Kalau sudah sampai Kuala Kangsar, tidak sah kalau tak pekena cendol dan laksa. Jadi, usai penamaan calon Pilihanraya Kecil Kuala Kangsar semalam, saya berkesempatan meronda-ronda bandar kecil ini mencari laksa dan cendol, sehari sebelum berpuasa, eloklah tu.
Apa istimewanya laksa di Kuala Kangsar dengan laksa di tempat lain? Beza laksa di sini ialah bahan yang digunakan. Barulah saya tahu, menurut Kak Su, laksa Kuala Kangsar dibuat dari tepung gandum dan bukannya tepung beras seperti laksa yang lain. Jadi, rasanya pun sedikit berbeza.
“Laksa ni akak buat sendiri, tak sama dengan laksa putih tu. Akak guna tepung gandum, campur garam dan minyak sikit, lepas tu uli,” kata Kak Su.
Menurut ibu berusia awal 50-an ini, beliau sudahpun berniaga laksa di Kuala Kangsar sejak 15 tahun lalu. Perniagaan laksa yang diusahakan mendapat sambutan baik dari masyarakat setempat mahupun pelawat dari luar.
“Sehari akak boleh jual dalam 30 kilo,” ujarnya kepada saya.
“Saya rasa kak, masa pilihanraya ni kena tambah banyak kilo lagilah,” sambut saya mencelah.
“Eloklah tu, bila lagi nak macam ni, jarang-jarang pilihanraya, satu Malaysia tumpu kat sini,” sampuk temannya Kak N sambal memotong bawang. Kak Su pula sibuk melayan pelangan yang baru duduk.
Saya tersenyum mendengar ngomel Kak N, mengangguk. Sebagaimana peniaga-peniaga kecil yang lain, mereka gigih berniaga. Sesekali sempat juga saya bertanya pendapat mereka mengenai politik.
“Adik ni dari NGO kan? “ soal Kak N bila melihat saya mencatit sesuatu di buku nota kecil saya sambal memerhati t-shirt yang saya pakai yang tertera sloga “Never Surrender” yang merupakan t-shirt yang dibikin komuniti Pangrok Sulap.
Saya tidak pula menjawab ya atau tak, saya beritahu kak N yang saya datang untuk buat sedikit tinjauan pendapat masyarakat tempatan sempena PRK Kuala Kangsar. Mungkin jika saya cakap saya dari parti Roket, mereka akan lebih ‘segan’ nak berbual.
“Akak rasa sebagai peniaga, apa masalah yang akak hadapi? Bagaimana dengan majlis perbandaran?” soal saya.
“Dengan majlis memang tak ada masalah, janji ada lesen. Harga barang naik!” pantas Kak Su jawab.
Kata Kak Su, dalam tiga bulan lalu, sekilo laksa dijual RM12 sahaja, sekarang harganya sudah RM13. Kenaikan ini termasuklah harga cili burung.
Sambil kami bersembang, pelanggan lain yang ada turut mendengar celoteh kami bertiga sambal tersenyum-senyum.
“Dulu adalah cuba tanam tapi tak jadi,” seloroh Kak Su. “Tapi itulah, kita ni orang biasa, komplen macam mana pun, kalau nak naik, dia naik,” sambungnya.
“Tapi yang komplen tu tak daftar mengundi…” sahut Kak N.
Saya ketawa mendengarnya. Kak Su dan Kak N nampaknya memang peduli dengan isu-isu semasa. Siapa kata orang kampung tak peduli? Mereka tahu dan mereka faham apa yang berlaku.
“Okay kak, akak rasalah, pilihanraya kali ni, calon macam mana akak akan pilih?” soal saya. Sengaja saya tidak mahu bertanya mereka akan pilih parti mana. Sebab, sebelum ini, saya pernah dijawab responden “undi adalah rahsia”. Jadi, kurang elok pula kalua ditanya apa pilihan mereka.
“Kita nak calon yang boleh buat kerja,” jawab Kak Su.
“Kali ni kita ada empat penjuru. BN, PAS, Amanah dan Bebas. Akak rasa macam mana dengan calon-calon parti ini?” soal saya.
Kak Su dan Kak N bagai tak menyerah melayan soalan-soalan saya. Cuma saya agak terkejut bila Kak Su jawab beliau kurang yakin dengan calon wanita.
“Kenapa pula kak?” saya kehairanan.
“Calon wanita mudah dipergunakan, bos suruh sain, dia sain…” jawab Kak Su selamba.
Secara peribadi, pandangan Kak Su itu agak mengejutkan saya dan stereotaip. Mungkin orang lama sepertinya lebih faham keadaan politik di kawasannya atau beliau pernah melalui pengalamannya sendiri.
