Vive le nom de guerre

While googling for more information on hill slope projects I came across Rusdi Mustapha’s article in the Malay Mail titled They are just too powerful for words.

But what caught my eye was his last paragraph which states:

In the case of CPI, I appreciate its willingness to agree to disagree, but I remain steadfast in what I wrote in my column. Reading his letter to the editor (“CPI is not communist”, Oct 16) I say well done to chief executive officer Dr Lim Teck Ghee for “giving space to Pak Sako to present his considered analysis”, but I remain concerned about CPI allowing itself to be used by a nom de plume as a platform to attack the relationship of the Malays and their Royalty.

There is nothing wrong with a writer using a nom de plume to air his or her views, and I also question Rusdi’s contention that it had attacked the ‘relationship of the Malays and their Royalty’.

Indeed, Dr Lim Teck Ghee, the director of CPI responded to Rusdi's allegation in Response to Malay Mail article calling CPI ‘communist’.

I don’t propose to go into it (you can read the article for yourself) but suffice to say I wasn’t surprised to read Dr Lim saying Rusdi Mustapha had made ‘… a number of unfounded allegations, the most scurrilous of which are:

1. CPI [is] creating discord among the three major races in the country via its postings.
2. CPI should be investigated for inciting racial hatred and for being anti-monarchy in its content.
3. CPI is also questioning the special rights of the Malays under the Constitution.
4. CPI [is a] Communist Party Initiative operating under the guise of being a legitimate outfit.

There is not a single shred of evidence provided by Encik Rusdi to support any of these charges.’

I am not surprised at all. We’re all too well aware of the way in which the government mouthpieces had been used in the most disgraceful manner to incite, provoke and instigate the heartland so as to rally them behind the so-called ethnic-defender, UMNO, through their series of racist rants, vicious vitriolic and polemical propaganda.

But have these mainstream media, particular the Malay medium newspapers ever been investigated, let alone charged for inciting racial hatred among Malaysians?

Some people and sectors in Malaysia are privileged, pampered and protected – Teflon-ised from the laws of the nation that other Malaysian would be subjected to.

For example, when two local newspapers printed the infamous caricatures of Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) we saw them suspended for their provocative publications. But what about the NST? Not only was it exempt from the same treatment when it printed the same thing, the NST had the arrogant gall to publish the caricature a second time, without any ill effect …

… as I said, some people are privileged, pampered and protected. There are obviously two sets of laws in the nation.

The use of a nom de plume or more correctly in its original French version, nom de guerre, is a time honoured practice by renowned writers such as Mark Twain, Lewis Carroll, JD Robb, Andy McNab, etc.

They did so for a variety of reasons, perhaps to make a writer more credible in his or her work – for example, even if you have a PhD in Islamic theology and are a learned Islamic scholar but use a name like Chan Ah Kow you’re hardly to be taken seriously in your opinion on Islamic law, especially in this country. A good non de guerre would be Zulkifli Ridhuan Kulim wakakaka.

Then there is the issue of retribution – in Malaysia this means from the authority. The clarion call that’s vogue for the heartland is of course anything to do with agama, bangsa dan raja, as can be seen from Rusdi’s condemnation of the CPI as being anti monarchy and questioning the rights of the Malay, when Dr Lim said there isn't a shred of truth in them.

We have witnessed how Teresa Kok was incarcerated for allegedly insulting Islam when no such insult had occurred. We have seen a journalist in Penang similarly incarcerated for reporting on what ubër nationalist Ahmad Ismail had said.

Then there was blogger Nat Tan and Jed Yoong. The list goes on and on.

As I mentioned, this is a nation where two sets of rules exist, one for those privileged, pampered and protected like Rusdi Mustapha, where using your real name is guaranteed to be safe, whilst Teresa Kok, Karpal Singh, Lim Kit Siang, Nat Tan and Jed Yoong had sufffered from its heavy handedness.

On the question of using your real name, here's another aspect - let’s compare The Malay Mail’s article on Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand's earth-shaking autopsy finding (not that we weren’t expecting it) where the MACC now stands indicted as indicated by the Malaysiakini headlines Teoh's death 80% homicide: Thai forensics expert.

Below is the online version of The Malay Mail titled Explosive testimony from Dr Death where Frankie D'Cruz wrote:

Imagine a corpse on the stainless steel table and bending over it, with ravenous frustration, is a woman resembling a princess of punk rock.

Her head is covered with dark red spikes, lips the colour of dried blood and gloved fingernails, as she prepares to slice the body open, encrusted with spangles.

Firstly he trivializes a very serious revelation of monumental criminal proportion. Secondly, he presented Dr Pornthirp as one belonging to the bizarre, perhaps from the lunatic fringe.

Thirdly and the most serious one, he described Dr Pornthirp as ‘Doctor Death’.

The libellous nature of calling a doctor ‘Doctor Death’ in the English language (and I would imagine The Malay Mail to be a English language newspaper) is unmistakable. Frank D'Cruz is suggesting that the doctor had been killing her patients, like one Dr Jayant Patel, a 'Doctor Death' who is believed to have killed some 80 of his patients in Queensland Australia.

Another category of doctors described as ‘Dr Death’ would be euthanasia advocates like American Jack Kervokian and Australian Philip Nitschke.

'Doctor Death' means his/her patient or patients had died under his/her hands!

I hope Dr Pornthirp will sue the hell out of this Frank D’Cruz and The Malay Mail for malicious libel.

So … what’s the value of having your name as a byline in bold like Frank D‘Cruz when you write such tripe?

In Malaysia, unless you belong to the privileged, pampered and protected, you would be wise to use a nom de guerre.

It should be in the quality and integrity of your writing, the logic and balance of your arguments and the relevance of your proposition that matters, not a bloody name.

For did not Juliet Capulet in Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2) tell Romeo Montague that a name is just an artificial and meaningless convention, as in "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

It’s the quality and integrity of your article, not your privileged, pampered and protected pomposity of a name. Pordah Rusdi!