Rahsia di Sebalik Hubungan DAP dan PAS.


Dulu, pemimpin PAS katakan yang mereka memperjuangkan Islam yang kononnya tidak diendahkan oleh parti Barisan Nasional. Malah di dalam buku terbitan Pemuda Pas, ‘100 sebab kenapa UMNO wajib ditolak’, perkara yang paling utama yang mereka katakan ialah, UMNO mesti ditolak kerana “UMNO Tolak Hudud”. Tetapi alangkah anehnya apabila PAS masih lagi bekerjasama dengan DAP walaupun pengerusinya, Karpal Singh, bukan sahaja menolak hudud malah anti-hudud.

karpal langkah mayat statement

Sudahlah begitu, tiba-tiba sahaja Haji Hadi Awang pula selaku Presiden PAS yang dulunya memperjuangkan negara Islam mengatakan bahawa, “Dalam Quran dia tak sebut ‘Islamic state’ (negeri Islam), dia sebut negara kebajikan.”

Dulu:

Sekarang:


Sikap liberalisme dan pluralisme agama di kalangan pemimpin PAS juga semakin menjadi-jadi. Pemimpin PAS kini telah menghalalkan berdoa di dalam kuil Buddha bersama tok sami ataupun menyanyi lagu Gospel bersama orang-orang Kristian yang mana bertentangan dengan ajaran Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

surin21-300x234

Pluralisme Pas 1

Mereka bersikap seperti Ayah Pin, yang mengakui dirinya dihantar dari kerajaan langit untuk menjaga keharmonian manusia di atas dunia, tidak kira apa agama.

Pernahkah anda terfikir mengapakah DAP, yang begitu vocal dan ketara dalam melawan prinsip Islam dan membenci agama Islam, tidak menolak pemimpin-pemimpin PAS? Malah mereka bekerjasama di dalam satu gabungan ‘Pakatan Rakyat’ demi ‘menawan Putrajaya’. Tontoni dan dengarlah video di bawah untuk mengetahui muslihat DAP di sebalik hubungan mereka bersama PAS dari seorang bekas ahli DAP sendiri.

Pabila Agama Digadaikan Untuk Permainan Politik…


…Perjuangan agama yang mulia pula difitnahkan sebagai satu tipu helah politik. Kononlah mereka yang mempertahankan ‘fatwa orang Islam yang sedang ‘menuju Putrajaya’ dihalalkan berdoa bersama tok sami Buddha di dalam kuil Buddha atau menyertai upacara Hindu’ inilah pejuang Islam yang sebenar.  Tontonilah video dibawah.

Siapakah sebenarnya pengkhianat agama Islam tercinta?

Ustaz Azahar A Pluralist?


This is what happens when the opposition coalition says that it is okay for the Christians to use Allah to depict their god.

181178_359782157422864_102400000_n

Ustaz Azhar claims on his Facebook account that both Muslims and Christians worship the same God, Allah when it is clearly not the case. The Christians believe in the Trinity, God in three divine persons, while the Qur’an states in the surah Al-Ikhlas:

(Say: He is Allah, the One and Only) قُلۡ هُوَ اللّٰہُ اَحَدٌ

Even the majority of Christians does not agree with calling their god, Allah. Quoting a passage from the ‘Christian Post’, U.S. (Is Calling the Christian God ‘Allah’ Wrong? – August 23, 2007)

“The key condition behind calling the Christian God Allah is that Allah must refer to the same God as the one in the Bible. However, this requirement presents “a huge problem for both Muslims and Christians….” From its very starting point Islam denies what Christianity takes as its central truth claim – the fact that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Father. If Allah has no Son by definition, Allah is not the God who revealed himself in the Son. How then can the use of Allah by Christians lead to anything but confusion …and worse?”

By the way, here is another interesting photo I’ve found:

ustaz sayang anda

Seem familiar?

jesus

Does Ustaz Azahar believe in religious pluralism?

Polilemik Isu Kalimah Allah by Naser Disa


Lim Guan Eng, representing the Christians, had demanded to be allowed to use the word Allah to depict the Christian God, arguing that it is their right to call their God with any name they wish to; in their efforts to divide the Muslims. The Muslims across Malaysia should stand together despite of their different political views to say “NO!” to their demands. Watch this video to learn why.

MUST WATCH! MESTI TONTON!

Kalimah Allah: Pakatan Rakyat Violated the Federal Constitution


The leaders of Pakatan Rakyat, including those from the Malaysian Islamic Party, PAS had agreed to allow the Malaysian Christians to use the word Allah in the Malay version bible.

