Grenfell Tower

[Woosh]

Just remember that some of us do speak out, ask questions and challenge these, often corrupt, individuals.

I do the same to you what you do to them.
I ask you questions and expect you to back up your views with proven facts.
If you cannot back your arguments with facts then you are no better than the people you criticise.
(I typed criticize and changed it to please your sensibility. You see, everyone can be polite while aggressively debating).

 

[Zlatan]

It would certainly quell suspicion ( a little) if official figures of survivors were published.
If there is a small discrepancy adding all the knowns together , well that would be sort of normal but a large figure ??
I was under impression only 168 people had been accounted for , adding to this the known deaths only gives around 250. Is it possible only 250 residents were in occupancy in a tower block capable of housing 600 ???
One report I,ve seen said as many as 324 people " could " be unaccounted for ???

 

[Woosh]

It would certainly quell suspicion ( a little) if official figures of survivors were published.

some journalists will surely ask under FOI for the number of claimants and the disbursed amounts.
I think the gray area is the 23 flats where the police could not find anyone to contact and no recognisable human remain.

 

[soundwave]

some journalists will surely ask under FOI for the number of claimants and the disbursed amounts.
I think the gray area is the 23 flats where the police could not find anyone to contact and no recognisable human remain.

try it they will just say it will cost more than the £450 limit and refuse it

 

[soundwave]

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/number_of_poeple_rehoused_or_to
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/grenfell_disaster_the_truth

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_many_of_the_120_households_o

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/grenfell_tower_numbers_of_victim

loads more on there if you look.

 

[Woosh]

loads more on there if you look.

we'll get some answers in 20 days.

 

[soundwave]

we'll get some answers in 20 days.

i have had some come in in under 2 weeks tho

 

[oldtom]

I do the same to you what you do to them.
I ask you questions and expect you to back up your views with proven facts.
If you cannot back your arguments with facts then you are no better than the people you criticise.
(I typed criticize and changed it to please your sensibility. You see, everyone can be polite while aggressively debating).

Just to be clear 'Woosh', this is not a debating chamber so the rules of debate do not apply here.

I really don't understand why you imagine that you are entitled to answers to stupid questions. I have no problem responding to relevant, sensible questions on any subject about which I have even a little knowledge but people who ask stupid questions repeatedly will simply be ignored by me.

With regard to facts, certainly as far as the Grenfell Tower disaster is concerned, there continues to be a very deliberate suppression of the casualty numbers on the part of the government and/or its agencies. You appear, judging by your contributions to these political threads, to have absolute faith in a whole raft of public servants - you even seem to believe that there is a golden dawn ahead should 'Brexit' finally see the UK out of the EU and without many friends elsewhere in the world. The only gold in the UK's future is fools' gold!

As for the numbers at Grenfell, it really doesn't matter two weeks after the event whether the numbers are perfectly correct or not; someone knows, perhaps not exactly, the number unaccounted for so there is no practical reason why the public should not be made party to such a figure, albeit not necessarily an exact figure. Only those concerned about loved ones remain worried about the identification of those recovered from the building and those yet to be recovered. However, only the numbers concern me and I do not trust this appalling government or its agencies to tell the truth.

It is likely that much blame will be found to be at the government's door and that of the local council but legal culpability requires skilled legal argument and I'm sure there will be highly qualified lawyers looking very carefully at all the material relating to this disaster, even now before we have a final death tally.

Remember it took 28 years to see charges brought against some of the leading 'players' in the shambles that led to 96 deaths.

Tom

 

[Woosh]

oldtom, you seem to make a habit of calling people like me stupid.

 

[Croxden]

After cremation o

Remember it took 28 years to see charges brought against some of the leading 'players' in the shambles that led to 96 deaths.

Tom

Are you expecting a result?
It'll be kicked into the long grass.

 

[Danidl]

Just to be clear 'Woosh', this is not a debating chamber so the rules of debate do not apply here.

I really don't understand why you imagine that you are entitled to answers to stupid questions. I have no problem responding to relevant, sensible questions on any subject about which I have even a little knowledge but people who ask stupid questions repeatedly will simply be ignored by me.

