Police Report On Lim Guan Eng’s False Statements

whatsapp-image-2016-11-24-at-11-54-16-am

Yesterday, as a loyal citizen of Malaysia, I filed a police report on Lim Guan Eng’s blog article regarding Act 355 at the Ampang Jaya Police Station.

In the article, the Pulau Pinang’s Chief Minister (CM) made four seditious false accusations:

  1. DAP opposes the hudud-like laws because it is contrary to the Federal Constitution.
  2. Our Federal Constitution is secular in nature with Islam as the religion of the Federation. Raising the punishment cap so that it can come closer to Hudud provisions would contravene the Federal Constitution in both spirit and substance.
  3. MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP deserve public condemnation for betraying their principles and promises to uphold and defend the Federal Constitution but also for their political expediency to continue to deceive the people by supporting UMNO that is willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect.
  4. DAP reiterates that the failure of MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN now is seen as a form of tacit approval of the unconstitutional measures adopted by UMNO to support PAS’ move to raise the punishment cap of Islamic laws that moves closer to Hudud-like laws.

DAP opposes the hudud-like laws because it is contrary to the Federal Constitution.

This is a recycled accusation that I’ve answered many times before.

Neither the Act 355 nor the amendment of the Act is contrary to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and the amendment of Act 355 it is not about implementing hudud-like laws as falsely accused by the CM of Pulau Pinang.

The fact that the Federal Constitution recognises the institution of Syariah Courts as stated in the Article 121 (1A) and the Part 1 List II  of the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution, proves that the Act 355 is not contrary to the Federal Constitution.

Furthermore, the Act 355 is an existing Act and it is already part of the laws of Malaysia.

“Our Federal Constitution is secular in nature with Islam as the religion of the Federation. Raising the punishment cap so that it can come closer to Hudud provisions would contravene the Federal Constitution in both spirit and substance.”

In his above accusation, he made two contradicting statements, saying that the “Federal Constitution is secular in nature” and “with Islam as the religion of the Federation”.

How can our Federal Constitution that states Islam as the religion of the Federation be secular in nature, when George Jacob Holyoake who is the creator of the term secularism, defines secularism as separating government and religion?

In fact, if our Federal Constitution is secular in nature, the Act 355 cannot be part of the laws of Malaysia and the Syariah Courts cannot be part of our judicial systems.

And if our Federal Constitution is secular in nature, the flag of Malaysia must not have any symbol of religion, such as the crescent and star in our flag that represents the religion of Islam.

“MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP deserve public condemnation for betraying their principles and promises to uphold and defend the Federal Constitution but also for their political expediency to continue to deceive the people by supporting UMNO that is willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect.”

What a defamation and malicious falsehood!

The amendment of Act 355 is not contrary to the Federal Constitution and it is a lie made in bad faith to accuse UMNO as “willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect”, when everything was done according to the law.

“DAP reiterates that the failure of MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN now is seen as a form of tacit approval of the unconstitutional measures adopted by UMNO to support PAS’ move to raise the punishment cap of Islamic laws that moves closer to Hudud-like laws.”

It is clearly said in the Act 355 that the Act only affect the Muslims, so why must the CM who is non-Muslim politicise the issue?

By calling MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN, and accusing the two biggest Muslim parties, PAS and UMNO as working together to bypass the Federal Constitution, Lim Guan Eng is trying to create religious and racial tension among the citizens of Malaysia.

Not only that, Lim Guan Eng’s words are against the call made by the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong’s in the parliament on the 7th of March, 2016:

“Beta berharap langkah-langkah ke arah memperkukuhkan institusi agama dan kecekapan perlaksanaan undang-undang pentadbiran agama Islam melalui pemerkasaan Mahkamah Syariah dapat disegerakan.”

Lim Guan Eng has gone against four parts of the Sedition Act 1948, Section 3(1)(a), Section 3(1)(c), Section 3(1)(e), and Section 3(1)(f), an offense which is punishable under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948.

Section 3(1)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948 states:

Sesuatu “kecenderungan menghasut” ialah kecenderungan—bagi mendatangkan kebencian atau penghinaan atau bagi membangkitkan perasaan tidak setia terhadap mana-mana Raja atau Kerajaan;

The CM of Pulau Pinang’s seditious words which contradict to the call made by the Yang Di Pertuan Agong can be seen as a “seditious tendency” that could “bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government.”

