I am voicing my concerns again, since Mr Mark Micallef chose to re-phrase my letter in his own words by publishing an editorial in the Sunday Times of Malta instead, adding that I am suggesting the creation of a new blood bank, which I am not. More irritatingly, he didn’t mention a most important point that might have held my reasoning to obloquy: not that a migrant or two are given blood, but that a sizeable conflict involving a number of immigrants might empty the blood bank, which regularly appeals for donations. This could endanger the legitimate population.
Such are our current laws, drawn up before this invasion of illegal immigrants. “Chi bolla, sbolla” – laws are made by men and can be changed by men. This might seem disconcerting at first, but if one were to analyse all this in introspection, the logical ending would indicate that we are in a precarious situation. I am genuinely concerned about my nation, the dangers into which our negligence and compassion can lead us and the government’s in-action in the face of a dire calamity.
Imagine a possible scenario where a sizeable-conflict breaks out and multiple illegal immigrants need blood. Would it be responsible to exhaust our supply for their benefit and in so doing put all other ‘legal citizens’ at risk? This is the gist of my argument. We frequently hear about quarrels and even a judge used the term “tribal warfare” just a few months ago – I am not hallucinating! Most of these conflicts are not reported, although we’ve heard of one this week involving Marsa illegal immigrants looting their friends in Hal Far.
Therefore, sadly, it is indeed very possible that we may find ourselves the victims of our own equality policies. Who can discount the possibility of a natural disaster such as an earthquake, or a national emergency, say an aircraft crashing on a town or village, or violent rioting and whatnot? In such scenarios, wouldn’t you, a donor perhaps, distinguish between kith and kin and illegal immigrants who, knowingly and willingly, breached our border laws and have been given total immunity for their criminal acts by this clement government, without your approval?
Is it not understood that one per cent of our present population is made up of illegal immigrants that have become a significant drain on all national resources, blood supplies included? Taking into consideration the fact that this percentage will multiply very soon (those who visit Mater Dei can testify to this), we are dealing with a very large number of people. Imagine if one per cent of the population is positive to HIV or even suffering from flu. Would that not be considered an epidemic? A blood bank is a precious and limited life-or-death commodity and it is the government’s dragging of its feet and infantile proposals such as “burden sharing” that has led us to such a situation. Simon Busuttil himself called “burden sharing” a “joke”. In the meantime, we are enduring this burden and, as Mr Micallef quoted, lives can be jeopardised: Maltese lives! Until concrete decisions are taken, and the crisis is rectified, we have to take into consideration, first and foremost, the health of those who, through their taxes, defray the costs of maintaining Mater Dei, as well as the welcome tourists.
Someone pointed out that illegal immigrants might be donating blood. This is entirely possible, though highly improbable. I would like to point out that, according to Mr C. Barbara (chairman of Pathology and a respected person), the “parasite community”, that one per cent of inhabitants, are directly responsible for half the HIV cases in Malta. Moreover, since most illegal immigrants are coming from Africa, where unprotected sex is a standard practice, it might be that in some cases they would not be allowed to donate.
My rationale is neither racist nor xenophobic, as claimed by a few quibbling and blabbering ‘Christian’ people. It’s not racist, because ‘illegal immigration’ does not concern one particular race and not xenophobic, because I believe that all welcome tourists should benefit equally.
Some maintain that blood can never be given according to race, religion or belief, political inclination and the like, and I categorically commend that. However, I say again that illegal immigrants are criminals, who planned and then entered our country illegally. That should not grant them an automatic right to benefit from our limited life-or-death blood supplies, even in ‘tribal war’ circumstances. I blame the government for failing to stop illegal immigration and for
letting it become first a problem, then a worry and then, inevitably, a crisis.
And the so-called ‘Opposition’ is also to blame. During the EU referendum campaign they instilled fear by saying that Sicilians would come to Malta and deprive us of our jobs. Who eventually came to Malta, who are taking our jobs and who are straining all our resources? The Opposition is silent in the face of all this: a complete U-turn indeed!
The government, which is responsible for the current situation, should find a remedy. The ‘intellectuals’, however, who are more popular than qualified, and are devoid of ideas and ideals as to how to deal with the problem, simply moan and groan with the EU and proffer ‘jokes’. Stopping illegal immigrants in international waters is one solution, but this has to be backed up by an immediate repatriation programme, just as Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando has suggested. He was elbowed out by his own timorous party which, instead of recognising the looming crises of illegal immigration, wanted to seem politically correct. And so the influx continued – and will continue, and so will the number of children they bear.
In this scenario, I cannot but insist on first and foremost safeguarding my own people. No, I do not want my own donated blood to be squandered on illegal immigrants, most of whom had the gall to shriek and plead by satellite phones to be saved, obliging us to send our people miles out to sea to recover them. I feel I am within my rights to ask that, especially when stocks are low, my donations are for my fellow people and those whom we welcome here. Had the immigration problem been tackled seriously, we would not be facing a crisis and playing host to hundreds of illegal immigrants. And such a stance, on my part, would not have been necessary in the first case. People’s sentiments can no longer be damped and suppressed. As anger continues to mount, and injustice is painfully felt, thinking people are standing up to voice their honest concerns. The Prime Minister might decide to continue calling their concerns “racist and intolerant”. Whether this is sensible, fair or to be applauded, I leave the reader to decide.
May the smart alecs, who scorn me instead of my message, enjoy the same liberty and freedom to be able to comment against and deprecate others with whom, despite all truisms, they disagree.
That is my view. And there the matter stands.
A. Spiteri