Wednesday 28 June 2017

Chairman May telling more lies about Cladding




The 1984 Documentary That Predicted Grenfell Tower

At PMQs Today, Jeremy Corbyn launched an attack on the Tory government’s agenda of cuts to local authorities, and the effect they had on the Grenfell disaster, saying:
"When you cut local authority budgets by 40% we all pay a price in safety.
Fewer inspectors, fewer building control inspectors, fewer planning inspectors. We all pay a price.
And Mr Speaker, those cuts to the fire service have meant that there are 11,000 fewer firefighters. The public sector pay cap is hitting recruitment and retention right across the public sector. What the tragedy of Grenfell Tower has exposed is the disastrous effect of austerity.
This disregard for working-class communities, the terrible consequences of deregulation and cutting corners, I urge the prime minister to come up with the resources needed to test and remove cladding, retrofit sprinklers, properly fund the fire service and the police so that all our communities can truly feel safe in their own homes.
This disaster must be a wake-up call."
Chairman May responded by claiming that the cladding of the tower blocks began under Tony Blairs New Labour government.


"The cladding of tower blocks did not start under this government, it did not start under the previous government. The cladding of tower blocks began under the Blair government."

The video above however, proves that the cladding of Tower Blocks started in 1984 and who was in power in 1984 ...... Margret Thatcher 1979 - 1989.

CONCLUSION
Chairman May lied on this point,  the cladding of Tower Blocks started in 1984 and Margret Thatcher 1979 - 1989 was in power.


LINKS
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grenfell-tower-fire-1984-documentary-predict-disaster-north-kensington-a7811616.html
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=01b_1498515562
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=153834
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/625609/Grenfell-Tower-fire-west-London-inferno-predicted-television-documentary-30-years-ago
https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/home/over-half-of-council-towers-pose-a-fire-risk/5205197.article
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/mar/28/lakanal-house-fire-deaths-prevented
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mUhdsCUjJeQC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=where+was+cladding+on+tower+blocks+1st+used&source=bl&ots=jcw1GTfXAP&sig=y3sJa2KqLznKBEtXgpVDJV4ejM4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi-zce_v-HUAhXkCcAKHUOBAAw4RhDoAQg1MAM#v=onepage&q=where%20was%20cladding%20on%20tower%20blocks%201st%20used&f=false

Tuesday 27 June 2017

In light of the recent Grenfell Tower fire

Its always the way, horse, stable, bolted ..... my company and I'm sure others across the UK are sending out messages to staff starting something like this....
Dear Colleagues

"In light of the recent Grenfell Tower fire in London we are carrying out a review of Fire Safety to identify any areas we could improve on"

Here's a start

1hr Fire Door ... I don't think so

I was Manager at a Partitioning company back in my distant past and involved in designing a partitioning system including fire tests on various components including doors, so have some knowledge in the area of fire and fire tests.

Fire safety is a can of worms and just because a door, for instance, is supplied with a fire rating certificate, doesn’t mean it has a fire rating if its installed incorrectly. Doors and leafs are particularly difficult to get through a fire test and get a certificate. Adding vision panels only exacerbates the problems. Also every bit of door furniture cuts into the integrity of the fire stopping abilities of the door and has to be put back.

I had a quick look at one door in our building which on a stair well should be 1hr fire rated. I found three initial faults (there may be more I didn’t look that hard).

Faults as noted on the picture above
  1. Intumescent strip continuity has been broken at top of door which is worst point.
  2. Flush bolts should be bedded in intumescent paste.
  3. Hinges should be fitted with intumescent strip under both blades.
I wouldn’t bet on the door above lasting longer than 15mins before integrity failed at top of door and fire crossed over to other side.

The problem is this isn’t unusual and these type of faults can be found all over the UK. Installers only get asked to provide a fire certificate to cover the type of door installed, not the installation and I have rarely seen flush bolts or hinges fitted on site with intumescent paste or strip. Also how long the installation will last in a fire depends on the skill and attention of the person that fitted it.

At a previous place of work, the IT Department was situated at the end of a corridor with access in and out, down this same corridor. The wall on the corridor side should have been 1hr fire rated construction. Unfortunately over the years someone had fitted a glass sliding hatch into the wall. That means the integrity of the wall has been broken and a hatchway of this type would last a maximum of approximately10 Min's before fire crossed over. I pointed this out several times until eventually they got a fire officer down to look at it. He said it was fine. Go figure.

