No 10 insists RAF Fairford is safe after US withdraws bombers

No 10 insists RAF Fairford is safe after US withdraws bombers

2 hours ago
Vicky Wong

Getty Images
The US has withdrawn all of its bombers from RAF Fairford


Downing Street has insisted RAF Fairford is safe, after the US withdrew all of its bombers from the military base.

The Pentagon confirmed on Sunday it had removed its bombers - thought to be about a dozen B-1s - from the base back to their home stations in America.

US media reported a new threat led to the bombers being removed, which follows a major incident on 27 September when police were alerted to three "suspicious vehicles" near the airbase.

A No 10 spokesperson said he would not comment on "foreign nations' military operations", but said the base was safe, and pointed to US President Donald Trump's comments last week, where he "praised our police, defence and security services" in relation to the base.

Peace for villagers as US bombers leave UK airbase

What makes RAF Fairford one of the UK's most important military sites?

He added that Defence Secretary Wes Streeting had said last week, "we have tried and tested approaches to defend our bases around the country and throughout the world".

Speaking on Monday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he would not directly tie last week's incident to the decision to pull bombers from RAF Fairford.

He added: "It's not unusual to see movement of assets to different parts of the world based on exercises, redeployments, people changing out and new people coming in, new planes coming in and old planes going out."

Rubio said the US still has full confidence in the security of all its bases and that British authorities have been very cooperative since the incident.

US Vice President JD Vance later said the bombers were moved out of an "abundance of caution", adding Washington feels Iran is doing what it has "done for 49 years... which is engage in acts of terrorism against the US and against a lot of other people".

RAF Fairford - in the Cotswolds in Gloucestershire - is at the centre of an incident being investigated by counter-terror police.

Five men were initially arrested on suspicion of terror offences and subsequently released on bail. A sixth man, a UK-Iranian national, was also later arrested and released on bail.

Whitehall sources have not disputed that the decision from Washington to remove the bombers was in response to the incident at the airbase in Gloucestershire.

The BBC has also been told it was a military rather than a political decision - taken at an operational level - and communicated from the US military to its British counterparts.

Earlier on Monday, the New York Times reported US commanders had received new threats about an Iran-backed plot against RAF Fairford according to two US officials.

The newspaper wrote that the new information was part of the same threat warnings from three weeks ago, but officials acted quickly after specific details emerged in the past 24 hours.

Ezra Cohen, who served as a defence official under Trump's first administration, called the US' decision "prudent".

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "These are very, very unique platforms that aren't being produced anymore, and we have a limited number of them. The B-1 bomber is a strategic asset, and we're going to take steps to protect it from all sorts of threats."

It is technically possible for the US to conduct precision strikes directly from the US without a UK base - like in Operation Midnight Hammer last year.

But the removal of the bombers from RAF Fairford will see the US lose a foothold for the country outside continental Europe.

Liberal Democrat defence spokesperson James MacCleary called the US' decision to withdraw its bombers "deeply concerning" and called for the government to set out a plan to ensure the country's military bases are "fit for purpose".

Days after the incident at RAF Fairford, Prime Minister Andy Burnham said there were "strong indications" that Iran had played a part in the incident but did not provide further details, while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Fox News that it "clearly involve[d] the hands of a foreign actor" without going into further details.

Tehran has strongly denied any involvement.

In July, Iran said "any base used for aggression against Iranian territory constitutes a legitimate target for our forces".

RAF Fairford, near the village of Whelford in the Cotswolds, has been used as a forward operating location by the USAF for decades.

In recent months, the US has flown B-1 and B-52 bombers from the base for the Middle East, after the UK approved a US request to use it for defensive strikes on Iran.

Residents living close to RAF Fairford told the BBC of their relief at the departure of bombers from the airbase, with one local saying she was "thrilled," citing the noise and feeling "increasingly vulnerable" in recent weeks.

Another villager, who said he has seen bombs being loaded aboard aircraft from his back garden, said he knew something was happening when he saw planes leaving "one, after another, after another" on Sunday.

DEATH TOLL BY BULLYING IS INCREASING IN SCHOOLS, UNIVERSITIES

 

OutSyed The Box

Monday, October 5, 2026

DEATH TOLL BY BULLYING IS INCREASING IN SCHOOLS, UNIVERSITIES

 

1. Latest case: Oct 3 2026

BATU PAHAT – 3 male students detained over murder of Form 4 female student 
body discovered at her school in Yong Peng, Johor, on Oct 3.
16-year-old Irene Sofiya Mohd Khairool Faisal, found dead in school hall 5.30pm
Police arrested three 16-year-old suspects, who attend same school 
hours after the body was found.
teenager found with dried blood on her body, bruising 
consistent with being assaulted.

