Saya seronok baca mengenai rasuah dalam PAS. Selama ini pemimpin PAS berkokok tidak henti-henti bahawa pemilihan UMNO penuh dengan rasuah.Tetapi PAS sendiri bukan sahaja bergelumang dengan rasuah tetapi juga menggalakkan rasuah.
Yang nyata, Musyridul Am PAS, Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat tidak menolak kemungkinan berlaku rasuah ataupun politik wang semasa berlangsung pemilihan peringkat kawasan bulan lepas. Beliau tidak menolak mentah-mentah dakwaan yang dibuat oleh Ketua Dewan Ulama, Mohamed Daud Iraqi.
Nik Aziz juga tidak dapat menentukan apakah Mat Iraq memberi nasihat ataupun beliau (Mat Iraqi) ada bukti bila menuduh berlaku rasuah dalam pemilihan PAS.
Saya ingin penjenguk fikir satu perkara sebelum menilai tulisan saudara Mohd Sayuti Omar bertajuk “Jangan Sembunyi Rasuah Bawah Kupiah “Celoteh Murai 45” melalui blognya untuk renungan bersama. Saya perturunkan beberapa para untuk tetapan.
Hakikatnya PAS sudah lama bergelumang dengan RASUAH SECARA TERANG-TERANGAN.
Bukan sekadar menawarkan ‘syurga’ dan perkara-perkara Islam sahaja.
Ambil sahaja fatwa Nik Aziz “Beri duit ambil, beri kain pakai, beri gula kacau, bila mengundi pangkah bulan. …”
Kata-kata ini merujuk kepada kononnya ‘rasuah UMNO dan Barisan Nasional (BN)’ kepada pengundi pada musim pilihan raya.
Pokoknya – jika DUIT, KAIN, KOPI, GULA bersifat rasuah, apakah wajar pengundi PAS (sudah pasti Islam) mengambilnya? Apakah agama Islam menggalakkan orang Islam pejam mata mengambil apa sahaja bentuk pemberian berunsur rasuah.
dipetik dari http://hambali1.blogspot.com
Tidakkah PAS menganggap wang, kain dan minuman itu rasuah? Kenapa kepada penyokong dan pengikut PAS ‘pemberian UMNO dan BN itu halal’ dan kepada penyokong UMNO dan BN haram?
Setahu saya rasuah berlaku apabila ada orang memberi dan menerima. Dia bukan di pihak pemberi sahaja. Malah lebih buruk, apabila Nik Aziz berfatwa ‘menghalalkan orang PAS menerima rasuah, walaupun wang, kain, kopi dan gula’.
Jadi tidak hairan kalau dalam pemilihan parti, ada perbuatan rasuah dilakukan dan cita-cita untuk menang dalam pemilihan tetap tinggi, kalaupun pemimpin PAS mendakwa merekalah benar-benar Islam.
Jadi jom kita tinjau apa kata Sayuti:
1. Mat Iraq tidak dikenakan apa-apa tindakan. Kalau benar tidak ada rasuah dalam PAS kenapa Mat Iraq tidak dikenakan tindakan disiplin? Apakah PAS memberi amaran kepada Mat Iraq? Kalau amaran kenapa pula tidak disebut ia diberikan amaran? Logik dan adilnya kalau dah buat fitnah, hukum saja jangan taruh dan simpan lagi. Pas tentu arif mengenai bahaya fitnah dan kata-kata Rasulullah mengenai anaknya Fatimah! Apakah PAS juga mengamalkan tindakan double standard macam parti cap keris itu?
2. Hadi (Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang) cuba menyembunyikan isu rasuah atau politik wang di bawah kupiah kerana nak jaga maruah parti. Tentu Hadi tahu apa hukumnya hipokrit dan munafik serta persoalan di Mahsyar kelak. Kalau Hadi juga berbuat begitu bermakna Hadi juga mengamalkan politik tusuk punca dalam kain?
3. Murai cukup benci kalau orang bercakap; berkatalah yang benar walaupun pahit, tetapi bila kena gilirannya sendiri yang pahit tidak mahu dikatakan dan hanya suka mengatakan yang manis-manis sahaja. Keputusan yang Pas ambil berhubung dengan rasuah itu menjelaskan bagaimana wibawa para ulama dalam PAS itu sendiri!
Sebenarnya bagi PAS, memang dia pandai menutup kelemahan parti dan pemimpinnya.
PAS berbeza dengan UMNO bukan dalam konteks Islamnya tetapi cara pemimpin utama PAS menutup dosa dan kelemahan pemimpinnya.
Saya bersetuju dengan Sayuti kalau beliau mengandaikan PAS menutup perbuatan rasuah dengan kopiahnya.
