Tuesday, February 10, 2026

Too Costly To Invade: Why Iran Remains A Very Difficult Target To Conquer Despite Combined Might Of U.S. & Israel?



Tuesday, February 10, 2026


Too Costly To Invade: Why Iran Remains A Very Difficult Target To Conquer Despite Combined Might Of U.S. & Israel?


By Sumit Ahlawat
-February 10, 2026


As the threat of another war looms in the Middle East, one question that is perplexing everyone is how Iran, which has been systematically weakened by decades of sanctions and Israel’s multiple wars in the region following the October 2022 Hamas attack, is able to stand against the combined might of the US and Israel.

During the 12-day war in June 2025, Israel maintained complete air superiority over Iranian territory. Iran has no air force worth its name, and its air defense systems were systematically degraded by Israeli air strikes. Israel has also decapitated Iranian military leadership, eliminating top generals in precision air strikes.

Besides, one of the main vectors of Iranian bargaining, its several proxies in the region, the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah, have all been weakened, and its staunchest regional ally, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, has fled the country and is living in exile in Russia.

Moscow, meanwhile, is fully occupied in the Ukraine War, effectively leaving Tehran with no friends with the sole exception of China, which, we all know, will only extend diplomatic and some economic assistance to Iran in case of a military conflict.

To make things worse, the country’s currency has collapsed, inflation is at an all-time high, and the Iranian regime is facing one of the most serious internal challenges to its authority.

Israel has been arguing that Iran is at its weakest and is ripe for a regime-change operation aided by external military intervention.

On the other side is the combined might of the regional military hegemon, Israel, and the global superpower, the US, aided by a network of American strategic allies, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Jordan, and Bahrain, along with nearly 18 US military bases.


Image for Representation.


The US has also deployed its carrier strike group, USS Abraham Lincoln, and rushed fighter jets, guided missile destroyers, and its most advanced air defense systems to the region.

And yet, military experts are warning Washington against any misadventure in the Persian Gulf.

William Hartung, Senior Research Fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, has warned that Iran could turn into another Iraq War for the US.

“It’s reminiscent of the beginning of the Iraq War, when they said it’s going to be a cakewalk. It’s not going to cost anything. A couple of trillion dollars, hundreds of thousands of casualties, many U.S. veterans coming home with PTSD, a regime that was sectarian that paved the way for ISIS — it couldn’t have gone worse. This is a different beginning, but the end is uncertain, and I don’t think we want to go there.”

Georg Spรถttle, a Hungarian Security Analyst, cautioned that Washington may opt for a “warning airstrike” but should avoid a long war that the US public “would not accept.”


The question is, why, despite the disproportionate difference in military capabilities, an economy that is on life support, and a deeply unpopular regime, Tehran still presents a formidable challenge to the US-Israel combine?

Actually, a combination of geographic, geopolitical, and military factors makes Tehran a force to be reckoned with.


Geographic Factors That Favor Iran


Iran sits in close proximity to the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway crucial for the world’s oil supply. The oil demands of nearly one-fifth of the world’s population pass through the Strait of Hormuz.


In case of a military conflict, Iran could easily enforce its closure. This threat has been repeated by Iranian political and military authorities for years.


Closing the Strait of Hormuz could be achieved through the use of submarine mines, cruise missiles, coastal defense systems, and high-speed boats.

Furthermore, countries like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and Iraq also depend on the Strait of Hormuz for supplying their oil and gas to their customers.

The vulnerability of the Strait of Hormuz is a key reason why all regional partners of the US are opposed to a military intervention in Iran.

Iran could also destabilize the Red Sea shipping lanes through its Houthi proxies.

This could impact global trade and energy security, thus entangling the whole world in the conflict.

However, Iran also has considerable military means to inflict pain on the US and Israel.


Iran’s Military Arsenal

Iran’s biggest military arsenal is its missile and drone capabilities.

Iran has a formidable arsenal of ballistic and even hypersonic missiles, apart from lethal long-range drones.

During the 12-day war with Israel, Tehran launched over 500 missiles towards Israel, many of which bypassed Israel’s advanced, multilayered air defense systems and hit Israeli territory.


Iranian Karrar drone carrying the Shahab Saqib anti-air missile in its underbelly


Iran could also hit US military bases in the region.

The US has deployed over 40,000 soldiers to the region, stationed at nearly 18 military bases.

