24 Storey Tower on Fire in Kensington - dies

No.....I don't think that's him

look like him to me.

Sorry, just seen........I was looking at the speaker

Where is his missus?

Why didn't the fire brigade use the dry riser in the block right next to it to spray the buildings?

Why haven't the fire brigade been kitted out with bouncy mattresses? - I have one that inflates via the exhaust and raises a car up.

On the video above from about the 1 minute mark,
A woman appears to be trying to hide.
Same person ??
Crisis actor from France ?

The press did not make any "mistakes" over the reporting of this at all. They were just exposed because one of their actors overplayed his part.

Everything that the MSM and press has reported has been meticulously planned from day one. As soon as Mr Talabi was outed as a fraud the legal people swooped in to tidy everything up, nothing to see here type of thing, incriminating videos removed off YouTube with threats made to the poster, a quick face saving piece for the local BBC news and the cover up is complete.

If you want to see the BBC propaganda machine in full swing just watch this episode of Victoria Derbyshire, it's pretty difficult to stomach as it has Mr Eghal and his crisis actor friends in full Post Traumatic Stress Disorder mode and boy do they lay it on thick. Just count how many times he says the word trauma, it's absolutely disgusting.



Victoria Derbyshire, 19/07/2017: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08y9vcy via @bbciplayer

Society of the Spectacle wrote:

On the video above from about the 1 minute mark,
A woman appears to be trying to hide.
Same person ??
Crisis actor from France ?

at 1:36 doesnt look like the top one , nose is not same.

Cheers Lopsum, she does look dodgy though trying to duck and not be seen.

Spotted

https://youtu.be/xokihFjy-ws

So the footage of the firefighters sat on their arse was in fact firemen "waiting" to go into a raging inferno?... thanks for clearing that up love.

Oh by the way, if anybody has managed to find a picture or video footage of a fireman who even looks like he's been anywhere near a fire please send it to me as I've had no joy so far. I'll accept any fireman with soot on his uniform or even a relatively clean fireman that's been sweating. Thanks

Others have mentioned this.
I am wondering about many things particularly that the police saying the storming of the council offices was by a rentacrowd, hence the prevalence of peaky.

Why are we not hearing from the people in the block next door

This episode of Newsnight throws up more questions than answers.

https://youtu.be/TrzcjUhf61w

The firemen who had dealt with the fridge fire hear on their radio's "it's a 5 pump fire, it's a 10 pump fire which is bad then it's a 20 pump fire which is a catastrophe"

So even though the fire was classified as catastrophic why did the fire brigade usher 4 or 5 (depending on which story you hear) people into Olu's flat? Surely their only objective at that point was to get people out?

Why did the high ladder not arrive on the scene until half an hour after a call was made from a high rise building on fire?

The stairwell was smoke filled between floors 3 and 14 so why would Olu's flat  be deemed as safe by anybody?

By 2.16 every available breathing set in London was on scene, that's over 40 fire engines and crew so why was it another hour and 15 minutes before the fire brigade tell Olu to "run"?

If you look at the intensity of the fire at 6 minutes 27 secs into the video Mr Talabi is saying he was still in the building at this point...are you kidding me?

The fire brigade were hindered as their radio's weren't working properly. Didn't we hear that with the 9/11 firefighters to?

And why did the aerial platform which is just a few metres short of the roof of Grenfell tower not arrive until many hours later in the morning?

Now listen to this interview with London fireman Damian Magee.



https://youtu.be/C1FfuNrQSQY


Now the words he uses at 2.11 secs of this video "a little boy came downstairs with his mother" This indicates that they were not accompanied by any firemen... Why?

He then asks a 5 year old boy if there was anybody else in the flat. Why would you not ask his mother? Surely a better source for valuable information than a traumatised 5 year old boy?

Even though Mr Magee openly states that the procedure for fighting a high rise fire is to fight it from the inside so why did you use the excuse that the ladders "don't go that high?"

Mr Magee states that he "watched families die" but then says "I wish I would have done things differently, grabbed a set and run up there myself" .
So would it be correct to assume you never got past the ground floor and the families you saw die were outside?

At no point does Mr Magee say he rescued anybody from that building but watched families die. What would be more important than getting people out of that building?

The whole thing stinks!

Hi Awoken2

You must be on target, either that or Annie Logical is trying to post - this thread (no others) keeps crashing the tab on my phone tonight!

Cheers!

Hi iamani, seems to be working fine my end.

Annie I'll post this on your behalf. And I would be seriously considering suing his lying little ass if I was you as you no doubt have record of all correspondence with him?

https://youtu.be/55HcUWsZyhM

Apparently the fire brigade did use the dry risers in the neighbouring block? Still they should be fitted out with bouncy air mattresses.

Annie and all, I am surprised that "Pat" has some "clout" to be able to take down ytube vids. Clearly has backing. I don't think its the rentacrowd mob! Annie, any info greatly received so we can all input.

A very important contradiction

https://youtu.be/xokihFjy-ws

(3 minutes 54 seconds)


https://youtu.be/TrzcjUhf61w

(2 minutes 53s)
(3 minutes 36s)
(8 minutes 28s)

It does appear that from what information gleaned from the fire service that their ability to effectively tackle this fire was seriously impeded.