2. Last week : 30 Sep 2026

fatal beating of 14-year-old student Muhammad Idlan Fareeq Shahril
death of  14-year-old student at Malaysian boarding school 
Police in Kuala Pilah detained two 16-year-old students 
informal disciplinary rules operate behind closed boarding school doors

Idlan was caught vaping by a hostel warden on September 23. 
Two days later, a 16-year-old student instructed to bring Idlan to dormitory
where he was struck on soles of feet with rubber hosepipe
forced to remove his shirt, hit on chest, back until he collapsed
police investigating bullying involving several of the students
one suspect had previously bullied (others) 

3. July 17 2025 : Zara Qairina death 

painful memories of death of 13-year-old Zara Qairina Mahathir
high-profile death of Zara Qairina Mahathir last year behind dormitory doors.
pronounced dead on July 17 last year
found unconscious dormitory at an Islamic boarding school in Sabah.

4. Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) student killed in May 2017 

Victim: Navy cadet officer Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain (aged 21).
Tortured with steam iron, beaten at Jebat Hostel block May 21 - 22, 2017
over false accusation of laptop theft
He passed away on June 1, 2017
Feb 2025 Federal Court set aside death sentences for 6 UPNM students  
restoring their original 18-year prison sentences for culpable homicide 

My Comments:

These were all cases of bullying. I have only two comments. 
No. 1.  You cannot ask a monkey to take care of bananas. 
No. 2.  What does that mean? It means you just have to wait for the next murder, death or killing in the schools, hostels, universities etc. 

'Not again': Arrest of US marine for murder reignites protests in Japan's Okinawa

'Not again': Arrest of US marine for murder reignites protests in Japan's Okinawa

5 hours ago
Kurumi Mori

Japan correspondent

AFP via Getty Images


For many Okinawa locals, the arrest of a US soldier accused of robbing and killing a woman in a hotel room has reignited decades of frustration over crimes involving US military personnel there.

"Honestly my first reaction was, 'Not again,'" 52-year-old longtime Okinawa resident Ai Sato told the BBC.

"Nothing has changed since I was a child. How many times are we going to repeat the same thing, create more victims, cause their families to suffer, and ultimately, cause the people of Okinawa to grieve?"

Akemi Oshiro, a 62-year-old Ginowan resident shared similar sentiments.

"I know we shouldn't get used to terrible things like this, but because they keep happening, I've stopped being surprised," she told the BBC.

Okinawa hosts the largest US military presence in Japan. It is home to several US military bases and tens of thousands of American troops.

US Marine Lance Corporal Devin Jacob Ballard, 20, was arrested by Japanese police on Sunday. Police say an investigation is underway and that Ballard is in Japanese custody because the alleged crime was unrelated to official military duties.

Whether a US service member is acting in the performance of official duty or not can determine which country has primary jurisdiction. When Japan has jurisdiction, but the suspect is under US custody, they can retain custody until Japan brings charges.

EPA

Some locals gathered to protest against the robbery-murder case on Sunday

Ballard was assigned to III Marine Expeditionary Force and stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Ginowan City.

The Okinawa prefectural police say 39-year-old Anna Yagi was found dead early 3 October in a hotel room in Naha.

Security footage allegedly shows a man believed to be the suspect entering the hotel with the woman and leaving alone with her belongings. Local media citing police have reported that Yagi appeared to have been strangled with a cord.

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi registered an official protest with Washington. But residents like Sato feel that's far from enough.

"I am deeply disappointed by the same kinds of government comments we have been hearing for decades -- that they will protest or that they take the matter seriously."

"I want Prime Minister Takaichi to call President Trump directly, someone with whom she has been emphasizing as having a close relationship with, and discuss concrete measures to prevent this from happening yet again," she said.

Following news of the suspected murder, people in Japan have been voicing anger with some 100 people protesting in both Naha and Tokyo. Others took to social media expressing their outrage and demanding justice with one user saying: "Enough is enough."

Reuters

US Marine Lance Corporal Devin Jacob Ballard was arrested on suspicion of committing the murder


Over the past few years, a number of accidents and crimes have led to growing local opposition to the US presence on the island.

