Richard Benkin's Blog

Harvard's Double Standard

2011-12-08T05:19:00.003-06:00

This past week, Harvard dumped my friend and colleague Dr. Subramanian Swamy. Dr. Swamy had been affiliated with Harvard since his student days and on the faculty since 1964. The Harvard faculty voted overwhelmingly to dump Swamy in light of his July publication calling for harsh measures against Indian Muslims who do not acknowledge India's Hindu character. The University, it should be noted, earlier rejected calls to sanction Swamy over the article, which they labeled free speech. Moreover, Dr. Swamy is a very frank and outspoken individual; his views could come as no surprise to anyone.

Does that mean that the Harvard move was one of opportunity rather than outrage, and that they were just waiting for an excuse to deprive Harvard students of a uniquely qualified professor?

Dr. Swamy taught economics, a discipline for which he has impeccable qualifications; qualifications based on real world experience helping India become the economy it is. He is the President of India's Janata Party; yet, this cabal of elites have dumped him because of an article.

Yet, the infamous Stephen Walt remains a favored fellow at Harvard, despite his co-authorship of a particularly heinous and hate-filled book, The Jewish Lobby. It reprises the old canard that US foreign policy is unduly influenced by Jews and others advocating for a strong US-Israel relationship. Yet, Harvard faculty continue to honor Walt and would defend his hate-speech to the death.

So, why Harvard's double standard? Why is free speech suspended when the subject is Muslims if it makes the elite uncomfortable? Why is hate-speech against others defended as free speech by these same elites? Is it perhaps time that we re-assess the value of anyone looking to this same cadre of academic elites for wisdom or unbiased information?

Don't Believe Talking Points: Obama Foreign Policy a Disaster

2011-11-02T15:42:00.001-05:00

In an article in Andrew Breitbart's foreign policy blog, Big Peace, I make the argument that the recent talking points about Obama's foreign policy miss the point. Specifically, they congratulate the President for the deaths of Bin Laden, Gadaffi, and Al Alawki--all bad guys, and allege they indicate his overall foreign policy success. While their deaths are blows to the other side, they have not stopped the progression of real dangers that remain strong thanks in large part due to Obama's policies. The article is the first of two, this one concentrating on the Middle East, the next on South Asia.

The focus is the Democrats' contention that Obama has "won back" US friends and influence around the world. In articles and speeches several years ago, I took issue with the notion that we really lost anything--except in the minds of racist and Euro-centric pundits. Now, however, we seen really to have lost true influence by policies that emphasize weakness, abdicate leadership, and equivocate on values.

The Palestinians, who Obama has gone out of his way to smooch, recently rejected his demands that they abandon their effort to secure statehood via the UN--a fool's errand in the first place. And who could blame them? In February, Obama made similar threats about repercussions if they went ahead with their anti-Israel building resolution; they did, and he didn't. The Israelis aren't listening to him, either; certainly not when he and his parroting Secretary of State "demand" they stop building; and very recently perhaps in planning a strike against Iran.

Iran is another example, by the way. First, they rejected his craven and embarrassing outreach; they went ahead and slaughtered their own citizens; and they have increased their sphere of influence at our expense. Obama's influence with Turkey has all but evaporated for this once-reliable ally, now a reliable flotilla-sponsoring antagonist.

Obama's love for the actions behind the Arab Spring has not prevented it from becoming an Arab Winter. We cannot even get our "new friends" to extradite the Lockerbie Bomber, responsible for the mass murder of 189 Americans.

And if you think that's bad, wait for the article on South Asia.

A Quiet Case of Ethnic Cleansing: The Murder of Bangladesh's Hindus

2011-10-01T17:12:00.003-05:00

My book about the ethnic cleansing of Bangladesh's Hindus, A Quiet Case of Ethnic Cleansing, is scheduled to be published in January 2012. The publisher is Akshaya Prakasahan of New Delhi, India. The book is expected to strike a major blow against the silence that has kept one of our age's worst human rights abuses off the international radar.

Using my own extensive experience on the ground, as well as the extensive research of a social scientist (which is my education and training), I make a compelling case in the book for why this terrible atrocity is happening, what are its roots, and how as terrible as it is, it is only a precursor to what will happen to the rest of us if we allow this thing to proceed with impunity and even our tacit approval.

Several prominent individuals and groups are eagerly anticipating the book's publication, which we hope will lead to more actions that place the ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh on the international human rights agenda. We also will making the book available in the United States and worldwide as well.

A Quiet Case of Ethnic Cleansing:
The Murder of Bangladesh's Hindus
By Dr. Richard L. Benkin
Akshaya Prakasahan, New Delhi
Coming January 2012

Support Senate Bill 1245

2011-08-30T08:24:00.003-05:00

On July 29, 2011, the US House passed HR440 with overwhelming bi-partisan support calling for the appointment of a “Special Envoy to Promote Religious Freedom of Religious Minorities in the Near East and South Central Asia.” Through this position, the United States can regain world leadership in fighting real human rights abuses and turn the tide that has swept some of the worst of them under the carpet of geo-politics.

There is little doubt that bill will pass. The Special Envoy can defend the defenseless and give voice to the voiceless—or recognize only those “flavor of the month” issues that already have garnered their share or more of the world’s attention; or perhaps not even deserve it. The way to make sure the Special Envoy addresses the really important issues and not the politically correct ones is by being prominent in the process and in the Special Envoy’s selection. Success will be pivotal for our own human rights strategies.

Senate bill 1245 is with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which has 19 members. We need voters in their state to call them and urge them to support and co-sponsor S1245; and make sure it is advanced at the next committee meeting (possibly in September). Note how this will help stop oppression of the Bangladeshi Hindus (who have been reduced from a third of the population to less than eight percent) or other oppressed groups; and please mention my name as someone who is familiar with the region, issues, and people in various governments there.

Click here for information to contact Committee members and a link to contact any other Senators or House Members. If you want more information, contact me. Thank you.

New Hope for Bangladeshi Hindus

2011-07-30T05:39:00.003-05:00

On July 28, something happened that forever changed the situation for the oppressed Hindus of Bangladesh. Congressman Robert Dold (R-IL) addressed the US House in support of HR440, sponsored by Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA) to establish a “Special Envoy to Promote Religious Freedom of Religious Minorities in the Near East and South Central Asia” with the rank of ambassador. HR440 passed 402-20; the few nay votes coming as a protest against any new expenditures (even this tiny one) at this time.

Dold began his speech by doing something that had never been done before in the United States Congress: He raised the issue of Bangladesh's oppression of Hindus forcefully and specifically. One of the greatest impediments we face in moving people to action that will stop the ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh is the failure of people to name it as an atrocity. Now it is a matter of record in the United States Congress, and will provide the basis for more severe action. Dold's first words were:

"Since 1947, 49 million Hindus in Bangladesh have gone missing according to Professor Sachi Dastidar. And a recent Hindu American Foundation report concluded that the Hindus of Bangladesh continue to be victims of daily acts of murder, rape, kidnapping, temple destruction, and physical intimidation. Dr. Richard Benkin, an authority on human rights abuses in Bangladesh, has described to me on several occasions the atrocities and human rights abuses suffered by Bangladesh's Hindus that he personally has verified."

Some people make hours-long speeches and do little more than waste the time of their listeners; but in a one and a quarter minute speech, Dold created a watershed event that gave hope to millions of the oppressed by refusing to bury their plight amid generalities like "minorities" and "extremism"; and he urged the US to act. It did not take long before word of his action spread among many of them. Now, perpetrators, appeasers, and deniers can no longer pretend that the atrocity is not happening. Naming it was the first step in defeating it and sets a new basis for several actions now in the works to do just that. Thank you, Bob Dold, for doing what no one else has been able to do. And thank you, USA.

Bangladesh Awami League Bares Anti-Hindu Teeth

2011-07-02T09:25:00.003-05:00

Last month, Bangladesh’s Supreme Court ruled against some constitutional amendments instituted during two military dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s. It was hailed as a great step forward for freedom in Bangladesh and was roundly condemned by Jamaat and other Islamists. The court then asked the government to submit replacements for ratification in the Awami-dominated parliament. So what did this oh-so-progressive and freedom-loving Awami League do? It submitted new laws that outlawed military governments and religiously-based parties; but it left intact one of the most significant and hateful amendments that came under the Court’s scrutiny: the Eighth. Bangladesh’s Eighth Amendment made Islam the official state religion and essential to the character of all that flows from Bangladeshi law. It is an amendment that Hindus and others say makes them second-class citizens in their own country. Every law they have to follow begins with “in the name of Allah the beneficent.” Madrassas (Islamic schools) are given a favored position by their government and often receive public support, even those preaching radical Islam. Yet, this “pro-minority” government does nothing—NOTHING—even when its own Supreme Court sets the table for them.

While the Awami League has shown its preference for radical jihadists over true partnership in the world, that same world has assiduously ignored it. Just before its election, the Supreme Court and military-backed government arranged things so it could repeal the anti-Hindu Vested Property Act by mere fiat. It did not; but no one said a word. Nor has the destruction of Bangladesh's Hindu community slowed under this duplicitous government. Will this be the straw that breaks the appeasing camel's back?

Judging by the non-reaction to it, likely not. There has not been even one phone call from President Obama or Secretary of State Clinton to Bangladesh, challenging the government on this or other anti-minority actions. No one has reminded Sheikh Hasina of her still unfulfilled promises to end official minority discrimination in Bangladesh—and how she has an opportunity with this constitutional change to prove that she and her party are not shams

The Awami League's action is also yet another clear sign that the policies of weakness implemented by the Obama Administration are leading the Muslim world to take actions that distance themselves further from the rest of the world and move them closer to the likes of Ahmadinejad and the Taliban. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are, at best, oblivious; at worst, complicit. Will the American people end this madness in 2012?

India--Our True Friend in South Asia

2011-06-02T06:00:00.003-05:00

The killing of Osama bin Laden in a compound less than 100 km from the Pakistani capital of Islamabad caused many Americans to question just how much of an ally the Muslim Islamic State is. We've heard all the arguments--that Pakistan provides invaluable help for our anti-Islamist efforts in South Asia, that it has suffered major losses at the hands of our enemies, and so forth. We also know that Pakistan was more of an ally during the Cold War than its rival India, whose premier PM, J Nehru, took it on a pro-Soviet course that did not vary until the USSR's fall. Times have changed, however; international alliances have shifted; and both countries could proffer charges against one another. But there is too much at stake to do that.

The withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, which begins next month, will create a power vacuum that the Karzai government is incapable of filling. Candidates to do so include China (which has been making strong moves in that direction), the Taliban (which remains active in the country--and the Obama administration is even looking to cut a deal with the Islamists), Iran (which has a Shi'ite group there in need of its "protection"), and Pakistan (which at the very least is suspect and unstable). None of them would make for a friendly South Asia. Yet, the Obama administration continues to dismiss the one regional power that would: India. Its interests are largely the same as the US, as are its major enemies; the specter of its increased influence is the one thing that scares the pants off the Pakistanis; it has the economic and military strength to check Chinese expansion; and it is, like the US and unlike the other candidates, a committed democratic republic.

There's still time--not a lot, but some; and the only path that has any chance of keeping Afghanistan and most of South Asia from falling under Islamist or Chinese control is a mature relationship between these two great powers: the United States of America and India. For more, see: India as the Solution to Afghan Power Vacuum.

2011 Days of Remembrance

2011-05-01T08:42:00.003-05:00

From today through May 8, the United States will mark the 2001 Days of Remembrance, a commemoration created by a unanimous vote in Congress. It is a time for Americans to remember the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews and others. Like many Americans, I have Holocaust survivors in my family and members of my family who did not survive. And like other decent human beings on the planet, I will strain with every ounce of effort I can muster to defeat those who want to murder the victims a second time by denying what happened to them.

On the evening of April 19, I was honored by being asked to receive a formal Proclamation from my home, the Village of Mount Prospect just outside of Chicago, declaring May 1-8, 2011 Days of Remembrance in our town. About a month earlier, I received a mailing from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum asking that people approach their home towns and ask if they would issue a proclamation. I immediately contacted Mount Prospect Mayor Irvana Wilks (whom I had met previously through Senator Mark Kirk, another unyielding foe of Holocaust denial). Mayor Wilks responded immediately, and the village issued the proclamation. Emphasizing its universal message, Village Trustee John Matuszak read the proclamation, noting before he did that his own grandmother was murdered in the Holocaust.

During this time of rampant Holocaust denial, it is critical that all decent people work overtime to defeat it. Ironically, the Holocaust against the Jews might be the most extensively documented atrocity in history. The attempt to deny it is plain and simple anti-Semitism and political cynicism in their worst forms. Let the 2012 Days of Remembrance see even more such proclamations by even more localities throughout the United States and worldwide. I would be honored to help.

An End to a Hindu India?

2011-04-03T08:04:00.001-05:00

Jihad has come to India. The Obama administration and the State Department will tell you that it is nothing more than isolated acts by individuals and the New Delhi government will say you are stirring up anti-Muslim sentiment. But I have seen it for myself first-hand and know that this studied denial will find us caught as flat-footed in India as we were in Lebanon, Egypt, Libya, and elsewhere. The difference is that India is an economic and military giant, with nuclear weapons and could be a cornerstone of any effective fight against radical Islam.

I have spent several years along India's 2545 mile-long frontier with Bangladesh, and have seen the impact Bangladesh's radicalization has had on its giant neighbor to the west. Amitabh Tripathi, who has been fighting against what he calls his country's "soft policies," noted that Bangladesh's Muslims "are not radicalized but their institutions are." Mixed with corruption on both sides of the border, that radicalization has produced demographic change in many strategic areas of India and given Muslim activists carte blanche throughout the country.
Each year in states like Uttar Dinajpur and West Bengal directly across from the Islamic state, we find that increasingly more mixed Hindu-Muslim villages are now all Muslim or Muslim-dominated. Gone are the roadside temples characteristic of places where Hindus practice their faith openly; gone are the sights of Hindu women dressed in their colorful saris and other vestments. They have been replaced by mosques and burqas. Last year, Tripathi and I met with Bimal Praminik, Director of the Kolkata-based Centre for Research in Indo-Bangladesh Relations who has studied these population changes and is convinced they are integral to the jihad's that threatens us all, noting that the dominant culture for South Asian Muslims has become more "Arabic," than South Asian.

Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have been disappearing for years; now we are seeing Hindus being replaced by radicalized Muslims all in India. Between 1981 and 1991, Muslim population growth in West Bengal actually exceeded its growth in Bangladesh. India’s Muslim population growth outstripped government predictions based on demographic factors (fertility and mortality). There had to be another element driving the change, which Pramanik and others identify as "illegal immigration from across the border."

Statistics might be the "smoking gun," but jihad's impact is more powerful in the testimony of its victims. In places as far afield as Deganga and Meerut, Hindu populations are fleeing Muslim violence and government inaction. Elsewhere, an elderly Hindu in the Howrah district told us how Muslims are taking over her property piece by piece. She even showed us a wall with a star and crescent on it that local Muslims built to identify it as dar al Islam. In another village, residents showed us the remains of a Hindu temple that Muslims recently destroyed after urinating on its holy objects. Most poignant was the testimony of a crestfallen mother in Norit whose 22-year-old daughter was abducted weeks ago by local Muslims. Abduction of Hindu women and girls in the name of Islam has been common in Bangladesh for years and is a key element in jihad: eliminating females of childbearing years from the gene pool and forcing them to "produce" Muslim offspring instead. It is now happening in India, according to victimized parents who told me about it in India's North and Northeast.

Our State Department will tell you that there is no jihad in India. They will hew the official line that the liberal Awami League government in Bangladesh has put an end to anti-Hindu actions there. A similarly weak government in New Delhi will parrot the same platitudes. Yet, their false palliatives bring no comfort to the scores of victims who have told us their stories; or the many others now unable to do so. Imagine what an Islamist India would mean.

Corruption finally getting its Due in Indian Media

2011-03-05T11:17:00.001-06:00

For several years, US President Barack Obama has been pressing Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai to end corruption in his country; and he really will not get off that demand. Now, besides the fact that Obama comes from my home town, Chicago, which makes Obama's demand particularly ironic; anyone familiar with governments in South Asia knows that corruption is almost endemic and makes us Chicagoans look like rank amateurs. Remember the glee with which US leaders hailed the election of Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari even though Zardari's monumental corruption had earned him the dubious title of "Mr. 10 Percent"? Obama had no problem sending Pakistan billions of dollars more (courtesy of US taxpayers) in care of Mr. 10 percent.

