Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

So you don't have the article from yesterday evening? Do you remember the exact wording of the sentence you want? Maybe you could use that as a search term.

You could also get a printed copy of the paper and see if it's different from the online version.
 
Found this in one of the support groups from yesterday (4 JULY 2017 • 9:21PM):

The Justice4Grenfell agitators: campaign group tries to push Tower inquiry judge to resign

he Grenfell Tower judge is being subjected to a politically-motivated witch hunt, his allies said yesterday, as a Labour MP demanded he be replaced by someone “who understands human beings”.

Friends of Sir Martin Moore-Bick have been taken aback by the sustained attacks on him since his appointment as Grenfell inquiry chairman just five days ago.

They point out that Emma Dent Coad, the Labour MP for Kensington, who called on him to resign yesterday on the grounds he is a ‘technocrat’ with a lack of understanding of ‘human beings’ has never even met the judge.

Chris Williamson, one of Jeremy Corbyn’s most loyal lieutenants who was appointed shadow fire minister on Monday, also demanded Sir Martin quit as chairman, insisting his inquiry be far wider-reaching.

But Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, accused Mr Corbyn of trying to make political gain from the tragedy. “I’m afraid that Jeremy Corbyn has treated this like a bit of political football and that is a shame,” Mr Javid Channel 4 News.

The clamour for Sir Martin to resign came as the Government admitted just nine families had been rehoused since the fire. Many had been offered unsuitable new accommodation outside of Kensington and in one case in a tower block but that had also been refused.


Justice4Grenfell, a campaign group set up in the immediate aftermath of the fire, wrote to Theresa May last night saying it was withdrawing its support for the public inquiry until Sir Martin was removed from his post.

The group was set up by local campaigners, including a veteran activist Ismahil Blagrove who called for a revolution in the wake of the fire and Sue Caro, a former BBC diversity manager and a staunch Corbyn supporter, who posted on Twitter that Adolf Hitler was “inspired by US racist laws”, which explains America’s ‘guilty conscience and support for Israel”.

None of the Justice4Grenfell’s key organisers was a resident in the high rise building in which at least 80 people perished although the group is keen to stress it is an umbrella organisation with widespread backing in the community.

Dominic Grieve QC, the former attorney general, said he was dismayed by the attacks on Sir Martin. “I find all this extraordinary,” he said, “There is overwhelming evidence of his competence in the course of his career and if someone of his standing is rejected it raises the question who in fact exists who could do the job.

“It has been suggested that he doesn’t have sufficient humanity to do this job but he is a human being like the rest of us and there is not a shred of evidence to support the view he doesn’t have the necessary qualities.”


A senior Tory source said: “This feels like a political witch hunt orchestrated by the left. Jeremy Corbyn has not called for the judge’s sacking but he is hardly slapping down his MPs either.”

One friend of Sir Martin said: “It is clear that some people regard the fire as not just a tragedy in itself but indicative of wider problems in society about the way people are housed and they want to use the fire as a catalyst to examine these issues.”

Another ally said: “I don’t know why Emma Dent Coad has criticised the judge. They have never met. I would say Martin is a normal human being like she is.

“Martin is anticipating this to be a rough ride and he is prepared for it and he is willing to get on with it. He wants to be judged by what he does in the inquiry.”
 
So you don't have the article from yesterday evening? Do you remember the exact wording of the sentence you want? Maybe you could use that as a search term.

You could also get a printed copy of the paper and see if it's different from the online version.

Unfortunately I didn't see it until this evening. Should be in today's printed version as the time shown on the online copy is 21:21 yesterday.
 
That link is just to the current version, live on the Telegraph site. The date and time are from when the article was first published. If there have been minor changes between first publication and now, the paper wouldn't amend the date and time.
 
That link is just to the current version, live on the Telegraph site. The date and time are from when the article was first published. If there have been minor changes between first publication and now, the paper wouldn't amend the date and time.
Shame as some online publications will list at the very least the date and time of edits/updates.
 
It should be in the printed version if it went online at that time. Would be a great example of how they operate if they have changed it. Maybe help change a few peoples minds.
 
Would be a great example of how they operate if they have changed it.

But everyone already knows that papers tell lies, make assumptions and mistakes. Never accept anything as true unless you've checked it in several other papers. That gives you about half the story, if you're lucky. You never find out the rest unless you talk to people who were involved.
 
