AGC appeal Yusoff Rawther acquittal

Murray Hunter


AGC appeal Yusoff Rawther acquittal

Yusoff’s political persecution continues

Jun 17, 2025




The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) has filed an appeal against the High Court’s acquittal of Yusoff Rawther on charges of drug trafficking and possession of imitation forearms. High Court Judge Jamil Hussin ruled on June 12 the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against Yusoff Rawther. Yusoff Rawther’s legal team was not required to enter any defence as the prosecution had failed to present enough evidence to support their case.


From 3Rs to 4Rs

After the acquittal, there were so many unanswered questions. Why didn’t the AGC lawyers study the evidence carefully and detect flaws in the police case? Why weren’t the police questioned on the evidence provided to the AGC? Who signed off on making the prosecution of Yussoff Rawther? Was it internal? Was it under the direction of others?

Instead of showing transparency, the AGC threatened anyone who disussed the Yusoff Rawther would face consequences. Now Malaysia has the 4Rs (race, religion, royalty, and Rawther).

The charges the AGC is appealing fall under under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 carries the death penalty or between 30 and 40 years’ imprisonment and at least 12 strokes of the cane upon conviction.

What the public must ask now is after the AGC was humiliated by having the court totally reject the case, due to lack of a case, why are they still seeking a case that could lead to Yusoff Rawther’s sentencing to death, when there are massive doubts over the evidence?

Someone high up within the AGC wants to utilize more public funding to pursue and persecute Yussoff Rawther on a very flimsy case, where the evidence points to it being planted. The AGC would be acting in the public interest if they investigated who planted the drugs and imitation pistols in Yussoff Rawther’s car. An injustice by the state is going on and clearly the AGC is part of this.

Malaysia is not a safe place if the state is free to victimize its enemies

Today in Malaysia, no one is safe from the government. If you criticize the government, they will come after you and frame you if necessary. Once within their legal system they will torture you. This is the case of Yussoff Rawther, we must stand up to. Yusoff made a police report back in 2021 about an alleged sexual assault. He made a civil claim only after the police refused to act. Now the respondent happens to be a prime minister, and is using the state to victimize Yusoff Rawther.

This is gangsterism, and the AGC is clearly part of this.

PM Anwar might have chosen the wrong fruit avacado to indirectly champion the poor

Murray Hunter

PM Anwar might have chosen the wrong fruit avacado to indirectly champion the poor

P Ramasamy
Jun 17, 2025





Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim might have chosen the inappropriate example of avocado fruit to support his argument why imported luxury fruits have to be imposed a sales tax of 5 percent.

It must be remembered that although the bulk of avocado are imported, some quantity is also produced locally due to the its heath benefits.

Avacdo is the latest fruit item that is considered as health food that is not exclusively reserved for the rich.

The poor are also increasingly consuming the avacado fruit item if they can afford. To say that avocado is meant for the rich misses the point of its demand among the lower income households.

I think Anwar in trying to be the champion of the poor missed the point of growing demand for avacado from all sections of the society.

At the same time, Anwar forgot to mention the fact that imported fruits with sales tax such oranges, apples and others are in demand from all socio-economic classes. Can Anwar say that just because oranges and apples are imported that they are luxury items.

I believe that Anwar chose the wrong fruit, avacado, to justify the sales tax and indirectly support the poor.

The point I am making is that even if the bulk of avacado are imported, the fruit is not meant for the rich and those who can afford them.

There are many ways to champion the poor and the needy in the country such bringing down inflation by cutting down on the costs of basic essentials in the country.

Improved trade unions rights might contribute to increasing the power of labour to increase the wages.

Sales tax on imported goods such as fruits is something acceptable but pointing to the example of avacado as a luxury item doesn’t make sense.

Maybe Anwar was ill-advised on the matter of imported fruits particularly the popular avacado. By the way, Anwar is not an economist neither is he a financial expert.

But at least he should have gone one step further by urging Malaysian farmers to plant avacado trees to bring down the imported fruit. I am sure his buddy Mohammed Sabu, the Minister of Agriculture, might welcome it especially coming from the prime minister.

Anyway, there is more to address the plight of the poor in the country rather than justifying sales tax on avocado and other imported fruits.

Trump floats firing ‘numbskull’ Fed chair Powell

Trump floats firing ‘numbskull’ Fed chair Powell



Chair of the US Federal Reserve Jerome Powell speaks during a press conference following the Federal Open Market Committee meeting in Washington June 18, 2025. — AFP pic

Saturday, 21 Jun 2025 10:01 AM MYT



WASHINGTON, June 21 — US President Donald Trump escalated his criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Friday -- publicly mulling whether to fire the official and appoint himself to the central bank.

The Republican leader, who regularly berates Powell over the bank’s decisions not to lower interest rates, took to Truth Social to smear the banker as a “numbskull,” “moron” and “obvious Trump Hater.”

“I fully understand that my strong criticism of him makes it more difficult for him to do what he should be doing, lowering Rates, but I’ve tried it all different ways,” said Trump, who appointed Powell during his first term.

“I’ve been nice, I’ve been neutral, and I’ve been nasty, and nice and neutral didn’t work!”


