In all the screaming and shouting about not wanting black people around, we have forgotten that the US ambassador is listening
Published:
July 18, 2013 at 10:24pm
But that’s all right, because Mr Elena Farrugia, the PS for Competitiveness and Economic Growth (what a silly title) laid on a huge spread of little cakes for her visit, a real ‘hawuffu’ (no idea how to spell that) that is inappropriate in nature and sheer quantity, unless Deborah Schembri and Manuel Mallia were sitting out of shot and waiting to hoover them up.
23 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
A few napkins and a couple of side plates would have been nice.
Did Peter Paul Zammit bake those cakes?
And what about Barack and Michelle Obama?
If Edward Snowden is right, they were listening too.
A decent coffee or a cuppa tea would have been more appropriate. What peasants are running this country?
Maybe he just wanted her to smell the coffee
He probably thinks the poor girl is too skinny and needs some extra calories.
Meanwhile Godfrey Farrugia launches campaign against obesity and informs us that “il-platt taghna qed ikollu mizuri aktar milli suppost”
Perhaps we should be thankful that they didn’t supply godawful violent pink trifle “tal-metru” bought from a hawker at City Gate.
Eżatt bħal ma kont tista’ tixtri mill-gabbana tal-Fusellu li kellu f’Putirjal fit-tmeninijiet.
Daphne, klandestini li ma tafhomx thenn ghalihom u ma trid lil hadd ki joffendihom ( U hekk ghandu jkun), u nies li ma jaqblux mieghek politikament taghtihom mill-ghar u tasal anki li tinfamhom. Dawn mhux proxxmu tieghek ukoll?
[Daphne – You are confusing issues, Tracy. Political views are an acceptable basis for sparring because they are a matter of choice. We CHOOSE our political views. Therefore it is normal and acceptable to be criticised for those choices. Also, political criticism is ESSENTIAL TO THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF DEMOCRACY – yes, even criticism of the people involved. The pious mantra in Malta – criticise the act but not the person – is heard nowhere else. This is because it is derived directly from Catholic doctrine and the admonishment to hate the sin but not the sinner. Matters which are not a person’s or group’s choice – sexuality, for instance, or skin colour, or gender, or physical disability – are not an acceptable basis for sparring or criticism. The key word is ‘choice’. People choose to vote Labour (or PN). They do not choose to be black, and quite frankly, even if they did, so what. The choice to be black would affect nobody else. The choice to vote Labour (or PN) most certainly does.]
Thanks Daphne for not publishing again my comment. Even on another post (Who taught David Gatt……), the last part of my comment was left out. Seems you had no reply to give me.
I do respect your opinion but for goodness’ sake don’t be biased.
Finally may I remind you that whatever we do and say isour own responsibility and we have to pay for it when one day we meet Our Almighty God to be judged. ( You may not publish this comment – my aim is to make you read it.)
[Daphne – I imagine the Almighty God might have a few questions about the way we thought and spoke about other people on the basis of their skin colour. I have a great deal of difficulty having any kind of conversation or debate with people whose arguments are rooted in religious law, and this not because I “don’t have an answer” but precisely because I do, and yet at the same time I know it is useless because the two people involved in the debate are coming at it from different standpoints: the rational and the irrational. I find it curious that some people fear Malta being taken over by irrational Muslims who organise their thoughts and views according to religious diktat, when they do exactly the same themselves. It is quite possible to be a believer of sorts while also reasoning in a secular and rational manner about matters that have nothing to do with religion.]
Tracy, you may believe that what you write is your own responsibility and believe that you will finally face judgement by your maker (I won’t argue with that – believe what you wish), but in the meantime, Daphne is responsible for all that is published in her blog.
If you think that what you write is legal and harmless, you may always publish it in your own blog (lots of free blog choices around). Free speech has nothing to do with any false right to publish anything on anyone else’s property, but all to do with having the right to publish something yourself.
In any case, you may post in the VivaMalta forum. They’ll welcome you with open arms.
Daphne, I must admit that your religious beliefs are very different from mine. I do respect them. Do stick to them and I stick to mine.
[Daphne – You have no idea what my religious beliefs are, and you shouldn’t presume to know because it is not a subject I discuss.]
Finally may I remind you that I have FULL respect for EVERYBODY, being skin coloured or not. I am fully aware how to speak about them not to hurt their feelings.
[Daphne – That has nothing to do with religion, and it is a personal choice.]
Did Manuel Mallia send a policeman to serve the tea?
Unless some micro object is framed there, the picture frame above the ambassadors is bare and its glass cracked.
As for the savouries and sweets, finesse at its best. Looks like a scene from a village wedding spread. Bloody peasants.
Is there any sense of proportion?
Rather a space more formal and refreshments more sober.
Anti-obesity campaign?
No thanks, we’re Joseph’s new generation of fat cats.
U jekk ma joghgbokx mur lura minn fejn gejt.
Labour should be careful. Tainting our relations with other democracies throws us back into the isolation of the 1970s and early 1980s.
Madam Ambassador is a highly qualified and experienced diplomat (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/189495.htm).
Does the Hon George Vella think that these are subjective too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVOnWXMNRCA is a good example of the ‘subjective’ nature of qualifications.
…and right now Australia’s (Labour) Prime Minister is mulling the ‘PNG’ (Papua New Guinea) solution for asylum seekers:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/19/rudds-boat-fix-sense-sailed?INTCMP=SRCH
…and, more to the point:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/19/kevin-rudd-asylum-boats-png
Reading the Ambassador’s C.V. they better be careful what they say in Maltese to their staff, since she must understand, and most probably talk the language, more than some of us do.
What does hawuffu mean? I checked in Aquilina and Serracino Inglott, to no avail. The word however still rings a very remote bell. The way I’m understanding the meaning is a fussy do which does not suit its context.
[Daphne – Yes, that’s about it. I couldn’t find it in the dictionary either when I tried to look up its spelling, but that might be because I’m spelling it all wrong to begin with.]
I believe the expression is “ta’ uffu,” meaning extravagant, opulent, lavish, etc.
Great excuse for an “after-party,” I guess.