Hudud? Read this and think.

Related topics: Blasphemy, Apostasy, Law

Do you think Hudood (Hudud) is necessary to be a fair and just law? You should read this and think first:

Lies & Distortions by the Media about Hudood Ordinance (of Pakistan) http://jsmawais.googlepages.com/Booklet.pdf

Sharia Justice? Sultan of Brunei's Playboy Prince Brother 'Kept Mistress as Adulterers Face Death by Stoning'
By Ludovica Iaccino (7 May 2014)
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/sharia-justice-sultan-bruneis-playboy-prince-brother-kept-mistress-adulterers-face-death-by-1447528

Jillian Lauren claims she was the mistress
of Prince Jefri, brother of the Sultan
of Brunei - Facebook

An American Jewish woman has claimed she was hired to be the mistress of Prince Jefri Bolkiah, the playboy brother of the Sultan of Brunei.

Her revelation came just days after Brunei implemented sharia law, which allows residents to be stoned to death for "transgressions" such as homosexuality and adultery.

In her book Some Girls: My Life in a Harem, Jillian Lauren, 36, explained how she was picked to be Jefri's mistress.

Before turning 17, Lauren had dropped out of school to become a stripper. During her career, she was offered $20,000 (£11,785) to perform for a Singaporean businessman.

She soon understood that the man she had to entertain was not a Singaporean, but the Brunei prince.

"[The job] was an invitation to be the personal guest of the notorious playboy prince Jefri Bolkiah, the youngest brother of the Sultan of Brunei," Lauren told the Daily Beast.

"The prince threw lavish parties every night. At these parties there was drinking (which was not legal in public), dancing, some fairly hilarious karaoke, and, most important, women—about 30 or 40 beauties from all over the world, comprising a harem of sorts.

"I spent the next year and some change as his girlfriend."

Sharia law, also known as Islami Qaqun, is the moral code and religious law and is the bedrock of the legal system in several Islamic countries.

Under sharia, sexual intercourse is only allowed between husband and wife. Any form of sex outside wedlock is considered a crime and punishable by death.

Lauren, who has returned to her hometown, suggested that the prince and sultan might not be willing to observe the laws they have implemented.

"It is the privilege of the prince and the sultan to misbehave," she said. "As the citizens of Brunei face the erosion of their rights, I imagine the man I once knew, holed up in a posh hotel suite somewhere, maybe with another American teenager in his lap, making laws that legislate morality."

The introduction of sharia law in Brunei has sparked international outrage.

Many NGOs have repeatedly urged the sultan to withdraw the new rigid penal code, seen as a limitation of freedom and basic human rights.

Many people, including celebrities, are boycotting hotels owned by the oil-rich state's monarch in protest.

Consider to read:
http://nypost.com/2014/05/10/inside-the-wacky-sex-obsessed-world-of-brunei/

Brunei: When Sharia serves the sultan and US media

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/05/brunei-sharia-law-at-what-cost-2014528134130788926.html

The Sultan of Brunei Hassanal Bolkiah recently announced the adoption of a penal code based on Sharia [EPA]

On May 1, the Sultanate of Brunei introduced the first of three phases in its adoption of a penal code based on Islamic law, or Sharia. The move brought with it a flurry of international outcry, condemnation and moral indignation in the United States. The outrage over the adoption of a Sharia-based penal code, however, has outweighed any actual understanding of not only Sharia, but also of the Sultan of Brunei's calculated political move.

Condemnations have focused, in particular, on the application of the death penalty by stoning for offences such as blasphemy and illicit sex acts such as sodomy, rape and extra-marital sex; whipping and amputations for "less serious crimes". According to the United Nations, Brunei's adoption of the penal code violates international law as "stoning people to death constitutes torture or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment and is thus clearly prohibited". Amnesty International also warned that the move threatened to send the country back to the "dark ages".

Selective outrage


In keeping with a tradition of selective and uninformed outrage, US media outlets, celebrities and some lawmakers have been at the forefront of public condemnation of Brunei's new penal code.

US headlines boasted of Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah's own Sharia non-compliancy and "wacky sex obsession"; admonished the silence of the US government; and called into question Brunei's financial connection to the Clinton Foundation.

Hollywood, too, was unable to resist expressing outrage as it rushed to boycott the Beverly Hills Hotel, owned by the Sultan's Brunei Investment Agency. The boycott, which cost the agency over $1.5m in cancelled bookings, has been led by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organisation in the US.

Framing Brunei's new Sharia system in terms of "anti-gay" and "anti-women" legislation, as it has been in US coverage and protests, obscures the actual motivations behind the Sultanate's decision and nourishes the tired trope of "those crazy Muslims", an angle which the US media has an all-too comfortable relationship with.

Critical engagement with this story has been near non-existent, save an attempt in a PolicyMic article by Scott Long in which he questions the motives of US protests against the Sultanate's adoption of Sharia: "Why are gay bloggers, Tweeters and groups like Human Rights Campaign hyping this as an 'anti-gay' law? Obviously, because they haven't talked to anybody in Brunei … [and] consulted feminist groups in South and Southeast Asia who could clue them in on the impact of these laws … They're interested in publicity and the satisfaction of speaking their minds."

The domestic context within the US is central to how this story has been covered. There is an increasing popular and political support for same-sex marriage and LGBTQ rights in the country, with 30 states currently embroiled in legal debates over the status of same-sex marriage. During the past year and a half, there have also been a number of anti-Sharia bills introduced and passed in several states, with the most recent bill being passed in the Florida state senate on April 28.

Thus, Sharia is scary; LGBTQ rights are trendy. Scary Islam stories that tap into current and ever-present ideological moods and sensitivities generate visceral reactions that in turn bring in clicks and traffic.

Brunei's economic downturn


In the midst of the noise from all this outcry, US media outlets have hardly troubled themselves with asking why the playboy sultan is suddenly interested in bringing in a penal code that should (at least in theory) indict him before anyone else. It is interesting to note that the release of the latest economic performance figures for his country coincided with Sultan Bolkiah's original announcement of bringing in Sharia.





The 2013-2014 Global Competitiveness Report from the World Economic Forum revealed that for the first time in its recent history, the most problematic factor for doing business in Brunei is now access to financing.

According to a report released in February by The Brunei Times, crude oil exports, fell 34 percent in one year. This had an immense effect on total exports, which decreased by 11.8 percent.

More striking drops came from miscellaneous manufactured articles and chemical exports, which fell by a whopping 53.8 and 98.3 percent, respectively. In contrast, chemical imports increased by 18.8 percent, transport rose 31.5 percent, and imports of manufactured articles went up by 39.2 percent. Brunei's total trade between 2012 and 2013 has declined by 8.4 percent. In a single year, Brunei went through quite a dramatic economic downturn.

