I refer to the letter Call to reject Malaysiakini and Western stupidity.

To start, I would like to say that Malaysiakini has provided for many of us Malaysians with an alternative source of news. From time to time, I do detect some bias of the writers, but not significant. And to be totally unbiased, you would require one who has no emotions.

Otherwise, I would like to congratulate Malaysiakini and its struggle to provide an unbiased view of what is happening in Malaysia. After reading the writer's comments, I felt that his comments were designed to undermine the credibility of Malaysiakini with lots of attacks that were either flawed with logical fallacies or were outright incompetent arguments.

I'll now attempt to list point by point his comments and provide my own arguments. As I have no way to convince readers that I am in no way related to Malaysiakini other than the fact that I'm a subscriber, I shall not write about this anymore..

The writer wrote:

‘I was about to join your ‘famous' website but declined because of your boasts and those who awarded your website are one of the same - subjugated, enslaved, Western-induced weak brains.'

My comment:

If you want to make comments about the awards that Malaysiakini was given, and that you find utterly distasteful, do so by providing proof and arguments that are convincing or at least provide a small write-up or link for it. Otherwise, this argument can be considered to have the logical fallacy of ‘confusing association with causation' and ‘non-sequitur'.

First, that you're saying that because of this association to the awards, Malaysiakini is not a good source of information. And the latter because you're not stating how bad these awards are. Therefore to me, this argument doesn't follow and there's no logical connection between what you are claiming.

Please don't be selfish with the facts, as your ‘obvious' intention is to help prevent certain catastrophes from happening to most people, I urge you to share these critical information with us.

The writer wrote:

‘... built on fast, accurate and independent news, and well informed and diverse views' - Your views are not fast, not accurate, not independent, not well-informed and not diverse.'

My comment:

What is the yardstick that you've used to measure these parameters? Please provide instances. From my perspective, Malaysiakini is much faster when compared to reading the newspapers. So, to me, it is already fast. This is the parameter that I can really argue with you.

But for the others, you're setting a very arbitrary statement here, so please provide further statements about how inaccurate Malaysiakini is.

The writer wrote:

‘Discussion on taboo subjects such as migrant workers, Aids, Islam and racial quota systems has generated a new understanding on these issues.' - Your discussion has generated new understanding or more tension, more demonstrations, more friction, instability and distress among the races in this beautiful peaceful country'

My comment:

You're not stating the major premise of your argument, so I have to assume that your assumption is that by discussing these issues, we will create more tension, demonstrations and friction so forth and so on.

If yes, then what is your alternative? Should we just sweep these things under the carpet and pretend this never happens? I wonder what is the system of governance you're trying to advocate. Pray tell.

The writer wrote:

‘Our editorial position is consistently supportive of justice, human rights, democracy, freedom of speech and good governance' - Justice according to who? You only? Under the name of freedom, do you want to legalise the lower-than-animal behavior called gay and lesbianism?

Human rights according to who? The US and UK that had occupied and invaded more than 120 nations and killed millions? Democracy? The sure-fail, man-made system that has failed humanity all over the world?

You want me to elaborate on the stupidity of democracy? Three persons vied for a post, one guy got 40 percent of he votes and the other two got 25 percent and 35 percent. The winner, the guy who got 40, has 60 percent of the electorate against him! What happens?

A continued cycle of hate and disagreement. This is one of the many stupidities of this sure-fail man-made system.

My comment:

Of course, not the justice according tothe one who would think that the only product of freedom is the legalising of homosexuality. Also, it is distasteful to call homosexuals ‘lower-than-animal'. This statement shows very clearly that the writer has an ultra-conservative religious thinking.

His next statement more or less implies that advocacy for human rights could only result in a country becoming an imperialistic country, and one that would invade countries and kill millions. I would like to remind the writer that the Catholic Church, various Islamic countries and earlier Christian empires have also invaded, murdered and killed many.

So, the ‘stupidity' of democracy is clearly shown by the writer but what is his alternative? What would happen to the person with 40 percent of the votes, you ask? Well, in a democratic system, he should be given the authority to act as the leader, within the bounds of rules and regulations.

What is the other alternative then, you say? Through bloodlines? And how do you ensure good governance? We can see in history that most monarchical cultures have given way to democratically- elected governments.

Why?

Because you cannot ensure that all the offspring of a king would be suited for governance. Or do you advocate dictators?

Anyway, democracy, I believe, is as what Winston Churchil ascribes: ‘It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.'

So, my dear writer, pray tell what is your great idea?

The rest of the ravings of the writer is very much a result of the East-West polarisation and the false assumption that everything the West does is evil. His claims imply that the West is evil and that the West invades, kills and legalises slavery. Let me ask you, which culture did not practice slavery in the past? And which cultures started abolishing slavery?

As for invading and killing, which country on earth has not experienced war? Why do you say that it is a fault that is only found within the Western civilisation? Name me one country in the East that has not been involved in any war, in the present or past, nor in slavery nor in plundering neighboring countries in war.

The West has its weaknesses, so do we all. The problems that you have mentioned exist in the West, but it is not possible to disassociate any of them from the East. The world is getting smaller and smaller and the only result if we were to follow your kind of distaste for the West would only mean continued conflict between East and West.

Ask yourself, why is it that the West at this point of time has so much more advanced technology than the East. Is this not a sign of a certain strength that they have that we should emulate? Or is your only strategy calling them ‘stupid and weak'?

I myself am from the East, and I am utterly disgusted by the likes of you. You misrepresent the East, you do not know what you are talking about. As people say, the empty tin makes the loudest noise, and I believe you, sir, fall into this category.

Reflect on yourself before you make statements that embarrass yourself and your fellow Easterners.