Southwark Plans for Camberwell Old & New Cemeteries.

[dbboy]

Looked at the small size screenshot you provided, one grave is adjacent to a pathway, the other appears that the CWCG were on the case, I would hope Southwark will respond accordingly and make amendments to their plans, no reason for them not to as it was identified.

[Blanche Cameron]

Here is a larger screenshot of the letter CWGC sent Southwark Council. It appears that Southwark is pressuring the CWGC to allow development over war graves.

Also attached is a photo of one of the lanes in Camberwell Old Cemetery.

For those just joining, here is the link to our letter to the CWGC:

http://www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/focc-appeals-for-cwgc-help/4593880728 And the list of the 131 servicemen and women whose graves are not marked:

http://savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk/missing-131-ww1-soldiers-names/4593878330

Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

[edhistory]

Who is the Data Controller who is responsible for has custody of the petition?

[dbboy]

Do you agree that CWCG are on the case, and where issues are identified they are highlighting these and seeking alternatives?

Because from the screenshot letter it seems so doesn't it.

[JoeLeg]

How's all your other arguments going Blanche? You know, all those really strong ones that have had no effect so far?

Is that why you're pretending to give a fuck about fallen servicemen? Because you didn't before...

[edhistory]

On 22 May 2017 Mr James Barber twittered in favour of FOCC/SSW activities.

[Blanche Cameron]

We support the CWGC efforts to protect the war graves which Southwark is developing over. Unfortunately, Southwark has put them in a very difficult position. Southwark has been planning this for years but is only just consulting with them now, years after the plans were drawn up and months after groundworks began.

Why weren't the CGWC consulted in 2011 when Southwark was consulting on their burial strategy?

Southwark should be preserving all the graves - not just the war graves - as well as the woods and nature. The cemeteries should be nature reserves, like Nunhead Cemetery. See photo below.

Visit the cemeteries today. They're lovely.

Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

[edhistory]

Who is the Data Controller who is responsible for has custody of the petition?

[nxjen]

"Why weren't the CWGC consulted in 2011 when Southwark was consulting on their burial strategy?"

Because the 2011 consultation was about overall strategy and it would have been premature. Now the works are getting closer, Southwark are working co-operatively with CWGC regarding the details of the plans so that tweaks can be made. Once again, you are trying to make a big deal out of something that really isn't an issue in the hopes of gaining support in your aim of change of use for the cemeteries to become nature reserves.

[Penguin68]

We support the CWGC efforts to protect the war graves which Southwark is developing over.

This is a very tendentious use of the word 'developing'. Southwark is doing what has been traditional in London Cemeteries - re-using then for future burials - turning graveyards into parks and leisure and recreation centres (change of use) would be closer to the meaning of development here, which is what ssw wants.

Why weren't the CGWC consulted in 2011 when Southwark was consulting on their burial strategy?

Why should they be? - the known CWGC graves never formed part of Southwark's plans. It is the CWGC, NOT Southwark, which has a special responsibility for war graves - Southwark has no such special responsibility - it treats all its buried with an even hand. It is the CWGC who failed to properly identify or mark graves perhaps (and they had a lot more on their plate at the relevant time) - this was never Southwark's responsibility, As these have been discovered Southwark has worked closely with the CWGC - apparently to their satisfaction.

Southwark should be preserving all the graves - not just the war graves - as well as the woods and nature.

But only in your view - this is not an actual imperative (it's not in any real sense 'true'). I think Southwark should be ensuring continued availability of burial sites locally in Southwark. And that their strategy to do so is the right one. That's my view (but again it contains no universal truth). Most of 'the graves' you talk about are in fact (in terms of numbers buried) unmarked - so no more 'preservable' as anything buried in an unmarked stretch of land. In the areas being worked on many of the graves that are marked have monuments now broken and almost featureless.

No burials (war graves apart) less than 75 years old will be disturbed at all in this phase (and that includes family graves where it is the latest interment which sets the clock). War graves older than 75 years will also be preserved, where they can be identified and marked.

You want a (frankly creepy) museum and military fetish site and recreation centre, I want somewhere for the living to mourn their departed. As for enjoying nature - well I enjoy the working cemeteries we have, well tended (now) and curiously life affirming - and they are stuff full of nature, and not just overgrown scrub.

[Blanche Cameron]

"the 2011 consultation was about overall strategy and it would have been premature. Now the works are getting closer, Southwark are working co-operatively with CWGC".

Premature? Southwark brought in the heavy machinery last year, they are now laying out roads. To ?consult? the CWGC now is to leave to just about the last moment. And in doing so, the CWGC told them there are 48 war graves not six.

If they had contacted them before, the CWGC owuldn?t be in the position they are now of having to ask Southwark not to drive roads over war graves and or leave 23 war graves without headstones.

See photo attached of what Southwark is doing to the cemeteries.

Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

[nxjen]

As I said before, now the works are getting closer, Southwark are working co-operatively with CWGC regarding the details of the plans so that tweaks can be made. It's common for building plans to be amended constantly until the project's finished. I doubt that the CWGC has been put in any position they can't handle and would repeat that they have issued a statement that they are happy with the works.

[dbboy]

Why oh why can you not see reason, the cemeteries are working cemeteries being used for there intended purpose.

What you consider woods are infect over grown scrub which the council CLEARLY neglected for years and realising the imminent shortage of burial space, are clearing those areas for new burials, nothing wrong with that. Is that not the better option than starting to use Honor Oak Rec ground for new burials??

Plans take time to develop and prepare, but a plan can be altered, however your approach scuppered any hopes of achieving that.

Simply put, your attempts at running this campaign have spectacularly failed because you seem incapable of discussing/negotiating with the community or authorities about the matter. The approach taken seems to be either do what we want or we'll continue to run an aggressive campaign using all sorts of spurious arguments to get our own way, and ignoring or distorting the facts to suit yourselves.

You want to preserve nature, can you explain what you mean by preserving nature? Nature is all around us and again as has been explained we have an abundance of green spaces and are spoilt about the amount we have here to use for recreational purposes. Having a picnic in a cemetery is in my opinion just plain weird!!!!

I would not want people having a picnic on an adjacent grave I was visiting, or people running or cycling past. Perhaps you have not experienced that yet??? Cemeteries are supposed to be quiet, peaceful and tranquile places to allow reflection and memories of relatives or friends buried there.

Re-using graves that are 75+years old although not ideal is a way of further managing the lack of burial space. Take a look at the monuments of those graves that are un-kept and some of which are no longer legible. It is also highly likely that the graves/monuments are no longer visited by the family as they have also passed away or moved away.

Part of the problem is after the deceased are buried unfortunately some graves are not maintained by families, hence the move towards rows of graves. Just as World War 1 and 2 graves are laid out in Commonwealth cemeteries. Row upon row of graves, why is that, because it is much easier for the authorities to maintain the cemeteries so keeping them looking respectable. Have you ever seen a Commonwealth cemetery that is over grown? Nope.

Their is a balancing act between being able to continue to bury the deceased locally or not having any space to use. What is the alternative, you propose the NIMBY approach and as I understand it to use land in another borough. All that does is move the issue elsewhere.

BTW the monument you have chosen looks like nature is doing what it does if uncontrolled, taking over, in time the entire monument will be covered with foliage, and the angle looks unstable. (And do you have permission to publish photos of other peoples graves???)

[Blanche Cameron]

Here is a record of a servicewoman buried on the development area. She was buried with 7 others in 101/25607 on consecrated ground near Underhill Road.

131. Member WILLIAMS, EDITH OLIVE DoD: 28/10/1918 Women's RAF, 1st Stores Depot. Daughter Alice M. Greenfield, 10A, Staveley Rd., Asylum Rd., Peckham, London). (see screenshot attached.)

Southwark waited until they had already brought in the heavy machinery before they contacted the Commonwealth War Graves Commission.

The war graves is just another reason why this project has to be stopped.

Visit the cemeteries today. There is still beauty there.

Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

[Penguin68]

The grave of someone who served in the military - even when they may have died during the course of a war, is not a war grave unless their death was a consequence of the war - this may have been the case of Edith Williams - but it is very unusual.

As I have said there are many many former soldiers, sailors and airmen who will have been buried in the local cemeteries - but whose death was not war related.

Do you know how Ms Williams died? Has the CWGC claimed her as one of their own (i.e. a war-related death?). The CWGC was formed by the time this lady died, why was she not interred in a CWG if she 'qualified'?

And, more to the point, so what?

There are dead people buried in the cemeteries. Wow! Don't make a fetish of dead people, or give greater value to a life cut short by war to one lived fully. All deaths (well most deaths) are mourned. The mourning is no stronger or more valid if the deceased was killed in a war. Actually, the mourning for those who die in 2017 is because recent and current, more 'valid' to care about, perhaps than the mourning of those themselves now dead a hundred years ago.

But then, you don't care for the living and recently bereaved, do you?

[nxjen]

I'm not sure of the point Blanche is attempting to make here, other than pointing to the sadness of the loss of life. That Ms Williams was buried in a grave with 7 others points to the probability this was a public grave where memorials were not allowed. I believe her name appears on the Screen Wall, a fitting commemoration. The CWGC website states "Individuals are commemorated in this way when their loss has been officially declared by their relevant service but there is no known burial for the individual, or in circumstances where graves cannot be individually marked, or where the grave site has become inaccessible and unmaintainable."

ETA The claim that Southwark left it late in the day to contact the CWGC may or may not be true. It's not really relevant as the two organisations are now working co-operatively together.

[JoeLeg]

Blanche Cameron Wrote:

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

> Here is a record of a servicewoman buried on the

> development area. She was buried with 7 others in

> 101/25607 on consecrated ground near Underhill

> Road.