Although officials insist that Brunei's economic decline is only short-term in nature, the population has felt its effect. Concern for increased crime has prompted some to welcome the implementation of the Sharia penal code. Of course, neither the economic decline nor the crimes punishable by the newly introduced penal code have an effect on the royals, who live an extremely lavish lifestyle that includes the keeping of mistresses.

Sharia as a means of control?


In giving an overall evaluation of what the Sharia is about, the 14th century scholar Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya stated that: "The essence and basis of Sharia is wisdom and benefits for people in this world and the next. It is all justice, all mercy, all benefits, and all wisdom. Every application that goes from justice to oppression, from mercy to its opposite, from benefit to harm, and from wisdom to frivolity then it is not from Sharia - even if [someone] tries to interpret it as such."

If we consider the motives of the sultan for introducing Sharia in Brunei, in light of what Ibn Qayyim says what Sharia is about, we can safely conclude that the sultan is joining the ranks of governments in the Muslim world who manipulate Islam to suit their own political purposes.

In an earlier address answering the negative reactions to the introduction of what he calls Sharia's legal code, the sultan commented on what he feels are "abuses" of mass communication media, including Internet blogs and WhatsApp. There seems to be a strong sense of concern for political unrest triggered by "certain parties" who may be "provoking the people" and "wish to see internal strife or to instigate conflict and do not respect their leader or government".

In contrast to what has been communicated through US media about the sultan introducing Sharia to target homosexuals or apply extreme punishments for crimes, he actually stated that his motives are political in nature: "[The critics] can no longer be given the liberty to continue with their mockery, and if there is a basis for them to be brought to court, the first phase of the [Sharia] (criminal) law this coming April will be relevant to them."

Any further talk of religion is superfluous at this point. Focusing the discussion on Brunei's move to adopt Sharia penal code, which more importantly relies on mischaracterisations of Sharia, is dishonest framing. It encourages knee-jerk reactionary protests that pick and choose their causes for alarm. Both the sultan and US media are exploiting Sharia for their own purposes. Meanwhile, the people of Brunei who are in the middle and ignored, will face the real possibility of the oncoming oppression.

Prince Jefri at his London home in Regents Park in 2006.
Photo: Paul Grover

Related topics: Blasphemy, Apostasy, Law

Read More

Blasphemy & Apostacy Law - Is It Quranic?

Related topics: Hudud (Hudood)

Sūrat l-Māidah 5:48
http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=5&verse=48

And We have revealed to you, [O Muúammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.


Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256
http://quran.com/2/256

There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.



Why Blasphemy Laws Are Actually Anti-Islamic (15 April 2014)
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/faisal-kutty-/blasphemy-laws_b_5149380.html

"Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine."
Pakistan Criminal Code Article 295 -C

In a span of less than two weeks, in two separate cases, three Christians -- a couple and an another unrelated man -- were sentenced to death and fined under this draconian provision of the Pakistani criminal Code. A paralyzed church school worker, Shafqat Masih, and his wife Shagufta, were sentenced for sending text messages against the Holy Prophet. While Sawan Masih, a road sweeper from Lahore, was condemned to death after a friend accused him of making blasphemous remarks during an argument.

Human rights activists are counting on a de facto death penalty moratorium in place since 2008 to keep them from the hangman's noose. Though Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has attempted to lift the moratorium.

"This is a travesty of justice," said David Griffiths, Amnesty International's Deputy Asia Pacific Director, commenting on the Masih case. Indeed, both cases are not only a travesty of Justice but make a mockery of Islam.

Such cruel and unusual penalties are on the books in far too many Muslim nations. In many instances they are the legacy of colonial rule. A case in point is Pakistan, where the existing blasphemy laws date back to 1860 British laws against insulting religion to keep the peace between religions. These provisions were inherited by Pakistan in the 1947 partition. The laws were expanded and penalties made harsher under General Zia Ul Haq in his 1986 attempts to establish his piety and win support from orthodox religious parties and the masses. According to Osama Siddique and Zahra Hayat, in addition to creating procedural inadequacies, General Haq's changes to the inherited laws involved eliminating "any requirement of intent, deliberate or malicious" from various sections despite the fact that proof of intention on the part of the accused to "insult the religion of a class of persons" was a prerequisite to the application of the blasphemy sections.

Since 1987, 247 blasphemy cases have been registered, according to a 2013 report from the Center for Research and Security Studies (CRSS), an independent think tank based in Islamabad. In fact, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan reports that 34 people were charged with blasphemy in 2013, while 27 were charged in 2012. Nineteen people are now on death row for blasphemy, while another 20 are serving life. Moreover, dozens have died as a result of riots, extra-judicial killings and mob "justice."

Based on the fact that these are being done in the name of Islam, it would not be illogical to conclude that Islam advocates extensive restrictions on free speech and imposes excessive penalties for blasphemy. A closer look at Islamic jurisprudence and blasphemy reveals a much more nuanced perspective.

There is, of course, strong precedent in the Islamic legal tradition to argue that blasphemous speech targeted at any religion should be restricted, but at the same time there is scholarly consensus around the notion that there is no criminal or worldly sanction mandated. As Intisar Rabb noted, with the exception of Hanafi jurists who expanded the Islamic doctrine of defamation to a new crime of blasphemy, most jurists from all of the other major Sunni and Shi'a schools of jurisprudence refused to classify even intentional jabs at the Prophet as criminally blasphemous. Some scholars even point out that the prophet himself did not retaliate even when subjected to direct physical and verbal attacks.

So where does the confusion arise from? It appears that many Islamic jurists conflated blasphemy and apostasy. As prominent classical and contemporary scholars such as Ibn Taymiyah, Mahmood Shaltut, Mohamed Hashim Kamali and Rabb, among others, have examined the context of the ruling on apostasy and concluded that death was only mandated even in the case of apostasy when it was combined with war against the community. Building on Ibn Taymiyah and Shaltut, Rabb concludes that "...the premodern period was an era in which citizenship was defined by religion. In the worlds of Islam and Christendom alike, to declare allegiance to another religion while continuing to reside in the land where one's original religion was dominant, was to renounce allegiance to one's co-religionists in a way tantamount to treason."

