Massive West London Apartment fire

First topic message reminder :

London fire: fears of people trapped as major blaze engulfs tower block


(CNN)A huge fire has engulfed a 24-story apartment block in West London.

Around 200 firefighters and 20 fire trucks have been deployed to tackle the blaze as rescue workers try to evacuate the building in Lancaster West Estate in North Kensington, London Fire Brigade said.


The fire broke out before daybreak local time Wednesday. In a statement posted to Twitter, London police say two people are currently being treated for smoke inhalation and they're waiting updates on further injuries.

Photos and video shared on social media show the tower block engulfed in flames.
"The whole building is on fire (and) spreading fast," witness Goran Karimi told CNN.
He said he saw people jumping from the building.

Grenfell Tower

The 24-story Grenfell Tower was built in the 1970s and recently subject to a $10.9 million redevelopment, according to property firm Rydon.

Close to Notting Hill, the tower block is around a five minute walk from the Latimer Road Underground station and near the Westfield shopping center in the west London suburbs.
According to property website RightMove, the average rent in the building is around $2,500 a month.

News is just now breaking.  This is all there is, save for live TV.

Blink again...and look what is right before you. I've explained it twice.

You are preordaining a form of answer, and because you expect something else, you are not seeing. The most important piece of evidence of Tory neglect is the fact that this fire happened. You are still looking for cause and effect of this fire, when the fire and it's causes are all wrapped up as the effect of Tory neglect! Don't get caught up in mis-framing the question.

Original Quill wrote:Blink again...and look what is right before you.  I've explained it twice.

You are preordaining a form of answer, and because you expect something else, you are not seeing.  The most important piece of evidence of Tory neglect is the fact that this fire happened.  You are still looking for cause and effect of this fire, when the fire and it's causes are all wrapped up as the effect of Tory neglect!  Don't get caught up in mis-framing the question.

No, you haven't, you've just generalised. I want details of what you know. Can't you give them? If not, then you can't back any of it up and your post in invalid.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Blink again...and look what is right before you.  I've explained it twice.

You are preordaining a form of answer, and because you expect something else, you are not seeing.  The most important piece of evidence of Tory neglect is the fact that this fire happened.  You are still looking for cause and effect of this fire, when the fire and it's causes are all wrapped up as the effect of Tory neglect!  Don't get caught up in mis-framing the question.

No, you haven't, you've just generalised. I want details of what you know. Can't you give them? If not, then you can't back any of it up and your post in invalid.

But relevant generalizations are important, as they bypass unnecessary dithering and hand wringing.

The details of what I know are that tragedies like the Grenfell Tower fire are not supposed to happen, and governments are supposed to assure that they do not happen. This happened on the Tory watch.

Nuff said, for action to take place right now.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, you haven't, you've just generalised. I want details of what you know. Can't you give them? If not, then you can't back any of it up and your post in invalid.

But relevant generalizations are important, as they bypass unnecessary dithering and hand wringing.

The details of what I know are that tragedies like the Grenfell Tower fire are not supposed to happen, and governments are supposed to assure that they do not happen.  This happened on the Tory watch.  

Nuff said, for action to take place right now.

No Quill. Your accusation was very specific, so please give a specific answer.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

But relevant generalizations are important, as they bypass unnecessary dithering and hand wringing.

The details of what I know are that tragedies like the Grenfell Tower fire are not supposed to happen, and governments are supposed to assure that they do not happen.  This happened on the Tory watch.  

Nuff said, for action to take place right now.

No Quill. Your accusation was very specific, so please give a specific answer.

Read the papers. You'll see exactly what I am saying, playing out in the next few days. You'll see the criticism starting right away. It begins with: this shouldn't have happened! Then it moves to: who's responsible? From here it goes to: the government is supposed to prevent this sort of thing from happening! Then it lands: the government fooked up!

Government will be sucked into the debate regardless. The government is ultimately responsible for the Health and Safety of citizens in all aspects of life...as well it should be.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No Quill. Your accusation was very specific, so please give a specific answer.

Read the papers.  You'll see exactly what I am saying, playing out in the next few days.  You'll see the criticism starting right away.  It begins with: this shouldn't have happened!  Then it moves to: who's responsible?  From here it goes to: the government is supposed to prevent this sort of thing from happening!  Then it lands: the government fooked up!

Government will be sucked into the debate regardless.  The government is ultimately responsible for the Health and Safety of citizens in all aspects of life...as well it should be.

No Quill - this is the accusation you made.

When the Tories took office, one of the first things they did was to go through a phase of deregulation (think: deprotecting the public).

Now can you back that up or not? If you can't, just admit it.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Read the papers.  You'll see exactly what I am saying, playing out in the next few days.  You'll see the criticism starting right away.  It begins with: this shouldn't have happened!  Then it moves to: who's responsible?  From here it goes to: the government is supposed to prevent this sort of thing from happening!  Then it lands: the government fooked up!

