Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[STEMO]

I would bet that the "protest" is the usual Labour / momentum/ SWP (all the same thing now under Corbyn) - rent a mob.   
Corbyn and his band of Trots are calling for local empty houses to be requisitioned. A  bit of state seizure of property would get them very excited.
However the human rights act so beloved by the yoghurt knitters apparently forbids this. A classic case of left wing thinking disappearing up its own arse, because it never bears close scrutiny.
Meanwhile it turns out that Kensington council actually has more than half of the houses needed sitting empty, and councils in the surrounding area should be able to chip in to supply the rest. So the dreams of the opportunist Socialists look doomed once again.
Imo, the fact that this turned party political while the flames were still burning is utterly contemptible.
[/


Don't go betting too much, Albs, you must have lost a bit on the landslide bet.

[RobG]

The core was clearly as much on fire as the outside... Be surprised if the final tally isn't well over 150...

It ain't right and it sure ain't fair. But life's like that sometimes.

I wonder if your sentiments would be the same if it were your friends or family members

[RobG]

you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would,

Rather a wild generalisation. personally speaking, if it was a choice between safety or saving a few bob, safety would be at the forefront

[Lizzie Zoom]

Reports are now coming in that the cladding used on this building was a cheaper, less fire safe, example than is actually available at £2 more per panel.

So, as I have said, one of the richest boroughs in one of the worlds richest city fitted sub standard panels as it was housing for the poor. A bloody disgrace, and no doubt will result in heads rolling. The police have launched a criminal investigation, gathering evidence, already

Ffs, really?

If it had been your property, and you needed 1500 panels, you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would, so stop being such a sodding hypocrite.

No you wouldn't, if you were responsible for the safety of hundreds of families and you knew these panels were not up to the highest standard.  We as a family always bought the best from a H&S point of view for our family, and would never skimp when their lives were involved!

So , no, I am not being a "sodding hypocrite" as you so nicely put it, and stop being so bloody rude when all people are doing is expressing an opinion. You never stop inputting on every damn thread you can as though you have nothing better to do!  As I have stated before it is not surprising this forum has not still got scores of members contributing. Apart from us who are able to hold our own, who would when you are always there being cynical and plain bloody rude to other members.

Get off my back!

[Zirfeld]

What is about Polat Tower Istanbul?

The fire was comparable. But it did not went much inside the building. No one was seriously hurt. The tower could be reconstructed and it is still i use.

What went wrong in London?

Rolf

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

I would bet that the "protest" is the usual Labour / momentum/ SWP (all the same thing now under Corbyn) - rent a mob.   
Corbyn and his band of Trots are calling for local empty houses to be requisitioned. A  bit of state seizure of property would get them very excited.
However the human rights act so beloved by the yoghurt knitters apparently forbids this. A classic case of left wing thinking disappearing up its own arse, because it never bears close scrutiny.
Meanwhile it turns out that Kensington council actually has more than half of the houses needed sitting empty, and councils in the surrounding area should be able to chip in to supply the rest. So the dreams of the opportunist Socialists look doomed once again.
Imo, the fact that this turned party political while the flames were still burning is utterly contemptible.
[/


Don't go betting too much, Albs, you must have lost a bit on the landslide bet.

Me and almost everyone in the country. It was as certain as a bet could be, until it became obvious that May has no judgement whatsoever, no  advisers who live on planet earth,  and Corbyn wrote an unbelievable number of cheques he could never cash.

[omega2018]

Reports are now coming in that the cladding used on this building was a cheaper, less fire safe, example than is actually available at £2 more per panel.

So, as I have said, one of the richest boroughs in one of the worlds richest city fitted sub standard panels as it was housing for the poor. A bloody disgrace, and no doubt will result in heads rolling. The police have launched a criminal investigation, gathering evidence, already

Ffs, really?

If it had been your property, and you needed 1500 panels, you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would, so stop being such a sodding hypocrite.

so you're a slum landlord are you?  i would pay £2 extra and get the fire resistant ones.  especially if i thought it might save hundreds of lives.  especially if i thought i might get sacked when the people died and my decision was found out.  not that that will happen unfortunately but it damn should.

apprently retro fitting sprinklers during the £8 million refit would have cost £200k. less than £2,000 per life.

[omega2018]

What is about Polat Tower Istanbul?

The fire was comparable. But it did not went much inside the building. No one was seriously hurt. The tower could be reconstructed and it is still i use.

What went wrong in London?

Rolf

strong wind during that one may have made the difference, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUBoKOZC9M8 compared to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpRS3PRyCbY

[Sir Tigger KC]

One thing's for sure is that a lot of people (probably worldwide) will make an absolute killing ripping off this sort of cladding and insulation and replacing it with non flammable products. 

