Me! Me! Me!

If Southwark is so short of burial space Why! Oh! Why! isn't Southwark utilising the extensive reserved ground for burials located beside Camberwell New Cemetery otherwise named as a 'recreation ground?

Given present urgent need for Southwark burial space which was always readily available within Camberwell New Cemetery's ample 'over-the-cemetery-fence-spill-over-space-recreation-ground' and not utilised for its purpose for decades - there has to be suspicions (does there not?) of possible dirty dealings that may be dug up from Southwark/Lewisham data files that reference the two councils understanding about plans for that 'shared' Southwark burial acreage. Southwark, despite urgent space needed for interring, would seem to be deterred from using Rec space for easily available interments. And, another question - Has the Rec ground been historically or latterly listed as Holy Ground? I.e. sanctified as burial land as any cemetery space is? If so, why are dogs pooing and ruffians running amok on that 'last resting place land'? Meantime, Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries thought to be overfilled many times over are now unnecessarily being poked, prodded and dug about for evermore 'reusable-refusable-disusable-six-food-under-nook-&-cranny-last-homes-for-the-dead'. Disgraceful!

Like Squatters Rights where squatters can (or, used to be able to) own a property after so many years of squatting residency sees "Temporary" for the LB Southwark re said Camberwell New Cemetery land (Recreation ground) probably means Southwark has forever 'queered its pitch' (pardon the pun) as Lewisham being the land-grabbing squatter has pretty much been allowed to appropriate said unused Southwark burial patch for so long. 'Temporary' as applied to that particular piece of Southwark people's designated burial land appears to imply Lewisham gamesters and dog-poo people can have the land 'Forever'.

And, to imagine ALL this could have been avoided years ago had Southwark Council properly re-appropriated for the purpose acres of unused designated Southward owned burial ground that is the adjacent land to Camberwell New Cemetery that has been to all intents and purposes GIVEN gratis to the LB of Lewisham as a play field. How dare Southwark Council give away land belonging to the people of Southwark to another borough.

Build your bonfire and label it as a celebration of some 'ethnic festival'. Date of November 5th is just one legitimate reason to have a bonfire. There must be loads of other calendar dates throughout the year where 'ethnic bonfires' can be lit. Lol

Have just noted this older thread about 'St. Anthony's Church, East Dulwich' while trying to see if that church still existed after noting an old postcard of the church. There doesn't appear to be a St. Anthony's church in the area other than the name given to an East Dulwich primary school. (See attached photo)

Yes, I was at 'Save Southwark Woods' Council meeting. Pics show dumped area. After dumping it was quickly overgrown and continued to be dumped with all sorts of incidental waste - some from cemetery maintenance I would say as Hollyhocks, Pampas Grass and other garden waste floribunda regrew on the site. I noted mature trees were buried high up to their upper trunks and quickly died. Residue dead trunks will no doubt be evident inside 'the dumped hill' to be landscaped soon. Fauna and flora has, of course, taken advantage of the area including a Brimstone butterfly I managed to stalk and photo on opportunist buddleja c.2009. Such butterflies are shy creatures preferring wild habitats unfrequented by Homo sapiens. Any proposed landscaping that follows general municipal pepper-potting blandness, constant mowing and strimming and ignorance of 'bio-diverse habitats' will not expect to see a re-visitation of the Brimstone butterfly or its shy ilk. Last summer in the wooded area of Camberwell Old Cemetery I saw for the first time in some surprising number (as in Brockley & Ladywell Cemeteries) Ringlet butterflies normally seen in more rural localities. (See/click blue numbered attached pic refs below)

As a local amateur archivist (founder member of FoBLC) I am very interested in London cemeteries. I have a library of digital photos of Camberwell Old Cemetery going back many years including 1 or 2 pics of 'illegal dumped area' when first appeared. What a wonderful cemetery for its fauna and flora? See attached (click below) old print I have of Camberwell old Cemetery when first set up in 1850's as 'The new cemetery at Forest Hill'.

