Saturday, 17 October 2026

Supporting Umno for all the wrong reasons

 Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia

No News Is Bad News

 

Supporting Umno for all the wrong reasons

https://www.tiktok.com/@jeff.li168/video/7690977440922946836 (Billions Behind The Palace Walls)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmIy2KoECP8 ('I don't want to see you!' - Tuanku Muhriz tells MB; DAP rep questions sitting delay)

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 18, 2026: Umno had been the backbone of federal governments for more than six decades since Merdeka (Independence) 1957.

What has it achieved for national unity and harmony for multi-racial Malaysians and Malaysia? Absolutely nothing.

All the party of pencuri-pencuri (thieves) has achieved is the systemic plundering of the country’s wealth and racial bigotry policies and politics.

Malaysians, thus, should not forget why they dumped the Umno-led Barisan Nasional (BN) in the last general election (GE15), leaving it with only 26 MPs in the 222-seat Parliament.

Yet, with just 26 seats, Umno continues to wreak political havoc because the Anwar Ibrahim-led Pakatan Harapan (PH) does not hold the majority political hand.

So, come GE16, Malaysians must try to wipe out BN-Umno from Parliament and give the Rafizi-led Bersama, PH, Sabah and Sarawak a strong hand to implement real reforms without hindrance from the racial and bigoted Umno.

View the above video link and lawyer activist Siti Kasim’s post on the Negri Sembilan Saga and form your own judgment why Umno is never untuk rakyat dan negara (for people and country):

NEGERI SEMBILAN SAGA

The incident on 16 October 2026 has made Ismail Lasim's position as Negeri Sembilan Menteri Besar considerably more difficult, both politically and institutionally.

Tuanku Muhriz publicly rebuked Ismail and reportedly told him not to seek an audience until he withdrew his earlier statements, ending with the words “Go away.” That is an extraordinary public confrontation between a constitutional ruler and his Menteri Besar.

There are three important considerations.

1. Loss of trust. A Menteri Besar must be able to maintain a functional constitutional relationship with the ruler. The public confrontation raises serious questions about how that relationship can operate.

2. Conflicting explanations. Ismail previously claimed that he signed the proclamation concerning Tuanku Muhriz under duress. Yet the State Executive Council subsequently supported recognising the rival claimant. Ismail has not adequately explained this apparent contradiction publicly.

3. Constitutional accountability. The Attorney General's Chambers reportedly concluded that the proclamation seeking to remove Tuanku Muhriz was invalid. However, the legal dispute and the separate question of Ismail's tenure must be distinguished from the personal breakdown between the ruler and Menteri Besar.

Resignation is therefore a serious option, but it is not an automatic legal consequence of a royal rebuke. Ismail's constitutional position, the confidence of the State Legislative Assembly, and the applicable provisions of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution must also be considered.

Senior lawyer Rosli Dahlan has publicly called for Ismail to resign, while Ismail himself said on 8 October that he would not do so.

The strongest question to put to Ismail is this:

If you maintain that you were forced to sign a proclamation against the ruler, why did your administration subsequently support its effect? And if the relationship between the palace and your government has broken down so publicly, how do you intend to govern effectively?

Ultimately, this is about more than royal displeasure. It is about constitutional consistency, public accountability and the stability of the state government. Those are the standards against which any decision to remain in office or resign should be examined.

SITI KASIM

Malaysian Government’s skewered law enforcement and justice

 Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia

No News Is Bad News

 

Malaysian Government’s skewered law enforcement and justice

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 18, 2026: Former Attorney-General Tommy Thomas says all it takes is 30 minutes to have police commando killer Sirul Azhar Umar extradited from Australia.

Of course Thomas is absolutely right but he got it wrong that “there is no political will” for not doing so

The Government’s skewered law enforcement and justice is not about political will.

It is about law enforcement discrimination and laws for the (political elite) and for the man on the street. It is also about the exploitation of law enforcement to serve political “interests”.

There are so many examples for this but the murder of Mongolian French translator Altantuya Shaariibuu takes the cake.

The real question is who is the Government trying to protect from those directly and indirectly involved in issuing the order to have an innocent foreign woman from being executed?

Believe it or not, even a court judge in the case ruled that the motive for the murder is irrelevant or not important?

No News Is Bad News reproduces below a news report on why Sirul is allowed to roam freely in Australia and what Thomas’ views about the Government’s lack of action to get Sirul back to Malaysia to face the law and punishment:

 

Just take 30 mins to settle Sirul’s extradition, says ex-AG

K. Parkaran

Tommy Thomas says all that is needed is a written undertaking by Malaysia to Australia, 'but there is no political will'.