Powell’s term does not conclude until next year. He has said his dismissal would be unlawful, and that he has no intention of stepping down voluntary if Trump asks.


“I don’t know why the Board doesn’t override this Total and Complete Moron!” Trump posted. “Maybe, just maybe, I’ll have to change my mind about firing him? But regardless, his Term ends shortly!”

Trump lashed out after the Fed held interest rates steady for a fourth consecutive meeting on Wednesday, forecasting higher inflation and cooler growth as Trump’s tariffs take hold.


The projections were its first since Trump unleashed sweeping 10 percent tariffs on almost all trading partners in April. — AFP

***

kt comments:

Carrot Head really an S-Whole

‘She’s wrong’: Trump disputes spy chief Gabbard’s take on Iran’s nuclear programme

‘She’s wrong’: Trump disputes spy chief Gabbard’s take on Iran’s nuclear programme



This file photo shows US President Donald Trump looking at Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, on the day of Gabbard's swearing in ceremony, in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC, US February 12, 2025. — Reuters

Saturday, 21 Jun 2025 12:57 PM MYT



WASHINGTON, June 21 — US President Donald Trump said yesterday that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was wrong in suggesting there was no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon.

Trump contested intelligence assessments relayed earlier this year by his spy chief that Tehran was not building a nuclear weapon when he spoke with reporters at an airport in Morristown, New Jersey.


“She’s wrong,” Trump said.

In March, Gabbard testified to Congress that the US intelligence community continued to believe that Tehran was not building a nuclear weapon. “The (intelligence community) continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon,” she said.


Yesterday, Gabbard said in a post on the social media platform X that: “America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalise the assembly. President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.”


She said the media has taken her March testimony “out of context” and was trying to “manufacture division.”

The White House has said Trump would weigh involvement in the Iran–Israel conflict over the next two weeks. On Tuesday, Trump made similar comments to reporters about Gabbard’s assessment.


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has justified a week of airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets by saying Tehran was on the verge of having a warhead.

Iran denies developing nuclear weapons, saying its uranium enrichment programme is only for peaceful purposes.

In March, Gabbard also described Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile as unprecedented for a state without such weapons and said the government was watching the situation closely. She also said Iran had started discussing nuclear weapons in public, “emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran’s decision-making apparatus.”

A source with access to US intelligence reports told Reuters the March assessment presented by Gabbard has not changed. The source said US spy services judged it would take up to three years for Iran to build a warhead with which it could hit a target of its choice.

David Albright, a former UN nuclear inspector, questioned the revised view offered by Gabbard yesterday, estimating it would take Iran at least six months to produce a crude nuclear “device” that could not be delivered by a missile.

To produce a nuclear weapon that could be delivered on target by missile would take Iran at least one to two years, said Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

Trump has frequently disavowed the findings of US intelligence agencies, which he and his supporters have charged — without providing proof — are part of a “deep state” cabal of US officials opposed to his presidency.

Gabbard, a fierce Trump loyalist, has been among the president’s backers who have aired such allegations.

The Republican president repeatedly clashed with US spy agencies during his first term, including over an assessment that Moscow worked to sway the 2016 presidential vote in his favour and his acceptance of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s denials. — Reuters

***

kt comments:

Crowned Clown is an S-Whole bullsh*tter to his very S-Whole core, in total obedience to Shailok Satan-yahu

Wisma Putra: Malaysia shuts embassy in Iran, orders diplomats home amid rising Middle East tensions

Wisma Putra: Malaysia shuts embassy in Iran, orders diplomats home amid rising Middle East tensions



Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan (left) said Malaysia joins several other countries that have already withdrawn their diplomatic missions from the country. — Bernama pic

Saturday, 21 Jun 2025 12:33 PM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, June 21 – Malaysia has temporarily shut its embassy in Iran and ordered the immediate return of all diplomatic staff following escalating tensions in the Middle East, Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan said today.

New Straits Times quoted him saying the decision was made in response to a wave of Israeli airstrikes on Iran, with Malaysia joining several other countries that have already withdrawn their diplomatic missions from the country.


“I have instructed all embassy personnel, including the ambassador, to leave. All Malaysians have been asked to exit Iran,” he said.

He added that some have declined to leave, including three students in Qom and one in Isfahan, who are based far from Tehran.


Last week, Putrajaya said all Malaysians currently in Iran have been strongly urged to leave the country immediately amid the heightened security situation following Israel’s aggression against Iran.


The Foreign Ministry said the situation in Iran remains highly volatile and may take a turn for the worse without warning.

Communications Minister Datuk Fahmi Fadzil previously said that the government would evacuate all Malaysians from Iran yesterday.


Yesterday, the Ministry of Higher Education said it will continue to monitor Malaysian students currently in Iran after identifying seven there, although the exact number remains uncertain as some are there under self-sponsorship.

KINIGUIDE | GST vs SST: Is one better than the other?

KINIGUIDE | GST vs SST: Is one better than the other?

Malaysiakini Team
Published: Jun 21, 2025 10:08 AM
Updated: 12:55 PM


KINIGUIDE | There is an ongoing national conversation in Malaysia about consumption taxes, balancing the legacy of the goods and services tax (GST) with the phased return and expansion of the sales and services tax (SST).

Let’s scrutinise both tax systems.

