Cannabis – A Gateway to Hell?

A few days ago Parliament approved legislation regulating the legalisation of cannabis. The protestations of rehabilitation experts, professionals and other concerned bodies – and later their suggestions to mitigate the effects of the proposed measures - were totally ignored. The government which in 2012 had solemnly promised to listen has, nine years later, contracted some severe sort of age-related hearing loss and become stone-deaf. 

Many are asking what will happen now. None of us is endowed with precognitive powers, so what the future really holds is a mystery. However, the highly-educated guess of most of my colleagues, who are more knowledgeable about drug-related matters than I am, is that the doomsday scenarios envisaged by some, featuring thousands of our fellow-countrymen becoming enslaved to the devil weed and streets replete with mindless zombies staggering about (I exaggerate, but you get my drift), are the stuff of comic-books, and not tomorrow’s reality.

So, no end-times panoramas but plenty of negative outcomes not to look forward to: an increase in use, a smallish rise in the number of cannabis dependent-individuals, some further cases of cannabis-related psychosis and quite possibly higher numbers of drug-induced accidents (some of which will result in death) both at the work-place and on the roads. There will be the inevitable irresponsible idiots who will grow/smoke the stuff at home and not exercise due control over their children. Possibly the most underrated effect of all is that recovering addicts will find it harder to resist the lure of relapse with cannabis becoming more easily and widely available. All avoidable problems and heartaches.

There of course will be inevitable positive effects as a result of the new the legislative regime: trafficking will be quite substantially reduced (though it will never die out, in much the same way as the contraband of cigarettes and alcohol persists), a small proportion of police resources can be diverted elsewhere, and the quality of the cannabis sold will improve.

All in all, we would have been considerably better off with a tweaking of the legislative framework to ensure more comprehensive decriminalisation rather than the virtual legalisation and normalisation of cannabis use. Experts have tried to warn the government, but Robert Abela’s outfit apparently does not suffer wise men – or women - gladly.

Doubtlessly within a few months, the hullabaloo surrounding this bill will die down and the process of mainstreaming of the substance will be smoothly completed with the (few) casualties quietly buried and hospitalised with the other victims of life. 

However, on another level after Tuesday’s vote, life may never be the same again. The enactment of this legislation has signalled another psychological milestone - a crossing of a mental Rubicon, as it were. In much the same way as divorce paved the way for the legal sanctioning of behaviour and attitudes deemed to fall within the realm of civil rights, and many people - previously opposed to civil unions, adoption by same-sex couples and same-sex marriages - just accepted their enactment without a murmur, so the legalisation of cannabis may unleash a spate of “reforms’’ previously undreamt of among us, which will also receive Parliamentary approval.

How long will it take for the argument to be brought up that, now that  cannabis is legal, it is discriminatory for users of heroin and cocaine to be prosecuted for carrying small(ish) amounts of their drug of choice and that society would be better off with these substances being brought into the mainstream and regulated, just like dope? If objections to the fact that legalisation will quite likely result in increased use of cannabis had no effect on the executive and our legislators, why should the esteemed ladies and gentlemen (go away, Commissioner Dalli) be swayed by the same argument in relation to coke and smack? Does anyone honestly think that cocaine and heroin will be not liberalised, in more or less the same way cannabis has been, fairly soon?

The government (or at least those elements within it evidently bent on transforming our country into a liberal ‘paradise’ where most things, include some hitherto considered immoral, go) has already chosen to tread the path conveniently paved by the divorce referendum. The gate to this paradise has been pushed open even further by yet another triumph of the liberal lobby – and the dismantling of another set of psychological barriers to changes so far deemed shocking by most of us.

Many are afraid that one of  items on the 'liberal' agenda is something even more sinister than the legalisation of coke and heroin with all their lethal consequences. What was inconceivable even a decade ago is now, if not quite at the door, certainly this side of the horizon. The great fear for those of us who consider human life to be the primary value is that some time with the next few years abortion will, in some shape or form, be introduced.

