How intellectuals should be thinking. How intellectuals should LOOK BEYOND the tittle and EXPLOIT the content. SAY Facts but NO Slanders. P/S: No Offense :)

Why We Must Accept PAS

Posted by Intellectual Thought Sunday 24 July 2011 22:08

2

PAS Speeches: THE COLLECTION

1.PAS selama ini bercakap tentang memperjuangkan Negara Islam tetapi pada 25 Jun 2008 semasa sessi perbahasan menjunjung kasih di atas titah Paduk Seri Sultan Perak, ADUN Pasir Panjang telah membuat kenyataan seperti berikut:

Di manakah dalam mana-mana transkrip PAS yang menyatakan bahawa PAS hendak melaksanakan Negara Islam. Saya minta pandangan dan jawapan di manakah transkrip PAS dalam memorandum ke dalam perlembagaan PAS sendiri ada menyatakan PAS nak melaksanakan Negara Islam”

Tidakkah ini menggadaikan prinsip ???

2. Begitu juga tentang soal hudud. Sebelum ini PAS membuat pelbagai tuduhan kepada pimpinan UMNO mengenai hudud. Namun kenapa kini wujudnya perubahan sikap pemimpin PAS sendiri mengenai pelaksanaan hudud apabila hendak mewajarkan kerjasama dengan DAP.

Pada 7 Mac 200, Timbalan Presiden PAS ketika itu, Haji Hadi pernah dilaporkan berkata:

" Hudud adalah satu aspek daripada 0.001% daripada hukum Islam". Ini bermakna apabila memerintah sendiri hudud yang dibesarkan selama ini diperkecilkan sehingga 1/10,000.

Terbaru,Timbalan Pesuruhjaya PAS Kelantan Datuk Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah ketika membuat kenyataan mengenai pelaksanaan hudud pada 2 September 2010 dengan jelas menyatakan:

“Tidak semestinya kita akan laksanakan, kita melihat kepada persediaan dan persetujuan masyarakat. Kita ada persetujuan untuk peringkat ini kita tidak bincangkan soal hudud. Misi kita yang utama ialah untuk menjatuhkan Barisan Nasional pada pilihan raya”

Tidakkah ini menggadaikan prinsip ???

3. Begitu juga dalam soal pemerintahan. UMNO pernah dikafirkan kerana menjalin kerjasama dengan orang bukan Islam. Buktinya:

Majlis Ulama PAS Kelantan pada Ogos 1963 membuat kenyataan “"Orang-orang Islam yang berkongsi dengan orang-orang kafir untuk memerintah negara, menjadi kafir atau haram"

Namun demi kepentingan politik apa pula kata Mursyidul Am PAS Datuk Nik Abd Aziz Nik Mat pada 12 Mei 1999 “Jika Nabi Muhammad boleh menandatangani perjanjian dengan musuh tradisi Islam, iaitu kaum Yahudi, sebaik tiba di Madinah, PAS juga sanggup bekerjasama dengan DAP.”

Tidakkah ini juga namanya menggadai prinsip ???

4.Begitu juga dalam soal Perlembagaan Negara – UMNO dituduh mempertahankan perlembagaan sekular dan Presiden PAS sekarang pada 7 April 1981 telah mengeluarkan amanat yang berbunyi:

“Saudara-saudara sekelian percayalah,

Kita menentang UMNO,bukan kerana nama dia UMNO. Kita menentang Barisan Nasional bukan kerana dia lama memerintah kerajaan. Kita menentang dia ialah kerana dia mengekalkan perlembagaan penjajah,mengekalkan undang-undang kafir,mengekalkan peraturan jahiliyah.Oleh kerana itulah kita menentang mereka.Oleh kerana itulah kita menghadapi mereka. Oleh itulah kita cuba berlawan dengan mereka.

Percayalah saudara-saudara sekelian,

Perjuangan kita adalah jihad, ucapan kita adalah jihad, derma kita adalah jihad. Bergantunglah kita kepada Allah dengan (menghadapi) puak-puak ini kerana kalau kita mati melawan puak-puak ini, mati kita adalah syahid. Mati kita adalah Islam. Kita tidak perlu masuk Buddha, Kita tidak perlu masuk Hindu, Kita tidak perlu masuk Kristian, Tapi kita menjadi kafir dengan mengamalkan 'politik suku, agama suku'”

Tidak cukup dengan itu, Mursyidul Am PAS semasa menyampaikan khutbah di Masjd Pengadang Baru Marang pada Oktober 2001 menyebut:

"Negara kita Malaysia belum merdeka lagi kerana perlembagaannya masih perlembagaan kafir."

Namun hakikatnya dalam Perlembagaan PAS Fasal 6 (11) dengan jelas menyebutkan:

“Melakukan apa-apa jua usaha dan tindakan dalam batas-batas Perlembagaan dan undang-undang Negara bagi mencapai semua tujuan-tujuan PAS ke dalam dan ke luar”

Tidakkah ini tidak berprinsip namanya ???

Amanat Haji Hadi ini jelas bercanggah dengan Islam sesuai dengan keputusan Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan

 
Keputusan:

1. Bahawa Amanat Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi adalah -

(a) bercanggah dari segi ajaran Islam;

(b) bercanggah dengan kepentingan masyarakat Islam dan kemuliaan Agamanya; dan

(c) bercanggah dengan prinsip dakwah Islamiah.

