Monday, April 30, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 30, 2012

1. Twenty years ago the Serbs of Yugoslavia began their genocidal war against the Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They made no attempt to hide their intention to kill all the Muslims. They openly declared they were carrying out “ethnic cleansing”.

2. Europe, according to the Europeans, is Christendom – the kingdom of the Christians. The presence of a European Muslim country in Europe seems to contradict this assertion.

3. Although Europeans are not as committed to Christianity today as they were in the past, nevertheless anti-Muslim feelings is still strong. So the elimination of Muslims from Europe is not unwelcome. The genocidal war waged by the Serbs was allowed to go on.

4. But the Serbs committed horrible atrocities against the Bosnians. A television report showed a British Army officer expressing horror and anger when Serbs burnt houses with the occupants still in them.

5. But the NATO forces were there only to watch. They may not shoot at the murderous Serbs. When in Srebrenica the Dutch troops, tasked with protecting the Bosnians saw the Serb soldiers killing 8,000 Bosnians in front of their eyes, they simply moved away. The Serbs used axes to bash in the heads of Bosnian men and boys in one of the worst massacres in Europe.

6. Perhaps it was this massacre which prompted the West to stop the fighting. Apparently they could stop the Serbs if they wanted to.

7. But in a travesty of justice America imposed on the Bosnians the Dayton Plan in which Bosnia-Herzegovina was divided into two.

8. The Serbs were rewarded with an independent state completely under their rule although it is supposed to be a part of Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is called Republika Srpska.

9. The rest of Bosnia-Herzegovina would have three presidents all the time. There would be a Serb President, a Croatian President and a Bosnian President. Every decision by this coalition Government must be agreed to by all three Presidents.

10. As can be expected the Serb President never agreed to anything that can contribute to the rebuilding of this part of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

11. The west talks ad infinitum about justice and the rule of law. Rewarding the murderous genocidal Serbs with an independent state and frustrating the Bosnian Muslims’ quest for independence by giving veto power to the Serbs and the Croats is an example of justice for the West. They have ensured there would be no Muslim state in Christendom.

Thursday, April 26, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 25, 2012

1. I am sorry if I angered anyone for pointing out that the millionaires (and billionaires) of Malaysia made their first million in Malaysia. I do not claim to have helped them. I accept that they did not need my help. In fact many made their pile before my time. What I was trying to point out is that Malaysia, not me, gave them the leg-up or head-start, setting them on their journey to wealth and riches.

2. I believe all these people cannot but accept this fact. They cannot deny that what I said is true. But I must acknowledge that at least one of them made his first million abroad through trading in oil. With that money he came back and built his empire through opportunities created by the country.

3. Facts are facts whether you acknowledge them or not. One need not be grateful for the facts, but still they are facts. I was just stating facts. If I offend anyone I apologise.

Monday, April 23, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 23, 2012

1. I have been criticising America’s blockade of Iran.

2. America’s action is said to be due to Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

3. Israel has 200 nuclear warheads and obviously poses a greater threat to Iran than Iran’s threat against its neighbours.

4. Am I being unnecessarily critical of the United States?

Below is part of an article by Brian A Burchill of Global Research E-Newsletter, Canada which seems to validate my stand. For the full article please see the URL


By Brian A. Burchill

Global Research, April 3, 2012

The UK’s Guardian recently interviewed “current and former U.S. and European officials with access to intelligence on Iran,” and concluded that the United States, its European allies, and even Israel, agree that Tehran is probably years away from having a deliverable nuclear warhead.

Twice in recent weeks, CBC News anchor Peter Mansbridge has closely questioned two leaders who hold a different view.
In a January 18th interview, Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Mansbridge that he thinks that “the evidence is…overwhelming” and that it “is just beyond dispute at this point” that Iran’s purpose is to develop nuclear weapons. When pressed about Iran’s insistence that it has no intention to build nuclear weapons, Harper said “I think there is absolutely no doubt they are lying”.

Harper’s claims are all-too-reminiscent of US Former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s February, 2003, statement at the UN that, with “facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence”.

There was no doubt in his mind that Saddam Hussein was working to obtain key components to produce nuclear weapons.

