[Continuation] Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

[Jack by the hedge]

I remarked that it appeared to be a lithium-ion fire from what people in the general public claiming to be familiar with such matters commented, the speed of the fire and its sheer intensity, together with the floor collapsing...

On the specific point of the floor collapsing, that occurred after a large number of cars had been ablaze for several hours. So there is no way to attribute that to 'car zero'.

Also you have literally no idea whether the floor below car zero was even involved in the collapse or not.

Maybe waiting for the report would be a better idea.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Sunak has a company in the Cayman Islands (read: secrecy) and all of his assets are listed in the Parliamentary interest as being on a 'blind register'. Even Cameron and Boris Johnson never hid behind a 'blind register' as it is important for public servants in high places to be seen to be completely transparent, spotless and without conflicts of interest.

I guess you mean a blind trust, and not that he's fraudulently claiming a disability allowance.

It also looks as if you think (or wish to imply) that a blind trust is a method of concealing assets. I know nothing whatever about accountancy or matters financial, but I do not think that is what they are.

 

[GlennB]

On the specific point of the floor collapsing, that occurred after a large number of cars had been ablaze for several hours. So there is no way to attribute that to 'car zero'.

Also you have literally no idea whether the floor below car zero was even involved in the collapse or not.

Maybe waiting for the report would be a better idea.

Also, 'car zero' was on a higher level than the floor filmed collapsing.

 

[Dabop]

Citation, please.

Every post you have made in multiple threads...

 

[Foster Zygote]

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and his wife...

So you're going to counter the observation that you're a conspiracy theorist by showing us your wall full of headshots and thumb-tacks connected by red yarn.

Of course the embargo on the cause of the Luton Airport car park fire is directly due to Sunak protecting his personal financial interests. Mark my words.

What embargo?

Your words are so often laughably wrong. Why would anyone mark your words?

In the 2018 Liverpool ECHO car park fire we were told straight away what make the culprit vehicle was.

Were we? You're so often wrong that I'm not going to take your word for it. It was known from the first photo of the burning car that the Luton vehicle was a Land Rover Discovery, the same as the Liverpool vehicle.

 

[Foster Zygote]

That is a matter of fact. Learn to recognise factual information.

You mean "facts" like diesel needs high pressure to burn, or any electrical fault in an automobile's wiring harness will immediately cut off all lights, or that welding steel doesn't involve melting it?

You may stick your fingers in your ears and shout "ICAN'THEARYOUICAN'THEARYOU!!!" whenever any of your "facts" are shown to be completely wrong, but you can't make the evidence of your ineptitude disappear from the minds of others just by wishing it away.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Maybe waiting for the report would be a better idea.

But she has to savor the "just you wait - you'll see..." of a future prediction.

 

[CompusMentus]

Nonsense. I was called a conspiracy theorist in the Nicola Bulley case.....

Would that have something to do with you insisting that the man who claimed to have discovered Nichola Bulley was an undercover policeman?

(Rhetorical question)

Compus

 

[JayUtah]

Again, a massive personal attack just because a couple of individuals didn't know about the use of primes in denoting time durations. Likewise the issue with the freaking winter coat and the belief clothes make you immediately sink in water. It wasn't me that had the problem!

What actually happened was that you were egregiously and obviously wrong, and you spun an ever more amusing series of lies to avoid admitting it. Once we figured out what you were trying to say, you remained the only one with the problem. I mention it because it’s one of the few examples of your posts that isn’t strictly a conspiracy theory. But I see you’ve managed to turn it into one.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

How to recognize what skill sets are needed is the first step.

English comprehension is the primary skill needed to understand the following sentence:

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

IMV the UK taxpayer is quite entitled to understand the logistics of this fire and why the Fire & Rescue Services were unable to cope with it.

Entitled is not the same as qualified. I'd have thought most UK taxpayers were qualified to read the italicized English sentence above, but Vixen has convinced me that at least one UK taxpayer lacks that skill.

