Former IGP Hanif Omar to head panel to look into Bersih rally allegations
PUTRAJAYA: Tun Hanif Omar
, the former Inspector-General of Police, has been appointed chairman of the six-member Independent Advisory Panel that will investigate allegations and concerns raised following the Bersih 3.0 rally on April 28.
Former IGP Hanif Omar to head panel to look into Bersih rally allegat ...
atira Post at 9-5-2012 23:09
Mamat ni ke yang dikatakan ade kuasa mengkafirkan orang Islam yang lain? Dah tunjuk sangat pendirian die anti-pembangkang, camner nak adil... Bodoh punya kerja
PAS tolak panel bebas, Hanif ketuai siasatan
Abdul Rahim Sabri
9:02AM Mei 10, 2012
PAS menolak penubuhan panel bebas untuk menyiasat dakwaan insiden keganasan polis ketika menangani perhimpunan BERSIH pada 28 April lalu.
Parti itu juga menolak perlantikan bekas ketua polis negara Tan Sri Haniff Omar mengetuai panel siasatan itu kerana didakwanya akan "bersifat prejudis" terhadap peserta BERSIH berhubung insiden tersebut.
NONENaib Presidennya Datuk Mahfuz Omar berkata asas penolakan penubuhan panel itu dibuat kerana mendakwa kerajaan "menolak peranan" Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (Suhakam) yang mampu berbuat demikian.
"Kita nampak secara jelas kerajaan menolak peranan Suhakam. Sedangkan Suhakam (mampu) membuat penyiasatan berasaskan kepada proses demokrasi dan hak asasi manusia," katanya kepada Malaysiakini.
Mahfuz mengulas keputusan kerajaan melantik enam orang panel diketuai Hanif bagi menyiasat insiden kekasaran polis dalam perhimpunan tersebut yang menyaksikan penggunaan gas pemedih mata dan air kimia untuk menyurai peserta.
Mengulas lanjut, ahli parlimen Pokok Sena turut mendakwa penolakan peranan suruhanjaya dibuat kononnya badan itu "memberi pandangan yang tidak berpihak" kepada kerajaan.
Sebelum ini, suruhanjaya itu mengeluarkan laporan bahawa polis telah melanggar hak asasi manusia apabila mereka melepaskan tembakan gas pemedih mata ke dalam kawasan kemudahan awam semasa perhimpunan BERSIH 2.0 Julai tahun lalu. http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/196954
Mengulas pelantikan Haniff itu, Mahfuz berkata PAS menolaknya kerana mendakwa kerajaan "memilih orang yang memihak kepada kerajaan dan prejudis terhadap peserta BERSIH 3.0".
Menurut Mahfuz, ia berikutan dakwaan Haniff yang menyatakan wujudnya pihak yang bersimpati kepada komunis dalam perhimpunan itu dan wujudnya dakwaan ada asas untuk menggulingkan kerajaan sedia ada.
"Ini cukup jelas, pelantikan Haniff menunjukkan bahawa panel ini menjadi alat dan kepentingan untuk menghalalkan tindak tanduk polis dan kerajaan terhadap peserta BERSIH," tegas Mahfuz.
Sehubungan itu, beliau mencadangkan jawatankuasa pemandu BERSIH dan peserta yang didakwa dikasari polis supaya mengemukakan bukti berhubung kekasaran tersebut untuk siasatan Suhakam.
"...walaupun (Suhakam) tidak diminta oleh kerajaan (untuk berbuat penyiasatan) kerana itulah peranan mereka (selama ini)," katanya.
Saifuddin: Tun Hanif Omar 'kurang sesuai' jadi pengerusi panel
Wartawan Sinar Harian
10 Mei 2012
6 Ahli Panel Penasihat Bebas
SHAH ALAM - Ahli Majlis Tertinggi (MT) Umno, Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah menyambut baik pembentukan Panel Penasihat Bebas enam anggota bagi mendapatkan gambaran sebenar mengenai kejadian rusuhan berikutan penganjuran Bersih 3.0 di ibu negara bulan lalu.
Bagaimanapun kata Saifuddin, beliau melihat pelantikan bekas Ketua Polis Negara, Tun Hanif Omar sebagai pengerusi panel itu "kurang sesuai."
