Chua Soiled Lek says  Burn that Holy Quran WHAT IS SO GREAT ABOUT THAT ISLAM’S HUDUD LAW ? 


MCA president Chua Soi Lek appears to be on a warpath, defending his criticism of Muslim women who chose not to shake hands with the opposite sex for religious reasons.
In an angry reaction to questions from reporters, Chua insisted that the norm practised by many Muslim women to avoid skin contact with the opposite sex during handshake was contrary to “basic culture and manners to shake hands”.
“I have been in the public life for many years. It’s part of the basic culture and manners to shake hands,” said Chua, who also scolded a reporter from online portal Malaysiakini, which first broke news of Chua’s attack on PAS candidate Normala Sudirman.
(The Star) – The DAP must first explain how hudud law will not affect the Chinese community before it asks for their support in the general election, MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek said.
In throwing the challenge, he pointed out that the Federal Constitution should be amended if the country was to be turned into an Islamic state that paved the way for hudud’s implementation.
“As such, how can the DAP say that the Chinese will not be affected by such amendments?” he asked, adding that the DAP was either insulting the people’s intelligence or blinded by its quest for power – both done at the expense of the community.
Speaking at a luncheon with Lumut MCA division members here yesterday, Dr Chua said the DAP should not offer the excuse that PAS needed at least two-thirds in Parliament to pass any amendment to the Constitution, and that the DAP would not support such an amendment.
“There is no valid reason for the Chinese to support DAP, PAS or Parti Keadilan Rakyat as by doing so, the community is only helping to make PAS’ dream of a hudud state nearer to reality,” he said.
Dr Chua said the DAP did not have the interest of the Chinese at heart when it collaborated with PAS.
“The DAP wanted the Chinese votes to survive, and at the same time it worked with its enemy (PAS),” he said.
Dr Chua also challenged the DAP to name Pakatan Rakyat’s prime minister should the Opposition come to power.
He said until and unless the DAP could do this, it was not in a position to assure the Chinese that their interests would be taken care of.
Meanwhile, Lumut MP Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha said the people should know the consequences, if not the risks, if they supported Pakatan.
He said the DAP could give excuses to gain the people’s support but the facts speak louder.
He, too, pointed out the hudud issue as a good example.
Kong, who is also the Perak MCA deputy chairman, said if Pakatan came into power, it would table the proposed amendments to the Constitution in Parliament and pave the way for hudud’s implementation.
He said the DAP should explain to the people what the reality was if such a proposal was tabled.
“Can the DAP guarantee that they could not get the two-thirds support to pass the Bill?”
 Chua Soi Lek says i can go on fucking spree without fear that the Internal Security Act  and Hud Lawis not really that bad. It is just that we have to be very careful in how it is used. In the early days of the ISA, the law was actually very good because it had, then, served our purposes. Okay, maybe there are no more communist terrorists operating in the jungles. But we still have one more threat, the threat of race riots. So the ISA helps as far as ensuring that Malays, Chinese and Indians do not kill each other.
To think that this is a very senior man of the MCA, the ‘second’ partner in the ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional, talking. And yet he speaks like this. I shudder to think what the mentality of the other Cina kwei in MCA must be like. God help this country!



  After a six-month-long investigative research project, the Center for American Progress Action Fund released a 138-page report, Fear Inc., Exposing the Islamophobia Network in America, which for the first time reveals that more than $42 million from seven foundations over the past decade have helped empower a relatively small, interconnected and incestuous group of individuals and organizations to spread anti-Muslim fear and hate in America. 

I, along with fellow co-authors Eli Clifton, Matt Duss, Lee Fang, Scott Keyes and Faiz Shakir, expose this network in depth for the first time, categorize it, trace the money trail to the donors, name the players in the network, connect the dots between them, and uncover the genesis of several fictitious threats such as the current “anti-Sharia” fear sweeping the nation, as well as the protests of neighborhood mosques as alleged “Trojan horses” and incubators of radicalization.

We’ve defined Islamophobia as the following: an exaggerated fear, hatred, and hostility toward Islam and Muslims that is perpetuated by negative stereotypes resulting in bias, discrimination, and the marginalization and exclusion of Muslims from America’s social, political, and civic life.

Healthy debate, disagreement and differences of opinion are a critical part of any civil society, and it is in fact necessary when discussing religion, race and politics. This report, however, targets those individuals who have clearly ventured towards poisonous extremist ideology and rhetoric by exploiting fears concerning terrorism and national security, as well general ignorance of Muslims, as a profitable vehicle to advance a hateful agenda.

The Islamphobia Network in America is comprised of 5 categories:

  1. The Money Trail: A List of 7 funders who have given nearly $43 million to anti-Muslim organizations and think tanks.
  2. The Islamophobia Scholars and Policy Experts: Five individuals and their respective organizations that act as the central nervous system responsible for manufacturing the fictitious memes and fear-mongering talking points about Muslims and Islam. For example, Frank Gaffney’s neo-conservative think tank “Center for Security Policy” has used its millions to misdefine Sharia, or Islamic religious law, as the pre-eminent totalitarian threat to America which radical Muslims will allegedly use to supplant and replace the U.S. Constitution. No religious Muslim scholar, let alone a practicing layman, would recognize this definition of Sharia, which in reality primarily deals with personal religious observances, including practices such as charitable giving, prayer, and honoring one’s parents, and precepts virtually identical to those of Christianity and Judaism.
  3. Grassroots Organizations and the Religious Right: New and existing activist networks and mainstream popular religious personalities disseminate these messages to their constituents and elected officials. The organization Act! For America relies upon Frank Gaffney’s anti-Sharia memes and promotes this fictitious threat through their 573 national chapters and 170,000 members worldwide. Currently, 23 states are in process of considering anti-Sharia bills.
  4. The Media Enablers: The mainstreaming of this fringe, extremist rhetoric is aided by media allies in network TV (Fox News), radio (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck), online magazines (World Net Daily, Front Page Magazine) and the Islamophobia blogosphere (Jihad Watch) which gives Islamophobe talking heads an influential pulpit to broadcast their misinformation.
  5. The Political Players: Finally, these talking points end up as sound bites and wedge issues for politicians and specifically several 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates, such as Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich who all have jumped on the manufactured, fictitious “anti-Sharia” bandwagon.

This fear-mongering rhetoric negatively affects our fellow Muslim American citizens and portrays them as perpetual hostile suspects instead of our neighbors and allies. Currently, this has reached a crescendo resulting in certain communities attempting to curtail constitutionally protected rights and freedoms.

For example, we’ve witnessed grassroots organizations protest the construction of mosques, constitutionally protected houses of worship, in Tennessee, California and Brooklyn. In February, Muslim American families with young children attending a fundraising dinner in Yorba Linda, California were jeered by protestors who called them “Terrorists!” and told them “Take your Sharia and go home, you terrorist lovers.” This was not the result of a spontaneous groundswell of public bullying, but rather a well organized and highly effective effort orchestrated by principal grassroots organizations of the Islamophobia network, such as Act! For America, Stop Islamization of America, and State Tea Party groups.

Blogger Pamela Geller, the co-founder of the hate group “Stop Islamization of America” and face of the manufactured “Ground Zero Mosque” controversy – which was neither a mosque nor at ground zero – clearly reveals her bias and bigotry against Muslims when she equates practicing Muslims with Nazis: “Devout Muslims should be prohibited from military service. Would Patton have recruited Nazis into his army?”

Brigitte Gabriel, the “radical Islamophobe” founder of the effective, anti-Muslims grassroots network “Act for America,” believes a practicing Muslim “who prays five times a day — this practicing Muslim, who believes in the teachings of the Koran, cannot be a loyal citizen to the United States of America.”

The Anti Defamation League has reviewed both of these groups’ rhetoric and actions and concluded they are simply promoting a conspiratorial agenda against Muslims under the guise of fighting radical Islam.

This report exposes these alleged “patriots” for what they really are: the primary motivators of fear and bigotry in an economically uncertain and politically volatile climate which urgently needs less hate, division and fear mongering, and instead a proactive, united effort towards moderation by embracing American values that protect our religious freedoms, ensure a vibrant, diverse democracy, and sustain America as beacon of inclusivity.

