'Blame poverty for terrorism' says Obama

by Hellsangel Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:29 am

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/bergen-terrorism-root-causes/index.html

PS: Were the 9/11 hijackers from poor families? Especially Mohamed Atta?

by southindian Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:27 am

Jihadi John is a university graduate from London with a degree in Computer Science.

American politicians need not sugarcoat to make politically correct statements.

by nevada Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:18 am

One of the reasons but not the main reason.

by Seva Lamberdar Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:13 pm

nevada wrote:One of the reasons but not the main reason.

Poverty usually drives people into despair, making them steal, rob (including as arm robbers and dacoits) and even sell themselves as prostitutes, but rarely makes them terrorists (especially the political and religious kind).

by nevada Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:50 pm

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
nevada wrote:One of the reasons but not the main reason.
Poverty usually drives people into despair, making them steal, rob (including as arm robbers and dacoits) and even sell themselves as prostitutes, but rarely makes them terrorists (especially the political and religious kind).

It can make them go to the mosque where a kind mullah will feed them sumptuous biryani, show videos of violence, point out the root cause for all evil, and turn them into a "soldier" in the "holy war". Exhibit 1: Ajmal Kasab.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Fri Feb 27, 2015 3:21 pm

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/bergen-terrorism-root-causes/index.html

PS: Were the 9/11 hijackers from poor families? Especially Mohamed Atta?

None of these assholes are from poverty - that too the "leadership" of these Jehadi groups and the new recruits..

OSAMA

Al-Jawahiri

Al-Baghdadi

Jihadi John

Geelani

etc..etc..

by southindian Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:15 pm

According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.

by nevada Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:26 pm

southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.

He is half Muslim - or maybe secretly 100% Muslim. So can't expect him to say anything directly about the book.

by confuzzled dude Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:49 pm

southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.

One would agree with you if terrorism among muslim population was as rampant as casteism among Hindu population.

by Kris Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:17 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.
One would agree with you if terrorism among muslim population was as rampant as casteism among Hindu population.

>>>What is the connection between a discussion on the Islamic holy book and Hindu caste-ism? Can either be discussed on its own merits and/or demerits? Or are you raising this point only because SI is (presumably) a Hindu?

by Kris Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:27 pm

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/bergen-terrorism-root-causes/index.html

PS: Were the 9/11 hijackers from poor families? Especially Mohamed Atta?

>>>And the flip side of this if poverty is the only cause, why poor folks of other religions are not taking up this modus operandi.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:43 pm

holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.

by confuzzled dude Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:43 pm

Kris wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.
One would agree with you if terrorism among muslim population was as rampant as casteism among Hindu population.
>>>What is the connection between a discussion on the Islamic holy book and Hindu caste-ism? Can either be discussed on its own merits and/or demerits? Or are you raising this point only because SI is (presumably) a Hindu?

Both are related to religion(s), besides I was only following SI's logic.

by Kris Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:49 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Kris wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.
One would agree with you if terrorism among muslim population was as rampant as casteism among Hindu population.
>>>What is the connection between a discussion on the Islamic holy book and Hindu caste-ism? Can either be discussed on its own merits and/or demerits? Or are you raising this point only because SI is (presumably) a Hindu?
Both are related to religion(s), besides I was only following SI's logic.

>>>This sort of broad contextualizing will negate the possibility of any critical discussion of anything. Wouldn't it?

by Kris Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:51 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.

>>>and therein lies the problem.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:56 pm

Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.
>>>and therein lies the problem.

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.

perhaps it is much easier and takes less courage to rail against a document written by medievalists, than take a principled stance against a law much revered by one's colleagues and neighbors.

i wonder what obama blames for the rage that compels a young man to pick up a weapon of mass destruction, enter a nursery school, and gun down more than twenty children in cold blood.

by Kris Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:05 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.
>>>and therein lies the problem.

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.