"Saya amat menghormati Tun Hanif. PDRM berada di zaman kegemilangannya semasa beliau Ketua Polis Negara. Menjadi ahli panel, sesuai. Tapi sebagai Pengerusi Panel, kurang sesuai kerana ia (turut) melibatkan siasatan ke atas tindakan polis (semasa Bersih 3.0)," kata beliau yang juga Timbalan Menteri Pengajian Tinggi dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.
Malah katanya, beliau tiada masalah dengan keenam-enam ahli panel, tetapi "cuma ia akan lebih baik" jika ditambah dengan mereka yang ada rekod baik dalam kerja-kerja hak asasi dan penambahbaikan demokrasi.
"Bagi saya ini satu peluang yang baik bagi kerajaan memperbetulkan persepsi dan menjelaskan kepada rakyat apa yang sebenarnya berlaku. Dan, jika dijalankan dengan baik, menggunakan peluang ini dengan baik, saya rasa ia akan mendatangkan faedah kepada kerajaan," kata beliau.
Selain Hanif selaku pengerusi, anggota panel terdiri daripada bekas Ketua Hakim Borneo Tan Sri Steve Sim, Pengarah Urusan Kumpulan Media Karangkraf Datuk Hussamuddin Yaacub, Penasihat Undang-undang Kumpulan Akhbar Sin Chiew Liew Peng Chuan, Pengurus Besar Kanan Hal Ehwal Korporat Petronas Datuk Medan Abdullah dan Pakar Psikologi Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Prof Dr Ruszmi Ismail.
Kata Saifuddin, beliau merasakan Sim boleh mengetuai panel tersebut.
Mengumumkan perkara itu semalam,
Menteri Dalam Negeri, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein berkata, panel penasihat akan mengadakan mesyuarat pertama mereka secepat mungkin untuk menentukan terma rujukan serta peranan mereka.
Katanya, mesyuarat Jemaah Menteri semalam sekali lagi memberikan penekanan kepada keperluan untuk mempertahankan keluhuran undang-undang, konsisten dengan pendirian kerajaan dalam mencari kebenaran, keadilan serta pembelaan kepada semua pihak.
"Adalah menjadi hasrat kerajaan agar panel penasihat bebas ini dapat memberi ruang kepada semua pihak untuk mengemukakan laporan, bantahan, maklum balas, serta bahan bukti berkenaan kejadian rusuhan itu," katanya.
Menurutnya, pada masa yang sama, polis akan terus dengan siasatan mereka berhubung kejadian rusuhan itu, dan mengemukakan hasilnya kepada Pejabat Peguam Negara untuk tindakan lanjut.
Hishammuddin berkata, penubuhan panel itu juga bertujuan menyediakan saluran kepada mereka yang merasakan menjadi mangsa pihak tertentu pada hari kejadian, dan merasakan seolah-olah tidak ada saluran yang telus untuk mendengar luahan serta pandangan mereka mengenai apa yang berlaku.
Katanya, beliau percaya anggota panel itu cukup diyakini untuk memuaskan hati semua pihak.
Tapi macam biasa, permainan wayang & tarik-tali pon bermula....
Pilihan raya: Dr M tak setuju batal pindaan
9 Mei 2012
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
KUALA LUMPUR - Bekas perdana menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad berharap kerajaan tidak menarik balik Rang Undang-Undang Kesalahan Pilihan Raya kerana khuatir akan berlaku perkara-perkara di luar kawalan.
"Saya khuatir kalau kerajaan 'withdraw' (tarik balik), macam-macam akan berlaku... kita tak dapat buat apa-apa, pendek kata akan berlaku penipuan yang besar dan tidak ada satu yang boleh kita lakukan.
"Saya harap ini 'rumours' (khabar angin) sahaja dan kerajaan tidak akan tarik balik," katanya kepada pemberita selepas melancarkan buku "Towards World War III Scenario", di Yayasan Al-Bukhary di sini, hari ini.
Dr Mahathir mengulas kenyataan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz hari ini bahawa kerajaan akan menarik balik Rang Undang-Undang Kesalahan Pilihan Raya berikutan tentangan daripada
anggota-anggota Parlimen kerajaan dan pembangkang.
Nazri berkata beliau akan mengemukakan usul untuk menarik balik cadangan pindaan ke atas Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954 itu di Dewan Negara esok.
Dr Mahathir berkata cadangan untuk menarik balik rang undang-undang itu mungkin kerana kerajaan yakin dapat menangani kemungkinan yang bakal berlaku.
Namun, beliau berkata: "Tetapi kalau saya jadi perdana menteri, saya kurang yakin la... saya tak kuat".
