Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Lambeth Labour's plan to demolish Cressingham Gardens & build luxury flats around Brockwell Park

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
Thanks. The latest comment on the dissenter is full of prejudice against people with mental health issues.

As someone who has had mental health issues I think this is bigoted and nasty.

I've just posted up about the recent post.

It just confirms what I posted up previously in post 1372.

Stand Up to Lambeth aren't coming well out of this.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
So Stand Up to Lambeth = prejudice against people with mental health issues.

And Lambeth Council are supposed to be the worst.

I give up.
 

brixtonblade

Well-Known Member
So Stand Up to Lambeth = prejudice against people with mental health issues.

And Lambeth Council are supposed to be the worst.

I give up.
I don't think that's fair... SUTL have done lots of good work and it's not fair to categorise them like that because of that comment
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
I don't think that's fair... SUTL have done lots of good work and it's not fair to categorise them like that because of that comment
I await them to comment on the article to disown the recent comments in that case.

I've been following the post article discussion. its unpleasant and nasty.

I've been attacked. Its why I've left it alone. I haven't got the energy for it.

I'm sympathetic but losing that in the way they have behaved out the Buzz comment section.

I've been questioned. Like why should I have to justify myself? Stand Up to Lambeth have no idea of what I've been through. And I don't feel like justifiying myself to them.

And I don't think the intervention on mental health was an accident.

Its shit.

I stick up for my friends. And I think my friend has been treated very badly by so called community organisation.
 
Last edited:

brixtonblade

Well-Known Member
I await them to comment on the article to disown the recent comments in that case.

I've been following the post article discussion. its unpleasant and nasty.

I've been attacked. Its why I've left it alone. I haven't got the energy for it.

I'm sympathetic but losing that in the way they have behaved out the Buzz comment section.

I've been questioned. Like why should I have to justify myself? The Jokers of Stand Up to Lambeth have no idea of what I've been through. And I don't feel like justifiying myself to them.

And I don't think the intervention on mental health was an accident.

Its shit.

I stick up for my friends. And I think my friend has been treated very badly by so called community organisation.
The point I'm making is that 2 or 3 people in that comment thread don't represent SUTL

The event was very informative and had a really useful discussion

SUTL have organised and supported demos and campaigns on lots of really important local issues

People getting pissy on the internet shouldnt undermine that
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
The point I'm making is that 2 or 3 people in that comment thread don't represent SUTL

The event was very informative and had a really useful discussion

SUTL have organised and supported demos and campaigns on lots of really important local issues

People getting pissy on the internet shouldnt undermine that
I beg to differ.

The people posting up made clear they are leading lights in SUTL.

A lot of people like me who can't make meeitings due to work depend on internet.

That is the norm now.

When I engage with SUTL on the article I get load of shit. Like my mate, a commited community activist. Apparently the wrong kind.

Once he gets criticised they get there mates in to have a go.

Using mental health is hate speech. IMO

We live our lives on the internet more now. Its not to be dismissed as just pissy.
 

brixtonblade

Well-Known Member
I beg to differ.

The people posting up made clear they are leading lights in SUTL.

A lot of people like me who can't make meeitings due to work depend on internet.

That is the norm now.

When I engage with SUTL on the article I get load of shit. Like my mate, a commited community activist. Apparently the wrong kind.

Once he gets criticised they get there mates in to have a go.

Using mental health is hate speech. IMO

We live our lives on the internet more now. Its not to be dismissed as just pissy.
That's all fair

I don't think that thread is a fair representation of what SUTL are about but I understand why you've drawn your conclusion if it's all you've seen of them (or at least people posting in their favour)
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
This is interesting but its not the point I was making.

When my friend who atttedend the meeting posted up on the comment section of the Brixton Buzz article he was attacked and vilified.

Accused of being corrupt. The same as Labour Cllrs.

The thrust of it was that it you aren't for us your against us.
The thrust of it was that David was the person who launched the first attack, with what was a rather skewed interpretation of what happened at the event. He then doubled down on his fantasy version, and pretty much ignored what happened, and was recorded to have happened.

When I come in to defend my mate, who has track record of supporting the community, I get questioned.
Track records are meaningless, except how they mark your friend out to you. Most of our awesomely-awful Labour twats have supported their wards. That doesn't vaccinate them against criticism for acting like an arse.
I'd also say that you're being a hypocrite. You're supporting one person with a track record for supporting his local community, and vilifying another on the basis of the party he's a member of, not on the basis of his track record of supporting his local community.