But winds of change might be blowing. I just returned from a few weeks in South Asia and witnessed something new. Previously, most Indian media coverage focused on terror attacks by Islamists and Maoists; or the budget; or elections; and all of it took a back seat to cricket. This February, however, they covered the Maoists' kidnapping one minor official, but corruption scandals (called scams) dominated the media--except of course for cricket.

The big fish caught in this net was India's now former Commonwealth Games Organizing Committee Chairman, and still high official of the ruling Congress Party, Suresh Kalmadi. There are a host of allegations against the once seemingly untouchable giant, but he says that all is well. He probably has not spoken with a couple of his aides recently who were arrested and subsequently denied bail in the matter. There is at least on sworn statement on record testifying that the witness was forced to pay a million rupee bribe. The probe was initiated after relentless investigations by the news channel Times Now. The channel has vowed to press on with its independent investigations in this any "many other scams."

Our experience in the United States and elsewhere is that the success of this sort of investigative journalism is like an addictive drug. Once the media recognizes that it has the power to effect such a sea change and help the people immeasurably, it is unlikely that they will put the toothpaste back in the tube. (Personally, I was very impressed by the Times Now on air personnel and their commitment to quality journalism.) Moreover, the people will soon see that what they once thought they had to accept can be fought--and those who try to rob the people brought down, no matter how influential they are. Hence, the importance of a case against the political heavyweight Kalmadi.

Having spent a great deal of time in South Asia, I'm familiar with the fatalism with which the people accept massive corruption. Spouses of local officials boast to each other about how much money their official/spouses have been able to pocket. In at least one case I investigated, I found that some West Bengal police stations even have a semi-official post for the person who coordinates all corruption activities. Yes, that really is the case! At the same time, you can see the effect of corruption in the horrible roads, infrastructure failings, and various other indicators that government money is not getting to the people. (I've also seen instances of corruption first-hand carried out openly.

Once the people of India recognize that they do not have to live with these injustices, it will be quite a trick if anyone on the corruption gravy train will be able to convince them that they do.

Forcefield Board to Address Kolkata Rally for Bangladeshi Hindus

2011-02-03T19:13:00.003-06:00

On February 14, the entire Board of Forcefield--the non-agenda driven human rights organization committed to ending the oppression of Bangladeshi Hindus--will take part in the annual meeting of Hindu Samhati in Kolkata, India. This year's event will be devoted to defending the Bangladeshi Hindus who are being systematically eliminated by Islamists, a government indifferent to their fate and so colluding in it, and a population with too many people who would rather feed their material comforts than their immortal souls.

In the prepared portion of his remarks, Forcefield President Richard Benkin from the United States asks the audience, estimated to be about 25,000: "What if you found yourself in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, or more recently in Darfur? You might have looked around and thought, ‘Something’s wrong. Something’s terribly wrong. You can see that. I’m afraid that something really bad is about to happen, and no one seems to be doing anything to stop it.’ Knowing what you know now, what would you have done? Gone about your life, pretending that you didn’t see what you saw? Or would you do everything in your power to stop the impending atrocity and save the lives of so many innocent people? Would it have mattered if you were not Jewish or African? We here today do not have to guess at what our answer should be. We have the lessons of history. Because of the Holocaust and what happened in places like Darfur, we know what will happen—and it is about to happen again."

Forcefield co-founder Miriam Jones from Australia notes: "FORCEFIELD is a new organisation but we are concerned and want to find out more. We have come here to listen and to learn and the things that we learn we shall take back to our governments of Australia and America. We want your story to be told. For far too long the world has been unaware but I am going to try and change that. I shall be going to Canberra and I shall be knocking on doors and I will not stop knocking until those doors open. Once those doors open I shall not leave until I have told your story and not only will I tell your story I will make sure that they are listening. And when I am sure they are Listening I will make sure that they will begin steps to change this injustice."

Although Forcefield's third Board Member, Amitabh Tripathi from India, is not expected to address the crowd, he will be instrumental in post-meeting discussions about a new effort combining Forcefield's efforts with those of Hindu Samhati and Tapan Ghosh.

The speeches and news of the event will be available after the rally. Benkin and Ghosh expect the rally and subsequent organizing to be a watershed in putting an end to the persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh.

Ending Ignorance: Jewish Studies in India

2011-01-02T21:04:00.004-06:00

In early 2009, I was at Lucknow University in India and had just concluded two days of talks. On my way to the car, an individual stopped me and insisted I join him and his colleagues in the Islamic Studies Department for some tea and conversation. While there I met a Muslim journalist who said quite matter-of-factly that "every Muslim child knows that the media is controlled by seven powerful Jews."

"Oh, I must have missed that meeting," I replied. Besides, I told him it was nonsense and challenged him to name the seven powerful Jews. He began with Rupert Murdoch.

"Not Jewish," I said, "a friend, but not Jewish. Who's next?"

"Ted Turner," he replied.

"Ted Turner? I'm not sure he even likes Jews!"

You get the point. This man was an influential Urdo journalist and a guest in the Islamic Studies Department of a major Indian university. He helps shape Indian Muslim opinion yet is so woefully ignorant about Jews.

For two days prior, as I spoke to Indian students at Lucknow, I was peppered with questions about Israel and the Jewish people. There was a real hunger among students for information about both. One of the questions I receive regularly (there and elsewhere) is: "How has tiny Israel defeated the terrorists when giant India cannot?" Unfortunately, they cannot easily find that or other unbiased information about Israel and the Jews from the elites in media and academia who, for the most part, enforce a rigidly anti-Israel perspective. Almost every Indian university has an Islamic Studies Department, but none offer much on Jewish studies.

Dr. Navras Aafreedi was responsible for my time at Lucknow University, and he is trying almost single-handedly to get students the information they crave. With the support of Forcefield, a human rights not-for-profit of which I am the President, Rabbi Howard Gorin of the Washington, DC area, and others' Navras is assembling information resources that he is making available to students. Congressman-elect Robert Dold (R-IL) has also expressed his support for the effort and desire to help it succeed.

Navras Aafreedi continues to seek out new or used books and other resources. The need is great, and the cost of shipping is also significant. Rabbi Gorin's synagogue raised money (http://www.interfaithstrength.com/Navras.htm), and Forcefield has assisted both in book donations and in shipping costs. Navras perseveres despite continued obstacles; and even though this effort is not likely one that will endear him with the powers that be in academia, he continues with it because he sees the need and hears the cries of the students. People wanting to help this effort can contact Dr. Aafreedi directly (aafreedi@gmail.com), through me (drrbenkin@comcast.net), or through Forcefield (http://www.forcefieldnow.org). The cause is just, and it is an important case of hasbara that can have a profound impact on a key population at a critical moment in time.

Assam Government to Deport Victims of Islamist Terror

2010-12-01T18:21:00.005-06:00

For several years, I have been traveling around West Bengal, India, in an effort to gather evidence about the plight of Bangladeshi Hindus and bring that evidence to human rights supporters in the United States Congress and Senate. The Bangladeshi Hindu population has fallen from just under a fifth of the Bangladeshi people at independence in 1971, to eight percent or less today. Contrary to apologists, there has been no corresponding increase in the Hindu share of West Bengal--the Indian state that borders Bangladesh and shares its ethnicity. In fact, the Hindu proportion of West Bengal has fallen during that time as well.

While we receive a steady stream of reported atrocities against Hindus in Bangladesh (reports which we investigate and almost always verify) and West Bengal; we are now receiving new reports from the neighboring Indian state of Assam, which stretches along Bangladesh's northern border. For years, and especially during times of unrest in Bangladesh, Hindus have fled to Assam for safe haven. In fact, the Assam Supreme Court has issued rulings of special protection for them.

Now, however, the Assamese government has begun issuing orders of eviction to many of these Hindus, all victims of Islamist (and Islamist fellow travelers) atrocity. It is doing this contemptuously of the longstanding supreme court rulings. It has not, by the way, issued any such orders to the growing number of Muslims now in the state. These infiltrators are attempting to replicate the same demographic shift in Assam as we are seeing in West Bengal.

Several local groups are forming to stop this double victimization. One of them, The Protection Forum for Bengali Hindus of Assam, has asked us to join them in this fight; and we will be standing with them in a matter of months. Some have also appealed to the national Indian government and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. But it is clear that the only thing with a chance of stopping this is the pressure that comes from shining a light on these actions and forcing the world to confront what is happening to these perpetually victimized people before it is too late.

That has become one of our goals, and it is a major aim of our next trip to the region. If you want to help, contact Dr. Richard Benkin at drrbenkin@comcast.net.

Now the work begins!

2010-11-09T06:12:00.004-06:00

Not all of our candidates were victorious in the November 2 elections. The relentlessly independent Congressman John Adler of New Jersey lost to Tea Party backed Jon Runyan. While we lost one friend in Congress, we are confident that we have gained another. The amazing Joel Pollak gave Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky a scare during the campaign but failed to unseat Congress's biggest spender and most leftist Member. Our congratulations to both men for raising important issues, and we expect that we have seen the last of neither.

A lot of great candidates won election and re-election--candidates that will stand strong for the United States, for the fight against radical Islam, and for the oppressed Hindus of Bangladesh, Kashmir, and elsewhere. The two most spectacular victories was the election of Mark Kirk to the US Senate from Illinois, and of Robert Dold to the Congressional seat Kirk is vacating. Senator-elect Kirk has been our strongest and most constant ally in our human rights struggles, and is pledged to help us "save more lives" and stop the spread of radical Islam. Congressman-elect Dold is already working with us, even before taking office, and will be an equally strong voice. Both men are acutely aware of the importance of this issue to the victims, to our nation, and to their Hindu-American constituents, who helped them to victory.

Now our work begins. We have an ambitious agenda for 2011--both in Washington and in South Asia. The 2010 elections have sent a clear message to our adversaries and to our actual and potential allies that we will not tolerate the destruction of Hindu communities in Bangladesh and elsewhere; nor the growth of Islamic radicalism.

Anyone who wishes to help--and receive the [US] tax deduction for 2010--can contribute to our fully deductible 501c3 at http://wwwforcefieldnow.org.

And now to work. As the great Jewish sage Hillel said, "If not now, when?"

Votes that will Save Lives on November 2

2010-10-07T05:22:00.007-05:00

As I have spent time on Capitol Hill pressing my human rights efforts, I have been fortunate to gather support from Democrats and Republicans, Conservatives and Liberals. It shows that people still recognize those values that unite Americans regardless of party or ideology. With the 2011 election nearing--and the need for effective action to save Bengali Hindus growing every day--it is critical for us to support those candidates whose election will save lives, prevent rapes, and stop the expansion of our worst enemies in South Asia.

Some supporters--like Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), Congressman Eric Cantor (R-VA), Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ), Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz (D-PA), and Congressman Steve Rothman (D-NJ)--deserve our support but are well ahead of their opponents. Others are in close races and need the vote of everyone who cares about human rights and wants to stop the murder of Bangladeshi Hindus. Their principled actions make them deserving of our support: Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL), running for the US Senate from Illinois; Robert Dold (R), running for the US Congress from the Illinois 10th District; Joel Pollak (R), running for the US Congress from the Illinois 9th District; and Congressman John Adler (D-NJ), in a tough race for re-election to the US Congress from the New Jersey 3rd District.

All of these individuals have shown themselves to be champions of human rights and friends of the Bengali Hindus.

No one has been a greater champion for us than Mark Kirk. His election to the US Senate will bring the safety of all Bengali Hindus closer and help us defeat America's most vicious enemies who are solidifying their base on South Asia. John Adler, as a freshman Congressman, has shown his independence and courage and always laid out a welcome mat for me and supported our human rights issues, and will continue to do so. Both Bob Dold and Joel Pollak have made clear their commitment to taking a leadership role in defending these oppressed and defenseless minorities.

Please tell everyone you know in these districts that votes for Mark Kirk, John Adler, Bob Dold, and Joel Pollak will bring closer the day when oppressed Bengali Hindus can live in safety. For more information, please feel free to contact me.

Congressional Candidate Joel Pollak Focuses on Indian Americans

2010-09-02T06:01:00.003-05:00

Joel Pollak is running for Congress from Illinois’ Ninth District and has made the Indian-American community an integral part of his campaign; a role he pledges to carry with him to Washington if elected. I sat with Pollak for over an hour one hot August afternoon near Chicago’s Devon Avenue as Shri Baba Brajraj Sharan gave a presentation on the ecological and spiritual degradation of India’s Braj Region, legendary home to Lord Krishna. Though it overran another commitment of his, Pollak remained transfixed on Baba’s presentation, later speaking emotionally about what he saw and his own experiences. Pollak’s biography suggests that his love for the Indian community is neither new nor political. Rather, as one community member told me, “it is a good partnership.”

He is running to represent the large NRI populations on Chicago’s North Side and in many of its suburbs. Despite the community’s size and vibrancy it has been under served, he believes, by incumbent Congresswoman, Jan Schakowsky, who "has been in Washington for 12 years and never once took up any issue of importance to us," according to a community member. Pollak vows to change that and has empanelled an Indian-American Advisory Committee with significant influence in his campaign. In the first of several interviews, Pollak spoke about foreign policy issues involving India and China.

RB: In 2005, your opponent voted against legislation to deter arms sales to China. Recent news suggests China’s arms industry is now outpacing our own. First, do you believe that China constitutes a threat to the United States and India; and second, if so, what would you as a member of Congress do to reduce or counter that threat?

JP: China’s military buildup and increased assertiveness around the world have raised the prospect of intensifying security competition both between China and the U.S., and between China and other countries in the Asia-Pacific. I believe that China’s foreign policy could be very destabilizing—unless, that is, the U.S. remains firm in defense of our allies overseas. In Congress, my policy towards China will involve commitments to defend loyal, democratic allies like India and strengthen diplomatic and security relations. India is a partner in the war against terrorism, and also in the global struggle for human rights.

RB: China has claimed the Indian State of Arunachal Pradesh and its hydro-electric resources, critical to both China’s and India’s burgeoning economies. Having seen China’s expansionist bent from Tibet to Hong Kong and other claims once thought ridiculous gain credence in the international arena; how would you prevent China from seizing Arunachal Pradesh and its critical resources?

JP: Yes, China has increasingly disputed Indian sovereignty over Arunachal Pradesh and even increased operations along the border. The Obama Administration has ignored India’s concerns, and gone so far as to make joint statements with Beijing promising to “work together” to promote security in South Asia. I think that is the wrong approach. The Administration should stop taking the friendliness of Beijing’s intentions for granted, and instead develop a realistic, strategic plan to prevent the outbreak of conflict along the border. We should deter China from further inflaming border tensions with India, or from launching an invasion, by projecting strength, defending our alliance with India, and passing a clear, unambiguous resolution promising that we will not stand by idly if China invades or destabilizes Arunachal Pradesh. As your representative in Congress, I will propose such a resolution, and I will encourage the House India Caucus and other members to sign on.

RB: Former Indian Cabinet Minister Dr. Subramanian Swami has noted that the Chinese economy is dependent on importing semi-raw goods from other Asian nations and exporting them to the West. He further suggested that convincing those nations to send their products through India instead would be an economic game changer. What is your reaction to that?

JP: America has become India’s largest trading and investment partner. However, India still has many tariffs and non-tariff barriers that discourage countries from exporting to India. One goal of our economic partnership with India should be to encourage further domestic liberalization to boost Indian economic growth and market access for companies wishing to send their partially produced products to India. In exchange, we could offer Indian greater access to American labor markets by lifting the cap on H1B visas.

Schakowsky has coasted to victory in previous elections thanks to Chicago’s legendary machine; but this is no ordinary election year, and Pollak is running neck and neck with his powerful opponent in what is shaping up to be a real “David and Goliath” race. Political newcomer Pollak (David) looks to be in position to upset Schakowsky (Goliath) in a race that mirrors events elsewhere around the country. As Pollak himself noted, "We have taken a ‘safe’ seat and turned it into a competitive race that is giving real power to the people of the 9th District." And a big piece of that power pie is going to Indian-Americans with whom Pollack and his wife Julia have longstanding personal and cultural ties.

Imagine, a US Congressman who knows about Arunachal Pradesh!