“Iran has the ability to shut down the region’s energy production whenever it wants. Iran can cause devastating damage to U.S. military bases, which could result in the deaths of hundreds or even thousands of American soldiers. And Iran could carry out decisive attacks on Israel that would weaken its ability to survive and make the land unlivable for millions of its residents,” Scott Ritter, Former UN Weapons Inspector and US Marine Corps Intelligence Officer, warned.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said Iran possesses the largest and most diverse missile arsenal in the Middle East, with thousands of ballistic and cruise missiles ranging from a few hundred kilometers to as far as 2,000-2,500 kilometers.

Some of these systems can reach Israel and parts of southeastern Europe. Most US military bases in the region are within range of these missiles.

In 2025, prior to the 12-day war, Iran’s ballistic missile inventory was estimated at between 2,500 and 3,000. It used over 500 missiles during the war.

However, Tehran ramped up its missile production after the war.

In October, CNN reported that Iran purchased sodium perchlorate from China to replenish its missile stocks.

According to military analyst Ron Ben-Yishai, Iran is now producing hundreds of ballistic missiles every month.

Iran has also upgraded its missiles since the June 2025 war.

“The reported steps include shifting from liquid fuel to solid fuel to cut launch preparation time from hours to minutes and reduce its intelligence signature, ramping up mass production of Kheibar and Fattah missiles, improving missile accuracy using technological components, and acquiring satellite-based intelligence,” the Jerusalem Post reported.

The missiles that pose a threat include the Shahab series, including Shahab-3 and Kheibar Shekan, with a range of about 2,000 kilometers and warheads reported to weigh between 700 and 1,000 kilograms of explosives.


This handout photo provided by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) official website Sepah News on February 1, 2025, shows a test launch during the unveiling of the Ghadr-380 naval cruise missile in an undisclosed location in Iran. The naval arm of the IRGC unveiled a new underground missile facility on the south coast in footage aired by state television on February 1, two weeks after unveiling an underground naval base. (Photo by SEPAH NEWS / AFP) /


Iran’s Fattah 1 and Fattah 2 missiles are claimed to reach hypersonic capabilities, with sharp aerodynamic maneuverability, and a warhead of about half a ton.

The Sejjil series is described as a two-stage, solid-fuel ballistic missile designed for short-warning launches from a bunker, with a warhead reported to range from 500 to 1,000 kilograms of explosives.

The Khorramshahr missile, according to Iranian reports, carries an especially heavy warhead, averaging around 1,500 kilograms, and is considered one of the most accurate missiles in Iran’s arsenal.

Iran also has cruise missiles such as Kh-55: an air-launched nuclear-capable weapon (up to 3,000 km), and the advanced anti-ship missile the Khalid Farzh (about 300 km), capable of carrying a 1,000 kg warhead.

Iran also has thousands of long-range Shahed drones, which have been used by Russia against Ukraine, and the Mohajer series of drones.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), Iran’s missile forces compensate for its weak air force by enabling long-range strikes through short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, land-attack cruise missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

Iran also has a very capable Navy, focusing on asymmetric warfare and regional dominance in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz. It uses a two-branch structure—the traditional Islamic Republic of Iran Navy (IRIN) and the aggressive Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN)—utilizing fast-attack boats, submarines, and drones to counter larger adversaries.

Iran has focused on small, fast-attack boats, drones, and mines to disrupt shipping and threaten larger warships.

According to Global Firepower’s 2024 report, Iran’s navy ranks 37th out of 145 naval forces worldwide.

Iranian naval fleet includes modern destroyers such as Zulfiqar, Sahand, and Zagros. Alphand and Moj-class frigates.

However, the most notable component of Iran’s fleet is its submarine force, which comprises 27 submarines.

Among them are three Tareq-class (Kilo-class) diesel-electric submarines, which have been employed in strategic operations such as mine-laying and launching cruise missiles. Its Fateh-class submarines (2) and Ghadir-class mini-submarines (23) are maneuverable in shallow waters and are equipped with torpedo and missile launch tubes.

Global Firepower estimates that Iran’s navy comprises 109 assets, including 25 submarines, 21 patrol vessels, 7 frigates, 3 corvettes, and 1 mine warfare ship.

In the narrow waters of Hormuz, Iran could employ asymmetric warfare, using its fast boats, cruise missiles, drones, and mini-submarines to overwhelm the enemy’s larger, slower warships and dominate the crucial choke points.

It is worth remembering that in March 2025, the US launched Operation Rough Rider against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Houthis had no naval force and depended on drones and rudimentary missiles. Yet, they were able to destabilize the Red Sea shipping lanes.

The US operation lasted three months, cost over USD 1 billion, and the US lost two F/A-18 Hornet jets and seven MQ-9 drones, yet they were not able to subdue the Houthis.