What is GST?

Enacted under the Goods and Services Tax Act 2014, Malaysia implemented GST ( six percent) from April 1, 2015, levied at each supply-chain stage.


Basic goods like fresh food, water, and electricity remained zero-rated, while some services - education and healthcare, for example, were GST-exempt.

Businesses could claim input tax refunds, avoiding tax-on-tax. A year before it was repealed in June 2018, revenue from GST peaked at RM44 billion.

What is SST, and what’s new?

The SST was introduced through the Sales Tax Act 1972 and the Service Tax Act 1975. The laws were in force until replaced by GST on April 1, 2015.

When the Pakatan Harapan government came to power in 2018, it abolished the GST and reinstated SST on Sept 1, 2018.

SST comprises a single-stage sales tax and a separate service tax (six percent), now levied on broader categories under Budget 2025, including luxury food items and commercial services.

However, from July 1, 2025, SST rates will be increased to eight percent for some sectors, and extended to items like salmon, avocado, apples, and beauty services.

The government expects the expanded SST to increase revenue by RM5 billion this year, and by RM10 billion in 2026.

What’s happening on July 1?

Putrajaya will implement revised sales tax rates and expand the scope of the service tax starting July 1, in a move aimed at strengthening Malaysia’s fiscal position through higher revenue and a broader tax base.

Finance Minister II Amir Hamzah Azizan announced that a zero percent sales tax on necessities will be maintained, while non-essential goods will see a tax of between five and 10 percent.

Finance Minister II Amir Hamzah Azizan


The full list of the expanded service tax and exemptions is here.

How the taxation works?

The example below assumes a simple supply chain involving a manufacturer or importer that produces or imports a product for RM100 and then sells it for a RM10 profit margin.

Each business further down the supply chain - namely the distributor and the retailer – also seeks an RM10 margin to cover their own expenses, and hopefully, turn a profit before the product finally ends up with the consumer.

If there is no consumption tax involved, then the consumer will end up buying the product for RM130 (RM100 initial cost, RM30 profit margin).

Under GST, however, the manufacturer collects a six percent GST (RM6.60) from the distributor on the government’s behalf.

The distributor does the same when it sells the product to a retailer. However, the distributor can also claim tax credits for the RM6.60 GST through the manufacturer.

In a perfect world, this would be reflected in the price such that the increased cost associated with the tax is not further passed down the supply chain.

The same applies to the retailer, which claims RM7.20 in tax credit for the GST paid through the distributor, and then charges six percent GST to the consumer.

The final price comes to RM137.80. Throughout the process, the government collects RM21.60, but refunds RM13.80 in tax credits - leaving RM7.80 (six percent of the retail price) for the Federal Consolidated Fund.

When it comes to SST, however, the tax is only levied when the product is sold from the manufacturer or importer to the distributor at a rate that varies, depending on the type of product involved.

That is the only tax involved and there is no provision for tax refunds.

For the GST, we must note that the total collected is exactly six percent of the retail price, which is also the standard rate levied.

But this is not the case with the SST. In the examples above, the tax collected is 4.23 percent or 8.46 percent of the retail price, respectively, rather than the five or 10 percent that the government collects.

This figure will vary depending on the margins collected by each player in the supply chain. Hence, it is difficult for consumers to know how much is being paid to the government.

Why the difference matters?

The GST was often touted as being more efficient and transparent than SST, and the key to understanding the latter is appreciating the amount of paperwork involved for businesses to collect GST for the government and claim tax credits for themselves.

In a nutshell, GST creates a paper trail that cuts through the entire supply chain, making it more difficult for businesses to evade paying taxes compared to the SST.

It is also acknowledged to be more transparent. This is true in the sense that consumers/ taxpayers know exactly how much they are paying to the government in the form of GST.

Under SST, consumers are likely to still see “service tax” on the receipts for the services they pay for, but not “sales tax” on the receipts of the goods they purchase.

However, the GST scheme was not without its shortcomings. For one, keeping track of all that paperwork adds to the cost of doing business, which is ultimately passed down to the consumer.

There have also been persistent complaints about delays in GST refunds, which drives up prices.

Why some prefer GST over SST

Revenue and deficit control: GST generates higher revenue and a broader tax base, crucial for funding public services and reducing deficits.


Fairness and transparency: GST is transparent and progressive - with exhaustive coverage and better visibility - while SST hides tax in prices and lacks equity safeguards.


Economic readiness and public acceptance: While GST is more efficient, SST is simpler and less politically sensitive but raises questions about its sufficiency and impact on businesses and consumers.


Policy path ahead: Authorities have kept GST off the table until wage levels and economic health improve. Yet calls from businesses and international bodies suggest a structured, transparent shift back to GST may be prudent.

What’s the latest

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has reaffirmed his stance against reintroducing GST - arguing it would burden consumers and emphasised SST’s targeted tax on luxury imports.

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim


Anwar said the government believes that GST should only be reinstated when the people’s average income levels increase to a more reasonable level of at least RM4,000 a month.

***

kt comments:

Pakatan lied and kerbau-ed against GST until it painted itself into a corner - lying deceitful S-Wholes.

