A piece by Alfred Mifsud, ‘Friday Wisdom: Throwing stones’, (TMID, 23 October), sounded more like Friday boredom than wisdom to me!
‘One can take the boy out of the country, but you cannot take the country out of the boy.’
Mr Mifsud sounded more of an apologist for the Labour Party than an independent commentator of this paper. In that case he should say so outright.
To begin with, “expressed regret” does not equal an apology and Joseph’s feeble attempt at satisfying even the most naive failed miserably. One does not state facts and at the same time use them as an apology. He just quoted the obvious and, in this case, to both Labourites and Nationalists and all those in between.
No one expects Joseph to as much as scrape his knees. As a matter of fact everyone expects Joseph to stand like a man, get himself and his party to apologise for the deeds of 30 years ago and get it over with. But Joseph refuses to stand up and be counted, very much as his predecessor who never had any regrets.
On the one hand, Mr Mifsud describes Mintoff as having “either allowed them (the abysmal events) to happen or was careless or powerless in not preventing them”. Quite an indictment! But wait! Barely two paragraphs down, Mr Mifsud continues, “But being the strong leader he was .....” What is it going to be, Alfred, Mintoff the powerless who allowed the abysmal events to happen or the “strong leader” who had enough power to prevent them? Is this a typical ‘having it either way’ type of argument?
Mintoff’s achievements (1947-1979), “need no recital”, Mr Mifsud continues. Every coin has two sides, therefore while Mr Mifsud chose not to recite Mintoff’s achievements during this particular period in time, I shall not make a huge list of his failures; however, Mintoff was exceptionally successful in dividing the country, a malady which affects us to this day. It would be grossly unfair to blame the other side for defending its principles and for resisting an untenable situation which just barely missed becoming guerrilla warfare.
The forces (as listed) working against the Labour Party were forces which realised how precarious democracy under the MLP would have been and time has proven them right. While Mr Mifsud describes the problems in 1958 as “forces of liberation against their foreign occupier”, he forgets that Mintoff was trying to integrate Malta with its one and only ‘occupier’! Incredible! Also, what does attacking police stations and vandalising vehicles at the shipyards, some being thrown into the docks, have to do with ‘liberalisation’?
Thank heavens that between 1962 and 1971 “violence was no issue”! No, it was preparation time for what was to follow and proves that under a Nationalist administration, the principles are negotiation and compromise not confrontation and catastrophes.
No other prime minister before or after Mintoff (and KMB) found it necessary to establish a ‘republic guard’. One wonders why! And for the Republican Guard to run out of control (as did the Police Force) points to a cowardly approach by the highest administration, letting the ‘guard’ loose to execute their dirty jobs while maintaining a deceptively ‘clean image’!
A favourite counter-excuse well used by the Labour Party sympathisers is the case of Karin Grech whose cold case is tentatively reopened from time to time and one hopes that someone with a half decent conscience will come forward with some useful clue, leading to the arrest of the culprit(s). But why use Karin Grech in order to sow doubt that maybe, just maybe, a Nationalist did it? Is this not somewhat similar to what Alfred Sant tried to do with regard to Gunner Psaila?
If Alfred Mifsud was prompted to write his comments following the 30th anniversary of the burning of The Times, then let me remind him that this incident was not an isolated one for which the MLP could somehow be excused for not being on guard for one short afternoon. The Labour Party has much more to apologise for and it has to be the leader and the party with a joint declaration and apology which the public still awaits, some thirty years after the fact. Shall we continue to hold our breath?
No, Joseph, you don’t have to kneel and nobody will throw stones at you, this is 2009 not 1979! But please stand tall like a man and truly do what’s right, without ifs or buts, and let us all throw flowers at you, not rocks!
J Martinelli
London, Ontario
Canada