That is a matter of fact. Learn to recognise factual information.

Almost everyone who has been participating in this thread recognizes and acknowledges the fact that the Bedfordshire Fire & Rescue Service has told us "The vehicle involved was diesel-powered – it was not a mild hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicle."

One participant has been unable to recognize that factual information.

Again, a massive personal attack just because a couple of individuals didn't know about the use of primes in denoting time durations.

I recall only one such individual.

IIRC, it was just one individual that had the problem with the use of primes.

Does anyone recall a second individual who was having that same problem with primes?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Your words are so often laughably wrong. Why would anyone mark your words?

With red pen, perhaps?

 

[SpitfireIX]

The first two are current affairs topics which were moved to conspiracy theories in order to give posters a green flag to relentlessly hurl abuse for fun.

You just espoused a new conspiracy theory involving the forum moderators, without providing any evidence. Further, correctly and relevantly calling attention to your misapprehensions, ignorance, incompetence, and lack of critical thinking skills does not constitute abuse, no matter how butthurt you are about it. And I second Jay's invitation to you to report any post you feel is abusive for moderation, rather than just make dramatic claims that everyone is abusing you.

The current topic is of general public interest. If it doesn't interest you, it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory!

Non sequitur. Your thread was moved here because you are insinuating that elements within the British government are conspiring to conceal the true source of the fire, not because no one is interested in the topic.

As for the MV Estonia this too is a current affairs topic and indeed there has been much publicity in the mass media about the new investigation. This catastrophe which immediately killed a thousand people including babies, children, mothers, grandmothers, men, almost the entire Stockholm police union cohort, happened in my local area and this part of the world is naturally my area of interest just as others is theirs. One of the USA's most famous mariner was also interested in this topic (Greg Bemis).

Again, you have advanced several ridiculous and in some cases contradictory conspiracy theories on the sinking of the Estonia, so the threads were properly moved here.

I don't think you understand what a conspiracy theorist is.

See below.

As for the third link to Crimes and Trials, that particular murder, too, was of great interest in the mass media. The idea that there was some kind of conspiracy to 'get the American woman' is not mine.

[Note: I meant to mention this when it was brought up earlier, but although I didn't participate much, I did read through the entire Amanda Knox thread in all of its then-current iterations at one point when things were slow elsewhere on the forum. Also, to avoid derailing this thread, I will not be making any further comments or responses here concerning Vixen's claims about Amanda Knox.]

The hilited is your usual laughable spin. Of course you never claimed there was a conspiracy to frame Knox; rather, you claimed that she and her ex-boyfriend are obviously guilty, but that their murder convictions were overturned because of, inter alia, corrupt Italian Supreme Court justices, her ex-boyfriend's purported Mafia connections, and improper pressure from the US State Department. Further, you ignored the overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence of gross misconduct and incompetence on the part of the Italian authorities in this case, and you also ignored the experts in biology and forensic science in the thread who attempted to correct your many misapprehensions. So par for the course.

A conspiracy theory is one in which a mysterious cabal of people presume to want to rule the world. For example, Hitler's belief in a Jewish conspiracy to not only instigate communism but to paradoxically dominate banking, or David Icke's belief that the Royal Family are lizards and part of an underground cabal who live deep within the earth controlling world events. (I feel sure Icke borrowed heavily from Jim Morrison's poems about the 'Lizard Kings'.) Wanting to understand how an appalling accident or a murder happened is hardly a conspiracy theory. Yes, people want to understand how the towers collapsed in 9/11 but that is not a conspiracy theory. The conspiracy theorists are those who believe it was some kind of Zionist plot by Mossad, the classic example of a conspiracy theory.

No. From Merriam-Webster:

. . . a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators . . .

also : a theory asserting that a secret of great importance is being kept from the public . . . [italics original; bolding mine]​

So no, it doesn't need reptilian overlords or worldwide Jewish cabals to be a conspiracy theory. "NASA Faked the moon landings" and "The CIA killed JFK" are two clear conspiracy theories that don't involve multinational-level conspirators.

