Tower block fire - london

ianh · 7 Jul 2020 at 19:25

NVP said:
You can say race, as that is specifically the subject for some strange reason.

While the QC is saying "race" I'd instead change the word to "poor" instead as I agree with this -

LOAM said:
I think the point he's making is that despite being in one of the richest boroughs of London, corners were cut and decisions made that in their opinion was influenced by the "type" of end user / tennant that would be inhabiting Grenfell.

Where "type" (for me at least) would insinuate "poor" rather than "race" because I think that the idea was to make the flats look nice for those in the local area who were better off financially as well as the tenants but, as the tenants were poor, the people in charge of the decision didn't put much money into it leading to some cost cutting going on. It's one of those "perfect storm" situations where if any one thing was done differently, from as simple as the owner of the fridge that started the fire buying a different brand to the council buying different cladding to the fire brigades response being different, then we wouldn't be here now.

I'm personally very surprised by the QC's choice of language here and I'm, not sure that a supposition such as that will add anything additional to his legal case that might help win it over the facts they already have.

d_brennen · 7 Jul 2020 at 19:32

Did any of the tenants who were subletting their flats get pulled up? I remember part of the problem of identifying the dead was that there were people who shouldn't have been residing there.

Chris Wilson · 7 Jul 2020 at 19:40

d_brennen said:
Did any of the tenants who were subletting their flats get pulled up? I remember part of the problem of identifying the dead was that there were people who shouldn't have been residing there.

I doubt it as an amnesty was given to those who shouldn't have been in the UK as a country let alone Grenfell as a dwelling... Just watch BLM attach themselves like leaches to this new cause now the case has resumed, and wait for the protests to erupt.

NVP · 7 Jul 2020 at 19:44

ianh said:
While the QC is saying "race" I'd instead change the word to "poor" instead as I agree with this -

Yes, as per my original post I disagree with the race aspect, I was merely correcting LOAM based on the QC's perspective.

ianh said:
I'm personally very surprised by the QC's choice of language here and I'm, not sure that a supposition such as that will add anything additional to his legal case that might help win it over the facts they already have

Thats the problem I see, there is no financial benefit to this tangent other than potential fame so I could only conclude they genuinely relate this back to institutional racism. Unfortunately he's not looking at an accurate correlation, much like @Dis86 did in the other thread. Goes to show how similar people are, ironic.

Dis86 · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:02

NVP said:
Yes, as per my original post I disagree with the race aspect, I was merely correcting LOAM based on the QC's perspective.

Thats the problem I see, there is no financial benefit to this tangent other than potential fame so I could only conclude they genuinely relate this back to institutional racism. Unfortunately he's not looking at an accurate correlation, much like @Dis86 did in the other thread. Goes to show how similar people are, ironic.

Aww dude, you so salty. Get over the fact that you didn't get the answers you wanted and you had nothing to back up your opinions.

NVP · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:05

Dis86 said:
Aww dude, you so salty. Get over the fact that you didn't get the answers you wanted and you had nothing to back up your opinions.

No salt, you were quite a good example to use as it was very recent in a similar thread. Perhaps you're projecting?

Dis86 · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:09

NVP said:
No salt, you were quite a good example to use as it was very recent in a similar thread. Perhaps you're projecting?

Want some vinegar with that salt?

NVP · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:13

Epic.

Dis86 · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:14

NVP · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:15

If you honestly can't see why I've included you as an example then I guess I won't try so hard to discuss a topic with you in future, as it appears pointless. Shame.

Dis86 · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:16

NVP said:
If you honestly can't see why I've included you as an example then I guess I won't try so hard to discuss a topic with you in future, as it appears pointless. Shame.

Says the one who ran away from the last discussion. You proved there was no discussing with you. You'd entered with a set opinion founded on nothing, provided no facts, were unable to counter any and then left in a strop.

NVP · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:20

Did I really? I think I gave up when, after giving multiple potential reasons for the topic at hand you continued to pull them back to race and colour and genetics.

Once you'd stated people of African genetics have a higher propensity for crime for the however-manyth time, I realised you weren't willing to comprehend any other possibility.

You are quite arrogant if you believe that is how the previous thread went. And now you are recalling dishonestly as well, all because you're not even willing to try to see why I've included you as the example.

Either way, again - I'm done with your bigotry.

Dis86 · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:23

NVP said:
Did I really? I think I gave up when, after giving multiple potential reasons for the topic at hand you continued to pull them back to race and colour and genetics.

Except that didn't happen...did it? I just proved you wrong when you asserted as a fact (with no support) that there is no genetic basis behind race. Which there is. Which is what I said.

You then tried to claim there was no shared culture between black people in and outside of Africa which again, I proved you wrong on.

You then whined out of the thread.

Oh and let's not forget you then contradicted yourself with your comment about backing blood nomatter what, which you'd forgotten about.

NVP · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:37

Wow, this is an extremely dishonest or ignorant level of posting.

You'll get this one reply.

Dis86 said:
Except that didn't happen...did it? I just proved you wrong when you asserted as a fact (with no support) that there is no genetic basis behind race. Which there is. Which is what I said.

The thread is still there for all to read, you could possibly get that perspective if you really cherry picked a bunch of quotes perhaps, but I'd much prefer you read posts without your bias, perhaps then you'd understand the original intention. For what it's worth, I recall this was about you labelling and categorising all "blacks" as something I'm sure derogatory, and I clarified that if you wished to do so then use actual race such as Jamaican etc. I think o then also called you a bigot, which is where you appear to have been so butt hurt you were no longer willing to discuss honestly and maturely.

Dis86 said:
You then tried to claim there was no shared culture between black people in and outside of Africa which again, I proved you wrong on.

Haha no, again you are being dishonest. You implied Africans were criminal in nature and that must be why their descendents in foreign lands are also criminal in behaviour. I surely shouldn't need to repeat what I said in reply to that... your interpretation above is telling.

Dis86 said:
Oh and let's not forget you then contradicted yourself with your comment about backing blood nomatter what, which you'd forgotten about.

This was a strange tactic for yourself. You stopped replying, then I was in topic with someone's and ypu interjected with a completely random, unrelated point from another thread which I can't recall. Thats when I realised you were merely reactionary posting, and any further conversation would be fruitless.

Listen @Dis86 , not everyone who discusses does so argumentatively and it is OK to be wrong. Being so closed off means you'll miss so much.

Dis86 · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:39

NVP said:
Wow, this is an extremely dishonest or ignorant level of posting.

You'll get this one reply.

The thread is still there for all to read, you could possibly get that perspective if you really cherry picked a bunch of quotes perhaps, but I'd much prefer you read posts without your bias, perhaps then you'd understand the original intention. For what it's worth, I recall this was about you labelling and categorising all "blacks" as something I'm sure derogatory, and I clarified that if you wished to do so then use actual race such as Jamaican etc. I think o then also called you a bigot, which is where you appear to have been so butt hurt you were no longer willing to discuss honestly and maturely.

Haha no, again you are being dishonest. You implied Africans were criminal in nature and that must be why their descendents in foreign lands are also criminal in behaviour. I surely shouldn't need to repeat what I said in reply to that... your interpretation above is telling.

This was a strange tactic for yourself. You stopped replying, then I was in topic with someone's and ypu interjected with a completely random, unrelated point from another thread which I can't recall. Thats when I realised you were merely reactionary posting, and any further conversation would be fruitless.

Listen @Dis86 , not everyone who discusses does so argumentatively and it is OK to be wrong. Being so closed off means you'll miss so much.

None of those things happened. But OK.

jpaul · 7 Jul 2020 at 20:58

the qc just seems to be trying to make a mockery of the proceeding and moor-bick, but the eg. c4 news doesn't report and critique it,
does he think he's appearing in a hollywood film

https://www.gardencourtchambers.co....-on-behalf-of-survivors-and-bereaved-families

