Tag Archives: COMANGO

Ke Mana Arah Puteri UMNO?

SIS Forum Sdn Bhd recently posted this image on their Instagram page:

I was really shocked by the photo and the caption!

The big smiles shows that they are proud of their actions, how sad.

SIS Forum is against the amendments of the Act 355 to empower the Shariah Courts, the government’s stance on Kalimah Allah issue, fatwas, the Islamic authorities and other Islamic policies and the teaching of Islam.

On the other hand, SIS Forum fights for LGBT rights, liberalism, pluralism, wrong interpretation of the holy Quran and other matters against Islam.

Sis Forum is also a member of two anti-government coalition, BERSIH and COMANGO.

BERSIH that received funding from George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) and National Democratic Institute (NDI), makes malicious and slanderous accusations not only towards UMNO but also towards PM Najib, and their main activity is organising illegal anti-government demonstrations in which they humiliate PM Najib and in its latest demonstration, BERSIH demonstrators are calling for PM Najib to step down.

COMANGO is a loose coalition of NGOs that made false accusations regarding human rights in Malaysia and demands the government of Malaysia to sign the UNHRC treaties that are against Islam, the Federal Constitution, the Rukun Negara (National Principles) and the laws of our country.

So, what is going on with Puteri UMNO and what are they trying to prove?

Is this an action of being politically mature or are they trying to stab UMNO in the back?

For their information, DAPSY will not be doing such thing together with PERKASA unless PERKASA makes a u-turn on its stance regarding Islam and the Malays.

What can they gain politically from inviting SIS Forum to their event?

If they think that political gain is not important for them despite they are an UMNO wing at the time when the general election is looming near; then I’m speechless.

Can’t those Puteri UMNO think of the consequences of their actions; that by working together with SIS Forum, they are giving the impression that they can tolerate and respect SIS Forum’s liberal and anti-government ideology?

Or are they really moving towards that path and away from UMNO’s ‘demi agama, bangsa dan tanahair’?

Next, perhaps they can invite leaders of SIS Forum as speakers for their programs.

Kuasa Pendaftar Pertubuhan Yang Kita Tak Ambil Peduli

Semakin banyak saya membaca, semakin bertambah pengetahuan saya dan semakin saya sedar begitu banyak pekara yang saya perlu saya pelajari.

Membaca tulisan salah seorang Uncle Naser Disa di portal Menara.my yang bertajuk, ‘ROS Boleh Batalkan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan Yang Menentang Agenda Islam Negara!’ telah membuka mata saya betapa tingginya kedudukan Islam sebagai agama bagi Persekutuan di negara kita, dan betapa lemahnya usaha kita dalam menggunakan peruntukan undang-undang yang sediaada untuk mempertahankan kedaulatan Islam.

Saya diminta oleh Menara.my untuk mengulas isu ini, dan setelah saya menghubungi Uncle Naser untuk mendapatkan keterangan lanjut tentang perkara ini, dan saya menulis satu artikel ringkas.

Di sini saya lampirkan tulisan saya yang telah disiarkan oleh portal Menara.my.


Saya amat tertarik membaca kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif, Institut Kajian Strategik Islam Malaysia (IKSIM), Dato’ Prof. Hj Mahamad Naser Disa seperti yang dilaporkan oleh portal berita Menara di bawah tajuk, ‘ROS Boleh Batalkan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan Yang Menentang Agenda Islam Negara!’.

ali-karim-petak-2-203x300

Seksyen 2A Akta Pertubuhan 1966 dengan jelas menggariskan bahawa setiap pertubuhan berdaftar mestilah mematuhi Perlembagaan Persekutuan dalam menjalankan urusan mereka.

Menara melaporkan bahawa menurut Dato’ Prof. Hj Mahamad Naser Disa, parti-parti politik dan pertubuhan yang menentang pemerkasaan Akta 355 boleh dibatalkan pendaftaran mereka.

Selain daripada mempersoalkan pindaan Akta 355, apakah tuduhan bahawa Malaysia ialah sebuah Negara Sekular oleh pemimpin sesebuah parti politik atau pertubuhan akan mengakibatkan terbatalnya pendaftaran pertubuhan mereka kerana perkara itu jelas bertentangan dengan Perkara 3(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan?

