Choudhury Update

An op-ed piece from yesterday's Wall Street Journal offers some disturbing news regarding Bangladeshi editor Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury:

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, editor of a weekly newspaper in Dhaka, was charged in January 2004 with sedition, a charge that has since been broadened to include treason, blasphemy and espionage. His real "crime" was to advocate for peaceful relations between Muslims and Jews in the Mideast and to call attention to the radical Islamist threat within Bangladesh. Pressure from the U.S. helped lead to his release on bail in April 2005, although the charges have not been dropped.

Now Dhaka is ratcheting up the pressure. On March 18, more than a dozen members of the government's Rapid Action Battalion stormed Mr. Choudhury's newspaper offices in Dhaka at gunpoint. After "discovering" illegal drugs in Mr. Choudhury's desk drawer, the RAB blindfolded Mr. Choudhury and a colleague and carted them to headquarters. There, Mr. Choudhury tells us, his interrogators accused him of being a "Zionist spy" and beat his colleague, Mahboob Ar Rahman, a 57-year-old man who had to seek medical treatment. The pair were released after midnight.

The RAB has a reputation for extreme thuggishness. Created in 2004 by the civilian government in place at the time, it is supposed to be an elite counter-terrorism force. As Mr. Choudhury left their custody, his RAB abductors told him that if he raised a fuss about the incident they'd return, perhaps to his home next time. He tells us the threats have continued for the past week.


The editorial notes that the House of Representatives has voted overwhelmingly to demand that the charges against Choudhury be dropped. These words need to be followed up with actions. The Bangladeshi government's persecution of Choudhury is both an individual outrage and an alarming symptom of the growth of Islamist militancy in that country. If it is allowed to stand unchallenged the eventual impact will be felt well beyond Bangladesh.

An American friend of Choudhury's, Richard Benkin, has a site called Interfaith Strength with much more on this situation.

"I hope that people in the world will stand with us against radical Islamists."

Courtesy of Power Line comes this New York Sun interview with persecuted Bangladeshi newspaper editor Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. Here is a small portion of that interview:

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is remarkably calm for someone facing death. I sat for a few minutes in a state of near shock after our conversation earlier today ended with him politely thanking me for my time and telling me that "I hope that people in the world will stand with us against radical Islamists. We can be free together and secure the world for future generations." He spoke from Dhaka, Bangladesh, where on Monday he goes on trial for his life on counts of sedition, treason, and blasphemy.

Mr. Choudhury, a Bangladeshi journalist, is accused, he told us, of "praising Jews and Christians," "spying for Israel," and being "an agent of the Mossad" -- because he advocated relations between Israel and Bangladesh. He's also accused of being critical of Islamic radicals, which is considered blasphemy. He committed these crimes by writing articles favorable toward Jews and Christians.

He did so, he says, because while he was born and raised in a Muslim country (Bangladesh) where he was taught a "religion of hatred" and a "religion of Jihad," his father "told from an early age not to listen and to learn for himself." He did and became friends with Jews, realized the lies he had been taught, and wanted to end "the culture of hatred." He says that if "Muslim countries want peace they need relations with Israel."

Mr. Choudhury says he holds no hope of getting a fair trial. The judge, he says, is a radical Islamist who has already made clear his view that Mr. Choudhury is guilty. "In open court ... he made comments that by praising Christians and Jews I have hurt the sentiment of Muslims ... which is a crime," the journalist says. Other comments made by the Judge have made it clear, Mr. Choudhury tells me, that the judge's goal is a conviction and a death sentence. Mr. Choudhury describes his judge as a "one man judge and jury," and Mr. Choudhury cannot even present witnesses in his own defense.


(Emphasis added-DD)


As noted above, Mr. Choudhury goes on trial Monday on charges of blasphemy, for which he faces the death penalty. His only crime is that he had the courage to speak out against the climate of hatred and intolerance fostered by radical Islamists in his country. Click here for information on how you can support this brave individual.

Choudhury Update

The Jerusalem Post has some disturbing news regarding Bangladeshi editor Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury:

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, editor of the Weekly Blitz newspaper, an English-language publication based in the Bangladeshi capital of Dhaka, was working in his office on October 5 when nearly 40 people stormed the premises.

The mob beat Choudhury, leaving him with a fractured ankle, and looted cash that was kept in the company safe. Choudhury was briefly hospitalized.