History has taught us that what’s happening to Muslim Americans right now is simply a remake. In the past, the characters were Jews, Irish Catholics, Japanese Americans and Gays and Lesbians. However, America, despite sadly succumbing to hysteria in moments past, eventually – and sometimes grudgingly – regains its moral compass and strives to become a nation resilient to fear and scapegoating.
Just like the McCarthyites before them, the individuals in the Islamophobia network, as revealed in the report, should immediately cleanse themselves of their fear-mongering and ignorance, which results in a short-term profit but comes at the expense of them becoming the villains in our children’s history books.

By Harun Yahya
In the Quran, Jews and Christians, the members of the religions who abide by the Divine Books revealed by God, are called the “People of the Book.”
There are many nations in the world with different colors, creeds, and languages.
These differences have been a cause of enmity throughout history in societies that did not live by religious moral values.
The perceived wisdom is that people can never manage to co-exist and that disputes arise wherever such differences exist. However, this is a great misconception and the facts are otherwise.
In fact, it is God who created human beings in different communities and in the Quran, He calls all people to peace and security:
{O You who believe! Enter absolutely into peace. Do not follow in the footsteps of Satan. He is an outright enemy to you.} (Al-Baqarah 2: 208)
{Allah calls to the Abode of Peace and He guides whom He wills to a straight path.} (Yunus 10: 25)
All divine religions revealed through God’s Prophets summon people to have faith in God, recommend them to display moral perfection and warn them against bad morals. Despite the fact that all divine religions—except for Islam—are distorted, it is evident today that some of their messages are fundamentally the same. That is why these conflicts, which are stirred up artificially, lack reasonable and logical grounds. As stated in the verse above, the main reason for unrest among people is not complying with God‘s summoning but following in the “footsteps of Satan.”
Believers’ harboring hostile feelings to other people who have faith in God is a moral weakness that displeases God, who prohibits all believers from displaying such feelings. He calls on people to establish peace, safety and friendship. In the Quran, revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), God gives believers explicit commands and recommendations on this subject.
The Status of the People of the Book in the Quran
In the Quran, Jews and Christians, the members of the religions who abide by the Divine Books revealed by God, are called the “People of the Book.” What Muslims’ views of the People of the Book should be, their relations, and the status of the People of the Book in social life are described in verses and the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad in detail. The People of the Book, while they rely basically on God‘s revelation, have moral precepts and know what is lawful and what is not. For this reason, if one of the People of the Book cooks some food, it is lawful for Muslims to eat it. In the same way, permission has been given to a Muslim man to marry a woman from among the People of the Book. On this subject God commands:
Throughout Islamic history, the People of the Book have been always treated with compassion in Muslim societies.
{Today all good things have been made lawful for you. And the food of those given the Book is also lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. So are chaste women from among the believers and chaste women of those given the Book before you, once you have given them their dowries in marriage, not in fornication or taking them as lovers. But as for anyone who disbelieves, his actions will come to nothing and in the Hereafter he will be among the losers.} (Al-Ma’idah 5: 5)
Throughout Islamic history, the People of the Book have been always treated with compassion in Muslim societies. This was particularly evident in the Ottoman Empire. It is a well known fact that the Jews, whose rights were denied and were exiled by the Catholic Kingdom of Spain, took refuge in the lands of the Ottoman Empire. As will be dealt with in detail in the following sections, when Sultan Mehmed II, the Conqueror captured Istanbul, he granted both Christians and Jews all their fundamental rights. Throughout Ottoman history, Jews were regarded as People of the Book and enjoyed peaceful coexistence with Muslims.
How Should a Muslim Regard Judaism?
Prophet Muhammad treated the People of the Book with the utmost understanding and justice. Thanks to this noble attitude, Abdullah ibn Salam, a prominent rabbi, and his friends converted to Islam and came to believe in his prophethood.
The practices of the Inquisition in European history, which were a consequence of Christian bigotry, or of anti-Semitism that is itself linked to racist views (hatred of Jews) were never observed in the Islamic world. In the 20th century, however, with some Jews embracing atheistic Zionism, the Middle East became the scene of conflict and unrest between Jews and Muslims.