>>>>I don't know about this forum. Many issues don't seem to come up here. At a national level, they are debated. I do agree with you overall on the idea of seeing the constitution as infallible ('original intent') etc. which almost reaches the level of a religion. That precludes critical analysis to see if it fits as society evolves. I am with those who see it as a living, breathing document in general.

by confuzzled dude Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:24 pm

Kris wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Kris wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.
One would agree with you if terrorism among muslim population was as rampant as casteism among Hindu population.
>>>What is the connection between a discussion on the Islamic holy book and Hindu caste-ism? Can either be discussed on its own merits and/or demerits? Or are you raising this point only because SI is (presumably) a Hindu?
Both are related to religion(s), besides I was only following SI's logic.
>>>This sort of broad contextualizing will negate the possibility of any critical discussion of anything. Wouldn't it?

Completely agreed, let's hope SI does too.

by southindian Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:03 pm

Naah! CD,

You got poor logic. Very weak logic. Hindus DO NOT slaughter, murder because their books says so.

Hindus are first ones to stand up, shout, blame each other on casteism... Casteiest Hindus who kill do it due to rage.

Dude, take your blinds off, your poor innocence off and accept threat to the world IN EVERY COUNTRY because of threat by followers of ONE BOOK.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:50 pm

Kris wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:According to Obama a huge number of Indian Muslims could become terrorists.

Stop talking like politically correct politician and get too the root.

Point to their terrorism manual. Their book.
One would agree with you if terrorism among muslim population was as rampant as casteism among Hindu population.
>>>What is the connection between a discussion on the Islamic holy book and Hindu caste-ism? Can either be discussed on its own merits and/or demerits? Or are you raising this point only because SI is (presumably) a Hindu?

The connection is Mian Daud...He just cannot take any criticism of iSlam or an iSlami.

I am looking for an "apt" title for him...

by Guest Sat Feb 28, 2015 9:15 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.
>>>and therein lies the problem.

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.

perhaps it is much easier and takes less courage to rail against a document written by medievalists, than take a principled stance against a law much revered by one's colleagues and neighbors.

i wonder what obama blames for the rage that compels a young man to pick up a weapon of mass destruction, enter a nursery school, and gun down more than twenty children in cold blood.

Why does a discussion on the root causes of terrorism have to be diverted to casteism and gun control? Have guts to discuss that with honesty and courage.

btw, those 20 innocent children were gun down because of the shooter's mental illess. No sane person would do that. So yeah, bring stricter laws on who the firearms should be around. The guy had a history of mental illness and the guy shouldn't have been allowed into the shooting ranges or any guns allowed at his home. Fight to bring such laws, not total gun control, which you too know is not feasible but you guys keep harping about it.

My assistant at work was hit by a drunk driver when she was 8 months pregnant and because of that, her son was born almost quadriplegic. He is seven now and totally wheel chair bound. So will you guys advocate for a total ban on alcohol, including your stupid beers, coz it's killing people or do you support stricter laws on DUI?

Incidentally, that assistant's husband left her coz he couldn't deal with a handicapped child. She's a single mom now living on her own, who possesses a gun, who goes for shooting/self defense lessons, has a gun license and all. She says that having a gun gives her a peace of mind and allows her to sleep well at night, without fear. My older manager who lives a peaceful life along with her retired and terminally ill husband by the lake side also possesses a gun. She says, 'Honey, at this age and owing to our health conditions, a gun is the only way to protect ourselves. We may never use it in our lives, but having it gives us peace of mind.' There are many such ppl in US and they will never vote for a total ban on guns. Yes, bring in stricter laws, but banning them totally is not feasible.

I was attending a seminar on smoking cessation (helping ppl quit smoking) last week. The facts that were presented there were just mind blowing. Do you know that every year as many people in US die because of tobacco related health issues as the ones who died during first world war+second world war+the korean war+the vietnam war combined? Every f'gging year! Do you know that second hand smoking is 100 times more dangerous than first hand smoking? Do you have any idea how many children and babies are exposed to second hand smoking in their homes and cars every day? Do you know that for 80% of the smokers, the habit was formed before they turned 18? Who is going to be the voice for those children? The other day, i saw a mom in a car with two little kids buckled up to their car seats in the back. The mom was smoking, but crack opened her window a bit and was putting her hand outside intermittently, holding the cigarette. Does she really think she was protecting her kids by holding the cigarettes out the window? Does she have any idea how much smoke she's exposing her little innocent kids to in the car? Who's going to be the voice for those kids?

