Tuesday, November 03, 2026

Zahid denies trying to sabotage unity government with shelved projects remarks

 


Zahid denies trying to sabotage unity government with shelved projects remarks

Zahid denies trying to sabotage unity government with shelved projects remarks

The deputy prime minister says he is prepared to produce documentary evidence of the official directive to counter the allegations.

Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi
Rural and regional development minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi insisted that the claims of postponed or cancelled letters of acceptance for the shelved projects were accurate.
PETALING JAYA:
Deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has denied allegations that he attempted to sabotage the unity government with his remarks on the shelving of several rural development projects in Sabah and Sarawak.

Zahid, who is also rural and regional development minister, insisted that his remarks on the postponement or cancellation of the letters of acceptance (SST) for the projects were accurate.

He also said he was prepared to produce documentary evidence of the official directive to counter the allegations made against him.

“I have no intention to do that (sabotage), but those are the facts… Whether they were postponed or cancelled, what is clear is that all SSTs that have been and are due to be issued were ordered to be cancelled.

“I have evidence of the directive letter that was issued. I can show it to the Jelutong MP,” Bernama reported him as saying at a press conference after officiating an event at Dewan MPJ Alamanda in Jasin, Melaka.

Yesterday, Jelutong MP RSN Rayer accused Zahid of trying to sabotage the unity government with his remarks on the shelving of several rural development projects in Sabah and Sarawak.

Rayer said Zahid made the government seem indifferent to the infrastructural issues faced by the two states as well as rural communities in the peninsula.

He said claims that the funds set aside for the shelved projects had been wasted had angered the public, even though finance minister II Amir Hamzah Azizan had clarified that no projects had been cancelled.

Rayer also alleged that Zahid was conspiring with the opposition to topple the government.

Last week, when winding up the debate on the 2027 budget, Zahid had claimed that projects in Sabah and Sarawak were shelved on the orders of the rural and regional development ministry’s secretary-general, despite funds being set aside for it.

Amir later rejected claims the finance ministry had cancelled projects, saying the rural and regional development ministry was merely told to hold off on awarding new road contracts until the unpaid bills were cleared.

Court strikes out suit by Daim’s family over alleged plot to topple govt

 


Court strikes out suit by Daim’s family over alleged plot to topple govt

Court strikes out suit by Daim’s family over alleged plot to topple govt

Judge allows the government’s application to strike out the suit, ruling that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

Naimah Abdul Khalid
Former finance minister Daim Zainuddin’s widow, Naimah Khalid, their two sons, Amir and Amin, and lawyers Amir Zharif Abdullah and Nizamuddin Hamid filed the suit early this year against Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, Inspector-General of Police Khalid Ismail and the government. (Bernama pic)
KUALA LUMPUR:
The High Court here has struck out a lawsuit filed by the family of the late former finance minister Daim Zainuddin and two lawyers seeking to stop a police investigation into an alleged plot to topple the government.

Justice Indra Nehru Savandiah allowed the government’s application to strike out the suit, ruling that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

Daim’s widow, Naimah Khalid, their two sons, Amir and Amin, and lawyers Amir Zharif Abdullah and Nizamuddin Hamid filed the suit early this year against Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, Inspector-General of Police Khalid Ismail and the government.

They said the suit was intended to challenge an alleged abuse of power and stop what they described as false claims of a “Zionist plot” to overthrow the government.

In her brief ruling, Indra said there was no compelling evidence to support the plaintiffs’ allegation that the police investigation was conducted in bad faith.

The investigation was conducted under Section 124B of the Penal Code, which deals with activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy.

“The plaintiffs’ claim that the first defendant’s (Anwar’s) public remarks influenced the police investigation was merely speculative and unsupported by facts capable of establishing bad faith,” she said.

Indra said the court would provide its full grounds of judgment if an appeal is filed.

The court made no order as to costs.

Lawyers Abraham Au and Gurdial Singh Nijar represented the plaintiffs, while senior federal counsel Sallehuddin Ali and Solehheen Zaki appeared for the government.

Khalid previously said that Bukit Aman federal police were investigating an alleged attempt to overthrow the government and threaten national stability, following a police report.

He said Bukit Aman’s classified crimes investigation unit was looking into allegations that an influential local figure had collaborated with an international media organisation in the alleged plot.

Nizamuddin had dismissed the claim that he was involved in an attempt to topple the government, describing it as “the mother of all lies”.

He confirmed that he and his law firm partner, Amir Zharif, were named in a police report as having attended a meeting with Naimah, but denied any plot to overthrow the government.