Persolannya, kenapakah sekarang ini pemimpin-pemimpin parti politik dan pertubuhan berlumba-lumba untuk dengan lantangnya mendakwa bahawa mereka bebas dan berhak menentang dan menghina hal-hal berkaitan agama Islam dan kedudukan istimewa orang Melayu? Malah, ada pemimpin yang sanggup menghina Raja-Raja Melayu dan mempertikaikan titah Raja-Raja kita. Apakah mereka terlalu jahil undang-undang atau sengaja mahu mencabar undang-undang dan kedaulatan Perlembagaan negara kita?

Akta Pertubuhan 1966 memperuntukkan bahawa setiap pertubuhan diwajibkan untuk menjalankan apa-apa aktiviti dan hal ehwal nya selaras dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan Perlembagaan Negeri. Dan yang penting sekali, jika apa-apa yang dibuat oleh pertubuhan itu berlawanan dengan, atau berkurangan atau bertentangan terhadap, atau tidak mengambilkira mengenai kedudukan Islam sebagai agama Malaysia, maka pendaftaran pertubuhan tersebut boleh dibatalkan.

Kes-kes seperti kenyataan songsang oleh pemimpin-pemimpin parti politik, G25, COMANGO, Bersih, SIS Forum Berhad, dan lain-lain dengan jelas melanggar Seksyen 2A Akta Pertubuhan 1966.  Mereka dengan sengaja menyalahtafsirkan Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia untuk mengelirukan orang ramai dalam usaha untuk meruntuhkan asas-asas negara kita yang bertentangan dengan ideologi mereka.

Malah, COMANGO pula sudahpun membawa tuntutan-tuntutan yang bercanggah dengan Seksyen 2A Akta Pertubuhan 1966 kepada Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu (PBB) untuk Semakan Berkala Sejagat (Universal Periodic Review). Perkara ini telah membawa kepada tekanan oleh Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu keatas negara kita dan mendesak kerajaan Malaysia mematuhi piawaian UPR biarpun ianya jelas bertentangan dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia.

Apakah ini bermakna bahawa tindakan boleh diambil ke atas pertubuhan-pertubuhan mereka?

Kini sudah sampai masanya pihak berwajib mengambil langkah yang lebih tegas dalam mengawal aktiviti-aktiviti parti-parti politik dan pertubuhan yang dengan bangganya menghina dan memperlekehkan agama Islam serta membuat kenyataan yang bertentangan denganundang-undang Malaysia. Perkara ini amat penting kerana ianya boleh mencetuskan perbalahan kaum dan agama yang boleh membawa kepada rusuhan seperti tragedi 13 Mei 1969. Jika ini terjadi, kestabilan ekonomi negara akan musnah dan akan membawa kepada kehancuran negara kita.

logo-head

Is Muhyiddin Still “A Malay First”?

“I am a Malay first!” stated Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin as he accused DAP’s Parliamentary Leader, Lim Kit Siang’s statement as “to put a wedge between the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister.”

That happened six years ago when Tan Sri Muhyiddin was still the Deputy Prime Minister and the, “I am a Malay first” was regarded as a heroic statement by the members of UMNO, in accordance with UMNO’s spirit of “alif, ba, ta (agama, bangsa dan tanahair)” or religion, race and nation.

Below is the video of his statement originally released by MalaysiaKini’s KiniTV.

But now the former Deputy Prime Minister seems to change his mind.

He joined Tun Dr. Mahathir to team up with the enemies of UMNO who are against Islam, the Malay rights and the Federal Constitution such as Lim Kit Siang, Tony Pua, Teresa Kok, Tian Chua, Ambiga Sreenevasan, Maria Chin, and others.

(Photo credit to Dr MIM)

(Photo credit to Dr MIM)

By teaming up with those enemies of UMNO, he is now against his own party and what he said six years ago.

When he said, “I am a Malay first”, it automatically means he is also saying that he is a Muslim first because according to the interpretation of Malay in the Clause 2 of the Article 160 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia:

“…“Malay” means a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom…”

So how could he becomes teammates with Lim Kit Siang and happily sharing a couch with him?