Tobacco kills way more ppl than guns. Why don't you guys raise your voice against banning tobacco? No, you won't do that coz it's not as cool as talking about second amendment and gun control. Disgusting!

by truthbetold Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:05 am

jihadi violence and koran, hinduism and caste, and us constitution and right bear arms are all issues that need to be discussed. But bringing up one when challenged on other subjects is a cowards way of replying to the challenge.

Both max and cd could not advance arguments to show that jihadi violence does not stem from koran or jihadi violence is a source of bigger concern than caste or gun problem to the wider world. That does not mean caste or gun control are not a problem nor do they not merit a discussion.

So drop your diversionary horses and face up to the challenge at hand.

by truthbetold Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:17 am

Hell,

I heard few of Obama's speeches on this topic. His point is not that individual terrorist actors come from poor families. His point is that the condition for terrorist philosophy to take hold is primed by poverty or denial of dignified life. Many of these regions and countries are under despotic rulers who obstruct economic growth and democracy. The deprived people of those countries look for alternate solutions. Because of intense brutality of those regimes normal democratic resistance movements are easily vanquished. That leaves room only for Boko Harem, ISIS etc. Once the conditions for trouble are created and matured, individual terror activists can come from any section of the society.

Obama is right. These countries need democratic movements and economic growth.

by Guest Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:18 am

Kris wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/bergen-terrorism-root-causes/index.html

PS: Were the 9/11 hijackers from poor families? Especially Mohamed Atta?
>>>And the flip side of this if poverty is the only cause, why poor folks of other religions are not taking up this modus operandi.

Spot on! Excellent point!

by confuzzled dude Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:33 am

truthbetold wrote:jihadi violence and koran, hinduism and caste, and us constitution and right bear arms are all issues that need to be discussed. But bringing up one when challenged on other subjects is a cowards way of replying to the challenge.

Both max and cd could not advance arguments to show that jihadi violence does not stem from koran or jihadi violence is a source of bigger concern than caste or gun problem to the wider world. That does not mean caste or gun control are not a problem nor do they not merit a discussion.

So drop your diversionary horses and face up to the challenge at hand.

Being completely illogical/irrational and cowardice are birthrights of right leaning folks or else why would anyone strongly feel that one has to carry a gun (to be safe) in a first world country. BTW, you're risking the wrath of those gun-toting/supporting intellectuals by conferring those wonderful titles meant for them on us.

by confuzzled dude Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:41 am

Kinnera wrote:
Kris wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/bergen-terrorism-root-causes/index.html

PS: Were the 9/11 hijackers from poor families? Especially Mohamed Atta?
>>>And the flip side of this if poverty is the only cause, why poor folks of other religions are not taking up this modus operandi.
Spot on! Excellent point!

What's the basis of Naxalite movement? poverty. There you go, an example from the very land you're born and raised. You probably didn't care because much of your clan was a part of feudal landlords.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:48 am

Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.
>>>and therein lies the problem.

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.
>>>>I don't know about this forum. Many issues don't seem to come up here. At a national level, they are debated. I do agree with you overall on the idea of seeing the constitution as infallible ('original intent') etc. which almost reaches the level of a religion. That precludes critical analysis to see if it fits as society evolves. I am with those who see it as a living, breathing document in general.

thank you. my intention was not to divert the original discussion which has merit, i.e. literal interpretation of a medieval text, but to force some people here to look at their own blind spots when it comes to literal interpretations of another document written long ago.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:50 am

i do think obama is wrong that the root cause for terrorism is poverty. poverty could be one of the drivers, but as shown by bin laden, mohammed atta, and now this british terrorist, well to do muslims also turn to terrorism. there is a siege mentality that seems to have taken hold in some quarters of muslims in the west.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:55 am

Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.
>>>and therein lies the problem.

