Jenijenjen

So just to be clear anything I post that is not in accordance with your views is gaslighting. Thanks for that.

The language you use certainly is that of describing an enemy. I haven't put any words in your mouth, just reacted to the words you've posted on this forum. As Waseley has implied, someone having opposing views to yourself is not gaslighting nor is it trolling, that other social media term frequently misused. ETA: Is accusing someone of gaslighting when in fact they're not gaslighting at all a form of gaslighting in itself ?

Heartblock: You see anyone who is pro LTN as your enemy so don't be surprised if this cuts both ways. Your constant wild accusations that everyone who is pro LTN lives in one of the closed roads and are in favour of them for their own selfish reasons is just plain wrong, frankly antagonistic, not backed up by any kind of evidence and has the effect of increasing support for the LTNs. Well done.

In my mind, ?The Lane? implies a not too dissimilar street to Lordship Lane in Ealing. Despite nearly 40 years living here now, can never get my head around LL as ?The Lane.?

Just saw Megan?s are attempting a rebrand of Lordship Lane with a sign they?ve installed saying ?Megan?s on the Lordship?. Hilarious.

The answer to your question is yes

Have you tried Shannon?s on Stansted Road? I was there last weekend and there was a large selection of plants though I couldn?t say for tomatoes specifically. Anyway, worth a trip. Or perhaps you could go the Internet route?

The word desperate might be more appropriate than brazen

Every candidate in every election, National and local, campaigns using their opposition?s weak and unpopular points so nothing new here. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No one really knows why anyone else voted the way > that they did. But Labour certainly campaigned on > an anti- Tory platform rather than a pro-Labour > one - at least in the campaign literature I > received - so presumably they themselves saw the > potential in anti-Tory votes. It maybe makes it a > bit harder for them to claim a clear mandate for > some of their more controversial policies - but > that doesn?t really matter given they?re in charge > for four more years and no one can stop them, I > guess!

ab29 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Poor Londn. I wish people voted on local issues > rather than trying to punish tories. They did vote on local issues. There are many more local issues than LTNs

Despite what the pundits are saying, it?s wrong to think Labour has won locally because voters are angry with the central Tory government. Most who voted Labour did so simply because they prefer to live in an area with a Labour administration with Labour policies.

Admin made the first post on this thread saying ?The old thread [www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk] has been closed as it was getting too personal, too vindictive, too "wrong". Please keep this thread on topic.? Seems to me like they gave a reason

Have you checked your schedule of payments? You can do this online if you have an account on the Southwark Council website. I was a little late setting up a DD and now see that my first payment will be taken in May, each monthly payment increased to reflect the payments will be taken over 9 months now instead of 10.

I?m a fan of Pret and looking forward to the local one opening. Whether one prefers Pret or an independent is a matter of personal preference and Pret opening widens the choice. I actually prefer the friendly indifference of most Pret staff and the more spacious premises than the often cramped and smaller independent spaces.

Anyway, despite Rockets sensationalism and exaggeration, Southwark Council have confirmed they have not provided any facilities or equipment https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/id-like-to-see-them-take-over-the-whole-park-locals-react-to-peckhams-extinction-rebellion-encampment/

I?m happy for my council tax to pay for these portaloos as well if in fact they are being paid for by the council. I haven?t seen any confirmation this is actually the case, only assumptions. I?m far happier my council tax is used for that purpose than on legal fees to prevent the campsite or my taxes on the police clearing it.

Well, The Times would say that, wouldn?t it

"For goodness sake even the Green party says it is counter productive" As Waseley has pointed out, this is not a true reflection of Caroline Lucas' views quoted in the BBC article. The following are extracts from the article where she is directly quoted: "I am sorry that it has come to this and that this is the only way that people feel they can make their voices heard." ... "Personally for example, if you are going to try and stop Tube trains moving around I think that is counterproductive. "I think that being on the streets of London has been shown to be a way of capturing people's imaginations. "People have joined those protests who have never protested before. They are doing it because they know we have to leave new fossil fuels in the ground. "The International Energy Agency says that, the latest IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report says that, and yet this government and this energy strategy... is foreseeing getting out even more oil and gas from the North Sea, that is frankly immoral and the UN general secretary said that is frankly both morally and economically mad." Note she only believes attempting to stop tube trains is counter productive.

The council has been accused of SO many things that anything more is likely to be water off a duck?s back. The Council?s letter states ?XR has given a number of assurances in relation to noise, behaviour and leaving the park as they find it? and at this stage we really can?t prejudge the outcome. Would a formal agreement really make any difference?

This year, due to flood alleviation works, Gala Festival will be taking place on the Common north of the cafe. The Common was purchased by the Camberwell Vestry when the Lord of the Manor threatened to sell it for building. This ownership has passed to Southwark Council over the different forms of local government. I for one am very grateful the Vestry took this action, imagine the Common built over with tiny houses. However, after this purchase took place ancient common rights no longer applied. For clarity this sets out the rights on common land from the Government website https://www.gov.uk/common-land-village-greens. "You cannot: camp on common land without the owner?s permission light a fire or have a barbecue hold a festival or other event without permission drive across it without permission unless you have the right to access your property" Southwark are in effect turning a blind eye which in my opinion is the right thing to do. The campsite is taking up a very small space on the Rye and I don't see how it can impede residents' enjoyment of the common.

A large reason why women were denied the vote for so long was Asquith, Liberal Prime Minister 1908 to 1916 was set against it as he reasoned that the women who would initially be awarded the vote, would be from the middle classes and more likely to vote Tory. Suffragettes gained a lot of sympathy through their actions not least for the cruel practice of force feeding and the horrifying health conditions that could result and the mental cruelty of the Cat and Mouse Act. So no, it wasn?t a case of the suffragists playing ball during WWI being given the vote as a reward though it was a huge opportunity for women to show how capable they are. I?m not sure the Court of Public Opinion are against X R, posts on this thread show otherwise.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rockets Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If it is authorised then the council needs to > > explain why; XR are not a group they should be > > supporting or encouraging. > > Why, exactly? > > This is the most important issue of our time, and > so far as I can see the vast majority of people > are just hoping it will go away. > > We are actually on the brink of extinction, with a > very tiny window of opportunity left to do > something about it. > > The climate scientists' pleas are relegated to the > parts of the online news that nobody looks at. > > We should be grateful to XR for actually doing > something to make people realise what's going on, > instead of burying their heads in the sand. > > If I was younger and in better health, I would > join them. Well said Sue. The EDF demographic has really changed with people living in DV commenting negatively on events in ED. Bring back Louisa.

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jenijenjen Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Whoosh > > > I assume that's the sound of a packed bus passing > you at a stop 😉 Not possible because traffic has been so slowed down by the LTNs that it wouldn't be able to get up enough speed to make a whooshing sound.

Whoosh

Oh Waseley, you haven't been paying attention. It's all the Labour Southwark Council's fault and the Labour London Mayor's fault, any other point of view has become heresy on the Forum.