Gereja-Allah-300x225

Disappointed over the issue, the Sultan of Selangor, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah held an urgent meeting with the Mufti of Selangor and the high ranking members of MAIS and JAIS and decided that Allah could not be allowed to be used by any religions other than Islam. The secretory of MAIS, Datuk Mohd Misri Idris said, “The Sultan of Selangor has made a decision and decreed that the word Allah is a sacred word specific for Muslims and prohibited to be used by any non-Muslim religion in Selangor as stated in a fatwa and gazetted on Feb 18, 2010.”

In response, PKR’s Anwar Ibrahim criticised the statement by saying that, “MAIS has nothing to do with the Selangor government. That is why all of their critics were pointing towards Pakatan… never towards UMNO.”

It is obvious that Pakatan Rakyat had shown constant lack of respect towards the Sultan. (Please read,Sultan Not Invited To Selangor Merdeka Celebration, Who’s Fault?) so it is not surprising for Anwar to openly (though indirectly) question the authority of the Sultan as the Head of The Religion of Islam as it had been written in the Article 3 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. Article 3(2) states that:

In every State other than States not having a Ruler the position of the Ruler as the Head of the religion of Islam in his State in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution of that State, and, subject to that Constitution, all rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers enjoyed by him as Head of that religion, are unaffected and unimpaired; but in any acts, observances of ceremonies with respect to which the Conference of Rulers has agreed that they should extend to the Federation as a whole each of the other Rulers shall in his capacity of Head of the religion of Islam authorize the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to represent him.

In their published administration master plan, Buku Jingga, the Malaysian opposition (unregistered) coalition named Pakatan Rakyat gave honeyed promises to the Malay Muslims that the first two of their main objectives are:

1. To defend the Federal Constitution, Islam as the religion of the Federation while other religions can be practiced peacefully anywhere in the country, the special position of the Malays and the indigenous people anywhere including Sabah and Sarawak, and the legitimate interests of other races in accordance to Article 153. 2. To defend the role and responsibility of the institution of Constitutional Monarchy.

But in just one lash of his tongue, Anwar who is the leader of the Malaysian opposition had gone against both of these objectives. As written in the Article 3(2) of the Federal Constitution, Sultan Sharafuddin has full authority to prohibit the use of the word ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims, in his capacity as the Head of Religion (Islam) in Selangor. And nobody has the rights to belittle his majesty’s decree.

It is obvious that Anwar had gone against the Federal Constitution by questioning the role and responsibility of the institution of Constitutional Monarchy in his statement on Sunday. This shows the Pakatan Rakyat’s etiquette.

anwar-ibrahim

Anwar Ibrahim had shown his true colours in Bersih 3.0 when he practically drove the demonstrators into danger by instigating the crowd into a violent mad rush as they crashed into the police barricades, almost causing a stampede! And after throwing his supporters into a dangerous situation, Anwar was caught on camera grinning with satisfaction before disappearing from the scene; leaving his supporters to fight with the police without him and endangering their lives in such a ruthless and violent situation.

The same goes with PAS leaders. Calling themselves as ‘very Islamic’, they at the same time commit actions that had not only humiliate the Muslims and but also Islam. Crazily involved, planning and taking part in all kinds of unIslamic and useless political protests and demonstrations, PAS leaders ironically, rejected and even condemned the Himpunan Sejuta Umat; an event which was organised by Muslim NGOs calling the Muslims to strengthen their faith and to fight against apostasy.

Is the fight for Putrajaya is much more important in the eyes of the PAS’s leaders and members than the fight for Islam and the faith of the Muslims? I guess the answer is, “Yes!” PAS leaders are moving away from their once supposed goal of fighting for Islam, and are now making their decisions based on the topmost value upheld by PKR and DAP; total freedom.

The total freedom in voicing out their demands whether they are rational or otherwise in any way they wish to, including violent demonstrations as the Bersih 3.0. The freedom to swear as they like to anyone they choose, to show complete disrespect, to be ignorant and arrogant because it is their own rights as humans. The total freedom in their actions; to pull out a piece of rag and claiming that it is worthy to replace the flag of their own country, humiliating and denouncing their own nation on the night when the Malaysians are celebrating one of the biggest history of the country, Malaysian’s Independence.

What will be next for PAS? How about the total freedom in choosing who one wishes to be as what PAS’s allies in Bersih had been fighting for? Or in another word, the total freedom to practice homosexuality or to change one’s gender?

