showboat

Can't see anywhere in his post that he's saying LibDems are to thank for a lower crime rate. So your comment about party politics looks to me like a Campbell-esque attempt to smear a councillor you hate. That's between you and your conscience. Don't know what you issue with marking kits is either.

But I see no problem with TELLING PEOPLE WHAT THE POLICE HAVE SAID, which is all he did. Being a victim of crime is horrible. But it's good to be reminded that ED isn't too bad in that respect. People on this forum sometimes interpret a couple of burglaries as evidence that the sky is falling down...

All James did was to provide information that originally came from the police. Personally I'm grateful, it's interesting to know.

And why tell him to go away? At least he puts his head above the parapet, knowing it'll get bitten off by one side or the other.

Most politicians hide away. He's still here, engaging with the public. Isn't that what we want them to do, even if we don't like how they vote?

buddug Wrote:

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

> James Barber wrote: "At the East Dulwich ward

> Safer Neighbourhood Team panel - held at ED Police

> station last Wednesday 18/1 - local Police stated

> that East Dulwich WARD is bucking the current

> rising crime trend. Lowest reported crime rate for

> three years. That no consolation if you've still

> been a victim of crime."

> But then he goes on: "They specifically said no

> Xmas binge occurred of burglaries... blah blah."

>

> He's doing it again! Someone posts they've been

> burgled and he immediately jumps in quoting low

> crime statistics like a broken record.

> Unbelievable. Please, James, just go away!

You don't like James Barber. We get it. But now you sound like the stuck record.

Stop banging on the man. I don't agree with all he says, but I don't take every chance to call him a liar.

What's so bad about telling people that crime isn't too bad here? As the yanks would say 'why you gotta hate man?'

You're either a total troll or the kind of person who has moved here and thinks they own the place just because they have a bit of money. I actually said that market forces would determine if it would be a success. I also said I didn't personally like tattoos but wasn't about to impose my beliefs on others.

You're the one who thinks only the lower classes and criminals should have them. You're either a prejucied idiot or totally twisted.

Either way I wash my hands of bigots like you, this thread and this forum. Have a nice life.

Alan - yes, fair enough. I did put words in your mouth there.

Let me rephrase.

I believe that anyone who describes tattoos as 'cheap and demeaning' is ignoring the fact that many others think differently, and is ignorant of the fact that it is a PERSONAL CHOICE.

I believe that to describe David Beckham in the way you did is wrong, and it GIVES ME THE IMPRESSION that you feel a tattoo place should not be opened round here, simply because you don't like how they look.

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> >

> Is it? I think it's cheap and demeaning. I realise

> in this country I'm probably in a minority. What

> happens though when they are not trendy? I think

> David Beckham is a disgrace and sets a terrible

> example.

So how exactly did I put words in your mouth?

Ha! Yes. TK Maxx, and let's put a Matalan in there somewhere.

While we're at it, a Primark would do funny things to the blood pressure of some people round here...

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> >

> And how exactly did I qualify for this honour?

>

I wouldn't call being an unapologetic and unpleasant snob an honour. But since you ask, describing tattoos as 'cheap and demeaning' is offensive, frankly. And you may not like David Beckham, but the man has put his money where his mouth is with his footballing academy and can put what he wants on his body. He's a good father and - a rarity in modern footballers - a decent role model for hard work.

You're saying that you are the arbiter of taste and decency, and that you're opinion of what is good and right should dictate whether or not a tattoo shop should open near us.

Nimbyism and arrogance of the highest order. Just because you don't like looking at it isn't a reason to tell others they can't look like that.

As for Silverfox...wow. Were you mugged by a tattood person in your youth or something? You bigoted freak. Get a sense of perspective and stop being a hater. Or get to the Village where your way of life isn't threatened.

Disgusting.

If a tattoo place isn't wanted here then it will fail within a few months. If it survives then it's because there;s business for it. How people think that it will lower the tone of the area is beyond me.