>

You plainly think that by using a woman's grave you will somehow conjure up sympathy. That's pathetic.

> 131. Member WILLIAMS, EDITH OLIVE DoD: 28/10/1918

> Women's RAF, 1st Stores Depot. Daughter Alice M.

> Greenfield, 10A, Staveley Rd., Asylum Rd.,

> Peckham, London). (see screenshot attached.)

>

Do you actually know how she died? Was she a victim of enemy action? Do you actually know ANYTHING about how the military works? You're quite the Walter Mitty fantasist, dreaming that you understand the services. A WRAF stores worker is, shall we say, pretty unlikely to have been anywhere near German troops.

> Southwark waited until they had already brought in

> the heavy machinery before they contacted the

> Commonwealth War Graves Commission.

>

Better late than never, and it seems CWGC and Southwark are cooperating fine. So what's your point?

> The war graves is just another reason why this

> project has to be stopped.

>

What you mean by this is that you and Lewis have discovered how useless you are at this, and are grasping at anything you can. And it still isn't working.

> Visit the cemeteries today. There is still beauty

> there.

>

And there still will be. You don't get to tell other people what they're allowed to find beautiful. You're arrogance would be breathtaking if you weren't so much fun to laugh and point at.

Do you realise the scale of media and public support the CWGC can generate with just a little bit of effort? If they wanted to shut this down they could've slammed the brakes on Southwark weeks ago. The fact that they haven't demonstrates your position is false. Much like yourself.

[Penguin68]

Do you actually know how she died? Was she a victim of enemy action? Do you actually know ANYTHING about how the military works?

If, as has been asserted by njxn she is memorialised on the Screen Wall, there is a good likelihood that her death was as a consequence of war, if not at the hand of an enemy. There was a high rate of accidents, particularly in the RAF and predecessor (RFC) (a lot of training flights ended in disaster) and she may well have been involved in such an accident - if her death was accidental but on duty she could well have been seen as a suitable candidate for the Wall Memorial by the CWGC.

It is also a (remote) possibility that she was in a RAF depot behind the lines over-run during the German 1918 Spring offensive - however, other than nurses I am not sure how many women personnel saw service overseas in France in WWI. If she was a victim of the Spring Offensive she would still have died in the UK - having been hospitalised home. It may be significant that her mother was local to this area.

[JoeLeg]

She could also have been hit by a horse or fallen off a ladder.

While it's possible she was on the continent, I find it highly unlikely. Save for medical personnel not many women were deployed near the front line. She died shortly before the Armistice, so if it was as a result of battlefield injuries them she certainly was invalided home.

Either way, she is memorialised on the Screen Wall, like so many other poor souls. Not forgotten. Never forgotten.

[Blanche Cameron]

There is still time to make it to the cemeteries today and see what we are fighting for.

Blanche Cameron

Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark Woods campaign

07731 304 966 / [email protected] / www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

[rendelharris]

JoeLeg Wrote:

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

> Do you actually know how she died? Was she a

> victim of enemy action? Do you actually know

> ANYTHING about how the military works? You're

> quite the Walter Mitty fantasist, dreaming that

> you understand the services. A WRAF stores worker

> is, shall we say, pretty unlikely to have been

> anywhere near German troops.

As poor Edith served at the 1st Stores Depot, RAF Kidbrooke, Greenwich for just three weeks prior to her death from "unknown causes" (also in London) I'd say the chances of her being a casualty of war are infinitesimally small. Her records can be seen here: https://livesofthefirstworldwar.org/lifestory/7154060 - further investigation reveals "Unsurprisingly, there are no changes of posting in her three week service career - she was enlisted as Immobile, i.e. living at home and attached to her local WRAF station."

[JoeLeg]

Blanche Cameron Wrote:

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

> There is still time to make it to the cemeteries

> today and see what we are fighting for.

>

> Blanche Cameron

> Friends of Camberwell Cemeteries / Save Southwark

> Woods campaign

> 07731 304 966 / [email protected] /

> www.savesouthwarkwoods.org.uk

Ah, classic Blanche. Totally ignore things that disprove your argument.

[rendelharris]

Just happened to get a notification from Twitter that Lewis Schaffer had posted new material (he quotes you at length Joe, aren't you flattered?).

Amongst other "gems" I noticed this, tweeted one day after the Manchester atrocity:

"I don't blame the terrorists. I blame God for giving them 72 virgins."

This from a man who helps head up an organisation which claims respect for the dead is one of its primary motivations.

[Otta]

Yeah I saw that. Forget the timing / insensitve manner of it. It's just a really shit joke. And this dude is a comic?

[JoeLeg]

He's a very unsuccessful comic (hardly an endangered species I suppose).

I reckon his failings in his work are part of why he's the way he is.

Quote me all you like Lewis, I stand by every word!