I think wait for phase 2 of the Grenfell inquiry to see where the blame really lies. The recent report was simply dealing with the fire.
Only another couple of years.
It's been an incredibly intensive inquiry, with thousands of people interviewed and a phenomenal amount of in depth research and investigation carried out.
Hundreds of 'experts' and specialists have been interviewed and I suspect, will produce one of the most comprehensive inquiry results we've ever seen.
I think wait for phase 2 of the Grenfell inquiry to see where the blame really lies. The recent report was simply dealing with the fire.
Only another couple of years.
It's been an incredibly intensive inquiry, with thousands of people interviewed and a phenomenal amount of in depth research and investigation carried out.
Hundreds of 'experts' and specialists have been interviewed and I suspect, will produce one of the most comprehensive inquiry results we've ever seen.
I've been flicking through it tonight. The details are extensive, not one stone unturned as far as I can see. as it should be.
What has to be made clear is that the criticism of the LFB are not criticisms of fire fighters. These brave people risk their lives daily for the public and everybody knows that. If lessons are learned from this, it should make fire fighters slightly safer too.
This is what the London Fire Brigade had to say at the enquiry into the tragic Summerland fire of 1973 on the Isle of Man.
I extract two excerpts from page 22...."Mr Miller said the London Fire Brigade was “very concerned” about
the increasing use of plastics for both the external walls and interior fittings
of buildings."..... and ....."If I had been shown a
description of the centre before it was built I would have
warned the planners they were creating a potential fire
hazard.”.....
The politicians and planners have and had been warned since before 1973 by the London Fire Brigade about the potential hazards of cladding containing plastic yet the London Fire Brigade have been deemed the scapegoats.
Hopefully people now have an inkling as to why I keep banging on about politicians, both blue and red, having blood on their hands over 50 plus years.
My late father and his successors as London Fire Brigade Officers did and have done all they humanly could and can to get proper fire safety onto the political agenda.
The fault for Grenfell Tower does NOT rest with them.
Another instance of the headline not actually representing what was said. At no point did the bumbling idiot say that those killed lacked common sense.
The Metro is as shitty a rag as the rest of them. Both left and right.
I think wait for phase 2 of the Grenfell inquiry to see where the blame really lies. The recent report was simply dealing with the fire.
Only another couple of years.
I think that it's due for publication this January.
My view would be that the Organisation that instructed the works gave the contractors a specification who then went and done a Valued Engineering exercise(VE). Cost cutting for another word, where you search out alternative products that comply with specification but are cheaper.
This Organisation would either then accept or reject the VE proposal and in this case they accepted the alternative cladding. This would now be installed by the contractors.
The next question is - were the installers competent to install it and who signed it off as compliant?
It has also been stated that when LFB tested some of the certified fire doors they failed! It looks like being a very complex investigation and that takes time.
Jacob Rees- Mogg has said that the victims of the Grenfell Tower fire should have used "common sense" to leave the building while it was on fire.
He spoke about the Grenfell report that came out last week on LBC radio, saying:
'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'.
He subsequently made an apology ... as well he should.
Jacob Rees- Mogg has said that the victims of the Grenfell Tower fire should have used "common sense" to leave the building while it was on fire.
He spoke about the Grenfell report that came out last week on LBC radio, saying:
'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'.
He subsequently made an apology ... as well he should.
I turned off at Jacob Rees-Mogg. The "man" is an utter tool.
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
"'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'." - He's literally saying that to not leave the building would be down to a lack of common sense.
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
I don't think he has been misquoted
The statement is in every publication and the wider domain
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
"'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'." - He's literally saying that to not leave the building would be down to a lack of common sense.
He's literally not. He's saying that, from his perspective, leaving a burning building is the common sense approach. I agree that is true. That doesn't then automatically mean someone else can fill in the blanks around what he thinks other peoples responses would be.
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
I don't think he has been misquoted
The statement is in every publication and the wider domain
Agreed. He hasn't been misquoted as all of the actual quotes in all of the articles never mention once a quote saying what the headline infers.
I can't believe I'm defending the man but, in this instance, it's justified.
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
He's saying that if he was in the building to him it would seem the common sense thing to leave a burning high rise building - regardless of what the LFB advice was. Can't say I disagree with that.
People are spinning this to make it sound like he suggested the people that died lacked common sense. He didn't.
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
AS @Big_Bad_World has said, saying leaving a burning building seems the commen sense thing to do is not the same as saying the people of Grenfell lacked common sense. People choose to view it that way because they don't like him
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
"'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'." - He's literally saying that to not leave the building would be down to a lack of common sense.
He's literally not. He's saying that, from his perspective, leaving a burning building is the common sense approach. I agree that is true. That doesn't then automatically mean someone else can fill in the blanks around what he thinks other peoples responses would be.
Either in his opinion you have common sense and leave, or in his opinion you lack common sense and follow LFB advice and stay put. Surely there's no in between?
I'm not necessarily denying that it would naturally occur to people to leave a burning building (I've never been in that situation) but when you are given advice based on an LFB policy which, in the vast majority of cases, proves to be the correct and safest option, surely that is the sensible thing to do?
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
"'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'." - He's literally saying that to not leave the building would be down to a lack of common sense.