That intelligence has since been exposed as lies. In fact, the Iraqi chemical engineer who perpetrated the false intelligence, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, confessed his lies on British television April 3rd.

Also troubling is that Harper cited the International Atomic Energy Commission, but in the March 22nd Guardian, the agency’s former director-general, Hans Blix, raised concerns about its recent credibility. The IAEC has been charged with over-reliance on unverified intelligence, and pro-Western bias, since the 2009 arrival of its new chief, Yukiya Amano.

More recently, Harper’s conclusion was thrown into question during a CBC News One on One interview with US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, aired last weekend.

Panetta first stated that the best US intelligence has concluded that Iran has not made the decision to build a nuclear weapon. He went on to say that Iran is involved in providing non-nuclear weapons to terrorist-associated groups outside the country.

However, when Mansbridge queried whether containment was an effective policy (sealing off the country to prevent weapons exports to outsiders), Panetta then contradicted his own intelligence claim by saying the US was going to apply economic and diplomatic sanctions because “we cannot allow a country that supports terrorism to have a nuclear weapon.”

When pushed to justify the sanctions, Panetta played the debate-ending trump card – the supposed threat of Muslim terrorism – the card spawned by 9/11.

Thus ended the Panetta news segment – Mansbridge did not challenge whether hidden, ubiquitous, amorphous terrorism was a factor in the case of Iran.

Brian A. Burchill is Mechanical Engineer based in British Columbia.

Tuesday, April 17, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 17, 2012

1. Malaysia is, relatively speaking, a small country. The population is only 28 million with a per capita income of USD8,000. But many Malaysians have done very well on the world stage. They are big and often they are the biggest in the world.

2. This is especially so in business. These people make their first million in the country. And they grew, prospering in the conducive business environment that Malaysia provides.

3. PETRONAS is a Government company. It is a national oil company like those found in most oil-producing countries. But PETRONAS did not confine itself to merely collecting royalty. PETRONAS went into all the different upstream and downstream areas of the petroleum industry. It went abroad, prospecting, producing, transporting, shipping, laying pipes and building ports and terminals. It is also into natural gas liquefaction and petrochemicals.

4. It is rare for a Government company to do well. But PETRONAS has done well and contributed much to Government revenue.

5. The private sector has not done badly either. Many have grown and expanded. Kuok Bros, building on its sugar and flour monopoly business, expanded into luxury hotels. The Shangri-La Hotel chains are all over East Asia and beyond. Palm oil plantations in Malaysia and Indonesia contributed billions to the corporation.

6. Lim Goh Tong came to Malaysia penniless. A casino license granted by the first Government of independent Malaysia contributed to the creation of one of the biggest corporations in the world. Resorts World operates casinos in Malaysia, Singapore, USA and UK, and elsewhere. Additionally, his Malaysian corporation owns huge palm oil estates and cruise ships.

7. The Genting group has more hotel rooms than any other hotel chain in the Far East.

8. Yeoh Tiong Lay (YTL) is another Malaysian company, which started as a construction company but now owns valuable properties in KL and other Malaysian towns. It owns a profitable power plant in Malaysia and a water supply utility in the UK.

9. Datuk Azman Shah owns a hotel chain, the Holiday Villa, largely in Malaysia but also in London, Sudan and other locations.

10. Vincent Tan has many businesses. He is also a big property owner in KL and in other parts of Malaysia. His most remarkable success in the Cosway chain of stores, with thousands operating in East Asian countries, in the USA and in Mexico.

11. Ananda Krishnan made his first million trading in oil. Coming home he started Astro and Maxis, telecommunication and paid television businesses. He is the owner of three satellites, which provide telecommunication service covering most of Southeast Asia. He owns and operates mobile phone services in many countries, including in India.

12. Eversendai is not a Japanese company. It is a Malaysian company, which has done very well in the Middle East especially. The main business is steel framework for building, including the Burj Khalifa, currently the tallest building in the world. The owner is an Indian.

13. And there are many more companies, which had their head start in Malaysia but have grown and expanded to many parts of the world. They may not be as big as the ones I have listed but they have done quite well for themselves.

