Wednesday, November 12, 2008

He Is Back

The Hello, Gorgeous guy is back.  

As reported here, this guy had taken a different view of the whole Zardari-Palin stint.  He got hammered in the media afterwards and now, he is back with a reply.  

Since I posted his first letter, I feel obliged to post this one as well.  

THIS is further to my captioned letter of Oct 17. It appears that some of your readers focused only on its superficial meaning, but weren’t able to understand the real message.

Thus, Samar Kaiser (Oct 21) and Riffat Rehman (Oct 29) were unhappy that I had apparently tried to justify Asif Zardari’s telling Sarah Palin she was ‘gorgeous’ and even offering to hug her. In her sequal, “The great ‘seducteur’” (Nov 2), to the column ‘Hello, Gorgeous’ which had set off the lively debate in these columns, Anjum Niaz has revealed another reader’s response.

Ms Niaz says that a female friend of hers in America ‘was not amused’ by my anonymous, light-hearted response. The friend threatened that if I tried to behave with her impulsively and called her ‘gorgeous’ as I had jokingly said I would be the first pretty woman that I next encountered in the west, I would get ‘punched’ (by her)!

The intended message of my letter had four points.

1) It is more difficult to restrain one’s impulses during one’s youth, compared to the time when one is in the 50s. A person is more likely to feel lonely when travelling alone, but even then self-control must be there, as in my trip to Paris.

2) Before saying the things that he did in front of Ms Palin, our president should have considered the adverse effect this could have on the people back home, especially the youth.

3) A married man has additionally got to consider his wife’s sensibilities. Mr Zardari, too, had a wife until just nine months before the incident. So, that was all the more reason for him to be extra careful.

4) He should have apologised to the nation, or at least expressed his regrets, but he hasn’t, so far. Perhaps his wife’s first death anniversary on Dec 27 may serve to make him contrite.

As far as Ms Anjum’s friend is concerned, she would have been better off, if, instead of emotion, she had used reason to assess my letter. Somebody had said, “I have never known a man who was sensual in his youth, who was high-minded when old.” If I could resist all the temptations of the West even in my younger days, why would I not be high-minded now?

Seneca’s words said in this context ought to be internalised: “What if one might have all the pleasures of the world for the asking? Who would so unman himself as by accepting them to desert his soul and become a perpetual slave to his senses.”



By the way, I found it myself this time around.  And I think that his earlier stance was more amusing than this one.



  1. The poor guy got misunderstood. The misfortune of every intelligent man in this nation.


Wanna say something? Say it out loud.