So perhaps get your definitions clear. 'Conspiracy theorist' does not mean 'someone I disagree with because I am not interested in the same topics they are interested in'.

Proudly wrong as usual.

You are obviously insinuating that "a secret of great importance is being kept from the public," namely, that the Luton Airport Carpark Fire was caused or accelerated by an EV. So please explain to us again how you're not a conspiracy theorist.

 

[JayUtah]

Does anyone recall a second individual who was having that same problem with primes?

In Vixen’s version of the story, she schooled everyone else on what she believed was something only she knew. It takes a lot of confidence to “teach” from a position of obvious ignorance and insist that resulting confusion on the part of the “students” is somehow their collective fault.

ETA. And this is a problem because her whole “current affairs” discussion here is based on her trying to school everyone else in exactly the same manner: totally ignorant yet supremely confident.

 

[catsmate]

Oh come on. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murty, daughter of Infosys multi-billionaire, who came to be elected as an MP after he was introduced to then PM David Cameron by Indian President Modi, easily earn £2,000,000 in share dividends per annum alone without lifting a finger. Sunak has a company in the Cayman Islands (read: secrecy) and all of his assets are listed in the Parliamentary interest as being on a 'blind register'. Even Cameron and Boris Johnson never hid behind a 'blind register' as it is important for public servants in high places to be seen to be completely transparent, spotless and without conflicts of interest. Why would Sunak want to be in a high-stress job earning less than £200,000 per annum as UK Prime Minister other than to enhance his business interests. He has a whole fleet of Land Rover Jaguar vehicles and via his wife close links with Tata, who have been given all kinds of generous grants by the current PM to trade in the UK.

Of course the embargo on the cause of the Luton Airport car park fire is directly due to Sunak protecting his personal financial interests. Mark my words.


In the 2018 Liverpool ECHO car park fire we were told straight away what make the culprit vehicle was.

Oh jeebus, so much drivel in one paragraph. Start with what a 'blind trust' (note the second word ) actually is. And who, like Johnson (you're wrong there, as usual), use them.

 

[zooterkin]

Oh jeebus, so much drivel in one paragraph. Start with what a 'blind trust' (note the second word ) actually is. And who, like Johnson (you're wrong there, as usual), use them.

You'd think a chartered accountant would know what a blind trust was.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Oh jeebus, so much drivel in one paragraph. Start with what a 'blind trust' (note the second word ) actually is. And who, like Johnson (you're wrong there, as usual), use them.

Let's be honest the problem with Sunak isn't his holdings in the blind trust (although I think there are some concerns about how blind it actually is), but rather his interests that he does have full view of because they belong to his wife & FiL.

 

[SpitfireIX]

I guess you mean a blind trust, and not that he's fraudulently claiming a disability allowance.

I'm seriously starting to wonder whether someone's just winding us up. . . .

It also looks as if you think (or wish to imply) that a blind trust is a method of concealing assets. I know nothing whatever about accountancy or matters financial, but I do not think that is what they are.

I checked, and the type of blind trust that Sunak is using is similar to that that US politicians use. Straight from the horse's mouth:

An individual puts funds or assets into a trust on terms which allow the trustees to buy and sell trust assets as they see fit without informing the settlor. The purpose of such a trust is to allow a politician not to declare an interest in certain assets because they do not know at any time what assets are owned by the trust. The settlor may retain an interest or the trust may even be a bare trust in which the settlor remains absolutely entitled to the assets. In either case the trustees need give only sufficient details of income and gains to allow the settlor to complete a Self Assessment Tax Return. It is possible there are many bare blind trusts that HMRC [His Majesty's Revenue and Customs] would not be aware of because all income and gains are returned by the settlor on their personal Self Assessment Tax Return.​

The one grain of truth in Vixen's claim is that Sunak has been criticized by opposition parties for not being more transparent about his investments, but financial opacity is not a reason for using a blind trust.