14. For a relatively small country, still not a developed country, Malaysia can be proud of the successes of its sons. I am sure that these successful people must also be proud of themselves and their achievements. I am also sure that they never forget their small beginnings in Malaysia, the kick-start that set them off to achieve great things.

15. There are many other kinds of successes that Malaysians can be proud of. We were once the biggest producer of tin and rubber in the world. Now we are the biggest producer of palm oil in the world.

16. Malaysians now bought and own brand name companies like Laura Ashley, Crabtree & Evelyn.

17. Yes, Malaysia is a small country but it has provided Malaysians of all races the opportunities to excel and succeed beyond the dreams of its founding fathers, perhaps beyond the dreams of the Malaysian tycoons themselves.

Friday, April 13, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 13, 2012

1. I have often been asked by foreigners regarding Malaysia’s successful transition from an agricultural country to an industrialised country. Just as often, they wondered how a multi-racial country could stay peaceful and stable, thus enabling the transition to be made.

2. I myself did not, in pre-independence days dream that there could be stability for Malaysia and that it would change its economic base and prosper. I did not dream of this because when we were struggling against the Malayan Union and then for independence, the country was poor and there was a great deal of animosity between the Malays and the Chinese.

3. We have almost forgotten it now but the Japanese surrender saw the mainly Chinese Anti-Japanese guerrillas emerging from the jungles, declaring that they now rule the country. There were clashes between the Malays and the Chinese and several were killed on each side.

4. Anti-Chinese feelings among the Malays ran high. Part of their objection to the Malayan Union was because the British proposed to give citizenship to all including the Chinese.

5. Apart from subsistence padi cultivation and inshore fishing the Malays of Kedah had no source of income. They were very poor.

6. The Chinese were involved in shop-keeping even in the Malay villages. The rice-mills belonged to them.

7. What we in Kedah saw in those days was continued poverty and conflicts between the races. The Malays felt threatened and their reaction was to unite and form a Malay political party – the United Malays National Organisation. It was solely dedicated to fighting the Malayan Union and upholding Malay rights. There was no desire to cooperate with the Chinese at all, certainly not for achieving merdeka.

8. After the Malayan Union was scrapped and replaced by the Federation of Malaya (officially Persekutuan Tanah Melayu), the British misjudged Malay sentiment and persuaded Dato Onn to open up UMNO to non-Malays. His proposal was rejected and he had to leave UMNO.

9. To cut a long story short, Tunku Abdul Rahman, realising that he needed Chinese support in order to achieve independence, came up with a unique solution.

10. UMNO could remain a purely Malay party but it would work with the purely Chinese Malaysian Chinese Association to allay British suspicions that independence would lead to seizure of Chinese properties by the Malays.

11. The cooperation worked so well that the Malayan Indian Congress decided to join it. And so the alliance of racial parties was formed. It was appropriately called the Alliance. Together they obtained independence for Malaya and this same concept enabled Sabah, Sarawak and for a time Singapore parties to join and set up independent Malaysia.

12. But Malay animosity towards the Chinese and Chinese dissatisfaction with the terms of the social contract was still extant, so that in 1969 race riots broke out. Foreign as well as many Malaysians concluded that the fragile coalition had failed. But Tun Razak resurrected it and formed an even bigger coalition, the Barisan Nasional or National Front.

13. Fear of race riots recurring helped to keep the Barisan Nasional parties together. And so from 1971 until today the country enjoyed peace and stability under Barisan Nasional Governments. Unprecedented growth took place and Malaysia became an industrialised country.

14. Admittedly the Barisan Nasional did not do well in 2008. But it is not because of the Barisan Nasional as a concept or as a party failed. The poor performance was due to extremely poor leadership.

15. The essence of this kind of racial parties cooperating is the willingness of every party to make sacrifices. No party should expect to get 100% of what it considers its entitlement. Everyone must give up something in order to gain much more from growth and development.

16. The coalition concept worked so well that the opposition try to copy it. Today Pakatan is a loose coalition of sorts involving the three opposition parties; the PAS, DAP and Keadilan.

