A serialised long post intended to reassure readers that while we normally let sleeping dogs lie there is no reason to believe that we are reluctant to call a spade a spade.
N.B. To be read in doses. Reminder to Daphne-lites: You are free not to read on. On the other hand the breaking down into parts of this post is intended to facilitate cutting and pasting for better presentation while posting in other blogs’ comment sections.
I
The intellectual standards of this too-complicated-for-plebs blog do not normally allow us (the Royal We for Wankellectuals) to descend into the pits of mud-slinging that can be discovered daily in other quarters of the Maltese blogging world.
Back in 2007 J’accuse (6 on the 10th of March) had a tough time moderating the bitching and haggling in the comment section. Having realised belatedly the usefulness of the new media (thanks to the eyeopening sessions on J’accuse in mid-election campaign) some of those commentators went on to open blogs of their own… perpetuating their inimitable style developed in the comment section.
II
That was then. Meanwhile, we remained happy to discuss politics and not people, ideas and not looks, values not prejudices – all the while observing the development of the use of the new media. We continued to ask questions – in particular with regards to different parts of the Fourth Estate. Others chose what a colleague of mine called the Slash and Burn style of journalism – and got their accolades from their acolytes.
Today, I feel obliged to put up this post after a sincere demonstration of concern by readers who via e-mails and phone calls wondered whether I would ever reply to what appears to be a sudden fixation by Daphne Caruana Galizia on what she calls a “Class A Wanker” (actually she claims to have called me so several times bah… sticks, stones and girls in a playground).
III
I would normally have no time to check the lesser side of her blog – the Runs – having long abandoned any hope of finding any intelligent conversation by the various aliases. I have no problem with checking Daphne’s daily postings because I cannot honestly expect to comment on the internet news without taking into account other blogger’s points of view and slants on the news. I have no time to waste on the ramblings of the Daphne-lites in the comments section though and were it not for the signalling by J’accuse readers and a sudden mention in a post attacking an article by Saviour Balzan (but mainly based on the usual “guilt by association” approach – more on this later) I would not have noticed the revival of the DCG fixation.
It transpires that a few Daphne-lites have been stoking the columnist’s easily flammable temper by posting interesting observations about myself or my blog. It also turns out that Daphne is stupid enough to think that I would actually post on her blog with an alias. I have never hidden behind an alias and never will. What did happen – as I confirmed by using common sense and a bit of research – is that a person who commented regularly on this blog (using his first name to boot), and who is based in Luxembourg, started to do so on Daphne’s (using the same first name).
The paranoid reaction to the endless nit-picking by this particular commentator was to send him back to “his own blog” to play. Yawn-inducing paranoia had come into play.
IV
Daphne and the Daphne-lites have a fixation with the unreadability of this blog. Incredibly they also have a knack of referring to it constantly. Does that classify as irony? Sadly for the rent-a-crowd in that corner of the net J’accuse shows no signs of abating and remains a steady reference point for the more balanced approach to analysing current affairs. (Did I mention that we turn 6 on the 10th of March?).
Of course our analysis might not always fit in to the jigsaw puzzle of the World as Seen from the Runs. Here are a few (unanswered) examples:
- PLATEGATE or Why Now? Part 1: J’accuse was the ONLY presence in any part of the press asking the most pertinent question in the Daphne Caruana Galizia vs Consuelo Scerri Herrera saga. If Daphne had collected such a wealth of information over a long period of time alleging inappropriate behaviour by a Magistrate … what prompted her to start blogging about it? Why did she choose that particular moment? Was it so hard to admit that it had nothing to do with civic conscience or journalistic probity? WHY NOW?
- RAYMOND CARUANA or Why Now? Part 2: Almost a year passed and we had a similar situation. DCG upped the ante on Illum journalist Julia Farrugia. Suddenly more than 25 years after the actual facts DCG developed an acute sense of journalistic investigation and went on a whole trip piecing publicly available information together to develop a story. What you think about the story is irrelevant. Daphne’s timing is not. It is irresponsible to say the least. But very typical of journalism that is not at the service of the public and the truth. It is journalism at the service and use of private means and ends. I don’t buy the stories of Daphne being some poodle to RCC or some other masters bidding her to do this and that. What I do read is a very unprofessional and unethical application of journalistic skill. Why now indeed?
- JPO: Funny how JPO is now accusing Daphne in court (under oath) of being a slave to political masters – ready to do some spin damage at their beck and call. J’accuse can vouch that Daphne was busy insulting anyone who dared criticise crocodile tear Jeffrey during the Mistra saga. She backed the nationalist party’s outright defence of the man even in such instances when he was given a press card to ask questions to Alfred Sant. Press decency my backside… the imperative was save Jeffrey… save the party. Especially from people who were “setting themselves up as objects of hate”… yep this was the time when Daphne heaped insults on anyone who dared propose that the PL/PN option was a blind, valueless cul-de-sac…. we would be vindicated come the divorce issue (among others).. but hey what counted was the character assassination at the time.
