Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Unmasking A False Friend of the West: Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

Expand Messages
  • Beowulf
    All muslims lie, all of the time. B http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/92561/sec_id/92561 Unmasking A False Friend of the West: Salah Uddin
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      All muslims lie, all of the time.



      Unmasking A False Friend of the West: Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

      by Brenda West (July 2011)

      Can we admit that we have been scammed? Many of us in the Western world
      believed the Bangladeshi journalist and publisher, Salah Uddin Shoaib
      Choudhury, when he called himself a "Muslim Zionist." Choudhury presented
      himself as devoted to Jewish people and Western principles of democracy. He
      won international acclaim and generous financial support as one of the few
      Muslims who affirmed our values by playing on the hopes and fears of the
      West in the post 9/11 world. However, this in-depth investigation reveals
      that he has been exploiting his supporters and is creating national security
      risks for both Israel and the West.


      The Legend of Shoaib Choudhury

      An earnest fan club has gathered around Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. His
      image was of a noble, highly moral person who was willing to face
      imprisonment and death in support of minorities, especially Jews, in his
      Muslim rule country. In November, 2003 Choudhury defied a ban Bangladesh had
      placed on its citizens preventing them from traveling to Israel, and was
      arrested. Choudhury was on his way to a media conference in Tel Aviv
      organized by Dr. Ada Aharoni, the head of a group called the International
      Forum for the Literature and Culture of Peace (IFLAC). Very quickly, word
      got out to an American friend, Richard Benkin, with whom Choudhury had been
      communicating by email and telephone for almost a year. Through Benkin’s
      intercession, the Internet was soon awash with Free Choudhury petitions and
      articles denouncing his imprisonment and demanding his release.

      An international movement was born, and Choudhury was eventually released
      from prison on bail. In the United States, Choudhury won endorsements from
      Congressional representatives Mark Steven Kirk, Nita Lowey, Peter King,
      Joseph Crowley, and Anthony Weiner. They pushed through Congressional
      Resolution 64 in 2007 to demand that the Bangladeshi government drop all
      charges against Choudhury and no longer insist that he show up for court
      appearances; the European Parliament took a similar action in 2006, as did
      the Australian Senate in 2007. A Canadian Member of Parliament and
      international lawyer, Erwin Cotler, provided pro bono representation.
      Choudhury received a cash award from the Prince of Monaco at a ceremony
      attended by Holocaust survivor and author Elie Wiesel in 2007. Many Israeli
      newspapers and institutions sang his praises with weekly articles. The Wall
      Street Journal carried admiring articles about him, as did many other
      newspapers, and bloggers flooded the Internet with their awe stricken
      appreciation of what looked like Choudhury’s dedication to Western
      humanistic principles. He was a celebrated lecturer at Yale University,
      Rutgers, and the American Jewish Council, among others.

      Choudhury’s fame brought him donations from well-funded institutions such as
      the Middle East Forum and the Hudson Institute, as well as from many
      individuals. With a gentle, charming manner and a gift for empathy,
      Choudhury inspired respect, love and even adoration among many. For those
      concerned with antisemitism, there was a rush to be part of the “in” group
      that knew about the Shoaib saga, almost like the frenzy that developed
      around Bernie Madoff when some Jews, trusting Madoff because he was one of
      them, competed for status in gaining access to the Great Man. As if held in
      a kind of hypnotic spell, the collective media first of the Jewish community
      and then of the larger Western world failed to heed many disquieting
      rumblings about Choudhury from his Bangladeshi compatriots, those who knew
      him best.

      The Legerdemain of Choudhury- His Hidden Islamist And Criminal Past

      The spell was broken for me when I realized he had defrauded
      > two of his most devoted female, Zionist supporters of large sums of

      After viewing the documents involved, the New York Police Department charged
      Choudhury with Grand Larceny via Fraud. Not only did he bounce three checks,
      break a contract, and send countless email promises to repay that were never
      kept, but Choudhury founded the business relationships on an elaborate
      deception. He tricked the women by inventing elaborate stories about the
      businessmen he was dealing with – a Mr. Yun, David Jones, Sagir Ahmed Bhai –
      to convince the defrauded women that their money was involved in legitimate
      transactions. But the problem is, the associates never existed. For over a
      year, Choudhury maintained these ruses. When the women wrote that they
      suspected fraud, Choudhury threatened to sue them for slandering his good
      name. Furthering the deception, and demanding their continued trust, he
      created elaborate email exchanges between the women and the fabricated
      associates. The fake partners wrote to the women that they thought the world
      of Choudhury on both a personal and a professional level.

      Choudhury mailed one of his victims an obviously counterfeit check, signed
      by the fictitious David Jones, by way of indicating that he would pay her
      when the check was cashed.


      A close look at the check shows that the city and the bank do not exist, and
      the numbers do not make sense. The money was never paid to the women who
      trusted him. It is one thing to meet with business reversals and need more
      time to repay a loan made in good faith. But if the entire premise of the
      loan is dishonestly conceived, then the transaction is a fraud. Choudhury
      appealed to his Zionist friends’ sympathy by claiming he could not get a
      regular bank loan because he was persecuted due to his support of Israel.
      This claim turned out to be dubious.