IMG-20160305-WA0007

Is Lim Kit Siang more Malay and Islamic than PM Najib to the former Deputy Prime Minister?

Has Tan Sri Muhyiddin forgotten that Lim Kit Siang had rudely made a malicious accusation that a verse from the Quran, the verse 120 of Surah Al-Baqarah caused religious hatred and blamed JAKIM for using the verse in a Khutbah Jumaat?

By teaming up with Lim Kit Siang who is clearly against Islam and the Malay rights, Tan Sri Muhyiddin is now against his own principles of Malay first.

azan1

Photo credit to Pisau.net

His other new teammate, Tony Pua among others had humiliated the law and principals of Islam by making fun of the Islamic view regarding Valentines Day.

Image from Tonu Pua's Facebook.

Image from Tonu Pua’s Facebook.

In his Chinese New Year video, Tony Phua again makes fun of the Muslims by mocking a Saudi Arabian Muslim in a very humiliated ways.

Another new teammate of Tan Sri Muhyiddin, Teresa Kok had ordered the Jawi script on road signs of Jalan Bukit Bintang and Jalan Taman Seputeh to be abolished.

p10203551a imgp4219a1

Jawi is the original script of the Malay language, and the Malay Language is the national Language according to the Article 152 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

(1) The national language shall be the Malay language and shall be in such script…

Tian Chua who is another of Tan Sri Muhyiddin’s new teammate, on February 2013 made a malicious and uncalled comment about the Lahad Datu standoff saying that the death of ten policemen and soldiers from our PDRM and ATM including nine Malays who were protecting Lahad Datu was just a “sandiwara UMNO” or a theatrical staged by UMNO as a conspiracy to distract and scare the people because of the general election.

Picture1

Ambiga and Maria Chin are both Bersih leaders that organised illegal demonstrations against the government, creating havoc and disorder and promoting the anarchy ideology which is against the principals of the Malay and Islam.

They, who are also behind COMANGO, are fighting for the LGBT rights which is against Islam apart from fighting for parts of the Islamic laws to be abolished.

COMANGO demands Malaysia to:

  1. Sign the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) which is against the Articles 3(1) and 11(4) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

  2. Sign the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination  (ICERD) which is against Article 153 of the Federal Constitution that gives special rights and position of the Malays and the Bumiputras (indigenous people of the Sabah and Sarawak).

  3. Sign SOGI Rights (Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity) to legalise LGBTIQ  which is against Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution and also the Malaysian law.

  4. Demands that some enactments of the Syariah Law to be abolished which is against Article 3(1) and against the second principle of the Rukun Negara that says, “Loyalty to the king and country,” because the king is the protector of Islam.

What Bersih and COMANGO are fighting for are against the Federal Constitution as Islam is the religion of the Federation.

bendera-lgbt

Tan Sri Muhyiddin whom once claimed to be a Malay first, has now become teammates with people who are against Islam and the special rights and position of the Malays and the Bumiputras.

Maybe now he has changed his mind about being a Malay first for, on the 27th of February 2016, he made a new statement:

“Ketepikan sentimen kaum, agama dan ideologi untuk ke arah mewujudkan sebuah kerajaan yang adil, amanah dan berintegriti.”

Isn’t it weird that just because he is against the Prime Minister, his personal principals and views have changed and he is now teammates to the people who are trying to destroy his party that had once made him a Deputy Prime Minister?

Is Lim Kit Siang more Malay and Islamic than PM Najib to the former Deputy Prime Minister?

His actions hurt the Malays and UMNO members who had voted for him.

Kalau marahkan nyamuk jangan bakar kelambu, jangan sampai menang sorak, kampung tergadai.

G25, Another Voice Of Liberal Muslims

The Malaysia Insider reported that a “group of retired Malay civil servants of G25 against religious extremism plans to seek an audience with the Malay rulers to petition for a committee that will review the application of Islam in Malaysian law.”
G25 wrote an open letter (please click here for the open letter) dated December 7, 2014 among others expressed that they are disturbed and deeply dismayed “over the continuing unresolved disputes on the position and application of Islamic laws in this country” and stated that “the teachings of our faith must continue to evolve” to be relevant.
They wrote that:

“The on-going debate over these matters display a lack of clarity and understanding on the place of Islam within our constitutional democracy.”