Islamization of Northeast India no Coincidence

2010-07-01T08:08:00.004-05:00

On February 15, 2010, I sat in a cab while it made its way through a traffic-clogged Kolkata to the office of Bimal Pramanik director of the Kolkata-based Centre for Research in Indo-Bangladesh Relations. Pramanik expressed serious concerns about the decades-long pattern of demographic changes in West Bengal (and Assam), and we discussed the context in which we can better understand them. Amitabh Tripathi, founder of the South Asia forum and a tireless activist in the fight against radical Islam, arranged the meeting and was a key participant in it.

Pramanik in Bangladesh’s 1971 War of Independence and is familiar with traditional Bengali Hindus and Muslims relations and how much they have changed in recent decades. While “Muslim infiltration” and demographic change itself is an issue, Primanik is more concerned about the deliberate nature of that change. He called it “Bangladeshi infiltration with Pakistani ideas,” and that the key element to the conflict is that South Asian Muslims are abandoning their traditional culture for “Arabic” dominated culture. Tripathi also noted the growth of Wahabi influence in Bangladesh, something that our colleague Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury also has documented.

In 1905 then again in 1947, Bengal was divided into a Muslim-majority entities (Bangladesh, previously East Bengal and East Pakistan) and a Hindu-majority entity (West Bengal state within India). In the second half of the twentieth century, however, the Muslim proportion of West Bengal’s population rose by 25 percent and its Hindu population declined by almost nine. In the same period, the proportion of East Bengal’s Hindu population declined by almost three-fourths, its Muslim share rose by more than one-third. Those significant shifts do not happen as a result of natural demographic processes, and the trends have continued into the 21st century. Pramanik noted that while Muslim population growth in West Bengal was nearly 35 percent between 1981 and 1991, it was only 25 percent in the same period in Bangladesh. “How can there be such a wide difference in growth rates between the two countries?” He asks. “This can only be explained by the illegal immigration from across the border.”

The South Asia Research Society conducted an exhaustive demographic study of population trends in West Bengal since 1941 and found that before 1971, almost all East Bengali refugees in West Bengal were minorities. Since then, “there has been largescale voluntary infiltration” of Bangladeshi Muslims “as well as the forced migration” of minorities, mostly Hindu.

Pramanik’s own study of Bengal population changes examined changes that occurred between 1951 (after the major share of population transfers from 1947 had been completed) and 2001. The intervening 50 years saw the rise of radical Islam as a major international player and so also several decades of efforts by radical Muslims to implement their designs. Differential growth rates between Hindus and Muslims in Bengal are startling. In Bangladesh, the Hindu population grew from about nine to eleven million, or 23.16 percent; while the Muslim population grew from 32 to 111 million, or 244.68 percent. Apologists have attempted to dismiss this disparity as free decisions by Hindus for economic reasons, but decisions were not free and even if for economic reasons they were due to anti-Hindu actions: seizure of assets under the Vested Property Act, religious discrimination, persecution, and so forth. And if it was simple population transfer, population figures for the Indian state closest to Bangladesh with the same ethnic group would reflect that. So what do we see? West Bengal had about 19 million Hindus in 1951 and 58 million in 2001, an increase of 198.54 percent. Its 1951 Muslim population of approximately five million Muslims grew to more than 20 million in 2001 or by 310.13 percent. Muslim growth rate exceeded that of Hindus in all but one district. Primanik documented a situation of “unabated infiltration,” especially during the final two decades of his study and a pattern of increased crime in these districts as the Muslim infiltration became more prominent. His findings help quantify frequent testimony by Bangladeshi Hindu refugees of increased attacks on their ersatz colonies by combined forces of Bangladeshis and Muslim villages from the surrounding areas; and my own observation of formerly mixed Hindu-Muslim villages now almost all Muslim and the disappearance or abandonment of the once ubiquitous roadside Mandirs or Hindu temples.

The prolific Primanik suggest what awaits Hindus in West Bengal, as well as the darker motivations behind the phenomena noted in this book. “This continuous infiltration from across the border is slowly and steadily changing the demographic pattern in the border areas, especially in the States of West Bengal and Assam… which is threatening our secular polity and national security. This is a religio-cultural process taking place in a geographical space considered to be strategically important. Thus, the emergence of Bangladesh has created in the North-Eastern States of India certain conditions conducive to Islamisation.”

Jews Unite! Gaza Flotilla IS Anti-Semitism"

2010-06-01T06:15:00.005-05:00

Why is it so difficult for we Jews to call out our enemies for what they are: Anti-Semites? Are Muslims afraid to toss around the charge of "Islamophobic" as easily as they tossed around candies to celebrate the 9/11 attacks? Have the left and their associates shied away from calling anyone who opposes them "racists"? And their charges are almost always disingenuous. Then why do we fear calling things what they are?

The knee-jerk Israel bashing response to the Gaza terror flotilla by the UN, EU, and the rest of the morally bankrupt idiots places their endemic anti-Semitism on full view. Israel--the Jewish State--acted in every way to stave off violence, and issued numerous warnings to the countries and entities involved. They told them that they were attempting to break a blockade and would be stopped from doing so. (Let's remember that the "blockaded" have launched thousands of missiles indiscriminately against Jewish children with that alphabet soup of anti-Semites consistently silent. I guess it's okay with them if Jews are killed; just don't mess with terrorists.) They offered to transfer any humanitarian supplies on the terror flotilla over land to Gaza--which would have satisfied the alleged humanitarian purpose of the flotilla and its Turkish Islamist backers; but they rejected it preferring violence against Israel instead. All of that is well-documented.

What needs to be called out is the anti-Semitic reaction--and it needs to be identified as such. Ask yourself what their reaction would have been if a group of Jews from Yesha lobbed missiles at schools in Syria? Ask them what their reaction would have been if the Jewish IDF opened fire first. And ask them why they all demand that Israel, the Jewish State, be investigated,, while they do not demand the same of provocateur Turkey, the Islamic State!

Once again, the US State Department failed to show the courage needed in this situation. As reported in the Washington Post, it issued a statement saying that the United States remains "deeply concerned by the suffering of civilians in Gaza" and "will continue to engage the Israelis on a daily basis to expand the scope and type of goods allowed into Gaza."

Nothing about the suffering of the Jewish children in Southern Israel, subject to constant rocket attack from the terrorist enclave; nothing about the openly Islamist intentions of the activists on board the flotilla; nothing about Turkey's role in generating this international incident and the loss of life President Obama "deeply regrets."

There is only one answer to this diplomatic pogrom, and that is self-defense by all Jews and our non-Jewish allies. Am I the only one who sees that? I doubt it. So where is the courage we have lauded in the past?

UPDATE: JUNE 3, 2010: As we knew would happen, there is more and more evidence of terrorist backing and involvement in what Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister called this "armada of hate." See my web site for new information, and for two new articles, see: Turkish 'aid' group had terror ties and 3 flotilla fatalities 'dreamt of martyrdom.'

The al Dura hoax, the non-massacre in Jenin, the doctored photos from Qana, and on and on: Too bad that Israel's bashers never let a silly thing like facts get in their way.

UPDATE: JUNE 3, 2010

Practical Jewish-Hindu Cooperation

2010-05-02T08:23:00.006-05:00

On Sunday, April 25, 2010, there was a large rally held in front of the Israeli embassy in New York. Its purpose was to show support for the State of Israel and protest the current US administration’s policies that demonize the Jewish State. The day before, I was among three recipients of the Vishwa Hindu Ratna award at the Hindu Temple of Greater Chicago. The rally, organized largely by Jewish groups, was notable for the significant presence of Hindu and Sikh groups. The award was given to me, a Jew, for my principled and ongoing defense of Hindus, especially in Bangladesh. Participants at both events recognize that radical Islam and its passive tolerance threaten the very existence of Jews and Hindus respectively. (And for the record, all of us are Americans, too, another favorite target of Islamists.)

I agree with critical thinkers like Dr. Daniel Pipes, who argue against infusing political debate with religion. That can turn rational discourse into zero sum vilification in which each side accuses the other of moral atrocity and believes it is not debating an issue but defending the divine. I am also trained as a social scientist, however, and that training directs me to investigate significant social factors that appear regularly in the same set of events. So, while not all acts of terrorism in this world have been perpetrated by Islamists, that factor has appeared in the overwhelming number of terrorist actions that refusing to look at it sacrifices the scientific method in favor of political correctness. Similarly, Judaism and Hinduism were two very prominent factors helping to organize and explain the events of that weekend.

In Chicago, Hindus were adamant on thanking this Jew for defending their co-religionists; and subsequent to the New York rally, I was part of numerous email chains by Jews wanting to know how we can thank Hindus for their passionate participation. Perhaps it is time to return the favor and save lives at the same time. Just as Israel is facing an existential threat at this moment so, too, Bangladesh’s Hindus are dying. That is not opinion but fact. At the time of India’s partition in 1948, they made up a little less than a third of East Pakistan’s population. When East Pakistan became Bangladesh in 1971, Hindus were less than a fifth; thirty years later, less than one in ten; and some estimates put them at less than eight percent today. If we do nothing about it, they will follow Kashmir’s Hindu population into oblivion in our lifetime.

There are initial discussions underway to hold a rally in defense of these victims of ethnic cleansing, perhaps in New York (not clear yet), that would involve members of those same two religious communities. Clearly, such an event should resonate with all religious communities in the United States, this is simply the initial point of discussion. All individuals and organizations that would like to participate—if not by their presence by their donations—should contact me at drrbenkin@comcast.net; fully tax deductible online donations can be made by going to my web site, http://www.interfaithstrength.com and clicking the “Donate” button.

Israeli Diplomatic Offensive a No-Brainer

2010-04-04T09:28:00.003-05:00

In late March, according to the AP, “Britain took the extraordinary step Tuesday of expelling an Israeli diplomat for the first time in more than 20 years, after concluding there was compelling evidence that Israel was responsible for the use of forged British passports in the plot to slay a senior Hamas operative in Dubai.” Ironically, the man behind the move, UK Foreign Minister David Milliband, justified the move by saying that the high-quality fakes were “almost certainly made by a state intelligence service.” After taking such strong action, he also “insisted Britain has drawn no conclusions over who is responsible for the killing. Is there any question that Britain’s move was political and nothing else?

In August, for instance, an international committee accused the UK of selling arms that “killed civilians” in Sri Lanka and that were used to make IEDs in Iraq. The government responded by promising a “full review.” That was eight months ago; the alleged Israel incident occurred in January. Did the British expel diplomats from Saudi Arabia over any of its numerous human rights violations? Or from Russia during any of the mini-wars, anti-terror operations, or crackdowns? Even more shocking, did the British do anythingto Iranian diplomats enjoying its hospitality during the recent murders of dissidents, government-led oppression of religious and ethnic minorities, or any other Iranian atrocities? But it did it to Israel for something only alleged and far less deadly than the incidents noted above. Now, it is “re-considering” any arms sales to Israel. That should be the last straw.

How far have Israel and its friends have allowed this Israel’s international standing to fall? The Dubai assassination took out a terrorist and Hamas arms trafficker; yet, the resulting furor was aimed exclusively at the assassins. There was no expression of thanks to whoever took out this known terrorist, responsible for the death of many innocents. What kind of topsy-turvy world it this? Nor was there any acknowledgment that Israel—and for that matter, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, because it is still not clear who arranged the hit—has a legitimate right to protect its citizens and its very existence. Clearly, those who have sounded off on this incident have lost any semblance of a moral compass.

Israel has been rather passive in response to an international onslaught of vilification of which this is but the latest example, regardless of which party is in power—and it has not worked. There is no shortage of otherwise impotent countries and groups lining up to take pot shots at the world’s only Jewish State. Strategists should ask if they foresee a time when those nations will simply decide to stop doing that and treat Israel treated like other nations. Unless they can come up with a “yes” to that, it clearly is time for a change. Israel and America have allowed their enemies to take the initiative and set the agenda for their existential war on terror; doing little more than responding to the most recent provocation with the likelihood being that the enemy has anticipated the response. Why do we think the Gaza weapons factories and smuggling tunnels are always empty when Israel bombs them after a terrorist attack? When al Qaeda launched the 9/11 attack against the United States from its strongholds in Afghanistan it is highly unlikely that the US invasion of that South Asian nation surprised anyone. When Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists stepped up their attacks on Israeli civilians and then captured Israelis from Israeli territory; did they not expect Israel to launch the 2006 Operation Defensive Shield? And even if they suspected that the United States and Israel might have the resolve to finish the job, they knew they could count on the “international community” to lend a hand in preventing that.

Israel, however, is not a beggar nation without recourse. It can use its strengths to force those whose main desire is placating Israel’s enemies to think twice before engaging in that sort of morally bankrupt diplomacy. It can start with the current crisis. Instead of engaging in an empty tit-for-tat move, expelling some marginal British diplomat in a move that will be forgotten and rectified in not too long, try hitting them where it hurts. The British economy is still going through a difficult time, and quite a few British companies depend on the business they do in Israel: British Gas, Apax Partners, Unilever, HSBC, British Airways, Lloyds of London, and Rolls Royce Aero Engines among others. There is rather extensive evidence that one of them HSBC, has had a role in helping to fund anti-Israel terrorist groups. The allegation first arose in 2004, when Washington attorney Allen Gerson targeted HSBC, Citigroup, and others for channeling funds through their Saudi subsidiaries to Palestinian terror groups. Five years later, HSBC was accused of supporting “financial jihad” in the form of disruptive banking techniques also through its Saudi branch and “Sharia advisor.” Also in 2009, HSBC (as well as a subsidiary of the Royal Bank of Scotland) was accused of funneling money to Hamas through a Gaza facility. It would not be unreasonable for the Israeli government to restrict HSBC’s activities, suspend its license, levy fines, or launch a highly public government investigation of HSBC for supporting terrorism. They can do this, moreover, without jeopardizing the benefits that the relationship brings to both countries, as it is in no one’s interest to escalate the crisis over Israel’s actions—unless Israel shows that its enemies in Britain can do what they wish without fear of meaningful action.

Similarly, Israeli longshoremen and other laborers can refuse to unload or otherwise handle goods that have been processed by members of the British unions who called for a boycott of the Jewish state. They might even prevail upon their cohorts in the United States to do the same, as every major American union previously joined the Jewish Labor Unions denunciation of the Brits’ boycott call.

Perhaps nothing enrages Israel and its supporters as much, however, as when governments like Britain take a holier-than-thou attitude toward Israel, condemning it for legitimate self-defense actions that pale in comparison to their own. If Israel’s vaunted intelligence agency is as good as its reputation suggests, it would not be difficult for the Mossad to leak information about real torture, for instance, committed by British security forces in Ireland or atrocities in the Falklands. Have all the actions of British forces in Iraq and Afghanistan been beyond reproach. Certainly, there are incidents that rise to the level of the accusations they hurl against Israel. As The Economist noted, when commenting on the current Israel-British row, “Israel provides Britain with much needed intelligence on areas such as Iran which it will be reluctant to forfeit.” So, Israel is not without assets it can marshal to forestall similar feigned outrage by governments in Britain and elsewhere.

When countries like the UK can take this sort of harsh actions far out of proportion to any alleged offense, knowing that it can do so with impunity; when the world’s worst human rights offenders feel free to lecture Israel about human rights with the only reaction pat on the back; it is time to change the dynamic that works only for the international “bad guys.”