Of course, just like cannabis, and other ‘reforms’ the killing of human life in the womb will not appear in any electoral manifesto as a clear and solemn promise. Rather, an ambiguous reference to a “discussion’’ will quite likely be made as per the tried and tested blueprint. Proposal 16 of Section 16 of the PL’s 2017 Manifesto stated that “the next step is to start a discussion […] about the use of cannabis for recreational purposes.’’

Any reasonable individual would have interpreted that phrase as meaning that there would be a discussion about WHETHER to introduce legislation legalising pot. Instead, right from the off, we were presented with the intention to introduce the legislation and were most generously offered the possibility to discuss HOW to introduce it. Commissioner Dalli can now smugly enjoy another gloat at our expense.

Robert Abela who had stated he would oppose anybody who sought to introduce abortion, recently made very clear noises about a “discussion’’ about abortion although, in fairness, he also mentioned the need to uphold the rights of unborn human life.

The nightmare scenario: this “discussion’’ will be mentioned in the 2022 Electoral Manifesto in roughly the same terms as the proposal to hold a discussion on cannabis. And do you know what? Voters will not give a blind bit of notice to the implications of that promise. What with the economy still apparently doing well and the Partit Nazzjonalista looking like a badly-rehearsed vaudeville act, the PL will be resoundingly returned. And then the ‘discussion’ will start...

The notion that cannabis is a gateway drug may have been practically debunked in so far as the conceptualisation of the addiction itinerary is concerned, but in the Maltese context the legalisation of the drug may yet prove to be the gateway to a horrendously and hellishly bloody future.

I hope to God I’m wrong.

Sue Arnold's Change of Heart

Sue Arnold is a highly-respected British journalist with liberal views. When I lived in the UK during the early '80s I, along with tens of thousands of others, was a devotee of her weekly column in The Observer. Although almost four decades have gone by, I still remember vividly the Sunday she sprang the news on an unsuspecting readership that she was virtually blind due to a genetic eye condition called Retinitis Pigmentosa.

Occasionally she smoked cannabis. In 1997, she published an article  in the Observer revealing that she had smoked ‘skunk’ at a dinner party. Skunk is the most potent form of cannabis available, and Sue's eyesight had improved dramatically for the short period she was under its influence. Unfortunately for her, the joint also had an inebriating effect, rendering her ‘legless’ and almost unable to speak.          http://cdnedge.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/212301.stm

Not surprisingly, Arnold became a vociferous champion for the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes, initially campaigning for research to be done to isolate the cannabinoid which gave her back her eyesight for those few precious minutes, from the rest of  tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) which produces the stoning effect. Eventually, she broadened the scope of her articulate support for a change in attitudes to the legalisation of cannabis for both therapeutic and recreational purposes.

As is well known, the British Government was, at the time, planning to downgrade cannabis from a Class B to a Class C drug (on the same level as steroids and sedatives). Initially this would have meant that personal use would no longer make one liable to prosecution. But the medical establishment and drug workers warned that the effect of this move would be an increase in drug use, with all the consequences this would entail. Stung by the strength of the reaction, the British Government had decided to go ahead with the downgrading, but continued to consider possession of cannabis illegal.

All those who had been following the debate about the decriminalisation of cannabis expected Sue Arnold to come out with a partial endorsement of the proposals to liberalise the law. But, on the 18th January 2004, Arnold wrote an article in the Observer announcing that she was no longer in favour of the use of cannabis. What had brought about the astounding change of heart was the damage cannabis had wreaked on something more precious to her than her own eyesight: the well-being of one of her sons.

Some years before, this young man had suffered a psychotic episode precipitated by the use of cannabis. He had spent six months in a psychiatric facility in England, and had been discharged on medication which, the family was told,  he would probably have to remain on for the rest of his life. Sue Arnold had seen for herself that those who warned about the serious ill-effects of cannabis were not simply reactionary killjoys bent on maintaining a repressive legal regime unnecessarily, but had very solid arguments to back up their stance http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/jan/18/drugsandalcohol.society

The belief that besides increasing the chances of contracting lung cancer and emphysema, cannabis use can be responsible for triggering psychosis in susceptible individuals has gained momentum. Researchers at Yale University have concluded that THC can produce a psychotic reaction. years ago, Dr. Robin Murray, a senior psychiatrist at Maudsley Hospital warned that smoking dope can greatly increase one’s chances of becoming mentally ill - and can also aggravate existing psychotic symptoms. The Psychiatric Times has reviewed the evidence and concluded that in regions cannabis becomes more accessible, cases of cannabis-induced psychosis are expected to increase: Cannabis-Induced Psychosis: A Review (psychiatrictimes.com).

