Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

[smartcooky]

You haven't been content yet to wait for the official report. You've made up your mind already. And by saying you might dispute the official report, you're disclaiming any sort of belief in its authority.

100%.

I fully expect that when the official report comes out, and it doesn't back up Vixen's extraordinary and ludicrous claims, she will at the very least summarily dismiss its contents, more likely, she will claim its writers have been got at by the Deep State! This would be par for the course for conspiracy theorists...

As someone else I have conversed with on the internet is has said...

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution"

 

[JayUtah]

Show me the newspaper report that confirms make, model and year of the vehicle concerned. They have the video posted by 'Bitcoin Bertie' so what is the problem, since you are claiming complete transparency?

Same straw man. Same answer.

 

[Foster Zygote]

They haven't told you anything, so they cannot be lying. Why do you think people arrested for serious crimes are advised by their lawyer to say, 'no comment' to every question?

They have told us that it was definitely a diesel powered vehicle, not an EV, hybrid or mild EV.

So, were they lying?

It's a good thing that spouting asinine conspiracy theories isn't a crime, so you won't need to consult a lawyer.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Same straw man. Same answer.

Vixen is going full deer tick on this until the completed investigation report is issued, because it's about all she's got left (as little as it is) and she should be able to hang on for about five months.

 

[Mojo]

They have told us that it was definitely a diesel powered vehicle, not an EV, hybrid or mild EV.

So, were they lying?

Vixen certainly is.

 

[phiwum]

'Conspiracy theory' has come to mean 'ridiculous lunatic theory' of the David Icke/Dan Brown type, purveyed to make its authors a lot of money. For example, there is a lot of money to be made out of outrageous 9/11 theories. However, that does not mean that people genuinely interested in the logistics of what exactly happened are also loonies who must be censored by any means necessary.

Some conspiracy theorists do make money spreading their nonsense. This is not an essential feature of conspiracy theories.

In the case of the Luton Airport car park fire there are many experts and commentators who are sceptical of the initial claims and of the failure to provide concrete information as to the make of the car involved. This does not make it a 'conspiracy theory' along the lines of 'the Covid virus is a hoax designed to force people into taking jabs which contain silicon chips connecting to the nearest mast in order to enrich Bill Gates'.

Which experts do you have in mind? I'd be interested in learning about them.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Show me the newspaper report that confirms make, model and year of the vehicle concerned. They have the video posted by 'Bitcoin Bertie' so what is the problem, since you are claiming complete transparency?

What has this got to do with waiting for the report? This in no way answers my question about why you said they were not reporting the prime minister's money making shenanigans yet because of some kind of protocol.

The most likely reason, IMO, for not publishing make, model, year, colour and trim level of the car is that they did not have that info confirmed at a time when it was newsworthy. The video they published will have been with the permission of the person who took it.

Now will you explain what it is you think the press will reveal when "protocol" permits? You're accusing them of colluding in covering up a deception on the British people. Do you anticipate their admitting that?

 

[phiwum]

No need to listen to me. Take a look at what a couple of car experts say.

First, Auto Expert John Cadogan, who brought out this video shortly after the fire:

It seems that he's self-identifying as an Auto Expert. He says, "If you're wondering what qualifies me to do this, I have a degree in mechanical engineering, and I've been a reporter for the past 25 years - reporting on the car industry, automotive consumer issues, and reviewing cars, in print, online, and on radio and TV." (https://autoexpert.com.au/about/).

I don't know if he's really a recognized expert or not. "A degree in mechanical engineering" is pretty paltry evidence, so the real evidence must rely on his experience and reputation, but I haven't found anyone calling him an expert (although some refer to his Auto Expert John Cadogan channel by name).

https://youtu.be/zk0MWDsueMY?si=qlZTs4rJA20e4a8W

Luton Airport car park fire: What the media is not saying | Auto Expert John Cadogan

Skip the VPN paid promotion bit about five minutes in.

Too long, didn't watch: see 11:50 re media reports; 18:49 re type of car; 19:47 re cause of fire and 20:50 re EV effectts on public car parks.

Almost half a million views, so you cannot just brush him off as an inconsequential 'conspiracy theorist'.

Oh, well, half a million views is obviously proof of expertise. You're right, he's not an inconsequential conspiracy theorist, but he might be a consequential conspiracy theorist. (Or not. I didn't watch the video, because I'd rather learn of the credentials before I bother accepting his authority.)

Then there is a really excellent summing up by citizen investigative YouTuber Geoff Buys Cars:

Gosh. Geoff Buys Cars sounds way more trustworthy than Bitcoin Bernie. You can just tell, can't you?

Bear in mind, we have had NO confirmation that the widely-distributed video of the professed Vehicle Zero from the back is the vehicle that caused the fire. It might be a video from a completely different event. One hopes the BBC et al would have checked the video's metadata and were satisfied it was authentic.

Well, I guess we should ask how many views it got. That's the most reasonable test for authority, no?

 

[SpitfireIX]

Which experts do you have in mind? I'd be interested in learning about them.

Here's one:

 

[Jack by the hedge]

They haven't told you anything, so they cannot be lying. Why do you think people arrested for serious crimes are advised by their lawyer to say, 'no comment' to every question?