The problem is it takes something like Grenfell before people start questioning. History shows its only noises in most cases not much actual action will happen.

In the case of blocks of flats the profile has been raised to high on the back of many unnecessary deaths and changes are being made. But there will still be corners cut.

Time will tell as it has a habit of biting back.



Links
http://www.firesafe.org.uk/fire-doors/
http://www.firesafe.org.uk/fire-doors/ 

Monday 19 June 2017

The Lies about Grenfell Exposed

The Comment

For all protesters blaming Theresa May. And for all Labour / Jeremy Corbyn supporters note the following facts.

Grenfell Tower built by a Labour Council, under a Labour Government ~ "Sorry Rubbish"

Sadiq Khan was the Housing Minister in 2008. As Mayor he produced a report saying the Fire Services DID NOT need further funding. ~ "Sorry Rubbish"

Emma Coad newly elected MP was on the board of the tenant management group who are now accused of not listening to the tenants. ~ "This has some semblence of truth"

The cladding (banned in the USA) was chosen by Ed Miliband to meet EU climate change legislation. ~ "Sorry Rubbish"

Time to look inward and stop shifting the blame elsewhere for political gain.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So lets have a look at this because I like facts, when they are factual and not just being banded around for some political agenda.

Alleged fact 1

Grenfell Tower built by a Labour Council, under a Labour Government 

Fact
It was Designed in 1967, Council approved construction in 1970, Build Started in 1972 completed in 1974.
It was designed during Harold Wilson's (Labour) reign by Clifford Wearden and Associates
Construction was approved in 1970 when Edward Heath (Conservative) was in power.
The build was started in 1972 when Edward Health (Conservative) was in power.
Build was completed in 1974 when Harold Wilson (Labour) came back into power.

Was Grenfell Tower built by a Labour Council?  Since 1964 the Kensington and Chelsea council has been controlled by the Conservative party.

Was Grenfell tower built under a Labour Government? The majority of the construction if not all of it was during a Conservative Government.

CONCLUSION = MISINFORMATION

Alleged fact 2

Sadiq Khan was the Housing Minister in 2008. 
FACT: He wasn't the housing minister in 2008. That was Caroline Flint and then Margaret Beckett.

As Mayor he produced a report saying the Fire Services DID NOT need further funding. 
FACT: Im unable to find any documents or report where he said this.

CONCLUSION = SUSPECTED MISINFORMATION

Alleged fact 3

Emma Coad newly elected MP was on the board of the tenant management group who are now accused of not listening to the tenants.  
FACT: She was on the board of the Housing and Property Scrutiny Committee between 23/05/2013 - 11/06/2014

CONCLUSION = FACTUAL 


Alleged fact 4

The cladding (banned in the USA) was chosen by Ed Miliband to meet EU climate change legislation.
FACT: I can only find this comment from the chancellor Phillip Hammond “My understanding is the cladding in question, this flammable cladding which is banned in Europe and the US, is also banned here.  I can find no evidence of it being chosen by Ed Milliband.

CONCLUSION = SUSPECTED MISINFORMATION



Links

Tuesday 13 June 2017

Possibly the best Tweet ever


Dear Theresa, it's not the number of MPs that counts it's how you use them. You have to do more with less that's all 😂👏👍




Nothing more needs to be said really.

Saturday 10 June 2017

I Told You I Wasnt Weak


Interesting how things turn out. Chairman May just threw away the biggest poll lead any politician has ever had in the run up to the election.  All she expected to do was show her face briefly in a few well guarded places making sure no one could ask any embarrassing questions. Produce a manifesto with no costings in it and then ride the wave across the line. So what if we loose a few votes on the way were so far in front we cant be beaten.

Oh how wrong you were Chairman May.

Meanwhile Jeremy Corbyn who has been vilified and misrepresented by the Tory press for two years. Got his head down refused to be beaten and had crowds of thousands coming out to hear him speak Ive not known anyone since the war that has been able to do that.

Oh how wrong the PLP were.

When the election campaign started we were hoping to limit damage, everyone thought that, noone predicted the result that happened.

Both sides lost or did both sides win?

The Tories got more votes but were short of the 326 needed to form a government so neith side crossed the finish line.

Now the Tories are getting into bed with the DUP an organisation with Terrorist roots. Lets see where the press goes with that after the Terrorist sympathiser claims.