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.

perhaps it is much easier and takes less courage to rail against a document written by medievalists, than take a principled stance against a law much revered by one's colleagues and neighbors.

i wonder what obama blames for the rage that compels a young man to pick up a weapon of mass destruction, enter a nursery school, and gun down more than twenty children in cold blood.
Why does a discussion on the root causes of terrorism have to be diverted to casteism and gun control? Have guts to discuss that with honesty and courage.

btw, those 20 innocent children were gun down because of the shooter's mental illess. No sane person would do that. So yeah, bring stricter laws on who the firearms should be around. The guy had a history of mental illness and the guy shouldn't have been allowed into the shooting ranges or any guns allowed at his home. Fight to bring such laws, not total gun control, which you too know is not feasible but you guys keep harping about it.

My assistant at work was hit by a drunk driver when she was 8 months pregnant and because of that, her son was born almost quadriplegic. He is seven now and totally wheel chair bound. So will you guys advocate for a total ban on alcohol, including your stupid beers, coz it's killing people or do you support stricter laws on DUI?

Incidentally, that assistant's husband left her coz he couldn't deal with a handicapped child. She's a single mom now living on her own, who possesses a gun, who goes for shooting/self defense lessons, has a gun license and all. She says that having a gun gives her a peace of mind and allows her to sleep well at night, without fear. My older manager who lives a peaceful life along with her retired and terminally ill husband by the lake side also possesses a gun. She says, 'Honey, at this age and owing to our health conditions, a gun is the only way to protect ourselves. We may never use it in our lives, but having it gives us peace of mind.' There are many such ppl in US and they will never vote for a total ban on guns. Yes, bring in stricter laws, but banning them totally is not feasible.

I was attending a seminar on smoking cessation (helping ppl quit smoking) last week. The facts that were presented there were just mind blowing. Do you know that every year as many people in US die because of tobacco related health issues as the ones who died during first world war+second world war+the korean war+the vietnam war combined? Every f'gging year! Do you know that second hand smoking is 100 times more dangerous than first hand smoking? Do you have any idea how many children and babies are exposed to second hand smoking in their homes and cars every day? Do you know that for 80% of the smokers, the habit was formed before they turned 18? Who is going to be the voice for those children? The other day, i saw a mom in a car with two little kids buckled up to their car seats in the back. The mom was smoking, but crack opened her window a bit and was putting her hand outside intermittently, holding the cigarette. Does she really think she was protecting her kids by holding the cigarettes out the window? Does she have any idea how much smoke she's exposing her little innocent kids to in the car? Who's going to be the voice for those kids?

Tobacco kills way more ppl than guns. Why don't you guys raise your voice against banning tobacco? No, you won't do that coz it's not as cool as talking about second amendment and gun control. Disgusting!

unless you've been living in a cave, the efforts to root out tobacco in the US and other western countries is relentless (as it should be). there are health warnings on tobacco products, it's taxed to the wazoo, there are PR campaigns against tobacco companies, social campaigns to prevent young people from taking it up, and there are laws in the US that severely restrict the advertising and marketing of tobacco.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:58 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.

perhaps it is much easier and takes less courage to rail against a document written by medievalists, than take a principled stance against a law much revered by one's colleagues and neighbors.

i wonder what obama blames for the rage that compels a young man to pick up a weapon of mass destruction, enter a nursery school, and gun down more than twenty children in cold blood.

1. Criticism of Koran and iSlamis is proportional to the anarchy, bombing, and killing committed by the iSlamis in the name of Koran.

