‘Grenfell’ bonfire

Bridgeit, you are absolutely correct, a fact is a fact and cannot be disputed. However, as you rightly say, opinions about facts can and do differ. And that’s where robust, but polite, discussion comes in.

jura - if I remember right recently you contributed mainly to the news and politics topics. Which are notorious for bringing out strong views and sometimes hostility. So you often need a thick skin.
I used to take part quite a bit in those, but very rarely now, though they're not as fiery as in the past.
Why don't you stay and just take part in other threads? You used to give good advice on pets and health

It would be somewhat ironic if these "morons" were to be prosecuted for their actions while the main perpetrators of the Grenfell tragedy walk away scot-free.

For those of us who have been following the daily podcasts from the Enquiry, the above looks as if it may very well happen. The manufacturers and those that fitted the combined product inflammable cladding are all claiming that they followed all current safety regulations and making a very good case in that.

Those regulations and H&SE regulated inspections had been gradually reduced by successive governments since 2002 until 2016 in favour of in-house safety testing by companies with the result being Grenfell.

I am sure that everyone hopes that those that brought this tragedy about are brought to justice, but the feeling is at this point in time, that may well not happen.

A further irony in this would be that had Grenfell been a factory or any other workplace then everything from the design of the building, inspection procedures and the fitting of that cladding would never have been allowed to take place under Health & Safety at Work legislation.

I don’t think facts can have different interpretations, because they are , well, Facts , the opinion one can have is wither a fact has a positive or negative affect on anyone or any situation, or how relavant any particular fact is to a situation.

maddyone That's OK, apology accepted. I just didn't want jura to think I was bossing her around!

At times, some of us feel strong enough to cope with ganging up, bullying even - and at times not, for all sorts of reason. Maw you should therefore know better.

Will follow Drs orders- as she is so right. I don't need this in my life right now.

I think Jura felt ganged up on over some of her posts and that is how it appeared (in my opinion)

But you did talk of “ganging up” * Paddyann*.
Are you taking that back too?

Indeed Baggs.

Other question-answer===deliberate autosuggestion was a term describing a way of starting up trouble amongst those who were offended i.e. friends/relatives of those who perished.

Jalima, only just come back on here, I’m so sorry for misquoting you, it was my clumsy use of words and for that I apologise.

However, I would say generally, that if anyone feels that discussion on Gransnet is causing them stress, then it would make good sense to have a rest from Gransnet for a while.

We need robust discussion on Gransnet, and obviously opinions will differ. However bullying/insulting comments should hopefully never appear here amongst mature people. I can’t say I’ve noticed anything of that type on this discussion, if there is any, I’ve missed it.

Oh! Were you referring to the back garden bonfire gang as airheads?

I doubt if a chief prosecutor is an airhead, EV.

These airheads obviously weren't affected as they watched the tragedy unfold !!

What do you mean by "deliberate autosuggestion", please, EllanV?

Oh, and it's fine that other people don't think that's the issue. It's part of the issue for me and, obviously, for people like that chief prosecutor.

The " Grenfell " case is going before the CPS to see if there's a case for prosecution ie,hate crime which is/can be serious in that it is a deliberate autosuggestion for fuelling a backlash.

whatever any one says in any form of media, does not detract from the utter unacceptability and dreadfulness of the act

I agree (except insofar as I indicated yesterday, had the effigy burning been 'used' in a political way rather than the way it was used to be nasty about the people who died) and so does the chief prosecutor I quoted. In fact, I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who didn't agree.

Jalima118 it's an interesting and worldwide case which can drain all your resources One which maybe a few here may be familiar with and I'm confident that one day it'll go the right way. Supporters are also on Twitter.

Baggs some of us really don’t think that’s the issue. It’s being investigated by the police and whatever they decide or whatever any one says in any form of media, does not detract from the utter unacceptability and dreadfulness of the act.

Here we go again indeed! This thread has gone well weird. I did ponder a reply to the jibe about PMs and "what they do" (whoever 'they' are) but thought better of it as the post seemed to exude a certain distress. I then laughed at myself for not being able to find my Gransnet inbox because it is so seldom used.

In the Times this morning it says this about the effigy burning: "The burning of an effigy of Grenfell Tower was highly offensive but unlikely to reach the criminal threshold, a former chief prosecutor said yesterday after the arrests of six men."

I'm wondering what other papers have said. Anyone?

Bridgeit as it's already been said it's a Miscarriage of Justice.There are umpteen different shortened expressions used in the case that I'm following. CPS,DPP,CCRC etc.

Oh here we go again.
This is of course in danger of becoming a thread about a thread (although which one is unclear)
There have been some lively differences of opinion particularly on the various threads connected with Brexit.
At what point does disagreeing become ganging up? If there are several posters on each side of the political divide, is it ganging up to share points of view? If so are both “sides” guilty of the offence?
<shakes head>

Oh dear
If several posters agree on a subject and disagree with one poster's viewpoint does that mean we shouldn't all post because we could be accused of 'ganging up'?
I'm ready to listen to anyone's point of view but may not always agree with them because that's what it is, you're right paddyann - a different interpretation of the facts .

I think Jura felt ganged up on over some of her posts and that is how it appeared (in my opinion).My opinion is often very different from many on here and I have been accused of being "different from the norm" just to be awkward ...thats not the case I just have a diffferent view on most things to many on GN .
I'm made of stronger stuff so it doesn't get to me ,if Jura is already feeling under pressure in the real world the ganging up could easily be enough to be a worry .

There are posts I avoid now because I know I'll get abuse from certain members and to be honest I wont be irritated by small minds that dont like a different interpretation of the facts .

Ooohhh. jal you are right in context

I can't believe that anyone has been forced to " walk away " from this forum of all forums

Am I missing something?
Nobody has been “forced to walk away” from anything have they?