Imagine how much damage Iran could inflict on the US and Israel.



Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK.


***



Iranians are Persians, not Arabs - they can blardy fight.


Massie Exposes Les Wexner As Epstein Co-Conspirator, Opening Door To Criminal Charges Against Kash Patel





Massie Exposes Les Wexner As Epstein Co-Conspirator, Opening Door To Criminal Charges Against Kash Patel



by blueapples
Tuesday, Feb 10, 2026 - 23:30

blueapples on X | ashesofacacia.substack.com


Although President Donald J. Trump has amplified his attacks against Kentucky representative Thomas Massie on the basis of deluded claims that he is a radical, un-American liberal who is hellbent on sabotaging his administration, it is the congressman’s continued crusade to expose the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein that shows the actual threat he poses to Trump. 

The latest development in the Epstein Files fallout has clearly proven that the Trump administration’s best attempts to continue to cover up the crimes of Epstein and his accomplices are no match for Massie’s vigilance. After granting members of Congress access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein Files in response to the pressure mounted by Massie, the revelations therein have shown the lengths that the Trump Department of Justice (”DOJ”) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (”FBI”) have taken to continue the Epstein cover-up, going as far as to break federal law in an increasingly futile attempt to keep the truth from the American public.

The enhanced political pressure from Massie and California representative Ro Khanna following their success in passing The Epstein Files Transparency Act resulted in the Trump DOJ deciding to allow members of Congress to view unredacted files beginning on Monday morning. Members of Congress have been given limited access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein Files on computers at DOJ offices, provided they give 24 hours’ notice, though they will not be given access to the physical documents themselves. 

The DOJ has limited access to members of Congress alone, excluding any members of their staff. Although members of Congress will be able to take notes on any files they view, the DOJ has prohibited them from bringing any electronic devices into their review sessions. Unredacted documents made accessible to members of Congress are also limited to the trove of over 3 million files that have been released to the public, far short of the full scope of the more than 6 million files the DOJ has said it has in its possession.

Despite being given such limited access, the revelations included in what has been made available have led to a monumental shift that disproves the Trump administration’s narrative that the action it has been taken on the Epstein Files has been made with the aim of providing full transparency. 

According to representatives Massie and Khanna, they have identified at least six individuals incriminated in Epstein’s crimes, two of whom the FBI has officially labeled as co-conspirators, in the limited time allocated to them on the first day of being able to review the unredacted files whose identities have been obfuscated by the Trump administration despite their apparent complicity. Of those officially acknowledged as a co-conspirator is high-profile Epstein associate and billionaire Les Wexner, whose confirmation as such opens the door to criminal charges being brought against against high-ranking members of the Trump administration.

While Wexner’s role in facilitating the crimes of Epstein has been well-established for years, the revelation that the FBI officially acknowledged him as a co-conspirator by 2019 dismantles the narrative woven by the Trump administration that it has not withheld the identities of any of the notorious pedophile’s accomplices. 

In September 2025, Patel ostensibly did just that when he testified before Congress regarding Epstein. During his testimony, Patel was asked “Who did Epstein traffic these young women to?” by Louisiana Senator John N. Kennedy. Patel responded, “Himself.” There is no credible information—none—that he trafficked to other individuals.” 

The revelation that the FBI had confirmed that Wexner was a co-conspirator of Epstein by 2019 suggests that Patel lied to Congress during his testimony. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, knowingly and willingly making a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement to Congress is a felony punishable by a prison sentence of up to five years.

In response to Massie exposing the FBI’s documented admission of Wexner as a co-conspirator years before Patel testified to Congress that the agency he helms had no credible information of others involved in Epstein’s criminal network, the DOJ went on the defensive in a feeble attempt to minimize the seriousness of this revelation. 

US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche offered an explanation to Massie for the sweeping redactions made by the DOJ in violation of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. Blanche stated that one particular document highlighted by Massie, which had 18 of the 20 names included in it redacted, was so heavily censored because it included “numerous victim names.” However, the newly released version of the document without the prohibited redactions withheld only 2 of the 20 names, meaning that the DOJ illegally redacted 16 before being forced to publish its revised version.

Despite the brief time Massie was given to review unredacted versions of the Epstein Files released to the public, he was able to uncover the name of another potential co-conspirator implicated in one of the most disturbing documents to be released to the public. 

In the Epstein Files release EFTA00774231, a redacted sender emailed Epstein on April 24th, 2009, writing, “where are you? are you ok , I loved the torture video.” 

