• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Drove past Greenfell tower this morning"

Collapse

  • northernladyuk
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    You're wilfully (or stupidly) reading too much into what I said, which was that I had heard one or two rumours and didn't know if they were true. Quite probably, as NF said, the rumours are bollocks, and I don't dispute that.

    But the main point I meant to make was that _if_ there was some discreditable (e.g. crazy cooking technique) or criminal (e.g. growing or brewing drugs) reason for the fire then we wouldn't be told. Anyone who disputes that is the gullible cretin, not me!
    The risk of a fire starting always exists. The problem here is the manner in which it spread up the outside of the building, you chunt.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    Oh we would find out.

    Remember we can get English news from outside the UK thanks to the internet, and some of those media outlets have nothing to do with the British Establishment.
    Indeed. Wikileaks showed just how boring most government stuff is. Instead of stories about how we are run by GALS we heard that Hilary Clinton did not like the Iraqi ambassador or some such.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    You're wilfully (or stupidly) reading too much into what I said, which was that I had heard one or two rumours and didn't know if they were true. Quite probably, as NF said, the rumours are bollocks, and I don't dispute that.

    But the main point I meant to make was that _if_ there was some discreditable (e.g. crazy cooking technique) or criminal (e.g. growing or brewing drugs) reason for the fire then we wouldn't be told. Anyone who disputes that is the gullible cretin, not me!
    Oh we would find out.

    Remember we can get English news from outside the UK thanks to the internet, and some of those media outlets have nothing to do with the British Establishment.

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by WTFH View Post
    Owlhoot has posted things like this recently, but refuses to provide any sources or evidence. ...
    You're wilfully (or stupidly) reading too much into what I said, which was that I had heard one or two rumours and didn't know if they were true. Quite probably, as NF said, the rumours are bollocks, and I don't dispute that.

    But the main point I meant to make was that _if_ there was some discreditable (e.g. crazy cooking technique) or criminal (e.g. growing or brewing drugs) reason for the fire then we wouldn't be told. Anyone who disputes that is the gullible cretin, not me!

    Leave a comment:


  • WTFH
    replied
    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    Are you actually asking that CUK posts should be backed up by sources or evidence?

    If that is the case, could mod decisions be backed up by evidence?
    Haha.
    Perhaps if mods were implying/stating that people died due to them doing something illegal, and that the local council is not responsible, then yes, I'd expect evidence to be supplied.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    Originally posted by WTFH View Post
    posted things like this recently, but refuses to provide any sources or evidence.
    Are you actually asking that CUK posts should be backed up by sources or evidence?

    If that is the case, could mod decisions be backed up by evidence?

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    It's not a rumour.
    It's not, he said rumours...

    Leave a comment:


  • NickFitz
    replied
    Being in London for a conference tomorrow, I took the H&C past there earlier on. I didn't know how close the block is to the track, which is elevated at that point. Very shocking to see such devastation so close

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladyuk View Post
    I've heard rumours that you are a ******* idiot.
    It's not a rumour.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladyuk
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladyuk View Post
    I've heard rumours that you are a ******* idiot.
    Originally posted by WTFH View Post
    Owlhoot has posted things like this recently, but refuses to provide any sources or evidence. As such we have to accept that he is a liar, or is being fed lies by his controllers (EDL/BNP/DM/UKIP) and is too stupid to question the lies as they would then rock the fundamentals of his faith. Much easier to say that it's rumoured to be a drug den than to accept anything that would mean that innocent people died in a fire.
    KUATB

    Leave a comment:


  • WTFH
    replied
    Owlhoot has posted things like this recently, but refuses to provide any sources or evidence. As such we have to accept that he is a liar, or is being fed lies by his controllers (EDL/BNP/DM/UKIP) and is too stupid to question the lies as they would then rock the fundamentals of his faith. Much easier to say that it's rumoured to be a drug den than to accept anything that would mean that innocent people died in a fire.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladyuk
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    I've heard rumours that the flat where the fire started was being used to grow cannabis, and a grow light overheated.

    But even if that is true, we'll almost certainly never be told. Much easier to blame Hotpoint for a mysterious incendiary fridge.

    Also, apparently the guy who lived in the flat has gone AWOL (with or without the Government's connivance).
    I've heard rumours that you are a ******* idiot.

    Leave a comment:


  • chopper
    replied
    I had suspected a meth lab rather than a cannabis farm...

    I work in an office building attached to Manchester Arena, whose main entrance was in the foyer area which was bombed. We've been back in the building three weeks ago, but half of the glass fronted entrance into the foyer is boarded up (glass broken by the shrapnel), the unsmashed panes have had opaque film placed over them. My desk pretty much overlooks that area. Builders have been in the foyer, mainly securing the area (I am unable to see into it, but based on a journalist who gained access to the foyer yesterday as part of Prince Charles' visit, the flooring still bears the scars of the explosion, and apparently concrete and metalwork has holes in it from the shrapnel. We were told cameras were not allowed into the foyer as it is still being treated as a crime scene) but they have been quite noisy. The main entrance to the foyer from Victoria Station has been concealed behind scaffolding.

    Seeing that, every day, is an incredibly sobering experience indeed.

    Leave a comment:


  • NickFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    I've heard rumours that the flat where the fire started was being used to grow cannabis, and a grow light overheated.

    But even if that is true, we'll almost certainly never be told. Much easier to blame Hotpoint for a mysterious incendiary fridge.

    Also, apparently the guy who lived in the flat has gone AWOL (with or without the Government's connivance).
    Sounds like utter bollocks to me. If you're doing a large-scale grow you don't do it in a tower block where it's hard to bypass the meter, or get gear and crops in and out, without being caught. And a small grow for personal use doesn't make much sense - in an area like that, it'd be cheaper and easier to buy from the big boys. I wouldn't imagine you'd have to walk far to find a bit of green round there

    A cheap secondhand fridge, probably not well looked after, going up, though - that sounds a lot more likely.

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    Government KNEW cladding could catch fire a year ago | Daily Mail Online

    Government reassured by quango that flammable cladding was safe last April
    Paid adviser BRE Global said 'no evidence' safety checks on towers 'were failing'
    It's now being paid to confirm if cladding is dangerous and has failed all 95 so far
    Out of date building regulations are being blamed for allowing cladding through
    US firm halts sales of Grenfell-type panels sending its share price plummeting
    'Convoluted' fire regulations were last looked at in 2005 and are a 'total mess'

    Of course, being the Wail, this could well be nonsense....
    One of the prominent people at the paper cleaner, gardener or painter and decorator etc is missing

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X