2. Mana-mana orang Islam adalah dilarang –

(a) menyebar, mengajar, mempelajari dan mengamalkan amanat tersebut; dan

(b) menjual, mencetak, mengedar, membeli atau memiliki amanat tersebut.

Status Penwartaan: Diwartakan

Nombor Rujukan: PMM/0020 Jld.4 (61)

Akta/Enakmen: M.P.U. 13

Banyak lagi contoh-contoh bagaimana PAS sanggup menggadai prinsip dan mengelirukan masyarakat demi memuaskan nafsu politik parti itu. Natijah daripda kenyataan yang dibuat ia telah menyebabkan berlakunya perpecahan di kalangan umat Islam.

Antara lain:

Tahun 1979 Tok Guru PAS di Pondok Pasir Tumboh, Kelantan, Haji Mustafa Abu Bakar mengeluarkan fatwa semasa berceramah di sebuah surau di Hulu Besut mengkafirkan ahli UMNO.

Disebut di mahkamah bahawa beliau didapati menuduh “orang-orang UMNO dalam Barisan Nasional (BN) hukumnya murtad” dan “orang UMNO dalam Barisan Nasional tidak sah dijadikan imam sembahyang”. Juga ‘‘sembelihan orang UMNO Barisan Nasional tidak boleh dimakan”; “tidak sah akad nikah sekiranya jurunikah itu orang Barisan Nasional” dan “kalau tidak bersefahaman antara suami isteri jika salah seorang Pas yang satu Barisan Nasional nescaya hukumnya tertalaklah antara suami isteri dan jika bersetubuh juga hukumnya zina, kalau dapat anak hukumnya anak zina.”

Himpunan Kenyataan-Kenyataan Nik Aziz

1. "Kita bersyukur dengan pendirian DAP sekarang, kerana mereka sudah berubah sikap dan sanggup bekerjasama dengan PAS, asalkan tidak mendirikan negara Islam" - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Berita Harian 12 Mei 1999.

2. "Bukan sahaja dalam menifesto, dalam perlembagaan PAS sendiri memang tidak mengandungi satu perkataan pun untuk menubuhkan sebuah negara Islam, dia (DAP) boleh tengok sendiri dan baca perlembagaan itu." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 4 Ogos 2001.

3. "Terdapat unsur kafir dalam UMNO kerana parti itu menolak Islam dalam pentadbiran negara, UMNO juga ada ciri kafir" - Ceramah Nik Aziz Nik Mat di Padang Tembak, Pengkalan Chepa, 3 Julai 1999.

4. "Jika melawan UMNO tiba-tiba meninggal dunia, maka kita dikira mati syahid." - Kuliah Nik Aziz Nik Mat di Masjid Kg Pulau Melaka.

5. "Allah sendiri gunakan perkataan memaki, mencemuh atau mencarut, jadi manusia sendiri berpeluang menggunakan maki hamun, tapi terserahlah kepada manusia di mana tempatnya." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 28 April 1999.

6. "Siapa yang nak tolong kerajaan Islam, kami sebagai pemimpin Islam mesti terima sama ada DAP, MCA, dan MIC. Kalau nak tolong mengapa kita tolak. Jika DAP ikhlas nak tolong PAS, saya terima. Usahkan DAP, syaitan pun boleh saya terima." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 24 Januari 1999.

7. "Orang-orang Islam yang berkongsi dengan orang-orang kafir untuk memerintah negara, menjadi kafir atau haram" - Hukum Dewan Ulama PAS Kelantan, Ogos 1963.

8. "Islam tidak melarang umatnya mengeluarkan perkataan mencarut dan mencaci seseorang jika kena pada tempat dan masanya, kerana ia sudah menjadi salah satu naluri." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Berita Harian, 29 April 1999.

9. "Kelantan menggunakan hasil cukai arak, lesen anjing dan sebagainya bagi menampung kos membuat jalan dan lain-lain projek pembagunan. Arak itu sendiri boleh diminum oleh bukan Islam, jadi bila minum oleh mereka, maka untuk menjaga keselamatan, kerajaan mengambil duit dari mana?" - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 26 November 1994.

10. "Bagi penjualan arak, ia hanya dibenar jual oleh orang bukan Islam kepada golongan itu sahaja, kerana jika ia diharamkan sudah tentu menyulitkan orang bukan Islam untuk menikmatinya." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 19 November 1992.

11. "PAS Sedia gugur slogan negara Islam, jadi untuk mencari perdamaian itu, setakat mana yang boleh kita hendak kepada Islam, tapi kalau nampak menyusahkan tak apa..." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Berita Harian, 25 Jun 1999.

12. "Menentang PAS adalah Haram mengikut al-Quran." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Berita Minggu, 24 April 1994.

13. "Tidak ada orang yang berhak menjaga dunia ini, kecuali orang yang belajar ilmu agama Islam." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Berita Harian, 17 April 1995.

14. "Tiada sesiapa di muka bumi ini yang tahu menjaga dunia termasuk menguruskan soal budaya, ekonomi serta harta benda, melainkan ulama." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 6 November 1999.

15. "Saya di antara orang yang cukup kuat menyokong untuk meluaskan keahlian PAS ini kepada orang bukan Islam." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Kota Bharu, 1999.

