Group+4

= = =O: Jill, Kathleen, Joel, Kaleigh, Calum, Stephanie, Bella, Murray= =B: Jon, Chris, Kris, Nathan Do, Sally=

Link 3 To answer Jon's question, i think it is deffenetly worth your wild to seek out answers anywheres on the web, because once you know you need something as big as a trasplant or major procidure, it cant hurt to educate yourself on it and see whats out there. Also i agree that this could pose as a "black market" but then again facebook is too open with information that it wouldnt be safe for the people that set it up, so i find it very unlikely that they would do such a thing on facebook. Kris June, 8th 8 43am

It's nice to know that there are actually people out there that would actually do that for somebody else just so they can live a normal life! I personaly think this is a great thing to do for somebody in need. Concidering the waiting list for any organ is long and the chances's are slim that you'll even be eligable for the organ itself. Kris June 8th 8 39am

I agree with Stephanie many hopefuls will start posting pleas for organs or anything they need. However I believe most people will not be as lucky as this man. The reporter even said the chances were very slim. I believe that this may even create a black market on face book. What do you guys think is this right place to go to seek medical or any kind of help? Jon June 7,2010 4;23pm.  I think this shows all the sceptics of face book that it can be a good thing! This man may not even have the chance to live much longer if face book was not there. I do agree with Sally that if I had a problem I probably would not think of face book first were everyone can know what’s wrong with me. Jon June 7,2010 4;23pm.

I think this one is pretty awesome. Its nice to see that facebook can be useful at times. Facebook is a good way to keep in touch with old friends and to stay connected. But it also has its creepy wierd ways to. Like someone could make a fake account and totaly creep on you,freaky stuff. Its also pretty cool that he is useing facebook to raise money for the transplant. What do you other people think about this article ???? I think its pretty awesome eh? Murray June 3, 2010 11:50 AM

My typical opinion of facebook is that it is unsafe, unpredictable, and a poor use of time. I agree with you Murray in that is can be useful for people in certain situations. I personally think that facebook is not for everyone, but it is great to see that someone has benefited from a social networking website. In my opinion, people should be in a specific circumstance to be using facebook. This man definetly falls into this category. Upon reading this article and watching the video, I instantly thought of privacy. I personally wouldn't want all facebook-users knowing that I had a life threatening disease. What are your thoughts on this situation? Sally, June.3,2010,7:15pm

I agree that I wouldn't want people knowing that my life is at risk. But on the other hand if I was close to dieing I would probably do just about anything to stay alive. Because alot of people that I know always say that they don't care if they die and I always ask "have you ever been close to death?". Now about the facebook thing. Facebook can be unsafe but everybody should know the risk of makeing a account on facebook because just about everybody talks about it. I mean just go on youtube and look for a video that probably says how unsafe it can be.Youtube would be another unsafe website but everything about the internet is unsafe and risky. What do you think about what I said? XD Murray, June 4th, 2010 11:22 AM

Facebook is definetly an interesting concept, and I can understand how people can get addicted to it. There have been many publicized news stories about the negative effects of Facebook, and the horrible things that have happened due to the lack of privacy. I agree that it is a convenient way of talking with your friends, but talking over the internet is not socializing. Most people on facebook have 150 friends or more. My question is, how many of these 150 friends do you actually talk to in person everyday? Sally,June.6,2010,11:40am

This article is quite mind boggling. Finding somebody willing and able to donate any organ is very lucky, and knowing that person is even luckier. Facebook, in my opinion, just happened to be in the right place at the right time. It didn't really help anyone. Some people post ads saying they need organ donors on craigslist, and lots of people do find donors. This is just an "it could happen to you" sappy story that is trying to promote Facebook. To answer Sally's question, out of my hundred-or-so friends on Facebook, I only talk to maybe 4 every day, 3 of them being family members. Is Facebook really the right place to turn to if you're in need of somebody, who has to be already on your friends list, to willingly donate one of their organs? Calum, June 6

I don't see there being a problem with using Facebook for this if it's you last resource... that is, if you don't mind it being public. What are the odds of everything working out so well for him? He is a very lucky considering the donor and him weren't even all that great of friends in high school. I agree with Calum's statement, Facebook just happened to be in the right place at the right time. Do you think he would have found a donor as quickly without Facebook? or have raised money? Stephanie, June 6, 2010.

I love these situations, where people just reach out and help- even from the Facebook. It actually makes me happy to see this long lost friend giving him a kidney. It just shows that there are people out there who still care, even in the strangest situations. I personally think he could have found a kidney without using Facebook, probably not as fast though. I also think he definitely could have raise money without Facebook, it just helped. What do you guys think are the possibilities of this happening again? Are there still truly good people that will help anyone they can out there? Bella, June 6, 2010.

