councils coat of arms illegal? - Page 3

cashman · 20-02-2008, 19:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected]

The real michael is not expressing himself in a civilised fashion but he may well have brought to light a breach of the rules of heraldry (if such rules exist) which our council have, in their ignorance, breached.

i agree could well have done, ya do not gather much support though with junk like that though.

Tealeaf · 20-02-2008, 19:52

I think that The Real Michael is, in fact, Garinda in alter-ego mode.

MikeSz · 20-02-2008, 19:54

I was going to ask if anybody actually cared, but as we are on page three then it seems they do and I cant help but find that a little disturbing

Bonnyboy · 20-02-2008, 19:56

Whoever he is, he seems a tad wound up

cashman · 20-02-2008, 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeSz

I was going to ask if anybody actually cared, but as we are on page three then it seems they do and I cant help but find that a little disturbing

about what? the coat of arms? if thats what ya find a little disturbing mike, that disturbs me a little, given your occupation.

MikeSz · 20-02-2008, 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

about what? the coat of arms? if thats what ya find a little disturbing mike, that disturbs me a little, given your occupation.

We dont deal with coats of arms

Unless they're a registered trade mark!

cashman · 20-02-2008, 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeSz

We dont deal with coats of arms

Unless they're a registered trade mark!

ya didn,t answer me question

MikeSz · 20-02-2008, 20:26

I think the initial attempt at humour in my original post has, by now, especially if I have to explain it, worn off well and true

garinda · 20-02-2008, 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tin Monkey

The Real Michael seems to be real crazy

You really need to listen to the wonderful music he creates, before you decide on that. Look through his old posts for the links.

To hear it evokes everything that is quintessentially English...or do I mean pseudo American (c)rap?

Apparently it's only those nasty Jews at the BBC, who are stopping us all from buying it, and thus preventing it from topping the popular music charts.

Personally I don't give a lion rampant, and three cross-eyed bees, what's on the borough's coat of arms, as long as it doesn't cost us anymore money.

garinda · 20-02-2008, 23:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diesel

Ain't that a little racist...? I'm not easily offended, but being Scottish, I actually find that quite disgusting.

As a 'bicile' I'm also very offended.

Well, if only it was a real word, I would be.

smallville · 21-02-2008, 17:36

Whilst I'd rather not give credence to a racist rant, I would like to set the record straight. In 1974 the Borough of Hyndburn was created from the Distrcit Council of Accrington and six other Urban District Councils (all of which had their own crest, as we have seen by the display of the Accrington Crest on here). On creation of the new Borough the Hyndburn crest was officially bestowed upon it and approved by the Heraldry. This crest as been used since 1974 and is the official seel of the Council. It is legal and legitimate and is actually owned by the Council. It canot be used by others without the permission of the Council.The original certificate of 1974 bestowing the Crest on the Council can be viewed, by request, at the Councils Offices on Ormerod Street.
Family Crests are passed down the line of the eldest son and may only be used by those in this direct lineage. It is therefore more than likely that our originator is the one illegally using a Crest in this instance.

Acrylic-bob · 21-02-2008, 17:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by smallville

Whilst I'd rather not give credence to a racist rant, I would like to set the record straight. In 1974 the Borough of Hyndburn was created from the Distrcit Council of Accrington and six other Urban District Councils (all of which had their own crest, as we have seen by the display of the Accrington Crest on here). On creation of the new Borough the Hyndburn crest was officially bestowed upon it and approved by the Heraldry. This crest as been used since 1974 and is the official seel of the Council. It is legal and legitimate and is actually owned by the Council. It canot be used by others without the permission of the Council.The original certificate of 1974 bestowing the Crest on the Council can be viewed, by request, at the Councils Offices on Ormerod Street.
Family Crests are passed down the line of the eldest son and may only be used by those in this direct lineage. It is therefore more than likely that our originator is the one illegally using a Crest in this instance.

It was my understanding that the current arms of the borough were granted in 1976.

The word "crest" actually refers to the symbol surmounting the helm at the top of the achievement.

Passing an achievement along the male line is subject to the Law of Cadence, which is not exactly as straight forward as "smallville" suggests.

Other than those few quibbles I broadly agree with "smallville's" comments.

A question for the realmichael, how do you propose to destroy all instances of the borough's arms "by proxy"?

Any questions or disputes are properly referred to the Court of Heralds.

Wynonie Harris · 21-02-2008, 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by the real michael

the imbeciles should stick to glorfying monkeys like a/pals

Sad, isn't it, when people have to stoop to this kind of downright insulting abuse?

cashman · 21-02-2008, 22:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Sad, isn't it, when people have to stoop to this kind of downright insulting abuse?

personally i think the guys a complete fruitcake n should be pitied. after being beaten with a mallet.

Wynonie Harris · 21-02-2008, 22:52

So do I Mr C, and I usually treat his rants as such, but insulting the town's war dead is a step too far in my opinion.