Actually, there should not be any question about the place of Islam within our constitution because it is clearly stated in Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia that Islam is the religion of the Federation and the oath pledged by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as in accordance to Article 37(1) is made in the name of Allah, “Wallahi Wabillahi Watallahi” and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong pledges to uphold Islam at all time.

Article 3(1) said that:

“Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”

Article 37(1) stated that the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong needs to take his oath before exercising his functions:

“The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall before exercising his functions take and subscribe before the Conference of Rulers and in the presence of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court (or in his absence the next senior judge of the Federal Court available) the oath of office set out in Part I of the Fourth Schedule; and the oath shall be attested by two persons appointed for the purpose by the Conference of Rulers.”

The oath pledged by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong:

“Wallahi: Wabillahi: Watallahi,

Maka dengan lafaz ini berikrarlah Kami dengan sesungguhnya dan dengan sebenarnya mengaku akan taat setia pada menjalankan dengan adilnya pemerintahan bagi Malaysia dengan mengikut sebagaimana undang-undang dan Perlembagaan yang telah disahkan dan dimasyurkan dan akan disah dan dimasyurkan di masa hadapan ini. Dan lagi Kami berikrar mengaku dengan sesungguh dan dengan sebenarnya memeliharakan pada setiap masa Agama Islam dan berdiri tetap di atas permintaan yang adil dan aman di dalam Negeri.”

G25 also wrote:

“We refer specifically to the current situation where religious bodies seem to be asserting authority beyond their jurisdiction; where issuance of various fatwa violate the Federal Constitution and breach the democratic and consultative process of shura; where the rise of supremacist NGOs accusing dissenting voices of being anti-Islam, anti-monarchy and anti-Malay has made attempts at rational discussion and conflict resolution difficult; and most importantly, where the use of the Sedition Act hangs as a constant threat to silence anyone with a contrary opinion. These developments undermine Malaysia’s commitment to democratic principles and rule of law, breed intlerance and bigotry, and have heightened anxieties over national peace and stability.”

Contrary to the accusation made by G25, the religious bodies are not “asserting authority beyond their jurisdiction, but they are doing their job to uphold Islam as the religion of the Federation as stated under Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution.

“…the rise of supremacist NGOs accusing dissenting voices of being anti-Islam, anti-monarchy and anti-Malay has made attempts at rational discussion and conflict resolution difficult…” – G25

From the above statement I guess the NGOs that G25 called supremacist are the Malay and Islamic NGOs who are fighting to uphold Islam which is the religion of the Federation as written in Article 3(1) and protecting the rights of the Malays as written in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.
I just wonder why the Malays of G25 are so disturbed by people fighting for Islam and the rights of the Malays?
And why is G25 quiet when liberal NGOs like COMANGO questioned, humiliated and challenged Islam, the Malays rights and our Rulers?
Does G25 think that it is constitutional when people like Lim Kit Siang, Eric Paulsen and Tony Pua humiliate and slender Islam, the Friday Sermon and JAKIM?
What about some illegal coalition of NGOs such as BERSIH who went against the law by organising illegal street demonstrations, with the hope to topple a democratically elected government?
G25 also attacked Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom for doing his job as the minister in charge of the Islamic affairs:

“…we are particularly concerned with the statement issued by Minister Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, in response to the recent Court of Appeal judgement on the right of transgendered women to dress according to their identity.”

Calling the Sedition Act as a tool to silence the voices with a contrary opinion shows that one does not understand the Sedition Act.
According to Tan Sri Aziz Abdul Rahman, (please refer to this article) the Sedition Act or Akta Hasutan was written after the government identified four serious issues as one of the major causes of the serious 1969 racial riot:

  • Article 153 of the Federal Constitution: Special Rights For The Malays
  • Article 152 of the Federal Constitution: Malay As The National Language
  • Part III: of the Citizenship Rights                 
  • Article 181 of the Federal Constitution: Rights, Status, Sovereignty Of The Rulers

I just do not understand why G25 members want the four sensitive issues to be questioned when open debates on the four issues could actually “heightened anxieties over national peace and stability.”

