Prologue to a voyage, an open letter to Mr. Waziri

[Maqari]

A nobel piece of work that was on lagos online although i stand in disagreement with few of your points but then its inargurable that all human beings are more or less just a collection of data & experiances that rummage the extremities of both concious and the sub-concious mind, the processing of this data is what we simply refer to as a "thought" while the manifestation of them bears the name "expression" wether is rendered in the form of speach action or a gesture, thus im in total overstanding that we might very often differ in points of view, for the very thing that makes the existance of opinion possible is as different as our finger prints, afterall without position perspective is vain,and the chances of two minds traversing constantly in a  perfect allingment is close none, if such occurs then only one of these minds engages in an effective thought process while the other just accompanies  subjected to a suggestive thinking methodology.
with this established i will proceed to discuss the cause of the prologue, u've cited in your letter to me that:
" Contrary to ur inclinations, I believe strongly in human obligations not rights as you do."
the question of difference between human rights and obligations is a matter that tends to adopt the shape of the number "8" whenever discussed and travels in an infinitive manner,without necessarily arriving at any port of accomplishment, try to precisely compute all human obligations whatever falls behind your final qoata will then become a "right" and vise versa, so its incircumstantial that a person believes in one without the other for the very present of rights requires the undeniable existance of obligation thesame goes for the latter.
 however when one tackles the issue of obligation he will find him/herself surrounded by more contradictions than when discussing "rights" this is because: the logistics of rights are often amalgamated with fundamental human reasoning, take for instance the "freedom of thought" now create two categories 1 right 2 obligation try fitting it into the first u will find it resting within comfortably , if you try thesame tactic on the second u will  be obliged to erase the word "freedom" from the phrase,this does not go to discredit your belief in human obligations rather to prove the relativility of my theory,
im kind of tired now and cannot think with my usual velocity,i will write more later, by all means if you object to my posting this publicly feel free to express so, and i will withdraw my post, bear in mind that i did this with the stainless intention of sharing our intellectual encounters with the rest of the comrades @ kanoonline ONE

oh i almost forgot here is another one

Iza s?ra rabbul baiti lid-dhurbi dhariban ** Fashiymat li-ahlil baiti ar-raksu wad-darab

[Maqari]

^

[Waziri]

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Robert Frost

Ahh Maqari! Really?

I can see it was the fragments of our personal correspondence you pasted there, but of course there is no harm in bringing it to public scrutiny.

But I think u shud have published the whole reply that others may have an insight into what really happened between you and I. That will also help them when it comes to reaching conclusions on what we may come to say in the near future.

I think u wrote first giving me ur personal profile and asking for mine saying:

..., i would appriciate if u include a few vaig details of yourself also in your response , PEACE  

Well it was kind of you to have asked and it was my obligation to respond telling you what you would NEED to know about me at the moment.

And in explaining my position on the philosophies of the world and in response to this your understanding of modern world as u put it:

...,im engaged in some human right activities, dedicated to the cause of promoting intellectual progress, i indulge only in honest progressive correspondance i have small tolerence for commodity and , ...

I said what u quoted above of me that: "Contrary to ur inclinations, I believe strongly in human obligations not rights as you do." And I added that this will not deter our friendship as you sought.

That is that. But with regard to the subject matter I suggest

1.      You tell or publish what u read of me at lagos  online   so that others will see and judge for themselves first.

2.      Then go ahead and point out what you do not agree with by some valid postulations. It is then I will come in with counter argument if there is.

3.      On the issue of rights or obligations, you just go ahead and tell us about your own concept of right and liberties and what you understand by my proposing obligations and duties. It is here I will come in with my understanding, where I cannot explain I will appeal to the understanding of scholars whose views and opinions are respected.

4.         This is essential for this discourse is no longer our personal prerogative. We have a duty to our readers to be explicit and to the point,  that they may not be lost or misguided. I believe "intellectualism is that ability to simply thoughts".

Finally, ours here in this forum are a series of intellectual voyages in the hope of re - discovering ourselves and as well as our generation, but my paradigm always is that of a Muslim who is first a Muslim before any other thing and as such on every aspect that require logical analysis, the end that carries the stint of the unexplainable always leave me in the cocoon of my worldview which = ISLAM.  I don't know yours?

