Grenfell Tower block disaster

SWP's back said:
He has his own place, he doesn't want to go back because he gets "panic attacks" so he prefers to stay in a four star hotel with his meals provided. The property market has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
Exactly

'Unable' and 'refusing' are quite different.

A piss taking leach plus a stupid local authority equals an opportunists dream ticket.
 
SWP's back said:
He has his own place, he doesn't want to go back because he gets "panic attacks" so he prefers to stay in a four star hotel with his meals provided. The property market has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
Nah, all the markets fault. You can't get a nice studio with a maid service and meals provided anywhere in London anymore. Cheaper to stay in a hotel.

(Probably is)
 
I can understand how remaining in shared accommodation could be quite traumatic for him due to the reasons he states himself in that article.

But turning down a studio because he wants a one-bedroom apartment is a pisstake.
 
bluethrunthru said:
Well given the upset some firefighters have clearly demonstrated the last couple of days who is to say this poor sod hasn't got PTSD too? As for the hotel accommodation thats as much down to the absurd property market in London that means suitable alternative ( and cheaper ) accommodation probably isn't available.

As for the source.... well its the Mail isn't it? They love to agitate their readers over breakfast. Alongside reporting the absence of crumpets this story has all the required dog whistles in it - students - non-home owners - council support - a grand a week costs - just enough to get the blood pressure of " Mr Angry of Surbiton" on the rise for the day.
Click to expand...
No sounds like the student is taking the piss as for the council fucking idiots for doing this
 
SWP's back said:
He has his own place, he doesn't want to go back because he gets "panic attacks" so he prefers to stay in a four star hotel with his meals provided. The property market has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

of course it does. If there were more available at a reasonable cost then he wouldn't need to be put up in a hotel. Given that option he may well conquer his fears and go back to his own gaff.
 
bluethrunthru said:
of course it does. If there were more available at a reasonable cost then he wouldn't need to be put up in a hotel. Given that option he may well conquer his fears and go back to his own gaff.
Click to expand...

'Conquer his fears'? Lol

Those fears amount to getting rumbled and/or having to provide for himself.

The sponging ****.
 
SWP's back said:
What do people make of this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...enfell-survivors-DIDNT-live-tower-hotels.html

A couple of survivors who didn’t live there are still being put up by the council at a four star hotel as they don’t want to return to their own private accommodation due to panic attacks:

“One student, who said he was visiting a friend on the night of the blaze, has argued that what he witnessed caused him such distress he cannot return to his home.

He did go back to his privately-rented shared flat in another part of London for a few weeks following the fire, but after contacting the council he was placed in a four-star hotel in west London.

He has been living in the hotel, with breakfast and dinner included, for much of the past 12 months at an estimated cost of more than £1,000-per-week. The student said he could not return to his original accommodation four miles from the tower because he is suffering from flashbacks and panic attacks.

‘I didn’t live there but I’m affected like everybody else,’ he said. ‘I went to the council support centre and told them how I am affected and asked whether they could pay the rent or get me a room. I said I needed urgent help. I need to be in a safe environment. They wouldn’t listen to anything because I came from a different borough. They kept pushing me away.’”

Seems a bit of a piss take that. It absolutely right that those that lost their houses are looked after and the same for those sub-letting or whose partners lived there but the guy above seems to be just milking it.
Click to expand...

If the government had done their job iver a year ago when this tragedy occurred this wouldn't still be happening today.
If the government hadn't tried saving a few thousand £s on fire proof cladding, this wouldn't be happening today.
If the government had listened to the poor people that lived in council accommodation that health and safety standards were at a bare minimum, this wouldn't be happening today.

While this man is in the wrong lets not deflect from the main issue here.

The government have treated the people of Grenfell with distain and shows another gulf between the classes of people.

What annoys me is the usual right wingers and Tory loving supporters deflecting from the main issue. Yes this guy is in the wrong, amd anyone that doesn't believe he's chancing it needs to give their heads a wobble.

Anyone, I'll the last words to the people of Grenfell and how they felt and still feel about the government and Theresa May

 
SWP's back said:
This is the problem with off topic. Some people are so hell bent on carrying on their own line of argument that they can’t remotely engage with something that doesn’t agree with that argument.

No one is arguing that someone doesn’t do time for the tragedy. This story is completely separate however and it’s a chancer just wanting to live off the council (tax payer) and profit from a tragedy. But some on here would rather ignore than and attack the source or deflect rather than decry his actions.
Click to expand...
SWP's back said:
What do people make of this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...enfell-survivors-DIDNT-live-tower-hotels.html

A couple of survivors who didn’t live there are still being put up by the council at a four star hotel as they don’t want to return to their own private accommodation due to panic attacks:

“One student, who said he was visiting a friend on the night of the blaze, has argued that what he witnessed caused him such distress he cannot return to his home.

He did go back to his privately-rented shared flat in another part of London for a few weeks following the fire, but after contacting the council he was placed in a four-star hotel in west London.

He has been living in the hotel, with breakfast and dinner included, for much of the past 12 months at an estimated cost of more than £1,000-per-week. The student said he could not return to his original accommodation four miles from the tower because he is suffering from flashbacks and panic attacks.

‘I didn’t live there but I’m affected like everybody else,’ he said. ‘I went to the council support centre and told them how I am affected and asked whether they could pay the rent or get me a room. I said I needed urgent help. I need to be in a safe environment. They wouldn’t listen to anything because I came from a different borough. They kept pushing me away.’”

Seems a bit of a piss take that. It absolutely right that those that lost their houses are looked after and the same for those sub-letting or whose partners lived there but the guy above seems to be just milking it.
Click to expand...

And isnt this the same newspaper that named the man who's fridge started the fire as the person to blame?

As i stated previously, the deflection tactic is on point at the mail again.

Here is how that racist publications way in describing the man they blamed for the fire.

https://goo.gl/images/42JxH2

Now you might understand why the Mail is not getting the respectful discussions its article deserves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.