Ignore Indian events at our own Peril

2010-03-07T11:23:00.004-06:00

For the past year, I have been saying that the political center in India is collapsing. The re-election of the left-centrist Congress Party last year only masked this inevitable decline because the finale might not come this year, or maybe even next; but it is coming, and when it does it will be with an explosion heard round the world. I was in India for just over two weeks in February, and during that time noted:

• Relations with fellow nuclear power Pakistan deteriorated in a hail of harsh rhetoric and threats such that the Obama administration sent Senator John Kerry to try and “calm” tensions.
• Pakistan first refused to join in scheduled talks with India about the former’s involvement in a 2008 terror attack that killed almost 200 Indians.
• Later, they agreed to talk only if they focused on Kashmir—a territorial dispute between the countries that has sparked skirmishes, continued terror and counter-terror operations, and all out wars between the two. India wanted to focus on terrorism, but acquiesced and said they would consider the matter but insisted the talks concentrate on terrorism.
• While this was happening, Islamists launched another deadly Islamist terrorist attack, this time on Pune, a major Indian city of over 5,000,000 people, that at last count took 13 lives and left over five dozen injured.
• Initial investigations identified the terrorists as Indian citizens, known as Indian Mujahedeen who are committed to replacing India with an Islamist state.
• Subsequent investigations confirmed that fact and added that the operation likely was directed from Pakistan.
• The Indian government announced that American Islamist David Headley gave his captors information about the “Karachi Project” that was carried out by Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI. He said the ISI brought sympathetic Indian Muslims to Pakistan, trained them in terrorist techniques, and returned them to India where they were to await further instructions to carry out terrorist attacks.
• Communist insurgents, known as Naxalites, abducted a government official in the state of Bihar and refused to release him until the government caved into their demands, one of which was for the Indian government to end its, very effective, military crackdown on the Maoist revolutionaries.
• Naxalites carried out a half dozen military operations against the government and people of India. Among the many terror operations were at least two of particular note. They launched a particularly gruesome attack on an unarmed paramilitary camp in which more than two dozen soldiers were shot or burned alive; and an unknown number of wounded were seized and taken to undisclosed locations as hostages. They also attacked an unarmed village in the Jamui district of Bihar because its inhabitants refused cooperate with their insurgency. They murdered several villagers, including some who were burned alive when the Maoists torched homes in the village.
• Islamists carried out several terror attacks, mostly in Kashmir, but in other areas of India, as well. The attacks killed both civilians and military personnel indiscriminately.
• The government’s anti-terror squad prevented another half dozen Islamist terror attacks, seizing 200 kilograms of ammonium nitrate, 600 detonators, and 200 gel sticks from known Muslim terrorists, in one raid in Gujurat (a state that has been a rallying cry for Islamists after violence there in 2002. The government also detained two British nationals caught at a hotel near the international airport with high-tech devices for monitoring and tracking air traffic.
• Students rioted—and as of the time I left were still rioting—at an Indian university in Hyderabad in the South of the country At the time I left India, one student was near death after self-immolating as part of the protest.

Imagine the media coverage if any one of those things occurred in the United States. Yet, from what I could glean from the Internet and elsewhere, it appears that our own media (except for a few journals that ran my articles) devoted far more ink to Tiger Woods than to all of these events combined. India is a nuclear power, as is the United States. India, like the US, is a major target of international jihiadis. Its other primary adversary also has nuclear weapons as do those of the United States. Both countries are among the largest and most populous nations on earth. Both are among the world’s most important economic powers. And both countries are critical if Islamist and communist imperialism and terror are to be defeated.

Indians are questioning the United States' reliability as an ally in the war against radical Islam. Our continuing aid to Pakistan--aid which even former Pakistani strongman Pervez Musharraf admitted had been channeled against India--is incomprehensible to most Indians without relying on cynicism about politics; and the Obama administration's policies have led most anti-Islamists to conclude that his administration would sacrifice allies like Indian and Israel if it meant even a superficial friendship from America's worst enemies.

A Phony Peace Process

2010-01-05T05:17:00.004-06:00

If we were to demand honesty from our political leaders, media, and international groups, we would have long ago banned the phrase "the peace process" from all discussions of what has happened with regard to the Israel-Arab conflict to date.There is no Middle East peace process; never has been. The reason for that is not Israeli "settlements," not Hamas per se, not President Obmama. The problem predates all of them. And there is no sillier notion with currency in the world today than that of the solution being an end to the so-called "occupation"; that is, Israeli hegemony over lands re-captured during the 1967 Six-Day War.

The idea of the occupation is perhaps the most damaging of them all because it has focused world attention on a goal that has nothing to do with peace between Israel and the Arabs. First of all, the lands in question were determined merely by troop positions at the end of Israel's 1948 War of Independence--where Israeli, Jordanian, Egyptian, and Syrian troops were at the moment an armistice was announced. That's it; there was no natural mandate, no historical consciousness, no nothing, just troops. Second, expecting peace from an end to that so-called occupation presumes that there was peace before 1967 when it came into existence. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. The Arabs were trying to "drive the Jews into the sea," as they put it since before the State of Israel came into existence. Their collective militaries invaded the new Jewish State at the moment of its birth with that goal in mind. The 1967 War itself was a defensive war, in which Israel struck Egypt only after the latter committed an act of war, according to international law, with a blockade and by massing troops on its border. Syria and Jordan went to war before being attacked--and Israeli leaders had frantically tried to convince Jordan to stay out of the war, but the latter invaded nonetheless.

Let's also remember that before 1967, the "West Bank," Gaza, and eastern Jerusalem were occupied continuously by Muslim powers: from 1948 by Jordan and Egypt and before then by Turkey. Yet, there was no cry for them to allow a "Palestinian State" to take shape on those lands. Never! In 1964--three years before Israel gained control of those lands, the Palestinian Liberation Organization was born and made no mention of an end to that Arab occupation; not a word for Jordan and Egypt to give up those lands. But it did call for Israel's destruction--all of Israel!

So if we really want peace, we need to give up the notion of a return to 1967. There was no peace then, so why would we want to return to it? The concept of "land for peace" was always an idiotic idea. The real issue in the Israel-Arab conflict is and always was the latter's refusal to accept a viable Jewish State of Israel in the Middle East. Until that is addressed head-on as the key, peace will remain elusive.

What, then, does peace require?

* That every Arab and Muslim leader commit themselves to defending the existence of a Jewish State of Israel among their people. Not every policy or action, but that State's legitimacy and very existence.

* That probably means cooperating with Israel--militarily if necessary--to defeat terror groups that refuse the peace.

* It means that all parties must defend equal Jewish and Muslim access and legitimacy to all holy sites, including Jerusalem's Temple Mount, Hebron's Cave of Machpelah, and so forth; regardless of which party has political hegemony.

* It means that the Arabs have to reform their educational system to eliminate all the negative and hate-filled lessons about Jews and their State.

* Arabs must give up the notion of flooding Israel with millions of Arabs under their so-called right of return; because it is just a disingenuous way of appearing to accept a Jewish State while working to destroy it. Let's stop pretending it is anything else.

* And it means that the rest of the world--which really has no skin in the game--has to commit to support this genuinepeace process, no matter how many of their assumptions have to die.

Does that solve all the problems; does it provide the parties with mutual trust? No, but without them, peace will never come, and with them, there is no chance that it will not.

Should the US Hold Hearings on Bangladesh?

2009-11-14T06:28:00.005-06:00

I recently returned from several days in Washington where I met with legislative leaders and staff, as well as members of various rights commissions from the United States government. Much in the meetings concerned Bangladesh's admittedly false prosecution of Muslim journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, who accompanied me to various offices in Washington. Or perhaps it is more accurate to say I accompanied him, as his case continues to raise concerns in Washington where it has been a significant impediment to better US-Bangladesh relations.

In the meetings, however, I also furthered previously held discussions about the ongoing and government-supported persecution of Hindus and other minorities in Bangladesh. In 1948, after the population transfers that accompanied India's partition, Hindus were about one third of East Pakistan's population. In 1971, when East Pakistan became Bangladesh, they were just under one in five. Today, they are only nine percent. Normal demographic processes do not explain that kind of decline; and SUNY Professor Sachi Dastidar estimates that over 40 million Hindus are "missing" from the Bangladeshi census--killed, forced to convert, forced to emigrate, or never born as a result.

The current Bangladeshi government took office this year with a pledge to change that; but, if anything, persecution has gotten more severe under the center-left Awami League. In its first two months of office alone, we verified one and a half serious attacks on Hindus every week: murder, rape, child abduction, assault, land grabs, forced conversion, and religious desecration. In every case, the victims were attacked because they were Hindu by victimizers who did so because the Awami League allows them to do as as Muslims; it is even enshrined in Bangladeshi Law, the Vested Property Act. In some instances, the government even participated in the attacks. Throughout 2009, these attacks have continued with a wink and a nod from the government.

Several US bodies investigate these matters from the US Commission on International Religious Freedom to the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission in the US House of Representatives and many other pertinent bodies. The key to US concern, besides the human rights atrocities, is that the government does nothing to stop them or even participates. That is what we have in Bangladesh. Moreover, US citizens purchase Bangladeshi garments and other goods, and US companies might decide to do business in Bangladesh. Moreover, Bangladesh contributes the second largest contingent to UN peacekeeping missions, which are in large part supported by US taxpayers. We also give millions in aid each year to Bangladesh.

Shouldn't our government make these Americans aware that by doing so they are supporting ethnic cleansing of Hindus--so that Americans can choose to spend their dollars on countries that do not support our enemies?

Persecution of Hindus increasing in Bangladesh

2009-10-25T19:29:00.002-05:00

When Sheikh Hasina and the Bangladeshi Awami League (BAL) took power in Bangladesh following a landslide victory in late December, a torrent of superficial commentaries suggested that the BAL would usher in a new era; one in which minorities no longer faced systematic and government-tolerated persecution and one in which the government opposed the growing power of Islamist radicals in Bangladesh. I recall being asked to participate in a conference call with Hindu activists in the country shortly after the election during which the latter's sentiments were: give them some time and they will do the right thing. On the other hand, I cautioned that the worst thing minorities could do now was lay down and be silent, that the BAL had no intention of changing the status quo and that if minorities fail to assert their rights from the start, they never will be recognized.

Ten months later, unfortunately, my prediction it turns out was the accurate one.

Despite repeated promises to do so, the government has made no concrete move to repeal the Vested Property Act, that law which empowers the Bangladeshi government to seize the land of non-Muslims and give it to Muslims. It also provides the legal and economic basis for the continued effort to eradicate Bangladesh's Hindu community: a community that has fallen from one third of the nation at partition (1947) to one fifth at independence (1971) to nine percent today.

Dozens of government-tolerated anti-Hindu actions were reported during the BAL's first two months in office. My organization was able to confirm at least 12 (1.5 every week) involving rape, murder, assault, land grabs, forced conversion, and religious desecration. In all cases, government officials (at several levels) participated in the actions and/or prevented their prosecution. In some cases, they interfered with recovering abducted minor Hindus.

This Spring saw an anti-Hindu pogrom carried out with government support in a Dhaka neighborhood just behind a police station. There were also at least three confirmed cases of abduction of young Hindus by Muslims and their (forced) conversion to Islam. Once again, the government prevented a fair and open investigation of the matters or the safe recovery of the victims. In several cases, the police ignored blatant evidence of break ins and other crimes.

Most recently, in a nine-day period this month (October 2009), I received evidence that the pace of anti-Hindu actions is accelerating. The Bangladeshi paper, The Daily Janakantha, reported at least seven cases of Hindu girls being lured to vulnerable spots where they were abducted and forcibly converted to Islam. According to human rights activist, Advocate Rabindra Ghosh and others, the police refused to investigate the matter or admit that any crimes were committed. This conforms with our previous experience that police and other government officials will not consider any conversion to Islam (forced or voluntary) anything other than an achievement worthy of their praise.

Bangladesh's Daily Samakal and the Bangladesh Minority Watch report this month that a Muslim mob attacked and destroyed a Hindu Temple to the god Shiva. They also destroyed its deities and other artifacts, and it should be noted that the Temple was recently repaired following previous attacks by Muslims. The attack took place in the Dhaka district, and police have not taken any action despite promises to do so.

Finally, in that same week, a young Hindu woman was abducted from her bed and taken to an open field where he six Muslim attackers raped her in turn. They brutalized her so badly that she is currently fighting for her life in a local hospital. (The attack took place in the Pabna District.) The woman's husband tried to stop his wife's abduction but was stabbed and beaten into unconsciousness. Formal charges have yet to be filed against any of the perpetrators.

When will the Awami League live up to its promises? We know the answer to that: never. The real question is when will the rest of the world realize that.

Islamists Gaining under Awami Leage in Bangladesh

2009-09-29T05:26:00.003-05:00

Ever since the Awami League's ascension to power in Bangladesh, there has been a regular cottage industry of apologists claiming that the left-center government will navigate the country away from patronizing Islamists and oppression minorities. If anything, things have worsened under Sheikh Hasina and her cronies. Violence against minorities is not only increasing but becoming more severe--and open--day by day. I have vetted numerous allegations and have established a severe anti-minority action in Bangladesh at the rate of about one per week and a half. The real figures probably are higher.

Now, Muslim dissident journalist, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury reports on new evidence of how open pro-Islamist rhetoric is, including the demonization of other religions--things far worse than what their allies decry as "hate speech."

Shoaib has been arrested and tortured as a result of his pro-US, pro-Israel, and anti-Islamist actions; and still faces capital charges of treason, sedition, and blasphemy.

He writes from Dhaka,"Hizbut Towhid, a notorious Islamist group in BANGLADESH, recently published a book and DVD named DAJJAL, which is sold openly in all major bookstores in this country.

"This book is written by Selim Ponni, the kingpin of this group. He terms Jews and Christians as "enemies of humanity" and asks people to start JIHAD against Jews and Christians. This is an extremely provocative book and DVD.

"I am surprised, how Awami League, which proclaims to be a secularist party is allowing this. Hizbut Towhid never could sell such hate materials openly before.

For those who look at that and say, "free speech," you might be missing the point. We can put aside the debate on whether or not governments should censor "hate speech," which is what Hizbut and other Islamist groups offer their readers. Shoaib's points are two. The first is that Islamists are more powerful and can spew their hatred openly. (Were this book and DVD an isolated incident, it might not be enough to conclude that, but taken with the uptick in anti-minority activity and Islamist strength, it is significant.) The second is that we are letting our enemy socialize the Muslim world for jihad by default--just because the US is occupied with serious domestic battles, like health care, does not mean our enemies have stopped their nefarious deeds, the worst of which have little to do with the crisis in Iran.

Third, the Awami League continues to lie with a straight face, telling the world that none of this is happening. The PM has lied again and again about repealing the racist Vested Property Act (VPA) and other anti-minority legislation on the books. (The VPA allows the government to seize non-Muslim property and distribute it to its Muslim cronies.) Just this month, US Secretary of State continued the fiction with a syrupy sweet speech about the Awami League's democratic and moderate Islam ideals. What nonsense! Worse, it gives the Awami League the notion that it is getting away with ethnic cleansing and supporting the worst jihadists while telling a gullible West that it is fighting both!

New Wild West? Rustling Cattle to fund Jihad

2009-08-31T06:17:00.003-05:00

It is a story most Americans have heard time and again: "bad guys" in the Old West stealing cattle from law-abiding citizens. It was a very lucrative business back then but one that was hated by the people of the Old West. No doubt, we assumed it was a thing of the past and that cattle rustlers posed no threat to us--we urbanized and urbane Americans. Well, we had better think again.

Interfaith Strength first learned in March that Bengali Muslims were using the proceeds from stolen cattle to fund jihad in South Asia. During a clandestine and late-night meeting in Kolkata, individuals with homes in the border area between India and Bangladesh told me that "after ten o'clock you can see everything." By everything, they meant cattle going out of India in exchange for arms and terrorists coming into the country. The jihadis were helped in this effort by corrupt officials from West Bengal, the Indian state that lies on Bangladesh's western border and has been under the iron first of communist rule for the past 30 years.

Interfaith Strength recently investigated the allegations and has been able to confirm the existence of this network that is funding anti-Indian and specifically anti-Hindu terrorism with proceeds gained from violating a sacred tenet of the Hindu faith.

We will have more on this in the coming days.

Bangladeshi Hindu Abducted, Forced to Convert to Islam

2009-08-09T07:14:00.005-05:00

For most of us in the West, the notion of forced conversion seems to belong to a bygone age and a long discredited mentality. The sad fact, however, is that like the slave trade and other atrocities we have left in our past, forced conversion is alive and well even today. The Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist, Christian Unity Council (BHBCUC) has reported a case of abduction and forced conversion in Bangladesh; and two human rights organizations, Global Human Rights Defence (GHRD)and Bangladesh Minority Watch (BDMW) have investigated the incident. All three groups have a history of credibility in these matters, as well as people on the ground that can confirm or refute allegations.

The case involves a Hindu woman named Koli Goswami. According to the BHBCUC report, at least five Muslim perpetrators including a government official broke into Koli's home at 12:45am on June 13, 2009. They vandalized the home and grabbed the 20-year-old-college student. When the girl tried to alert others by screaming, they covered her head and, as others started coming to her rescue, fired pistols in the air to scare them away. One of the alleged perpetrators, Touhidul Islam Bhuiya (Sumon) is currently facing murder charges in a separate case.

Yet, the Bangladeshi police have denied that any crime was committed in this case; which also allows Sumon to remain free. When GHRD and BDMW representatives visited the site, police told them, "It is not kidnapping. It is love affairs between kidnapper and victim." Kidnapper? Victim? That hardly sounds like a love affair. So, Bangladeshi police, as is standard in these matters (and they are not uncommon), have refused to pursue a case: despite physical evidence of a break-in at the family home; despite the video taped testimony of the family; despite the lodging of a complaint by the girl's uncle; and despite requests by the family for them to help locate and produce Koli.

