Setiap Artikel Malaysiawaves ke Email Anda.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Dipersilakan untuk Like Facebook Page T. Besi

Search Malaysiawaves

Friday, January 9, 2009

Against HIV Testing, Malaysian AIDS Council Must Be Out of Their Minds

There is a new requirement for all Muslims newly weds, and that is for them to conduct HIV testing before their marriage takes place. The suggestion seems to provoke negative comments from many liberal organization in Malaysia namely the Malaysian AIds Council.

Reading most of comments coming from Sisters in Islam, Irene Fernendez, MAC, Ivy Josiah etc, their main contention is that the ruling is against one's "human rights"(???).

In other words, the human rights reason was invoke, as usual, when resisting such ruling made by religous authorities. It doesn't surprise me considering all human rights activists view religion as a inhibitors to one's practicing their entire humans rights.

But my other question would be, what about the human rights of those not infected by HIV of their future's spouse's HIV condition? Isn't it within my basic human rights to know what type of virus I might be infected with when I marry my possible spouse?

What's even scarier is that reasons like "HIV patients can also live their lives like normal people could live" is also cited right after the the human rights reason is mentioned by these NGOs

So, here is my understanding of their policy:

a. HIV testing is against a person's basic human rights
b. Secrecy is the best policy when it comes to HIV infection. Even if one is infected, it shouldn't be informed to others even their possible spouse.
c. It's OK to contract HIV because HIV sufferers can still live their lives normally.

So, in other words, we must keep HIV information about a person secret from their future spouses because even if their spouse contracts HIV they can still live a normal life.

I don't know about you, but this type of policy sounds completely loony".

In other words, NGO's like MAC, SIS and others are not really interested in stopping and stemming the spread of the HIV virus. They're only interested in protecting the rights of people already diagnosed with HIV. The fact that the HIV carriers are spreading their virus inhibited is not an issue and any move towards stopping these people from spreading the virus is an act against human rights.

No wonder the Malaysian AIDS Council, despite getting millions in terms of grants from tax payers, have yet to come up with anything concrete towards eradicating and stopping the spread of HIV and AIDS in the soceity.

Based on their press statement here, the MAC specifically mentions that secrecy must be maintained for HIV testing, and I quote:


"Confidentiality – HIV testing should only occur when confidentiality of results can beguaranteed."


One can easily see how screwed up this policy is and it doesn't take someone with a Phd to see it's stupidity. MAC supports secrecy so that those with HIV can continue spreading the virus inhibited.

So as long as HIV carriers remains unflagged, how does MAC suggest the virus be stopped from spreading?

MAC is Only Interested In Protecting Drug Abusers, Fornicators, Adulterers, Homosexuals From Being Flagged

The real motive behind these liberal's resistance to the idea is their commitment towards protecting the practice of homosexuality, drug abuse and promiscous sex.

They believe that the disease can be stopped with the use of a rubber that is not even one inch thick. They are merely promoting solutions already proven a failure in the Western world.

They know that what the Religous Authority of Malaysia is doing is the correct approach towards permenant solution towards the spread of the virus. But, because of their liberal ideology that promotes and supports the practice of promiscous and homosexual sex, they must resist such policy.

So to all Malaysians, stop listening to NGO that has no other agenda but to promote their proven fail policies in the name of protecting liberal ideology of the West. At what expense, may I ask? At the expense of innocent women and men ( and children) contracting HIV virus in the name of secrecy.

I for one do not want my daugthers and sisters contracting HIV simply because a bunch of insecure NGO thinks that the move is wrong. I mean it's not MAC that will be trying to solve problems of people contracting HIV anyways. They won't be there providing families with material or even emotional support. We are the ones that have to watch our families die in front of our eyes and not them. So, stop listening to people who are trying to do nothing but export their stupid liberal ideology.

Tulang Besi


38 comments:

Anonymous said...

To this blog's writer:

Like it or not, "Drug Abusers, Fornicators, Adulterers, [and] Homosexuals" (as you put it) have rights to their privacy.

Not to mention, there are plenty of HIV-positive people who are not in one of those groups. They too have privacy rights.