16. "PAS boleh terima pemimpin DAP jadi Perdana Menteri, tidak ada apa, asalkan dia terima syarat yang ditetapkan oleh Barisan Alternatif." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 6 November 1999.

17. "Para imam hendaklah faham bahawa ada anak-anak mukim tidak mahu menuruti imam yang beraqidah politik suku, agama suku, kerana boleh menyebabkan sembahyang tidak sah." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Harakah, 4 Mac 2001.

18. "Tafsiran negara Islam yang dikehendaki oleh PAS sebenarnya sudah terkandung dalam Manifesto Barisan Alternatif (BA) yang dikemukakan pada pilihanraya yang ke-10 itu." - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Harakah 1-15 Ogos 2001.

19. "Ini penting kerana kita juga mahukan sokongan dan undi bukan Islam dalam usaha memenangi pilihanraya umum akan datang" - Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Ucapan di Muktamar Dewan Pemuda PAS ke-31, Petaling Jaya, 24 Mei 2004.

20. "Negara kita Malaysia belum merdeka lagi kerana perlembagaannya masih perlembagaan kafir."- Khutbah Nik Aziz Nik Mat di Masjid Pengadang Baru, Marang, Oktober 2001.

21. “Jika ada parti lain yang menentang kepimpinan PAS yang menjalankan pemerintahan cara Islam, ia adalah haram.” – Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Harakah, 23 April 1994.

22. “Memang ada lagi persefahaman antara PAS dengan Malaikat, sebab itulah APU (Angkatan Perpaduan Ummah) memerintah lagi (di Kelantan)”. –Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 27 April 1995.

23. “Kerajaan PAS Kelantan akan mengkaji kemungkinan melarang wanita bekerja. Tidak adil membiarkan wanita, kerana lelaki dari segi fitrahnya mempunyai tanggungjawab mencari nafkah bagi menanggung kehidupan keluarga.” – Nik Aziz Nik Mat, 16 Mac 1999 di Kota Baharu.

24. “Ya Allah, aku mohon butakan mata pengundi-pengundi hantu supaya mereka tidak Nampak simbol lain kecuali simbol PAS. “ – Doa Nik Aziz Nik Mat pada 27 Mei 1999 diaminkan oleh kira-kira 3000 penyokong beliau dalam satu majlis makan malam dan cerah PAS di Sungai Bakut, Nibong Tebal.

25. “UMNO tetap parti sekular kerana asas perlembagaanya tidak merujuk al-Quran dan Hadis.” – Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Harakah, 22 Februari 1999.

26. ‘‘Tiada sebab langsung orang Islam tolak Islam. Islam yang dibawa oleh UMNO ini Islam kacukan, Islam plastik. Macam duit palsu, ubat palsu, makanan palsu. Ini Islam palsu yang dibawa UMNO. Islam ini tidak boleh bawa ke akhirat, tidak boleh bawa ke syurga, dia boleh bawa dekat pintu kubur. Bertengkar atas muka tak habis-habis dengan Melayu sendiri boleh bertengkar.’’ – Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Rakaman Audio di Sidang Akhbar di Pulau Pinang pada 17 Ogos 2009.

27. “Jika Nabi Muhammad boleh menandatangani perjanjian dengan musuh tradisi Islam, iaitu kaum Yahudi, sebaik tiba di Madinah, PAS juga sanggup bekerjasama dengan DAP.” – Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Berita Harian, 12 Mei 1999

28. "Percaya-ae (kepercayaan) manusiyo (manusia) kepada kiamat menyebabkan seganah-ganah (seganas-ganas) manusia akan tok (tak) jadi ganah. Kerana dia yakin walau bagaimana ganahnya aku dan bagaimana pangkat... tingginya pangkat aku, tapi apalah nasib aku apabila aku berdepae (berdepan) dengan padang mahsyar. Di padang mahsyar kelak ada lagi yang lebih gagah daripada aku namanya Allah Subhanahuwataala. Ada lagi yang lebih jabaruut, lebih samseng daripada aku iaitu Allah Subhanahuwataala. Ada lagi yang lebih angkuh daripada aku iaitu Allah Subhanahuwataala. Dan nama Allah Subhanahuwataala satu daripada namanya al-Mutakabbir, al-Jabbarul Mutakabbir. ( Al-Jabbar maknanya gagah kuasa ataupun kita panggil samseng. Al-Mutakabbir sombong, angkuh.) Akulah oghaenya (orangnya) sombong, tok denga (dengar) kato (kata) orang lain. Itu satu daripada sifat Allah Taala. Samseng pun dok (ada) di aku, hanelan (handalan) pun dok di aku, somong (sombong) pun di aku. Kalu (kalau) samseng, aku lebih samseng. Kalu mu jahat, aku lebih jahat, kalu mu somong (sombong) aku lebih somong. Percayaan kito manusiyo kepada akidah nilah, akidah akhirat kito panggil menyebabkan orang Melayu yang sokong Pas ni tidak jahat...'' – Rakaman Ucapan Nik Aziz Nik Mat berhubung isu Allah Samseng, Utusan Malaysia, 31 Julai 2002.

