Grok

Youre the only one mentioning colour here. If you can read you will see im saying there are no go zones and it includes east london as elsewhere and police do not routinely go there as therevwould be a riotvevery night of thevweek. That imo is a no go zone. Under cover of the no go zones, as you gather nefarious activities carry on unabated previsely because the police do not go there on a regular patrol basis.and it includes all criminality such as those that would engage in extremist activities. This fact maybe unpallatable to you but so what. Do you really think that you live in a law abiding society with bobbys on every corner stopping every game of knock down ginger before it starts?Did you think it was pure chance and coincidence that hoardes of scummy yoof and gangs appeared out of thin air to roam the streets of london in2011 holding the capital to ransom. No, they had been doingbthis on a regular basis but in smaller doses in such no go areas. The same applys to the criminals that were out on their mopeds etc on halloween, where do you think they pracrice, keep the bikes etc. And yes, have heard it before, know all types of people and know london. I do not live in an ED village bubble. JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Grok Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Prove it wrong then? You cant. Try getting out > the > > pub and actually see whats going on. There sre > no > > go areas everywhere, including southwark. There > > are estates in peckham that police do not > patrol > > and only go there mob handed if called out. But > > youre gonna call that bollocks too huh? Get out > of > > the pub! > > > There's a difference between places where the > police will automatically go in large numbers - > because they know they'll probably need them - and > places where the police are too scared to go in. > > You know full well you were trying to suggest that > parts of East London are totally off limits to > police and white people because they've been > turned into completely Islamic areas. Don't make > out that you weren't. And all you have to back > this up is "have heard before". Not a compelling > argument I would suggest. > > Segregation is a problem in London, but the police > aren't scared to go anywhere; they just make sure > they have the resources they feel they need. > Donald Trump is talking shite, and you aren't that > far behind.

Prove it wrong then? You cant. Try getting out the pub and actually see whats going on. There sre no go areas everywhere, including southwark. There are estates in peckham that police do not patrol and only go there mob handed if called out. But youre gonna call that bollocks too huh? Get out of the pub!

Free Louisa!

Cannot stand the vile man but he is right about no go areas eg areas in east london in tower hamlets, walthamstow etc, have heard before. As he is mega rich he will get what he wants. Be afraid.

I fully and completely understand. I was answering Keane. The OP appears to be threatening violence, and others seem to think that they have no responsibility in keeping clear of dog shit just because it shouldnt be there. Its a bit like crossing a road at a crossing on the green man signal with your eyes closed because cars 'should'not be moving, but sometimes they do so we keep our eyes open. Then i offered practical solutions to avoid shite. What if the dogs owner is elderly and cannot bend down to bag the poo? Its a discussion as you said. Sally81 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Grok I think you're totally missing the point and > I'm not sure why you're bothering to post. If > everyone took your attitude we'd live in a > complete sh*t tip! It should not be there in the > first place and the OP and the rest of us are > simply opening a discussion about what if anything > can be done. The answer is not, as it appears you > think, to just step around it. By that logic we > can all drop our rubbish, fly tip, pee in doorways > etc etc and we'll all just put up with it because, > you know, we can just step over it, close our eyes > to it, ignore it, clean it off ourselves when we > get home. Believe me, I agree there are some real > 'first world problem' type threads on this forum, > and while I also agree this issue of dog mess only > falls into the 'things that are highly annoying > catergory' - it's still a valid enough local issue > to pool thoughts on and find out what, if anything > can be done - other than the 'just ignore it' > approach. > > James, thank you. I will email.

I would simply step over or around it thus avoiding getting it on my shoes. I would then also avoid it with any wheeled object I may be using, and I would instruct or otherwise any offspring to also avoid it. These simple steps then prevent me having to clean if off footwear, items, equipment and children. If this was a regular occurence I would contact the council by phone or email as per their website info, asking for the pavement to be cleaned and to look at what other options may be available. A tad hassley I know, but its not a perfect (first) world. keane Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The post is about dog mess! Maybe grok won't mind > if the dog owners who don't pick up just let their > dogs shit outside his house.

Lieutenant

Caroline

The children! Won't somebody please think of the poor poor children! I wouldn't let my kid run about unsupervised off lead if i could not guarantee it was from mess from dogs, cats, foxes, rsbbits, rats etc. Why just dogs? And is it ok for kids to roll around in urine. I think dog owners should clean up after their dogs. I also think that biking on pavements should not happen. I also think that drivers should not park on yellow lines. But most of all I think people need to take responsibility for themselves and their offspring. Sally81 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Grok you think my 4 year old should have to run > about on the park dodging dog muck do you? > And Growlybear - of course there are many, many > more important things to discuss but this is a > local forum for chatting about local issues that > annoy us. Get it?? How about you pop on to the For > Sale section and pick on someone there, maybe ask > if there are not more important things to do than > selling an old toaster for a fiver? > > Dog mess is a real problem all over East Dulwich > and surrounding areas and I've definitely noticed > it getting worse. There was talk of Dog Licensing > in some (one particular?) areas, again, recently > wasn't there?

So you travelled by train to Victoria without a ticket or permit to travel? Hmmmm lol Lynne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No one staffing East Dulwich this afternoon so > went to Denmark Hill. Ticket office closed there > and ticket machine out of order. (Question- how do > people actually buy tickets?) > Had to go to Victoria just to speak to a human > being.