At the end of the day Chairman May has proved herself to be anything but Strong and Stable .... Weak and Wobbly, Incompetent, Conceited, Vain, Self serving .... Im not sure which best covers it.

And were expected to trust Chairman May in Brexit negotiations .... OMG we are in the crap.

Friday 9 June 2017

Theresa Mays throw of the dice gambled the UK


Lets just reflect on why this election was called. 

An election which will probably go down as the biggest failure that a party has ever made.To be so far ahead in the polls and to throw it all away by incompetance on a grand scale beggars belief.

Theresa May already had a majority and had stated several times there would be no election because

"What Britain needs is a period of stability in the lead up to Brexit"

Theresa May started her campaign on the basis of the "Strong and Stable" mantra which was quickly ridiculed and in a lot of cases, maybe not dropped altogether, but used a lot less than at the start.

David Cameron started all this with an ill thought out referendum, ill thought out because he was vain enough to think that he could win the vote, even telling EU leaders "Dont worry I can swing this". Ill thought out because he ran the referendum on a one vote can win it, no doubt because he thought he could win it by a few votes. The referendum a very important vote for the UK should have been on a 60% min to win it, that way you couldnt get a 50-50 split. Cameron lost the vote and split the country.

He then did the thing that he said he wouldn't and resigned.

Strong and Stable ..... Nope .... Weak and Wobbly

So back to Theresa May who campaigned to remain but now says shes the strongest leader to negotiate Brexit. Theresa May who didn't need to call an election as she already had a majority but called one after saying that she wouldn't. She then took her campaign around the country only visiting very protected sites where the audience was vetted to make sure there was no surprise or hostile questions. She also refuse to get involved in TV debates making herself look very weak. The u turn to have an election wasnt a Brave decision as some might suggest It was a vain gamble based on the polls at that time. We do not need a leader that takes vain gambles.

 Strong and Stable ..... Nope .... Weak and Wobbly

Theresa May has gambled on getting a majority of over 100 seats and ended up in a worse situation.  That would be OK if it just affected her but it doesnt it affects our position in the Brexit negotiations.

Theresa May is anything but Strong and Stable ..... Definately .... Weak and Wobbly and should resign.

Mean while Corbyn spoke to everyone, dealt with difficult questions and had crowds of thousands turn up to hear him speak whereever he was. He mobilised the young to vote for him and after two years of vilification and leadership challeges, Jeremy Corbyn has come through it all with dignity his tenacity is the mark of a real leader. He stood firm after a vote of no confidence and rode the waves of calls for his resignation. Whereas at the 1st sign of trouble Cameron resigned .... that is not a real leader.  

One thing that has come out of this Jeremy Corbyn has shown himself to be a real leader that can enthuse thousands.

The young may have changed history.

Thursday 8 June 2017

May and Corbyn's record on anti-terror legislation

Reality Check: May and Corbyn's record on anti-terror legislation


"I am shocked that Jeremy Corbyn, just in 2011, boasted that he had opposed every piece of anti-terror legislation in his 30 years in office."
- Amber Rudd, Home Secretary, BBC Election Debate

"Can I just remind you that in 2005 Theresa May voted against the anti-terror legislation at that time. She voted against it, as did David Davis, as did a number of people that are now in your cabinet because they felt that the legislation was giving too much executive power."
- Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, BBC Election Debate.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been accused by the Conservatives of consistently blocking anti-terror legislation. Last night, during the BBC Election Debate, Jeremy Corbyn suggested that Theresa May's record was inconsistent and that the prime minister had voted against some anti-terror measures in the past.

Reality Check has looked back at the key votes since 2000.

Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have taken very different paths to becoming leaders of their parties. Mrs May has almost exclusively served as a minister or shadow minister during her 20 years as an MP. In 2010 she became Home Secretary - after the Conservatives formed the coalition government with the Lib Dems. She remained in that post until becoming Prime Minister in 2016.
Mr Corbyn first became an MP in 1983 and had previously never held a position on the front bench before becoming leader in September 2015.

With that in mind, what is the record of both leaders when it comes to anti-terror legislation?

Terrorism Act 2000

This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading)

Corbyn: Voted against it

Context: This legislation was supported by both Labour and the Conservatives and was therefore highly unlikely to be defeated.

