Setiap Artikel Malaysiawaves ke Email Anda.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Dipersilakan untuk Like Facebook Page T. Besi

Search Malaysiawaves

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Zul Nordin an Extremist? What About Muslims in Article 11 Movement?

We have to know who the real extremists are. It may not be the people we think they are.


Haris Ibrahim argues that Zulkifli Nordin is an extremist. It has something to do with Zul Nordin barging into the failed open forum recently organized by Bar Council. My question to Haris is, what about the muslims who are members and supporters of the Article 11 movement?


Why is this Question Valid?


Why not? Isn’t Article 11 ideology states the need for the Article 11 of the Constitution to be interpreted in a liberal way? As such, the ramification of such ideology results in what is explained by the then CAJ Abdul Hamid in Kamariah bte Ali v Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan, Malaysia. He opined that in allowing Article 11 to be construed so liberally would entail making invalid entire bodies of Islamic law; e.g. Zakat laws, marriage laws, et cetera.

In other words, if the Article 11 people have their way, Islam in Malaysia will be utterly destroyed. I strongly believe that advocates of the destruction of Islam are the true extremist in Malaysia.


Bar Council a Member of Article 11 Movement


A reference to the Article 11 website shows that the Bar Council is a member of Article 11 movement. In other words, the Bar Council is a member of an organization committed towards the destruction of Islam in Malaysia.

So, when the Bar Council organizes a meeting or forum discussing Islam, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the forum will produce significant anti Islam outcome.

Let me repeat this point. If BAR Council is sincere in solving real problems with regards to inconsistencies between Civil and Shariah laws in this country (which I admit exists), why couldn’t the Bar Council organize a joint meeting or conference with Islamic NGO across the country and come up with a joint declaration or proposal? Is that too difficult to do?

In fact, as reported in Harakahdaily, the chairman of FORKAD( Movement against Apostasy), Mr Ridzuan Mohd Nor, has agreed to have any sort of discussion towards solving standing problems in the society.


Why Bar Council Always Side With Anti Islam Elements?


There are so many questions with regards to the forum:

  1. Why only invite converts that has problems in their conversion to the forum? Why didn’t Bar Council invite Jeanne Abdullah or Toh Puan Dr Aishah Ong whom ahd converted without hitch
  2. What is the rate of problematic conversion as compared to non problematic ones? I know the Bar Council are lawyers so they are not very good with mathematics but such data is important in knowing if the problem is a serious ones or not.
  3. In the case of Subashi, why only highlight the plight of Subashi, what about the rights of the husband. As asked by the President of the Shariah Lawyer Association of Malaysia, Mr Zainul Rijal:

“Dalam kes forum ‘Memeluk Islam’ Sabtu lalu, mengapa hanya menjejak semula kes R. Subashini dan S. Shamala. Soalnya, bagaimana dengan hak bekas suami Subashini, Saravanan @ Mohd. Shafi Saravanan Abdullah yang memeluk Islam? Mengapa haknya sebagai orang Islam tidak dibangkitkan?”

  1. Why Bar Council is biased towards anti Islam elements when 40% of their members are muslims? Shouldn’t Bar Council, at least, be impartial?
  2. I’ve read reports from a lot of their forums. What is clearly lacking is the existence of empirical data supporting the Bar Council’s case. Most of their battle cry are based upon ideological rantings.
  3. Why hasn’t the lawyer of Siti Fatimah Tan invited to speak at the forum? Isn’t the case relevant to the topic?
  4. Why couldn’t the Bar Council consider the proposals made by various Muslims NGO. For example, Zainol Rijal proposed (in solving the body-snatching problem):

"Sungguhpun saya seorang peguam, namun isu perebutan mayat boleh dielakkan daripada dipanjangkan kepada mahkamah. Untuk menjayakannya, ketua-ketua agama misalnya mufti dan paderi perlulah mengadakan rundingan. Hasil perbincangan boleh dipanjangkan kepada sultan,''

In the last few years, Bar Council’s has been consistently taking Anti Islam stance. They prefer to promote their social reengineering agenda as opposed to trying to find viable solutions to real problems.

That explains why Muslims turned up in numbers resisting the Bar Council forum. It’s like expecting the rain not to wet the ground when it falls.


Zul Nordin Represents the Sentiment of Majority of Muslims


KeAdilan is making a big mistake by subjecting Zul Nordin to disciplinary hearings. From what I’ve heard, he was just entering the hall after hearing that the meeting was cancelled. He wanted to ensure that the meeting was really cancelled. Besides, as a registered member of the Bar Council, he had every right to enter the forum hall.

For my money, if Zul Nordin hadn’t done what he did, KeAdilan would have a harder time during the Permatang Pauh election. Anwar Ibrahim would have easily been painted as a “pro apostasy” candidate.


Most Malaysian are Interested in Stability and Harmony


I believe that most Malaysians will not tolerate anyone who openly declares war on any specific religion. As long as Shariah is applied to Muslims only, I believe we can lead a life in peace and harmony. I think the real extremists in Malaysia are the liberal Muslims. By liberal I mean Muslims that wants Islam to be reinterpreted. And parts of Islam which contradicts western ideology like secularism, feminism etc must be either purged or reinterpreted.