But everyone already knows that papers tell lies, make assumptions and mistakes. Never accept anything as true unless you've checked it in several other papers. That gives you about half the story, if you're lucky. You never find out the rest unless you talk to people who were involved.

Not sure everybody does. We all like to indulge in a little confirmation bias information gathering.

I thought the speech, which I saw on Facebook but quickly became unavailable, Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting was amazing. They need more people like her fighting for them, not people who will happily make dodgy social media posts.
 
Not sure everybody does. We all like to indulge in a little confirmation bias information gathering.

I thought the speech, which I saw on Facebook but quickly became unavailable, Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting was amazing. They need more people like her fighting for them, not people who will happily make dodgy social media posts.
You are questioning the veracity of Ishmahill's fb post?
 
But everyone already knows that papers tell lies, make assumptions and mistakes. Never accept anything as true unless you've checked it in several other papers. That gives you about half the story, if you're lucky. You never find out the rest unless you talk to people who were involved.

Not everyone, plus we all like a bit of confirmation bias based information gathering whether we admit it or not.
 
You are questioning the veracity of Ismail's fb post?

I posted my question because I thought the Telegraph had changed their story. If they have I would see it as a bit of a victory for him.

As it looks like it might also be him making things up I now question his motivation. Same feeling I had about UKBLM leaders, who took their bit of fame, wrote a couple of articles and then fucked off having destroyed what was a viable national organisation for challenging racism.

I saw the speech Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting. She is clearly concerned solely with helping the residents. Same sincerity and passion as Doreen Lawrence and Marcia Rigg. These are people who work tirelessly for what they believe in.

People making inaccurate Facebook posts are not fit to represent those people. Certainly you need to be able to operate at the same level as the judges, lawyers, journalists but truth needs to be at the heart of everything if that's what you're fighting for.
 
Cunts.

"This period of leave to remain for those directly affected by the fire will provide survivors with the time to deal with the extremely difficult circumstances in which they find themselves and start to rebuild their lives whilst considering their future options,
 
I posted my question because I thought the Telegraph had changed their story. If they have I would see it as a bit of a victory for him.

As it looks like it might also be him making things up I now question his motivation. Same feeling I had about UKBLM leaders, who took their bit of fame, wrote a couple of articles and then fucked off having destroyed what was a viable national organisation for challenging racism.

I saw the speech Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting. She is clearly concerned solely with helping the residents. Same sincerity and passion as Doreen Lawrence and Marcia Rigg. These are people who work tirelessly for what they believe in.

People making inaccurate Facebook posts are not fit to represent those people. Certainly you need to be able to operate at the same level as the judges, lawyers, journalists but truth needs to be at the heart of everything if that's what you're fighting for.

You feel all that on the back of one facebook post? :D

Also, I think you need to spell out just what you think he is making up? could there be no other reason for this inconsistency?

Here is his post again to aid you:
We didn't expect to challenge the Establishment and the mainstream media and be able to leave this unscathed. We have been prepared for and awaiting the lies and distortions and it has begun today in The Telegraph - of course owned by billionaire tax dodgers, the Barclay brothers.

It is journalism of the most sloppy and desperate kind, demonstrated by their inability to even spell my name correctly - low standards characteristic of The Telegraph.

The fact that they would dare to call us "AGITATORS", is a clear indication as to how they view common people attempting to secure justice from a rigged system that favours the elite and powerful in society.

1. The article claims that Justice4Grenfell had sent a letter to Theresa may - this is totally untrue. The journalist has made this assumption from the basis of a comment made by Yvette Williams that we were in the process of drafting a letter.

2. The article goes on to suggest that there is a political witch hunt to get rid of selected judge, Sir Martin Moore-Bick. It mentions nothing of the case in which Sir Martin ruled against a Westminster tenant and exiled her to Milton Keynes, or why many residents have voiced objections to the judges appointment.

3. If the Telegraph is ever interested in pursuing honest journalism instead of pushing the agenda of its billionaire owners or the Establishment, then it should reach out to survivors and residents of North Kensington and help expose the culture of corruption and history of neglect that contributed to this tragedy.

This will not be another Hillsborough, where elements of the media targeted, vilified, denounced and attempted to discredit the survivors and families seeking justice. We stand together united as a community with the principle aim of seeking accountability and justice!