Terdahulu, Dr Mahathir yang juga Presiden Yayasan Keamanan Global Perdana (PGPF) melancarkan buku bertajuk 'Towards World War III Scenario : Dangers of Nuclear War' hasil tulisan Michel Chossudovsky sempena prosiding Tribunal Jenayah Perang Kuala Lumpur.
Dr Mahathir dan isteri Tun Dr Siti Hasmah kemudian menghadiri sesi dialog dengan Chossudevsky, seorang profesor ekonomi dari University of Ottawa.
Chossudevsky dalam bukunya, antara lain menyatakan bahawa Amerika Syarikat dan sekutunya Pertubuhan Perjanjian Atlantik Utara (NATO) bersedia untuk melancarkan perang nuklear terhadap Iran dan Korea Utara, yang menurutnya mungkin menyebabkan perang dunia ketiga.
Beliau turut mendakwa bahawa pendapat saintifik diguna untuk memanipulasi pandangan masyarakat antarabangsa bagi menghalalkan 'perang kemanusiaan' menggunakan taktik senjata nuklear, atas nama keamanan dunia, dan pada masa sama mengesahkannya sebagai satu cara untuk melindungi dunia barat daripada serangan nuklear. - Bernama
On the authority of Abu Sa'id al-Khudri who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings upon him) say: When any one of you sees anything that is disapproved (of by Allah), let him change it with his hand. If he is not able to do so, then let him change it with his tongue. And if he is not able to do so, then let him change it with his heart, though that is the weakest (kind of) faith.
Allah designated for this Ummah (Muslim community) people who will protect His din (Divine Authority), and who will facilitate their affairs and make them on a level of sincerity and understanding. Among them Allah raised the ulama, people of understanding, people trustworthy working day and night around the world, people who whenever they see fitnah (vices), they fight it, whenever they see taghut (those who fight God), they will call for jihad to fight it.
Allah established this din by the Companions and their Followers. He designated this Ummah with ulama like Sufyan Al Thawri, Sufyan Al Uyayna, Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, Imam Al Uza'i, Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i, Imam Ahmad and many other later scholars.
Seeking knowledge is fard (obligatory) but seeking knowledge is of two types; one is Fard 'ayn (individual obligation) and one is Fard kifayah (collective obligation). The knowledge that is obligatory to seek is Ilm al Dharuri, the knowledge that one cannot fulfill one's obligation if not understood or studies. The other knowledge is Fard Kifayah, to understand or study it and it does not take priority over other duties.
We have to understand the foundation of the din (Religion of God). People usually ask for a particular solution to a problem, but in any topic concerning ibadah (Worship), you have to study the pillars of it, the wajibat (necessities) of it, the foundations, prohibitions, the recommendations etc.
Similarly if we want to study about Al Mudhaharah (demonstration) we have to know about its objective, its means, because it is not just a matter of saying it is 'allowed' or 'not allowed'.
If we study this topic, we find that the Shari’ah terms are very important. Nobody will dispute or disagree that to help Muslims is fard and to cooperate with Muslims is fard, that it is fard to support our Muslim Ummah.
Mudhaharah in the Arabic language is “support”, it is narrated in Sunan al-Darimi that Ali ibn Talib said: "I fought on the day of Badr and supported (dhaharah) the Muslims."
Allah asks us to have wala (loyalty) to the believers, part of that is to support them. Allah says: Allah forbids you to have relationship with those who fight you because of your Din ... and those who support them.
When we mention demonstrations, we are speaking about support and this is one of the best forms of support for the one who is far away from us and we cannot reach them. Demonstrations are a means to support our Din (Way of Life chosen by God).
We need to understand the term Mudhaharah (demonstrations). Imam Al-Khattabi defined the term demonstration and he understood from it that the support in demonstrations must be in relation to the jihad and battlefield, Allah says: If they seek help from you in the Din, support them,
Meaning if they ask you to fight, you must fight and the demonstration is boosting the morale of the Muslims in a time of weakness, it is a form of creating a high profile for Islam; it is a form of support. It is a noble thing not something evil.
Demonstration motivates the Muslims and it makes them aware about their Muslim brothers. The demonstration is a form of rejecting the evil, a form of commanding good and forbidding evil.
That is exactly what the Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) did. Demonstration is not something Bid’ah (innovated outside Islamic Shariah) and it does have evidences and anybody who speaks about demonstrations must understand the reality of the demonstration.