Section 3(1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948 says:

Sesuatu “kecenderungan menghasut” ialah kecenderungan—bagi mendatangkan kebencian atau penghinaan atau bagi membangkitkan perasaan tidak setia terhadap pentadbirankeadilan di Malaysia atau di mana-mana Negeri;

Accusing the amendment of Act 355 is a hudud-like law that “would contravene the Federal Constitution in both spirit and substance”, is an insult to the Syariah Courts, hudud law and Islam as well as giving bad impressions to the hudud law and Syariah Courts which could “bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State”.

Section 3(1)(e) of the Sedition Act 1948 states:

Sesuatu “kecenderungan menghasut” ialah kecenderungan—bagi mengembangkan perasaan niat jahat dan permusuhan antara kaum atau golongan penduduk yang berlainan di Malaysia; atau

By making statements that:

  • MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP deserve public condemnation for betraying their principles and promises to uphold and defend the Federal Constitution but also for their political expediency to continue to deceive the people by supporting UMNO that is willing to work together with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution to allow these laws to take effect.
  • Calling MCA, MIC, Gerakan and SUPP to leave BN because of the “unconstitutional measures adopted by UMNO to support PAS’ move”,

Lim Guan Eng is playing a religious and racial games by falsely accusing the Malay Muslim PAS and UMNO “bypass the Federal Constitution” and “taking unconstitutional measures” which could “promote feelings of ill will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia”.

This will cause the non-Muslims to think that the government and the Muslims are up to something bad and doing things against the law which can cause anger and disharmony among the people of different races and religions.

Section 3(1)(f) of the Sedition Act says:

bagi mempersoalkan apa-apa perkara, hak, taraf, kedudukan, keistimewaan, kedaulatan atau prerogatif yang ditetapkan atau dilindungi oleh peruntukan Bahagian III Perlembagaan Persekutuan atau Perkara 152, 153 atau 181 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

The Yang Di-Pertuan Agong is the head of religion of Islam of the country and “to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution is against the Sedition Act.

It is the rights of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong to make decisions on matters concerning the religion of Islam as stated in the Federal Constitution thus making statements against the statement made by the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong regarding this matter is interfering with the rights of the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong.

<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-13316" src="https://ahmadalijetplane.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/whatsapp-image-2016-11-24-at-11-23-30-pm.png" alt=""whatsapp-i

Related Posts:

Video: Japan’s Earthquake Triggers Tsunami Waves Surge Nov 2016

A 7.3 magnitude earthquake shook northern Japan at 5:59 am on 22nd of November, 2016, triggering a small tsunami.

Japan Meteorological Agency said that the epicentre of the earthquake, which was felt in Tokyo, was off the coast of Fukushima prefecture at a depth of about 10 km (6 miles).

The quake however did not kill or injure anyone, nor did it damage the Onagawa Nuclear Plant, though Tokyo Electric Power Co was still checking if the other nuclear plants in Fukushima are damaged.

The biggest quake recorded to hit Japan was a 9 magnitude quake, causing a large tsunami which led to the world’s worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl, a quarter of a century earlier.

Below are some videos of the tsunami waves surge:

 

https://embed.theguardian.com/embed/video/world/video/2016/nov/22/japan-earthquake-tsunami-waves-surge-up-river-video

Rare Supermoon: Stunning photos from across the globe capture lunar phenomenon

The moon rises behind the castle of Almodovar in Cordoba, southern Spain. (AP Photo/Miguel Morenatti)
The moon rises behind the castle of Almodovar in Cordoba, southern Spain. (AP Photo/Miguel Morenatti)\

A rare full supermoon lit up the skies last night for the first time in 70 years.

The moon appeared bigger and brighter than usual as it came 30,000km closer to earth than usual.

Sky-gazers across the globe flocked outside to spot the lunar phenomenon as it lit up the night sky.

Unfortunately in the UK, a thick layer of cloud ruined most people’s view, and the supermoon was barely visible in large swathes of the country.

But other countries were treated to a real light show, as the megamoon loomed large in the clear sky.

Here are some of the best pictures from across the world.

Bersih Has Never Taken Soros’ Money?