 

[junkshop]

...So perhaps get your definitions clear. 'Conspiracy theorist' does not mean 'someone I disagree with because I am not interested in the same topics they are interested in'.

On what basis do you arrive at the conclusion that I am not interested in these topics? My posting in disagreement with your fanciful interpretations suggests that I am interested.

If I weren't, then I wouldn't bother to engage, surely?

I use ferries, cars & carparks. I have an interest in surviving this usage. I also have, by extention, an interest in the investigation of what went wrong when these things go wrong not being derailed by misinformation, conspiratorial ideation, or any other flavours of ********.

My disagreeing with your fantasies is not evidence of a lack of interest, indeed it is the very opposite.


You are correct when you write that "'Conspiracy theorist' does not mean 'someone I disagree with because I am not interested in the same topics they are interested in'.", but that is very clearly not what anyone here has meant when they have called you a conspiracy theorist.

 

[EHocking]

…
For crying out loud, we are talking about a massive fire that destroyed up to 1,500 vehicles and collapsed an entire multi-storey modern airport car park within yards of an international airport, albeit mostly budget airlines.
…

I hesitate to ask, but of what relevance is the highlighted to your CT?

 

[novaphile]

...

A conspiracy theory is one in which a mysterious cabal of people presume to want to rule the world.

...

So we can add 'conspiracy theory' to the incredibly long list of things that Vixen doesn't understand.

 

[EHocking]

There is no point in applying mass exams if there is no pass rate. Most public exams are standardized so that there is a pass mark.

The problem is not that there is a Pass rate on the exam, but that you think that the success rate of the process is the same thing, e.g.,

That was the common understanding. Chances of passing very slim, obviously owing to limited number of places but still very competitive.

Again, the chances of successful placement has been/is small. This is not the same as the pass score of the exam.

Oh, and a standardised test has nothing to do with how the scores/pass is calculated (or standard deviations of same), it is the definition of tests that “ are designed in such a way that the questions and interpretations are consistent and are administered and scored in a predetermined, standard manner.”.

Test score interpretation/determination may involve normative interpretation of scores, but scores being determined by standard distribution is not what “standardised test” means. A standardised test can also be scored using “criterion-referenced” score interpretation. These are sometimes referred to as “standard-based assessment”.

Perhaps the latter is where you have become confused between standardised test, standard based assessment and standard deviations?

 

[Steve]

I hesitate to ask, but of what relevance is the highlighted to your CT?

To get people discussing something, anything, that distracts everyone here from her poorly thought out conspiracy theories.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Again, the chances of successful placement has been/is small. This is not the same as the pass score of the exam.

She seems to think that passing the test means getting the job, and that having few actual positions available means that the test has to be proportionally more difficult to pass.

But, if it's like pretty much any other job application process, passing the placement test just means you have demonstrated the necessary skill set to do the job, and are then placed in a pool of applicants to be further evaluated, typically with interviews. Given that a job posting is going to specify the work to be done, I'd wager that most applicants are able to pass the preliminary test, even when there is only one position being filled.

 

[EHocking]

To get people discussing something, anything, that distracts everyone here from her poorly thought out conspiracy theories.

That and her class bigotry.

… I have no great love of the so-called working classes ...

Which she believes is normal.

…I was on a plane from Arlanda to Heathrow recently and immediately knew it was a British cabin crew on board (SAS Airline). When the crew member brought me my Christmas turkey and cheese toast, he was literally fawning and scraping the floor as he asked me if I wanted sugar in my tea. He was the campest cabin crew member I have ever met*.
...

hmmm, not just class bigotry it seems…

 

[EHocking]

She seems to think that passing the test means getting the job, and that having few actual positions available means that the test has to be proportionally more difficult to pass.

Even though I provided a link to the Fast Stream page on the Civil Service website that explains the entire process.

