Puneet Madan on the inaugural Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam Rally in New York on May 3, 2009:

We are a multi-lingual, multi-cultural, multi-religious, multi-ethnic group that have gathered in Times Square, New York, today (May 3, 2009) under the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI) banner to reaffirm the most basic of principles that our ancestors stood for when, over six decades ago, they established the United Nations, the cornerstone of a hoped-for global democracy. In doing so, they hoped to ensure that never again would humankind face the persecution it suffered during the tragedies of the mid-20th century. The establishment of the United Nations was to be the beginning of a new era in which people of different religion, cultures, castes, and color would together create a new global society, a humanistic society, finally overcoming the fascism and imperialism of the times past.

HRCARI reaffirms the most basic principles human rights: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to vote, and the assurance that all human beings are equal, regardless of his social, cultural, gender, racial, sexuality or religious status.

For many in our world, democracy is considered the essence of human freedom. However, for others, the term “democracy” has come to imply only the right to vote. This is exemplified in the many Islamic countries that hold elections, even while exhibiting nary a trace of freedom. The most famous recent example of elections without the "essence of democracy" include the 2006 election of Hamas in the Palestinian Territories. The reality is that freedom, as a concept, has been defined straight out of existence. While most people in the world define freedom and human rights according to the universalistic notions set forth in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNUDHR), and other documents such as the United States’ Declaration of Independence, radical Muslims have defined “freedom” to mean the freedom they enjoy to exploit human suffering and dignity, a "freedom", they believe, is granted them by their age-old religious scripture. They are, in short, demanding that the democratic, freedom-loving world be tolerant to their intolerance.

In the 1930s, when Jews were forced to wear arm bands in Nazi Germany, the world ignored their plight. One of the excuses for ignoring Jewish suffering during the Holocaust was a perceived need to be "sensitive" to the plight of Nazi Germany. It is still an open question why and how the world ignored and appeased the Nazi threat for as long as it did, until action was finally taken. But it is clear that by ignoring the Nazi threat, the world permitted a massive human tragedy, the Holocaust, to happen. The United Nations was founded in the wake of that tragedy in order to prevent another Holocaust.

Ironically the same story repeated itself in 1999, when the Taliban forced Afghan Hindus and Sikhs to wear orange armbands. They also were responsible for the genocide of the Hazara Muslims in Northern Afghanistan. Let loose, the Taliban grew into a global threat by 2001, and we are still living under the shadow of that threat. Today, the media and politicians are attempting to claim there is a “moderate Taliban.” The term “moderate Taliban” is an oxymoron in itself. Once again we are making deals and compromising the very definition of the “universal human dignity” in order to be “sensitive” towards the demands of perpetrators of genocide.

Presently, whenever a terrorist kills innocent people in horrific events such attacks on September 11, 2001 (New York), March 27, 2002 (Passover bombing in Netanya, Israel), March 11, 2003 (Madrid bombing), July 7, 2005 (London bombing), and November 26-28 2008 (Mumbai attacks), the majority of “mainstream politicians” run out to make apologies on behalf of the terrorists. There is also denial of the problem of radical Islam by the “mainstream media,” which does not refer to radical Muslims by their true identity: radical Muslims or Islamic terrorists. Instead, they have been referred to as “South Asians”, “militants" etc. When this is combined with a politically correct mentality, which requires universal tolerance—that is, tolerance even of intolerant radical Islam—a deadly “cocktail” is created. The last time such a confluence of events occurred was during the lead-up to the rise of Nazis in Germany, culminating in the World War II. It is important to note that we must discuss the background of radical Islam, because its history, thus far, has been ignored. The root of radical Islam must be understood in order to prevent further genocide.

We, the Indians, would like to inform Americans and the world of the full scope of the problem of radical Islam that we endured. During and before the 1920s, there was a mass-murdering rampage undertaken by India's radical Muslims, under the guise of evicting the British from India. In truth, these murders occurred as part of the khilafat movement, in order to found a radical Islamic state, a pan-Islamic caliphate, in the “British Jewel” of India. Today’s radical Muslims are, kind of, a continuation of same radical Islamic movement, having the same goal as those of the 1920s: founding of an Islamic caliphate of the global scale. However, since the history of radical Islam is unknown, or forgotten, it is mistakenly believed that radical Islam is a new phenomenon, a direct result of “Western imperialism” or other external factors.