New IGP never a PKR member or leader, says Fuziah

FMT:

New IGP never a PKR member or leader, says Fuziah


The party secretary-general demands online news outlet hold an inquiry as to how such an error was made on Khalid Ismail’s profile

PKR secretary-general Fuziah Salleh said the false information could fuel speculation that the IGP’s appointment was politically motivated.

PETALING JAYA: The new Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Khalid Ismail, has never been a member of PKR, let alone a state party leader, says Fuziah Salleh.

The PKR secretary-general was responding to claims published on the social media page of a local news outlet yesterday linking the IGP to a political party, Bernama reported.

In a statement today, PKR secretary-general Dr Fuziah Salleh said the circulation of false information on the incoming IGP’s profile could undermine his image and credibility.


She added that it could also fuel negative perceptions of PKR as the ruling party if members of the public believe that Khalid’s appointment as IGP was politically motivated.

Fuziah stressed that such an error should never have occurred and urged the news outlet to conduct an internal inquiry.


She also listed the names of all Kedah state leadership council chairmen since 1999 to show that Khalid had never been one.

Yesterday, Khalid, the Bukit Aman Special Branch director was named the IGP on a two-year contract, effective June 23.

He will take over as the nation’s top cop from Razarudin Husain, whose term ends tomorrow.

Khalid, 60, joined the police force in April 1987 and began his career with the Special Branch at Bukit Aman.

Razaruddin says monitored ‘3R’ cases weekly as IGP, but attacks against Faisal Halim and two other footballers remain unsolved

Razaruddin says monitored ‘3R’ cases weekly as IGP, but attacks against Faisal Halim and two other footballers remain unsolved



Tan Sri Razarudin Husain has stepped down as inspector-general of police after a two-year term. — Picture Firdaus Latif

Saturday, 21 Jun 2025 9:53 AM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, June 21 — Former inspector-general of police Tan Sri Razaruddin Husain has revealed what were the biggest cases for him during his tenure, and which cases he could not resolve in time.

Speaking to Malay daily Utusan Malaysia, Razarudin said cases involving the so-called “3R” issues — race, religion, royalty — were top.


“I monitor them monitored weekly, by ensuring that investigations were completed within seven days and reports submitted to the Attorney General’s Chambers, unless specific instructions are received requiring a shorter time frame of three to four days to verify the findings,” he was quoted saying.

He also highlighted other cases involving the Islamic faith, such as the deviant teachings linked to Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH).


In September last year, Bukit Aman announced a massive raid on 20 charity houses linked to GISBH in Selangor and Negeri Sembilan, in which they rescued over 400 child residents and arrest nearly 200 people between the ages of 17 and 64.


Razarudin also listed the fatal shooting of Customs Department deputy director-general Datuk Shaharuddin Ibrahim in 2013 as a remaining cold case.

Shaharuddin was gunned down in a morning in April 2013, as one of two men on a motorcycle fired at close range when he stopped his four-wheel-drive vehicle at the traffic light at Lebuh Sentosa, Putrajaya.


To this day, no one has been charged with Shaharuddin’s murder although over 40 people were arrested and quizzed, but police believe that he was killed because of his operations against smugglers and a car syndicate.

Razarudin also said that the police still cannot solve the attacks against footballers Faisal Halim, Safiq Rahim, and Akhyar Rashid.

“There have also been long-standing cases involving shootouts between gangsters in Kuala Lumpur and drug cartels fighting over power and territory, as well as the sale of counterfeit drugs,” he reportedly said.

Yesterday, former director of the Special Branch Datuk Seri Mohd Khalid Ismail was appointed as the new Inspector-General of Police on a two-year contract beginning this Monday.

Razarudin stepped down yesterday after a two-year term, previously succeeding Tan Sri Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani.

Opinion: Stop being a pot that calls the kettle black, Saifuddin

Opinion: Stop being a pot that calls the kettle black, Saifuddin


20 Jun 2025 • 9:00 AM MYT


TheRealNehruism
Writer. Seeker. Teacher

Image credit: The Sun / US Embassy KL Flickr


When I first saw the article where former finance minister Saifuddin Abdullah would be urging Anwar to get his tax facts right and saying that Malaysians were facing a “triple economic threat”, my interest was piqued.


It was piqued because I think that it has been way too long since Anwar has done anything for the working class. Last budget, he raised the minimum wage and expanded social security for us, but that was almost a year ago.


Considering it has been so long since Anwar has done anything for us, any fault of his on the economic department is exciting news for me – to hear about how he is failing all of us in economics would have been as enjoyable as hearing the news of a relative who owes you money having his car repossessed by the bank –it would have given you an excellent opportunity to chime in and say : “ see, this is what happens when you don't pay what you owe,” to remind the people that owes you, that before they go around strutting their feathers with the likes of Xi Jinping and Putin, they should see to it that their commitment to you is fulfilled .


Unfortunately, however, Saifuddin’s article, like a bad movie, only seemed interesting in the teaser and the trailer – the movie itself was a waste of money.


Although starting promisingly in the title, by the time I reached the third line in his very short article, I already knew that Saifuddin’s article was going to be a major disappointment.



It seemed that the major problem that Saifuddin has with Anwar’s economic plan is that he Anwar had misrepresented the meanings of GST and SST in a viral video.


