A "prudent" trip to Libya

Joseph Muscat, who had told us that Malta should be "prudent" and "not take sides" during the Libyan crisis, recently visited the National Transitional Council in Libya. "We elevated Malta's reputation", we were told. It is more likely that the aim of the visit was rather to restore his reputation with the Libyans, considering he was one of the few, if not the only, Opposition Leader in Europe to criticize the government for "not being prudent" and condemning Gaddafi, even if this happened after the adoption of a UN resolution which allowed member states to use "all necessary measures" to protect Libyan civilians.

Yes, this visit was necessary because he needed to apologize for having insisted that we should "not take sides but assist the fighters", never specifying which fighters we were meant to assist (maybe the ones shelling hospitals and bombing civilians?), two weeks after the adoption of the UN resolution. (Because we have to be "neutral" you see, and for some that means closing our eyes to anything happening around us).

He needed to apologize for the editorial on Maltastar (Labour's official news site) which had criticized Gonzi "for rushing to say Gaddafi should step down."

And probably, he also needed to apologize on behalf of George Vella who till last September was still criticizing Gonzi for having made a declaration condemning Gaddafi without, according to him, "having considered enough the business interests Malta held." (Because of course, business interests come before human rights.) In any case, business interests have improved considerably thanks also to the government's clear stand in assisting the NTC, co-ordinating humanitarian assistance, and condemning Gaddafi's regime.

But we all know that Labour's consistent position under Muscat is to sit on the fence and be "prudent" about everything. And we are slowly understanding what "prudent" means: something like promising the issuing of permits to developers while telling environmentalists that the same permits will not be issued.

Prudence: first it was fear of losing some friends just in case they stay in power, now it is fear of losing some votes if we happen to take some clear stands.

Comments

Who's the real monster?

I usually hate comparisons, but some very different reactions from the 'great unthinking' rabble do merit some analysis. In May this year, the notorious dog Star was found buried alive . A prima facie , this looked liked the most horrific case of animal cruelty, and is still considered so by some. The perpetrator was described by the sensitive and caring animal-lovers as a villain, a heartless monster, deserving of death, stoning, or even to be 'buried alive in the same manner'. But what did Mr. Vella actually do, according to the testimony heard in Court? Star was sick. It was shedding fur, and quite old already, and its owner did not afford the treatment. In trying to save some money from paying for the dog to be put to sleep and killed properly by vets, she gave it to Mr. Vella to have it killed himself. Nothing much to make people angry till now. Mercy-killing of very sick and suffering animals is widely done and usually acceptable. You may

Shema Yisrael, the cries of the Palestinian people

You live a peaceful life in a modest home. You've never bothered anyone and you've never caused trouble. Out of the blues, a group of people claim that they should live in your house. Why? Because they have been persecuted in a war, and they claim that some 5,000 years ago, their God had told them your home was their promised land. Somehow, the whole community agrees with their wishes, and asks you to grant them your spare-bedroom. You oblige. After a few months, they take the whole top-floor. In a few year's time, they take over your kitchen. After a few more years, they own your house and keep you and your family locked in the bathroom. They don't even allow you to get out, while they strip-search you the few times they do. Even if it's a medical emergency. Sometimes not even medical personnel and ambulances are allowed to see to your needs while your children die in your hands. Desperation starts hitting you. Life seems to offer no hopes. In moments

Why I am dropping out of the Anti-ACTA protest

Like many avid internet users, I have followed with interest the debate about ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). After reading numerous articles, watched sensational videos, and discussed ad nauseam with friends, I have realized that what I have come across is a campaign hi-jacked by lies, myths and misconceptions as to rival Malta's misinformed divorce referendum campaign. I have to say that the videos on Youtube got me worried. I quickly signed the petition, joined the Anti-ACTA groups, and prepared myself for a full-blown fight against the big-governments who want to intrude on our privacy and freedom of expression. Like our MEP Edward Scicluna invited us to do in the University debate last Wednesday, I did not try to understand the details of ACTA but rather saw who the players behind it were. But as usual, my logical instincts took over, and his call to not try to understand ACTA actually pushed me to read the text. And here's what I now know: ACTA is

Mark Anthony Sammut

Search This Blog