2018年7月16日星期一

酒肉朋友

上個月老伴在香港病倒, 返到悉尼的頭兩三星期一直在咳嗽, 看了醫生也無用。於是朋友們都各獻食療良方, 其中一方是薑蓉片糖蒸豆腐。我一聽就眉頭縐, 可以想像到那不倫不類的味道。於我而言, 精巧好吃的東西本身就會使人精神為之一振, 治不了病也可以祭五臟, 祭了五臟就加快痊癒。豆腐本身是價廉健康美食, 我當時就蒸豆腐給老伴吃, 當然不是用那療方。我當時用薑蓉及日本麵豉醬來蒸, 但為了賣相, 在中心加上杞子, 像點睛一樣, 帶來感觀效果, 

今晚, 我把打邊爐剩下來的蝦膠加上去: 


加炒菜、藕餅和薑絲牛肉金菇通粉, 就是兩老的晚餐了。

好友思華(程思華)不寫文章不做廣播, 昨天問我豆腐糕食譜, 一面買材料, 一面拍照來問, 是這種蒜嗎?



是這種粉嗎?


她認真做起豆腐糕來, 在過程中不斷傳些是非題來, 用不用先炒材料, 蒜青要不要, 要放蒜油嗎, 諸如此類。蒸好了還送了一份來要我品評。可惜我家中還有很多吃剩的東西, 還未品嚐她的廚藝。住在我家附近的老友可謂食福不淺, 當我做好了甚麼好吃的東西懶得送上門時, 就會叫他們去街時繞路過來拿。遇到朋友心情欠佳, 情緒低落, 我都會帶些好吃的東西去探訪問候。重點不是食物本身, 而是那番心意。我結交的不是「酒食遊戲相徵逐」那種酒肉朋友。

十多年前移居悉尼不久, 每星期都跟一班來自香港和台灣的人一起行山(爬山), 從中結識了一對台灣夫婦, 男的以前在台灣一間大學做行政工作, 女的是大機構的人事主管。女的突然出現肝衰竭, 命懸一線, 幸好及時換了肝。我事後才知悉此事, 因為大家只是投緣卻不稔熟。在她手術後我倆去探訪她, 她攬着我哭泣。換肝存着很多手術後的問題, 也有存活年數的問題, 她情緒很低落, 胃口很差。甜言蜜語我拿手, 弄吃我也不拙。再去探訪時就煲鮑魚雞湯及燜青邊鮑去。我一向都覺得, 好吃的東西可治癒一半的病, 也可促進感情。她漸漸康復了。他們一定是捐了很多錢給醫院, 醫院特別為了他們的捐款辦了個致謝的儀式, 他們邀請我倆一同出席, 我推卻了。雖然只邀請我倆, 但我從不沾別人的光。隨着活動的改變, 近這幾年我們完全沒有聯繫了。標少待人是很熱情的, 但一點也不長情。既灑脫豪爽, 亦尖刻計較, 待好的人好, 對壞的人劣。為朋友可以兩脇揷刀, 奸佞之士我會狂插幾刀。所以我朋友不算多, 敵人卻也不少。朋友太多我就要在廚房裏忙得團團轉了。Thank God.

71 則留言:

  1. https://topick.hket.com/article/1619566/%E7%97%B0%E5%92%B3%E7%87%A5%E5%92%B3%E4%B9%85%E5%92%B3%E7%97%87%E7%8B%80%E9%80%90%E5%80%8B%E6%8D%89%20%20%20%E6%B7%AE%E5%B1%B1%E7%B2%A5%E5%8F%AF%E6%AD%A2%E5%92%B3%E6%B2%BB%E5%93%AE%E5%96%98

    你們來香港時,熱到爆。我估呀標嫂可能係熱感。

    試下羅漢果煲水。

    Terry

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 好番喇, 多謝關心。現在就凍到死, 沒有落雪, 但好多地方零下幾度。

      刪除
    2. 凍就呀標嫂向你取暖好了。:)

      冬天就啱我多d. 我在夏伏中。

      Terry

      刪除
    3. Terry哥, 你揾完客仔錢 找我來消遣

      刪除
    4. 豈敢豈敢!應該有没有客仔都找標爺消遣吓.:)

      Terry

      刪除
  2. 嘩哈哈~~~豆腐糕果然吸引 , 連懂吃的[思華]也要嘗試去做. 也多得她的圖片, 讓本人解開了一些疑惑...如果記憶無誤, [思華]在香港某報曾有專欄 , 以食而論政治. 她也[書不離手], 非常博學.如今[不寫文章不做廣播] , 有點可惜....RL

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 從[程小姐]想起了[江小姐]....那個[江太史]的後人. 聽說有出版社為她出了本[食經] , 應該很好賣罷, 不竟豪門出身, 食得應該不一樣... 其實不論貧富 ,食材貴賤 ,如果 連食都唔考究 , 死做爛做, 打餐打死, 為乜 ?