Outrage over the gruesome content of the email alluding to a snuff film justifying the claims that the crimes of the Epstein network went far beyond human trafficking and child sexual abuse resounded throughout the public discourse after its revelation. That anger was amplified by the DOJ’s decision to redact the identity of the email’s author, as there was no indication it was the name of one of Epstein’s victims, whom the DOJ would be allowed to conceal in compliance with The Epstein Files Transparency Act. After viewing the unredacted version of the email, Massie announced that the disclosure revealed that Emirati business magnate Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem was the person who sent the email discussing the torture video to Epstein.

Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, an Emirati businessman who is the chairman and chief executive officer of DP World and the chairman of the Ports, Customs & Free Zone Corporation, is referenced in 336 of the more than 3 million Epstein files currently available to the public. The files concerning Bin Sulayem reveal a years-long relationship between the two. In the Epstein Files release EFTA01155800, Epstein states that his relationship with Bin Sulayem began in 2002 in a letter of recommendation written regarding a property the Emirati businessman sought to lease in New York City.

Numerous other emails between Epstein and Bin Sulayem contain images withheld by the DOJ, exchanges regarding each party’s travel plans, dinner invitations, and numerous correspondences including Boris Nikolic, the biotech venture capitalist and Bill Gates adviser who was named as an executor of Epstein’s estate in his last will and testament amended just before his supposed death on August 10th, 2019. 

The earliest evidence of Epstein introducing Nikolic to Bin Sulayem is documented in Epstein Files release EFTA00897104, an email sent by Epstein to Bin Sulayem on October 11th, 2010. Epstein copies Nikolic on the email, the body of which reads “Boris, Nov 29 30.” An email written to Epstein at 6:50:20 pm on November 29th, 2010, by Nikolic, disclosed as Epstein Files release EFTA02415345, confirms that he and Bin Sulayem met on the date referenced in the October 2010 email.

Files documenting the notorious pedophile’s close relationship with Bin Sulayem also reveal communication with other members of Epstein’s innermost circle throughout their near decades-long relationship. In a June 27th, 2011 email exchange with a respondent named “Sarah K.,” presumably Sarah Kellen—who was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution agreement tendered by the former Trump Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta during his tenure as the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida under the Bush administration—Bin Sulayem coordinates the receipt of a package sent to him from Epstein. 

Bin Sulayem also held similar discussions when coordinating visits with and receiving shipments from Epstein with another unindicted co-conspirator named in the non-prosecution agreement, Lesley Groff.

Bin Sulayem’s ingratiation into Epstein’s network also confirms that Epstein introduced him to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. This is confirmed in the Epstein Files release EFTA02600899, in which Bin Sulayem invites Barak to visit him for dinner to discuss business opportunities during his stay in Tel Aviv at a penthouse located at 1 Rothschild Boulevard.

In iMessages with Epstein on August 15th, 2015, Bin Sulayem coordinates a visit during a trip to New Mexico, where Epstein’s infamous Zorro Ranch, the site where he was alleged to have run a black market baby farm, was located. The Emirati business magnate admits he was traveling with his wife, three children, and their nanny when coordinating his visit with Epstein before sending him links to various pornographic websites. Epstein’s responses are sparse, solely confirming that he has sent a car to transport Bin Sulayem to meet with him. Bin Sulayem also refers to an email he sent Epstein from a private email address, which is redacted by the DOJ.

As in the case of other file redactions, US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche responded to Massie’s revelation that Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem was the sender of the torture video email to Epstein by defending the DOJ’s decision to redact it. 

Blanche stated the redaction complied with The Epstein Files Transparency Act, as it was made due to the message only including Bin Sulayem’s email address, and as personally identifiable information, that information was required to be withheld. However, that explanation proved to be a Pyrrhic victory against Massie, as it also served as a tacit admission that Bin Sulayem was indeed the author of the email discussing the torture video with Epstein.

Reactions from other members of Congress who were able to review unredacted versions of the Epstein Files on Monday signify the seismic shift taking place against the Trump administration. 

Colorado Republican congressional representative Lauren Boebert spoke with a reporter when leaving the DOJ offices after viewing the unredacted Epstein files. Boebert, who has been a strong ally of Trump’s during her tenure in Congress, appeared visibly angry during the interview. She expressed her belief that the Trump DOJ has knowingly redacted the names of accomplices of Epstein in violation of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. 

“I think that there are folks who are definitely implicated and co-conspirators, and, you know, I don’t think everyone there that was talking about underage girls being trafficked are victims.” 

