Pro-PAS versus anti-PAS in PKR

By MT Webmaster Last updated Oct 7, 2016

So, while we have Azmin Ali saying that Pakatan Harapan must unite and agree to go to bed with PAS, Khalid Jaafar says liberal Malaysians must unite and oppose the Islamists. So which of Anwar’s inner circle do we listen to? But then we must not forget that Azmin has his personal interest. He knows that without PAS he cannot continue as the Selangor Menteri Besar.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

A member of Anwar Ibrahim’s inner circle, Selangor Menteri Besar Azmin Ali, said that opposition parties must be united in order to usher PAS back into Pakatan Harapan. “I believe that it’s going to be a collective effort. All parties and individuals must come back to the drawing board and discuss what’s best for the country and the people.” (READ MORE HERE)

Another member of Anwar Ibrahim’s inner circle, Khalid Jaafar of IKD (Institut Kajian Dasar), said ‘liberalists’ must speak up against decisions and issues brought up and implemented by Islamists. If Malaysia ever turns into another Pakistan or Iran, where the Muslim extremists rule, blame it on the liberals for staying silent, said Khalid Jaafar, a liberal advocate.

Khalid urged liberalists in the country not to give up and continue to persuade others on the reasons to practise liberalism. “The voice of Islamists in the country has been loud for too long. Liberalists have to speak up. They also have to be prompt with their arguments.” (READ MORE HERE)

Yes, you can see how Anwar’s inner circle is divided between those who want to still go to bed with PAS and those who think that PAS belongs to the era of 616 and not to this era of 2016.

Siti Kasim, as well as many other Muslim ‘liberalists’ and non-Muslims, have blamed Anwar for what some people call the ‘Talibanisation’ of Malaysia. (READ HERE)

In a way that is true both then and now, that is if you do consider Malaysia being ‘Talibanised’. When asked about the Islamic Syariah laws of Hudud, Anwar replied that as a Muslim he cannot (as in forbidden) oppose Hudud but he feels Malaysia is not yet ready for such harsh laws and Malaysians need to be educated first regarding Hudud and only when Malaysians are ready to accept Hudud should the country begin to move in that direction.

So what is that supposed to mean? Is that a yes or a no? Does Anwar support Hudud or not? Yes or no? Why this long song and dance about ‘as a Muslim I cannot oppose Hudud but I feel Malaysia is not yet ready for such harsh laws and Malaysians need to be educated first regarding Hudud and only when Malaysians are ready to accept Hudud should the country begin to move in that direction’?

It is like a couple of years ago when Anwar was asked during a TV interview, three times, whether he is gay and he refused to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and went on and on about political conspiracies and the fight for change and how he posed a danger to those who walk in the corridors of power and how they used unfounded allegations to bring him down and so on. Five minutes of rambling without answering that very simple question with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

So, yes, Anwar is certainly to blame for the current state of affairs. Why could he not just say ‘yes I support Hudud’ or ‘no I do not support Hudud’? That would very clearly establish PKR’s position on the matter. If the answer is ‘yes I support Hudud’ does that then mean PKR disagrees with DAP, who opposes Hudud?

Anwar wants to live in both worlds. He wants to live in the PAS pro-Hudud world plus he wants to live in the DAP anti-Hudud world. I suppose that would sort of make you bisexual, dua-dua pun boleh.

When Siti Kasim said that Anwar is to blame for the present state of affairs, she was referring to his ABIM days. Khalid Jaafar more or less confirmed this when he said, “There were concerns about morality, ethics and religious hollowness, with many feeling education had failed to address the needs of religion. People in the 1980s felt they had got independence and Malaysia was already developing well, but that we were not keeping up with the needs of the religion. These feelings were not isolated to Malaysia, but felt the world over.”

Khalid said everything correctly except clarify that when he said ‘People in the 1980s felt they…’ he meant Anwar and ABIM. I remember back in those days (late 1970s and early 1980s) when Anwar used to label those who wore western clothes and those Malays who patronised places like Selangor Club and Lake Club as kafir (infidels).

Then, after joining Umno in 1982, Anwar started riding horses at Vincent Tan’s Bukit Kiara Equestrian Centre. And then when criticised for living an ‘elite’ life as opposed to before when he was in ABIM, he replied he is just following the Prophet’s example, who also rode horses.

Yes, but I am sure Prophet Muhammad did not ride with Wan Zaleha Radzi.

When the Iran-Iraq War started in September 1980, some of the ABIM leaders visited Iran and actually went to the frontline where their bus got shot full of holes. Fortunately no one was hurt or killed. Why visit Iran and not Iraq? Because at that time Iran was anti-America while Iraq was supported by the United States.

So what does that tell you about Anwar’s people and ABIM in 1980 before Anwar joined Umno in 1982? In fact, from 1975 till 1982, Anwar was the representative for Asia Pacific for the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY) under Sheikh Hassan Abdullah. Many countries have accused WAMY of supporting and financing terrorism while India said WAMY is behind the terrorism in Kashmir.

How many so-called ‘liberal’ Malays know all this? Do those DAP Chinese who hate PAS so much know this part of Anwar’s background? Do they know Anwar is a wolf in sheep’s clothing? This is as funny as Sir Elton John launching an anti-gay movement.

Raja Petra Kamarudin RPK