Friday, February 20, 2009

The Right of Reply: Part 1

I received a mail from one "Warrior 231" requesting the use of my blog to publish a letter directed to the blogmaster of "Disquiet" who has maintained an elegant silence over the appeareance of the letter in his blog. I was given to understand that "Warrior 231" had left 2 comments under the post "The Cost of Winning" available here: Subsequent to that, Warrior was assailed by other readers to whom he responded with this comment. Surprisingly, the blogmaster, who proclaims himself to be an advocate of human rights, inexplicably rejected the comment and peremptorily closed the discussion. As a layman, I think this is a gross violation of "Warrior 231's" right to reply and freedom of speech, vital constituents of "human rights". So, i decided to allow Warrior 231 access to this blog to post his deleted/banned? repartees. The following is the first of several comments that were banned from "Disquiet".

Dear Sir

I am deeply perplexed and saddened by your decision not to publish my responses to "perfidious charlatan and conspirator" and Anon 10.21pm considering the fact that the right of reply is a God-given right, the limb of civilised discourse and the grist of clarification. That you choose to ignore my inherent human right to uphold my dignity through the channel of rational discourse is a damning indictment as to your even-handedness in moderating the comments corresponded to you by concerned citizens such as myself. Good sir, I am not implying for a moment that you have not been impartial but the fact that you inadvertently allowed my comment to wallow in existential ennui over 2 days and your subsequent decision to abort its publication raises profound ethical issues regarding your commitment to free speech. Even more troubling is your misplaced decision that I am not entitled to a right of reply merely because the contents of that reply intimated to you over this blog might lead to rancour which I firmly aver is never my intention to kindle. I dare hazard that your decision could have also been coloured by the contents of that comment, the truth of which might have troubled your conscience and may have shaken the very substructure of your convictions not to mention jeopardise your future relations with those commentators who, unbeknownst to me, may be members of your sorority. (Pardon me, Sir..if I had been a tad too presumptuous)

Pray sir, what was so incendiary in that harmless comment that provoked you to respond in such a presumptuous manner. In hindsight, my comment only contained a repartee to the two aforementioned personages, an invocation to the Almighty and a poem that alluded to the vicissitudes of existence and the Fortune of men drunk on the elixir of Power plus other sundry observations that would have hardly ruffled the sensitive feathers cosseting individual egos much less warrant the treatment accorded to it. Allow me, Sir to pen an “elegy” to assuage its agitated soul:

“Oh, Sweet Comment of Mine, whither thou flit in the desolate dales and moors of Cyberdom, the droplets of tears trickling through thy lonely soul, wretched might be thine heart to be cast away by heartless wimps, sorrowful may be thy mien for being wronged by knaves…..

Fear not lonely one , for even in thy solitude, wraithlike do thy haunt the bartered conscience of depraved men, for succumbing to the lure of Mammon, to the ethereal glory of praise and to the drunken revelry of condescension, they have tarried to murther you in unseemly haste!!

Tear no more my beloved, for thy mirror image will riseth from the bowels of despair, to glide through the gates of Caprice, and from thence, will she trill the notes of Truth, till the hounds of deceit, scamper away in fright into the fog of iniquity………..”

Now back to my comment, your inadvertent dereliction of duty has cost me dear, Sir, as I am now exposed to the malicious slingshots and insinuations of hypocrisy as attested by “Anti warrior 231’s diatribe. I cannot fathom what infernal being motivated him/her to concoct such blatant monstrosities and neither can I slake his/her perfidious thirst for besmirching the unsullied reputation of others. I can only say that during the course of my lifetime I have chanced to observe such individuals whose souls are so blighted by hate and vengeance that they become the willing tools of Lucifer’s bleating and take it upon themselves to spread the canker of acrimony and to kindle the embers of hatred in the ingle of Life through their words and deeds.

I can only assume from his/her infernal ramblings that he/she are privy to your affairs (recuse ..etc) or is a member of your fraternity. Nevertheless, his brazen instigation that you ignore my imprecations is totally uncalled for and rescinds whatever goodwill he may have engendered in me initially . It is perniciously obvious that he is Lucifer in disguise bent on stoking the fires of rancour in order to achieve his infernal ends of not having you respond to my comments. As to the motivations underlying his outburst, I can only hazard a guess that he fears the revelations of certain facts by you will be detrimental to his cause.

Dear Sir, I hold you in such high regard that I am sure that you will not stoop so low as to swallow his dastardly solicitation wholesale. In fact, I am certain that you will do the opposite considering your gentlemanly lineage and your insatiable penchant for rational discourse and exchange of views. That allied to your imperviousness to instigation, chicanery and other tools of immoral connivance will render his pathetic endeavour an unmitigated failure and shame him into remorse. I am certain that your voice of conscience will drown out his whispers of deceit and rancour..