Daniel and his brother's 'Dulwich Heating & Plumbing' (Mobile: 07852 757654) is, certainly, to be re-recommended. At short notice on a Sunday emergency I called them (as recommended by someone in my street) and they were on my doorstep in Nunhead by the hour ready to fix a sudden leak from my toilet cistern which threatened to flood my home. As well, I mentioned a further ongoing leak problem to my mains loft tank during 'my telephone call out' where an additional 'domestic plumbing problem' was fixed with required parts that needed doing for ages. - And, altogether with ongoing consultation as to what was being done with what required replacement part and final assessment of 'a job well done'.

This "TROLL" has posted all too eagerly. But, because I dissent against 'the general line' I am now seeming to be 'deleted' by person or persons unknown because of my 'vigorous dissenting'. LOL! javascript:editor_tools_handle_smiley()

This "TROLL" has posted all too eagerly. But, because I dissent against 'the general line' I am now seeming to be 'deleted' by person or persons unknown because of my 'vigorous dissenting'. LOL!

For attention of administrator: Please specify for sake of fairness and non-bias "defamatory comments" that caused you to delete certain posts of a third party and, also, of my most recent post which was composed, knowingly, not to insult or defame anyone. Otherwise, this thread leaves itself open to bias as to the Camberwell New Cemetery issue re: 'overspill burial ground/sports field'. The additional issue raised re: illegal dumping in Southwark cemeteries also needs clarifying as to what posts (or what part of a post) was/were deemed defamatory. Otherwise, again, certain bias may be levelled at you the 'administrator' of this thread. If, as you state above "Anyone posting defamatory comments is liable for their comments" then why delete certain posts when onus is, as you say, rests entirely with 'posters for their comments'?

For the sake of a true record on issues I would suggest NO post should be removed. Otherwise, a skewed or unbalanced point of view prevails. Certainly, if offence, insult or libel, etc. is apparent then the 'perpetrator' should be given an opportunity to amend or answer their post. Otherwise, we're into the issue of a one-sided debate just as happened to me on another similar site to this where my post arguing contrarily to the Rec'ers saw my post summarily deleted. Fortunately, I'm glad to say this sensible site didn't feel the same to delete the same post (dated March 13th above) that the other site took offence to where they prefer to manipulate one side of the issue to predominate in print. By-the-by, as a local amateur archivist, I have ongoing digital photo records going back years covering local cemeteries and other areas of South London collected during countless walks. 'Dumping' in the cemeteries going back years was contentiously observable in my record. E.g. Camberwell Old Cemetery (one of the dumping sites) sees in my pictures an obvious example which has, all too late, now been 'noticed'. 'Dumping' in Nunhead is another tricky one. I contended years ago that the open sector near where Moslem burials are rightfully enabled may have been mis-overlaid upon Christian burials plots. Although, this was, oddly, denied by 'certain authorities connected to that cemetery' when observable evidence was (and as far as I am concerned) remains clear. In any case, it was for all to see that 'builders rubble' or inappropriate infill had been used to overlay said area that subsequently had a further thin overlay of 'purer earth' spread to mask bits of brick, electric wiring and other out-of-place cemetery ground covering.

But, don't you see..? I apologise if I came across 'disrespectful'... Cremations (a perfectly respectable way to see ourselves off when our time is due) will allow green space to be preserved that would, otherwise, be used for burials? This is what the controversy is about over the so-called Honor Oak Rec and/or Overspill Burial Site for Camberwell New Cemetery. We can't have it both ways. 'Ground' is required for ongoing interment. Where is that 'ground' to come from if not from existing 'green space'? I, for one, am happy to be cremated if it preserves a playing field that has been commandeered by locals over the years that thought it was free for the taking. If cremation was good enough for my foster mother (RIP) it is good enough for me.

Of course, the answer to satisfy everyone is for no more burials. Instead, cremations should be put into law. One wonders how many who have signed for and wish the Rec to be retained will be content to be cremated when their time comes?