How can we ever express our gratitude, Robert Abela? Owen Bonnici deserves a monument. Come next Republic Day, the cannabis lobby should be collectively decorated.

In Malta, the lobby for the relaxation of the laws regulating cannabis possession and use has won the day. Dope’s apparent and relative harmlessness, the difficulty to enforce the law (as evidenced by the widespread use of the drug among the young and not so young), and personal freedom are presented as arguments for its legalisation. But the inevitable rise in consumption of cannabis - when it becomes legal - and the dangers it poses to mental health, for at least a proportion of users, should have made us think twice before we let ourselves be convinced by the glib arguments of the ‘liberal’ lobby and the government's thirst for revenue - and votes.

At the very least, the government should take on the board the 53 NGOs' recommendations.

We do not have to go through Sue Arnold’s heartbreaking experience in order to realise what good sense dictates. Even at one second to midnight.

The British government has since reclassified cannabis as a class B drug.

Bernard u Emma u L-Abort. Imma anke Robert...

Jien membru ta l-grupp Abortion in Malta? Not in my Name!  M’iniex parti tal-amministrazzjoni, imma ili fih sa mill-bidu li twaqqaf. Nipprova nkun attiv kemm nista’. Dan li nqala’ dan l-aħħar ġegħelni nirrifletti. It-tħarbix jgħinni naħseb.

1. Meta sseħibt fih qatt u qatt ma immaġinajt li se jkun hemm fostna min se jsejħulu biex imur id-depot tal-Pulizija biex jagħti stqarrija fuq dak li kiteb fil-grupp. Imma ġraw ħafna affarijiet dan l-aħħar li qatt ma immaġinajna: żewġ anti-abortisti prominenti  qasmu x-xmara u kkampjaw ix-xatt l-ieħor, l-ex-PM li qabel l-2013 kien qalilna li hu kontra l-abort ftit xhur ilu qalilna li kkonverta u se jimpenja ruħu biex jiddaħħal f’Malta, il-PM li kien qalilna li jekk xi ħadd jipprova jdaħħal l-abort “isib lili kontrih’’ issa qed jgħid li hu favur diskussjoni u l-Kap il-ġdid tal-PN kważi malli tela’ qal li hu favur dibattitu (imbagħad benġilha li hu favur diskussjoni dwar kif ngħinu li-nisa tqal li għandhom id-diffikultà) approva l-kandidatura mal-partit ta’ persuna li hija apertament favur l-abort.

2. Fil-grupp kien hawn reazzjoni għal dawn l-avvenimenti kollha. L-aktar waħda qalila kienet għall-approvazzjoni ta’ Emma Portelli Bonnici mal-PN. Naħseb li kienet tnin ftit ftit bħal ma jiġri dejjem, li kieku Dr. Portelli Bonnici ma reġgħetx nefħet fuq il-ġamar billi marret u għamlet rapport lill-pulizija fuq qassis li, skont hi, kien uża kliem ta’ mibegħda fil-konfronti tagħħa fuq il-paġna tagħna. Ħafna ħaduha bi kbira (u mhux qed ngħid li għandhom raġun) li kandidata Nazzjonalista marret tirraporta qassis u l-biċċa l-kbira deher li kienu Nazzjonalisti pjuttost akkaniti, għalkemm mhux veru li kienu Nazzjonalisti biss.

