The Last Leaf Soul-food...very nice...

Train from Pakistan, 2004: The Return
RE: Veeresh said: shahid/140 - sorry, I write the way I see it.

---

Veeresh,
Buddy, you are no ee cummings. You might write the way you see it. But your writing is staggeringly horrendous. Read the book I suggested or don`t write at all. Your muddled thoughts are in some dire need of clarity.

My two cents: Don`t travel, see, think and DEFINATELY don`t write.

Train from Pakistan, 2004: The Return
Veeresh,
Using the principles of Strunk and White please rewrite your ``preamble`` and re-post:

``Final preamble to an epilogue on a tribute that became a travelogue accused of being a monologue. If chowkies, inter-actors and lurkers here think that what I got from some of them is bitchy and terrible, then they need to see what a typical South Asian family can achieve after a funeral where truth takes precedence over pretense. To some extent, ``pulling their chain``, was like therapy. Consider . . .``

Train from Pakistan, 2004: The Return
Veeresh,
May I suggest Strunk and White, The Elements of Style. Some important writing tips they touch upon:

1. Choose a suitable design and hold to it.
2. Make the paragraph the unit of composition.
3. Use the active voice.
4. Put statements in positive form.
5. Use definite, specific, concrete language.
6. Omit needless words. Omit needless words. Omit needless words.
7. Avoid a succession of loose sentences.
8. Express coordinate ideas in similar form.
9. Keep related words together.
10. Place the emphatic words of a sentence at the end.
11. Write with nouns and verbs.
12. Revise and rewrite.
13. Do not overwrite.
14. Do not overstate.
15. Avoid the use of qualifiers.

and so on....good luck!

How that Other Democracy (India) Differs
Veeresh,
Your article doesn`t say anything and is really a bizarre concoction of disparate thoughts. You title your article: ``How that Other Democracy (India) Differs``. So...how does it differ? It is a title/question, which warrants serious thought of which you have shown none. You then mix in your crock-melange the fact that the United States has a bipolar election process, a business gathering you attended, and a book which was presented to you called ``A Time of Coalitions; Divided we Stand`` (which you found ``highly readable``). Then there is the question of language...whatever do you mean when you write:

``Divided we Stand`` brings out, very evocatively, how India would probably benefit from a multi-dimensional political system, with self-correctives born out of practical compulsions and traditions rather than untested and shallow ideologies.``

I have read this sentence about ten times and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Incoherent writing reflects incoherent thoughts. Take some pride in the quality of what you post...

Church vs Mosque
re: A. Shiraz/Solitude

Can`t tell if your piece is a ``tongue-in-cheek`` commentary - but there are a number of contemporary architects who are designing mosques where women have prayer areas of comparable size and stature (not relegated to the basement). Gulzar Haider, an old professor of mine not only designed mosques such as these but is proposing one in Florida where men and women will stand shoulder-to-shoulder. You really must look beyond the ``mullah`` and you will find people challenging Islamic fundamentals which you might have absorbed as truths growing up. It is up to you to challenge these interpretations that the ``mullah`` has tried to pass as ``the truth``. There is really no value in a ``daisy-cutter`` critique when you don`t know the leg you stand on - you are really no better than the ``mullah`` at that point. There is a history of art, music, and architecture in Islam - visit Rumi`s tomb in Konya or buy a Nusrat CD at the nearest music store. Calligraphy, miniatures, ceramics, jewelry - there is a very sophisticated history of art in the Islamic world. Your social experiment should also include a few mosques by the architect Sinan; or visit the Great Mosque of Niono in Mali; or Hasan Fathy`s Mosque of Gurna in Egypt. If these do not move you in any way, do yourself a favour and bypass all churches/temples/mandirs and go directly to the closest Barnes and Noble/Chapters and pick up a copy of Friedich Nietzsche

A Matter of Destiny
RE: Malik99
YLH is quite clear in his logic. What makes sense to him or myself might not for you. Now, your reading of history (Islamic or otherwise) may be very different, but that is your perogative. History is always an interpretative account from an individual`s perspective. What are the facts? You tell us. For me whether they were cultural, scientific, or medical advances - they were, in fact, an enduring significance to Mankind as a whole. These were not made in the name of God or for Islam. The fact that these men/women during the ``Classical Age of Islam`` were Muslims only gives it context. The foundation of this legacy was due to a geographical unity giving rise to an unequalled cross-fertilization of an once isolated tradition. This was a significant moment in time. Contextually, as a ``History of Ideas``, this is severely lacking in our times and what probaby makes Naseeb/Chowk such a magnet. I`m sure Thabit ibn Qurrah who produced many original works and treatises on dozens of topics ranging from medicine to physics had no desire to quantify the energy or effusions passed by a djinn.