Therefore, if the Shariah is limited to Muslims only, I believe these people with their social reengineering agenda will automatically be irrelevant. Peoplem like them thrive on tensions between us. The right way is to get rid of the tension and ignore the rants of people like these.


Must Reject Social Reengineering Extremists in Our Soceity


Who are these people? Social-Reengineering extremists. That’s who. They hide behind the term “Human Rights”, “freedom of religion” etc. What they are is nothing more than a bunch of people promoting social reengineering ideology aimed at destroying social fabric of society and not to mention religion. Specifically they want to destroy Islam. These are the real extremists that must be rejected.

I believe all race and religion can stand up and reject such move. It will only result in heightening of tension and deepening of resentment between Muslims and Non Muslims.


Tulang Besi

.

54 comments:

nawfal said...

Proud to say here that I was one of the many demonstrators against the Bar Council forum.

Too bad for Haris Ibrahim. He lost again this time. What a sour grape.

Anonymous said...

Cant understand why u guys cant sit & talk. Always blaming others and refuse to look into the parties facing the problem. You dont want to try & see things from both parties. You guys are so blinded that u cant see the truth. Your religion teaches u to be tolerant NEVER violent!

Anonymous said...

Tulang Besi,

This is from the Article 11 Coalition website.

Addressing only the contents of their mission statement (below) with which points do you disagree and what exactly do you find objectionable?

(please stick to the issues and cite specific examples -- not your usual straw men)

Emmar

..........

Mission Statement
Our mission is to ensure a Malaysia that:

* upholds the supremacy of the Federal Constitution;
* protects every person equally, regardless of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender; and
* is firmly established in, and upholds, the rule of law.

Objectives

We aim to promote awareness towards, advocate for, and contribute to achieving a Malaysia where all Malaysians in our daily lives:

1. affirm the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the land;
2. strive to build national unity;
3. affirm the right of every person to full and adequate access to justice;
4. recognise the need for a judiciary that is impartial, independent and an equal arm of the government;
5. recognise that the Federal Constitution embodies an agreement among the various communities;
6. respect the Constitutional guarantees of equal protection for every person in a multi-racial, multi-religious Malaysia;
7. seek to protect fundamental liberties for all;
8. respect the freedom of thought, conscience, belief and religion of every person; and
9. ensure that Malaysia does not become a theocratic state.

nawfal said...

Emmar,

Not many people are as naive as you. You can have the sweetest language and terms, yet kalau dah memang syaitan, it is not so difficult to recognize.

Nostradamus said...

QUE SERA, SERA -(What Will Be, Will Be)(Apa Yang akan Jadi akan Terjadi)
--------------------------------

Meaning of Que Sera, Sera:
(Maksud Que Sera, Sera:)

The expression "What will be,will be" is used to describe the notion that fate will decide the outcome of a course of events, even if action is taken to try to alter it.

(Ungkapan "Apa yang akan jadi akan terjadi digunakan untuk maksud Takdir akan menentukan keputusan kejadian-kejadian seterusnya walaupun tindakan diambil untuk cuba menghalangnya.)


(Lyrics written by Jay Livingston and Ray Evans
for Alfred Hitchcock's 1956 re-make of his 1934 film
"The Man Who Knew Too Much" starring Doris Day and James Stewart.)


When I was just a little girl,
I asked my mother, "What will I be?
Will I be pretty?
Will I be rich?"
Here's what she said to me:

"Que sera, sera,
Whatever will be, will be;
The future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera,
What will be, will be."

When I was just a child in school,
I asked my teacher, "What will I try?
Should I paint pictures"
Should I sing songs?"
This was her wise reply:

"Que sera, sera,
Whatever will be, will be;
The future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera,
What will be, will be."

When I grew up and fell in love.
I asked my sweetheart, "What lies ahead?
Will we have rainbows
Day after day?"
Here's what my sweetheart said:

"Que sera, sera,
Whatever will be, will be;
The future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera,
What will be, will be."

Now I have Children of my own.
They ask their mother, "What will I be?"
Will I be handsome?
Will I be rich?"
I tell them tenderly:

"Que sera, sera,
Whatever will be, will be;
The future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera,
What will be, will be.
Que Sera, Sera!"

http://patek1472.wordpress.com

Terry said...

extremists are those people who cant listen nor talk to people are of in diference believe, and u, tulang besi, are a typical one, ur articles are not worth for me to read in the future.u may live into ur own extremistic world, but, please, don't claime ur self as a true malaysian bloger who is realy respect, undestand and true and not hypercritic to the fairness of the multi ethical malaysia in the future.

nawfal said...

terry, where did you get that definition for extremist?

Anonymous said...

@ nawfal

My question was specific to Tulang Besi's (and perhaps your) points of disagreement with the Article 11 Coalition (for which I hold no brief).

You may call me naive or insinuate that I am syaitan all you like. My skin is thick enough. Still, unlike you, I prefer the intellectual stimulation of sparring with well-thought ideas rather than insults.

Emmar

tyu said...

Tulung Besi,

Suppose you go to work and there is this colleague always bad-mouthing you. And he is having a meeting with another colleague, you don't know whether he will further bad-mouth you, but you suspect he will do so. Would you go kick down his door and demand for apology and prevent the meeting? Wouldn't a better way to resolve the problem is to talk to this guy and sort out the differences or use your actions to prove your critics wrong?