But, if it's like pretty much any other job application process, passing the placement test just means you have demonstrated the necessary skill set to do the job, and are then placed in a pool of applicants to be further evaluated, typically with interviews. Given that a job posting is going to specify the work to be done, I'd wager that most applicants are able to pass the preliminary test, even when there is only one position being filled.

You are of course referring to the Success Rate of the Fast Track process that Vixen continues to confuse with the exam pass rate.

 

[catsmate]

Seems like her entire opus at this forum, except perhaps for a side quest about apostrophes.

I missed that.

 

[catsmate]

That is a matter of fact. Learn to recognise factual information.

Sigh. No it's not, for those of us living in the Real World.

 

[Vixen]

Do you think that might have something to do with you suggesting, for example, that the body was found by an undercover police officer who was, for reasons unknown, posing as a psychic?

That was the logical conclusion I came to from the final report, which clearly stated that only authorized personnel were present at the final recovery scene. Hardly a 'conspiracy theory', if officially confirmed in an official report.

 

[Vixen]

Why are you making stuff up?

BBC. Fact.

 

[zooterkin]

BBC. Fact.

The car was a diesel. Now that's a fact, but you seem to have trouble with it for some reason.

 

[Vixen]

I guess you mean a blind trust, and not that he's fraudulently claiming a disability allowance.

It also looks as if you think (or wish to imply) that a blind trust is a method of concealing assets. I know nothing whatever about accountancy or matters financial, but I do not think that is what they are.

The register where members of parliament have to declare their interests. Going 'blind' is simply a claim that whilst you have an interest in say, Company X, whilst serving, you endeavour to step back from your role as company director, or whatever, and therefore, the reasoning runs, you do not now have any conflict of interest.

But I would question why the Prime Minister of the UK who owns a very lucrative company registered in the Cayman Islands which is ultra-secretive and no-one can look up company records at all, should want to put down your interests as 'blind' on the register unless it is to conceal something you don't want the public to be aware off. Nobody checks to actually see if you have 'stepped away' and are genuinely at arm's length distance from your business activities.

 

[zooterkin]

That was the logical conclusion I came to from the final report, which clearly stated that only authorized personnel were present at the final recovery scene. Hardly a 'conspiracy theory', if officially confirmed in an official report.

Another example of your 'logical thinking'?

 

[zooterkin]

That was the logical conclusion I came to from the final report, which clearly stated that only authorized personnel were present at the final recovery scene. Hardly a 'conspiracy theory', if officially confirmed in an official report.

Another example of your 'logical thinking'?

 

[Vixen]

So you're going to counter the observation that you're a conspiracy theorist by showing us your wall full of headshots and thumb-tacks connected by red yarn.


What embargo?

Your words are so often laughably wrong. Why would anyone mark your words?


Were we? You're so often wrong that I'm not going to take your word for it. It was known from the first photo of the burning car that the Luton vehicle was a Land Rover Discovery, the same as the Liverpool vehicle.

Citation please of where it was confirmed it was a Land Rover Discovery.

 

[Vixen]

Would that have something to do with you insisting that the man who claimed to have discovered Nichola Bulley was an undercover policeman?

(Rhetorical question)

Compus

Read the report. It clearly states everybody present was authorized personnel.

 

[Vixen]

What actually happened was that you were egregiously and obviously wrong, and you spun an ever more amusing series of lies to avoid admitting it. Once we figured out what you were trying to say, you remained the only one with the problem. I mention it because it’s one of the few examples of your posts that isn’t strictly a conspiracy theory. But I see you’ve managed to turn it into one.

Seriously, we all notice typos and unfamiliar expressions all the time. To turn it into a thread for people to express their inner heckler...really...?

As I said before that was how we did it. I get that not everybody did but that is hardly an excuse for ad hominem attack.

 

[catsmate]

I stand by that belief that there is a cover up over the involvement of EV vehicles.

And yet you have absolutely no evidence to support your opinion.