Sometimes MPs will seek an informal arrangement with opposition MPs not to vote together. This is known as pairing and is used when members have other commitments and are likely to miss a vote. It is not known whether Theresa May was paired in this case. As well as Mrs May, other absent MPs included Prime Minister Tony Blair and Conservative leader William Hague.

Mr Corbyn was one of a handful of rebels and spoke out against the legislation. He argued: "I am not in favour of violence or terrorism but one does not solve those problems by imprisoning the innocent."

Second Reading refers to a vote that takes place in Parliament before the legislation moves to a committee of MPs who scrutinise it line by line. Third Reading is the final chance for the Commons to debate the contents of the legislation.

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York. It allowed foreign terrorist suspects to be detained indefinitely.

May: Voted for it at Second Reading; absent at Third Reading
Corbyn: Voted against it

Context: Again, like the 2000 Terrorism Act, the legislation was supported by the leadership of both parties. The vote was not close.
Mr Corbyn opposed it, saying the legislation was rushed, and argued it was "extremely dangerous because it is a denial of civil liberties".

Fourteen-day detention

This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.
May: Voted against it
Corbyn: Voted against it
Context: The Conservative front bench opposed the act, saying it gave too much power to the then Home Secretary David Blunkett.

Control Orders

The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.
May: Voted against it
Corbyn: Voted against it
Context: The Conservative front bench opposed the act. David Davis, who was shadow home secretary at the time, said the legislation had "clearly been very badly drawn-up".
Mr Corbyn voted against. He has previously described control orders as damaging to community relations. He said: "They make people less, rather than more, co-operative with the police and everyone else."

ID cards

Legislation which paved the way for the controversial introduction of ID cards, was introduced by the Labour government in 2006. The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010.
May: Voted against it
Corbyn: Voted against it
Context: The Conservative front bench opposed the introduction of ID cards on the basis that the voluntary scheme would lead to "creeping compulsion".
Mr Corbyn also opposed, telling Parliament that ID cards "will not solve crime, fraud or terrorism".

Ninety-day detention

Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days.
May: Voted against the 90-day aspect. She voted for it at the Third Reading after major changes
Corbyn: Voted against at every stage
Context: The Conservative front bench was strongly against the 90-day detention aspect and their opposition contributed to Tony Blair's first defeat in the Commons. The Conservatives did go on to support a Labour backbench MP's proposal to extend the detention period to 28 days, which was passed.
Mr Corbyn was one of 49 Labour MPs who rebelled against the government. He also voted against the subsequent proposal to extend detention without charge to 28 days.

Counter-terrorism Act 2008

This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days, but the Labour government abandoned this after being defeated in the House of Lords.
May: Absent from the vote
Corbyn: Voted against it
Context: The position of the Conservative front bench was to abstain from the vote. The party was concerned with aspects of the 42-day detention proposal.
Mr Corbyn was also against the 42-days proposal. He was worried the plans would give increasing powers to government and that future home secretaries would extend the detention period still further.

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act

This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.
May: Voted for it
Corbyn: Voted against it
Context: Theresa May, as home secretary, introduced the new regime saying it would be more focused and targeted than control orders.

Justice and Security Act 2013

This legislation granted controversial new powers to close court doors on the grounds of national security. It allowed ministers to ask for a "closed material procedure" - an order to bar the public, press and claimant in a case from court.
May: Voted for it at Second Reading; absent at Third Reading
Corbyn: Voted against it
Context: This was legislation Mrs May introduced as Home Secretary. Even though she missed the vote at Third Reading it's almost certain this would have been an agreed absence as she spoke up for the bill in Parliament.
Mr Corbyn said he opposed secrecy in courts and voted against it.

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016

Referred to as the "snooper's charter" by critics, this legislation allowed for the bulk interception of communications.
May: Voted for it
Corbyn: Absent from the vote
Context: This was legislation introduced by Mrs May as home secretary. She said the ability to access telecommunications data would allow law-enforcement agencies to investigate criminal activity and protect the public.
This vote took place after Mr Corbyn was elected leader. He was absent from the Commons vote even though Labour, as a whole, voted for the legislation at Third Reading. It is not known whether he was paired. The party abstained at Second Reading.

What did Corbyn say on Shoot to Kill



"That includes full authority for the police to use whatever action is necessary and effective to protect the security of our people and our Country. That includes full authority for the police to use whatever force is necessary to protect and save life as they did last night, as they did in Westminister."

Monday 5 June 2017

What did Sadiq Khan actually say?