In the video that Saifuddin has taken offense to, it seems that Anwar had stated that GST stood for “general sales tax” and applied to all goods while saying that SST was imposed only on imported items, which according to Saifuddin, is both incorrect.


It is incorrect, according to Saifuddin, because GST refers to the goods and services tax, covering both goods and services, not merely “general service” while SST, or sales and services tax, is not limited to imported goods, but also applies to selected domestic goods and services.


Pouncing on this pedantic error by Anwar, Saifuddin will then exaggerate Anwar’s fault to the point that he will suggest that our entire economy is in danger because Anwar explained a couple of terms wrong in a speech.



Now Saifuddin might not be very fond of Anwar, and as a member of the opposition, I suppose he has the right and duty to find Anwar’s fault, but when he has to use this petty of an error to find an ammunition to fire at Anwar, it looks bad on him, not Anwar.


In the second half of his article, Saifuddin would try to make article more interesting by suggesting how the working class are in a whole lot of pain come this July because of something he called the ” economic triple threat,” but despite making it sound so grand as an expression, the gist of Saifuddin’s contention again failed to fire convincingly.


According to Saifuddin, the ” economic triple threat,” are :


The“ache” of increased and expanded SST;


The“betrayal” felt with the targeted subsidy removal for RON95 petrol;


The “pressure” of higher electricity bills squeezing both B40 and M40 households.


According to Saifuddin, these ache, betrayal and pressure is bound to compound the rakyat’s hardship, but the problem is that other than utter these three lines, Saifuddin didn’t bother to explain to us exactly how is it that these aches, betrayal and pressure is going to cause the rakyat a great deal of trouble,


Instead, he will just cursorily tell us that it it is Anwar's flawed policies and ill-informed narratives, that will cause the people of the country to be guinea pigs for Anwar’s economic experimentation, and leave the rest for us to figure out by ourselves.


I don’t know if Saifuddin is aware of this, but you can’t accuse Anwar of giving an ill-informed narrative while giving an ill-informed narrative yourself. Will it kill him to elaborate his point a little more so that we can understand where he is coming from and where is he going with his points ?


I personally think that it is only losers that try to defeat their opponents by finding their grammar or spelling mistake.


Saifuddin needs to understand that it is not our due to believe him – it is his job to convince us – he can’t just cursorily suggest that our economy is doomed and we are heading towards a lot of ache, pressure and betrayal, and expect us to believe him as if he has a proven track record of being accurate, reliable and true.


I can’t believe I have to say this to a former foreign minister, but dude, if you are going to suggest big ideas like “triple economic threat”, try to flesh out your article with more than 296 words. If a mechanic explaining a minor problem with your car will use more than 296 words to convince you what is wrong with your car, you definitely need much more than 296 words to explain a major economic concern that will cause 80 percent of the country to feel ache, pressure and betrayal.


I was a maths teacher, not an economics teacher previously, but I don’t think you need to be an economics teacher to see how sloppy and sub-standard Saifuddin's work is here.


If I was a teacher judging Saifuddin’s work here, I would probably just throw this entire piece in the wastebasket after I read it, before scolding Saifuddin for wasting ink and paper, as well as my time and his time with this pointless article.


When you want to say something, aim to have something to say, Saifuddin, not just aim to be someone who is saying something.


If you haven’t found something to say, wait for the point to come, and put some effort at fleshing it out and presenting it properly after it comes, instead of just dishing out some half-baked stuff, with the expectation that people will be able to see your genius, despite the fact that your work is so lousy and half baked.



Anyway, to your question, how can the public have confidence that Malaysia’s fiscal policies are on the right track, when Anwar doesn’t seem to know what he is talking about, well, you should probably just go look in the mirror to find out the answer.


If our foreign policy could survive despite having someone so sloppy and sub-standard as you being our former foreign minister, I suppose our economy can finance and economy can survive too, regardless of how sloppy and sub-standard you think Anwar is as our finance minister.

Ex-Special Branch chief Khalid Ismail is new IGP, succeeding Razarudin

Ex-Special Branch chief Khalid Ismail is new IGP, succeeding Razarudin



Datuk Seri Mohd Khalid Ismail moves on from heading the Special Branch to his newest appointment as Inspector-General of Police for a two-year contract from June 23, 2025. — Picture courtesy of the Home Ministry

Friday, 20 Jun 2025 3:55 PM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, June 20 — Datuk Seri Mohd Khalid Ismail has been appointed as the new Inspector-General of Police on a two-year contract beginning June 23, 2025.

The announcement was made by Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail who said the appointment has the consent of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the prime minister and the recommendation of the Police Force Commission.


In a media statement, Saifuddin Nasution said that Mohd Khalid “possesses the competency and strong leadership qualities to ensure continuity and assume the responsibilities of leading the Royal Malaysia Police”.

Mohd Khalid began his policing career in 1987 and has served in various key roles including deputy director of Special Branch, the police intelligence division, and as security liaison officer in London.


Prior to his new appointment, the 60-year-old served as director of the Special Branch and retired on April 8 but was reappointed on a contract basis from that date until now.



Saifuddin Abdullah congratulated Mohd Khalid on his appointment.