In a Sinar Harian (SH) article, “Bersih terus berjuang demi rakyat”, SH’s reporter Siti Nursyahidah Abu Bakar interviewed Bersih 2.0 chairman Maria Chin Abdullah and her deputy, Shahrul Aman Mohd Saari regarding Bersih 5.
The reporter’s statement and question, and Maria Chin and Shahrul Aman’s answers under the subject, “Fitnah kitar semula” caught my eyes:
Fitnah kitar semula

Menjelang 19 November, timbul lagi cerita buruk kononnya Bersih mendapat dana daripada jutawan Amerika Syarikat, George Soros. Anda rasa ini sengaja dimainkan untuk menghalang rakyat sertai Bersih 5? – Sinar Harian.

From her statement and how she asked her question, it seems that the reporter is trying to say that it is a lie that Bersih did receive funding from George Soros, calling it a recycled slander; how interesting.
Shahrul answered:

Jika kita lihat rentetan fitnah terhadap Bersih, ia hampir sama seperti himpunan lalu. Malah, fitnah dimainkan juga sering dikitar semula termasuk isu dana Soros. Sedangkan isu ini sudah tutup dan pada 2013, sebuah akhbar telah meminta maaf kepada Bersih.

By using the apology made by a newspaper to Bersih in 2013 to prove his case, Shahrul claimed that the Soros issue was a recycled slander.
And in this article, Maria Chin also denied receiving money from George Soros:

Mengenai tuduhan dapat dana daripada Soros, tunjukkan bukti dalam akaun kami. Apa yang kita buat pada 2014, kita dapat derma RM2.6 juta daripada orang awam.

But the same Maria Chin Abdullah had admitted taking money from NDI and OSI.

maria-chin-nedndi
Credit to AIDC

And this is what Ambiga has to say about NDI and OSI:

Taken from Free Malaysia Today, who quoted The Malaysian Insider.
Credit to Free Malaysia Today, who quoted The Malaysian Insider.

Now, how can Maria Chin deny receiving funds from George Soros when both she and Ambiga confessed that they had received money from both National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Open Society Institute (OSI) which is now known as Open Society Foundation, an organisation established by George Soros?
Maria Chin and Shahrul Aman can use Sinar Harian to lie about Soros to Bersih’s supporters but they cannot cheat those who are clever enough to read and do some research about their activities.
In the case of a newspaper apologising to Bersih as mentioned by Shahrul, NST made the mistake by saying that Bersih was funded by National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and OSI instead of NDI and OSI as admitted by both Ambiga and Maria Chin.
So, NST made no mistake about saying that Bersih had received money from George Soros’s OSI, it is Shahrul who twisted the facts and tried to use this case to lie to everybody about Soros’s fund to Bersih.
It is technically true that Bersih 2.0 was not directly funded by NED, but by receiving money from NDI, they are indirectly taking NED’s money because NDI is also funded by NED for this project.

bersih-dana-ndi
Please click the photo for larger image. From NDI’s official website, credit to Karim’s Blog (akarimomar.wordpress.com).

Instead of lying, Bersih 2.0 must admit that they did receive funding from the US organisations.
Stop lying and spinning stories because if Bersih thinks that it is doing the right thing, it has nothing to hide and lie about.
Even the Russia Today wrote that Soros’s OSI funded Bersih and how the United States assisted the Malaysian opposition during the previous General Election.

rt-opposition-ned rt-quote-pr-receivert-quote-osi

PAN Protects Alcohol, Rejects Hadi’s Bill?

PAN or Parti Amanah Negara’s MP for Kota Raja, Dr Siti Mariah Mahmud said in Parliament that the alcohol taxes should not be raised as reported by Free Malaysia Today (FMT).

I would understand if this issue was raised by a non-Muslim MP, but why must a Muslim MP from a so-called Islamic political party raised the issue in parliament?

FMT reported that Siti Mariah who is the women’s wing chief of PAN said that, “As for alcohol, it is allowed to non-Muslims, so if we increase its tax it will burden them.”

Bagi alkohol pula, ia dibenarkan untuk bukan Muslim, jadi jika kita naikkan cukainya ia akan membebankan mereka,” kata Siti Mariah Mahmood (Amanah-Kota Raja) di Dewan Rakyat hari ini. – FMT

This is an argument made by a senior leader from a party that claims that its aim is to become the main Islamic party in Malaysia.