29. “Islam bawah UMNO tidak ke mana dan tidak boleh bawa seseorang itu ke syurga. Berdasar perkara itu, saya percaya penduduk di kawasan Permatang Pasir akan memilih calon Pas sebagai wakil rakyat mereka,” – Ucapan Nik Aziz Nik Mat kepada pemberita di Institut Kemahiran Belia Negara (IKBN) pada 17 Ogos 2009 selepas proses penamaan calon bagi pilihan raya kecil Permatang Pasir.

30. "DAP kalau hina Islam pasal dia bukan Islam. Yang orang Islam tolak Islam itu lebih menghina Islam," – Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Utusan Malaysia, 12 Ogos 2009.

 
HUKUM MENGIKUT RASA

1. PAS tidak konsisten, hukumnya berubah-ubah mengikut kepentingan PAS sendiri. Pada tahun 1963 Dewan Ulama PAS Kelantan telah memutuskan hukuman bahawa orang Islam yang bekerjasama dengan orang kafir memerintah negara menjadi kafir atau haram. Tiba-tiba pada bulan April 1999, PAS bekerjasama dengan Parti DAP, sedangkan parti itu menolak pembentukan negara Islam (Utusan Malaysia 22 April 1999). Nik Aziz bersyukur kerana DAP menerima PAS walaupun menolak negara Islam (Berita Harian 12 Mei 1999).

2. Ketua Dewan Ulamak PAS Terengganu semasa berucap di Kampung Gong Duek, Besut, Terengganu pada 1 April 1981 antara lain berkata, "orang munafik ialah orang yang mengambil orang kafir buat kawan baik … siapa adik kakak, ambil orang kafir buat kawan baik". (Disambut beramai-ramai "UMNO")…Ha…UMNO… Apa hukum orang ni?…..(Pendengar jawab "Munafiq") dan disambung dengan "Munafiq".

3. Pada 24 Januari 1999, Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat berkata di Kampung Pulau Melaka, PAS sedia bekerjasama dengan mana-mana parti polilik, termasuk DAP dalam pilihanraya umum akan datang, malah katanya dengan syaitan sekalipun beliau terima.
 
PERPECAHAN UMMAH

1. Mendirikan pusat sembahyang Jumaat berasingan di dalam kariah yang sama (2 Jumaat sekampung), kerana PAS mengeluarkan fatwa bahawa sembahyang berimamkan orang UMNO tidak sah. Perbuatan ini menimbulkan perpecahan di kalangan umat Islam, memutuskan silaturrahim dan putus hubungan karabat atau adik-beradik. Tegasnya PAS telah meragukan ibadat sembahyang bagi ahli PAS sendiri.
 
MEROSAKKAN AMAL IBADAT

1. Orang-orang PAS yang belum dapat mendirikan pusat Jumaat sendiri, mengambil tindakan sembahyang jemaah berasingan di dalam sebuah masjid seperti Di Gong Pasir, Besut dan Alor Limbat, Marang, Terengganu. Di dalam satu kariah, didirikan dua Jumaat, satu di masjid kariah dan satu lagi di Markas PAS yang dijadikan masjid. Jika tiada markas PAS di sesuatu kariah, ahli PAS di kariah itu akan berjumaat di kariah lain dimana terdapat markas PAS atau masjid yang dikuasai oleh orang PAS.

MENENTANG PERLAKSANAAN PROGRAM ISLAM

1. Program-program Islam bagi melaksanakan Institusi Islam dicemuh oleh PAS, seperti penubuhan Bank Islam, Universiti Islam dan Institusi Islam yang yang lain. Ini dilakukan untuk tidak menampakkan imej Islam pada UMNO dan kerajaan. Mereka menentang perlaksanaan program Islam. Anehnya antaranya pemimpin PAS itu, ada yang merayu supaya anaknya dapat memasuki Universiti Islam dan universiti-universiti lain.

2. Pesuruhjaya PAS Terengganu, Haji Hadi Awang mensifatkan penubuhan Bank Islam dan pajak gadai Islam yang sedang diusahakan oleh kerajaan tidak memberi apa-apa ertipun kepada umat Islam di negara ini.

"Perkara ini hanya sebagai kulit yang berlambangkan Islam sedangkan pemerintahan negara tidak dijalankan mengikut cara Islam". (Harakah - 26 Januari 1983).
 
AMANAT HADI MEMBAWA KESESATAN

1. Di dalam Fatwa Haji Hadi pada 7 April 1981 (ada rakaman kaset) dinyatakan bahawa sesiapa dikalangan pengikut PAS yang mati kerana melawan UMNO adalah mati syahid, mati Islam, kerana UMNO mempertahankan perlembagaan Malaysia yang dikatakan sebagai peraturan kafir dan perlembagaan penjajah. Pada hal PAS juga menggunakan Perlembagaan yang sama (Undang-undang Tubuh PAS Fasal 6 (II). PAS juga mempertahankan Perlembagaan Malaysia dalam manifesto Barisan Alternatif (1999).

PENYELEWENGAN ZAKAT

1. PAS melawan pihak berkuasa di dalam urusan kutipan zakat dan mengutip zakat di kalangan ahli-ahli dan penyokongnya bagi kepentingan parti itu. PAS juga mengeluarkan fatwa bahawa membayar zakat kepada PAS sah, kerana PAS berjuang Fi Sabilillah. Kutipan itu dibuat tanpa peraturan dan rekod yang kemas. Hak-hak asnaf yang lain tidak dipedulikan.