Most people I know could care less about Islam to be classified as "anti-Islam". Respect may be a more appropriate word. But one must realize we can never "demand" respect. Respect must be "earned". I think it is common is Eastern cultures to demand respect. "I graduated from Longkang University and you are not, so you must listen to me". "I am so and so, so you shall not criticize me". Sound familiar?

I think as a defender of Islam, as you and Zul are, you should spread the good name of Islam by setting good examples. If you think the Bar Council has smeared the good name of Islam, hold another forum to reject their points. Only then you can convince people and bring upon more respect to your religion.

Sure, by forbidding the forum you can prevent people saying things you don't want to hear, better yet you can have laws to prevent people criticizing Islam. But as a wise person once said: "you can't legislate love" and certainly in my view, you can't legislate respect, nor can you demand it.

Tulang Besi said...

Dear Emmar,

Did u read the background section of the website?

Because it provides the meaning to all the vague provisions in their objective statement.

From what I read and from my dialouge with Haris Ibrahim, the Article 11 movement is a movement towards eradicating the role and supremacy of the Shariah Law and Shariah courts.

Which is why Haris Ibrahim kept uttering the importance of religous laws not being allowed to be enforced by their liberal interpretation of Article 11 of the Constitution.

As Abdul Hamid CAJ (as he then was) in Kamariah bte Ali v Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan, Malaysia opined that in allowing Article 11 to be construed so liberally would entail making invalid entire bodies of Islamic law; e.g. Zakat laws, marriage laws, et cetera. (In short, all Islamic laws would be rendered null and void.)

So in short, it is a movement towards eradicating Islam.

So, need to read the entire page before u come to your conclusion, Emmar.

Tulang Besi said...

Blogger Terry said...

extremists are those people who cant listen nor talk to people are of in diference believe, and u, tulang besi, are a typical one, ur articles are not worth for me to read in the future

MY REPLY: So, what about people who refuse to listen and talk to those subscribing to religous beliefs and way of lives?

Are they not extremists as well?

Or is it just a one way street? The typical western-biased type of definition where such term is applied only to religous people?

Anonymous said...

Dear Tulang Besi,

Personally I have nothing against Zulkifli Nordin. But I'm saddened by fact that though being a professional he has failed to respect other faiths. If you had watched the videos featuring him you would realize how prejudice he was toward other religions.

Everyone is entitled to defend his religion; however in defending ones, one must not resort to condemning another, which Zul had done. I’m not a fanatic and I would not resort to such condemnation in whatsoever circumstances. But in a country where all of us are dreaming to have a bangsa Malaysia do you think likes Ahmad and Zulkifli would help us achieve such nation? In his speech Zul spoke a lot about Hinduism that only reflects his shallowness and ignorance about the faith. If he really needed information about Hinduism or for that matter even Christianity and Buddhism he should have referred to the right people before making a comment. But he didn’t. Don’t you agree with me what Zul has done is all wrong?

Let me rest my case with the following excerpt from star 31.08.08. This is a statement of a well respected statesman, scientist and philosopher who is a Muslim who has my highest regards.

“As a Muslim in a secular but Hindu-majority India, Dr Abdul Kalam is revered for his efforts in forging unity and tolerance among faiths. He reportedly reads the Quran and the Bhagavad Gita with equal devotion.
When asked what his message would be to Malaysia’s multi-ethnic, multi-religious population, he said: “Based on what I have studied, I believe that all religions have two components. One is theology; the other is spirituality. For theology, every religion has its own unique system, which it protects.
“But spirituality is the common factor for all religions. It is the bridge that connects all religions.”

SO, COME LET US CONNECT OURSELVES THROUGH SPIRITUALITY, MY FELLOW BROTHER!

SURESH

Anonymous said...

Tulang,

It is tiresome to have to ask that you be specific. You refer to 'background', to your 'conversations', yet everything is so vague and you often misrepresent others' positions.

I see nowhere that the Art.11 Coalition wants to eradicate "the role and supremacy of the Shariah Law and Shariah courts" as you put it. They do seem to be constitutionalists which means a constant evaluation between Constitutional and Syariah laws.

Look, in our society we need laws. Very often, we have little say in the formulation of the law (through lack of democratic representation). Those that adhere to conservative religious laws should be flexible and patient enough to not get their panties all bunched up when gray areas between civil laws and Syariah appear.

If we continue with a dual system, I suggest that anyone charged by the State be given the choice of which judicial process his or her case will be submitted -- something like the 'free market' system.

And one more thing. I have listened to Zul Nordin speak on several occasions and find him to be, not a righteous defender of Islam, but a mean-spirited bigot who appeals to the xenophobia of coconut shell-dwelling amphibians.

Emmar

Tulang Besi said...

Suresh says:
Dear Tulang Besi,

Personally I have nothing against Zulkifli Nordin. But I'm saddened by fact that though being a professional he has failed to respect other faiths. If you had watched the videos featuring him you would realize how prejudice he was toward other religions.

MY REPLY: Dear Suresh,

Zul Nordin may have some problems in his beliefs and ideology, but he is still much better than your run of the mills UMNO man.

As for my support for him in this issue, I think it's not just me but a lot of people.

It's not Zul Nordin per say but what he represented in his resistance to the forum. That's what is being supported

Anonymous said...