 

[Vixen]

You just espoused a new conspiracy theory involving the forum moderators, without providing any evidence. Further, correctly and relevantly calling attention to your misapprehensions, ignorance, incompetence, and lack of critical thinking skills does not constitute abuse, no matter how butthurt you are about it. And I second Jay's invitation to you to report any post you feel is abusive for moderation, rather than just make dramatic claims that everyone is abusing you.




Non sequitur. Your thread was moved here because you are insinuating that elements within the British government are conspiring to conceal the true source of the fire, not because no one is interested in the topic.




Again, you have advanced several ridiculous and in some cases contradictory conspiracy theories on the sinking of the Estonia, so the threads were properly moved here.




See below.




[Note: I meant to mention this when it was brought up earlier, but although I didn't participate much, I did read through the entire Amanda Knox thread in all of its then-current iterations at one point when things were slow elsewhere on the forum. Also, to avoid derailing this thread, I will not be making any further comments or responses here concerning Vixen's claims about Amanda Knox.]

The hilited is your usual laughable spin. Of course you never claimed there was a conspiracy to frame Knox; rather, you claimed that she and her ex-boyfriend are obviously guilty, but that their murder convictions were overturned because of, inter alia, corrupt Italian Supreme Court justices, her ex-boyfriend's purported Mafia connections, and improper pressure from the US State Department. Further, you ignored the overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence of gross misconduct and incompetence on the part of the Italian authorities in this case, and you also ignored the experts in biology and forensic science in the thread who attempted to correct your many misapprehensions. So par for the course.




No. From Merriam-Webster:

. . . a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators . . .

also : a theory asserting that a secret of great importance is being kept from the public . . . [italics original; bolding mine]​

So no, it doesn't need reptilian overlords or worldwide Jewish cabals to be a conspiracy theory. "NASA Faked the moon landings" and "The CIA killed JFK" are two clear conspiracy theories that don't involve multinational-level conspirators.




Proudly wrong as usual.

You are obviously insinuating that "a secret of great importance is being kept from the public," namely, that the Luton Airport Carpark Fire was caused or accelerated by an EV. So please explain to us again how you're not a conspiracy theorist.

It is important to be clear on word meanings otherwise they just become meaningless. Looking at court processes and court transcripts and stating an opinion of them, whilst providing reasoning for the opinion, really does not qualify as a conspiracy theory. (You do know that Italy does factually have a mafia problem, mafias which do in fact interfere with its legal machinery? This is fact, or perhaps only an opinion, but it's not a 'conspiracy theory'). A true pure conspiracy theory is one that states, 'That defendant was convicted of murder for doing cartwheels'. This is the actual conspiracy theory believed and stated by a large number of people in this forum as an ISF mantra in every second thread.

It is my opinion there is a cover up re the Luton Airport car park fire, albeit a banal mundane one with standard embargos placed on the press as to what they are allowed and not allowed to report. That is my opinion. Relax. It is not threatening to have someone differing in opinion from oneself. The whole idea of a forum is discussing how you reached your opinion.

 

[Vixen]

Oh jeebus, so much drivel in one paragraph. Start with what a 'blind trust' (note the second word ) actually is. And who, like Johnson (you're wrong there, as usual), use them.

Fact: PM Rishi Sunak is the only UK prime minister who has listed his interests on the register as being on a blind register. Note the words [whilst in office as] serving Prime Minister.

So once again a rash assertion on your part.

 

[Vixen]

Let's be honest the problem with Sunak isn't his holdings in the blind trust (although I think there are some concerns about how blind it actually is), but rather his interests that he does have full view of because they belong to his wife & FiL.

He sold his shares in Infosys back to his wife, thinking it would be sufficient to allay concerns of 'conflict of interest'.

OK, nobody expects anyone serving as a Prime Minister or even as an M.P. to give up their business interests but perhaps the law or parliamentary protocols need to be amended so that only minor MP's can hide behind a genuine 'blind register' i.e., a genuine resolution to not be part of that companies business activities so that no suspicion of corruption can arise. For example, insider dealing. Cameron's connections to the now criminalized Greensill was one such close sailing to the wind.