The 2016 rape and murder of a 20-year-old local woman saw tens of thousands of protesters demonstrate against the heavy US presence there. A former US marine subsequently received a life sentence for the crime.

The US currently has about 55,000 military personnel stationed in Japan, with the heaviest concentration based on the tropical island prefecture. Okinawa is one of the country's smallest prefectures by size, but 70% of the land used exclusively by the US military in Japan is located there.

In 1972, Okinawa prefecture was returned to Japanese control after United States forces occupied the islands at the end of the Second World War. Since then, there have been 6,409 arrests for criminal offenses related to US military personnel, according to Okinawa Prefectural Government.

Locals say the significant US presence has stirred resentment over a number of issues from crimes including rapes, assaults, and drunk-driving accidents to local disturbances such as noise and aircraft crashes.

In 1995, three US servicemen abducted, beat, and raped a 12-year-old schoolgirl as she walked home from a stationery store.

In 2025, a US Marine was convicted of choking and sexually assaulting a Japanese woman.

"Even 80 yeas after the war, Okinawa where we live is a place that is so unnerving," 48-year-old mother of two boys Hitomi Miyagi told the BBC.

"We will not stop raising our voices hoping for an Okinawa, where we can live in peace."

***

Go home lah, lu wankees

Another Child Dead at School. When Will Enough Be Enough?

Malaysia's #1 Content Aggregator


Another Child Dead at School. When Will Enough Be Enough?

5 Oct 2026 • 10:30 AM MYT

Felicia Yoan
I'm a graphic designer, with a passion for creativity in all its forms

Image Source: The Vibes


Honestly, I am angry. Not just sad. Not just shocked. Angry. I cannot understand how someone can take another person's life and simply leave a family to pick up the pieces. Irene was only 16. She went to school that day expecting to come home. She had dreams, a future and a family who loved her. Who gave anyone the right to take all of that away from her?



A 16-year-old girl went to school for tuition on a Saturday and never came home. Irene Sofiya was a Form Four student from Yong Peng, Johor. According to her grandmother, she was a good and well-behaved girl who dreamed of becoming a doctor, following in the footsteps of her late mother. She was only 16. She had so much life ahead of her.


According to New Straits Times, on October 3, around 5.30pm, two of Irene's classmates noticed that her motorcycle was still parked at school, but she was nowhere to be found. They went to her house, and her grandmother and aunt rushed to the school. They found Irene in the school hall, covered in blood and suffering serious injuries. Her grandmother reportedly held her while she was still slightly responsive. Irene looked at her one last time before she went still. Medics later pronounced her dead at the scene.



Just imagine being her grandmother. You go to school expecting to bring your granddaughter home, only to find her fighting for her life in the school hall. You hold her in your arms, she looks at you one last time, and then she is gone.


How is any family supposed to live with that?


Police are investigating the case as a murder, and the motive remains unclear. Several 16-year-old boys from the same school were reportedly detained, while one suspect was brought to court and remanded for six days. The Prime Minister has ordered a full investigation, while the Education Minister has also gone to Yong Peng to examine what happened (Source: Channel News Asia).



Of course, the investigation must be completed properly. Whoever is responsible must be identified, and the evidence must be tested in court. But if someone is eventually convicted of deliberately taking another person's life, I honestly struggle with the idea that we should focus so much on protecting the offender that we forget about the victim.


I don't care how young you are. I don't care how angry you were. I don't care what argument you had. You have no right to decide that another human being should die.



And if mental illness is involved, then yes, it should be properly assessed and treated. But we also need to remember the person who is no longer here. Irene does not get treatment. Irene does not get a second chance. Irene does not get to grow up.


Her grandmother does not get her granddaughter back. Her family does not get to watch her graduate. And Irene does not get to become the doctor she dreamed of becoming. That is what makes me angry.


Malaysia has already seen other tragedies involving young students. Last year, 16-year-old Yap Shing Xuen died after being stabbed by a schoolmate. Then there was Zara Qairina, whose death at a school hostel shocked the country and whose inquest is still ongoing. Now we are mourning Irene.



Different cases may have different circumstances, but how many times are we going to say, "This is shocking", hold discussions for a few weeks and then move on?


What is happening to our children?


I know some people will say, "They are only children." But being young does not mean actions should have no consequences. If a juvenile is convicted of an extremely serious crime such as murder, I believe Malaysia needs to seriously reconsider whether our current juvenile sentencing framework provides a punishment that is clear, proportionate, and meaningful.