      Choudhury operates a shady website called Jethro Conglomerate
      <http://jethrodhaka.blogspot.com/> , for which a scam alert
      <http://classifieds.agriscape.com/ad/138239/en/> has been posted by an
      organization that regulates the business dealings of the commodities
      Choudhury sells. (In case you are curious or are impressed with Choudhury’s
      interest in things Jewish, Jethro is the Hebrew word for Choudhury’s
      preferred moniker, Shoaib.) Choudhury states on the Jethro Conglomerates
      website that he represents a company called Noca <http://www.nocainc.com/> .
      Noca itself does not seem legitimate. It is not licensed. It provides no
      information about who owns or runs the company. The representatives
      <http://nocainc.com/contact.php> they do list could be of interest to law
      enforcement. The Noca site says it is located in Canada but it gives an
      unpublished Nevada phone number. There is an odor of mobster activity
      connected with this enterprise, as well as Choudhury’s involvement in it. As
      we shall see in Choudhury’s published resume, Choudhury worked closely with
      the indicted mobster, Aziz Mohammed Bhai, who fled Bangladesh in 2009 to
      avoid imprisonment for various charges, including murder.

      Amazingly, for all the nearly eight years that Choudhury has been in the
      international eye since the well-publicized arrest in 2003, no one has
      bothered to check on his biographical data. Most of this information is
      clearly posted in his resume on the website
      <http://www.interfaithstrength.com/ShoaibBio.htm> owned by Richard Benkin,
      and can also be seen on Wikipedia.org. Choudhury was born in 1965 and has
      said elsewhere that he attended Saint Joseph’s College in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
      He claims to have gone on to graduate from a Master’s program in journalism
      at the London School of Economics in 1989, and then worked for the Soviet
      news agency Itar-Tass from 1989 – 1995, quickly rising to the top by
      becoming its chief correspondent in 1993.

      Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury’s Official Resume

      Professional History

      1989-1993: Correspondent, Itar-Tass News Agency(Russia)

      1993-1995: Chief Correspondent, Itar-Tass News Agency(Russia)

      1995: Special Correspondent, The New Nation (English language,

      1995: Translator (Bangla): The Rise and Fall of Pahlavi
      Dynasty by

      (Iranian) General Hossain Fardoust; Iranian Embassy, Dhaka

      1995-1999: Founder and Managing Director, A-21 TV , Bangladesh’s first
      private television channel,

      1999: Bangladesh government (Awami League) forcibly closed
      A-21 TV after coverage of opposition news.

      1999: Charged with sedition, imprisoned, and tortured.
      (October 10, 1999)

      2001: Released from prison and all charges dropped.(January
      10, 2001)

      2001-2002: Special Correspondent, Daily Inqilab, Dhaka, Bangladesh

      2002: Partial Owner, Managing Director, Inqilab Television

      2002: Removed from office, shares seized after refusing to
      attend Inqilab sponsored and organized pro-Saddam Hussain, anti-US rally in

      2002: Founded Weekly Blitz (May 2002)

      2003-2005: Charged with sedition, imprisoned, and tortured after
      writing articles warning Bangladeshis of the rise of Islamists, urging
      Bangladesh to recognize Israel, and advocating religious equality and
      interfaith dialogue; and after attempting to travel to Israel. (November 29
      2003 – April 30, 2005)

      The first part of this history is totally made up and the rest is spun to
      hide things he would rather you not know about. First of all, Choudhury did
      not go to college. A Google search shows that Saint Joseph’s was only a
      secondary school until it added on a college wing in 1999, long after
      Choudhury would have been there. Choudhury claims to have earned a Master’s
      degree in journalism at the London School of Economics in 1989. However,
      correspondence with them revealed that they did not have any kind of media
      program in 1989, and they never heard of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury at
      all. The administrators at the London School of Economics were very
      diligent, even searching by the complete birth date known, January 12, 1965,
      but nothing came up for him. Similarly, an email and telephone exchange with
      Itar-Tass, and a very thorough search on their part, revealed that not only
      had they never heard of Choudhury but they never had a branch in Bangladesh

      So what was the young Mr. Choudhury doing from 1983 or so, when he would
      have presumably graduated from high school, until 1995? That leaves about
      twelve years unaccounted for. What does appear on his resume as the next
      work record, after an alleged brief stint at the New Nation newspaper, is a
      deep involvement in Islamist activities. Choudhury’s own record states that
      in 1995 he worked under the tutelage of the Iranian Embassy. Iran had
      already become a regime of theocratic mullahs that called the United States
      the Great Satan and Israel the Little Satan. Choudhury’s job was translating
      The Rise and Fall of Pahlavi Dynasty, written by former general Hossain
      Fardoust, an Iranian contemporary of Shah Pahlavi, and Ali Akbar Dareini, a
      reporter for the Associated Press. As you will remember, Shah Pahlavi was
      the last monarch who ruled in Iran before the mullahs took over.

      There is no doubt about the veracity of the next leg of Choudhury’s Islamist
      sojourn because it was well noted by the outspoken secular anti-Islamists of
      the day, outraged as they were by the actions Choudhury took against them.
      He worked for A-21TV and a newspaper called the Daily Inquilab. What
      Choudhury does not tell us is that these outfits were run by the most
      malevolent men in Bangladesh at the time, which would be known to anyone who
      either lived in Bangladesh or who had studied its politics. One was an open
      Islamist while the other, a Mafia don, worked with people who supported
      Islamists. While Choudhury does admit that he was formerly an Islamist, he
      does not tell his foreign supporters what that entailed.