Seems to me you came at this with a dislike of him and are making some very heavy judgements based on not very much at all. Perhaps I am wrong, perhaps you know a lot about him and have simply yet to say.
 
Um. conspiracy theorist on FB now link the company who supplied the cladding to international global capital / Joos & Bildeberg group. Pre planned demolition to facilitate redevelopment for the rich by all accounts. Some earlier discussion over whether the Grenfell missing ever actually existed. fucking hell, have these people no shame ?
 
Um. conspiracy theorist on FB now link the company who supplied the cladding to international global capital / Joos & Bildeberg group. Pre planned demolition to facilitate redevelopment for the rich by all accounts. Some earlier discussion over whether the Grenfell missing ever actually existed. fucking hell, have these people no shame ?
They don't see the need for shame. On the contrary, they consider themselves to be doing us a favour by revealing to us these incredibly well-kept secrets that only a few million fruitloops on the Internet have managed to figure out the TRUTH behind.

If you talk to these people, there is frank incomprehension in them at the idea that anyone could seriously consider any other narrative. Hence the horrible confrontations with Sandy Hook parents, etc.
 
They don't see the need for shame. On the contrary, they consider themselves to be doing us a favour by revealing to us these incredibly well-kept secrets that only a few million fruitloops on the Internet have managed to figure out the TRUTH behind.

If you talk to these people, there is frank incomprehension in them at the idea that anyone could seriously consider any other narrative. Hence the horrible confrontations with Sandy Hook parents, etc.
OK. That means one thing. They have to be ejected from wherever they turn up, by physical force if necessary.
 
Is there actually anyone amongst the survivors in this position? I know there were some people with official refugee status but these are people whose immigration status has already been established and whose rights to be in this country shoudl not be affected by events of the fire.
This article would seem to apply that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant, Are there actually people in this position or is someone just stirring things up?
 
Is there actually anyone amongst the survivors in this position? I know there were some people with official refugee status but these are people whose immigration status has already been established and whose rights to be in this country shoudl not be affected by events of the fire.
This article would seem to apply that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant, Are there actually people in this position or is someone just stirring things up?
It will be difficult to find out now, won't it? Anyone in that position would be unlikely to come forward under threat of deportation.
 
It will be difficult to find out now, won't it? Anyone in that position would be unlikely to come forward under threat of deportation.
Well yes that's why I'm curious the article gives the impression that on the night of the fire there were people coming out of the building and melting into the darkness like ghosts which is possible but seems a bit far fetched to me. There would be panic and confusion, many went to the hospital,a load more would have just gone along with the crowd and ended up in the leisure centre with the others. Amongst all these people was there anyone who's legal (let's not get into debates over moral) right to be there was in anyway questionable.
It would take remarkable presence of mind for someone to be woken in the middle of night, stagger downstairs throgh the smoke and fire struggling to breathe and then get outside and think to themselves
"Damn the gig is up I had better disappear"
That why's I am curious if there are any such people or is this article and the quotes in it is actually fact based or some journo and or politician fishing for a bite.
 
BemusedbyLife I think the answer is, no one actually knows.

I find it totally possible there were some 'illegals' in the building, but how many I doubt we will ever know.
 
Is there actually anyone amongst the survivors in this position? I know there were some people with official refugee status but these are people whose immigration status has already been established and whose rights to be in this country shoudl not be affected by events of the fire.
This article would seem to apply that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant, Are there actually people in this position or is someone just stirring things up?

Well, it's entirely possible that were people living in the block in this "illegal" or "undocumented" or whatever-the-hell-preferred-word situation.

You and your family could be living in the Grenfell block, meet someone in a desperately homeless situation, invite said person to come and crash in your place - living room sofa or a sleeping bag on the floor, whatever.

"
... that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant...

I think your "might be" and "possibly" be actually does mean that some serious thought must be given to that fact that it is very likely that there were were some people living there about whom the council did not know.

People WILL at times, have friends/family to stay for a long time, and yeah, some of them might be "illegal immigrants" or students who have overstayed visa etc.

I didn't think of informing council/Housing Association when I took my brother in to stay for a while. Nor did he, at a later time, notify them that Nigerian friend, having finished his studies, would stay in his flat for a while.

Anyone "illegal" and surviving through all that horrible hellish fire and terror ... oh let them recover and do not terrify them further.
 
Back
Top Bottom