Although I am investigating the matter further, the basic facts in this case (that is, the break in and abduction) are not in dispute. The police, too, have seen the physical evidence, as well as other material provided by BDMW's Rabindra Ghosh. The incident itself is a terrible crime, but making matters worse is the fact that it remains a common occurrence in Bangladesh. Victims are universally young women and girls, sometimes boys, of child bearing years or younger. The choice of victims is deliberate and as such, meets the fourth condition of genocide, as described in the international Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide: "Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

The active participation by a government official in the Koli Goswami forced conversion, as well as police refusal to prosecute the case, are consistent with other incidents of active government involvement and support for forcibly converting young minority members to Islam. It is also consistent with figures gathered during the period of Arab terror bombings in Israel. During that period, Arab terrorists disproportionately bombed places frequented by Israeli Jews of childbearing years or younger: children and even babies especially in Judea and Samaria, clubs like Mike’s Place in Tel Aviv, markets where young mothers shop, shopping malls, and so forth. What Islamists cannot gain because they are militarily weak and morally bankrupt, they try to gain through genocide.

And consider this: at the time of the India-Pakistan partition (1947), Hindus made up almost one third of the population in the territory known today as Bangladesh. Today, they are but nine percent. There can be little doubt that incidents such as that of Koli Goswami are part of a deliberate process that has caused that population decline; and if it is not stopped, we will witness an end to Bangladesh's minorities in our lifetimes.

Arab Responsibility for Palestinian "Refugees"

2009-07-26T09:20:00.002-05:00

Through a continuous bombardment of propaganda intended to supplant historical fact, the Arabs have made the so-called refugee problem a key element in their war against Israel. Today, they use it as the basis for their claimed "right of return," which is intended to force Israel to accept millions of Arabs into their country and so destroy the Jewish state. Those familiar with the history of 1948 know that Arab leaders urged Arabs to leave the new Jewish state so they could destroy it and then return to claim the entire land. The Palestinian Media Watch recently published testimony by Palestinians--who were there at the time--that confirms the historical truth that the refugee problem is a fabricated one and not the fault of Israel. The fact is that anyone who includes an Arab "right of return" in a peace agreement supports the destruction of Israel and is therefore not a worthy negotiating partner.

The six testimonies are:

"The radio stations of the Arab regimes kept repeating to us: "Get away from the battle lines. It's a matter of ten days or two weeks at the most, and we'll bring you back to Ein-Kerem." (Palestinian TV, 2009)

"The first war between Arabs and Israel had started and the "Arab Salvation Army" told the Palestinians: 'We have come to you in order to liquidate the Zionists and their state. Leave your houses and villages, you will return to them in a few days safely. Leave them so we can fulfill our mission (liquidate Israel) in the best way and so you won't be hurt." (Al Ayyam, 2008)

"The leaders and the elites promised us [refugees] at the beginning of the "Catastrophe" in 1948, that the duration of the exile will not be long, and that it will not last more than a few days or months, and afterwards the refugees will return to their homes, which most of them did not leave until they put their trust in those[worthless] promises made by the leaders and the political elites." (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, 2006)

"They [Arab leaders] told us: The Jews attacked our region and it is better to evacuate the village and return after the battle is over. And indeed there were among us [who fled Israel] those who left a fire burning under the pot, those who left their flock [of sheep] and those who left their money and gold behind, based on the assumption that we would return after a few hours" (Al Ayyam, 2006)

"Like the armies of your predecessors in the year of 1948, who forced us to leave [Israel], on the pretext of clearing the battlefields of civilians." (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, 2001)

"Son of refugee: 'Mr. Ibrahim [Sarsur]: I address you as a Muslim. My father and grandfather told me that during the "Catastrophe" [in 1948], our District Officer issued an order that whoever stays in Palestine and in Majdel [southern Israel] is a traitor, he is a traitor.'" (Palestinian TV, 1999)

The Arab narrative about Israel, Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount has been a deliberate attempt to replace historical fact with propaganda.

Is Shoaib Choudhury's ordeal coming to an end?

2009-07-19T12:34:00.000-05:00

Shoaib’s July 15 court appearance was surprisingly different from what we have experienced for months. With no warning to the defense, the government called three new witnesses. (Their only previous witness remained AWOL). Each testified briefly. The former Assistant Commissioner of Bangladesh’s Special Branch said Shoaib committed a crime by trying to go to Israel. He also said he committed the crime of hurting the "religious sentiments of Muslims by praising Christians and Jews." A non-governmental computer technician testified that the government seized Shoaib's computers but did not say what was found on it. He also got into a protracted discussion with Shoaib’s attorney about whether the items seized were computers, printers, or other peripherals. The Inspector of Police also accused Shoaib of breaking the law by trying to go to Israel. Shoaib’s attorney did get him to admit that Shoaib had no airplane ticket to Israel, however, alleging he was going to Bangkok and Singapore then on to Tel Aviv; an odd route even under Dhaka’s travel ban.

The point is that none of this is new or even compelling. If this is all the government can regurgitate after five and a half years, there cannot be much of a case, at least on the basis of Bangladeshi law. Even the judge seemed to agree, asking the defense to explain exactly what Shoaib is accused of doing, after the day’s lame testimony. (The government seems to have finally given up on the false and easily-disproved allegation of a “Hello Tel Aviv” article since the judge asked for evidence of the allegation.) When Advocate Govinda said that Shoaib's crime was exposing the rise of radical Islam and its use of madrassas, Judge Bashir Ullah--and this might sound familiar--said he should be rewarded for that and not condemned. Shoaib said the Public Prosecutor was smiling at that point.

Whether he was smiling because he knows a guilty verdict will be handed down regardless, because he knows our expectations of vindication will be dashed as were our previous hopes, or because he sees an end to Shoaib’s ordeal crowned with a not guilty verdict; is a matter of speculation. We seem to have gone through this before under previous governments only to be disappointed. But Shoaib believes that the government has decided to finish the trial, he expects as early as August. They could have done so months, even years ago but did not. Perhaps the economic hard times have led them to re-cast their strategy as regards trade. Perhaps they have read recent articles urging the United Nations to bar Bangladesh from peacekeeping missions. Bangladesh provides more UN peacekeepers than any other country except Pakistan, and doing so has become critical for the Bangladeshi economy. It was also one of the underlying reasons for the 2007 coup there. Or maybe it is they, not us, who ultimately tired of it all.

If Shoaib is right, here is what we can expect. Once the government concludes its case, the court will set a date for "argument," or the defense's rebuttal. Once that is concluded, the judge will retire to determine verdicts and set a date when judgement will be read. Today’s events certainly made it seem that the government had despaired of presenting any serious evidence for the charge; a hopeful sign. We must remember, however, that if the real decision is to continuing placating the radicals, the lack of evidence will not factor into Shoaib’s fate. It certainly has not up till now.

Next date: July 22, 2009.

Stop Shaking Your Fists and do Something!

2009-07-05T07:38:00.002-05:00

Address to Telugu Association of North America (TANA)
Rosemont, IL (Suburban Chicago), July 4, 2009

I was asked to come here today to talk about the ethnic cleansing of Bangladeshi Hindus: by Islamists—who drive it—“average” Bangladeshi Muslims—who carry it out—and the Bangladesh government—that has encouraged it almost since the day of its birth. That is why I am here. But I grow weary of attending conference after conference where I see the same people shaking the same ineffective fists at the same enemies. What do they think they are accomplishing?

To those who never tire of complimenting themselves for their years of work on the victims’ behalf; to Bangladeshi politicians who cynically claim to be the Hindus’ great hope; and to those international organizations that pretend to carry the mantle of human rights; I ask:

With all of your “heroic” action, have things gotten any better for the Bangladeshi Hindus? Are they any safer today than they were when you started your activity? Has Bangladesh repealed the openly anti-Hindu Vested Property Act that provides the legal framework for ethnic cleansing and rewards the victimizers with the victims’ land?

With all of your “heroic” action, why have Hindus fallen from 30 percent of the population at the time of Partition (1947) to nine percent today?

My God! Have we learned nothing from the Nazi Holocaust? Do we really have to wonder what the end of these sterile actions will be; not for us, but for the Bangladeshi Hindus? Look at Pakistan’s Hindus, who were once one fifth of the population but are only one percent today. Even that remnant is streaming into Indian Punjab ahead of the advancing Taliban; and I saw that for myself in March.

The comparison with the Nazis is not strained; for Islamists want the same thing for Hindus that Nazis wanted for the Jews. And Islamists today, like Nazis in the 1930s, find no shortage of world leaders and diplomats who recommend we overlook their sins as some sort of cultural expression or justified anger; who urge us to cooperate with those murdering innocents. You’ve heard the expression, “If you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas.” Well, if we do as they suggest, we will have the smell of the charnel house upon us; which is the stench emanating from Bangladesh today.

Albert Einstein famously defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” We—no, the Bangladeshi Hindus—cannot afford for us to do the same thing we have been doing for years expecting that somehow things will change. We must understand that making polite protests, putting our trust in Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League, and waiting for the UN, Amnesty International, or the rest of the misnomered human rights industry to act will achieve nothing except more of the same. And what is that? Try this.

On March 23 this year, I was in North Bengal, near Bangladesh’s northern border, taking testimony from refugees. That is not easy because many are reluctant to speak, especially about things happening now. Indian state and national governments refuse to recognize their presence as legitimate. They are “illegal aliens” and so are afraid. They have no rights, no status; and at any time can be told to leave their makeshift encampments and find somewhere else to live because someone wants the land on which they are huddling. I observed this myself in 2008, arriving at one camp just moments after the order came and the refugees were packing up their few meager belongings to find another deserted cluster of huts somewhere down the road. These refugees from Islamist terror are afraid that telling the truth about their situation will anger the local CPIM leader or police (both of whom likely take bribes to allow Islamist infiltration), and be sent back to Bangladesh to meet with any one of several atrocities, possibly death.

Sometimes, they describe what happened then say it occurred a safe number of years ago; I have to figure out which ones really did happen recently. Occasionally, though some brave Hindus speak up regardless of potential consequences, convinced as they are that there is nothing about their current state that makes them happy or promises anything better for their children and grandchildren; and this is what I encountered that day in March. A local teacher and a political activist said they knew of a Hindu family that had crossed into India only 22 days earlier and were willing to talk. They asked if we were interested in meeting with them, and of course, we jumped at the chance. We followed them along the main road until they ordered us to stop and get out of the car. They directed me onto the back of a motorcycle and took me along a narrow, winding path through farmland, then an area covered by banana palms and other growth; and finally to a clearing with a few ramshackle huts where the family awaited to tell their all too familiar story. I’m sure you all have heard it. They were at home on their little farm in Bangladesh when a gang of Muslims broke in and ordered them off their land. When the father protested, they beat him severely and took possession of the family home. Other, extended family reported other incidents, the murder of an uncle and more land grabs; and that the Bangladeshi police refused to help when they went to them. I’ve heard that a lot from refugees in rural India and have experienced it as well after attacks on dissidents in Dhaka. The police frequently refuse to accept their complaints and voice support for the attackers. In fact, in many cases, the police instead act on counter claims by the attackers. Many refugees have told me point blank that the police tell them that they need to do was to get out of Bangladesh.

Getting back to March 23, the family’s young daughter affected me the most. At first, she was silent then her mother stopped her from speaking; but she kept trying to talk. Eventually, she did and told me that “the Muslims… chased” her; her exact words. Her mother clearly did not want her daughter to talk about her experience and tried to take over the conversation. I realized later she just was trying to protect her. But the girl kept talking, looking down and away as she did. There was a lot more to this, so I decided to give her a break turning to some of the others before asking her, “Did the Muslims say anything when they were chasing you?” That question really made her uncomfortable, especially with my camera going, even though, by agreement, I did not show faces or give away our location; so I turned it off. It was only then that, still looking down, she said that they “caught [her and] did bad things.”

Perhaps it was her tragedy; perhaps her courage. It could have been her parents, still trying to spare her, because most of these young rape victims are shunned by their families and consigned to live with their attackers only to be victimized again and again. But I think about that girl and her family a great deal. I thought about them last month when President Obama addressed the Muslim world; and with all due respect, I had to disagree with him about something essential in his speech. The problem we face is not those he termed the “violent extremists.” It was not just extremists who brutalized that family and the many more like them. In fact, most of the attackers in these cases are average Muslim citizens who do it because they know they can. Nor was it a Taliban Afghani, Wahabi Saudi, or holocaust-denying Iranian government that let them get away with it. It was a “moderate” Bangladeshi government—the Awami League government that the West has said would move Bangladesh away from its anti-minority and pro-Islamist past. They are the ones from whom we must demand action if this is ever going to stop; and since the US, India, or the UN, will not, it is up to us, and I am prepared to address that because you will remember I believe that speeches and fist shaking are worthless unless they result in effective action. But I first want to mention another young girl I met; this time in 2008, near the North Bengal-Nepal border.

She told me she wanted to be a schoolteacher. Why? Because she was proud of being a Bengali Hindu and thought the most important thing she could do was to instill the same in other, young Bengali Hindus. Given the world in which she lives, her statement shows an incredible inner strength that any of us would be proud to have. But I wonder if she will get the chance, because the Indian and West Bengali governments are not making it easy for her people to survive, let alone spend time on education. The surrounding villages are becoming more and more hostile to Hindus. As we rode through them, my companions noted that they once had mixed Hindu-Muslim populations but are now all Muslim—and you could verify that by the absence of the small temples common wherever Hindus live in India. From time to time, too, Islamists from across the border will team up with these locals and attack the refugee camps. So, I wonder how much Hindu spirit—like that girl’s—is being snuffed out every day.

Several times every week, I receive reports of anti-Hindu violence in Bangladesh. For the past two months, I have been verifying them and filling in missing data so we can convinced others that human decency demands action by people in power. Here are seven incidents from January alone—remember, there likely are many more, but these are the ones where I have found “smoking guns”:

On 1 January, 14-year-old Subarna Karmakar was on her way home from school in the Barisal district when several Muslim males grabbed the girl, forced her onto a motorcycle, and carried her off. Her whereabouts remain unknown, and police have taken no action to locate the girl or prosecute the perpetrators.

On 15 January, nine Muslim males kicked in the door of a family home in the Khulna district, and forced their way in the house. They seized eight-year-old Choyon Bairagee and when his mother Aduri begged for mercy, the kidnappers threatened to kill her. The boy’s whereabouts remain unknown, and police have taken no action to locate him or prosecute the perpetrators.

On 24 January in Khulna, five or six Muslim fundamentalists attacked Thakur Das Mondol, a member of the Hindu Union Council and Chairman of Magur Khali Union Jubo Dal. He was carried to Khulna Medical College Hospital in a “senseless condition.” Police have taken no action.

On 26 January in Faridpur, a group of local, heavily armed Muslim Fundamentalists attacked a Hindu funeral site and a nearby Kali temple, which they destroyed completely. They have seized the temple land, and police have taken no action.

On 28 January, a madrassa was built on the land of a Hindu Temple to the goddess Kali in Dinajpur. Police have taken no action despite numerous appeals, including one to the Prime Minister through AFM Zahid Hasan.

On 30 January in the Chittagong district, 10-15 Islamists attacked the Swaraswait Pandal, destroying the temple and a deity. They also left at least ten worshippers seriously hurt. Police have taken no action despite numerous appeals, including one to the Prime Minister through AFM Zahid Hasan.

Also on 30 January, in the Dhaka district, Md. Hasan Habib, a local Awami League official, noting his position with the new government, forcibly occupied land belonging to Monindra Nath Mondal and threatened the victim should he report the infraction. Police have taken no acion.

In February, there were at least five more, including a murder; and March incidents included rape and a possible anti-Hindu pogrom that police allowed in Dhaka.

For us there can be only one question: What are WE going to do about it.

We need specific goals and a plan to achieve them. I have found that good people are unable to turn their backs when faced with real tragedy and real human rights horrors such as I saw in March. I defy anybody to look in the face of that brave girl and feel nothing. But I am just as firmly convinced that government, press, and even human right activists will do everything they can to avoid getting to that point. For some, it is because they do not want yet one more issue in their very busy lives. For others, an ideological or political agenda drives it. Only we can overcome that. If we wait for it to happen magically, we will witness an end to Hindus in Bangladesh and have that guilt on our heads. Recognize that there is no internal dynamic by which the Bangladeshi government will change things. That includes the Awami League. The only way to effect change is to get to it indirectly through the action of third parties like the United States. We must be ready to act.

