London Fire and Aftermath RIP

Yourself isit

Widdershins wrote: »

''Militant socialists'' using a fire as an excuse to overthrow government (and it states this aim n the leaflets, they're not coy). It is definitely being used as a political weapon.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/17/grenfell-community-fear-day-rage-protest-could-descend-riots/

So what. The alt right use terrorist attacks to politicise immigration.

If it's the case here that the conservatives are responsible so be it.

devnull

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

That list was an exercise in deflection and mis-information. You never checked the accuracy of any of it before posting it here and assumed it must be correct because you seen it on facebook therefore by distributing it you are party to the deflection and mis-information exercise

It's the hypocritical nature of most of those on the right and those who voted for Brexit and are blaming foreigners for all of the problems in the UK.

- Everything that supports their view is automatically correct regardless of if there is proof
- Everything that doesn't support their view is wrong no matter how much proof there is.
- Every positive result of brexit is automatically fact regardless of proof
- Every negative result of brexit is project fear and made up.

Normally they then go off and say that they have seen the light because they have saw the truth on Russia Today who isn't afraid to tell the truth.

Despite the fact Russia Today is the least impartial news network out there.

Yourself isit

123shooter wrote: »

They are copying what's going on by the lefty libs in America against Trump. You will find it will happen here as well if it hasn't now with the venom and mis-info spread against Brexit and now the Conservative's.

There was a Labour man on the tele today saying everybody should rise up and march on the Conservative's. He wants a million people on the street. He says the Conservative's should step down even though they won the election and make way for Corbyn and Labour cause they would be better even though they lost and the majority of the people don't want them to govern.

Pointless having an election or voting anymore if that's the case.

Now they use disasters and tragic death to rebel rouse.

Worlds gone mad.

If the "disaster" is caused by Tory actions or inactions then a protest is legitimate.

Yourself isit

123shooter wrote: »

Let me know when you do jury service.:rolleyes:

What does that even mean? I said "if" the conservatives are responsible.

123shooter

devnull wrote: »

It's the hypocritical nature of most of those on the right and those who voted for Brexit and are blaming foreigners for all of the problems in the UK.

- Everything that supports their view is automatically correct regardless of if there is proof
- Everything that doesn't support their view is wrong no matter how much proof there is.
- Every positive result of brexit is automatically fact regardless of proof
- Every negative result of brexit is project fear and made up.

Normally they then go off and say that they have seen the light because they have saw the truth on Russia Today who isn't afraid to tell the truth.

Despite the fact Russia Today is the least impartial news network out there.

Another load of misinformation coming in. People voted for Brexit for their own reasons and not all because of immigration.

123shooter

Yourself isit wrote: »

What does that even mean? I said "if" the conservatives are responsible.

You did sorry I misread.:o:o I will delete.

youreadthat

Everything is the Tories' fault. All those avoidable train crashes under the last Labour government were also the Tories fault.

devnull

123shooter wrote: »

Another load of misinformation coming in. People voted for Brexit for their own reasons and not all because of immigration.

The nationalist mentality that has been whipped up by some of the media in the UK that blames the immigrants for everything because these are people who have vested interests and some deep hatred themselves.

Many in government are quite happy to blame foreigners for all of the countries problems because if people didn't blame the foreigners, they would blame the people who actually caused the problems, the government themselves.

The media and the politicians portray the country as being "full" and services being "stretched to capacity." and then state that there are "too many people coming in and putting strains on the services."

I've yet to have a coherent argument with many of the right-wingers who have this view because when you ask them to start backing up what they say they are unable to do so and start resorting to stuff like:

"We are too full."
"Everybody knows it's true."
"The dogs on the street know the score."
"They are everywhere, for example a friend of mine."
"They dictate to us what we can and can't do."
"I read in the paper that..."
"They are all murderers and rapists...."

Same soundbites over and over again, but no substance whatsoever.

devnull

Yourself isit wrote: »

So what. The alt right use terrorist attacks to politicise immigration.

They also use immigration as a scapegoat to cover up Tory party polices as well, especially when it comes to cuts to public services that are being hidden by the right wing press.

They point to public services being overwhelmed by migrants but don't mention that the extra capacity being used by extra migrants is only a minor impact compared to the capacity that has been taken out by tory cuts.

123shooter

devnull wrote: »

The nationalist mentality that has been whipped up by some of the media in the UK that blames the immigrants for everything because these are people who have vested interests and some deep hatred themselves.

Many in government are quite happy to blame foreigners for all of the countries problems because if people didn't blame the foreigners, they would blame the people who actually caused the problems, the government themselves.

The media and the politicians portray the country as being "full" and services being "stretched to capacity." and then state that there are "too many people coming in and putting strains on the services."

I've yet to have a coherent argument with many of the right-wingers who have this view because when you ask them to start backing up what they say they are unable to do so and start resorting to stuff like:

"We are too full."
"Everybody knows it's true."
"The dogs on the street know the score."
"They are everywhere, for example a friend of mine."
"They dictate to us what we can and can't do."
"I read in the paper that..."
"They are all murderers and rapists...."

Same soundbites over and over again, but no substance whatsoever.

Well you may have a point but then so may they, but it is their country and they can steer it's and their destiny regardless of the fallout that will happen elsewhere. It's not really their problem if some other country loses out or whatever.

I can just imagine if an English man came over here and told Irish people you are all wrong and misguided in the way you think and you can't do what you want with your own country.

Wompa1

123shooter wrote: »

They are copying what's going on by the lefty libs in America against Trump. You will find it will happen here as well if it hasn't now with the venom and mis-info spread against Brexit and now the Conservative's.

There was a Labour man on the tele today saying everybody should rise up and march on the Conservative's. He wants a million people on the street. He says the Conservative's should step down even though they won the election and make way for Corbyn and Labour cause they would be better even though they lost and the majority of the people don't want them to govern.

Pointless having an election or voting anymore if that's the case.

Now they use disasters and tragic death to rebel rouse.

Worlds gone mad.

Hmmmmmmm....

I live in the US. Within a couple of hours of the shooting at the baseball field this week. It was claimed that the shooter had asked an official if those training were Republicans or Democrats, before going off to get his gun.

A senator there later stated the man who asked that was wearing different clothes than the shooter. To me, I don't think it would be that odd for a passerby who was curious but not up on politics to ask who was out there.

A few hours later, two different politicians at the field confirmed it was the same guy.

What doesn't sit well with me about that is the fact they have found the guy moved down there, was living in a van and appeared to have a list of Republicans he wanted to knock off. If that was the case, why would he need to ask if they were Republicans or Democrats at all? He had been in the area for months scouting out for his opportunity.

More to this. Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi and Trump himself went into the whole divisiveness speil as Trump's friends at Fox News and MSNBC continued to fan the flames of hate.

Point being. This whole lefty libs vs right wing nutjobs thing feels very manufactured over here. It makes my balls ache when I see people in Ireland using the same terms and phrases that the talking heads over here put out e.g. libtards, lefties, snowflakes. Yuck. Have an original f'ckin thought!

123shooter

Wompa1 wrote:

. It makes my balls ache when I see people in Ireland using the same terms and phrases that the talking heads over here put out e.g. libtards, lefties, snowflakes. Yuck. Have an original f'ckin thought!

In the States you called them Commies I believe. We have always called them Lefties.

Widdershins

Yourself isit wrote: »

So what. The alt right use terrorist attacks to politicise immigration.

If it's the case here that the conservatives are responsible so be it.

There's a big difference between politicising, which in itself is objectionable, and a public invitation to join them in overthrowing the government! And a ''Day of Rage!''. That's very serious stuff.

The public didn't get frenzied after any of the attacks, I never saw the same level of politicising on social media. Yes the Right do it to an extent but they seem to do it on some kind of alternative sites and groups, you don't see it anywhere near so widespread. I'm not trying to suggest the Right are angels but they're not even the issue now, unless they're mixed in with the Hard Leftists who are doing this.

devnull

Widdershins wrote: »

Yes the Right do it to an extent but they seem to do it on some kind of alternative sites and groups, you don't see it anywhere near so widespread.

Have you ever head of the Daily Mail?

B_Wayne

devnull wrote: »

Have you ever head of the Daily Mail?

Recalling that time where judges were branded enemies of the state... Complete with photos. It was because of a ruling on article 50 for brexit

Widdershins

I'm talking about individuals, many of them, mobilising and vocalising an intent to overthrow the government, not a notorious newspaper.

123shooter

B_Wayne wrote: »

Recalling that time where judges were branded enemies of the state... Complete with photos. It was because of a ruling on article 50 for brexit

But the will of the people, the majority I think is called democracy was being interfered with by a small group of people who may have had vested interests.

The people have the right to know who is ruling on and in this case against their will do you not think?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Widdershins wrote: »

I'm talking about individuals, many of them, mobilising and vocalising an intent to overthrow the government, not a notorious newspaper.

It's like the old joke: a hard right and a hard left winger are eing interviewed by an immigration officer at an airport prior to entry:

Immigration officer: "Do you support the overthrow of the government by subversive or violent means?"

Hard right - "Subversive"
Hard left - "Violent"

B_Wayne

123shooter wrote: »

But the will of the people, the majority I think is called democracy was being interfered with by a small group of people who may have had vested interests.

The people have the right to know who is ruling on and in this case against their will do you not think?

The judges rule on what legally had to be done. They didn't expose some controversial lobby interests. They simply attacked the judicial system for doing their jobs and totally opened them up to being targeted by right wing extremists. This was literally the same year that Jo Cox was murdered by a 'Britain First' supporter.

Also in relation to the 'left' in America being Communists, it's rubbish. The American left is effectively centrist by European standards.

devnull

123shooter wrote: »

But the will of the people, the majority I think is called democracy was being interfered with by a small group of people who may have had vested interests.

The constitution must always be respected to protect from dictators coming to power and using their powers for political gain.

Otherwise Prime Ministers become de-facto dictators if they can just ignore the constitution and there is no body to up-hold it.

If there is no protectors of the constitution, essentially the Prime Minster can do what they want when they want.

History should show you what happens with that....