Incumbent IGP Tan Sri Razarudin Husain steps down from the post today after a two-year term.


He succeeded Tan Sri Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani.

Razarudin’s handover ceremony and farewell parade is scheduled for today at the Kuala Lumpur Police Training Centre on Jalan Semarak.

***

kt remarks:

My suspicions have been proven correct, that DIGP Ayob was likely to be sidelined.

Patrick Lawrence: World’s Most Dangerous Man & His Enabler

Consortium News
Volume 30, Number 169 —Thursday, June 19, 2025


Patrick Lawrence: World’s Most Dangerous Man & His Enabler


Netanyahu has craved this war with Iran for decades, always justifying his psychotic lust by way of endless lies and an apparently bottomless paranoia

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing a joint session of U.S. Congress on July 24, 2024. (C-Span screen shot)

By Patrick Lawrence
ScheerPost

It is some years since I described Benjamin Netanyahu as the most dangerous man in West Asia.

That was back when we heard from him all about the menace of the Assad regime in Damascus, the Beelzebub otherwise known as Iran’s supreme leader and other such unthinkably malign figures.

The Israeli prime minister just graduated. By any serious reckoning he is the world’s most dangerous man as of the shockingly reckless, altogether nihilist attacks he launched against the Islamic Republic in the early hours of Friday, June 13. I will get to Donald Trump’s place in the ratings in a sec.

In his initial announcement of “Operation Rising Lion,” Netanyahu asserted that Iran presents “an existential threat” to Israel and that he had no choice but to order an attack. This is nonsense, but we had better pay attention to the nonsense.

With this loaded phrase, Bibi has effectively licensed the Zionist state to launch a nuclear weapon if these attacks fail to destroy all of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear programs, as seems likely. This is my read.

There is indeed an existential threat abroad as of last Friday. But it extends well beyond Iran and, indeed, West Asia.

As the self-defined Jewish state’s long, dreadful record makes plain, it appears to recognize no limits to the violence it will inflict on others, its breaches of international law and the norms of the human cause, and the risks it will inflict on the world in the name of what amounts to a biblically authorized project of subjugation and domination.

To finish this point, the obsessed leader of a nuclear-armed nation never subjected to the terms of the Non–Proliferation Treaty has just attacked a non-nuclear nation it calls a mortal danger to Israel’s survival because of the nuclear weapons it does not possess. You do the math, as the expression goes.

“Operation Rising Lion,” for the record, is a reference to the Prophecy of Balaam, an infidel with a very mixed record but who impressed the ancient Israelites with his exceptional powers of divination. In the Revised Standard Version of Numbers, 23:24, we find him saying, “Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood of the slain.”

So does Bibi, who has the Palestinians down as evil Amalekites straight out of the Old Testament’s mythologies, once again state his purpose.

Israel and Iran are now at war, as one Tehrani told The New York Times after she listened to explosions and watched the flicker fires out her window last Friday evening. All is changed now.

Netanyahu has craved this war for decades, always justifying his lust — a clinically psychotic lust, it is right to say — by way of endless lies and an apparently bottomless paranoia. These lies and this paranoia just put the world in danger of a global confrontation.

We are all Iranians now: I am perfectly willing to say this.

As to President Trump and the American role in this, there is no need any longer for any of us to deceive ourselves. I continue to insist, against many who think otherwise, that the Zionist state is to be understood as a recklessly over-indulged client and not the Übermeister of U.S. policy.

It is a complex dynamic, I mean to say, but the Zionist state just got done what the imperium wants in its broader ambition to “reshape the Middle East,” as the neoconservative cliques who direct U.S. policy have long put it. As I have noted previously in this space, borrowing from spookspeak, Israel does Washington’s wet work in West Asia.

Netanyahu with U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the Pentagon on Feb. 5. (DoD/Madelyn Keech/Public Domain)

As many commentators have remarked in many places, the Israelis have a well-established practice of lying in matters to do with events, policies, the conduct of the Israel Defense Forces and so on.

All governments lie, as I.F. Stone famously contended on many occasions, but the Israelis are in a class of their own among the officially mendacious, it is fair to say.

The thing about the Israelis is that they continue to lie even after a given lie is exposed. Netanyahu, a ready-to-hand case in point, still goes on about how the Hamas militias who attacked southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, raped men and women, beheaded some babies and baked others in ovens, and so on.

All of this has been exposed as false, the product of Israel’s hasbara apparatus, the constantly-in-motion machine that produces propaganda for the consumption of international audiences. But Bibi nonetheless continues to retail these smears.

And this is the case with Netanyahu’s claims that, as of last week, Iran was on the very brink of producing nuclear weapons, and it was therefore urgent to stop it.

When he announced Operation Rising Lion, Netanyahu asserted, “It could be in a year, it could be within a few months — it could be less than a year.” Read this carefully. It is sheer fear mongering, not a stated fact in it. There is no more substance to these assertions than there has been since Netanyahu first started carrying on in this fashion in the early 1990s.

Anyone aware of the record knows this is merely another in the long line of statements Netanyahu has made of this kind. Bibi knows all his “coulds” and predictions are groundless — Israeli intel and the Central Intelligence Agency have told him so — and he cannot but know those paying attention know he knows this.