In the year 1926, there was a summit in Mecca that gave birth to two Radical Islamic movements—the Muslim Brotherhood and Tablighi Jamaat—to combat the “non-Islamic” world on the western and eastern boundaries of the Arabian peninsula.^[1] The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al Husseini was a key participant in this summit. He was in fact a key architect of the Jewish Holocaust and of the radical Islamic terrorism in Palestine. In addition, the radical Deobandi Muslim cleric, Maulana Ilyas, traveled back to India and created the Tablighi Jamaat. As such, in the “Western front”, Hassan-al-Banna and his associate Amin al Husseini received funds from Deobandi radicals, as well as from the Nawab (governor) of Hyderabad, India. This ultimately led to the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood, which later adopted the Mawdudi vision of the 'Ummah', or the society that decide how to impose religious apartheid on global level.

The Mecca Summit of 1926 quickly resulted in a series of murders of many opponents of the Aryan Race theory in India. As an example, the murder of high profile spiritual Hindu guru Swami Shraddhanand is still well-known. Although the political body maintained that the serial killings of 1926 were done by scattered religious fanatics and lacked any broader political connections, the actions of these murderers points to a different reality. The period between 1926 and 1932 was perhaps the earliest and most dynamic phase during which radical Muslims realigned themselves into a threat of global proportions. An example of early hate education and the tie-in to genocide can be traced back to 1926, when a radical Muslim, known as Inayat Allah Khan al-Mashriqi, translated Hitler's “Mein Kampf” into Urdu. This hate-text was then widely sold in mosques, and the sale of Mein Kampf in the Urdu-speaking world rivaled that in pre-Nazi Germany of 1926.

In the year 1929, there was a massacre of Jewish men, women, and children in the city of Hebron, in the British Mandate of Palestine. This massacre caused the British establishment, out of fear, to evict the victims of the massacre, the Jews, from the historic city of Hebron. What is not well-known is that the Hebron massacre itself was financed through an early version of “Sharia finance”: money was sent in from around the world, especially from India, in order to finance the massacre. Responding to the Hebron massacre, in addition to transferring all Jews out of Hebron, the British also tightened the control of the transfer of money between radical Muslim groups. The money transfer system was completely blocked by 1933, creating what today is known as the financial crisis of the Jerusalem-based Supreme Muslim Council (1932–1935). In 1933, the radical Islamic lobby came up with the idea of creating a pseudo-religious money transfer system to fund their violent and extremist activities in name of Islam: this banking system is today recognized as the “Sharia banking.”

After the British choked out the money-flow to radical Islamic groups, 1936 marked a new beginning for the radical Islamic movements, as the funds to support their hate-campaign now came from Nazi Germany. Amazingly, the two groups formed after the 1926 Mecca Summit, the Muslim Brotherhood and Tablighi Jamaat, now came together under one umbrella to work with the Nazis. During World War II, ‘Berlin Radio’ broadcasted Amin al-Husseini's sermons, in which he asked Muslims in India and beyond to attack anyone helping the British war effort against the Nazis. Indeed, there were, thereafter, nationwide attacks against the Hindus, who had sided with the British to fight the Nazis. In response, the British decided to lock up India's entire Muslim and leftist lobby.

After World War II, the British freed all the radical Muslims, who had contributed to genocide alongside the Nazis. Despite the fact that Amin al Husseini was an architect of the Final Solution, he was never prosecuted, and in fact died in 1974 at a ripe old age, never having to answer for his crimes.

If this was not egregious enough, the British political lobby pushed for the partition of India, without recognizing the human tragedy this would cause. Even until today, there are political lobbies, including British backed Indian leftists, that refuse to acknowledge the Indian partition genocide, denying due respect to its victims. Such Denialism has become the prime source of a never-ending cycle of barbarity. We see denial of genocide even today regarding the 1915 genocide in Armenia, the ongoing genocide in Sudan, and the incitement to genocide, on a daily basis, against the Jews in the state-sponsored media of Islamic countries such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. This global Denialism will not let our civilization properly mourn the victims of radical Islam or prevent its recurrence.