My question to PAN’s Dr Siti Mariah are:

  1. Why must a Muslim like Siti Mariah fights for something which is haram just to win the non-Muslims’ votes?
  2. Is fighting for the non-Muslims alcohol drinker is more important than fighting for the Muslims who want the Act 355 to be amended?
  3. Is the issue of alcohol tax is more important than the issue of the amendment of Act 355?
  4. Is fighting for the tax on alcohol not to be increased is one of the actions taken by Siti Mariah and PAN to empower Islam as promised by them to their main voters who are the Muslims?
  5. Is there no better issue to fight for other than alcohol?
  6. Is PAN not aware of the bad effect of alcohol?
  7. Is PAN saying that all non-Muslims consume alcohol for concluding that an increase on alcohol tax will burden the non-Muslim and not only the people who consume alcohol?
  8. Is she implying that drinking alcohol is such an important part of the lives of the non-Muslims that it is a duty for her to raise the issue regardless the fact that she is a Muslim?

Siti Mariah must understand that alcohol is haram to the Muslims so it is wrong for a Muslim to fight for alcohol, as there is no reason for non-Muslims to make a fuss about Act 355 as it has nothing to do with them.

Furthermore, why must she fight for alcohol?

Is she not aware of the bad effects of being drunk, like causing accidents, crimes like domestic violence, fights and other violence actions?

Is this how a Muslim MP supposed to be; promoting bad practices and assuming that every non-Muslims drinks alcohol.

Siti Mariah as a PAS candidate in the 13th General Election has violated the trust of her Muslims voters.

Trump Wins Against Clinton in the 2016 US Election

picture6

Photo credit to Yahoo! News - As of Nov 9, 2016 | 9:23 AM (PST)
Photo credit to Yahoo! News – As of Nov 9, 2016 | 9:23 AM (PST)

Akta 355: Poster Dangkal SIS Forum Tentang Akta 355

img-20161018-wa0001

Poster di atas yang bertajuk, “Memahami Rang Undang-Undang 355 Dan Impaknya” telah dikeluarkan oleh SIS Forum (Malaysia) Berhad untuk membantah cadangan pindaan Akta 355.

Jelas bahawa SIS Forum (Malaysia) Berhad yang lebih suka dikenali sebagai Sisters in Islam tidak memahami atau dengan sengaja mahu mengelirukan orang ramai dengan fakta-fakta yang tidak betul dan tidak tepat berkenaan cadangan pindaan Akta 355.

Sebenarnya SIS Forum amat keliru dan tidak faham perkara yang mereka bangkitkan kerana apa yang mereka dakwa sebagai Rang Undang-Undang (RUU) 355 itu sebenarnya ialah Bil Persendirian cadangan pindaan Akta 355 dan bukannya Rang Undang-Undang 355.

Rang undang-undang mestilah digubal oleh kerajaan Persekutuan dengan syarat tertentu dan dalam hal ini, kerajaan hanya boleh menggubal RUU ini setelah Bil Persendirian pindaan Akta 355 ini diluluskan oleh parlimen.

Saya ingin mengulas poster di atas, ayat bewarna merah ialah kenyataan pada poster SIS Forum Berhad manakala ayat bewarna biru ialah ulasan saya.

Akta 355 merupakan akta berkaitan bidang kuasa jenayah mahkamah syariah.
Seksyen 2 di bawah Akta 355 menjelaskan batas bidang kuasa mahkamah syariah di mana hukuman maksimum yang boleh dikenakan adalah penjara 3 tahun atau denda RM5000 atau 6 kali sebatan atau apa-apa gabungan hukuman tersebut.

SIS Forum mestilah amanah dan mesti menerangkan  perkara-perkara asas yang amat penting tentang Akta 355 dan Seksyen 2 Akta 355.

  • Pertama, SIS Forum mesti menjelaskan bahawa bidang kuasa Mahkamah Syariah hanya terhad kepada orang Islam sahaja untuk mengelak kekeliruan di kalangan rakyat yang kurang memahami isu perundangan dan Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
  • Kedua, hukuman sebat yang dijatuhkan oleh Mahkamah Syariah adalah “sebatan syariah” yang amat jauh lebih ringan daripada “sebatan sivil”.

Apakah cadangan pindaan RUU355?
Parti politik PAS mencadangkan untuk meminda Akta 355 bagi meningkatkan hukuman denda yang dikenakan olen mahkamah syariah, kecuali hukuman mati. Jumlah hukuman yang dikenakan akan ditentukan oleh Dewan Undangan Negeri.” 