According to your logic, we should have regular testing for all married persons -- monthly? yearly? After all, plenty of men and women have affairs while married (and not exclusively before.

Do you agree to subject yourself to testing for your wife's peace of mind?

The Anonymous Ranger

Anonymous said...

The government should not get involved in private matters. Next thing you know, they want to put cameras in your bedroom to monitor you. If you are concerned about HIV, then ask the person that wants to marry your daughter toget tested. Simple. If said person refuse, then he cannot marry your daughter.

Give the government power over you, and they will abuse you.

Tulang Besi said...



Like it or not, "Drug Abusers, Fornicators, Adulterers, [and] Homosexuals" (as you put it) have rights to their privacy.

Not to mention, there are plenty of HIV-positive people who are not in one of those groups. They too have privacy rights.


Hmmm privacy. Does that mean we also allow them to spread their deadly virus without taking any constructive measures?

What about the right of others NOT TO BE INFECTED by these HIV carriers?

Should we trample on their rights as well?

Tulang Besi said...

January 9, 2009 2:13 PM
Delete
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The government should not get involved in private matters. Next thing you know, they want to put cameras in your bedroom to monitor you.


When you start infecting others with your virus, it's no more a private matter.

Whatever you do to yourself is your own business. But whatever you do that affects others is no more a private matter.

It's that simple.

Anonymous said...

Should the government also mandate testing for Syphilis, Cancer, Thalasemia, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer, Muscular Dystrophy, Leprosy, hemorrhoids etc etc. Hello ... where do we stop? God forbid if your daughter marries someone who has hemorrhoids.

Like I said, this is a private matter. Government should not get involved. When you give them power over you, they will abuse it.

“We” am not trampling “their“ rights. They have a right marry their loved ones even if said person have HIV. They have the right to ask for their partner to be tested. They have a right to refuse to marry their partner if said person refuse testing. They have a right to be educated about HIV and other diseases. Please tell me how are ‘we” are trampling on “their” rights.

My problem is when the government comes in and legislate matters between private parties.

Tulang Besi said...

Delete
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Should the government also mandate testing for Syphilis, Cancer, Thalasemia, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer, Muscular Dystrophy, Leprosy, hemorrhoids etc etc. Hello ... where do we stop? God forbid if your daughter marries someone who has hemorrhoids.


Why not? It's only one blood test and it doesn't take that big of a problem.

I am all for it. Its my God's given right not to be infected by these diseases.

Anonymous said...

Selalunya sesiapa yang dijangkiti aids la yang tak nak go for blood test! dia org takut yang dia org tak leh jangkitkan penyakit dia org kat org lain!

Anonymous said...

Tulang Besi said...
I am all for it. Its my God's given right not to be infected by these diseases.


Then you better have your wife tested. hahaha

Anonymous said...

Yes, yes

We know you are a right-wing extremist TB. Your point of view is not surprising.

But the question is how far do you wish to intrude into people's personal lives.

Should married people be tested too? If so, how often?

And do I understand you correctly when you say it is not your 'God-given right' to be infected by cancer, et cetera?

You certainly do know how to keep us amused.

Tulang Besi said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, yes

We know you are a right-wing extremist TB. Your point of view is not surprising.

But the question is how far do you wish to intrude into people's personal lives.


So infecting others with HIV is not a form of intruding other people's lives?

What abt the fact that we need to effectively control the spread of HIV viruses in our soceity?

The real truth is that privacy is used as a tool to stop main masses from feeling afraid to continue practicing promiscous sex.

THat's the truth of it all.

Anonymous said...

should married people be tested every week, every month, every year?

after all, we have to control don't we?

Tulang Besi said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

should married people be tested every week, every month, every year?

after all, we have to control don't we?


If need be, why not? Nowadays, times are so bad that i think such test is required.

otherwise innocent people will be given the death sentence.

Anonymous said...

If someone is HIV positive, should that info be kept confidential? Or should it be made public?

windsurfer said...

Privacy, somewhat a very weakly based argument. Think, should the government wishes to hide a bird flu disease spreading in Town X to protect the "privacy" of the people infected in the town, would you simply be delighted to accept that?