I am not saying every troubled child should be treated like an adult. I am saying that age should not make the value of the victim's life feel smaller.If someone is found guilty of taking a life, there must be serious accountability.


At the same time, we need to ask how these tragedies can be prevented. Parents and teachers need to talk to children more. Ask if they are being bullied. Ask if they are bullying someone else. Ask who they spend time with. Ask whether they have seen something frightening at school. And when they speak, actually listen.



Children need discipline, boundaries and consequences. But they also need counselling, supervision and early intervention. We cannot wait until a student is seriously injured or dead before everyone suddenly starts asking what went wrong.


Irene was not just another name in the news. She was someone's granddaughter. Someone's daughter. Someone's future doctor. Her late mother was a doctor, and Irene wanted to follow in her footsteps. Think about all the people she could have helped. Think about the future she could have had.



That future was taken away from her. That's why I am angry.


Our children go to school to learn, grow up, make friends, and build their future. Parents should be able to send them through the school gates without wondering whether they will come home alive.


Irene should have been preparing for her future. She should have been studying to become a doctor. She should have been coming home.


Instead, her family is preparing for a funeral.


How many more children need to die before we finally say: enough is enough?

Poor Kee Thuan Chye; Malaysia Still Wants More

Malaysia's #1 Content Aggregator


Poor Kee Thuan Chye; Malaysia Still Wants More

5 Oct 2026 • 7:45 AM MYT

Mihar Dias
A behaviourist by training, a consultant and executive coach by profession

Mihar Dias on Gemini

Poor Kee Thuan Chye; Malaysia Still Wants More

By Rahim Said


I read Kee Thuan Chye’s piece with the peculiar emotion one experiences when an old colleague writes something you wish he didn't have to write. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19VCdMFCjV/



We once belonged to the same academic ecosystem at USM. In those days, universities were places where people argued about ideas, politics, literature and society without first checking whether the argument came with the correct racial, religious or institutional warranty.


Thuan Chye has remained remarkably consistent.



He wants to be Malaysian.


Unfortunately, Malaysia appears to have developed a rather complicated application procedure for that.


First, you must be born here.


Then you must grow up here.


Then you must eat the food.


Then you must sing Negaraku.


Then you must demonstrate sufficient appreciation of Malay culture, Chinese culture, Indian culture and probably whatever culture happens to be fashionable at the moment.


Thuan Chye has done all that.


He has even given his children Malay, Indian and Chinese names.



Still not enough.


Perhaps the Immigration Department should consider issuing a Malaysian Belonging Certificate.


Validity: five years.


Renewal subject to political circumstances.


Conditions may change without notice.


Thuan Chye’s problem, I suspect, is that he has committed the unforgivable offence of taking Malaysia seriously.


He believed that being Malaysian meant belonging to the country rather than to a racial category.


How quaint.


He thought citizenship was a relationship between an individual and a nation.



We seem occasionally to treat it as a membership card in an enormous and permanently quarrelling club.


And the membership committee is forever asking:


“But what are you?”


Thuan Chye has spent a lifetime answering that question.


Perhaps the better question is:


“What has Malaysia become?”


That is where his article becomes uncomfortable.


He remembers the Malaysia of his youth, when Malay, Chinese and Indian schoolchildren could be friends without somebody eventually producing a constitutional footnote.


He remembers Yusoff Carrim, his Form Six friend, with whom he did things that school authorities would probably have preferred to remain permanently classified.



That is what friendship used to be.


You did not have to establish your ethnic credentials before getting into trouble together.


Then came May 13.


Then came decades in which race and religion became increasingly organised, institutionalised and, occasionally, weaponised for political purposes.


Thuan Chye describes something particularly sad: meeting old Malay friends years later and discovering that they now speak a different language.


Not Bahasa Melayu.


The language of caution.


The language of institutional survival.



The language that tells you that certain subjects are better left untouched.


I recognise the phenomenon.


There is a strange occupational hazard in Malaysia: the higher a person climbs into the establishment, the more carefully he sometimes has to avoid looking down.


Thuan Chye says some of his old schoolmates who have risen into senior positions are particularly difficult to talk to because they cannot complain about the system.


They are beneficiaries of it.


And here I feel especially sorry for him.


Because Tuan Chye has spent much of his life speaking truth to power.