First, Indiana Congressman Mike Pence once said that any member of Congress who gets at least ten phone calls (not emails!) from constituents on a particular issue will take notice, convene staff meetings, and likely vote their constituents’ passion. To be ready we need someone or some group to collect names and phone numbers of people in every Congressional District willing to call their Representatives. We must put them into a data base that can be activated as soon as the moment comes; for if we wait to do it until that moment, we will fail. For instance, Bangladesh is heavily dependent on the United States and other western nations for garment imports; trade is a serious issue that can be addressed. So is Bangladesh’s participation in UN peacekeeping missions—to which it provides the second largest number of soldiers. Third parties must be motivated to take action that will “convince” Bangladeshis that supporting justice and opposing ethnic cleansing is in their interests. There are some good people in Washington. Congressman Mark Kirk from here in Illinois, for instance, was also touched by the story of that young Hindu girl. He has helped me with South Asian human rights issues in the past and will support them again.

Our success in any of these things will not just help the particular bill. More importantly perhaps, it will identify us (and Hindus) as an organized and powerful political constituency that no longer can be ignored.

So, who will volunteer? [Identify people.] Meet me after the session, and I will get you started. Give me your name and contact information.

Second, many of us receive regular emails about anti-Hindu incidents. Some are accurate, some not; and even many that are accurate lack specific information needed to make them credible. At the behest of people who can do something about this, I have been reviewing and vetting incidents but the volume of information is much greater than I can handle alone. We need another group to help—existing organizations, students, or a group of individuals making that commitment today. I have developed the methods and a spreadsheet for the information.

So, who will volunteer? [Identify people.] Meet me after the session, and I will get you started. Give me your name and contact information.

And third, sometimes it takes a particular incident for people to recognize a human tragedy. Finding such an incident could be the spark that lights this fire. Throughout May, reports out of Bangladesh told of an anti-Hindu pogrom in Dhaka; a pogrom carried out by supporters and officials of the ruling Awami League; police also participated. Although further investigation shows that the number of people evicted to be fewer than the 400 first alleged, dozens remain homeless still. Worse, the social and political acceptability of and support for anti-Hindu actions in Bangladesh is undeniable. The attackers grabbed ancestral land, beat residents with the police looking on, and purposely destroyed a Shiva Mandir; one of many Hindu temples destroyed this year alone. And the government supports it. It rewarded the attackers with their victims’ land! As an American, I am incensed that my government sends millions in aid each year to such a government. Is this our issue? Is it the face of that young Hindu girl? This should outrage the entire world; but it does not. Has humanity lost any sense of justice, or is this something we can change? I suggest the latter. We can be the engine that drives that outrage, or we can be passive and let it pass. The choice is ours.

Thank you.

Did an anti-Hindu pogrom occur in Bangladesh?

2009-06-21T11:24:00.006-05:00

Throughout May, numerous reports coming out of Bangladesh told of a chilling attack on Hindus in an area of the Bangladeshi capital of Dhaka known as Sutrapur. Several human rights groups and small Bangladeshi papers wrote that the community of perhaps 400 Hindu Dalits (more familiarly "Untouchables") was engaged in its daily routine when "hundreds" of Muslims stormed the area, accompanied by police. They started abusing residents, according to the reports, and demanded that they quite the area, leaving the coveted land to the attackers. Several informants claim that the police stood by while residents were beaten, houses sacked and in at least three cases burned to the ground, and a Hindu temple to the god, Shiva, was destroyed. They also claim that the police cited Bangladesh's anti-minority (and especially anti-Hindu) Vested Property Act as the legal basis for evicting the families, who have resided in the area for about 150 years, paying taxes and utilities.

Others, however, claim that "nothing happened," and that the police said there was no temple destroyed "just a few deities." The police refused to investigate the matter at first but eventually relented.

What we have confirmed is that there were at least three attacks on the community on 30 March, 16 April, and 29 April. A good deal of the land was seized by attackers who claim that the land was forfeit to Muslims under the Vested Property Act, a claim supported by Dhaka police. At least a dozen Hindu families remain homeless. There are a number of other facts alleged, which I am continuing to investigate.

One fact remains clear, however: none of the bodies which shouldbe publicizing and investigating the matter has said anything, save for a few mentions in various Bangladeshi newspapers. While some have tried to justify the attack as nothing more than a "land dispute," that denial is even more damning as apologists for the current government in Dhaka seem to think it a proper way to resolve civil disputes!

Anyone who has verifiable information about these incidents or the current status of the victims, possession of the land, or the police investigation, is urged to contact me immediately through this blog, FACEBOOK, or at drrbenkin@comcast.net. By doing so, you will be helping to uncover the ongoing cover-up of the ethnic cleansing of Bangladeshi Hindus.

The Truth WILL set us Free

2009-06-14T08:39:00.004-05:00

In January, I helped force an anti-Israel conference to be canceled in Australia. As so many anti-Israel events are, this one too was cloaked in the language of human rights. In fact, the conference organizer, Maqsood Alshams, was known as a human rights activist Down Under, and the conference was to "debate" charging Israel with war crimes for the Gaza War.

A few days before it was to begin, however, the conference organizer made some blatantly anti-Semitic remarks and used them--not human rights--to explain his rationale for the conference. With the help of several Australians, we exposed him. (Now, to be sure, that faux human rights language is more times than not a fig leaf for anti-Semitism, which we exposed in this case. But it was not the rabid Israel haters (and Jew haters) who were the key. If anything, they would have cheered Alshams' remarks. The key was the academic institutions and liberal participants, including Jews who justified their participation by "compassion for the Palestinians.

Even after Alshams' anti-Semitism was exposed in one of Australia's most widely-read dailies, they were not planning to pull out of the conference. It took another day of emphasizing the poison that was the rationale for the conference before they did. "I don't want to confuse the Palestinian issues that I care about with any form of racism or anti-Semitism," said one of the academics, explaining his pullout. "As a Jew who condemns anti-Semitism I though it would be inappropriate to engage in a debate in that kind of environment," said another.

And that's the key. Regardless of how chic it has become in those circles to be anti-Israel, it is still difficult for participants to associate themselves with open and blatant "racism or anti-Semitism." As the Australian conference is far from unique (we have seen recent examples of the same in Canada, for instance), Israel's supporters world wide should be vigilant and ready to act in similar situations. It is not all that difficult if we (1) have truth and justice on our side; (2) are active in smoking out these things; and (3) have an organized effort ready to act whenever we do.

The elements are all there, too, and I offer to work with anyone who wants to see the same results we gained in Australia this January.

Pro-Peace Muslim threatened the day President Obama speaks to the Muslim world of peace

2009-06-04T20:19:00.000-05:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 4, 2009
CONTACT: Richard L. Benkin, Ph.D.; +1-847-922-6426;
drrbenkin@comcast.net; http://www.InterfaithStrength.com

Dhaka, Bangladesh—The Bangladeshi government resumed its harassment of pro-peace journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, despite repeated promises not to. Intelligence agents have been staking out his house “past few days,” according to neighbors; and the family cornered a man insisting that he was from Bangladesh’s DGFI intelligence service. “Sergeant Rafiq” was ask when Choudhury left and returned home, his license plate, and so forth. Choudhury called numerous government agencies, but only one replied, denying it had sent anyone. With crimes by persons claiming to be from the government increasing daily in Bangladesh, the family was concerned. Ultimately, however, the agent admitted being charged with investigating five dissidents, including Choudhury. Bangladeshi’s Washington Embassy agreed that our concern was especially justified Choudhury’s tenuous position. Such visits often are meant as threats in Bangladesh. As of tonight, the police refuse to take any action in the matter or even accept Choudhury’s complaint.

The Muslim world’s only self-proclaimed Zionist, Choudhury was arrested in 2003 by government agents and Islamist forces after advocating relations with Israel, religious equality, and exposing the rise of radical Islam in Bangladesh. He was tortured and held for seventeen months and only released after strong pressure by human rights activist Dr. Richard Benkin and US Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL). The government then charged Choudhury with the capital offenses of sedition, treason, and blasphemy “for praising Christians and Jews,” regularly admitting that the charges are baseless and maintained to appease radical Islamists. Though the government has not produce a single piece of evidence for the charges, and its sole witness keeps refusing to appear, the government continues the case in an effort to intimidate him into Choudhury and to drain his financial resources. As one DC insider put it, “They’ve made the process the punishment.”

The life of this courageous dissident journalist is in danger unless the world renews the protests it lodged during previous governments.

For further information, contact Dr. Richard Benkin at the telephone or email above.

Hey Sheikh Hasina, no one's forgotten Shoaib Choudhury!

2009-05-30T20:56:00.003-05:00

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury’s struggle once played out in dramatic events: his 2003 arrest; my storming Washington’s Bangladeshi embassy in 2004; his 2005 release after a tense meeting involving Bangladesh’s ambassador, US Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL), and me; middle of the night battles to prevent his re-incarceration; international accolades for the Islamic world’s only “Muslim Zionist” and supportive resolutions from the US Congress and others in 2006 and 2007. But five and a half years since Shoaib’s arrest, things have settled into a Kafkaesque holding pattern with no end in sight. As one Washington insider quipped, "The Bangladeshis have made the process the punishment."

In 2003, Shoaib Choudhury broke Bangladesh's blackout on positive, or even objective news and information about Israel and the Jewish people. The ever more powerful Islamists there were already furious with him for exposing their rise to power and use of madrassas, or Muslim religious schools, to radicalize young Bangladeshis. So, for doing nothing more than his profession as a journalist, they engineered his arrest and torture, getting the government to try in vain to extract a false confession from him that he was an Israeli spy.

After 17 months, with the help of US Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL), I succeeded in forcing his release, but though multiple government officials have promised to drop the charges against him--charges they admit are false--the charges remain. More than one Bangladeshi official also admitted that they fear dropping the charges because they do not want to anger Islamic radicals. No less an expert than Professor Irwin Cotler--former Canadian Law Minister and attorney for luminaries like Nelson Mandela and Andrei Sakharov--has identified over a dozen violations of Bangladeshi law in their prosecution of Shoaib Choudhury.

Yet, May 26th marked his 50th court appearance in the 49 months since his release. As usual, he was forced to wait outside for hours only to be told that his case was continued because the government’s sole witness did not show. This is draining his economic and emotional resources; the possibility of reincarnation or even execution is ever present.

His defenders have tired of waiting and are ready to do battle again--just as we forced Bangladesh's notorious RAB to release him last year after only a few tense hours. We will continue to oppose--successfully--all legislation designed to reward Bangladesh with tariff relief or other trade benefits when its government continues to play fast and loose with human rights while allowing Islamists to take over every social institution in the country. We will seek to implement Foreign Ops language that would strip Bangladesh of US aid for its defiance of international outrage and norms of civilization. And we will look to exclude Bangladesh from participating in UN Peacekeeping Missions since it cannot even keep the peace within its own borders.

To appease Islamic radicals and reward its own cronies, the Bangladesh government has continuedthis false prosecution--not so much at their own expense, but at the expense of their people. Their willful infliction of misery on their own people is contrary to what every civilized people expects of its government.

We have stood by Shoaib for five and a half years, and we have no intention of abandoning him--not now, not ever.

Memorial Day, 2009

2009-05-24T07:34:00.005-05:00

This is Memorial Day weekend in the United States. It is a time of a three-day weekend and respite from work on Monday. But the purpose of that respite is to honor those Americans who have fought and died in the cause of freedom. As we hear people try to minimize or even stand in opposition to what they accomplished, we should remember that people worldwide live in freedom today because of them. Without them, the two great scourges of the twentieth century--fascism and communism--might have triumphed; thanks to them, they did not.

The march of freedom worldwide over the past decades--freedom from colonialism, genuine imperialism, and despotism--has been possible only because of their sacrifice; and the sacrifice of citizens from other nations as well. On Memorial Day, I honor them, too.

Today, we face another scourge with the same objectives as fascism and communism: to force their own version of life on the rest of the world, and to grab the power that comes with it. Right now, there are people fighting and dying to stop them. And so on Memorial Day, 2009, I think of them, too, and pledge to stand and defend theirhonor when others try to besmirch their sacrifice. It's the least they deserve.

To all of those who died in the cause of freedom, I offer my humble prayers and sincere thanks.

Concern Mounting again for pro-Israel Muslim, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

2009-05-17T11:23:00.002-05:00

The fact that the fight for Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury has reached an impasse should lead no one to conclude that his defenders have given up. Not a week goes by when I do not receive at least one interrogatory about it; and even as I have been speaking about saving the Bangladeshi Hindus from government-tolerated discrimination, the host always begins by asking me for an update on Shoaib.

Calls and emails come from media and from average citizens wanting to know if he is all right and what they can do to help. And people still ask about boycotting Bangladeshi goods, something I have opposed to this point. And there is continued concern from governments, as well. The Australian Foreign Ministry expressed interest in meeting with me for an update on the case and to see what might be proper for it to do. In a recent letter to Australian Senator Ursula Stephens, it wrote that “The Australian Government will continue to encourage the Government of Bangladesh to ensure that Mr. Choudhury’s trial is conducted in an expeditious and transparent fashion in accordance with proper judicial process and that his human rights are respected at all times. A high ranking member of the ruling party, Stephens is close to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and has been an outspoken advocate for Shoaib Choudhury.

The Foreign Ministry’s letter points to the next phase of the international struggle for justice in this case. First focused on gaining Shoaib’s release from imprisonment and torture, we shifted after that success when several government officials admitted that the charges against him were “false…and only maintained to appease the radicals.” We exposed the truth behind the prosecution, but the former (BNP) government went forward with the case; and in doing so, decided their political need to “appease the radicals” was more important than the damage they were doing to the people of Bangladesh. Their decision has meant that every piece of legislation intended to provide tariff relief for Bangladeshi imports to the United States has been defeated. (The United States imports about 70 percent of Bangladesh’s garment exports, and has free trade agreements and other relationships with several garment exporting countries that are steadily eroding Bangladesh’s place in the US market as a result.) Several members of the Bangladeshi government were told that these consequences would follow their continued need to placate radicals, as “the American people do not intend to spend their money to support their enemies.”

Once the legal proceedings began, internationally famed human rights attorney Irwin Cotler filed an amicus curiae brief that identified almost two dozen ways in which the case violated Bangladesh’s own laws and international human rights laws. Dr. Cotler has defended such luminaries as Nelson Mandela, Andrei Sakharov, and Saad Ibrahim, as well as Shoaib Choudhury. Moreover, the proceedings have been carried out contrary to accepted principles of justice worldwide: in five and a half years since the charges were brought, the government has been unable to provide one shred of evidence to support them; on August 6, 2008, when it made a completely fictitious allegation alleged that Shoaib wrote an article entitled, “Hello Tel Aviv” for USA Today, the trial judge demanded proof of the article, or he would dismiss the case; the government never provided any, and the judge never raised the issue again. The government had one witness, the officer in charge of Shoaib’s 2003 arrest, and he has not shown up to testify for the past several court dates. There is a legal principle in civil societies world wide that “justice delayed is justice denied”; and so in any society of laws, the court would have issued a warrant for the witness to testify or dismissed the case. Bangladesh has done neither. These various illegal irregularities on the part of the Bangladeshi government, prompted one US official to suggest to me in April that “because they have no case against Shoaib, the Bangladeshis are making the legal process his punishment.”

Many people have wondered if Bangladesh’s Awami League government will break from the policies of its predecessor or continue them, making only cosmetic changes to enhance it own image. On January 12, several members of the US Congress (Republicans, Democrats, and committees that determine appropriations and trade legislation) sent a letter to the then newly elected Prime Minister. They congratulated Sheikh Hasina on her electoral victory and noted that her first step in bringing “democracy, integrity and prosperity to Bangladesh” should be “to quickly drop all charges against Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury.” “Doing so,” they noted, “will take a significant step toward restoring faith in the Bangladeshi government and removing a significant obstacle in Bangladeshi-American relations.”

It has not, which means that Bangladeshi goods will continue to be assessed higher tariffs than those of its competitors. The fact that the Awami League government has done nothing to demonstrate that it is any different from is prompting some legal experts to explore a case against Bangladesh at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands. Others are looking to see if Shoaib’s persecution should exclude Bangladesh from UN peacekeeping forces.

