Alberta's oilsands industry is a huge source of harmful air pollution, study says

[MHz]

Wheel of fortune approaches are not really 'research'. The bad news is science is so interlinked that is you correctly identify a flaw and fix it correctly re rest of 'science' has to adapt to that single change. The buttery-fly effect with each process along the way being examined in some detail more or less.

 

[petros]

Did I say conspiracy? "I don't know" is an acceptable answer for the wise. What's the matter with bowing out gracefully?


DEA Wages Hemp War Behind The Scenes In House

Do we live in the US? No, so the DEA is doing us s f-cking favour.

https://www.thestar.com/business/20...ry-is-growing-fast-but-competition-looms.html

Read up and shut up.

 

[captain morgan]

Yeah ... it's sure something you wouldn't do

What the fukk are you talking about?

My points are exclusively based on economics

 

[lone wolf]

Then you're less intelligent than I thought because, no matter how greedy people are, it's not always about making MONEY

 

[Cliffy]

I am not opposed, not invested in oil directly, and have not smoked it since my teen years. But I could have sworn you were a pot user/smoker. I stand corrected (in your case).

You might have got that impression from listening to Petroglyph spouting BS about me. Pinhead hasn't got a clue.

 

[lone wolf]

Do we live in the US? No, so the DEA is doing us s f-cking favour.

https://www.thestar.com/business/20...ry-is-growing-fast-but-competition-looms.html

Read up and shut up.

Your article repeats me in long form. I think you just argue to see your words in print. BTW... In case Google didn't tell you, US policy pretty much writes the rules for Canadian industry - they being our biggest trading partner

 

[petros]

Your article repeats me in long form. I think you just argue to see your words in print. BTW... In case Google didn't tell you, US policy pretty much writes the rules for Canadian industry - they being our biggest trading partner

It does? Are you high?

 

[PoliticalNick]

in other words, no Assault took place.

The only one that claimed to have been assaulted was the NDP woos that should go back to being a homemaker.

Gotta remember that for possible future needs...."I didn't intend to kill 4 People while driving drunk" so no vehicular homicide charge. "I didn't intend to hurt anyone when I opened fire in a crowded bar" so no murder charges. This could work well....except that you are culpable for ALL your actions when doing something wrong. Hence the murder charge you get if you're in a shootout with a cop and he kills someone.

 

[gerryh]

Gotta remember that for possible future needs...."I didn't intend to kill 4 People while driving drunk" so no vehicular homicide charge. "I didn't intend to hurt anyone when I opened fire in a crowded bar" so no murder charges. This could work well....except that you are culpable for ALL your actions when doing something wrong. Hence the murder charge you get if you're in a shootout with a cop and he kills someone.

Not the same, not really surprised that you are trying to redirect AND rewrite the law. Read what you quoted, and if you can't understand it, have someone explain it to. Then look at what the law says about vehicular "homicide" and the the other murder charges. It is apples and oranges, numbnuts.


BTW, dummy, there is no such thing as "vehicular homicide" in Canada.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

You might have got that impression from listening to Petroglyph spouting BS about me. Pinhead hasn't got a clue.

Possibly. In any case, my bad,

 

[pgs]

And you know this how? I have not smoked pot for almost 40 years.
Could it be said that those who are opposed to hemp are those who either/or haven't smoked it and/or are heavily invested in oil stocks? ASsumptions aboud. (No, that is not a typo)

You keep saying that , I wonder why you quit if you like it so much .

in other words, no Assault took place.

The only one that claimed to have been assaulted was the NDP woos that should go back to being a homemaker.

I thought she was going to be a soccer star .

Then you're less intelligent than I thought because, no matter how greedy people are, it's not always about making MONEY

Yes it is elsewise teachers wouldn't go on strike every other year for the children .

 

[petros]

You keep saying that , I wonder why you quit if you like it so much .

He says because he's a f-cking illicit grower.

 

[JLM]

Yes it is elsewise teachers wouldn't go on strike every other year for the children .

I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn for anyone who believes that malarkey.

 

[taxslave]

Do you think hemp is going to grow, harvest and process all by itself?

Do you really think we are dumb enough to take a few million acres of farm land out of food production just to grow pot? Especially since all that oil, gas , and coal is just sitting under the ground.