Bukan ini kali pertama PAS menutup kelemahan pemimpinnya. Ada beberapa kes rasuah lain PAS selindungkan, termasuk rasuah dalam Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan.
PAS juga bijak menutup malu parti dan pemimpinnya. Lihatlah berapa banyak kes khalwat dan ‘main dengan bini’ orang PAS boleh tutup rapat-rapat.
Inilah sahaja kelebihan pemimpin dan ahli PAS. Pemimpin tutup kesilapan dan ahli menerima dan kunci mulut. ‘Tidak baik memperkatakan dan menyebarkan aib orang lain”
Tetapi UMNO, pemimpin dan hali tidak reti tutup atau lindungi salah laku pemimpinnya.
Pemimpin buka mulut seluas-luasnya kalau ada perbuatan rasuah di kalangan pemimpin dan ahli UMNO jadi tukang karut yang menjaja ke seluruh negara. “Lebih banyak dedah, walaupun aib, lebih seronok”.
Lihat sahaja isu rasuah dalam pemilihan parti UMNO yang lalu. Yang dipanggil dan didakwa beratus-ratus. Belum tentu salah sudah nampak bersalah.
Yang kena tindakan seorang dua tetapi hebohnya sampai satu dunia.
Lebih memburukkan keadaan yang tidak didakwa ada beratus-ratus dan selepas pemilihan, Jawatankuasa Disiplin pun tidak berfungsi dan UMNO dilihat parti yang mengamalkan rasuah.
Sewajarnya kalau mahu nampak bersih, bicara dan dakwa dan bagi yang bersih, umumkan nama mereka sebagai ‘bersih daripada rasuah’, bukan longgokkan dengan yang memang sewajarnya didakwa.
Akhirnya, kononnya mahu dilihat bersih dan bersedia menjadi telus – UMNO dilihat parti kotor dan rasuah sedangkan PAS parti bersih dan Islam.
Tiba pilihan raya UMNO yang telus putih mata dan PAS yang menutup dosa dan kejahatan di bawah kopiah di lihat bersih dan disokong oleh rakyat yang dibutakan mata melalui fatwa – termasuk fatwa Nik Aziz mengenai duit, wang, kopi dan gula
Khamis, Mei 21, 2009
Pakatan Rakyat afraid of critism!
The Pakatan Rakyat state government does not practise what it preaches when it comes to freedom of information and open discussion as the decision by the rights and privileges committee of the Selangor legislative assembly shows the administration is bent on silencing critics, former Selangor Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo said today.
Commenting on his impending suspension together with four fellow Barisan Nasional (BN) assemblymen the Sungai Panjang state assemblyman, he said the move also reeked of revenge.
"We regret the Speaker (Teng Chang Khim) has resorted to this cruel act of muzzling assemblymen who give constructive criticism," Mohd Khir told the media at his office in Glenmarie.
"I can take it if they want to suspend me for one year for not attending the select committee on competency, accountability and transparency (Selcat) hearing but suspending the four other assemblyman for suggesting that the hearing should be held behind closed doors and not be made a political game is not right.
"What they have done goes against all they have been proclaiming about freedom of information." he said, adding that this will not stop BN assemblymen from speaking up.
Mohd Khir faces up to a year’s suspension and also stands to lose his allowance of more than RM4,000 a month and other perks such as claims for office phone, driver, entertainment and special allowances. In addition, he faces a six-month suspension for each of three insulting statement he made about the Selcat in his blog and the media, as well as loss of allowance and perks.
His colleagues Datuk Warno Dogol (Sabak), Mohd Isa Abu Kasim (Batang Kali), Datuk Marsum Paing (Dengkil) and Datuk Mohamed Idris Abdu Bakar (Hulu Bernam) each face a six-month suspension and loss of allowances and perks for making statements that defamed the assembly.
The Selcat hearing was held to scrutinise the excesses of the now defunct wives of Selangor BN parliamentarians and state assemblymen welfare organization (Balkis) which was headed by Mohd Khir’s wife Datin Seri Zahrah Kechik before it was dissolved following the fall of BN in Selangor during 2008 general election.
"If Selcat is really serious about upholding transparency and accountability they should check on several matters in the state government," Mohd Khir said, citing, among others, the awarding of tenders, profits from sand mining, the involvement of state executive councillor Liu in stopping Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) officers from carrying out their duties, the appointment of contractors in the local authorities and the Klang bus station fiasco.
Commenting on his impending suspension together with four fellow Barisan Nasional (BN) assemblymen the Sungai Panjang state assemblyman, he said the move also reeked of revenge.
