|
|
|
IT imperatives
The making of the Great Wall I HAVE gone through your most comprehensive research-oriented article on the above subject that appeared in the Dawn Magazine issue of Jan 13, 2002. I heartily congratulate you for undertaking each an in-depth study. Sir Nicholas Barrington worked as British Ambassador and High Commissioner in Pakistan during 1987-94. Presently, he lives in London and is interested in the heritage of Pakistan. After going through my book The Tombs of Kalhora Chiefs at Hyderabad, published by Oxford University Press, Karachi, in 1994, he not only enjoyed it but also congratulated me for such detailed research. He was confused on two points, however, and wrote me a letter on Aug 16, 1999, for clarification that I thrashed out promptly. Similarly in your article, I am also confused on the following points: a) In the first para, you have mentioned that the Great Wall runs 6,700kms from East to West, but subsequently you have given details of the walls constructed by the dynasties as under: western side: 650kms; northern side: 1,500kms; eastern side: 4,000kms. This brings the total to (6,150kms). Thus, there is a gap of 550kms. b) You have given details of the western, northern and eastern sides of the wall constructed by the Zhou, Jin and finally the Ming dynasties. There is no mention of the southern side. Is this because there is no wall there (I have no full idea of the Great Wall). c) There is no information about the cost involved in the projects. If dynasty-wise information is not available, can’t the total cost involved in the project be had? M. SIDDIQUE G. MEMON Hyderabad Foul-breathing to dispel stink? I HAVE not been glancing through the Dawn Magazine mail for quite some time and have also been skipping the glossy and pictures-backed column of Anjum Niaz since her recent comeback to the magazine with its lucid and often overloaded narrations. But I did go through the letter by A. Waheed titled It wasn’t anti-Semitism (March 7, 2002) as it enticed my mind due to it being the burning topic of the day and stirred up by the sizzling hot environment of the Middle East. The focus of the letter was on vindicating the position of Anjum Niaz, by sorting out the accusation of Syed Wasiq Ali that she appeared to be anti-Semitic by saying that some people call the New York Times as “Jew York Times”. It dissipated Mr Ali’s apprehension about the possible consequences of such unguarded verbiage. While I don’t have much to argue about the arguments of Mr Waheed in favour of Anjum, it did spur my interest in Anjum’s column Nuke-making made easy for dummies (March 17, 2002). I could not help noticing the volcanic unloading of her tirade, this time against Iftikhar Khan and Steven Emerson, by using all the adjectives in her armoury to vent her hate and disdain. Steven Emerson and his recent creation “American Jihad” do not deserve any diligence or rational consideration for the ill-founded fabrications or/and wild fantasies. But is foul-breathing by the charming Anjum Niaz to dispel the bad stink of Emerson reflective of good taste? However, an effective short course for media goons at NYC and Washington is a valid suggestion by her for Nisar Memon, the founding guru of The Reformers, and for a bit of reform in his current field of activity as the information minister. M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY Karachi | ||
THIS letter is with reference to the article IT imperatives published in the Dawn Magazine issue of Feb 3, 2002. It was too long and completely unnecessary.|
|
|
|
