An intimate guide to life in Greenwich
Art - Ask The Phantom - Basics - Books - Cafes - Days Out - Debates - Drinking - Eating Out - Events - Favourite Haunts - Food and Drink - Free Greenwich - Gay - Going Out - Green Greenwich - Greenwich People - Mostly-Accurate History - News - Not-Quite-Greenwich - Open Spaces - Places of Interest - Regional Greenwich - Reviews - Secret Greenwich -Services - Shopping - Streets - Takeaways - Things to Do - Weird Greenwich - Where to Stay
Labels: News
posted by The Greenwich Phantom at
18:16
Greenwich is one of the coolest "uncool" places there is in London. It's not profoundly unfashionable - rather somewhere where it doesn't occur to people that there is anything more than a few museums, a nice park and the Cutty Sark. The really adventurous might know about the Trafalgar Tavern or venture out to Greenwich market on a Sunday afternoon, but essentially, Greenwich is still relatively undiscovered for one of the great regions of London. I adore Greenwich - but I'm not blind to its faults either. In this journal I take an affectionate but honest - at times brutally so - look, giving my own personal low-down on the things to do - and one or two of the things NOT to do in Greenwich. I am being unashamedly parochial here. I will talk about the tourist sites, of course - how could I not when we have a World Heritage Site on our doorstep - but also about the things which make our town great - the little things. Interesting vistas, cool shops, bizarre novelties and quirky one-offs which make this place buzz. Greetings, by the way, to all of you who have travelled with me from Livejournal - and thank you for making the journey.
RSS Feed [Atom]
30 Comments:
Why don't the protest committee produce some simple t-shirts that folks can wear to the park. I can't see any supporters being arrested for wearing one??
Oh here we go - funny season is upon us...
Perhaps the real reason is that the organisers knew that very few of the people who have taken the easy step of linking to the facebook page would actually take the hard step of turning up at the park.
Especially as a quick look at the page shows very few actually live in Greenwich.
Perhaps therefore its all a conspiracy theory involving people like Greenwich Pahntom making ludicrous claims like the demo has been banned to cover up the fact that the real reason is that turn out would have been poor...
Hmm 'tell the truth' (sic) if that is your opinion on GP could the same be thought about your 'theory' - hello kettle meet pot :-]
Off the top of my head, I think that the protest might have been cancelled - if it has been, and this is not disinformation by the Phantom - it is because it would have needed weeks of planning and obtaining written permissions for things.
I once organised a march from Hyde Park to Broadcasting House, and this involved several interviews with the Special Events Police and my having to sign a document taking sole personal responsibility for everything that happened in Hyde Park, including the death of any of the participants. I signed, although I was very very scared.
Perhaps the organisers of the proposed march in the Park, against the equestrian events plans, baulked at signing such a document.
LOCOG must be laughing their socks off. The one thing they want to avoid above everything is a highly visible and vocal protest by ordinary people under the eyes of the media (which in Britain is nearly always sympathetic to the "plucky underdog"). Until it is too late, of course, and my guess is that that "too late" moment comes at the end of next week, on/around 22 August.
Meanwhile, NOGOE is turning itself into a "formality".
The only thing that is going to make LOCOG do anything different is MAJOR PUBLIC EMBARRASSMENT. Which requires a quite different approach, and unfortunately I don't have time to coordinate this. However, think Families Need Fathers.
I think you mean Fathers 4 Justice not Families Need Fathers - the former are the publicity-mad ones.
D'oh, first link should be this site, not that I really wish to give them any more traffic.
It should say something when it's easier to organise a water fight in a public park via Facebook than a protest...
Maybe they realised the foolishness of organising up to 10,000 random people to march through Greenwich Park to protest against the potential damage of 20,000. The more successful this march was going to be, the greater the chance it would undermine the protest message and can you imagine the furore if any damage had been caused to the park itself by those protesting. We all know there are people out there who will assemble to protest at the licking of a stamp (no indication yet that you are one of those Indigo - though perhaps your name relates to the preferred colour of your lycra)... I'm speculating. Perhaps they were all put off by the threat of rain!
For Greenwich Park's completely unbiased view, have a look at the front page of the equally unbiased Pravda. I mean the lovely propaganda thing that the council do....Dammit...Greenwich Time - that's it...
And here's a compromise suggestion - Why not keep the showjumping...still get all them lovely "iconic" views that have LOCOG etc etc etc weeing themselves with excitement, but the main fabric of the park remains intact....
Ellis that is a damn fine idea - I'm all for compromise.
Well I have to say Greenwich Phantom's reputation just took an almighty tumble in my eyes with this rubbish.