  • Cadangan pindaan Akta 355 bukanlah semata-mata mahu meningkatkan hukuman denda. Denda di dalam konteks undang-undang Mahkamah Syariah sekarang bermakna sejumlah wang (tidak melebihi lima ribu ringgit) yang mesti dibayar oleh pesalah.
  • Perkara yang dicadangkan dalam pindaan Akta 355 termasuklah Mahkamah Syariah bukan hanya boleh mengenakan hukuman penjara, denda dan sebatan syariah, tetapi boleh mengenakan berbagai bentuk hukuman-hukuman lain termasuk hukuman sosial jika ianya lebih berkesan.

Apakah impak pindaan ini, jika diluluskan?
-Ia akan memberi kuasa yang lebih luas kepada mahkamah syariah untuk mengenakan hukuman denda kepada pesalah jenayah syariah tanpa batasan kecuali hukuman mati.
-Hukuman yang dikenakan oleh mahkamah syariah selamanya tidak akan selaras kerana ia tertakluk mengikut negeri.
-Kelemahan pelaksanaan hukuman akan memberi nama yang buruk kepada mahkamah syariah dan agama Islam.

Dakwaan SIS Forum adalah prejudis, di luar komteks dan tidak benar. Impak sebenar pindaan ini bila di luluskan ialah Mahkamah Syariah boleh menjatuhkan hukuman yang selaras dengan kadar hukuman Mahkamah Sivil dan DUN boleh menggubal undang-undang yang lebih sesuai bukan hanya untuk menghukum tapi juga untuk mendidik umat Islam supaya menjadi lebih baik di samping mengurangkan jenayah syariah.

  • Menuduh pindaan ini akan “memberi kuasa yang lebih luas kepada mahkamah syariah untuk mengenakan hukuman denda kepada pesalah jenayah syariah tanpa batasan kecuali hukuman mati” adalah satu fitnah jahat kerana bentuk dan had hukuman syariah adalah digubal oleh DUN di peringkat Negeri dan bukannya oleh Mahkamah Syariah itu sendiri.
  • Amat tidak masuk akal bila SIS Forum mendakwa jika pindaan ini diluluskan, impaknya ialah, “Hukuman yang dikenakan oleh mahkamah syariah selamanya tidak akan selaras kerana ia tertakluk mengikut negeri”. Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang memperuntukan kuasa penggubalan Undang-undang Syariah kepada Negeri dan bukannya cadangan pindaan Akta 355 yang mencadangkan perkara ini. Oleh itu, perkara ini tiada kaitan dengan pindaan Akta 355.
  • Amat tidak logik untuk SIS Forum mendakwa satu lagi “impak pindaan ini, jika diluluskan” ialah, “Kelemahan pelaksanaan hukuman akan memberi nama yang buruk kepada mahkamah syariah dan agama Islam” kerana Mahkamah Syariah bukanlah institusi yang melaksanakan hukuman.

Benarkah pindaan ini akan memartabatkan status mahkamah syariah di Malaysia?
Tidak benar, kerana pindaan ini hanya tertumpu kepada aspek hukuman, tanpa menyelesaikan masalah sistemik di mahkamah syariah, contohnya perlaksanaan Undang-undang Keluarga Islam yang masih bermasalah.

Keupayaan Mahkamah Syariah menjatuhkan hukuman yang setimpal dengan kesalahan syariah sudah tentu akan memartabatkan status Mahkamah Syariah.

  • Sekarang had hukuman Mahkamah Syariah jauh lebih rendah daripada hampir semua hukuman jenayah sivil, contohnya hukuman merokok di tempat awam adalah jauh lebih tinggi daripada hukuman jenayah syariah. Apakah SIS Forum merasakan bahawa kesalahan merokok di tempat awam adalah lebih serius daripada kesalahan di bawah Undang-undang Keluarga Islam?

Cara-cara lain untuk memperkasakan mahkamah syariah:
– Menyelaraskan sistem undang-undang keluarga Islam di antara negeri-negeri di Malaysia supaya sama.
– Memudahkan proses tuntutan nafkah bagi ibu-ibu tunggal supaya lebih efisien.
– Mempercepatkan proses perceraian, hak penjagaan anak dan lain-lain supaya tidak berlanjutan sehingga bertahun-tahun.
– Memastikan setiap daerah di Malaysia mempunyai hakim syarie yang mencukupi dan adil gender.

Undang-undang Syariah di Malaysia tidak hanya tertakluk kepada Undang-undang Keluarga Islam sahaja.