This passage explains what is at stake in the Choudhury case:

Dr. Richard Benkin, an American human rights activist leading the fight for Choudhury's release, expressed grave concern about the current situation.

"Choudhury is unique because he has not fled to the West, but continues to oppose militant Islamists from inside the Muslim world," Benkin told the Post. "He feels that if he can defeat the radicals in their own back yard it will be a victory for peace and justice unlike any other thus far."

"More and more Muslims are looking at this case," Benkin said. "They want to see if Shoaib will get the support and protection he needs from the West. If he is victorious, other Muslims will try the same; if we allow him to go down, they will remain silent."

(Emphasis added-DD)


Librarians for Fairness has information on how to express your support for Mr. Choudhury.

The Persecution of Choudhury

In a superb piece for the Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens describes the brutal persecution endured by one freethinking Bangladeshi journalist:

Meet Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. As these lines are being written, Mr. Choudhury, a gadfly Bangladeshi journalist, is running for his life. Assuming he survives till Thursday, he will face charges of blasphemy, sedition, treason and espionage in a Dhaka courtroom. His crime is to have tried to attend a writers' conference in Tel Aviv on how the media can foster world peace. If convicted, he could face the death penalty.

Welcome to Bangladesh, a country the State Department's Richard Boucher recently portrayed in congressional testimony as "a traditionally moderate and tolerant country" that shares America's "commitment to democracy, human rights and the rule of law." That's an interesting way to describe a country that is regularly ranked as the world's most corrupt by Transparency International and whose governing coalition, in addition to the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party of Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, includes two fundamentalist Islamic parties that advocate the imposition of Shariah law. There are an estimated 64,000 madrassas (religious schools) in Bangladesh. The Ministry of Industries is in the hands of Motiur Rahman Nizami, a radical Islamist with a reputation of a violent past. In March the Peace Corps was forced to leave the country for fear of terrorist attacks. Seven other journalists have also been brought up on sedition charges by Ms. Zia's government, most of them for attempting to document Bangladesh's repression of religious minorities.

But few stories better illustrate the Islamist tinderbox that Bangladesh has become than Mr. Choudhury's. "When I began my newspaper [the Weekly Blitz] in 2003 I decided to make an end to the well-orchestrated propaganda campaign against Jews and Christians and especially against Israel," he says in the first of several telephone interviews in recent days. "In Bangladesh and especially during Friday prayers, the clerics propagate jihad and encourage the killing of Jews and Christians. When I was a child my father told me not to believe those words but to look at the world's realities."


Mr. Choudhury's problems began when he accepted an invitation to visit Israel. He was arrested and spent 16 months in prison. Unfortunately, this was just the beginning:

In July, the offices of the Weekly Blitz were bombed by Islamic militants. In September, a judge with Islamist ties ordered the case continued, despite the government's reluctance to prosecute, on the grounds that Mr. Choudhury had hurt the sentiments of Muslims by praising Christians and Jews and spoiling the image of Bangladesh world-wide. Last week, the police detail that had been posted to the Blitz's offices since the July bombing mysteriously vanished. The next day the offices were ransacked and Mr. Choudhury was badly beaten by a mob of 40 or so people. Over the weekend he lodged a formal complaint with the police, who responded by issuing an arrest warrant for him. Now he's on the run, fearing torture or worse if he's taken into custody.


The story of Mr. Choudhury is about more than the repression of a brave dissident: it is a case study in how the growth of radical Islamism has endangered intellectual freedom in much of the Muslim world. As Stephens alludes to in his essay, Islamism has become an increasingly influential force in Bangladesh. This radicalization has included the development of jihadist groups who openly proclaim their desire to replace Bangladesh's troubled democracy with a Sharia-based Islamist regime. If courageous moderate Muslims like Mr. Choudhury are silenced, the Islamists will be well on their way to achieving this objective.

The Choudhury Case in Context

Librarians for Fairness recently republished a good overview of the case of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury:

Choudhury's crime: calling for diplomatic ties between his native Bangladesh and the State of Israel.

"The High Court has ruled that by conveying the message of the rise of Islamic militancy in Bangladesh to Jews and Christians, and by advocating relations between Dhaka and Jerusalem, I have damaged the image of Bangladesh worldwide," Choudhury said.

[...]

Choudhury, who is free on bail, said there is little chance of receiving a fair trial, and he probably will be sentenced to death. He spoke from a secure landline since his cell phone is under government surveillance, Choudhury said.

"The judicial system is corrupted by Islamic radicals," he said. "By continuing this trial and convicting me, they want to send the message that anyone else in Bangladesh who thinks as I do will face the same consequences."


Sadly, Mr. Choudhury is far from the only victim of Islamist persecution in Bangladesh. Novelist Taslima Nasreen was forced to flee the country in the early 1990s after an organized Islamist campaign demanding her murder. As with Choudhury, instead of standing against these threats, the Bangladeshi authorities themselves hounded Ms. Nasreen. As best I can determine, the fatwas against Ms. Nasreen remain in effect.

According to Reporters Sans Frontieres, in Bangladesh "55 journalists were hounded and threatened in 2005 for articles deemed “un-Islamic” by fundamentalists."



How has this situation come to pass? A Bangladeshi writer based in Sweden offered this analysis to Daniel Freedman of the New York Sun:

After the major political changeover in 1975, what's actually going on in Bangladesh is gradual Islamicisation of the country. And by the time, coming out from the 'closet' the Islamist forces are now dominant in the country.

They're deep seated in society too, where they're dominating social life and behaviour, now. Hardline demands are intensifying day by day at national and local levels. As a result, a grave and grim danger is fast unravelling for the country, its secular people and minorities as well as its moderate Muslims, which also threatens the region.


Mr. Freedman's correspondent lays out in detail how Bangladeshi Islamists have taken advantage of both a permissive environment and large foreign subsidies to spread their cultural and ideological influence. The consequences of this creeping radicalization have been disastrous for free expression:

Secterianism, bombing of shrines, minority bashing (especially the Hindu minority), killing secular writers and thinkers -all are now on the rise. Islamist zealots are "wildly" calling for changing the political system from democracy to Sha'ria-based governance. More fatwas(religious edicts) are now emanating from the foaming mouths of Islamic fanatics and their likes. Soon the entire nation will be> radicalised. That's why Ms. Eliza Griswold, a reporter of The New York Times, painted a very grim picture of Bangladesh in her very damaging write-up on January 23, 2005, in its magazine section, in which she boldly proclaimed that Bangladesh is becoming a 'hotbed' of Islamic fundamentalism.

So, it's no more the internal issue of Bangladesh, it's turning dangerous rapidly for the region. Hence the international community has to act on containing these thriving evil forces, before it's to late. Otherwise, the threatening boast of the 'mullahs'--the gradually forced Islamicization of the country--will become a reality sooner than anyone can imagine.


Bangladesh is one of the world's most populous Muslim nations, with nearly 150 million people. If its troubled democracy is replaced by Islamist totalitarianism, the people of Bangladesh aren't the only ones who will suffer.

Bangladesh Update

On January 30th, the New York Sun's "It Shines For All" blog published an alarming update on the situation in Bangladesh from Irfan Malik. Malik, a friend of dissident journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, paints a worrisome portrait of the spread of radical Islamism that Choudhury has so eloquently warned about:

In recent weeks, Bangladesh is experiencing re-emergence of the Islamist radical forces with several arrests of jihadists with huge explosives and arms. Members of banned Jamaatul Mujahedin Bangladesh (JMB) are reportedly targeting the former State Minister for Home Affairs Lutfozzaman Babar, members of his family and other secular forces in Bangladesh, when top six notorious kingpins of this militant group are awaiting death penalty. According to several reports, all of these six jihadist masterminds will be hanged to death by the end of February.

On 21st January 2007, former State Minister Babar wrote a letter to the Chief Advisor of the Caretaker Government, Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed seeking full time police protection for the safety of his life. Earlier, government withdrew police protection from the residence of the entire former minister’s of the recent past government. In his letter, Babar said, during his term in the home ministry, he took several massive steps in combating terrorism and radical forces and were successful in nabbing large number of notorious criminals as well as most of the kingpins of banned Jamaatul Mujahedin Bangladesh (JMB). He had also successfully combating so-called communist and leftist terror groups in the southern part of the country. Such actions have restored peace, security and safety in Bangladesh. Development partners of this country have always been highly appreciative of government’s anti-terrorism and anti-radical drive, which remains as the most significant point of credits for the recent past government. Global media has also appreciated Babar’s tireless efforts in combating terrorism as well as radical-terror groups.


Unfortunately, Minister Babar's forthright stand against jihadists and other thugs has placed his life in grave danger. Men such as him and Choudhury represent Bangladesh's best chance of avoiding the Islamist abyss.


Meanwhile, the Sun's Daniel Freedman notes a frightening development that he has discovered from his communications with Choudhury:

During our phone conversations with Shoaib we often heard clicks, and Shoaib informed us that his phone is regularly tapped. It now turns out that the Islamists are pretending to be me in emails, in order to entrap Shoaib and his friends. Shoaib suspects that the Islamists may be intercepting his friends' e-mails through a local server (Shoaib uses a secure server).


Finally, to end on a positive note, an excellent pro-Choudhury web site has been created. Interfaith Strength offers a wealth of links and readings on Choudhury and Bangladesh, as well as information on how you can help. Click here to pay it a visit.

Choudhury In Court

Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury appeared in court today to face charges including treason and blasphemy. Courtesy of Richard Benkin's pro-Choudhury site Interfaith Strength, here is the latest on his situation:

From Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury on the Sept. 23 court appearance: "30th Court Appearance since released on bail on April 30th 2005. On tomorrow,23rd September 2007 at 10:00 am [Bangladesh Time] Despite repeated assurances from the Government and Resolution in the US Congress, European Parliament, & Australian Parliament,the false sedition, treason and blasphemy charges still hang on my head. As per statistics maintained by one of my lawyers, I have spent more than 210 hours in attending court, since my release. This is a serious stain on members of my family and me, both financial and mental. All such expenses are borne from the income Of Blitz Printers & Blitz Publications." BUT, THE BANGLADESHI GOVERNMENT HAS DECIDED TO INCREASE THE HARRASSMENT BY MAKING THE COURT DATES MORE FREQUENT SHOAIB SENT THIS AFTER BEING IN COURT: "On Sunday, 23rd of September 2007, I went to the court at 10:00 am Bangladesh Time, and the judge after keeping me on the dock for 5 hours set the next date for 30th of September 2007. My lawyer appealed to the court for fixing the next date After Eid, as it is extremely painful for anyone to be in the Court during the months of Ramadan [I am fasting of course]. The judge declined his prayers and asked me to appear before the court on 30th September 2007 when the trial will resume. The judge has instructed his staffs in the court to issue summon on the witnesses to appear before the court on the specified date. This will be my 31st appearance in the court since getting released on bail."

The government's continued outrage--it's decision to side with injustice--seems a clear message that perhaps we must now again clearly express our outrage. So far, we have been successful in preventing the nation of Bangladesh, which prefers the company of terrorists to justice, from winning any trade benefits. It should know, however, that its continued outrages place its economic relations with us in serious jeopardy. I don't know about anyone else, but I do not want to purchase garments made in a country that oppresses my brother without cause. I suggest others check the labels BEFORE buying a garment. And there is more action, as the Bangladeshi government has a great deal of exposure. I previously offered myself as an intermediary to negotiate and resolve the issue amicably, but evidently this government prefers the path of confrontation. If that is their choice, so be it. Expect more in the coming weeks.

Obama to Choudhury: No, We Can't

Via Hot Air, here is the latest video contribution to the Barack Obama personality cult. It manages to be creepily Orwellian and unintentionally hilarious all at the same time:




In the meantime, there is one individual who is probably somewhat less than impressed by Obama's gloriously vague paeans to hope and change. His name is Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury and I have written about his situation a number of times.

Choudhury is a Bangladeshi journalist arrested in 2003 and charged with sedition, treason and blasphemy, offenses that carry the death penalty in that country. His real crimes consisted of speaking out in defense of Israel and condemning the spread of radical Islamism in Bangladesh. Richard Benkin, an American friend of Choudhury's, began to lobby members of Congress on his behalf. In a March 28 piece for The American Thinker web site, Benkin explains how his efforts drew a positive response from every lawmaker he lobbied, with one exception:

In fact, I approached about 15 percent of the House and a handful of Senators: Democratic, Republican, left, right, moderate; you name it. And every one of them reacted with support; every one of them, that is, except one. Who was the one lawmaker that took a pass on saving the life of an imprisoned US ally and opponent of Islamist extremism? That's right, my own Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

I first met with his staff in April 2005 in his DC office. Keep in mind this was the same week that Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) spent hours learning about the case and then met well after "working hours" in a very difficult meeting with the Bangladeshi ambassador and me to secure Shoaib's release. I brought Obama's staff extensive documentation of the injustice, as well as other evidence of Shoaib's activities; we spoke for quite a long time, but they never called back. In fact, they ignored all my subsequent follow-up contacts. But it was, after all soon after his election; perhaps early disorganization was to blame.

Yet, I spoke personally with Obama 13 months later at a general meeting hosted by Obama and Durbin. To my delight, when my name was mentioned, Durbin responded immediately with praise and support, saying that it was "an important human rights case," and asked to see me privately about the matter. I spoke with to both him and Obama, who at his best moments looked quizzical and confused. While Durbin later sent a formal protest to the Bangladeshis, Obama never responded; nor again did he or his staff reply to my subsequent entreaties.

I spoke with Obama one other time about Shoaib's case, less than six months later. I reminded him or our last encounter, gave him an update on the case, and asked for his support in one of any number of ways. He hesitated a moment then held out his hand and said, "Well, we're sure happy for all the work you are doing." Propriety prevents me from verbalizing what I was thinking then. I offered to send him more information, which he asked me to do. And, guess what, I never heard back despite the reams of evidence I did send.

(Emphasis added-DD)


In a recent post, Irshad Manji proclaimed Barack Obama to be an "Agent of Moral Courage". Yet said agent of courage cannot be bothered to take the simplest of actions on behalf of a Muslim dissident facing possible execution for his beliefs. "Yes, we can"? Apparently not if you're a persecuted Muslim freethinker.

Why the Choudhury Case Matters

Courtesy of the blog of Congressman Mark Steven Kirk, Janet Albrechtson explains in The Australian about why the case of Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is so important:

WHILE Taj al-Din al-Hilali is now an international star, having attracted worldwide headlines for his recent outpouring of Western hatred, another Muslim man has barely registered on the media's radar screen. This man is facing the death penalty charged with blasphemy, sedition and treason. He was in court on Monday. His crime? He has been advocating peace between Muslims and the West. You won't have heard of this man. But it's time you did. From a small country half a world away, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is fighting Islamic extremism the only way he can: with words and ideas.

The West could learn something from this man. Slow on the uptake, we have finally worked out that the war on terrorism is, in the long run, a battle of ideas. When terrorists fly planes into skyscrapers, blow up a Bali nightclub, a Spanish train, the London Underground or an embassy in Indonesia, the worldwide media understandably gives maximum coverage to the death and destruction. For Islamist terrorists, it is another win in the propaganda war for Osama bin Laden, al-Qa'ida and every radical racing to join the jihad cause.

The West has been slow to realise that the only real way to fight terrorists who preach death and devastation based on a perverted Islam is by presenting an enlightened alternative to those thinking about joining the jihadists.

In some ways, it is the Cold War all over again.

(Emphasis added-DD)


The lack of intellectual freedom in the Arab and Muslim world has been crucial in facilitating the rise of radical Islamism. For one thing, it has fostered a climate in which free thought and expression is discouraged, thus helping enable Islamists to silence those they disagree with. In addition, the atmosphere of censorship and intimidation has stunted the growth of moderate viewpoints in opposition to the current ruling regimes. The only alternative that has been able to emerge is the totalitarian vision of the Islamists. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury and other Muslim liberals are risking their lives to change this situation. They deserve our support.

Cartoon Jihad in Bangladesh

On Sunday, Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury returns to court to face charges including blasphemy, sedition and treason, charges that carry the death penalty. Mr. Choudhury's "crimes" consist of praising Israel and condemning Islamist extremism. There had been some hope that Bangladesh's new government, which is less beholden to Islamists than its predecessor, would drop the charges. Unfortunately, this does not seem to be the case.

One recent event in particular offers a very bad omen for Choudhury. On Thursday, Bangladeshi authorities arrested a newspaper cartoonist named Arifur Rahman and arbitrarily sentenced him to 30 days in prison for drawing a cartoon deemed defamatory of the Prophet Mohammed. The BBC describes the "offending" cartoon:

Police arrested Mr Rahman following complaints by the head cleric of Dhaka's main mosque.

The cartoon featured a conversation between a mullah and a child and ended with a joke about the Prophet Mohammed's name.

Mr Rahman was jailed under Bangladesh's emergency laws.

These give the authorities powers to hold people without charge if they are deemed to threaten national security.

The government's information minister said the cartoons were part of a conspiracy to throw the country in chaos, but a senior editor of the newspaper said the cartoons had been published by mistake.


The newspaper in question, Prothom Alo, has fired Rahman and apologized for the cartoon. As usual, the Islamists remain unsatisfied. To begin with, the cartoonist, editor and publisher involved are being sued by an Islamic university. Many Islamists, however, aren't content with legal responses to this "offense".

Today, in an echo of the 1994 protests demanding the death of author Taslima Nasreen, Islamist protestors in the Bangladeshi capital of Dhaka demanded that Rahman's editor be killed. Agence France Presse describes the scene:

Demonstrators chanted slogans demanding the execution of newspaper editor Matiur Rahman and burned effigies of him and copies of the Bengali-language daily.

"More than 9,000 people protested against the cartoon in front of the national mosque and tried to march to the Prothom Alo office," said a police official speaking on condition of anonymity.

A doctor at the city's main hospital said that five people had been treated for "very minor" injuries.

The cartoon appeared in Prothom Alo's weekly satirical magazine Alpin. Its cartoonist, Arisur Rahman, 23, was detained earlier this week and later remanded in custody by a court.

Matiur Rahman Thursday apologized for the cartoon, which showed a small boy adding the name Mohammed to the name of a cat.


In addition to the arrest of Arifur Rahman, AFP also reports that "Bangladesh's military-backed emergency government seized copies of another magazine for allegedly insulting Islam":

"The government has banned the Eid issue of the Bengali language weekly magazine Shaptahik 2000 for publishing an autobiographical article where the writer desecrated the holy shrine Mecca," said Shahenur Mia, senior information officer at the home affairs ministry.

Mia declined to elaborate, but the Daily Inqilab newspaper said that the author, Daud Haider, who has lived in Germany for 30 years, compared Mecca to a brothel in India.

"The government has ordered the seizure of all copies of this issue of the magazine," added Mia.


The events in Bangladesh show that Islamists do not have to hold power in order to censor that which they deem "un-Islamic". Just the threat of Islamist anger is enough to persuade many Muslim governments to crack down on expression that offends the extremists. However, instead of placating them, such appeasement merely emboldens the Islamists.

Supporting Choudhury

Courtesy of Jihad Watch, a plea from Dr. Richard Benkin on behalf of Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury:

On November 14, Representives Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Nita Lowey (D-NY) introduced a Congressional Resolution urging the Bangladesh government to drop all charges against Muslim journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury and cease all other forms of harassment against him. I have attached Congressman Kirk's press release about this, as well as the Resolution itself, House Resolution 1080. It will be voted on before Congress adjourns at the end of this year.

Please contact your Congressional Representatives and urge them to support House Resolution 1080. Please encourage everyone you know to do the same. This is an issue that both Democrats and Republicans are supporting, and we must get it passed by a huge margin. This is our chance and the Congress's chance to make a strong statement for justice and against radicalism, and help save the life of this very brave man. You should contact your current Member of Congress who was in office before the recent elections.

Please act now and get everyone you know to act.


Please visit the Jihad Watch post for PDF links to the relevant documents. You can find out who your Congressman is, and how to contact him or her, by going to Project Vote Smart and typing in your 9 digit zip code. If you don't know your full zip code, use the USPS web site to find it.

Mr. Choudhury Goes to Court

Courtesy of the Israel Insider web site, Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury relates his experiences in court during the first day of his trial on charges of treason and blasphemy:

The Court picked up my case at 1:35 pm., and there was a hearing for around 10 minutes. The judge, Mohammed Momin Ullah, asked the Public Prosecutor to read the charge in front of me. He came and read, "By praising the Jews and Christians, by attempting to travel to Israel and by predicting the so-called rise of Islamist millitancy in the country and expressing such through writings inside the country and abroad, you have tried to damage the image and relations of Bangladesh with the outside world. For which, charges under section 295-A, 120-A, 124-A, 105-A and 108-A are brought against you. Are you guilty or not"? he asked.

I replied, "I am not guilty." By advocating inter-faith dialogue, supporting relations between Bangladesh and Israel, I have not done anything wrong. Regarding the existence of Islamist radicals in this country, the matter is already endorsed several times by country's press, leaders, administration and judiciary. Continuation of this false case will open the doors for JMB criminals, whose death penalty issue is now in the higher court, in getting legal benefit. I firmly stand on my position'. Then my lawyers told the court that they will challenge this decision to the higher court.


