Children at Play

I see the Grenfell Tower fire inquiry has got off to a good start:

Families of those killed in the Grenfell Tower fire left an inquiry in tears after a video of the blaze was shown without a warning.

One woman was said to have collapsed outside the hearing after seeing the video, which included footage filmed from inside the burning building.

An inquiry official apologised, saying a warning system had failed.

People attending an inquiry into the causes of a tower block blaze collapse after unexpectedly seeing footage of the tower block blaze. What did they expect, The Sound of Music?

Karim Mussily, whose uncle Hesham Rahman lived on the 23rd floor, earned a standing ovation from other relatives in the room when he told the inquiry: “We’ve been censored enough, it’s our time; whether you like it or not, you have to listen.”

Never mind what actually happened, then. And relatives of Grenfell Tower fire victims claiming they’ve been censored is like Noam Chomsky and John Pilger writing columns in national newspapers complaining they’ve been silenced. The Guardian has more:

There was anger at the way participants were silenced by inquiry lawyers. One person, Nabil Choucair, who lost six loved ones, was told that a part of the statement he wanted to make had been rejected by the inquiry.

Choucair wanted to make clear that he had taken no part in the production of a tribute presented by his brother, Hisham, on Tuesday that caused 20 people to walk out and one woman to collapse in distress because of the footage showing the burning tower. A broadcaster had wrongly captioned film of the incident with his name.

So rather than try to find out how the fire started, why it spread so rapidly, and what went wrong with evacuating the residents the inquiry is reduced to bickering over who made a video. And we’re only on Day Two.

“This is another example of the public inquiry running it the way they want to do and picking and choosing who they want,” Choucair said. “It gives me great concern over who this inquiry is about.”

You and me both mate, but I suspect for different reasons.

Others were angry at plans to move proceedings from the Millennium Gloucester hotel, in South Kensington, a convenient location for members of the community, to offices in Holborn, once the tributes to the dead are completed.

In other words, people are angry that the actual inquiry will begin and the grief-mongering cease.

Chris Imafidon, who said he had tutored children who lost parents in the fire, said: “They say … it’s better in Holborn for all the lawyers and all the judges that are there, they said they can’t find a convenient place here. Everything that’s perceived to be the needs of the survivors, the first thing they say is no. That insensitivity, that arrogance! That they know everything and we know nothing because we’re poor.”

I wonder if those who conducted the inquiry into the Herald of Free Enterprise or the King’s Cross fire heeded the views of those whose sole connection with events was the tutoring of victims’ children?

Yvette Williams said she was concerned about who would be chosen as “additional panel members” to the inquiry board, additions that the community had fought for. In a recent blogpost on the Justice4Grenfell website, she wrote: “It is vital that the PM and inquiry team does not select panel members who look like us but ‘act’ like them.”

So being non-white is not enough, panel members must also act non-white. Whatever that means.

The audience wept as the voice of Fethia Hassan, four, was played at the end of an emotional video tribute to the child, to her sister Hania Hassan, three, and their mother Rania Ibrahim, 31. Speaking in Arabic in the recording, made during a trip to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the girl blew kisses to her cousins and told them she loved them.

Let nobody doubt the value a four year old speaking in Arabic from Jeddah brings to an inquiry as to how a fire started in a London tower block.

There isn’t going to be an inquiry, is there?


19 thoughts on “Children at Play

  1. The Guardian doesn’t want an enquiry that will look for the cause of the fire and recommend changes. It wants a circus to point blame at their enemies, whether they are to blame or not.

  2. You know in the sixties when all those revolutionary leftists would spend weeks having a meeting where everyone got to speak for six hours at a time, and everyone else thought they were wasting their time? Turns out they were preparing for the blame-shifting inquiries they’d be chairing decades later.

  3. This is not the UK I used to defend here is Spain.

    It has happened. The takeover by aliens (not sure if of the ‘outer space’ type) has occurred.

    And I’am (not) sorry but I don’t like it. Posturing ignorant stupidity mixed with a real dose of infantile ideological axe-grinding searching for the end of the West.

    Ecksie, wherefore art thou?

  4. is / I’m

    I just come from the gym and my body isn’t under control yet!!

  5. I do think you may want to give Sir Martin Moore-Bick a little more benefit of the doubt.

    The absurd charade going on at the moment is a clearly separated section of the enquiry’s phase 1, called “Commemoration Hearings”. The real opening of the enquiry is scheduled to happen after this bit’s over.

    I do think it might be a reasonably cunning plan to corral the trouble-making into one spot and blow through the media interest before the lawyers settle-in for years of comfortable day-work. The whining race-baiters won’t stop after this stage, but a) hardly anyone will still be listening and b) of the people who are listening, most people will think that claims that anyone was ‘silenced’ are demonstrably unjustified.

    There’s a schedule here:

  6. @Dave
    That’s an interesting suggestion. I suppose time will tell.

    But so far it keeps reminding me of Theodore Dalrymple’s dissection of the MacPherson report.