Our "modern & liberalised" people who chose to scream out loud the human rights are thinking backward in this matter. At the back of their mind they fear that by revealing a patient having HIV will degrade that person's integrity hence their chances to enjoy life like others. This is in another word to say that the HIV infected patients should be kept in their closet. The same people who pronounced loudly that "gay has their right", "changing religion is your right" seemingly conflicting themselves nowadays..

These paranoids suffer inferiority complex disease for too long that they hardly notice how ridiculous they sound, and now they're attempting to infect others with it.

And NO, HIV testing is not a beginning of some kind of chain reactions. Installing camera in your bedroom??? I believe the government has not gone mad enough to have such a wild imagination as yours.

What a joke

Anonymous said...

I agree 100% with Tulang Besi and windsurfur. Must stop HIV/AIDs at all cost. Must stop all the philandering an moral decay that’s going on. The government should have mandatory testing for HIV/AIDs and other sexually transmitted diseases. Testing should be done weekly or even daily. Don’t worry about the cost, the government can subcontract Sime Darby to provide the HIV test kits. Test kits will be provided “free” to the public. (Got to give back something to Sime after they lost the IJN thingy.) When people are busy being tested all the time, they will forget that water rates have gone up by 30%, food prices have not come down, electricity rates have not gone down, economic situation is real bad etc etc. All this mandatory testing will cow and impress the power of government over the people.

Testing for HIV would not stop AIDs spreading. Remember, what spreads AIDs is the philandering that’s going on. So how to prevent people with HIV from having sex with non HIV people? Well the answer is simple. The government should set up squads of Sex Police. Every time someone in the country wants to have sex, they must get a permit from the Sex Police. Sex with more than five people at once shall be declared illegal. The police should be given powers to enter your bedrooms to do spot checks. What if they do unnatural sex acts which could lead to HIV. What if they don’t do it with their wifes? Sex police must be equipped with anal probes with flashlights so that they can inspect at will.

People with HIV/AID should be exposed in the newspapers and television. Their names will be published together with their mugshots. We don’t care if they happen to be women who contract HIV/AIDs via their philandering husbands, or people who got HIV/AIDs via tainted blood transfusions. Exposed them all. Shame them like the prostitutes and philanderers. The interest of society at large is more important than the individual.

What if the Sex Police cannot prevent 100% AIDs from spreading? You think the public will remember all the names of people with HIV that have been published? Always remember, that the goal is to prevent AIDs. HIV people must be separated from the public at large. We should then set up a penal colony on some island. Then intern them. These are degenerates, so who cares about them. Perhaps can put them in someplace like Penang with Lim Guan Eng (that guys is against hudud anyways). Then can cancel the second bridge and give the money to Sime Darby for the AIDS kit. Of course kits are given “free” to the public.

Anonymous said...

I agree with HIV testing because it is critical for humanity.

Everyone above age 18 or thereabout should be tested (regularly) at least for their own knowledge. This is to ensure that people are not ignorant that they are a walking time bomb.

The above should only be done if HIV testing can be done easily as walking through a booth and being informed glaringly and privately of one's HIV status.

Privacy of the results should be maintained and can only be called upon by by law.

Thus if a people infect another person after being informed of his/her HIV positive status, then the person is accountable for the damage.

Implementation of the above may not be easy but if there is a will, then there is a way.

Btw, God has nothing to do with the above. If God exists and is that powerful, then God should have killed the HIV virus in the first place

Grand Marquis said...

Dear Tulang Besi,

I appreciate your effort in counteracting with the liberal group. It is certainly a very tiring effort.

In reality, many of these defenders of liberal ideology are just plain hypocrites. They go to the great extend of trying to defend homosexuality, but I doubt many of them willing to let another man put their dick into their but, or probably seeing their daughter marry another women and their son marrying another man even though they desperately fighting for the right of these people.

In other word, liberalism is for everybody else, except me.

I believe, deep in their heart they are afraid of AIDS too and want a spouse who is AIDS free. If their prospective partner comes to them and claimed that he or she could probably an AIDS carrier, they would scream the hell out for them to do a blood test before they would agree to a marriage.

But out there, they will go all out to oppose anyone else who try to do the same as what they probably would do. They will shout the slogans of human rights, AIDS's right, gay's right, animal's right and whatever fit into the right word.

