MUST HE LIE? MEET THE MUSLIM ZIONIST “HERO” WHO RIPS OFF HIS FEMALE JEWISH SUPPORTERS

MUST HE LIE?  MEET THE MUSLIM ZIONIST “HERO” WHO RIPS OFF HIS FEMALE JEWISH SUPPORTERS

By Brenda West

Call me disillusioned.  No, call me furious.  Nearly three years ago, when Salah UddinShoaibChoudhury was supposedly facing execution for his advocacy for Israel, I wrote an article pleading for his life to be spared.  I called it Must He Die?  Meet The Muslim Dissident Who Loves Jews, Christians And Free Speech.  You can read it here.

Choudhury was arrested in 2003 for attempting to travel to Israel, following several months of writing articles advocating for Jews, and other minorities in his country, Bangladesh.  He also criticized Bangladesh for its policy of denying normal diplomatic relations Israel.  Bangladesh had and still has a policy of not permitting its citizens to travel to Israel or openly communicate with Israelis.  Choudhury went to prison for seventeen months and faced possible hanging on charges of blasphemy, sedition, and insulting Islam, until an American friend intervened and drummed up support to get him released.  He then received pro bono legal help from the Canadian MP, Irwin Cotler.

A cause celebre, certainly.Choudhury was seen as a man of great and noble character, an unexpected friend of the West who loved us enough to face great adversity for Western principles.  He won international awards, including one from the Prince of Monaco.  Holocaust survivor ElieWeisel praised him.  He was an invited (and paid) lecturer at Rutgers and at the Jewish Department at Yale University.  The American Jewish Committee gave him an award for moral courage.  The Internet was flooded with articles admiring him for his courage and caring, especially since he published reports that he was under frequent attack in Bangladesh both from hoodlums and from the Bangladesh government that subjected him to frequent trials, any one of which – he alleged – could result in his being taken back into custody and executed.  “Free Choudhury” campaigns were started, as was a move to boycott Bangladesh unless the government dropped its charges against him.  Representative Mark Kirk initiated  House Resolution 64 in 2007 to put pressure on Bangladesh to drop all charges against Choudhury;  it passed almost unanimously.  Choudhury enjoyed enormous popularity.  Knowing about him, or even better, knowing him, was the in thing to do for many people.

Now I find out that he has defrauded two of his most devoted female Jewish supporters of large sums of money.  Choudhurycoldly calculated how to get their money using plans that involved a complex web of lies that spanned many months.  Just about every word he said to these two women was a lie, captured forever in emails and Skypes.

Choudhury has been charged by the New York Police Department with Grand Larceny via Fraud.  The Bangladeshi ambassador of commerce, after viewing the broken contract, proof of money paid, and bounced checks involved in the financial transactions, described Mr. Choudhury as a “total fraudster, a complete liar and cheat” and added that he was known as that by most people in his native country.

I now regret ever advocating for him and thereby adding to the pile of false good news about him.

Here is an overview of his scams, with just a sample of his deceptions. A full treatment of these would greatly exceed the space limits of a news article.

• ·        Choudhury wrote many pages of emails and Skypes describing in great detail his long standing business relationship and friendship with the very reliable Mr. Yun.He trusted  Mr. Yun so much that he even had him over to his house as a frequent guest, someone who enjoyed playing chess with his young son.  All he needed was a loan for which he would put up his Crown Music and Video Company as collateral in a contract that would mature in a year.  He even provided – on request – a detailed contract between himself and Yun.

• ·        When she hesitated, he told that this was the opportunity of a life time for him but that no one in Bangladesh would lend him the money he needed because of his persecuted status.  Still she hesitated until he told her that he would have to sell the printing press on which he published his Bengali language version of his online newspaper, and that giving it up would be like losing a child.  She shebelieved that the right thing to do was to protect what seemed to be the only source of free speech in Bangladesh so she consented to making the loan.

