JoeLeg

Yeah, and what Otta said. A concise way of putting it.

Look, I can only speak for myself, but I live opposite he cemetery, and when all this started I looked at the plans and read SSW's position on it, and came to the conclusion that if the council is not going to ban all burial within he borough, then they will administer the land as they see fit. Southwark Council are awful, and there's a lot of things to fight them on, and I just don't think this in one of them, particularly when there are still people in the area who desire to be interred locally; as long as the Council is willing to do it (and I'm pretty sure it's only because it's financially viable for them), there isn't a lot to be gained from fighting them. It's an emotive issue on both sides, but ultimately my view is that if burial is to be permitted within the borough then that's what the land just primarily be used for. You want to fight them on this issue? Get something going on the more basic issue of whether there should be burial within Southwark at all. The arguments over trees and veterans graves are distractions to a more fundamental debate which it sounds to me should be the centre of all this. Out another way, I don't think the past and current tactics of SSW are ever going to be effective, because they're fighting a decision that's already happened. Far better to try and influence the future. The actions of Southwark over/around One Tree Hill are a different matter which I'm less convinced about, but I need to look into it more.

fruityloops Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Think you need to go for a walk, to let off some > steam. There used to be a cracking cemetery for > that, just off Underhill Road. Oh it's still there, are you having trouble seeing it? Should've gone to Specsavers. Methinks it might more be yourself that needs a calming walk, suffused as you are with righteous indignation at the idea that Blanche, Lewis and the others should be challenged, or that they might not be entirely correct. As much as I may have disagreed with him on some stuff, I've found Hopone's posts much more informative and useful. I'm not blind to the idea that Southwark Council are a bunch of bar-stewards who will happily ignore their own regulations if it suits them, but the approach of SSW has consistently been one of abusing (literally) anyone who won't fall into line with their dogma. Add to the fact that they really don't seem realistic or balanced in their view of the future of internment, and I find them very hard to get on board with Hopone on the other hand seems to deal in facts, and will debate. I like debate, it means I might learn something, and from him I have. SSW don't do debate.

It winds me up massively when my own kids don't show the flowers respect, and I have to bite my tongue when I see other people - or their children - treating them like a free florist. #Firstworldproblem maybe, but to me it's also a valuable lesson in how beautiful nature can be if left alone to develop naturally, which in a city is pretty rare.

Thank you Burbage/Penguin. Even without the aid of a map that's somewhat clearer. In the absence of a usable map (I accept one may not exist), is it clear that trees were not felled on the LNR? Were they entirely removed from CNC land? Is there a clear delineation between the two?

I'm really not being a keyboard warrior, I'm trying to ask a question. The issue being disagreed over is, as far as I can tell, what part of One Tree Hill is a municipal cemetery. I only asked if there's a map, anywhere, that delineates it, because I can't find one. You choose to be passive aggressive and rude, well that's your choice. I suspect you're the 'keyboard warrior' because I doubt, if I asked you these questions to your face, that you'd have the balls to be so rude, but there you are safe behind your device feeling happy to tell people to study primary school geography. The answer to my question thus seems to be, no, you have no primary source past your own personal opinion, which you are of course entitled. But the view you have taken isn't first hand evidence of how the local authorities have defined the area. I was, and still am, genuinely seeking an answer.

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pay attention this time. If you go into > Camberwell New Cemetery, walk up the *slope* to > the glade, you will find yourself on a hill. Lo, > it is the same hill that has St Augustine's on it. > That is my source - it is easy to replicate and > am inviting you to do so and compare answers. If > you don't know a hill when you are standing on one > then you need to check a different forum, e.g. one > about primary school geography. Pay attention this time: Where is your documented source, that is to say separate from your personal opinion, that defines part of One Tree Hill as a municipal cemetery? Is there a map I can look at, one issued by the council or anyone else, which shows the geographical parameters of One Tree Hill, and the parts of it which are municipal cemetery? I'm not trying to be difficult; I'm simply asking to see primary sources. It's not an unreasonable request.

ed_pete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't know this for sure as I'm not well > travelled but do Asia street food sellers have to > comply with the Health and Safety and have Food > Hygiene training ? Not in years past, but more recently local authorities have been making them all move inside to malls or general community areas, for the purposes of inspection and prevention of disease. Before that they used to spread all over Hanoi, Penang, Bangkok or wherever they were. I would imagine they're subject to about as much inspection as anyone is out there, which may be as much as they pay to avoid, frankly. The fact is that they tend to sell food so quickly that it doesn't have time to spoil. In fact - as much as I can be sure of this - I've never to my knowledge had food poisoning in Asia from street food, only restaurants; my wife told me not to have that crab, and she was right!

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "This is called moving the goalposts." > > Indeed it is. You seem to be redefining a hill. > I care not how you interpret a map (they typically > name such features in a convenient space), local > knowledge has the answer. I suggest you climb the > hill, visit the glade, admire then view and then > tell me which hill you are standing on (AKA Oak of > Honor Hill). Well, if we climb to the top of One Tree Hill then of course we will be on top of One Tree Hill, that's obvious. What I'm asking - again - is if you're able to provide proof that part of One Tree Hill is a municipal cemetary? Is there an official map somewhere? I'm interested to know your sources.

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don't know, hard to be exact. Less than a quarter > I would say. > > With the works proposed, enough to scar the hill. Can you provide an aunthenticated link for that claim? A map, anything? Thanks.

As Foxy says, it's the hot climates of Asia and to a lesser extent Central and South America that gave rise to 'street food' as many envisage it. People want something quick and refreshing, they don't want to sit in a restaurant, they want to eat and go. In its original form it's a reflection of culture as much as needs. The idea of it has been 're-booted' in the west, and it's debatable how good it's been. I'd say the only defining characteristic is that it has to be good. In Asia they just don't tolerate bad food; if it isn't excellent it won't sell, as there's so much competition, and people know what it should tast like. That's partly why so many vendors specialise in just one or two things.

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No it is not. I was up there this morning and > took in the great view from the hill. Anyone who > disputes this would seem to be unfamiliar with the > area! Ok then, how much of One Tree Hill is actually a municipal cemetery?

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Penguin68 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > For any active academic sociologists or > political > > scientists who might be reading this thread > (and > > its predecessor) can I suggest it would make a > > wonderful case study in 'post-truth' politics - > > which predates both the Brexit debate and the > > Trump election and which may suggest that this > is > > a true underlying sea-change in post war > politics. > > All that is missing (I am assuming) is > > interference from Russia (happy to stand > corrected > > on that...!) > > How true and this post is a wonderful example of > post truth: > "One Tree Hill is outside the area which is > earmarked for burial, not being in any municipal > cemetery" > > This is factually incorrect. One Tree Hill is a > geographic feature. I think you may be confusing > this with the Local Nature Reserve. That's some creative interpretation of facts there HopOne. SSW are wilfully misrepresenting the councils actions with regards to exactly where the cutting has taken place.

Those bacon naan's are freaking great. My bosses have a habit of scheduling long morning 'work meetings' at Dishoom; I've been known to go through more than one bacon naan...No idea why they're so good, pretty simple idea (bacon sandwich basically), but the naan bread works really well with it. Can't imagine they'd come to ED, but I'd be a regular. The black lentil daal is pretty mental too.

So what you mean, Louisa, is that a concept exists, and some examples are good, some are bad, and some are somewhere in between. Sort of like everything else in the restaurant world? And like a lot of things in the restaurant world, it's highly subjective. One persons authentic Nasi Goreng is another persons underwhelming pile of rice.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The death of plates in restaurants as a result of > street food rubbish is one reason I don't like > eatin out much anymore. Garlic bread served on a > old wheel trim isn't my > Idea of appetising. > > Louisa. Yeah, the Harvesters and Aberdeen Angus Steakhouses you rate so highly really have lost the plot lately.

This has now passed into the realm of the laughable. So Blanche and Lewis - presumably thinking this will be their ticket onto a Newsnight interview or Panorama expose where they show the evil powers-that-be just who they've messed with - get a bit of national press coverage that turns out to be remarkably balanced and points out that all interested bodies have followed the law. Crying racism hasn't worked, the war graves commission already disagrees with them, and now Blanche has lost track of where exactly One Tree Hill is. Plus the headlines she's linked to are articles which, um, don't back up their case. Blanche, did you actually read them? That protest on Saturday wasn't exactly powerful either. Anyway, do carry on kids. I'm now enjoying laughing at you make fools of yourselves.

Oooooooh...reall good authentic rustic Vietnamese. Yes please! Though I'm a fan of Urban Orient in Crystal Palace. Cheap and cheerful, and really tasty.

So SSW finally get some national press coverage, and....shock horror....it provides unbiased reporting which makes it look like the council simply did its job, and that other bodies involved think the law needs to be clarified to essentially enable councils to do this kind of thing. And SSW look like a bunch of nimbys? Or am I reading that wrong!

Things change, times change, areas change. My mum moved into East Dulwich in the 1960's, and she's been here ever since. For a long time she expressed amazement that Peckham never picked up on what these days we call gentrification. But it's finally arrived. Money talks. I'd agree that it's a form of social cleansing, one that's been going on at various times over the decades and has affected all ethnic groups. Soho? Spitalfields? The East End? Portobello? Even places like Bromley and Orpington are seeing changes. Maybe there should be a law against it, but there isn't. And there never was. I'm sad to see Peckham go the way it is, but I think it's now inevitable.

This is very true. It's all in the mid-terms. If the Dem's do well, Trump is finished; the GOP will have a quiet word with him. If they fail, and the Republicans still hold the House and Senate, they'll keep him for another term. They don't have any qualms about pulling the rug out from under Trump is they think he's threatening their future chances. But nor do they mind tolerating him so long as they get what they want. He's keeping the seat warm for Pence, one way or another. The GOP see him as an anomaly, a lesson to be learned for the future.

I imagine they'd have purchased the freehold if they could've, but didn't James Barber say in an earlier post that the landlord chose to go with PH? Unless the price for freehold purchase was so unreal as to make it not worth it. I imagine that a landlord dealing with someone like Cineworld would've happily agreed to a very long lease with no break clause, as it guarantees income for them unless the whole company goes belly up.

To be honest I'm no clearer on your position re: LLW than I was before. But asked and answered so fair enough. I do though think it's a bit rich to lecture others on social justice when you're not bothered whether people are paid LLW. By saying that you can visit Plex and eat at MacD's a person is reinforcing support for a world that embraces minimum wage and zero-hours contracts. Now I suspect that isn't a world that you want to see, but you accept a certain amount of 'realpolitik' where this is concerned. However, I'm just not sure you can level 'social justice' at others if you aren't practising what you preach. Could be wrong though...

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are people on this thread rendal, who openly > talk about patronising this establishment, and yet > on other threads like to wear the 'ethical hat'. > I'm not making it up to suit my argument, it's > true. I just find it painful to listen to certain > people praising this cinema on the one hand, then > talking about how they care about workers rights > on other threads. You can't be a socialist when it > suits, if you care about social justice then it > should be in every thread of your being, not just > when the moment is right. > > Louisa. I'm confused (not unusual for me)... Do you support things like LLW? Are you saying that you aren't a hypocrite for visiting Plex, MacDonalds and Harvester? Because for sure they don't pay it. I don't mind if you don't, it's your money and your conscience. I'm (honestly) just trying to work out where you stand on this issue.

Hey Blanche, This new tactic you're trying with soldiers graves - take it over to ARRSE and see how much support you get! I'm only one ex-soldier, who thinks you can sod off with that tactic. But go and ask some more. If you're so keen to play the military card maybe see if you can get some military types on board? Otherwise maybe stop thinking you speak for the military.