As for me, his vitriolic innuendoes that I had been niggardly with fair comment and am a depraved hypocrite bent on fomenting trouble is mischievous to say the least. My good name has been crucified like a Lamb on the hills of Golgotha and I have to forever more bear the cross of iniquity as I ascend the steep stony inclines of my personal Calvary. Pray, what moved him to so assail my credibility with such conscienceless impunity is indeed the great mystery that awaits unravelling. His untrammelled accusation bespeaks a deep seated malevolence the very reflection of which is mirrored in his/her pseudonym. Such was his venomous diatribe that he even deemed it fit to invoke a curse against my livelihood: “may his neighbour's buffaloes have an enjoyable time on his farm.”. Oh! If only he had a modicum…,nay a speck, of empathy in his wretched soul to understand my plight and the excruciating travails I am currently experiencing as a farmer but then such insouciant personal attacks from such characters are nothing to be surprised about coming from a Yahoo who will never attain the maturity and sagacity of the incomparable Houynhmn .

Be that as it may, I will try to humour his insatiable curiosity as to my view regarding the a)Terengganu and Kedah (sic)?Perlis palace-rabble imbroglio and b) Tun Dr Mahathir’s neutering of royal immunity, only to remove the crucifix of iniquity imprinted on my name by that dissolute wastrel………… .

a) Dear Anti-Warrior 231 : I cannot provide incontrovertible regarding my stand as I only commenced commenting under the nom de guerre : warrior 231 some what sporadically approximately 4 months or so after the said tumult and more consistently on Rocky’s Bru from October onwards on a variety of topics which the impartial Bru raised.. Suffice to say my comments have railed against politaikos from both sides of the divide with equal fervour. Despite not perusing the relevant state constitutions as to the powers vested therein for their respective monarchs, I nevertheless aver that the actions of certain politicians in ridiculing the monarch of the states mentioned DOES constitute an act of lese majesty which fall within the ambit of “seditious tendency” under Article 3 of the Sedition Act, 1948. that no action was instituted against the said charlatans is no fault of mine and of course does not in any absolve them from such charges.. But 2 WRONGS DO NOT MAKETH A RIGHT, SIR and hence my firm stand that action should be instituted against one Mohammad Nizar bins Jamaluddin who has the audacity of even helming a perceptibly “illegal” administration. This much I have argued with the relevant facts and a level-headed mien.

b) Regarding the revered statesman Tun Dr Mahathir’s actions, I would venture to say that his actions established the sovereignity of the people (through CAB 1: 1983) as well as the maxim “no one is above the law” (through CAB 2: 1993). Thus, I find it strange that anyone claiming to be the champions of “ketuanan rakyat” would deign to quibble over this fact. Lest, it be misconstrued by diseased minds that, support for Dr M implies I am biased against his opponents, do bear in mind such support devolves from an understanding of what he had done for the country, warts and all, for even opposition leaders like Jeff Ooi have expressed admiration for the man in their blogs (example : Screenshots).

In fact, sans Dr M, my apolitical stance is evident by my criticism of the power play that is going at the expense of the rakyat, my criticism of the cronyism evident in IJN, Labu and other such remonstrations where the relevant issues were dissected based on FACTS alone. (not hearsays, rumour, SDs etc) In fact, I have even called for a military coup d’etat and the establishment of a non-partisan technocrat led government to steer the country through the roiling economic waters. I would say that form of government would be the best possible compromise if the establishment of a Islamic theocracy is not palatable or whose time is not well nigh. All my thoughts are widely available for perusal in the comments sections of Rocky’s Bru, the place to visit if evidence alluded to here : “I insist he furnish concrete proof of the evidence that he will submit to you, not merely his say so.” is so assiduously sought. If possible, I will try to sequester some of my precious time to furnish the requisite proof. However, I firmly stress that I will not be in any way badgered into fulfilling implausible demands and neither will I be cowed by the heckles and catcalls of sundry dissolute vermin obsessed with entrapping me and besmirching my spotless reputation. Be that as it may, realising the impermanence of life and the ethereality of existence, I am to moved to forgive “anti-warrior 231”, if he had written that comment in ignorance or due to imbecility.

Finally, sir, forgive me for my prolixity and arcane style. It was something I perfected on my own, having dropped out school at a young age due to poverty, a style I acquired from my voracious appetite for Dickens, Smollett. Defoe during my leisure from the drudgery of army life…..

Warrior 231

Revert: For those who happen to trawl here, you are at liberty to make your own judgements regarding the integrity and impartiality of a certain "wakil" . My commisserations to" Warrior 231" over his humiliation which i can understand as I still remember how i was hounded out of a certain blog many moons ago when I challenged accepted dogma spouted by lobotomised.................. ;D

No comments: