The investigation into the Grenfell Tower disaster hasn't got off to a good start:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40446579

 

Tom

I say give all concerned a chance, the ex-residents in particular are far too impatient and demanding impossible things. For example they want the judge's inquiry widened to include criminal matters, but it simply cannot do that since the police are carrying out that separate investigation and have already said they will not hesitate to prosecute where appropriate. If the judge finds additional information of value during the inquiry he will no doubt pass that on to the police.

 

Thorough police investigations and thorough public inquiries take a long time, as does detailed forensic examination of large quantities of material.

 

Which would everyone prefer, the correct conclusions and actions eventually or quick and inaccurate ones sooner?

.

Harry Leslie Smith, Labour Party dinosaur, recently made this comment about the reporting of the casualty figures from Grenfell Tower:

 

'Even when Titanic sank, White Star was able to provide a list of the dead within days but at Grenfell, the govt tries to obscure numbers of dead.'

Tom

oldtom, I know where you stand on the political spectrum but your last post was blatantly OTT.

The police do what they can to identify the victims so please, do refrain from trying to make out that our police is incompetent or worse, politically motivated to minimize the number of casualties.

There are still 23 flats where the police could not find human remains and could not contact anyone who lived there. The police presume that they all died although there is a chance that they did not. They already are counted in the 79.

oldtom, I know where you stand on the political spectrum but your last post was blatantly OTT.

 

What is OTT about reporting the words of an old man who makes a fair point? Perhaps you think Harry Leslie Smith is wrong when he says that White Star had a list drawn up within days.

 

I believe it is wrong that none of the agencies involved in the Grenfell Tower tragedy has been able to publish a list of all known residents, (ignoring guests and illegals), so that everyone can deduce an approximate number of those unaccounted for. If it should be the case that the dead and missing total 79, fine! As far as I can see though, the known survivors + 79 do not come anywhere near the 600+ believed to be residents of Grenfell Tower.

 

It is now 16 days since the inferno and the media has decided our interests are best served by reporting on how well the new political alliance shoring up an incompetent government is working, so why has no list been published which might confirm the published numbers - not names - just numbers?

 

Apart from that, what have my political leanings got to do with my concerns over numbers which many believe to be spurious?

 

Tom

The number 600 residents is a guestimate, I could have said 300 or 400 for 106 flats.

With London being a 24 hours a day city, in the summer, people were on holiday, go out to work or for other reasons. Who can guess the number who are not in? I could say 100 or 200.

Do you know how many walked out?

I would guess the number of fatalities is not far of the current police estimate.

Why don't you trust our police?

We should learn from the past, the past has shown that politics and police have worked together and have covered up many crimes, in the last thirty years that has ranged from the Hillsborough disaster and miners strikes of the eighties where police acted on the orders of Thatcher and against the democratic process, to more recent times when the massive paedophile investigation just got nowhere.

 

Now your ordinary officer on the beat is generally a good guy, most police officers are, I just think political influence can be a problem at the top of the chain of command, certain past events make me wary of trusting the top brass and these guys cover their tracks really well, our press has never done a good enough job at tackling some of them too, no surprise there.

 

Back to my first statement, not saying there is a cover up, just saying my trust isn't 100% when it comes to the best interests of the British people being served by our politicians and top brass at the police force.

Why don't you trust our police?

 

You seem to be developing a habit of asking really stupid questions 'Woosh'. In this instance, I note the comments from 'Mal69' and I don't think there is anything I need add.

 

Your faith in the government, indeed all four pillars of society plus the fourth estate seems boundless whereas I question every word and every deed because history informs us (usually much later) that, outside of family, any trust we have in the rest is usually misplaced.

 

Tom

the police knows everyone is watching their every move and press release.

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

the police knows everyone is watching their every move and press release.

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

 

You're still doing it 'Woosh'! That is another stupid question and it would be pointless for me to answer it.

 

Returning to my concerns over the arithmetic surrounding the Grenfell incident, I am not alone it seems. Today, the web blogger Mike Sivier who pens his views under the banner, 'Vox Political', asks essentially the same questions that concern me.

 

is-the-establishment-admitting-it-will-lie-to-us-over-grenfell-tower

 

I find it quite incredible that you continue your 'faith ministry' on this subject, particularly in the same week that 6 people have been charged over the Hillsborough disaster 28 years ago, 4 of them ex-police officers.

 

People need to ask questions of the government and their agents; that is how we progress society for the better. If you choose to simply believe all the BS delivered to you by various politicians, their media wing and their financial backers every single day without let-up, that is your choice. Just remember that some of us do speak out, ask questions and challenge these, often corrupt, individuals. We may make mistakes from time to time but the man who never made a mistake never made anything!

 

Tom

Edited June 30, 20178 yr by oldtom

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).

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 ???

Edited June 30, 20178 yr by Zlatan

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.

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

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.

loads more on there if you look.

 

we'll get some answers in 20 days.

we'll get some answers in 20 days.

i have had some come in in under 2 weeks tho

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

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

Edited July 1, 20178 yr by Kudoscycles

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