Government will be sucked into the debate regardless.  The government is ultimately responsible for the Health and Safety of citizens in all aspects of life...as well it should be.

No Quill - this is the accusation you made.

When the Tories took office, one of the first things they did was to go through a phase of deregulation (think: deprotecting the public).

Now can you back that up or not? If you can't, just admit it.

Watch, wait ...and see.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No Quill - this is the accusation you made.


Now can you back that up or not? If you can't, just admit it.

Watch, wait ...and see.

Of course I know that people will blame the Tories, but you made a specific accusation which you simply got out of thin air. All you had to do was provide some info on the Tories doing what you said they did, and you failed.

I don't see how its Tories fault, Labour has been in government as well since 70s why not blame them too.

It's an accident. Maybe more can be done with high rise blocks all over the country.

Come on Quill answer the question.

of course it can be laid at the door of the tories

see here

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tory-donors-firm-major-investor-10637120

what a surprise eh?

and here


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/grenfell-tower-smoking-symbol-broken-10634930

As quill often (and correctly) says.....follow the money

Lord Foul wrote:of course it can be laid at the door of the tories

see here  

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tory-donors-firm-major-investor-10637120

what a surprise eh?

Concerns about external cladding and fires date back to at least 1999, when a blaze tore through a 14-storey block of flats in Irvine, Ayrshire, killing an elderly man.

Weren't Labour in power then?

Lord Foul wrote:of course it can be laid at the door of the tories

see here  

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tory-donors-firm-major-investor-10637120

what a surprise eh?

So how is that the Tories fault?

"There is currently no requirement for exterior cladding on high-rise buildings to be non-combustible."

"Concerns about external cladding and fires date back to at least 1999, when a blaze tore through a 14-storey block of flats in Irvine, Ayrshire, killing an elderly man."

Look I understand people annoyed over this, but there was many failings here over years where nothing was done for safety and this could have happened in any building with this on.

Would you have said the same if this happened in a building in a Labour council led area?

I very much doubt it

Lord Foul wrote:and here


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/grenfell-tower-smoking-symbol-broken-10634930

As quill often (and correctly) says.....follow the money

If the council wanted to save money, they wouldn't have bothered with the cladding at all.

Data shows universities, hospitals and councils spent millions installing cladding.

It is unclear if it was the same aluminium cladding thought to be used on Grenfell.

£553m of taxpayers' cash was spent on the hundreds of public sector contracts.


Government launching emergency review of 4,000 council-owned tower blocks.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4613130/Schools-hospitals-leisure-centres-cladding-Grenfell-Tower.html#ixzz4kI0qtIbG
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Fire safety experts warned as long ago as 1999 that the cladding used on buildings such as Grenfell Tower posed a deadly threat to hundreds of residents inside, it has emerged.

The experts, from industry and the firefighters’ union, predicted that such cladding could help drive any fire upwards to quickly engulf an entire building.

In a chilling premonition of what would happen 18 years later at Grenfell Tower - where at least at least 58 people are now feared to have been killed - Fire Brigades Union official Glyn Evans told MPs: “The problem with cladding is that it will, if it is able, spread fire and it will spread it vertically. If you get multistorey buildings you will get fire spread up the outside if the cladding will permit it.”

After hearing evidence from Mr Evans and others, a House of Commons committee concluded in early 2000 that the authorities could not afford to wait before taking action to tackle the risk.

It’s report stated: “We do not believe that it should take a serious fire in which many people are killed before all reasonable steps are taken towards minimising the risks.”

The report appears to have been one of several alarm bells rung over the safety of high rise buildings which went unheeded.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/17/warnings-deathtrap-high-rise-building-cladding-ignored-decades/

Raggamuffin wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:There are something like 30,000 of these cladded high rise in the UK.  

Yes, I read that too.

But the councils are just doing what the eu rules told them to do... and in accordance with the regulations set out under Blairs labour government...

Im sure the councils/housing associations would rather not be forced to be putting up cladding at huge cost...

And didge... you said that fridge had been confirmed as source of fire... can you show where this confirmation is...?

Why do they keep saying "58 people are now feared to have been killed"???
There were approximately 500-600 people living there.

Where are the rest of them then? Why arent they saying "approx over 400 appear to have died"?

Tommy Monk wrote:And didge... you said that fridge had been confirmed as source of fire... can you show where this confirmation is...?

That hasn't been confirmed as far as I know.

eddie wrote:

I posted that in another thread.

Apologies rags. I hadn't seen it.

eddie wrote:Apologies rags. I hadn't seen it.

I thought it was interesting, although she's clearly very distressed.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:Apologies rags. I hadn't seen it.