Moreover, Kamali, Chairman of the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies, examined the concept of fitnah, a word that appears in both the Quran and the hadith (prophetic tradition) in a variety of contexts and seemingly with various meanings, and its effect on freedom of expression. He found that the dominant meaning of fitnah in the Quran is "seditious speech that attacks a government's legitimacy and denies believers the right to practice their faith." Importantly, it is seditious fitnah in the form of political treason, through acts such as attempting to overthrow a leader that was "duly elected and confirmed through the community's pledge of allegiance (bay'ah)," that according to one hadith, can be punishable by death.

In other words, classical Islamic law interpretations stipulated death as a punishment when apostasy was combined with treason and rebellion against the state, not for blasphemy. Indeed, this later position is more in line with the Quranic message of tolerance ("there is no compulsion in religion") and freedom of conscience. The Quran further states that had God willed it He could have created all of humanity with the same beliefs. Indeed, as Kamali and others point out, the Quran, prophetic conduct/teachings and the thrust of classical Islamic jurisprudence supports "the vindication of the truth and the protection of human dignity" by guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression. Moreover, during the medieval Islamic period, proving blasphemy required meeting the high evidentiary standards of the rest of Islamic criminal law.

Rabb, for instance, also notes that:
"...the elements required to declare speech to be blasphemy ... meant dealing with an internally coherent system of laws and folded in cultural, temporal, and jurisdictional standards of propriety and treasonous intent. The implication is that, for most jurists, the blasphemy laws formulated in classical Islamic legal writings could apply only to a Muslim society of earlier times and particular places of shared moral norms according to a narrow set of justifications."

Two Pakistani officials -- Salman Taseer (the former governor of Punjab) and Shahbaz Bhatti (former Federal Minister for Minorities) - have been murdered to date for speaking out. Islamic scholars for the most part have been reticent to speak out in any resounding manner due to the potential backlash. Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, a prominent and popular Islamic scholar, who said that the blasphemy laws have no justification in Islam was forced to leave the country in 2011 for his own safety.

This lack of opposition to these outdated and out of context laws and the scapegoating of minorities and dissenters in far too many Muslim nations only sullies Islam and Muslims. It is high time that Islamic scholars internationally speak out against this travesty of Islam.

By Faizal Kutty
(Assistant Professor of Law, Valparaiso University and Adjunct Professor of Law, Osgoode Hall)


I want to add more article which is also important for us to ponder: (added on 30 May 2014)

BLASPHEMY AND APOSTASY LAWS: ISLAM OR HISLAM?

Religious blasphemy can be a touchy subject, especially in countries like Pakistan. People who oppose this oppressive law (such as Salman Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti) are often murdered. However, what needs to be said has to be said. As George Orwell famously puts it: “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

Every single Prophet was mocked and threatened by their people, but they never went around killing them. The Quran, as you would see, is completely against such oppressive laws . Religion is a personal matter, and one is entitled to their opinions regarding it.

Then, how did these laws find their way into “Islam?”

Fabrications. And mind you, not out of reverence, but only to protect the interests of the clergyclass. You see, these restrictive laws allow clergymen to exercise complete control over people, punishing anyone that threatens their position by declaring them as apostates. To these clergymen, religion is a business – a very lucrative one at that. Hence, to keep the competition out, and force their monopoly (Their interpretation) – they come up with such laws so that “consumers” keep buying their “product.” Business tactics!

They rule people by fear. But they can only rule those who are ignorant of the Qur’an. Not me! Why should I revere them, when the Quran very explicitly talks against them?

“O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! A great many religious leaders, rabbis, priests, monks, Mullahs, yogis, and mystics devour the wealth of people in falsehood, and bar them from the path of God.” Quran  9:34

Right, makes sense. But then, what does the Quran actually say about these laws?

To be very frank, blasphemy and apostasy laws are a “blasphemy” to the teachings of the Quran. No no, I don’t mean that in the traditional sense! First, hear me out!

Although not mutually exclusive, I will try to categorize them.

Regarding Apostasy:

In the very second chapter of the Quran, God informs the reader that:

“There is NO COMPULSION in matters of faith. The right way is now distinct from the wrong way. Anyone who denounces false authorities and becomes at peace with God has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks. God is Hearer, Knower.” Quran 2:256

To support this, the Quran also pushes the reader to conclude a debate by saying:
“To you, your belief system. And to me, mine.” Quran 109:6

This verse seals the deal:“If your Lord willed, all who are on earth, would have believed (By not providing free will). Would you then, COMPEL people to become believers?” Quran  10:99

Regarding Blasphemy:

This is a statement I often hear when it comes to blasphemy: “Hold on. If someone mocks my religion, it prompts me to act violently. You see, it makes me very emotional.”

This kind of a statement only shows your ignorance of the Quran:
“When you see them engaged in vain discourse about Our verses, turn away from them unless they engage in a different subject. If Satan ever makes you forget (your mind gets engrossed in their discourse,) then as soon as you recollect, no longer sit in the company of the people who confound the truth with falsehood.” Quran 6:68

Let me get this clear. So we’re allowed to engage with them if they change the topic? That must mean we are not supposed to have enmity towards them, let alone kill them!

And, again:
Whenever they (Believers) hear vain talk of ridicule, they withdraw from it decently and say, “To us our deeds and to you yours; Peace be upon you, we do not seek to join the ignorant.” Quran 28:55

Ah, you see? Those verses are shouting freedom of expression at the top of their lungs! Islam is a very progressive path to God. Whereas, Blasphemy and Apostasy laws paint a very negative picture of Islam, deterring people away from it! What is wrong with us? Instead of standing up for Quranic values, we now stand for anti-Quranic values, and call it Islam? It’s like setting your own house on fire, for God’s sake! There is not a single verse that encourages Muslims to act violently towards those who decide to leave Islam, or even make a mockery of the Quran. After all, shouldn’t truth be able to defend itself on its own merit? What good is a belief that is forced?

 

However, it would be interesting to note the behavior of rejectors towards the Prophets:

Threats to Prophet Nooh: They said, “If you do not desist, O Noah, you will surely be of those who are stoned.” Quran 26:116

Threats to Prophet Ibrahim: [His father] said:”Do you dislike my gods, O Abraham? If you cease not, I will certainly cause you to be stoned to death! Now get away from me for good!” Quran 19:46

They [Priesthood] said: “Burn him alive and uphold your gods if you are going to take any action.” Quran 21:68

Threats to Prophet Musa: [Pharaoh] said, “If you take a god/authority other than me, I will surely place you among those imprisoned.” Quran 26:29

Threats to Musa’s followers: [Pharaoh] said, I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will surely crucify you all.” Quran 26:49

Threats to other Messengers:  They said, “Indeed, we consider you a bad omen. If you do not desist, we will surely stone you, and there will surely touch you, from us, a painful punishment.” Quran 36:18

That’s very revealing, isn’t it? Puts things in perspective! Let me ask you: Were not all Prophets Blasphemers and Apostates to the prevalent religion in their times? Of course they were! By condoning these laws, however, you actually support the ill-treatment towards the Prophets. After all, you would’ve done the same!