I say I'm a Council tenant. So get asked what kind.

I haven't got the energy to deal with this.

I'm apparently under suspicion for being the wrong kind of Council tenant.

I've seen this before in community issues. Council are supposed to be the main enemy. But if one doesn't tow the line one is treated by community activists in just the same way as Council treat dissenters.

I'm not happy or gloating about this. Reading the comments at end of the Brixton Buzz piece its classic case of how committed community activists can end up treating dissenting individuals in the same way as Council.

I can take it from that Tory Briggs. Tories are cunts. So that is whats expected.

Demolition – is your estate next? Local councillors, housing activists, researchers and journalists discuss Lambeth policy
David didn't dissent, he chucked out an interpretation of events that didn't accord with reality.
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
The Tory accused me of :

"ideologically driven assumptions"
You judged his work as a cllr via his membership of a political party, so I can see where he's coming from. As far as he's concerned, you're just another leftie accusing him of being a reincarnation of Thatcher.
As I've stated elsewhere, while he's a Tory, he's also been helpful to anti-regen campaigners. He's put himself out when he didn't have to, and we - SUtL - wanted him on the panel because his perspective differs from ours, same as the Lib Dem panellist. We wanted a broad spread of opinion, not a "Lambeth Housing Activists" echo-chamber. As it is, we got some good information from Briggs about the HfL "business plan" that I was able to feed in to a meeting with Lambeth council officers the week after.
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
I've just read the latest comments on that page - tried to comment too but not sure it submitted properly. A couple of the comments definitely overstep the mark and the "Maudsley" one is bang out of line. Urban looks positively easy going in comparison.
I haven't got a clue who the person who made the Maudsley comment is, but - as someone who's used their services recently - I just took it as a more sniffy version of "fuck off, you nutter". Unpleasant, but nothing people haven't heard before.
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
So Stand Up to Lambeth = prejudice against people with mental health issues.
Frankly, fuck off with tarring an entire group with the same brush, and your crass assumption that none of us have, or have had mental health issues. I person who isn't connected with SUtL makes a comment you don't agree with, and all of a sudden we're all cunts?

Do one.
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
I beg to differ.

The people posting up made clear they are leading lights in SUTL.

A lot of people like me who can't make meeitings due to work depend on internet.

That is the norm now.

When I engage with SUTL on the article I get load of shit. Like my mate, a commited community activist. Apparently the wrong kind.

Once he gets criticised they get there mates in to have a go.

Using mental health is hate speech. IMO

We live our lives on the internet more now. Its not to be dismissed as just pissy.
"Leading lights"? SUtL is a collective. brixtonblade is a member, as am I, as is Hurst&Meath. There are no leaders, because it makes it easier to control power-plays by people like the Momentum and LHA people who attended meetings and tried to make OUR thing - standing up to Lambeth Council - into their thing - supporting Jeremy Corbyn and/or the Labour Party.

Hate speech - hate speech depends, in the legal sense, on me calling you in a derogatory manner a "nutter" because I know you're a "nutter", weaponising my knowledge of your mental health status. Telling someone you don't know (as presumably H&M doesn't personally know CH1) to go to the local psych ward and get their meds checked isn't hate speech, it's an insult - hurtful/unkind/plain nasty to be sure, but not "hate speech", even by the perverse standards the police and CPS impose.

I shouldn't have to be saying this stuff to you. You usually think things through.
 

editor

hiraethified
To be honest, I don't think many people are coming out too well from that Buzz discussion, which is a shame because you're all - more or less - on the same side.
 

brixtonblade

Well-Known Member
"Leading lights"? SUtL is a collective. brixtonblade is a member, as am I, as is Hurst&Meath. There are no leaders, because it makes it easier to control power-plays by people like the Momentum and LHA people who attended meetings and tried to make OUR thing - standing up to Lambeth Council - into their thing - supporting Jeremy Corbyn and/or the Labour Party.

Hate speech - hate speech depends, in the legal sense, on me calling you in a derogatory manner a "nutter" because I know you're a "nutter", weaponising my knowledge of your mental health status. Telling someone you don't know (as presumably H&M doesn't personally know CH1) to go to the local psych ward and get their meds checked isn't hate speech, it's an insult - hurtful/unkind/plain nasty to be sure, but not "hate speech", even by the perverse standards the police and CPS impose.

I shouldn't have to be saying this stuff to you. You usually think things through.
I think you're being too lenient. I now there's loads of bullshit all over the internet but that doesnt mean that "go to the maudsley" is any kind of acceptable comment for someone purporting to be fighting on behalf of the Lambeth community. The think I like about SUTL is that its got a wide range of voices and that it's about making a difference... it is diminshed by "with us or against us" posts like on that thread and even more so when they start making unpleasant coments about mental health.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
"Leading lights"? SUtL is a collective. brixtonblade is a member, as am I, as is Hurst&Meath. There are no leaders, because it makes it easier to control power-plays by people like the Momentum and LHA people who attended meetings and tried to make OUR thing - standing up to Lambeth Council - into their thing - supporting Jeremy Corbyn and/or the Labour Party.

Hate speech - hate speech depends, in the legal sense, on me calling you in a derogatory manner a "nutter" because I know you're a "nutter", weaponising my knowledge of your mental health status. Telling someone you don't know (as presumably H&M doesn't personally know CH1) to go to the local psych ward and get their meds checked isn't hate speech, it's an insult - hurtful/unkind/plain nasty to be sure, but not "hate speech", even by the perverse standards the police and CPS impose.

I shouldn't have to be saying this stuff to you. You usually think things through.
Without going into details the remark about going to Maudsley was weaponised.

It was to obviously done by someone who knows that person's background.

So under your definition it was weaponised.

Totally unacceptable imo way to argue.

And If insults are directed at a person like saying go to Maudsley to have meds checked are actually directed at a person who has had mental health issues the defence that one didn't know doesn't apply.
 
Last edited:

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
Without going into details the remark about going to Maudsley was weaponised.

It was to obviously done by someone who knows that person's background.
Except that I'm stating categorically that it wasn't. I'm aware that the person knows of David, but only insofar as he's a person known around Brixton as a character and a former Lib Dem councillor.

So under your definition it was weaponised.

I was clear reference to the person's circumstances.The circumstances Im aware of.
You've decided that it was a clear reference, so that's that, isn't it? You're not going to listen to anyone contradicting what you've decided to be holy writ.

Totally unacceptable imo way to argue.
Maybe, but is blindly supporting a mate any better?
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
Except that I'm stating categorically that it wasn't. I'm aware that the person knows of David, but only insofar as he's a person known around Brixton as a character and a former Lib Dem councillor.



You've decided that it was a clear reference, so that's that, isn't it? You're not going to listen to anyone contradicting what you've decided to be holy writ.



Maybe, but is blindly supporting a mate any better?
It was obvious to me by the way the comment was written that it was a clear reference.
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
I think you're being too lenient. I now there's loads of bullshit all over the internet but that doesnt mean that "go to the maudsley" is any kind of acceptable comment for someone purporting to be fighting on behalf of the Lambeth community. The think I like about SUTL is that its got a wide range of voices and that it's about making a difference... it is diminshed by "with us or against us" posts like on that thread and even more so when they start making unpleasant coments about mental health.
Someone came along and spouted a version of events that's contrary to what happened (see the allegations about Lisa McKenzie, for example). That was the trigger for all of it - a version that didn't accord with the recorded footage of the event, but did accord to David Warner's preferences and prejudices. I can see why that was taken as provocation, because frankly - as I stated straight away on that Buzz comment section - I thought they must have been at a different event than me. I explained in a reasonable manner what had actually happened, but got no explanation from him as to why his version differed from what I witnessed. In such a case, I can see why someone might take a "with us or against us" position, especially given SUtL's previous experience with members of Momentum, Unite etc trying to rubbish us after we cunted them off.

As for the mental health comment, I've explained my position. I can't speak for whoever this Thorpe character is.
 

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
It was obvious to me by the way the comment was written that it was a clear reference.
Like I said - although I shouldn't have bothered - you've already decided it is. Nothing is going to convince you otherwise, so of course it's "obvious" to you.
 

brixtonblade

Well-Known Member
Someone came along and spouted a version of events that's contrary to what happened (see the allegations about Lisa McKenzie, for example). That was the trigger for all of it - a version that didn't accord with the recorded footage of the event, but did accord to David Warner's preferences and prejudices. I can see why that was taken as provocation, because frankly - as I stated straight away on that Buzz comment section - I thought they must have been at a different event than me. I explained in a reasonable manner what had actually happened, but got no explanation from him as to why his version differed from what I witnessed. In such a case, I can see why someone might take a "with us or against us" position, especially given SUtL's previous experience with members of Momentum, Unite etc trying to rubbish us after we cunted them off.

