Sweet.Science wrote: » I'd say the council are well aware though
ohnonotgmail wrote: » those chairs look like the suit she bought for the kids communion.
Ruraldweller56 wrote: » I would hope so. If she's spending €2,500 on a set of chairs surely she's putting them somewhere. Unless she's going hauling them around with the kids.
Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: » Theyre a 6 piece set right? She’s going to bring her own seats to Tallaght Garda station next time. “We’re not poor, just homeless”
I see sheep wrote: » There's already 3!! threads on the first page of this forum abusing travellers, do you go into every thread and try to link it to travellers? What's your obsession? Do a traveller girl you fancied shoot you down when you were a young lad and now you spend your life obsessed with them?
Ray Palmer wrote: » So what level of racist are you?
Ray Palmer wrote: » You just have me completely wrong because you don't know how to actually critically think. You have to put everybody in little boxes so you can try to understand the world. I can assure you I pay a lot more taxes than you do.
Goldengirl wrote: » The halting site did not meet any safety standards, because DLRCC deemed it emergency accommodation. So they circumnavigated safety regs, squashed a few caravans together in a corner of a field , and left them there , without coming back to the site to try to ensure that safety standards would be upheld. That was their job and their responsibility as paid and accountable employees .The man who was a drunk and cooking chips had no hope as did none of the rest of the family. Four working fire extinguishers are not much good if everyone who might be able to lift and use them is asleep or unconscious. This is not something to be proud of and certainly complacency is as much a factor as the burning chip pan in these deaths. Would ye be so cool about it if it had happened in a row of terraced houses? There would be marches on the capital streets in protest , and rightly so.
sligojoek wrote: » Shared by Mags on FB regarding somebody trying to grow plants in space. Fly with the stars little innocent dogs and horses
Deebles McBeebles wrote: » Would you move in beside a halting site?
Ruraldweller56 wrote: » Oh deary me you are a sketch :pac:
Deebles McBeebles wrote: » Would you though, Ray?
punisher5112 wrote: » Are you the husband of Cash????
kowloon wrote: » You know damn well that they're not cash or related to cash by the fact that their post is easy to read without making your eyes bleed, so cut it out. There's not much of a discussion on this thread when it's mainly just people ranting about travellers and tarring an entire group of people in a way that would make a skinhead gang proud. It's okay to point out that there are problems without all the histrionics on display here. It's a thread in a discussion forum that you're writing, not an attention grabbing ****piece for the daily ****wit.
Goldengirl wrote: » Fire extinguishers were useless as they were already un conscious except for the young lad who tried but couldn't use them. Fire hydrant had no water pressure. The person who changed the smoke alarm to a heat sensor was wrong, and the council should have checked the site after it became obvious it was no longer emergency accommodation but a settlement with families.I can't accept the blasé attitude that says this is " all the travellers fault" , and that's being charitable. Provision of emergency accomodation for anyone in the country,needs to meet safety standards. I do not think this is negotiable. It is not negotiable if you or I are building a house , so why is it ok for a halting site?
Goldengirl wrote: » Fire extinguishers were useless as they were already un conscious except for the young lad who tried but couldn't use them.
Goldengirl wrote: » Fire hydrant had no water pressure. The person who changed the smoke alarm to a heat sensor was wrong, and the council should have checked the site after it became obvious it was no longer emergency accommodation but a settlement with families.
Goldengirl wrote: » I can't accept the blasé attitude that says this is " all the travellers fault" , and that's being charitable. Provision of emergency accomodation for anyone in the country,needs to meet safety standards. I do not think this is negotiable. It is not negotiable if you or I are building a house , so why is it ok for a halting site?
KrustyUCC wrote: » She's some buyer/seller on FB She's selling a '€600' suit she bought her son for her daughters communion Offer currently €250 so prob €350 loss like new worn just for chaple On 2nd Feb 2018 before her garda station stunt she was 'looking for a clean 7 seater' Was able to say on a €2000 car 'wer r u i will buy 2 day' Yet "HOMELESSNESS campaigner Margaret Cash was placed on a 12-month probation bond today. The 28-year-old, Westpark Gate, Tallaght, had pleaded guilty to stealing clothing worth €321 from Penneys, Nutgrove Shopping Centre, Rathfarnham, on February 17, 2018. “I don’t know what the shoplifting has to do with me being homeless, it is my private life. "I never said I was a saint or anything, far from it. “None of this has to do with the homeless crisis. “I feel like I’m being attacked for highlighting the homeless crisis. It’s all about me shoplifting, they are looking for the bad. “The clothes were for the kids. I feel like I am being targeted. It is letting the Government off the hook.”https://www.thesun.ie/news/3274135/margaret-cash-saint-avoiding-jail-penneys/Plenty of money for communion stuff, a car and couches Apparently 'love's me 7 beautiful kids more than life' yet she didn't think "What would happen to your children if you were to go to jail?" Then again “I never said I was poor. I said I was homeless. I get benefits the same as everyone else. I just haven’t got enough to get a home."https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/i-have-been-constantly-begging-for-help-margaret-cash-on-being-homeless-1.3598174
Plumbthedepths wrote: » All I get from your nonsense is its everyone's fault except the idiot that caused the fire.
blanch152 wrote: » This is a serious tragedy, yet you are trying to make a joke out of it by posting stuff like that. Fire extinguishers are useless anywhere everyone is unconscious. Whose fault is that? It is certainly not the council's that they were all unconscious. It is the fault of the people who drank until they were unconscious. The person who changed the smoke alarm was wrong????? Surely, you mean that the person who changed the smoke alarm carries a huge amount of the blame. How would the council know that it was obvious it was no longer emergency accommodation? Are the council watching the site 24/7? In this case, it is all the fault of the people living in the caravan. They changed the smoke alarm. They lit a chip pan and left it on. They drank until they became unconscious. The council couldn't have changed any of that. That could have happened whether they lived in a caravan, a house or a palace.
Deebles McBeebles wrote: » Just a few highlights for anyone (like me) who missed the goings-on since yesterday evening Ooooh! Absolute sh*te. Is that real? Seriously I need to know because it felt like I'd just taken LSD after reading it.
Goldengirl wrote: No , that is not what I said , as you know . In a previous answer to you I accepted that the chip pan started the fire. But it is a council halting site, provided by the council so is the responsibility of the council and the fire safety officers to ensure that fire safety regulations are enacted on any site within its remit. And in reply to another post , the council are responsible along with individuals who remove smoke alarms , and who do not take care while cooking. Of course there is individual responsibility for the actions/ inactions of people, but this applies to the council also. I have no interest personally in progressing this debate , except to tell those who were blaming the individual travellers alone for the tragedy.
Goldengirl wrote: » No , that is not what I said , as you know . In a previous answer to you I accepted that the chip pan started the fire. But it is a council halting site, provided by the council so is the responsibility of the council and the fire safety officers to ensure that fire safety regulations are enacted on any site within its remit. And in reply to another post , the council are responsible along with individuals who remove smoke alarms , and who do not take care while cooking. Of course there is individual responsibility for the actions/ inactions of people, but this applies to the council also. I have no interest personally in progressing this debate , except to tell those who were blaming the individual travellers alone for the tragedy.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » If I was drinking, forgot about a chip pan and passed out from being drunk it would be my fault if i died in a fire. Seems like the PC crowd are twisting themselves up in knots to blame everyone except the people responsible.
Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: » Is it though? Can we reasonably expect the council to hold the hands of grown adults? I am not blaming the victims, because it was an accident. But it’s certainly nobody else’s fault.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b9d7cf56a75eee6d7dd35aa28294f673.svg)