The protest will not have been cancelled. I guarantee you that. If it had the organisers would have made hay with the intervention.
More likely that they knoew turnout would be poor.
I hope Greenwich Phantom will apologise for his error before its too late.
Hmm...aren't the pro-olympics people in an absolute FURY that there are so many objections to the horses in the park..and now threats! GP should apologise "..before it's too late." Oo..er.
Still it's good to know that there's a couple of people prepared to debate. Even if Gill and tell the truth do sound exactly like each other. And make the same spelling mistakes...
tell the truth and Gill.
What's it got to do with the Phantom and why should he apologise? The Phantom's just reporting what he/she has read and is allowed to postulate on the cause for the cancellation.
Why should he apologise?
Because this was clearly misleading, factually incorrect and provocative.
Still no facts to prove that heavy handed tactics got this cancelled - because quite frankly they wouldn't of.
Its a shame that objectors to our park being used for the Games cant stick to facts.
But then again that has been their problem all along.
The objectors have done nothing but spread misinformation and rumour - helped by people with vested interests in seeing the events move elsewhere.
I'm glad that more and more local residents are starting to see through this nonsense. And having watched the GB team excel in Beijing I cant wait to cheer them on in our own borough in four years time.
Its clear now that the objectors know that the tide is turning - and the best they can do is accuse pro games residents of posting under different names.
Laughable!
Gill you still seem to be in a 'fury' and this may be clouding your judgement and the facts.
Please show where on this thread GP refers to and I'm quoting you:
'Because this was clearly misleading, factually incorrect and provocative.
Still no facts to prove that heavy handed tactics got this cancelled - because quite frankly they wouldn't of.'
Please give me (a Greenwich resident who has not altered their view) facts and statistics that, and again I'm quoting you:
'I'm glad that more and more local residents are starting to see through this nonsense.'
Greenwich Park is NOT hosting the Olympics, merely the equestrian events. There are many residents and park users that are sceptical of the LOCOG's proposals to move, prune or dig up trees, doesn't mean they object to the Olympics wholesale. Doesn't make you right because you jump up and down and shout the loudest. Is It not you that seems intent on pedalling falsehoods.
If you look at the long term pain of disrupting the park vs the short term gain of, what a two days of show-jumping and cross-country riders trying not to decapitate themselves on the trees that won't be dug up! Remind me how many medals did we get at Bejing for this illustious event???
Also how do you know 'tell the truth is a 'he'?
I'm all for a debate but not if you going to become an irrational ranter.
Did anyone else read Andrew Gilligan's piece for the ES, debating the whole Greenwich Park and the Olympics issue. I'll happily scan and send GP if you want it?
LGM is a classic example of an anti park protestor.
If you oppose their views - you are accused of "shouting" and "jumping up and down"
You cant be pro the games coming to the park and talk in a level voice ofcourse - or so LGM and others would have you believe.
This again only goes to prove my point - the vocal minority that oppose the park being used only seek to ridicule any opinions that go against their own.
They do no accept the common held logic that people only speak up when they are against something - not for it.
Sorry to break that mould.
If there was a huge swathe of opinion locally against the park being used - there would have been a demonstration in the park as planned a few week ago.
Fact is there was no real desire for it. It was just a move to get cheap headlines. And thats what it got.
Gill, I ask you to answer some very simple questions you decide the best defence is to attack and lob a few schoolgirl insults. Tsk tsk.
You don't know me ergo you have no concept of whether I'm a 'classic' anti-park protester. Erm, again another falsehood. I'm not anti-park I love the park. I'm yet to be convinced by any of the statements put out by the council and LOCOG. I would like some transparency please and I will not accept some half-baked ravings. So Gill take a chill-pill and breathe....
Here we go again
Pot calling kettle...
So you think I dont know you well enough to make comments bout you - BUT its fine for you to make comments about me.
As i said - and as I maintain - this is the best that antipark protestors cant do.
They dont deal in fact - just misinformation.
And when they are not doing that about the venues - they do it about people that disagree with them. First I'm "shouting" and "ranting" now I need to take a "chill pill"
Pathetic. And that's why its not worth debating you with - as you are more interested in a slanging match.
Oh dear Gill, you clearly have let your emotions get the better of you.I suggested a 'chill-pill' to ease the 'fury' ;-) and for the sake of sounding like a cracked record, I-AM-NOT-ANTI-PARK.
Do you know what Gill, today in the park (the place you think I'm anti) I met the nicest family who actually turned up to the protest (not realising it had been cancelled) along with a throng of others. The father of the family had discovered that the police would not issue the necessary permissions for the protest to go ahead. Before I digress this family have lived in Greenwich for years; they support the Olympics but they question the decision to hold the equestrian events in a park that quite likely, is not fit for purpose.
Gill please bring to the table a coherent reason why the equestrian events should go ahead, show me something to allay my fears and concerns and try to hold off with the insults. If you can do that I will happily wave my flag and get behind the Olympic committee and support the equestrian. Walk a mile in another's shoes.
Team bronze and individual bronze. Not sure if it's worth it.
I have to agree with those local residents who are fed up with this scaremongering about the park.
Why is it people are so quick to jump to conclusions about the events - when the body responsible for them has yet to consult people, and the full details of the plans have not been released?
As as for the last poster who claims "The father of the family had discovered that the police would not issue the necessary permissions for the protest to go ahead"...this is again likely to be hearsay and utter nonsense.
If this is the case - how come the local press who covered this story haven't picked up on this "fact"?
How come the facebook group haven't mentioned this "fact"?
Next you'll tell us the father was indeed Michale Jackson...
James SE10 what is scaremongering about my posts? I've been trying to get anyone who supports the park being used for the equestrian event to give me a coherent argument. If you bothered to read my post I said if Gill/James SE10/Tell the Truth et al could convince me, then I would get behind it. I must commend you on the 'utter nonsense' statement - how coherent. The father is local resident, has three young sons and spoke to a local bobby who explained the reason for the cancellation. No doubt they are all liars??? In your eyes anyone concerned about the possibility of the park being closed for long periods and ancient trees being moved or cut down are being unreasonable. The LOCOG and the council have done little to allay their concerns. So are you suggesting we wait until after 2012 - a little pointless don't you think. How about everyone lays their cards on the table and we have a proper and transparent public consultation. Or do you think that is also scaremongering. So come on give me something to alter my opinions. James SE10 I for one would be happy to poll all the local residents and if you are to believed then you have nothing to worry about as the 'majority' support the plans for the park so you have no need to convince the minority. Better get back to your flag waving along with Boris - I'm sure you do a grand job :-]
This post has been removed by the author.
LGM here's a link to the article you mentioned, including some interesting comments. Apologies if the yays think this is more "scaremongering" but it's quite a well written piece.
The stand-out quote for me is:
"Whatever they say, they cannot fit a full-length course in at Greenwich unless it is unnecessarily twisty, or something else goes..."
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard
-olympics/article-23538726-details/
Greenwich+Park+and+a+lesson+from
+China/article.do
So LGM you offered no evidence to back up the fact you "heard" from an unnamed local father who had heard from an unnamed local bobby that the police had cnacelled this marhc.
If ever there was proof - that's not!
As I say - how come this isnt mentioned on the facebook site then. How come the organisers themselves arent claiming police intervention stopped this rally?
Please stick to the fact and stop the nonsense.
As for Julie's post - is that the same evening standard article that admitted there had been very little damage done to the course in Hong Kong?
Julie thanks for posting the article. I'm afraid I must of recycled my original copy. it was an interesting article - quite measured for Andrew Gilligan ;-)
James SE10 your (understanding) reading appears as poor as your spelling! I did not state anything as a fact. I merely clarified that, this family were made aware of the protest (they don't have a facebook account) word-of-mouth is quite useful; even in this day and age. I clarified the source of the information. I'm not about to start naming folk because of your bullying tone. He had no reason to lie. I, as do you, are entitled to an opinion. Post like yours only confirm one thing, that you appear not to be interested in a genuine debate just attacking people virtually.
LGM - your latest post will turn even more people off from your very hollow arguments. Thank you.
First you accuse me of "shouting" and "jumping up and down". Then you say I should take a "chill pill." Now you accuse someone else of bullying you!
You really should think before you type...
What hypocritical behaviour - and yet again more evidence of the lengths people who object to Greenwich Park being used will go to to discredit anyone who diagrees with their opinion.
How very grown up!
James SE10 - I would suggest no more responses to this poster. He appears to thrive on insulting people.
for fear of being flamed, Gill and james why do you think your views will be valued above others; in particular LGM's who has asked questions of both of you nut don't seem able or won't answer?? I'm curious after following this for the past few days. I'm neutral on the park but I turning towards a view. Do any of you want to guess as you are all so insightful??
Gill - all I can say is well said.
The puerile behaviour of LGM and others has certainly opened my eyes on this debate.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-olympics/article-23546123-details/Olympics+minister+orders+rethink+over+2012+plans+for+Greenwich+park/article.do
Hallelujah to someone finally seeing sense :-)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home