One other thing for you is my warm welcome as you come into the community of your generation of Nigerian youths with a vision and mission to bring positive changes to our new world. Here, in agreement we rejoice and in disagreement we celebrate in the words of our poet friend who says:

"There is no better story than this we live
For we only live once and die
Why then do we cry?
Let us laugh till the we day"

I hope you will go ahead and move the motion as called for the duel.

I remain most grateful
I remain yours

[Maqari]

Its does not take a scientist to see that you viewed my words above through the spectacles of self defence ,thus setting motion into a different direction,

"But I think u shud have published the whole reply that others may have an insight into what really happened between you and I. That will also help them when it comes to reaching conclusions on what we may come to say in the near future."

i didnt publish the whole reply out of respect for privacy and only refered to opinions that u have in the past manifested publicly , like the lagos online post , my only refrence to it was when i said,
"A nobel piece of work that was on lagos online although i stand in disagreement with few of your points but " i even bothered to explain that our opinions might continue to differ,

the other thing i referred to was the subject of RIGHTS and OBLIGATIONS because at the moment i believed it was a topic worth discussing (apparently not), for its most ovious that my post evoked certain misinterpretations, dont be disheartened if i say that i do not sustain  conversations that are somewhat  built on vaig emotional foundations,

"Finally, ours here in this forum are a series of intellectual voyages in the hope of re - discovering ourselves and as well as our generation, but my paradigm always is that of a Muslim who is first a Muslim before any other thing and as such on every aspect that require logical analysis, the end that carries the stint of the unexplainable always leave me in the cocoon of my worldview which = ISLAM.  I don't know yours? "

MORTAL

peace one

[Waziri]

Its does not take a scientist to see that you viewed my words above through the spectacles of self defence ,thus setting motion into a different direction,

Well that could, but the fact is you are the only person I have ever come across who would quote from a private and personal communications in public and apologise saying :

by all means if you object to my posting this publicly feel free to express so, and i will withdraw my post,

This is weird. If you truly believe they were opinions I expressed somewhere in public why not just go there and quote me instead of quoting from our private communications?

You said I have given the discourse a different direction. Actually I had to digress a little to give the public an insight into the condition that made me say what I said because as we proceed I will definately need to refer back with the view to re-affirming or re-claiming my utterences. But yet I have adressed the issue you raised and gave u a guideline thru' which I believe the discourse will find meaningful direction.

You accused me of approaching the discourse from an emotional point of view? I believe of course that mankind is a combination of reason and emotions. And I think the bulk of K-onliners  know how I usually approach issues. As such I will not say anything here.

If I sprang in self defence, I think you called for it for it was not only an issue you raised up there but a statement telling telling the public that I have writting you a letter. Maqari, you can raise an issue without pointing to that.

Maqari, that action of yours betrays your lack of good sense of privacy and as such makes me greatly feel uncomfortable with you for I do not know whether if I tell you next in private bout my other inclinations you will not betray me or not. It is unfortunate.

Yes, we are all MORTALS but our description of the universe we live are different, some think it is material and some think it is spritual, like the christians, and I think as a Muslim it is when the material and the spritual finds confluence as it is in the true nature of man: A combination of emotion and reason. When you are ready for the discourse I am here.

[Waziri]

Maqari if I were you, being that I am seeking for a sincere intellectual exercise and since Waziri is saying something like, OBLIGATION not RIGHT. I will first ask Waziri first and try to understand him, because he may come up with something I do not know. Instead of just reaching conclusion and calling for a public discourse by making a declaration of my position, rightaway blocking in my brains the chances of newer ideas getting in there.  

This does not potray in any way a will to understand and as such I asked you first to let me have your own understanding first. Who knows, maybe you can convince me, maybe it is me who is in the wrong, may be we may create a new breed of idea, maybe, maybe,.....FOR my desire in life is nothing more than increase in knowledge and wisdom. Not taking pride in my understanding of intellectual arguments.

[ummita]

Mah brothers, I apologise 4 intrudin, seems lyk its a one on one kinda thing!.................bt u guys will spend eternity arguin & quotin each oda which is :-/......if u guys dnt end it...it MIGHT escalate 2 a full-blown argument. So as ur sister am askin: WHERE IS D LUV? D LUV? D LUV? nima make I quote (Black Eyed Peas).