DERMA JIHAD

1. PAS banyak mengutip derma di setiap ceramah-ceramah yang diadakan, tetapi pengurusannya tidak telus. Amanah tidak terpelihara. Ia bukan sahaja salah dari segi undang-undang, tetapi lebih salah dari segi syariat. Amanat Hadi menyebut "Derma kita adalah Jihad".


PULAU MEMULAU

1. Pemulauan sembahyang jenazah, kenduri dan lain-lain lagi yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang PAS terhadap orang-orang UMNO, tanpa menghiraukah hukum-hukum kejiranan dan persaudaraan Islam. Berlakunya perceraian suami isteri kerana berlainan parti dan kubur juga berasingan (di Gong Medang, Tembila, Besut dan di Kampung Cik Long, Setiu).

PEMBOHONGAN PAS


1. PAS mendakwa hendak menegakkan negara Islam. Sebenarnya PAS berbohong kerana dalam Perlembagaan PAS tidak menyebut penubuhan negara Islam Cuma cakap-cakap dalam kempen PAS sahaja.


BERGADUH SURUHAN ALLAH

1. Sebenarnya perjuangan PAS mengharuskan pergaduhan. Haji Abd Hadi Awang selaku Timbalan Presiden PAS telah menyalahtafsirkan ayat 251, surah al-Baqarah dengan kata:

"Kalau Tidak menjadikan manusia ini bergaduh nescaya akan rosaklah muka bumi ini ". Ucapan ini dibuat beliau di Kampung Bukit Kulim, Marang, Terengganu pada 24 September 1980 (Ada rakaman kaset).

MEMPERSENDAKAN HUKUM HUDUD ALLAH

1. PAS telah mempersednakan hudud Allah. Buktinya setelah Hadi Awang menjadi Menteri Besar Terengganu, beliau berkata "Perlaksanaan hukum hudud melalui proses panjang". Apakah ertinya proses panjang sedangkan hudud PAS diluluskan dalam Dewan Undangan Negeri Kelantan pada 3 November 1993, dengan nama Enakmen Kanun Jenayah Syariah II 1993. Mengapakah tidak memilih jalan pendek dengan menggunakan hudud PAS Kelantan, sedangkan larangan terhadap qariah menyertai tilawah mengikut keputusan Kelantan?

Haji Hadi juga berkata :" Hudud adalah satu aspek daripada 0.001% daripada hukum Islam". Ini bermakna apabila memerintah sendiri hudud yang dibesarkan selama ini diperkecilkan sehingga 1/10,000. (Utusan Malaysia 7 Mac 2000).

Apa yang menghairankan penggubalan Hudud Kelantan dahulu di pengerusikan oleh Haji Hadi sendiri.

PAS HINA WANITA


1. PAS menghina kedudukan wanita dengan mendolak dalihkan hukum terhadap mereka serta tidak menggalakkan mereka bekerja. Mereka tidak dibenarkan menjadi calon tetapi membenarkan pengundi PAS mengundi calon wanita daripada parti lain dalam gabungan Barisan Alternatif. Suara wanita adalah aurat apabila membaca Al-Quran, sebaliknya suara-suara Muslimat PAS dibenarkan berkempen memaki dan mencaci dan bersuara di Dewan Negara. Lebih tidak berakhlak lagi Nik Aziz menyamakan tilawah Al-Quran dengan nyanyian.

"Kerajaan PAS Kelantan akan mengkaji kemungkinan melarang wanita bekerja. Tidak adil membiarkan wanita kerana lelaki dari segi fitrahnya mempunyai tanggungjawab mencari nafkah bagi menanggung kehidupan keluarga," kata Nik Aziz pada 16 Mac 1999 di Kota Bharu.

Pada 20 Julai 1999 Nik Aziz berkata, cadangan kerajaan negeri memberi pekerjaan kepada wanita "kurang rupawan" kerana wanita rupawan biasanya mempunyai suami kaya. Jika wanita rupawan tidak bekerja ia tidak menimbulkan sebarang masalah kepada mereka.

The King's Command

Posted by Intellectual Thought Friday 15 July 2011 07:06

1

Read and understand. He is our king. The one we must trust the most and obey his commands. I was shocked that one of my friend said that the King gave permission for Bersih rally. Well he did NOT. He gave full responsibilities to our PM, Najib Razak because he TRUSTED Najib more :)

The King's Command in Malay


The King's Command in English


I believe Bernama is trusted. And I believe if you read on pro-oppositions blog, they mostly don't publish the whole sentence. You'll get confused reading the incomplete sentence. The true meaning of the commands can't get through your mind.


How can our citizens nowadays criticize the king casually? It's nothing like the ancient people where they really put the king at a really high position in their hearts. What has become to our Malaysians???

The Truth That Cannot Be Covered

Posted by Intellectual Thought 00:34

0

We can find a lot of videos regarding the 9th July rally on the YouTube. I know all the oppositions' videos are on the list among the high views. I know most of the people will find videos to assume that police is the one who started the war, the one who disrupt the 'peace' rally (which is illegal), the one to be blame on almost anything! Let us view the other side's, shall we? Happy Watching :)








If you are willing to seek for the truth, the truth will come to you. I must say, my bro said this to me,

"If you want something that is so big, the sacrifices that you'll have to go through will be as equal in size".