So long for these hypocrite libralist supporter...

Anonymous said...

bolo punya olang who against HIV testing.

These are the people who never ceased to amaze the crowd with their stupid liberal idea that everyone has rights.

Tulang besi, i never like your ideas before, but i have to agree with you on this.

The issue is not WHY but Why not?

Other people want to protect themselves and their families from 'death sentence' so i think this could somehow reduced how AIDS is spreading.

I dont want my daughter, sister,mom, aunt, niece, nephew unknowingly and innocently inflicted with AIDS just because his/her stupid partner refused to tell that he/she is with AIDS.

Tolonglah, manusia sorok banyak benda including tax and debt which are less serious. And u think they will tell their partner they have AIDS?

It aint about breached of privacy but safety.

Let's wait til these liberals or any of their love ones are inflicted and see what they say.

Anonymous said...

Let's get something straight.

Those of you labeling other views as 'liberal' are actually the liberal ones.

Many of you misunderstand the word 'liberal', associating it with something outside of what you consider immoral. It is not surprising since that is how mass media propaganda has framed it.

The position against testing is not a liberal one, if one must apply a name, use libertarian.

Liberals, in the economic sense (where the word arose from originally), favor increased government intervention. In the social sense, liberals want the government to be proactive.

Libertarians want the government LESS involved in personal lives and behavior.

If you are concerned about your wives, sisters, daughters, etc... (funny how nobody mentions sons, husbands, brothers - I guess your minds are ossified with a particular slant) then how does a government do better than an individual.

You want to marry? Then make sure you tell your prospective spouse that you want them to take an HIV test.

There! Problem solved. No need for onerous laws or increased bureaucracy (and we, the people, save money too).

The Anonymous Ranger

windsurfer said...

The HIV testing was derived from case study. Most people infected by HIV via legal marriage usually have no idea that their spouse has the virus. You can speak out loud all you want about privacy but in modern practice it is not something new that some people would ask for blood tests before they get married, likewise.

Get over your imagination.

Anonymous said...

If you are going to mention a case study, please cite it specifically.

Regardless, your comment has no relevance to the issue. There is no need for the government to get involved in people's lives for this reason. It should be between two people, and if those people happen to be a husband and wife (or wife and wife, etc., who cares), they can work out the testing arrangements.

Let the government stick to its job of being corrupt and restricting our other freedoms -- it already has its hands full.

Those of you whose knee-jerk reactions lead you to favor government regulation are way too liberal. Yes, we know how much you hate gays and players but get the government out of daily lives, not deeper into them.

Enough of this social engineering project. Build roads, defend the country, print currency, sudah cukup!

By the way, what happens when you (and I mean YOU) get a false positive test for HIV and it is in the system forever, as a scarlet letter you cannot remove?

Or do you trust the government to treat your private data carefully?

...kind of makes you think.

The Anonymous Ranger

Tulang Besi said...

It's amazing how Malaysian AIDS Council are given grants by the government just so they can espouse fail and lousy ideas about controlling the spread of HIV and AIDS.

It's a rare occcurance when one can get paid for screwing up 100% of the time.

Their grants are from taxpayers money and in the millions.

Anonymous said...

Yes, yes,

why pay for 'fail and lousy ideas' when Tulang Besi will provide them for free.

btw, what is a 'fail idea'
is that English?

windsurfer said...

Ranger says,

"Enough of this social engineering project. Build roads, defend the country, print currency, sudah cukup!"

I'm sure this imaginary country you wished for will be a failed one.

If you've never heard of some people ended up infected with HIV then it's no surprise that you're against HIV testing just on the base of privacy or human rights, weakly at that too. I don't need a case study to prove that either.

How is HIV screening violate individual rights when transmitting HIV knowingly/unknowingly is already a crime? It is everyone's responsibility to check their blood, especially those who sexually active with multiple partners. But since not everyone is responsible enough and most of the time we take things for granted, government is spot on to enforce these people to take the test.

But as I said earlier, if you are SMART enough, take the test yourself without the knowledge of your partner. That would avoid unnecessary drama.

