I would like to reply to Disappointed's letter . Before I rebut Disappointed's arguments, I'd like to state the reason why the effort to label PAS as intolerant is actively going on.

This is because PAS is the only hope for democracy, freedom of speech, transparency, good governance, anti-corruption and many more good qualities in a government of Malaysia. It is only PAS which stands steadfastly for these principles - and has the strength and the support of the people - to push through these reforms.

Even in states ruled by PAS, such qualities are evident. For example, there is a meet-the-people session by government and elected officials held on regular basis for the people to air their grievances and complaints, the state assembly sitting is carried live over the Internet for everyone to see, a 'hisbah' council is formed to root out corruption from government officials, assistance is given to people of Terengganu without any discrimination, be they Muslims or non-Muslims.

Such principles that PAS holds dearly is what the corrupt and decadent BN regime fears most and will use every effort they have to stop PAS from getting into power. Why? Because PAS will introduce a culture of good governance in Malaysian society should it comes into power. These values, in turn, will be entrenched into the Malaysian society's psyche and will destroy any hope of BN from getting into power again.

Take Kelantan for example. The BN have failed three times in a row because the people of Kelantan knows that the current government is the cleanest, and has the people at their heart. Their 12 years' experience under the BN proves that a poor but clean government will always be beneficial to the people as opposed to a rich but corrupt government. A rich but corrupt government will always leave the people to be hung out to dry and make a small handful of elites richer.

Therefore, with the help of the BN-controlled media, the campaign to smear PAS as an intolerant and backward party is launched. Among the 'bullets' used by the BN media is parroted by Disappointed and I quote: "If one disagrees with their political stance or policies, then one must be against Islam itself."

Disappointed would have been right in his statement should he produce evidence to prove that what PAS holds as vice is not the same as what Islam holds as vice. As far as I know, PAS' definition of vice is exactly the same as that of Islam. There is no difference. So I am correct to say that those who are against PAS' stand on vice is actually having problems with Islam itself.

Furthermore, the so-called proof that Disappointed used and I quote: "Didn't it pass legislation exempting state assembly members from certain conditions regarding multiple marriages that ordinary Muslims have to fulfill?"

Such legislation is non-existent. Such a 'legislation' was actually a proposal made by a BN representative to the Terengganu government but it was never put into law. The mentri besar responded to the proposal by quoting the Quran and Sunnah and the BN-controlled media put a spin on it and blame PAS instead.

Disappointed's effort to paint other Islamic states or government's as intolerant is also found wanting. Take for instance his example on Pakistan and I quote:

"Take Islamic Pakistan, for example. It even has the penalty of revenge rape that sentences a teenage girl in a family to be sexually brutalisd in 'compensation' for a rape allegedly committed by her family member.

"In one case, a village elder who passed judgment stood up to remove his trousers so that he could join in to "satisfy justice". Is that an example of a strong stand against vice that you aver Islamic states practices? Perhaps that naughty girl was wearing lipstick and perfume?"

This example does not reflect at all the Islamic law practice in Pakistan. Why? Because the incident occurred in the tribal areas in the Northwest Frontier province of Pakistan. This area is not covered by the Pakistani law or their law enforcement agencies even from the inception of Pakistan as a nation state. What Disappointed quoted above is an example of tribal laws being practised in those areas.

It's a pity that Disappointed went out on a limb to prove Islamists as intolerant all around the world when examples of secularists being much more intolerant is standing right in front of his face.

Here I quote some examples:

1) The apartheid regime of South Africa was a secular regime.

2) The Soviet communist regime, which was responsible for the massacre of 50 million human beings, was a secular regime.

3) The Pol Pot regime of Kampuchea, which was responsible for the massacre of about 1 million Kampucheans, was a secular regime.

4) The Suharto regime was a secular regime.

5) The Turkish army, which goes against all forms of religious expression, is a secular regime.

6) The illegitimate state of Israel is a secular regime.

7) The American government, which expels teachers from their schools for teaching creationism as opposed to evolutionism, is a secular regime.

8) The various colonialists, which was responsible for countless massacres and killings of innocent human being throughout their reigns, were secular regimes as well.

9) The corrupt regimes ruling most of the Muslim nation across the world are secular nationalist regimes including Malaysia.

10) The IMF that subjects most of the poor nation as slaves via their usury based system is secular.

So the list of 'secular intolerance' goes on and on, and yet Disappointed conveniently choose to overlook them. What Disappointed fails to see is that secularism is mutually exclusive to concepts like tolerance, freedom of religion, transparency, etc.

In his book The Dying God by historian David Livingstone, he argues that secularism is actually a religion of its own in place of the existing religion. I tend to agree to that analysis especially when Livingstone cited historical evidence as far back as the bible.

PAS will not support ideas like the Sexual Revolution which advocates homosexuality, anal sex, pedophile etc. PAS will not support the feminist agenda which in turn will result in the breakdown of the family institution. PAS will not support capitalism which advocates a usury based financial system that results in the oppression of the human race.

What PAS stands for is what is good for humanity, a strong family institution, an economy free from usury, a wealth distribution system that is fair and equitable free from cronyism, nepotism and corruption, a society clean from vice so as the family institution is protected, a society which protects the rights of its people to express themselves, a government free from corruption, and an administration which is efficient and transparent.