"We regret the Speaker (Teng Chang Khim) has resorted to this cruel act of muzzling assemblymen who give constructive criticism," Mohd Khir told the media at his office in Glenmarie.
"I can take it if they want to suspend me for one year for not attending the select committee on competency, accountability and transparency (Selcat) hearing but suspending the four other assemblyman for suggesting that the hearing should be held behind closed doors and not be made a political game is not right.
"What they have done goes against all they have been proclaiming about freedom of information." he said, adding that this will not stop BN assemblymen from speaking up.
Mohd Khir faces up to a year’s suspension and also stands to lose his allowance of more than RM4,000 a month and other perks such as claims for office phone, driver, entertainment and special allowances. In addition, he faces a six-month suspension for each of three insulting statement he made about the Selcat in his blog and the media, as well as loss of allowance and perks.
His colleagues Datuk Warno Dogol (Sabak), Mohd Isa Abu Kasim (Batang Kali), Datuk Marsum Paing (Dengkil) and Datuk Mohamed Idris Abdu Bakar (Hulu Bernam) each face a six-month suspension and loss of allowances and perks for making statements that defamed the assembly.
The Selcat hearing was held to scrutinise the excesses of the now defunct wives of Selangor BN parliamentarians and state assemblymen welfare organization (Balkis) which was headed by Mohd Khir’s wife Datin Seri Zahrah Kechik before it was dissolved following the fall of BN in Selangor during 2008 general election.
"If Selcat is really serious about upholding transparency and accountability they should check on several matters in the state government," Mohd Khir said, citing, among others, the awarding of tenders, profits from sand mining, the involvement of state executive councillor Liu in stopping Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) officers from carrying out their duties, the appointment of contractors in the local authorities and the Klang bus station fiasco.
The Anwar Dilemma
A Letter to Bru, the New Yorker's Malay Dilemma
from: http://rockybru.com
A young friend sent me an e-mail yesterday, wondering if I'd read the article on Malaysia by the New Yorker magazine.
The article's headline is The Malay Dilemma, borrowed from Dr Mahathir's once-controversial and formerly-banned book.
I thought that Anwar's Malay Dilemma would have been a more apt title for the article. If you rely wholly on the New Yorker for your analysis on Malaysian politics, you'd think that Malaysia is a nation almost beyond redemption, where salvation lies with one man.
The following, in italic, is my young friend's email.
Dear Rocky, I have always wondered why that, as a young Malay, my morale has been very low since coming back in 2005. Why my non-Malay friends are publicly telling me that it is because 'your skin-color people' that Malaysia is going down the drain and to the dogs. After reading this article, I think I have finally understood why. This is the reality that Anwar has managed to paint of Malays and Malaysia. Through the blogs and American media, he has managed to paint this reality in the minds of all Malaysians and the world. This article was forwarded by a buddy of mine in the States, nasi lemak, with the following comment. You should read the comments after the article. Thought it'd be interesting read for you. Cheers.
The comment;
Anwar will never be the Aung San Suu Kyi of Malaysia. How can you be, when for the first 2/3 of your career, you were the strongest man in the Junta?
"So many angry posts about Anifah and his "big mouth," but no one wants to link it to Anwar's already-launched American-seduction PR campaign. Just read that pandering New Yorker article. The impression I get is Malaysia is a backward neo-theocracy, with UMNO warlords running it to the ground Islamic-fundamentalism style - and Anwar is the sincere, self-doubting "messenger of god" to save the nation. What a load of cock. Sounds just like Ahmed Chelabi when he was bullshitting the Americans into invading Iraq - paint the nation as an American enemy, and they will take notice. BN is suffering from corruption and apathy, yes; Malaysia has alot of socially outdated and ineffective policies, especially race-wise, yes; people are fedup - yes! But framing us as Baath-esque, blind-to-the-world, anti-semetic religious rice-monkeys? Come on. Anwar is a true-blue traitor for going around shitting on Malaysia with such fervor, but it seems so many people want him to do exactly that. Says alot about his supporters and what they sincerely think.
People will believe exactly what they want, to get whatever it they want;
that is life. Anwar is just providing himself as a receptacle for our
people's projection - using their grouses as his personal platform to be Big Boss of Malaysia. Maybe the people need some kind of figure like that, to embody and fight for their frustrations. But, for the love of God, please know what kind of receptacle you are using. You may not notice it is a toilet bowl.
Nothing Anifah said is new - anyone with a passing interest in Malaysia
would have heard the Altantuya accusations (even my American friends have read it in passing somewhere on international news sites, and they don't particularly give a damn about this part of the world).