Shuhaily resumes duties as AKPS chief





Shuhaily resumes duties as AKPS chief


Malaysian Border Control and Protection Agency says its director-general was on leave last week


AKPS director-general Shuhaily Zain chairing a meeting with the agency’s commanders and senior officers. (Facebook pic)



PETALING JAYA: Shuhaily Zain has resumed his duties as director-general of the Malaysian Border Control and Protection Agency (AKPS), despite home minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail saying he would return to the police force.

In a Facebook post, AKPS said Shuhaily returned to duty today by chairing a commanders’ meeting, after going on leave last week.

“The meeting gathered AKPS senior officers and entry point commanders, focussing on organising the workflow for 2027, specifically to strengthen the agency’s strategic direction, operational preparedness and overall effectiveness.


“The focus is clear. The workflow has been tightened. The mission continues,” it said.

Shuhaily, the former head of Bukit Aman’s criminal investigation department, was seconded to AKPS as its director-general on July 1 last year.


On Oct 21, he was charged at the Sepang magistrates’ court with assaulting two policemen at KLIA in September. He claimed trial.

Last Thursday, Saifuddin said the ministry had decided to end Shuhaily’s secondment to AKPS and return him to the police force.

However, Inspector-General of Police Khalid Ismail later said Shuhaily’s two-year term as AKPS director-general could only be cut short with the consent of the king.

Khalid also said the police force was waiting for legal advice from the Attorney-General’s Chambers before finalising Shuhaily’s return.

The show must go on: Paul Anka, Andy Garcia lead Kennedy Centre Honours as Trump row forces venue change






The show must go on: Paul Anka, Andy Garcia lead Kennedy Centre Honours as Trump row forces venue change



Paul Anka (pictured) and Andy Garcia will be honoured alongside David Foster, David Mamet and Barbara Mandrell at this year’s Kennedy Centre Honours. — AFP pic


First Published: Tuesday, 03 Nov 2026 8:49 AM MYT


WASHINGTON, Nov 3 — The Kennedy Centre, the famed Washington arts hub that President Donald Trump has sought to overhaul, yesterday named singer Paul Anka and actor Andy Garcia among five honourees recognised for lifetime artist contributions.

Composer and producer David Foster, playwright David Mamet and musician Barbara Mandrell were also listed as recipients of the Kennedy Centre Honours, one of the United States’ highest arts awards.

This year’s ceremony will for the first time be hosted at Washington’s Capital One Arena rather than the Kennedy Centre, which has been shuttered since September amid a legal battle over renovations.

The Kennedy Centre — inaugurated in 1971 following the assassination of US president John F. Kennedy — is also the target of Trump’s contested effort to rename it the Trump-Kennedy Centre.


Trump hosted last year’s awards programme, which included Rocky actor Sylvester Stallone, country singer George Strait, disco legend Gloria Gaynor and rock band KISS.

The Kennedy Centre had long enjoyed bipartisan support before Trump appointed himself board chairman in February 2025, pledging to end “woke political programming” at the site.

A host of artists cancelled concerts at the venue in response to Trump’s takeover, while US media has reported that Kennedy Centre ticket sales have plummeted. — AFP


***


A disgusting thick-skinned sleazy pig of MAGA mentality, the type that my visitor TS loves, wakakaka

BTW, Paul Anka is a Canadian of Syrian-Lebanese extract, an Arab by pedigree (a Christian) so to speak, 👍👍👍




US Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block California ballots






US Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block California ballots



People cast their ballots at a polling station in the Los Angeles LGBT Center in the Hollywood neighbourhood of Los Angeles, California, on November 2, 2026. Americans voting in the midterm elections will decide who controls Congress for the final two years of Donald Trump’s presidency, along with dozens of governorships and thousands of state offices. — AFP pic



First Published: Tuesday, 03 Nov 2026 9:01 AM MYT


WASHINGTON, Nov 3 — The US Supreme Court on Monday rejected a Trump administration emergency bid to force California to set aside the mail-in ballots of more than 20,000 people on the grounds they may not be American citizens.

Acting a day before the US midterm elections, the top court denied the request in an unsigned, one-sentence ruling, as is common in urgent cases before the court. It gave no reasoning for the decision.



The federal government had accused California of having 190,000 illegal voters on its rolls. It recently revised the figure to 20,000 and filed an emergency lawsuit — after early voting had begun — to stop the state from sending ballots to them.