MR THOMAS: Sinait. SIR MARTIN MOORE-BICK: How do you spell it? MR THOMAS: S-I-N-A-I-T. SIR MARTIN MOORE-BICK: No. MR THOMAS: Okay. Well, let me tell you about Sinait. 23 In 2015, the local population of Sinait from 24 a census indicated the population was 25,000. Sinait is 25 a small, picturesque fishing village, with white sand

both the bbc and c4 seem to be applying their employees diversity quotient to the content of their news programmes.
Similarly had to listen on r4today to a one side presentation by Bianca Williams 'dragged from car / black profiling' discourse, and the Lammys take one it

edit : ok that was his 2018 presentation

edit2 :todays is just as bad
https://assets.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/documents/transcript/Transcript 7 July 2020.pdf

My final words: a marginalisation of families and 8 advocates from real -time engagement renders this process 9 ineffective . That should not be the Grenfell legacy . 10 Remember, sir, ineffective participation reduces access 11 to justice . Reduced access to justice leads to a lack 12 of justice , and a lack of justice is just another way of 13 saying this is unjust

LOAM · 7 Jul 2020 at 22:34

Chris Wilson said:
For a QC in his all the time in the world to prepare opening speech to leave an intelligent gentleman like your good self (`tennant' aside.... ) saying "I am pretty certain he's not insinuating X" And "I think the point he is making" suggests he is not making things at all clear already, especially as many to whom he is addressing these words have poor English and a sub standard education, not being the promised and needed doctors, scientists and architects as Terminal_Boy so rightly notes I strongly suspect there has been something of a mood swing amongst many of the English population and after the BLM troubles, the virus and the stress it's caused many may no longer look upon those making further attempts at financial and political capital from this fire so tolerantly. A current common disaster affecting people globally will tend to take the drama out of what is now a somewhat historic event that at the time grabbed the news.

I think it's an incredibly weak argument to make (that race influenced the decision making process), economics based on the social "worth" would have been a more accurate accusation . I do think though that the entire process has been a bit of a whitewash. There are many technical reasons why Grenfell happened ranging from sprinkler requirements, window reveal details, appropriate use of materials but there are also many failings that sit in the lap of multiple governments who have pandered to lobbying and not brought AP document B up to a standard that is fit for modern construction.

I think (I'm doing it again) they probably realise this is going to be found to be a tragic accident, lessons will be learned etc etc and are desperately clutching at straws. I genuinely don't think they will be able to pin it on any one person or discipline because the issue goes all the way back to the building regs being maintained by parliament, aren't fit for purpose (in parts) and are updated at a glacial pace all the while being subject to lobbyists who have a vested interest in not seeing them improve.

abbviper · 7 Jul 2020 at 22:50

Reading some of that makes you cringe.

1) Referring to the ‘murder’ of GF, as far as i know there has not been a finding of murder at this stage.
2) He also refers to PoC which many people find offensive, indeed the judiciary are told that this expression should be avoided - yet for some reason a professional court user is using it.
3) A significant amount of time spent cross examining a witness about a note and why it is not more detailed, witness highlights that it then wouldn’t be a note Pathetic.

Skunkworks · 8 Jul 2020 at 13:19

The QC is linking it to race to increase the victimhood of the tenants. Not only are they a victim of the fire, but they are victims due to their race too. And we all know that victims have to be tiptoed around. After all, you’d have to be some kind of evil person to doubt or aggressively cross examine such a victim, and the media will no doubt incite against such a person.

We’ve gone from supporting victims to lauding and rewarding them. We’ve inadvertently made victimhood desirable, now everyone wants a piece.

Caracus2k · 18 Jul 2020 at 17:23

An article from the Guardian (of all places) that tacitly confirms what was always apparent...

That the Grenfell narrative of a systemically racist, indifferent to the 'poor' tory leadership being the cause of the fire is and always was an obvious nasty lie.

Leaseholders billed up to £115,000 each to remove Grenfell-style cladding

Owners of flats in Connect House, in the city’s trendy Ancoats district, said they face financial ruin over the £5.2m cost to make the property safe and have called on the government to intervene.

Manchester and Salford have among the highest number of buildings still wrapped in Grenfell-style aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding.

Manchester central has been a labour run since its inception.

Salford (and later the merged Salford and Eccles) has consistently returned Labour politicians to power since 1945

See also the Independent for reporting on the hearings that doesn't quite fit the narrative.

Flammable insulation chosen for Grenfell Tower as part of a focus on eco-friendliness