I'm prepared for the sacrifices because the thing that I want is very big, it is the peace of Malaysia. I promised to repay Malaysia for the peace I've been through until this day.

More photos: Lie Lady & The Real Dead Person

BERSIH: The Difference Malaysia & Melbourne

Posted by Intellectual Thought Tuesday 12 July 2011 04:16

0

It looks like I really have to state this AGAIN & AGAIN..People should think wise. I’ve said this a lot of times. My post before related to this: You Are Under Arrest!

Where ever you want to hold an event, you must ask the owner of the place rite? This means like you need to have a permission to do an event at any place which is not yours. Same situation happened here in Malaysia.

An example of permit.
Do this, no tees will be banned. Or you want the polices to look sucks in front of the citizens?

BERSIH 2.0 rally never do ask for a PERMIT. They confused us with facts that they are legal organisations, PM has okayed to do it in the stadium lah etc..BUT, pemit is still the thing that you need to ask before holding anything at anywhere. Simple question, If you own a big lawn in front of your house then suddenly people out-of-no-where; never even say a word to you holding a BBQ gathering there. What would you do? I think you’d do more ‘violent’ than what the police did during the BERSIH 2.0 rally. Come on..tear gas and handcuffs? That is for me, such a pussy actions.

The fact is, the BERSIH 2.0 rally being held at foreign countries; let us take Melbourne, Australia as it is a developed known-wide country has asked for a permit. Do you think that they can assemble like all they want at foreign countries? NO. The police there have been firm. They’ll ask about these things:

  1. Where to do it? With condition; not at residential areas and school.
  2. Under what occasion?
  3. How much people will be attending?
  4. Who will be attending?
  5. How will you do it? With condition; not to disrupt businesses and traffic.
  6. What to say? What to be written on the banners? EXACT time and date? etc..

So..do you think, without asking the permit, the police would know how to arrange things? With the opposition coalition boasted that up to 300,000 people will be attending? With counter-rally PERKASA and UMNO Youth? So whose fault that all the roads need to be closed? WITH NO SOLID EXPLANATION WHERE TO DO IT, tell me..How can we arrange this illegal event? This is why PERMIT IS IMPORTANT.

"If you own a big lawn in front of your house then suddenly people out-of-no-where; never even say a word to you holding a BBQ gathering there. What would you do? I think you’d do more ‘violent’ than what the police did during the BERSIH 2.0 rally."

P/S: People ask nicely, we’ll do it nicely. But if people don’t ask, we’ll do it according to the law. ILLEGAL RALLY!

See why police may act under the law without government’s permission and court orders HERE.

See this article in Malay HERE.

POLICE Have Their Rights

Posted by Intellectual Thought Monday 11 July 2011 02:42

0



First of all, we have to admit whether we like it or not, POLICE IS DAMN IMPORTANT IN OUR LIFE. To maintain safety in this beloved country.

Regarding to BERSIH, here’s a quote to lighten up the police who works real hard for the peace of the country;

"The peace we have currently is not for free, we have to work hard in order to sustain it."

THANK YOU to all the police nationwide.

Folks, now it is time to talk about the ‘real’ interpretation of the right to assemble under the Article (10) of the Federal Constitution (FC).

What the opposition, left-wing activists and the twisted tongue lawyers always told us, the right to assemble under the FC and United Nation's Declaration on Human Rights (PBB) is a blank cheque (full rights) that the police have NO SPACE AT ALL to be empowered by law.

Typical..Very typical. They actually hid the true interpretation of the FC and never once try to admit that our law is a document that balances and and provide EXCEPTION TO EVERY RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES given to anyone and any groups for various reasons. One of the reason; to maintain peace and harmony.


The right to assemble in Article 10 clause 1(b) was not mentioned at full privileges BUT with the conditions; peace and without arms. So, if an assembly is being seen as a threat to peace and/or armed then the right to assemble IS DENIED.

Move on at clause 2, which explained further that peace; or; security of the federation and public order determine the right to assemble which requires a permit.

So.. Who determines whether a particular assembly is peacebly and without arms and permit can be issued? Is is the organisers of BERSIH 2.0, Datuk Ambiga, Mat Sabu, the organising Committee or 400 Bar Council members? Is it the twisted Professor of Law from UIA, Prof Aziz Bari?

Nope.. It is the police and only to the police is empowered to determine and issue the permit under Section 27 of the Police Act 1967.


 

Police is in the business of maintaining law and order and it is with them that power and ability to determine if any assembly will be peaceful. They have the intelligence information and records of past assembly.

Seldom opposition sympathisers and supporters claim police as bias for the ruling party or pro Government NGOs.

Whether they admit it or not, the reality is the ruling party and pro-Government NGOs are more cooperative, respectable and do not resist the police. They are more LAW ABIDING than oppositions and left wing.

Police are human too. Every action only invite an equal and opposite reaction.

If it is true that police to be uncompromising in implementing the law, the Parliament would be empty of opposition and Pakatan Rakyat states have empty MB's office.

The opposition and NGOs seldom claimed that their rights to assemble was being denied and it is against the United Nation's Declaration on Human Rights. Is it really so?