And that’s the most ironic bit. Assuming that a messenger were to come today, these people would utter the same threats to him. You see, they are no different from the people the Prophets strived against. They, like everyone else, have fabricated their own laws in the name of God. So, when you ask them to reform, they either consider you a blasphemer or an apostate and have a fatwa issued to kill you.  That’s the scary thing about truth: it doesn’t require aggression but is always met with aggression. 

Now, it’s completely up to you whether you want to rethink your stance or keep on blindly following what you have been taught: whether you want to follow Islam or Hislam. Because unlike them, sincere believers do not ever force their beliefs on anyone else.

What was that golden rule, again? “Anything that goes against the Quran should be rejected.” Yeah, often said but seldom followed, my friend.

  

*If you liked this post, please help us spread the word by sharing it on your social networks!

Please subscribe to our blog (Top right – Computer) and (Bottom – Cell phone/Tablet)

And please like Our Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/quranalyzeit

Blasphemy and Apostasy Laws: Islam or Hislam?

How anti-Qur’anic rulings lead to negative misconceptions about Islam.

by Ro Waseem

In January 2011, the governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, was gunned down by one of his own security guards over a controversial move — opposing the blasphemy law in Pakistan. Although thousands of Pakistanis condemned this by attending his funeral and showing support on social media, religious fanatics hailed his murderer as a hero, recently naming a mosque after him.

As a Muslim, I stand firmly against blasphemy laws. My faith demands that I do so, for it repeatedly asks me to stand for justice and fight oppression.

The Quran shows us that even though God’s prophets were mocked and threatened, they never killed their accusers for hurting their “religious sentiments.” In fact, the Quran opposes any laws that restrain freedom of speech or would have someone killed over differences in belief. Rather, Quran 73:10 says, “Be patient over what they say, and leave them graciously.”

So how did these blasphemy and apostasy laws come to be associated with Islam?

The blasphemy and apostasy laws are found in the Hadeeth, sayings attributed to Prophet Mohammad, which were compiled two-three centuries after his death. Muslims know that no Hadeeth should contradict the Quran if they are to be accepted, given their subjective nature and reliance on the Quran for authenticity.

But early scholars intentionally overlooked this to protect the interests of clergymen and political leaders. These oppressive laws allow them to exercise complete control over people, punishing anyone who threatens their position by declaring them apostates — enemies of Islam. To so many clergymen, religion is nothing but a means to gain power and control people. To keep out competition and force their monopoly, they invent laws in the name of God so “consumers” have no choice but to keep buying their “product.” Or face persecution.

Religious leaders like Tahir-ul-Qadri, a staunch proponent of blasphemy laws, rule people by fear. Add to that the fact that the average Muslim is unaware of the Quran’s teachings, which makes them likely to believe whatever the clergy tells them about Islam. Of these leaders, the Qur’an asks us to be weary: “O You who have believed! A great many religious leaders: rabbis, priests, monks, Mullahs, yogis, and mystics devour the wealth of people in falsehood, and bar them from the path of God” (Quran 9:34).

So what exactly does the Quran say about blasphemy and apostasy?

Quite frankly, blasphemy and apostasy laws are themselves blasphemous to the teachings of the Qur’an. Not in the traditional sense, but because they violate the very instructions the scripture gives regarding freedom of belief.

Regarding apostasy, in Quran 2:256 God says, “There is no compulsion in matters of faith. The right way is now distinct from the wrong way. Anyone who denounces false authorities and becomes at peace with God has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks. God is Hearer, Knower.”
In a similar vein, verse 109:6 instructs adherents to end a debate by saying: “To you, your belief system. And to me, mine.”

If all that isn’t convincing enough, Quran 10:99 should seal the deal: “If your Lord willed, all who are on earth, would have believed (by not providing free will). Would you then, compel people to become believers?”

When it comes to blasphemy, I often hear some version of, “Hold on. If someone mocks my religion, it prompts me to act violently. You see, it makes me very emotional.”

But this statement only shows an ignorance of the Quran, which says in verse 6:68, “When you see them engaged in vain discourse about Our verses, turn away from them unless they engage in a different subject. If Satan ever makes you forget (i.e. your mind gets engrossed in their discourse,) then as soon as you recollect, no longer sit in the company of the people who confound the truth with falsehood.”

Here, Muslims are instructed to engage with these people if they change the topic. Certainly that means we’re not to have enmity towards them, let alone kill them!

And, again, Quran 28:55 instructs, “Whenever they (believers) hear vain talk of ridicule, they withdraw from it decently and say, ‘“To us our deeds and to you yours; Peace be upon you, we do not seek to join the ignorant.”

Those verses are practically shouting freedom of expression at the top of their lungs! Islam is a very progressive path to God, one in which differences in opinions and beliefs are accepted, not punished (Quran 39:18). On the other hand, blasphemy and apostasy laws lead to negative misconceptions about Islam being an oppressive faith.

But what are we Muslims to do? By not voicing our disapproval, we stand for these anti-Quranic laws and call them Islam. Is that not like setting your own house on fire? There is not a single verse that encourages Muslims to act violently toward those who leave Islam, or even mock the Quran. After all, shouldn’t truth be able to defend itself on its own merit? What good is a forced belief?

We can even take it a step further by noting how rejecters treated the prophets.

Of Prophet Nooh: “They said, ‘If you do not desist, O Noah, you will surely be of those who are stoned’” (Quran 26:116).

Prophet Ibrahim’s father said, ”Do you dislike my gods, O Abraham? If you cease not, I will certainly cause you to be stoned to death! Now get away from me for good” (Quran 19:46). Similarly, the priesthood said of Ibrahim, “Burn him alive and uphold your gods if you are going to take any action” (Quran 21:68).

Regarding Prophet Musa, “[Pharaoh] said, ‘If you take a god/authority other than me, I will surely place you among those imprisoned’” (Quran 26:29). To Musa’s followers, Pharaoh also said, “I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will surely crucify you all” (Quran 26:49).”

These verses should reveal to us a different perspective: all prophets were seen as blasphemers and apostates to the prevalent religion of their time. To condone the oppressive laws of religious leaders today is to support ill treatment of the prophets. After all, you would’ve done the same!