Tambah Kak Su lagi, dia lebih senang dengan calon yang boleh menegur bos dan tidak sekadar ‘yes bos’.
Saya mengangguk-angguk. Begitu dengan Kak N, senyum mengangguk. Semangkuk laksa habis saya hirup. Saya tambah sekilo lagi untuk dibawa pulang makan bersahur.
Sambil mengucapkan terima kasih dan selamat berpuasa kepada Kak Su dan Kak N, saya kira, Pilihanraya Kecil Kuala Kangsar ini mungkin memberi sedikit kejutan walaupun dalam pusingan pertama ini, kita melihat bendera BN dan PAS lebih banyak dari Amanah. Hanya ‘orang Kuale’ sahaja tahu apa yang mereka mahukan. –Roketkini.com
Can a thief’s hand be cut off in Islam...
If PAS President Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi thinks that crime can be likened to diabetes and that amputating a thief’s hand can be likened to cutting off the gangrene-infected limb of a diabetic patient to save a life, then he is exactly the sado-masochistic Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland who was obsessed with decapitation.
Hadi’s baying for blood must stop, for it is feared if Hadi has his way, we may just have an army of amputees, whose hands were cut off for the smallest theft.
It must be remembered that under the strict laws of the true Islam according to verified texts and scriptures, it is almost impossible to amputate a convicted thief’s hand.
According to traditions of the Prophet Muhammad, verified scholars of Islam, Islamic texts and scriptures, there are 19 preconditions for amputating hand of a thief.
If any of these preconditions are not met,the hand should not be cut but still the thief has other punishments. Also, the cut of hand should be from end of fingers and the palm of hand should always remain, says islam.stackexchange.com, a website which has experts on Islam answering questions on the religion.
The 19 pre-conditions are:
1. The thief must be an adult. Abdullah Ibn Sinan relates the following tradition from Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq (a.s.):When a minor child steals for the first and the second time he is forgiven. If he does it for the third time he is issued a strict warning and beating. If he persists in his crime, the tips of his fingers are slightly cut and if he repeats the act, some more of his fingers are cut away. (Even then, before that is done, there are the conditions below which have to be looked at.)
2. The thief must be sane. So if an insane person robs, his hand is not amputed. He may be suitably warned and scolded.
3. The thief must not have resorted to stealing under duress, if he had been compelled to do so, the penal code is not applied.
4. The stolen thing must be something that is worth owning. Hence, if ones freedom is restricted it cannot be called a theft.
5. The value of the stolen object must not be less than one-fourth misqal of pure gold. One misqal is equal to eighteen grams. One-fourth misqal is four-and-a-half gram.
6. The son or the slave of the thief must not own the thing that is stolen. So if a father steals from his son, he is not punished.
7. Eatables stolen during the times of famine do not make the thief liable for having his hands cut. It is narrated from Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq (a.s.) that he said: In the time of famine and draught the hands of a thief are not cut off for stealing edible items like bread and meat etc.
8. If a soldier participates in a raid and steals from the plundered goods obtained in war before they are distributed, he is exempted from the punishment.
9. If one of the parties to a transaction steals a property and claims that it rightfully belongs to him, he is not liable to be punished.
10. If a person is accused of theft, but before his theft is proved to the judge, he pays the owner the value of the goods, he is not penalised. Similarly, if a son steals from his father but before the verdict is issued the father dies, the son is not punished, as stolen goods now comprise his inheritance.
11. If the use of the stolen things is Harām (e.g. wine or pork), there is no penal action against the robber.
12. If the thief claims that he had not taken a particular thing with the intention of stealing it, and the judge considers otherwise, there shall be no punishment for it.
13. The object should have been stolen from a place where the owner’s permission is required to enter. If a theft takes place in a public mosque or public bath, the thief does not have his hand amputed.
14. The thing should have been stolen from a secure place.
15. The thief must himself take away the stolen goods from their proper place. If one takes out the thing from its safe place and another one takes it away, neither of the two can be punished for theft. If a thief removes the stolen object and loads it on his animal, or gives it to an insane man or a minor child for taking it away, the latter is not penalised. This is because the animal, the insane person and the child are mere carriers of the goods.
16. Severing of the hand is a punishment for theft. Theft implies that someone takes away something without the knowledge of others who later realise that the thing is missing. Hence if a person forcibly loots some goods from its owner, he is not punished for theft.
17. If before a theft can be proved, the thief goes to the judge and repents and promises not to steal in future he is saved from the punishment.
18. For a theft to be proved, two just witnesses should have seen the thief stealing. (Just witnesses must be practising Muslims, pure from crime and has no record of lying.)