Altantuya’s father, Shaariibuu Setev and lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo listening to a civil suit verdict in her office earlier this year. (Al Jazeera pic)

PETALING JAYA: Two lawyers have urged the government to bring home convicted killer Sirul Azhar Umar from Australia to reopen the “unresolved” murder case of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu, who was shot and had her body blown up in 2006.

Former attorney-general Tommy Thomas said it would take only 30 minutes for Malaysia to ensure that Sirul could be extradited from Australia, where he fled in 2015.

“Malaysia just needs to give an undertaking to Australia that Sirul won’t face the death penalty on his return. The foreign and home ministers and the attorney general must sit together and write a letter to their counterparts in Australia,” Thomas said.

“It’s as easy as that — a letter that can be written in half an hour. I think there is no political will. They’d rather it be part of history and want everybody to forget about it. But it can’t be forgotten.”

The Altantuya case captured headlines as details emerged linking the woman to Abdul Razak Baginda, an aide to then defence minister Najib Razak, speculation about her involvement in a submarine deal between France and Malaysia, and messages between Razak and Musa Safri, another aide to Najib.

Thomas and lawyer Sangeet Kaur Deo, who represents Altantuya’s family, said Sirul’s extradition would allow Malaysian authorities to verify claims about the killing that Sirul made in a statutory declaration while being held in detention by Australian immigration.

Speaking to satellite broadcaster Al Jazeera in a two-part documentary “Murder in Malaysia – Justice for Altantuya” aired today, Thomas and Sangeet said Sirul’s claims in his statutory declaration — and those by his accomplice Azilah Hadri in a separate declaration — must be verified in order to reopen the case.

Thomas and Sangeet said the two men should face action for making false declarations if their claims were not true.

Forensic pathologist Dr Mohd Shah Mohmood showing Al Jazeera producer Mary Ann Jolly pictures of the evidence gathered at the scene of murder. (Al Jazeera pic)

Sirul fled to Australia seeking asylum before the Federal Court sentenced him to death. His asylum application was rejected in 2019 and he was held in detention until 2023, when he was released into society; however, he could not be deported to Malaysia under Australian law that prevents deportation where the applicant will face the death penalty.

With Malaysia’s mandatory death sentence repealed and Azilah’s sentence commuted to 40 years, Thomas said there is no reason Sirul cannot be extradited.

No reply from the AG

Sangeet said she had written to the attorney-general but received no response. “It’s their duty to reply,” she said.

If Sirul lied in his affidavit, action should be taken, she said. “And if he is right, something should also be done. My job is simply asking for it to be investigated,” she told Al Jazeera.

She said all that Altantuya’s family wants is for Malaysia and Australia to find a lawful path through the courts and diplomacy so accountability is finally served. “We must end the standstill, because the standstill is the injustice.”

She said the most obvious question is why Azilah, a police commando, would take instructions from Razak who was not his superior. “That’s a question that hasn’t been answered and ought to be investigated.”

Sangeet noted that Razak, whose abetment charges were dropped, had every opportunity during the hearing of a civil suit filed by Altantuya’s father Shaariibuu to state on oath that the two men acted alone.

“He chose not to take it.”

Shaariibuu Setev, a Mongolian professor who has sought justice for the gruesome murder of his daughter Altantuya. (Al Jazeera pic)

Text messages to Musa Safri

The documentary revealed text messages sent by Razak to Najib’s security aide Musa Safri the night before Altantuya’s murder.

At 9.35pm, Razak wrote: “Did you get my SMS about wanting to meet at DPM’s office?” Three minutes later: “When will you be there? I can drop by in the morning. Tks.”

Razak was suggesting a meeting at the office of the deputy prime minister (then Najib), said Americk Singh Sidhu, a lawyer for the late private investigator P Balasubramaniam who was engaged by Razak to watch Altantuya’s movements before she was killed.

“Now, one wonders why and for what purpose. You have Musa organising Azilah and Sirul for Razak, but why involve the deputy prime minister?”

He believes files from the short-lived task force set up by Thomas in the 2018-2020 Pakatan Harapan government should be reopened, as interviews with 40 witnesses had been conducted relating to Sirul’s 2019 statutory declaration.

“I think this is a case where the truth must emerge. The truth is the casualty here. Obviously there are vested interests, strong forces. For whatever reasons, they just don’t want the truth to emerge, so there must be public pressure.”

