Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Patient at Vancouver Heath Care facility reported EBE/aliens
Share: 
by agora | January 26, 2009 at 09:19 pm
167 views | 0 Recommendations | 14 comments
The following apparent alien sighting took place at about 3:00 am to 4:00 am on 3 March 2006 in East Vancouver: internet site reference: www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2009/01/26/03074.html
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (14)
at 14:00 on January 27th, 2009
So some really old people living in a care facility and all drugged up on pills think they saw something. That is a daily occurance not news.
at 17:13 on January 27th, 2009
Sounds like you are making an ageist comment. The witnesses was clearly identified as having a very sharp mind, if you bothered to read the article. Making statements like that about senior citizens is prejudicial, and tantamount to bigotry.
at 18:06 on January 27th, 2009
Sorry but I call them how I see tham and no PC bullying is going to change that. Do you regularly visit care homes? I do. I am basing my comments on my own personal observations. You?
at 19:00 on January 27th, 2009
I have been to senior citizens residences, etc, and your comments, and as I have indicated, are tantamount to bigotry. "PC" is a phrase which tends to be used by bigots, full of hate/antipathy, who try to cover-up their own apparent ignorance. Your PC comments is consistent with an apparent bigot.
at 19:28 on January 27th, 2009
Please read the Code of Conduct. I have forwarded your personal attacks for the webmaster.
at 19:51 on January 27th, 2009
I have a right to defend myself, and senior citizens, against your apparent prejudice and bigotry.
at 19:53 on January 27th, 2009
I also do not believe that the 'NowPublic' Code of Conduct supports bigotry.
at 20:00 on January 27th, 2009
Nothing I posted falls under the definition of bigotry. Just because I see the world differently than you does not give you the right to assert that I am a bigot.
at 19:54 on January 27th, 2009
You have no right (under the Code of Conduct) to engage in personal attacks on any member's character as a response to comments on a story that you disagree with.
at 19:59 on January 27th, 2009
This sighting was nearly 3 years ago how is this current News?
at 20:26 on January 27th, 2009
To Vinny: If most people are unaware of the incident, it still can be considered news.
To 'Eastvanray':
Your comment: "So some really old people living in a care facility and all drugged up on pills think they saw something" IS apparent bigotry.
You don't even know the witness, yet, apparently just because the witness is a senior citizens, you fabricate that the witness was "drugged up on pills".
Your comment was totally ignorant, and a vulgar stereotype directed at senior citizens.
at 20:34 on January 27th, 2009
Read my comments. Stating that people in care facilities are "really old" and "drugged up on pills" are facts. If you want to dispute those assertations then do so but you are not permitted to attack the person making them.
at 21:07 on January 27th, 2009
Agora,
Thanks for your post.I would request you to please stick to NP guidelines. Also how do you know that people are still unaware of the incident. Vinny is right in asking how can be a three year old incident be a news. If you think there are any other reason which makes it a news please let us know. Also please don't indulge in personal attacks. If you want to convey a message to any member please use PM tool. Thanks once again for your post.
at 22:54 on January 27th, 2009
To Easvanray:
Firstly, 'Eastvanray' a 'fact' in not the same as an 'assertion'. You don't appear to have any 'factual' evidence that the witnesses is "drugged out on pills". Yes, you engage in a personal attack against the witness, then after I dispute you unfounded statement, claim that I am engaged in a 'personal attack' against you. It is you who is engaged in the personal attacks, and the ageist comments against senior citizens. The age of the witness is irrelevant. The witness in the article was clearly identified as having a very sharp mind, so your claim is totally vexatious and gratuitous.
To Sanjay:
Perhaps you can send to me a reference to a newspaper or other perodical that demonstrates that there is a broad awareness of the incident?
Indeed, I have seen CNN and other sucessful/established broadcasters make news revelations based upon historical documents, i.e. U.S. Civil War, etc etc. Their editors make an evaluation of newsworthiness based in part of reader interest in revelations. In other words, 'news' is not simply, necessarily events that took place today, last week, this month or even this year... indeed, investigative journalism sometimes takes years of research.
Futhermore, you seem to refuse to acknowledge that 'Eastvanray' made ageist comments. The claim that I also made a "personal attack" is arguably erroneous. Canadian Human Rights statutes specifically protect Canadian citizens from the kind of prejudicial stereotypes that were being directed against senior citizens as "drugged out on pills".
It is apparent that the witness was not "drugged out on pills", as 'Eastvanray' appears to vexatiously claim.
How you would like if someone made a racial comment against you based upon a stereotype associated with your ethnocultural background; and when you sought to defend yourself from stereotype-based comments, you were then accused of a "personal attack"?