[STEMO]

This nice fella got what he deserved:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/16/man-jailed-sharing-photo-dead-grenfell-tower-fire-victim-facebook/

[Doctor Gollum]

you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would,

Rather a wild generalisation. personally speaking, if it was a choice between safety or saving a few bob, safety would be at the forefront

No more than the plucked from thin air £2 number... Which incidentally buys an extra 10mm of foam thickness per square metre.

A quantity surveyor tasked with shaving the budget probably didn't even blink...

The panels used were within code. If they weren't they wouldn't have been used. It's as simple as that. There are always better or more expensive ways of doing something... 99,999 times the most efficient way is perfectly adequate, this tragedy is the odd one out... Think the lower grade rivets on the Titanic.

[omega2018]

Reports are now coming in that the cladding used on this building was a cheaper, less fire safe, example than is actually available at £2 more per panel.

So, as I have said, one of the richest boroughs in one of the worlds richest city fitted sub standard panels as it was housing for the poor. A bloody disgrace, and no doubt will result in heads rolling. The police have launched a criminal investigation, gathering evidence, already

Ffs, really?

If it had been your property, and you needed 1500 panels, you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would, so stop being such a sodding hypocrite.

No you wouldn't, if you were responsible for the safety of hundreds of families and you knew these panels were not up to the highest standard.  We as a family always bought the best from a H&S point of view for our family, and would never skimp when their lives were involved!

So , no, I am not being a "sodding hypocrite" as you so nicely put it, and stop being so bloody rude when all people are doing is expressing an opinion. You never stop inputting on every damn thread you can as though you have nothing better to do!  As I have stated before it is not surprising this forum has not still got scores of members contributing. Apart from us who are able to hold our own, who would when you are always there being cynical and plain bloody rude to other members.

Get off my back!

well said  

by the way estimates suggest that the cost of using the more expensive version (of the panels) would have cost about £5,000, that's for the whole building. so about £33 a life: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fire-resistant-grenfell-tower-cladding-10631733   

[omega2018]

you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would,

Rather a wild generalisation. personally speaking, if it was a choice between safety or saving a few bob, safety would be at the forefront

No more than the plucked from thin air £2 number... Which incidentally buys an extra 10mm of foam thickness per square metre.

A quantity surveyor tasked with shaving the budget probably didn't even blink...

The panels used were within code. If they weren't they wouldn't have been used. It's as simple as that. There are always better or more expensive ways of doing something... 99,999 times the most efficient way is perfectly adequate, this tragedy is the odd one out... Think the lower grade rivets on the Titanic.

the panels are banned in the USA and Germany http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/16/why-is-cladding-banned-in-the-us-and-germany-used-on-buildings-in-the-uk-6712578/

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Reports are now coming in that the cladding used on this building was a cheaper, less fire safe, example than is actually available at £2 more per panel.

So, as I have said, one of the richest boroughs in one of the worlds richest city fitted sub standard panels as it was housing for the poor. A bloody disgrace, and no doubt will result in heads rolling. The police have launched a criminal investigation, gathering evidence, already

Ffs, really?

If it had been your property, and you needed 1500 panels, you would buy the £20 ones instead of the £22. Any of us would, so stop being such a sodding hypocrite.

No you wouldn't, if you were responsible for the safety of hundreds of families and you knew these panels were not up to the highest standard.  We as a family always bought the best from a H&S point of view for our family, and would never skimp when their lives were involved!

So , no, I am not being a "sodding hypocrite" as you so nicely put it, and stop being so bloody rude when all people are doing is expressing an opinion. You never stop inputting on every damn thread you can as though you have nothing better to do!  As I have stated before it is not surprising this forum has not still got scores of members contributing. Apart from us who are able to hold our own, who would when you are always there being cynical and plain bloody rude to other members.

Get off my back!

well said  

by the way estimates suggest that the cost of using the more expensive version (of the panels) would have cost about £5,000, that's for the whole building. so about £33 a life: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fire-resistant-grenfell-tower-cladding-10631733

That's assuming the more expensive panels would have prevented the loss off life, which is a big assumption at this stage. 

[omega2018]

This nice fella got what he deserved:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/16/man-jailed-sharing-photo-dead-grenfell-tower-fire-victim-facebook/

wow thats fast justice. can't see it being delivered so quickly for the people responsible for the deaths.  can't see them pleading guilty either..

also don't paid professional war photographers take those sort of pictures all the time?  oh silly me they take pics of dead foreigners so thats ok .