2. You think you personally have criticized koran and iSlami bombing proportionally?...heck...even ever?

by Guest Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:02 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race. and that includes ones that at one point sanctioned slavery, and to this day sanction the right to carry firearms without appropriate background checks. unintended consequences of such holy books led to the massacre of twenty innocent kindergartners in connecticut some years ago.

footnote: a holy book is one that is accepted wholesale without critical examination.
>>>and therein lies the problem.

IMO there hasn't been a whole lot of critical examination of parts of the US constitution -- in particular the second amendment. there is more mayhem caused in the US homeland as a result of this particular portion of the constitution than anything in the koran. however, there is a disproportionate amount of discussion on this board about the koran by US citizens of indian origin. the second amendment doesn't merit a fraction of that discussion.

perhaps it is much easier and takes less courage to rail against a document written by medievalists, than take a principled stance against a law much revered by one's colleagues and neighbors.

i wonder what obama blames for the rage that compels a young man to pick up a weapon of mass destruction, enter a nursery school, and gun down more than twenty children in cold blood.
Why does a discussion on the root causes of terrorism have to be diverted to casteism and gun control? Have guts to discuss that with honesty and courage.

btw, those 20 innocent children were gun down because of the shooter's mental illess. No sane person would do that. So yeah, bring stricter laws on who the firearms should be around. The guy had a history of mental illness and the guy shouldn't have been allowed into the shooting ranges or any guns allowed at his home. Fight to bring such laws, not total gun control, which you too know is not feasible but you guys keep harping about it.

My assistant at work was hit by a drunk driver when she was 8 months pregnant and because of that, her son was born almost quadriplegic. He is seven now and totally wheel chair bound. So will you guys advocate for a total ban on alcohol, including your stupid beers, coz it's killing people or do you support stricter laws on DUI?

Incidentally, that assistant's husband left her coz he couldn't deal with a handicapped child. She's a single mom now living on her own, who possesses a gun, who goes for shooting/self defense lessons, has a gun license and all. She says that having a gun gives her a peace of mind and allows her to sleep well at night, without fear. My older manager who lives a peaceful life along with her retired and terminally ill husband by the lake side also possesses a gun. She says, 'Honey, at this age and owing to our health conditions, a gun is the only way to protect ourselves. We may never use it in our lives, but having it gives us peace of mind.' There are many such ppl in US and they will never vote for a total ban on guns. Yes, bring in stricter laws, but banning them totally is not feasible.

I was attending a seminar on smoking cessation (helping ppl quit smoking) last week. The facts that were presented there were just mind blowing. Do you know that every year as many people in US die because of tobacco related health issues as the ones who died during first world war+second world war+the korean war+the vietnam war combined? Every f'gging year! Do you know that second hand smoking is 100 times more dangerous than first hand smoking? Do you have any idea how many children and babies are exposed to second hand smoking in their homes and cars every day? Do you know that for 80% of the smokers, the habit was formed before they turned 18? Who is going to be the voice for those children? The other day, i saw a mom in a car with two little kids buckled up to their car seats in the back. The mom was smoking, but crack opened her window a bit and was putting her hand outside intermittently, holding the cigarette. Does she really think she was protecting her kids by holding the cigarettes out the window? Does she have any idea how much smoke she's exposing her little innocent kids to in the car? Who's going to be the voice for those kids?

Tobacco kills way more ppl than guns. Why don't you guys raise your voice against banning tobacco? No, you won't do that coz it's not as cool as talking about second amendment and gun control. Disgusting!

unless you've been living in a cave, the efforts to root out tobacco in the US and other western countries is relentless (as it should be). there are health warnings on tobacco products, it's taxed to the wazoo, there are PR campaigns against tobacco companies, social campaigns to prevent young people from taking it up, and there are laws in the US that severely restrict the advertising and marketing of tobacco.

