Should Hyndburn be supporting Pakistan in Kashmir?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Less

The simple reply to that is:-

November the 11th, every year, 'Lest we forget'.

Some things we should remember, the death of a generation & the guardianship of democracy must never be forgotten.

I don't think that is quite the same thing.
Some things are to be remembered...they are part of our history.
And the guardianship of democracy is not in dispute.(how much democracy have we got anyway?......you might want to ask G.Jones about that...with respect of the chance to have a say on a much more important issue...the EU)

I did not, and do not agree with HBC getting involved in issues which are international in their origin(I voted NO in the poll)....but I fail to see what a continued (circular)discussion has on this issue. I am happy to be enlightened though.

It is plain that the councillors concerned are not going to do anything about the situation(if anything could be done)....and they know of the displeasure of those who have commented on here, but this does not seem to move anyone either.....it is, therefore, a bit pointless.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I don't think that is quite the same thing.

Of course it's the same thing!

Their sacrifice and that of many others since then, was, to ensure OUR freedom, not to let some half baked ideas put forward to a tin pot local council run rough shod over the wishes of the majority.

[Michael1954]

Margaret, if it's pointless, stop reading the thread. Don't you think you are being a tad patronising?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I don't think that is quite the same thing.
Some things are to be remembered...they are part of our history.
And the guardianship of democracy is not in dispute.(how much democracy have we got anyway?......you might want to ask G.Jones about that...with respect of the chance to have a say on a much more important issue...the EU)

I did not, and do not agree with HBC getting involved in issues which are international in their origin(I voted NO in the poll)....but I fail to see what a continued (circular)discussion has on this issue. I am happy to be enlightened though.

It is plain that the councillors concerned are not going to do anything about the situation(if anything could be done)....and they know of the displeasure of those who have commented on here, but this does not seem to move anyone either.....it is, therefore, a bit pointless.

So come the next General Election you'll be forgetting that your M.P. voted against you having a vote in a referendum on E.U. membership, even though you seemed quite keen to want one yourself?

This discussion, besides a councillor recently discussing it for the first time since the motion was supported, is valid because some of those politicans who voted for it will soon be up for re-election.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

It is plain that the councillors concerned are not going to do anything about the situation

No, they won't.

Though anyone they're supposed to represent, who are unhappy with what their elected representatives have done in their name, have the option of doing something about it...at the ballot box.

[Wrighty]

Originally Posted by garinda

No, they won't.

Though anyone they're supposed to represent, who are unhappy with what their elected representatives have done in their name, have the option of doing something about it...at the ballot box.

Hit em where it hurts! not literally mind you lol

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by garinda

It's being discussed on here at the moment because, for the first time since the motion was supported by the council in November, a councillor, Ken Moss, has recently discussed the issue on Accy Web.

Until this week there's been a wall of stony silence from any councillor on here, about this matter.

That is why it's still valid as a discussion.

I was asked outright on the same day that I came back to the forum after a hiatus. I've given my opinion, although this thread has now changed to getting all hissy about the original wording rather than the motion that was actually passed.

With councillors getting a roasting for something they didn't do, I don't see there's anything left to discuss.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Michael1954

Margaret, if it's pointless, stop reading the thread. Don't you think you are being a tad patronising?

I'm sorry if you think I am, as you put it, a tad patronising...that certainly wasn't how my post was meant to be perceived......I read what I like...you cannot make a comment if you do not read something.

And G, No I certainly won't be forgetting the way our current MP treated his constituency member...which was, with utter contempt.

Less, I am quite aware of why our soldiers fought...my father was one of those, as probably yours was too....and I remember them and their efforts....though a lot of their efforts seem to be in vain, and this is not because of what local government have done...it is because of what our governments over the years have done.

The only redress we have is to ensure we make our displeasure is felt the next time there is an election...local or otherwise.......but while there are the likes of some of the councillors(whose names I am sure you know, but I will not mention) are in place do not expect things to change too much...they are only looking after their 'brothers'.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

this does not seem to move anyone either.....it is, therefore, a bit pointless.

Just because the councillors involved seem unconcerned with what they did, does not make discussing it 'pointless'.

If enough of the people that elect them to be their representatives are made aware of their actions, those councillors might be forced to face the consequences of their actions.

'All that’s necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.' - Edmund Burke.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Maybe, but the councillor who was responsible for bringing the issue to the table will not suffer such because he has his community to support him.
I do not like having to justify my comment, but here goes my reasoning.......it is pointless in respect of the fact that nothing will be done by the councillors about the issue...whether it will affect them at the ballot box is anybody's guess, I suppose it would depend on who was standing against them......the discussion just treads the same ground...over and over......and that is my cue to bow out.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

And G, No I certainly won't be forgetting the way our current MP treated his constituency member...which was, with utter contempt.

Similarly, it is also valid to remember what our local, as well as what our national representatives have done, come the next election.

More so in this case, is this subject a valid topic for discussion, because for the first time since it happened, a councillor has recently used this forum to publicly comment on what was carried out in our name.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Maybe, but the councillor who was responsible for bringing the issue to the table will not suffer such because he has his community to support him.
I do not like having to justify my comment, but here goes my reasoning.......it is pointless in respect of the fact that nothing will be done by the councillors about the issue...whether it will affect them at the ballot box is anybody's guess, I suppose it would depend on who was standing against them......the discussion just treads the same ground...over and over......and that is my cue to bow out.

I don't subscribe to apathy.

If something is wrong, it should be challenged.

The world isn't fair, or perfect.

That doesn't mean we should hold our hands up, and surrender to that fact.

Things can, and do change.

Constantly.

With a little effort.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

I was asked outright on the same day that I came back to the forum after a hiatus. I've given my opinion, although this thread has now changed to getting all hissy about the original wording rather than the motion that was actually passed.

With councillors getting a roasting for something they didn't do, I don't see there's anything left to discuss.

Thats whats bugging me Ken, If the original wording was objectionable then why was the motion not dumped there n then by the ruling party?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by garinda

Things can, and do change.

Constantly.

With a little effort.

You only have to look at the change on this forum, in regards to support for Graham Jones, to see that.

From hero, to zero, in three easy steps.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by cashman

Thats whats bugging me Ken, If the original wording was objectionable then why was the motion not dumped there n then by the ruling party?

Because motions don't work like that, you can't just throw something out because you don't agree with it otherwise the ruling group would just dump everything that wasn't in their favour. That's no better than a dictatorship anyway and I wouldn't be in favour no matter who was in control.

Putting up amendments to motions is common practice and a better way of improving things.