TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Man sets himself on fire outside the White House
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Man sets himself on fire outside the White House

quote:

Man Sets Himself on Fire Near White House 1 hour, 13 minutes ago U.S. Government - AP WASHINGTON - A man set himself afire Monday just outside a White House gate and repeatedly yelled "Allah Allah" as a Secret Service officer held him facedown on the sidewalk. Alan Etter, spokesman for the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Services, said the man suffered burns to about 30 percent of his body. The man had burns to his head, back, arms and face but was conscious when medics took him to Washington Hospital Center, Etter said. White House doctors joined uniformed Secret Service personnel in administering first aid until the emergency service technicians arrived. They transported the 52-year-old man, who was not identified, to the burn unit of Washington Hospital Center. Lorie Lewis, a Secret Service spokeswoman, said the man "set himself on fire on Pennsylvania Avenue on the north side of the White House complex." Etter said the incident occurred about 2 p.m. next to the guard post on the north side of the White House beside a section of Pennsylvania Avenue recently reopened to pedestrians. Witnesses reported hearing screams and seeing a man in flames. The man's right trouser leg was burned. Afterward, he lay on the sidewalk about 10-15 feet from his partially burned raincoat, attache case and various papers. A fire extinguisher was there as well. Secret Service personnel confiscated the man's items. A Florida couple with a video camera taped the incident. John and Beverly Beers, tourists from Palm Beach, Fla., say they turned the tape over to the Secret Service. Authorities also interviewed the couple in Lafayette Park. Jim Clarke of Burke, Va., was walking his dog when the incident occurred. He said Secret Service agents acted quickly and used an extinguisher to put out the flames. There was no immediate word on the man's condition or what led to the fire. There was evidence of an ignitable liquid at the scene, Etter said. The Secret Service (news - web sites), which disclosed no additional details, is investigating the incident.

wow another dumbass Arab!

quote:

Originally posted by Philly wow another dumbass Arab!

another dumbass westerner generalization...

quote:

Originally posted by Philly wow another dumbass Arab!

Arab or not, the guy obviously had some intense problems...

This guy should've died, and too bad he didn't - yet. Anybody stupid enough to set themselves on fire doesn't deserve tax dollars to pay for his hospital bills.

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by JM Arab or not, the guy obviously had some intense problems... This guy should've died, and too bad he didn't - yet. Anybody stupid enough to set themselves on fire doesn't deserve tax dollars to pay for his hospital bills. >JM<

I still don't understand what he was trying to prove

quote:

Originally posted by JM Arab or not, the guy obviously had some intense problems... This guy should've died, and too bad he didn't - yet. Anybody stupid enough to set themselves on fire doesn't deserve tax dollars to pay for his hospital bills. >JM<

so i take it you also think that people who smoke and get lung cnacer shouldnt be treated either. What about someone who speeds and crashes there car, should they just be left to die on the side of the road?

quote:

Originally posted by Michael19 so i take it you also think that people who smoke and get lung cnacer shouldnt be treated either. What about someone who speeds and crashes there car, should they just be left to die on the side of the road?

Actually I kinda like that idea...not to the extreme that you've highlighted it though...

I think there's a certain order in Canada who's treated first...i'm not sure if it's proposed or already in place that if you're a smoker and have lung cancer you'll be last to be treated or something...

quote:

Originally posted by starsearcher Actually I kinda like that idea...not to the extreme that you've highlighted it though... I think there's a certain order in Canada who's treated first...i'm not sure if it's proposed or already in place that if you're a smoker and have lung cancer you'll be last to be treated or something...

I'd agree with that...

Not saying one life is worth more than the other but if that person in the hosptial PUT themselves there through years of self-abuse, why should I have to pay for their dumb ass when they never full well what they were doing...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r I'd agree with that... Not saying one life is worth more than the other but if that person in the hosptial PUT themselves there through years of self-abuse, why should I have to pay for their dumb ass when they never full well what they were doing...

They should just raise taxes on cigarettes and put the money into Health Care.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r I'd agree with that... Not saying one life is worth more than the other but if that person in the hosptial PUT themselves there through years of self-abuse, why should I have to pay for their dumb ass when they never full well what they were doing...

probaly because we all harm each other in a different way or another,drink,drugs,food etc etc.


if your to say "smokers should be treated last because they borught it on themselves", you are going down a very dodgey road, you could nearly nit pick every sickness as being caused by the person.

i.e heart problems=bad eating. It would be a vicous circle.

this is America, we should have let him have his freedom of expression and let himself burn!

quote:

Originally posted by BadBadNeil this is America, we should have let him have his freedom of expression and let himself burn!

Which is why they let him burn... "we don't need no water let the mother f****r burn..." till they finally extinguished them

quote:

Originally posted by .montecarlo. They should just raise taxes on cigarettes and put the money into Health Care.