123shooter

B_Wayne wrote: »

The judges rule on what legally had to be done. They didn't expose some controversial lobby interests. They simply attacked the judicial system for doing their jobs and totally opened them up to being targeted by right wing extremists. This was literally the same year that Jo Cox was murdered by a 'Britain First' supporter.

Also in relation to the 'left' in America being Communists, it's rubbish. The American left is effectively centrist by European standards.

Commies.........I was referring to what they used to be called not what they were or are today.

As regards judges you have a fair point but it should never have got before a judge. In a democracy the will of the majority should be supreme not disregarded because someone does not like what the will of the majority decide. If a judge can throw out the will of the people then any old soak will try same..........which could be why some are trying to do this now.

devnull

123shooter wrote: »

As regards judges you have a fair point but it should never have got before a judge. In a democracy the will of the majority should be supreme not disregarded because someone does not like what the will of the majority decide.

There is a constitution that has to be up-held, you just can't ignore it because you feel like it at the end of the day, that is very dangerous if they can ignore the constitutional rules and could lead to dictators gaining and abusing power.

Going to the judges is exactly what happens in a democracy, a person deciding that they will ignore the rules of the land and the constitution because they do not like it is acting like a dictator, not a democrat.

B_Wayne

123shooter wrote: »

Commies.........I was referring to what they used to be called not what they were or are today.

As regards judges you have a fair point but it should never have got before a judge. In a democracy the will of the majority should be supreme not disregarded because someone does not like what the will of the majority decide. If a judge can throw out the will of the people then any old soak will try same..........which could be why some are trying to do this now.

And you will find that communist witch hunts in the US were a humiliating part of US history.

It got before a judge there was a legitimate question on the legality of the prime minister enacting article 50 on her own. It's far better to challenge before she enacts it, only to discover it was illegal. It would perfectly legal to challenge it. It's a defined part of democracies across the world to engage in constitutional questions such as this.

To use Donald Trump as an example, his executive orders have been challenged more than once and various courts have found there to be a question on if it violated the constitution. The judicial system is a major part in maintaining a fair democracy.

123shooter

B_Wayne wrote:

The judicial system is a major part in maintaining a fair democracy.

Yes but I think we all know that in this case there were other motives involved by some.

jackofalltrades

Samaris wrote: »

The gas lines in the stairwell are not yet confirmed.

When I first read this I thought, no way would anyone allow putting a gas pipe in the only escape route out of a building.
But it seems to have been the case amazingly.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/14/key-questions-about-the-grenfell-tower-fire

What about the new gas pipes in the central stairwell? Did they exacerbate the blaze?

A local councillor, Judith Blakeman, who sits on the tenant management organisation, raised concerns in March about the National Grid installation of gas risers or pipes in the main stairwell as part of the refurbishment. She was assured by the landlord that they would be boxed in with fire-rated protection, but this does not appear to have been done. The London fire brigade said on Thursday morning they had not been able to put out the flames until they had isolated a ruptured gas main in the block.

Samaris

Widdershins wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not reading aggressive responses especially from the poster with the ''tear posts apart'' mindset.I apologise if I posted untrue/inaccurate information.

I assume that refers to me since I went and researched every point in that facebook post. Odd that, since you asked for others to google it the first time you brought that load of nonsense to the table. Very rude to demand others do your research and then refuse to read it, but there you go.

It is important because false information spreads mistrust and politicises the issue. In this case, there was a screamingly clear agenda. (Although I assume you'll avoid reading this post as well so all of this is probably a waste of my time.)

No doubt your friend didn't mean anything malicious by it, but whoever first wrote that post either certainly did or has an impressive inability to read. Nonetheless, that malicious post has spread around the internet apparently, since your friend is far from the only one to post it. And very few people will bother to check it for accuracy before spreading the lies, half-truths and deceitful framing of the whole thing to another person. That's why it's important to fact-check.

B_Wayne

123shooter wrote: »

Yes but I think we all know that in this case there were other motives involved by some.

Given the result, it was a pretty legitimate case. It doesn't matter what the motivation was to take the case. The Supreme Court just did their job. This has moved entirely off topic. I shall simply state that the articles run on the judges were completely provocative and targeted the judicial system.

jackofalltrades

jackofalltrades wrote: »

When I first read this I thought, no way would anyone allow putting a gas pipe in the only escape route out of a building.
But it seems to have been the case amazingly.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/14/key-questions-about-the-grenfell-tower-fire

The day after the fire when it kept re-igniting I wondered if there was gas but thought there'd be no way.

How in the **** could they think that was a good idea but not install sprinklers at the same time?

Samaris

I was afraid that the gas lines bit was true, mostly because it seems such an insane thing to do that I'm not sure anyone would think of it unless there were actually pipes visible in the main stairwell. I was hoping it wasn't though.

Who in gods name thought that was a good idea?

123shooter

Deleted User wrote: »

The day after the fire when it kept re-igniting I wondered if there was gas but thought there'd be no way.

How in the **** could they think that was a good idea but not install sprinklers at the same time?

Sprinklers are a fantastic idea in any building I think......as long as someone can isolate the leccy in the first second they go off.