      刪除
    2. 我跟思華常碰頭的, 但我們不談寫作, 因為我水平太低, 沒有她的文采, 更不談政治, 政治傷友情。最好就是談吃來祭五臟。江獻珠出了很多本食譜, 走進書局放食經的地方就可找到。

      刪除
    3. 蒜好貴!香港2-3蚊一札,近期芫茜好平,3蚊兩大扎!

      刪除
    4. 係咁架喇, 有的東西這裏便宜, 供求定律。

      刪除
    5. 我邊様平靚食邊様,退休人士就係咁,活在當下。退休前唔會咁諗,成日以為平得幾多,原来街市/葯房價錢平超市好多,even一隻同是泰國蛋已經差一倍!

      刪除
    6. 呢d都係無水慢慢養成嘅慳錢習慣。以前細個時,慳五毫巴士錢,寧可行十個八個巴士站路程。依家T shirt 當睡衣,有不少五蚊大或更大的窿窿都照着。當然老婆唔順超啦。

      Terry

      刪除
    7. 慳自己但闊佬人哋。穿窿用來做地布。

      刪除
    8. 依家穿窿襪就唔着了。多年前,試過有次去旅行除鞋入寺院,原來着住穿㝫襪!咁只好拉長隻襪,將穿㝫個位夾在腳指下面。:)

      Terry

      刪除
    9. 講起舊衫當地布,後生呢輩可能唔知係咩?我有個女舊同事就係一直堅持唔用地拖,而係用地布抹地,話咩位置都抹到又可順便運動,真係被佢點醒咗!

      刪除
    10. 不為物累, 物盡其用。

      刪除
  3. 標少親友都有福。
    我自己在人擠空氣差時,戴口罩預防上呼吸道感染。很冷時晚上用電毡。KKC

    回覆刪除
  4. 港酒店提供整形諮詢韓整容醫脫無牌行醫罪官:未來發生的事,非診斷 ...
    https://news.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/.../1531729486550
    裁判官認為,整容醫生只是就未來會發生的抽脂手術診斷,而非針對目前的疾病,因此當日諮詢會面不構成執業醫學,裁定各被告無罪。
    --------------------------
    是否以後難放蛇..其他案. KKC

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 我都唔明
      有咩理由手術前既解釋部分都唔算行醫

      完全違反常理既

      刪除
    2. Agree. I believe DoJ will ask the magistrate to state the case and let the Court of Appeal look at this interpretation.

      刪除
  5. https://news.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/20180717/s00001/1531796189950

    禁止運作其實即係點?改名開另一檔可唔可以?

    回覆刪除
  6. 咁標少覺得合唔合理?同bill of rights有無衝突?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 禁止社團合理, 但並非禁止個人想法, 人權法不是萬能的, 表面看無衝突。

      刪除
    2. https://billsiu.blogspot.com/2016/04/blog-post.html

      刪除
    3. 今次政府要取締這社團, 跟我兩年幾前篇文無關, 他們只是後知後覺, 否則一早就郁個民族黨。

      刪除
    4. 我覺得不是後知後覺, 是泛民這兩年鳥龍出醜事件不斷, 實力江河日下, 想聚眾還擊也無能為力, 所以現在便是政府對那些叫得過癮但政治力捧蛋的人找數的好機會

      刪除
    5. 陳浩天月初應台獨學者邀請到台灣,解放軍今天起在東海海域進行6天實彈演習,昨天保安局宣告正考慮禁止香港民族黨運作....都是和台獨趨勢有關。
      KKC

      刪除
    6. 政治舉措也很正常。

      刪除
  7. 請問如果係 facebook 開個群組,鼓吹港獨,是否可引用社團條例來禁止?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. This question is not easy to answer. At the outset, there should be evidence to show that the group is a "society"(社團). Chatroom chitchat does not in itself become a society. It is not different from a group of people chatting in a park or in a restaurant. There should be clear evidence of an association, organization etc. If 「香港民族黨」uses facebook to open a chat group and uses it as a forum to propagate HK independence, then I would say the evidence suffices to trigger a S.8 Cap 151 prohibition.

      刪除
    2. https://t.me/hongkongindependent

      歡迎來港獨Telegram Group

      刪除
    3. 留畀兔仔去荔枝角拜山先至歡迎喇。

      刪除
    4. 兔仔正在啃警方給陳浩天700多頁的文件,還是不用看,勸陳移民?
      網上叫港獨的多是發洩不滿情,吹牛的多,有黨綱的民族黨才是堅實的。
      KKC

      刪除
    5. 其實這事件我應寫一篇, 但鼓不起勁。

      刪除
    6. 現時港獨就是化有理性的人的時間,益了建制派紙媒做文章。難怪標少鼓不起勁。
      KKC

      刪除
  8. 如果被捕後行使right to silence,可唔可以直情拒絶錄影會面房,唔入錄影會面房?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 真實的情況就應問你的律師。

      刪除
    2. 拘捕後留你係差館是必然權力, 即係話, 你行使right to silence,「然後揀房」!
      除非一方十分離譜, 否則你話該四個字法官點判?
      相信揀房權利, 管理人優先吧! 大佬, 你唔係上賓, say no理由「拒絶錄影入錄影會面房做乜, 你行政失當」好表面, 無重要利害因素, 管理人知道了自會處理.
      BBTW

      刪除
    3. 這類問題我不懂答, 等如警察拉你你唔肯上警車, 選擇行路返差館, 你話得唔得, 是否疑犯的權利? 我唔識答咁嘅問題。

      刪除
    4. 如果有十幾萬公民抗命堵塞馬路,話呢樣係犯o既天賦人權,可能真係有。

      刪除
    5. 警察好鐘意攞一啲空白口供, 證明自己有問過犯, 但係犯選擇唔答, 聲稱為加強個犯嘅可疑程度, 錄一段唔講嘢嘅片係同理
      但係同為執法嘅海關就唔會咁做, 話呢樣嘢一啲用都冇

      其實呢啲空白口供上到庭有冇用

      刪除
    6. "If you do not want to answer questions, you should tell the Police outright that you do not wish to be interviewed at all."

      https://www.legalaid.nsw.gov.au/publications/factsheets-and-resources/burn-movie/the-right-to-silence

      I just wonder whether I can express my wish to not be interviewed in HK.

      5:45

      刪除
    7. 下午4:16 "...呢樣嘢一啲用都冇, 其實呢啲空白口供上到庭...冇用", 是.
      只不過是花絮、插曲, 見到緊張「局面」, 除非法庭上百無聊賴, 否則任何控方/辯方論點已淹蓋此事.
      又百無聊賴到真係無野講你眼望我眼, 咁就等人講出有力的前因後果, 導致如此局面, 處理失當扣幾多分......
      如此, 對當前刑事控罪沒有任何影響 (除非罪行是違抗警令), 你知, 與定罪無關.
      影響堂費, 下? 有人為此拗左半日, 有影響.
      BBTW

      刪除
  9. https://www.hk01.com/社會新聞/212353/出埋盾牌拉婦孺-中年婦殘疾兒光顧食肆-水務署指偷水拉上警車?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=fbpost_link&utm_campaign=mama
    水務署職員十分過份,使市民氣憤!!!><”

    回覆刪除
  10. 印度奇聞

    On cam: Lawyers thrash rape accused at Chennai mahila court
    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/city/chennai/on-cam-lawyers-thrash-rape-accused-at-chennai-mahila-court/videoshow/65024642.cms

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. From the clip, I am not too sure what happened.

      刪除
    2. Fifty lawyers beat up alleged gang-rapists when they appear in Indian court accused of sexually assaulting a girl, 12, for more than seven months

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5963011/Fifty-lawyers-beat-alleged-gang-rapists-appear-Indian-court.html

      刪除
    3. 死刑是便宜了這類犯人,但律師打疑犯是不够文明。有社會學家說社會罪行是全個社會的問題,不應當做一個人的錯,不應集中在一個人的問題,死刑會有錯失的。那我就說:判犯人的父母死刑才够警示作用呢!
      KKC

      刪除
    4. 如果不判死刑,全球來說,將來有無可能社會罪行的犯人父母被判入獄呢? 生產者責任制,最後可能追到去上帝,那就先要過天主教/基督教教會這一關,其他宗教無大礙吧。印度強姦案新聞多,看多了麻木。
      KKC

      刪除
    5. 坐牢不算誅吧,可能他們父母無顏面見人也想找地方躲一會呢。KKC

      刪除
    6. vs Free Soul :)
      BBTW

      刪除
  11. 曾生始終都要入番去。。。今次"好友"們不知有冇去撐場?
    http://news.rthk.hk/rthk/ch/component/k2/1408006-20180720.htm?spTabChangeable=0

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20180720/bkn-20180720121724154-0720_00822_001.html

      楊指出,原審法官在審訊尾聲才解除一名陪審員職務,是有責任解釋清楚原因。此外,原審法官亦有權提出他覺得辯方不妥當的做法。楊指原審法官有權合理斷定,辯方在結案陳詞時安排社會賢達聽審,是試圖變相提供品格證供影響陪審團。不過他是否應該在作斷定前,先作查問及給予相關人士解釋權利,或者可以商榷。

      楊表示,原審法官的判詞是先判決訟費問題,然後才解釋解除陪審員職務的原因,及批評辯方找人聽審的做法。兩件事都是在審訊完結後才判決,法官將之放在同一份書面判詞發布並無不妥。而且兩件事在判詞內一先一後處理,互無關連。這樣批評法官混淆兩事,毫無理據且對法官不公平。

      刪除
    2. 衰到要詐病去逃避牢獄之苦,真係夠晒香港仔...