3. Kien hemm din ir-reazzjoni qawwija għaliex – biex ma noqogħdux induru mal-lewża – ħafna minn dawk favur il-ħajja huma wkoll Nazzjonalisti. Hemm eluf ta’ Laburisti wkoll fost il-membri tal-grupp – u nies li daqqa jivvutaw naħa u daqqa oħra – imma l-biċċa l-kbira normalment jivvutaw lill-PN. Dawn assolutament ma ridux inniżżluha jirrappreżenta lill-Partit li huma jafuh li jitnebbaħ mill-valuri Nsara se jkun hemm min irid li l-liġi Maltija tippermetti l-qtil tal-ħajja umana fil-ġuf. Barra minn hekk, anke dawk li mhumiex marbuta mal-PN qed jirrealizzaw kemm huwa perikoluż li jkollok MP li, anke jekk il-partit ma jaqbilx, għandu s-setgħa li jintroduċi Private Members’ Bill u jekk isib appoġġ biżżejjed fil-kamra, f’temp ta’ ftit xhur insibu li l-qirda tal-ħajja fil-ġuf saret legali f’pajjiżna.

4. Ksaħna meta bdejna nisimgħu li xi nies mill-grupp (li jgħodd l-eluf kbar) kienu ssejħu d-depot. Waħħalna fir-rapport li Emma Portelli Bonnici kienet għamlet, imma wara ftit sirna nafu li hi kienet irrapurtat biss lil Fr. Andrew Borg. Il-pulizija, milli jidher, aġixxew ex-ufficio (jiġifieri minn jeddhom, mingħajr il-ħtieġa li jsir rapport) u, wara li qraw il-messaġġi f’ Abortion in Malta? Not in my name! sejħu madwar 40 (erbgħin!) ruħ. Uħud minn dawn  lanqas fejn sewwasew jiġi d-depot ma kienu jafu u għalkemm il-pulizija ttrattawhom tajjeb, l-esperjenza għal xi ftit kienet, tista’ tgħid, trawmatika.

5. Dan kollu – biex ngħidu kollox anke qabel ma l-membri tagħna ssejħu d-depot – naħsbu li daħħal lill-PN f’qoxortu. Bejn irrealizza li l-kandidatura ta’ persuna favur l-abort kienet se ttellef il-voti minflok, kif kien ħaseb Grech (forsi fuq parir tal-konsulenti) li se juri li l-partit huwa miftuħ anke għal ideat li sa ftit ilu kienu taboo assolut. L-interpretazzjoni ċinika hija li li għamlu kalkolu ta’ malajr u qiesu li se jitilfu aktar milli se jirbħu – u wara ftit Bernard Grech ħareġ jgħid li mhux sa jippermetti “li xi ħadd fil-Partit se ikun favur l-abort u jibqa’ fil- Partit, jew jibqa’ b’xi mod jirrapreżenta lill-Partit. M’hemmx post għal min mhux favur il-ħajja.’’ Daqqet ħelu f’widnejna. Mhux li smajnieha qabel, għidna – u fraħna. U minn fostna ħafna bdew jgħidu: Bernard Grech wera li hu ta’ prinċipju u ta’ stoffa, gwerrier li ma jibżax jieħu deċiżjonijiet ibsin imdawla mit-twemmin tal-partit li jmexxi.

6. Kienet ferħa bla temma. Instemgħet għajta ta’ ljun qalbieni li dwiet għal waqt wieħed kemm qajmet ġisem min semagħha xewk xewk, biex f’ħakka t’għajn l-iljun deher jirtira b’denbu bejn saqajh. Għandi viżjoni quddiem għajnejja (forsi żbaljata għal kollox) li l-consigliere kważi ġdid fjamant mar jiġri għandu il-Kap bir-reazzjoni tal-lobby tal-abortisti f’id waħda u l-calculator fl-oħra u wrieh li meta tqis kollox, aktarx ma jaqbilx li l-PN jżomm mal-prinċipju storiku u aħjar jekk jipproġetta x-xbiha tal-partit modern, cool u miftuħ għal kull żiffa, riħ jew riefnu jonfoħ min-naħa tas-suċċess elettorali – u kull ma jġibu magħhom. U mhux ħaġa kbira (jekk tassew ġara dak li stħajjilt) biex il-consigliere kważi ġdid fjamant , mogħmi bid-dawl jgħammex tal-ideat liberalissimi li jħaddan, għafas xi numru fil-calculator, jekk mhux tnejn, żbaljat. Għax hemm għadd ġmielu ta’ Nazzjonalisti, u oħrajn li kienu kważi ċerti li se jivvutaw lil Bernard & Co. li issa qegħdin jgħidu “Inżabbab mhux nivvota’’. U l-partiti l-ġodda li ma jistħux ixejru l-banner tal-ħajja jogħrku jdejhom.