Ok i m not sure what exactly these ppl in article 11 are up to and wat they hope top acomplish. For all those out there who still dont seem to get it the rule and law of Islam outdates everything else and the law wasnt made by a human being. Literally its Gods law. This is what Muslims are ascribed to believe. Everything that is being argued on is already stated in the Quran and hadiths and is clear. So to those who wish to alter this please understand that u are disrespecting what is written in the Books. Knowing this if one continues to disrespect the teachings then one becomes an enemy and like every single human who was born out of a womb u would stand and defend the very fabric of your teachings from ppl who want to alter it.

They want the federal constitution to rule... fair enough but if it violates with the teachings of islam then it cannot be implemented.. same goes with other religion.. if the federal bill violates the teachings of other religion it cannot take prority.

As for Zul right motive wrong approach and really dumb to open his mouth and call ppl names..there was nothing Islamic about his approach. Islam welcomes an open debate with anyone concerning its fundementals,

i worte to brother Haris.. dont argue just refer to the Quran and hadith if u really want to take down Islam. If its not in there then what is being told is crap and most probably invented... In the process i hope many ppl will realise Islam is simple and everything has already been laid out.. all one needs to do is follow..

And pls dont convert if u dont get wat Islam is..

Tulang Besi said...

emmar says:

"Anonymous said...

Tulang,

It is tiresome to have to ask that you be specific. You refer to 'background', to your 'conversations', yet everything is so vague and you often misrepresent others' positions.

I see nowhere that the Art.11 Coalition wants to eradicate "the role and supremacy of the Shariah Law and Shariah courts" as you put it. They do seem to be constitutionalists which means a constant evaluation between Constitutional and Syariah laws. "

MY REPLY: Actually, it's clear to me that you didn't read the background section of the website.

Information there is important in getting the right understanding of the other sections.

Anonymous said...

although i disagree with you regarding with the "fraksi UMNO" issue, i fully agree and support you on this issue. reminder to everyone here... you can insult the malays, and we don't really care about it. but the moment you insult islam... we, no matter from PKR,PAS or UMNO will unite against you.

Tayadih Maysia said...

salam,

malang ada orang Islam yang bersengkongkol dengan gerakan anti-Islam...


nawfal: kau budak uia?

Anonymous said...

tulang besi,

How about the muslims who don't want to live under sharia law? Not all Muslims want to...

melayu islam said...

This is why there are Malays who will continue to support UMNO and even PKR not Pas. Because we don't want to live under Pas interpretation of religion. Yet some non-Muslims do not understand. They think we support corruption. No we don't. We don't think Pas interpretation of Islam is good for the Malays. For Pas has proved it has done nothing significant for the Kelantan people and soon you will see the same thing for the Kedah people. If the thinking is backward, then it will be hard to move forward.

The Malays need to be liberated from restricted religious interpretation. We hope that the non-Muslims understand this and support us.


Regards,
Brothers in Islam

teohjitkhiam said...

In the case of Subashi, why only highlight the plight of Subashi, what about the rights of the husband. As asked by the President of the Shariah Lawyer Association of Malaysia, Mr Zainul Rijal:

“Dalam kes forum ‘Memeluk Islam’ Sabtu lalu, mengapa hanya menjejak semula kes R. Subashini dan S. Shamala. Soalnya, bagaimana dengan hak bekas suami Subashini, Saravanan @ Mohd. Shafi Saravanan Abdullah yang memeluk Islam? Mengapa haknya sebagai orang Islam tidak dibangkitkan?”

I must disagree with Mr Zainul Rijal's ill-thought statement. The original marriage between husband and wife was carried out under the civil law.

The husband has exercised his right to freely convert to Islam re: freedom of religion under the Constitution; the wife now must be allowed the right to dissolve the marriage through civil law..... Or did we miss the part where the tok kadi solemnized the marriage between Subashini and Saravanan?

Anonymous said...

I have been following Tulang Besi's blog for some time now. What I would like to say here is, there is a lot of mature people here discussing important topics is a mature way.
In so far as this topic is concern I am proud to read some very sound arguments by people of both divide in a very rational and mature way.
All I can say is "syabas". I am proud of you guys.
Lets talk over our problems. Fighting with each other will not benefit anyone.

Anonymous said...

This time,bro haris is deadly wrong in labelling Zul as an extremist.Bar Council in my opinion has become the tool of UMNO,probaly KJ.Bar Council n most of the Kl elite group would rather sleep with the known devil then opening a new life based on principals of law n justice.What's Malaysian culture?Money talks,bull$hit walks!!Corporate whores,lawyers r part of that group.They have all sorts of links with the ruling elite,for example Ambiga sold her house?to anak mami jarum Sharizat.Bottomline is,their stupid whims n fancies must not be disturbed...making money,golfing,clubbing n once in a while,talking about human rights,religion,just to fool the public that they care for the society.

Anonymous said...

Even the prince of seculars Raja Petra has revealed that the recent get 2gethar between the Pm n Bar Council was fully sponsored by the gomen.Why is Bar Council keeping quiet now?Why not,discuss the issue now?

Anonymous said...

On the other hand it would be better for the Bar Council not to allow itself to be trapped into the evil Umno design. It should have acted wisely and speedily to announce that the seminar would be held behind closed door to avoid any unhealthy consequence on inter-
ethnic and inter-religious relations in this country. Certainly the Bar Council realizes how important it is to ensure that the agenda of the irresponsible minority elements who want to create ethnic dissension do not succeed.