Oh.My.God.

Over the years I've seen some pretty snobbish, nimbyish and frankly offensive views posted here, but Alan Medic and Silverfox have just surpassed them all.

Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean OTHER PEOPLE have to agree with you. I'm no fan of body ink or piercing - and would never have it done - but what others do is their own deal. My wife has tattoos - should I not find her attractive because of it? And why shouldn't they be catered for round here? "Associated with payday loans"? Get a life. That's a horrible thing to say - and if you saw the salary levels of some inked people I know you'd realise what an idiot you are.

I guess by your logic that NO business that you personally don't approve of should be allowed here? Who made you overlords of ED?

Rats only go in search of food and shelter. If they're heading in your house (which I agree isn't great) then either - as civilserveant says - they've been disturbed, or they think they can find food.

They don't go near humans if they have any choice in the matter.

As I think your house is unlikely to be a tip, then probably someone has moved them on from where they were. Unfortunately your only option (as far as I know) is to shout at EHO's until they do something.

Eyesore? Bit harsh...

What's your suggestion then?

Hi all,

The playgroup we used to take our little one to has closed down. Can anyone reccomend a playgroup or one o'clock club in the area for a 21 month old with too much energy?

Thanks in advance!

Dan

Willis B - they may work for others but I've found them to be a total rip off. If you like them then fine, but I'm never going back.

They just didn't listen to what I wanted, and for the money they charge...

We use the Loreal spray too - it does do a good job, but we're starting to get into dreadlock territory now - needs trimming! We'll try Village Way.

Tangleteeze? Will have to track those down.

Thanks!

Hi,

We've got a 20 month old girl with really curly hair - it's getting pretty difficult to get a brush through it or even wash it without a screaming meltdown! It needs cutting.

But, she doesn't like to sit still. Does anyone know a good person for cutting a toddlers hair?

Thanks,

Dan

"the rotten shit machines"

So you're obviously coming at this from an open-minded point of view...

I agree with the broad point about dogs on leashes though.

"That fact it punishments and rehabilitation does not work either, it very easy to say this until a member of your family has been brutally murdered and life does not mean life so what is the solution?"

Just a couple of points...

1. The DNA tests used in Britain are considered to be unreliable by the FBI - and the Americans have their own problems with unsafe convictions, so why anyone thinks the use of DNA would prevent innocent people being executed is beyond me.

2. Albert Pierrepoint himself famously said "I have come to the conclusion that executions solve nothing, and are only an antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge which takes the easy way and hands over the responsibility for revenge to other people...The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off."

He also said "All the men and woman whom I have faced at that final moment, convince me that in what I have done, I have not prevented a single murder."

Although he indeed seemed to flip flop on his opinions about capital punishment throughout the last years of his life, it seems that he felt it was not an effective deterrent. The continuing murder rate in places with the death penalty seems to support this view.

3. If a member of your family has been brutally murdered and you think that execution of the offender is the answer (assuming you have the right one - Birmingham Six/Guildford Four anyone?), then it sounds to me like what you want is actually revenge, not fair justice. This is why families of victims don't have sentencing rights.

4. If you truly support the death penalty, then answer me this - do you have total, 100% faith in our legal system? Do you believe it is watertight and infallible? If not, then do you accept that an innocent person might be executed for a crime they did not commit (which is murder) while the real criminal walked free? You say that it's easy to talk until someone you know is murdered. Well, what if someone you knew and believed to be innocent was condemned? Where would your support for capital punishment be then?

Otta - I don't want to drag this off-topic, but I can assure you there are those who think this way. You'd be amazed what some sections of the community from the Indian sub-continent think about the Afro-Carribean community, and vice versa.

I remember reading a Darcus Howe column in which he railed against exactly that type of thinking, writing about how exasperated he felt by the infighting which does so much to hold back concerted and organised anti-racism action. No one can deny that white bigots are the biggest 'threat' where racism is concerned, but those who think it is limited to those idiots are fooling themselves. My wife (of Trinidadian descent) is constantly amazed by the attitudes she hears from Carribean's who feel safe talking in front of her.