With the New Yorker article, the American intellectual community may now finally have Malaysia as a dirty blip on the radar. What Anifah did, in the light of this, is in my opinion, appropriate. Good thing Secretary Clinton didn't seem to take too much interest in Anwar personally (while maintaining that America brought up rule of law and due process during discussions). I think she can smell a rat here, especially considering Anwar's escapades with neo-con war-peddlers like Paul Wolfowitz. For my money, she knows how Chelabi played Wolfowitz (perhaps also the other way round), and won't take the risk on another asshole with a personal agenda. And despite his best efforts, Anwar will never be the Aung San Suu Kyi of Malaysia. How can you be, when for the first 2/3 of your career, you were the strongest man in the Junta?
By the way, I fully expect this comment, and others of similar leanings, to be mostly ignored or ridiculed. Right now, the popular thing to do is
rubbish the government. All the cool kids are doing it.
So will most of their fanboys."
at 11:01 PM
from: http://rockybru.com
A young friend sent me an e-mail yesterday, wondering if I'd read the article on Malaysia by the New Yorker magazine.
The article's headline is The Malay Dilemma, borrowed from Dr Mahathir's once-controversial and formerly-banned book.
I thought that Anwar's Malay Dilemma would have been a more apt title for the article. If you rely wholly on the New Yorker for your analysis on Malaysian politics, you'd think that Malaysia is a nation almost beyond redemption, where salvation lies with one man.
The following, in italic, is my young friend's email.
Dear Rocky, I have always wondered why that, as a young Malay, my morale has been very low since coming back in 2005. Why my non-Malay friends are publicly telling me that it is because 'your skin-color people' that Malaysia is going down the drain and to the dogs. After reading this article, I think I have finally understood why. This is the reality that Anwar has managed to paint of Malays and Malaysia. Through the blogs and American media, he has managed to paint this reality in the minds of all Malaysians and the world. This article was forwarded by a buddy of mine in the States, nasi lemak, with the following comment. You should read the comments after the article. Thought it'd be interesting read for you. Cheers.
The comment;
Anwar will never be the Aung San Suu Kyi of Malaysia. How can you be, when for the first 2/3 of your career, you were the strongest man in the Junta?
"So many angry posts about Anifah and his "big mouth," but no one wants to link it to Anwar's already-launched American-seduction PR campaign. Just read that pandering New Yorker article. The impression I get is Malaysia is a backward neo-theocracy, with UMNO warlords running it to the ground Islamic-fundamentalism style - and Anwar is the sincere, self-doubting "messenger of god" to save the nation. What a load of cock. Sounds just like Ahmed Chelabi when he was bullshitting the Americans into invading Iraq - paint the nation as an American enemy, and they will take notice. BN is suffering from corruption and apathy, yes; Malaysia has alot of socially outdated and ineffective policies, especially race-wise, yes; people are fedup - yes! But framing us as Baath-esque, blind-to-the-world, anti-semetic religious rice-monkeys? Come on. Anwar is a true-blue traitor for going around shitting on Malaysia with such fervor, but it seems so many people want him to do exactly that. Says alot about his supporters and what they sincerely think.
People will believe exactly what they want, to get whatever it they want;
that is life. Anwar is just providing himself as a receptacle for our
people's projection - using their grouses as his personal platform to be Big Boss of Malaysia. Maybe the people need some kind of figure like that, to embody and fight for their frustrations. But, for the love of God, please know what kind of receptacle you are using. You may not notice it is a toilet bowl.
Nothing Anifah said is new - anyone with a passing interest in Malaysia
would have heard the Altantuya accusations (even my American friends have read it in passing somewhere on international news sites, and they don't particularly give a damn about this part of the world).
With the New Yorker article, the American intellectual community may now finally have Malaysia as a dirty blip on the radar. What Anifah did, in the light of this, is in my opinion, appropriate. Good thing Secretary Clinton didn't seem to take too much interest in Anwar personally (while maintaining that America brought up rule of law and due process during discussions). I think she can smell a rat here, especially considering Anwar's escapades with neo-con war-peddlers like Paul Wolfowitz. For my money, she knows how Chelabi played Wolfowitz (perhaps also the other way round), and won't take the risk on another asshole with a personal agenda. And despite his best efforts, Anwar will never be the Aung San Suu Kyi of Malaysia. How can you be, when for the first 2/3 of your career, you were the strongest man in the Junta?
By the way, I fully expect this comment, and others of similar leanings, to be mostly ignored or ridiculed. Right now, the popular thing to do is
rubbish the government. All the cool kids are doing it.
So will most of their fanboys."
at 11:01 PM
Langgan:
Catatan (Atom)