There was plenty of misinformation about what Sadiq Khan said ......

New York explosion: Sadiq Khan says "terror attacks are 'part and parcel of life in a big city'"


even Donald Trump got involved .....

You have to be kidding me?!: Terror attacks are part of living in big city, says London Mayor Sadiq Khan 



But what did khan really say? well the best way to find out is to watch the video.


But here it is in black and white as well ....

Sadiq Khan
"Its part and parcel of living in a great global city, you've got to be prepared for these things, you've got to be vigilant, you've got to support the police doing an incredibly hard job, you've got to support the security services."

Conclusion
Another case of misinformation.



LINKS




Friday 2 June 2017

Amber Rudd v Jeremy Corbyn Comment Fact Checked


"I am shocked that Jeremy Corbyn, just in 2011, boasted that he had opposed every piece of anti-terror legislation in his 30 years in office."
- Amber Rudd, Home Secretary, BBC Election Debate

"Can I just remind you that in 2005 Theresa May voted against the anti-terror legislation at that time. She voted against it, as did David Davis, as did a number of people that are now in your cabinet because they felt that the legislation was giving too much executive power."
- Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, BBC Election Debate.


So I thought Id fact check the two statements above.

With regard to Amber Rudds claim: 
I think Rudd is referring to a speech made by Corbyn in 2011 at the Stop The War Coalition, where he said .....
"Ive been involved in opposing anti-terror legislation ever since I first went into Parliament in 1983"
So you could say that Amber Rudd's comment was similar but not the same. Whilst its not exactly what Corbyn said, its vaguely similar and just been dressed up to look worse.

Its also a sound bite of a speech and can be taken out of context. When we are talking anti-terror legislation we have to consider how much legislation us, the innocent people of the UK, are prepared to put up with before its intolerable.
This is Corbyns point and presumably why Theresa May voted against it as well.  The context in which the comment is made is better understood if you look at the whole speech, the video is posted below.  Corbyns oposition is not to let terrorist have free reign, its in oposition of constricting civil liberties for us all.


With regard to Jeremy Corbyn's claim:

On 28 Feb 2005: Theresa May voted to give a greater role to the courts in relation to the imposition of control orders. 

On 28 Feb 2005: Theresa May voted no on Prevention of Terrorism Bill — Third Reading

On 9 Mar 2005: Theresa May voted no on Prevention of Terrorism Bill — Rejection of New Lords' Amendment — Sunset Clause

On 9 Mar 2005: Theresa May voted no on Prevention of Terrorism Bill — Rejection of Lords' Amendment — Human Rights Obligations

On 10 Mar 2005: Theresa May voted no on Prevention of Terrorism Bill — Weak Sunset Clause

On 10 Mar 2005: Theresa May voted no on Prevention of Terrorism Bill — Insisted Amendment — Human Rights Obligations

On 26 Oct 2005: Theresa May voted yes on Terrorism Bill — Second Reading

Summary
Generally voted against Labour's anti-terrorism laws Show votes 6 votes for, 49 votes against, 15 absences, between 2001–2010 

So Jeremy Corbyn was correct to claim that Theresa May voted against Anti-Terror legislation in 2005 and in fact between 2001 & 2010,  Theresa May voted 49 times against Anti-Terror legislation.

      


Stop the War Jeremy Corbyn Part 1

 Stop the War Jeremy Corbyn Part 2



LINKS

Thursday 1 June 2017

The Falklands War 1982 - I Hope It Was Worth It For Britain's Sake

The Falklands War - The Untold Story

Falklands Crisis was a 1982 war between Argentina and the United Kingdom. The conflict resulted from the long-standing dispute over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, which lie in the South Atlantic, east of Argentina.



Personally, there are too many things that don't add up



LINKS

Scrap dealer who accidentally set off the Falklands War




























Emily Thornberry Calls Theresa May a 'Coward'


Well done Emily Thornberry put the pompous ass in his place. How dare they criticise the Labour Party Manifesto when the Conservatives have no costings in theirs. How ridiculously stupid to think they could con the British Public with that one. OK I guess some will be taken in.

He was trying to suggest that Rudd was the only Calm one there when Corbyn never got involved in any of the squabbling and talking over people either.

Anyway Thornberry put up a good show here.


Another aside, I noticed that an ex military from the 80s said today ...

"If Corbyn can negotiate peace with the IRA he can negotiate Brexit"