We find it in Kitab Al Hulya Al Awliya (vol 1), Ibn Abbas narrated, he asked:
"O Messenger of God, are we not on Haq (Truth) whether we die or stay alive?" The Prophet said, "Indeed, by the one whose hand is my soul, you are on the Haq whether dead or alive". So Ibn Abbas said, "So why are we hiding? By the one who sent you with the truth, we should come out!”.
And they went out in two lines, Hamzah in one and Umar al-Khattab with the other. They came out until they went to the Ka'bah and the Quraysh looked to Hamzah and Umar and they were so depressed. The Prophet called Umar that day ‘Al Farouq’.
It is mentioned in Al Isabah that Muhammad ibn Uthman ibn Abi Shybah narrated from Ibn Abbas the story about how Umar came to Islam and that, “He went out with Hamzah in two lines with the Muslims”.
So the Prophet gave consent and went out with them in a demonstration, so is that haram? That is the danger of the one who speaks without ilm (knowledge) about the evidences.
We find further evidence in the incident when the verses on treatment of women were revealed, some men started to beat their wives and the women came out in a huge demonstration and complained that some men took advantage and beat their wives.
Moreover, Prophet Nuh (Noah) used to call the people day and night and go door to door, Muslims went to Abyssinia and they took a stand publicly in front of the King and the Prophet consented.
Moreover there was a huge gathering and demonstration in the Bay'ah (pledge of loyalty) to the Prophet under the tree. Demonstration is not a new phenomenon.
EGYPTIAN UPRISING ... Muslim women in Egypt at the forefront of the protests against Mubarak's dictatorship
Some people may complain "What is the benefit?" They should realise that the demonstration is not dispraised. So if there are people who do not like it, they should remain silent and should not attack those who do it. These people only want to cover up the fact that they are cowards. They never command good or forbid evil at all, but are afraid that they will be arrested or will be called 'terrorists'.
All Muslim scholars encourage demonstrations against evil
In fact we do not come across any scholars claiming that demonstrations are haram, rather the fatwas (decrees) for demonstrations are everywhere. Shaykh Abu Muhammad Al Maqdisi said that it is allowed and praised those who do them.
Even Salman al Awdah (Saudi Islamic scholar) said, "We find nothing wrong with it; it is a form of condemning the evil ."
As long as it is free from anything haram , the original rules for these kinds of things is that it is permissible and the incident of the Prophet and the Companions in Makkah is well documented.
Shaykh Ali Al-Khudr also said: "Demonstrations are to come out collectively in an organised way for a particular objective; the original rules are that it is permissible. The Muslims are to other Muslims like a block, they support each other, it is a form of jihad, to call for jihad, to command good and forbid evil. That gathering is a demonstration and it is the Sunnah of the Prophets.”
And he also called it the means leading to the wajib (the obligatory acts).
A PROTEST IN THE US ... Islam condones any acts to mobilise the masses for something noble
If we go to all the ulama, even those who we disagree with, they say that it is permitted. It is only some scholars of the Saudi dynasty, whom it suits them to shout "haram!" if there is a demonstration against the Saudi dynasty, and to say that it is "halal" or even fard if it is in favour of their dynasty.
Those who say it is permissible, they are all found in prison like Shaykh Sulayman Al-Alwan, who said publicly: “It is permissible by the evidence that our Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, was put in prison, and the ulama and their disciples came outside and that was the biggest demonstration, it was the uprising of the Hanabilah (followers of Imam Ahmad Hanbal) to release him.”
Some people like to speak about it from the angle of benefit and interest, so they always speak about bringing benefit to the Muslim community; we can say, Allah says, If they ask you for help, help them
And the Prophet said: "Support your Muslim brother (verbally, financially, physically) whether oppressor or oppressed"
So supporting your Muslim brothers collectively, openly and publicly is allowed and that is why ibn Taymiyyah in his time saw the people demonstrate for his release from captivity and he wrote that it reminded him of the demonstration of the Hanbali followers.
Even Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab with his students demonstrated publicly and gathered together ending with fighting, it is a form of jihad, a form carrying da’wah (spreading the word of God), a form of commanding good and forbidding evil; it is not bid’ah. It was done by the Prophet and by his Companions.
'Not haram just because non-Muslims do it'
It is not the case that “whatever the non-Muslims do, then it becomes haram in our religion”. Rather it is only the haram acts which are forbidden. For example, demonstrations involving swearing are not allowed.