19. If the owner takes back his goods or allows the thief to keep them before the matter is reported to the Qazi and does not press for a penalty, the thief is not punished.
With all these conditions, Hadi and his followers’ obsession with amputation have shamed Islam as a religion full of blood and gore. This is the same way meat-eaters are portrayed as cave-men clubbing a poor animal to death and then tearing off raw flesh dripping with blood - when in reality it is not so.
Even if Hadi's Hudud has all the 19 pre-conditions, it is feared that there will be much injustice, judging from the overzealousness of Hadi and his followers to amputate merely to show their might. - Zakiah Koya
Malaysian Journalist: Najib Cracked Down on Free Speech to Limit 1MDB Fallout...
Mustapha Kamil, the former group editor of the English-language New Straits Times, which is controlled by Mr. Najib’s ruling party, took a rare public stance by saying that an increasingly “authoritarian” stand by the government toward media was the reason he quit the newspaper in April. He had worked there for more than a quarter-century. Mustapha Kamil worked for New Straits Times for more than 25 years
Mr. Mustapha initially remained quiet after stepping down, but last week posted the reasons for his action on his Facebook page—an unusual act in the closed world of Malaysian state media.
A journalist’s responsibility is “first to the truth,” Mr. Mustapha wrote. Investigators in at least seven countries are probing 1Malaysia Development Bhd., or 1MDB, a government investment fund Mr. Najib set up in 2009 to boost growth. Some investigators have said they believe $6 billion has gone missing.
Hundreds of millions of dollars originating from 1MDB allegedly moved into Mr. Najib’s private accounts via a web of offshore entities, and was spent on politics, jewelry and clothes, The Wall Street Journal has reported, citing investigators and bank-transfer documents.
Mr. Najib’s government has banned newspapers it controls—which include the New Straits Times and the larger-circulation Malay-language Berita Harian and Utusan Malaysia newspapers—from covering the 1MDB story, Mr. Mustapha said in an interview.
News releases from 1MDB denying stories in the Journal and calling into question its sources would sometimes come to the New Straits Times from the prime minister’s office with orders to run the statements in their entirety, according to Mr. Mustapha. The newspaper did as they were told.
“There are specific instructions to use this or that story, and we’re not allowed to question,” he said. “Before 1MDB, there was more freedom for us to do our job.”
Mr. Najib and the 1MDB fund didn’t respond to questions about whether the government pressured media over coverage of the scandal. In the past, Malaysia’s government has justified curbing media freedom to report on 1MDB, citing the need to maintain public order.
The prime minister has said the money he received in his account was a political donation from Saudi Arabia, and most of it was returned. 1MDB has denied wrongdoing and says it is cooperating with the probes.
Mr. Mustapha acknowledged that the New Straits Times, which is controlled by Media Prima Bhd., a company owned by Mr. Najib’s ruling United Malays National Organization, always faced some curbs on free expression.
Those limits, though, have narrowed considerably in the past year since Mr. Najib began to fight allegations about taking money from 1MDB, he added.
“It was not this frequent and not this authoritarian,” Mr. Mustapha said of previous media controls.
James Chin, a Malaysian academic who heads the Asia Institute at the University of Tasmania, disagrees that the level of pressure on state-run media from the government has increased under Mr. Najib. He said the government of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad regularly closed newspapers.
But the 1MDB scandal has rolled on for so long—hurting the ruling party’s image—that it is starting to cause fissures between Mr. Najib and editors from newspapers that should support him, Mr. Chin said.
Some independent news outlets, like the Edge Media Group, have also faced pressure from Mr. Najib’s administration after reporting critically about the 1MDB scandal. Last year, the government said it suspended The Edge Weekly and The Edge Financial Daily for two months due to the company’s reporting on the scandal. The Malaysian Insider, another online news site owned by the Edge group, said it was blocked by the government in March and decided to shut down amid falling advertising revenue.
Mr. Najib’s administration has cracked down on criticism of 1MDB in other ways. Last year, a former ruling-party politician was arrested on charges of economic sabotage after he called for an investigation into 1MDB. He was later released on bail.
Mr. Mustapha said on Facebook that the Pulitzer Prize committee’s decision in April to cite The Wall Street Journal as a finalist in international reporting for its coverage of 1MDB was a factor in his decision.
“When an American newspaper…wrote a story that got nominated for the coveted Pulitzer Prize, about an issue that happened right under my nose, I began to seriously search my conscience and asked myself why I was in journalism in the first place,” he said. - Tom Wright,WSJ
Mustapha Kamil letak jawatan demi kebenaran.
cheers.
No comments:
Post a Comment