Does Joseph Muscat actually understand the terrible thing he’s done here?
Was Joseph Muscat daft enough to believe that there would be no reaction?
Or is he still a Super One reporter?
Was Joseph Muscat daft enough to believe that there would be no reaction? Or, more stupidly still, that the de Marcos would be so busy getting upset at Richard Cachia Caruana’s remarks made around 16 years ago that they would overlook getting furious at the Labour Party for its current insinuation that Guido de Marco – who is deceased and cannot reply – was implicated in the murder attempt.
Does the Labour Party fully understand – or understand at all – just how serious this is? Muscat is such trash.
NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE – not as Opposition leader and certainly, definitely not as prime minister. And just look at the ‘One News’ response – as though they’re not the Labour Party and faffing around pretending to be a media organisation without a Moviment Bla Isem attached.
This when the registered editor for One News is none other than Kurt ‘The Coconut’ Farrugia, the Labour Party’s communications coordinator and the man who issues their farcical press statements and press releases.
Their approach to doing things is like that of evil boy scouts.
timesofmalta.com – Wednesday, July 18, 2012, 16:19
DE MARCO FAMILY HITS OUT AT PL AND ITS MEDIA OVER ‘OBSCENE AND IRRESPONSIBLE’ CLAIMS
– One News replies
The family of late President Emeritus Guido de Marco said in a statement today that they strongly deplored the “obscene and irresponsible” way how the Labour Party through One News and Maltastar had tried to implicate Prof de Marco in the attempted murder of Richard Cachia Caruana.
Mrs Violet de Marco and her children Giannella, Fiorella and Mario noted that Mr Cachia Caruana himself had categorically denied the allegations made by One News and Maltastar about Prof de Marco.
As Mr Cachia Caruana had himself declared: “it is shocking and inconceivable for anyone to suggest that I could have ever believed that Nationalist ministers were involved and that I had continued to work with them.”
The family said the actions of the Labour Party were slanderous to their collective memory and showed that the Labour Party did not even respect the memory of a person who was deceased.
The family reserved the right to take legal action, including criminal libel, against the leaders of the Labour Party, One News and Maltastar for this obscene and shameful attempt to slander the memory of Prof Guido de Marco for their partisan political purposes.
ONE NEWS STATEMENT
In a reply, One News said they understood that, for political reasons, the de Marco family could not attack Mr Cachia Caruana.
It said that the recording of what Mr Cachia Caruana said about the late Prof. de Marco and his children was broadcast in full and nothing that had been said was denied.
The de Marco family, One News said, knew that the One stations had always respected Prof. de Marco’s work in the several roles he filled.
13 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Tafu tirragunaw!
WHO exactly “implicated” Guido de Marco? One News merely reported on the recording, and since it did not misrepresent what was said, that’s as far as its responsibility goes: it exposed the (idiotic and neurotic) utterances of a public person. If anything is “obscene” it emerges from the recording itself.
[Daphne – Go back to serving drinks to Jeffrey, Kevin. Or does Sharon do that? Super One and the Labour Party did something worse: say outright that Richard Cachia Caruana implicated Guido de Marco in the attempt on his life. Twist it as much as you like. The photographs of Jeffrey Pullicino partying with your wife and her lousy brother are there to stay.]
Iddawwariex kev, did-darba qazzuha.
Kev, have you turned to Super One for your conspiracy news now?
Kevvy, getting it wrong as usual.
Nothing in that recording shows that Guido de Marco was implicated – or don’t you know the meaning of the word?
You’ve picked up Super One’s inept interpretation – no surprises there – that Cachia Caruana said Guido de Marco had an active role in orchestrating the murder attempt when he clearly said no such thing.
And he pretends to be intelligent.
Actually, no one implicated de Marco in the attempted murder per se. That was the PN’s spin on Labour’s spin.
But did you listen to the whole audio or are you shooting from the hip as usual?
RCC says he has NO DOUBT that what happened was a consequence of a comment that de Marco made to Col. Maurice Calleja: http://youtu.be/0okk0cG0Hxs (it’s at the very end).
So, do get your heads straight, because to people who investigate rationally you lot look like a bunch of competing twerps.