17. There is one other element that is needed for a coalition to work. Although it is an alliance of equals, it needs a strong core which can act as the first among equals. The core will act as referee whenever the other components fail to agree with each other. The core must of course be fair at all times.

18. On the other hand the core must not be too strong as to be able to go on its own. If it fails to get the support of the others it will also fail.

19. Clearly the parties of the Barisan Nasional coalition are dependent on each other.

20. However, should the coalition achieve only a small majority, it will be constantly threatened by the possibility of any one of the parties defecting and bringing down the Government. This is its Achilles’ heel. But otherwise the coalition has functioned well in Malaysia.

21. For a country to develop it needs a strong Government that can ensure stability. No one party in Malaysia can provide a strong Government. Certainly the “Pakatan” cannot provide this.

22. The peoples of Malaysia must realise this and choose their Governments wisely. They must not allow racial sentiments to cloud good pragmatic common sense.

23. Malaysia had enjoyed half-a-century of peace and growth under the Barisan Nasional. No one can honestly say that he had not benefitted from Barisan Nasional rule.

Thursday, April 12, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 10, 2012

1. Oil drives the world. Ever since the invention of the internal combustion engine, the demand for oil has been increasing by leaps and bounds.

2. Today the estimated total consumption of oil per day amounts to 70,000,000 plus barrels. Engines has been made more efficient i.e. consume less oil for a given power. But still the demand for oil continues to rise.

3. In 1973 the price of one barrel of crude oil was just 3.50 USD. The oil producing countries were being robbed. They remained poor and at the mercy of the Seven Sisters – the biggest and richest petroleum companies of the world. They dictated the price. And they paid royalty amounting to only 20% or so of the price of crude to the poor countries.

4. The producing countries would have remained poor but for the anger over the state of Israel being supported by the West. Following the Yom Kippur War, the Organisation of Oil Producing Countries, decided to cut oil supply to the West.

5. Suddenly the producer countries got the upper hand. They could deny supply and therefore they could dictate prices.

6. Within one year the price shot up to 12 USD. From then on the price went up higher and higher.

7. Today the price is USD 120 per barrel. The producing countries had accordingly become extremely wealthy from their production sharing contracts.

8. But it is not just the producers who are pushing up oil price. The Western consumer countries are even more guilty. Their profligate ways and their policy of dominating the world has resulted in sanctions and wars against the Muslim oil producers which invariably affected the supply of oil to the world. The war against terror initiated by the United States has resulted in blockades against many Muslim oil producing countries.

9. In total disregard for international law and the United Nations, the United States is currently blockading Iran, a major oil exporter. In order to make the sanctions effective the United States need other countries to do the same.

10. But countries which source their oil from Iran are naturally unwilling to join in the blockade. To get them to apply sanction the United States is now doing a lot of arm-twisting, making threats against the total trade of these countries. Countries like Malaysia are very susceptible.

11. This great advocate of free trade, of globalisation, of a borderless world seems ever ready to renege on its undertaking on free trade. You get to trade freely if you do as you are told.

12. But the United States cannot force China, Russia and India. No attempt is made against European countries either because without Iranian oil their economies would grind to a stop.

13. This great country which is so dedicated to promoting free trade picks and choose the countries to bully. But then it is also not so committed to the freedoms of democracy.

14. Faced with the threat of terrorism the United States did not hesitate to curtail freedom even for its own people. Having passed the equivalence of the ISA on foreign terror suspects, Obama recently extended detention without trial to American citizens as well.

15. But the United States Congress has done better. It also legalised torture. So there is no need to send prisoners to countries which permits torture.

16. Malaysia should be proud of having the United States and Britain copy its legal system. But while Malaysia rids itself of the ISA, don’t expect the United States to do the same. Guantanamo is now 10 years old. It is set to go on forever.

17. There will be no trial for the detainees. Homeland security means no security for others. At any time they can be bombed and rocketed out of existence, starved through sanctions and failure to cooperate in applying sanctions against Iran will result in denial of free trade.

