Jump to content

Recommended Posts

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Save Southwark Woods street stall at Coop on

> Forest Hill Road. Almost total local support to

> save trees and graves. Til 5pm.

>

> Save Southwark Woods are fighting to stop

> Southwark from continuing to cut down trees and

> digging up or covering over the dead. We are for

> preserving their memorials.

>

> Lewis Schaffer

> Kind of person who misses trains on advanced

> tickets.

> Http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk


Does preserving memorials include climbing on them to take publicity photos ?????

panda boy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But there is some hope it appears. Harriet Harman and Zac Goldsmith are now publicly

> demanding the work to be stopped until more answers have been provided by the council and

> further independent studies made.


Harman made a couple of quite reasonable suggestions, whereas Goldsmith has come over as a complete gullible fool who has believed just about all of SSW's propaganda.


I was quite undecided between Goldsmith and Khan for mayor - he's made it quite a simple choice for Khan for me now.

Report back from SSW table at the CoOp is near universal revulsion at tree cutting and disgust at local people's graves being dug up and mounded over. And not to mention the incedulity at the council leasing plots in crushed building waste above the remains of the dead.



Is there anyone who speaks up for the council plans and who will use their real name?


Lewis Schaffer

Failure at saving 12 big trees, failure as a father, failure at comedy.

Http://www.lewisschaffer.co.uk

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Report back from SSW table at the CoOp is near universal revulsion at tree cutting and disgust at

> local people's graves being dug up and mounded over. And not to mention the incedulity at the

> council leasing plots in crushed building waste above the remains of the dead.


Considering how Lewis re-interpreted Harman's letter, I think we can safely say this hasn't actually happened.

Can someone on this forum tell me the name of a group or a person who supports the Council's cemetery strategy I.e. cutting down trees, removing headstones, and digging up and mounding over graves to provide burial spaces in crushed construction waste on top of the buried dead or to provide space in confiscated graves above the remains of the previous occupants? (Besides an undertaker, a council worker, a Councillor or contractor.)


Thank you


Lewis Schaffer

Nunhead American Radio

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Can someone on this forum tell me the name of a group or a person who supports the Council's

> cemetery strategy I.e. cutting down trees, removing headstones, and digging up and mounding

> over graves to provide burial spaces in crushed construction waste on top of the buried dead or to

> provide space in confiscated graves above the remains of the previous occupants? (Besides an

> undertaker, a council worker, a Councillor or contractor.)


You really have quite an unhealthy fascination about collecting the names of those who oppose your little group, don't you? It really is quite creepy.


SSW: We are making notes, and when we win the war, you will be brought to account. You - what is your name.

Mainwaring: Don't tell him, Pike!

SSW: [writes down name] Pike...

I can say (happily) that (1) I am entirely relaxed about Southwark implementing policies as set-out in (leads to a downloaded .pdf) https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjwqPLYyOPKAhWLbD4KHRJ0D7YQFggkMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southwark.gov.uk%2Fdownload%2Fdownloads%2Fid%2F11857%2Flednet_report&usg=AFQjCNFAByQf3HUb8islnvImdlc-c_A-JA&cad=rja and that (2) I am sad that Southwark so neglected its graveyards that it needs now to undertake remedial works to clear scrub growth and cope with graves damaged by unplanned tree-growth etc. but accept that this is a necessary step to bringing back land always intended for burials into use.


Your use of words (i.e. 'confiscated') is always tendentious. But yes, actually, councils are allowed to re-use burial space, under certain very clear provisos.


And I am fed up with you constantly claiming your opponents are partial - don't tell me all this publicity isn't intended to boost your personal career as a stand-up - you use your name because you want to sell your name. This campaign (dishonest as it is) is all about marketing you.

Seems yesterdays warning has fallen on DEAF ears, carry on pushing the boundaries, or is that borders (see what I did there) and I hope and pray Admin will do what it should have done a long time ago and BAN you. Then you'll have no publicity what so ever.


Funny how Harriet's letter is so small and unreadable, now we know why.


Like everything from Nundead heights (which is also a figment of your imagination) actually its Nunhead Grove, to now saying you have universal revulsion, you call anything you don't like black when its white, hot when its cold, light when its dark, you don't want change unless its change you want etc. Your behaviour is similar to that of a magalamaniac.