I love it too, it's truly heart warming, it gave me hope that there are still kind-hearted people out there. I think the possibilities are pretty slim, but it's worth a try if your in a situation like that. After seeing this I'd say there are still truly good people out there. The donor agreed to giving away one of his organs leaving behind a scar, not many people would do that for an old high school acquaintance but after watching this it's clearly possible. Do you think that after people see this news report Facebook will be bombarded with groups to get someone to donate a organ? Stephanie, June 6, 2010.

Paul Jones is a hero. I don't know of many people that would donate an organ to a long lost friend. I'm sure after this transplant these two will keep in touch. This proves that facebook can be a very useful site, it possibly saved Eli's life. After this I do think more people will start using facebook for new things, maybe making more groups to get someone an organ. If his plea on facebook saved Eli's life, do you think it can save others? Jill Fox June 6

Personally I love facebook, it's just a cool way to interact with people. It's good to see that it is going to good use. Could you imagine how greatful you'd feel if an old friend said they'd donate an organ to you because of facebook? I know if i saw a group on facebook I would consider doing this for someone. I think Paul is an incredible person, and I don't even know him.

I think this is a great story. We see so many horror stories about facebook and this is a nice alternative. Even if public networking sites can be very dangerous this shows us that some good can come of it. To answer Jill's question, yes I think there could be more stories like this. Paul Jones is obviously a very generous man and I'm sure there are many other people out there willing to donate to somebody in need. Do you think maybe someday a medical center could start one big group where people could post what they need and people could respond? It would be weird and all but if it's worked this time it might work again if somebody was really in need. Kathleen June 6

Well it might work, it might not, I don't know. All I know is that this man was waiting three years for a transplant. If he did not plea for help on facebook he might still be waiting. But yes, Paul would have to be very brave; it would just be wierd, yet awesome, to give up an organ for someone that you have not talked to for 10 years. What do you guys think of the idea of possibly an online medical site where you could ask for things like organs? Nathan 06/07/10

I personally do not have facebook but after reading this story I think it's a great way to connect with old friends and stay in touch with your present ones as well. Maybe after people read this story Paul Jones will inspire more people to do similar acts of kindness. I think he did a really nice thing by saving Eli's life. If posting "I need a kidney" on facebook seemed questionable at first I'm sure he's glad he did it in the end. Do you think even more people will sign up for facebook now or start accepting more friends if they already have an account? Kathleen June 7

Well I can not say whether people would or not but I think it is fair to say that more people might be encouraged to do what Eli did and maybe post their medical needs online on social networks like facebook and myspace. I believe that if people could see past themselve and stop and think, "hey, this person is going to die if I don't donate one of my kidneys. I think I will go and see if I am a match.". But sadley we have to many in need of donors, and to few donors. Do you think a social networking site is a good place for posting medical needs? Or do you think another kind of site can be made for this? Nathan

Link 2 - Watch the video (if you are unable, read the article) and make your comments.

Really? this is the best CNN could put out? Is there nothing else better going on? CNN doesnt give a crap about the child, he just seems to be the attion getter for them talking about other issuses later on in the same arttical. They say the kid is quicker the most his age? they must mean mentaly, he is 44lbs, and only 2 years old! His parents obviously do what ever they can to keep him happy and quite, if they had real concerns they would stop with the smoking at once, and i find it hard to believe that he smokes 40 smokes a day. That would be thats about 2 smokes every hour, and thats inculding while he sleeps. honestly this is sad situation to see, but shame on CNN, there exploting him to talk about how bad smoking is and the goverment issuses. Kris D 06/01/2010 12:46pm

Honestly I do not care what this video says. I have seen reports and read stories about this. A **__TWO__** year old child is not going to just grab a cigarette, then grab a match or lighter and start smoking! Somebody had to teach him/show him how to smoke. Even if it was some random stranger that gave it to the kid, you are not going to get addicted off just one. It is also the mothers fault for buying the cigarettes for him. You can imagine the damage this will do/has done to this child who is two years old, because you can see the effects of it on adults. My only question would be why would any mother keep buying a 2 year old 40 cigarettes a day? Even if he is throwing fits. Nathan 05/31/10 8:20pm

