- 1 Post
- 91 Comments
15·1 month agoFull article
DOGE says it stopped millions of dollars meant for condoms in Gaza By Casey Harper | The Center Square
(The Center Square) – White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at the White House press briefing Tuesday that the administration had just stopped millions in taxpayer dollars from paying for condoms for those in Gaza.
Leavitt said the finding came as a result of the pause in federal funding for a range of federal efforts, including foreign aid payments, so they can be reviewed.
That pause has sparked pushback and criticism for the Trump administration as many federal efforts ground to a halt. Leavitt, however, pointed to the Gaza condoms as proof of the necessity of the pause.
“DOGE and OMB also found that there was about to be $50 million taxpayer dollars that went out the door to fund condoms in Gaza,” Leavitt said. “That is a preposterous waste of taxpayer money.”
It is unclear if the entire $50 million was for condoms, which would be an incredible sum for a population of that size, or if the condoms were just part of a $50 million spending plan. According to media reports, Hamas militants used condoms as balloons and have tied explosives to them in previous attacks.
Leavitt said they also stopped $37 million that was about to be sent to the World Health Organization. Trump signed an executive order last week to pull the U.S. out of WHO.
“So that is what this pause is focused on, being good stewards of tax dollars,” she added.
Elon Musk, who now heads DOGE, wrote on X that the finding was just the "tip of [the] iceberg.”
Screenshot
No, I really don’t think that ~50% of the population is “pro-life” because they hate women and want to force young girls to raise babies. If that was the case, why would they be ok with girls giving up their kids for adoption? Surely they’d want that delegalized too. Besides, if you hate women and want to see them suffer, there’s got to be an easier, more efficient way that will result in even greater harm.
Your comment is a “pro-choice” equivalent of a “pro-lifer” saying that everyone “pro-choice” is a satanic pedophile who wants to murder babies for their own amusement.
I know exactly what your comment is supposed to be. A moral superiority circle jerk based on an illogical, unsubstantiated, unrealistic premise. You’re not supposed to question it or push back against it, you’re supposed to just go along with it so that everyone can nod along and feel good about themselves.
Let’s be honest now, everyone knows what the whole “pro-life” and “pro-choice” debate is about. Both sides think that taking away a part of a woman’s bodily autonomy is bad and that killing the life developing inside her isn’t as meaningless as killing a fruit fly or getting your tonsils removed. But from the “pro-lifers” point of view, banning abortion is the lesser of two evils because the alternative is killing something that they believe to be a baby, while from the “pro-choicers” point of view, allowing abortion is the right choice because it’s kinda sorta not really a baby yet, so forcing a girl to do something she doesn’t want to do just to save this maybe baby isn’t the right call.
This is a 100% accurate representation of each point of view, and any notion that any significant part of either movement supports it for any other reason is absolutely batshit fucking insane. (I almost never make categorical statements like this, but I really mean it here.)
The only reason why I engaged with not just your comment but this post at all is to push back against this “the more radical and extremist, the better and ideologically superior” emperor’s new clothes style no true Scotsman crap. I hope that the people reading this will be able to find some sense in themselves and admit, if not publicly, at least internally where the truth lies in this situation.
I guess there’s quite a difference between will and could.
https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/15749980
Btw, is there a better way of posting the same response to multiple comments?
I think that a more likely explanation is that a lot of people believe that human life begins at conception, therefore, consider abortion to be murder.
I put it there because people have different opinions on when a human life begins, some think it begins at conception, some after 1st trimester, some at birth… However you define the “thing” growing in the womb as, abortion involves killing it and that’s probably(obviously) why it’s treated differently than adoption.
Well, one of those involves killing a baby/something that will become a baby, so that’s probably the differentiating factor in legislators’ eyes.
15·2 months agoY’all already got a computer, now go produce the next facebook or amazon.
I know this is a joke but if anyone is wondering it’s because they build those things to go towards the air, otherwise they would be going away from the air and it would be hard to breath. Earth is going away from the air too but luckily it has trees attached to itself that make more air and leave it behind, that’s where wind comes from.
2·6 months agoMullvad accepts monero, that’s probably the most convenient way to pay for it anonymously.
Just get a pixel. Use the enemy’s weapon against them.
I don’t think you know what a ponzi scheme is. A ponzi scheme is a situation where a business pays it’s previous investors with the money from it’s new investors… In a fairly launched crypto currency there is no business or other central entity distributing the coins so there is nothing to invest in and no one to pay you back. The only think you can “invest” in is the network itself and the only thing you can “invest” is the work of your computer to secure the network for which you will be rewarded with some coins. Every other good store of value in the world works the same. In order to obtain gold or silver you have to pointlessly dig in the ground searching for some useless metal whose only worth comes from it’s scarcity and being difficult to obtain. In that sense if crypto currencies are a ponzi scheme then so are silver, gold, diamonds, €/$/£ (paper or digital), stocks and everything else whose value doesn’t come from it’s intrinsic qualities.
If you don’t want to dig in the ground/use your computers work you can pay someone else to do it or just buy the metal/coin from them if they already acquired it. But if it’s so useless why would anyone spend their time, effort or intrinsically valuable things (like food, fuel, tools etc.) to acquire it? Because while it’s basic qualities don’t make it a good source of energy, food, heat, light, shelter, security, comfort, entertainment… non of the things we as humans value, they do make it an ideal candidate for a store of value a unit of account and a medium of exchange. That’s why people valued this metals for millennia and continue to do so. They don’t have value on their own, but in the context of the societal system we live in their intrinsic qualities make them invaluable. The value of gold, cash etc. came from it’s place in that system, crypto currencies are in many aspects an improvement on those intrinsic qualities that make gold and cash valuable so it’s only natural that they will replace the aforementioned in many areas of life.
Only to so called “hosted/custodial wallets” aka crypto banks or custodial exchanges. Non-custodial wallets/exchanges or p2p transactions are unaffected, because they’re impossible to stop or trace. Businesses accepting private crypto currencies should not be affected as long as they accept direct payments like MullvadVPN does.
I think the horsefucker would agree with me.
It’s that guy who donned an elaborate disguise to experience life as a non-famous person.
Neither do crackheads.
Soon the only private option left will be to curl the website, read the html and picture it in my head.