"Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, a Muslim editor and commentator in Bangladesh, has a rare virtue -- he champions dialogue and decency in a culture hemmed in by extremism and corruption. When his weekly newspaper, Blitz, published articles favourable to Israel, it was blacklisted by various companies. Some people demanded that the paper be banned. Mr. Choudhury was thrown out of a private television company.

"But all of this pales compared with what happened last month. As he boarded a flight in Dhaka, the capital, on his way to a writers' conference in Tel Aviv, Mr. Choudhury was arrested by security personnel, accused of being a spy and thrown in prison. The charges are a baseless sham. The Committee to Protect Journalists in New York and the Paris-based Reporters Sans Frontiè res have vigorously condemned his arrest. Governments, including Washington, need to demand his release.

"The Tel Aviv meeting Mr. Choudhury was planning to attend was called "Bridges Through Culture" and the lecture he hoped to deliver concerned the role of the media in establishing peace. Mr. Choudhury, who was going to open a Bangladeshi branch of a group called the International Forum for the Literature and Culture of Peace, would have been the first journalist from Bangladesh to speak publicly in Israel.

"Mr. Choudhury's mistreatment is not occurring in a vacuum. Muslim extremism is growing in Bangladesh. Moreover, violence against journalists who stand up to the ruling party, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, has been increasing, especially in the south and especially for those exposing links between politicians and organised crime. On Dec. 4, a correspondent for a southern regional daily was beaten and stabbed by members of the party's youth wing after publication of an article critical of a key local politician.

"On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Sans Frontières sent letters to Khaleda Zia, the prime minister of Bangladesh, expressing grave concern over these developments. Their alarm is quite justified. Bangladesh may now be among the world's most dangerous countries for journalists. That makes Mr. Choudhury's courageous stand for Muslim-Jewish dialogue all the more admirable -- and vital to defend."

Although The New York Times' accusations are laughable, no Bangladeshi should be amused. The accusations leveled are most serious. As America's most influential newspaper, the Times' opinion pieces are widely read and believed. Many Americans will now believe the fallacies propagated by Times about Bangladesh as facts. Let us look closely at the accusations. Anyone perusing Bangladeshi newspapers will notice that pro-Israeli views are not at all uncommon. Recently, The Daily Star published pro-Israeli articles and letters written by Jewish Americans and others with Muslim-sounding names. Bangladeshis took these in strides as manifestation of freedom of speech and a free press in Bangladesh. It is inconceivable that The New York Times would publish pro-Palestinian articles and letters of similar bias. One has to worry now whether those pro-Israeli articles/letters published in the Bangladeshi media were individual opinions or coordinated efforts to paint Israel favourably to Bangladeshis. With the apparent failure of those efforts, The New York Times now fires a proverbial shot across Bangladesh's bow, as though as a warning!

With pro-Israeli articles and letters appearing in the Bangladeshi media, the Times' innuendo that Mr. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury was arrested solely because he is pro-Israel does not hold much water. Another significant fact that the Times does not care to mention is that Bangladesh does not have diplomatic relations with Israel. That being the case, it is intriguing how Mr. Choudhury was going to travel to Tel Aviv from Dhaka, when Bangladesh passport explicitly forbids travel to Israel! Whether or not Bangladesh should recognise Israel, that is for Bangladeshis to decide, not for The New York Times to dictate. Personally, if a deal is signed that is acceptable to the Palestinians, the writer would be favourably disposed towards the Israel of proven peacemakers such as former Prime Ministers Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak, but would vehemently oppose overtures to the Israel of mass murderer Ariel Sharon until he reforms himself. New York's indomitable pro-Israeli propagandist Mr. David Harris of The American Jewish Committee is at it again. His current radio commercials wish Americans happy Christmas and Hanukkah, while at the same time reminding listeners that there is no religious freedom in (three Muslim countries he doubtless hopes Mr. Bush should attack next) Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran! Why doesn't some of these people understand that to be secure Israel does not need America to destroy all of Israel's Muslim neighbours; all Israel needs for security is to withdraw to its pre-1967 border!

The Times calls charges against Mr. Choudhury "baseless sham." How is it so sure? Does it have some inside information that Bangladesh is not privy to? The Times also urges Washington to demand Mr. Choudhury's release. The New York Times' display of colonial arrogance -- that Bangladesh's democracy notwithstanding, they have the right to demand what they want from our highest executive, Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, on any matter however trivial -- is regrettable to say the least. This is no way to show respect for a democracy! One cannot read or hear a single word about Israel in the American media without being bombarded with repeated reminders that Israel is a democracy. Bangladesh sticks out like a sore thumb in the western media because it shoots down their pet theory that no Muslim nation can be truly democratic. And the inconvenient fact that two democratically elected Muslim women have been ruling Bangladesh for the last twelve years, when America has never had a female President, therefore, must be suppressed at all cost! That is why there is no mention of Bangladesh's democracy in a Times editorial devoted entirely to Bangladesh. Would the Times have pressured Washington to release someone the US had arrested on espionage charges? Instead of showing disrespect for Bangladesh's democracy and justice system, the Times should be confident, as we expatriate Bangladeshis are, that if Mr. Choudhury is not guilty, he will indeed be found not guilty by Bangladesh's justice system, without any foreign intervention. The Times should remember that during the tenure of our previous Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, the killers of her father, father of the nation Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, although convicted, could not be executed because the case is in legal limbo.

One is left to wonder whether something sinister is afoot here. Zionists have such a stranglehold over American media that the brainwashing of Americans with pro-Israeli propaganda has reached epidemic proportions. In developing countries like Bangladesh, because of the freedom of press, opposing views on Israel are articulated. And in these days of the Internet, many Americans are exposed to the truth about Israel published in the Net versions of Bangladeshi media, perhaps causing consternation among the Zionists. What better way to discredit Bangladesh than through an editorial in The New York Times, declaring Bangladesh a "Muslim extremist" country, unsafe for journalists! Anyone who truly knows Bangladesh will agree with the United States Secretary of State Colin Powell that average Bangladeshis practice moderation in every facet of national life, and that Bangladeshi press is as free as any of the world's other democracies. Because it considers Bangladesh a military and economic lightweight, The New York Times should not misuse its enormous clout to denigrate Bangladesh so unfairly, and peddle interests of nations other than the US. Bangladesh should refuse to be intimidated by mighty New York Times' threatening posture and continue to be what it is best at -- a moderate nation seeking progress and prosperity through peaceful means. Contrary to the Times' assertion, Bangladesh is one of the safest countries in the world for real journalists.