A Matter of Destiny
Bina...you`re right...Monis` page was unique with all the funny-little-mug-shots. I must say I am proud of my classmates and friends Bina and Monis who have found novel (pun very much intended Bina) and stimulating ways to engage this world we live in...

An Air Canada Flagging
RE: #19 - Tahmed32

TAhmed32... I have never criticized nor ignored the legitimate concern of airline security in the above account or in any of my postings. Why you think otherwise is really beyond me. In my last paragraph I very CLEARLY write:

``A procedure for APPEALING is what is needed here.``

Please note the word ``APPEALING`` - I DID NOT say we need a new procedure for ``security``. I have never said anything other than that and go on to say:

``It is then that the government can attempt to strike an appropriate balance between respecting the values of equality while also ensuring the SAFETY OF THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY.``

Please note SAFTETY OF THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY.
DOST-MITTAR has most eloquently summed up my ``intent`` in his many postings should you continue to misconstrue/misread me and/or my account.

SM

nb. I do appreciate the ``cartoonist-compliment``.

An Air Canada Flagging
Couldn`t resist with my #111 comment (wink!)...had a bet with some collegues to see how quickly tahemd32 and veeresh would swoop in. You did me proud (and a little bit richer!!) guys!
Shahid

An Air Canada Flagging
RE: Ahmadzai wrote - ``My humble submission on this article is as follows: Shahid`s article has a weakness in that it tries to raise the emotional level of an average Muslim just along the line Al Qaeda and extremist religious parties are doing all over the world to turn us against the West. ``

---

If there is a post that made me really mad it is this one. It is a foolish yet dangerous post which takes totally unrelated thoughts and ideas, sews them together unscrupulously, and then ``humbly`` presently them as truths. How does one make these conjectures????
Shahid

An Air Canada Flagging RE: #103 - ``Look at the bright side, this problem will be solved probably in the next generation, provided you are judicial with your children`s names.``

kkkandk, One step ahead of you...I thought I had it all planned out by naming my future first-born Ed Kennedy...can`t do that now. Will have to settle for Henry Kissinger. Now if only had I those aqualine, European looks. Oh well!

An Air Canada Flagging
Sorry for the long paste, but this is rather funny!
Enjoy.

NYT
August 20, 2004
Senator? Terrorist? A Watch List Stops Kennedy at Airport
By RACHEL L. SWARNS

WASHINGTON, Aug. 19 - The meeting had all the hallmarks of an ordinary Congressional hearing. There was Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, discussing the problems faced by ordinary citizens mistakenly placed on terrorist watch lists. Then, to the astonishment of the crowd attending a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, Mr. Kennedy offered himself up as Exhibit A.

Between March 1 and April 6, airline agents tried to block Mr. Kennedy from boarding airplanes on five occasions because his name resembled an alias used by a suspected terrorist who had been barred from flying on airlines in the United States, his aides and government officials said.

Instead of acknowledging the craggy-faced, silver-haired septuagenarian as the Congressional leader whose face has flashed across the nation`s television sets for decades, the airline agents acted as if they had stumbled across a fanatic who might blow up an American airplane. Mr. Kennedy said they refused to give him his ticket.

``He said, `We can`t give it to you`,`` Mr. Kennedy said, describing an encounter with an airline agent to the rapt audience. `` `You can`t buy a ticket to go on the airline to Boston.` I said, `Well, why not?` He said, `We can`t tell you.` ``

``Tried to get on a plane back to Washington,`` Mr. Kennedy continued. `` `You can`t get on the plane.` I went up to the desk and said, `I`ve been getting on this plane, you know, for 42 years. Why can`t I get on the plane?` ``

The hearing room erupted in laughter.

Mr. Kennedy said his situation highlighted the odyssey encountered by people whose names had mistakenly appeared on terrorist watch lists or resembled the names of suspected terrorists on such lists. In April, the American Civil Liberties Union sued the government on behalf of seven airline passengers who said they had wrongly been placed on no-fly lists or associated with names on the lists and could not find a way to clarify their identities.

In Mr. Kennedy`s case, airline supervisors ultimately overruled the ticket agents in each instance and allowed him to board the plane. But it took several weeks for the Department of Homeland Security to clear the matter up altogether, the senator`s aides said.