We just passed that in Oklahoma....I think the tax is 4 cents per cigarette.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael19 so i take it you also think that people who smoke and get lung cnacer shouldnt be treated either. What about someone who speeds and crashes there car, should they just be left to die on the side of the road?

wtf are you talking about?

i'm tired of people taking shit out of context and posing questions that have nothing to do with anything.

the loser that set himself on fire was basically in the act of comitting self-imposed imminent suicide. that's much different than smoking/lung cancer, and/or chosing to drive a car.

key words:

self-imposed imminent suicide



>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by JM wtf are you talking about? i'm tired of people taking shit out of context and posing questions that have nothing to do with anything. the loser that set himself on fire was basically in the act of comitting self-imposed imminent suicide. that's much different than smoking/lung cancer, and/or chosing to drive a car. key words: self-imposed imminent suicide >JM<

Hmmmm yeah I agree

quote:

Originally posted by Michael19 probaly because we all harm each other in a different way or another,drink,drugs,food etc etc. if your to say "smokers should be treated last because they borught it on themselves", you are going down a very dodgey road, you could nearly nit pick every sickness as being caused by the person. i.e heart problems=bad eating. It would be a vicous circle.

Not really.
Lung Cancer from years of smoking doesn't take much diagnosis...

Bringing back personal responsibility as opposed to government support (ie.taxpayer support) is what is needed.
There's just not enough accountability in people anymore...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Not really. Lung Cancer from years of smoking doesn't take much diagnosis...

Then how can you explain those that die at the age of 91 yet smoked a pack every day of their life?

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Then how can you explain those that die at the age of 91 yet smoked a pack every day of their life?

Good point... regardless of what it says on the warning label, the relationship between smoking and lung cancer is one of association; not causation.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Then how can you explain those that die at the age of 91 yet smoked a pack every day of their life?

True; I mean...look at George Burns and how old he got.

Maybe some people just won't die? lol
(I know, that's bad...I liked George too)

But there's no denying that they are the exception and not the rule.

But getting back to the human torch...

This guy obviously has a few screws loose.
What good can he do now in the state he's in now as opposed to what he could have done.
That person was without hope and thought selfishness was his only escape, dispite what statement he was trying to make.
The fact that he's Arabic has no other connotation to me other than he was indeed a sick man...

quote:

Originally posted by JM This guy should've died, and too bad he didn't - yet. Anybody stupid enough to set themselves on fire doesn't deserve tax dollars to pay for his hospital bills. >JM<

Why do you assume tax dollars are paying for it? After all, we are in one of the few countries with private healthcare.

Re: Man sets himself on fire outside the White House

quote:

Originally posted by starsearcher

About three decades too late. George Lincoln Rockwell and American Nazi Party used to pass out gasoline and matches during anti-war demonstrations in D.C. back in the 'Nam era when buddhists were firing themselves up over there.


[[[smoke]]]

quote:

Originally posted by auujay Why do you assume tax dollars are paying for it? After all, we are in one of the few countries with private healthcare.

Who knows if it is tax dollars but someone has to pay for it. Most likely if you are willing to burn yourself and commit suicide you don't have health coverage. Our country will treat the fool anyways and someone will get stuck with the outrageous medical bills.

quote:

Originally posted by BadBadNeil this is America, we should have let him have his freedom of expression and let himself burn!

Yeah, I was thinking of the freedom in Europe vs freedom in the US thread when I read this. Maybe he was stopped because he carried out his suicide attempt in public view - others might suffer severe physical problems for witnessing it.

quote:

Originally posted by .montecarlo. Good point... regardless of what it says on the warning label, the relationship between smoking and lung cancer is one of association; not causation.

I think that you have misunderstood what a causal relationship is. A causal relationship does not have to be "if A then definately B" (in fact I would contest the existence of such relationships. A causal relationship would be "if we fix A then the probability of B changes". And data does support that such a relationship between smoking and lung cancer exists. The only other explanation (and the one the tobacco industry insists that we must not rule out) is that there is some unknown third factor which has a causal impact on both your smoking habits and your lung cancer resistance - something like a gene which leaves you susceptible to lung cancer *and* triggers a irresistable urge to smoke.

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic I think that you have misunderstood what a causal relationship is. A causal relationship does not have to be "if A then definately B" (in fact I would contest the existence of such relationships. A causal relationship would be "if A then the probability of B changes". And data does support that such a relationship between smoking and lung cancer exists. The only other explanation (and the one the tobacco industry insists that we must not rule out) is that there is some unknown third factor which has a causal impact on both your smoking habits and your lung cancer resistance - something like a gene which leaves you susceptible to lung cancer *and* triggers a irresistable urge to smoke.

Well, it depends on what criteria you're using to establish a causal relationship. Admittedly i'm more familiar with a general framework than with specific medical arguments.

quote:

Method of Agreement: If a specific antecedent circumstance is found to be present on every occasion on which a phenomenon occurs, it may be inferred to be the cause of that phenomenon. Method of Difference: If an antecedent circumstance is present only on those occasions when a phenomenon occurs, it may be inferred to be the cause of that phenomenon. Joint Method of Agreement and Difference: If an antecedent circumstance is invariably present when, but only when, a phenomenon occurs, it may be inferred to be the cause of that phenomenon. Method of Residues: If portions of a complex phenomenon can be explained by reference to parts of a complex antecedent circumstance, whatever remains of that circumstance may be inferred to be the cause of the remainder that phenomenon. Method of Concomitant Variation: If an antecedent circumstance is observed to change proportionally with the occurrence of a phenomenon, it is probably the cause of that phenomenon. www.philosophypages.com

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Then how can you explain those that die at the age of 91 yet smoked a pack every day of their life?

my grandpa. smoked since he was 7 years old (2 packs/day since i've been born). died at 83 years old... was a officer for 4 years in WWII and after that won the Yugoslav cross country championship all while smoking.

>JM<

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.