Grenfell Towers Fire

[chesters1]

We know that get this in your head the council told the contractors to use the cheap cladding to save money on the refurbishment

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/16/grenfell-tower-refurbishment-used-cheaper-cladding-tenants-accused/amp/

The council has no control over it ,it could have stepped under planning laws rejecting the cladding but the company that made or installed it said it was legal

Whether it was will come out and kctmo will be judged

 

Ps you cant use the link !you complained the press were gutter press only fit for toilet paper!

 

What is interesting is this page is being considered for deletion ,manipulating history? Cover up ? Who knows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower

Edited June 21, 2017 by chesters1

[big_cod]

The council has no control over it ,it could have stepped under planning laws rejecting the cladding but the company that made or installed it said it was legal

Whether it was will come out and kctmo will be judged

 

Ps you cant use the link !you complained the press were gutter press only fit for toilet paper!

You want a link to the gutter press here one this disgusting peice of trash they call the sun and look what they are saying remember Hillsboro Chesters I do .

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/3804113/cladding-grenfell-london-tower-fire/amp/

Edited June 21, 2017 by big_cod

[chesters1]

You want a link to the gutter press here one this disgusting peice of trash they call the sun and look what they are saying remember Hillsboro I do .

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/3804113/cladding-grenfell-london-tower-fire/amp/

All gutter press only fit for toilet paper so why use them ?

How about for a change put a link directly to the source of your rant ,why use hearsay or gutter press only fit for toilet paper and what the fick has Hillsborough got to do with this thread except to divert people away from your lack of proof in every other thing you whine about

 

You want a link to the gutter press here one this disgusting peice of trash they call the sun and look what they are saying remember Hillsboro I do .

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/3804113/cladding-grenfell-london-tower-fire/amp/

All gutter press only fit for toilet paper so why use them ?

How about for a change put a link directly to the source of your rant ,why use hearsay or gutter press only fit for toilet paper and what the fick has Hillsborough got to do with this thread except to divert people away from your lack of proof in every other thing you whine about

 

And i will say that twice to hopefully let it sink in

Edited June 21, 2017 by chesters1

[Huge_Vitae]

Just because Hammond said the cladding was banned does NOT mean that it is, can't you get it through your head that because a politician or media report says something does not make it gospel.

 

The question is under discussion, as yet, I have not seen any reference to that product being 'banned', in actual fact, as I stated earlier the 'experts' are discussing that fact, sadly, in a world where people require instant answers to questions raised there can only be one way to proportion blame and that has to be in a Court of Law and never, just never in a Newspaper or on the TV.

 

It may very well be true and that the use of the product in the situation that it was used was wrong, but my understanding is that the product use should be subject to a risk analysis to confirm that it's use was safe in that single use, if that was done then the person authoring the conclusion is to blame for being wrong, if that assessment was not done then somebody else is to blame, irrespective of whatever, I do not believe at this stage that it was anything to do with the elected members of the Govt. or Local Authority unless a member of the LA overruled the expert advice they would have been given.

 

Clearly somebody got it wrong, clearly those responsible should be held to account, but I fail to see how people demonstrating and chanting "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" wearing a Guy Fawkes mask helps the situation at all, and to say that it's OK to proportion blame based on what a crowd thinks is clearly no basis of trial.

 

"Look what we've caught, we've caught a witch, may we burn her?"

[chesters1]

Good job hammond got a masters in material science ,building design and safety and a batchelors in high rise flat cladding

No wait he didnt hes just a politition with the usual shady past

 

Remember cod believes everything untrue if it suits his agenda and ridicules anything true if it does not

Edited June 21, 2017 by chesters1

[big_cod]

Just because Hammond said the cladding was banned does NOT mean that it is, can't you get it through your head that because a politician or media report says something does not make it gospel.

 

The question is under discussion, as yet, I have not seen any reference to that product being 'banned', in actual fact, as I stated earlier the 'experts' are discussing that fact, sadly, in a world where people require instant answers to questions raised there can only be one way to proportion blame and that has to be in a Court of Law and never, just never in a Newspaper or on the TV.

 

It may very well be true and that the use of the product in the situation that it was used was wrong, but my understanding is that the product use should be subject to a risk analysis to confirm that it's use was safe in that single use, if that was done then the person authoring the conclusion is to blame for being wrong, if that assessment was not done then somebody else is to blame, irrespective of whatever, I do not believe at this stage that it was anything to do with the elected members of the Govt. or Local Authority unless a member of the LA overruled the expert advice they would have been given.

 

Clearly somebody got it wrong, clearly those responsible should be held to account, but I fail to see how people demonstrating and chanting "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" wearing a Guy Fawkes mask helps the situation at all, and to say that it's OK to proportion blame based on what a crowd thinks is clearly no basis of trial.

 

"Look what we've caught, we've caught a witch, may we burn her?"

So what do you think caused the fire to fly up the tower in minuites. !!! Edited June 21, 2017 by big_cod

[Huge_Vitae]

So what do you think caused the fire to fly up the tower in minuites. !!!

Quite frankly, I do not know because I am not in possession of nor able to access the evidence.

 

What I do have is the memory of entering a burning building to rescue the occupants, what I do have forever etched in my memory is 'that smell of burning human flesh'.

 

What I do have is memory of attending Hampshire Fire & Rescue HQ in Eastleigh and entering the 'hot house' to drag out a dummy to show me how stupid I was to attempt it, what I do have is the knowledge that I would probably do the same again.

 

What I do have to do is congratulate LFB and MetPol in preventing people from entering the building to 'rescue' people.

 

What I do have is an opinion, and at this stage that opinion is that the cladding is to blame, but what I am not able to do is to poportion blame to any person or persons because I do not rely on newspaper opinion to lead me to the truth, all they can do is lead me to an opinion, and opinions do not, thankfully apportion blame, that is the job of a Court of Law, be it the Highest Court in the Land, HM Coroner's Court, a Court of Law or even a Civil Court.

[big_cod]

Quite frankly, I do not know because I am not in possession of nor able to access the evidence.

 

What I do have is the memory of entering a burning building to rescue the occupants, what I do have forever etched in my memory is 'that smell of burning human flesh'.

 

What I do have is memory of attending Hampshire Fire & Rescue HQ in Eastleigh and entering the 'hot house' to drag out a dummy to show me how stupid I was to attempt it, what I do have is the knowledge that I would probably do the same again.

 

What I do have to do is congratulate LFB and MetPol in preventing people from entering the building to 'rescue' people.

 

What I do have is an opinion, and at this stage that opinion is that the cladding is to blame, but what I am not able to do is to poportion blame to any person or persons because I do not rely on newspaper opinion to lead me to the truth, all they can do is lead me to an opinion, and opinions do not, thankfully apportion blame, that is the job of a Court of Law, be it the Highest Court in the Land, HM Coroner's Court, a Court of Law or even a Civil Court.

So you agree the cladding excelled the fire and your experience you talk about must have been harrowing, I myself have done a fire fighting course twice with a BA set on my back going through a smoke filled building for my previous job ,so let's wait and see a hell of a lot of questions need to be answered about this terrible tradegy and If there is negligence here person or persons need to be held to account, Edited June 22, 2017 by big_cod

[leedafeeder]

With the MP's rewarding themselves a nine per cent pay deal,perhaps they may like to donate the rise to the Grenfell fundraising. However its quite obvious none of them will.

Well done Andy Murray for donating his Queens tournament winnings....pity he went out so early....

[Andrew]

The council cheif exec has resigned, no more £250k salary for him then