There was an adult discussion being undertaken on the issue, but yesterday your posts put a stop to all of that. If you disagree so vermontly with the council, go get an injunction and do it legally rather than continuing to bleat.

I am going to propose having a debate of some sort and need someone to represent the pro camp


Would someone on this Forum give me the name of a group or a person who supports the Council's cemetery strategy


I.e. cutting down trees, removing headstones, and digging up and mounding over graves to provide burial spaces in crushed construction waste on top of the buried dead or to provide space in a confiscated grave above the remains of the previous occupants?


Lewis Schaffer

Email me

Try southwark Council, you have all their names, Oh they won't talk with you either, I wonder why?????????????????????????


But in the mean time................................


> SSW: We are making notes, and when we win the war,

> you will be brought to account. You - what is

> your name.

> Mainwaring: Don't tell him, Pike!

> SSW: Pike...

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am going to propose having a debate of some sort

> and need someone to represent the pro camp

>

> Would someone on this Forum give me the name of a

> group or a person who supports the Council's

> cemetery strategy

>

> I.e. cutting down trees, removing headstones, and

> digging up and mounding over graves to provide

> burial spaces in crushed construction waste on top

> of the buried dead or to provide space in a

> confiscated grave above the remains of the

> previous occupants?

>

> Lewis Schaffer

> Email me



I can't imagine that anybody who has read the whole of this thread would want to take part in a face to face debate with you, on either side.

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Time this thread was locked and consigned to

> comedy forum history?


This ^^^



steveo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think Lewis is gathering material and a ban

> would be playing into his comedic hands.



^^^^ And this.



This was fun for a while (I never really cared either way about what happens, but I did think some of the SSW falsehoods needed challenging), but the fun has drained away and it's like watching a once loved pet sitting in it's own poo because it can't move on.


Put it out of it's misery.

Think that would be a really good idea to have a meeting or a debate or something - to see how the community feels. There has been posts on this forum which say that Save Southwark Woods doesn't really have local support.


Would someone on this Forum give me the name of a group or a person who supports the Council's cemetery strategy? Someone?


The person or group can even debate what we think is the strategy.


We think the council's strategy is to cut down trees, remove headstones, and dig up and mounding over graves to provide burial spaces in crushed construction waste on top of the buried dead or to provide space in confiscated graves above the remains of the previous occupants. We are sure it is to cut down trees cause they have done that already.


I think it should be someone who doesn't have a vested financial interest in the strategy. Then again, it would be nice to see Councillor Vicki Mills or her husband Gavin Edward or Fiona Colley defend their horrible, sinful, cynical and immoral actions.


Any names?

Lewis Schaffer

Local Person

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am going to propose having a debate of some sort and need someone to represent the pro camp

>

> Would someone on this Forum give me the name of a group or a person who supports the Council's

> cemetery strategy


Well, in that case, get the experts in, i.e. the council.


I think you'll need someone of the calibre of Kofi Annan to chair that kind of debate, though.

edborders Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Think that would be a really good idea to have a

> meeting or a debate or something - to see how the

> community feels. There has been posts on this

> forum which say that Save Southwark Woods doesn't

> really have local support.

>

> Would someone on this Forum give me the name of a

> group or a person who supports the Council's

> cemetery strategy? Someone?

>

> The person or group can even debate what we think

> is the strategy.

>

> We think the council's strategy is to cut down

> trees, remove headstones, and dig up and mounding

> over graves to provide burial spaces in crushed

> construction waste on top of the buried dead or to

> provide space in confiscated graves above the

> remains of the previous occupants. We are sure it

> is to cut down trees cause they have done that

> already.

>

> I think it should be someone who doesn't have a

> vested financial interest in the strategy. Then

> again, it would be nice to see Councillor Vicki

> Mills or her husband Gavin Edward or Fiona Colley

> defend their horrible, sinful, cynical and immoral

> actions.

>

> Any names?

> Lewis Schaffer

> Local Person


Yeah, the Grim Reaper, running around a cemetery.

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Despite a warning to behave, Edborders has now

> been banned.



Thank goodness. Although it has to be said that several regular posters have behaved appallingly on this thread.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Absolute mugs. That's what they take you for.  
    • Trossachs definitely have one! 
    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...