The trouble is that power has become increasingly sophisticated at pretending not to hear.


His question therefore deserves another question.


What does Malaysia actually want from Kee Thuan Chye?


He has already given it 72 years.


He has given it his writing.


His theatre.


His memories.


His children.


His loyalty.


His tears during Negaraku.


His love of Sejarah Melayu.


His appetite for banana-leaf rice.


At this rate, the poor man may eventually have to offer Malaysia his DNA.


Even then someone may say:


“Very touching, Kee Thuan Chye. But where is your surat sokongan?”



The tragedy of being almost Malaysian


There is something deeply Malaysian about Thuan Chye’s predicament.


We are perfectly capable of celebrating diversity in speeches.


We put “unity in diversity” on banners.


We have multicultural festivals.


We eat together.


We pose together.


We sing together.


And then, occasionally, we go back to our respective corners and ask whether the other fellow has been getting too comfortable.


This is the Malaysian paradox:


We are very good at living together. We are less certain about belonging together.



Thuan Chye's sadness is therefore not really about food, music, poetry or even politics.


It is about recognition.


He wants to know whether after 72 years Malaysia will finally stop asking him to prove that he belongs to the country in which he was born.


And that is where I feel sorry for my old USM colleague.


Because Thuan Chye has spent decades trying to convince Malaysia that he is Malaysian.


Perhaps the joke is that Malaysia should have been trying to convince him.


After all, he has already passed the test.



It is Malaysia that appears to be sitting for the examination.


And judging from the answers so far, I am afraid the examiner may have to remark:


“Promising candidate. Unfortunately, still has difficulty with belonging.”


So, Kee Thuan Chye, old friend, you ask:


Apa lagi Malaysia mahu?


I have a cynical suggestion.


Perhaps Malaysia wants you to stop asking.


And that, my dear Kee Thuan Chye, may be precisely why you must continue.

This has gone on long enough – It is time for the law to act

This has gone on long enough – It is time for the law to act


How many times must Tunku Nadzaruddin proclaim himself Ruler? Repeating the same thing over and over again is, according to Einstein, a sign of insanity

Updated 10 hours ago · Published on 05 Oct 2026 7:52AM

Tuanku Muhriz described corruption as the enemy of justice, trust and the future of the nation. - October 5, 2026



by Vinod Sekhar




THERE comes a point when something stops being a constitutional dispute and starts becoming a national embarrassment.

I believe we have reached that point in Negeri Sembilan.

How many times must Tunku Nadzaruddin proclaim himself Ruler before somebody finally tells him that repeating something does not make it true? Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, according to Einstein, is a sign of insanity

How many letters must be written? How many pretend instructions issued? How many attempts must be made to circumvent institutions that have already spoken?

And how much embarrassment must be inflicted upon the Royal Institution before the law finally steps in?

Let us remember where this extraordinary episode began.

A purported proclamation was made at a hotel in Melaka — not at the royal palace in Seri Menanti, not through the recognised institutions of Negeri Sembilan, but in another state.

It attracted ridicule for obvious reasons.

Yet what followed has ceased to be funny.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers has stated that the Menteri Besar and State Executive Council had no unilateral power to terminate or vacate the office of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.

The State Secretary’s Office subsequently refused to gazette or implement the disputed proclamation, accepting the AGC’s position that it was invalid.

The Dewan Keadilan dan Undang has maintained that Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir remains the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.

And when Tuanku Muhriz revoked the appointments of ten Exco members after they were found to have breached the oaths of allegiance they had sworn before him, that revocation was gazetted.

The Attorney-General subsequently confirmed that the revocations were valid under Article XXXVIII(5) of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution.

Yet apparently even this is not enough.

Now we have a letter dated September 30 asking the Attorney-General to effectively recognise Tunku Nadzaruddin and requesting that future federal gazettes concerning the Yang di-Pertuan Besar or Raja Negeri Sembilan be published only after confirmation from him and those supporting his claim.

Really?

At what point does determination become delusion?

At what point does ambition become something far more serious?

And perhaps most importantly: why is this happening at all?

Follow the timing

There is another part of this story that Malaysians should not ignore.

Tuanku Muhriz has become increasingly outspoken about corruption.

In January this year, he delivered one of the clearest royal denunciations of corruption we have heard in recent years.

He described corruption as the enemy of justice, trust and the future of the nation.

He warned that corruption destroys institutional integrity and the moral foundations of society.

He expressed disbelief that Malaysians could continue supporting people convicted of serious corruption offences as though corruption were somehow acceptable or forgivable.

Those are not the words of a ceremonial Ruler content merely to cut ribbons.

Those are the words of a Ruler talking about values.

Then in April, Tuanku Muhriz again reminded those entrusted with high office in Negeri Sembilan that their decisions must be based upon facts, information, established rules and law — and must never be driven merely by personal desires or emotions.

He warned that otherwise the integrity of the administration itself could be damaged.

And then came the attempt to remove him.

Coincidence?

Perhaps.

I have no evidence to say otherwise, and neither should anyone manufacture evidence where none exists.

But Malaysians are entitled to ask questions.

Who benefits from removing a Ruler who has become increasingly vocal against corruption?

Who benefits from replacing him?

Why was it suddenly so important?

What interests — political, personal or financial — lie behind this extraordinary determination to seize control of the highest institution in the state? And of course, not forgetting that the Ruler of Negeri Sembilan will likely become King of Malaysia in our unique rotation system in about 7 years.

These questions must now be answered.

Because when people pursue a position with this degree of desperation, the public is entitled to ask what exactly makes that position so valuable to them.

This is not a game

What troubles me most now is that the people involved seem to be behaving like badly wounded animals trapped in a corner — striking in every direction without recognising how increasingly desperate their actions appear.

Another proclamation.

Another letter.

Another instruction.

Another attempt to force the machinery of government to accept something that its institutions have repeatedly declined to recognise.

Enough.

This is Negeri Sembilan.

This is Malaysia.

Our Royal Institutions are not toys to be fought over by ambitious men.

Adat is not a weapon to be conveniently interpreted whenever somebody wants a throne.

And the Constitution is certainly not a menu from which politicians and princes may select whichever provisions suit them today and ignore the rest tomorrow.

There is something particularly disturbing about watching people claim to be defending the dignity of an institution while their actions risk making that very institution an object of public ridicule.

This has embarrassed Negeri Sembilan.

It is increasingly embarrassing Malaysia.

And it has gone on for far too long.

Where are the authorities?

There is also a legal question which can no longer simply be whispered about.

Section 121B of the Penal Code expressly deals with offences against the authority of a Ruler, including intending the deposition or deprivation of a Ruler from the rule of a State. The current provision carries imprisonment of between 30 and 40 years and liability to a fine.

Separately, the Sedition Act defines a seditious tendency to include exciting people to procure, otherwise than by lawful means, the alteration of matters established by law, as well as certain conduct directed against a Ruler; Section 4 creates the relevant offences.

I am not a court.

I am not going to pronounce anybody criminally guilty. That is precisely why we have police, prosecutors and judges. But surely what has happened now demands investigation.

If the evidence establishes that offences have been committed, then those responsible must be arrested, charged and tried — whoever they are.

Tunku.

Former Undang.

Politician.

Exco member.

Nobody should be above the law.

And if they are innocent, let a proper investigation establish that too.

But doing nothing is no longer neutrality.

Silence eventually becomes permission.

The monarchy must never become a prize

There is a bigger principle here.

Malaysia’s constitutional monarchies survive not because Rulers possess titles.

They survive because the people accord those institutions respect.

That respect is precious.

It is built over generations.

And it can be damaged very quickly when royal institutions become entangled with political manoeuvring, personal ambition and position battles.

Tuanku Muhriz has served Negeri Sembilan with dignity. He has spoken about integrity. He has spoken against corruption.

He has reminded those holding public office that law must come before personal desire.

And perhaps that is precisely the lesson everyone involved in this sorry episode should finally understand.

The law must come before personal desire.

A throne is not a corporate takeover.

A Ruler cannot simply be replaced because somebody else wants the job. And Negeri Sembilan does not belong to politicians, princes, former Undangs or current ones.

Ultimately, its institutions exist in trust for its people. They deserve institutions that command respect rather than invite ridicule.

There is an irony at the centre of this entire affair. A Ruler warned Malaysia that corruption and the abandonment of principle could destroy the moral foundations of society.

Months later, we are watching a battle over his throne that raises profound questions about ambition, power and respect for law.

Perhaps the answer to this crisis lies in Tuanku Muhriz’s own message. Justice. Trust. Rule of law.

Daulat Tuanku. And daulat undang-undang Malaysia. - October 5, 2026



Datuk Dr Vinod Sekhar is the publisher of The Vibes and Chairman of the Petra Group

Syed Saddiq warns Rohingya issue could become ‘nuclear bomb’ for Malaysia

Syed Saddiq warns Rohingya issue could become ‘nuclear bomb’ for Malaysia


The Muar MP warns that unchecked inflows and failed resettlement commitments could pose wider political, security and social challenges

Updated 1 hour ago · Published on 05 Oct 2026 5:23PM

Syed Saddiq says Malaysia is bearing a disproportionate share of the Rohingya refugee burden - October 5, 2026



THE Rohingya refugee issue could become a “nuclear bomb” threatening Malaysia’s political stability and moral fabric if it is not addressed firmly and urgently, Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman told the Dewan Rakyat today.

The MUDA president said Malaysia had for decades demonstrated humanitarian responsibility by accepting refugees from various conflicts, including Vietnam, many of whom were eventually resettled in developed countries.

However, he said the same burden-sharing arrangement had failed for the Rohingya, with Malaysia continuing to absorb a disproportionate share of refugees while neighbouring countries and major powers failed to fulfil their commitments.

“Official statistics show that Malaysia is hosting more than 130,000 Rohingya refugees, compared with fewer than 2,600 in Indonesia, fewer than 500 in Thailand and fewer than 20,000 in India,” he said during a debate on refugee management in Malaysia.

“This shows that promises have not been fulfilled. Malaysia has ultimately had to absorb all the problems, while others remain comfortable, as if we are the ones who have to solve this problem.”

Syed Saddiq said unofficial estimates put the number of refugees in Malaysia at about 200,000, while wealthier countries with stronger gross domestic product had accepted fewer than 1,000.

He also criticised the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and countries that had pledged to use Malaysia as a temporary transit point before refugees were resettled in third countries.

He said Malaysia’s position as a perceived safe destination had also created incentives for trafficking syndicates to bring Rohingya refugees into the country, with the cost reportedly reaching US$5,000 (RM20,400) per person.

“Why Malaysia? Because Malaysia is seen as a safe place. If the Royal Malaysian Navy and the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency do not act firmly, we are indirectly giving these smugglers an incentive to continue bringing thousands or tens of thousands of people to Malaysia,” he said.

Syed Saddiq cited the discovery of more than 150 graves in Wang Kelian, Perlis, as evidence of the deadly consequences of human smuggling networks.

He called for a zero-tolerance policy by enforcement agencies against illegal entry by sea, while urging Malaysia to stop relying on resettlement commitments made by developed countries.

“We can no longer allow ourselves to believe in the promises of developed countries, such as resettlement and temporary accommodation in Malaysia while the process is being carried out. No longer. Neighbouring countries must also share the burden and bring this issue to ASEAN.

“If Western countries want to criticise us, ask them to provide places, not just leave Malaysia to shoulder the burden. We need a bipartisan solution,” he said.

He also proposed that the Dewan Rakyat establish a special committee to examine the refugee issue so it would not be handled according to partisan interests.

“We need the political courage to act together, but there must be a target. For example, within 10 years, we should reduce the number of refugees from 200,000 to a much smaller figure,” he said. - October 5, 2026

 

A theory on why Malays accept corrupt leaders

A theory on why Malays accept corrupt leaders

5 hours ago

Tajuddin Rasdi

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

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

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

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

Reason one: taxation

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

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

Reason two: government employment

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

Advertisement

Advertisement

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

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

Reason three: lack of awareness

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

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

Reason four: Islamic education

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

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

• Religious education itself: I have reviewed thousands of Friday sermons, and none explains how tax money becomes salaries or development funds. Corruption is treated as a minor sin, distant and irrelevant to ordinary people.
• Political sermons: Some religious teachers from political parties justify corruption, claiming it is not punishable under hudud because it is absent from classical fiqh texts. So, stealing RM200 shoes may warrant amputation but embezzling RM40 billion is not mentioned. As a result, corruption is seen as less serious than drinking alcohol, not wearing the headscarf, or failing to vote for an Islamic party.
• Preachers from abroad: Some insist that Muslims must vote for Muslim candidates, even if they are weak or immoral, as long as they are Muslim. This is compounded by political parties promising heaven for those who vote for them. Thus, corruption, slander and insults will be tolerated if the party claims to uphold Islam in politics.

Reason five: party benefits

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

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

Reason six: the DAP bogeyman

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

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

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

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

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