      A brief note about Bangladesh’s history is in order. In 1971, Bangladesh was
      born out of an especially bloody war of liberation from Pakistan, which had
      declared itself an Islamic Republic. The emerging nation, formerly known as
      East Pakistan, had its own language and a practice of Islam that was
      syncretized to some degree with the practices of its Hindu and Christian
      minorities. The Bangladeshi revolutionaries wanted to be free of the
      fundamentalist interpretation of Islam practiced by Pakistan. They chose
      instead a society that would still be Muslim yet would also be secular,
      allowing for a more equitable treatment of their large non-Muslim
      population, unlike Pakistan’s practices. Opposing the revolutionaries was an
      old guard in Bangladesh known as nationalists that rejected separation from
      Pakistan, mainly because it would water down the practice of Islam. Their
      Mullahs (Islamist religious leaders) taught that it is a sacred duty for
      Muslims to kill kafirs (non-Muslims). The nationalists cooperated with the
      Pakistani army and a state of civil war ensued. Over three million
      intellectuals, university professors, professionals, journalists and others
      who wanted a secular state were massacred by the old guard fundamentalists.
      Countless women were raped and captured as sex slaves, and many homes and
      business were either appropriated or destroyed. Hindus suffered the brunt of
      the persecutions. As many as ten million Hindus fled to India, and their
      continuing exodus is depopulating Bangladesh of its indigenous population
      even now. United States officials in Bangladesh at the time referred to
      these slaughters as genocide. Mass graves are being discovered even to this
      day. The Bangladeshis who violated their own people in the name of Islamic
      fundamentalism were never brought to trial. The issue of whether or not to
      prosecute and punish the men who orchestrated the atrocities is still
      unsettled, constantly roiling Bangladesh’s unstable governing processes.

      The men Choudhury worked with are considered war criminals who orchestrated
      these massacres of their fellow countrymen. Choudhury does not tell you this
      in his resume, but his partner and financial backer for his A-21 TV project
      was Aziz Mohammed Bhai, known as one of the supporters of the mass murders
      of Bangladeshi intellectuals who fought for the independence of their
      country from Islamist Pakistan. Bangladesh authorities believe Bhai has
      close ties to the Aga Khan Foundation
      ep-capture-of-america-and-some-clues-as-to-the-once-and-future-cataclysm/> ,
      a charity front group for Iran’s Revolutionary Guard whose mission is to
      spread the Islamic revolution of Iran, and they also believe that Khan
      conspired with an Al Qaeda tied terrorist to assassinate people he
      considered to be enemies of the jihad. Bhai’s connections go deep and wide,
      tying him in with Russian mobsters, North Korea, and Iranian President
      Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
      Bhai is also widely known in Bangladesh as a Mafia style mobster who has
      been charged with international smuggling
      <http://nagoriknews.com/news_details.php?CID=25,%20> , drug dealing
      > , and embezzling large amounts of money from banks. Here we see how
      Choudhury’s contact with Islamists in the Iranian Embassy may have lined him
      up for further associations with a person tied to the Iranian Revolution, as
      well as to organized crime. When Bhai was charged in 2009 with the 1998
      murder <http://www.newagebd.com/2006/aug/04/front.html> of Bangladesh’s
      leading actor, whom he saw as an apostate for being an outspoken critic of
      the war criminals, he fled the country and is now living in Malaysia.
      According to his own resume, Choudhury was working closely with Bhai at the
      time of the murder.

      In 1999 Choudhury tells us in his resume that he went to prison for sixteen
      months for “sedition.” But he does not say what was involved. What happened
      was that he had been planning to broadcast programs violently opposed to the
      philosophy of the secular Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League.
      Choudhury would have entertained guest speakers such as the gruesome war
      criminal Moulana Delwar Hossain Saidi
      <http://warcriminalsinbangladesh.blogspot.com/2010/03/open-to-all.html> .
      (Moulana means prayer leader.) Saidi informed Pakistani troops
      about the whereabouts of resistance fighters so that he could confiscate
      their property and sell it very brazenly in open markets for a profit. Long
      after the War of Liberation was over, Saidi was in the habit of giving hate
      talks <http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/wp-content/Sayeedi.pdf> in which he
      would say things like, “Why should we feel sad when our Hindu brothers chose
      to leave our country? Do we mourn when we have indigestion and materials
      leave our body?”

      The Awami League interfered with the A-21 TV channel’s plans to broadcast
      inflammatory programming that could destabilize the country. In retaliation,
      Choudhury launched a cyber campaign to kill Prime Minister Hasina, her
      family, and other members of her government. Fortunately, he was apprehended
      before any harm came to his intended victims. Choudhury’s death threats are
      confirmed by a senior level police officer from Bangladesh who traced the
      threatening email messages to Choudhury’s email address. This official, who
      asked to have his name withheld, was instrumental in arresting the criminal.
      According to Choudhury’s resume, he was imprisoned for sixteen months.

      Choudhury was released from prison for making death threats when the
      government changed in 2001. This is the correct reason why “all charges were
      dropped,” as Choudhury states in his resume, refuting his unwarranted
      implication that the charges were found to be groundless. When the
      Bangladesh Nationalist Party came to power, opposed as they were to the
      secularism of the Awami League, Choudhury’s threats against the life of the
      secularist Awami League were viewed in a different light, and Choudhury
      sprang back into action. Now he went to work for the Daily Inquilab, a
      seriously Islamist media outfit. When questioned by his American audience
      about why he worked for such philosophically repugnant people, Choudhury
      says the economy was bad and he needed the money, but that he himself was
      just a happy go lucky fellow who had no special affinity for the Inquilab
      message. In fact, Choudhury explains, he (a married man) brought his
      girlfriends there and drank alcohol in his office just to show them that he
      did not share their values. That excuse seems hard to buy, considering his
      previous ardent commitment to Islamism and the fact that surely Inquilab
      would have checked him out very carefully before hiring him. These fellows
      were no lightweights. Funding came from Osama bin Laden and Sadaam Hussein,
      according to Choudhury, who boasted in the Blitz about his credibility as a
      counter-terrorism expert because of the seriousness of his previous