And how effective is that? Unless you are living in a cave, the efforts to bring stricter controls for guns has been going on. Just like you guys want total gun control, ask for total tobacco and alcohol control. Total ban! Why not? Alcohol and tobacco kill more ppl than guns.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:09 am

Kinnera wrote:
And how effective is that?

very.

from the CDC:
'Blame poverty for terrorism' says Obama Trends_2011b

Kinnera wrote:Unless you are living in a cave, the efforts to bring stricter controls for guns has been going on. Just like you guys want total gun control, ask for total tobacco and alcohol control. Total ban! Why not? Alcohol and tobacco kill more ppl than guns.

who is "you guys"? i have not asked for total banning of guns.

by Guest Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:11 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
And how effective is that?

very.

from the CDC:

Kinnera wrote:Unless you are living in a cave, the efforts to bring stricter controls for guns has been going on. Just like you guys want total gun control, ask for total tobacco and alcohol control. Total ban! Why not? Alcohol and tobacco kill more ppl than guns.

who is "you guys"? i have not asked for total banning of guns.

yeah, but still more ppl die of tobacco than of guns, fyi.

If you are not for total banning of guns, but for stricter laws, then i don't see on what point you or anyone else on this forum disagree on. Everyone wants greater control on the licensing and dispensing of the guns. No brainer there.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:15 am

i don't have the energy to educate you on the long term discussion and arguments people have been having here on guns. you were not a participant in those discussions, but suddenly want to participate. that is your prerogative, but you should at least inform yourself about what we have argued about before coming to the conclusion that there is nothing to disagree about. hint: it's about background checks, not selling guns to folks with mental illness, and restrict types of guns and magazine capacity.

by Guest Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:20 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't have the energy to educate you on the long term discussion and arguments people have been having here on guns. you were not a participant in those discussions, but suddenly want to participate. that is your prerogative, but you should at least inform yourself about what we have argued about before coming to the conclusion that there is nothing to disagree about. hint: it's about background checks, not selling guns to folks with mental illness, and restrict types of guns and magazine capacity.

ok. As long as you are not for a 'total ban of guns', i am cool with that coz that's the stupidest stand anyone can take at this point in US. It's like asking for total ban of tobacco and alcohol. Not feasible.

ok..go ahead with your gun control debate in a thread about the causes of global terrorism. I am out.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:26 am

Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't have the energy to educate you on the long term discussion and arguments people have been having here on guns. you were not a participant in those discussions, but suddenly want to participate. that is your prerogative, but you should at least inform yourself about what we have argued about before coming to the conclusion that there is nothing to disagree about. hint: it's about background checks, not selling guns to folks with mental illness, and restrict types of guns and magazine capacity.
ok. As long as you are not for a 'total ban of guns', i am cool with that coz that's the stupidest stand anyone can take at this point in US. It's like asking for total ban of tobacco and alcohol. Not feasible.

ok..go ahead with your gun control debate in a thread about the causes of global terrorism. I am out.

Now MaxE will put a chart comparing the violent killings by iSlamis with the numbers killed by smoking and Guns.

by Hellsangel Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:53 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i don't have the energy to educate you on the long term discussion and arguments people have been having here on guns. you were not a participant in those discussions, but suddenly want to participate. that is your prerogative, but you should at least inform yourself about what we have argued about before coming to the conclusion that there is nothing to disagree about. hint: it's about background checks, not selling guns to folks with mental illness, and restrict types of guns and magazine capacity.
ok. As long as you are not for a 'total ban of guns', i am cool with that coz that's the stupidest stand anyone can take at this point in US. It's like asking for total ban of tobacco and alcohol. Not feasible.

ok..go ahead with your gun control debate in a thread about the causes of global terrorism. I am out.

Now MaxE will put a chart comparing the violent killings by iSlamis with the numbers killed by smoking and Guns.

Hmm. Is that a smoking gun, your Holiness?

by southindian Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:40 pm

I'm in total agreement with teacher Max. Ban all guns all over the world. Using guns is way too easy to kill. No glamor. The Jihadi John style brings more people to agree on violence.

by Propagandhi711 Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:54 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:holy books are never good for the human race.

uhhh, professor..never good? maybe your knowledge of human history is a bit shallow, perhaps?

by Sponsored content