It is extremely difficult to get to the bottom of many of the alarming stories we read in our press. My column last week made mention of a September 14 news item which related how a religious school teacher, a Qari (a reciter of the Quran), of the small town of Yazman, near Multan, had chopped off the tongue of a 13-year old student who some days previously had observed his teacher sodomizing a fellow student.

The boy's father, a Pesh Imam (a leader of prayers) had told reporters that his son had witnessed the sexual assault, had been threatened by the Qari not to tell anyone about it, had told his father, and the Qari had then used a razor on his tongue. But no arrest had been made, as the boy's family had not so far lodged any complaint with the local police.

Another report in another newspaper on the same day had it that the boy, Hafiz Abdul Qadoos, was aged 18, that he had reported the matter to the police and that a case against Qari Bashir Ahmed, the seminary in charge, who had deprived him of the power of speech, had been registered under sections 336 and 506 of the Pakistan Penal Code.

The case was registered on the complaint of the boy, who 'told' the local SHO that he and the Qari had for long been at daggers drawn, that on several occasions he had thrashed the Qari, and that on September 2 the Qari in his turn had overpowered him and 'injured' his tongue with a sharp weapon, and then threatened him with dire consequences 'if he let the cat out of the bag'.

The boy's father, when contacted by the police told quite a different story. He claimed that the injuries to the his son's tongue were self-inflicted and that boy had not lost the power of speech. The police maintained that the boy had given his statement in writing as he could not speak. Some of the town's people had told the police that the Qari had first sodomized the boy Qudoos and then cut off his tongue.

Come September 18 and in a further report on the incident we learnt that the Yazman police had discharged the case against the Qari as two local doctors had declared that the injury was indeed self-inflicted. A fresh case had been filed under section 182 of the Penal Code against the boy Qudoos for having misled the police.

All quite normal happenings in our neck of the woods.

We will presumably never know the truth, nor will we learn of the true state of the injuries to the boy, nor of his fate. If someone concerned in this sordid matter can do a spot of clarification, the people will at least learn what is or is not what.

On September 19, a news report from Naushahro Feroze, headlined 'Jirga hands over girl, land in murder dispute', gave us the startling news that a former ambassador of Pakistan, Syed Manzoor Ali Shah, had been a member of the three-man jirga. One Naban Solangi had been murdered by three of his relatives. The judgment of the Jirga was that two of the accused, a father and son, would hand over one acre of land and Rs 10,000 to the sons of Solangi and that the third accused would hand over his daughter. Both parties readily agreed. Again, normal happenings.

A headline in a Lahore newspaper yesterday reads : 'Jirga system to remain intact, says governor.' The NWFP governor has declared in Bajaur Agency that the tribal areas will not be subject to judicial reforms. Will our other three governors follow suit? This would be quite in keeping with our times.

Another report in this newspaper on September 19, underneath the blazing headline 'Policemen wanted in rape cases still at large', related how, during the past two months there had been reports of gang rapes involving policemen. In one case, a woman, the mother of two, was found in Neelam Colony crying in agony as her face had been burnt with acid. She was taken to Jinnah Hospital where it was established that she had been raped.

Her story was that she had been abducted by three policemen of Karachi, taken to Mian Chunnu in Punjab, and repeatedly raped over the course of one week. She was brought back to Karachi, threatened with the usual 'dire consequences' if she spoke out, and the dire consequences in her case was a dose of acid-throwing.

A 'clarification' to this story issued by a 'spokesman' was published in yesterday's Dawn. It only serves to further confuse the issue - the object obviously being to adhere to the old saying, 'if you cannot convince them, confuse them.' Again, perfectly normal.

The second case took place in Karachi's Kashmir Colony, involving four policemen, who took a young girl to a Defence house, raped her, and then dumped her near Golden Towers (also in Defence). A case has been registered against the four policemen, who of course absconded and remain at large.

On quite a different topic which I touched upon last Sunday, on the difficulties now faced, post-9/11, by Pakistani students trying to obtain admission to US colleges and the requisite US visas, 'Aliya and Saqib' responded by e-mail:

"Hello, Your recent article with the mention of Pakistani/ Muslim students not getting visas, brought back the memory of the Aga Khan medical students and Duke University. I am sending you the web documents regarding an incident in which a Duke professor told students that he won't consider their applications because they may be terrorists."

The story dates back to December 19, 2001:

"Medical school dean apologizes for faculty letter sent to foreign students. Three Pakistani medical students, whose inquiries about working in a research laboratory were initially rebuffed by a Duke University professor, have been sent a letter of apology from Dr R. Sanders Williams, dean of the Duke School of Medicine.

"Williams also has sent a message to the Duke University Medical Centre community that reaffirms Duke's commitment to cultural diversity.

"In his letter e-mailed to the three students at Aga Khan University Medical College, Williams stated, 'I have learned of your interest in spending time in one of our research laboratories and of the intemperate and inappropriate response that you received from Professor Michael Reedy in your quest for information. Professor Reedy's initial response to you does not represent the views of Duke University or of Duke University Medical School.

"...... 'I have spoken with Professor Reedy and, as he indicated to you in his follow-up e-mail, he sincerely regrets his initial response and appreciates very much your acceptance of his apology. I am convinced his response is both sincere and appropriate. In addition to his apology, I want to express my own on behalf of our school.'

"The students concerned had e-mailed Reedy about possible summer research opportunities in his laboratory, Reedy replied by e-mail: 'Your ethnicity and your age (student age = idealistic) are so similar to those of the jihad-minded terrorists from the schools that nurtured the Taliban and Al Qaeda that it is not worth our trouble to try to determine if you are a well-disguised terrorist or a real learning-motivated medical student. You may well be innocent, but some of your neighbours are as potentially lethal as anthrax or HIV, and must be protected against.

"As long as there are zealots whose idea of reasonable dialogue and persuasive rhetoric is suicide bombing, we seem to have no efficient choice but to react with suspicion, which must motivate us to extreme avoidance or to kill-or-be-killed defensive activism aimed at extermination.'

"Reedy later apologized: 'I see now that my negative reaction came mainly from my anger and frustration with the extremism and deceptiveness of the terrorists of Sept. 11, which seemed to destroy my personal hopes for a reasoned an peaceful resolution of international conflicts. ... Your messages touched me in that sore spot, and I fired back at you in anger and frustration ......... I deeply apologize for my violent words and bad manners.'

"Reedy also noted that the incident had 'made very clear to me that the ease and speed of e-mail can embody hazards as significant as its conveniences'." This last observation is very correct.

All involved in the occurrences related in this column have undoubtedly acted in keeping with their respective characters and with the knowledge each possesses. Should the people of Pakistan educate themselves to remain in synchronization with the world outside, or should we keep to our insular ignorant barbaric ways and expect the world to accord us respect?