Is it not interesting that some members of some small rural communities, who express concern at the impact on local schools, housing, health facilities and other local services, that placing an Asylum seekers reception centre for a large number of people, relative to the actual size of the local population in their locality, are branded Racist. By various self-serving politicians, media personalities and those with vested interests in these matters. Now surely a Racist is a person who is of the belief that another person is less of a human being on the basis of that other person’s racial origins, culture and background? Want a good example of this attitude, look up the Punch cartoons on the Irish. Are Irish people really of this belief?
Meanwhile, In Dublin’s fair city, Politicians, Business people and some local residents object to the locating of a facility for homeless men, on the basis that doing so will lower the tone of the area, and some of these homeless men will resort to begging, to the distress of all the said complainants. And guess what the facility for homeless men is cancelled!!! No one is even suggesting anything like calling those complainants, self-serving snobs or Racist!
Of course in all of these things wild accusations of someone else’s motives and behaviour, conveniently ignores that at the root of both these issues is the failure of our so-called democratic society to provide for all its citizens’ basic human rights. Notice we do not specifically blame the current government but the system operated by multiple interests.
The photos you see here were forwarded to streetdogs.blog the word on the street, by one of our readers. A young lady whose 15-month-old baby is attending Temple Street Children’s Hospital, for a failure to thrive condition. This young lady and her partner were given to understand that some samples of suitable dietary supplements for trial would be delivered to their home by a delivery service.
The couple, of course, was delighted when they saw a reputable delivery company’s van, pull up outside their gate, and the driver approaching their front door with three boxes in his arms. Upon opening each of the three boxes, the couple were stunned and bemused by the boxes contents. Each box measured 15cm in height x 19cm in width x 29cm in length, so each individual box is large enough to contain 6 x 500ml bottles.
So, what did each box contain? Well the first box is shown here on the left contained 3 x 200ml bottles of dietary supplement, the second box being shown here in the middle contained 2 x 100ml of dietary supplement and the third box being shown here on the right contained, contained ONE SINGLE SHEET of an A4 sized information pamphlet on the contents of the other two boxes. You might notice each individual box says, “FRAGILE” including the one containing the ONE SINGLE SHEET OF A4!!!!!!
In essences, 800 ml of the supplementary dietary trial samples and one single A4 information pamphlet were packed and dispatched for delivery in packaging more suited and designed to contain NINE LITRES, more than 9 times greater than 800ml plus one A4 information pamphlet!! Did somebody say something about over expenditure by the HSE, who presumably are paying somebody for this kind of wasteful and exploitative behaviour by some private companies dealing with the HSE? One is also given to wondering how our environmentally concerned groups view this wanton waste of resources?
To comment on this press the comments tab on the left of the page. Readers comments on this and other subjects are welcome here at streetdogs.blog the word on the street.
An interesting observation from one of streetdogs.blog the word on the street, readers. Given all the modern concerns about children’s school lunches in respect of the health value issues around the contents of the school lunch box our reader wonders how many concerned and aware parents place oral hygiene equipment in their children’s lunch boxes?
Any other readers like to comment on this subject of oral hygiene awareness for the school lunch box?
When a person is on a dating site and they are chatting to someone who they are led to belief is in the same town as them and so readily available for a coffee date meeting and who’s photo suggests someone they would be attracted to, but in reality the other persons is located in another country, and is using someone else’s photo. Would it not be correct to say that this other person is engaged in an actual deception? Even if no form of reward is obtained by this other person, other than to their own ego and the enhancing of peoples belief in their supposed ability to be where their admires expect them to be doing what people believe them to be doing, is this not deception.
In respect of what is now being called Fob-Gate, where certain TDs are reported as having been recorded as being present in the Dáil, when in fact they were some considerable distance away the far side of the Country, one defense put up by one person was that TDs being recorded as being present in the Dáil by a fob had nothing to do with claiming expenses , as once they attended at least one hundred and twenty days in the Dáil, a TD’s expenses would not improve with any further attendances recorded by their fob, past said one hundred and twenty days attendance..
Now the question must be, that in accepting the above defense as being correct, then why bother to be recorded as being present when you are not? Perhaps the Catfish and Kittenfish on dating sites might have some of the same reasons, do you think?
How is it that a common ordinary person working in a factory or some other place of employment, who either on their own behalf or another persons behalf falsely used a clocking-in-card to obtain payment for a period of their own or someone else’s alleged presence, would find themselves subject to dismissal from their employment, if indeed they did not also face Criminal prosecution for Fraud and/or conspiracy to defraud. So whats different about TD’s ( We have yet to hear about Senators)s doing effectively the same thing? Perhaps TD Marie Bailey’s actions are not so bad after all, at least the Lady was putting her claim up for full examination by An Irish Court to decide any justification of her claim! Unlike the nod and wink and blind eye Carry- on- TD’s, involved in these activities.