a reasonable inquiry + a totally reasonable response

For some context on Andrew's tantrum about "Ali Cook"and his history of using burner accounts, see this post and this post.

It should be noted again that Andrew was only ever asked to submit basic personal information to an immigration lawyer ( "Name" "Date of Birth" "Address" "Telephone Number" "City and/or town of Birth" "US Social Security Number" "Number of People in Your Household" "Any Proof of Income abroad" "Earnings for the Last Three Years") and sign an affidavit (which could be done via email). He could have accomplished both those tasks in a few weeks.

Instead, after derailing his brother's green card application for 2 years during a pandemic, Andrew wrote four pages of rambling nonsense about how the name Ali reminded him of a childhood pet. This is a questionable use of time, especially for someone who would later claim to be suffering from long-haul Covid symptoms and sleeping on the streets in front of an internet cafe. To any outside observers, can Andrew's behaviour be characterized as anything other than purposeful obstructionism?

Some other claims that need to be addressed:

"a muslim man in malayasia murdered my best friend, who was my labrador companion, right in font of me with a parang/ machete. imagine being 9 years old and walking your dog in peace and then a lunatic muslim man comes out of his home with a machete and runs across a two lane road and hacks your dog to death in front of you and everyone else."

This never happened. The family did have a golden lab, named Ptolomy. According to Andrew's uncle Cantius (known to friends and family as "Umbie"), Andrew's father (at the time a veterinary surgeon) put the dog to sleep after it was badly injured. But as to how that injury happened, no one in the Camoens family really knows.

Andrew's uncle Umbie states:



Umbie's full statement on the matter can be heard here. [Youtube link.]

Andrew's mother often speculated that a neighbour may have been responsible for injuring the dog - but at no point did Andrew witness "a lunatic muslim man" hack Ptolomy to death.

But whatever the details are behind the dog's demise, the idea that Adrian could consciously trigger a traumatic memory that happened before he was even born simply by mentioning the name "Ali" is gaslighting, pure and simple. Does Andrew get similarly triggered by the name "Bali"? Apparently not.

"i never agreed with your decision when you had an opportunity to live in the west coast and i said as much. "

This is a reference to Adrian's college girlfriend, who was from California, and who Adrian was pressured to marry in order to stay in the US (despite the fact that she had yet to finish college). The claim that Adrian returned to Malaysia in opposition to his brother's wishes is false. In reality, Andrew agreed with Adrian's decision to wait until his girlfriend had finished school before getting married, even if it meant leaving the US for a year. But there's more to the story that Andrew is ignoring.

As Adrian's student visa was set to expire in the fall of 2002, and it became clear that he'd have to leave the US, Andrew ignored months of panicked emails and phone calls from his brother. It was only after Adrian left an answering machine message stating his intention to travel to Boston to see Andrew in person (at the house Adrian helped his brother buy) that Andrew finally responded via email. [This incident may explain why Andrew has gone out of his way to make sure his brother doesn't know his whereabouts.] He sent Adrian a generic list of immigration lawyers in the Boston area.

When they met face to face in Boston, Andrew did not offer his brother any words of support; instead, he went on a screaming tirade about Adrian's beard (because according to Andrew "the lawyer is Jewish" and the beard made Adrian "look like a Muslim"), and because Adrian did not follow Andrew's constant nagging to get a credit card or driver's license. This nagging came at the alleged recommendation of the same immigration lawyer, who Andrew claimed for years was "working on Adrian's case" (but who Adrian never met, and who Andrew never offered to introduce).

It turned out Andrew never had an immigration lawyer "working on the case". The lawyer they met with was named Honoré, and was of Afro-Caribbean descent. [Also, he did not seem to have a problem with Adrian's beard.]

When Adrian returned to New York, he received an email from Andrew apologizing and stating, "I wish I was a better person." It's clear Andrew has fallen well short of that mark.

The only time Andrew actively discouraged his brother from returning to Asia was in 2000, when Adrian went back to visit his mom and dad. Why Andrew was so dead set against this and repeatedly called Adrian a "sucker" for visiting his own parents is something only Andrew knows.

"i used moms valuable stamps. and they snatched my project from my hands and tore up moms stamps in front of my face."

This is the most audacious claim in the email, and maybe the most telling. It's common knowledge that the rift between Andrew and his mother occurred because he sold the most valuable parts of her stamp collection to other collectors, using the money to go to clubs around Manila, take his girlfriend Sharon out on dates, and buy himself some better clothes. The clothes he bought must have been real fancy for 1986, since he was voted "Best Dressed Dude" in his high school yearbook. Even after all that, as Andrew stated in his own letters from 1990, Andrew's mother still sent him thousands of dollars in support after he dropped out of college.

Years later, she would weep in Church during a Good Friday mass, saying that she "couldn't forgive him" for what he did.

Other than that, she never missed an opportunity to praise Andrew - despite the heartless way he cut her out of his life once he secured his US residency.

It's clear that Andrew is experiencing deep shame and guilt over the way he mistreated his mother - but to try to recast himself as a victim in the loss of her stamp collection is beyond reprehensible. Having passed away in 2017, Andrew's mother is unable to refute these claims, and Adrian was too young to witness the crime when it happened. Andrew seems to think that no one around is capable of challenging his version of these events - however, his sister is still alive, and can easily debunk his claims.

The strangest part about these allegations is their performative nature. Andrew knows what he wrote is false; he also knows that Adrian is aware of the truth about what transpired. So for whose benefit is all this revisionism? Is there a third party that's privy to these communications?

"i had to endure being a catholic boy in muslim malayasia"

Even though Andrew's mother was a devout Catholic, Andrew did not get baptized or officially convert to Catholicism until after he was enrolled in Boston College (a Jesuit university) in 1986. The claim that he was bullied growing up because he was "a Catholic boy in Muslim Malaysia" is farcical.

Throughout this email, Andrew expresses a deep antipathy towards Muslim countries in general, and Malaysia in particular. What then does he make of the fact that in 2007 his brother Adrian chose to return to Malaysia rather than stay with Andrew in a 3-storey house in the Boston suburbs? If Andrew views living in Malaysia as "traumatic", how much worse was living with him?