Watching this video made me feel disgusted. This child is only two years old and he smoke 40 cigaraettes a day! I think that some people might be quick to blame Indonesia for not signing the treaty to take anit-smoking measures but I believe it is the child's immediate environment that has lead him to smoking. I'm not saying that changes shouldn't be made within the country because the facts definitely show that a change needs to happen. To answer Nathan's question I believe that there is something wrong with his mother. One cigarette at a market would not get him addicted. She said that the main reason she wants him to quit is because is because of money. I think this is an issue brought on by bad parenting and lack of awareness. What do you guys think, bad parenting, lack of government control, or both? Kaleigh, May 31st

I was disturbed as well after watching the video and reading the article. I think part of the reason Aldi is smoking is because of the lack of protection against children in Indonesia, as well as the parenting aspect. Personally, I think this child should attend a rehabilitation center to try to improve his health and well being. Aldi's parents should also seek help to learn how to deal with their child's needs, for the sake of his health and quality of life. Chris, I disagree with your statement about the lack of importance of this issue. Although this story could be considered insignificant, it is beneficial to bring awareness so the affected children can recieve help. In my opinion, awareness could allow for these children to get the help they need, so similar situations could be prevented and resolved. What are your opinions on this issue? Do you think this article is insignificant to viewers and listeners? Sally, June.2,2010,5:40

I agree that this is terrible that a young, innocent child is doing such a disgusting habit, but it isn't his fault. It is, however, his mothers fault for not stopping it sooner, and mostly for smoking while pregnant. It's great that the government is offering to pay the family for support of their child. When it says the child vomits when he doesn't get a cigarette, do you think it's voluntarily or a side effect of this insane addiction? Calum, June 2

I think it's lack of parenting care, to be honest. This is quite ridiculous. Why on earth would the mother of this child allow him to smoke not just a cigarette, but about 40 a day? I really don't understand it. Does they not know the things it can do to you? Aldi's parents need to learn that this is very unhealthy. Obviously kids are going to throw fits, but giving in like that is the worst thing they could have done. Aldi has his parents wrapped around his finger. If he wants a smoke all he has to do is throw a fit. I find it sad to hear that the family see's it as amusement, I personally think it's disgusting. To answer Calum's question, I think the vomiting is a side effect from his addiction. I'm guessing this boy has a lot of harm done to his body, he needs to be stopped or who knows what state of health he'll be in 10 years from now. Stephanie, June 2, 2010.

Answering Stephanie's questions, I think the parents are afraid of the child throwing too big a fit, they may fear him hurting himself, or other people thinking it's child abuse. The man who taunted the little boy with a cigarette at the airport wouldn't be too happy to see any human, regardless their age, throwing a fit because they "need" a smoke that much. The parents may know the bad effects that smoking has on humans, and maybe they just don't care, but it may be fear that drives them to spend the $4 a day on cigarettes. Spending that much money on ANYTHING can't be good for the family, financially. The family didn't look like they were bathing in cash. If the parents can afford to spend that much on cigarettes, wouldn't they be able to use the money towards nicotine gum/ patches, even if they're not as readily available? Calum, June 2

But isn't this sort of taking the easy way out? I can see how there would be fear of people thinking you abuse your child, but is it really right for you to give the child the smokes to save yourself from having to deal with the rumors? The fact that they are spending all this money on cigarettes but not towards nicotine gum or patches really confuses me. Are they doing it because they don't have access to the nicotine gum and such, because they just want to take the easy way out, or is it because they are just trying to make him happy and they feel as though this will make him happy? Stephanie, June 2, 2010.

This is a really startling article. If a child grows up in a place where smoking is common they will obviously see no problem with it and that is where we need to start fixing it. Aldi's parents smoked while his mother was pregnant so the addiction was probably formed before he was even born--if his mother quit and is trying to get him to quit she most likely didn't know what she was doing to her child. I don't think it is a lack of parenting at all but a lack of knowledge. The film stated that advertising for cigarettes is all over the place where that family lives and that's what we need to change. There are a lot of people all over there that would probably change in an instant if they knew the harm smoking was causing. On the other hand if it has been a part of their culture for years is it sacred to them or something like that? If so would change be right? Is it better to be physically harmed or have your beliefs damaged? Kathleen June 2, 2010

Ok, this is to both to Stephanie's and Calum's last respones. The parents are taking the easy way out, there is no doubt about it. But from a parents point of veiw they have dug a hole way over there head and now the his "fits" actally cause him to hut him self seourouly, there more or less "inclined" to give in to there sons wants, or his safety, even though they are putting it at risk with the smoking. I isee them as reaching out for help because the dont know what o do, they dont give him what he wants, he freaks like a WoW freak out and hurts himself or possibly even others. Now, if they give it to him they are hurting his heath and putting him at risk dow the road, what the parents really need is some outside help, cause really, the kid wont remember anything thats happening now, he is 2! Honestly, does anyone here remember when they were two years old and what there life was like? Kris D June 2nd /2010 11:28pm