      Inquilab was owned by Maulana Abdul Mannan, an alleged mastermind behind the
      slaughter of intellectuals and professionals during Bangladesh’s War of
      Independence <http://muktadhara.net/monnan.html> , according to the NY Times
      <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/world/asia/06bangladesh.html?_r=3%20> .
      The now defunct Inquilab organization is believed to have also been funded
      by the fundamentalist group Jamaat-e-Islami, the South Asia equivalent of
      the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East, and the most powerful Islamist
      party in Bangladesh. While true to the core values of Hasan al-Banna, the
      Muslim Brotherhood’s founder, the leader of Jamaat, Maulana Moududi
      i%20and%20Islamic%20Militancy%20by%20Shahriar%20Kabir.pdf> , softened the
      face of this hard core group for the sake of political expediency. Thus, men
      who were committed to Jamaat did not have to wear beards, and we have no
      photographs of Choudhury in a beard. Even though female leadership was
      generally considered invalid, Jamaat accepted a woman, Khaleda Zia, as the
      leader of a political party that expressed most of their views. As the widow
      of the assassinated president and former army chief, Ziaur Rahman, she was
      allowed to lead his old party, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party.

      Choudhury’s passion for Islamism came through in the fights he picked with
      non-believers. Hindus at the time of his Inquilab involvement were - and
      still are - having their property legally but very unjustly seized by
      Muslims under the Vested Land Act; Hindus were – and still are - raped,
      beaten, murdered and their temples are destroyed. Choudhury had not one word
      to say in defense of Hindus. Rather, he called them Malouns, which
      translates politely as, “someone who has sexual relations with his own
      sister.” During his two year stint with Inquilab, Choudhury regularly
      insulted secularists. One of the worst insults this soon-to-become a Muslim
      Zionist could think of at the time was to call someone an agent for Mossad,
      the Israeli intelligence agency. This epithet was hurled at Shariar Kabir
      <http://www.iheu.org/node/1114> , a notable human rights activist, well
      respected among other secularists and intellectuals, while he was imprisoned
      for protesting the unjust treatment of minorities. Choudhury’s barbs are
      authenticated by having been published in Inquilab, according to multiple
      Bangladeshi sources.

      Choudhury appears to have been perfectly aligned with his brothers in the
      Islamist movement, but this job ended too. So what went wrong? He was fired
      for stealing from them. Choudhury’s Inquilab employers accused him of
      embezzling about $3,000 that they gave him to buy television equipment. He
      upped the ante by counter claiming that they owed him $1,000,000 for shares
      stolen from him. The fact that he invested that much money in an
      organization he later claims to have had no affinity for just does not add
      up. We will see later how this might have affected his airport arrest in
      2003, the event that put him on the international map. But first, let us
      look at the material Choudhury has published since his release in 2005. It
      will help us gain a new perspective on the 2003 airport arrest.

      Where Does Choudhury Really Stand In The Political World?

      Although Choudhury likes to promote himself as the only Muslim Zionist in
      the world, it just is not so. The Italian Sheikh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi
      <http://www.amislam.com/> established a group in 1997 that has quietly –
      without drama or requests for money – been teaching that Muslims should
      accept Israel as a Jewish state, according to the scriptures of the Koran.
      Choudhury joined the group and was given a place of honor, which was later
      rescinded when Sheikh Palazzi learned about the swindles. He booted
      Choudhury from his group and posted a notice to that effect on his website,
      which reads in part, “It has recently come to our attention that Salah Uddin
      Shoaib Choudhury, whom we thought shared our pro-Israel sentiments for noble
      reasons, has been opportunistically defrauding at least two of his devoted
      Jewish supporters…”

      Choudhury never made peace with the secularists in Bangladesh after his
      re-invention of himself as a Muslim Zionist. He simply ignored them, and
      held himself out to be the only brave voice speaking out against Islamism in
      Bangladesh. Due to insufficient attention given to the secularists in the
      Western press, an impression arose that Bangladesh was seething with
      violence towards dissidents, and utterly lacking in awareness of democratic
      values. That becomes really laughable when one reads the online Bangladeshi
      English press, such as The Daily Star
      <http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/index.php> , The Independent
      <http://www.theindependentbd.com/> , and many others. While not strong
      advocates of establishing diplomatic relations with Israel, these papers run
      front page editorials against Islamists. In fact, the Daily Star still
      archives several articles supporting Choudhury's point of view
      <http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/topic/salah-choudhury> , a
      journalistic courtesy he never extends to them, calling the Daily Star
      terrible names for not fully accepting his agenda. Previously, the Daily
      Star ran an editorial saying that while they do not share his political
      convictions, they hope he gets a fair trial. Not to say that Bangladesh does
      not have serious issues with democratic processes, but if we listen only to
      Choudhury, we think that he alone is staving off the forces of repression in
      Bangladesh. Just in terms of demographics, that is impossible. Since about
      twenty percent of the population is non-Muslim, we can expect that about
      twenty percent of the journalists in Bangladesh will be non-Muslim and
      pursue an agenda that is not Islamist. According to a Bangladeshi source,
      about ninety nine percent of the journalists in the country are against the
      Islamists. Googling Bangladeshi newspapers, one finds many online English
      journals and the tone is remarkably like that of mainstream American

      There is a network of political writers, most of them with graduate degrees
      and many with teaching positions, that is rich in both numbers and
      sophistication. They have been committed to democracy and equal rights for
      minorities from the beginning of their careers, unlike Choudhury. For
      example, just on the first page of the Bangladeshi based blog known as
      e16.htm> one finds at least sixty secular and humanist intellectuals,
      including Ali Sina, Syed Kamran Mirza, Abul Kasem, and Alamgir Hussain. They
      write in English, and who knows how many more write in the same spirit in
      Bangla. The well- known Ibn Warraq, born in India/Pakistan, also writes for
      them. Another anti-Islamist blog held in high esteem is Faith Freedom
      <http://www.faithfreedom.org/Author/SKM.htm> , which was started by a group
      of Bangladeshis. Some members of these groups have spoken out boldly in
      protest against the Muslim world’s treatment of Jews and Israel. Choudhury
      was never a part of these groups, and never acknowledged the support some of
      their members gave to Jews and Israel, although many of their pro-Israel
      writings pre-date his dramatic attempt to fly to Israel.