Oya I dey offer free mediation fa! (she laffs)

Maqari & Waziri PASS D PEACE BROTHERS..................

[Hausanicious]

Yeah really, pass d peace brothers, as mah sista Ummita says.

Ayi ma tukka hanci from here.

[Anonymous]

Waziri this conversation is over, im wrong for disclosing a particle of your so called private email to me, i wil ask the admin to delete the thread,im currently under extreme travelling conditions and my access to the web is somewhat scarce so i will not be able to contribute as much to convos". Peace One  

[JiboNura]

Contrary to Maqari's and Waziri's intellectual reasonings and inclinations where the former believes in "Right" and the latter  respects "Obligations" I believe in both.

But as a mere observer, I detect certain misconduct or bias as regards to Maqari's posting. To all intents and purposes, Maqari's schezophrenic overzelousness, was self indicting. Perharps this could be the reason that made him transform  personal correspondence into anti-trust paradox. And probably it could be that he wanted to seek relevance for himself.

Whatever   the case, as it may, I think before we do such things we need to consider some other things.

First, as a true believer of Rights and probably duties, one needs to understand simple legalistic context of social interactions. It is a great intellectual lacuna, to dislay a sacred property which is, was, going to be shared between two or more people. One can only do that if there is what is called "consensus ad idem" (the coming together of the two minds to agree on certain things). Unless, this is done, one has no legal or moral justification to do so. Infact, it is tantamount to breach of trust and is liable to punishment by imprisonment.  It is breach of right and a misrepresentation.

Maqari, being an "intellectual luminary" and an ardent believer of "RIGHTS" as he always say; I do not know why he has forgotten this simple legal arithmetic. As a sign of self confession and self indictment, he even seeked the subject that if he doesn't want his actions he can hounorably withdraw. Certainly this is a pointer to the fact that Maqari's conscience  is at fault.

on the other hand, Waziri has every right to err 'cos it is human. But for both of them to be on the safer sides. I implore Maqari to pls go ahead and publish the "letter" in question. And Waziri should pls try and bring the "topic at issue" so that we can have a clear picture of what is happening in between.

But like i said, I am only an ordinary observer of public affairs. In case of any contrary view to my observation from any of the parties, or any other obserrver, I stand to be corrected.    

I remain loyal

[Muhammad]

salam
when intellectuals quarrel, who suffers?........................... the lay men.
i call for burying the hatchet.
and i say no more.

[Humrah]

Salam,

Amin, Hausanicious and Ummita, whenever something like this happen the best thing 2 do is to make an objective analysis in2 d matter. Tell who is right and the one that is wrong. It is d only way we will all learn 2 inprove. Jibo Nura thank you.

[Anonymous]

Humrah, there is a difference between debating issues and when they turn into arguments. There is also a point in time when people like Hausanious, Ummita and Amin need to cut right through an issue to avoid what could lead to harsh wordings! Who is right and who is wrong doesnt matter, if they cant debate their issues in a right manner without making offensive personal comments to each other then its best to put an end to it. Two wrongs dont make a right. You are suppose to put an end to it not to back up any of them. Its silly to say that they should point out who is right and who is wrong. They are no judges! Besides inbanda shaidanin mutum, wa ke irin wannan maganar idan anga zai jawo fada, kamata yayi a dakatar da ita, ko ba haka ba jama'a? Zaman lafiya maganin zaman duniya :-X

[Hafsy_Lady]

salam
when intellectuals quarrel, who suffers?........................... the lay men.
i call for burying the hatchet.

CAN I PLEASE BURY THE HATCHET IN THEIR HEADS ::) BECAUSE WE NO WAN WAHALA. AND BECAUSE THEY WAN TURN PLACE INTO WRESTLING FEDERATION......DAMA HALI ZANEN DUTSE, BA YAU AKA FARA BA AI ::)

ON THE WHOLE, I DEY TROWEY SALUTE TO (CANT ACCESS MY ACCOUNT)

TRULLY SAID

FOR WAZIRI 10 STROKES OF BULALA