Ironically, what the "mainstream media" highlights concerning Islamic violence is just the backlash by the victims of radical Islam, not the actions of the instigators, the radical Muslims. The portrayal of the backlash by the victims as the source of the problem, the "mainstream media" is, in fact, fueling resentment amongst Muslims and helping their recruitment to radical Islamic groups for waging Jihadi warfare. The best example of this phenomenon is the Gujarat riots of 2002 (India). These riots were provoked by the Godhra train-burning incident, in which 58 Hindus were charred into coals. The media, callously disregarding the Ghodra train-burning, heaped tremendous attention upon the Hindu backlash, the so-called Gujarat riots, and its Muslim victims. The media also implicitly excused dozens of suicide bomb attacks by radical Muslims, which occurred soon afterward, by citing the legitimate Muslim resentment over the Gujarat riots. None of the "mainstream media" outlets ever stopped to query the psychological state of Hindus when the riots occurred. In fact, the Indian government had ignored for decades the plight of the Hindu victims of radical Islam, prior to the 2002 Gujarat riots. Then there was the Godhra train burning incident ahead of the riots, in which a mob of radical Muslims set fire on a train containing Hindu pilgrims, including women and infant children, burning them alive. This occurred at the same time as mosques were blaring on their loudspeakers messages to kill the "kuffar," i.e. the Hindus.

The vast majority of the "mainstream media" and politicians refused to acknowledge these facts. It is also true that Muslims suffered extensively during the 2002 Gujarat riots, which HRCARI will never excuse, or endorse. Nonetheless, the Godhra train-burning incident (the instigator of Gujarat riots 2002), the Mumbai train bombings and the London tube bombings are intimately connected: their motivation is radical Islam; the perpetrators are radical Muslims. Why the media, the politicians, refuse to make and highlight this obvious link between these horror acts of terrorism? The horrendous Godhra terror incident was the handiwork of the Tablighi Jamaat, the same group which worked as an intelligence agency for the Nazis, also worked as a proxy in recruiting the Jihadis for the London Tube bombings and the Glasgow airport attack. But hardly any media outlet will ever publish this fact. Instead, the "mainstream media" pretends that all cultures are equal, and we should "give respect" to the culture of radical Islam than confronting this hateful ideology.

When will we acknowledge that the paganic 'multicultural’ system is, politically, a failure? How long will we continue shying off from standing up for human dignity in the name of political correctness? When will we recognize that the society we created after World War II was secular, not multicultural? Modern democracies hold the sacredness of life as their core value, not any obsolete ancient scripture. In modern democracy, all human beings are equal.

Ironically, the Muslim world has rejected the secular notion of human rights after World War II; it never joined the universalistic effort to prevent future human tragedies. And let me be clear that I am counting in this, those Muslims around the world, who applaud the fanatics. At the same time, we are deeply thankful to the handful of Muslims, who have joined us today in this stand for human rights and dignity for all.

For whatever reason, be it oil-money spent to propagate extremist forms of Islam, or due to cultural reasons, the majority of Muslims have not spoken out against the radical Islamists' rampant violence and violation of human rights worldwide. This needs to change for success of our mission, and it is a hopeful sign that some Muslims have stood together with us today; they are starting to speak out against radical Islam. They need to take a clear stand against the radicals and intensify their unequivocal condemnation of violence and violation of human in Islamic countries. We are eager to join Muslims for calling in one voice for the equality of all before the law, and the enforcement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights everywhere without exception.

We are here today to call for universal human rights and dignity. We hope that this global campaign will continue to be strengthened until uniform human rights and dignity is ensured to all regardless of faith, color, caste, or race.

Before closing, we want to pay our respect to all the innocent victims of all types of fascism. This is a moment we provide recognition of this, but we will continue our fight to prevent future occurrence of genocide, a mission in which the United Nations has failed miserably.

[1] Al-Karmil, May 30 1926, issue no. 1186.