Altantuya’s father, Shaariibuu Setev, a Mongolian professor, has travelled to Malaysia more than 20 times seeking justice for his daughter and vowed not to give up his quest to find the man who ordered the policemen to kill her.

In June, Mongolia’s new prime minister, Nyam-Osoryn Uchral, acknowledged the torment and financial hardship Shaariibuu has endured and presented him with an apartment.

Police bodyguard Sirul Azhar Umar was convicted of Altantuya Shaariibuu’s murder in 2015, together with fellow commando Azilah Hadri. (Al Jazeera pic)

Wednesday, 7 October 2026

When promises of fighting corruption become ‘bullshit’

Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia

No News Is Bad News

When promises of fighting corruption become ‘bullshit’

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 7, 2026: Politicians and the Government can promise endlessly to fight graft but it becomes “bullshit” when they do not preach what they promise.

“Freeing” a pencuri (thief) by giving him a “discount” on jail sentence and reducing a court fine, and then placing him on house arrest to enjoy his ill-gotten gains and luxury does nothing to any so-called effort to fight graft/corruption.

Disgraced and former Umno president and prime minister Najib “1MDB” Razak is no ordinary pencuri as he abused his power as prime minister and stole millions, if not billions, of Ringgit from the rakyat dan negara (people and country).

 

And the rakyat dan negara need to pay interest and principal debts until 2039.

🗓️ Payment Timeline

Malaysia must continue paying off its remaining 1MDB debts until 2039, when the final government-guaranteed Islamic medium-term notes (sukuk) mature. [1]

📌 Current Debt Status

· Remaining Liability: RM8.9 billion ($2.8 billion) in outstanding principal and interest. [1]

· Final Settlement: A RM5 billion principal payment plus accrued interest is scheduled for 2039. [1]

· Total Paid to Date: RM42.5 billion has been disbursed by the government as of mid-2026. [1]

· Asset Recoveries: RM31.3 billion has been recovered, leaving an uncovered potential shortfall/loss of around RM20.1 billion. [1]

No News Is Bad News reproduces below two articles found in electronic social media trying to figure out why the majority of Malays support the corrupt or embrace corruption, and continue to support Barisan Nasional-Umno, a party of many corrupt leaders.

*What Hassan Abdul Karim did in Parliament today was rare in modern Malaysian politics:* he connected anti-corruption rhetoric to the credibility of the justice system itself — and did so openly, on the record, in front of the government he nominally supports.

That matters.

1. The question cuts straight through the theatre

Hassan’s intervention was not emotional grandstanding. It was a logical indictment:

How can the country wage an all-out war against corruption when convicted elites later receive “discounts” on punishment?

This is not a partisan question. It is a systemic one.

Anti-corruption does not fail because of lack of slogans.

It fails when punishment becomes negotiable for the powerful.

1. Why invoking the King makes this moment explosive

Hassan deliberately framed his criticism around the royal decree by Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar, who called for an all-out war against corruption.

That framing does two things:

      1.    It elevates the issue above party politics

      2.    It exposes the contradiction between declared national values and actual elite behaviour

When an MP says, in effect, “Tuanku, forgive me, but how can this war be real when justice is unequal?” — he is highlighting a credibility crisis, not challenging the monarchy.

1. “Discounts” are more corrosive than acquittals

This is the part many politicians avoid saying.

A controversial acquittal can be debated legally.

A post-conviction “discount” destroys moral authority.

Why?

Because it tells the public:

      •     Courts may convict you

      •     But status can still soften consequences

      •     Accountability is not final

That is fatal to deterrence.

In anti-corruption theory, certainty of punishment matters more than severity. When certainty disappears for elites, corruption becomes rational behaviour — not a risk.

1. This is an indictment of the system, not just individuals

Hassan was careful not to name names — but everyone knows what he was referring to.

That restraint is important. It signals that the problem is structural:

      •     Executive influence after convictions

      •     Selective mercy perceived as elite privilege

      •     Unequal application of justice

When ordinary Malaysians see:

      •     Small offenders jailed without mercy

      •     Powerful figures convicted, then relieved

They do not see compassion.

They see class justice.

1. Why this hits harder coming from a PKR veteran

Hassan is not opposition. He is not PN. He is not an outsider.

He comes from the Reformasi tradition — the same moral lineage that once promised:

      •     Rule of law

      •     Equality before the law

      •     No sacred cows

That is why his question is so uncomfortable for the government.

It suggests that even within PKR, there is unease that the movement’s founding promises are being diluted by power.