Monday, April 2, 2012


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on April 02, 2012

1. Saya ucap terima kasih kepada Hilal Asyraf kerana menjawab dengan panjang lebar soalan-soalan saya.

2. Sebenarnya saya membuat soalan-soalan kerana ingin mendapat pengesahan berkenaan reaksi terhadap apa yang telah diucapkan oleh saya berkenaan hudud.

3. Jawapan Hilal mengesahkan apa yang saya syaki, iaitu Hilal dan mungkin ramai orang Islam lain berpendapat bahawa wahyu Allah s.w.t. seperti yang terdapat dalam Al-Quran adalah setaraf dengan Hadith sohih Bukhari, iaitu kesahihan yang dibuat oleh manusia biasa walaupun pakar dalam bidang Hadith.

4. Lebih teruk lagi ialah pendapat bahawa ada ayat Al-Quran yang sudah dimansuh tetapi masih boleh dibaca iaitu baca tanpa terima.

5. Tidak pula disebut ayat yang mana yang telah dimansuh. Apakah yang dimansuh ini ialah ayat yang bertentangan dengan Hadith yang dikatakan sohih?

6. Berkenaan dengan Surah An-Nur, Ayat 2, (ayat yang terang dan jelas iaitu ayat Mukhamat) dan saya perturunkannya disini; “Perempuan dan lelaki yang berzina, hendaklah kamu sebat tiap-tiap seorang dari keduanya seratus kali sebat; dan janganlah kamu dipengaruhi oleh perasaan belas kasihan terhadap keduanya dalam menjalankan hukum agama Allah, jika benar kamu beriman kepada Allah dan hari Akhirat dan hendaklah disaksikan hukuman seksa yang dikenakan kepada mereka itu oleh sekumpulan orang-orang yang beriman.”

7. Bandingkan “hukum sebat seratus kali” dengan “orang itu direjam” dalam Hadith sohih riwayat Bukhari (Dari Jabir bin Abdullah Al Ansar RA).

8. Bolehkah disamakan hukum sebat dan hukum rejam (iaitu hukum bunuh)? Siapa pun yang berfikiran waras akan berkata hukum-hukum ini amat berbeza. Justeru itu dakwaan Hilal seperti berikut, “Jelas, sekali lagi, hukum ini daripada Al-Quran dan Hadith”, memberi gambaran seolah-olah hukum dalam Al-Quran iaitu “sebat” adalah sama dengan hukum rejam dalam Hadith.” Pemikiran yang waras tidak mungkin mengaku yang sebat dengan bunuh adalah sama.

9. Memanglah Bukhari membuat kajian mendalam mengikut syarat-syarat yang Bukhari sendiri mengenakan kepada dirinya. Memang pun Hadith sohih Bukhari yang tidak bertentangan dengan ayat Al-Quran boleh diterima sebagai sohih.

10. Yang menimbul masalah ialah apabila sohih Bukhari tidak sama dengan wahyu Allah s.w.t. dalam Al-Quran – umpamanya Surah An-Nur, Ayat 2.

11. Hanya dengan berkata tidak ada percanggahan antara Hadith yang sohih dengan ayat-ayat Al-Quran bermakna menafi kenyataan. Percanggahan memang ada seperti yang disebut diatas.

12. Jawapan, “Sekiranya kita menjumpai ta’arudh (perlanggaran, percanggahan) ini, di antara Hadith yang sohih dengan ayat Al-Quran, maka hendaklah kita kaji semula apakah sebabnya. Dan biasanya, percanggahan itu bukanlah percanggahan, tetapi diantaranya disebabkan (mengikut surat kedua Hilal):

(a) “Silap dalam periwayatan Hadith”

(b) “Ayat Al-Quran itu sudah dinasakh (mansuh) hukumnya, tetapi tidak dinasakh (mansuh) bacaannya”

(c) “Atau Rasullah s.a.w. melakukan/membenarkan/melarang perkara tersebut, sebelum ayat Al-Quran turun melarang/membenarkan”

Mengikut pendapat ini “silap periwayatan Hadith” lebih mudah diterima kerana daripada 600,000 hadith kebanyakannya lemah dan tidak sohih, daripada mendakwa “ayat Al-Quran itu sudah dimansuh” sesuatu yang amat bercanggah dengan penerimaan oleh orang Islam bahawa Al-Quran itu mengumpul semua wahyu Allah s.w.t. yang disampaikan kepada Rasulnya, Muhammad s.a.w. untuk umat manusia.