 

[JLM]

Do you think hemp is going to grow, harvest and process all by itself?

I just have one little question, why wasn't the construction of 1941 continued and in fact why are cars not built in this manner today. If it can stand a beating with an axe, that would just about eliminate 90% of the body damage we are paying for today.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Not the same, not really surprised that you are trying to redirect AND rewrite the law. Read what you quoted, and if you can't understand it, have someone explain it to. Then look at what the law says about vehicular "homicide" and the the other murder charges. It is apples and oranges, numbnuts.


BTW, dummy, there is no such thing as "vehicular homicide" in Canada.

You obviously don't have a clue what "intent" means in this situation. He "intended" to push and shove and pull on people. Whether it was the person he aimed for or someone else is irrelevant. He didn't slip and fall and accidentally shove somebody, he intentionally did it. That includes the lady behind him.

In Canada it's we use different laws that all amount to the same thing with basically the same punishments as murder/manslaughter.

Canada
The Criminal Code does not have a specific offence for vehicular homicide, but has a series of provisions covering driving offences causing death,[2] among them:

dangerous driving causing death
criminal negligence causing death
failure to stop for police causing death
street racing causing death
impaired driving causing death
hit and run driving causing death
The maximum penalty for dangerous driving causing death, absent any of the remaining 5 elements mentioned above, is 14 years' imprisonment.[3] The maximum penalty is otherwise life imprisonment. Anyone sentenced to life imprisonment for a Criminal Code driving offence is eligible to apply for parole after serving 7 years, but there is no guarantee of parole.

 

[JLM]

You obviously don't have a clue what "intent" means in this situation. He "intended" to push and shove and pull on people. Whether it was the person he aimed for or someone else is irrelevant. He didn't slip and fall and accidentally shove somebody, he intentionally did it. That includes the lady behind him.

In Canada it's we use different laws that all amount to the same thing with basically the same punishments as murder/manslaughter.

That is bullsh*t, I watched the video 8 or 10 times and can state with certainty he did not focus on the woman behind him for so much as one second. Sure it was obvious that he was acting like an A$$hole but it doesn't help the credibility of the episode by "putting on the agony"!

 

[gerryh]

You obviously don't have a clue what "intent" means in this situation. He "intended" to push and shove and pull on people. Whether it was the person he aimed for or someone else is irrelevant. He didn't slip and fall and accidentally shove somebody, he intentionally did it. That includes the lady behind him.

In Canada it's we use different laws that all amount to the same thing with basically the same punishments as murder/manslaughter.

Well, dummy ( and you make that so clear every time you post), the law concerning assault is clear when it comes to intent. Intent must be proven to make the charge stick. The only ones screaming about assault were anti libs and they all pointed to the female member as the "victim". The video does not prove "intent", when it comes to her, at all.


That's right, we use different laws from the Sates. We are an independent country, and if you are going to be citing laws, in Canada, it would be prudent to use the proper terms. Unless you enjoy making yourself look like a complete moron.




BTW, how much longer before you go slinking off and disappear?

 

[JLM]

Well, dummy ( and you make that so clear every time you post), the law concerning assault is clear when it comes to intent. Intent must be proven to make the charge stick. The only ones screaming about assault were anti libs and they all pointed to the female member as the "victim". The video does not prove "intent", when it comes to her, at all.

I just rewatched the part of the video where the "wounded" member was expounding on her ordeal saying she was so overwhelmed she had to go out and sit in the lobby and hence missed the vote. I didn't see any blood or bandages!


(Dippers have been known to be a little shrill)

 

[Cliffy]

I just have one little question, why wasn't the construction of 1941 continued and in fact why are cars not built in this manner today. If it can stand a beating with an axe, that would just about eliminate 90% of the body damage we are paying for today.

In case you didn't notice, hemp production is illegal and has been since the 30s when Randolph Hurst made up stories about black men smoking pot and raping white women (he way heavily invested in wood pulp for his newspaper chain) and Dow chemicals was lobbying to get rid of the competition for their nylon rope. It is quite funny how many people on here still think Reefer Madness was a documentary. Hemp was made illegal to get rid of the competition and had nothing to do with drugs. Also, the US had all those cops and jails set up from prohibition and they had to find something for them to do.