      Although Choudhury may act as if there are no centrist Bangladeshi
      intellectuals, he is not above stealing their work. Writing under the
      assumed name of Sunita Paul,
      <http://www.docstrangelove.com/2009/04/03/sunita-paul-plagiarist/> he
      lifted five whole paragraphs from a mainstream journalist, Mashuqur Rahman.
      Choudhury then wrote a slew of articles under the name of Sunita Paul that
      argued for protecting the Islamist war criminals of 1971. This dangerously
      inflamed public opinion against the Awami League, and could have incited the
      destabilization of Bangladesh. Plagiarism appears to be a consistent trait
      of Choudhury, whether he is writing under the name of Sunita Paul or under
      his own name of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. Picking out just one example
      among many, here is an article that Choudhury plagiarized.

      <http://www.hudson-ny.org/1346/mosque-at-ground-zero-muslim-view> Choudhury
      wrote on May 27, 2010 at Hudsonny.org:

      At this time, the largest mosque and cultural center in Manhattan is The
      Islamic Cultural Center of New York. This $17 million dollar center opened
      on April 15, 1991, just after the First Gulf War ended. Since September
      11th, 2001, a number of controversial statements have came from at least two
      of the Center's leaders, both of them blaming the Jewish population for the
      attacks and denying any Muslim involvement.

      Compare this with Stefanie Schappert's

      earlier paragraph on May 25, 2010 at the examiner.com:

      Currently, The Islamic Cultural Center of New York is the largest mosque and
      Islamic cultural center in Manhattan. The $17 million dollar center opened
      on April 15,1991, just after the First Gulf War ended. Since September 11th,
      2001, a number of controversial statements came from at least two of the
      centers leaders, both of them blaming the Jewish population for the attacks
      and denying any Muslim involvement.

      You will see that only minor changes were made to the text of this

      Choudhury’s Newspaper Publishes Islamist, Communist And Anti-West Material

      The weekly Blitz’s banner declares it is “THE ONLY ANTI JIHADIST NEWSPAPER
      NONE BUT GOD.” Yet the Blitz’ actual publishing practices belie those

      The Blitz published an article by an openly Islamist writer, someone who
      backs the terrorist group Jamaat-e-Islami
      iberal.”> that murdered millions during Bangladesh’s war of independence.
      On March 31, 2010, the Blitz ran a very disturbing article
      n> by an Islamist professor, Dr. Mohammed Saidul Islam, urging that the
      trials of the war criminals either not be done at all or done in such a way
      as to protect the war criminals.

      This is simply amazing. Jamaat-e –Islami is the same group that was
      responsible for the massacres of the 1971 war, and that is quite open about
      their goal of implementing Sharia. Jamaat-e -Islami was even listed as a
      terrorist group by Choudhury in his self-published book, Inside Madrassa,
      pg. 264-266.[1]
      st_id=3#_ftn1> Choudhury must have been so impressed by the dangerousness
      of this group that he simply repeated the section on it, word for word,
      paragraph for paragraph. (More likely, it is yet one more example of very
      sloppy editing in this self-published book, and may even have been a mistake
      due to an over application of Choudhury’s cut and paste style of
      authorship.) Dr. Islam, when contacted, identified himself as an assistant
      professor of Sociology at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore,
      with a Western education, and acknowledged that he is the author of an
      article Why Hizab is Criticized in the West
      <http://dahuk.org/InsidePages/article_hijab.htm> commending the wearing of
      the hijab as a counter to Western capitalism. The article appeared in a
      journal, Dakuk, that was launched by pro Islamist Bangladeshis, most of whom
      live in the U.S. Dr. Islam writes, “Islamic way of life (they call it
      fundamentalism to instill a notion of stigma and negativity) offers an
      excellent form of lifestyle, which is totally free of extravagance,
      hedonism, exploitation, and consumerism. However, these are the inherent
      characteristics of capitalism.” Destroying capitalism, seen as a decadent
      product of the secular West, is a primary objective of Islam(ists) as they
      move towards their goal of creating a caliphate, as will be seen in this
      Hizb ut-Tahir video <http://shoebat.com/videos/khilafah.php> promoting a
      seminar, “Fall Of Capitalism And Rise Of Islam.” Let me be clear. Choudhury
      ran an article by an Islamist, without comment, who defends the terrorist
      group Jamaat and aligns himself with the goals of an additional terrorist
      group that wants to smash capitalism and create a caliphate.

      Choudhury took the side of the Islamists in an uproar over a cartoon
      ury.html> mocking Mohammed in a Bengali newspaper, the same sort of thing
      that happened with the protest over Danish cartoons in September, 2005. In
      September, 2007, the editor of the Bengali daily Prothom Alo published a
      relatively innocuous drawing about Mohammed. Instead of taking the
      opportunity to defend free speech and to advance religious tolerance,
      Choudhury actually went so far as to urge that the publisher of the cartoon
      be arrested for “blasphemy.” This is clearly showing a preference for the
      fundamentalist Islam that Bangladesh fought its war of independence to be
      free of.