7. L-amministraturi tal-grupp Abortion in Malta? Not in my name mill-ewwel daru ma’ dawk l-erbgħin ruħ li sfaw arrestati u lesti jipprovdulhom għajnuna legali –biċċa minnha ffinanzjata mill-membri tal-grupp – jekk il-pulizija jiddeċiedu li jipproċedu kontrihom. Esperjenza kerha, imma probabbli hija sinjal ta’ dak li hemm jisteniena fix-xhur u s-snin li ġejjin. Il-ġlieda se tiħrax hekk kif aktar nies qegħdin jinħakmu mill-kurrenti hekk-imsejħa liberali u jħaddnu t-twemmin suppost progressiv tal-jien-hu-alla-sidi. Qed ngħixu f’dinja fejn il-partit politiċi lesti jagħmlu l-kompromessi għall-voti – u fejn il-pressjoni minn barra minn Malta timbotta kontinwament għall-bidla fid-direzzjoni tas-sodifazzjon tal-istinti u għala bieb għajni mill-konsegwenzi.

8. Il-ħruxija tal-ġlieda m’għandha qatt taqtagħlna qalbna imma lanqas m’għandha twebbishielna tant li naraw lill-“avversarji’’ bħala xjaten. Hemm min qed jaqbeż il-linji u jwaddab l-insulti bl-addoċċ. Mhux dejjem qed issir id-differenza bejn l-argument favur l-abort (li hu mnellaħ mill-qalba u mnawwar mill-għeruq) u min jagħmel l-abort jew qed jiġġieled biex isir legali (li huma bnedmin bħalna, xbiha t’Alla għal min jemmen). Niġġieldu l-argument b’ħiltna kollha, imma lill-avversarji, bħala bnedmin, irridu nirrispettawhom.

Anke għal min jiġi jaqa’ u jqum mill-aspett “morali’, hemm liġi li tgħid li ċertu lingwaġġ ma jistax jintuża. Ma rridux ripetizzjoni talli ġara (anke jekk il-Pulizija esaġeraw bil-kbir meta sejħu d-Depot nies fuq kummenti tassew innoċenti). U jekk lanqas dan l-argument mhu konvinċenti biżżejjed, tajjeb niftakru li ma jaqbilx li lil dawk ta’ favur l-abort nagħtuhom iċ-ċans jilagħbuha tal-vittmi msawta bil-kitba ta’ “dawk ta’ favur il-ħajja’’. 

9. Aħna rridu nkunu moħħna hemm u ma ninsewx għal sekonda x’inhu l-aktar importanti. Bħalissa qed nisimgħu ħafna kliem sabiħ mill-membri tal-grupp favur il-prinċipji li nħaddnu, imma, kif toqrob l-elezzjoni, id-deni jibda jaħkem sew u, bl-iskuża li l-avversarji politiċi ma jixirqilhomx ikunu fil-Gvern, malajr ninsew li l-ħajja tiġi l-ewwel u qabel kollox u nċedu għat-tentazzjoni li nivvutaw skont il-passjoni politika u mhux skont il-prinċipji u l-valuri li nħaddnu u nippridkaw.

10. F’dawn l-aħħar jiem, bir-raġun kollu, il-ħarsa tagħna kienet fuq il-PN u Emma Portelli Bonnici. Fil-PN hemm nies prominenti oħra li huma wkoll favur l-abort (Martina Caruana, Jamie Vella). Ma jawgura tajjeb xejn għall-futur. Imma ma naħsbux li t-theddid għall-ħajja umana ġej minn hemm biss. Imċappas bl-aħmar ukoll; fil-PL hemm individwi mlaħħqa li huma favur l-abort: Cyrus Engerer u Alfred Sant, pereżemju. Imma hemm oħrajn li 99% huma wkoll tal-qatgħa ta’ Emma Portelli Bonnici, Jamie Vella, Martina Caruana eċċ. Pereżempju Rosianne Cutajar.  U l-enfasi fuq ''id-drittijiet riproduttivi'' (ħafna drabi ewfemiżmu għall-abort) jagħtuk x'tifhem li hemm oħrajn....