Zionism appeared in the mid-19th century as an ideology espousing a homeland for landless Jews. But as with many ideologies, Zionism became corrupted over the course of time, and that legitimate demand turned into a radical conception resorting to terror and violence and allied with extremist forces. Atheist Zionism, on the other hand, is a racist, chauvinistic and colonialist ideology.
There are two varieties of Zionism today. The first of these is the Zionist conception of the devout Jewish people, who wish to live in peace and security in Israel alongside Muslims, seeking peace and wishing to worship in the lands of their forefathers and engage in business. In that sense, Muslims support Zionism. We would fully back the devout Jewish people living in peace and security in their own lands, remembering Allah, worshipping in their synagogues and engaging in science and trade in their own land. The Zionist belief held by a devout Jew and based on the Torah does not in any way conflict with the Quran. The Jews’ living in that region is indicated in the Quran, in which it is revealed that God has settled the Children of Israel on it:
{Remember when Moses said to his people, “My people! Remember Allah’s blessing to you when He appointed prophets among you and appointed kings for you, and gave you what He had not given to anyone else in all the worlds! My people! Enter the Holy Land which Allah has ordained for you. Do not turn back in your tracks and so become transformed into losers.} (Al-Ma’idah 5: 20-1)
It is the “irreligious, Godless Zionism” that we as Muslims condemn and regard as a threat. These Godless Zionists, who do not defend the existence and oneness of God, but, on the contrary, encourage a Darwinist, materialist perspective and thus engage in irreligious propaganda, are also a threat to devout Jews. Godless Zionism is today engaged in a struggle against peace, security and moral virtue, and constantly produces strife and turmoil and the shedding of blood.
There is no doubt that atheistic Zionism is a detrimental and harmful ideology for Muslims and world peace alike. It is therefore the duty of every Muslim and person, no matter what his political stance or belief, to struggle against this harmful ideology on intellectual grounds. However, as in the case of any sphere, it is also of vital importance to establish justice and to avoid prejudice. A Muslim must oppose radical Zionists while ensuring that injustice and oppression are not inflicted on innocent Jews.
In the Quran, we are commanded not to make judgments about people just because they belong to a particular race, nation or religion.
As in every form of racism, anti-Semitism is an ideology utterly foreign to Islam. A Muslim opposes all forms of genocide, torture and violence, regardless of religion, race and ethnical origins. A Muslim will never support even the most minor attack on innocent Jews, in the same way he would not approve of any cruel treatment of a member of any other nation. On the contrary, he will denounce it. In the Quran, those who make mischief on earth, who subject people to cruelty and those who kill people for no reason are denounced. Some verses on this subject read as follows:
{Seek the abode of the Hereafter with what Allah has given you, without forgetting your portion of the world. And do good as Allah has been good to you. And do not seek to cause corruption in the earth. Allah does not love corrupters.} (Al-Qasas 28: 77)
{Then, is it to be expected of you, if you were put in authority, that you will do mischief in the land, and sever your ties of kinship? Such are the people Allah has cursed, making them deaf and blinding their eyes.} (Muhammad 47: 22-3)
{There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants in the earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful punishment.} (Ash-Shura 42: 42)
In compliance with these commands of God, the intellectual struggle against atheistic Zionism should not lapse into a kind of an “antagonism towards Jews,” and innocent people should not be subjected to such unacceptable reactions. This is what being just and tolerant entails.
In the Quran, we are commanded not to make judgments about people just because they belong to a particular race, nation or religion. In every community, there are good people as well as wicked people. The Quran draws attention to this differentiation. For instance, right after mentioning the rebellious nature-against God and His religion-of some People of the Book, there is reference to an exception:
{[However] They are not all alike. Among the People of the Book there is an upright community who recites the revelation of God during the night and fall prostrate before Him. They believe in God and the Last Day, enjoin what is right and forbid what is evil, and vie with one another in good works. They are of the righteous and whatever good they do, its reward will not be denied them. God knows those who fear [Him].} (Al-Imran 3:113-15)
In conclusion, a person who thinks in the light of the verses of the Quran and fears God can in no way feel hostility towards Jews because of their religion or creed. The moral teachings of the Quran exclude all racism. For this reason, a Muslim who follows the Quran does not practice racism and does not despise people because they belong to a certain race. It is commanded in the Quran that, so long as they show no hostility to Islam or Muslims, a tolerant and friendly attitude must be maintained toward other religions. For this reason, a Muslim who follows the Quran should assume a compassionate and friendly manner towards people of different religions, and especially towards the People of the Book.