13. Hilal sendiri mencatit, “Menolak apa-apa sahaja daripada Al-Quran hukumnya adalah kafir”. Surah Al-Maidah, Ayat 44 berbunyi “Oleh itu janganlah kamu takut kepada manusia tetapi hendaklah kamu takut kepadaKu, dan janganlah kamu menjual ayat-ayatKu dengan harga sedikit, dan sesiapa yang tidak menghukum dengan apa yang telah diturunkan oleh Allah maka mereka itulah orang-orang kafir. Tidak pula disebut di mana-mana “tidak menghukum mengikut Hadith adalah kafir.”

14. Memansuhkan ayat Al-Quran samalah dengan menolak ayat Al-Quran dan hukumannya juga tentulah kafir. Siapakah yang memansuhkan ayat Al-Quran dan ayat yang mana yang dimansuhkan? Tidak ada bukti yang Nabi yang memansuhkannya. Jika sebelum diterima wahyu, Rasullah s.a.w. melakukan/membenarkan/melarang perkara tersebut, apakah apabila kemudian Nabi Muhammad menerima wahyu dari Allah s.w.t. maka Nabi akan menolak wahyu dan mengekalkan pendapatnya yang terdahulu?

15. Bolehkah kita terima bahawa Rasulah s.a.w. ingkar dan menolak wahyu dari Allah s.w.t.? Ini tidak masuk akal dan tidak disebut di mana-mana.

16. Tidak mungkin Hadith disamakan dengan wahyu Allah s.w.t. Hadith bergantung kepada periwayatan, penilaian/kajian oleh manusia biasa sedangkan wahyu Allah oleh Rasullah s.a.w. untuk umat manusia.

17. Manusia terdedah kepada berbagai-bagai kelemahan dan kesilapan. Nabi Muhammad adalah Rasul dan Baginda tidaklah seperti manusia biasa dengan kelemahan-kelemahan mereka.

18. Umat Islam sekarang ini berada dalam keadaan yang buruk dan terhina. Negara mereka diserang, dilanda dan dihancurkan. Ratusan ribu orang Islam dibunuh, diseksa, ditawan; sekatan makanan dan ubat-ubatan menyebabkan beribu-ribu kanak-kanak dan orang tua mati. Agama Islam dicemuh, dikatakan agama pengganas yang dibawa oleh Nabi yang dikatakan ketua pengganas dan bermacam lagi.

19. Al-Quran berkata segala yang baik datangnya dari Allah s.w.t. dan segala yang buruk datangnya dari kita sendiri.

20. Bagi saya adalah jelas keburukan yang menimpa umat Islam adalah kerana perbuatan kita sendiri.

21. Untuk mengenalpasti apa yang salah yang dilakukan oleh umat Islam, saya membaca Al-Quran untuk mendapat panduan darinya. Dan saya dapati sungguh banyak daripada ajaran dan panduan yang terdapat dalam Al-Quran tidak diamalkan oleh kita. Ada juga yang ditolak oleh kita untuk mematuhi ajaran daripada punca lain.

22. Apabila sahaja datang orang yang pandai bercakap maka kita mengikuti mereka. Sebab itu ada Ashaari dan Ayah Pin. Dan banyak pula tarikat diadakan yang tidak menepati ajaran Islam.

23. Dan ramai juga yang lebih percaya kepada punca ajaran yang tidak dari Al-Quran, bahkan bertentangan dengan Islam.

24. Sebaliknya kita tahu Islam adalah Ad-deen, cara hidup. Dan sesungguhnya terdapat panduan yang jelas dalam Al-Quran berkenaan cara hidup bagi orang Islam. Dan jika cara hidup ini diamalkan maka tetap orang Islam akan berjaya, akan terpelihara daripada keburukan yang disebut tadi.