Dr Syed Husin Ali
Deputy President, keADILan
People's Justice Party

Anonymous said...

Forum BAR COUNCIL Agenda Abdullah
10

08

2008
Saya malas mengulas panjang kerana masih di dalam mood Festival Filem Malaysia yang baru berakhir semalam. Tetapi ada beberapa perkara yang ingin saya sentuh secara ringkas,

• Pihak-pihak tertentu didalam BAR Council telah dipergunakan oleh Abdullah Ahmad Badwi untuk tujuan Politik.
• Ianya bermula selepas pilihanraya umum ke 12.
• Memahami keadaan yang meruncing di dalam isu kehakiman yang hilang kepercayaan oleh rakyat, Abdullah menerusi wakilnya telah menggunakan BAR Council.
• Adalah tidak pasti sama ada ahli-ahli BAR Council mengetahuinya atau hanya beberapa kerat di dalam jawatankuasa tertingginya sahaja yang terlibat.
• Selepas PRU12, BAR Council telah menganjurkan satu majlis makan malam dan jemputannya ialah ahli-ahli politik bekas-bekas hakim termasuk yang dipecat oleh Kerajaan sebelum ini.
• Di dalam majlis makan malam tersebut, Abdullah mengumumkan bahawa kerajaan akan memberikan sumbangan Ex-Gratia kepada hakim-hakim yang dipecat sewaktu krisis kehakiman lewat 80’an.
• Makan Malam anjuran BAR Council itu sebenarnya ditaja atau boleh dikatakan dibiayai sepenuhnya oleh Kerajaan Malaysia.
• BAR Council telah membiayakan diri mereka menjadi platform Abdullah membina semula popularitinya yang merudum.

Siapakah yang mendapat manfaat daripada Forum yang berlangung semalam (Sabtu) berhubung perlembagaan negara yang melibatkan mereka yang memuluk agama Islam?

• Abdullah Ahmad Badawi mendapagt manfaat kerana forum itu boleh menjadi platform yang menyatukan orang-orang Melayu dan Islam.
• Forum sebegitu menimbulkan kemarahan orang Melayu.
• Forum sebegitu mengakibatkan pemimpin-pemimpin di dalam UMNO yang menentang Abdullah terpaksa beralih pandangan dan bersatu bagi mempertahankan kepentingan UMNO memperjuangkan hak orang-orang Islam.
• Forum begitu menekan pemimpin-pemimpin pembangkan beragama Islam untuk turut sama dengan pemimpin UMNO supaya tidak dilihat dayus dalam hal Islam dan Melayu.
• Orang-orang Melayu bangkit dan keadaan jadi tegang lalu parti politik seperti PAS dan faction Melayu dalam PKR jadi tersepit di tengah-tengah.

Bagi mereka yang menyokong forum itu dan menentang forum itu, sila ambil kira faktor di atas.

Anonymous said...

Tulang Besi said:
Actually, it's clear to me that you didn't read the background section of the website.

Information there is important in getting the right understanding of the other sections.

.......

Tulang,

I have read that website in its entirety so please stop making vague references and CITE the specific information to which you refer so that we can debate it.

And please also stop this habit you have of declaring yourself correct or the winner of each debate point in your comment posts. It is very arrogant.

Emmar

amoker said...

To be honest, this is one of the lesser posting that i read from Tulang Besi. Sorry about that, but many of the reasoning are assumptive and seemed to be from corridor of UMNO chats.

Am also keen on your continual defence of Zulfikli that "From what I’ve heard, he was just entering the hall after hearing that the meeting was cancelled." Another hearsay but Zul came out strongly to reinforce that he know what he did and he did the right thing.

Joseph said...

Muslims never keen on reasoning. They like to dominate others whenever possible. Worse still, they like to blame others for their own misery. Not only it happens here, but throughout the world you can see it everywhere. It's very pathetic for the most populous religion followers to behave this way.

Stanley Teoh said...

Hello TULANG BESI and NAWFAL and all you LIKE MINDED people out there, the forum was organised to solve PROBLEMS-not NO PROBLEMS ! No Need to inject so-call secret agendas, when there is NONE at all !! When there is a problem, we try to solve it. When there is NO problem, what is there to solve ??!!

Anonymous said...

My neighbour are both converts and are devout Muslims. The husband is of Tamil origin who was a Hindu, the wife a Chinese who was a Buddhist (don't know which variety). Their children have become Malays of sorts because they speak Malay in their daily communications with one another and look like Malays. Of course they eat the way all Malaysians do. To top it up, the husband's mother who converts to Christianity (from Hindu) is staying with the family. The wife maintains a good relationship with her father, mother and siblings. This is especially so when celebrating the Lunar New Year. A few houses away is another Muslim couple who are also converts but the situation is directly opposite. The wife is of Tamil hindu origin and the husband a Chinese Buddhist. I fail to understand the furore of converting to Islam. Maybe I am just too naive. Maybe.