When asked a follow-up question regarding the potential of clemency for convicted Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell, Boebert’s frustration showed as she vociferously rejected the premise, stating, “I think Ghislaine Maxwell should get more time, and she should definitely be in a harsher prison.” It’s absolutely disgusting.”

In November, President Trump attempted to persuade Representative Boebert to remove her name from the discharge petition that ultimately led to the passage of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. 

Trump similarly took that tactic against other key allies of his in Congress, including Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina and then-Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. 

That futile effort to continue to insulate the co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein resulted in an irreconcilable schism with Greene, which led to her resignation from Congress. Following the announcement of her resignation, Greene revealed that Trump attempted to persuade her to vote against releasing the Epstein Files because their disclosure would harm friends of the president who would be implicated in them.

The continued effort to protect the co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein has only further undermined President Trump’s legitimacy, as revelations of the extent of the cover-up he continues to perpetrate not only risks alienating crucial political allies but also, in doing so, furthers political momentum gaining traction against the president that could lead to action taken against key administration officials such as the impeachment of Attorney General Pam Bondi and potential criminal charges being brought against FBI Director Kash Patel. 

With its political foundation being shaken to its core in the fallout from how it has handled the release of the Epstein Files, it appears that it is only a matter of time before the house of cards that the Trump administration has turned itself into because of its unyielding commitment to protecting the pedophile elite comes crashing down.

***


Someone once wrote that, Kush Patel looked as if he accidentally came across his mum frigging a man.
๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚




Where Is Nurul Izzah?





OPINION | Where Is Nurul Izzah?


10 Feb 2026 • 1:00 PM MYT



TheRealNehruism
An award-winning Newswav creator, Bebas News columnist & ex-FMT columnist


Image credit: Yahoo



What happened to Nurul Izzah?


Does she regret contesting for the position of PKR deputy president last May? Is she overwhelmed by the responsibilities? Is she unable — or unwilling — to fully own the task she fought to obtain?


Just last week or so, this question was going through my mind, and this week I find out that this is a question that is not only swirling in my mind - it might be swirling in the minds of within PKR itself.


How so?


Well, just a couple of days ago, Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Abdul Karim recently suggested that Rafizi Ramli — not Nurul Izzah — should eventually succeed Anwar Ibrahim as PKR president and Malaysia’s next prime minister.


According to Hassan, despite Rafizi’s constant criticism of the government, Rafizi should not only not be disciplined, but instead encouraged — because his critiques are grounded in policy expertise, fiscal discipline, and governance reform.


Hassan even further by suggesting that if PH wins the next general election, Anwar should serve only one more term as prime minister, after which Rafizi should become PKR president, while Nurul Izzah remains deputy.


I find this proposal to be revealing, not only because Rafizi was defeated by Nurul Izzah in the party elections last year, but because his defeat was so bitter that he resigned as Minister of Economy and has since emerged as one of the most relentless critics of the government — often sounding more like opposition than government backbencher.


Just last week, in fact, Rafizi would even remark that unlike Anwar, he was not obsessed with becoming prime minister.


“Unlike (Anwar) whose sole preoccupation in life is to become a prime minister, I am blessed because I am very happy if I can retire quietly just like any other person, enough to survive quietly,” Rafizi wrote In a pointed post on X,


Describing himself as “easily contented” and “not sentimental,” Rafizi stressed that he has everything he needs, and that he is content with his current life and even finds time to jog daily to maintain his health.


And yet, despite this open admission that he doesn't want to hold the top post in the country just a few last week, Hassan Karim would still propose Rafizi as PKR’s future president and prime ministerial candidate, while suggesting Nurul Izzah remain deputy.


This immediately raises a disturbing question:


How badly must Nurul Izzah be performing — or how invisible must she have become — for a veteran PKR figure like Hassan Karim to publicly prefer Rafizi over her?


The Silence of the Deputy President


It has been 9 months since Nurul Izzah defeated Rafizi and assumed the post of PKR deputy president. And yet, her presence in Malaysian political life has been almost ghost-like.


This absence is astonishing, because Malaysia has not lacked politically charged issues and events since Nurul Izzah took office.


Let me just name a few:


– corruption allegations involving military-linked entities


– the escalating feud between UMNO and DAP


– the Sabah election


– UMNO’s threats to exit the unity government


– MIC’s rebellion against UMNO


– DAP’s renewed push for UEC recognition


– economic anxiety


– governance reform stagnation


Almost every week brings a fresh political storm.


And yet, Nurul Izzah has been conspicuously absent from nearly all of them.


She has not emerged as a key policy voice.


She has not become a moral compass.