Glance up from your regular respectful visit to a buried loved one in their over crowded Camberwell New Cemetery burial plot. Look beyond the crowded burial plots over and beyond what seems to be a cemetery boundary of cast-iron palings to a boringly expansive grassed area that stretches on and on with no aesthetic demeanour attached to it whatsoever (other than grass and more grass) and you will note that expansive green presently known as ?Honor Oak Rec? is ripe and ready for overspill interments as the green was originally intended. Trouble is that Rec, although intended for the dead, has been commandeered by un-dead dog-poopers and nondescript football players that are unable to kick their way out of a large paper bag. After paying respects to a deceased loved one I peered through cemetery palings only the other day and know it to be true of the flimsy usage of the ground as I have often noted in previous frequent visits. As for pooper-walkers what are they doing when dogs, according to by-law, are disallowed access to designated sporting fields? It does have to be said during my Saturday afternoon cemetery visit I saw the kids play area was fully enjoyed by more in number than were sporadic on ?Camberwell New Cemetery?s Overspill Burial Green?. I am of the opinion the dead are able to make far more use of the disputed Honor Oak disputed green than the living. By all means leave a stretch of football pitch remaining in the burial revamp. After all, British football teams are in desperate need of talent that could still conceivably be spawned in Honor Oak no matter how long it takes and on what size of grass patch the talent we crave may be captured.

Provocative as they purposefully are (to elicit debate, albeit, with a measure of tongue-in-cheek silly poking) my posts elsewhere on a ?Save HOP Recreation Ground!? via 'The community website for Forest Hill and Honor Oak, London SE23' sees me, now, utterly zapped off that site without any recourse to answer insults toward me like I?m a "Troll" or I do it ?just for kicks?. Clearly, different and/or contrary opinion is not welcome with them SE23?s while certain local dictators of the 'Save HOP burial plot/recreation ground campaign' don't want a debate...except so long as it's for a FOR their ?Save HOP [Recreation] ground?. (My brackets seeing as it's legally debatable as to who the ground belongs to whether to SE23 or the rest of Southwark which comprises all sorts of postcodes.)

I have been purposefully provocative. I, certainly, wouldn't want to see useful recreation grounds taken away. I still maintain such grounds tend to be devoid of aesthetics. Peripheral and in-between areas to a pitch, court or childrens' play area most certainly could be softened with planting. Saying bulbs are "silly" e.g. away on far boundaries of a sports field is saying a sports person or other user of that 'Rec' has no sense of that, or cares about that, kind of aesthetic. This is nonsense and insulting to the intelligence of shared users not just sporty types. Unless, of course, there's a determined local ownership to this particular 'Rec' which SE23 is claiming over and above the rest of Southwark which historically 'own' that plot as well as those of SE23. After all, Southwark tax payers as a whole pay for that facility.

Architectural specifications should ALWAYS be mindful of potential to burglary. It goes without saying detached and semi-detached dwellings afford would-be intruders convenient access and entrance around side and to rear of properties. Access gaps between semis need to be secured with bricked-up lockable doorways. Battery operated sensor security lighting is very cheap now that requires no wiring to install.

I disagree...There's more "Dog Crap" in the Council Chambers and in Parliament than on our streets!

I know this 'pathetic plot' very well on account of my frequent visits passing through or by the area during my walks from Peckham via 'the three cemeteries' (Nunhead, Camberwell New and Brockley & Ladywell which takes in One Tree Hill and beyond through to Ladywell Fields. I was gob-smacked that there was 'a friends group' existing for the now disputed Rec seeing as it is, to all intents and purposes, just a boring bit of grass space with no redeemable aesthetic features, (trees, flowers, planting, etc.) that anyone would care about except dog owners using the wide open green space as a daily toilet and grubbing-up ground. Oh! and that little corner called a "Children's Play Area" purposefully fenced off to keep those dangerous toddlers penned-in from attacking the public? Whenever I have viewed that Rec I have noted few using it except "Rover" the rampaging retriever, "Tison" a Scary Pit-Bull and an ever-so irritating "FeFe" a yappy-slappy Chihuahua. I am all in favour of our green spaces being 'saved' if there is something worth saving in terms of a properly managed green oasis. However, a dog romping ground-cum-mutt-toilet facility is hardly worth meowing about. In any case, whether Rec or reclaimed burial ground Lewisham Council will allow, as it always has, full dog rights to pooches and any nondescript canine scruff a romp, play and poop plot in the reclaimed cemetery space that is planned to be clipped off a certain segment of the 'Bonzo Doo Da Dog Land's land. Otherwise, known as Honor Oak Recreation Ground. (Woof! Woof!)