The Supreme Court action came after lower courts last week — and again on Monday — rejected the demand by the Department of Justice (DOJ), with one judge calling it brazen pre-election interference.


Solicitor General D. John Sauer, in an emergency filing with the Supreme Court, had said that “once California commingles the challenged ballots with lawful ones, there is no way to get the challenged ballots back.”

The California ballot case appeared to be another attempt by the administration to cast doubt on the results of Tuesday’s vote, in which President Donald Trump’s Republican Party is at risk of losing control of Congress.


Trump — who has never acknowledged his own election defeat by Democrat Joe Biden in 2020 — has been claiming for months that there will be fraud in the midterms.

US District Judge David Carter last week refused to order the seizure of the ballots and sided with the government of Democratic-led California.


“The DOJ’s actions are indicative of a broad, ongoing pattern of attempted election interference by federal officials,” Carter said.

Another district judge, James Boasberg, also ruled against the Trump administration on Monday, saying the lists of alleged non-citizens were “flawed.”


Sullivan vs Sullivan

A controversy similar to California’s arose in neighbouring Nevada. The administration said initially it had identified 16,000 non-citizen voters there, but after verification procedures that number dropped to 185 — and then to zero.

Studies repeatedly show that while cases of voter fraud exist, such incidents are extremely rare and do not influence election results.

In another closely-watched election case, a federal judge in Alaska over the weekend tossed out a bid by the Trump administration to hold up US Senate election results in the state should the Democratic candidate win.

The DOJ had asked the court to block certification of the results if Republican Dan Sullivan, the incumbent, loses on Tuesday because a second candidate also named Dan Sullivan would have siphoned off votes.

Mary Peltola, the Democratic candidate for Senate in Alaska, has denied recruiting the second Sullivan into the race, but The New York Times reported that members of her campaign staff had been involved. — AFP

A greeting by any other name is just as sweet





A greeting by any other name is just as sweet

Sunday, 01 Nov 2026


FOR a long time, we have wished our Indian friends “Happy Deepavali”, our Malay friends “Selamat Hari Raya” and our Chinese friends “Kong Hei Fatt Choy” in Cantonese or “Keong Hee Huat Chye” in Hokkien.




It was that simple. Everyone understood the goodwill behind the greetings. Nobody needed a dictionary, a cultural seminar, or a social media debate to explain what we meant.

Today, even the names of festivals can become controversial: Deepavali versus Diwali, Hari Raya versus Lebaran, buka puasa versus iftar, and Kong Hei Fatt Choy versus Gong Xi Fa Cai.

Call them what you will; the celebrations remain essentially the same. But identity matters, and we know how sensitive cultural and ethnic issues can be.

The irony is that Malaysia’s multicultural character has always rested on shared celebrations, open houses, exchanged greetings and food from different communities. Yet social media can turn almost every linguistic difference into a dispute.

Take Deepavali and Diwali. Both refer to the Hindu festival of lights, with the names shaped by regional, linguistic, and cultural traditions. Deepavali is widely used in Malaysia, Brunei, and Singapore, while Diwali is more common in parts of India and among Indian communities in countries such as the United States and Britain.

Neither should be treated as a threat to the other.

The same applies to Hari Raya and Lebaran. Hari Raya Aidilfitri is familiar in Malaysia, while Lebaran is widely used in Indonesia, alongside Idulfitri.

Shared traditions do not require identical vocabulary. We can appreciate our neighbours’ expressions without abandoning our own.

Buka puasa and iftar likewise refer to breaking the Ramadan fast. One term is a deeply familiar one in Malaysia, while the other is the Arabic term widely used across the Muslim world. Neither makes someone more religious or authentic.

The spirit of Ramadan lies in generosity, compassion, and fellowship, not in policing the words used at the dining table.

Among Malaysian Chinese, “Kong Hei Fatt Choy” and “Gong Xi Fa Cai” reflect different linguistic traditions. Cantonese, Hok-kien, Hakka, and other Chinese dialects have shaped local speech, while Mandarin has become increasingly prominent through education and the media.

A Cantonese greeting is not outdated, just as a Mandarin greeting does not erase local heritage. Both have a place in our linguistically diverse society. Ultimately, the choice may come down to personal preference, family tradition, or simply what is most convenient.

But the growing dominance of Mandarin worries me, parti-cularly in Penang, where the distinctive local variety of Hok-kien risks being lost.

Many younger Chinese Malay-sians, having attended Chinese primary schools, are more comfortable speaking Mandarin than Hokkien. For Baby Boomers like me, who received our education in English-medium schools, navigating conversations in Penang can sometimes be a struggle.