    Perhaps the fact that the inquiry was open to the public had something to do with the nature of the resulting report. The public gallery regularly overflowed with activists and extremists, who did not hesitate to jeer and mock the witnesses with whom they disagreed; the head of the inquiry, Sir William Macpherson, rarely admonished these spectators, thus creating an officially sanctioned atmosphere of intimidation…An incipient riot is not a situation in which the truth is likely to emerge or to be uppermost in people’s minds.

  7. The Ecksian solution would be to burn down the inquiry with all the participants in-situ. This isn’t an inquiry, it is the beginning of one of those Moaist show trials. It also has about as much connection to Britain as the residents of that tower did.

  8. Bilbao: Had we a decent PM instead of the Fish Faced Cow HE–HE would go down there and order the room cleared of anyone not an immediate witness. The proceedings should be televised but NO public present. A tough crew should have been appointed and made an opening statement that the purpose is to find out the causes etc. They should state explicitly that a socialist circus designed to advance the ZaNu bullshit kicked off by that scum Jizza on the day of the fire will not be tolerated. They might be wise to mention the quality of J-Dumps “compassion” considering 80 Venezuelan protestors gunned down by socialist thugs have received nary a mention by the compassionate twat.

    Then it proceeds on strict lines. A small amount of hanky -sobbing might be allowed but any emotional displays let alone vile CM posturing will lead to the immediate removal of the transgressor until proper composure and absence of politicking can be displayed. Strict control–no posturing at all let alone the brazen display of hatred towards white people –who mostly paid for them to be alive anyway. Any display of said hatred to bring the same exact punishment that would fall on whites making abusive statements.

    That is how to run an Inquiry.

  9. Dave, that’s a fair point, and time will indeed tell.

    I think Mr Ecks should have been in charge of setting the thing up, though.

  10. “I think Mr Ecks should have been in charge of setting the thing up, though.”

    Well, his idea of a politician grandstanding in the middle of an independent enquiry certainly destroys any suggestion that nothing could make this one any worse…

    Anyway, we’ll see. One thing’s for sure, though, if the BBC don’t like the contents of the final report, they’ll just report it as though it says what they wanted all along.

  11. “One woman was said to have collapsed outside the hearing”

    This is how bad journalism has become in these sceptic isles: the reporter (sorry, opinion-twister) here has no facts, no idea how to find out, but whereas once any such hearsay stories would be discounted they are now valuable parts of the emotional monologue, liberally spiced in the modern fashion with as many emotional words as possible.

  12. Chris Imafidon, who said he had tutored children who lost parents in the fire

    Yeah…about Chris Imafidon: it turns out he’s a Nigerian who allegedly pretends he’s an Oxford professor who also has the ‘brainiest children in Britain’.

    You just couldn’t make it up. What a circus.

  13. Dave–That we have few–maybe no–political pigs for whom such a clear-out would not be undertaken as an act of personal aggrandisement before the media is one of the major reasons for the trouble we are in. Of course we have none with even the guts never mind the selfless nature.

    That said the dressing down and expulsion of dross SHOULD be seen on the media. Even with the lying gloss the CM media gang would put on it –it would still show the all scum ranged against this nation ( from Soros on down to imported chancers) that things would be different from then on.

  14. This, for me, is the scariest and most depressing bit:

    “We’ve been censored enough, it’s our time; whether you like it or not, you have to listen.”

    These are the exact terms in which the great Laurie Penny once explained, in the Guardian, the concept of “checking one’s privilege”:

    “When someone asks you to check your privilege, it doesn’t mean you should stop talking – it means you should start listening, and sometimes that involves giving the other person in the room a chance to speak. That’s what often upsets people most about the whole idea. It’s about who gets to speak, and who has to listen”

    I’m all for allowing people a chance to speak. What is really sinister is the assertion that other people should be forced to listen. So no, Mr. Mussily. This is the UK, and whereas I don’t want to prevent you from saying anything you want, I reserve the right to ignore you. You have been given a platform by weaklings who should have known better. I’m not interested in your poverty, your grief, your sense of entitlement, or anything about you.

  15. @Sam Vara:

    We have, still, the right of non-association. That may well change with our insipid governments and busy-body lawmakers, but for the time being we can safely ignore any twattery on offer.

  16. It would be my standard assumption that anyone caught up in such a disaster would suffer grief. So much so that were I in their position I would not feel any need to tell anyone (though it would of course show).
    Am I being unkind to wonder if they dost protest too much?

  17. Chris Imafidon – what fun!

    Came across him years ago but turns out he has been raising his profile lately. He seems to come up everywhere, from the respectable NPR …

    … to getting barmy press releases reprinted on low-grade “news” sites…

    Here he is debating with MPs…

    And he seems to have got himself all over various news networks in recent times for a variety of issues – LondonLive, BBC, and loads of historic stuff on his successful tutoring of his daughters, on CNN and Sky and pretty much anywhere as far as I can see. Seems he must make more money from his tuition and educational consultancy business than whatever he used to make as a doctor (if that’s what he actually was!).

    His linkedin is so he seems to trade very heavily on the whole fictional Professor thing – suspect it’s to impress other Nigerians. But the content is full of such transparent gobbledegook (“He has often said that every child has an estimated 100 billion brain cells and one cell computes faster than the world’s fastest NASA super computer”) that one wonders how anybody, anywhere falls for it.

Comments are closed.