Caleb was responding to the community flagging process. That means that one or more people flagged the answer as requiring moderator attention. The flagging is anonymous, so you won't know who objected unless they tell you.
I checked to see, but I didn't flag the answer, though I thought about it. For me, the problem with the answer was the two questions:
Have you ever heard of a martyr?
Doesn't that count?
Caleb noted the answer might be taken as sarcastic, to which I agree. There are ways to make your answer without coming off as derisive or arrogant.
The good news is that if you edit the answer to fix the tone, and flag it for moderator attention, there's a good chance the answer can be restored.
Now for the meta-question: I don't think you do yourself any favors by pitting one moderator against another. Caleb did what his conscience said was right in responding to the community flagging on that answer. Every day moderators need to make decisions about what's best for the site. It's a difficult job that will certainly get harder as the site grows. Each one knows that the others are doing their best and won't question each other's motives lightly. Moderators must show solidarity with each other. For the good of the site, we most allow them to do their work without hindrance or complaint if possible.
If a moderator does have a bad day or whatever, we shouldn't call them out publicly or beg another moderator to interfere. Bringing the matter to meta isn't a bad idea, but keep it low key (which you didn't do), non-confrontational (ditto), and address the issue objectively (you didn't really do that either). You might have quoted your answer here (for people who can't see deleted answers [I can]) and asked how it could be improved.
Finally, "robbed of 30+ reputation points!!" sounds simultaneously shallow and hysterical.