Please forgive my tardiness in responding to your racist, defamatory and provocative insights into my research and writing abilities. No, your infantile rant on RiotAct has not escaped me; it’s just that it’s taken me some time to identify precisely who you are. After reading your infantile rant, I asked my main man Mahmud to track down the arse-wipe who wrote this, to which Mahmud replied, “Brother asking me to go into a cesspool and find an arse-wipe, that’s easy; asking me to go into a cesspool, which is full of arse-wipes with the express purpose of identifying a single one, is a much more difficult task.” So you see my dilemma, arse-wipe? Nevertheless, after considerable effort and better research skills than you seem to possess based upon your recent comments on RiotACT, my main man Mahmud has identified you to my satisfaction and I now feel comfortable in how to structure my response to you.
You see, I was trying to determine whether you are an arse-wipe associated with the Australian Federal Police (AFP), the Australian Public Service (APS), the Australian Capital Territory Public Service (ACTPS) or simply an arse-wipe at large. Now that I’ve identified to which category of arse-wipe you belong, I have the following points to make.
1. Your command of the English language appears to be somewhat wanting. I briefly debated the value of replying to you, given your apparent language limitations. In the hope that this response may impart something of value to you and in the knowledge that most Canberran arse-wipes are egotists who will read anything about themselves even if they fail to comprehend the content, I will persist. Just ask mummy to help you with the hard bits.
For your information, Blak and Black and it’s associates devote their resources and spare time to assisting members of Indigenous and refugee communities in developing their language skills and general knowledge about the Australian community and the expectations that not only they should have of the community, but that the community should expect from them. As part of this process, I run English language classes for adult refugees. After reading your slanderous and infantile rant, I put up the sentence which you seem incapable of comprehending to a group of Afghani refugee meat workers. The immediate response from a number of these people was, “Bakchos, may we borrow your dictionary, as there are some words in there we are unfamiliar with.”
After providing those who requested with a dictionary, they had no problems in determining what the sentence meant. The point is arse-wipe, if you don’t know what a word means you reach for the dictionary! I don’t know how someone who self-styles himself as “creative” could possibly be unaware of this little invention, namely the dictionary.
2. Next time you ask mummy to wipe your snotty nose, perhaps you could also ask her to show you how to follow a web link. What you normally do when following a web link is hover the cursor over it and click upon the indicated text using the left mouse button (that would be the one below your index finger, presuming your mouse is designed for use in the right hand and has two buttons). If you had performed this task on the link you so derided me about, you would have found that it opens a document with the following header:
As I’m unaware of your actual level of illiteracy, though judging from your inability to comprehend a simple sentence I suspect that your problem is a functional illiteracy evidenced by your lack of comprehension, I will explain to you what this URL means. As you will see, it contains the term ‘parliament’, the acronym ‘nsw’ for New South Wales, the abbreviation ‘gov’ for government and the abbreviation ‘au’ for Australia. Put it all together and it shows that this link belongs to an official NSW Government Parliamentary website. The header from the document itself and the abbreviations ‘parlment/hanstrans’ in the URL indicate that this particular link is to the NSW Government Parliamentary Hansard Transcript for the date ‘19900517’, namely May 17, 1990. I hope this little lesson in how to follow a link in an online document has been helpful.
3. Your lack of knowledge about the historical context of the term ‘Manchus’ is indicative of a person who has a low level of education (or alternatively, in the words of another ill-informed RiotACT commenter ‘Classified’, someone who attended “the University of East Bumcrack”[i]), a problem exacerbated by an apparent lack of comprehension abilities. As another commenter to your infantile rant ‘blondcat’ noted, the term Manchu is common parlance within the public service.[ii] Again, I suggest that the next time you ask mummy to wipe your snotty nose, you also ask her how to do a basic Google search, from which you may find some illuminating material.
4. “The Hansard referred to is actually 11 May 1994. The website he ripped the text off has the wrong date, which says a lot about the credibility of the site.”