      刪除
    3. 我唔服!有咩理由可以上訴量刑起點成功,上訴庭法官仲監硬揾理由再減三分一?條友無求情過喎!係咪俾面派對?

      刪除
    4. 楊官:

      Observation

      174. The judge, on the prosecution’s application, discharged a juror towards the end of the re-trial. It was right that he should give his reasons for doing, so as he had earlier indicated. The judge was also entitled to voice what he considered to be an improper way of conducting the applicant’s defence. The use of a public relations firm to bring prominent and respectable citizens to sit in court at reserved seats during counsel’s final addresses, could, if established, reasonably be perceived as an improper way of attempting to influence the jury that the applicant was a person of exemplary character, who had the support of prominent and respectable members of the community. The judge would then have been entitled to take it as an attempt to bring in evidence of good character through the back door, although it is perhaps debatable whether the judge should have first made the necessary enquiries and allowed the relevant parties to be heard before he made those comments.

      175. One can perhaps appreciate why the judge chose to include his explanation for discharging the juror and his comments on the applicant’s conduct of the case in, but separate from, the decision on the Costs Order. It was by that stage of proceedings more convenient to have one written decision covering both matters. In any event, the judge’s reasons for discharging the juror and his comments only appeared after he made the Costs Order. As Ms Montgomery was the first to admit, those reasons and comments bore no relevance to the costs decision at all.

      176. We do not think it is fair to accuse a professional judge of allowing irrelevant matters to influence his exercise of discretion just because he found it convenient to include his reasons for discharging the juror and his comments on the defence conduct in his decision on costs. We do not think that the judge’s observation concerning the defence conduct resulting in the discharge of a juror had any part to play in the Costs Order he made. The complaint that the judge had allowed irrelevant matters to influence his exercise of discretion should not, with respect, have been made.

      刪除
    5. Danny,

      Court of Appeal just said the starting point is too high,

      159. However, whilst we agree with the judge’s reasoning in respect of sentence, we think that, in all the circumstances, he pitched the starting point for sentence too high. In our judgment, the sentence after trial should have been 18 months’ imprisonment. From that starting point, we would give the applicant a 6 months’ reduction for his good character and past contribution to Hong Kong. That corresponds to the same percentage reduction afforded to the applicant by the judge from the starting point he adopted. We do not consider that there is anything in the medical report furnished to us which takes the applicant’s position outside the normal health considerations to be expected of someone of the applicant’s age in facing the prospect of imprisonment for the first time in his life.

      160. Accordingly, we shall reduce the applicant’s sentence of imprisonment from 1 year and 8 months (or 20 months) to 1 year (or 12 months).

      刪除
    6. 巴巴先生,

      七除八扣, 曾生仲有半年坐。詐病都詐唔到半年。

      刪除
    7. 咁又唔係啦標少… CSD對呢啲敏感犯通常都揸正嚟做小心翼翼。曾sir一舉手話有乜頭暈身慶,一定即刻入QMCW。醫官discharge咗咪又舉手囉。六隻啫,好快過。
      BTW如果我係曾sir,我就唔上CFA啦。佢老婆啲錢都用得七七八八啦。橫掂都已經名譽掃地,連1/7都無份上台,就算CFA打贏,攞番長俸都未必冚到使咗嘅costs...

      刪除
    8. Bill, it's a joke for the reduction according to his good character and past contribution. How to qualify? In that sense, all citizens can be applied for the same reason.

      刪除
    9. Danny兄,總之朝中有人好辦事。。。

      刪除
    10. peter chan, 特首係合約聘用,何來有長俸?曾sir係提早退休離開公務員行列,今次〝行為不當〞係佢退休後發生,要取消佢公務員嗰份長俸,除非佢今次衰嘅係叛逆罪啦!

      刪除
    11. 長俸來自以前做政務司司長時。

      刪除
  12. http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20180720/bkn-20180720122304211-0720_00822_001.html

    標少講過警察冇可能bind over, 咁輔警呢?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 如果已革除輔警職或辭職, 可以考慮,

      刪除
  13. 曾生是天主教徙,教會有無做過統計,經常去聖堂的而受過法庭審判輸了的,信徒人數佔全部信徒比例是否逐年增加。法律程序増加社會負擔,如果教會能令信徒保持清心寡慾,就能減少社會負擔。如果父母有生產者責任,他每周去祈禱的教會應該多少有點保養期責任。
    KKC

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 你神化了宗教, 神化了牧羊人及那些黑草羊, 教會自身難保, 怎去提供保養?

      刪除