And that’s the most ironic part. If a messenger were to come today, these clergymen and their ardent followers would utter the same threats to him. They have fabricated their own laws in the name of God, so when you ask them to reform, they either consider you a blasphemer or an apostate and have a fatwa issued to kill you.  That’s the scary thing about truth: it doesn’t warrant aggression but is always met with it.

This is not a matter of interpretation, as some would call it. The Quran condemns forced belief in numerous verses. Rather, this is a matter of giving preference to the Hadeeth over the Quran to justify bigotry and extremism in the name of Islam. Having said that, it’s up to you whether you want to rethink your stance or keep blindly following what you have been taught — whether you want to follow Islam or Hislam. Because unlike misguided religious fanatics, sincere believers never force their beliefs on others.

What’s the Golden Rule, again? “Any secondary source on Islam that goes against the Quran should be rejected.”

Often said, but seldom followed.

The opinions expressed in this piece belong to the author.
Image courtesy of Cezary Piwowarski.

More on: apostate, Blasphemy Laws, Hadeeth, Hislam, Islam, muslim, pakistan, Prophet Mohammad, prophets, Quran, Salman Taseer, Tahir-ul-Qadri

About Ro Waseem

 

Ro Waseem is a progressive Muslim who is bent on separating culture from religion. His articles have been published by The Express Tribune, The Malaysian Insider, and World Religion News. He blogs about Muslim reformation at http://quranalyzeit.wordpress.com.

Related topics: Hudud (Hudood)

Read More

Understanding Halal Certification Schemes

http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.130/understanding-halal-certification-schemes.html



Please note this is not about halal food. Q Society's spokesman Andrew Horwood points out: "Halal food itself is not of concern. Nearly all our food is naturally permissible to Muslims and observant Muslims can make food of unknown origin halal by proclaiming 'bismillah' over the food before eating.*

What is of concern are the recently invented certification schemes, designed to permeate the supply chain from feeding trough to super market shelves and restaurant kitchens; including many non-food goods and services.

According to meat industry groups and research, two thirds of chicken and lamb meat and over half the beef sold in Australia now comes from Halal-certified suppliers. Most dairy products as well as other food and many non-food items are certified to sharia standards, but not always labelled.

Islamic organizations have estimated the value of the global halal certification market at USD 2.3 trillion in 2013, growing by 20% per year. No other religious group has imposed a similar tax-like scheme on the general public.

Investigative researchers in France, Canada and the USA have found links between halal certifying organisations and shop fronts for terrorist groups like Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Similar research in Australia is yet to be undertaken.

Grand Mufti Dr Mustafa Ceric has suggested at an international conference in 2010, that Islam can conquer the world through the Halal (certification) movement.

We politely but firmly object. Q Society has three simple and fair policy proposals:

1. Apply the 'User Pays' principle If observant Muslims insist on special rituals and halal certification for their food, then Islamic community organisations should provide these services and cover the fees and extra expenses for the suppliers. Religion is always a contentious issue and should never be imposed onto others.

2. Insist on clear labelling All products and services from halal-certified suppliers should be clearly labelled by one standard symbol. This way the consumer can recognise when meat, meat-based products or other products and services come from halal-certified sources. Then consumers can make an informed decision

3. No more discrimination In most Australian abattoirs Muslim males only are employed as slaughterers. Non-Muslims and women are not halal. This is discrimination on religious and gender grounds. We understand that halal-slaughtered meat is important to observant Muslims. We propose if abattoirs require exemption from our non-discrimination laws, that they be owned and operated by a religious organisation. This is similar to religious schools, for which Australia allows certain exemptions from non-discrimination laws.


* Nowhere in Islamic scripture does it say Muslims should eat only halal-certified food. Most observant Muslims know perfectly well that nearly all our food is by default halal:

Koran Sura 2:173 (Al-Baqarah) reads: "He hath forbidden you only carrion, and blood, and swine flesh, and that which hath been immolated to any other than God. But he who is driven by necessity, neither craving nor transgressing, it is no sin for him. Lo! God is Forgiving, Merciful."

Koran Sura 5.5 (Al Ma'idah) prescribes: "The food of the People of the Book (that is Jewish and Christian people) is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them."

And from the hadith narrated by Aisha (Bukhari Volume 3, Book 34, Number 273) Muslims know: "Some people said, "O Allah's Apostle! Meat is brought to us by some people and we are not sure whether the name of Allah has been mentioned on it or not." Allah's Apostle said, "Mention the name of Allah and eat it."

Action Points:

Watch our halal certification information video. Share it with your family and connections.

Read, download and distribute our Q on: Halal Food and Halal Certification paper and our petition form from our website qsociety dot org dot au

Pick up a stack of our "Why Swallow This?" fliers at the next Q meeting and do an hour of letter boxing each week in your neighbourhood.

Talk and write to your local state and federal MP and Senators. Ask them to consider our three policy proposals

When shopping ask for non-halal certified options. You are not a bad person if you do not want to support Islamic organisations with your shopping dollar.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of pig DNA and social justice – Hamri Ibrahim & Daniel Iqram (29 May 2014)
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/of-pig-dna-and-social-justice-hamri-ibrahim-daniel-iqram
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/bukan-babi-saja-haram-rasuah-penyelewengan-juga-haram-kata-ahli-parlimen-pa

Lately, the Malaysian populace, specifically Muslim Malays, were taken aback by the detection of porcine DNA by the Ministry of Health in two products by the chocolate manufacturer Cadbury.

Following the incident, Jakim (the supreme authority on Islamic affairs in the country) suspended with immediate effect the halal certificates for the chocolate bars Dairy Milk Hazelnut and Dairy Milk Roast Almond.

It has stirred anger amongst Malaysian Muslims, as they are of the perception that their trust in Cadbury to market halal products has been betrayed.

The widespread displeasure in the company has resulted in a multitude of criticisms and negative reactions. Most recently, an organisation claiming to collectively represent Islamic NGOs in Malaysia declared jihad against the company.

In a press conference in Kuala Lumpur, the president of Pertubuhan Kebajikan Darul Islah Malaysia (a welfare body) called for holy war against Cadbury for their alleged attempts to ‘weaken’ the Muslim community in Malaysia.

Meanwhile, the Allied Coordinating Committee of Islamic NGOs demanded that Cadbury bear the cost of blood exchange transfusions for Muslims who had consumed the chocolate prior to the aforementioned exposure.

In addition, there were those who suggested that they rinse their mouths with soil water (as an analogy to the cleansing practice decreed by a minority of scholars for the contact of human skin with pigs).

Furthermore, the president of Persatuan Pengguna Islam Malaysia (the Muslim Consumer Association of Malaysia) urged Cadbury to shut down its factories and beseeched Muslims to boycott its products.