Now this transparent lie proves enough to start a war with two sides and risk a war with many.

On June 11, two days before the Israelis launched their attacks on Iran, a social media account going by name “The United States of Israel” posted on X a timeline of Netanyahu’s claims that the Islamic Republic was about to cross the threshold and become a nuclear-capable danger.

There are 20 entries, beginning in 1992 and ending earlier this year. In 1996 Iran was some months to one year away from building a bomb. In 2010 it was a year away, in 2021 months to a year, and so on.

The United States of Israel

@IsraeliLobby

·

Follow

Netanyahu's Iran nuclear bomb claim timeline: 1992-present

2:14 PM · Jun 12, 2025

35.8K

Reply

Copy link

I am not familiar with The United States of Israel and cannot vouch for every entry, but of those I know, they are all accurate. I think first of 2013, when Netanyahu addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Oct. 1. The forecast then, a dozen years ago, was a year to nuclear capability.

I covered that occasion. It was one week after Hassan Rouhani, elected in June as Iran’s reformist president, addressed the General Assembly and courageously reached out a hand to propose the start of talks to govern his nation’s nuclear programs.

Two years later, Tehran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which did so. It was exactly what Netanyahu wanted least, and Donald Trump obliged him when he scuttled the accord in 2018, a year after taking office.

If readers are interested, The Intercept published a piece 10 years ago confirming many of these dates. It is now recirculating under its original headline, “Benjamin Netanyahu’s Long History of Crying Wolf About Iran’s Nuclear Weapons,” yet more fitting now than it was in 2015.

Netanyahu at the U.N. General Assembly with a graphic about Iran’s nuclear bomb capability on Sept. 27, 2012. (UN Photo/J. Carrier)

But never mind all that. Netanyahu has succeeded over the years in creating a sort of meta reality that thrives in mainstream media as we speak. One must give him this.

Israel had no alternative but to attack, Bret Stephens, an Iran hawk of long standing, suggested in last Friday’s New York Times: “In plain English, Iran has been deceiving the world for years while gathering the means to build multiple nuclear weapons.”

David French, another conservative Times columnist, in Saturday’s editions: “The necessity of stopping Iran’s march to a bomb is far more clear [sic] today than it was even three years ago.”

These commentators and others now place much weight on a resolution (sponsored by the United States, Britain, France and Germany) passed by the International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors (Russia and China voted against) charging that Iran has been in violation of its obligations under the Nuclear Non–Proliferation Treaty.

Some facts: The agency is an organ of the United Nations and has 35 members. The resolution was presented Thursday, June 12, a day before Israel began attacking Iran. It passed with a vote of 19 board members in favor, three against and 11 abstentions; two board members did not vote.

These facts merit scrutiny. Why did four Western powers, which unanimously support Israel and oppose Iran, introduce this resolution when, by last Thursday, United States and European officials were already warning of an imminent Israeli attack?

Why did 16 other nations — many of them non–Western, some of them (Canada, the Netherlands, South Korea, Japan) U.S. allies — decline to back the resolution? On the day of the vote, you may recall, the State Department withdrew its diplomatic staff from its embassy in Baghdad and encouraged the families of military personnel in the region to evacuate on a voluntary basis.

Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, immediately interpreted the IAEA’s censure as politically motivated, a preface to the Israelis’ operation the next day. Let us take care here: This view of events cannot be verified as so, but it most certainly cannot be dismissed.

The IAEA censure is contained in a four-page June 12 report. This is a highly technical document having to do with the agency’s access to nuclear-related sites in Iran and the Iranians’ official accounts of their nuclear programs in their regular contacts with the IAEA.

The points of contention between the agency and the Iranians go back five years; the most recent of these dates to November 2024. Nothing happened last week or last month or the month before that to prompt the agency’s censure.

Here is a key passage in the document:


“Noting with concern the Director General’s conclusion, most recently in GOV/2025/25, that these issues stem from Iran’s obligations under its NPT Safeguards Agreement and unless and until Iran assists the Agency is [sic] resolving the outstanding issues, the Agency will not be in a position to provide assurance that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful …”

Does this read to you like a declaration that Iran is on the brink of nuclear-capability and must urgently be stopped? Or does this read as another in a long line of interim reports, the basis for further interaction of the kind that has gone on routinely for decades?

Does this, or any other passage if you care to read the technical prose, support Bibi Netanyahu’s latest predictions as earlier quoted? Does it support the commentaries of David French and Bret Stephens? Put this report next to the assertions of these people and you have an across-the-board case of gross distortion.

Iran, in response to the IAEA censure, now threatens to withdraw altogether from the Non–Proliferation Treaty and pursue its nuclear capabilities in earnest. You can read this as a potential horror show or you can think about the principle of deterrence. I have been of the latter persuasion for many years in the Iranian case.

Deterrence was held very high as a strategic concept during the Cold War decades. I regretted the circumstances that made deterrence necessary but saw the necessity of it. And now we have a nuclear-armed nation of many-times-demonstrated dangerous judgments threatening “a State without nuclear weapons,” as the IAEA refers to Iran. I come to the same conclusion.