What AIDS council have misunderstood is that the act is demeaning to those who were infected not by cause of their negligence, example is the one born with HIV. But they missed a point that most of these people are well aware of their disease, so is everyone they're connected with. The targeted crowd is actually the people who have no idea that they're a carrier or try to hide it from their potential sex partners.

So the government action is very far from what the AIDS council described as "fear and ignorance within government". I'd agree that not majority of infection cases are related to marriage, but every little effort to prevent the spreading of the disease should be counted for, not detested.

If you think hard enough instead of using that part of your brain fully devoted to 'liberal thinking', you might find out that maybe the action might benefit towards raising general awareness of HIV in long term, and perhaps a better substitute to the 'free condoms' campaign the AIDS council shouted about a while back.

Anonymous said...

Windsurfer,

“The HIV testing was derived from case study.”

“I don't need a case study to prove that either.”

Phoah!! At first I was so impressed (monkey shock) that this guy got some case study to back up his arguments. Then in his next posting he said no need case study. What la you. You talking out of your butt ah?

Nobody including MAC is against HIV testing. What we are against is “mandatory” HIV testing imposed by government. I don’t like it when government forces things on people. Case in point, like the Program Khidmat Negara. 2.4 billion ringgit gone oledi. Crony gets big bungalow. What do we get? 16 buried children. <-- Another case against BIG government.

Also you really think testing for HIV can reduce AIDS spreading? Cannot la fren. You don’t get AIDS by shaking hands. You need to stop the HIV people from having sex with non-HIV people or sharing needles. So please tell me what is you plan to prevent HIV people from having sex.

MAC article here:

http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal/general_news/mandatory_hiv_testing_not_the_solution_mac.html

Tulang Besi said...


Nobody including MAC is against HIV testing. What we are against is “mandatory” HIV testing imposed by government.


So, it means that if a person have HIV, he or she can refuse to have himself tested, and at the same time he can continue spreading the virus as he will.

Mandatory testing will force HIV carriers to reveal their true state of health and others are protected from his/her virus.

Isn't that simple enough? Isn't that a more straightforward way of reducing infection?

windsurfer said...

I don't need case study because we already know that there are people who get infected from their spouses. Ignorance about this would be another good reason why some people against HIV testing. It's not rocket science since HIV is a sexually transmitted disease, you don't need case study to explain that. So government action is reasonable action since it was not made on basis of ignorance.

Also you really think testing for HIV can reduce AIDS spreading? Cannot la fren. You don’t get AIDS by shaking hands. You need to stop the HIV people from having sex with non-HIV people or sharing needles. So please tell me what is you plan to prevent HIV people from having sex.

You cannot stop people from having sex, but you can stop people from having sex with the wrong person.

Anonymous said...

Hello windsurfer,

“You cannot stop people from having sex, but you can stop people from having sex with the wrong person.”

You mabuk ka? First part of your above sentence already contradict the second part. How to have logical argument from someone whose thinking defies logic. Bikin kepala pusing daa.

But amuse me anyway, tell me how to stop HIV person from having sex with non HIV person. What mechanism do you propose? Prison (I think in prison also people have sex, unless its solitary confinement)? Castration (I don’t know what is female equivalent)? Culling (like babi JE)? Serrated chastity belt?

Anonymous said...

No government!

If you don't want to have sex with someone because you suspect HIV, then just don't. Your chances are very low that you will contract it.

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

And how does a one-time test solve this problem?

And how do you propose to prevent HIV-positive people from spreading their disease other than refusing them a marriage permit?

Sounds like this is getting to be a bigger project.

And Windsurfer...aka KepalaAnginSurfer

The 'liberal thinking' is your own ideology. Keeping government out of our private affairs when it isn't necessary is anything but liberal. 'Liberal' is what you support! And condoms (free or otherwise, public or private) would be much more effective than pre-nuptial HIV

The Anonymous Ranger

Tulang Besi said...

If you don't want to have sex with someone because you suspect HIV, then just don't. Your chances are very low that you will contract it.

I am for 100% governement on this. Your suggestion of no government makes zero sense.

Anonymous said...

You mabuk ka? First part of your above sentence already contradict the second part. How to have logical argument from someone whose thinking defies logic. Bikin kepala pusing daa.