Even more extreme were those who proposed that the factories be burned down altogether.

It is most certainly decreed in Islam that pigs and products thereof are forbidden for consumption by Muslims; Cadbury Malaysia was clearly in the wrong to have used porcine elements in their confection, in light of this fact.

This move, which circumstantially involved false advertising, deservedly drew enormous surprise from the nation’s adherents of the Islamic faith.

However, the over-reaction in this circumstance has made it appear as if Muslims are excessively sensitive in matters of accidental consumption, to the point that other, more pressing injustices (such as gambling, corruption, the imbibing of alcohol, adultery, and the throwing away of babies) have been overshadowed.

The effect is doubly sordid when common sense says that those who commit sin without knowing, surely cannot be blamed.

This tidal lashback from the Malays seems to dissociate daily living rulings pertinent to food consumption from those related to social harmony and governance. Do these rulings not come from the same God?

As Muslims, we have been taught from young that impurity of food results in impurity of flesh, the consequence of which is punishment in Purgatory. Thus, food consumption is treated with vigilance in a Muslim household.

Nevertheless, few are aware of the fact that acquiring wealth via illicit means, such as gambling and corruption, impacts in the same way that porcine product ingestion does. And food which is obtained from that impure wealth will result in the same punishment; never mind the fact that gambling and corruption bring harm to those surrounding the individual in question as well.

In a more practical example, the fabric which holds together the people of a nation will surely be disrupted by widespread corruption. Felons will live as they wish to and are free to go about their wrongdoings as they please, without fear for the law. Consequently, crime and social ills will increase in number following the unjust conduct of the responsible authorities.

In this setting of Malaysia as a multi-racial and multi-religious country, the typical reaction of Muslims in facing such issues often gives rise to confusion and misunderstanding of the non-Muslim society regarding authentic Islamic teachings.

Moreover, ever since the shaman incident at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport around two months back, Malaysia has often been thrown into the limelight whenever Muslim concerns arise, albeit frequently for the wrong reasons.

It inadvertently paints a negative picture of Muslims in Malaysia as a whole, even though the reality may be that the fewer, more level-headed ones think not in the same careless, unrefined fashion as the majority.

Thus, perceivedly necessary acts such as arson, blood exchange transfusions and rinsing mouths with soil water may be seen as extreme by outsiders and are misrepresentative of the proper image of Islam.

However grave the matter at hand, we must face it with rationality and not be emotion-driven. Islam as rahmatal lil-‘alaamin (the blessing to the universe) has always taught its adherents civility and affection towards others.

At the same time, the relevant authorities must take strict action against Cadbury to ensure that such an occurrence does not repeat itself in the future.

Therefore, it is necessary for Malaysian Muslims to practise wisdom when dealing with any sort of issue and not to counteract excessively.

These sort of situations should be actually capitalised on to show non-Muslims the correct Islamic teachings, based on the Quran and Sunnah (way of the Prophet).

What has happened instead is that they have resulted in the miscomprehension of others towards Muslims, and, most possibly, it has driven them further away from the faith. – May 29, 2014.

* Hamri Ibrahim & Daniel Iqram are readers of The Malaysian Insider.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.


Cadbury assures Muslims its products are free of pork-related ingredients (30 May 2014)
http://news.malaysia.msn.com/tmi/cadbury-assures-muslims-its-products-are-free-of-pork-related-ingredients

Read More

Soldier Killed, 2 Civillians Injured in Lahad Datu Shooting – Bernama (TMI)

A soldier was killed while two people were injured after a soldier allegedly fired several shots following a commotion in front of a convenience store in Lahad Datu town, in Sabah, early this morning.

Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Hamza Taib said the soldier, Muhamad Fiffixezapey Mat Hussin, 28, died at the Lahad Datu Hospital.

Muhamad Fiffixezapey was shot in the left side of his chest.

Hamza said the two civilians who were hurt in front of Gemilang 24 Jam outlet at 4.45am were Indonesian men, aged 31 and 38 years-old.

They were injured on the left calf and left back, respectively, and were treated at the Lahad Datu Hospital.

According to Hamza, the soldier who fired the shots was on patrol duty during the incident.

He said investigations at the scene found several bullet casings and blood on the ground.

"The motive of the incident is still being investigated under Section 302 and 307 of the Penal Code.

"Police are trying to trace the soldier involved. An arrest will be made and the weapon will be seized," he said.

Hamza advised the public to remain calm as the incident was classified as a criminal case and did not involve crimnals from outside the state.

"The situation is safe and under control," he added. – Bernama, May 28, 2014.


Source:
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/soldier-killed-2-civillians-injured-in-lahad-datu-shooting-bernama

Read More

The Perverse Logic of Utusan

Nowadays, news portal and internet has grown wider and has gone so viral. Especially regarding politics. Sometimes it can be very confusing for those who did not keeping up-to-date with the politics scenes and lack of knowledge about the country political backgrounds and updates. Yesterday I have read a news from MalaysiaKini titled "Umno = Malays, the perverse logic of Utusan" (27 May 2014) in replies to the previous news titled "Hina Umno sama dengan hina Melayu-Islam" (25 May 2014) which means "Insulting Umno means Insulting Muslim-Malay". It says that "According to Utusan, insulting PAS is insulting Malays and Islam too."

It seems like Utusan have their own hidden agenda or being manipulated by certain people for promoting hatreds between races and religion which leads to Racism. But Utusan has already been in-and-out of Courts recently including being sentence for "Dafamation" lately by Khalid Ibrahim, the Selongor MB (MalaysiaKini: Utusan mohon maaf pada Khalid Ibrahim). I think there must be anybody who have been supporting them in the area of financial, after all those cases. Political parties should not be double standard. They are suppose to have vission and mission for the good of this country disregarding race, religion and culture. What actually is the purpose of "1 Malaysia" slogan for? if they do not put their words into action. Read another story about Utusan here: Umno to plough RM40mil into Utusan Melayu (From 13 November 2013).