The G25 further wrote:

“The Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land and any law enacted, including Islamic laws, cannot violate the Constitution, in particular the provisions on fundamental liberties, federal-state division of powers and legislative procedures”

How could the Islamic laws violate the Federal Constitution when Islam is the religion of the Federation as stated in Article 3(1) of the the Federal Constitution?
In the ruling of the Court of Appeal’s three-member panel led by Federal Court judge Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali on the Kalimah Allah case:

[31] It is my observation that the words “in peace and harmony” in Article 3(1) has a historical background and dimension, to the effect that those words are not without significance. The Article places the religion of Islam at par with the other basic structures of the Constitution, as it is the 3 rd in the order of precedence of the Articles that were within the confines of Part I of the Constitution. It is pertinent to note that the fundamental liberties Articles were grouped together subsequently under Part II of the Constitution.

And in the case of Ramah v Laton, it has been decided that the Islamic laws are the laws of the land, so it does not violate the Federal Constitution.

G25 then wrote:

“It is our fervent belief that for Islam to continue to be relevant and universal in our times, the understanding, codification and implementation of the teachings of our faith must continue to evolve.”

We have to follow the real teaching of Islam. We are the Muslims of Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah from the Shafie school of thought or madhhab, so this is the guideline followed by our Islamic authorities.
The true teaching of Islam is always relevant, therefore it must never be evolved or liberalised by anybody.

Hudud Is Against Federal Constitution, Total Freedom Is Not?

Insider 16The Malaysian Insider(TMI) reported that, “Bar Council constitutional law committee chairperson Firdaus Husni said the current framework of Malaysia’s Federal Constitution did not allow for hudud implementation, based on several articles.”

According to TMI, the articles are Articles 7, 8 and 3 of the Federal Constitution.

It puzzles me when Firdaus Husni said that, “hudud could also be challenged using Article 3, which stated that Islam was the religion of the federation”; when hudud is a part of Islam and not against the religion of the Federation.

Article 3(1) says:

“Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation”.

She went on saying:

“Instead, the 1993 Supreme Court case held it to mean that Islam in the context of Article 3 only relates to rituals and ceremonies,” –  The Malaysian Insider. 

I guess she was referring to the case of Che Omar Che Soh v Public Prosecutor (1988) 2 MLJ 55; an old case which is no longer a good law; in fact the case was decided before the coming into effect of Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution.

To define Islam in Article 3(1), she should refer to later and more important cases to like the cases of Meor Atiqul Rahman v Fatimah Sihi and others [2000] 5 MLJ 375 and Lina Joy v Majlis agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan & 1 Lagi [2007] 4
MLJ 585.

Furthermore, in Che’ Omar bin Che’ Soh v Public Prosecutor, Tun Salleh Abbas did not say that Malaysia is a secular nation but Tun Salleh Abbas only said that secular laws were used in Malaysia.

Articles 3(1), 11(4), 12(2), 37(1) and 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution proves that Malaysia is an Islamic country, in fact, that the word ‘secular’ has never been written in the Federal Constitution.

After giving all her arguments of why Hudud is against the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, I have a question for the Bar Council; has the Bar Council forgotten about Articles 3(1), 10(4), 11(4), 181 and others when it fights for the LBGT rights, the freedom for the Muslims to change their religion or to become atheists and to abolish of the Sedition Act?

Indeed as lawyers they surely understand that in order for the Sedition Act to be removed, it needs the consent of nine Sultans because the Sedition Act is related to Article 10 (4); but they do not respect and sort of question the rights of the Sultan which is against the Article 181 of the Federal Constitution.

The Bar Council also supports COMANGO that are fighting for lots of things that are against the Federal Constitution in Geneva.

To simplify what I am trying to say, I think those Bar Council lawyers do not mind to change the Federal Constitution in order to achieve what they want.

So what is the logic of the Bar Council’s arguments saying that Hudud is against the Federal Constitution, when they are also fighting for things which are against the Federal Constitution?