In a meeting at the Bangladeshi Embassy in Washington, Ambassador M. Humayun Kabir addressed Bangladesh’s inability to gain favorable trade status in the US by asking me, “How can you hold up aid for 150 million people because of one man?”

“How can I? How can you?” I responded. “You’re the ones prosecuting a case you have admitted to be false. You’re the ones telling the rest of the world that you place the feelings of the radicals above your own laws. All you have to do is stop it. How can I? How can you do this to your people?”

Does the US Support Pakistan over India?

2009-05-10T09:02:00.002-05:00

From Nehru to Obama: Why the US supports Pakistan

Poll after poll shows that Americans view India, not Pakistan, as their ally; a kindred democracy fighting a common Islamist enemy. Nevertheless, when I was in India throughout March, the question I was asked most frequently was “Why is the United States supporting Pakistan?” Even before President Obama’s March 27 speech, trepidation had been building. Admitted supporters of the US President told me in Delhi’s Connaught Place that Obama’s pro-Pakistan tilt varied from their pre-election expectations. One aspiring journalist expressed a growing sentiment that Obama’s actions are meant to “insure that the American people are safe,” regardless of “lives of other people of other countries.” But Obama’s speech pledged an addition $1.5 annually to Pakistan and identified it—not India—as an ally in fighting the Taliban.

That baffled Indians since Pakistan has shown a decided inability and lack of desire to take on Islamist terrorists, while Indians have been laying down their lives in that struggle. Even Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher seemed uncomfortably aware of the inconsistency. Shortly after Obama spoke, a CNN-IBN correspondent asked Boucher if he thought the Pakistanis had the “ability and willingness” to fight the Taliban as Obama said they would.

“Let me put it this way,” Boucher replied. “We talked to all the senior people there…and they said they wanted to.”

They “wanted to”? That was Boucher’s ringing support? No wonder Indians are concerned. Many Americans are working to change that policy, but India has a role in that, too. For US policy can be traced in part to Indian decisions decades ago.

People in the US State Department are no different than their counterparts elsewhere. They depend on contacts and authoritative people “on the ground” worldwide; people with inside information and expertise impossible to garner from halfway around the world. In the 1950s, Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru made a critical decision to minimize contacts with the US and thereby gave Pakistan that exclusive role. In 1955, he founded the Non-Aligned Movement, which was nonaligned in name only. Look at Nehru’s cohorts: Gamal Abdul Nasser, whose Egypt was a major Soviet ally and large recipient of Soviet aid; and Josip Broz Tito, while a communist gadfly, solidly in that camp; Marxist Kwame Nkrumah; and Indonesia’s Sukarno, aligned with China and North Korea. India itself became dependent on Soviet aid and welcomed legions of Soviet advisors and experts. Only in the early 1990s did India realize it backed the wrong side in the Cold War and had to re-orient its policies.

For almost four decades, when US diplomats and advisors needed someone with inside information, they would call their contacts who all were Pakistani and who helped their careers. It is no wonder that experts advising Obama see the world through that Pakistani prism and believe them when they say they will fight the radicals. Those decades-long relationships still hold sway. Moreover, Indian leaders often allow their desire to be politically correct on other issues—such as Iraq and at times Israel—take precedence over Indian interests. But all is not lost.

Washington is a city crawling with lobbyists. Everyone has them, including India. The challenge facing them must be to make India Washington’s major source of information; to convince people to call an Indian, not a Pakistani, when they need good information about South Asia. That must be a priority for everyone from the Indian embassy to paid lobbyists and Indian officials who meet with their US counterparts. They also should push their own plans to counter Pakistan’s. For instance, Obama spoke of regional cooperation. Since Indian troops were so successful against Kashmiri terrorists, let them take on that fight, so Pakistan can move its troops from there to fight the Taliban. That only makes sense if Obama and the Pakistanis were serious about cooperating and fighting terrorists.

There are a myriad of ways to do it and people in the US ready for it. That is the challenge facing those who want to see a change in US policies in South Asia.

More Empty Words from Bangladesh

2009-05-02T21:47:00.000-05:00

I recently received an email from an individual involved in the struggle for minority rights in Bangladesh. It trumpeted “a new development” in the Bangladeshi government’s attitude toward minorities. But what was its evidence? A statement by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajid that her “government believes in peace and prosperity of the mass of people, freedom of all religions and equal rights of people of all walks of life”; and a promise to repeal Bangladesh’s discriminatory laws.

When will people learn to look at one’s ACTIONS and not be lulled into complacency by their words? Complacency means disaster for the minorities.

I have heard the same pious-sounding statements from Bangladeshi officials of both major parties and none were ever reflected in action. I wondered why these leaders continued to say such things when all they did was confirm that the speakers were either unwilling or unable to carry out their promises, if not both. No one in Washington believes them anymore, as evidenced by the fact that knows that every single piece of legislation designed to give Bangladesh favorable trade status here failed. That government even sent Nobel laureate Mohammed Yunis to lobby for one of them, but the bill never even got out of committee. As long as Bangladeshi governments allow rampant oppression against minorities, they will remain so.

Yet, Hasina’s empty words are enough for those who ignore history and prefer to hope that she might be serious this time. Well, good for them; it’s nice to have hope. But “a new development”? Hardly. Hers was a statement to a visiting foreign; and if there was any substance to the countless hopeful statements that national leaders make when speaking to foreign dignitaries, our world would have long forgotten the scourges of war, poverty, and minority oppression. Even Adolf Hitler told foreign leaders in 1937 that Czechoslovakia was the last of his “territorial demands.”

Mouthing empty words is easy, taking action is not. And Hasina’s party has been as complicit in minority oppression as any. Both it and its more openly Islamist rival have shared equally in the spoils of it: minority land and property confiscated under Bangladesh’s racist Vested Property Act. Worse, attacks on Bangladeshi minorities have increased since the AL took power; and are carried out with the knowledge that the government will not stop them. I have interviewed dozens of victims (some who have been attacked as recently as February), and most report that local officials refused to help them or even participated in the attacks.

Unfortunately for the victims, those who should be forcing the government to keep its word seem content with the words alone. Bangladeshi Hindus have been reduced from almost one in five Bangladeshis at independence to less than one in ten today. Words will not protect those who remain, but if advocacy groups pretend they are, they will be condemning Bangladesh’s minorities to the same fate of non-Muslims in Pakistan; where those who have not been murdered, forced to convert, or forced out now pay the jizya for the “privilege” of being tolerated. Regardless of her words, Sheikh Hasina must be held accountable for what her government does. And if it lacks the will to act, people of goodwill need to help her get it. Otherwise, they all will be guilty of making minority oppression permanent.

For more information on this, visit My Web Site.

Extra! Extra! Make bad decisions; get paid for them.

2009-04-16T05:55:00.000-05:00

The Taliban are cutting through Pakistan like a knife through butter; the Pakistani government has responded by ceding parts of the country to the terrorists and ignoring the extensive Talibanization of its intelligence service, military, and bureaucracy. David Kilcullen, former adviser General David Petraeus, recently said that Pakistan could collapse within six months; and February report from a task force chaired by no less than former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel and Massachusetts Senator John Kerry said: “We are running out of time to help Pakistan change its present course toward increasing economic and political instability, and even ultimate failure.”

So, what is the Obama administration’s response? Throw US taxpayer money down the rat’s hole. Or in the words of one mainstream Indian journalist regarding US policy: “Terrorism pays!” Obama’s policies are alienating South Asian allies who are laying down their lives fighting the same Islamist enemy we face. They are enabling a Pakistani government that is using our tax dollars to fight our Indian friends; a government that is content to see its country thoroughly Talibanized and to come down on the wrong side of every international conflict, helping the people they are supposed to be fighting; a government that again has agreed to cede parts of the country to the Taliban and let Sharia become the law of those lands. And Obama’s actions tell the Islamists that they can continue “cleansing” Pakistan and Bangladesh of their Hindus, and we will not say a word.

The same philosophy underlies Obama’s foreign policy and domestic blunders. Pakistan’s difficulty is the product of bad and self-seeking decisions. For years, radical Islam has been making serious inroads throughout Pakistani society, but its leaders deliberately chose to ignore it. They did so partly out of fear—fear that radicals might assassinate them; fear that they might alienate a bloc of voters; fear that the radicals would successfully use their opposition to paint them as Zionists or pro-American. And they did so out of greed—greed for the graft that would continue flowing from the minions that were taking direction from the radicals; graft from the billions in petrodollars that were funding radical activities. They did so out of wishful thinking that the radicals would either fade away or join the ranks of other civil servants, more concerned with personal enrichment than any philosophy or social goal. And they did so in some cases because they agreed with the radicals’ short term goals. Now Obama is paying them for a promise (to undo the damage their bad decisions have wrought.

America’s crisis, like Pakistan’s, has an ideological component. The ultra-liberal Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to loan money to people who did not qualify for them with draconian consequences for any bank that dared stay with traditional mortgage criteria even if the applicant was a minority. There was also a greed component in the cushy roles and extensive contributions by lenders to Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) to ignore warnings about the system and use their positions to rubber stamp rather than oversee. But most importantly, our problems stem from bad decisions: bad decisions by the auto makers which turned once gold standard businesses into train wrecks; bad decisions by lenders to continue making bad loans; and bad decisions by home buyers to borrow more than they could repay and pretend that their incomes supported the lifestyles they demanded. And how has Obama “taught them a lesson”? By paying them for it.

Rewarding bad behavior—whether in Pakistan or the United States—will do only one thing and that is encourage more bad behavior. Obama did not tell the Pakistanis, “You knew Islamists were taking over your society but chose not to oppose them. Now, in order to get the aid we can offer and become a true ally, you have to change.” Nor did he tell those Americans who made bad business, lending, or borrowing decisions, “The one thing we will not do is enable your bad behavior with the money of Americans who made good decisions.” Instead, he has committed the United States to a policy that seeks to make the untenable viable; that promises not to force people to take responsibility for their bad decisions; that insures bad behavior will continue with regular rewards compliments of US taxpayers.

The Death Throes of Pakistan's Hindus

2009-04-04T07:15:00.003-05:00

I just returned from a month in India during which time an incredible number of significant events were occurring. My primary mission in going was to document and raise awareness of the ethnic cleansing of Bangladeshi Hindus. I found plenty, including evidence of ongoing attacks on them both in Bangladesh and in West Bengal, India. The border between the two is so porous that terrorists and contraband move freely with and without the help of India's Border Security Force or West Bengal police. But I also witnessed the tragic beginning of the end for Pakistan's Hindus. Once one in five Pakistanis, they have been reduced to one percent of the population.

But as the Taliban take over ever larger chunks of that country, that remnant of a people is streaming across the border into Indian Punjab. The stream became a torrent with the Taliban's seizure of the Swat Valley earlier this year. Hindu refugees report attacks and threats by the Taliban, as well as officials telling them to leave the country "or else." The February agreement between the Taliban and the Zardari government ceded the area to the former and allowed Sharia law to be imposed on Swat's 1.2 million inhabitants.

President Obama has used this agreement as a model in his stated quest for "moderate Taliban." But not only does the agreement countersign ethnic cleansing, it also failed even before Obama's anticipated speech on US policy in the region. Just hours before the President spoke, one of the Taliban parties to the agreement, Tehrik e Taliban, abrogated it with a terror attack on a mosque in Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province, and has engaged in other terrorist attacks subsequently.

One Hindi language channel quoted a Taliban spokesman confirming that his group was pulling out of the agreement not to attack elsewhere in Pakistan because, he said, it would be contrary to Allah's wishes to limit Sharia to the Swat Valley. Yet, no major media in India, the US, or elsewhere made this connection.

Even more shameful, no media or government has protested the ethnic cleansing of Pakistan's Hindus, who are being finished off by the Taliban. All governments involved in the region are just allowing it to happen,too. What kind of a world do we live in when India will not defend Hindus attacked for being Hindus; when the US ignores the atrocity; when not a single human rights group or the UN utters a word of protest?

What is happening to Pakistan's Hindus is a crime, but a crime that is largely accomplished. There remain 13,000,000 Hindus in Bangladesh subject to the same attacks, the same racist laws, and the same intention to eradicate them. Worse, the battle is spilling across the open border into India, and it is changing the demographic balance in the region. It is also allowing terrorists into the country whose intention is to undermine the very nation of Hindustan.

My mission is to prevent that, to prevent the murders and other atrocities, even if I am the only voice of protest to cry out about this crime against humanity.

Obama's Afgh-Pak Policy Already Unraveling

2009-03-28T01:37:00.001-05:00

Delhi, India. United States President Barack Hussein Obama unveiled his much awaited South Asian strategy in a globally televised speech last night (Indian time). Today many Indians told me, as one put it, that Obama “lived up to his middle name by showing the face of a pro-Pakistan US policy,” a critical component of which that policy is to find “moderate Taliban” with whom the United States and its allies can negotiate a peace. Imagine if in 1942, Franklin Roosevelt said the US was going to look for moderate Nazis who could negotiate peace. Americans would have been outraged then, and history would show the policy to have been a calamitous mistake. Fortunately, we do not have to wait for the passage of history since those moderate Taliban have already provided evidence that the policy is terribly flawed.

Obama’s template for it is the agreement earlier this year between the current Pakistani government and the Taliban that gave the latter control of Pakistan’s Swat Valley and accepted the imposition of Sharia law there. In exchange, the Taliban “promised” not to launch further attacks against the Pakitani government. Yet just hours before Obama’s speech, a suicide bomber blew himself up in a mosque located in the Khyber region near the Pakistan-Afghan border. So far, the dead or injured number at least 170 of the 250 worshippers. The mosque was completely destroyed. Most news outlets reported the event as a message to Obama that defeating the Taliban will not be easy and that the “militants” could strike at Pakistan pretty much at will. The media also said that no group has yet claimed responsibility for the attack. All of that is true, but very few outlets reported the fact that several security sources have evidence that the attack was the work of Tehrik-e-Taliban, a deadly Islamist group headed by Batullah Mehsud. What makes that especially significant is that Tehrik-e-Taliban and Mehsud were one of those “moderate Taliban” that entered into that agreement in the Swat Valley. One of the Hindi language channels reported that the group’s spokesman claimed it abrogated the treaty because “it is against the will of Allah to fight for Sharia only in Swat Valley, that all of Pakistan must be under Sharia.”

It took only a month for these “moderates” to do what Hamas, Hizbollah, and other radical Islamists terror groups have done consistently; treating all agreements with us as nothing more than temporary respites valid only until they believe it in their interests to fight. It is a clearly established pattern among these groups yet no one in the Obama Administration seems able to make a connection.

Clinton Smiles in the midst of South Asian disaster

2009-03-18T02:21:00.000-05:00

Rudrapur, India. If Americans (or anyone else) needed proof that our government is hopelessly lost in South Asia, this morning’s Indian papers provide all the confirmation they need from a beaming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praising the Pakistanis for “themselves resolving [their] difficulties.” What idiocy! While President Asif Ali Zardari and his political rival Nawaz Sharif resolved their personal rivalry (because the military “convinced” Zardari that it would be in his best interests to give into Sharif), Clinton’s belief that this deal can “stabilize civilian democracy and the rule of law” in Pakistan would be laughable were it not so tragic.

Despite apologists for the Pakistani mess, the Taliban is cutting through that country like a knife through butter. Moreover, as it does, this government that Clinton praises cut a deal with “moderate Taliban” that ceded Pakistan’s Swat Valley to the it, allowing its imposition of Sharia law on over 1.2 million people. This is precisely the course now recommended by the Obama Administration and Obama himself! The Swat Valley, it should be noted, is only 100 miles from the Pakistani capital of Islamabad. While we worry about Iran, we might soon see an Islamist State that already has nuclear weapons. And Obama and Clinton smiling about it like a couple of Cheshire cats.

Their allies who made the deal claim that it was “not capitulation but the price of peace.” Yeah, much like unconditional surrender was the price of peace for Germany and Japan after World War II. But that’s Pakistani democracy for you—and Obama’s surreal notion of finding moderate Taliban.

All the while, they are content to allow what has become a river of misery to flow from Pakistan to India’a Punjab: a mass exodus of Pakistani Hindus. This remnant of a community was once one in five Pakistanis and has been reduced to one percent of the population. With Taliban forces in effective control over greater portions of the country, the Hindu population is fleeing fast, either after atrocities have been committed or just ahead of them. According to several informants among them, Taliban officials told them to get out of the country fast or face “dire consequences.” Those officials had a personal stake in that, too, as Pakistan’s Enemy Property Act then gives them the right to seize that “non-Muslim” land and distribute it to a Muslim; likely a relative, ally, or purchaser. Clinton’s praise for this government under which this problem has only grown is consigning the Hindus of Pakistan to extinction through death, forced conversion, or flight. The Pakistan government said this was not “capitulation but the price of peace.” Tell that to the millions streaming across this sad border. They are also victims of a deal with “moderate Taliban,” such as President Obama said he wants to make elsewhere in South Asia.

Are we still smiling Secretary Clinton?

Islamist Nuke Coming Soon!

2009-03-11T06:26:00.006-05:00

Maybe the sky isn't falling right now, but Pakistan is. I'm in India, so I do not know how widely this is being covered back in the United States, but there is a major crisis in Pakistan right now--which, for those who might not know, is an Islamic Republic that already has nuclear weapons. It also has longstanding conflicts with India and is right next door to nuclear wannabe, Iran.

Last year, that country held elections which ousted a military strongman who--for all his faults and limitations--cooperated with the US in the war on Islamist extremism, while keeping a lid on Al Qaeda expansion and anti-Americanism in his country. Many in the West hailed this as a triumph of democracy, forgetting that elections are the last step, not the first to democracy. There followed a veritable cottage industry of apologists who were quick to offer excuses every time the government behaved in an undemocratic, incompetent, or anti-American fashion.

Well, in words made famous by President Obama's former pastor, "the chickens have come home to roost." That government is days away from a complete collapse. Al Qaeda forces are marching through the country like a knife through butter, and the government already has agreed to its demands for a state within a state that imposes Sharia law on populations where it has taken power. The Pakistani government said that this was not "capitulation but the price of peace." Yes, as was unconditional surrender for Germany and Japan in World War II.

The military has given the government the sort of ultimatum that says it's time to start clearing out its desk and looking for asylum in one of those havens for deposed and corrupt rulers. And in fact, it is clear that only a military takeover will prevent an Al Qaeda takeover of nuclear Pakistan. Meanwhile, politicians are squabbling, calling each other traitors, and threatening to action against one another instead of acting against their common enemy.

People expect the military to take power in Pakistan around March 16. Unfortunately, that will only delay the Islamist victory there, especially with senior elements in the military and in Pakistani intelligence already sympathetic to that end. This could pose a serious if not grave threat to the United States and our allies. But do we have any indication that our government is acting; or even has a plan?

Genocide in the Making -- and the World is Silent

2009-02-28T08:22:00.005-06:00

For over thirty years, Islamist radicals have been engaging in a systematic program of ethnic cleansing in Bangladesh. When they began, Hindus accounted for somewhat less than one in five Bangladeshis; today they are fewer that one in ten. Professor Sachi Dastidar of SUNY has estimated that the number of "lost" Hindus (that is, those murdered and those never born as a result of the ethnic cleansing) could be as high as 35 million!

Nor is it only the radicals who are culpable. The first partner in crime is the succession of governments in Bangladesh. It did not matter if they were right of center, left of center, a dictatorship, civilian or military. Every one of them maintained a blatantly racist law that has been a cornerstone in the Islamist plan: The Vested Property Act.

Imagine if the United States had a law allowing the government to seize the land of non-Christians and distribute it to Christians of their choice. Imagine the outcry not only from Americans (Christians and non-Christians alike), but from around the world. Every NGO; every country on earth; every blogger on the internet would scream "Racism!" And they would be right. While the US has no such law, Bangladesh does, except it seizes the land of non-Muslims and gives it to Muslims close to whichever political party is in power (including the currently ruling Awami League). It has been on the books for 34 years, and there is no effort to repeal it; even though several otherwise cautious Bangladeshi officials have admitted that "it is racist and must be repealed."

But that brings us to the second partner in crime: the rest of us. For 34 years, self-styled champions of human rights have been silent. Amnesty International's web site devotes several articles to Guantanamo but not a single one to this openly racist and jihadist law. The UN, too, has been silent. As its "Durban II" conference opens, millions will be victimized by this legalized form of ethnic cleansing in Bangladesh; this proudly announced form of racism.

And we know--we know with biblical certainty--that the racists who are running Durban II will not even mention this terrible atrocity whose victims will one day dwarf in number those in Darfur, Rwanda, and elsewhere if this is not stopped. And the UN, Amnesty International, and the rest of the world will wring their hands, cry over the victims, and wonder how such a thing could have happened!

New Bangladeshis' True Colors: Anti-Radical Muslim Attacked

2009-02-22T12:28:00.004-06:00

Dhaka, Bangladesh (Feb. 22, 2009)—At 10am today, local time, internationally-acclaimed journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, was attacked as he was working in the office of his newspaper, Weekly Blitz, by “a gang of thugs” from Bangladesh’s ruling Awami League. I spoke by telephone with Choudhury as he awaited medical treatment for eye, neck, and other injuries suffered in the attack. The renewed violence marks the first against him since he was abducted by Bangladesh’s dreaded Rapid Action Battalion a year ago. After Choudhury was released unharmed, the military was able to assure that he was not attacked--until today under the auspices of the self-styled "moderate" politicians in charge.

A large group stormed Blitz premises and attacked newspaper staff until they found Choudhury. At that point, he said, “they dragged me [and two staff] into the street” where they beat them “in broad daylight…looted my office and stole my laptop” with “all my sensitive information." According to another reliable source, the attackers held Choudhury at gunpoint. As of this writing, they continue to occupy the Blitz office.

According to Choudhury, the police were impassive and seemed intimidated when the attackers emphasized their party membership and accused him of being an agent of the Israeli Mossad. They later threatened to attack his home should Choudhury go to the police again.

Choudhury was arrested in 2003 by government agents, in cooperation with Islamist forces, because of his advocacy of relations with Israel and religious equality, and his articles exposing the rise of radical Islam in Bangladesh. He was tortured and held for seventeen months and only released after strong pressure by human rights activist Dr. Richard Benkin and US Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL). In 2007, the US Congress passed a Kirk-introduced resolution 409-1 calling on Bangladesh to stop harassing Choudhury and drop capital charges against him after extensive evidence confirmed them to be false, contrary to Bangladeshi law, and as admitted by successive Bangladeshi officials, maintained only to appease Islamists. The Bangladeshi government continues to remain in defiance of that resolution and its provisions.

In December, Bangladesh elected a new left of center government that had promised to make a clean break from Bangladesh's corrupt past, end oppression of minorities, and stop harassment of dissidents and journalists. Thus far, its actions have been contrary to those promises. Leftist apparatchik, meanwhile, in many cases at the behest of pro-communist Shahriar Kabir, are leading a violent effort to silence Shoaib Choudhury and other rights activists who are not part of their anti-US and anti-religious cadre.

Individuals are urged to phone their representatives in the US Congress and inform them of the attack and of their outrage that Bangladesh continues to spurn House Resolution 64 and instead side with radical Islamists and anti-US communists. They also can contact Dr. Richard Benkin through this blog or at drrbenkin@comcast.net.

“The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in the stars but in ourselves.”

2009-02-15T18:17:00.002-06:00

When historians look back on our era and wonder how a relatively small group of Islamist radicals controlled the international agenda for great countries across the globe, they will ask why we failed to heed those words that William Shakespeare wrote four centuries earlier. Last week in Kolkata, India, police arrested the editor and publisher of the city’s most prestigious English-language daily for “hurting the religious feelings” of Muslims. That’s right, we now live in an age where the state can muzzle press freedom because the newspaper hurt someone’s feelings. Ravindra Kumar and Anand Sinha of The Statesman were hauled before a judge on February 11 and charged under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code which outlaws “deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.” The law is unclear, as one might imagine when it comes to specific and objective criteria for determining one’s intentions. It appears that Section 295A trusts this Solomon-like task to whichever bureaucrat happens to take a fancy to pursuing a case.

The Statesman’s offending action took place on February 5 when it reprinted an article that began, “The right to criticise religion is being slowly doused in acid.” Its thesis is that criticizing religion is essentially different from criticizing other ideas because its evidence is faith, which is neither verifiable nor replicable; and religion gets special treatment that erodes essential and hard-won freedoms. He cites the changed role of the United Nations Rapporteur on Human Rights who “has always been tasked with exposing and shaming those who prevent free speech.” But the UN Human Rights Council has charged the role to identifying “‘abuses of free expression’ including ‘defamation of religions and prophets’….Instead of condemning the people who wanted to murder Salman Rushdie, they will be condemning Salman Rushdie himself.”

The article’s motley collection of ideas is within the tradition of the anti-religious European left. Were it not, action of the UN Human Rights Council would have come as no surprise. No doubt, the author was not one of those people outraged by the Jew-hating fest that was the Council’s Durban Conference. He offers ideas with which I agree and those with which I disagree. And that is his point: that our reaction to words should determine their legality. But it is not mine.

The Indian government did not act because these words were particularly heinous. It has remained passive in the face of far worse. For instance, it took no action against the Mumbai publisher of “The Jewish Fifth Column in India” or against those responsible for bringing India the anti-Jewish forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The government acted in this case because Muslims made it an issue and orchestrated several days of riots—which subsided as soon as Kumar and Sinha were arrested. It did the same thing during when a paper published the famous Mohammed cartoons. It is part of successive Indian governments’ policies of appeasement and what nationalists call pseudo secularism. That refers to the fact that India is supposed to be a secular nation but out of fear places Islam in a privileged position; hence, pseudo secularism.

India is not alone in stifling free expression for fear of upsetting Muslims. When Toronto demonstrators attacked Jewish students and yelled that “Hitler should have finished the job [and killed all the Jews],” police told the Jewish students to disperse, and Canada’s “Human Rights Commission” refused to entertain their complaints. Other, mostly leftist, governments, too, are undermining their principles of free expression to appease growing Islamic populations and their countries of origin. Moreover, they are taking these actions when these populations take to the streets because, they say, they are upset. That is the very moment when doing so is most dangerous; when appeasement in 2009 could have the same consequences it did in 1937. For if history has taught us anything, it is that rewarding bad behavior produces, not peace, but only more bad behavior.

Are my Sources better than CNN's?

2009-02-08T09:13:00.002-06:00

My news sources must be so much better than CNN’s and others’ because I keep coming across things that they do not have. The most recent item was the death of an Islamic clergyman this week in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh. Moulana Hafez Hamidullah passed away quietly at his residence at the age of 63. He was an influential member of the Bangladesh Khelafat Andolan (BKA), a religious and political association of fundamentalist Muslims, very prominent Islamic clergyman, and Vice Principal of a madrassa. Despite the media’s seeming obsession with Islam, there was no mention of Hamidullah’s passing anywhere.

Yet, this very religious Muslim cleric was consistently outspoken in condemning “all forms of militancy in the name of religion.” He preached interfaith harmony based on mutual respect and was (along with the BKA) outspoken defenders of Bangladesh’s “Muslim Zionist,” Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, who was arrested and tortured after exposing the rise of radical Islam in his country and urging relations with Israel, continues to publish Bangladesh’s only openly Zionist newspaper. The BKA also joins with Choudhury in urging an end to Bangladesh’s prohibition on travel to Israel and in promoting relations with the Jewish State.

While I never met Hamidullah, Choudhury and I met with two of his colleagues in Dhaka in 2007. The first part of our hours-long meeting was rather tense and focused on our profound differences, especially about Israel and the United States’ role in fighting Islamist terror. Although we remained at odds on many points even after our uncensored interfaith dialogue, as I remarked, “Well, we’re not throwing bombs at each other, are we.” We thus “agreed to disagree” and actually found several shared values. Thus followed a warm relationship marked by rigorous honesty and mutual respect. They even published a statement that “neither the Zionists nor the Americans are the real enemy of the Believers and the Muslims.”

Yet prominent media and organizations do not even mention these or other Muslims who have stood against terrorism carried out in their name. For if they did their agenda of what Judea Pearl called “normalization of evil” fails. Like President Obama’s pledge to speak respectfully with Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who espouses goals that are contrary to the principles of freedom and justice for which people have struggled for centuries; that agenda is premised on accepting those goals as a reality we must acknowledge. It is the same philosophy that attempts to turn Hamas into a legitimate player in the Middle East. Those who push dialogue with the world’s Ahmedinejads have, by doing so, turned any war on Islamist extremism into a war on Islam itself by incorrectly accepting extremism as basic to Islam. The existence of Muslims—especially highly religious Muslims—who are fighting that extremism, upsets their ideological apple cart.

So, is it the media’s and their political cronies’ ideological agenda; or does my unfunded, one-man operation just have far more extensive news resources than CNN, the networks, AP, and everyone else put together?

Victory over Anti-Semitism!

2009-02-04T05:40:00.006-06:00

An anti-Israel conference scheduled for an Australian government building was canceled after a several individuals revealed its leader’s anti-Semitic motives. Maqsood Alshams, an illegal immigrant from Bangladesh, planned the conference to debate charging Israel with war crimes for its recent actions in Gaza. Alshams has become known Down Under as a “human rights” advocate, his stated context for relentless anti-Israel venom. On December 30, he circulated an email, calling Israel’s defensive war a “crime against humanity” and demanding international intervention to “stop the Israeli carnage.” In an email response, I asked Alshams why he did not call for “international intervention when Palestinians--and Hamas in particular--thanked Israel for leaving Gaza by making it a terrorist base to lob missiles onto civilian populations in Southern Israel?”

Alshams replied, “The simple answer is that you the Jews are real motherf***ing bast*rds.” He claimed the Mossad abused him in Turkey’s “Jewish Consulate” and told me to “keep your dirty mouth shut calling any Bangladeshi a brother, you guys are simply as*h*les….keep your dirty mouth shut…I wonder why God himself (sic) hate the Jews…” Now Alshams did not share these sentiments with the larger group as it would sully his carefully crafted image and reveal his actual motives; so I did.

I also asked Bangladeshi journalist, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, to investigate Alshams’ claims of being a persecuted journalist in need of asylum, which many Australians believed. Choudhury found no one at the National Press Club who knew of Alshams or could verify that he “ever worked with any newspaper here.” He did, however, find a connection between Alshams and the radical Jammat e-Islami. Choudhury, the Bangladeshi Alshams told me not to call brother, was imprisoned and tortured for writing pro-Israel, anti-Islamist articles. While I led the campaign that freed him, Alshams and his ilk did nothing. So when he emerged from the hell of that confinement, it Choudhury who said, “When my own people abandoned me, my Jewish brother protected me, stood with me.”

Anna Berger is a child of Holocaust survivors, outraged by Alshams anti-Jewish tirade and again when he called Israel’s actions worse than the Nazis’. We exposed him to others, including the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies. Soon, the Sydney Morning Herald, one of Australia’s largest newspapers, picked up the story. They verified my accusations, and I sent them Alshams’ damning email. The next day, it ran the story exposing Alshams. He first defended the hate-speech as private then claimed “I have many Jewish friends.” When he saw that no one was buying his “some of my best friends” defence, he blamed his tirade on being “intoxicated and angry.” While that might explain Alshams’ bad judgement in revealing his motives, it would not explain away the motives themselves. Conference participants distanced themselves from him, and the conference was cancelled. The revelations spoiled its public façade of being s fair debate engaged of the purest of motives.

Israel’s enemies have successfully—and fallaciously—appropriated the human rights high ground. Talking heads in academia, the media, and government have allowed them to engage in the worst sort of illogic and bigotry by adopting their version of history and morality. No hyperbole is out of bounds for them. They compare Israelis to Nazis and Palestinians to Jewish holocaust victims, though there is no similarity between the two. They have so terribly skewed the ideological playing field that Hamas can use Arab civilians as human shields then accuse Israel of human rights violations when those civilians become casualties of war. This incident exposed the Israel-bashers’ real motivations by stripping away its cynical use of human rights language.

This lesson must not be lost. We were just a group of individuals--no different from so many other people on just about every continent--who encounter the hate-filled and often genocidal words of the Israel-hating crowd. But how often are people silent? More to the point, how often do people take their outrage to lengths that expose the truth of so many in the anti-Israel crowd? And so many of them would do so if the hatred was about any group other than their own. Good for them, but not good for us. Those who engage in honest debate and dialogue are welcome to join verbal battle with us. As my fundamentalist Islamic friend and brother say, we "agree to disagree." And because of that, Bangladeshi Kazi Azizul Haq and I have found many points on which we do agree.

But those who cloak genocidal aims in false human rights language must be exposed for who and what they are and for the danger they represent. The media does not do it, so we must.