She has not led political battles.


She has not shaped public discourse.


Even more tellingly, during Anwar’s cabinet reshuffle last December, Nurul Izzah failed to secure even a deputy minister position.


Let that sink in.


The deputy president of the ruling party, widely perceived as Anwar’s political heir, could not enter the cabinet — while even the much-criticised education minister managed to retain her post.


This inevitably raises another uncomfortable question:


Does even Anwar Ibrahim lack confidence in his daughter’s readiness to govern?


My Paradox: Why I Still Believe in Nurul Izzah

Personally, I place Nurul Izzah at the top of my list of potential future prime ministers, alongside Khairy Jamaluddin and Rafizi Ramli.


Of the three, she is both my top prediction and my top preference.


She is my top prediction because hers is the pathway that is clearest - Rafizi and Khairy on the hand, as the Romans say, will either have to “find a path or make one.” ("Aut viam inveniam aut faciam")


And as to why she is my top preference, well, to be bluntly honest, I think it is because she has good face. The Indians have a saying - the state of the heart can be seen in the face. ( "เฎ…เฎ•เฎค்เฎคிเฎฉ் เฎ…เฎดเฎ•ு เฎฎுเฎ•เฎค்เฎคிเฎฒ் เฎคெเฎฐிเฎฏுเฎฎ்"). She appears, at least to me, like she has the face of a good person - or someone who thinks of others, not only herself - who is governed by restraint and conscience, not just ambition and calculation, which is of utmost value, especially in someone who might someday wield tremendous power.


With Rafizi and Khairy, i think we will just get another politician who will more or less do what every other politician does, if it comes to pass that one o them manage to rise to the top, but with Nurul, I feel that we might get something different, and between an old wine in a new bottle and something genuinely different, i think I speak for everyone when I say that we are all desperately in the mood for something truly different.


While the fact that she is a woman is being framed by some people as a political disadvantage, to me it is an advantage, because that is how exhausted I am by the endless rule of old men.


As much as I hope that Rafizi and Khairy, if they are destined to rise, will usher in the rule of younger man, I am even more welcoming of Nurul Izzah, for not only is she young, but a woman. The more different the next PM is from the last few PM's we had, the more I feel that hope will return to my heart.


But Leadership Demands One Brutal Trait: Winning


Yet idealism must confront political reality.

At the end of the day, a leader must be a winner.


Leadership is not merely about virtue. It is about the willingness to step into the arena, endure conflict, defeat rivals, and seize authority.


And on this crucial metric, Nurul Izzah appears wanting.


Nearly a year into her return to frontline politics, she remains peripheral. She has not stamped authority. She has not seized narrative space. She has not built political dominance.


In politics, absence is not neutrality — it is weakness.


Between a weak and virtuous person and one who is strong even if they are not without their vices, I truly believe that it is better to have the latter in a leadership position.


Why?


Because the weak are not really virtuous - they are just weak - and when the weak have power, power will corrupt them for the worse.


As for the strong with some vice, to be brutally honest, it might not even be such a bad thing for them to have some vice, if their vice is under control and they are capable of securing success and victories for the nation. After all, we don't want leaders who are saint - we want one that can pursue success with determination - and i have yet to see anyone who pursues success who doesn't have any vice in them,


If Nurul Izzah cannot command political gravity now, when she is party deputy president and daughter of the sitting prime minister, she is weak, and if she is weak, no matter how good she is, it is better for her and for us, to listen to Hassan Karim's counsel, and hand over the party's reign to Rafizi.


***


Nurul won't ascend any further as she suffers from 3 main disadvantage, namely:

(a) She is way too quiet which in our politics is not a very encouraging virtue;

(b) She has a Chinese husband which in our principally Malay World doesn't benefit, but nay, disadvantages her; and

(c) She is a woman, a wonderful woman but nonetheless a woman, again in a Malay World, which will treat her as a politically inconsequential.

I am not sure why Anwar pushed her into the front, to stand as Deputy President PKR when she lacks the proclivity for such a post. Perhaps Anwar wanted a 'friendlier' face next to him rather than a young ambitious man - Anwar already had too much of such in AA, etc.







Court weighs PAS MP’s appeal against RM750K award to DAP trio


FMT:

Court weighs PAS MP’s appeal against RM750K award to DAP trio


5 hours ago
Faisal Asyraf

Siti Mastura Muhammad’s lawyer says her comments were ‘ideological comparisons’, while Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng and Teresa Kok seek higher awards for reputational harm


Siti Mastura Muhammad is appealing against a judgment made in favour of Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng and Teresa Kok, handed down by the Penang High Court in December 2024.



PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has reserved judgment in PAS MP Siti Mastura Muhammad’s appeal against a ruling ordering her to pay RM750,000 in damages for defaming three senior DAP politicians.

In court today, counsel Yusfarizal Yusoff, representing Siti, argued that her remarks linking Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng and Teresa Kok to the late Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) leader Chin Peng were intended to reference similarities in political ideology, not to suggest literal family ties.

Yusfarizal submitted that when Siti used the word “cousin” during a political speech in Kemaman, Terengganu, on Nov 4, 2023, she was drawing an ideological comparison between CPM’s and DAP’s principles.


“When the defendant used the phrase ‘Chin Peng’s cousin’, she was drawing a comparison at the level of political ideology, which could be equated with DAP’s principles,” he said.

Yusfarizal referred to DAP’s 1967 Setapak Declaration, submitting that it showed alleged similarities with communist principles.


He stressed that Siti’s remarks were made in the context of a political speech delivered during an election period, and should be understood as political criticism rather than an allegation of criminal or subversive conduct.

“My humble argument is that the context is a political speech and that an election was around the corner,” he said, emphasising that the comparison stopped with political ideology.

He said the High Court judge had “over-analysed” the issue, adding that DAP had previously attempted to equate PAS’s ideology with the Taliban, which he said reflected the prevailing political climate in the country.

On Dec 4, 2024, the Penang High Court ruled in favour of the trio, awarding RM300,000 to Kit Siang, RM250,000 to Guan Eng and RM200,000 to Kok.


Justice Quay Chew Soon also ordered Siti to pay RM25,000 in costs to each plaintiff, with 5% interest from the date of judgment.


‘Trio suffered reputational harm’

Counsel SN Nair, appearing for the DAP leaders, argued that Siti’s intentions were neither accidental nor benign, and that the High Court was correct in finding malice.

He submitted that the remarks were “specious, calculated and profoundly malicious”, aimed at demonising his clients rather than engaging in legitimate political debate.


Nair said Siti’s speech exploited deeply rooted racial and historical sensitivities by equating Chinese political leadership with communism, violence and terrorism.

“This conduct was directed at the general electorate, in particular the sizeable Malay voting population, by invoking auto-suggestive historical conditioning rather than rational debate,” he said.

Nair also said that the false linkage to Chin Peng carried an unmistakable pre-election message and caused reputational harm that was “enduring and effectively irreversible”.

He asked for Siti’s appeal to be dismissed with costs. Nair also asked for his clients’ cross-appeal for higher damages to be allowed, to properly vindicate their reputation and reflect gravity and excessive aggravating conduct.

At the end of proceedings, the three-judge panel, chaired by Justice Ahmad Kamal Shahid and comprising Justices Evrol Mariette Peters and Latifah Tahar, fixed Feb 24 for case management.


Michelle Yeoh to receive Hollywood Walk of Fame star on second day of CNY





Michelle Yeoh to receive Hollywood Walk of Fame star on second day of CNY



Tan Sri Michelle Yeoh made history by becoming the first Malaysian and Asian to win the Best Actress award at the Oscars. — AFP pic

Tuesday, 10 Feb 2026 4:20 PM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 10 — Malaysia’s first Oscar winner, Tan Sri Michelle Yeoh, will receive her own star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame on February 18, the second day of Chinese New Year, in a ceremony presented by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce.

The star-giving ceremony will take place at 11.30am Pacific Time on February 18, which corresponds to 3.30am on February 19 in Malaysia, Variety reported.

EXCLUSIVE: Michelle Yeoh will be honored with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce on Feb. 18 at 11:30am PT.
5K
Reply
Copy link

The prestigious honour comes after a remarkable period in Yeoh’s career, following her historic Best Actress win at the Academy Awards in 2024 for her role in Everything Everywhere All at Once.


The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce first announced Yeoh as an honouree in June 2023, placing her alongside other entertainment luminaries such as Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige and the late actor Carl Weathers.

Since her Oscar win, the 63-year-old Ipoh-born actress has been involved in several high-profile projects.


She appeared in the 2025 major blockbuster Wicked: For Good and will have a significant role in James Cameron’s upcoming sequels, beginning with Avatar 4 and continuing into Avatar 5.


Her upcoming work also includes a role in the Prime Video series Blade Runner 2099 and a unique short film titled Sandiwara, directed by Oscar-winner Sean Baker.

In Sandiwara, which was shot entirely on iPhones in a Malaysian night market, Yeoh will play five different roles. The film is set to have its world premiere at the Berlin International Film Festival on February 13.