A Muslim’s view of Judaism and Holocaust must be based on these basic criteria. Some Jews may be subjected to criticism only because they have a racist attitude, shed blood in the name of Zionism and subject other people to cruelty in compliance with the commands of the distorted Torah. A Muslim wishes to see an end to anti-Semitic racist movements and ideologies such as atheistic Zionism that practice racism in the name of the Jews, and a peaceable world order established, in which every race and belief can live in peace and justice.
Anti-Semitism and other kinds of racism (eg. prejudice against blacks) are perversions arising from various ideologies and superstitions. When we examine anti-Semitism and other forms of racism, we see clearly that they promote ideas and a model of society that is totally contrary to the moral teachings of the Quran. At the root of anti-Semitism for instance lie hatred, violence, and lack of compassion. An anti-Semite may be so cruel as to support the murder of Jewish people, men, women, children and the aged, and condone their torture. However, the moral teaching of the Quran enjoins love, compassion and mercy for all people. It also commands Muslims to show justice and be forgiving even to their enemies.
As stated in the verse: {…if someone kills another person—unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth—it is as if he had murdered all mankind…} (Al-Ma’idah 5: 32) It is a very serious crime to slay even a single innocent person.
A Muslim must respect and protect the holy places where the People of the Book worship God, and protect them.
On the other hand, anti-Semites and other racists baulk at living together in peace with people of different races or creeds. (eg. German racists (Nazis) were opposed to Germans and Jews living together. They rejected it, citing concern for the degeneration of their respective races.) However, in the Quran, there is not the slightest distinction between races; in the Quran God advises that people of different faiths live together in the same society in peace and happiness. In the Quran God does not even discriminate between those who do not believe in Him and religion and those who are actively hostile to it. God commands Muslims to make their position clear to those who are hostile, while He orders them to treat with justice to those who do not show such hostility:
{Allah does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you over religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. Allah loves those who are just. Allah merely forbids you from taking as friends those who have fought you over religion and driven you from your homes and who supported your expulsion. Any who take them as friends are wrongdoers.} (Al-Mumtahanah 60: 8-9)
Monasteries, Churches and Synagogues Must Be Respected
A Muslim must respect and protect the holy places where the People of the Book worship God, and protect them. For Muslims, these places are precious because in these places, people, whether Jews or Christians, remember God. In the Quran, the places of worship of the People of the Book, such as monasteries, churches and synagogues, are mentioned as places of worship protected by God.
{…if Allah had not driven some people back by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques, where Allah‘s name is mentioned much, would have been pulled down and destroyed. Allah will certainly help those who help Him—Allah is All-Strong, Almighty.} (Al-Hajj 22: 40)
As a manifestation of his loyalty to God‘s commands, the Prophet Muhammad was most careful not to destroy the holy places of the People of the Book. Such destruction means, in the first place, opposing God‘s commands. This aside, it means preventing people who have faith in God worshipping Him. Indeed, the Prophet Muhammad promised the Christians, who were the other party to a peace agreement he made, that their churches would not be destroyed and that they would never be harmed. The tax (Jizyah) agreements he made with Christians also guaranteed the safety of churches.
The first agreement made after the death of the Prophet that guaranteed the protection of the temples was a tax agreement Khalid ibn al-Waleed signed with the leader of the city of Anat. Ibn Ishaq stated that those agreements made by Khalid ibn al-Waleed were also approved by Abu Bakr and the three caliphs following him. This aside, Abu Bakr offered the same guarantees that had been offered to the people of Najran by the Prophet Muhammad.
The Islamic societies that abided by Islamic morality after the death of the Prophet also paid special attention to this issue. Muslim leaders who adhered to the Quran and the Sunnah respected the places of worship of non-Muslims in conquered countries and showed great compassion to the clergy. Christians who lived under Muslim rule for centuries never rebelled for religious reasons. This, there is no doubt, is the result of the just and loving attitudes of Muslim leaders in compliance with Quranic rules.
Posted 1 minute ago by the headhunter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s