U l-iktar li għandhom ibeżżgħuna mhumiex dawk li (bejn wieħed u ieħor) jitkellmu fil-miftuħ, daqskemm dawk li ma jitkellmu qatt fuq l-abort imma jekk kellu jkun hemm vot fil-Parlament lesti mhumiex lesti jisfidaw il-whip, avolja din suppost hija kwistjoni fundamentali ta’ kuxjenza. Il-pożizzjoni tal-partit - kif rajna mill-kwistjonijiet fuq iż-żwieġ gay u l-addozzjonijiet minn koppji omosesswali - wara l-elezzjoni taf tinbidel inkiss inkiss u ħesrem.

Se jkollna għalxiex u ma' xiex nissieltu. Moħħna hemm.

 

Ħsibijiet Feġġejja

       1.      Malta: ġenna tal-art imnejka. U mhux Joseph Muscat biss niekha.

2.      Joseph Muscat: inkarnazzjoni ta’ Dr. Faustus - biegħ ruħu lix-xitan għall-poter u l-popolarità.

3.      Joseph Muscat: egrant tentattiv ta’ frame-up fuqu – 99.9%

4.      Joseph Muscat: ma kellu x’jaqsam xejn mal-mewt ta’ Daphne

5.      Joseph Muscat: għamel ġid, imma probabbli l-agħar Prim Ministru ta’ Malta.

6.      Joseph Muscat: Għax ma jparparx lejn xi galassja oħra?

7.      Edward Zammit Lewis: imissu jwarrab. Wiċċu u u sormu xorta.

8.      Rosianne Cutajar: imissha twarrab. Wiċċha u sormha xorta. Kont se ngħid li t-tnejn isbaħ minn ta’ Zammit Lewis, imma aħjar le.

9.      Kirsty Debono: ha proprio culo (metaforikament). Laħqet bidlet l-alleanza għax kieku Repubblika et al sallbuha.

10. Repubblika: għanijiet sublimi, imma l-mibegħda ċċajpar għemilhom.

11. The Shift News: il-veri eredi ta’ Daphne, imma l-mibegħda ċċajpar kitbiethom.

12. Occupy Justice: bejn Repubblika u The Shift News, nippreferi 'l Occupy Justice.

13. Daphne: Kull ġurnata li tgħaddi niskopri kemm kellha raġun fuq il-korruzzjoni u kif taħdem.

14. Daphne: kittieba sublimi, investiġtraċi straordinarja, antropologa m’hawnx bħalha.

15. Daphne: kellha difetti serji, imma ħaqqha monument.

16. Daphne: Il-familja tagħha terrqet fid-dulur u immaturat. Li laqgħu l-apoloġija ta’ Robert Abela sinjal eċċellenti.

17. Daphne: il-pass li jmiss hu li l-familja issa tiltaqa’ mal-President.

18. Jason Azzopardi: għandu kuraġġ ta’ ljun. Nixtieq ngħid affarijiet tajba oħra fuqu imma ma nistax insib.

19. Il-PN: farsa tbikkik.

20. Il-PN: kieku kien bniedem konna niċċertifikawh għal Monte Karmeli – tendenzi suwiċidali serji u akuti

21. Bernard Grech: Jidher inkapaċi, imma min, ħlief xi Eddie Fenech Adami, isib tarf f’dak it-taħwid?

22. Bernard Grech: biex imexxi l-PN jeħtieġ l-għerf ta’ Salamun, il-kuraġġ ta’ David, is-saħħa ta’ Sansun u l-fortuna ta’ Ġakobb. Minflok qisu l-poplu Lhudi jdur u jagħqad fid-deżert.

23. Bernard Grech: qisu jien meta kont nipprova ntellaq. Jaf li se jispiċċa l-aħħar, imma jibqa’ għaddej joħlom bil-mirakli.