Anonymous said...

lol!@ stanly teoh..no problem ..so why tok ?what prolemos bar councils have solved anyway?True,not every loya r c*nts ok..but its very clear to lot's of fellas,it was a trap.The aim was to show to every malay that Anwar has abondened the malays,Anwar is a barua cina,etc etc..in fact weeks b4 the by election,Anwar in his ceramahs had warned the public about Barisan's/Biro Tatanegara propoganda..

Norma Kassim said...

i agree with your views.

Anonymous said...

alahai tulang besi kenapa buka balik cerita ni. memang tak ada kesudahannya. tajuk macam ni nabi pun xdapat selesaikan dengan nasrani najran

Nawfal said...

Stanley Teoh,

You might think that the forum is intended to solve the problems. But more than 50% of the population might think otherwise. It was creating problem.

Why I say more than 50%? Obviously it was not a nationwide poll - but when there were people from PAS, PKR, UMNO and many prominent Malay NGOs, I can't be that off-mark.

nawfal said...

The problem started because many Muslim haters here wanted to start a fire.

If you're really interested and sincere in solving problems, why not invite the right people (ulama', Anwar Ibrahim the shartie judges and lawyers, the religious departments, JAKIM, PAS, PKR, PEMBELA,etc) to a close-door discussion. Why rely on ignoramus like Haris Ibrahim? What can he solve?

As Zul Nordin rightly said, if he wanted to have a discussion about Hinduism or Christianity, he would definitely not call certain kacang putih seller to discuss with him.

Bar Council had never intended to solve the problem. The intention was to badmouth Islam.

nawfal said...

Emmar,

well thought ideas huh? how could it screwed up? a well thought sinister idea perhaps.

Anonymous said...

well said nawfal.. bar council look like intelligent person but actually not. They try to held a talk amongst people that have ignorance about islam. A bunch of stupid fella that try to talk about a thing they dont really have idea about it. Bravo Bar Council bravo.. You guys show your stupidity

Anonymous said...

What the muslim fail to see here is that we are muslim and have our own syariah law, syariah law doesn't apply to the non muslims, so apasal kecoh kecoh ni?

Tulang Besi said...

teohjitkhiam says:

"I must disagree with Mr Zainul Rijal's ill-thought statement. The original marriage between husband and wife was carried out under the civil law.

The husband has exercised his right to freely convert to Islam re: freedom of religion under the Constitution; the wife now must be allowed the right to dissolve the marriage through civil law..... Or did we miss the part where the tok kadi solemnized the marriage between Subashini and Saravanan?"\

MY REPLY: Dear Teoh, I think you have a point here.But I believe the problem can be solved.

Anonymous said...

Judge a religion by its scriptures, not its adherents.

Muhammad said...

I suggest that if we want to discuss about something, we go and refer to the experts. If you have car problems, u go to the workshop. If u have question in Christianity, u go and see the Priest, Pastor, or Reverend or any ppl who hav the knowledge and it is the same applies to Islam. If someone have problem u will have refer to the expert which is The Ulama'or syura or to the mufti. Not a barber, shoemaker or a lawyer, or a secular person. Islam open the room for discussion and believe me.. Islam have no room for extremist.. We can discuss any matter which I means any matter regarding the faith and there will be no room of hatred from the muslim. If there is violence, there will be from perverse transgressors (ppl who have drifted from the path). What they are supposed to do is to do it open and do it GRAND AND WITH RELIGIOUS PERSON OR PROFESSIONAL IN THE FIELD. Not a bunch of lawyers who doesn't know about Islam and discuss about Islam. Dat is why saddened me. And as for ZN, sometimes we human we have wrong approach.. don't just melatah and to the BAR Coun.. if want to do something, do it appropriately.

d.E. said...

I think we need to be able to agree to disagree. Everyone has their own opinion. Tulang Besi opinion might be the same with you or u agree with him. To some of you you may totally disagree with him. In true democracy we should be able to accept his opinion on this matter whether you agree with him or not.

Calling Zul Nordin an extremist may be a bit too harsh. But as an MP, he should have shown his political skill by solving the problem diplomatically. This is probably what Malaysian MP's are lacking.

Muslim should be able to discuss Islamic matters with their non-muslim counterpart. If you don't know the answer, find someone who knows. Don't just hide behind laws and the threat of violence.

Anonymous said...

same shit different day.

Anonymous said...

tulang,
all these gibberish. there is no interest in your article to try to help resolving our beloved malaysia's dilemma. u r just an opologist for the PKR's racist YB who is elected to represent his constituents. Instead he considers hinseld muslim, malay the malaysian.

i thought u argued that we are all malaysian. this has shown and proved 2 us that u are jsut like the rest of them.

as the saying goes, the spots will never change.

sad day for me to read your article in supporting the racit PKR YB.

Born2Reign said...

We are not against the demonstrators against the forum. We are against the violence inflicted BY MUSLIMS against the forum.

VIOLENCE = Muslim way of life?

Do you really want to reaffirm what the world thinks of Islam the religion of terrorists?

I believe the silent majority of Muslims are not against the forum, it's only the unruly and gangster ones that give Islam a bad name, and continue to do so.

You can have a demonstration against rock concerts, abolish ISA, abortions, etc.

The question in all our minds is: Are Muslims capable of PEACEFUL demonstrations?

So far I have not seen any.

nawfal said he is proud to demonstrate against the forum, and Haris lost.