I've also read a news from TheMalaysianInsider titled, "Now, Zahid calls Chinese 'ungrateful' for voting DAP" where according to the news, Zahid said "It is the Malays and the Indians who help Chinese businessmen. And when they vote, they choose DAP. They are ungrateful.". From the words "Businessmen", there is one thing that has come to my mind. Business are actually a fair deal or trades (Goods/Service : Payment), where customer and seller get what they want fairly. Where the taxes are administered by the government itself. So why do he state that the chinese businessmen are ungrateful. Do they have debts with the government? Business is not the same thing with 'Rasuah' (Corruption). The statement seems like leaving us with a question mark, because it seems like there has been some kind of deals or scandals going on between them (Zahid-Chinese Businessmen). You might be shocked if you read his background: http://ms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Zahid_Hamidi#Tahanan_politik_ISA

I'm not accusing anybody, I'm just sharing this for us to ponder and learn to become a "Good listener and not easily judging others" person. No matter if it is from the Mainstream Mass Media or not. Now is the right time for the Government and authorities to prove that they are the man of their words, and convince all malaysians disregards of their backgrounds that they can feel safe living in this country. Stop doing insincere and last minutes action only during election and when people storming their voices over the Internet. (Read my post regarding Internet here.)



- JIM

Read More

Police Misconduct Continues Unabated, Is There No End To It? (TheAntDaily)

http://www.theantdaily.com/Main/Police-misconduct-continues-unabated-Is-there-no-end-to-it (25 May 2014)

QUICK TAKE: Imagine this. You are a lone female driving home after consuming wine a wee bit too much in the wee hours of the morning. Three “crooks” then flag you down and molest you.

The “crooks” then fleece you of your money and make you wait almost an hour, before your friends come to your aid.

Enraged and violated, who do you turn to for help? If you said the police, think again. What if the crooks themselves are the men in blue?

That is the exact predicament that a 24-year-old woman was forced to endure recently in Kuala Lumpur.

The woman, who works in a fitness centre, had recently lodged a complaint against three traffic policemen at the Pudu police station.

In her report, she stated that she was flagged down by the men near the US embassy on Jalan Tun Razak while she was driving under the influence of alcohol.

The men then allegedly made passing remarks about her breasts and one of them even reached into her blouse and groped one of them. Wanting to settle the matter, she was then made to wait for 45 minutes before a friend came to her aid and paid a bribe of RM100.

This is both appalling and enraging. The police are supposed to serve and protect the rakyat, and yet incidents like this continue to happen.

Remember the infamous “nude squat” incident back in 2005 where a local woman was forced to do squats in the nude in the Petaling Jaya police lock-up, and the act was secretly filmed by police personnel?

Police said it (making detainees perform squats) was standard police procedure to dislodge any items hidden in the victim's crevices -- which itself became a matter of contention between the authorities and opposition figures who exposed the issue.

The clip of the woman doing squats under the watchful eyes of a policewoman was later widely circulated via Multimedia Messaging System (MMS) and the matter got blown up, right till Parliament.

That is not the sole incident where the law enforcers had blatantly abused their badge. There have been reported cases of cops charged with raping foreigners.

Police indiscipline does not only come in the form of sexual misconduct. Recently cops on duty have been caught napping and boozing, without a worry in the world.

And there’s also the infamous “coffee money” culture that not only cops but almost all other enforcement authorities are known for.

Why has it come to this? The fact that they are not being paid enough aside, what happened to their moral values? Does carrying a badge and a pistol put them above the law?

Are their salaries not paid for by taxpayers? At least that should make them serve and protect the rakyat, right?

Cases like this are a grim reminder to the authorities that it is crucial to set up a body like the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

However, the government seems dead set against the setting up of such a commission, probably because it fears more police misdeeds will be revealed.

If such incidents of power abuse continue to happen, police should just abandon their motto of “Firm, Fair and Prudent”.

That way they won’t be accused of misleading the people.

Read More

Sarawak ex-CM’s Son Had RM9 Million in Bank Accounts, Court Told (TMI)

A bank employee today testified that Datuk Seri Mahmud Abu Bekir, son of former Sarawak chief minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, had RM9 million in four bank accounts.

CIMB Customer Resolution Department assistant vice-president P. Magendran Pillai was testifying in the suit by Mahmud's ex-wife Shahnaz Majid, who is seeking some RM400 million as settlement for their divorce, including matrimonial property and “mutaah” (Islamic conciliatory payment).

Earlier, Mahmud's lawyers Datuk Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar and Saadiah Din failed in their bid to stop Magendran from revealing details of the bank accounts, saying it contravened the Banking and Financial Institution Act (Bafia) 1989 that protects privacy of bank clients.

Shariah judge Muhammad Abdul Karim Wahab dismissed their contention and also rejected a verbal application from Saadiah that the witness must show proof he was allowed by CIMB to reveal details of Mahmud's bank accounts.

Shahnaz's lawyer Akbardin Abdul Kader informed the court that Magendran was subpoenaed as a witness.

In his testimony, Magendran said that until September 30, 2012, Mahmud had nearly RM9 million in four bank accounts.

Mahmud and Shahnaz, the sister of popular singer Datuk Sheila Majid, married in January 1992 and have a 20-year-old son, Raden Murya.

He filed for divorce in May 2011. – May 26, 2014.


Source:
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/sarawak-ex-cms-son-had-rm9-million-in-bank-accounts-court-told

Read More

A Tribute to MH370 - While We Have The Time

The title itself have a deep and valuable meaning. It reminds me of the followings:

While we have the time, appreciate and respect our parents
While we have the time, spend our times with our family and love ones
While we have the time, educate our children with good values
While we have the time, show honorable example to the young
While we have the time, do something for the good of other people instead of just for ourselves
While we have the time, forgive and forget others
While we have the time, do something that is not in vain
While we have the time, repent from our sins
While we have the time, never give up
While we have the time, avoid from participating crimes
While we have the time, quit from our bad habits and addiction
While we have the time, get enough rest
While we have the time, stop eating a lot of junk food
While we have the time, work out and exercise
While we have the time, live in a healthy lifestyle
While we have the time, prepare for the future
While we have the time, save some money for the future
While we have the time, drive safe
While we have the time, don't drink and drive
While we have the time, blah blah blah blah ... ...  ...  ....
...

This could go on and on...

The main point is, do good while we still have the to do it, and avoid from doing bad things while we still have time to avoid it.

- JIM

Read More

Is Our Vote Really P&C In The Elections?

Lately I was shocked to read a post stating "Zahid warns Rela, I know who did not vote" the headline of KiniTV portal dated May 24, 2014. Many of us Malaysian would be surprised since the law of Election Act slogan stated, "Undi anda adalah rasiah" which mean, "Your vote is private and confidential". No matter it is General Election or District Election. It is reflecting the transparency and integrity of our country Election Commission of Malaysia (SPR) and the Government itself.

General Election in our country determine who will rules and what will be affected and its consequences to our country in the five years ahead after an election. And it may also determine the future of our country. Can the General Election be treated as a joke? especially from the mouth of a home minister?

Something for us to ponder.