As for the mental health comment, I've explained my position. I can't speak for whoever this Thorpe character is.
Actually you're right... "with us or against us" isn't the problem here, its the shitty mental health comments which I find offensive with or without any reference to any given individuals MH situation
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
Ive just seen the abusive comment by Lisa McKenzie, who is a leading academic. Surprised that an academic can refer to someone as a "Bitch".

To make it clear I myself have been up against it with Council officers in Regen and Labour Cllrs. So am well aware what can happen if one goes against them.

I also support Council housing. I think the New Labour project was anti Council housing.

I don't need an academic to tell me this. I don't have a PhD or lecture in prestigious intstitutions. So can't refer to people as "bitches" and tell them to refer to me as "Dr"

I think this New Labour Council so called Regeneration plans for Council housing should be halted.
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
Is there a video yet of what actually happened at this event, so folk can judge for themselves?

While I don't agree with Gramsci that someone should be shut out of helping a group's aims just because they are a tory - I agree with him about the vindictive and unnecessary comments on that buzz thread. If I was a member of a residents association I wouldn't be happy with someone saying that stuff in my name. I guess the comments there aren't moderated as there's a whole load of what's clearly personal abuse which supposedly isn't even acceptable on U75.
 

bunnyr

New Member
Is there a video yet of what actually happened at this event, so folk can judge for themselves?

While I don't agree with Gramsci that someone should be shut out of helping a group's aims just because they are a tory - I agree with him about the vindictive and unnecessary comments on that buzz thread. If I was a member of a residents association I wouldn't be happy with someone saying that stuff in my name. I guess the comments there aren't moderated as there's a whole load of what's clearly personal abuse which supposedly isn't even acceptable on U75.
 

bunnyr

New Member
Errrrr, just one moment. I note the fake 'Selective Outrage' here, have you all failed to see the endless abuse from David Warner, or does that not matter?

David Warner went on the attack immediately and was very personal indeed, even going as far to accuse me (Daniel Fitzgerald) of racism just because I challenged a councillor along with many others, who happens to be black about her vile pro demolition position on Central Hill. I note that NONE of you here or on the Buzz thread commented on this outrage except violentpanda.

David Warner who remained silent throughout event then took to his keyboard after the event and went on the attack.

He also argues that councillors Jim Dickson, Becca Thackray, Jennifer Braithwaite deserve respect ffs!

This man is danger to council residents and is no more than a Lambeth Council Brown Shirt doing all their filth for them.

As always those who should be offering support don't. Interesting that after a bit of digging many of the above wingers are home owners and are not council residents like us on the receiving end of years of Lambeth council, Lambeth councilors abuse who bully and gaslight.

Even the wonderful Buzz in the past year has seemingly lost its sting and its free thinking non partisan position, going soft on Corbyn and especially the Greens.

The point is this, if you want to get personal & worse to openly lie and smear, then you are in No Position to play Cry Bully when some shit is thrown back at you.

The video of the entire event filmed by three of us no less, is vast. I'm chasing up it will be posted in its entirety. Watch this space.
 

editor

hiraethified
Even the wonderful Buzz in the past year has seemingly lost its sting and its free thinking non partisan position, going soft on Corbyn and especially the Greens.
I/we haven't got the resources to send people to cover many meetings so the account was sent in and reproduced in good faith, and to at least keep the topic in the news. You - like anyone else - are of course welcome to send in your own articles.

I can't say I've been happy with the tone of the comments in the Buzz piece, but I don't think it's my place to start censoring people or to take sides.

I'm not sure where you're getting the 'going soft' stuff. I don't think we've published a single article about Corbyn and the last time we posted anything about the Green Party was in December last year - and I'm quite happy to stand by the content in that piece
Green Party slams Lambeth Council transport plan for lack of ambition

Oh and I was sent the video but it was of such poor quality, I decided not to include it (although I'm happy to add a link).
 

bunnyr

New Member
Oh grow up & change the record, you're not the only one with mental health issues all those battling with Lambeth & our corrupt politicians are going through hell, myself included, stress levels are incredibly high. Though I have no desire to hang my dirty laundry out in public, I like to keep some privacy.
 
Top