V
Taste. Daphne is big on guilt by association and character assassination. Who will ever forget the “zokk u fergha” campaign? Just look now at the Mintoff-Labour-Gaddafi saga as Daffers turns into a one-woman CNN of sorts reporting such great events as which flag is flying over the Libyan embassy in between harassing Graffiti poster carriers in wolf-in-sheeps’ clothing outfit.
The Saviour Balzan post referred to above was a clumsy attempt at throwing a number of perceived “nasties” together. Here’s the list of persons supposedly manning the barricades in some imagined revolution :
Salvu Balzan, Roger de Giorgio, JPO, the Prisoner of Zenda from Brussels, Matthew Vella, Al Jazeera Stagno Navarra, Choccies Benoit, Josanne Cassar, Secret Weapon Astrid, Julia tal-Guy, Charlon ta’ Albertown, xi Claire Bonello max-shag ta’ Norman Lowell, Ronnie Pellegrini, David Friggieri and Jacques Rene Zammit. Jason Micallef will man the field hospital and the Communications Coconut can be used to sneak messages below the radar across AnAmy lines. Don’t forget to take Reno Calleja with you, my dears, u xi AST ukoll ghax dak espert kbir fir-regimes. U jekk ghandkom bzonn xi covert operative, tinsewx li ghandkom il-Guy tat-Tunny Net.
Hospitals, covert operatives, regimes… jeez imagination does run wild at night doesn’t it? Oh Well, should our revolution ever need a kitchen stocked with such WMDs as crockery of the finest kind we know who to turn to don’t we?
In one fell swoop Jacques René Zammit is equal to Reno Calleja is equal to Ronnie Pellegrini is equal to Roger Degiorgio etc etc. It’s obvious. If you haven’t swallowed the “blog is unreadable” line then you might as well believe that Jacques Zammit, Reno Calleja, AST and Franco Farrugia (another one bandied around who I do not know from Adam) have one and the same objective.
Anybody who knows me or any of the above would know that this couldn’t be further from the truth. Daphne is more comfortable avoiding subjects such as Plategate or constructive criticism of the faults in our representatives operation and chooses to build on the guilt by association. The frenetic, paranoid attempt at bunching everyone who she disagrees with into one caricatured bundle is much easier on the mind of her readers anyway.
That way she can let fire with the Wanker or unmarried or nerd or whatever she perceives as the latest trendy insult…
VI
So yes. We’ve taken some time to look at why Daphne has suddenly worried our readers with a few gratuitous insults aimed our way.
Read my lips (or my characters):
Jacques René Zammit has never insulted Daphne Caruana Galizia.
I have criticised her modus operandi. I have criticised her argument but I have NEVER insulted the person.
There must be something to be read in the fact that Daphne Caruana Galizia has never replied to any of the critical arguments posited here and elsewhere. If the answer, like her friend Lou’s is that she does not read the blog… that it is boring …it still does not explain the insults. If you chose to take note of criticism then you might as well have the decency to reply with counterarguments. Insults or character attacking with guilt by association does not help.
Don’t get me wrong. Insult as much as you like.. after all it is a free world and I am fully aware of the heat and kitchen argument. It’s just that it is good for readers to know where the insults are coming from and what they are all about. It goes without saying that the level of insults, inventions and character assassination attempts will be expected to increase over the coming days.
I’ll do my damn best not to bother much with anything coming my way from that corner of the net and I kindly ask readers to do the same. J’accuse goes on with its publish and be damned approach at blogging.
This wankellectual is almost done. Now for the finale… the answer you have all been waiting for:
VI
What is the difference between John Galliano and Daphne Caruana Galizia?
One tends to dress weirdly, hurl abusive insults in what sounds like an alcoholic rage and has a funny moustache when all made up…
… the other was fired by Dior.
When they say let sleeping dogs lie… it doesn’t mean you have to allow them to twist the truth. – J’accuse 2011
ADDENDUM: Note to TYOM people. You will inevitably reproduce this post because it deals with your pet hate. I know it is useless “forbidding” you to do so because what is good for the goose is good for the gander but if you do so then also have the decency to publish this addendum:
J’accuse DOES NOT and WILL NEVER endorse, support or in any way agree with TYOM, its content or its style.This kind of site can only be a disservice to the idea of proper use of new media and to the proper development of political discussion.
Related articles
