Does Dr. Megalommatis’s Convoluted Argument Helps or Hurts Somali Cause?
Recall the strange scenes of the Doctor Dolittle move by Eddy Murphy, the comedian
actor, where he was depicted as being half-crazed, renowned vet doctor who could
speak a wide array of animal languages. For some strange reasons, the character
became so much pro-occupied with the welfare of his pets at the clinic to the point
in which he gave up all other routine and rational human activities, much less about
the devotion of his family life. At some point, he started hearing voices and
acquired paranormal instinct to communicate with his subjects so much so that when
he comes to the lab every morning he could easily talk with the animals and field
their complains (dogs, birds, serpents, etc.) of which animal did what the night
before or who needs what among: e. g., about minor scuffles and sleep spoilers or
demand for food, water, entertainment, medical regiments and so on.
To the point, I’m referring to the pen name of Dr. Mohammed Megalommatis, an
unmistakably compulsive writer and somewhat cyber-pugilist and combative character
(might this comment bring down on me the verbal onslaught of the doctor soon?)
Anyone who occasionally gets in his main playgrounds such as American Chronicle web
pages rarely could miss his relatively well-composed but at times piercing and
acerbic tongue of political commentary on the Horn. I’m in the view that there are
many good (at least it used to be) points in his writings. As someone who traces his
backgrounds to the area, I was taken aback by his insightful comments about
Ethiopian dominant linguistic and ethno-religious issues and their past roles as an
instrument of socio-political depravity and oppression. He was also right about
exposing the supremacist features and unjustified past exploitation inflicted by
successive Ethiopian rulers from highlander ethnic groups on other nationalities.
His detest for the current Ethiopian illegal occupation in Somalia was also used to
be another congenial subject for many people, but that is where it ends as far as
topicality of mutual interest is concerned.
Lately, the Doctor waded into less glamorous territory, if not unethical, as he is
perhaps trying hard to get some insights on the “mud-still theory” and deceptive
inner-working of Somalia’s political feuds and there by inadvertently dragging in
his feet with other trivial topics including the role of S/land on the matter. He
even made unflattering remarks about the wife of S/land’s president for no apparent
reason (http://www.americanchronile.com/articles/66074) calling disparaging names
and titles even though she has no known power or saying in the government affairs.
The million dollar question is then why the busy Dr. drifted away from the usual
mantra and started taking pot-shots at every moving object in S/land scene? Why now
this issue and never before? Or who are the sources behind of all these
manufactured and less than gentlemanly material that muddied his hectic work? I’m
not too sure yet, except to say that only the doctor himself could shed some light
on what is failing him and who is feeding what garbage and the motives behind it.
But I can gather from his comments some lame accusations against S/land with respect
to the political misfortune of the South Somalia. Rest assured the government of SL
and populace has never felt schadenfraude about the misery of the southern
counterparts. The mess and prolonged predicament of the South is primary
self-inflicted wounds and people of the north had little say on the matters for long
time.
Definitely, haphazard comments like “Tyrant of the Red Sea” and “Republic of Huda
Berakat” are primarily side-kick and non sequitur line of arguments. They are worth
of nothing except eyesore as far as substance goes. On the other hand, I’m curios
why the Doctor is so reluctant to mention in his daily dosage other notorious
characters, who are still championing for the destruction and chaos scenes of
Somalia. There are plenty and he is well versed with that. It keeps me wondering
what’s failing the doctor and his gospel nowadays. Look no further what he offers in
his latest twisted logic ( http:/americanchronicle.com/articles/67695 .) The
phantasmagoric message in between the lines, as the title imply, goes like: any
chaotic environ of ( i.e. instance S/Land or P/land) will have beneficial spin to
the intractable chaotic situation of Somalia. It is something akin to a burning
house except few rooms and one tells you let the nature take its course instead of
trying to save what is left.
And one more caveat for anyone who is aspiring to become an objective pundit on
Somali political talk-shop is that most Somalis are notoriously dishonest when it
comes in inter-clan political interest and therefore unreliable as a credible
source. Asked by foreigner about his/her view, Somali will twist every historical
fact in favour of his lineage and against others at any length: perpetrator will
play victimhood card while at same claiming to be the invincible and undisputed
majority; thieve will invoke sainthood and accuse the perceived rival to the vice
versa; will beat the bush about purported superiority or material wealth of his
group and contrast it with others as a mere beggars; invoke all the noble character
and grandiose intentions while relegating others into the cast role. It is all about
deliberate tug-of -war to extract maximum sympathy from strangers in order to get
some edge on the fierce intra-group competition on the ground. That is why Somali
conflict of the south is protracted over 17 years and no solution in sight, that is
why some benevolent actors around the world couldn’t figure out the root cause and
that is the reason, to some degree, Somali territory was divided into five parts by
the colonials.
But let us assume he might as well be, with sheer naiveté, unwittingly mislead by
flatterers and people with extremely nefarious agenda about Somalia’s political
future. In that case, why the good professor shouldn’t take few comment sense
precaution, not withstanding with ethics of scholarly standards, including (1)
cross-reference and double checking his source’s credibility, biases, political
motivations or otherwise (2) do practical research work - - googling things are easy
but it can never be substitute for or as much reliable as other physical work (3)
paying attention to the feedback materials from critics and different points of
views which he could gain immense knowledge from(4) desist from personal attacks and
mudslinging with critics. If reaction of someone seems unwarranted why not just
ignore it altogether (5) admit and correct if mistake happen for one reason or
another (6) refrain from corrupting and taking out of context other people’s work
(7) refine hard-hitting titles and offensive language. Again a common sense dictates
the role and the type of lingo one uses in a given audience to the get message
across. Why bring out sledge hammer while the same task could be done with needle?
Dr. Megalomattis has every right to express his opinion and take whatever position
he likes. However, does the good doctor care about the reputation and objectivity of
his trade anymore? How about offending so often fans and detractors alike? Is the
charming and do-gooder old doctor morphed irreversibly into ‘Doctor Do-little’ - -
the one possessed by the supernatural world and hears whispers of invisible voices?
My moribund curiosity kept me following his material for a while. After I heard that
some irate Ethiopian nationals in N. America were attempting to silence past few
months for good under the pretext of hate speech, I fired an e-mail to the said
website in support of him and the readership. Now I doubt about the whole effort and
probably I’m not alone.
Mohamed A. Awale
Moe-awale@hotmail.com
VOA 13pm GMT
IslamOnline