A high ladder not being sent immediately.
An aerial platform not made available until many hours after the fire had been classified as catastrophic.
A break down in communication/radio's not working.
Protocols prohibiting most of the firefighters present unable to make any impact on the fire itself or evacuating residents.
The fire was unpresidented, like nothing she had ever seen in 29 years indicating this was not a natural fire.

It does look like our emergency services were pretty much disabled for the event.

Now take yourself back 16 years.

The military response capability of the most guarded airspace on the planet, disabled.
Communications between air traffic control to "hijacked" aircraft disabled.
Radio communications between NY fire crews disabled.
Over 80 CCTV cameras in or around The Pentagon disabled or not available.

But what ties these two things together more in my mind is the way the Zionest controlled MSM has mercilessly driven an agenda of creating racial intolerances.
The media have been proved to have lied about this event.

Isn't the most important question here what is their end goal?

Hi awoken,

Have you been following this on UK Column ,they are giving this a lot of coverage & last week the whole team went there.

Hi Dave, no I haven't seen any of them. Could you put the links up for quick reference please?, got loads on at the minute. Thanks

Hi,
Ceylon posts them on here ,also their own youtube channel = UK Column
I think they have a lot more to come .

Ps they are live at 1pm mon-fri

hope you find its useful.

And despite the current legislation requiring every rented property being fitted with smoke alarms, not a fire alarm activation is mentioned anywhere.

And the signs said that in the event of a fire, everyone stay in their rooms.

It's worse than that Handle. I do believe these are genuine residents that escaped the building.

https://youtu.be/W25enrEy5-4

Listen out for a very important line.

When there isn't a remedy there is no law

https://youtu.be/X9nhLppX2aA.

(Patrick Henningsen)

A very good insight into the tactics being used by the KCTMO. A private company masquerading as a Government body.

When a corporation is in charge then we know that the number one priority is profit. Now after looking at the way the KCTMO treat their residents, their ultimate objectives being profit then the need to have the redevelopment plans  looked at as part of the official inquiry is extremely important.

So I made an official complaint to IPSO about the ridiculous story printed in the Sun on 12th July. They usually reply within three days. I received this reply today...

"Dear Mr Owen

 

I write further to our earlier email regarding your complaint about an article headlined “HERO OF GRENFELL TOWER Brave man catches four-year-old girl thrown by mum from the 5th floor seconds before flat was engulfed in flames” published by thesun.co.uk on 15 June 2017.

 

On receipt of a complaint, IPSO’s Executive reviews it to ensure that it falls within our remit and raises a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Executive has now completed an assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Code. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Editors’ Code.

 

We noted your concern that the report and the photo captions referred to a man as “Pat”, when you understood his name was Oluwaseun Nesky Talabi, in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy).  IPSO is able to consider complaints from an individual who has been personally and directly affected by the alleged breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice; complaints from a representative group affected by an alleged breach where there is a substantial public interest; and complaints from third parties about accuracy.  In the case of third party complaints, we will need to consider the position of the party most closely involved.  In this instance, the concerns you raised under this Clause relate directly to identity of the man in the photograph.  Since you are not acting on his behalf with his knowledge and consent, we were unable to consider this aspect of your complaint further.

 

You told us you were also concerned that the photographs might breach Clause 1 (Accuracy) because you doubted their authenticity.  While we understood that you were dissatisfied with the conversation you had with the Sun about the verification of photographs in general, your complaint did not provide grounds for finding that these photographs were not of incident described in the article.   

 

Finally, you were concerned that the report might breach Clause 4 (Intrusion into grief or shock) because the story had no credibility and was a sensational story at a time when people were still in shock about a tragedy.  The terms of this Clause are designed to protect those directly affected by grief or shock.  As we explained above, when we receive third party complaints, we consider the position of the party most closely involved.  In this instance, the concerns you raised under this Clause relate directly to those that have lost friends and family in the Grenfell fire.  Since you are not acting on behalf someone directly affected by the fire, with their knowledge and consent, we were unable to consider this aspect of your complaint further.

 

You are entitled to request that the Executive’s decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us in the next seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made seven days after the date of this email.

 

We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns.

 

Best wishes,

 

Catherine Thomas

cc thesun.co.uk"

So in summary I can only question Oluwasean Talabi's identity if I'm acting on his behalf or have to have his permission to do so.

And unless you've been "directly affected" by a story you are not permitted to question it's authenticity.

It's a strange response because at no point was I ever asked if I had any connections to any Grenfell Tower survivors so their entire response was based on an assumption on their part.

I can feel another complaint coming on...

And now it turns into corporate manslaughter, what a surprise given the implications.

Under corporate manslaughter no one individual can be charged with any offences, only the corporation, the dead entity, can be held liable. What does this mean in reality?

It means two corporations can be held individually or jointly liable and a court hearing has to take place to determine the percentage of liability each corporation is liable for. Or, in other words it means just how much money (promissory notes) each will pay to a bank so the bank still wins.

It means that all those in the planning department who passed the plans for defective equipment to me used to clad the buildings cannot be charged with offences so they get away with it very nicely thank you, interestingly the public servants are protected again.

It means that the leaders of the council and the directors of the management company get away with it very nicely thank you.

As the police only have the powers to interview these people under caution, it means they have to surrender to a police station voluntarily as the police have no powers to arrest them, how's that for protectionism of civil servants, and what's the betting they will surrender, be interviewed under caution, and there will be only one thing constantly reitterated, "NO COMMENT.

It will go to court and the facade will be played out and the only decision will be how much each of the two corporations pays.