But another human skill is the ability to absorb and be absorbed by other cultures. Humans are at their strongest when they co-operate. It's the old adages of teamwork and mutually beneficial actions. Although I agree with the point that 'people like us' are more reassuring, I think it's part of our development as a species that we slowly (often very slowly) move towards a point where we actively encourage different groups to interact, as the exposure to others is often what has pushed us forward.

Of course there are terrible examples of the opposite being true - the colonisation of various indeginious (sic) peoples throughtout history show this - but we should've now gone past the point where we instinctly assume others are lesser than us. We need to push against these instincts, which are rooted deep in our brain as part of our desire to survive, and almost 're-learn' how to interact with those we don't understand.

That's so embarrasing. I mean, just so embarrasing...

That's what I get for being caught up in the East Dulwich-ness of it all!

(Going off now to sit in a dark corner until this feeling of shame and stupidity passes)

Mick Mac - why is that relevant (genuine question)?

Neil - Of course you're not. Anyone who sucks their teeth at me is being aggresive and they know it. Skin colour/ethnic background is irrelevant. The same goes for any other aggresive, hostile or offensive behaviour. Are they being racist? Well, who knows? It's no more specific than calling someone a wanker for no reason as you walk by.

An excellent and coherent post Penguin68.

"some believe that people who form part of a racial minority who may have been, or who are, oppressed cannot themselves ever be racist - thus in the UK only white people (the unoppressed majority) can be racist."

This, in particular, is an important and relevant point to our scoiety today, though not on topic for here.

I'm not sure I agree that intent is central to a definition of racism. Racism is a subtle and pervasive prejudice that can creep into our lives without us realising it. If we feel uncomfortable when we see a group of youths from a specific ethnic background walking towards us then that surely is a racist reaction, albeit one with minimal impact on others so long as we do not respond in line with that feeling. Likewise it is surely racism if we don't like the ethnic background of our friends new partner, or it too makes un uncomfortable, even if we can't say why. But again, so long as we keep it to ourselves and (hopefully) recognise that our attitudes might be wrong, then no harm done.

I don't feel the governer at the centre of this did act in an overtly racist manner - having given it a lot of thought - but is guilty only of bad judgement. I echo the comments by *Bob*; this should have been sorted internally.

Actually, no. That's not racist. It's a vicious statement, but not neccesarily incorrect. Truth can hurt.

Speaking as a very white, middle class born-and-bred East Dulwich resident (married to a mized race woman), I honestly feel that it's one of the great 'unspoken' issues of areas like this. Racism exists in all stratas of society. But we think that it 'couldn't possibly happen here' because we all read the Gaurdian/Independant and so on.

But some of the most racist things I'v heard have been from white folk with money. I'll happily post a list of the ones I know of the top of my head if you want, but for now suffice to say that I have been shocked by them. We think that to be a racist you need to live in Eltham, get tattoos, vote BNP, shave your head and fly the St George flag the roof of your white van. It isnt true of course, and although I don't think any parents at Goodrich will actively hold racist views, they may have subconcious beliefs about who they 'think' should be running the school. THIS DOESN'T MAKE THEM BAD PEOPLE, but it's something to think about.

But you didn't address the valid point she made which is that your wife has issued plainly contradictory statements, and then gone back and deleted some of them.

You can surely see how that looks a bit dodgy?

I still wish we could hear Mrs Paterson's side of the story. I'd be interested to know what these changes are and what her vision for the school is (as I say, my kid may well be there in a few years).

At the risk of being a stuck record, she really should've talked to Mr Moyles first. However, the choice of the Daily Mail to leak the story to speaks volumes about the intention of those behind it. Emily, you can defend them all you want, but you can't deny that the Daily Mail peddles a very specific line and they would've known how the story would be spun.