- JIM

Read more from:

Ambiga: Rela warning breached Election Act (25 May 2014)
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/263785

Ambiga: Zahid's Rela warning broke many EC rules (25 May 2014)
http://malaysiansmustknowthetruth.blogspot.com/2014/05/ambiga-zahids-rela-warning-broke-many.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MalaysiansMustKnowTheTruth+(Malaysians+Must+Know+the+TRUTH)

AMBIGA: ZAHID’S RELA WARNING BROKE MANY EC RULES (25 May 2014)
http://www.negarakita.com/Post-1006733-Ambiga%3A+Zahid%E2%80%99s+Rela+warning+broke+many+EC+rules

EC READS ZAHID'S WARNING AS 'JUST ADVICE' (25 May 2014)
http://www.negarakita.com/Post-1006942-EC+reads+Zahid's+warning+as+'just+advice'

Investigate Zahid for bribery, election violation, DAP MP tells AG (25 May 2014)
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/investigate-zahid-for-bribery-election-violation-dap-mp-tells-ag

'Probe Zahid under Election Offences Act' (25 May 2014)
http://www.therakyatpost.com/news/2014/05/25/probe-zahid-election-offences-act/

I was only joking with Rela members, says Zahid (25 May 2014)
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/263829

Zahid has broken the law if he knows who Rela members voted for, says DAP (25 May 2014)
https://my.news.yahoo.com/zahid-broken-law-knows-rela-members-voted-says-035915870.html

Zahid warns Rela, I know who did not vote (24 May 2014)
http://www.kinitv.com/video/7191O8

Zahid promises Rela new uniforms if Gerakan wins Teluk Intan polls (24 May 2014)
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/zahid-promises-rela-new-uniforms-if-gerakan-wins-teluk-intan-polls

Read More

MyWatch: Top Cop's Son Jobless But Rolling in Cash

Malaysia Kini - 22 May 2014
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/263522

Nearly a year after being shot, crime watchdog MyWatch chairperson R Sri Sanjeevan today hit out again at alleged corruption in the police force.

The PKR member also questioned the extraordinary wealth of a 30-year-old son of a state police chief.

Sanjeevan claimed the unemployed man bought two luxury cars last year - a Jaguar and an Audi A5, with a combined value of RM1.1 million.

His bank accounts, Sanjeevan alleged, had transactions worth some RM500,000 in the last six months, up to April.

"He is the only son in the family. He is jobless, he has no genuine source of income, no passive income...

"The coincidence here is that he is linked to a firearms company. The firearms company is in the same state where his father is the police chief," Sanjeevan told reporters at a restaurant in Kuala Lumpur.

He said MyWatch received a tip-off from an anonymous source, who also provided the bank account details of the state police chief's son for the last two years.

He added that the son, a law graduate, has not been employed since 2008, according to his Employee Provident Fund (EPF) record.

Malaysiakini has withheld the names of the state police chief and his son pending an official response from them.

The only Malay director

Sanjeevan said that the police chief's son was "the only Malay director" among 10 directors of a private limited arms company and received about RM100,000 a year in compensation for his position.

He got married last year.

His father has been the top cop of the state for some three years.

"Even if he worked 40 years in the force, his salary cannot afford all this," Sanjeevan said, emphasising why the government needed to seriously look into this case.

Sanjeevan said that he would furbish all the details in a report to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) next week.

Sanjeevan has been biting back at the police since he was shot by two men on a motorcycle in Negeri Sembilan on July 27 last year, which put him in a coma for 35 days.

Earlier this month, he questioned why the police were slow in pursuing his attackers.

In response, Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Khalid Abu Bakar ( left ) warned Sanjeevan not to hold the police at ransom by threatening to expose more police wrongdoings unless they dutifully investigate his case.

Sanjeevan asserted his right to do so as a concerned Malaysian.

"I am not a criminal. Why do you need to confiscate my phone and my pendrive, which contain a lot of sensitive documents of MyWatch - things I want to expose. Why?" he asked.

"As a Malaysian, I have a right to know what happens in the police force and it is entirely the responsibility of the IGP to answer whatever we want to know. If really he is sleeping, then I think he should resign and go back home."

Source:
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/263522
https://my.news.yahoo.com/mywatch-top-cops-son-jobless-rolling-cash-055154981.html

MyWatch dedah salah laku Ketua Polis Daerah Langkawi (26 May 2014)
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2014/05/26/mywatch-dedah-salah-laku-ketua-polis-daerah-langkawi/

Ketua polis Sabah pertahankan anaknya yang berada dalam senarai korupsi Sanjeevan (23 May 2014)
http://bm.theantdaily.com/Terkini/Ketua-polis-Sabah-pertahankan-anaknya-yang-berada-dalam-senarai-korupsi-Sanjeevan

Read More

Consumer Rights

Internet is not a free service, although government has launched free WiFi and Internet in the non-urban areas to let the people in those area to enjoy the same opportunity to gain knowledge and explore the world. Consumer who subscribed their own Internet Account have to deal with their bills monthly, daily or by period defending on the plan which they have subscribed. It is unfair if Government is controlling the speed of the Internet for political purpose. Of course, there is quota limits for the Internet service based on the plan subscribed. But if the connection are unstable, just guess how many times a consumer need to press the refresh button? Just because the connection has failed or time-out which is causing more data transferred during the page-refreshing, just for the sake of loading a complete page. And when the page has just complete loaded guess what? The ISP (Internet Service Provider) such as Celcom, Digi and Maxis send you a message saying "Your quota volume usage has exceeded, please purchase for more volume". Sometimes consumer have to face and waste a lot of time just for the sake of getting the Internet connection to be connected because of the unstable connection and bad signal. Government has no rights to control the Internet speed. Controlling it won't change the attitude of a kid or youth if the parents and school still failed to educate them about the good values. Just think about the places where there are no internet service available and the times when Internet have not existed yet, but criminals still occurs. Good values are educated by good examples and good attention, not by force. The increasing percentage of criminals in our Country are also caused by the bad examples shown by the surrounding adults, not enough attention by 24-hours working parents and the influences of the Movies and TV Show. Most Films in our country nowadays are more about gangster such as "KL Gangster", "Bini-Biniku Gangster" and etc. I think those are the issues where Government should be more focused on. For example, If a consumer purchased one nasi lemak for breakfast, should Government stop or control the consumer from eating it? The same thing with Internet. - JIM

Dyana slams Shaberry's broadband bait
http://www.kinitv.com/video/7152O8

Read More

Internet Speed is in the Hands of The Government ?

Is it true? It's a suggestion or a blackmail?

Is Internet being manipulated by politics?

Read More