My siblings and I had often tried to point this out in our writings in trying to wake up our countrymen but we had been labelled as ‘UMNO bloggers’ whose views and thoughts are biased and brainwashed. My little sister, Aeshah in fact had been accused of being a ‘retarded BN supporter’ and was asked how much had she been paid by UMNO.

It really baffles me how PAS’s, PKR’s and DAP’s Malays can be so gullible to believe that the spoon that was thrustered into their mouths were filled with honey while it contains poison. When will those Malays be able to open their eyes and try to understand the Federal Constitution?

As Uncle Azril Mohd Amin had written:

Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution unequivocally bestows upon Islam a special status that does not avail to other religions within the Federation. This arises from the fact that the said Article, clearly, exalts Islam. As a result of the exaltation, Islam exerts a dominating influence within the Federation’s social, political and cultural affairs in a way that sets it above the rest of the religions practised within the Federation.

Can Hijab Justifies Nurul Izzah’s Statement?


In response to Nurul Izzah’s statement on 3rd November, ‘Timbalan Ketua Muslimat’ PAS, Dr. Siti Mariah Mahmud, made a statement on 7th November saying:

“Adalah satu tuduhan yang tak masuk akal menuduh seorang muslimah mukminah, yang solat, yang puasa, yang tutup aurat mengajak orang Melayu meninggalkan Islam dan menyokong orang Melayu Murtad.” (It is a nonsensical accusation to accuse a Muslimah Mukminah, who prays, fasts, (and) cover her aurahs to suggest to the Malays to leave Islam and support the Muslim apostates).

Is it true, Dr. Mariah? So what does a person who prays, fasts, (and) covers her aurahs meant when she says,“When you ask me, there is no compulsion in religion… how can anyone say, ‘Sorry, this (religious freedom) only applies to non-Malays’? It has to apply equally” ?

Please take a look at  Prof. Dr. Musdah Mulia (I have no idea whether she really prays or fasts) but she wears hijab and dressed in Muslimah clothing. She claims to be a good Muslim and a popular ‘Muslim’ leader in Indonesia. She served as Senior Advisor of the Minister of Religious Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia from 2000 to 2007 and head of Research Division of The Council of Indonesian Ulema (MUI) from 2000 to 2005. She does looks like a great Muslim lady.

Dr. Siti Musdah Mulia (R) receiving her International Women of Courage Award in Washington.

In February, 2010, the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy published an article ‘Ada Apa Dengan Kebebasan Agama’ (What is it with freedom of religion?) written by Dr. Musdah Mulia where it says:

“hak kebebasan beragama bersifat mutlak, berada di dalam forum internum yang merupakan wujud dari inner freedom (freedom to be), dan itu termasuk hak non-derogable (tak bisa ditangguhkan pemenuhannya oleh negara dalam keadaan apa pun)”

Siti Musdah and Nurul Izzah’s father, Anwar Ibrahim.

Even though Dr. Siti Musdah Mulia covers her aurah and wearing her hijab, she is a Liberal Muslim activist. In 2007, she received the International Women of Courage Award for her efforts on supporting human rights and liberalism, claiming that Islam accepts freedom in religion. As it was reported on The Jakarta Post on an article ‘Siti Musdah Mulia: A Courageous Woman’:

One of the rights she is fighting for is the state’s guarantee of freedom of religion. Musdah believes pluralism is a must to build the country.

“Pluralism is the key for the continuation of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia,” she said.

She is also known for supporting the LGBTs, claiming that they should be respected and dignified by Muslims. She promoted and supported the so called ‘Lesbian Muslim’, Irshad Manji, by calling her a ‘Muslimah Mujtahidah’.  Two years earlier, the Jakarta Post published an article ‘Islam ‘Recognizes Homosexuality’, also featuring Musdah Mulia:

Moderate Muslim scholars said there were no reasons to reject homosexuals under Islam, and that the condemnation of homosexuals and homosexuality by mainstream ulema and many other Muslims was based on narrow-minded interpretations of Islamic teachings.

“There is no difference between lesbians and nonlesbians. In the eyes of God, people are valued based on their piety,” she told the discussion organized by nongovernmental organization Arus Pelang.

“The essence of the religion (Islam) is to humanize humans, respect and dignify them.”

Musdah said homosexuality was from God and should be considered natural, adding it was not pushed only by passion.

Now please click here for the full video of Nurul Izzah’s speech at Subang Jaya Full Gospel Church.

