cybercoma Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Considering it is neither, it must be the drugs. In reality the sky has no colour and the colours you think you see are illusions caused by light bouncing off of water particles. Is it LSD you're on? That's American too..... All colour is the product of light bouncing or being absorbed by things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 More gushing love for Canada. Even though you still don't understand our laws. But that's OK. We'll still take the love. Still playing with... er... your delusions I see. Laws? There are laws and rule of law in Canada? I never noticed that! Having lost faith in law seeing justice was explained to me as this "It might be immoral, but it is legal"..... When I heard that I totally lost all respect for our sweet and cunning judical system. Where is the protection of the state? Where is the justice for junkies - who instead of being protected and their well being sustained...are instead...brought into the realm of assisted suicide? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 (edited) All colour is the product of light bouncing or being absorbed by things. I am aware of that. But in reality "the sky" has no colour. The water particle refraction might be blue ~sometimes~ but the sky itself has no substance. The water refraction could just as easily be red, purple, yellow blackish grey, grey, white or even green depending on the angle of refraction the the spectrum being absorbed. Edited October 14, 2011 by charter.rights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 I am aware of that. Too funny....now we can argue about the "colour" of the sky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 I am aware of that. But in reality "the sky" has no colour. The water particle refraction might be blue ~sometimes~ but the sky itself has no substance. The water refraction could just as easily be red, purple, yellow blackish grey, grey, white or even green depending on the angle of refraction the the spectrum being absorbed. Classic example of denial of reality and the granting of choices to a foolish public that can have what ever colour they want...free choice - abortion - being a junkie - what next? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Hypothetical situation: Police come across a bunch of people smoking pot. Two of them are observed sharing a joint. The other two, were waiting to smoke it. Two other people did not smoke it, but knew that it was there. One person who smoked it earlier, left the scene before police arrived. Which of these people can be prosecuted? By Canadian law, please... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Hypothetical situation: Police come across a bunch of people smoking pot. Two of them are observed sharing a joint. The other two, were waiting to smoke it. Two other people did not smoke it, but knew that it was there. One person who smoked it earlier, left the scene before police arrived. Which of these people can be prosecuted? By Canadian law, please... The only person that should be prosecuted by Canadian law is you - for making the situation as muddy as possible- "Complexity is the santuary of scoundrels" - you must be a lawyer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Hypothetical situation: Police come across a bunch of people smoking pot. Two of them are observed sharing a joint. The other two, were waiting to smoke it. Two other people did not smoke it, but knew that it was there. One person who smoked it earlier, left the scene before police arrived. Which of these people can be prosecuted? By Canadian law, please... Right here in the above is the methodology used by our courts - the above is exactly how they think - like some childish little game of called mental masterbation. Instead of asking themselves "Is this good for society or is this bad for society"? and making the appropriate ruling - they do the above...some circle jerk mental dance that facinates and amuzes the legal mind but does nothing for the rest of us! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 There should be no intellectual pleasure derived during the process of judgement. All rulings should come about through cold and stark pragmatic thinking - the SCC seems to enjoy the acedemic luxury granted to them by the tax payer a little to much! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Classic example of denial of reality and the granting of choices to a foolish public that can have what ever colour they want...free choice - abortion - being a junkie - what next? Speaking of trolls....welcome back Oleg. Still not taking your meds I see.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Speaking of trolls....welcome back Oleg. Still not taking your meds I see.... Okay you know I don't like that - so here goes the troll as you say - firstly - I don't take "meds" as you put it...secondly that med comment is so old hat....and shows a lack of creative critizism on your part - and lastly FUCK OFF......oh and while I am at it my dear little friend - I don't give a damn if what I type makes sense or not - I love typing - and if by accident I hit on something useful - someone with less perjudice and more personal security than you have - might just pick up on it...oh - just so I feel a bit better -------------FUCK OFF one more time - lol. Oh - sorry about the profanity - I just don't care - and YOU - should get a job at the SCC - handing out their meds - cos I am sure they are one prescribed drugs - judging from their rulings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Okay you know I don't like that - so here goes the troll as you say - firstly - I don't take "meds" as you put it...secondly that med comment is so old hat....and shows a lack of creative critizism on your part - and lastly FUCK OFF......oh and while I am at it my dear little friend - I don't give a damn if what I type makes sense or not - I love typing - and if by accident I hit on something useful - someone with less perjudice and more personal security than you have - might just pick up on it...oh - just so I feel a bit better -------------FUCK OFF one more time - lol. Oh - sorry about the profanity - I just don't care - and YOU - should get a job at the SCC - handing out their meds - cos I am sure they are one prescribed drugs - judging from their rulings. You are so sensitive. Must be gay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 You are so sensitive. Must be gay. You gotta problem with being "gay"? If so, then I am most certainly gay! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 You gotta problem with being "gay"? Coming from a poster with the moniker "charter.rights", you wouldn't expect said poster to deride the LGBT minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Coming from a poster with the moniker "charter.rights", you wouldn't expect said poster to deride the LGBT minority. Maybe he got so pissed at member Oleg that he let his guard down! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 (edited) Coming from a poster with the moniker "charter.rights", you wouldn't expect said poster to deride the LGBT minority. I'm not deriding anyone. It was a simple question put to Oleg because he has shown those tendencies in the past. Free speech is a right we all support, right? Edited October 14, 2011 by charter.rights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 I'm not deriding anyone. It was a simple question put to Oleg because he has shown those tendencies in the past. Free speech is a right we all support, right? Oh, this is rich. Evidently it's not a right YOU support. There is no law. Period. Try citing the Criminal Code of Canada like I and others have. You are dismissed. Now trying being a good American and shut up. In case you are truly unaware of it, telling people to "shut up" because they don't agree with your viewpoint is hardly supporting "free speech." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Oh, this is rich. Evidently it's not a right YOU support. In case you are truly unaware of it, telling people to "shut up" because they don't agree with your viewpoint is hardly supporting "free speech." I fully support free speech. I have an absolute right to tell an American Woman troll to shut up unless she has proof. Otherwise, she has no argument to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 I fully support free speech. I have an absolute right to tell an American Woman troll to shut up unless she has proof. Otherwise, she has no argument to make. Ummm. Telling someone to "shut up" is hardly supporting free speech. "I don't agree with you, so shut up." Yeah, your support of my right to state my opinion is quite impressive. Once again. I did cite "proof" of my opinion in the way of citing links from many reputable Canadian sources, including the Canadian Parliament and Health Canada, saying the same thing I have - while you simply keep repeating your interpretation of the law - as you tell me to shut up and accuse me of being a troll. Simply because I don't agree with you. Fyi, that's a real sign of your ability (or lack thereof) to engage in an intelligent discussion - as well as a shining example of supporting the right of free speech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 In case you are truly unaware of it, telling people to "shut up" because they don't agree with your viewpoint is hardly supporting "free speech." Shut up. Charter Rights don't regulated the actions of private citizens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Shut up. Charter Rights don't regulated the actions of private citizens. Another fine example of how "we all support free speech." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 You do understand the notion that free-speech cannot be infringed upon by private citizens, right? This much is clear, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted October 14, 2011 Report Share Posted October 14, 2011 Another fine example of how "we all support free speech." My telling you to shut up is fully compliant with MY right to free speech. You can whine and complain all you want. That is YOUR right to free speech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.