I thought it was interesting, although she's clearly very distressed.

She is. But she has a bloody valid point about Oxfam and the Red Cross.
Where the fuck are they?

eddie wrote:Why do they keep saying "58 people are now feared to have been killed"???
There were approximately 500-600 people living there.

Where are the rest of them then? Why arent  they saying "approx over 400 appear to have died"?

I have heard that there may have been many illegal immigrants hiding out in there in rooms rented out to them by other residents...

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I thought it was interesting, although she's clearly very distressed.

She is. But she has a bloody valid point about Oxfam and the Red Cross.
Where the fuck are they?

It might help if you dont buy into Press TV, a state-owned Iranian propaganda channel.

http://www.redcross.org.uk/en/About-us/News/2017/June/Grenfell-Tower-fire

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I thought it was interesting, although she's clearly very distressed.

She is. But she has a bloody valid point about Oxfam and the Red Cross.
Where the fuck are they?

I think Red Cross people are there.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:And didge... you said that fridge had been confirmed as source of fire... can you show where this confirmation is...?

That hasn't been confirmed as far as I know.

Thats strange... as didge said that this had already been confirmed, on the previous page of posts...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That hasn't been confirmed as far as I know.

Thats strange... as didge said that this had already been confirmed, on the previous page of posts...

Well I haven't read that they've confirmed the source of the fire Tommy.

Thorin wrote:

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I thought it was interesting, although she's clearly very distressed.

She is. But she has a bloody valid point about Oxfam and the Red Cross.
Where the fuck are they?

It might help if you dont buy into Press TV, a state-owned Iranian propaganda channel.

http://www.redcross.org.uk/en/About-us/News/2017/June/Grenfell-Tower-fire

As opposed to the actual eyewitness who was there for 15 hours.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That hasn't been confirmed as far as I know.

Thats strange... as didge said that this had already been confirmed, on the previous page of posts...

I never said it had been confirmed as the source of the fire, reports show that it is.

You asked me about the Police confirmed the source, which I stated yes and on that I maybe mistaken.

eddie wrote:

Thorin wrote:

It might help if you dont buy into Press TV, a state-owned Iranian propaganda channel.

http://www.redcross.org.uk/en/About-us/News/2017/June/Grenfell-Tower-fire

As opposed to the actual eyewitness who was there for 15 hours.

Really an eye witness who has not even going to the hospital where the injured are and thinks all 500 dead

Gullible idiot

lol and I see because you could not back up this imaginary rule you lock the other thread Eddie. Talk about trying to censure your fuck up. Quill was right about you, that you are unfit to moderate, when you abuse the rules to get yourself out of looking stupid

So come on Eddie where is this rule?

If you cannot produce it you owe me an apology

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That hasn't been confirmed as far as I know.

Thats strange... as didge said that this had already been confirmed, on the previous page of posts...

Raggs said...

Well I haven't read that they've confirmed the source of the fire Tommy.





Yes, you are right Raggs... didge was lying before...!!!

Thorin wrote:lol and I see because you could not back up this imaginary rule you lock the other thread Eddie. Talk about trying to censure your fuck up. Quill was right about you, that you are unfit to moderate, when you abuse the rules to get yourself out of looking stupid

So come on Eddie where is this rule?

If you cannot produce it you owe me an apology

I'll tell you what I tell Quill: Contact the forum owner.

Now don't derail another thread or I'll lock it.

Thorin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Have they confirmed the source of the fire yet...?

Yes

Show me where I said fridge Tommy above?

Never did

I was mistaken that the Police have confirmed, happy to admit

Now who is lying?

eddie wrote:

Thorin wrote:lol and I see because you could not back up this imaginary rule you lock the other thread Eddie. Talk about trying to censure your fuck up. Quill was right about you, that you are unfit to moderate, when you abuse the rules to get yourself out of looking stupid

So come on Eddie where is this rule?

If you cannot produce it you owe me an apology

I'll tell you what I tell Quill: Contact the forum owner.

Now don't derail another thread or I'll lock it.

I will thank you, even more so that you failed to produce the imaginary rule

Or have the ability to admit you were wrong and apologise

Well done for spoiling threads, simple because some posters were countering views made at them

We have free speech in this country, I suggest you understand that.

Didge do stop being a bore. Contact the site owner and discuss your major concerns with him if it helps make you less angry.

Now let's get back on topic as this is an important thread.

eddie wrote:Didge do stop being a bore. Contact the site owner and discuss your major concerns to him if it helps makes you less angry.

Now let's get back on topic as this is an important thread.