      On the other hand, Choudhury regularly publishes a Nepalase writer, Dirgha
      Raj Prasai
      > , who calls Christianity and America demonic forces. Prasai does approve,
      however, of the nationalistic part of the Maoist movement. What is not
      generally known in the West – and what Choudhury does not spell out for us –
      is that in South East Asia Maoists and Islamists often join forces to fight
      their perceived common enemy of Western capitalism. Prasai would like to see
      elation.> spread to the rest of the area

      Without any provocation, Choudhury attacked Maronite Christian Brigitte
      Gabriel, founder of ACT!forAmerica, one of the leading national
      organizations concerned with protecting America from Islamist infiltration.
      Using yet one more pseudonym, Choudhury ran an article in his newspaper that
      made bizarre, unsubstantiated charges, such as, “(she) even secretly gives
      encouragement to her ACT comrades in funding murder of Jews and Muslims
      <http://www.weeklyblitz.net/1353/the-fearing-tactics-and-curiosity> .”

      Starting on September 10, 2010, we see over twenty-five articles singing the
      praises of North Korea. Some of these articles are authored by the North
      Korean embassy
      <http://www.weeklyblitz.net/1368/president-kim-il-sung-is-alive-in-mind> in
      Bangladesh. These articles are designated as ‘supplements,’ indicating that
      they are paid advertisements. However, other articles promoting North Korea
      are written by men with Anglo names who write in a style quite reminiscent
      of Choudhury’s, unmistakable for its misuse of English syntax. We do not
      know what financial arrangements have been made for these articles. Let us
      keep in mind that North Korea has trade agreements with Iran that include
      selling Iran nuclear materials. Iran has vowed to destroy Israel as “the
      little Satan” and the U.S. as “the big Satan.” We are reminded of
      Choudhury’s acknowledged ties to Iranian Islamists through the book he
      translated for the Iran Embassy.

      What about Israel? Promoting and protecting Israel is supposed to be the
      Muslim Zionist’s raison d’etre. Choudhury has run only four articles on
      Israel since the start of 2011. What he has ignored are a series of traumas
      Israel suffered during the spring of 2011: a devastating fire, possibly
      arson, that raged through the Carmel forest in December, 2010; the Fogel
      family massacre in Itamar, Israel, on March 12, 2011; the talks between
      President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu in May, 2011, which were
      front-page news for other publications because many viewed them as
      threatening Israel’s very survival as a Jewish state; and Delta Airlines
      announcing it will bar Jews and Israelis on some of its flights. Yet
      Choudhury ran an article on May 25, 2011 promoting Ron Paul
      sense> , who has consistently taken anti-Israel positions as a senator and
      made many anti- Jewish comments.

      Let us keep in mind that Choudhury’s first default on loans from his Zionist
      supporters (at least, that we are aware of) was in November, 2010. The
      second was in March, 2010. Could it be that Choudhury realized that Jewish
      funds would dry up once his theft became well known and so he is turning now
      to other foreign populations to finance him?

      Choudhury Is Feared And Despised Among His Own Countrymen

      Choudhury would be hard put to find work among his own Bangladeshi people to
      support him in the manner to which he has become accustomed. I have
      communicated with numerous Bangladeshis, both ex-patriots in the US and
      Bangladeshi citizens in their own country. Here is a compilation of what
      they say about Choudhury: “Total liar and cheat. Opportunist. Very evil. A
      common criminal – he belongs in jail. Womanizer. He lives like a prince so
      why does he need to borrow money? Double agent. A secret Islamist collecting
      money under cover of being for Jews and Israel. A pay for hire journalist.
      You people in the West are too good to realize how bad he is.” An official
      at the Bangladesh embassy described him as a “total fraudster” and confirmed
      that Choudhury was generally despised in Bangladesh for his dishonesty. As
      one Bangladeshi blogger wryly put it, “Many close observers of this
      ury.html> think he was the best con man Bangladesh could ever produce.”
      Choudhury took advantage of the inscrutability of the Internet to gull the
      Western world into thinking he was the exact opposite of what those who know
      him close-up have to say about him.

      Choudhury’s Conversion From Anti-Jewish To Pro-Jewish Does Not Make Sense

      When asked about how he changed his mind from an anti-Jewish position to a
      pro-Jewish one, he replied that after he worked with Russian Jews at Tass,
      he got to like them. But this makes no sense! As you will remember, the Tass
      reference he gives on his resume turns out to be bogus. Besides, even if he
      had gotten to know Jews at Tass from 1989 to 1995, by his own account he
      went directly to work in 1995 with virulently anti-Jewish people at A-21 TV,
      followed by Inquilab. That would mean that right after meeting Jews and
      liking them, Choudhury went to work against them. Choudhury was brazen
      enough to tell another lie about his resume while being videotaped at a
      speech he gave at the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of
      Antisemitism in October, 2009. He had himself introduced as earning a
      Master’s degree at the London School of Economics, which we have shown to be
      untrue. Then Choudhury went on to tell a tall tale about the oppression of
      the Jewish community in Bangladesh. He claimed that a community of 3,500
      Jews was so oppressed that they were not allowed to have their own synagogue
      or cemetery and had to use the facilities of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
      Choudhury even went so far as to solemnly intone that the antisemitic
      Bangladeshi government would deny those figures but that he, a special
      friend of the Jews, will speak out on their behalf. You can watch this at
      the 1:36 minute mark on this video <http://vimeo.com/7537431> . When I fact
      checked this with Bangladeshi associates, they broke out laughing. “But
      there are no Jews in Bangladesh,” they told me. This was confirmed by a
      well- established religious organization dedicated to the welfare of the
      Jewish people worldwide. After doing a thorough search of their
      international records at my request, they reported that they are not
      familiar with any Jews or Jewish community in Bangladesh. Adding to the lack
      of credibility about Choudhury’s much proclaimed change of heart regarding
      Jews, he has written not one word explaining his feelings or thoughts about
      going from extreme Jew hating to extreme Jew loving. Yet he is a man who
      writes thousands of words a week, some of them about his inner world, as in
      this piece <http://www.islam-watch.org/ShoaibChy/WithoutMother.htm> about
      not being able to attend his mother’s funeral because he was imprisoned.