24.  Adrian Delia: la vendetta è un piatto che va servito freddo.

25. Eddie Fenech Adami:  perfett ma kienx, imma Joseph Muscat ikkonfermalna li kien l-aqwa PM ta’ Malta

26. Eddie Fenech Adami: għandu xi neputi jixbhu? Il-PN għandu bżonnu bħall-ħobż.

27. Eddie Fenech Adami: Jekk tassew għandu d-demenzja, mhi xejn ħlief turija oħra tal-ħniena bla tarf t’Alla.

28. Lawrence Gonzi: kultant inħoss in-nuqqas tal-kalma rassikuranti li kien jaf jittrażmetti.

29. Karmenu Mifsud-Bonnici: qatt kellna politiku personalment integru aktar minnu?

30. Manuel Delia: the queen-maker?

31.  Roberta Metsola: taf tgħodd sal-għaxra...u anke ħdax.

32.  Roberta Metsola: kontra l-legalizzazzjoni tal-abort dejjem u f’kull każ?

33.  Robert Abela: għadu lest li jekk iqum xi ħadd f il-PL b’inizjattivi favur l-abort, “isib lili kontra tiegħu’’? Għax fil-każ se jkollu jippoppa sidru ta’ sikwit...

34. Robert Abela: imma dakinhar x’fettillu jistqarr li jħossu mkisser eċċ? F’konferenza stampa kien mhux fil-klinika tal-psikoterapista.

35. Robert Abela: Kemm-il darba waqa’ fil-politika rħisa ta’ kummenti li jaqtgħu fuq l-oppożizzjoni. Statista ma jinħeliex f’dawn l-affarijiet.

36. Robert Abela: ħaqqu prosit tal-apoloġija, anke jekk prevedibilment qanqlet reazzjoni fil-PL. Anzi, minħabba f’hekk, prosit doppju.

37.  Robert Abela: Meta se jagħmel dmiru u jneħħi lil Zammit Lewis minn Ministru?

38.  Robert Abela: mill-ewwel sab l-iebes – il-Covid, il-mewt ta’ Miriam Pace eċċ. S’issa, bħala PM ġaħġaħha, imma mhux li bbrilla wisq.

39.  Alfred Sant: Talli ċċivilizza lill-MLP u qaċċat lill-vjolenti, kapaċi naħfirlu anke tal-abort, kważi. Imma kważi biss.

40.  Alfred Sant: Il-patti max-xitan fil-politika moda li daħħalha hu?

41. Il-PL: fis-snin 70 u 80, kien soċjalista imma mhux demokratiku. Illum liberali roża ċar.

42.  Desmond Zammit Marmarà: alkoħol rari nixrob, imma jekk niltaqa’ miegħu lest inħallaslu birra, tnejn u anke tlieta.

43.  Desmond Zammit Marmarà: jistħoqqlu monument il-kwartieri tal-PL, avolja hemm min jixtieq jarmalu forka.

44.  Arnold Cassola: jindaħal f’kollox,  jikkummenta fuq kollox, imma ħafna drabi allaħares ma jkunx hu.

45.  Simon Mercieca: għadni ma nistax niddeċiedi jekk għandux Alla għalih, jew hux  qiegħed jgħaddi ż-żmien bin-nies u bih innifsu.

46. Graffiti: iqanqlu fija ambivalenza bla tarf. L-ambjent u l-abort - Alla u x-xitan, in-nar u l-ilma.

47.  Fr. David Muscat: tassew intelliġenti, fidi qawwija – imbagħad imur jingħaqad mal-lemin razzista u anti-semita!

48.  Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca: bħala Ministru ġieli ndaħlet fejn ma jesagħhiex. Illum imissha titkellem aktar fuq il-kwistjonijiet kontroversjali.

49.  Ġorġ Abela: ħasra li ibnu l-PM, għax fehemtu fuq kwistjonijiet soċjo-politiċi kienet tiswa ħafna.

50.  Jien: Nixtieq li qabel immut il-kuxjenza tħallini nerġa’ nivvota lil-Labour.