Here’s an important clause in the Declaration that does not give a blank cheque to such freedom.


Article 29(2) stipulated that individuals are subject to certain limitation under specific law. The restriction is to ensure fair demand on morality, public order, and general safety of a democratic community.

If you are really agree with Bersih, try to think it over if you want to keep the peace we are having currently, the fact that police had caught foreign parties linked to Communist and CIA together with Parti Sosialis Malaysia activists will make no one answers that the assembly will going peaceably.

Police too, have every excuse to apply ISA if Ambiga and Mat Sabu remains stubborn and defiant of police. After all, ISA is within the power of police and not politician Ministers.

*FACTS:
  • Detention Order under ISA should be authorised by Minister after 60 days. But the first 60 days i.e. for investigation, is authorised by police officers only without the need of court orders or the Minister (Section 73)
  • Regulating of Demonstrations under Police Act. Power to issue permit is by OCPD.

Police also received the court orders to seize 91 individuals that is being listed as the members that can't show off their faces at the city center or hot spots during the 9th of July. Disobey the police means disrespect to the law.

Tired right listen to the reality than the fraud? To accuse is an easy thing that will make a lot of humans trusting it but to show the facts is really hard because not much want to waste their time hearing and reading the facts or searching over it. They just want that thing to be in front of them and all they do is look the headlines and make quick, hasty assumptions. What to do, gossips spread faster than facts.

Bersih 2.0 really is a widespread fraud. Not only using the law of our lands but the people who didn’t seek for the real meaning of democracy. What a grieve..


You should think this way, Ambiga should have known BETTER.

BERSIH 2.0: Was It Worth Wrecking The Weekend?

Posted by Intellectual Thought Sunday 10 July 2011 11:07

0

Here, let us put aside the political influences away from our mind. Because, protesting BERSIH 2.0 rally doesn't mean we support the government. NO. We must think widely in all aspects. But because BERSIH 2.0 is more to political movement, everything had become A MESSED. People started not to think about the real issue being played by BERSIH 2.0. The democracy, the federal constitution that is being stirred and lied upon.
Here, I want to share what Zainul Arifin had to say;

I BELIEVE it is quite amazing that the organisers of the rally that resulted in the lockdown of Kuala Lumpur and the ensuing chaos would declare Bersih 2.0 to
be a success.



The rally paralysed the city, it caused numerous inconveniences, attracted a counter-rally that could have been explosive, resulted in perhaps millions of ringgit in losses, as well as money unnecessarily spent on security. We may soon see if there were injuries as a result.

A success? Is it not unlike kids gleefully sharing notes of their pranks, in spite of the inconvenience they might have caused? Many have suggested that the authorities could have done us all a favour by allowing them to walk.


But the authorities did not.
Whether one agreed with the decision or not, defying it meant breaking the law.

Thus, the decision to pursue the rallies was clearly a sign of arrogance and disrespect for the law and law enforcers. It is often said, the law may be an ass, but unless changed, it remains the law.


Bersih 2.0 was attracting counter-rallies that suggested security would be an issue. The police must react in anticipation of trouble, and not after the fact.

If Bersih 2.0 chairman S. Ambiga claimed that it was her constitutional right to assemble, then it must also be that of Umno Youth leader Khairy Jamaluddin and Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali, too. Now, the three would have been a volatile mix. Should the police not have acted? Selfishness can never be a virtue because it makes a person forget that he is among others. It makes a person believe that the world is required to revolve around him?
Obviously, it was wishful thinking, or an attempt to delude the public into thinking that the rallies yesterday were going to be peaceful.

When we have tens of thousands of people with energy pent up in the past few days, spurred on by their unbridled mob swagger, they would be anything but peaceful.


Some of the marchers, rabble rousers that they were, appeared to be spoiling for a fight.
How could anyone guarantee things to be peaceful when Bersih 2.0 was inviting all comers to join? This is like claiming one can control a boat going down the rapids — one could probably survive it, but it would not be the smoothest, or the safest, of rides.

Yesterday ’s rallies were also significant for another reason. They happened despite repeated pleas from the king, sultans and the majority of the citizens. It suggested arrogance. No one else mattered.


Neither king nor kin could change their minds, it seemed.


If the organisers were complaining that the government is not listening, they were also guilty of drowning themselves in their own rhetoric and righteousness.


Scores of tear gas canisters later, what have we achieved? What is the sum total of all that was gained or lost? If yesterday was a success, I dread to think how failure would look like.


All suggestions that Bersih 2.0 was apolitical were generally dismissed by the make-up of its committee and yesterday, it was smashed to smithereens by the antics of the crowd who wore their political affiliation proudly on their sleeves.
Political affiliation is not wrong, but please don’t try to pass off imitations as masterpieces.

“What have we gained?” is a good question to be asked by each of the rally organisers.


Maybe it was a pressure release valve that allowed us to ease the tension in the system, so that we be less tense and combative. If that was so, then it was good.


Maybe, it was indeed fuel to the fire, and there were those whose modus operandi was to create chaos. Firebrand speakers who easily charm audiences with entertainment — enter the showman and exit substance? There is a strong sense being bandied about that one must be dense or politically naïve or a government apologist for not supporting Bersih. This is clearly political posturing at its most annoying.