      Another Look At The 2003 Arrest Story

      But, you will ask, what about the famous arrest at the Dhaka airport in
      2003? What about all the suffering Choudhury endured afterwards? Did he not
      act selflessly for Jewish people?

      I suggest to you that Choudhury made a reasoned choice to jump start a new
      leg of his career by contriving to get himself arrested for trying to visit
      Israel. My take on this is shared by Sajjad Jahir
      shoaib.html> and other Bangladeshi writers. Choudhury’s income stream from
      his employer, Inquilab, was cut off when they accused him of stealing from
      them. So he would need another source of money.

      The men at Inquilab were Islamists with mobster ties. They would deal
      harshly with someone they believed defrauded them. According to Bangladeshi
      journalist Saleem Samed, an Ashoka <http://www.ashoka.org/fellow/3530>
      fellow, who has a blog called Bangladesh Jihad Watch, collecting money in
      Bangladesh through a civil law suit is not very likely to happen.
      Consequently, creditors resort to other means, such as seizing the thief and
      forcing him to hand over the money. Prison might have been safer for
      Choudhury than being out on the streets. Choudhury was no stranger to
      imprisonment. He had been locked up sixteen months previously for
      threatening to kill the Prime Minister and those associated with her. Prison
      was something he knew he could endure. Investing time in another prison term
      would be the equivalent, for him, of spending time at a junior college in
      order to open up future job opportunities.

      Choudhury’s photograph at the top of this article reveals him smiling in a
      self-satisfied way at the moment of his arrest. Who smiles when they find
      themselves unexpectedly overtaken by police, and arrested? Most people would
      be scared, angry or ashamed. Choudhury’s happy expression upon being
      arrested is very suspicious. However, the photograph served a purpose for
      him and he made sure it reached his potential backers. He emailed the
      photograph to Dr. Ada Aharoni, the organizer of the Israeli conference. When
      I spoke to her on June 15, 2011, she expressed anger at being duped into
      helping Choudhury fool the rest of the world, after he had invited himself
      to the conference. Dr. Aharoni disclosed that Choudhury asked her to help
      publicize his planned departure for Israel by announcing it to officials.
      She stated that Choudhury told her he had already written to officials about
      his departure. In addition, he asked her to write to the ambassador of
      Singapore stating his travel plans and asking for the ambassador’s
      permission to travel through Singapore to Israel. He knew travel to Israel
      was forbidden, so why did he announce his travel plans to government
      officials unless he wanted to be arrested? How is it that an associate of
      his was there at the ready to snap a picture of the arrest? Could the
      picture taker have been his brother and ever present business partner,
      Sohail, the same person who counter-signed the bogus contract Choudhury
      wrote to one of the women he defrauded? Dr. Aharoni says that she had
      immediate doubts about Choudhury when she saw the smiling photograph of his
      arrest, but gave him the benefit of the doubt based on her sympathies for
      his professed support of Israel. At any rate, it was not the travel ban
      itself that Choudhury was imprisoned for. That was a petty matter, penalized
      only by an eight dollar fine. Rather, he was charged with sedition because
      objectionable documents were found on his person as he traveled. This too
      looks like he was asking to be arrested. Choudhury could easily have scanned
      the documents that were critical of the Bangladesh government and emailed
      them to his Israeli contacts.

      Choudhury went to Israel looking for money, although he denies asking for
      funding. A December 2003 Israeli news story
      <http://www.kokhavivpublications.com/2003/israel/12/0312011155.html> states
      that Choudhury was found with a "project profile seeking a fund of TK 12
      crore," or approximately US$193,000. The money seeking part of his arrest
      story has since been dropped from subsequent articles as he has come to be
      seen as an uncontested hero with noble motives. However, money seeking has
      been part of Choudhury’s interactions with his fans for a long time after
      the arrest. Choudhury tells the world that he is called into court every two
      months or so after his release on bail. At times he puts out urgent notices
      to his fans that he could be executed at his next court appearance. For
      example, in March, 2010, he wrote to an American friend that he was sure he
      would not be taken back into custody when he appeared for his next trial
      date, and that for a long time nothing at all has happened when he shows up
      for pro forma court appearances. Yet six months later, on September 22,
      2010, he sent out an urgent press release stating that he was going back to
      trial on October 5, 2010 and could be executed. He asked for support, which
      implicitly means money. Concerning his safety, he wrote to the same American
      friend in February, 2010 that he had to pay for a bodyguard all the time and
      that it was expensive. Yet when his friend Richard Benkin visited him for
      several days in 2007, at a time when the political climate would have been
      hotter, not cooler, he reported seeing no bodyguard with Choudhury. Even as
      I write, Choudhury is making another false claim
      n> , repudiated by Bangladeshi journalist Saleem Samad, that the government
      is harassing him by not permitting him to leave the country. His pose as an
      endangered and deprived hero has brought him a handsome living over the

      Six years after his release from prison, Choudhury publishes freely. No one
      denies him the right to express himself. In fact, his media interests are
      expanding to the cinema. His latest use of media is producing a movie called
      “Black” that is supposed to protest Islam’s oppression of women. That is
      highly ironic, considering his emotionally crafted exploitation of female
      financial victims, and the many online comments calling him a womanizer seen
      about-self-styled-muslim-zionist-shoaib-choudhury/> and in other places.

