|
Now can the PAS people understand what they have done? They have committed ‘close proximity’ with Umno. And that is a crime in Islam.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
If I were to get caught in a hotel room with another woman who is not my wife, I will be arrested and charged. If there are three women with me and we are having a foursome I would probably escape though, as it appears like it becomes a crime only if I am alone with one woman.
I can shout and scream that we did nothing wrong. I can insist that we did not have sex and demand that they get a doctor to examine the woman to prove that there are no signs of recent penetration and that there are no traces of semen either in her front, back, mouth, nose or ears. Nevertheless, I will still be arrested and charged -- and if the woman is a Muslim as well then she too would suffer the same fate.
My ‘crime’ would not be for having illicit sex but for close proximity. I would be arrested and charged not for penetrating the woman but for being alone with her. That is how it works.
If I were to grumble and complain and profess my innocence, I would be told that in the first place I should not have done anything that will arouse suspicion. When you are alone with another woman behind locked doors then this could lead to only one thing, sex. The fact that there was never any intention to indulge in sex does not matter. It is my action of being alone with her that is the issue, not what my ultimate intentions were. It is perception and not reality that counts.
In fact, I should not even be seen entering the hotel with another woman who is not my wife, they would argue. What if someone who knows me, or the woman, saw us entering the hotel? Would that not look suspicious? I would be blamed for inviting suspicion and thereby causing others to have suspicions about me. Those who saw me may gossip and the gossip would pass from one to another.
Gossiping is a serious crime and a major sin in Islam. But people are now gossiping about me because of the suspicious manner in which I have acted. So, I am to blame for the sin of gossiping that others have committed. If I had not acted suspiciously then there would not have been any gossiping. But, because of me, many people are now gossiping. It is perception and not reality that counts.
Yes, Islam asks us to guard what we do lest we ‘force’ people to gossip. If people gossip because of our suspicious acts then we are to blame, not them. Sure, it is wrong for them to gossip. But they are only doing so because we have been careless and have given them reason to gossip.
So, it is not enough that we take gossipers to task. If they are gossiping because of what we have done and because of the suspicious manner in which we have acted then we are to blame for it. Islam is very clear on this. It is perception and not reality that counts.
Now can the PAS people understand what they have done? They have committed ‘close proximity’ with Umno. And that is a crime in Islam. Okay, maybe they did not strip naked and bugger Umno, or allowed Umno to bugger them. It is not the buggering that people are concerned about. It is the crime of close proximity with Umno that is the issue. And any secret rendezvous with Umno, not once but many times mind you, is what concerns us. If it had been an open meeting in full view of the public then that would be another thing altogether; although still troubling enough.
There are those who say that there is nothing wrong in PAS having ‘Malay unity’ talks with Umno. Malay unity is not un-Islamic, they argue. In fact, they further argue, Islam demands unity of the Ummah. So PAS is absolutely Islamic in agreeing to these Malay unity talks, they try to convince us.
Okay, let us dissect this argument. PAS agrees that there should be Malay unity. Malay unity against whom? Malays can only be united if it is against non-Malays. Are they arguing that Malays must unite against non-Malays? What would be the reason for Malays to unite other than to unite against non-Malays?
It appears like PAS is now subscribing to the Malays versus non-Malays concept. PAS has to now make it very clear what its stand is. Does it stand for Ketuanan Melayu or Ketuanan Islam, or both? Tell the non-Malays and non-Muslims, now, what PAS stands for and then forever hold your peace. Then we will know what to do come next general election. Come next general election we will send PAS into the ranks of the political has-beens.
This was what the PAS President said in his interview with Karim Raslan:
"Still, his ability to lead is unquestionable. It's arguable that the Malay community is also starting to believe the accusations against Anwar. His delay in taking an oath to swear on the Quran is also an issue."
The PAS President may be a graduate of the universities of Cairo and Medina and he may be able to speak Arabic more fluent than an Arab. Nevertheless, I am still going to challenge him on this one.
Is there such a thing as swearing on the Quran? We are told to obey the Quran and follow the example of the Prophet. In that case is this swearing on the Quran something that the Quran or the Prophet teaches us or is it an invention of misguided Muslims? The Quran, in the form that we know today, did not exist until after the Prophet died. It was Osman, the Third Caliph, who ordered that the Quran be compiled into a book form. Prior to that it was mostly etched in the heads of those who had memorised the Quran and on bits and pieces of bark and animal skin scattered all over the Arabian Peninsular.
Osman was worried about two things. First was that many of those who had memorised the Quran were dying in the many wars they were engaged in and there was a danger that the Quran would ‘die’ together with those who were dying. Secondly, many variations of the Quran were beginning to emerge so they had to come out with an approved version of the Quran and all the other variations would have to be destroyed.
A committee was set up to sieve through the different variations plus ‘interview’ those who had memorised the Quran to finally arrive at the approved version, which was then compiled into book form. They destroyed what they viewed as contradicting variations and sent this new book-form Quran to all the reaches of the Islamic empire and, today, that is the Quran we are using.
So how could the Prophet have asked us to swear on a Quran that never existed in his time the way it exists today? And whom would Anwar be following if he chose to swear on the Quran? Prophet Muhammad or some deviant who came along long after the Prophet had died and invented this ‘put your right hand on the holy book and left hand in the air and swear after me………..’?
Have we forgotten that ten years ago Anwar did swear an oath in Permatang Pauh that he did not sodomise Azizan, his wife’s driver? Did that do any good? In fact, Azizan also testified in court under oath, THREE TIMES, that Anwar never sodomised him. In spite of that they still convicted Anwar and sentenced him to 15 years jail on charges of abuse of power and sodomy. Did it do Anwar any good that he swore an oath in the name of Allah that he never sodomised Azizan? Did it do any good that Azizan too testified in court under oath, three times, that Anwar never sodomised him?
Anyway, let’s move onto another subject matter -- lawyer Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin. Kamarul is the lawyer of the IGP as well as the lawyer of one of the police officers on trial for the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu. What perception do you get from this ‘coincidence’? Or is the reality that the IGP ‘arranged’ the lawyer on behalf of one of his officers indicted for murder? Yes, talk about perception and reality.  Which one is, Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin, the defence lawyer representing Cpl Sirul Azhar Umar in the Altantuya murder trial?
1) Malaysia's police chief sues Anwar for defamation: lawyer
(AFP) - Malaysia's police chief Monday filed a defamation lawsuit against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim for accusing him of manipulating evidence, the officer's lawyer said.
Anwar has accused police chief Musa Hassan and attorney general Abdul Gani Patail of manipulating evidence in an investigation into an alleged beating he received while in police custody ten years ago.
In 1998 Anwar was arrested and later jailed for sodomy and corruption, and sacked as deputy premier. The sex conviction was later overturned.
Last month, Anwar filed a police complaint over his treatment in custody a decade ago, which resulted in him sporting a black eye.
Musa's lawyer Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin said the country's top policeman said Anwar had slandered him by repeating in public and to the media the allegations of manipulating evidence.
2) Defence questions credibility of two cops
(The Sun) - The defence team in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial today questioned the credibility of statements by C/Insp Koh Fei Cheow and ASP Zulkarnain Samsudin and the validity of the methods they had used to extract a purported disclosure from second accused Cpl Sirul Azhar Umar, 37.
Sirul’s counsel Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin, in submitting for a trial within a trial held to determine if the alleged disclosure by Sirul, which led to the discovery of Altantuya’s jewellery and belongings in a jacket in his apartment, can be adduced as evidence, pointed out discrepancies in the testimonies by the two policemen in relation to the time the disclosure was made.
 |