25. Tafsiran ajaran Islam yang berbeza-beza, mengutamakan Hadith lebih dari Al-Quran, fatwa yang dibuat yang tidak membantu umat Islam, dan kesediaan mengikut nafsu dan tidak akal fikiran, ghairah untuk menunjuk-nunjuk betapa kuatnya ke-Islaman kita – semua ini menyumbang kepada keburukan yang menimpa umat Islam.

26. Sesungguhnya umat Islamlah yang bersalah, terutama kerana membelakangkan wahyu Allah s.w.t. dalam Al-Quran. Selagi kita tidak mengaku kesalahan kita, selagi kita tidak kembali kepada ajaran Islam yang sebenar iaitu yang didapati dalam Al-Quran serta Hadith sohih dan fatwa-fatwa yang tidak bertentangan dengan Al-Quran, selama itulah kita akan berada dalam keadaan terhina dan tertindas.

27. Saya akui ada hukum potong tangan sipencuri. Tetapi pelaksanaannya mestilah mengambil kira keadaan. Jika kita tidak dapat laksanakan hukum ini kepada semua kerana perbezaan agama dan kemungkinan huru-hara berlaku, adalah lebih baik kita tidak laksanakan hukum ini keatas orang Islam sahaja sehingga berlaku ketidakadilan.

28. Saya tidak berkata orang Melayu banyak yang mencuri tetapi hakikatnya jumlah mereka yang mencuri di negara ini lebih ramai daripada orang bukan Islam. Hukuman yang berbeza antara rakyat sebuah negara tetap akan memperlihatkan ramai orang Melayu yang kudong tangan sementara orang bukan Islam kena dua bulan penjara. Adilkah ini?

29. Hukum bunuh orang yang murtad adalah juga dari Hadith. Hukum ini bukan dari Al-Quran.


30. Dalam Quran hudud diterjemah dengan perkataan “had” atau dalam Bahasa Inggeris “limit”. Had bermakna “setakat itu” tidak boleh lebih daripada itu.

31. Hukum-hukum yang terdapat dalam Al-Quran adalah hukum yang maksimum, yang tertinggi yang boleh dikenakan. Ini bermakna hukum yang kurang daripada yang tertinggi juga boleh dikenakan.

32. Tetapi kita asyik dengan nafsu yang ingin menunjuk-nunjuk betapa kerasnya pegangan kita kepada agama Islam. Justeru itu kita tafsir hudud bermakna yang tertinggi sekali daripada hukuman yang mungkin dijatuhkan mestilah dikenakan setiap kali.

33. Al-Quran dan agama Islam memberi banyak kelonggaran kepada pengamalan agama kita. Islam bukan diturunkan oleh Allah s.w.t. untuk menjadi beban kepada penganutnya.

34. Tetapi ramai daripada kita suka jika Islam menjadi beban yang berat supaya pengamal ajaran Islam dapat buktikan betapa kuatnya pegangan mereka kepada agama Islam. Kita suka jika kita didera sepanjang masa supaya dapat kita tunjuk betapa kuatnya iman kita. Kerana inilah wujud puak-puak yang keterlaluan dalam pengamalan agama mereka yang sering berkata orang lain kurang Islam atau tidak Islam. Dengan ini perpecahan berlaku di kalangan umat Islam sehingga mereka menjadi lemah dan mudah diperkosa oleh orang lain.

35. Ya. Saya bukan ulama. Saya tidak fasih dalam Bahasa Arab. Saya tidak terlatih seperti orang yang tidak senang dengan penjelasan saya, terlatih dan berijazah. Tetapi sebagai seorang orang Islam yang sedih dan perihatin terhadap nasib yang menimpa orang Islam saya berhak mencuba mengenalpasti sebab-sebab malapetaka menimpa kita.

36. Al-Quran juga berkata Allah SWT tidak akan mengubah nasib buruk kita sehingga kita berusaha mengubah nasib kita sendiri. Mengenalpasti sebab-sebab nasib kita menjadi buruk adalah usaha awalan untuk memperbaikinya.

37. Insyaallah, Tuhan tidak akan menghampa usaha dan harapan kita.