UNISLAMIC ... Demonstrations using swear words are prohibited in Islam
It creates awareness about the current situation because there is no other media, it is an alternative media; it reminds them about what they should do, it motivates those people who do nothing, it boosts the morale, it has a strategic outcome, it puts pressure in order for people to interact; that support in the form of demonstrations will put pressure on the government; it is an opportunity as well for the ulama to meet the masses and the masses to meet the ulama, it is a form of demonstrating the knowledge and there is no single qualified scholar that forbade it.
We need to forget about those fake ‘salafis’, they are people who are muqallid (those who blindly imitate).
The benefit in demonstrations is a lot; the ulama on the street is different than seeing them on satellite, it will send signals to those oppressed that there is an Ummah that will not leave them, an Ummah that supports them.
* This article is an adaptation from a reply given by the author to the question "Is demonstration/protest allowed in Islam" on the forum Ummah.comtemplate joomla
BERSIH 3 Pt 2
May08
2012 21 Comments Written by chedet
1. Some who condemned my piece on Bersih 3 say that the ruling party abused the authority of the Government to ensure its success. They ask why rural constituencies have more seats for less voters. Why the gerrymandering.
2. This is because since the days of the British the urban areas tend to dominate politics and to be better served by the Government. To balance this, the poorly serviced rural areas have to be given higher representation in the legislature.
3. This is not new. It is common practice in the United States the state of New Jersey with less than five million people gets the same number of Senate seats (two) as California with more than forty million people. In most democratic countries some leverage is given to constituencies which for a variety of reasons are less developed.
4. As to the use of Government authority in elections; this is never clear-cut. There is no clear line when authority is exceeded.
5. When a party in power uses Government to implement policies, plans or strategies so as to ensure support by the people, can we say it is abuse of Government authority. On the other hand when the opposition loudly proclaims that they would do things which would gain them public support, are they not making use of Government authority for their popularity?
6. The opposition says that it would increase subsidies for fuel and fertilizer, replace PTPTN with free higher education and raise petroleum royalty to 20% to the states instead of 5%, isn’t it also making use of Government authority to win support of the voters?
7. Indeed whereas the incumbent has to be cautious as it knows the financial capacity of the Government, the Opposition has no such constrains. If it wins it can have all kinds of excuses for not keeping promises.
8. Abuse of Government authority is not confined only to the ruling party. The Opposition is also bent on abusing Government authority.
9. There may be areas for improving the conduct of Malaysian elections. But the fact remains that in Malaysia the Opposition can and have indeed defeated the Government party. If the Opposition fails to win at federal level, it is simply because the people chose not to support them with the required majority.
When the Arab Spring happened in January 2011, our leaders reacted in a very odd fashion. The first response was to bring all our students in Egypt, all 11000 of them, home as if Egypt had just turned into a warzone and our students were in grave danger. It was very clear however, from what the students themselves said when they got home, that there was no physical danger at all. The ‘danger’ was more in the heads of our leaders who were perhaps afraid that our young people might get some funny ideas about democracy. Perhaps they thought the word doesn’t exist in Arabic.
There were also a lot of protestations by our leaders that Malaysia is not Egypt and our PM is not Mubarak. Well yes, Malaysia is certainly more economically advanced than Egypt. It doesn’t have the high levels of poverty and great inequalities that that country has had for decades, as well as the high youth unemployment, all of which added to the recipe for unrest that was bound to come at some time.
So no, we are not Egypt. But you know what they say about how people doth protest too much. What is this obsession with us NOT being Egypt anyway? If we’re not, then why worry? Besides, who needs to worry about the Arab Spring unless they identify themselves with Ben Ali, Mubarak, Gadaffi and Assad?
And if our PM is not Mubarak – that ex-Air Chief Marshall of the Egyptian Air Force who ruled for nearly 30 years and is now on trial on allegations of corruption as well as the premeditated murder of peaceful protestors – then what is he?
Mubarak used to torture people he didn’t like.
Mubarak was allegedly very corrupt.
Mubarak was much adored by the Americans, which was why they didn’t know what to do when the revolution started. After all they got Egypt to sign a peace treaty with Israel. During the Gaza siege two years ago, it was the Egyptians who obstructed aid from going to Gaza through Rafah. Nice guy, Mubarak.
Egyptian protestors were attacked by thugs on camels in Tahrir Square.