If we compare Hudud to the rights to leave Islam, I think Hudud as the Islamic laws is more relevant in Malaysia since Islam is the religion of the Federation.

As a Muslim, Bar Council lawyer, Firdaus Husni must fight for Islam and not against Islam.

The Pro-opposition Activists Are Pressing For Ismail Sabri’s Resignation

Screenshot_4

The title of the above article by The Malaysian Insider (TMI) really attract my attention.

TMI started the article by writing that:

“Some 49 activist groups today demanded the resignation of Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob who had gone on a racist rant against Chinese businesses, saying it was an irresponsible move on the part of the minister to play on racial sentiments.” – TMI

Which NGOs are the 49 activist groups that demanded the resignation of Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob?

So I searched for the names of the NGOs and I found the full list in Malaysia Today.

Slide1

The list of the 49 NGOS that are pressing for Ismail Sabri’s resignation. (Malaysia Today).

 

When I read the list, I found that many of the NGOs are very familiar; so I did more research …

First I put the list side by side with the full list of NGOs that part of Bersih :

Slide1

So most of them are part of Bersih.

Then I also put the list side by side with the list of NGOs which are part of COMANGO and this is what I found:

Slide2

So, that is why the names of the NGOs are very familiar to me and they are highlighted by TMI!

These same NGOs are the members of Bersih, COMANGO, NegaraKu and some of them like SUARAM and Sisters In Islam or its real name, SIS Forum are not legal NGOs because they are not registered under ROS.

It is very funny when some illegal NGOs are pressing for a legal minister’s resignation.

No wonder those NGOs want Ismail Sabri to resign, after all those NGOs are the opposition parties supporters and will only look for ways to oppose the government.

To be fair, TMI should change the title of the article to, “The pro-opposition activists are pressing for Ismail Sabri’s resignation” or “Bersih and COMANGO activists are pressing for Ismail Sabri’s resignation.”

They are not only pressing for Ismail Sabri to resign but they also want to change the government.

 

Khairy, A Trojan Horse?

Khairy

There is a leader who hold three important posts in the government of Malaysia as well as in his party.

His name is Khairy Jamaluddin, and he is the Sports and Youth Minister, the UMNO Youth Chief and the Member of Parliament of Rembau.

As a youth leader of his party, he must understand which party he is representing and who are the members of his political party.

On September 3, 2014, he launched Proham secretary-general, Datuk Dr. Denision Jayasooria’s biography at the DUMC.

There are three things I must say about this:

  1. Dr Denison is one of COMANGO‘s activists.
    So why must Khairy launch a biography of an activist who is fighting against the Federal Constitution and the policies of Khairy’s political party, especially ‘ketuanan Melayu’ and Islam as in the 2011 DUMC case, kalimah Allah issue, bible issue, Article 3(1), Article 121(1A), Article 153, Article 160 and others? Khairy COMANGO has lots of agendas against the government and is fighting for the opposition party to take over the Malaysian government.

  2. DUMC is a church.
    Why in the world a Muslim leader like Khairy Jamaluddin must go inside a church, just to launch such a book? If Khairy does not bother about the sensitivity and feelings of the Malays who are represented by UMNO and who voted for Khairy’s party in the GE13, why can’t Khairy, as a Muslim ask for the book launch to be held in another place instead of a church?

  3. And why DUMC?
    Has Khairy forgotten the DUMC case where on the 4th day of Ramadhan 1432/2011, JAIS received a report that there were Muslims attending a church program at DUMC and they were having dinner even before Maghrib? So JAIS went there to investigate, but were stopped by the church’s people. JAIS, UMNO and the government were badly condemned and blamed by the Christians, opposition parties’ leaders and also activists who are now involved in COMANGO, when according to the law JAIS did the right thing.

Is Khairy an UMNO leader who really does not care about the dignity of Islam, the feelings and the sensitivity of the Muslims who voted for UMNO which made it possible for him to become a minister?

Please do not hurt the feelings of those who support UMNO in order to be popular among those who hate UMNO.

I hope his boss’ll remind him to remember, understand and uphold the 7 Wasiat Raja-Raja Melayu.

Please click for larger image. (Photo credit to Uncle Zul Noordin's blog, zul4kulim).