John Dalli’s letter to “Jose Manuel”, sent on a personal letterhead with a Portomaso address, and signed as EU Commissioner – after he was forced out
What strikes me most about this letter is kemm hu baxx, injorant, stupidu u pastaz. The tone is all wrong, the grammar is APPALLING, and the letter is phenomenally badly written – totally substandard even for a junior clerk let alone a supposed EU Commissioner from a country in which English is an official language, and he doesn’t even know enough to engage somebody to write it properly.
That’s how stupid and arrogant he is.
He addresses the European Commission president as ‘Jose Manuel’ when this is not a personal note or an invitation to tea, then compounds his ignorance by signing off with his full name and his arrogated position – this when even a well-trained secretary (and all well-brought-up people) know that when you use somebody’s first name in a letter, you do the same with yours.
Those well-trained secretaries and well-brought-up people also know that when you use your personal correspondence sheets with your home address, you do not sign off with your business or official position, and this even when you haven’t been forced out and haven’t arrogated that position, let alone when you have.
UNFIT FOR PURPOSE: injorant, stupidu, hamallu u maledukat u issa kwazi zmagat ukoll milli jidher. And now we are going to repeat the same mistake with Karmenu Vella, who is straight out of the same mould.
I’ve had it up to here with these money-grubbing peasants and their kilba ghall-poter u flus, who don’t even have the nous to use their cash to buy themselves some manners and a few social graces and a bit of an education, or rather, who are so bloody arrogant and self-satisfied that they actually think they’re fine as they are, Hugo Chavez style.
23 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
That letter is not dated. Why?
That letter must have been drafted by John Dalli’s secretary, BS (Balzan Saviour).
BS famously told Dalli that he was going to get 45% in the PN leadership election of ’04.
That was double what Dalli actually got. BS’s prediction was the real BS (bull-shit).
‘Demanded for my resignation’ – literal translation from Maltese.
This proves once and for all that it’s not what you know but who you know.
Why was the letter by the Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy not dated?
Ghal li jista’ jkun, heqq.
That in itself can invalidate the letter.
Dalli wrote: “I did not offer my resignation but you demanded for (sic) it”.
I think that perhaps Dalli is being misled by the phrase ‘to offer one’s resignation’. Since there’s that ‘offer’, he imagines it has to be something one does spontaneously, out of one’s good heart. Barroso was demanding it so Dalli submitted his resignation but was not ‘offering’ it.
With some people everything is literal.
This point always confused me a bit. Why on earth is John Dalli still harping on about Barroso demanding his resignation? If that’s so, then John Dalli was fired and does not qualify for a handsome pension, and we all know that that’s why he ‘offered’ his resignation in the first place rather than waiting to be fired.
Barroso should say, fine, you want to be fired? You’re fired. Please hand over all monies you’ve received since October 2012.
End of court case.
So there must be a twist somewhere.
John Dalli does not see anything wrong in having a meeting with a tobacco industry lobbyist whilst on holiday in Gozo, and without informing Brussels.
He knows that it looks suspicious and he agreed with Barroso that it looks suspicious. What he does not accept is that that fact is not enough for Barroso to fire him. As far as he is concerned, if OLAF do not have proof that he accepted the bribes discussed by his canvasser over the phone with the Tobacco Industry, he cannot be fired.
There is a complete contrast between the European way and Maltese way of seeing things.
Barroso quite simply told Dalli that he was jeopardizing the image of the Commission. Barroso couldn’t risk that and told Dalli that his days as a Commissioner were over. The options were two: either he resigns voluntarily (and fights to clear his name and retain his pension) or he is fired (and loose his pension).
And in a way, even Joseph Muscat dealings with a blacklisted construction company falls in the same category. If a deal looks suspicious / risky then do not even accept to meet the other dubious party to discuss the deal.
That offer should not be accepted even if it is looks very profitable – Muscat’s own words were “a deal which cannot be refused”.
What I find strange in Dalli’s letter is his quoting Article 17.6. of the TEU. Barroso too says he acted in line with that article.
Having been requested to do so, the Commissioner “shall resign”.
Unless you are a judge, a letter of resignation is not required.
Had Dalli not resigned Barroso would have had to forcefully retire him or risk being forced to resign himself eventually, possibly dragging the Commission with him like Jacques Santer did in 1999.
It is not a question of Dalli resigning or being fired. Dalli left with a Commissioner’s pension.
The question before the Court is whether Dalli’s resignation is valid.
“I did not offer my resignation but you demanded for (sic) it”.
Doesn’t Dalli see how stupid he himself is making himself out to be?
It never takes a genius to work out that when, in such circumstances, a resignation is “offered,” not tendered, it is – as Barroso stated – the prelude to being sacked.
For whose benefit the farce?
What type of person is ever going to want to do legit business with Dalli?
Moreso now that he’s determined to fudge on in the same mire.
That’s Dalli doing a spot of Maltinglish; ‘int tlabtni ghaliha’.
Mhux sewwa naqbda ma’ dawn id-difetti fl-Ingliz, mhux sewwa, nay. Ahna nitghalmu li d-dnub hazin, izda mhux il-persuna. Mhux sewwa, Jozef, mhux sewwa.
….and what about the English? What a shame that we cannot use the basic simple present tense correctly
It has taken a long time for most people to notice how arrogant, ill mannered and inadequate this plonker (John Dalli) is.
After I was acquitted of all the false and malicious charges that he brought against me he did not have the common sense and decency to apologise.
He continues to confirm that he has no respect towards anyone including himself. He behaves and comes across as a bully. He does so because he was allowed to do so for many years. He should have been held accountable for his incompetence and arrogance years ago.
No one in Malta has the guts to stand up to him. He knows this and takes advantage of it. He should have been expelled from the Nationalist Party years ago.
Incredible? Unbelievable? Lost for words.
I have never seen Dalli riding a bicycle but I see him furiously back pedalling in this letter.
To add to my previous comment I believe Dalli made another big mistake in this letter. He did not put at the beginning “WITHOUT PREJUDICE”. This is important when anticipating a court case. It would appear that this letter has prejudiced his claim.
Regarding if Barosso should be arrested if he comes to Malta:
1. Dalli – this is not your private country. This is OUR country and you don’t decide who comes here and if they are arrested or not.
2. If Barosso comes to Malta, it will be an official visit. If you visit an other country – it will be an criminal who is a NOBODY outside his pesky little country.
3. Why does not the EU issue an arrest warrant against you ? Then we can let REAL police in a REAL European country handle your record!
4. Dalli, can you justify your income. Has the Tax authorities ever audited your affairs – and if not, WHY?
What a silly man.
Now a multimillionaire, flying round the globe in a day, he should be dedicating all his efforts to his massive international philanthropic programme based in the Bahamas.
Barroso is only trying to waste his time.
To hell with Barroso.
Get on with it Johnnie and help the underprivileged.
Just ignore Jose Manuel.
Compared to you he is a ‘mejjet bil-guh’.
Talking about charitable trusts in the Bahamas I would recommend to your readers a book called ‘Special Circumstances’ by Sheldon Siegel.
Through this book they might get a better idea of what some of these ‘charitable trusts are about.
What a pity, I used to think highly of this man some time ago, but not for many years now.