We are saddened to announce that as of yesterday, Saturday Nov 26, 3.40pm, Tiny has left the building. Tiny has been sold for an immoderate $100. Really, We must protest at these Singaporeans. They simply refuse to pay illegal immigrants the same hourly rates as citizens or permanent residents. But that is a different matter.
19 November 2005 :: Bye bye Tiny!! You're in the good hands of your new Mommy and Daddy now! Sengkang is your new home! Your new name is JJ.This depressive development, however, is tempered by the fact that Tiny has found a good home. He has a New Mommy and Daddy. They are a young couple with no kids, and they used to own two dogs whose kidneys sadly cashed in their chips due to the
Pedigree dog food malfunction last year. This New Mommy is the sister of our Mommy's colleague, so we will get regular updates. We hear the New Daddy is very happy with Tiny and loves him very much.
By the way, Tiny had a bath right before the puppy viewing to make him smell nice! Such a cutie, all curled up in the towel.Making it TwoWe were saddened to announce that as of yesterday, Saturday Nov 26, 5.45pm, Sam had left the building. Sam had been sold for an immoderate $120. Really, We must protest at these Singaporeans. They simply refuse to pay taxes to the Spaniards. But that is a different matter.
This depressive development, however, was tempered by the fact that Tiny has found a good home. He had two new teenaged female sidekicks and a new Old Mommy and Old Daddy. They stay in Woodlands. One of the teenaged female sidekicks, Fiona, was the part-time staff at Mommy's friend's shop. She chose Sam because she found his character very similar to hers. By that, we interpret to mean she's intelligent and adorable and loving and attention-seeking and a fast developer.
Making it ThreeHowever, as of 7.40pm today, Nov 27, Sam was back in the building. Fiona's persnickety Muslim neighbour had called the police to complain about Sam's crying last night. And although the police had said only to try to keep the puppy's noise down, the Malay man wanted to blow up the matter, complaining that dogs are dirty and that he didn't want them around. He threatened to call the Town Council. A fat lot of good that would have done, because it is not illegal to keep ONE dog in a flat.
This was Sam's new Mommy for a day. She's Fiona. Her neighbour wasn't happy about her getting a dog. So she had to return Sam. Boo to the neighbour!Ahem. At this point, We Puppies have to sidetrack from announcements to lodge a protest.
Dogs are as dirty as you let them get. Yes, their saliva will defile you, under Islam laws. But unless you go sticking yourself into Fiona's flat, how will Sam's saliva get onto you and defile you? Sam will certainly not go poking his tongue into your flat. Oh, you mean, if the evaporation from his doggie breath wafts over to your flat, that would defile you? Oh, you mean if he licked his paws, then if he trotted past your flat on his way down for a walk, that would defile the COMMON walkway and you would have to do cleansing rituals for your slippers if you walked over his pawprints? News Flash buddy: There's probably more sullying stuff like pork chop aromas from your other neighbour's kitchen, or what about that alcohol in the perfume you've just sprayed on?
Mommy's Muslim friend kept dogs before on his farm, although he wouldn't let the dogs lick him (much). But even if they did (and which human can resist the loving sniffies of dogs?), he and his family members would do the cleansing ritual and all would be fine.
This is the thing about a mixed bag population such as Singapore's. The humans have to be racially and religiously tolerant. And yet, some have to bend over backwards to accomodate the more intolerant people among the racial/religious groups. So in this case, should the Malay man accomodate the dog, or should Fiona's family accomodate the Malay man? If this were to escalate to the larger level, it would raise lots of tensions and no one would dare say that the Malay man should compromise his religious beliefs for the sake of Fiona's family having a dog.
On the other hand, if owning a dog were part of a religious practice, and it were religion against religion, of course the Malay man would lose the case, because it is 1. Fiona's right to keep a dog within the premises of her home and take it for walks on a leash 2. Her religious belief that owning a dog would bring her purity and long life.
The scary thing in Singapore is, you can get jailed for blogging potentially racial-hatred incitment posts too. We Puppies are NOT encouraging anti-Muslim sentiment, as those two young men who were jailed did on some internet forums. However, we ARE saying, please, give some, take some. We respect your rights to a dog-free environment, but that stops at the common corridor and especially does not extend beyond your neighbour's doorstep into her house. Sound travels, but from what we've seen, so does the stink of pontifical zero tolerance dogmatism.
Because Fiona felt so pressured, she returned Sam. Even though the whole afternoon, he'd been a good boy and not made any noise as he played fetch. And even when the Malay man came round in the afternoon to make more threats, he could see for himself that Sam was being a perfectly good boy. Yet he persisted. Unbelieveable. We shan't comment on religious matters. It's wrong. Back to tonight's announcements: Sam is back in the building. Snowie-Mummy was happy to see him, and so were all the other dogs. And so, there were three.
Yours irritatedly and irately,
Dennis, Duke of Da Hood
SpokesPuppy