How about you look where you are going and don't step in it? How about you don't break park rules and ride bikes on grass in the park? How about taking responsibilty for yourselves? Anyway, are not the roads mentioned above in SE15.

Cedges Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I will be spending this evening scraping of my > boots bright orange poo trod on outside Franco > Manca yesterday. > > I'm grossed out and also concerned what someone is > feeding their dog to produce turds of that > colour. > > Bleugh! Are you sure it wasn't posh cheese on toast?! The only reason people think there are more doggy turds than usual is because the leaves have been swept up/blown away. Be careful what you wish for. When you cant see it its not there. Until little Rupert discovers the joy of autumnal leaf diving.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Being as most of the regulars that used to be the > mythical clique no longer post, I'm interested to > hear who "the same old cliquey names" are this > week. Numbers and *Bob* so far, as usual where DF&Lou are concerned. > > Anything can be construed one way or another. Not when Lou has no right of reply in that section it cant.

They're circling again, the same old cliquey names when they think they can smell blood. Having read the thread I also think there is a pattern emerging and so agree with Louwich to that extent. Obviously the poster dislikes Louwich and slags them regularly. The pattern being for example that if the poster alleged that Louwich constantly complained about ED streets and then the poster started threads praising ED streets just to pop/provoke Louwich. Possible. The poster also then publicly calls for banning, and admin responds publicly with a warning to Foxy. Bad form. Poster msy not have called Lous name first but knows Lou is unjustly banned from that section so can be construed as a wind up/dig. I also feel that it is worth bearing in mind that Foxy, as can be seen from his public postings, is a single pensioner living alone in a rapidly changing ED where he has lived for years with previous demographic stability, and he uses the forum a lot, and it is almost Xmas.

Does'nt seem like it, James, with all of what is being reported on EDF? Seems like East Dulwich residents are sitting ducks whilst scummy theives do their xmas shopping on our homes. Are the police not going to even bother to try and catch them?! James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > At the Dulwich Community Council meeting the local > Police Inspector commented on crime levels. > Burglary - very slight rise in reported burglaries > from an incredibly low reported burglary crime > rate. > Please, please, please locks windows and doors as > the few crimes occurring are opportunistic. > They will produce a simple guide as to what we > should expect from the Police and how to engage > them.

Poor Foxy, such a shame. You and Lou are both right. Imo its yet another way the middle classes try and winkle out the long standing residents because they dont like the look of them! Foxy, you didnt get lost on Crystal Palace Rd the other evening, did you? :-) DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There seems to be so much talk of Suspicious > activity .. > > Bloke at the bus stop wearing a big coat and a > hat.. looked really dodgy. > > It was a while back maybe 18 months ago. After a > 4-5 mile walk I went in to the Caf? on Peckham Rye > > for a cup of tea and a almond croissant. Restore > sugar levels. Being diabetic I was testing my > levels after exercise. > > Well there were loads of kids in there and we all > know how small kids often stand and stare at > people.. > > All of a sudden one of the 'Mums' ? shouted.. > 'Come over here darling , come away from the man, > what Have I told you. ' > > I was mortified. > > I have on occasion spoke about caf?s and mums, > buggies & babies.. and not having proper blokes > cafes... > > I feel ostracized looking through the window of > these mummy cafes. I terrified to walk through the > door. > This has led to people suggesting myself as being > anti new businesses. I'm not. > > There just aren't many places in E.D where a > single bloke can go for a cup of tea without being > made to feel uncomfortable. > > DulwichFox

Melbourne Grove practice, just off the lane and great service. Gardens too far away and never get appt.

And this is what Louisa means maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > theboycj Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > We are currently in a 2 bed flat in E Dulwich > and > > have been here for a while > > 26 July 2014 - "HI guys me and my wife are fairly > new to the area," > > F*ck me you don't hang about do you?

As long as they clean up their act and stop all that nasty tumble weave, i don't care.

You asked. Im with jdremy on this one!

> You haven't managed to come up with any examples > of my "constantly" and "always" "slating local > businesses", so perhaps you will have better luck > with some examples of my being "a bully on this > forum" and "stirring it up". Er, top of head: The Lordship under prev management, at every opportunity even before it opened! The 'old' Cherry Tree, constantly and vindictively Jacks, waiting time and cold food Franklins, for bubble & squeak FFS, hardly fine dining, and wrote to the chef! Popping at poor Foxy many times OTT on M. Mcann abduction/murder Often trivial complaints about businesses that dont allow/stopped your screecharound nights.

Kebab fed lamb

Yes, very commendable but why isn't this help offererd to all homeless that pass through ED? Maybe because this person looks like you rather than not?

I think Foxy may have meant a killing machine. I agree with OP, out of respect fireworks should not have been let off but it is individuals choice and so offence shoukd not be taken because others do not share same view. Let the poster that Foxy aimed the comment at take offence if he/she chooses, dont stir the s#+t against Foxy. Far too much 'offence' being banded around willy nilly. 127 people have judt been murdered across the channel, now that is offensive.

Agree. No ones business but the owners. Keep noses out. madger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think you'll find that the many long term > dwellers here who know a bit about the situation > will probably tell you that the woman in question > has no interest in turning her property into > 'prime retail space', doesn't want 'help' and is > quite happy doing what she likes with her own > property... hats off to her. A bit of stubborn > eccentricity, if that's what you want to call it, > or simply just a willingness to live and let live, > as others on this thread have suggested!