You're entitled to your own opinions but not to your own facts. They state the fire started in a diesel car, not any kind of EV or hybrid.

 

[phiwum]

But it is not actually lying is it? It has told you almost nothing at all, and the fake 'update' in March was simply a repeat of what was already said in October.

As the model make and year of the vehicle has not been confirmed, nor even confirmation as to whether the widely-publicised video is genuine, then it retains plausible deniability that it ever lied.

"The vehicle involved was diesel-powered – it was not a mild hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicle. "

Sure, that just reeks of plausible deniability. Why, if it turns out that it was a hybrid, they could just say, "Yeah, but we didn't say what make it was or whether that video was real! Can't blame us just because we literally and explicitly said it was not a hybrid."

 

[phiwum]

One route out was via the tripartate system now abolished (mainly on grounds that most pupils were overwhelmingly from the middle classes):

wiki

Callaghan, unlike Wilson, seems to have been genuinely successful on merit alone:

wiki

Anyway, the few exceptions out of literally dozens of examples proves the rule. No point even discussing it as you know it is true.

You gave Sanna Marin's background as evidence that the class system is much weaker in Finland. How many Finnish prime ministers come from similarly middle class backgrounds?

Genuine question: Is she typical or is she also the exception that proves the rule?

 

[Steve]

"The vehicle involved was diesel-powered – it was not a mild hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicle. "

Sure, that just reeks of plausible deniability. Why, if it turns out that it was a hybrid, they could just say, "Yeah, but we didn't say what make it was or whether that video was real! Can't blame us just because we literally and explicitly said it was not a hybrid."

Surely you are not suggesting that they take their plausible deniability lessons from Vixen?

 

[smartcooky]

They haven't told you anything, so they cannot be lying. Why do you think people arrested for serious crimes are advised by their lawyer to say, 'no comment' to every question?

No evidence of any kind will make any difference to you. Everyone here knows you will just handwave away ANYTHING that disagrees with your predetermined conclusion.

Even if the actual, registered owner of the car were to come forward and say "....it was my 2014 Range Rover diesel that started the Luton Airport Car Park fire." you would still not be budged from your ludicrous conspiracy theory - you would question whether he was really the owner, and/or you would say that he has been got at and told what to say by the deep state.

 

[LondonJohn]

They won't because it is against protocol to do so before the report is published.

"Against protocol"? Oh dear.

Look: BF&RS has already issued an official statement which explicitly and unequivocally states that Car Zero was a regular diesel vehicle, and not an EV of any variety. I can guarantee you that if any mainstream media outlet had reliable and credible information that a) Car Zero was in fact an EV of some flavour, that therefore b) BF&RS was lying in its description of the vehicle, and that c) there was some form of coverup related to the vehicle being an EV of some flavour....... they would be all over this story like a rash.

In reality, there's no story here whatsoever. The only possible angles of interest are 1) whether sprinklers should get retrofitted to semi-closed multi-storey car parks, and 2) whether, if there were EVs among the other (secondary) vehicles destroyed in the Luton Airport fire, this made the fire significantly worse and/or more difficult to tackle.

Aside from that, the only people who actually believe in the conspiracy theory that Car Zero was an EV, and that there's a cover-up going on in order to protect the EV industry, are uninformed loons who either don't understand the situation properly or who have a psychological penchant for conspiracy theories (ie they think they are especially intelligent and insightful in a way that "ordinary" people are not).

 

[LondonJohn]

It turned out to be an 'update' on what was already said on 11 October 2023.

IOW not a genuine update as to the cause of the fire.

Total and utter bollocks.

 

[phiwum]

It turned out to be an 'update' on what was already said on 11 October 2023.

IOW not a genuine update as to the cause of the fire.


Reminds me of similar 'updates' re a particular famous person. It is simply a PR ploy called 'managing expectations' by simply repeating what was already said the other day.

It is pathetic that people are satisfied with this type of non-news, insofar they do not realise the cynical manipulation of their 'expectations'.

It evidently is a real update.

Before the latest press release, you kept suggesting that the information thus far did not rule out a mild hybrid. The latest press release explicitly does rule out a mild hybrid. Hence it contains new information not previously contained.

As well, the original comment the day after the fire said that it was "believed" to be a diesel or "pending confirmation" or some such. The new press release has none of those caveats. This is an official press release, not a PR statement. The lack of caveats is not an accident nor is it dumbing down the facts for the general public (it is for the journalists, not the general public). Hence, there is more information in the new release. The judgment that it was a diesel is better confirmed than previously.

 

[catsmate]

https://youtu.be/QZEku6lHfDM?si=LIwsHgW_niPtbGWI



5:48 onwards.

So no evidence then, just unsupported opinions.
Pathetic.

 

[catsmate]

So your views are based on political beliefs rather than the actual cause of the fire.

No. And I see you're not rushing out to provide us with the qualifications and relevant experience of your chosen "experts"...

Come on, you claimed there were "many experts", name them.

 

[catsmate]

And, naturally, you ignored the "no qualifications and a near pathological hatred of EVs" part of catsmate's post. Further, did it occur to you that a Putin shill would have an interest in attempting to discredit the British government?

The "influencer" in question regularly parrots Putin's lies about Ukraine, amongst other conspiratorial drivel.