SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are "vulnerable," "entitlement," "diversity," "transgender," "fetus," "evidence-based" and "science-based."
You don't say!
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
CDC Gets List of Forbidden Words: Science-Based, Evidence-Based, Vulnerable, Fetus, ...
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 94 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 3, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 17 2017, @04:14PM (12 children)
Shirley, you jest. The Arabs had far more equipment, some of it technologically superior* to Israel's, much of technologically equal, and only some of it inferior. Numbers alone should have won that war. The Arabs, especially Arafat, were so humiliated that they had to create a conspiracy theory in which the US made strikes against the Arabs, because the Jews couldn't have done it alone. (Never mind that the Jews were busy shooting up the USS Liberty at the time.)
In reality, the Jews had huge swinging balls, and they went into battle with the intention of WINNING. Many Arabs are known for going into battle, and expecting Allah to win the battle for them.
*the superior equipment consisted mostly of battle armor. The burnt and shattered tanks were still in the desert, (from both '67 and '71) to be inspected, when I was in the Navy. You can tell Israeli tanks from Arab tanks, because Chrysler. Chrysler corporation built tanks with shit hydraulic systems that tended to leak, and catch fire - hence the burnt tanks. Russia, on the other hand, built tanks that didn't leak, and used less flammable hydraulic fluid - hence the shattered tanks. Egyptian and Syrian tankers should have mopped Israel's armor away, and spearheaded major infantry assaults, based on technology.
https://highered.nbclearn.com/portal/site/HigherEd/flatview?cuecard=50044 [nbclearn.com]
Armed Forces Study Danger of Hydraulic Fluid in Military Equipment
That is exactly why Israel builds it's own armor today.
Note that NBC News apparently has confused core with corps - those misspellings will be found on the linked page, if you bother to click on it.
Of course, one must remember the Muslim chant - inshallah. God willing, we will . . . whatever. Strangely, Muslims never seem to consider that Allah was fighting on Israel's side? God willed that Israel would win? Think about it . . . American technology didn't hand Israel the victory free of charge.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @07:53PM (11 children)
Hey bub, 1948 called and it wants its colonial facts back.
Comparing the situation of modern day Palestinians to multiple oil-rich states from 50+ years ago is to literally bury your head in the sand.
The facts of today are that Israel has been systematically ghettoizing the palestinians for decades.
When even fucking Everlast [youtube.com] knows what's up, its time to stop denying.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 17 2017, @08:33PM (10 children)
Cute. The Six Day War was in 1967. The Yom Kippur war was in 1973. I viewed some of those tanks in 1978/1979. The article I linked to was dated 1983. The first Israeli built Merkava MK1 went into service in 1979. So, maybe you're not as cute as you think you are? No, I wasn't talking about 1948, I was talking about events that were "current events" in my own lifetime.
Also, the Palestinians aren't using the same weapons and tactics that they were using in 1948. In '78-'79, my own "baptism of fire" was under a rocket attack. Stupid little shitty rockets that couldn't really be aimed. Payload was minimal, damage minimal. There was no guidance system, the Pals just pointed them in the general direction, lit a fire, and watched them fly away. Today, the Pals have rockets that can reach Jerusalem from the Gaza Strip. The rockets still have crappy guidance, but they DO HAVE guidance.
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/middle-east-unrest/hamas-firing-china-designed-syria-made-m-302-rockets-israel-n152461 [nbcnews.com]
No - you're not half so cute as you think you are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @08:45PM
1979 was 39 years ago
You know you've lost the argument when your best rebuttal is that your facts are just 4 decades out of date.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @09:15PM (8 children)
...and Israel was the aggressor.
The Yom Kippur war was in 1973
...and Israel was the aggressor.
Way to step on your own argument.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @09:35PM
Runaway personifies that line about riding with the devil and hiding with the lord.
He's what's called a "fox evangelical." [twitter.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @10:42PM (2 children)
When there is a military build-up right on the other side of the border involving lots of tanks and military aircraft, and that country's leader is demonizing you to an unusual degree, attacking does not make you the aggressor. There is no duty to wait until you've had your airfields blown to bits.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 18 2017, @03:10AM (1 child)
Within its own borders, a country is free to conduct whatever military maneuvers it wants to.
attacking does not make you the aggressor
Actually, crossing the border with military might is the definition of aggression.
Additionally, the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 (USA is a signatory) forbids the Bush Doctrine (preemptive war).
Big clue: Just because USA.gov does something doesn't make it right.
In fact, WRT militarism in the last half century, what USA.gov has done has been the template for what -NOT- to do.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 18 2017, @06:05AM
Had you been running Israel, you'd have let the country come to an end. You'd fancy yourself to be moral and ethical as you and your fellow citizens are dying. I don't find it moral or ethical to let them die.
The attack was obviously coming in a matter of days. Destroying the enemy works a lot better when you are dishing out the nasty surprise than when you are receiving it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 18 2017, @03:08AM (3 children)
Read what AC says.
You may not be familiar with Texas law. I visit a town. Some dude carrying a gun gets loud and obnoxious, and says he is going to shoot me. I have all the justification I need to shoot him dead. No, I wasn't the aggressor, HE WAS! His credible statement that he was going to shoot me was the aggression. It was an assault, and I acted in self defense when I shot him first.
International law is no different.
Israel has been restrained, if you want to know the truth. When the shooting starts, there is no real reason to stop shooting as long as there are still bodies at non-ambient temperatures.
You don't like Israel? Oh-kay. I don't like Israel a whole lot either. But, try to get your facts straight. The Arabs have been the aggressors in almost every conflict since David ben Gurion and associates bombed that British hotel.
Next, you're going to be telling us how sweet and nice the Arabs are, right?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 18 2017, @03:13AM
Lol, look at runaway! Not only is he a texas lawyer, despite living in a different state even, he's also an international lawyer!
We are truly blessed to have such an educated fool here on soylent.
Ayup!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 18 2017, @03:20AM (1 child)
If there was any veracity your "facts", it would have been simple for you to have linked to a list of Arab incursions into the Israeli homeland.
I notice that you didn't provide any such substantiation.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 18 2017, @04:45AM
You're being intentionally obtuse. Rocket attacks constitute "incursions". Doesn't much matter that few were injured, and none killed in those attacks, the intent was there. Your ideology means jack shit if you and your friends are pointing weapons at someone - you'll be killed on sight just for pointing weapons.
You've forgotten too that this is a tribal land, and the crap has been going on for thousands of years. Muslims have been putting Jews to the sword, and burning down synagogues since the madman Mohammed was dancing around on the sands. Ditto with Christians, animists, and everyone else who didn't believe the same as Mohammed.
In Arabia, only the fittest survive. You may moon over some misplaced ideology, but no one over there is listening to you. No one. Arabs and Jews alike laugh at you. If you're going to cry rivers that neither the Jews nor the Arabs play by your rules, you might want to remove yourself to a drought stricken area, where the water will do some good. Reality isn't going to change to make you happy.