It's based on a lie, so it's worthless anyway.Well shit, there were two threads posted on this yesterday. I did not catch it as their titles were not as descriptive.....Sorry.....Mods, lock it down if you want.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's based on a lie, so it's worthless anyway.Well shit, there were two threads posted on this yesterday. I did not catch it as their titles were not as descriptive.....Sorry.....Mods, lock it down if you want.
Fake news! It specifically says whites over the age of 65 are not allowed to receive treatment! This is like colored restrooms all over again just like liberals did last time!Did you read the real report? Daily Mail is not a real report; https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/s...during_resource_shortages_20211223_1000_0.pdf
No. Not “same difference”. Non-whites was the term used to identify one specific group who should be treated differently based on their skin color.Non- whites, minorities, same difference. Why are you clowns so adverse to facts? Non white people are typically higher risk medical patients than white ones. That doesn't mean whites can't also be high risk you little crying victims.
Because those non whites are inherently high risk due to historical inequitable treatment. Pretending as if you don't know why that is the recommendation, as if it were made in a vacuum, really doesn't help your point.No. Not “same difference”. Non-whites was the term used to identify one specific group who should be treated differently based on their skin color.
I saw nothing that indicates you were any authority on which communities had higher medical risks.I saw nothing to indicate that you were tasked as the spokes-racist for NYC.
The term moron comes to mind for people who pretend as if all communities are at equal health risk.There’s a term commonly used to describe identifying and excluding groups of people based upon their skin color. Can you help me out and identify that term?
You seem to have a need to endorse racism as a cure for what you copied and pasted as “historical inequitable treatment”.Because those non whites are inherently high risk due to historical inequitable treatment. Pretending as if you don't know why that is the recommendation, as if it were made in a vacuum, really doesn't help your point.
I saw nothing that indicates you were any authority on which communities had higher medical risks.
The term moron comes to mind for people who pretend as if all communities are at equal health risk.
White New Yorkers told not to bother trying to get COVID treatments
Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor as longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19,' the document reads.
I mean damn, just when you thought NY could not get anymore retarded.
It specifically says whites over the age of 65 are not allowed to receive treatment!
White New Yorkers told not to bother trying to get COVID treatments
Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor as longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19,' the document reads.
I mean damn, just when you thought NY could not get anymore retarded.
Clearly you don’t realize you posted a link to a document that says non-white will be prioritized. Did you even read it? Smh. The OP is correct. Talk about pitiful. LOLWho would have guessed, that the first thread I read in 2022 is a big fat lie. Leave it to Daily Mail and FOX to lead the charge with fake news.
https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/s...during_resource_shortages_20211223_1000_0.pdf
You are definitely getting a reputation there bud as a pitiful liar.
In other words whites to the back of the line.You shouldn't take the Daily Fails word for it and read past the headline. They posted a picture of the memo and nowhere does it say white people are barred from treatment. What it does do say is that it should be given to people at high risk and makes a point that minorities are considered an inherent high risk due to systemic inequities.
The New York Dept. of Health does not say that. Daily Mail is implying that.Fake news! It specifically says whites over the age of 65 are not allowed to receive treatment! This is like colored restrooms all over again just like liberals did last time!
This is a post that shows you've been destroyed on the excuses you attempted to make. Now take your racist ace into a discussion that you might have a chance at convincing someone on, because you've been beaten on this one.Non- whites, minorities, same difference. Why are you clowns so adverse to facts? Non white people are typically higher risk medical patients than white ones. That doesn't mean whites can't also be high risk you little crying victims.
Regardless, he still attempted to interpret what he read here, and then he fell right into his own trap regardless of what the report said. Gotta love it.That's because you chose to read fake news. Did you read the "OFFICIAL" report? It says nothing about white people. Surely you aren't so stupid as to take seriously a partisan news outlet who can't provide it's own sources?
Yes I did. The New York Health Dept. does not say that. Show us where it prioritizes non-whites.Clearly you don’t realize you posted a link to a document that says non-white will be prioritized. Did you even read it? Smh. The OP is correct. Talk about pitiful. LOL
LOL, now you are having to correct one of your own... ROTFLMBO.The New York Dept. of Health does not say that. Daily Mail is implying that.
He interpreted it as prioritizing non-whites. He was wrong. And he did it because he needs to pedal lies. It's the whole point. To take an article, then twist it to his convenience.Regardless, he still attempted to interpret what he read here, and then he fell right into his own trap regardless of what the report said. Gotta love it.
Is it? I'm correcting the OP. What are you doing? On the sidelines talking shit as always. Get out of here. You're boring and contribute nothing.LOL, now you are having to correct one of your own... ROTFLMBO.
No, people should be treated based on risk and non white communities have higher risk due to historical inequities. This is all fairly easy to understand for anyone who isn't a mutant or a moron.You seem to have a need to endorse racism as a cure for what you copied and pasted as “historical inequitable treatment”.
So to summarize this hilariously confused argument, there is no case to be made for historical racism and the Democratic Party is incredibly racist and hasn't changed since the civil war. That's brilliant.You have made no case for any “historical inequitable treatment”. You just copied a slogan. The Democrat party has a long, lurid history of racism and they haven’t moved an inch forward since before the Civil War.
If the OP is right, show us. Don't talk about it.Clearly you don’t realize you posted a link to a document that says non-white will be prioritized. Did you even read it? Smh. The OP is correct. Talk about pitiful. LOL