I say your actions and foul mouth, just like Ahmad, has caused more loss for Islam worldwide. Gangsters and mob rule is the name of Islam. And the Muslims will destroy Islam, not the non-Muslims. When that time comes, don't blame the non-Muslims (like Ahmad the chihuahua)

Anonymous said...

Yalah.each wanna proclaim pemenang..people r forgetting the circumstances which influenced Zul to say things which have hurt the non malays..there was a mob with banners sayin "hidup ketuanan melayu...".Zul had to say somethin to diffuse UMNO's mobs..pakailah otak siki..Do u all think Pro UMNO mobs would have backed off if a chinese secular,or a hindu taliver were there to control them?Hah,knowing very well how UMNO mobs behave ,Zul did the correct thing...and in the end semua bersurai..habis cerita

nawfal said...

Born2reign,

Were you at the forum? How do you know it was violent? What do you mean by violent in the first place?

The crowd takbir and chanted, but there were no physical contact. We had unit amal controlling the situation. We had the FRU as another barrier after the unit amal. If takbir and chanting were what you considered violent, I wouldn't hesitate to declare that you have the most distorted idea of what demonstration is all about. Or worst still, you may not have any idea at all.

I don't really know if you had been to any demo, in Malaysia or outside Malaysia, esp. those organized by PAS or PKR. I don't know if you had been to the Bersih demo , manned mainly by PAS unit Amal. I don't know if you had been to the August 2006 congregation against IFC and Article 11 at Masjid Wilayah. FYI, the Var Council demo paled in comparison with Bersih or Masjid Wilayah 2006. I don't even know if you happen to be an armchair kakak tua critic, but I suspect you are.Please do come to the next demo organized by PAS or PKR to understand what demo is all about and what make them peaceful or not.

Let me affirm that INDEED majority
of the Muslims are against the forum. When you have reps from all Malay-muslim based major political parties and NGOs in a same demo, you can't be that off-mark to claim that more than 50% of the Malays are against the forum.

In my masjid somewhere in middle-class Klang Valley, almost everyone was against the forum. Where I work, in one of the most prestigious address in the country, we have a large majority of professional muslims, mainly supporters of PAS and PKR. None that I had seen supported the forum.

Which makes me convince that we have a good and representative sampling to tell the world that majority Malay Muslims hate that bloody forum.

The muslims have been watching Bar Council and people like Haris Ibrahim for years. We know their intention. The way the forum was titled and the fact that it was a forum opened to any ignoramus on the street exposed the true intention - that is to badmouthing Islam and Islamic jurisprudence.

It was one of the psy-war to belittle and to delegitimize Islam in this country with an end-state intention to totally secularize the nation. This is something the mukmin will never accept.

Btw, Islam never lost. So long we understand the guideline and teaching of Rasulullah. There are times when the Rasulullah are soft on the Kafirs, and there are times when he was tough. We have learnt thru our rich history when to be soft and when to be tough.

Islam does not need preaching and amrketing guide from secularist or non-Muslim on what is good or what is going to destroy Allah. (btw, Allah has said that Islam will be triumphat eventually- so should I be scared with your threat that Muslim will destroy Islam, when teh Quran and Hadis are saying otherwise?)

Islam is not any certain commodity and there are certainly no need to behave like salesperson. We are not doing any marketing.

let's Allah take care.

Purple Haze said...

In your article, you wrote

"In other words, if the Article 11 people have their way, Islam in Malaysia will be utterly destroyed. "

Are you saying that you have not much confidence in your fellow Malaysians faith in Islam ? You should be promoting the Islamic faith for its strengths and not by making it look weak.

Tulang Besi said...

purple haze says:

"
Are you saying that you have not much confidence in your fellow Malaysians faith in Islam ? You should be promoting the Islamic faith for its strengths and not by making it look weak."

MY REPLY: No I am saying that Islam will be destroyed because Islam will be taken out of the public domain.

It's not even an issue of faith in my brothers.

Anonymous said...

Don't have blogger ID, but my name is runa.

Not thinking at a macro level but just in terms of justice for individual cases because tulang besi talked of the supremacy of Syariah law being infringed by the work of Art 11 group. For such things as divorce and other family law issues, from the case to do with the Indian woman whose husband unilaterally changed the religion of her children, when he converted and married someone else, it is just a question for her right as an equal citizen in Malaysia to decide her children's religion,isnt it? As equal as her husband's right. And if this cannot be definitively decided should it be in the best interest of the child for this decision of an individual faith to be decided by the child on his/her majority? So what the group is doing is actually very necessary debate.

Aside: Furthermore, Malaysia is a member of the international women's rights treaty which obliges the state to change/modify cultural thinking and practices premised on the inferior status of the woman among other discriminatory aspects in a woman's life. Is the Syariah as practised here compliant with that? For that matter are civil laws also compliant with that?

Anonymous said...

Ok,I wanna know,why the harisibrahims,the imtiaz'ss were not there to explain,or even control the siutaion?..ya,so easy to talk..anybody can b an armcahir critic but,heroism,balls of steel was needed on that day..

the Sanctuary said...