Hassan Mafi ‏

@thatdayin1992

·

Follow

John Mearsheimer's take on Zionistan's attack on Iran: "Any country on the planet that trusts the US is remarkably foolish,... The lesson is that you should've gotten nuclear weapons a long time ago, & now you definitely have to get them in the future."

Watch on X

5:02 AM · Jun 16, 2025

1.2K

Reply

Copy link

Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s now-perturbed foreign minister, was due to travel to Oman Sunday, June 15, for further talks with the United States on a nuclear accord that would replace the agreement Netanyahu railed against even before it was signed and Trump abandoned. This is now off, for obvious reasons.

And so we come to the case of Donald J. Trump. I do not consider the American president to be as dangerous as Benjamin Netanyahu. He, Trump, may be stupider than Bibi, but he is not as unhinged. I count Trump Netanyahu’s enabler, and this is the role he just played.

U.S. President Donald Trump at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on June 10 for a commemoration of the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. (White House/Daniel Torok)

Trump is as deep in the pockets of the Israel lobbies and various wealthy American supporters of the Zionist state as any other American pol, allowing for very few exceptions. But in his support of so dangerous an operation as Rising Lion, Trump may have outdone them all, it seems to me. It is one thing, condemnable enough, to back a genocide by way of limitless supplies of weapons, political support and diplomatic cover. Isn’t another to approve of aggression that carries the risk of global conflagration? The degree of cynicism strikes me as yet greater than Joe Biden’s, and I admit that is going some.

There was a day or so just before Netanyahu’s lion began to rise when Trump put Marco Rubio, his hapless secretary of state, out in front of the microphones and cameras to tell the world no, the U.S. had no prior knowledge of Israel’s plans and there were no “American airplanes” involved.

It transpires that Rubio meant no jets with the “USAF” insignia painted on their fuselages. Newsweek reported the day the Israelis attacked that Israel has deployed a variety of American-made fighter jets in the Israeli inventory — F–35s, F–16s and F–15s — against the Iranians. You might ask whether this amounts to tacit consent, but don’t bother. The Israelis, ever eager to boast of America’s approval of all their malevolence, have clarified the matter.

Antiwar.com, the libertarian news site, reported June 13 that a senior Israeli official disclosed to The Jerusalem Post that the Netanyahu and Trump regimes colluded “to convince Tehran that diplomacy was still possible after Israel was ready to attack Iran.” As The Jerusalem Post reported,


“The round of U.S.–Iranian nuclear negotiations scheduled for Sunday was part of a coordinated U.S.–Israeli deception aimed at lowering Iran’s guard ahead of Friday’s attack.”

Here is the able Dave DeCamp’s report in Antiwar.com and here is The Jerusalem Post’s. And here, for good measure, is how The New York Times played this story under the headline, “A Miscalculation by Iran Led to Israeli Strikes’ Extensive Toll, Officials Say.”

Those foolish Iranians: They took the Americans at their word.

All this while, to complete the picture, Trump was on his Truth Social messaging platform with this kind of thing:


“We remain committed to a Diplomatic Resolution to the Iran Nuclear Issue! My entire Administration has been directed to negotiate with Iran. They could be a Great Country, but they first must completely give up hopes of obtaining a Nuclear Weapon. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

I like the flipped-off flattery, the upper-case nouns, and the exclamation points. Very Donald. So is what we read about in the above-cited publications.

I do not want to go on about how cravenly the U.S. so often conducts itself in matters of state. This has been noted often enough. But what the United States just did to Iran with the assist of its client seems to me the ne plus ultra of diplomatic betrayals. I can think of only one other case that offers a useful comparison.

That was when Vladimir Putin personally negotiated a settlement of the Ukraine crisis in its early stages. The Russian president invested heavily in the two Minsk Protocols, signed in September 2014 and February 2015, as a promising solution to the divisions evident in Ukraine after the U.S.–cultivated coup in Kiev in February 2014.

He subsequently discovered neither Ukraine nor the Western powers that served as guarantors of these accords, France and Germany, ever had any intention of implementing them. [As admitted later by the German and French leaders at the time.]

Negotiating the Minsk agreement in the Normandy Format in Paris on Dec. 9, 2019. (Kremlin.ru, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0)

Essentially at issue in these two cases is trust and breaches thereof. A measure of trust is foundational in international relations. Without it there can be no constructive diplomacy, either between adversaries or, for that matter, among allies.

Nations are that much closer to a default of hostility and potential chaos. The Europeans broke trust with the Russians when they abandoned the Minsk accords as soon as they signed them. Trump just broke trust with the Iranians. This is devastation of a kind — scorched-earth statecraft, we may as well call it.

To finish this point, do you think others do not notice this? The Chinese, to name the most critical case?

Trump and Netanyahu just executed the cheapest sort of good-cop, bad-cop routine with Tehran. It is a variant of Biden’s duplicity as he armed Israel with all it needed to proceed with its genocide in Gaza while claiming to fight “night and day” for a ceasefire.

Biden betrayed the Palestinians, Trump the Iranians. They have both betrayed all of us. These are acts of desperation, in my final read. Let us not forget why this is, and in which direction history’s wheel turns.




Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, lecturer and author, most recently of Journalists and Their Shadows, available from Clarity Press or via Amazon. Other books include Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century. His Twitter account, @thefloutist, has been permanently censored.