He's literally not. He's saying that, from his perspective, leaving a burning building is the common sense approach. I agree that is true. That doesn't then automatically mean someone else can fill in the blanks around what he thinks other peoples responses would be.
Either in his opinion you have common sense and leave, or in his opinion you lack common sense and follow LFB advice and stay put. Surely there's no in between?
Again, respectfully, no. Unless, of course, you believe that there can only ever be two trains of thought on it.
I think there will be a lot of people thinking that had they been in the position of leaving a burning building that’s the course of action they would have taken. Nothing wrong with that. It was however inflammatory and massively insensitive of Rees-Mogg to suggest it in such fashion given the advice given by the London Fire Brigade.
One word you didnt use shooters was unsurprising, tory toff obnoxiously blaming the victims, last week they laughed at Corbyns green tie, didn't even know it was for Grenfell yet we still vote these heartless elites into power
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
He's saying that if he was in the building to him it would seem the common sense thing to leave a burning high rise building - regardless of what the LFB advice was. Can't say I disagree with that.
People are spinning this to make it sound like he suggested the people that died lacked common sense. He didn't.
Why does he feel the need to make any comparison to what he would do and go further to make an assumption about what the interviewer would do differently to those that died, because they did what they were asked to do? He may not have overtly said it but the only logical conclusion is that he (and the interviewer) would act differently because they're capable of exercising higher levels of 'common sense' than those that stayed.
Comments
Hundreds of 'experts' and specialists have been interviewed and I suspect, will produce one of the most comprehensive inquiry results we've ever seen.
Scroll down to page 22/101.
This is what the London Fire Brigade had to say at the enquiry into the tragic Summerland fire of 1973 on the Isle of Man.
I extract two excerpts from page 22...."Mr Miller said the London Fire Brigade was “very concerned” about the increasing use of plastics for both the external walls and interior fittings of buildings."..... and ....."If I had been shown a description of the centre before it was built I would have warned the planners they were creating a potential fire hazard.”.....
There were no prosecutions following the Summerland enquiry. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-23515689
Here is a link to a BBC article regarding the Grenfell Tower cladding: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43558186
The politicians and planners have and had been warned since before 1973 by the London Fire Brigade about the potential hazards of cladding containing plastic yet the London Fire Brigade have been deemed the scapegoats.
Hopefully people now have an inkling as to why I keep banging on about politicians, both blue and red, having blood on their hands over 50 plus years.
My late father and his successors as London Fire Brigade Officers did and have done all they humanly could and can to get proper fire safety onto the political agenda.
The fault for Grenfell Tower does NOT rest with them.
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/05/jacob-rees-mogg-says-grenfell-victims-lacked-common-sense-staying-put-11042402/
Another instance of the headline not actually representing what was said. At no point did the bumbling idiot say that those killed lacked common sense.
The Metro is as shitty a rag as the rest of them. Both left and right.
Clickbait rules the waves.
My view would be that the Organisation that instructed the works gave the contractors a specification who then went and done a Valued Engineering exercise(VE). Cost cutting for another word, where you search out alternative products that comply with specification but are cheaper.
This Organisation would either then accept or reject the VE proposal and in this case they accepted the alternative cladding. This would now be installed by the contractors.
The next question is - were the installers competent to install it and who signed it off as compliant?
It has also been stated that when LFB tested some of the certified fire doors they failed! It looks like being a very complex investigation and that takes time.
Jacob Rees- Mogg has said that the victims of the Grenfell Tower fire should have used "common sense" to leave the building while it was on fire.
He spoke about the Grenfell report that came out last week on LBC radio, saying:
'If you just ignore what you're told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do'.
He subsequently made an apology ... as well he should.
Again, at no point did he say that the victims should have used common sense. The Metro has made that inference by smashing a few comments together to give them their clickbait headline.
He said that leaving a burning building 'seems the common sense thing to do', which it is.
Whenever there's been a fire alarm going off in an office I've worked in I've always headed straight for the stairs and ignored the office advice and protocol, as it seems the common sense thing to do. Now, that doesn't mean that anyone still in the building lacks common sense. Nor does it mean that I believe that to be the case.
As I said, clickbait rules the waves.
Can anyone put up an actual quote from Moggy, from the interview, where he says that the 'victims lacked common sense'? Any source will do....the Guardian or the Metro reports should be suffice to grab this disgusting language from.
If not then it's a typical rag trying to get views.
The statement is in every publication and the wider domain
He's literally not. He's saying that, from his perspective, leaving a burning building is the common sense approach. I agree that is true. That doesn't then automatically mean someone else can fill in the blanks around what he thinks other peoples responses would be.
Agreed. He hasn't been misquoted as all of the actual quotes in all of the articles never mention once a quote saying what the headline infers.
I can't believe I'm defending the man but, in this instance, it's justified.
He's saying that if he was in the building to him it would seem the common sense thing to leave a burning high rise building - regardless of what the LFB advice was. Can't say I disagree with that.
People are spinning this to make it sound like he suggested the people that died lacked common sense. He didn't.
Please see all of my previous comments and re-digest. My points still stand as he never actually says what the headline grabbers infer.
@Addickted is also spot on.
Again, respectfully, no. Unless, of course, you believe that there can only ever be two trains of thought on it.