Bobbie Knifes Joshie: Et tu, Bob?
September 28, 2011 by shuzheng
Among the Anglo Jesus Reporters
A Tale of Shakespearean Treachery & Back Stabbing
Giving them daily doses of Good News poison? White preachers used to do that. Now, you take over their work. That makes you a neo-colonialist. And their running dog. No?
Believe what you want to believe, but why is it so hard to leave other people alone?
Reply to the Rev. Bob 'Brutus' Teoh:
In English, in an Anglophile website named Malaysiakini, Josh Hong, Anglo racist and your Christian brother, writes about the failure of an infidel Chinese newspaper named Sin Chew to which you yourself, an Anglophile and Christian to boot, then respond in English in the same Anglophile website, plus two more others (Sin Chew, uppercaise), about the wonders of the same Chinese newspaper.
Can you see the convolution Reverend? It's not one contradiction, but three. Know which ones?
English aside. Can you even write your name in hanzi? (Know what's hanzi?) Nor is Joshie likely to remember his father's hanzi name, the same man who gave him his beginnings. Not only would Joshie dispute that – he would say he's from Jesus, the 'Chosen One' – he would also say the old man is a sinful infidel destined for a Jehovah hell while he goes the opposite direction, to heaven.
Why should the hanzi name matter? Well, because the two of you – one Bobshit, the other Joshit – speak of the Sinful Chew as though you know the hanzi market inside out when you can't even tell the title from the text. Which then adds to the curiosity … what the heck were the two of you quarreling about?
Let's try unpacking it – quickly. As best as can it be understood, Joshie is saying CC Liew (what specie name is that?) is a flop whereas you say he is god send. Both ideas – a flopped person and a god's gift – are not mutually exclusive (that's Darwinism) much as both of you tried to show otherwise.
Now, here is the catch. (a) Joshie didn't state an opinion or comment. He's asserting; it's in the title – hypocrisy although it took days for the Mkini Anglos to spell it right. Hypocrisy is not opinion; it's moral judgement on precedent events or facts. In other words, it has the force of good vs bad.
(b) You then answer that's not 'fair comment'. Who or what decides that which is fair? You do? Your Father-in-Heaven? And you don't even know that hypocrisy is not a comment. Read your bible again where you would have picked up any idea of fairness. You think there is any fair comment in that book? Any at all? It's contents are like that of Joshie's – full of self-righteous morality.
Put aside the bible and let's go back to your language. You say your purpose is 'not to defend Sin Chew' but you proceed to spend the next 736 words doing just that: the No. 1 newspaper, unsung heroes, on and on…. And before that you even said Joshie acted 'vicious', with a 'diatribe', 'axe to grind', and so on.
So you see, Reverend, your hypocrisy matches Joshie's – like and like – but you beat him in one respect: treachery.
In your reply's opening lines to Joshie, you would get near by defending him (he, an innocent victim of 'unfair comment' from shuzheng). Then, once next to him you'd stab him in the back with the same knife against which you had fought to defend him. It was even an old knife you used: the referenced shuzheng article was 18 months ago. After that you would claim innocence to the murder and cover it up with this: 'shuzheng's denigration is most uncharitable…' If that's denigration, what does it say of Joshie's article 18 months earlier, his defamation of Chinese as racists, his dogged attacks on the Chinese newspapers – the same thing he has just repeated and which you condemn.
But, then, that isn't surprising: Anglo Christians like you, like Joshie and like Thomas Lee, none of whom could stand for anybody who don't speak English and buy into your voodoo Jesus. Thomas Lee, your brother Reverend, also ex-Sin Chew who, one is told, also can't write his own hanzi name, has followed Joshie. He essentially said the same thing about Sin Chew when sacked some months ago. Then, sobbing before Petra Kamarudin and simultaneously uppercaise he would accuse his bosses (CC Liew?) of sucking up to the government while he was steadfast in his righteousness and paid the price. He would never admit to incompetence and, worse, using other people's money and the Sin Chew platform to draw a salary but to spread voodoo. Yet you said nothing about the lies and deceit.
All this seems incredulous, but that's what it amounts to….
But pray tell, what so bad about sucking up to the government, who at most won't give you money, than to suck up to your white man's god which for no reason, none at all, threatens you fire in eternal damnation?
See Reverend: all of you, you and your Anglo Jesus reporters, are essentially the same – illiterate and full of double-dealing shit. And not just that, but you also useless to society, incapable of earning an honest, decent wage but instead spend your life throwing stones (that's from the bible) at imagined adulterers passing by because you think you are so righteous.
So, the toing and froing between you and Joshie wasn't about some grand national, philosophical, social, political design (what would you know anyway). It was about your individual egos: what a good, fair Reverend you are. And Joshie? You think he's so clever all because he cited Oscar Wilde, an opium eater.
Looking forward to seeing you in hell….
xiaodi
PS: Here again is the shuzheng article from which you had cited but deliberately left out as the pertinent article link – we know why, don't we? But your omission was so obviously deceitful, one of many in your reply to Joshie. Were you born stupid or were you Jesuit-tutored that way?
As for Josh Hong he has been upgraded from Joshy to Joshie. After your reply, Joshie must be thinking: Et tu, Bob? Know where that comes from, Bobbie boy? You should go back to school… Try Chinese school next time.
Comments