Update: An Open Letter To Dr. Clarence Bayne
By N Oji Mzilikazi
December 7, 2013
On November 28, 2013, I was served with papers threatening legal action over “An Open Letter To Dr. Clarence Bayne,” published in the Montreal Community Contact Volume 23, Number 19 October 3, 2013, and unless retracted within 10 days, be liable for compensation for damages past, present and future.
As serious is the matter, I laughed — and hearty at that, at this legal shenanigan of Clarence Bayne to silence criticism and dissent — that is a hallmark of a healthy democracy…
10 thoughts on “Update: An Open Letter To Dr. Clarence Bayne”
I am one of those retired old farts who has crept away to irrelevance. However I am willing to be a financial contributor to expenses incurred in retiring that other old fart whose refuses to go away.
Much Respect Mr. Jeffers, Much Respect…
And in a case of added idiocy, the lawyer letter ends thus:
“Dr. Bayne, reserves his rights to claim full compensation for all the damages, past, present and future, the publishing of the Open Letter may have caused him and the content of the present letter could not be used against him in a court of law.”
Since when has democracy outlawed rebuttal/refutation?
I am surprised at all the comess that go on in theblack community.Bain beleive that he and he alone speaks for the black community.Ana when he talks no dog barks.Going to court over an opinion different to his is not the way to obtain a moral victory..Bain believe that he is the top dog,and when he barks no one answers.
That people refused to entertain his barks or reply to them embolden; engender autocracy…entitlement…narcissism…feelings of being top dog — in a neglected puppy mill.
Top dog? Where and in what? In case you did not know it I am fully aware who the people are that literally put soup in my fridge when there is illness or misfortune in my family. I have never seen you, N’ojai, Garvin or Yvonne Sam coming to my rescue when in dire need. .I am still working to pay my way. I pay my takes, I vote, I breath and I am capable of thought. Therefore I reserve the right to protect my sense of self. Thus I am top dog of myself. When I speak, I speak for myself and those with whom I have close bonds. Who can afford to retire and wants to go in a corner and die can do that. That is their right. But I have the right and the will to exercise the right to live until I die. N’Ojai is right about the immediate futility taking legal action against him. But he missed the point. And I am not about to tell him what it is. There are more ways than one to skin a cat. And I believe the Universe is beginning to unfold ever so slowly. We will see what it reveals.
Tut! Tut! It is the inherent right of each human to voice his/ her opinion publicly without fear of punishment/ censorship etc. . It is blatantly apparent that Dr. Bayne wants to voice his opinion on people and issues, desires to be heard, yet reacts when the converse is done. Poor player! Sore loser! The money that has been invested in legal fees could it not be put to better use in the community.Is there no other conciliatory measures to be adopted? Just proves the age old saying that Blacks can never talk to each other just talk at each other.
May the passage of time usher in wisdom and insight.
Yvonne time will provide all the answers.
If we seriously contemplate the exhortation: “Emancipate yourself from mental slavery,” we would not only talk to each other, but watch how we talk to one another. But when people entire lives are predicated on bullying, or being seen as Mr/Ms. This, Mr/Ms. That, or is a control freak, you can bet your last dollar they are going to do anything and everything to keep it that way and would not take kindly to criticism.
Read your own articles carefully and you will perhaps be hearing the voice of a real bully. Everybody says so. How come you mistake your own shadow for that of someone else. Go back from the top of this discourse and note how hard you labour to prove that I am the source of all failure in the Black Community. This can hardly be convincing even to you yourself. For you must be aware of your anger and the hatred that drive your outbursts. According to your logic in this long tedious aguement you present, I should be blamed for all the failures in the City of Montreal, because Clarence Bayne lives in Montreal.
I AM CAREFULLY RECORDING AND KEEPING THIS CONTENT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SPEWING. AS SOON AS A CLEAR CASE OF CYBER CRIME CAN BE ESTABLISHED YOU WILL HEAR FROM ME. I HAVE TIME I CAN WAIT UNTIL THE LAW IS CLEARER AND RETROACTIVE. MONEY IS NOT THE ISSUE. JAIL IS.
Do I take it that you agree with N’Ojai when he accuses me of almost being criminally irresponsible for the simple reason that I agree with a Board decision to sell the BSC and stop the financial bleeding? Are you saying that I do not have the right to set the records right by placing in the public archives a document presenting a legal argument showing his mal-intent? If so, I suppose you risk saying that Erene Antony is petty and irresponsible for being very upset that recently N’Ojai unjustifiably smeared her name and that of her son with totally inaccurate reporting? Obviously Community Contact felt the need to apologize and denounce and disassociate itself from such unwarranted attacks on our “vulnerable” community workers/leaders. Are so many upset people in the community petty because they are fed up with his sick attacks? Are you saying that it is good reporting to call all leaders in the Community “hustlers that would sell their mothers for a nickel” or words to that effect ( see Community Contact Articles 2013 and 2014). Hard hitting debates are invigorating and at times inspirational. But a habit of deliberate misrepresentation of the facts and unprofessional journalism is unacceptable. This is not a game of sore losers and jubilant one-up-manship. The Editor in Chief of Community Contact has set the record straight about the Paper’s policy of professionalism in the recent issue of the paper (July 27 2914). That is refreshing and reassuring. I hope all contributors will be governed by the spirit and practice of it. But of course we cannot hold the paper accountable for the cyber bullying practices of its occasional contributors.