• ·        In September, 2010, he borrowed another large sum from a second woman and told her he would repay her as soon as he got a wire transfer from David Jones (Mr. Yun).  Months went by with almost daily emails from Choudhury promising to repay and begging Jones to pay him so he could pay her.  Although Choudhurywas married, he told her was he was separated from his wife and had her write to David Jones saying she was his girlfriend, asking Jones to make the promised repayment to him.

• ·        However, David Jones (variously described to one woman as Korean and to the other as Chinese) turns out not to exist at all.  In spite of all the complicated transactions that appeared to be taking place with him, he turned out to be a total fabrication by Choudhury.  The only trace of this seemingly well established businessman was a sole email address, hassociated@yahoo.com.  And the only place this email showed up on a thorough Google search was on an obscure facebook page in the United Kingdom for the United States Representative, Mark Kirk, who initiated the House Resolution mentioned above.

• ·        So when the women were writing to Jones to try to understand what was happening with their money, they were really writing to Choudhury under an email account he created for the explicit purpose of deceiving them

By March, 2011, the women had found each other, become allies, and realized that they had been duped.  The only thing that each of these women had received were checks that bounced, masquerading as repayment.  Brazenly, even though one of the women told Choudhury that she knew David Jones did not exist, he emailed the other one a fake check from the non-existent Jones as proof that he would repay her, once Jones had paid him.

The bank this check is issued on does not exist, according to a Google search.  The town in which it is supposed to be located does not exist, with that spelling.  The bank number, routing number, and checking account number are impossibly sequenced.  They are 123456   999999 12345678.  Has anyone ever seen a legitimate check with numbers spewed out like that?  Lazy counterfeiting art, one might say.

Now look at the signature. It does not say David Jones, as indeed it does not have to, since the printed signature reads “For” David Jones, meaning that someone else could actually sign it.  However, the slope and general ‘personality’ of the pen strokes are definitely in the manner of  Choudhury’s signature on the contract he signed with one of his victims, as seen above.  Confusing?  Complicated?  Yes.  That is a Choudhury trademark when he wants to cover his tracks.

Remember that Choudhury has access to a printing plant.  He told the first woman he owned it outright but just needed emergency funds because he was in danger of having to sell it due to a short fall of income.  Yet he told the second woman that he needed funds to continue to buy the printing press on installments.

Two Bangladeshi contacts of this reporter told her that he did not own a printing press.  Nor does he own a recording studio, according to one of them.  The collateral he promised in his March, 2010 contract is apparently worthless, although more verification of his assets is in order.  At any rate, he has not offered up any cash based on the collateral he promised in his contract.

Choudhury made a claim to one of his victims that he cannot get a bank loan from anyone in Bangladesh because of his sacrifices for Israel.  That too must be questioned in light of his obvious defaulting to these two women, and the comments of the ambassador that he is well known as a fraudster.

He has painfully defrauded two of his trusting, caring supporters, people who considered themselves very special friends of the “Great Man.”  And there may be other victims who will emerge.  Beyond the hurt he inflicted on these two individuals, a broader problem arises.  Why should be we trust other things he tells us?  Given Choudhury’s chronic dissembling in this case, can anyone trust him about his political activities and the dangers he says he faces?  For example, do we know that he really was beaten up by thugs, suffering broken bones and damaged property, or even called back to court for trials every other month, as he alleges?  With each new claim of persecution, there was an appeal for support, which always meant a request for donations.  However, we have had no objective witness in Bangladesh to attest to his difficulties but have merely trusted Choudhury and taken him at his word.

Choudhury’s lying is wall-to-wall, spilling over to many aspects of his life.   Uncomfortable as it may be to read about such rankness of character, I believe it is necessary considering how much of the Western world he has duped.  I will further address his deceptions in Part II of this expose.

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

Her original post on Shoaib Choudhury , “Must He Die” is posted here at TSM