KHALISTAN TERRORIST PUN LARI KE MALAYSIA. ADA GROUP TUNGGU DEPA PULA!

• Khalistani Groups in Malaysia
• Punjab Railway Track Blast : 4 Terrorists Arrested ; Linked to ISI and Khalistani Groups in Malaysia
• in direct contact with ISI handlers and Khalistani extremist groups based in Malaysia.
• He had reportedly travelled to Malaysia earlier

1.  First here is slightly old news from Punjab in India from April 2026.

https://punjabnewsline.com/news/punjab-railway-track-blast-case-4-terrorists-arrested-linked-to-isi-and-khalistani-groups-in-malaysia

Punjab Railway Track Blast Case: 4 Terrorists Arrested ; Linked to ISI and Khalistani Groups in Malaysia

Patiala Police claims Pakistan’s ISI and Khalistani operatives orchestrated attack on freight rail corridor in Rajpura; explosives and weapons recovered.

Updated on: 28 Apr 2026

Punjab Railway Track Blast Case: 4 Terrorists Arrested ; Linked to ISI and Khalistani Groups in Malaysia

• Punjab Newsline | Patiala
• Punjab Police: explosion rail corridor in Rajpura, Patiala
• carried out by a terror module 
• linked to Pakistan’s ISI and Khalistani extremists.
• police arrested four accused — Pradeep Singh Khalsa, Kulwinder Singh Banga, Satnam Singh Satta, and Gurpreet Singh Gopi. 

recovered bomb, two pistols, live cartridges, IED from their possession
in direct contact with ISI handlers and Khalistani extremist groups based in Malaysia. 
attack took place on the night of April 27 at around 8:30 PM
explosion under a moving freight train
person planting device killed in the explosion
deceased identified as Jagroop Singh alias Roopa from Panjwar village. 
He had reportedly travelled to Malaysia earlier.

My Comments: Malaysia, Malaysia, Malaysia. 

2.  Here is news item no. 2

• Kuala Lumpur: Suspek warga asing buruan antarabangsa 
• mendalangi serangan bom kereta api di (iNDIA)

• Suspek menyusup masuk ke Malaysia penghujung April
• menyembunyikan diri di sekitar Lembah Klang 
• suspek bersembunyi di ibu negara sejak April 2026 lalu
• ditahan (D12) Bukit Aman

• sudah diserahkan kepada Imigresen bagi proses (deportasi).
• Hasil risikan intensif dan kerjasama maklumat antarabangsa
• suspek dikehendaki oleh pihak berkuasa India 
• berhubung letupan bom IED di daerah Patiala, Punjab, akhir April lalu.
• India memulakan operasi memburu dalang
• suspek dikesan melarikan diri dengan menggunakan identiti palsu

My Comments:

Sedih sekali suspek ini berjaya menyusup masuk ke Malaysia tanpa dikesan oleh agensi keselamatan kita. Sempadan negara dan pintu-pintu masuk begitu mudah ditembusi oleh mereka dengan menggunakan identiti palsu. 

Tetapi perisik dan agensi keselamatan India boleh mengesan kemasukan puak-puak ganas ini ke dalam negara kita. 

Pengganas dari Punjab, India ini adalah ahli kumpulan Khalistan yang beragama Sikh dan diterajui bangsa Punjabi.  

Maksudnya mereka tidak akan diberi status Penduduk Tetap di Malaysia. Berbanding dengan kes dulu di mana Abu Bakar Bashir dari Indonesia, seorang lagi da'i asal India diberi status PR (Permanent Resident). Kerajaan India pernah mohon secara rasmi da'i  itu dihantar pulang ke India tetapi permohonan kerajaan India ditolak.

Saya yakin pengganas Khalistan ini akan dihantar pulang ke India. 
Undi pro-Khalistan amat sikit sekali di Malaysia. 

Fake Italian Fashion And Original Manufactured Diamonds

 

GUTSHOT PODCAST EP 85 - BERSAMA'S AGENDA

 

PETUA KALAH PRU16 - UNDI MARANG HILANG PASAL ROHINGYA. OLEH NORMAN FERNANDEZ

 

Artikel berikut adalah sumbangan Sdr Norman Fernandez. Sedikit editing oleh saya. Sila baca komen saya di bawah sekali.

*BILA MARANG Menjadi PERMULAAN*

-Norman Fernandez-

Siapa sangka Marang, Trengganu menjadi permulaan.

Pada Ahad lalu telah menular di media sosial gambar sehelai kain putih yang digantung di sebuah jejantas dengan tulisan, 'Ini bukan Selayang, ini Marang' yang dipercayai bantahan penduduk tempatan yang menolak kehadiran pelarian Rohingya.

Trengganu dianggarkan mempunyai 6,000 pelarian Rohingya, kebanyakkan mereka tertumpu di daerah Marang (terutamanya di kawasan Rusila), Kuala Terengganu (seperti di kawasan sekitar Pulau Kambing), Kuala Nerus dan Dungun.

Pada 29 Mei lalu sebuah Petisyen yang dilancarkan oleh akaun 'Aku Anak Malaysia' yang antara lain menuntut kerajaan mencari penyelesaian alternatif menangani kebanjiran Rohingya telah meraih lebih 195,000 tandatangan.

Mutakhir ini video-video yang diviralkan dalam Tik Tok, komen dan debat media sosial menuntut pelarian Rohingya diusir keluar atau dihantar pulang.

Kemarahan dan fed up yang begitu terpendam makin menjelma.

Bukannya kerajaan tidak tahu kemarahan rakyat. Rakyat sudah lama bangkitkan masalah sosial yang dicetuskan Rohingya.

Orang ramai cukup kecewa melihat kerajaan tiada hala tuju dan rancangan jelas untuk menyelesaikan Rohingya ini.

Simpati sudah makin hilang dan kini berubah menjadi kebencian. Kerajaan akan hilang berpuluh ribu atau beratus ribu undi disebabkan Rohingya yang menjadi spesis yang begitu bermasalah.  

Di Indonesia pula Rohingya tidak ramai pun, sekitar 2,600 orang sahaja, hampir semua di Aceh. Dulu Rohingya disambut dengan tangan terbuka, tetapi hari ini Rohingya diusir secara paksa oleh orang Aceh. Penduduk tempatan tidak lagi mahu Rohingya tinggal di kawasan mereka dan menuntut Rohingya diusir keluar dari Indonesia.

Di Malaysia dipercayai terdapat hampir 200,000 pelarian Rohingya yang berdaftar dan tidak berdaftar - SEPULUH kali ganda bilangan Rohingya di Indonesia. Malaysia menjadi negara tumpuan bagi Rohingya. 

Rohingya memang mahu ke Malaysia, sebab Malaysia membenarkan mereka bergerak bebas, boleh berkerja dan berniaga, boleh membeli bot dan jadi nelayan, boleh membawa kenderaan tanpa lesen, boleh beranak-pinak dengan potongan 50% bayaran hospital, diberikan pelbagai kemudahan dan bantuan termasuk wang zakat?

Dan UNCHR pula menjadi seolah ‘Kementerian Dalam Negeri Hal Ehwal Rohingya’ berserta pelbagai Badan Bukan Kerajaan dan Pertubuhan Hak Asasi Manusia yang membela hak asasi mereka.

Setelah berpuluh tahun terpaksa toleransi Rohingya orang ramai tidak percaya lagi penipuan kononnya perlu seimbangkan keselamatan dan kemanusiaan dalam mengurus Rohingya atau kerajaan peka dan sedang dalam proses merancang solusi. Itu hanya kongkalikong. Berpuluh tahun sudah berlalu, dan kerajaan sudah banyak kali berubah. Rohingya masih kekal di sini.

Kerajaan perlu mengambil langkah lebih tegas dan menyeluruh dalam menangani isu pelarian Rohingya ini.

Sejak lebih enam tahun penulis telah memberikan pelbagai cadangan untuk menyelesaikan masalah Rohingya. 

Apakah begitu sukar untuk kerajaan mengarahkan pejabat UNCHR ditutup? Apakah UNHCR lebih berkuasa dan lebih berdaulat daripada kerajaan Malaysia? 

Jangan biarkan Rohingya bebas bergerak dalam negara kita lagi. Kumpulkan semua Rohingya yang menceroboh perairan kita  dan masukkan mereka dalam kem yang boleh menempatkan semua pelarian Rohingya?  Kemudian mereka patut dihantar pulang.

Apakah begitu sukar untuk kerajaan berunding dengan kerajaan Bangladesh,  untuk mengambil Rohingya untuk ditempatkan di pulau Bhasan Char?

Negara kita akan menghadapi pilihanraya. Sebuah poster politik di media social menyatakan bahawa undi rakyat akan diberikan kepada mana-mana parti sama ada BN, Pas atau PKR yang boleh menghalau pulang Rohingya ke negara asal mereka.

Masalah Rohingya akan jadi lebih hangat dan rakyat akan melihat parti mana yang boleh mengusir mereka keluar. 

Perhatikan gambar di atas itu sekali lagi. Sepanduk menolak Rohingya makin timbul di sana sini. Video mendesak Rohingya dipulangkan makin viral di media sosial, suara-suara marah makin lantang. 

Marang sudah memberi isyarat. 

*Norman Fernandez*

*Norman Fernandez adalah seorang peguam dan pengamat isu Rohingya sejak tahun 2014.*

MY COMMENTS:

Tuan-Tuan, tidak ada siapa pun suka atau setuju Rohingya. Tetapi bilangan mereka sudah hampir 200,000 orang. Jadi siapa yang tutup mata sebelah (atau tutup mata dua belah) membiarkan mereka masuk dalam negara kita?

ChatGpt kata:  repeatedly reported existence of people-smuggling and human-trafficking syndicates bringing Rohingya into Malaysia, through Malaysia–Thailand border and by sea into Kedah, Langkawi, Kelantan, and Penang.

Some notable reports include:

2024: Rohingya Smuggling Syndicate Busted in Kelantan.  ..arrest of 10 individuals, including a Rohingya man mastermind of migrant-smuggling syndicate. Authorities also arrested two alleged tekong darat (ground coordinators). The operation took place around Kota Bharu, Kelantan.

2025: Kedah Syndicate Linked to Rohingya Arrivals.  raided a transit house in Kuala Muda, Kedah, and detained 18 Rohingya migrants together with two Malaysian suspects believed to be the syndicate's masterminds. 

Tentu sekali ada orang yang benefit atau mendapat faedah. Tentu sekali ada orang yang dapat untung daripada kehadiran Rohingya. Mereka dapat duit. 

Dulu-dulu (zaman pemerintahan 1MDB) kita pernah dengar khabar bahawa terdapat perkampungan Rohingya di kawasan parlimen tertentu di Pahang. Pelbagai tuduhan dibuat. 

Tetapi yang jelas adalah sudah berpuluh tahun tetapi Rohingya bukan saja boleh kekal dalam  negara kita tetapi makin ramai pula. 

Tuan-Tuan orang Melayu, mereka sedang menjual negara kita. Our country is being sold. Untuk sedikit untung.

WHY WE NEED TO SERIOUSLY AMEND OUR DEFAMATION ACTS

Malaysia's defamation law is generally regarded as more plaintiff-friendly than that of the United States, and to a lesser extent more plaintiff-friendly than many other Western democracies.

The Core Differences

Malaysia:  In Malaysia, if someone publishes a statement that harms another person's reputation, the plaintiff generally needs to show:

1. The statement referred to them.
2. The statement was published to a third party.
3. The statement was defamatory.

Once those elements are established, the burden often shifts substantially to the defendant to establish a defense such as:

Truth (justification)
Fair comment
Qualified privilege
Absolute privilege

The law derives largely from the common law tradition and the Defamation Act 1957.

As a result:

Politicians frequently sue.
Businessmen frequently sue.
Large damages can be awarded.
Media organizations tend to be cautious.
Individuals can face significant legal risk for allegations they cannot prove.

United States

The United States is the outlier among Western democracies because of the First Amendment.  The landmark case is:  New York Times Co. v. Sullivan

The Supreme Court held that public officials cannot merely show a statement was false and damaging.   They must prove:

Actual Malice

The plaintiff must show the statement was made:   "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for whether it was false or not."

This is a very high standard.

Therefore: 

Politicians lose many defamation suits.
Satirists are strongly protected.
Investigative journalists are strongly protected.
Public debate is given wide latitude.

What Is A "Public Figure" In American Law?

This is one of the most important concepts in U.S. defamation law.  A public figure is someone who has either:

1. General-Purpose Public Figure

A person who is widely famous or influential.

Examples:  Donald Trump, Taylor Swift, Elon Musk, Major movie stars
National television personalities.

These people are considered public figures for virtually all public matters.

2. Public Official

Government officials with significant public responsibilities.

Examples:  Presidents, Prime ministers, Governors, Cabinet ministers, Mayors
Senior police officials, Judges in many circumstances

Because they exercise public power, criticism of them receives extraordinary constitutional protection.

3. Limited-Purpose Public Figure

Someone who voluntarily enters a major public controversy and becomes prominent in it.  

Examples:

Environmental activists
Political campaign leaders
Public advocates
Leaders of major pressure groups
Well-known NGO leaders

A person may be a public figure only regarding that specific controversy.

For example:   A scientist who becomes nationally known for climate activism may be treated as a public figure concerning climate debates but not necessarily concerning unrelated matters.

What About Ordinary Citizens?

Ordinary citizens receive much stronger protection.  
If a private citizen sues for defamation in America, they generally do not need to prove actual malice.
Usually they need only show negligence or a similar lower standard depending on state law.

For example:   If a newspaper falsely accuses an unknown schoolteacher of corruption, the teacher generally has a much easier case than a president would.    Ironically, it is often easier for an ordinary citizen to win a defamation case than for a president.

Example of Malaysia:

Suppose someone says:   "Minister X accepted RM10 million in bribes."

If sued:

Defendant may need to prove the allegation.
Failure to prove it may result in liability.

Example of  United States:  The same allegation against a cabinet minister, governor, or president.   

The politician must prove:

The statement is false.
It caused reputational damage.
The speaker knew it was false or recklessly ignored whether it was true.

That is a significantly higher hurdle.

Why American Comedians Can Say Almost Anything

Consider figures such as:  Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher, John Oliver

They routinely mock:  Presidents, Senators, Governors, Billionaires, Political parties
because:

Satire is heavily protected.
Public figures face the actual malice standard.
Political speech receives the highest constitutional protection.

American courts generally assume that robust, even harsh criticism of public officials is essential to democracy.

A joke that would likely trigger litigation in Malaysia may be protected speech in the United States.

Singapore

Singapore is often cited alongside Malaysia as having relatively plaintiff-friendly defamation laws.

Historically:

Politicians frequently sued opponents and foreign media.
Singapore Courts awarded substantial damages in some cases.
Critics argued this created a chilling effect on political speech.

Supporters argue it protects reputations and discourages irresponsible allegations.

Philosophical Difference -  Malaysia / Singapore Tradition

• The underlying principle is:
• Reputation is a valuable right deserving strong protection.
• If you make a serious accusation, you should be able to prove it.

American Tradition

• The underlying principle is:
• Free political speech is so important that some false statements must be tolerated.
• The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that political debate should be:
• "uninhibited, robust, and wide-open."
• The Court accepts that mistakes, exaggerations, and harsh attacks are sometimes the unavoidable cost of maintaining free public discussion.

One Sentence Summary

Malaysia's defamation system starts from the premise that reputation deserves strong legal protection, whereas the American system starts from the premise that criticism of public figures and public officials deserves extraordinary constitutional protection, even at the cost of allowing some false or unfair statements to go unpunished.