Steve Smith, in his letter to the editor March 24, reasserted the spurious and discredited claim that the Chinese came to the Caribbean in 1421. This theory is based on a book written by Gavin Menzies called 1421, whose methods and scholarship are disregarded not only by historians but by those who study the Chinese people. The map to which Mr Smith refers is of questionable authenticity.
Historian Robert Finlay put it best when he said of 1421: "The reasoning of 1421 is inexorably circular, its evidencespurious, its research derisory, its borrowings unacknowledged, its citations slipshod, and its assertions preposterous...Examination of the book's central claims reveals they are uniformly without substance." While revising historical knowledge is important, the assertions must be based in fact or on evidence of some authenticity.
Furthermore, with regards to his claims about the Falklands, it is interesting that in times of a plummeting economy and decreasing popularity (just as in 1982 under Leopoldo Galtieri), that Argentine President Cristina Kirchner has played the Falklands issue. This is nothing more than a political ploy meant to distract us from the real issues.
Mr Smith, while pointing out one matter that is of importance (Diego Garcia Islands), as was his stated intention, isavoiding the crux of the issue. He has failed to show any way in which this is related to the Falkland Islands other than Diego Garcia's geographical proximity, and the fact that the British were involved.With all due respect, Mr Smith, (which I doubt is your real name) be careful when stating as fact what in fact is questionable information. I am sure it was not your intention to do this, and that you believed in what you said. It remains, however, a risky thing to do because it leaves you wide open to criticism from those who do know. It is misinforming the public who may come to believe what you wrote and it affects your credibility when you are refuted.
Isidore Gabriel
via e-mail