With regard to facts, certainly as far as the Grenfell Tower disaster is concerned, there continues to be a very deliberate suppression of the casualty numbers on the part of the government and/or its agencies. You appear, judging by your contributions to these political threads, to have absolute faith in a whole raft of public servants - you even seem to believe that there is a golden dawn ahead should 'Brexit' finally see the UK out of the EU and without many friends elsewhere in the world. The only gold in the UK's future is fools' gold!

As for the numbers at Grenfell, it really doesn't matter two weeks after the event whether the numbers are perfectly correct or not; someone knows, perhaps not exactly, the number unaccounted for so there is no practical reason why the public should not be made party to such a figure, albeit not necessarily an exact figure. Only those concerned about loved ones remain worried about the identification of those recovered from the building and those yet to be recovered. However, only the numbers concern me and I do not trust this appalling government or its agencies to tell the truth.

It is likely that much blame will be found to be at the government's door and that of the local council but legal culpability requires skilled legal argument and I'm sure there will be highly qualified lawyers looking very carefully at all the material relating to this disaster, even now before we have a final death tally.

Remember it took 28 years to see charges brought against some of the leading 'players' in the shambles that led to 96 deaths.

Tom

Tom your responses to Woosh were at best ungracious. I cannot understand some of his stances on the Brexit question, but in the matter of grenfell, his upbringing would have expected rational answers to the questions he has posed. Such is the French way.
Like Woosh I am surprised that some of the quality investigative journalists have not pieced together a montage of projected casualties in each of the flats. And compared with known survivors, I would for instance have expected to see such in the Sunday times, it would have been so some decades ago. England is not (yet) a police state, so what pressure could have been applied to suppress informed speculation.

 

[Planemo]

However, only the numbers concern me and I do not trust this appalling government or its agencies to tell the truth.

I believe the numbers are concerning you because you (and many others) are grossly underestimating the amount of illegals that were resident, the problem being that by their very definition they don't exist. I have no doubt that there were possibly hundreds more fatalities, but demanding to know verifiable figures is simply not always possible. You then decide that it's all a conspiracy by the police/government to cover things up which at this time I feel is highly unfair. Citing Hillsborough events which the police were involved in over 28 years ago is not (IMO) justification to believe that anything which they do now is also full of skullduggery. Things have changed massively in the police. It isn't Life On Mars anymore I can assure you.

As someone who has entered many properties unannounced (including shared accomodations/flats) I am somewhat versed in being presented with factual experience where illegal residents are concerned. The numbers would shock you, and it is not a rarity, it's the norm. To complicate matters, even when there are documents to suggest who should be residing, that person/s are often not present and there are instead many folk who are not known. Going into a 3 bed property and finding 10 residents (none of whom are showing on DWP/home office/PNC or other records) was commonplace. This would also corroborate the sheer number of illegals I have personally witnessed exiting the back of lorries at various locations on a daily basis.

The only numbers we can go by are what can be established forensically as well as those residents who were auditable. Anyone else (of which I believe there will be many) cannot be 'made up' just to fill in the blanks and keep the conspiracy theorists happy.

It is a massive tradgedy when respects cannot be paid to the many of those who died, but this is the dire consequence of those same people not wanting to be showing on the system.

 

[Wicky]

Like Woosh I am surprised that some of the quality investigative journalists have not pieced together a montage of projected casualties in each of the flats.

London fire: Why don't we know how many died in Grenfell Tower?

"On 16 June when the police said the official number of confirmed dead was 30, the BBC estimated the number of dead and missing to be more than 70."

Grenfell Tower fire: Who were the victims?

 

[Kudoscycles]

Maybe this has already been suggested,I haven't read the full thread.
There seems to be a question of the validity of the fire test ,especially considering it has revealed 100% failure.
Surely the obvious solution is to submit the highest fire protection panels,I believe these are ceramic,if that fails then you must question the usefulness of these tests.
If the best passes then go down the protection scale until failures occur,the benchmark has thus been created.
I understand that most cladding is passed by reference to 'desktop studies',looks like a fudge to me.
KudosDave

 

[oldtom]

I cannot understand some of his stances on the Brexit question, but in the matter of grenfell, his upbringing would have expected rational answers to the questions he has posed. Such is the French way.

