Where is the cheapest country to visit?

Where is the cheapest country to visit?

Jason Behrmann, Extensive traveller that's experienced both 5 star hotels and living in a slum

I describe here one of my best and most affordable trips; I want to emphasize that this trip was the best in terms of value for money.

My prices are estimates—based on my sometimes fallible memory—in Canadian Dollars.

These are actual photos from my trip.

Ditch the stereotypes, Mexico is amazing.

Mexico City: Same as a world-class European city, but at 80% off

Mexico City is one of the world’s mega-cities, with a metropolitan population of 30 million. Beholden to a history that dates back several centuries, this immense capital is the country’s epicentre of culture and business.

These attributes provide all the offerings of a prominent European city at a fraction of the cost, primarily due to the low value of the Mexican Peso.

All noteworthy attractions are accessible by an extensive public transit system; it costs pennies to ride the metro great distances throughout the city. Transportation costs are negligible.

An ancient empire with an endearing culture

Like Rome, Mexico City was the centre of an ancient empire: the Aztecs. The Spanish colonizers destroyed most of the Aztec ruins within the downtown core, but a two hour bus ride away ($7), you can visit a UNESCO World Heritage site of a Teotihuan city with several pyramids, many of which are mind blowing in hight and size; you are free to climb on whatever you want.

Mexico invests heavily in arts and culture, so the city’s many museums are top-notch. My two favourites, the Museum of Anthropology and the Museum of Modern Art, had entry fees of a couple of bucks. Many epic, and extensive, murals by the renowned nationalist painter, Diego, are in public buildings where you can view his most famous works for free.

Everywhere you go you can hear live music on the streets—seriously, it’s everywhere; walking along the bustling sidewalks, you will pass several people singing while playing instruments, as well as the occasional dance event in a public square. Of course, there is no charge for revelling in these public displays of an endearing culture.

A unique shopping experience

Markets and boutiques abound.
The extensive marketplaces, full of artisanal and hand-made goods, are a signature of the city. You’ll be hard-pressed to find any item over $15 here, whether it be shoes, or clothes, or giant bouquets of flowers. The central food distribution centre for the city, Central de Abasto, has literally mountains of produce piled to the ceiling in transport/warehouse facilities. Here you can buy any kind of produce for pennies.

Mountains of watermelons on display at Central de Abasto.

You will find the occasional designer clothing boutique in trendy neighbourhoods. While not cheap, I estimate that these designer items were sold at half the price I would pay in Europe or Japan. Everything was high quality.

(There is a high-end shopping district in Polanco; you’ll find no deals here because the prices are the same as those at any North American city).

Incredible Food, delicious wine, and a booming nightlife

Mexico is an agricultural powerhouse, producing incredible amounts of fresh fruits and vegetables. Cheap, quality food abounds; a sizeable lunch, with a beer, at a regular restaurant will set you back a few dollars. The country also produces great wine. Common wines are equivalent in quality to the average Californian wine, but at a third of the price.

I would randomly choose restaurants in the historic colonial neighbourhood and request their best tequila, best glass of red wine, and a full gourmet dinner with desert. The tab was never over $30. It was common to have live music performances accompany my meal.

Bars are lively and crowded; clubs are expansive, far cleaner that any club in my home town of Montreal, and offer quality service. A couple of bucks will get you a nice drink, five dollars will get you fancy one.

Overall, I was so impressed with the value for money I obtained from this trip that I plan on going back to Mexico City in the near future.

Jais Will Not Accept Marriage Certificates From Outside Of Malaysia As Prove Of Marriage!!

Yeeh only marriage certificates issued in Heaven is valid as Malaysia is Heaven and when dies straight go to hell and friend below is waiting for you all. Must be a certified devil worshiper from Malaysia and with Malaysian issued certificate only the pious allowed into hell. No outsiders please

Jais Will Not Accept Marriage Certificates From Outside Of Malaysia As Prove Of Marriage!!

Malaysian Islamic Religious Department (Jais) is labeled as the most strict in most Muslim countries. Last month a married couple was arrested for khalwat (close proximity) by the religious authorities despite them having a marriage certificate

“Most of the time arrests are made if the husband is unable to provide sufficient evidence that the woman he is seen with is his wife,” said Hairul Nizan Mhd Idris, who works under the preaching department for Jais’ Hulu Langat division at a forum on Islamic family law.
Most of the time, husbands are unable to provide evidence because the couple got married in Thailand or in Indonesia. Malaysia will only accept marriage documents recognized in our country, so providing documents that the marriage took place outside the country is not enough.
However, Hairul pointed out that a raid would only take place if there was a complaint. “If there is no complaint, then we don’t come. If there is a complaint, then as religious authorities we have to act,” said Hairul.


For instance, when the religious authorities receive a complaint from a hotel, they would then go to the hotel and if they see the person’s car parked outside, they know the couple is inside the hotel room without a doubt. They will then knock on the door and say ‘Assalamualaikum’ (standard Muslim greeting) three times.
He said “only if there is no answer, although we know the people are inside, we will get the keys from the reception and go in the room. If the husband answers and says ‘I am with my wife and I don’t allow you to enter’ then, naturally, we will ask for proof that the woman is indeed his wife.”

“If he can provide proof, then that’s that. If he can’t, that’s when we take action,” he adds.
Most religious authorities do their job properly, but when they do something wrong, it is quickly spread without further verification because the majority of people loves to read the negative news.

MARKETS IN TURMOIL, FLIGHT TO SAFE HAVEN AS U.S. FIRES MISSILES AT SYRIAN AIR BASE

SYDNEY ― Bonds, the yen and gold jumped in Asia today, while stocks slipped, as investors turned to safe-haven assets after the United States launched cruise missiles against an air base in Syria, raising the risk of confrontation with Syrian backers Russia and Iran.
The US dollar dropped as much as 0.6 per cent, while gold and oil prices rallied hard, though the early market panic calmed when a US official called the attack a “one-off,” with no plans for escalation.


US President Donald Trump ordered the strikes yesterday against a Syrian air base controlled by President Bashar al-Assad’s forces in retaliation for a chemical attack that killed at least 70 people on Tuesday in a rebel-held area that was launched from the base.
MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan was down 0.4 per cent after earlier sliding as much as 0.85 per cent to a 2-1/2-week low. The index is set to end the week down about 0.2 per cent.
E-mini S&P 500 futures lost 0.3 per cent, having earlier tumbled as much as 0.7 per cent, in unusually sharp moves for Asian hours.
But Japan’s Nikkei reversed course again to be up 0.5 per cent, heading for a 1.1 per cent drop for the week.
“It was a knee-jerk reaction because markets are starting to come back a little, as it doesn’t seem like there will be further retaliation coming,” said Christoffer Moltke-Leth, head of institutional client trading at Saxo Capital Markets in Singapore.
“On the other hand, this could be a positive for Trump, showing that he stands firm on his word. When a strike happens, it leads to a little bit of a spike in the president’s popularity.”
Facing his biggest foreign policy crisis since taking office in January, Trump took the toughest direct US action yet in Syria’s six-year-old civil war.
Investors had already been on edge as Trump met Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Florida for talks over flashpoints such as North Korea and China’s huge trade surplus with the United States.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson noted the attack was “proportionate,” suggesting no follow-up was planned.
“The unexpected and unequivocal nature of the US response to the sarin-centric carnage in Syria, by President Trump, was very much in keeping with his promise not to telegraph his military options to the world in advance of taking action,” wrote Peter Kenney, senior strategist at Global Markets Advisory Group in New York.
“This comes at a time that President Trump is likely to be addressing the North Korea problem with his Chinese counterpart. Peace through strength is clearly the message.”

Highs for oil and gold

The yen, a favoured haven in times of stress due to Japan’s position as the world’s largest creditor nation, climbed across the board. The dollar moderated losses, last trading at ¥110.62 (RM4.44), after touching a near-two-week low of 110.14 earlier.
The dollar was otherwise steady against a basket of currencies at 100.65, as it benefited from flows into safe-haven US Treasuries.
The euro was trading at US$1.0648, near its close yesterday following comments by the European Central Bank head Mario Draghi that he sees no need to deviate from the ECB’s stated policy path at least until the end of the year.
Yields on 10-year Treasury debt fell as much as five basis points to 2.289 per cent, its lowest level since November, briefly breaking a significant chart barrier at 2.30 per cent for the first time this year. It was last at 2.3122 per cent.
Oil also rose on concerns the military intervention could affect supplies from the Middle East.
“What will be the response of Iran and Russia, two of the world’s largest oil producers and staunch allies of the Assad regime? … We will have to wait for these answers as the day moves on,” said Jeffrey Halley, senior market analyst at futures brokerage OANDA in Singapore.
US crude added 1.7 per cent to US$52.59 a barrel, after earlier touching its highest in a month, putting it on track for a 3.9 per cent gain this week.
Global benchmark Brent climbed 1.5 per cent to US$55.71, set to end the week up 5.5 per cent.
Spot gold prices added 0.9 per cent to US$1,262.46 an ounce after hitting their highest point since November 10.
“Clearly this raises the stakes, and we expect to see gold prices continuing to push higher in the short term, at least until there is some clarity around whether this is a one-off or develops into something more,” ANZ analyst Daniel Hynes said.
― Reuters

Tomahawk (missile) - Why the Navy’s Tomahawk missiles were the weapon of choice in strikes in Syria

Tomahawk (missile)

A BGM-109 Tomahawk flying in November 2002
Type	Long-range, all-weather, subsonic cruise missile
Place of origin	United States
Service history
In service	1983–present
Used by	United States Navy Royal Navy
Production history
Manufacturer	General Dynamics (initially) Raytheon/McDonnell Douglas
Unit cost	US$1.59m(FY2014)[1] (Block IV)
Specifications
Weight	2,900 lb (1,300 kg), 3,500 lb (1,600 kg) with booster
Length	Without booster: 18 ft 3 in (5.56 m) With booster: 20 ft 6 in (6.25 m)
Diameter	20.4 in (0.52 m)
Warhead	Nuclear: W80 warhead (retired)[2] Conventional: 1,000 pounds (450 kg) High explosive or Submunitions dispenser with BLU-97/B Combined Effects Bomb or PBXN
Detonation mechanism	FMU-148 since TLAM Block III, others for special applications
Engine	Williams International F107-WR-402turbofan using TH-dimer fuel and a solid-fuel rocket booster
Wingspan	8 ft 9 in (2.67 m)
Operational range	Block II TLAM-A – 1,350 nmi (1,550 mi; 2,500 km) Block III TLAM-C, Block IV TLAM-E – 900 nmi (1,000 mi; 1,700 km) Block III TLAM-D – 700 nmi (810 mi; 1,300 km)[3]
Speed	Subsonic; about 550 mph (890 km/h)
Guidance system	GPS, INS, TERCOM, DSMAC, active radar homing (RGM/UGM-109B)
Launch platform	Vertical Launch System (VLS) and horizontal submarine torpedo tubes (known as TTL (torpedo tube launch))

Why the Navy’s Tomahawk missiles were the weapon of choice in strikes in Syria

Watch video of the launch of the Tomhawk Missile strike in Syria

Washington Post reporter Dan Lamothe explains why President Trump launched 59 Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian military airfield on April 6 and what this means for the fight against the Islamic State. (Sarah Parnass, Julio Negron/The Washington Post)

The U.S. Navy launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles early Friday in Syria at a military airfield in response to a chemical-weapons attack this week on civilians, U.S. military officials said, relying on a mainstay weapon when the Pentagon wants to attack from a safe distance.

The missiles were launched about 4:40 a.m. local time from the USS Ross and USS Porter, Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, defense officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the operation. The strikes targeted al-Shayrat air base in Homs province, from which the Syrian military allegedly launched chemical weapons attacks against civilians Tuesday.

[U.S. strikes Syrian military airfield in first direct assault on Bashar al-Assad’s government]

The Tomahawk has been a critical part of U.S. warfare since the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and commonly carries a 1,000-pound warhead. It was last used by the Pentagon in October, when the military launched Tomahawks from the Red Sea at three coastal radar sites in Yemen after Houthi rebels there fired missiles at several U.S. ships over several days.

Before that, the United States used them in September 2014 as the country expanded its air war against militants from Iraq into Syria. The Pentagon said at the time that it launched 47 Tomahawks from two ships — the USS Philippine Sea in the Persian Gulf and the USS Arleigh Burke in the Red Sea — and hit sites used by what it called the Khorasan Group, an Islamist cell said to be linked to al-Qaeda.

The strikes, announced Thursday night in Washington, were launched from the USS Ross and the USS Port, two destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea, a defense official said on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the operation. Russian forces also use the base, but U.S. military officials said they “deconflicted” with them ahead of time to minimize the possibility of them being caught in the strikes.

President Trump on April 6 said the U.S. military struck a Syrian military airfield in retaliation for a chemical attack on Syrian civilians that occurred April 4. (The Washington Post)

One of the largest advantages to using the Tomahawk is that it does not require a pilot to be anywhere near a potential target. They can be launched from Navy destroyers up to 1,000 miles away, a tactical consideration when facing enemy air defenses. Assad’s military operates modest S-200 surface-to-air missile systems but is backed by Russian forces, which have more advanced S-300 and S-400 missiles. Those systems have better radar and fly faster than older surface-to-air missiles.

Chris Harmer, a defense analyst and former naval officer now with the Institute for the Study of War, said that the U.S. military can jam some of the Russian radar through the use of the EA-18G Growler jet and other means. But the Russians likely can withstand some of that jamming, especially the most advanced S-400 systems.

“We have the advantage, but it doesn’t mean it renders the Russian air defense irrelevant,” Harmer said.

Tomahawks have less explosive yield than larger bombs carried by manned U.S. aircraft, but to bomb Syrian planes on the ground, that does not matter, Harmer said. Planes, he said, are the “softest of soft targets” and do not require the largest U.S. munitions to destroy or incapacitate them.

There also is a specific variant of the Tomahawk that can carry cluster munitions that separate over a target, causing fragmentation and incendiary damage that could destroy vehicles, supply depots and aircraft on a flight line. The missiles would not cause as much damage to a runway as a larger Air Force bomb launched from a bomber or fighter.

The decision may have been driven in part by political concerns. The closest airfield the United States uses in the region is Incirlik Air Base in Turkey, but an operation against the Syrian government would likely require Turkish consent. The United States also has strike aircraft in other countries in the Middle East, but their use also could raise diplomatic issues.

If the Trump administration decided to use manned aircraft, the most likely option was naval aircraft. That could have included Harrier jets deployed with the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which were on Navy ships in the Mediterranean Sea as of Wednesday, according to photos released by the military.

The aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush also is in the Middle East but farther away in the Persian Gulf. Part of the fleet of ships accompanying the carrier are closer by, in the Mediterranean, and can carry Tomahawks

Why Israel and Hezbollah are heading for a new, devastating war in the Middle East

Read more here

In 13 years of watching these two bitter opponents, I have never seen such a high degree of anxiety that war is coming

Lebanon’s Hezbollah is backed by Iran and has greater support among ordinary citizens than Israel suggests AFP/Getty

This past Sunday, with great fanfare, Israeli politicians and military leaders finally announced to the Israeli public – and to the country’s enemies – that they had successfully layered the nation’s airspace with the most sophisticated anti-missile defence system ever developed.
Long-range Iranian or Syrian missiles, as it is anticipated, would mainly be handled by the US-backed Arrow system at high altitudes; smaller, but nevertheless extremely accurate, missiles from Hezbollah in Lebanon or Syria would be the domain of the US-backed David’s Sling, while drones, artillery and smaller rockets will continue to be dealt with by the (also US-backed) Iron Dome.
In mid-March, the new Arrow-3 missile system had seen its first successful use, knocking out a Syrian missile fired towards Israel in response to yet another Israeli Air Force attack within Syria, allegedly targeting Hezbollah positions.
This unprecedented ratcheting up of military confrontation in the Levant is raising significant concerns that a climactic war at least involving Hezbollah and Israel is increasingly likely, just 11 years after the last inconclusive round of hostilities left both sides licking their wounds and promising a “final” engagement.
In 13 years of watching these two bitter opponents, I have never seen such a high degree of anxiety among Lebanon’s political elite that war is coming.

This incredibly unstable and violent moment in geopolitics is undermining the central element that kept Israel and Hezbollah from overstepping each other’s red lines: fear, or rather a balance of fear based on the belief that the next conflict will be devastating for all sides.
When the next war hits, Israel will not only be well positioned to defend against Hezbollah’s main weapon – rockets launched against military and civilian targets – but it will also employ the unrestrained bombing of all Lebanese infrastructure and “supportive” civilian populations, ensuring that other Lebanese citizens turn on Hezbollah as a result.
Unfortunately for the balance of terror, Hezbollah and their allies seem to believe, with some cause, that the Israelis are wrong. First, a vicious bombing of all Lebanon will likely produce greater solidarity among Lebanese, rather than lead to any combination of ill-equipped communities to somehow confront Hezbollah.
Second, Hezbollah is not the same as the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), which was expelled from Lebanon after the devastating Israeli invasion in the summer of 1982. It is a deeply rooted Lebanese political grouping that has significant support in the country. As the leader of Hezbollah, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, has long reminded the Israelis, party supporters and especially his base among the Shia people of Lebanon are not going to get on a ship and move to Tunis as PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat once did. Most will stay and fight for their country

Third, Hezbollah and its key partner Iran seem to believe that Israel’s nuclear and chemical facilities, and even its new missile system, are vulnerable and could be easily overcome.
Finally, just as Israeli leaders seem overly confident that other Lebanese communities will quickly turn on Hezbollah if hit hard enough, Nasrallah and other key Hezbollah leaders I have met over the years seem equally entranced by the idea that the Israelis have become a soft people protected by a soft army that will not be able to collectively bear the dislocation resulting from Hezbollah’s land, sea and air strikes.
The core problem with all of these – mostly inaccurate – assumptions is that they are providing vital lubricant for the main casus belli that has now fully emerged in Southern Syria and the Occupied Golan. Indeed, both Hezbollah and Iran are very likely continuing to pursue the sort of underground military infrastructure in Southern Syria that they successfully pioneered against the Israelis in South Lebanon and more recently in other parts of Lebanon and Syria. For the Israelis, this activity is now being characterised in no uncertain terms as an existential red line.
Not surprisingly, the pace and scope of Israeli strikes has expanded in recent weeks and months. At the same time, the Syrian government, Hezbollah and Iran have now also made it clear that pushing the carte blanche that Israel claims in the skies above Lebanon and Syria will lead to greater counter-force.
As these dynamics gather pace, both Hezbollah and Israel can also claim that they were acting defensively if a major conflict starts in Syria or in Lebanon. On the one hand, Israel will argue that it was forced to pre-empt a growing terror threat on its border, while on the other Hezbollah and its allies will argue that they were illegally attacked and responded proportionately in order to maintain the balance of terror.


Perhaps even more problematic, Iran and Hezbollah have some reason to fear that the Trump administration, Russia and Syria’s al-Assad might find a suitable deal in the coming period that essentially deals out the Shia duo. Any attempt to sideline Iran and Hezbollah in Syria, however, would probably provoke a strong counter-reaction that could lead to a wider war. It would certainly leave both actors looking particularly vulnerable to an attempted knock-out blow by the Israelis.
At the very least, the new Trump administration considers Iran the main strategic enemy in the region. It has already signalled that it will pursue a more aggressive and confrontational policy, in sharp contrast to the previous Obama administration. As such, the White House and the US Congress are starting to take apart the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran while essentially assuring that there will be an unprecedented American support for Israel in the event of any conflict, no matter who is seen as “starting” it or how such a war is conducted.
On this score alone – the likely removal of American limitations on Israel – the balance of terror has been dramatically weakened.
Can anything be done to prevent the escalation of tensions? Sadly, it does not seem that any of the great powers, and especially the US, might intervene expeditiously and intelligently to address the root causes of conflict in this part of the world, much less the immediate triggers of a new Levantine war. One can only wait and hope that all sides recognise the Middle East simply cannot bear any more destruction and bloodshed.
Nicholas Noe is co-founder of the Beirut-based Mideastwire.com and editor of 'Voice of Hezbollah: The Statements of Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah'

NAJIB & HADI’S ‘HUDUD’ CIRCUS MAKES A LAUGHING STOCK OF THE MALAYS: UMNO-BN & PAS TO PAY A HEAVY PRICE IN GE14

When Umno made a drastic U-turn by deciding not to table the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 amendment bill (RUU355) in the Dewan Rakyat, we sensed that things would not come to a halt just that, and more follow-up developments were to surface soon.
Many might wonder whether Umno’s such a U-turn would deeply embarrass PAS, and whether PAS would launch an aggressive counter-attack, or how Najib is going to reassure Hadi Awang.

Equally surprising was the unbelievably toned down reactions from both Umno and PAS as if both parties had reached some sort of secret agreement and something more stunning is on the way.
Indeed, Umno has arranged to allow Hadi Awang to table the RUU355 amendment bill in the Dewan Rakyat today, marking yet another major step in accomplishing the Islamist party’s mission.
DPM Ahmad Zahid said last Saturday that the government would leave it to the Dewan Rakyat Speaker to decide whether to allow Hadi Awang to table his private member’s bill. He later said the motion would not go into voting in the current parliamentary session.
We all know what’s going on here. Hadi will be given the opportunity to table his private member’s bill but as the motion requires some debating before it goes into voting, and as today happens to be the last sitting of the current parliamentary session, there won’t be enough time for the motion to get adopted.
We can see from here that everything seems to have been planned. The Umno-PAS cooperation is still on-going and Umno has not yet abandoned PAS, and is still looking for ways to reassure its “new friend” after reversing its decision.
But, such an act of reassurance could be dangerous, and could very likely mortgage the rights of non-Muslims in this country as well as our secular system.
PKR feels that this whole RUU355 thing is but a political gimmick of Umno in hope of retaining the administrative power with a little help from PAS through the creation of three- or multi-cornered fights in the coming general elections.
In other words, PAS’ ultimate objective is the establishment of an Islamic state at the expense of its own administrative power.
Some say MCA and Gerakan are once again fooled by Umno, much to the delight of DAP. But, hold the laughter first, as everyone is watching whether DAP will eventually manage to talk PKR, Amanah and Bersatu into voting against Hadi Awang’s private bill.
Unfortunately, the government has concurrently effectuated yet another major reversal on the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) (Amendment) Act 2016 (Act 164) about to be tabled for second reading in the Dewan Rakyat, moving the prioritized item right behind Hadi’s private bill.
It has been said that this is also part of the political deal.

Remember the faces of the traitors who betrayed the Rakyat of Malaysia 

Many women have been victimized by the unilateral conversion of underage children after their fathers have embraced Islam. These women were forced to separate from their children and would not get any further despite years of legal battle to win back their children.
After all these years of waiting, the non-Muslim community in the country is finally able to see the government’s consent to amend Act 164. Unfortunately the high-profile opposition from the mufti of Perak has caused the government to pull the brake.
The amendment to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) (Amendment) Act 2016 has added Section 88A (1) which states that if a parent converts to Islam, the religion of their children shall remain the same unless both parents have agreed to the conversion of the children to Islam, and that the children can decide their own religious faiths upon reaching the age of 18.
The Perak mufti exerted pressure on the government to stall the bill. The news was given prominent coverage on Malay language newspapers. With the opposing voices getting stronger by the day thanks also to the Kelantan and Pahang muftis, it appears to us that the prospect to get the conversion problem resolved in near future becomes increasingly bleak.
The question is, the government has the obligation to execute the cabinet decision of 2009 to allow children to keep the religion of their parents at the time of marriage until they reach the age of 18 when they can decide on their own, in the event either of the parents converts to Islam.
– MYSINCHEW

It does not matter who is telling the truth as there is no fire with a spark. All in BN in complicity with PAS to screw the Malaysia Rakyat of their rights enshrined in the Constitution. Shame on these Devils and come PRU 14 you all are consign to Hell as you benefactor is waiting there with open arms

Only those from BN or BN supporters are welcomed and all others can go to heaven for all I care

MAKING A FOOL OF MUSLIMS: ‘I DON’T CARE WHAT PEOPLE SAY’ – SPEAKER PANDIKAR DENIES CONNIVING WITH NAJIB TO DEFER HADI’S BILL

Dewan Rakyat speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia has denied receiving instructions from BN with regard to deferring the debate on the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 (Act 355) amendments.
This is after MIC president Dr S Subramaniam was reported as stating that the decision to postpone the debate was made during the previous BN supreme council meeting.

“The decision was to allow PAS to present their case and there was agreement that there won’t be voting today. So as far as that is concerned, we followed the decision in the BN council,” he had said.
“I don’t care what they say. What matters is what I say and what I do,” said Pandikar.
“Because what they say, even the (BN) component leaders, is for their political mileage. They go for elections. I don’t go for elections,” he added.
The speaker said it was the government’s wish to complete all government business before Thursday, and he had to abide by this in accordance with Standing Order 15.
“So when I was given freedom on that day, I wanted to end it early,” he added.
He pointed out that the Speaker must put a matter to the floor to be debated by members of the House after the supporting speech for a motion is read out, but since the Parliament had gone through a marathon session the previous day, he decided to end the session early, on Thursday.
Yesterday, Pandikar deferred the debate on PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang’s motion to the next parliament sitting on July 24.
The day before, the Dewan Rakyat was on a marathon session for almost 20 hours, with the session ending at 5.05am on Thursday, setting a new record as the longest Parliament session.
As a result, some of the Parliament staff had to sleep in the office (to continue the next day), and he himself, was deprived of sleep, Pandikar said.
This was the reason, he, as the speaker, decided to end yesterday’s session earlier than usual, he added.

Pandikar stressed that he was being fair and does not have any political agenda.
Meanwhile, Pokok Sena MP Mahfuz Omar insisted that Pandikar had received instructions from BN to postpone Hadi’s motion to the next session.
“Supporter for the bill, Kota Baru MP (Takiyuddin Hassan) should have stood up and raised an objection to the speaker.
“He should have asked for a debate, in order to speed up the matter,” said the PAS lawmaker.
MKINI