I insist on speaking my distinctive Penang Hokkien, which I am proud of, but it may be a losing battle.

Then there is the wider debate over Christmas greetings.

In many Western countries, “Merry Christmas” was once the standard seasonal greeting, used freely in public spaces, workplaces, and schools. Increasingly, some institutions and corporations have adopted “Happy Holidays” instead.

There is a reasonable explanation for this. Christmas falls during a period when people also observe Hanukkah, New Year, and other religious or cultural occasions. “Happy Holidays” is intended to include everyone, including those who do not celebrate Christmas.

It can be a courteous gesture, although commercial considerations may have also played a part. The intention is to avoid assuming that everyone shares the same faith or tradition.

However, the growing use of “Happy Holidays” has also led to debates over what is commonly called woke culture, particularly the argument that public language should be adjusted to avoid excluding or offending particular groups.

In the United States and parts of Europe, critics argue that traditional Christian greetings are being abandoned in the name of diversity, sometimes creating the impression that the majority must set aside its customs to accommodate others.

There is a distinction between being considerate and becoming excessively anxious about causing offence.

In its best form, inclusive language encourages sensitivity and respect. In its worst form, it can make ordinary expressions seem unacceptable simply because not everyone shares the same beliefs.

There is nothing inherently wrong with saying “Happy Holidays” when addressing a mixed audience. Nor is there anything wrong with wishing someone “Merry Christmas”.

The problem begins when one greeting is presented as morally superior to the other, or when people are made to feel that saying “Merry Christmas” is insensitive, outdated, or politically incorrect.

Christians should not have to apologise for saying “Merry Christmas”, just as non-Christians should not be pressured to use the greeting.

Courtesy should leave room for both. A company may choose “Happy Holidays” for a general advertisement, while an individual may warmly wish a Christian friend “Merry Christmas”. There is no contradiction.

The purpose of inclusive language should be to widen the circle of respect, not erase familiar traditions. If every religious greeting is replaced by a neutral phrase for fear of offending someone, public life may become less contentious but also less meaningful.

Diversity should not require us to remove all references to faith and culture from our shared vocabulary.

The larger problem is not that different names exist, but that we sometimes treat those differences as challenges to our identity.

Learning another community’s preferred terminology is respectful. Humiliating someone for using a familiar expression in good faith is not.

If someone wishes us Happy Deepavali, Selamat Hari Raya, Kong Hei Fatt Choy or Merry Christmas, our first response should be to appreciate the goodwill behind the greeting.

Of course, precise terminology matters in certain contexts, including official documents and educational materials. Commu-nities should also be free to explain how they prefer their festivals to be named.

But respect must work both ways. We should not belittle another community’s language or demand that people abandon expressions rooted in family, heritage, and memory.

We must also distinguish genuine courtesy from compulsory conformity. It is courteous to ask how someone prefers to be addressed or to learn the name a community uses for its celebration. It is unreasonable to assume that every traditional expression is offensive simply because it is not universally shared.

Our multicultural identity is not built on having identical words for everything. It is built on understanding differences without feeling threatened by them.

Deepavali can co-exist with Diwali, Hari Raya with Lebaran, buka puasa with iftar, Kong Hei Fatt Choy with Gong Xi Fa Cai, and Merry Christmas with Happy Holidays.

Cultural pride should give us the confidence to cherish our own traditions while making room for others. If we can share our homes, food, friendships, and celebrations, surely we can accommodate different names for the same joy.

More importantly, Malaysia’s tradition of holding open houses during festive occasions remains one of our greatest strengths. Malaysians of different ethnicities and faiths visit one another, share meals, and celebrate together.

We do not need to turn every festival greeting into a religious or ideological debate. Sometimes, all it takes is common sense and a willingness to appreciate one another as fellow Malaysians.

Our country has long shown that people can live together without speaking, praying, or celebrating in exactly the same way. We should not allow excessive sensitivity to turn every greeting into a test of political correctness.

Good manners are not about finding one approved phrase for everyone. They are about understanding the person, the occasion, and the goodwill behind the words.

In Malaysia, we do not need to speak exactly the same language to understand one another. Sometimes, the most Malaysian response is also the simplest: smile, say thank you, and wish one another well.

After all, whatever names we use for our festivals, the spirit remains the same. We are Malaysians celebrating together, sharing goodwill, and embracing the goodness that brings us closer.


National Journalism Laureate Datuk Seri Wong Chun Wai is the chairman of Bernama.