I agree completely with Nathan and personally i am disturbed by the fact that this two year old is smoking. I would also blame the parents, because clearly he didn't start smoking by peer presure from his peers. But honestly what kind if parent would let their kid smoke at two years old? They're basically throwing away his life for him. Even though he throws fits when he doesn't get his way, the parents should still seak help for his addiction, which is accepted and considered entertaining. Do you know how wrong that is, to think it's entertaining to watch a two year old smoke? even though smoking has been in their culture for a long time, that doesn't mean it isn't a hazard and something that needs to be fixed. Jill Fox june 3rd, 12:21 am

I'm with stephanie on this one, why wouldn't the parents at least try to make him quit? They should be doing all they can to help their son. Everything's in their power and by buying him cigarettes they're just making the situation worse. Kris is right, I remember absolutely nothing about when I was two years old. This family clearly needs help, or this kid will continue smoking 40 cigarettes a day and he will die before he even gets the chance to live, which would be terrible to see. Jill Fox June 3rd, 12:30

Since we've established that it's obviously not the kid's fault since he is two, maybe some changes should be made to how the parents are dealt with. In a country where smoking is part of the culture, once again, I'm saying people need to be aware of the dangers smoking can cause. We can't get mad at people and say they don't know how to take care of their kid if they just didn't know any better. When a mother goes in for her doctor's appointment before her baby is born the doctor should tell her what to do and not to do so that her baby is safe. If the parents didn't know any better then this is a sign that the doctors and government (who put up smoking adds) aren't doing their job to keep the people safe. This kid needs help. A two year old smoking is __seriously wrong!__ But can you guys really blame the parents if they apparently didn't know any better? I think that this country has been left behind in the health system advances that other countries have and they need to be made aware. Kathleen June 3, 2010

Okay this is messed up. I agree to the people who said it wasn't the kids fault because the mother did say that she smoked while she was pregnant with him, That means he got addicted even before he was born. But I do say it is the parents fault because kids cry or whine when they don't get what they want, its up to the parent to give him what he wants. The parents have to be strong and stand thier ground when the child acts like that. Now I say they have to get the kid to stop smoking, because the parents job is to help the kid to give him what he needs not what he wants and what the kid needs is to stop smoking. Murray June 3, 2010 11:40 AM

In Canadian society, we view children smoking as horrific. Indonesian culture is clearly different, considering there are many children in the same situation as Aldi. Why do you think that our cultures are so different? Is Canada disconnected from that side of the world? Why do you think that cultures differ all across the globe? Sally, June 3,2010,7:00

I can understand Hillary Clinton's concern for South Korea. I believe she is attempting to prevent any tension between the two places. This event is a serious issue considering forty-six South Korean sailors died. In my opinion, the situation has most likely been blown up because of the previous problems South Korea and North Korea have had. Hillary Clinton said that North Korea provoked South Korea. Do you think that her statement was reasonable, or do you think that she should have considered the sides of both places? Do you think that the reaction of North Korea is beneficial to anyone in threatening to block cross-border traffic, or could this lead to larger problems? Could this influential event lead to a cival war between the two? Do you think that the cival war in 1950 solved any of the tensions between North Korea and South Korea, or has unfinished business allowed for a new problem to emerge? Sally May.26,2010, 7:15pm

=Link 1=

I read the article and I'm not too concerned about whats happening in Korea. Even if it was happening in North America I wouldn't worry about it. I think North and South Korea should solve thier problems by themselves because if more peole get involved it might just make even more people upset. To answer one of your questions no I don't think that the cival war in 1950 solved anything because war never really solves anything its still blood shed people just end up loseing everything. Murray May 27,2010 12:09 pm

I think this article is a great example of how wars are started. In the first paragraph of this piece it says that the missile was BLAMED on North Korea, not that it WAS North Korea. They even deny that they did it, although, I don't agree to threatening to start a war just for accusations. I realize that the missile may have had North Korean markings and what not, but there is the chance that they didn't fire it. And I agree with the previous comments, it most likely is being hyped up because of their past relationships, and war solves no problems. Edwin Starr put it best when he said "War, what is it good for? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING." Is it right for North Korea to make threats just for being blamed? Calum, May 29

I don't think that North Korea should be threatening South Korea, because it could be a misunderstanding. North Korea's threats could also create bigger problems. I agree with you Calum in that a war would not be an effective way to solve the issue at hand. I believe that the first thing that needs to be done is to find out or clarify who commited the crime. It is not a good idea to blame others before it is clear who did it. In my opinion, the mature and just way to solve the issue would be to talk it out, and come to an agreement as to what to do next. I believe North Korea and South Korea should work the problem out together, instead of allowing other places to get involved. Due to the fact that North Korea and South Korea have had previous issues, this is probably the cause of the tension between the two places. What are your thoughts on the issue? Sally, May.30,2010,4:57pm.