Federal Court sends former Felda chairman Isa Samad to prison for six years after restoring corruption convictions





Federal Court sends former Felda chairman Isa Samad to prison for six years after restoring corruption convictions



Former Felda chairman Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad is escorted by police to Sungai Buloh Prison at around 3.25pm after being ordered to serve a six-year prison sentence following the Federal Court’s decision to uphold his corruption conviction, in Putrajaya, February 10, 2026. — Bernama pic

Tuesday, 10 Feb 2026 11:48 AM MYT


PUTRAJAYA, Feb 10 — Former Felda chairman Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad is to serve a six-year prison sentence after the Federal Court reinstated his corruption conviction involving RM3.09 million.

A three-member bench, led by Justice Datuk Nordin Hassan, allowed the prosecution’s appeal, overturning Mohd Isa’s acquittal on nine corruption charges.

“The decision of the High Court in convicting the respondent (Mohd Isa) on all nine charges is hereby restored,” said Justice Nordin, who sat with Justices Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Datuk Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali.

He added that the sentence imposed by the High Court was appropriate and in accordance with the law. “We need to reiterate that corruption is a heinous act that would destroy a nation,” he said.


The court subsequently issued a warrant of committal for Mohd Isa, 76, to begin his sentence from today. He was sent to Sungai Buloh prison.

The bench restored the High Court’s February 3, 2021, decision, which sentenced him to six years’ imprisonment and a fine of RM15.45 million in default two-year imprisonment.

The former Negeri Sembilan Menteri Besar was found to have received RM3.09 million in bribes from Ikhwan Zaidel, then director of Gegasan Abadi Properties Sdn Bhd (GAPSB), through his former special officer, Muhammad Zahid Md Arip.


The bribe was given as an inducement to approve Felda Investment Corporation Sdn Bhd’s (FICSB) purchase of the Merdeka Palace Hotel & Suites in Kuching, Sarawak, for RM160 million.

In 2024, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s ruling, acquitting and discharging Mohd Isa on the charges.

In delivering the court’s decision, which lasted approximately one hour and 40 minutes, Justice Nordin ruled that the High Court was correct in finding that Mohd Isa had received the gratification, thereby invoking the presumption under Section 50(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009.

Section 50(1) is a presumption provision, establishing that any gratification accepted, given, or solicited is presumed to have been received, accepted, or solicited corruptly, unless the contrary is proven.

In reading the grounds of judgment, Justice Nordin said that Mohd Isa failed to rebut the presumption under Section 50(1). As a result, the elements of the offence were proven beyond a reasonable doubt for all nine charges against him.

He noted that evidence showed Mohd Isa had solicited the bribe through Muhammad Zahid, reportedly instructing him: “kalau diaorang bagi apa-apa, kau ambil lah” (if they give anything, you take it).

He added that Muhammad Zahid had informed Ikhwan Zaidel that “Tan Sri is a politician; many people come seeking his help. Sometimes, he requires funds for political work”.

Justice Nordin further noted that the respondent had asked Muhammad Zahid whether he had received any call from Ikhwan, to which Muhammad Zahid replied that he had not.

Justice Nordin noted that the respondent instructed Muhammad Zahid to call Ikhwan, saying, “Kau call lah diaorang, kirim salam tanya khabar” (Call them and convey my regards), which Muhammad Zahid understood as a directive to request political funds and acted upon.

He acknowledged that while conveying “salam” through an intermediary is a customary practice among Muslims, in this case, the respondent, in his capacity as chairman of FICSB and responsible for approving the purchase of the Merdeka Palace Hotel, repeatedly conveyed “salam” to the 16th prosecution witness (Ikhwan), who was GAPSB’s director and shareholder, giving it a different connotation.

Justice Nordin added that the respondent’s instructions to Muhammad Zahid, coupled with the repeated “salam”, corroborated evidence of solicitation for bribes.

“As the respondent’s special officer, it was highly improbable that Muhammad Zahid would solicit or demand the bribe for himself. It requires a person in authority to solicit or demand such a substantial amount, and in the present case, the respondent is that person,” he said.

Justice Nordin concluded that the Court of Appeal had misapplied the presumption under Section 50(1) and failed to properly assess the facts, warranting the Federal Court’s intervention.

In today’s proceedings, deputy public prosecutor Afzainizam Abdul Aziz appeared for the prosecution, while Mohd Isa was represented by lawyers M M Athimulan and Datuk Abu Bakar Isa Ramat. — Bernama