I do not get angry at imbeciles and liars such as yourself, its pointless

I will however expose your lies as I did

Happy to get back on topic after you jumped on two threads, which none of the other mods did, thus causing disruption yourself for no reason

eddie wrote:Part 3: The role of the moderators
All moderators are trusted by the site founder (Ben Reilly) to fairly enforce the rules, independent of oversight.
Members who repeatedly question the judgment of moderators may be deemed disruptive and subjected to basementing.
Members who feel they have been unfairly punished have the right to appeal their punishment to the site founder, either by e-mailing newsfixmod@gmail.com or a private message to the site founder.
Objectionable content should always be reported to one or more moderators. Moderators don't see all content at the moment it was posted. The presence of objectionable content should NOT be construed as tacit moderator approval of said content.
Moderators are in no way obliged to inform or explain to the rest of the community any member's punishment.

So nothing there about talking about other posters

You thus invented a rule and then use the rule to not question moderators as if that gets you out of jail

It does not

You owe me an apology

Now let that be the last of your fuckeries. You're the most often- banned poster on this site so start asking yourself why.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I thought it was interesting, although she's clearly very distressed.

She is. But she has a bloody valid point about Oxfam and the Red Cross.
Where the fuck are they?

What these people will need is money. Somewhere decent to live and money to replace what material things they've lost and some compensation for lost loved ones. Not boxes of cornflakes and panty pads.

eddie wrote:Now let that be the last of your fuckeries. You're the most often- banned poster on this site so start asking yourself why.

So nothing there about talking about other posters

You thus invented a rule and then use the rule to not question moderators as if that gets you out of jail

It does not

You owe me an apology

Now you just proved how incompetent you are.

I have been banned by Veya multiple times for no reason and still have had no response from the site owner

Quell surpise

Thorin wrote:
Fire safety experts warned as long ago as 1999 that the cladding used on buildings such as Grenfell Tower posed a deadly threat to hundreds of residents inside, it has emerged.

The experts, from industry and the firefighters’ union, predicted that such cladding could help drive any fire upwards to quickly engulf an entire building.

In a chilling premonition of what would happen 18 years later at Grenfell Tower - where at least at least 58 people are now feared to have been killed - Fire Brigades Union official Glyn Evans told MPs: “The problem with cladding is that it will, if it is able, spread fire and it will spread it vertically. If you get multistorey buildings you will get fire spread up the outside if the cladding will permit it.”

After hearing evidence from Mr Evans and others, a House of Commons committee concluded in early 2000 that the authorities could not afford to wait before taking action to tackle the risk.

It’s report stated: “We do not believe that it should take a serious fire in which many people are killed before all reasonable steps are taken towards minimising the risks.”

The report appears to have been one of several alarm bells rung over the safety of high rise buildings which went unheeded.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/17/warnings-deathtrap-high-rise-building-cladding-ignored-decades/

Governments and local councils around the world are now urgently looking at yheir own problems with "non compliance" with building and safety regulations, with many cases of non-compliant materials being used in high rise buildings across major cities..

In recent years there have been similar fires in apartment buildings in Melbourne (Docklands), Los Angeles, parts of Asia.. Probably luck, more than anything else, that the fatalities and casualties down in Melbourne were a lot lower than this week in London.

Combined wuth bureaucratic cutbacks, underfunding and undermanning of emergency services, and greedy building owners and shonky contractors, there are good reasons why the same thing will probably happen again.

There is no reason why the same thing won't happen in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane or Adelaide --  despite Oz having some of the toughest building standards in the world..

http://www.smh.com.au/national/london-tower-fire-could-happen-here-australian-buildings-cloaked-in-flammable-cladding-20170615-gwrpfu.html

http://www.smh.com.au/world/london-fire-building-safety-under-the-spotlight-after-deadly-blaze-engulfs-grenfell-tower-20170614-gwrdky.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/london-inferno-alarm-raised-for-aussie-buildings/news-story/334b00825e305eb9faff421522f9e04f

Didge you're going to the basement as I'm not locking a thread to spoil it for others.  
You aren't owed an apology and you're just behaving like a toddler so go and sit in the sandpit.

A rule about other forums will be coming and everyone else here seems to have known and understood that discussing other forums is not tolerated.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:

She is. But she has a bloody valid point about Oxfam and the Red Cross.
Where the fuck are they?

What these people will need is money.   Somewhere decent to live and money to replace what material things they've lost and some compensation for lost loved ones.  Not boxes of cornflakes and panty pads.

The probably could do with new knickers or underpants though. It's things like that which people never think of.

Thorin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Yes

Show me where I said fridge Tommy above?

Never did

I was mistaken that the Police have confirmed, happy to admit

Now who is lying?

All can be seen around the middle of page 5... conversation went as follows...

Didge - The Police have confirmed it as not deliberate

TM - Doesnt rule out what i said...

D - I am afraid it does unless you buy into conspiracies

TM - Have they confirmed the source of the fire yet...?

D - Yes