Nevertheless, the same could be said of those supporting Bersih 2.0 — that they are politically naïve or an apologist for the opposition or dense, too.


No one else knows the value of democracy? No one else cares about what happens in the country? This is surely an elitist we-know-what-is-good-for-you attitude.


Just shut up, endure the discomfort and we will make things better.


I have always argued that the right to assemble does not mean making a mess of other people’s lives. And taking to the streets is a great way to inconvenience people.


If the idea of the rallies was to test the will of the police, they have done so. If the idea was to embarrass the government, they may have succeeded. If the idea was to mess with our weekend, they have also succeeded beyond belief.


I understand political dissent is a fundamental right, but I always believe that our rights should take a back seat if they impinge upon others.


There are many who said that they should have been allowed to march peacefully, and then be over with it. This is if we want to be a developed democracy, they said. But what if the authorities had suspected things could go awry? Undoubtedly, the organisers of Bersih 2.0, purportedly calling for free and fair elections, were in fact setting the marker for the next general election.


It was surely the start of the opposition coalition’s campaign for the 13th general election. Don’t we know it?


No one else knows the value of democracy? No one else cares about what happens in the country? This is surely an elitist we-know-what-is-good-for-you attitude.


Why BERSIH Remains Unlawful

Posted by Intellectual Thought 02:43

0


SAID THE GOVERNMENT


  • The organisation has been declared unlawful by the home minister.
  • Allowed the gathering to be held at a stadium  to ease disruptions to daily life and for public safety.
  • It can’t be held at the Merdeka Stadium as the rally would only tarnish the historical site where independence for Malaysia was declared.
  • The Merdeka Stadium should only be used for official functions.  It is the prerogative of the owners.
  • The stadium WOULD NOT BE ABLE to accommodate the 300,000 people.
  • It was the CABINET’S DECISSION that the rally should not be held at any stadium in the capital city.
  • The government has given leeway for the gathering to go on, but they should also ABIDE THE LAWS and be reasonable.

SAID THE Inspector-General Polic (IGP)


  • The rally organisers would have to apply under different legal organisations or individuals.
  • The organisers need to apply for a PERMIT from the district police chief. This is after they are GRANTED PERMISSION by the chosen stadium’s management.
  • Any action that represents BERSIH, including wearing its T-shirts, will be dealt with in accordance with the law.
  • Police had advised Ambiga to choose a stadium outside the city and FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES when applying for a permit.
  • I have suggested the Melawati Stadium (offered by the Selangor menteri besar himself) or choose any other stadium in this country that is OUTSIDE KUALA LUMPUR
  • Merdeka Stadium, is too close to the city centre and can create MASSIVE TRAFFIC JAMS and DISRUPT BUSINESSES
  • They can still convey their message if it is done in other stadiums outside the city
  • In our meeting with Ambiga, she seemed adamant about her choice and was NOT WILLING to change her mind.

SAID THE REGISTRAR of SOCIETIES (RoS)


  • They can’t use any organisation that is registered with the RoS to hold the rally, since legal societies are NOT ALLOWED to associate in any way with the illegal activieties like BERSIH.
  • It is stipulated under the Societies Act 1966 that all registered societies cannot get involved in any activities that will jeopardise this country’s security.
  • Several well-known organisations named as supporters of the coalition:
    Amnesty International (Malaysia), All Women’s Action Society, Jemaah Islah Malaysia, Sisters in Islam, Solidariti Mahasiswa Malaysia, Suara Rakyat Malaysia and Women’s Aid Organisation.

    What are they doing now? Why are they associating with an unlawful organisation that plans to disrupt the country’s peace?


SAID THE ELECTION COMMISSION (SPR)


  • Those who were involved in 2007 BERSIH rally ended up being candidates for the opposition in the 2008 election.
  • They have been saying that they do not answer to any political parties but if you look at their demands to us, it mirrors those of the opposition.
  • The impression that BERSIH is giving that there is no room for discussion with us when ACTUALLY OUR DOOR IS ALWAYS OPEN.
  • The organisers of BERSIH seemed rushed and pressured to hold a gathering despite the CORRECTIVE measures the EC had put in place and was working on.

SAY INTELLECTUAL THOUGHT

  • Why protesting now? Why not right after the GE 12 if you think the result of opposition winning over 5 states is not fair and clean? Don’t you think it’s too late or maybe you think it’s the best protesting now because GE 13 is around the corner?
  • What argument did the king proffer that was not already expressed by PM Najib Razak, Deputy PM Muhyiddin Yassin and IGP Ismail Omar?
  • The King offered the same advice; “Maintenance of public order and security”.
  • BERSIH’s aim was to hand over a memorandum to the king at the end of their march. If that was their ONLY INTENTION, why didn’t Ambiga hand over the memorandum to the King when she met him?
  • Why using the Federal Constitution for the freedom of speech but didn’t highlight that Parliament may by law impose if it is being seen as a threat to the national security?
  • Why accept political parties into the coalition? Why don’t you just fight with NGOs?

Thus, let make this thing clear, it is unreasonable to do demonstration on the street over something that can be discussed and because of the UNCLEAR 8 demands with HIDDEN POLITICAL AGENDA that government and a lot of concerned citizens SAY NO TO BERSIH. I agree that it will remain unlawful.