'Danidl', I'm sure you didn't mean it so but your comment could easily be viewed as racist.

Leaving that aside, what you refer to as 'ungracious' comments by me towards 'Woosh' were based on my perception of his repeated unanswerable questions (by any lay commentator) on the events at Grenfell Tower and the aftermath.

I have just had a look back and here are some examples:

Why don't you trust our police?

were there two fires instead of one?

If you were the housing minister or the head of H&S, would you guarantee that none will ever burn on your watch?

why should anyone trust you more than me? and you and me more than the police?

A sprinkler system would have saved lives but whose fault is this for not having one installed? the architects? the H&S regulations? or TM?

why would the owner turn on the extractor fan?

Who do you think is/are to blame for this? TM and her ministers?

did the architects apply for planning consent?

Are you assuming that I post before googling?

Then a statement like this thrown in!

you are so full of venom I wonder how you can carry on living.

'Woosh's' motive in throwing up these questions is in the nature of flamebaiting, looking for argument in what he wrongly describes as debate. Clearly, no lay person has all the answers in the absence of information, particularly that of a scientific or forensic nature but 'Woosh' chooses to ask questions better directed towards those who have chosen to make it their professional business to deal in such matters. They are fair game and should be interrogated, given the history of politicians, both local and national, in matters of housing, fire safety provision, policing, health services and all the other ancillary matters connected with government.

There is a duty of care issue which these politicians seek every opportunity to deny and avoid and that is why it is right that ordinary members of the public must have their fears articulated on every forum and platform available. Social media reflects much of the opinion of those without the money, status or influence to otherwise bring about change in our society.

'Woosh' has, at every opportunity, chosen to defend the establishment and has repeatedly articulated his faith in the now largely discredited 'Brexit' project. Like a group of other tory supporters on this site, 'Woosh' cannot contain his hatred for socialism.

Tom

 

[oldtom]

Things have changed massively in the police. It isn't Life On Mars anymore I can assure you.

'Planemo', I'm afraid you cannot assure me. Much as I am sure you would like it to be the case, the police service has not changed in any material way over recent decades.

I would not criticise rank and file officers who perform their duties to the best of their ability but at the top of the management/administrative pyramid, politics and freemasonry still dictate the direction of police priorities and tactics. Crime-fighting seems to be well down the list of priorities for many constabularies these days and the police are seen increasingly as simply the protectors of the elite and enforcers of government policy.

Tom

 

[Woosh]

Oldtom,

Many years ago, I was about 12 or 13, my teacher started the first lesson in physics with a quote similar to this:

There is no right. There is no wrong. There are only degrees of correctness.

Needless to say that lesson has served me well and I excelled in that subject.
And I never insult the intelligence of people who hold different opinions to mine.

 

[Danidl]

'Danidl', I'm sure you didn't mean it so but your comment could easily be viewed as racist.

Leaving that aside, what you refer to as 'ungracious' comments by me towards 'Woosh' were based on my perception of his repeated unanswerable questions (by any lay commentator) on the events at Grenfell Tower and the aftermath.

I have just had a look back and here are some examples:



















Then a statement like this thrown in!



'Woosh's' motive in throwing up these questions is in the nature of flamebaiting, looking for argument in what he wrongly describes as debate. Clearly, no lay person has all the answers in the absence of information, particularly that of a scientific or forensic nature but 'Woosh' chooses to ask questions better directed towards those who have chosen to make it their professional business to deal in such matters. They are fair game and should be interrogated, given the history of politicians, both local and national, in matters of housing, fire safety provision, policing, health services and all the other ancillary matters connected with government.

There is a duty of care issue which these politicians seek every opportunity to deny and avoid and that is why it is right that ordinary members of the public must have their fears articulated on every forum and platform available. Social media reflects much of the opinion of those without the money, status or influence to otherwise bring about change in our society.

'Woosh' has, at every opportunity, chosen to defend the establishment and has repeatedly articulated his faith in the now largely discredited 'Brexit' project. Like a group of other tory supporters on this site, 'Woosh' cannot contain his hatred for socialism.

