New opportunity to save the woods!! Deadline Friday 23rd

[Sue]

edborders Wrote:

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

>

> https://twitter.com/SouthwarkWoods/status/69125837

> 9617071104/photo/1 This morning, this child's

> headstone has been removed.

>

Last time you posted on this forum about the removal of something stone from a grave - in that case, a statue which you unilaterally decided was called "The Angel Of Southwark" - you claimed that the council had "ripped" it down in order to destroy it.

It turned out that the council had removed it in order to restore it.

In this case, the ground is probably wet/waterlogged because - it has been raining.

And as penguin68 has said above, graves are driven over every time mowers mow the grass.

What is your point, exactly?

I'm not sure quite what you are hoping to gain by continuing to post your increasingly hysterical posts on here?

[henryb]

> You have proposed Kemnal Park cemetery in Bexley

> as an alternative. It's about a 90 min trip each

> way by public transport from ED. Add in the time

> spent in the cemetery, that would be about a four

> hour trip just to put flowers on a grave.

I think that the fact it takes 90 min to travel 5/6 miles on public transport maybe more of the issue there. The solution to bad public transport is better public transport - not chopping down trees.

It is a 20 min train from Peckham Rye to Eltham and the Cemetery Manager at Kemnal Park said he would be willing to put on a free shuttle service to the station if there was demand.

Tower Hamlets have decided it is reasonable for people to travel to here for burials and the most of their residents would be even further away.

I think you said earlier that is it about choice. Well why not give people the choice? Subsidize the out of borough burial at the same rate they are subsidizing in borough burials. Let people decide themselves. I think for many in the borough the distance would not be prohibitive and they might appreciate the lower cost.

[Otta]

I imagine that all the other members of Save the imaginary Woods are wishing Lewis would give it a rest. Talk about single handedly destroying any goodwill a campaign may have had.

I'm sure you're a good person Lewis, and it's laudable that you care so much for the tress. But the stuff you're typing is largely emotive nonsense which will serve only to turn people against you.

[Penguin68]

Lewis Schaffer has chosen to PM me as follows:-

Do you work for the council or one of the contractors? I think you should state that you are not a disinterested party if that is the case. Do you have an interested in keep burial going in the cemeteries?

Lewis Schaffer

Nunhead, Save Southwark Woods

For clarity - I have never worked for any council or building contractor. I have no interest (in the sense of partiality) for cemetery burial - indeed my personal preference would to chose not to be buried - I would prefer cost free corpse disposal, for me, as part of the normal refuse collection service. I do have an interest in the truth, in open dealing, in an absence of unnecessary hyperbole. I have lived very close to COC for close to 30 years and greatly enjoy its amenity, as a working cemetery, and wish it to continue as such. I find it offensive if, even privately, it is assumed that the only opposition to this pressure group is from those taking benefit from the council's policy. I do not normally disclose PMs (for obvious reasons) but this PM has insulted me.

[edborders]

Southwark Council has told us through twitter they don't need permission from the church to do "groundworks" in the cemetery - groundworks mean cutting down trees and putting in roads etc. So works are going ahead.

This is the first we heard of this.

The church hasn't told us that. And neither has the Council up until now. We have called the Church to for confirmation. It might be true. I might not be true.

People lie to you then laugh at you cause you believed them.

Lewis Schaffer

Cutting down trees for graves in 2016? Are you kidding?

[Sue]

edborders Wrote:

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

>

> People lie to you then laugh at you cause you

> believed them.

>

Who has lied to you, exactly?

ETA: And who has "laughed at you cause you believed them"?

How exactly have they laughed at you?

.

[Penguin68]

The church hasn't told us that. And neither has the Council up until now. We have called the Church to for confirmation. It might be true. I might not be true.

The Church is involved only when public burials are dug-up. It does not have to give permission for normal maintenance and ground works. If public graves are disturbed (i.e. bodies disinterred) that is an offence without church permission.

Where Private burials are concerned, this is covered by Section 74 of the 2007 London Local Authorities Act, and assumes that private rights have been cancelled under section 9 of the Greater London (General Powers) Act of 1976. No burial disturbed may be less than 75 years old, the act requires 'lift and deepen', where bodies already interred will then be buried under new interments.

What you are describing as happening would not in fact be covered by constraints as described for either Public or Private burials. It is normal (if much neglected) cemetery maintenance. It would be better to ensure contractors were meeting those requirements than failing to understand the actual legal position.

[Loz]

henryb Wrote:

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

> > You have proposed Kemnal Park cemetery in Bexley

> > as an alternative. It's about a 90 min trip each

> > way by public transport from ED. Add in the time

> > spent in the cemetery, that would be about a four

> > hour trip just to put flowers on a grave.

>

> I think that the fact it takes 90 min to travel

> 5/6 miles on public transport maybe more of the

> issue there. The solution to bad public transport

> is better public transport - not chopping down

> trees.

>

> It is a 20 min train from Peckham Rye to Eltham

> and the Cemetery Manager at Kemnal Park said he

> would be willing to put on a free shuttle service

> to the station if there was demand.

and

> I think you said earlier that is it about choice. Well why not give people the choice?

> Subsidize the out of borough burial at the same rate they are subsidizing in borough

> burials. Let people decide themselves. I think for many in the borough the distance

> would not be prohibitive and they might appreciate the lower cost.

So your solutions to the travel problem don't actually exist. That's a bit like saying if all the pensioners had jetpacks it would be 10 minutes at the most. ED to Kemnal Park is a nightmare journey - all the wishes and hopes in the world won't change that.

And talking about 'choice' is all well and good, but the SSW campaign is all about removing that choice. I'd be all for renewing the cemeteries AND cross subsidising out-of-borough burials. That seems quite a good solution. But that's not what the SSW people are proposing, is it? They want to stop people having that choice.

[edborders]

Southwark Council

"@SouthwarkWoods The preparatory works falls outside the remit of the Diocese of Southwark ow.ly/XuTjG"

Southwark Diocese today

"the Consistory Court has not granted permission for any works to take place, as due process with respect to those who have objected must first be undertaken."

Lewis Schaffer

I am against cutting down trees and digging up graves for more grave space.

[Sue]

The council appears to be making a distinction between preparatory work and other work.

So I'm still not clear who you say has lied to you and laughed at you?

[nununoolio]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> The council doesn't need Church permission to do

> its job of cemetery maintenance, nor to remove

> So it will only be 'driving over the

> bodies of children' in the sense that it is

> driving over the ground 6ft or so under which

> children are buried (which is what their mowers do

> many times a year).

Actually, they don't drive mowers over the graves as the ground is uneven and cluttered with half buried monuments/headstones etc..... Pretty sure all of the grass cutting is done with strimmers.

[edborders]

Today 7:30 EMERGENCY MEETING TO SAVE TREES AND HERITAGE in Camberwell Old and New Cemeteries.

Council workers on site AS YOU READ THIS, about to remove undergrowth and cut down trees to mound over 48,000 pauper's graves. It is your history and and your beauty that will be lost. Join us.

THE HERNE TAVERN

Forest Hill Road

7:30PM Tuesday 26 January 2016

Lewis Schaffer

New Yorker, Nunheader, 07886504221 Call me.

[robbin]

No thanks, Lewis.

[Sue]

Lewis, I've asked you twice now and you haven't replied either time.

So I'll try for a third time.

Who has lied to you?

Who has laughed at you?

If in fact nobody from either the council or the church has lied to you or laughed at you, do you not think you should apologise for writing in a post above that they have?

[nxjen]

Perhaps he's referring to the SSW campaigners

[Otta]

Lewis can't respond right now. He's currently chained to a tree in a cemetary, singing Bob Dylan songs.

[Sue]

Otta Wrote:

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

> Lewis can't respond right now. He's currently

> chained to a tree in a cemetary, singing Bob Dylan

> songs.

And he's changed the title of "Blowing in the Wind" to "Whistling in the Wind" :))

[dbboy]

and getting more and more frustrated, annoyed and probably cold and very wet, if his twitter feed is anything to go by, that neither the Church, council officers, councillors or MP's are taking any notice whatsoever.

[Otta]

WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE (long dead) CHILDREN!?!?

[Loz]

Sue Wrote:

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

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Lewis can't respond right now. He's currently

> > chained to a tree in a cemetary, singing Bob Dylan

> > songs.

>

> And he's changed the title of "Blowing in the

> Wind" to "Whistling in the Wind" :))

More likely he he's changed it to "Pissing in the Wind". >:D<

[Penguin68]

It is your history and and your beauty that will be lost. Join us.

And yet he specifically wants us to lose the option of future history by wanting to ban future burials. After 75 years, the needs of the present trump the memories (almost certainly no longer with living people) of the past. And the overgrown scrubland, with shattered graves and the residues of fly-tipping, is not everyone's idea of beauty (granted there are those that think than anything living and growing, apart from people, is beautiful).

[Sue]

His time would be better spent working to save endangered species - like the stag beetles which may hopefully take up residence in the logs to be "tossed" by the council into the adjoining nature reserve.

Let's hope the "tossing" doesn't crush any of them.

Very tempted to use the "tossing" word again but slightly changing the ending, but I'm uncharacteristically resisting. Hard :))

[dbboy]

er

[Sue]

Yeh, that was the one :))

ETA: What happened to missylewie, btw??

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1625565

ETA: I hope she wasn't a bona fide first time poster and got frightened off :(

[Otta]

Sue Wrote:

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

> Very tempted to use the "tossing" word again but

> slightly changing the ending, but I'm

> uncharacteristically resisting. Hard :))

FILTH!!!!!!!!!