Well, I would be neurotic if someone tried to kill me and the murderer is still at large.
Pretty lame debating skills there, Daphne. But then you wouldn’t really be Daphne, would you?
I replied to your alter ego, La Redoute, further down. That should settle it. If not, climb a high turret with a pair of binoculars.
[Daphne – La Redoute is not my alter ego. It’s a real person.]
I know that. Does ‘doppelganger’ sound better? Birds of a very same feather? Identical mindset?
Indeed, she’s your alter ego.
Assuming it’s a she, of course. At times I sense the vibes of an insecure male dressed up as a… well, La Redoute. So grandiose it’s grotesque.
[Daphne – You make the mistake of thinking that everyone who writes idiomatic English, punctuates and thinks clearly is me. I suppose I should feel flattered, but strangely, I do not.]
It is obvious that it can only be the prime minister who requests a brigadier’s resignation, when that brigadier is head of the armed forces and answerable only to the prime minister.
But that’s not really the point which should be at issue. It is this: should be have resigned? Of course he should have. His son and daughter were caught with a kilo of cocaine in his – not their – house.
If Brigadier Calleja was reluctant to resign, then he was wrong, and the prime minister was right to insist. If Guido de Marco really told him ‘you did nothing wrong’, then that was not correct, because it was not a matter of the brigadier doing right or wrong, but of him being seriously compromised by his children’s very serious drug-dealing activities. His son went down for 15 years for that cocaine deal.
I can repeatedly trust the PN administration’s judgment in most areas that matter to me. That is what I care about.
Can the MLP ever be trusted for its judgment? Would a Labour prime minister have let a head of the armed forces stay on despite drug deals taking place in his house by his children?
Going by what the Labour Party said then and how it is behaving now with its resurrection of this story, I think that yes, it would have allowed Brigadier Calleja to stay on, especially since he is one of their own.
I would not trust these people to clean my cesspit. That makes two of us.
I do not see what political advantage Labour could have taken out of this episode.
There were all the ingredients to turn people angry from this event. Dr. De Marco is highly respected on both sides of the political divide, making this attempt a complete suicide.
After so many years in opposition, PL haven’t learnt anything. They need not say anything to get in power.
If they show some fundamental respect and morals without slandering third parties (let alone a highly respected x president who is deceased) they would automatically get in power.
The more they speak with elections getting closer the more they distance themselves from the people. But after all these are the true colours of a party which needs a much bigger change than the PN.
The Moviment Bla Isem reminds me of the German football team of the past 30 years. They always start an international competition so well organised and play so well but when they get to the final places they always lose, sometimes even against a team which the odds would have been given as losers.
The exact words used by One TV were as follows:
“One svela li Richard Cachia Caruana semmgha zewg ministri li kellhom x’jaqsmu mal- attentat ta’ qtil fuqhu….”
“Iz-zewg ministri implikati huma Lawrence Gatt and ex president Guido De Marco…..”
“One news semmgha lil Richard Cachia Caruana innifsu jimplika lil- Lawrence Gatt ta l-attentat fuqhu.”
The words were clear and “jimplika” means “involvement in a crime” or ” bearing reponsibility for a crime”.
This telephone conversation was highly emotional provoked by an attempt on Richard Cachia Caruan’s life. One has to get the whole picture and analyse this conversation in its context.
Richard Cachia Caruana was backstabbed twice: physically in Mdina and then by Giannella Caruana Curran (de Marco) who was Meinrad Calleja’s defence lawyer before she was persuaded to drop the brief and her former partner Manuel Mallia took it over.
Although Dr Caruana Curran (de Marco) has a right to defend anyone she pleases, it was odd as this case was politically motivated and her father was deputy prime minister and a personal friend of Brigadier Calleja, besides being himself Meinrad Calleja’s former defence lawyer.
Richard Cachia Caruana was not responsible for Brigadier Calleja’s resignation. Richard Cachia Caruana was the secretary of the prime minister and the deputy prime minister was Giannella de Marco’s father.
If I were Giannella de Marco I would have refused to defend Meinrad Calleja, if not out of basic common decency then at least out of sound political sense. It would have been the least she could do to acknowledge Mr Cachia Caruana’s emotional hardship.