My Day in Court

(Link via Jihad Watch)


Again, I encourage anyone reading to express their support for Mr. Choudhury.

Giving Thanks for Intellectual Freedom

Michelle Malkin has a terrific post in response to those who complain about the "atmosphere of McCarthyism" in George Bush's America. While directed primarily at journalists, it's also quite applicable to those in our profession who believe that there is no greater threat to intellectual freedom than the Patriot Act:

Give thanks we don't live in Bangladesh, where you can be put on trial for writing columns supporting Israel and condemning Muslim violence. Just ask Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, editor of Blitz, the largest tabloid English-language weekly in Bangladesh. He is currently facing a sedition trial for speaking out about the threats radical Islam poses in Bangladesh. He has been imprisoned, harassed, beaten, and condemned. In court last week, his persecutors read these charges against him: "By praising the Jews and Christians, by attempting to travel to Israel and by predicting the so-called rise of Islamist millitancy in the country and expressing such through writings inside the country and abroad, you have tried to damage the image and relations of Bangladesh with the outside world." For expressing these dissident opinions, he faces the possibility of execution.

Give thanks we don't live in Egypt, where bloggers have been detained by the government for criticizing Islam and exposing the apathy of Cairo police to sexual harassment of women. Just ask Abdel Karim Suliman Amer, 22, who was arrested earlier this month for "spreading information disruptive of public order", "incitement to hate Muslims" and "defaming the President of the Republic." Ask Rami Siyam, who blogs under the name of Ayyoub, and has been outspoken in his criticism of Egyptian brutality. He was detained this week along with three friends after leaving the house of a fellow blogger. His host, 24-year-old reformist Muslim Muhammad al-Sharqawi, had been detained by the Egyptian government this spring as he left a peaceful demonstration in Cairo where he had displayed a sign reading, "I want my rights." Sharqawi was beaten in prison over several weeks.

Give thanks we don't live in Sudan, where editors can lose their heads for not kowtowing to the government line. Ask the family of Mohammed Taha, editor-in-chief of the Sudanese private daily Al-Wifaq, who was found decapitated on a Khartoum street in September. He had been kidnapped by masked jihadi gunmen. What did Taha do that cost him his life? He insulted Islam, and dared to question Muslim history, the roots of Mohammed, and other Muslims. Before his murder, his paper was shuttered for three months and he was hauled into court for "blasphemy."


Please read the rest.

On Dissident Librarians

Imagine my surprise when a co-worker told me recently that I was mentioned in American Libraries. Nonetheless, there I was, as part of an interesting and thoughtful essay by Wayne Bivens-Tatum in the November 2006 issue of AL.

In his piece, Mr. Bivens-Tatum discusses how me came across my article from the September 30, 2005 Chronicle, and from there discovered this and other conservative librarian blogs. As he did so, he "grew more and more disturbed, not because I agreed with these dissident librarians on every issue...but because I began to realize that the creation of political dissidents by ALA leadership was itself a problem."

Obviously, I agree with the point Mr. Bivens-Tatum is making. However, if you'll allow me, I need to make one important albeit semantic point: I am not a "political dissident". Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is a dissident; Martha Beatriz Roque is a dissident; Andrei Sakharov and Vladimir Bukovsky were dissidents. These are people who have risked death or imprisonment to speak their minds. I, on the other hand, risk little more than having unpleasant things said about me on web sites and listservs.

(What about your blog title, oh persecuted heretic? -Ed.) "Heretical Librarian" is nothing more than a tongue-in cheek way of getting my point across. Besides, it was the best name I could come up with. Unfortunately, it also makes me sound like a complete ubergeek, a not totally inaccurate impression, I'm forced to admit. However, the reaction my blog name got out of a certain humor-impaired Stalinist alone made it all worthwhile.


Anyway, back to the topic at hand. While Mr. Bivens-Tatum's essay is not online as far as I can tell, I encourage you to pick up a copy of the November American Libraries and give it a read. This key passage in particular cannot be improved upon:

If ALA and the culture of politicized librarianship it seems to foster are responsible for the alienation of fellow librarians...then this alienation should make us question our own values as well. How tolerant and understanding are we? How much diversity do we really care to see? Do we really respect intellectual freedom, or only when the free intellects join us in thinking like we do? Are we advancing private interests over professional concerns? Do we really respect our colleagues, or only if they happen to agree with us?


I applaud Mr. Bivens-Tatum for his willingness to step up and ask these questions.