Which part of logic that you find very hard to understand?

OK. Logic 101. Here goes

A is horny. She wants to have sex with group B.
Group B has people C, D , E .

Without HIV testing, A would not know if either one has HIV.

But thanks to HIV testing, she finds out that E is HIV positive. So now she only frequent C & D beds.

~

The motif is clear, to stop the spread, not sex.

Anonymous said...

“You CANNOT stop people from having sex, but you CAN stop people from having sex with the wrong person.”

Oh dear. Someone is trying to teach me Logic 101. Perhaps I should teach him (Or her) BASIC English. Ok here goes:

First part of the sentence – You CANNOT stop
Second part of sentence – You CAN stop

So which is it, CAN or CANNOT. Obviously the first part of the sentence CONTRADICTS the second. Fundamental flaw in logic.

Like I said in my post, even if you put HIV people in prison, you cannot stop them from having sex. Your goal (not mine) is to stop HIV/AIDS from spreading and I’m saying that mandatory testing (one time during marriage) does not stop AIDS from spreading. Hope this is clear.

Anonymous said...

usually people who doesn't want the test are the people who have AIDS already or suspected AIDS carrier! Gays lesbians, mak nyahs!

Grand Marquis said...

To some Anon who try to be the champion of logic, please, if you want to champion the cause of logic, please be more professional. Don't be like Samy Vellu trying to teach others to speak proper Malay.

Do you understand what is subject and predicate? Don't just cut the word as you like and then claim other people do not have logic.

-You CANNOT stop people from having sex
-You CAN stop people from having sex with the wrong person

obviously have different meaning.

Tulang Besi said...

Your goal (not mine) is to stop HIV/AIDS from spreading and I’m saying that mandatory testing (one time during marriage) does not stop AIDS from spreading. Hope this is clear.

But it will stop innocent people from getting themselves infected by the disease.

Right??

Anonymous said...

1. You CAN stop people from having sex WITH THE WRONG PERSON

I think the sentence is concrete and stands corrected if you put it in context, i.e people would not have sex with an HIV infected person.

Anyone who would be stupid enough to knowingly bang an HIV infected people is probably the one who would question the sentence.

Anonymous said...

Grand Marquis said:

“obviously have different meaning.”

And I said CONTRADICTORY. To have both in the same sentence is just illogical. I’ll rephrase the whole sentence with a question. I hope you can understand clear and simple English. Otherwise, it will be very difficult for me to proceed. ;-)

If you CANNOT STOP people from having sex, how on earth do you STOP people from having sex with the “wrong person (HIV+)” ? ...... (clear? No? Nod your head if you get it.)

Now let get back to the testing thing. If you test someone and he/she is HIV+, can you stop the couple from getting married? (This is so many steps BEFORE the sex part.) Is there legislation that prohibits the couple from getting married? I don’t think there is any such law in this country and love is a powerful force.

So the government pushes the issue back to the couple. What should have been a private matter between two parties is now a private matter again and the couple have to decide what to do next.

In the mean time, the crony makes money selling the HIV kits. If you google the HIV test kits, they cost from USD 15 to USD 60. Subtract discount for bulk purchase, add some freight, and some government mark up ... you do the math. How many people get tested in a year? Some BN crony will be set for life. The public of course gets the test kits “free”.

windsurfer said...

I'm just amazed how such a simple sentence became a subject of debate. The liberal has truly out of idea to combat, not to mention their inability to comprehend simple logic.

Now press (Ctrl) + ( + ) until the font size is big enough for a 5 year old to read them. That's your standard.

You cannot stop people from eating, because people eat to live, but you can stop them from eating unhealthily. How? I say, educate them.

And you cannot stop people from dying, because people somehow die when the time comes, but you can stop people from killing themselves. How? Give them therapy or whatever.

All things natural cannot be stopped, but we can actually stop them being done wrongly.

In other words.

If you want to have sex, go on, but have sex with people who are not HIV positive.

And the only way to know whether someone is HIV positive or not is by revealing their health status.

Don't be a hypocrite, you've gotta be out of your mind to still have sex with people whom you know to be a carrier, regardless whether you love that person or not.

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.