzi displayed a high sense of maturity by nominating this man as president, and to show his gratitude Abela reads out a speech like that, replete with insults and innuendos. The worst is still to come.
Alfred Sant.
Whoever the author of that piece is, is irrelevant. If the President disagreed with it, he should have refused to read it in all it’s glory. I am sure he read the text before and that it was not given to him in that instant.
Shame on the President of Malta (and all its people).
Shame on Joseph Muscat because this goes away from his phrase Malta Taghna lkoll. The rights of the large nationalist minority need to be respected (but who am I kidding, he does not even know the meaning of the term respect)
In 1987 former Labour minister and acting President Paul Xuereb read the speech from the throne which criticised the government in which Mr Xuereb was a minister.
But isn’t Joseph’s movement different?
Another mask shed. After four weeks, I would not have expected better from josephmuscat.com.
His behaviour gives away his arrested emotional development.
Today we have a prime minister who takes decisions based on spite and the desire for revenge, who preaches ‘Malta for all’ and ‘keep positive’ and then derives enjoyment from humilating his enemies in totally unnecessary ways.
He preached meritocracy and is now handing appointment after appointment based on connections, affiliations and most importantly, spite.
I, like many others, am proud of not having contributed to the installment of this sorry excuse of a PM who has built his success on slogans, gimmicks and a campaign of deceit and character assasination that has given him the largest electoral victory ever.
It was therefore no surprise that the content of the President’s speech was what it was. After all, the image, the party name, the flag, the emblem may all change but the mentality of Labour will alway remain the same. This individual is as spiteful and nasty as Mintoff was.
With hindsight, the president’s appointment was the biggest mnistake. By playing the goody-goody saint, the president was reinforcing the idea to disenchanted Nationalists that Labour had really changed and this played exactly into josephmuscat.com’s hand. Having Abela as president helped make unacceptable Labour acceptable.
As for the PN, it is understandable that we have suffered a huge set-back, but life goes on and five years will pass by in a flash, just like they did since the 2008 election.
I do not know what your readers think but the size of this defeat and the fact that we have punished the party that gave us back our country in 1987, the EU, the Euro and much more while at the same time rewarding the very man who was at the forefront opposing all of this has rekindled in me newly found enthusiasm to work within and strengthen the PN.
I believe it was a brainstorming effort by two or three persons and Joseph Muscat.
The speech was probably a tit-for-tat response to Emeritus Fenech Adami’s presence at the last PN meeting on the fosos.
Yes.
Except that there is no such thing as a “President Emeritus” in the Constitution of Malta. Dr Fenech Adami is, today, a retired statesman and a private citizen, and he is free to do whatever he pleases. Dr Abela, on the other hand, represents the State.
He should have refused to read that speech because it was offensive to a considerably large part of the the population and coming from the head of state it sounds even worse. Shame on everyone who took part and/or was complicit in this charade.
I think Alfred Sant wrote it. He has plenty of time. He has an open bill with George Abela.
He has several open bills with Lawrence Gonzi and he is the mentor of Joseph Muscat.
And the latter would have loved how his mentor sharpened the barbs.
In a sense this speech reveals the new old way of the PL. The speech could come from Joe Grima, and yes the speech could also come from one of the sick minds that bombarded the PN government from within.
The fact that Joseph Muscat allowed this speech to be given to the President could only mean that Malta taghna lkoll is dead.
Long live Old Labour. The main message is that with Labour the new dawn has reached Malta. Those over 40 know that very well. It is the blatant betrayal of 50000 voters who believed the national unity trash.
[Daphne – Definitely not. Alfred Sant is a literary writer.]
Whoever wrote it is not important. It is the contents that count and if the Nationalist Opposition members present chose to stay put and listen to that insulting speech, then I am sorry to say they deserved what was flung at them.
Naqbel li l-membri tal-PN messhom telqu ‘l barra.
Issa jmiss li wara dak l-insult min-naħa tal-figura fl-ogħla istituzzjoni, il-membri tal-PN jibbojkotjaw lill-president fl-attivitajiet li baqagħlu jagħmel sakemm eventwalment jgħib mix-xena fi ftit żmien ieħor.
Dan hu l-mod kif jafu jirringrazzjaw u japprezzaw is-soċjalisti. Diġa’ ibnu kien offiż għall-aħħar qabel l-elezzjoni, issa s-siġill għalqu missieru. Tal-mistħija – verament kapaċi jaqgħu fil-baxx dawn in-nies.
Bil-ħaqq, issa qed jidher ċar li min jinsa jerġa’ jġarrab.
A candidate from Sliema, perhaps?
Or maybe, from yonder, far away from our shores, in Brussles?