Corruption in Alberta, Canada, 'Mafia' or someone else...

[BrettA]

Pord?

What? I have nothing more to say, you're apparently immune to humour and, gloves off, seemingly going or already have gone quite mad. I know that's not a nice thing to say, but everyone in this thread has already been more than nice.

And I thank you all for your gracious help.

[BrettA]

I was also being facetious about her age.

Wow, such facetiousness and irony so close to each other. So I wonder how this thread will get edited - I suspect the current contents don't matter much not only because they'll likely change as have other threads (temp or perm?) but also I suspect that this isn't currently seen by many people at all.

Oh, and sigs are safe with me - certainly I will never type them. Toodles :-).

[Jason]

Do whatever you want man. I have no idea what you're going on about. You're not making sense.

[BrettA]

Do whatever you want man. I have no idea what you're going on about. You're not making sense.

What I want is a reasonable response to my question. I certainly never used the term 'gloves off' and to my knowledge, have done nothing to you that would cause you to avoid the question I posed yesterday.

So, again... is the young lady in red that you posted included in that system you described in so much detail in your post yesterday beginning: "Fine. But I'm still downloading the ones I deem spank...". TIA, Pord.

[Jason]

I thought I answered that when I said that you're immune to humour. I was trying to make laugh time - you know 'haha'.

But if you'd like to persist in being a seriouz buziness about nonsense, then first I'll say it simply: I wasn't being serious. However, your persistent pushing of this pointed question leads me to believe either a) She's actually underage (Again, I was making jest when I posted that pic. She doesn't look underage to me, I was making fun of the idea that you're taking photos of underage girls) or b) You're paranoid that people are making sly assertions that you photograph underage girls and you wish to 'turn the tables' by accusing them of getting off to photographs of allegedly underage girls.

I'm inclined to believe b except I don't believe you are photographing underage girls in sexually suggestive poses or anything of the sort. I think you've been through something traumatic, some sort of trigger event perhaps, and you're acting borderline paranoid-schizophrenic.

[Rum]

I thought I answered that when I said that you're immune to humour. I was trying to make laugh time - you know 'haha'.

But if you'd like to persist in being a seriouz buziness about nonsense, then first I'll say it simply: I wasn't being serious. However, your persistent pushing of this pointed question leads me to believe either a) She's actually underage (Again, I was making jest when I posted that pic. She doesn't look underage to me, I was making fun of the idea that you're taking photos of underage girls) or b) You're paranoid that people are making sly assertions that you photograph underage girls and you wish to 'turn the tables' by accusing them of getting off to photographs of allegedly underage girls.

I'm inclined to believe b except I don't believe you are photographing underage girls in sexually suggestive poses or anything of the sort. I think you've been through something traumatic, some sort of trigger event perhaps, and you're acting borderline paranoid-schizophrenic.

Really - not borderline Pord.

[BrettA]

I thought I answered that when I said that you're immune to humour. I was trying to make laugh time - you know 'haha'.

But if you'd like to persist in being a seriouz buziness about nonsense, then first I'll say it simply: I wasn't being serious. However, your persistent pushing of this pointed question leads me to believe either a) She's actually underage (Again, I was making jest when I posted that pic. She doesn't look underage to me, I was making fun of the idea that you're taking photos of underage girls) or b) You're paranoid that people are making sly assertions that you photograph underage girls and you wish to 'turn the tables' by accusing them of getting off to photographs of allegedly underage girls.

I'm inclined to believe b except I don't believe you are photographing underage girls in sexually suggestive poses or anything of the sort. I think you've been through something traumatic, some sort of trigger event perhaps, and you're acting borderline paranoid-schizophrenic.

Well there's certainly nothing problematic about taking pics like that one (if it remains the same as the one you posted - A897348oOL.jpg), right? I mean, she's fully clothed and leaning against a building, plus it was taken on a lighting course with multiple participants, including her mother, BTW (not that you could have known all that). Anyway, I'm unclear why you even asked her age but found it strange in light of your "I'm still downloading the ones I deem..." and the fact you'd downloaded that one. Were you going to ask for name and contact info next... jk, jk, jk ;-).

And if I was paranoid, I'd likely need to think that the whole lighting course was - lol - some sort of setup, no?

So now that you explain that she doesn't look underage to you, I have no clue why you mention "underage" 5 times just above - what's the connection, please? If she looked clearly above, say, 40, would you still be making this odd (to me) connection and mentioning "underage" 5 times (humour or not)?

I suggest that you need to add another option with your "seriouz buziness about nonsense": c) You're making a mountain out of a molehill, Pord.

[Jason]

I'm fine with leaving the molehill alone.

[BrettA]

This is one of those rare occasions where I feel like I should comment but don't want to say anything.

Hey! I did it!

I'm fine with leaving the molehill alone.

Sounds good to me as I didn't quite understand why you seemed to be trying to make a mountain of it in the first place - or even the useless comment above. Oh, sorry... I'm likely missing the hilarity of it.

[Jason]

I'm sure you're missing more than that ol' chap.

[BrettA]

Plonk.

[Jason]

Wow.. were you waiting this whole time for a response?

[BrettA]

Wow.. were you waiting this whole time for a response?

Now that's funny! Unless you're serious and with you I could see that being the case ;-).

[Seth]

I'm beginning to believe that the whole "set up an insanity plea" argument has some merit to it. A person who is arrested for producing kiddie porn could do worst than to argue that there's a "mob" conspiracy to frame him unjustly.

Sorry, dude, your credibility is closely approaching zero.

After all, if "they" wanted you that badly, they'd just pay some crackhead 50 bucks to whack you, and they'd have done it long ago.

[BrettA]

A new development is that meds usually prescribed by my GP - Dr. Jane Ballantine (Warfarin) - and cardiologist - Dr. Paul Pollak (Amiodarone, Coversill Plus) - were last prescribed to me under the name "D. Madan, S" ostensibly on Oct. 29.

I've known Jane for decades before being a patient and I very much like Dr. Pollak and hope that they too are not having unsavoury experiences by criminals or by this Dr. Madan, S (someone I had a total of ~15 minutes with at the Rockyview General Hospital). Curiouser and curiouser, but I trust reposting the same graphic in hopes of protecting Dr. Ballantine - and me, a fellow Ratz - will be acceptable to all.

Sincerely, G. Brett Aubrey