Malang sekali. Masih banyak manusia begitu naif atau sengaja tidak ingin memahami konsep hidup dalam organisasi. Agama adalah organisasi, cuma dalam ruanglitup lebih besar, atau istilah hari ini mega atau global. Dalam organisasi ada kod & etika. Ada tatacara dan prilaku yang mesti dipatuhi. Dan ada syarat & pra kelayakan untuk layak menjadi ahli. If you are not a member, then you are not a member!. As simple as that! You don’t just give give view & opinion pertaining to running of the organisation. Either you are stupid or you are arrogant. Likewise you don’t just throw shots and make slender statements, presuming you have all the rights in this world as a free human beast. Call it human rights, freedom of speech, or whatever. But still you don’t qualify. Until you are a member! Try gatecrash into somebody’s majlis, say holding an EGM, and starts throwing remarks. If you lucky, then you will be asked to leave, if not you should know better. And if you are a member, stay put with rules & regulation. Kod & etika, spt pakaian adalah untuk dipatuhi, bukan showcase semata-mata. Kpd semua muslim, yang pasti yahudi & nasara tetap musuh hingga kiamat.

Wan Solehah al-Halbani said...

Salam,

YB Zul Nordin bukan extremist kerana dia masih mengamalkan demokrasi dan menjadi ahli Parlimen. Beliau ingin kpd Islam dan ingin memeperjuangkan Islam agar Islam muncul sebagai agama yang berkuasa dan memerintah. Cuma beliau sepatutnya mengkaji bahawa perjuangan Islam melalui jalan demokrasi membawa beliau kpd kekufuran kerana :

1. Sebagai seorang ahli Parlimen, beliau adalah Tuhan Manusia yang kafir kerana beliau adalah berkuasa dan berdaulat untuk memerintah ke atas manusia yang menafikan hak Allah untuk memerintah (3:26);

2. Beliau adalah Tuhan Manusia yang kafir kerana beliau adalah berkuasa dan berdaulat untuk membuat undang-undang yang menafikan hak Allah untuk membuat undang-undang (12:40);

3. Beliau bersetuju kpd sistem demokrasi yang bererti beliau bersetuju dan beriman dgn agama manusia yang kafir yang menafikan agama Allah yang benar yang merosakkan Aqidah beliau dan yang mengeluarkan beliau dpd agama Allah (4:60);

4. Beliau bersetuju dgn agama demokrasi yang bererti beliau bersetuju dgn sistem pengabdian manusia kpd manusia yang menafikan konsep pengabdian manusia kpd Allah yang terkandung di dalam kalimah Laailaahaillallah (5:44);

5. Beliau bersetuju dgn agama demokrasi yang bererti beliau bersetuju dgn sistem manusia menyembah manusia yang menafikan penyembahan kpd Allah yang tunggal (9:31);

6. Beliau memilih untuk mengimani, menganuti dan mengamalkan agama demokrasi yang bererti beliau mencari agama yang lain dpd agama Allah kerana beliau bersetuju dgnnya dan beliau mengamalkannya, dan kerana undang-undang demokrasi yang dibuat oleh beliau adalah ditaati oleh manusia dan justeru beliau menolak agama Allah (3:85);

7. Beliau turut melantik diri beliau sebagai Tuhan dan beliau juga melantik seluruh ahli-ahli Parlimen sebagai Tuhan-tuhan Manusia yang berkuasa, berdaulat dan memrintah ke atas seluruh umat manusia (6:164);

8. Beliau menghalalkan jalan demokrasi padahal Allah melarangnya dan Allah menyifatkan orang-orang yang mengamalkan agama demokrasi sebagai orang-orang yang merancang untuk melakukan kejahatan yang akan dihumban ke dalam neraka (35:10).

Bukan sahaja YB Zul yang kafir, malahan seluruh ahli parlimen dpd UMNO, PAS dan PKR adalah orang-orang kafir kerana mereka mengamalkan agama demokrasi yang kafir serta mereka membuat, menguat kuasa dan mentaati undang-undang demokrasi yang kafir. Demokrasi adalah agama yang kafir kerana ianya adalah didasarkan kpd Perlembagaan Malaysia yang kafir. Perlembagaan Negara kita adalah kafir kerana ia membuat, menguat kuasa dan menghukum dgn undang-undang manusia yang kafir (perkara-perkara 43, 44 dan 161 Perlembagaan Malaysia).

Demokrasi adalah agama, iaitu agama manusia yang kafir kerana ianya adalah terdiri dpd AQIDAH, SYARIAT dan AKHLAKnya yang tersendiri yang datang dpd manusia yang selain dpd Allah.

Sekian, terima kasih.


Wan Solehah al-Halbani

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

ARiF merupakan jentera utama Harapan Baru di dalam membantu kelancaran gerakerja semua peringkat.

Kami ARiF Melaka memerlukan sumbangan dan bantuan kewangan daripada tuanpuan untuk kami melakukan gerakerja berkenaan. Oleh kerana kami masih baru, sumbangan diperlukan untuk menampung kos pakaian, membeli peralatan komunikasi, peralatan lalulintas dan sebagainya.

Kami amat berbebsar hati jika tuan/puan dapat menghulurkan sumangan kepada kami. Segala sumbangan diserahkan kepada pemegang amanah ARiF Melaka.

MOHD AZWAN AHMAD
a/k Maybank : 104013154427

Hantarkan makluman bank-in melalui SMS/WA ke 016-981 1315 (H.ANUAR)

Semuga Allah membalas segala jasa baik tuan/puan semua.