It is rather odd, if wearing a hijab is enough to show one’s faith and her understanding of Islam. After all, as Helen Ang had often pointed out, even Hannah Yeoh sometimes wears hijab. Or does that means she too would never “suggest the Malays to leave Islam and support the Muslim apostates”; especially since Hannah Yeoh is from PAS’s ally party DAP – the party led by non-Muslim leaders whom according to PAS’s spiritual leader understand Islam better than UMNO’s Muslim leaders?

A group of Muslimah with Hannah Yeoh (in the middle).

I think that as a Muslim leader Dr. Mariah should understand the implications of Nurul Izzah’s words at the forum to the Muslims especially to the PR members and supporters who idolised Nurul Izzah. It is very important for Dr. Mariah to put Islam first in making any judgment and not making foolish statements just to show her support for Anwar’s Ibrahim’s daughter. Or maybe  Dr. Mariah doesn’t know what she was saying when she made the statement. Either those or we’re going to hear about ‘Hannah Yeoh: An exemplary figure for Muslimah Mukminah’ from her soon.

Nurul Izzah: Like Father, Like Daughter.


Nurul Izzah speaking at the ‘Islamic State: Which version? Whose responsible?’ forum

The vice president of PKR, Nurul Izzah raised an uproar when on the 3rd of November 2012, she claimed that everyone, even the Malays, should be granted freedom in practicing religions of their choices. As a panel member of the forum ‘Islamic State: Which Version? Whose Responsibility?’ organised by the ‘Oriental Hearts and Mind Study Institute’ and the ‘Islamic Renaissance Front’, she was asked if Malays should have religious-freedom like the Non-Malays. In reply, she said:

“When you ask me, there is no compulsion in religion… how can anyone say, ‘Sorry, this (religious freedom) only applies to non-Malays’? It has to apply equally.”

Please listen to her statement in the video below:


In the statement, she had obviously declared “it (religious freedom) has to apply equally”, meaning to every person disregarding their race or ethnicity including the Malays as she also said, “how can anyone say, ‘Sorry, this (religious freedom) only applies to non-Malays’?”

In the Article 160(2) of the Federal Constitution, a Malay is defined as one who professes Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language and conforms to Malay customs.

So why is she denying that she encourages Muslims to renounce Islam? She is now trying to sue Utusan Malaysia, Berita Harian as well as a number of bloggers for slander, stating that:

“I regret there are people trying to twist my statement as if I disparage the issue of faith or accept Muslims who choose to apostate.”

Is she trying to say that while she wants everyone including Malays should be granted religious freedom, she at the same time doesn’t support the Muslims who choose to apostate? Though Malays are, by the definition written in the federal constitution, must be Muslims? And yet she claims that people are ‘twisting her statements’.

It doesn’t make any sense, does it? And how odd it is for a person who claims to fight for justice, when the news portal that reported her statement before Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian did was not being blamed for twisting her words. Is it because the news portal Malaysiakini is linked to the oppositions as claimed by many?

She is starting to sound exactly like the PKR leader who also happens to be her father, Anwar Ibrahim. Like father, like daughter – both sharing the idealism of Islamic liberalism and  religious pluralism, and both bombarded false accusations of defamation and slander mercilessly to the reporters who simply wrote down their statements, word by word.

Like father, like daughter

Despite that fact, they still have the heart to claim that Pakatan Rakyat and Party Keadlian Rakyat are fighting for ‘Human Rights’. In the same forum, to the questions on the rights of the LGBT community, Nurul Izzah stated that we should not ‘victimise’ anyone. Of course to Nurul Izzah, the LGBTs, who goes against the laws of nature and laws of Allah by their own choice, should be given their ‘rights’ but the reporters who reported what she said should be sued if her own statements went against her.

But of course, her dear father, Anwar Ibrahim would also agree with her that human rights and press freedom does not apply to folks from Utusan Malaysia or anyone who dares to tell the truth thus may stand in their way from reaching Putrajaya.

Malaysiakini wrote that “she said, what should be sought is “quality” where Muslims’ faith is strong. ‘Even me, being schooled in Assunta (secondary school) with a huge cross in the hall and an active singing Catholic society did not influence me,’ she said.”

Obviously, it did… or she wouldn’t dare to say that Allah Himself said in the Quran that there is no compulsion in religion to all including the Muslims. How could her aqidah stays strong when she dared to make such a statement? Where is the ‘quality’ and what kind of ‘quality’ is she referring to?