I think that this is a problem between South Korea and North Korea. I disagree with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and I do not think the whole world should respond to the ship, wouldn’t that just cause more problems? Some of the world will side with North Korea and some will side with South Korea, no one knows the whole story and it will just cause for a bigger war. If we involve the whole world everything will just get blown out of proportion. I agree with Sally and I don’t think North Korea should be threatening South Korea. Jill, May 30th

I do believe this is an issue however is Hillary Clinton doing the right thing? I don't believe so, if she lays blame on a side then there could be war which would be much worse than the sinking of one vessel. I agree with Sally that there should be no threats laid until they have evidence to support the crime. Jonathan,May 31, 2010 7:24AM.

I agree with Calum that this is a way to start a war, maybe a pointless war. Why are South Korea blaming north Korea for such a major thing, if some people are unsure?. I believe that this issue should be left to North/South Korea to decide, not be pressured by other countries. If they decide to go to war then that was there decision not someone else's, that’s the way I believe it should be. I Hillary Clinton is just pressuring the two side into war. Jonathan,Kennedy, May31,2010 8;21 AM

I agree with the other comments, But I think people just blame others because well its in are history in the past like all of the wars that happened its just how people are. Humanity is just going to rip its self apart, also I think America is trying to get them to start a war so that they can jump into the war with North Korea and South Korea because the American Goverment mostley spent thier money on weapons and all the stuff they don't really need. It's all because of fear of being killed or something like that. Murray,May 31,2010 12:11 PM

To answer Jonathan's question, I think they're blaming North Korea because they are the closest enemy that South Korea has. The blame may also be cause by their past disagreements. Also, the United States is always quick to blame the people they fear. They enjoy promoting propaganda, and keeping the general public in fear of anything and everything. Calum, May 31

I agree with most of you, but I don’t think its Hilary Clinton's place make these decisions. I know that it’s her job but this is a serious issue. Given the United States’ history with Korea I believe if anyone is making a decision from the US it should be Barack Obama .Whether or not they should be involved is your personal opinion, but thanks to Hilary Clinton the US already is. Depending on how serious this issue becomes, their involvement and what they decide to do could eventually be a major event that decides if there will some type of a war. If this issue does lead to war Canada will automatically be involved because of NATO. Do you guys think that Canada should get involved? And what would the US gain from a war? Kaleigh, May 31st

I agree with almost all of what you guys are saying also, it makes sense for the most part. I think Canada will most likely will get involved in this whole situation, whether I think they should or not, I'm not quite sure. I think that if they were to get into this it would go the same as every other war that Canada has been involved with. I don't particularly think the US could gain much from another war... I think they just like being into a war, it keeps them busy. What do you guys think is the reason the US likes to be involved with war so much? Bella, May 31st

If there should be a war I do think Canada should do its part. The more people/countries involved the quicker the conflict can be resolved. This is a very difficult situation, because war could start anytime. Reason being is because when hostilities between North and South Korea stopped it was not because of victory or surrendering; it was because a cease fire was given. That cease fire still holds today, meaning that this event could possibly have restarted/reopened the war from the 1950's. Why do you think that they ended this in only a cease fire? Nathan 05/31/10 8:10pm

I agree with the whole 'Canada should do its part', but we have done our part.. time and time again. We've been so involved with everything every country has been in. And it's always caused a lot of hurt, so again, I'm still not totally sure on what Canada should do. It's half in half for me, we should do our part, but also we've also done a lot involving war in the past. What do you guys think is the right thing to do? Bella, May 31st.

Well if this war broke out...China would be on the side of North Korea. The only way is to convince China that North Korea torpedoed the South Korean ship. But if war did break out, we would not want an outcome like WWI or WWII; where millions upon millions died. I agree with Benia that Canada has done its part it past and present wars. But this war will not be like the one in Afganistan, only worse. Anyway, I feel that if the United States are willing to help out in a war that is not theirs, we should help out too; even if only in a small way. Nathan