1. The unspoken implication: credibility is already bleeding

An “all-out war against corruption” cannot coexist with:

      •     Perceived elite exemptions

      •     Post-conviction leniency for the powerful

      •     Silence from institutions when credibility is questioned

You cannot ask civil servants, businesses, or citizens to fear the law if the law bends upward.

That is not reform. That is optics.

Final takeaway, Hassan Abdul Karim did not attack the King. He defended the King’s words by asking whether the system lives up to them.

And his question lingers:

If conviction is not the end for elites, if punishment can still be negotiated, then who exactly is this war against corruption meant for?

Until that question is answered honestly, every anti-corruption slogan will sound hollow — no matter who says it, or from which throne it is declared.

A theory on why Malays accept corrupt leaders

Tajuddin Rasdi

Education, economy, religion and party sentiment are said to be among the factors influencing Malays’ attitudes towards corruption.


There is a question that many non-Malays often ask me, and recently even my wife has raised it: why are Najib Razak and Umno still embraced by Malays, from kampung folk to those with tertiary education?

This question resurfaced following Najib’s conditional pardon allowing for house arrest and Umno’s significant victories in Johor and Negeri Sembilan.

In this article, I present my theory. Readers may find the issue worthy of a research project, or even a PhD thesis!

Reason one: taxation

Many Malays pay little or no tax. For example, my two children, both university graduates, earn about RM4,000 per month and contribute only a few ringgit in taxes. I, on the other hand, pay a substantial amount in tax, but a high-earning non-Malay friend pays four times more than I do.

Because many Malays do not feel the weight of taxation, corruption involving public funds does not resonate with them. To them, money for the people comes from a Malay-led government. As long as salaries, festive aid and allowances arrive, they are content.

Reason two: government employment

A large proportion of Malays work in government. The civil service and political leadership are overwhelmingly Malay – about 80%. Salaries are paid every month, so even if corruption drains RM40 billion, Malay wages remain unaffected.

People may say the country is drowning in debt due to 1MDB, but salaries still come in. Why then should the Malays worry about corruption?

If salaries were withheld for even one month, Umno would collapse and Najib would be cursed. But as long as salaries and allowances flow, corruption has no impact.

Reason three: lack of awareness

Civil servants and Malay businessmen are rarely told that their wages and development allocations – roads, schools, infrastructure – are funded largely by taxes paid by non-Malays employed outside government.

The plundering of billions through corruption does not strike home because Malays do not feel the burden of national debt. Thus, corrupt leaders chosen by Malays borrow from external sources while siphoning off wealth that rightfully belongs to the people.

Reason four: Islamic education

Whether at school or university, this issue is never taught. Even Islamic education avoids it, focusing instead on moral issues like alcohol, gambling and pork.

There are three aspects of Islam that cause corruption to be accepted or ignored:

· Religious education itself: I have reviewed thousands of Friday sermons, and none explains how tax money becomes salaries or development funds. Corruption is treated as a minor sin, distant and irrelevant to ordinary people.

· Political sermons: Some religious teachers from political parties justify corruption, claiming it is not punishable under hudud because it is absent from classical fiqh texts. So, stealing RM200 shoes may warrant amputation but embezzling RM40 billion is not mentioned. As a result, corruption is seen as less serious than drinking alcohol, not wearing the headscarf, or failing to vote for an Islamic party.

· Preachers from abroad: Some insist that Muslims must vote for Muslim candidates, even if they are weak or immoral, as long as they are Muslim. This is compounded by political parties promising heaven for those who vote for them. Thus, corruption, slander and insults will be tolerated if the party claims to uphold Islam in politics.

Reason five: party benefits

Malays receive benefits – haj trips, kitchen aid, bicycles – from Malay parties. No one ever asks where the money comes from.

At restaurants, Malays check for halal certificates, but when receiving party contributions, they never question the source of funds.

Reason six: the DAP bogeyman

This is the most classic and effective reason: vote for Malay or Islamic parties to prevent DAP from ruling. My wife’s retiree friends recently admitted voting for Umno out of fear that DAP would take over in Johor and Negeri Sembilan.

Malays have never compared the number of DAP members convicted of corruption against Malays from Malay parties.

All they care about is blocking DAP from coming to power because it is a party of infidels. Malays believe it is their religious duty as Muslims to prevent DAP from winning, and in doing so, they feel assured of heaven.

With no proper education at schools, universities or mosques about the impact of corruption, Malays will continue to support parties steeped in it.

I believe that until the end of time, Malays will not change but will go on backing corrupt parties in Malaysia.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.