Just days after Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge called Mr. Kennedy in early April to apologize and to promise that the problems would be resolved, another airline agent tried to stop Mr. Kennedy from boarding a plane yet again. The alias used by the suspected terrorist on the watch list was Edward Kennedy, said David Smith, a spokesman for the senator.

At the hearing, Mr. Kennedy wondered how ordinary citizens could navigate the tangled bureaucracy if a senator had so much trouble. ``How are they going to be able to get to be treated fairly and not have their rights abused?`` he asked.

Asa Hutchinson of the Department of Homeland Security, who was testifying at the Senate hearing, said his department was working to address the situation. He said travelers with such problems should contact the ombudsman at the Transportation Security Administration, a division of Homeland Security, who would help them take steps to clarify their identities.

``There is a process to clear names,`` said Mr. Hutchinson, the department`s under secretary for border security. ``But it does illustrate the importance of improving the whole system, which we are very aggressively working to do.``

On Monday, Mr. Hutchinson told Congress that Homeland Security officials planned to take over the checking of names of passengers against the no-fly lists. The responsibility is now carried out by the airlines, to ensure that terror suspects do not board airplanes and that law enforcement officials are promptly notified of potential security risks.

Advocates for tougher screening requirements say the current system is ineffective because the government does not provide the airlines with a comprehensive set of watch lists, in part because some of that information is classified. Civil libertarians also cite instances in which airlines have mistakenly denied passengers the right to fly.

The ticket agents who tried to block Mr. Kennedy from boarding planes to Washington, Boston, Palm Beach and New York worked for US Airways, Senate officials said. Amy Kudwa, a US Airways spokeswoman, acknowledged that Mr. Kennedy was a frequent passenger, but declined to comment on the incidents.

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union said they did not know how many people had been mistakenly placed on watch lists. But they said the sluggish responses from the airline and the government to Mr. Kennedy`s efforts to clear his name demonstrated the absurdity of the no-fly system.

``It demonstrates all those things that we found problems with in the first place, `` said Reginald Shulford of the A.C.L.U.``If you`re Ted Kennedy, you can call a friend,`` Mr. Shulford said. ``If you`re an average citizen you cannot. You can complain to the Department of Homeland Security, but to no avail.``

At the hearing, Mr. Kennedy emphasized his concern for passengers stuck on no-fly lists. But he tried to make light of his own troubles.

He said, to much laughter, that he did not believe the mistake was a conspiracy engineered by his Republican colleagues. And as Mr. Hutchinson offered up his apologies, Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, responded jokingly in kind.

Mr. Hutchinson said, ``Senator, we do regret that inconvenience to you.``

Mr. Hatch said, ``Quit smiling when you say that.``

An Air Canada Flagging
RE: #48, Tahmed32
Sorry...don`t see any intelligence in your reply. It seems you don`t really understand
the point of the article nor are you addressing the points I brought up in Post #46.
I really have nothing more to say to you.
Thank-you.
Shahid

An Air Canada Flagging
RE: tahmed32
Such hostility. Let`s cut all the crap about what the world thinks about ``whiners, spiteful people, Muslims, Indians, Pakis, Americans, Canadians`` or blue eyed toads for all I care. Tell me my seemingly, ``worldly and most intellectual friend`` how would you go about handling this particular situation. To recap, here are the facts:

1. You have been flagged and refused from boarding a flight.
2. You are refused to board a flight the next day.
3. You are told that from this point on you are to carry a PASSPORT on all domestic flights.
4. You are told that you are on potentially a watch list.
5. You are told under no circumstances are you to visit the United States by your lawyer.
6. You are lied to by Air Canada as to what transpired between you and the desk agents when you write in a complaint.
7. A politician tells you that Air Canada is lying to you and that a call was placed to the RCMP when you tried to board.

I can go on (but that would be whining, right?) - but my challenge to you is to write for me and for the rest of CHOWK on this board (or if you have the writing skills an article on CHOWK) what you would do in this instance. Please don`t resort to the usual namecalling rhetoric - it is quite tiring. I look forward to an intelligent response and hopefully you will surprise me with some useful advice for my particular situation.

Thank-you.

An Air Canada Flagging
#6 - Dost Mittar...it is a very high percentage and there have been a number of stories about this in the media...some counts are actually higher. The flagging, however, doesn`t reflect people who are not allowed to fly. You can be flagged but still allowed to fly...your profile, in these instances, will be highlighted for future flights. Some of the stories I have been hearing recently from journalists, lawyers, and friends are quite disturbing. As for Transport Canada they have actually denied, when contacted, of keeping any such security lists.