      Did Choudhury’s attempt to break Bangladesh’s ban on travel to Israel have a
      good impact? Probably not. According to an article
      <http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=22497> in an Indian
      newspaper on June 25, 2003, five months before Choudhury set off to break
      the travel ban, Bangladesh was considering recognizing Israel anyway.
      Bangladesh’s motivations were twofold: to gain more trade concessions from
      the U.S. and to further world peace. The secularist Awami League, the one
      that Choudhury has usually been at odds with, was for recognizing Israel
      while the communists were against it. The uproar caused by Choudhury’s quasi
      attempt to travel to Israel actually may have set back the cause of
      recognizing Israel. Bangladeshis resented being manipulated by someone they
      pegged as a charlatan who could nevertheless pull in the big guns of naïve
      American intervention. If Choudhury’s true motive were eliminating the
      Bangladeshi government’s ban on travel to Israel, why did he not challenge
      the ban before he tried to travel to Israel and why has his defense not
      challenged it since? Instead, the defense has relied on the prosecution not
      being able to bring forth a witness. But that makes no sense. Choudhury
      admits that he was at the airport trying to travel to Israel. The issue
      should not be whether or not he was breaking the ban, but the legitimacy of
      the ban itself. That would help other people who want to travel to Israel as
      well as him. Yet for all his so called heroism, Choudhury has not contested
      the travel ban itself.

      Choudhury: A Clear And Present Danger

      His publication, the WeeklyBlitz, supports regimes that threaten his own
      country, the region, and the world.

      Bangladesh is a gateway to terrorist ambitions in the area. It has been off
      the radar in terms of receiving the world’s attention as a potential hot bed
      of terrorism. Militant groups like Jamaat ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) and
      Jihad-i-Islami Bangladesh (HUJI-B) and even al Qaida are growing there in
      relative security, taking advantage of the breathing space offered them by
      the indifference of the Western world as they consolidate their strength and
      plan for outreach. Note that Choudhury gave his support to the banned HUJI-B
      party <http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=57036> by
      attending the Iftar dinner in September, 2008. From Bangladesh, jihadis can
      easily spread their influence to surrounding countries. India is especially
      vulnerable. Bangladesh is a tiny country surrounded almost completely by
      India. These long borders are porous, giving jihadis an opportunity to enter
      India from Bangladesh and undermine the largest non-Muslim ruled democracy
      in South East Asia. From India, jihadis can then be positioned to
      consolidate forces with fundamentalists in Pakistan and Afghanistan. As we
      have seen, Choudhury is now supporting North Korea, the nuclear buddy of
      genocide seeking Iran, which has vowed to destroy both Israel and America.
      Additionally, Choudhury is showing support for other communists in South
      East Asia, withdrawing support for Israel, and allowing wild hatred to be
      expressed in his newspaper towards Christianity and the United States.
      Relying on a fraudulent platform of being a great friend of the West, he
      continues to take money from supporters, both as voluntary donations and as
      grand larceny via fraud. Where this money goes is a mystery – an alarming

      Also very troubling are Choudhury’s ties to Islamists, Mafia type criminals,
      and dictators in Iran. The FBI is aware that terrorists, mobsters and
      dictators, although they may have different ideologies, will do business
      with each other in “grey markets” where they can raise money for their
      nefarious purposes. Choudhury may be operating in the area of grey markets,
      which can be either on the ground or online. As we have seen, Choudhury has
      had and still has ties to all three categories of these antisocial persons.
      His website, Jethro Conglomerates, has been flagged as a scam operation, and
      this should be further investigated. Choudhury has shown that he is skilled
      in using the Internet for criminal activities: the death threats made
      against Prime Minister Hasina, the many deceptions involved in creating and
      maintaining the myth that he is a persecuted friend of the West, the
      defrauding of the two Zionist women, and now Jethro Conglomerates. What we
      have seen so far may be just the tip of the iceberg, and I hope authorities
      investigate Choudhury’s activities thoroughly.

      To date, none of the well-known American figures who made Choudhury famous
      have responded when they were told directly about his financial crimes. They
      could have publically withdrawn, or even modified, their uncritical support
      for him. By failing to do so, they are continuing to empower an individual
      who is harmful on many levels.

      Since writing the first part
      > of this series on Choudhury, I have received numerous emails from
      Bangladeshis fed up with Choudhury’s many years of chicanery. They are not
      Islamists or anti-Zionists, as Choudhury would like to say, dismissing
      anyone who criticizes him. Rather, they ask me not to let Choudhury’s
      hateful actions poison inter-faith relations. What breaks my heart is that
      they are afraid to speak out because they see Choudhury protected by
      American diplomatic forces, and under that cover, getting away with all
      manner of offenses. How revolting that that our government’s power would be
      misused to protect evil. It must end.

      Brenda West is an occasional commenter on the political scene. She can be
      reached at BrendaWestNYC@....


      st_id=3#_ftnref1> [1] 2009, Blitz Publications, Dhaka, Bangladesh

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.