Tom

'Danidl', I'm sure you didn't mean it so but your comment could easily be viewed as racist.

Leaving that aside, what you refer to as 'ungracious' comments by me towards 'Woosh' were based on my perception of his repeated unanswerable questions (by any lay commentator) on the events at Grenfell Tower and the aftermath.

I have just had a look back and here are some examples:



















Then a statement like this thrown in!



'Woosh's' motive in throwing up these questions is in the nature of flamebaiting, looking for argument in what he wrongly describes as debate. Clearly, no lay person has all the answers in the absence of information, particularly that of a scientific or forensic nature but 'Woosh' chooses to ask questions better directed towards those who have chosen to make it their professional business to deal in such matters. They are fair game and should be interrogated, given the history of politicians, both local and national, in matters of housing, fire safety provision, policing, health services and all the other ancillary matters connected with government.

There is a duty of care issue which these politicians seek every opportunity to deny and avoid and that is why it is right that ordinary members of the public must have their fears articulated on every forum and platform available. Social media reflects much of the opinion of those without the money, status or influence to otherwise bring about change in our society.

'Woosh' has, at every opportunity, chosen to defend the establishment and has repeatedly articulated his faith in the now largely discredited 'Brexit' project. Like a group of other tory supporters on this site, 'Woosh' cannot contain his hatred for socialism.

Tom

Tom
I apologise for the delay in responding, but I had other more urgent tasks.
I would hope that my comment regarding French responses versus English responses would not be viewed as racist. It was intended to convey a difference in the two educational systems, where in France logic is a formal learning activity at school, following Descartes. Woosh s process of demanding definite answers to specific questions is a product of this philosophical model.

 

[oldtom]

Tom
I apologise for the delay in responding, but I had other more urgent tasks.
I would hope that my comment regarding French responses versus English responses would not be viewed as racist. It was intended to convey a difference in the two educational systems, where in France logic is a formal learning activity at school, following Descartes. Woosh s process of demanding definite answers to specific questions is a product of this philosophical model.

There is no need for any apology 'Danidl' as we all have other things to do of far greater importance than populating this thread with our heartfelt views.

I did understand the point you were making but so many of our 'Brexit' supporters in the UK have very negative views of the French people generally, (something that manifested itself very frequently when I was canvassing for the 'Remain' movement around the Home Counties during the lead-up to the referendum.) Lots of anti-French and German verbal abuse in any discussion about 'Brexit' was the rule rather than the exception. Equally, racist views about Syrians and Iraqis, Afghans, eastern Europeans, Indians and Pakistanis were prevalent among the Wetherspoon's 'patriots' full of Dutch courage...(no pun intended!)

Any comments even bordering on the critical of such people are lapped up by the kind of people to whom I refer - they loved the Farage parables!

Even last weekend, I did a stint on a 'Britain in Europe' stall but on that occasion, there was virtually none of the kind of abuse experienced previously. Most encouragingly, 31 people signed up to join our area movement and the general consensus of those was that things have changed and we never had enough information prior to the referendum.

Many expressed fears about the economy and a shrinkage in the job market in the next few years plus the price increases already in the system while pay rises are risible.

The strongest pro-'Brexit' remark came from Mr Shavenhead with tattoos replacing hair who strutted up with his Staffie-cross, shouting, 'Oi! Wot part of 'Brexit' don't you understand? We 'ad the vote an' you lost.' His raised voice attracted the attention of a couple of my ex-military colleagues enjoying their burgers while on their break and on seeing them stand up, he kindly disengaged from any further interrogation.

Tom

 

[oldtom]

Mike Sivier of 'Vox Political' captures the gist of a report from 'The Independent' in this article. Once again, it reveals an area where questions need to be asked of many individuals but we also need to examine this current government's attitude towards 'whistleblowers'.

There is probably only a very fine line between 'tragic accident' and 'culpable homicide' but this case may yet define such a distinction for future generations.

did-kensington-council-bury-fire-risk-assessment-on-advice-of-man-who-took-250k-for-writing-it

Tom