It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Grenfell Tower London Fire ... a conspiracy in the making?

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: audubon
a reply to: InceyWincey

What do you understand by the term "council housing", just as a matter of interest?

State funded subsidised housing, obviously.
What else do you think we are talking about?
Housing provided at reduced rents directly or indirectly managed by local government.




posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: InceyWincey

It's just that the Housing Acts of 1985 and 1988 transferred what was then called "council housing" out of the control of councils and into the control of bodies known as 'Housing Associations' - which are private non-profit corporations, receiving some funding allocation from central Government, and are not 'middlemen' for local government, as you seem to believe.

So you appear to be saying things that are not true.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: audubon

Oh behave, it's still funded by taxes, just a block grant usually to the housing associations except for some Labour controlled areas.
What's your point exactly? However it is managed it still has funding from the state and 18 year old girls get knocked up as a career choice to fall into the 'vulnerable' groups to get a cheap home.
Dude, I've worked in the trade, it is a shambles and exploited badly with 'single' parents who are living with the father of their kids on the sly. Massive fraud, not enough investigators.
*and I repeat, I despise corporate tax evasion as much as sluts who pop a kid out to gain a subsidised home funded by my taxes.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: InceyWincey

So you're just going to keep repeating your untrue claims, as though that will make them true?

Fine. I think I've made my point quite sufficiently, and anyone with any normal level of comprehension will be able to see what just happened in our brief exchange. I'm content to leave it there.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: InceyWincey
a reply to: 23432
I agree with what you posted in the main.
I do not agree that my taxes should fund subsidised homes for minimum wage workers and the unemployed to live in expensive areas. Especially when all an 18 year old girl needs to do is get knocked up to get the cheap home while claiming as a single parent and living with the father on the sly.
Yes we are all on the same ship, but tough # if you can't afford a cabin in the nicer parts, get educated, earn more, stop being a leech and expecting everyone else to pay for the home you can't afford.


it's just pragmatism on the part of those get knocked up ; unfortunately we have no were near enough opportunities for our young and the budget mismanagement is delibrate to create a non thinking ship mates.

We simply can't enforce a legislation against these young people's behaviour and hope the trend would change.

Problem is slightly deeper imho.

Impression tptb create is that the taxes pay for poor must come to end.

I think Austerity is to blame for all this mess .



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: 23432

nice analogy bud... i agree!



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: audubon
Cool, I bid you good day.


originally posted by: 23432
I think Austerity is to blame for all this mess .
Not for the lack of sprinklers on that building. Millions were spent on making it look pretty for the wealthy residents who didn't like the look of a shabby concrete social housing block.
The money was there, just terrible spending choices.
Although I'm against social housing, I expect it to be safe for residents if my taxes help pay for it.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I'm not sure if anything I say is going to make any sense but here goes,
I expect the police cannot say how many has died due to incineration of bodies from the inferno and will probably have to have forensics in to examine the ash pile and debris for any bone materiel etc to d.n.a. You can't just guess a number even though the police say it will be many.
The residents were calling for a register to be taken and I agree that, no one from the authority, even bothered the next day to take factual findings of those residents found alive.
The actual occupancy from all those dwellings may never be truthfully accounted for as some families might have had un- authorised people staying with them.
I didn't see many single ladies carrying babies outside the tower, mostly young families, extended families, elderly.
It is true for a person on benefits asking for dwellings to rent, you are given choices of areas, but, they can't just magic up places to live for that many people in 1 week. Even so, myself personally, I wouldn't like to have to move from my area, away from people I know and the sense of belonging which you build up over the years.
As we all saw the horrific tragic circumstances, the human loss and the pain of those involved, the answers will not come quick and for those involved very tough times ahead.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: sussy
I expect the police cannot say how many has died due to incineration of bodies from the inferno and will probably have to have forensics in to examine the ash pile and debris for any bone materiel etc to d.n.a. You can't just guess a number even though the police say it will be many.


Skeletons are very hard to destroy. Funereal cremation takes several hours at extraordinarily high temperatures concentrated in a very small space, and even then what is left after the cremation has to be put in what is basically a big tumble-drier with interior 'teeth' in order to be reduced to a rough powdered ash. The identification of badly-burned corpses will usually be done through dental records, but with so many transient occupiers, not all of whom will be on the books of the same dentist (or any dentist) even this fool-proof method is hard to complete in this case.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: sussy
I'm not sure if anything I say is going to make any sense but here goes,
I expect the police cannot say how many has died due to incineration of bodies from the inferno and will probably have to have forensics in to examine the ash pile and debris for any bone materiel etc to d.n.a. You can't just guess a number even though the police say it will be many.
The residents were calling for a register to be taken and I agree that, no one from the authority, even bothered the next day to take factual findings of those residents found alive.
The actual occupancy from all those dwellings may never be truthfully accounted for as some families might have had un- authorised people staying with them.


I understand, but looking at real eyewitness reports from Facebook, Twitter etc.. are saying that the a tight lid is being kept on actual figures, regardless of body identification, the picture being painted by the MEDIA is grossly disproportionate to the reality. At least ADMIT that there are roughly *this many dead* but they are just saying 58 presumed... 30 identified... and upto 70 missing besides that..

It cannot be.

Here is in this video, one guy had a friend in the fire department who says they found 40 or so dead bodies huddled up together in one room!

Video link:

Knowing how many people lived there and were liekly in there at 2 AM... there are hundreds unaccounted for and the police would have you believe that only upto 70 are unaccounted for not including the 58 currently presumed dead and those who made it out (which isn't very clear either).

Something is not right here, numbers are being greatly downplayed. Had MSM and authorities said " Hundreds feared dead inside the tower" than yeah I wouldn't be pushing this so much, because that is what firefighters have been silently reporting.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ISeekTruth101

The story of people dying while huddled together in one room for protection rings horribly true but there are all sorts of reasons that false stories get into circulation during times like these -- and most of them aren't malicious, they are just 'the grapevine' getting tangled as the stories get passed round.

Have to comment on this, though, as it struck a chord with something that's occurred to me separately:


Something is not right here, numbers are being greatly downplayed. Had MSM and authorities said " Hundreds feared dead inside the tower" than yeah I wouldn't be pushing this so much, because that is what firefighters have been silently reporting.


I agree, I think there is probably a slightly-ropy 'dripfeeding' tactic being deployed here. Probably, but not definitely.

The trick is the language. "Missing, presumed dead," means (in police-speak) that the individuals were in Grenfell tower on a regular basis and have been reported missing by their friends or family. By definition, it does not include people who have not been reported as missing.

So we have three totals: A) Confirmed dead; B) Reported as 'missing', now presumed dead; C) Dead, but not reported as 'missing' or confirmed dead

The last of those categories will not be declared in any announcements at this stage.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon

Yeah exactly, a play on words, damage control, they are drip feeding us and managing the flow of information. One man was arrested for posting a picture of a dead body, okay it was in bad taste, but he is in jail for three months.

I just have a chocking feeling because they are not reporting the scale of the tragedy accurately enough. Luckily hundreds of firefighters were involved, thousands of community members are witnesses, and so the truth must come out eventually no matter what information control is happening now. Too many people involved, they can't hide the truth for too long.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: InceyWincey
Not for the lack of sprinklers on that building.


Yet the building would have had a fire certificate. Anyway it's not advisable to stick sprinklers in domestic flats - can you imagine the destruction every time the fire alarm goes off. Besides, the point is moot as the fire spread up the sides of the building.

It's a tragedy, but best await the outcome of the investigation which will detail what should be improved.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: InceyWincey
I am a poor person and popped 3 kids out still no council house, its absolute garbage.



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

I own 4 flats and the council forced me to spend two grand on a sprinkler and smoke alarm system.
You know something I don't?



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: InceyWincey
I am a poor person and popped 3 kids out still no council house, its absolute garbage.


Why did you pop out 3 kids if you couldn't afford to raise them? Do you think taxpayers owe you a home?



posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Double post
edit on 18-6-2017 by InceyWincey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Is it true that this cladding was legal to use to a certain height only??

I mean when does a fire risk flammable material STOP becoming a fire risk when it reaches a certain height??

And another point, why is it even considered safe to use a fire risk flammable material based on height restrictions??

The fact that the material is a fire risk in the first place regardless of height use should be enough for an outright ban on it.
edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2017 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: InceyWincey

He is a tax payer, every thing he buys, eats and drinks is taxable.

In fact everyone one who spends their benefits is directly paying taxes on the goods they buy.

And what about the governments with their hands in the public purse, do we owe them that privilege, do they think they are somehow owed a privileged free life style??



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I think this new reports sums up nicely what I've been trying to convey:
What is the real death toll?


‘“While it is accepted by most people that the actual figure of the deceased can only be provided once there has been proper confirmation, those who are heavily involved do not feel their voices have been heard. The incremental increase in numbers of dead diminishes the impact of a significant loss of life. “Rough estimates are that at least 300 people are missing, presumed dead. It’s an insult to everyone’s intelligence to, on the one hand, portray the total devastation of the burnt out flats, whilst in the same breath suggesting that a limited number of people have died.” Read more at: inews.co.uk...



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join