So what exactly was wrong with the demands made by the Egyptian people assembling in Tahrir Square? They want a greater say in the policies of the government. They want an end to corruption. They want proper elections with many candidates to choose from, not just those handpicked by the rulers. They want an end to military interference in politics. They want proper management of the economy and the many problems resulting from the mismanagement of it. Aren’t these reasonable?
Egyptian police trying to arrest a female protestor in Tahrir Square.
But our government will not acknowledge that these demands are quite normal. Well maybe they’re not in an undemocratic country. But by refusing to support the Egyptian people’s right to all of these, do they support Mubarak and the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF)? You know, the ones who attacked their own people in Tahrir Square and killed some. The ones who did virginity tests on women protestors. The ones who tried to shut down the internet during the revolution?
The ones who are trying to rig the elections?
Egyptian Muslims and Christians in solidarity at Tahrir Square --isn't this good?
If the Tahrir Square occupiers brought down someone like Mubarak, is that necessarily bad? They still wanted to have proper elections afterwards. And lo and behold, the Muslim Brotherhood won many seats. Well, that’s democracy, it doesn’t necessarily give you the best government. But that’s no reason to get rid of democracy.
If Malaysia is not Egypt and our leaders are not Mubarak, then why are Malaysians who went to Bersih treated like Egyptian protestors? As Tommy Thomas has pointed out here, Malaysians are not much into occupying anything. They did not bring out tents and blankets so that they can sleep in Dataran Merdeka til the government was brought down. If anyone had gone down to Dataran on the Sunday after Bersih 3.0, apart from the barbed wire, everything was back to normal. The cars were out in the streets. The malls were packed. The restaurants were full. Made our point, now let’s go eat.
This is why we are not Egypt. In this we agree with our government. We are NOT Egypt. But then why respond in such Mubarak-like fashion?
The National Fatwa Council has issued a fatwa to say that demonstrations against the government are haram. This is exactly what the head of the Al-Azhar University Fatwa Committee said in the days after January 25 2011 when the Egyptian revolution started. He seemed totally out of touch with his people and the events that were unfolding. Even the Muslim Brotherhood, or at least the younger members, were out there demonstrating, along with their more secular fellow citizens, Muslim and Christian, men and women, young and old. So getting the NFC ( hmmm…dubious initials…) to issue such a fatwa seems very Mubarak-like, doesn’t it?
Does this mean, by the way, that demonstrations against the governments of Penang, Kedah and Selangor are now haram too? Or only if they are against the Federal Government?
If I now want to have a demonstration against, say, Perkasa, I can, right? Since they’re not the government?
Dr M: Not all were beaten up by cops
By SHAILA KOSHY [email protected]
KUALA LUMPUR: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has questioned his daughter’s claim of police violence during Bersih 3.0 just because 65 civilians were hospitalised as opposed to two cops.
“Many who were hurt were not beaten by the police. The demonstrators, too, attacked anyone they thought were watching or recording what was happening,” claimed the former prime minister.
“And there were the ‘red shirts’, the specially trained hooligans from PAS whose job was to use force,” he said in a letter in response to his daughter Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir’s column in The Star.
In her Musings column yesterday, Marina had written: “And, if as our Home Minister insists, nobody ordered the police violence, what made them do it, and to such a disproportionate extent? Sixty-five people wound up in hospital, out of which only two were policemen. Surely this says something.”
Dr Mahathir said Marina, who had taken part in both Bersih 2.0 and Bersih 3.0 rallies, herself was not hurt.
“That is because she did not try to break the barriers erected by the authorities. She sat down when she reached the barriers. Had all the demonstrators followed her example, no one would be hurt.”
He said Marina must have known that in other places, “barriers were pushed aside, the police cars had windscreens stamped on and broken, and overturned.”
Dr Mahathir said police needed special training to deal with mass violence, noting that these specially trained force “invariably apply the methods they are taught when dealing with any situation”.
Post time 9-5-2012 11:09 PM
EGYPTIAN UPRISING ... Muslim women in Egypt at the forefront of the protests against Mubarak's dictatorship
A PROTEST IN THE US ... Islam condones any acts to mobilise the masses for something noble
UNISLAMIC ... Demonstrations using swear words are prohibited in Islam
![Menjengah kehidupan baru Shuhada di OZ [siri pembongkaran acik forum kembali bersiaran]](https://uf.cari.com.my/forumx/mforum/block/cd/cdf437227debf09d1330d6c56eeeda98.jpg)