In making this statement you have defamed me. This is another reason my response has been delayed. I was awaiting legal advice as to whether your infantile rant, alleging that I had committed an act of plagiarism by lifting my material from another website and ascribing a supposedly incorrect date to the contents and therefore the material, amounts to defamation. Given that I’m undertaking a course of study leading to a higher degree based upon which I am recognized as a researcher, sullying my reputation by questioning my credibility could reasonably be expected to adversely affect my employment prospects as a researcher in the future. You did this by publishing defamatory and inaccurate material on a public website, which to date has attracted 171 comments and an unknown, but without doubt much larger number of readers over the past eight days. This goes to the level and extent of the defamation in which you have engaged.
I am still deciding whether or not it is worth suing you for this defamation. Irrespective of the course of action I decide to take, I suggest that you take the time to check your facts before engaging in what can only be perceived as racist and derogatory invective designed to denigrate someone based simply on their racial heritage. You cannot deny that you were aware of my Aboriginality prior to engaging in your infantile and inaccurate rant against me, as you specifically reference my background in your comment. This is the type of racist invective that Blak and Black is in fact speaking out against.
5. As a self-styled ‘creative_canberran’, most creative people I’ve met outside of Canberra would have taken the time to verify each of the facts upon which they were relying prior to going to publication. In this instance, you’ve clearly failed to even verify that the link goes where you purport; you made no attempt to ask a responsible adult if the sentence that you so deride actually makes sense and you’ve clearly failed to understand what Blak and Black is all about.
Blak and Black is about exposing corruption in the public sector. The public sector, for those who lack comprehension, includes the bureaucracy, parliament and the judiciary. Within the bureaucracy I include the State, Territory and Commonwealth Public Services, including their police services and at a Commonwealth level this would include the Australian Defence Force (ADF). I also consider racism, when it’s designed to humiliate and disadvantage an individual, to be a form of corruption. If you had actually taken the time to read Blak and Black properly rather than selecting a comment from an old post at random, you would note that I have discussed issues including Fred Martens, Julian Moti, Jill Courtney, Gary Lee-Rogers, Colin Winchester, Audrey Fagan, David Eastman, Schappelle Corby, The Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, West Papua, Timor-Leste, Colombia, Afghanistan, The United Kingdom and First Nations America. A significant proportion of these matters relate to Australians of European extraction (please note the capital ‘E’ for European, as it is a proper noun), which flies in the face of your allegation that I am merely concerned with “… perceived injustices to him in the past and the invasion of his traditional country.”
Blak and Black also includes occasional posts from guest writers who provide their own perspectives without coercion or moderation by me. Some are of these writers of European extraction. One is an Australian of six generations standing with a strong and proud Anglo-Irish heritage. Another is a more recent arrival with a strong Catalan heritage, proud of both his land of birth and his adopted homeland. Both of these people have their own views and possess their own eyes and ears and can determine for themselves what is corrupt or not. You will also note that there are a regular band of people who comment on the posts published on Blak and Black, many of whom volunteer their spare time free of charge to assisting the refugee and Indigenous communities and most of whom are not Indigenous Australians, but are in fact Australians of European extraction. All their comments go up on Blak and Black and unless they are defamatory to a third party, are published without moderation; in fact, moderation of the site is ONLY in place to prevent the type of defamation in which you have engaged. Each of these people have their own eyes and ears and can identify corruption and racism when it is encountered.
6. Whilst I am happy to accept that not everyone in Canberra is an arse-wipe – in fact I would go so far as to admit that the majority of Canberrans along with the majority of members of the AFP and the public service are not in fact arse-wipes – there is unfortunately a significant cadre of arse-wipes in our national capital who support the sort of racist and infantile drivel that you’ve engaged in, because they fear it would be to their detriment to speak out. This is what I call complicity and is in fact what led to the circumstances that resulted in the demise of the former ACT Commissioner for Revenue and has in turn caused the AFP to refuse to investigate a serious indecent assault on Australia’s most senior female Aboriginal bank executive whilst lunching in Canberra. If you take the time to read my last post, you will note that as recently as within the last fortnight she re-iterated to Brendan Smyth MLA that she intended to take the matter to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), because her complaint has failed to be accorded the due process that Australian’s are led to believe they are all entitled to under the rule of law and international treaties to which Australia is a signatory.
7. I’ve passed on my legal advice and your comments to the registrar of the “University of East Bumcrack”, which I understand is going to be placed before the University’s Senate, with a view to determining whether or not they wish to pursue an action for defamation.
|Will you sign the petition calling for a Royal Commission into the Australian Federal Police?|