  • Cadangan SIS Forum tidak merangkumi cara menyelesaikan kesalahan syariah lain seperti murtad, LGBTIQ, khalwat, menghina Islam, ajaran sesat dan lain-lain.
  • Sistem Undang-undang Keluarga Islam di antara negeri-negeri yang disamakan, proses tuntutan nafkah dimudahkan, proses perceraian dipercepatkan dan setiap daerah di Malaysia mempunyai hakim Syarie yang cukup sahaja tidak boleh memperkasakan Mahkamah Syariah jika had hukuman maksimanya jauh lebih rendah daripada hukuman merokok di tempat awam.
  • Jika SIS Forum berpendapat aspek hukuman tidak penting dalam sistem mahkamah, SIS Forum patut mendesak had hukuman Mahkamah Sivil diselaraskan dengan had hukuman Mahkamah Syariah iaitu terhad kepada 3 tahun penjara, denda 5 ribu ringgit dan 6 kali sebatan syariah.
  • Ataupun, adakah SIS Forum merasakan kesalahan syariah tidak seserius kesalahan sivil maka hukuman sekarang sudah memadai?
  • Sebenarnya cadangan SIS Forum berhubung cara penambahbaikan sistem Mahkamah Syariah sudah pun dilaksanakan Jabatan Kehakiman Syariah Malaysia dan Jabatan Kehakiman Syariah Negeri contohnya dengan menubuhkan Jawatankuasa Kerja Arahan Amalan Mahkamah Syariah untuk melicinkan proses mahkamah dan Jawatankuasa Kaedah Mahkamah Syariah pula untuk menggarap modul agar perbicaraan dapat dipercepatkan.

Bolehkah orang Islam membantah RUU355?
Rakyat Malaysia tanpa mengira latar belakang agama berhak menyuarakan bantahan kerana RUU355 adalan pindaan kepada prosedur yang akan memberi kesan kepada kepentingan awam.

  • Pertama, perkara ini berkaitan Bil Persendirian dan bukannya RUU355; jadi kenapa orang Islam harus membantah RUU355 yang tidak wujud?
  • Tidak menjadi satu kesalahan di bawah undang-undang Malaysia jika sesiapa sahaja mahu membantah Bil Persendirian ini, walaupun tiada sebab untuk mereka membantah satu pindaan yang membawa kepada kebaikan. Pindaan ini adalah salah satu cara untuk mengurangkan jenayah syariah. Pengurangan jenayah akan memberi kesan positif kepada seluruh rakyat yang cintakan keamanan termasuk juga orang yang bukan beragama Islam.
  • Namun, bagi orang Islam yang membantah bermakna mereka membantah satu usaha untuk mengurangkan jenayah Syariah; manakala bagi orang bukan Islam pula, tiada sebab untuk mereka membantah kerana jenayah syariah hanya melibatkan orang Islam sahaja dan Mahkamah Syariah tidak ada kaitan langsung dengan mereka.

SIS Forum Berhad yang suka menggunakan nama Islam sepatutnya membuat poster tentang pindaan Akta 355 dengan penuh amanah dan berdasarkan fakta yang tepat dan bukannya menggunakan imaginasi mereka untuk memburukkan suatu usaha yang murni untuk memartabatkan perundangan Islam di Malaysia.

Tindakan SIS Forum ini telah memberi nama yang buruk kepada agama Islam kerana mereka seakan memberi gambaran bahawa Mahkamah Syariah tidak harus diberi kuasa yang lebih tinggi dalam menjatuhkan hukuman; seolah-olah Mahkamah Syariah tidak penting dan hakim-hakim Mahkamah Syariah tidak mampu bertindak dengan adil dan amanah.

Related Post:

Videos: Jakarta Anti-Ahok Peaceful Assembly Turns Violent

This is a lesson for Bersih 5, a peaceful assembly can turn violent when it gets out of control.

http://players.brightcove.net/665003303001/4k5gFJHRe_default/index.html?videoId=5196916434001

Incredible Origami Animals By Spanish Gonzalo García Calvo

The collection includes birds of prey made in intricate details
The collection includes birds of prey made in intricate details

Professional musician Gonzalo García Calvo has created lots of outstanding origami animals and other objects using various of different techniques and papers.

The 35-year-old sells some of his more complex creations but gives away the simpler ones which he often left in public for people to find.

Below are some of the Madrid-based Spanish origami master’s awesome creation.

Please click the photos for larger images: